questionmark, on 14 October 2012 - 12:18 PM, said:
They never said that the rich had to have a least tax burden than the poor, as far as I can remember. And they have never said either that the constitution was there that some get rich at the expense of the misery of others but clearly in the preamble: to promote the common welfare.
Yes, they learned, problem is that most of those who keep squealing constitution do not know what they are talking about.
The problem with your logic is there would be no need for taxes the likes of which we have today if the constitution was followed. The federal government has no place or authority to be involved in the majority of social affairs that it is currently involved in. To believe anything otherwise would suggest that you, in fact, know nothing about the constitution. A government that has the power to give us everything also has the power to take it all away. How can you believe, based on history alone, that a governing power would hold dear the best interest of the people?
As ludicrous as this idea is, let's suppose that our federal government does care deeply for us. Even if that were the case, it would still fail because a few bureaucrats in Washington simply cannot efficiently manage the lives of an entire nation.