Today's Politicos vs The Words and Deeds of The Founders
Random header image... Refresh for more!
Make a blogger happy, come back. Sign up for email post alerts!

Category — Taxation

The Founders on Taxation and Debt

This has not been a particularly joyful season inside the beltway. All we’ve seen is a lot of clamoring, to little effect. In the hinterlands, we hear the echoes of the politicians’ raucous debate about government spending, government borrowing, and government intrusion into our homes and business. One side yells that the only solution is to tax the rich until they squeal, while the other side of the aisle insists we must reform entitlements or go the way of Greece. What would the Founders think about all this? Here is what they said in their own words.

Read the rest of this entry »

December 22, 2011   3 Comments

Constitutional Speed Bumps

In the first of our Constitution Day (week) posts, Jim looks at the speed bumps specified by the nation’s charter document to restrain government.

Read the rest of this entry »

September 12, 2011   1 Comment

The Centre Cannot Hold

Although the man in the White House is blaming everyone except the tooth fairy for the nation’s economic woes, he might consider looking in the mirror.

Read the rest of this entry »

August 11, 2011   5 Comments

Ana the Imp: The Wicked Debt of the West

British blogger Ana The Imp is nearly always erudite and she has proven to be so again in her most recent piece on the “Debt Crisis.” We share her desperation and frustration.

Read the rest of this entry »

August 9, 2011   No Comments

The Founding Fathers Solve Our Debt Crisis

The Founding Fathers recognized the burden of large debt and the importance of paying it off. After the American Revolution, the debt equaled 35 to 40 percent of GDP at a time when government spending and taxes were just 2 percent of GDP. Today the debt is more than 80% of GDP, taxes are about 25% of GDP, while spending is higher still.

Read the rest of this entry »

July 28, 2011   4 Comments

President Jackson’s Veto Message Regarding the Bank of the United States; July 10, 1832

One of the “Essential Documents” featured in The Patriot’s History Reader, is President Jackson’s veto message. Jackson’s words are perhaps more applicable to today than for his own time.

Read the rest of this entry »

July 27, 2011   1 Comment

Nullification: An Early Argument

The limit of executive power under the Constitution and the prerogatives of the states in a federal system were vexing in 1832 and have continued to be so. John C. Calhoun’s arguments regarding nullification resonate today.

Read the rest of this entry »

July 25, 2011   1 Comment

Helping Displaced Patriots: A Welfare Program From 1781

Imagine a welfare program without legions of bureaucrats making rules and ordering people’s lives. Imagine a program that draws on citizens’ voluntary generosity and the opportunity to do well by doing good. No imagination necessary. It happened in 1781.

Read the rest of this entry »

March 29, 2011   2 Comments

Entitlement or Empowerment?

Who are we as a people? What do we believe in?

Societies which fail to transmit their core beliefs to the next generation can expect those beliefs to erode, sometimes by design, sometimes by default or by carelessness. Standards not reinforced whither away. Liberty, independence and equality under the law give way to less demanding ideals.

Read the rest of this entry »

March 21, 2011   18 Comments

The Founders Believed in Limited Government

The system of checks and balances we gloss over in the education system deserves a closer look. The Constitution is a contract that ensures those checks and balances and that the government is ultimately answerable to the people. It’s not a “living document” as so many would have us believe. No lawyer believes in a living contract. If something isn’t working properly, then the contract must be amended, and contracts are amended every day all over this country. In fact, the United States Constitution has been amended twenty-seven times. That doesn’t mean that the contract is subject to interpretation – just amendment through the designated process.

Read the rest of this entry »

March 15, 2011   8 Comments