Expanded sales tax likely unconstitutional

The fascist Right complains that the rich pay too much in taxes, but their lame whinings are out of line for at least several reasons: 1) the rich pay a smaller percentage than the poor; 2) it would likely be unconstitutional to make the poor pay more.

As so-called Gov. Matt Bevin plans to expand Kentucky's sales tax to cover all food purchases, one big quandary seems to be missing from the debate. Not a surprise, because The Media supports everything the little criminal does - even firing their own pollster that showed him losing the election handily. The issue is this: How is it constitutional or fair to protect the money and property of the rich to a greater extent than that of the poor? What about the concerns over taxation without representation?

Taxation itself is not unconstitutional. Progressive taxation is a condign mandate by the people. But wouldn't it be a violation of due process to tax the poor more just for its own sake? Why should the government protect the rich but not the poor?

How many poor people actually serve in our legislatures? Isn't this also an issue of taxation without representation? It's fair to tax the rich simply on this principle, since there are more poor than rich. But what's the average income of our lawmakers compared to the general public?

It's bad enough that The Media and other elites actively try to suppress economic class consciousness. Fortunately, working-class Americans who vote for more progressive candidates do still exist, and we're a gallant crowd. The rumors are true: Left-wing populism is still honored by many Americans. The right-wing elites can't murder an idea - not even pride in one's economic class. But why are the complaints of the Far Right even still taken seriously after they've been debunked again and again?