Hello again, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to another episode of Freedom's Creed. I want to jump right into it today. The subject of big government can trigger in people a lot of different emotions, and especially when we're talking about something that I believe is an assault on our liberties, and that is the taxation of the people who actually make the government run because of those tax revenues. In the Constitution that was ratified on September 17, 1787, in Article 1, Section 9, it says this no capitation or other direct tax shall be laid unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken. And for clarification, a capitation is simply a direct tax that's imposed on each person. So in short order, the Constitution designates that the legislative body of the government has the power to tax the people of the United States. What I would like to do is just read a short piece from the Library of Congress.gov regarding an income tax. And please understand that in my reading things like this, it's never meant as an insult to someone's intelligence. My purpose in reading things like this are just to provide perspective and give some context to what it is that I'm actually talking about. Here it is, quote, during the Civil War, Congress passed the Revenue Act of 1861, which included a tax on personal incomes to help pay for war expenses. The tax was repealed ten years later. However, in 1894, Congress enacted a flat rate federal income tax, which was ruled unconstitutional the following year by the U.S. Supreme Court because it was a direct tax not apportioned according to the population of each state. The 16th Amendment, ratified in 1913, removed this objection by allowing the federal government to tax the income of individuals without regard to the population of each state. So it's interesting to note that Congress took about forty-two years from the time that the Revenue Act was repealed to enact the sixteenth Amendment, which taxes income. And I would add that permanently taxes income. Because can you imagine that we would have a tax repealed by the Congress, much like what was done in 1871 when the Congress repealed the Revenue Act? Can you imagine the same thing happening today? I'll pause so you can uh gather your thoughts and perhaps even laugh or cry a little bit. Okay. You feel better? In my experience, Congress never met a law it didn't like, at least that's taken place my whole lifetime. So it's laughable to imagine that the Congress today would repeal anything that would restrict revenue coming into the uh coffers of the United States Treasury. To me, imagining that Congress would repeal any tax law is like hell freezing over or pigs flying or increasing the twenty-four-hour day to let's say thirty-six hours in a day. Or how about this one? The founders coming back and taking on members of the current Congress in an MMA series of fights. Now, I don't care who you are, that would be great to see. Or let's say canceling New Year's Day. You get what I'm talking about here. The idea that Congress would repeal any tax law that they have on the books right now is unbelievably insane to think would ever happen. So you see, there's a reason why the Congress removed the phrase proportion to the census clause with respect to taxation when they created the 16th Amendment, when they said, quote, without apportionment among the several states and without regard to any census or enumeration. So Congress in the year 1913 ratified the 16th Amendment that says that the Congress has power to lay and collect taxes on incomes from whatever source derived. So for a little over what, 108 years, we have the 16th Amendment, which allows the Congress to take whatever it wants from us at whatever percentage it wants to take from us. So if that's not a scary proposition to you, then I would recommend a little time off from work and taking some time to reflect upon where your money goes. For the next few minutes, I want to go over a little exercise. And if you're a nerd like me, uh you've probably gone to the USdebtclock.org that shows a running total of the national debt, the federal tax revenue, the income tax revenue, the payroll tax revenue, and all these other different numbers, and they move at a rapid pace. So if you've never done that before, go ahead and do it. But again, you might have to take some time off work just to kind of recuperate and realize how in debt we are as a nation. And for this podcast episode, I'm just going to be focusing on the U.S. national debt and the federal tax revenue. The numbers are staggering. The U.S. national debt increases by about a million dollars every 22 seconds, roughly. In roughly one minute, the national debt has increased by $3 million and by $180 million per hour. And if you take that per hour figure and multiply that by 24 hours in a day, that number is $4.3 billion a day that the US national debt increases. And in a year's time, we've added approximately $1.57 trillion to the U.S. national debt. That's just disgusting. And you might be thinking, well, that's just the debt. What about the federal tax revenue? Well, what about the federal tax revenue? It takes roughly four and a half minutes for the federal tax revenue to increase by $1 million. Four and a half minutes for the tax revenue to reach a million dollars, yet 22 seconds for the US national debt to reach a million dollars. You don't think there's an imbalance there? I mean, the US debt, national debt, is outpacing the federal tax revenue by about 12 and a half times. And by all means, feel free to check my math because I could have made a mistake. And indeed, that would be somewhat positive news for taxpayers. But unfortunately, I don't think I've made a mistake. But if I have, again, that's on me. But here's the bottom line. I mean, are we going to quibble about a couple billion dollars here and there when it comes to the national debt? When we have a national debt that is roughly $28 trillion, we can't even get enough revenue into the coffers of the Treasury Department to even begin to make up for this debt. And that's to say nothing at all at this point about the billions of dollars of interest on the national debt. We're not even talking about that yet. We're just talking about what the national debt as a whole number is. There's interest, there's debt that we are in with respect to other countries, China being one of them. This is unsustainable. And it's a it's a gross negligence on the part of the Congress not to take control of this, what I consider a national crisis. I mean, we're looking at handing our children and our children's children debt for which they will not benefit at this point one whit from any of the governmental programs, so-called, that are supposed to be helping people. It's irresponsible, it's reckless, and it needs to come to an end. The Congress really needs to take action and nip this in the bud. Do something to get on a on a path of eliminating this gross national debt. It's just an appalling abuse of government, as far as I'm concerned. We hear the cliche about kicking the can down the road. Well, this is probably the most egregious use of that cliche because that's exactly what the current Congress and to be fair, Congresses in the past have done with this national debt. They've just kicked this can down the road and are passing it off to the next Congress to take care of, which it probably never will. I mean, it's sad to think and to be so pessimistic that this can't be rectified. It needs to be, and it's it's ridiculous. You know, the Tenth Amendment states that, quote, the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people, close quote. So the way I read that is that we're in a situation where the federal government is running roughshod over each of the states. And that's unacceptable to me. And it ought to be unacceptable to you as well. We're a sovereign nation, a sovereign people made up of 50 states, and whatever powers are not delegated to the United States or the federal government by the Constitution, those rights are reserved to the states or to we the people. The Federalist Papers were a series of essays written by Alexander Hamilton and James Madison primarily with a few by John Jay, but they were written in arguing for the establishment of the Constitution. In Federalist forty five, James Madison had this to say Several important considerations have been touched in the course of these papers, which discountenance the supposition that the operation of the federal government will by degrees prove fatal to the state governments close quote. Listen, I believe that the federal government has a purpose, just like state governments and local governments. But is there any doubt that at least with the current national debt and the rate of taxation that the federal government has indeed proved fatal to the states? In my mind, there is no doubt. And again, I'm not calling for the abolition of the federal government. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying let's have a little bit of responsibility and discipline among our elected representatives to take control of this terrible spending habit that we have in the country, or I should say in the Congress, and get on a path of some fiscal discipline. I mean, really, it's well past due. Well, by no means do I hope that I've put any sort of damper on your day or your night, but I want to bring these things to the attention of other people. And some of you, no doubt, are aware of these things, and others of you perhaps to a lesser extent, but nevertheless, these are things that we all need to be paying attention to and holding our representatives accountable for what they're doing or not doing in this case in Washington, D.C. And with that, ladies and gentlemen, we have come to an end of another episode, but I would like to uh close the episode with a quote from Stephen R. Covey and his book, Principle Centered Leadership. He says this, quote, the president of a major corporation once asked me to meet with him and his management team. He said that they were all too concerned with preserving their own management style. He said that the corporate mission statement had no impact on their style. These executives felt the mission was for the people, quote, out there, close quote, who were subject to the law, but they were above the law. The idea of moral compassing is unsettling to people who think they are above the law, because the Constitution, based on principles, is the law. It governs everybody, including the president. It places responsibility on individuals to examine their lives and determine if they are willing to live by it. All are accountable to the laws and principles.