Electoral Reform

[Jester]

If the government seizes part of my property in the name of X, but allows my neighbor to keep all his because of some "status", that is a violation of equal protection. If that "status" was skin color... Or sexual orientation... You'd sing another tune.

That argument is bogus. The "status" of skin colour, and very likely sexual orientation, is not chosen, and, to boot, has no relevance to taxation. What does it matter that you're black or white, gay, straight or otherwise come tax season? Your income, on the other hand, is a result of your own choices, and is directly perntinent to the issue of how much you can be taxed without undue burden.

I don't think this notion of "status" has any legal weight whatsoever. Any American lawyers or jurists care to correct me on that?

The constitution clearly grants these powers of income taxation to the federal government. The sixteenth amendment, at the very least, is nonsensical unless you grant this. The argument that progressive taxation is unconsitutional is bogus.

The rest of your post a rant, one assertion after another about communism, class warfare, a rather novel interpretation of the american revolution, etc... You will, I hope, forgive me if I ignore it as being rather beside the point.

-Jester