>>>>>>What can I say? Jefferson approved of scaling taxation according to wealth- and even waiving it altogether for poorer citizens. Can you not engage that point at all?
>>>>>
>>>>>I have engaged your point by citing his own words.
>>>>>
>>>>>>Nits about consumption tax versus income tax do not alter the man's guiding principles,
>>>>>
>>>>>As opposed to a "nit" it's quite an important difference and key to his beliefs in private property. Jefferson believed that the wealthy could support the "General Government" through taxation on imported articles, which The rich alone use. From those consumption levies, our revenues liberated by the discharge of the public debt, and its surplus applied to canal, roads, schools, etc., the farmer will see his government supported, his children educated, and the face of his country made a paradise by the contributions of the rich alone, without his being called on to spend a cent from his earnings.
>>>>>
>>>>>>or the opposite claims made by some wealthy people (not all - see http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec11/millionaires_11-16.html ). Jefferson was of course correct about France and I guess he'd say the same about some places today. Shame nobody paid much attention in France before the poor revolted and arranged jolly sessions for the enjoyment of Madame Defarge.
>>>>>
>>>>>The French Revolution was an overthrow of a feudal society ruled by a monarchy with the support of an elite aristocracy. The idea behind the movement was to move the country towards individual rights. Of course, the outcome was the Reign of Terror followed by Napoleon. So to draw a parallel to today, I look to the various uprisings in the middle east and notice that we're witnessing the very repeat of French history. Namely, ideallic movements overthrowing dictators only to be replaced by new dictators, with the commensurate "Terror" inbetween.
>>>>>
>>>>>There is also an element here in the US which wishes to overthrow our Republic and replace it with the absolute authority of the State, under the guise of fairness. I'd say it's ironic that in the rest of the world they're trying to throw off the shackles of central command, while here we have a vocal minority demanding those shackles be applied.
>>>>
>>>>A vocal minority is demanding that the state be given absolute authority? We'll let you take that one back, Jake, no blood, no foul ;-)
>>>
>>>I'll stand by what I said, afterall, it's pretty obvious.
>>>
>>>http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism
>>>Socialism : (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.
>>>
>>>PUBLIC MEETING: Occupy Wall Street and Beyond: Equality and the Fight for Socialism
>>>http://classifieds.chicagoreader.com/chicago/public-meeting-occupy-wall-street-and-beyond-equality-and-the-fight-for-socialism/ViewAd?oid=3615538
>>
>>Sigh. To avoid getting into a pointless argument, I will just say I suppose it depends how big this "element" or "vocal minority" is. If you really believe some substantial percentage of Americans want absolute state control. we'll have to agree to disagree.
>
>It's not me with whom you disagree, it's them.
>http://cpusa.org/cpusa-constitution/
>Only through the abolition of the capitalist system and the socialist reorganization of society can exploitation of human beings by others, and the evils of oppression, war, racism, environmental degradation, and poverty be ended. We seek to build a socialist society which puts people and nature before profits.
>
>You can pretend they do not exist and are not vocal, however, that does not reflect reality.

Jake, you are moving the goalposts. I never denied such opinions exist. I consider them completely insubstantial in number. There are all kinds of wacky thoughts on the fringes, from many different points of view. They are not in any way representative of the whole. (That's why they're called "on the fringes"). You have been leaving the impression that socialism -- "absolute state control," as you put it -- is something a lot of Americans want. It isn't.