Re: Further costs of war

[Robert Hettinga <rah@shipwright.com>]

At 3:43 pm -0500 on 11/23/97, Jim Choate wrote:


> 			       ARTICLE XVI.
>
> 	The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on
> incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the
> several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
> [25 February 1913.]

Wasn't the 16th ammendment the result of the constitutional challenge of a
Spanish American War tax? Or maybe it was used to fund whatever progressive
stuff TR was up to at the time. It seems to me that, from the Spanish
American War until the ammendment's implementation would be a reasonable
timeframe to get an ammendment effort underway, passed by congress, and
ratified by the states. Given the popularity of the war, it wouldn't
surprise me if a tax implemented to pay for it would have gone down so
easily.

I know that the income tax was first attempted as a temporary measure in
the Civil War, without much compliance, I bet, given that was a book entry
tax being tried in a predominantly cash-settled bearer certificate economy,
and, that, when they tried to do it again, sometime in the Third Great
Awakening :-),  the Supreme Court struck it down.

Of course, all the pseudoconstitutionalist claptrap about the 16th being
unconstitutional is, of course, that. The constitution's what the Supreme
Court says it is, unfortunately.

Doesn't mean the damn thing shouldn't be repealed, though there's fat
chance of that. Oh well. Fortunately, we can fight back with digital bearer
settlement. Someday. Soon, I hope.

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/
Ask me about FC98 in Anguilla!: <http://www.fc98.ai/>