PDA

View Full Version : Here's a conspiracy worth reviewing.



Melkolmr
28th August 07, 10:23 PM
I won't demand you watch the video, so I will present a summary.

Income tax is not legally required
IRS is fucking with you
Federal Reserve is unconstitutional and a bad idea
HOLY FUCK national IDs scare me

Now, I confess, he does come across as a bit paranoid, but let us ignore all but the facts. If anyone has any information that will clarify the truth for me and everyone else, be it proving OR debunking this video, please, by all means, share it.

-1656880303867390173

We have a video forum, please use it.

Also, read this sticky about embedding videos. (http://www.sociocide.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45936)

-Steve

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
28th August 07, 10:48 PM
1) Yes it is, and unless you hate firefighters and student loans I don't see what the problem is.

3) Holy shit I didn't know Andrew Jackson was running for president again.

4) What's the matter, too young to buy cigarettes?

Arhetton
29th August 07, 01:20 AM
Sadly Aaron Russo, the maker of the film which is called "America: Freedom to Fascism", he recently passed away.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/c3/Aaron_russo-cannes.jpg/180px-Aaron_russo-cannes.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Russo

He passed away on August 24 from cancer.

The new york times published a criticism of his movie which can be read here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/31/movies/31russ.html?ei=5088&en=05c0d0988f58fc50&ex=1311998400&partner=rssnyt&emc=rs&pagewanted=print


What is being debated, is whether or not there is a law that people have to pay income tax. Clearly there is not because income tax was introduced hundreds of years after the formation of the republic after the formation of the 'federal reserve' (which is not federal or a reserve lol).

However, even it it could be shown that there is a law - the important thing to question is not whether or not you are legally required to pay the tax, but on economic grounds whether or not the tax should exist at all.


unless you hate firefighters and student loans I don't see what the problem is.

This is not a legitimate defence of the income tax. Other taxes can pay for this too. Other services can be provided by the free market - loans for example.

People think that an income tax is neccessary to uphold society but its simply not true. The government taxes business, fuel and commodities and an income tax is NOT NECCESSARY to pay for government spending. It is when the government has a policy of increasing its own size and departments that you have a problem.

Your government is so irresponsible that they actually spend more than they tax, so taxes are being used to pay off interest on existing loans whilst they take out more loans to fund social security, health care and war.

Aaron Russo endorsed Ron Paul for president, you could look up some videos of Ron Paul talking about the income tax to get some ideas about its legitimacy, effectiveness and impact. Ron Paul wants to abolish the income tax and the IRS.

JZl6202HJGQ

Riddeck
29th August 07, 02:36 AM
Sadly Aaron Russo, the maker of the film which is called "America: Freedom to Fascism", he recently passed away.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/c3/Aaron_russo-cannes.jpg/180px-Aaron_russo-cannes.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Russo

He passed away on August 24 from cancer.

The new york times published a criticism of his movie which can be read here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/31/movies/31russ.html?ei=5088&en=05c0d0988f58fc50&ex=1311998400&partner=rssnyt&emc=rs&pagewanted=print


What is being debated, is whether or not there is a law that people have to pay income tax. Clearly there is not because income tax was introduced hundreds of years after the formation of the republic after the formation of the 'federal reserve' (which is not federal or a reserve lol).

However, even it it could be shown that there is a law - the important thing to question is not whether or not you are legally required to pay the tax, but on economic grounds whether or not the tax should exist at all.



This is not a legitimate defence of the income tax. Other taxes can pay for this too. Other services can be provided by the free market - loans for example.

People think that an income tax is neccessary to uphold society but its simply not true. The government taxes business, fuel and commodities and an income tax is NOT NECCESSARY to pay for government spending. It is when the government has a policy of increasing its own size and departments that you have a problem.

Your government is so irresponsible that they actually spend more than they tax, so taxes are being used to pay off interest on existing loans whilst they take out more loans to fund social security, health care and war.

Aaron Russo endorsed Ron Paul for president, you could look up some videos of Ron Paul talking about the income tax to get some ideas about its legitimacy, effectiveness and impact. Ron Paul wants to abolish the income tax and the IRS.

JZl6202HJGQ

I love, all of this. Glad someone brought this information out into this open forum, with the 9/11 talk going on.

Melkolmr
29th August 07, 02:47 AM
Firstly, Steve, thanks, my fault.

Secondly, I'm reluctant to believe anything anyone is suggesting about 9/11 because I'm just not educated enough to really know if what they say makes sense. But you know what, I really only have a passing interest in the truth there. I think with the future of civil liberty in danger, the events of several years ago should be considered, but not the sole or most significant consideration.

Arhetton
29th August 07, 06:18 AM
Firstly, Steve, thanks, my fault.

Secondly, I'm reluctant to believe anything anyone is suggesting about 9/11 because I'm just not educated enough to really know if what they say makes sense. But you know what, I really only have a passing interest in the truth there. I think with the future of civil liberty in danger, the events of several years ago should be considered, but not the sole or most significant consideration.

I agree with this statement.

I think it is also good that the public is taking an interest in investigating in their own way 9/11. I do think that it will take alot more evidence to come to any accurate conclusions. Some people seemed actually opposed to the fact that they are doing any research at all, and that to me is strange.

I think the 9/11 truth movement represents what is really a growing unease and mistrust of the government in general. Suspicions like that could not lodge in a mind unless there was fertile ground.

I'm willing to listen to what people have to put forward though.

Without a proper investigation it will only remain a 'convincing fiction'.

But you are right it is in the past and there are more important things to focus on.

And this thread is about a totally different topic so none of that should be brought over into here.


****************


I thought Russo's film was excellent. He pursued people who work or worked for the goverment, lawyers and policymakers and he really raises the issue in a comprehensive way.

The criticism on wikipedia of his film mainly nitpicks over a few quotes in the film which are not film destroying. Some of the chosen 'mistakes' aren't even worth mentioning.

The NYtimes article has more substantial criticism, but it also takes low blows


In the style of low-budget television documentaries, photographs appear on screen of J. P. Morgan, Paul Warburg and John D. Rockefeller.

I ask, well what the hell is he supposed to do for long dead people? Theres probably no footage of them available and he only mentions them in passing. What the hell is wrong with photographs?

I was really upset by the story about Joe louis in the documentary, particularly about how the IRS was allowed to take his inheritance from his dying mother.

polishillusion
29th August 07, 04:25 PM
fucking 9/11 hippies. i walk by the WTC in NYC everyday. i fuckin' hate them.

Riddeck
30th August 07, 12:29 AM
1) Yes it is, and unless you hate firefighters and student loans I don't see what the problem is.

Show me the law that says it does. Aaron Russo made a two hour movie trying to find this law. And most of our income tax is used to pay the interest on the goverment's debt to the Federal Reserve. Which is a perfect engine for keeping the private citizens who own the Federal Reserve rich. They get money from the Governments loans, which is our money, OUR labor being taxed. Then, as banks they get money from our loans.

They have their cake an eat it too.



4) What's the matter, too young to buy cigarettes?

National ID cards first, then BioMetric scanning next. Eventually they will remove paper money and EVERY SINGLE TRANSACTION THAT TAKES PLACE will be recorded.

*Edit* The National ID card is just a show that we are indeed moving towards a police state.

That is what is scary.
How is that for Freedom?

WarPhalange
30th August 07, 12:35 AM
National ID cards first, then BioMetric scanning next. Eventually they will remove paper money and EVERY SINGLE TRANSACTION THAT TAKES PLACE will be recorded.

How is that for Freedom?

When's the last time you got robbed?

Riddeck
30th August 07, 01:30 AM
When's the last time you got robbed?

Every two weeks when hundreds of my dollars evaporate to the Federal Income Tax.

Yiktin Voxbane
30th August 07, 02:22 AM
I thinki this can be neatly summised thusly


Red Pill

or

Blue Pill .

Your choice .

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
30th August 07, 02:49 AM
Show me the law that says it does. Aaron Russo made a two hour movie trying to find this law. And most of our income tax is used to pay the interest on the goverment's debt to the Federal Reserve. Which is a perfect engine for keeping the private citizens who own the Federal Reserve rich. They get money from the Governments loans, which is our money, OUR labor being taxed. Then, as banks they get money from our loans.

They have their cake an eat it too.

Do you make millions of dollars a year? Because opposition to federal income tax is really just a trojan horse scheme by the upper-class and people nostalgic for the 19th century. Fact is, the government has expenses and needs to tax you to cover them. If you don't want to pay taxes you should also abstain from voting, receiving student loans, and going to the hospital.

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
30th August 07, 02:52 AM
P.S. your neg reps are worth zero points, Riddeck. In a way that's just like not being able to vote because you don't believe in taxes.

Kein Haar
30th August 07, 09:40 AM
Do you make millions of dollars a year? Because opposition to federal income tax is really just a trojan horse scheme by the upper-class and people nostalgic for the 19th century. Fact is, the government has expenses and needs to tax you to cover them. If you don't want to pay taxes you should also abstain from voting, receiving student loans, and going to the hospital.

Millions, eh?

I'm only asking this to gauge why your post implies a somewhat different experience with the tax system compared to me. So...

How old are you?
Do you work?
Full/part time?
Rent? Own? Homeless? Public housing? Parents? Dorm?
Income bracket?
File yourself? Use an accountant?

Federal...Income tax....witholding.

Each of those words are important.

How well do you think the government would fare if they needed to collect as a lump sum, front- or back loaded? Either have many working people go without a paycheck from January to April, or unload a third of their income after december.

Not well, because it's fucking ridiculous......as witheld income tax.

So, until you:

-Own property (writing off mortgage interest...which is still relative paltry)
and/or
-Become an entreprenuer
and/or
-engage in lawful, albeit convoluted and cumbersome tax sheltering (i.e. buying farms or something)

...the regular old dude with a job who rents, has very little to work with as far as lawful tax avoidance.

Riddeck
30th August 07, 11:40 AM
Do you make millions of dollars a year? Because opposition to federal income tax is really just a trojan horse scheme by the upper-class and people nostalgic for the 19th century. Fact is, the government has expenses and needs to tax you to cover them. If you don't want to pay taxes you should also abstain from voting, receiving student loans, and going to the hospital.

You, again proving you have no clue what is going on.

Federal Income tax is unconstitutional, and only enforced by the strong arm of the law. I pay property taxes. I pay sales taxes. I pay gasoline tax.

Those taxes are legal, and needed, for things like education, and highways.

But again, you proving that you have less than zero clue about what you are talking about, as you cannot grasp the concept that something is unconstitutional.

Call up the IRS and have them present to you the law or stature that states you are legally responsible to pay Federal Income tax, and the one that says you have to file a 10-40.

Then, while you are at it, demand a '10-40' from them, to see exactly where your money is going.

I guarantee you get none of these documents.

(I await your brilliant response)

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
30th August 07, 05:22 PM
Either have many working people go without a paycheck from January to April, or unload a third of their income after december.

And how much money do these people make?

Riddeck, you're obviously legally require to pay income tax. I don't see any debate there. But how is a federal income tax unconstitutional?

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
30th August 07, 06:26 PM
Actually, don't answer that because the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitut ion) specifically allows Congress to collect an income tax.

Riddeck, that research took all of two minutes. Why couldn't you do it by yourself?

downinit
30th August 07, 06:30 PM
You obviously didn't even watch the movie.

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
30th August 07, 06:37 PM
It's entirely unnecessary to piss away an hour on that zany bullshit. It's okay to dislike the concept of an income tax but presenting the income tax as illegal and unconstitutional is dishonest.

Melkolmr
30th August 07, 10:57 PM
My understanding is, the Sixteenth Amendment gives the POWER to levy an income tax (either direct or excise). Russo's arguement, and that of many other tax protesters, is that no tax was ever officially levied by Congress. If it was there would be a LAW (not an amendment) stating the necessity of paying. Furthermore he argues that the income tax is not a direct tax or an excise tax, making it UNconstitutional in its current incarnation.

WarPhalange
30th August 07, 10:58 PM
So how the fuck are roads going to be built, dumbass?

Melkolmr
30th August 07, 11:03 PM
Chill out. I didn't say whether or not I agreed with the tax. Besides, there are other ways to pay for it. Many people favor a progressive sales tax, others would argue that the government gets more than enough money to build and maintain roads from other sources and should simply appropriate the money better. Besides, federal money doesn't even go to most roads.

Stick
30th August 07, 11:31 PM
The tax I lose on my income is a small price to pay for all the shit I get simply by being American.

Also, what the fuck sort of reasoning is this?


My understanding is, the Sixteenth Amendment gives the POWER to levy an income tax (either direct or excise). Russo's arguement, and that of many other tax protesters, is that no tax was ever officially levied by Congress. If it was there would be a LAW (not an amendment) stating the necessity of paying. Furthermore he argues that the income tax is not a direct tax or an excise tax, making it UNconstitutional in its current incarnation.

So tax forms just magically appeared from the ether?

Of course the government levied the fucking tax, we pay that levied tax every god damn year and paycheck.

The deal's pretty good actually, get the fuck over it.

Seriously, look at Europe and get the fuck over it.

PS: you can abstain from taxes all you want, but when I commit hilarious and heinous crimes against you you are not welcome to the protection of the law.

Melkolmr
30th August 07, 11:51 PM
Alright, he could well be wrong. That's why I posted it in an open forum. What's the law that requires it?

WarPhalange
30th August 07, 11:55 PM
Chill out. I didn't say whether or not I agreed with the tax. Besides, there are other ways to pay for it. Many people favor a progressive sales tax,

Sales tax would only work if it was scaled so that rich people pay more, i.e. income tax.

The reason? Bread still costs the same no matter how poor you are. You can't buy cheaper bread when you are dirt poor because you need basic stuff to live. Can't go any lower. So if it costs a set rate of $500 a week to stay alive (let's say), if you up the sales tax, the person can't survive. Yes, if he has to pay $20 more per week, he goes down the shitter. Just a matter of time. My family has been there.

A rich person still only has to eat so much. He won't buy double the food because he can. He might buy an expensive TV, but how often does that happen? Whereas people need food every day such as like South Africa.

Ahem... where was I?

Oh yes, so having everybody pay equally when they don't make equal money doesn't make sense. No, not everybody can make something of themselves, so don't give me that shit. You NEED these people to live a luxurious life like a normal U.S. American.

Now, I know there would be essentially food stamps given out to those who need it, but wtf, how is that different than getting a tax return if you didn't make enough? You'd still have to send in your info to the "tax revenue service" or whatever and then they'd give you food stamps if you need them. But what about the rich who now pay to the IRS? They wouldn't have to anyore, would they? So the rich would again get richer.


others would argue that the government gets more than enough money to build and maintain roads from other sources and should simply appropriate the money better. Besides, federal money doesn't even go to most roads.

Duh. You can always do that. Even with income tax.

Melkolmr
31st August 07, 12:02 AM
Oh, I'm not disagreeing with that (BTW, glad we're off "dumbass" terms). The question is whether or not the tax is being implemented legally. If it is then we're good, if it's not then it means the government is pretty much extorting money from its people (which you and I both know is mostly squandered thereafter).

Next, the sales tax. The idea of a progressive tax is, the tax rate increases as the amount the rate applies to increases. A loaf of bread might only face a 1% tax, a 500 grand yacht might face a 30% tax. Also, I don't know where I stand on the whole issue of everyone "making something of themselves." I don't know if that's possible or not, but it's a topic kind of dear to me (I even wondered about producing a documentary on it if I could gather the cash) and I'm totally willing to discuss it.

WarPhalange
31st August 07, 12:07 AM
Oh, I'm not disagreeing with that (BTW, glad we're off "dumbass" terms). The question is whether or not the tax is being implemented legally. If it is then we're good, if it's not then it means the government is pretty much extorting money from its people (which you and I both know is mostly squandered thereafter).
I don't give a damn. Know why? Because "the law" and justice are two different things. The law is very complicated and not very efficient. If they start doing things that are bad and against the law, then heads should roll. If it helps most people, and the ones it hurts can buy pain killers in the form of hookers and blow, then I don't care.


Next, the sales tax. The idea of a progressive tax is, the tax rate increases as the amount the rate applies to increases. A loaf of bread might only face a 1% tax, a 500 grand yacht might face a 30% tax. Also, I don't know where I stand on the whole issue of everyone "making something of themselves." I don't know if that's possible or not, but it's a topic kind of dear to me (I even wondered about producing a documentary on it if I could gather the cash) and I'm totally willing to discuss it.
Alright. Say bread is easy to buy like normal. Even easier, since it's 1% instead of 8% like here. What of the people who sell yachts or RVs for a living who now have zero business because everything they sell suddenly went up almost 30%?

Melkolmr
31st August 07, 12:10 AM
Firstly, justice applies to EVERYONE- even the rich. Secondly, if half a mil doesn't stop them from buying a yacht, an extra 150G won't either.

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
31st August 07, 12:11 AM
Oh, I'm not disagreeing with that (BTW, glad we're off "dumbass" terms). The question is whether or not the tax is being implemented legally. If it is then we're good, if it's not then it means the government is pretty much extorting money from its people (which you and I both know is mostly squandered thereafter).

Congress gave itself the power to levy an income tax (and this is only after faggots like you complained about earlier income taxes) and then levied it. Of course it's legal. This is no different than saying, "I don't know if driver's licenses are legal so I'm not sure if I really need one."

Dumbass.


Next, the sales tax. The idea of a progressive tax is, the tax rate increases as the amount the rate applies to increases. A loaf of bread might only face a 1% tax, a 500 grand yacht might face a 30% tax. Also, I don't know where I stand on the whole issue of everyone "making something of themselves." I don't know if that's possible or not, but it's a topic kind of dear to me (I even wondered about producing a documentary on it if I could gather the cash) and I'm totally willing to discuss it.

How is it fair to people who generally spend more money (parents and business owners, for example) compared to misers? You're just going to discourage people from spending obscene amounts of money, which will stagnate the economy.

Seriously. We've already tried adding luxury taxes specifically to expensive goods. The result? The people who could buy planes could also afford to go to other countries and buy cheaper, untaxed planes. Suddenly everyone who made those private jets lost their jobs.

Brilliant plan Adam Smith.

WarPhalange
31st August 07, 12:13 AM
Firstly, justice applies to EVERYONE- even the rich. Secondly, if half a mil doesn't stop them from buying a yacht, an extra 150G won't either.

No, but someone who is in the upper-middle class and has been saving his shekels for a boat, car, RV, house, whatever expensive thing, will now either reconsider or just buy something else.

Suddenly yacht seller isn't getting his pennies from people who can only afford the smaller boats. Smaller boats aren't made as much, normal people don't buy boats at all. Rich people rule the seas.

Melkolmr
31st August 07, 12:20 AM
As far as the income tax, MJS, point out the law. Again, I have not advocated a SINGLE THING. I haven't taken a SINGLE POSITION. So attacking me just brings your reading comprehension into question.

PL, eh... I wouldn't mind the rich ruling the seas. Maybe they'd all move out there and leave me alone. But, really, I don't know that a sales tax is the best method. I'm just explaining what it is.

Edited to change income to sales (my dumb ass didn't pay attention).

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
31st August 07, 12:26 AM
As far as the income tax, MJS, point out the law. Again, I have not advocated a SINGLE THING. I haven't taken a SINGLE POSITION. So attacking me just brings your reading comprehension into question.

You're questioning the legality of an income tax and presenting alternatives to it. That's a stance and an advocation.

Anyway, here's the TaxAlmanac (http://taxalmanac.org/index.php/Main_Page) that covers, in depth, the several laws regarding income tax and other taxes.

Stick
31st August 07, 12:27 AM
So Melkolmr, what do the top constitutional law professors have to say about the wording of the 16th amendment? Has it occurred to you that perhaps the ammendment itself constitues a sort of founding law upon which all of the existing tax codes- i.e. those laws you have to obey or thus spend a good deal of time in prison (ask capone)- are built?

Seriously, what is this "show me the law" crap? Do you believe the IRS simply sprang into being much the way dark age wise men thought dead bodies spontaneously produced flies?

Melkolmr
31st August 07, 12:33 AM
You're questioning the legality of an income tax and presenting alternatives to it. That's a stance and an advocation.

Anyway, here's the TaxAlmanac (http://taxalmanac.org/index.php/Main_Page) that covers, in depth, the several laws regarding income tax and other taxes.
I'm bringing the question up for discussion. I'm staying neutral. I never stated my belief on it, I never said there was no law on the books, and I'm presenting alternatives because there are alternatives. That's not a stance. I didn't say I thought this tax or that tax would be better, just that some people think so.


So Melkolmr, what do the top constitutional law professors have to say about the wording of the 16th amendment? Has it occurred to you that perhaps the ammendment itself constitues a sort of founding law upon which all of the existing tax codes- i.e. those laws you have to obey or thus spend a good deal of time in prison (ask capone)- are built?

Seriously, what is this "show me the law" crap? Do you believe the IRS simply sprang into being much the way dark age wise men thought dead bodies spontaneously produced flies?
Actually, yes, that is what I thought at first. But reviewing it demonstrated that the amendment clearly does not establish a law in its own right. It simply makes an allowance for an income tax under Constitutional tax law. And the establishment of the IRS is totally removed from the legality of the income tax.

Edit for afterthought: If the 16th amendment does in fact count as the establishing law, why not just cite that when asked by protesters?

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
31st August 07, 12:40 AM
I'm bringing the question up for discussion. I'm staying neutral. I never stated my belief on it, I never said there was no law on the books, and I'm presenting alternatives because there are alternatives. That's not a stance. I didn't say I thought this tax or that tax would be better, just that some people think so.

There's two problems with the devil's advocate excuse you're trying to build up. First, no one cares about your ability to argue for both sides of the fence when you do such a poor job of it. And second, you can't argue for such stupid ideas as a graduated sales tax.

Melkolmr
31st August 07, 12:45 AM
The trolling really doesn't work when it's easy to see you're not telling the truth.

Stick
31st August 07, 12:47 AM
FZOdXg3zhlI

Arhetton
31st August 07, 12:53 AM
So how do you all think government was run for over a hundred years without the income tax? It ran fine.

Have any of you ever worked for a business that illegally modified its tax records? I have. Do you know rich people who get away with paying virtually no tax at all? I do. Do you understand the income tax is a tax on the middle and working class - ie. wage earners? Do you understand that businesses can register their HQ in a country with little or no taxes ('tax haven') and modify their records so that they pay according to the tax rates of their HQ location? Do you understand stock options and all the sneaky shit 'rich' people get up to?

I'm under the impression that income tax is something that poor people pay to the government. And its funny when people take pride in being compulsorily taxed ('good citizen who pays their taxes'). If you didn't have to, you wouldn't. So stop waving your hypothetical tax penis around in the breeze.

Do you have any fucking clue how many taxes there are apart from income tax? I mean, theres actually such thing as a death tax - where the government taxes your assets after you die - how fucking ridiculous. As if they weren't lining their pockets already with the surplus that other people make, they tax you after you die.

Capital gains, fringe benefits, land tax, exise, stamp duty and excess, goods and or services tax, tariffs etc. The list is enormous. Every time you buy fuel, or pay for water or electricity, any time you make a purchase - the government is taxing that too. Roads aren't free, as I recall there are road tolls all over the fucking place. Public transport isn't free either, I have to pay every time I get on a bus or a train - so what the hell do the taxes pay for - answer - whatever the fuck the government wants it to pay for. Its not allocated to anything in particular. In Australia, the government spends hundreds of millions of dollars advertising useless shit on television every year. Millions of dollars, and they never have to justify the spending.

Have you ever seen a set of the full volumes of the tax code for your home country? Its a freaking legal maze and minefield. And the beurocracy to maintain it must be a complete MONSTER.

Melkolmr
31st August 07, 12:53 AM
I wish the cartoons I watched growing up were so chock full o' propaganda. I might be more patriotic than I am.

If they're right about tax money going to the manufacture of guns, then I'd like to get my refund in the form of a shiny new rifle.

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
31st August 07, 01:31 AM
So how do you all think government was run for over a hundred years without the income tax? It ran fine.

Government then =/ government today. The nation, its populace, and its government have grown so much that the methods of the 18th and 19th century don't make any sense in this day and age.


Have any of you ever worked for a business that illegally modified its tax records? I have. Do you know rich people who get away with paying virtually no tax at all? I do. Do you understand the income tax is a tax on the middle and working class - ie. wage earners? Do you understand that businesses can register their HQ in a country with little or no taxes ('tax haven') and modify their records so that they pay according to the tax rates of their HQ location? Do you understand stock options and all the sneaky shit 'rich' people get up to?

Ceteris paribus. I don't care about tax evasion because it's actually relatively abnormal and as such we cannot consider it to be an issue with income tax.


I'm under the impression that income tax is something that poor people pay to the government. And its funny when people take pride in being compulsorily taxed ('good citizen who pays their taxes'). If you didn't have to, you wouldn't. So stop waving your hypothetical tax penis around in the breeze.

The relationship between citizen and government is symbiotic. The government can't exist without the citizen's input (you vote and pay taxes) and the citizen and his property are at the peril of the elements and foreign invaders without the government.


Do you have any fucking clue how many taxes there are apart from income tax? I mean, theres actually such thing as a death tax - where the government taxes your assets after you die - how fucking ridiculous. As if they weren't lining their pockets already with the surplus that other people make, they tax you after you die.

The death tax really only effects very wealthy people because they're the only ones who leave large enough estates to be taxable. Furthermore, certain inheritances like farms and small business are exempt from the tax.


Capital gains, fringe benefits, land tax, exise, stamp duty and excess, goods and or services tax, tariffs etc. The list is enormous. Every time you buy fuel, or pay for water or electricity, any time you make a purchase - the government is taxing that too. Roads aren't free, as I recall there are road tolls all over the fucking place. Public transport isn't free either, I have to pay every time I get on a bus or a train - so what the hell do the taxes pay for - answer - whatever the fuck the government wants it to pay for. Its not allocated to anything in particular. In Australia, the government spends hundreds of millions of dollars advertising useless shit on television every year. Millions of dollars, and they never have to justify the spending.

You realize that all of these taxes go to pay for the goods you receive from the government, such as police and fire protection, and that these things benefit you even if you don't realize it? For example, your house isn't being invaded by Brian Peppers because he's in a jail funded by your taxes.

You also realize that several of the things you've criticized, such as toll roads and public transportation, are run by private companies and not the government?

Finally, you realize that you actually get to decide where your tax money goes every time you vote? Do you even vote?

Riddeck
31st August 07, 02:34 AM
I really wish some of you guys would just fucking watch a video.

This video shows a number of things, that if you JUST PUT YOUR ASS DOWN IN THE CHAIR AND VIEW IT, you will understand what it is about.

First it shows how the 16th Amendment DID NOT create any new taxes. The Supreme Court has TWO RULINGS against it. They cite this in the movie, multiple times.

Second it shows how the Federal Reserve is owned by Private Bankers (Rockefeller being one of them), however all the owners are still unknown. This information is not reviled. It also speaks of how the Fed Income tax is used to pay back the debt to the Federal Reserve.

Third it shows a court case in Illinois against a man named Whitey which proved (not sure if their law was amended) that Illinois residents would not have to pay a state income tax because the law read "If you are required to pay a federal income tax you must...".

Since there is NO LAW OR STATURE requiring you to pay Federal Income Tax. (The IRS cannot show you this law)

Finally it ties into what most of you consider 'crazy' territory. Some even go as far and say 'ignorance'. He talks about the idea that our Government is in debt to private citizens. They print the money, creating it out of thin air for our government (oh you need 20 billion?) and then loan us money (out of thin air) and charge us interest. THEN you pay an income tax that the Gov uses to pay their debt, and in the end YOU are the one getting fucked.

If you take this all into consideration, it really makes other 'conspiracies' feasible.

You have a small group of dominate men controlling your life. And they do not care about you.

Do you believe something should be done? Or do you want to continue to sit and deny all of it.

*EDIT*

The whole importance and why this focuses so hard on the law, is just that. We are a society of laws, and we have a Constitution for a reason. When it is being ignored, or abused, things have to be done.

Riddeck
31st August 07, 02:39 AM
Anyway, here's the TaxAlmanac (http://taxalmanac.org/index.php/Main_Page) that covers, in depth, the several laws regarding income tax and other taxes.

Seriously, stop it.

If a law is unconstitutional, it is not a law. That is how complicated it really is.

You have Constitutional rights, guaranteed. When they are no longer guaranteed, you have to start to worry.

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
31st August 07, 02:49 AM
Seriously, stop it.

If a law is unconstitutional, it is not a law. That is how complicated it really is.

You have Constitutional rights, guaranteed. When they are no longer guaranteed, you have to start to worry.

But the law IS constitutional because there's an amendment for it (and the two supreme court cases, Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. and Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad, were about, not against it).

Really, if you need a conspiracy to believe this just pretend that your income tax is gathered by aliens. Don't listen to some quack and then refuse to do your own research.

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
31st August 07, 02:56 AM
Second it shows how the Federal Reserve is owned by Private Bankers (Rockefeller being one of them), however all the owners are still unknown. This information is not reviled. It also speaks of how the Fed Income tax is used to pay back the debt to the Federal Reserve.

You don't understand how the federal reserve works do you? The government doesn't have all the money it spends. No one does. England and Russia and Turbanistan don't have all the money they spend either. So they borrow it. Everyone borrows from everyone else which is why no one calls their debts.


Since there is NO LAW OR STATURE requiring you to pay Federal Income Tax. (The IRS cannot show you this law)

http://taxalmanac.org/index.php/Internal_Revenue_Code:Sec._3402._Income_tax_collec ted_at_source

No, but I can.


Finally it ties into what most of you consider 'crazy' territory. Some even go as far and say 'ignorance'. He talks about the idea that our Government is in debt to private citizens. They print the money, creating it out of thin air for our government (oh you need 20 billion?) and then loan us money (out of thin air) and charge us interest. THEN you pay an income tax that the Gov uses to pay their debt, and in the end YOU are the one getting fucked.

We don't simply print or loan the government money. The amount of money in circulation, the income tax rate, and a lot of other things you don't understand are all functions of what we (we, not you) understand about economics. If the government simply printed an unlimited amount of money it would all be worthless anyway.

Stick
31st August 07, 06:42 AM
Oh holy shit..... I think I just figured it out..... MJS is a CPA!

In all seriousness, the nebulous ways of modern money making are something everyone should think about from time to time. That paper money is no longer backed by some hard substance (gold, silver) but simply by the shared belief of the citizens that use it in its inherent value- in the worth of their country's land, resources, man power, ingenuity, etc.- is the kind of thought that would make a 17th century banker's head implode (and subsequently make me LoL).

That imploded banker of yore's head should be all the hypothetical brain dripping evidence one needs to consider that just because government operated for hundreds of years without an income tax doesn't mean that it doesn't make sense now. Government was as small as we were, and we stopped being small roughly around the time of the income tax- by we I mean everything about this country save it's physical size.

I mean, hell, prior to serious taxation public school was a fucking joke- not that it's perfect now, mind you, just that compared to today's standards, what publicly funded schools pre-school through university and on into adult education do is so far beyond the horse shit "eh, come to school if you want" environment of the previous centuries.

The military is a tax eating machine impossible without what we give it today. Apart from the protection of ourselves and our interesets, the military is a huge drive for the overall growth of human knowledge and technology- hello Interwebz (look it up).

Riddeck, I'm just going to throw up a list of conspiracies and you go ahead and tell me which ones you've bought into

The moon landing never happened
Kennedy was killed by the CIA
Aliens are among us
The Knights Templar and Free Masons are totally in control of everything
The Pope is supposed to be a rabbit

Mister X
31st August 07, 01:41 PM
What raised the hair on the back of my neck was the fact that none of the people Aaron Russo interviewed was unable or unwilling to get a tax book and say,"Hey you stupid fuck this is the law that says you have to pay us now shut up ad go away".

Riddeck
31st August 07, 06:11 PM
Stick...

Only one on that list that I believe, and feel is relevant, is Kennedy. I need not explain further. Aliens thing, I stand on the fence, but I am certain that to believe we are the only intelligent life near us, seems a bit ridiculous.

Answer this for me though, why did George Bush, when running for President in 1988 claim he was never the director of the CIA, when he was in fact director when Kennedy was President? (and when he was assassinated by the master marksman Oswald).

As for MJS. America has a hierarchy of law. What this boils down to is simply that the Constitution is the end all, be all. Now if you had taken the time to watch the video, instead of spouting off like you know everything, you would have actually learned the definition of Income tax, and how it actually pertains to the 16th amendment. You would have learned the two court cases which ruled that the 16th amendment gave NO NEW TAX LEVY to Congress. The two you stated where cases involving corporation, which, if you had watched and learned you would know, is in fact, legal.

Income is defined as "Corporate gain or profit".

My labour, my time, and my energy do not fall into that definition.

You point out this tax book link, as if something in there is going to show me a law and a stature making me legally responsible to pay a federal income tax, and I assure you, it is not in there. And if it is in fact, somehow in there, it is not a law, because the HIGHEST court in the country deemed it unlawful.

Even the director of the IRS mucks himself in his chair when Aaron Russo asks him to show him the law. He cannot do it, because it does not exist. He then goes and contradicts himself, and states that the law is enforced even though it is not written.

So before you type anything else onto this thread, do yourself the favour of watching the video. You might, actually learn something.

And a note on the tax thing, education vs military...why is there such a severe imbalance? Why is so much money put into the military, and even less put into education? Would we not be a more powerful country if our population was more intelligent, and responsible?

The_Tao
31st August 07, 07:22 PM
Stick...

Only one on that list that I believe, and feel is relevant, is Kennedy. I need not explain further. Aliens thing, I stand on the fence, but I am certain that to believe we are the only intelligent life near us, seems a bit ridiculous.

Answer this for me though, why did George Bush, when running for President in 1988 claim he was never the director of the CIA, when he was in fact director when Kennedy was President? (and when he was assassinated by the master marksman Oswald).

As for MJS. America has a hierarchy of law. What this boils down to is simply that the Constitution is the end all, be all. Now if you had taken the time to watch the video, instead of spouting off like you know everything, you would have actually learned the definition of Income tax, and how it actually pertains to the 16th amendment. You would have learned the two court cases which ruled that the 16th amendment gave NO NEW TAX LEVY to Congress. The two you stated where cases involving corporation, which, if you had watched and learned you would know, is in fact, legal.

Income is defined as "Corporate gain or profit".

My labour, my time, and my energy do not fall into that definition.

You point out this tax book link, as if something in there is going to show me a law and a stature making me legally responsible to pay a federal income tax, and I assure you, it is not in there. And if it is in fact, somehow in there, it is not a law, because the HIGHEST court in the country deemed it unlawful.

Even the director of the IRS mucks himself in his chair when Aaron Russo asks him to show him the law. He cannot do it, because it does not exist. He then goes and contradicts himself, and states that the law is enforced even though it is not written.

So before you type anything else onto this thread, do yourself the favour of watching the video. You might, actually learn something.

And a note on the tax thing, education vs military...why is there such a severe imbalance? Why is so much money put into the military, and even less put into education? Would we not be a more powerful country if our population was more intelligent, and responsible?

the little education that s given seems to have skipped you

Stick
31st August 07, 08:53 PM
Stick...

Only one on that list that I believe, and feel is relevant, is Kennedy. I need not explain further. Aliens thing, I stand on the fence, but I am certain that to believe we are the only intelligent life near us, seems a bit ridiculous.

I too believe there's life out there. In my list I was getting at Area 51 and the tin foil hat wearing crowd convinced the Government and its black helicopters are in collusion with "Greys".


Answer this for me though, why did George Bush, when running for President in 1988 claim he was never the director of the CIA, when he was in fact director when Kennedy was President? (and when he was assassinated by the master marksman Oswald).

Because the Cold War was still a concern and generally speaking former directors of the CIA (recent books not withstanding) don't go out of their way to talk about their work at te agency in front of cameras and press. A lot more was going on in the 80's than further devious efforts to keep the truth about Kennedy under wraps. He may very well have had some dark insideous purpose for denying his involvement in the CIA, but I doubt very much it's what you think.


Income is defined as "Corporate gain or profit".

My labour, my time, and my energy do not fall into that definition.

O rly? (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/income)

Riddeck
1st September 07, 01:57 AM
I too believe there's life out there. In my list I was getting at Area 51 and the tin foil hat wearing crowd convinced the Government and its black helicopters are in collusion with "Greys".

Again, I do not know. Nor do you.




Because the Cold War was still a concern and generally speaking former directors of the CIA (recent books not withstanding) don't go out of their way to talk about their work at te agency in front of cameras and press. A lot more was going on in the 80's than further devious efforts to keep the truth about Kennedy under wraps. He may very well have had some dark insideous purpose for denying his involvement in the CIA, but I doubt very much it's what you think.

You can doubt, but you do not know, just as I do not know. But why lie to the American people, if not to cover something up? Or mislead in someway?




O rly? (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/income)

Meh.

Melkolmr
1st September 07, 01:22 PM
H.W. didn't take office as CIA director until Ford was president. John McCone was in when JFK was shot.

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
2nd September 07, 08:04 PM
And a note on the tax thing, education vs military...why is there such a severe imbalance? Why is so much money put into the military, and even less put into education? Would we not be a more powerful country if our population was more intelligent, and responsible?

This is the point I was making earlier, that you obviously don't understand economics at all and shouldn't really be opening your mouth about the legality or validity of an income tax.

Fact is, Aaron what'shisface is full of shit and you probably haven't put in the research (Which I presented for your consumption) to realize it. Lead a horse to water I suppose.

Dipshit.

Riddeck
2nd September 07, 11:02 PM
This is the point I was making earlier, that you obviously don't understand economics at all and shouldn't really be opening your mouth about the legality or validity of an income tax.

Fact is, Aaron what'shisface is full of shit and you probably haven't put in the research (Which I presented for your consumption) to realize it. Lead a horse to water I suppose.

Dipshit.


Economics is not the point. You are presenting a trail of logic that is leading nowhere.

The IRS themselves cannot and will not produce a law that makes a person responsible for Federal Income tax. It is unconstitutional, therefor not a law.

This is pretty cut and dry. What you offered me was a link on taxes, none of which expressively state the law exists.

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
3rd September 07, 12:24 AM
How can an income tax be be unconstitutional if there's a specific amendment for it? I want your explanation, not some other fag's.

Zub-Zub
3rd September 07, 01:49 AM
Economics is not the point. You are presenting a trail of logic that is leading nowhere.

The IRS themselves cannot and will not produce a law that makes a person responsible for Federal Income tax. It is unconstitutional, therefor not a law.

This is pretty cut and dry. What you offered me was a link on taxes, none of which expressively state the law exists.

Sorry, but MJS is correct here. Read the following excerpts below (culled from wikipedia):

Amendment XVI

(Ratified February 3, 1913)

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The United States imposes an income tax on individuals, corporations, trusts, and certain estates. This tax is imposed on the income event, such as the receipt of wages. Another example of an income event is the realization of a gain on the disposition of property; that is, the appreciation on the value of property is not taxed until that property is sold (i.e., when the gain is "realized").

The U.S. income tax was first proposed during the War of 1812, but was defeated.[4] In July 1861, the Congress passed a 3% tax on all net income above $600 a year (about USD 10,000 today). Income taxes were enacted at various times until 1894, but were not imposed after 1895 after an 1894 tax act was found to be unconstitutional. In response, the 16th Amendment was ratified in 1913.[4] Ratification has been unsuccessfully disputed by some tax protestors claiming, among other things, that slight errors in punctuation in the various instruments ratified by the several states invalidates the ratification. Tax protestors have also made other arguments about the validity of the U.S. income tax, without success (see Tax protester arguments).

The 2007 individual federal income tax rates are between 10% and 35%, depending on income and family status. People with relatively low incomes may pay no income tax, or may receive earned income tax credits (tax benefits); however, this does not include income based payroll taxes that fund Social Security and Medicare. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities states that three-fourths of taxpayers pay more in payroll taxes than they do in income taxes.[14]

[edit] U.S. state

Main articles: State income tax and State tax levels

Income tax may also be levied by individual U.S. states in addition to the federal income tax. Some states also allow individual cities to impose an additional income tax. Most state and local taxes are deductible expenses for federal tax purposes. Not all states levy an income tax (see State income tax).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


If anything, the matter I don't agree with is being taxed without regard to "any census or enumeration". That, to me, sounds like an approach to taxation without representation. It doesn't mean it is, but the government likes to construe things to their advantage, and thats what concerns me.