Income tax is a poll tax

[Genx87]

I thought income taxes were voluntary?

 

[bfdd]

You need clothes to get to the polls, clothing is subject to to sales tax. Sales taxes are now poll taxes. Failure to pay court ordered child support can be a felony. Child support is now a poll tax. It is irrelevant if you must own property or not, the amendment does not specify requirements. Property taxes are now poll taxes.

See why this is dumb? What is your point anyway?

I don't see anywhere it is required to be dressed to vote, do you? can you point out the legislation that proves as such? PS I can vote in the privacy of my own home, they mail out ballots. Again you failed.

 

[sactoking]

A poll tax is, by strict definition, a tax to participate at the polls (vote). The poll tax may be avoided by electing to not vote.

If the income tax were a poll tax then an interested party could avoid the income tax (functioning as a poll tax) by electing to not vote.

In the US if you don't vote you still potentially owe income tax, thus the income tax is not a poll tax.

 

[bfdd]

Read your own linked article troll, the poll tax is found in the "documents needed to get the ID, such as birth certificates. Even more significant is the burden on voters' time, disproportionately borne by poorer voters who don't own a car. How many of them will expend the time and money to collect the required documents and then wait in line at the state motor vehicle office, only to face the prospect of yet another line when they go to vote? A few surely will, but many will not."

the argument was voter id cards paid for by the state are a poll tax, when the state agrees to pay for it, you go to the next layer and say "WELL BIRTH CERTIFICATES!!!" please and if those were made free? BUT THEY HAVE TO TAKE THE BUS!!! oh noes. Seriously

A poll tax is, by strict definition, a tax to participate at the polls (vote). The poll tax may be avoided by electing to not vote.

If the income tax were a poll tax then an interested party could avoid the income tax (functioning as a poll tax) by electing to not vote.

In the US if you don't vote you still potentially owe income tax, thus the income tax is not a poll tax.

Thank you for the first real response shutting me up and with sound logic.

 

[thraashman]

Read your own linked article troll, the poll tax is found in the "documents needed to get the ID, such as birth certificates. Even more significant is the burden on voters' time, disproportionately borne by poorer voters who don't own a car. How many of them will expend the time and money to collect the required documents and then wait in line at the state motor vehicle office, only to face the prospect of yet another line when they go to vote? A few surely will, but many will not."

250,000 to 1. That's the approximate rate of voter disenfranchisement to voter fraud prevention these id laws create. Even conservative estimates put that at 50,000 to 1. Don't expect a conservative, who KNOWS that these id laws are about disenfranchising Democrat voters to listen to anything you say as they'd rather have a government that's not representative of the people to get their backwards policies in place.

 

[fskimospy]

A poll tax is, by strict definition, a tax to participate at the polls (vote). The poll tax may be avoided by electing to not vote.

If the income tax were a poll tax then an interested party could avoid the income tax (functioning as a poll tax) by electing to not vote.

In the US if you don't vote you still potentially owe income tax, thus the income tax is not a poll tax.

And that should end that.

 

[First]

the argument was voter id cards paid for by the state are a poll tax, when the state agrees to pay for it, you go to the next layer and say "WELL BIRTH CERTIFICATES!!!" please and if those were made free? BUT THEY HAVE TO TAKE THE BUS!!! oh noes. Seriously

You and nehalem's argument was that the ID is free courtesy of the state, and therefore there is no poll tax. Your own quote says there are other costs associated with the free ID, such as birth certificate and taking time off to go to the DMV. These are indirect poll taxes.

I'm sorry this confuses you, but it's reality.

 

[bfdd]

A poll tax is, by strict definition, a tax to participate at the polls (vote). The poll tax may be avoided by electing to not vote.

If the income tax were a poll tax then an interested party could avoid the income tax (functioning as a poll tax) by electing to not vote.

In the US if you don't vote you still potentially owe income tax, thus the income tax is not a poll tax.

250,000 to 1. That's the approximate rate of voter disenfranchisement to voter fraud prevention these id laws create. Even conservative estimates put that at 50,000 to 1. Don't expect a conservative, who KNOWS that these id laws are about disenfranchising Democrat voters to listen to anything you say as they'd rather have a government that's not representative of the people to get their backwards policies in place.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/279991/new-myths-voter-id-hans-von-spakovsky#

except it's all fucking myths spit out without any real evidence to support it. in fact in that very link i posted you will find information pointing to the fact that disenfranchisement does not happen at the rate you assume it would, in fact minority turn out in states with voter id laws is up even over the regular rate of voter turn out. So fail.

sactoking, thanks again for the post. Though like I said I'm still kind of confused. Income tax is required, being a felon is required, not doing one makes one a felon and prevents that person from voting. Does that not fit the same logic?

First, then how is income tax not a poll tax? We have to dig deeper than just the ID now, we have to goto the next level. How does one go about getting the ID. Well bottom level of everything is income tax as an American citizen. We HAVE TO PAY IT. You are forced to or else you're a felon. Felons can't vote, how is this different?

 

[sactoking]

sactoking, thanks again for the post. Though like I said I'm still kind of confused. Income tax is required, being a felon is required, not doing one makes one a felon and prevents that person from voting. Does that not fit the same logic?

Any tax can, ostensibly, be avoided by avoiding the activity which is purported to be taxed.

Don't want to pay the income tax? Don't have any earned income.
Don't want to pay the real property tax? Don't own any real property.
Don't want to pay the telecommunications services tax? Don't own a phone.
Don't want to pay the sales tax? Don't purchase taxable goods and services.
Don't want to pay a VAT? Avoid value-added goods and services.

If the income tax were a poll tax it could be avoided by avoiding the polls. Since it cannot be avoided in that manner, it is not a tax on that market segment or activity.

You're attempting what I call "pass-through" logic: If A leads to B and B leads to C then it's logical that the causation of A "passes through" to C such that A leads to C.

We recently had a meeting of the Board of Directors for our state health insurance exchange where it was claimed that policyholders pay the commissions for insurance agents. The logic was identical to what you are applying: since policyholders pay the premium and the commission is paid from the premium then policyholders pay the commissions. The error is that the agents have a contractual relationship with the insurers that dictates the level of commission paid and insurers are free to negotiate different commission levels with different agents while policyholders may not negotiate commission with agents (since that constitutes rebating or illegal inducement). Thus, the induction of A => B => C seems appropriate on the surface but is mechanically broken since A => B and B => C are two separate actions.

Here, income tax => felony => no vote looks to be appropriate on the surface but income tax => felony and felony => no vote are two separate and unrelated actions.

 

[Capt Caveman]

So do all the people who pay no income tax not get to vote?

/thread

 

[bfdd]

sactoking, arbitrary limit as to why one can get out of filing taxes. sounds like the "grandfathered" non-sense from Jim Crow laws. "Your daddy or grand pappy didn't have to pay a poll tax, so neither do you." Or is there a difference there? Pretty sure both are arbitrary limits putting people into different class of civilian. Isn't the whole point of being against the poll tax as to not discriminate against voters?

 

[sactoking]

sactoking, arbitrary limit as to why one can get out of filing taxes. sounds like the "grandfathered" non-sense from Jim Crow laws. "Your daddy or grand pappy didn't have to pay a poll tax, so neither do you." Or is there a difference there? Pretty sure both are arbitrary limits putting people into different class of civilian. Isn't the whole point of being against the poll tax as to not discriminate against voters?

I don't follow you.

 

[bfdd]

I don't follow you.

I'm saying, back in the day poll taxes had things that allowed certain individuals to be "exempt" from the poll tax. People who don't have to pay any income tax or not file income tax papers fall into that same category. Arbitrary limit as to what classifies a "special case". Same thing as the old Jim Crow shit. Except they had things like if your daddy had voted before emancipation you didn't have to pay a poll tax. Same kind of thing is it not?

 

[Jhhnn]

Not only does the OP employ failed logic, he uses failed facts-

http://felonvoting.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=286

It's one of those "States Rights!" things where very few (usually very conservative) states permanently ban tax evasion felons from voting.

One thing's for sure, though, when it comes to Righties- Knowledge is the enemy of Faith, so even the most trivial Google is unnecessary prior to shooting off their mouths.

 

[Jhhnn]

I'm saying, back in the day poll taxes had things that allowed certain individuals to be "exempt" from the poll tax. People who don't have to pay any income tax or not file income tax papers fall into that same category. Arbitrary limit as to what classifies a "special case". Same thing as the old Jim Crow shit. Except they had things like if your daddy had voted before emancipation you didn't have to pay a poll tax. Same kind of thing is it not?

Hitting the pipe early today?

 

[sactoking]

I'm saying, back in the day poll taxes had things that allowed certain individuals to be "exempt" from the poll tax. People who don't have to pay any income tax or not file income tax papers fall into that same category. Arbitrary limit as to what classifies a "special case". Same thing as the old Jim Crow shit. Except they had things like if your daddy had voted before emancipation you didn't have to pay a poll tax. Same kind of thing is it not?

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Are you saying that since discriminatory poll taxes were illegal that discriminatory income taxes are also illegal? Are you saying that discriminatory income taxes mirror discriminatory poll taxes in an attempt to draw another correlation between the two? Are you trying to say something else?

 

[bfdd]

Not only does the OP employ failed logic, he uses failed facts-

http://felonvoting.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=286

It's one of those "States Rights!" things where very few (usually very conservative) states permanently ban tax evasion felons from voting.

One thing's for sure, though, when it comes to Righties- Knowledge is the enemy of Faith, so even the most trivial Google is unnecessary prior to shooting off their mouths.

Thanks for the info, thought it was more states though I guess I was wrong. In all fairness Jhhnn, I did say "most states" and not all. Not to mention I'm not in here trying to get income tax reverted, more so trying to find holes in the "poll tax" thing and what constitutes one. I personally feel all felons should have the right to vote as long as time was served.

to sackto
that the discriminatory nature of the arbitrary limits set on who pays income tax or not is the similar and I don't see it as an "out", more that it still fits along the line. Not having to pay taxes isn't an exception to it being a poll tax is what I mean.

 

[Incorruptible]

The income tax must be ended it is wrong and used for wasteful spending.

 

[jackstar7]

The income tax must be ended it is wrong and used for wasteful spending.

Please. Continue.

 

[Pens1566]

And the AT P&N dumb thread of the day award goes to ...

 

[nehalem256]

Read your own linked article troll, the poll tax is found in the "documents needed to get the ID, such as birth certificates. Even more significant is the burden on voters' time, disproportionately borne by poorer voters who don't own a car. How many of them will expend the time and money to collect the required documents and then wait in line at the state motor vehicle office, only to face the prospect of yet another line when they go to vote? A few surely will, but many will not."

So in other words people lack any proof on who they are might have problems voting :hmm:

And note that the time argument applies equally to filing income tax.

 

[nehalem256]

I don't see anywhere it is required to be dressed to vote, do you?

Well assuming you do not vote absentee clothing is required.

In the US if you don't vote you still potentially owe income tax, thus the income tax is not a poll tax.

Well also in the US if you do not vote you potentially have to acquire photo id (for example if you would like to purchase cold medicine). So therefore requiring photo id to vote is not a poll tax.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Thank you for the first real response shutting me up and with sound logic.

Ironically, it doesn't actually refute your position at all.

It provides an example of how to avoid the alleged "poll tax" that income tax represents by deciding not to vote. It doesn't address whether or not income tax is in effect a poll tax.

The real reason it isn't a poll tax is that, again, it is independent of voting except at an extremely indirect level, so indirect that you could make the same argument for any tax.

 

[bfdd]

Ironically, it doesn't actually refute your position at all.

It provides an example of how to avoid the alleged "poll tax" that income tax represents by deciding not to vote. It doesn't address whether or not income tax is in effect a poll tax.

The real reason it isn't a poll tax is that, again, it is independent of voting except at an extremely indirect level, so indirect that you could make the same argument for any tax.

But I already showed how a sales tax doesn't fit the same argument. You don't have to buy anything and not everything you buy is subject to a sales tax. Also, you could go to a different state to buy things. Here you do not have that option, no matter where you go you're still subject to income tax. Even if you leave the USA. The only way to not be subject to income tax is to leave AND give up your citizenship. Which wouldn't really work because then you've given up in your entirety the right to vote.

 

[woolfe9999]

That changes it from being a poll tax how?

Whatever you want to call it, it's Constitutional, as is the income tax, so you'll need a Constitutional amendment to change it. BTW voting rights aren't the only rights that felons waive either. They pretty much waive the majority of them once convicted.

BTW, just like you aren't forced to, you know, buy things, you also aren't forced to earn income either, and certainly not at a taxable level. Hence, according to your logic, income tax isn't a "poll tax."

This thread delivers on the fail.