I frequently shop at Bartell Drug Co. more than any other drug store. It's locally run, it has a homey feel to it, good deals and friendly employees. 

This may all come to an end if Washington State passes I-1098, which would establish a state income tax "for the wealthy."

In a recent Seattle Times editorial, George Bartell notes how having to pay this tax would dip into the funds he would use to pay his 1700 employees and could eventually mean the end of the company because its competition -- namely major corporations like Walmart -- wouldn't be affected by this state law. 

Probably it wasn't the sponsors' intention to favor one group of companies over another. But they are activists. They are not sympathetic to business and don't understand it very well. I-1098 is the result.

In a Forbes.com article featured by Yahoo! News, entitled "Where America's Money Is Moving," Jon Bruner write about how IRS data show America's wealthy are moving in droves to the south to enjoy sunny weather, cheap real estate, and lower taxes.

My initial reaction was to opine about the benefits of lower taxes, but I've got some bigger fish to fry today:  How is any of this the IRS's business? See how the income tax system in the United States is an inherent violation of its citizens' privacy?

Using these data to effectively spy on Americans and track their migration habits, is well beyond the purview and proper role of the U.S. federal government. Let me tell you a story that should fascinate you...

With the release of both President Obama's and Vice President Biden's 2009 tax returns last week comes some revealing information. Though the Obama's reported that less than 6 percent of their $5.5 million income went to charity, the most interesting tidbit is that the Bidens gave less than 2 percent of their $333,000 income to charity. Even the standard church tithe -- considered a charitable donation -- is supposed to be 10 percent.

Far be it from me to criticize anyone for the amount of their charitable donations. Under normal circumstances, a person's private giving wouldn't be a point of criticism; it is, after all, a matter of personal conscience. However, these low levels of charitable donations, particularly on the part of the Bidens, stand out because of  earlier statements from Obama and Biden asserting that we need to "spread the wealth around" and that paying more taxes was the "patriotic" thing to do.

Here's Obama:

Robert P. Murphy of the Pacific Research Institute has a good article out on the insidious origins and history of the federal income tax:

As Tax Day approaches, Americans rummage for misplaced receipts and dread any letters from the Internal Revenue Service. Most Americans remain unaware that for almost a century America got along just fine with no federal income tax at all.

To help fund the Civil War, the federal government introduced its first federal income tax as part of the Revenue Act of 1861. This tax was very modest by modern standards, imposing a flat rate of 3 percent on all incomes above $800. This tax was rescinded in 1872, and in 1895 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal taxation of income derived from property had to be apportioned among the states.

For all practical purposes, it would take a constitutional amendment before the federal government could once again lay claim to the income of individual citizens. The opportunity came soon enough.

Read the rest here.