Jump to content

Income Tax?


Recommended Posts

I thought I'd throw this topic out their for a debate.
As you know by my avatar I live in the state of New Hampshire where the Brown's are currently staging their tax protest.
So I wanted to ask.
Income tax legal or illegal?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think income tax is a necessary thing done by the government to help run certain services.

I think its ridiculous how high it is though, but maybe thats just here in New Jersey. Pretty much in NJ the first 4 - 5 months of work is the government's cut. But then we get the rest of the 8 months! woohoo!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you know that not one cent of your income tax goes to run the country. It all goes to pay off the country's dept.
Bush need money for war, the federal reserve prints the money and gives it to Bush on loan. That drives up inflation by itself but then the American people pay back this loan with their labor.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i hate income tax, it makes me poorer everything month.

we get taxed on everything, from sales to property tax, to prostitution tax... lol maybe not that :-D

but screw taxes, i want to find a place where there are no taxes.. id say in the antarctic but i bet even there they have an icetax of some kind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would consider that reasonable if it went to pay for the war directly. But the war has already been paid for in full. The current system forces us to borrow money and then pay it back with interest. So we'll still be paying for this war long after its over like we pay for everything else. I don't think the government should borrow money and then tax my labor to pay it back.
I would like the income tax a lot better if it didn't pay dept. Say instead of paying dept, in went to education or civil programs etc. But in order to do this they would have to stop borrowing the money.
They borrow the money now and make us pay for it later. Think of the federal reserve as a giant credit card, and the government as the credit card holder and the people are the ones who pay the bill through taxation of our labor.
Rather than allowing the government to have a blank check, we need a system were the government earns an income from the people through legal taxation and then sits down and says ok this is how much money we have to use.
This would force the government to utilize the money more efficently knowing that its limited where as with the current system they can just write them selves another check and make the people pay for it later rather than now.
The government is our employee we are their employer, we pay them a set salary and they use that to the best of their abilites, it shouldn't be the other way around were they write themselves a check buy something and then tax us for the privalage.
It would be like the company I work for coming to me and saying. "Dave we just bought a new truck." "We couldn't really afford it but we found some one to issue us a blank check." "So now instead of paying for this truck with on hand money or through our profits we have decided that your gonna pay for it through your labor." "How does that sound?"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard the whole Aaron Russo thing, indeed, the Constitution says that direct taxes shall be apportioned. Thats all true. The 16th amendment changed that. It made income taxes legal and made apportionment not required. It may be possible that the Supreme Court previously decided income taxes weren't legal...but, if it went before them now, they would find them legal (Why don't you guys all go vote for Bush ONE more time...he should be able to do something right this time)...so what more needs to happen for them to be legal? A token Supreme Court Decision? I don't like them anymore than the next guy, but taxes are necessary.

Why was 2000-2008 so important for the republicans to get elected to the presidency? If the allegations are true, why would they stoop to cheating in FL? The aging Supreme Court. The republicans now have control of the Supreme Court for at least 12-15 years down the line. Overturn abortion, block stem cell research, prevent questioning of civil rights curtailment. Edited by Sonthert
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that but thats what I used as an example. The income tax is used for the sole purpose of paying dept no matter what it is.

U.S. NATIONAL DEBT CLOCK The Outstanding Public Debt as of 17 Jul 2007 at 08:42:08 PM GMT is:


The estimated population of the United States is 302,455,118
so each citizen's share of this debt is $29,385.51.


The National Debt has continued to increase an average of
$1.31 billion per day since September 29, 2006!
Concerned? Then tell Congress and the White House!


I ask you does the 1,500 they take from me a year even put a dent in that, espeacially when the government can just print them selves more money when its needed. I wish I could just print my self some moeny when ever I needed it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sonhert in response to your post a gentlemen in Florida was just let off on tax evasion charges. The judge in his case unlike with the Browns allowed previous supreme court descions to be submitted as evidence that he was not required to pay and that the 16th amendment did not grant congress any new taxing powers.
The jury found him not guilty.
If the Browns were able to do the same would they have been found not guilty. I don't know but at least they would have gotten a fair trial. The Browns were prosumed guilty the second they entered that court room and by not being able to submit evidence that they did not have to pay they could not prove them selves inocent. Edited by dcrooksjr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

watch the movie free (put by the people who made it so its legal) for more information
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173

more information on here and where to buy the dvd if you want to give it out to people to watch.
http://www.freedomtofascism.com/ Edited by boomhauer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen freedom to facism thats what made me start to question it. I like the interview with the former IRS agent who tried to claim the $50,000 prize for finding the law that required her to pay. She couldn't find one and to date that prize remains unclaimed. Edited by dcrooksjr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think every Jury would/should find those guilty of fighting taxes not guilty.

Think about how much tax REALLY goes into the used car you buy.

Taxes are paid for a foreign manufacturer to to ship the car to the United States. The car is shipped via semi to a dealership who pays fuel tax, road tax, interstate travel tax, emissions tax, and placed on a parking lot that usually has property tax. The car is sold by a man who pays tax from a man who has his wages taxed for selling the car. The man buys license plates (tax), a registration (tax), and shows proof of insurance and a driver's license (TAX!) at the BMV/DMV.

He drives the car.

He sells it in 5 years to buy another one.

The person who buys the car next goes on another tax rampage. Paying the government MORE tax. Why should tax ever be paid on a used car? The tax has already been paid.

This is why I like the Fairtax.org idea. Used goods do not deserve to have tax placed on them. Uncle Sam has his bloated fingers in enough pies, he does not need them to double dip in the same pie more than what the actual item is worth. Blargity!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you 100% ghostofdavid. I work at a food distribution center and I see a lot of trucks on a daily basis both from indepentdents and big companies and I honestly can't figure out how the indepentdents remain that way.
This one driver I get has a big yellow sticker on his truck that states this veicle pays $11,000 in highway use taxes a year. On top of that he also has to pay highway tolls, meals taxes, sales taxes, registration taxes, insurance fees, lumper fees and income tax and possibly more, all while trying to make a profit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in california people are stupid about taxes. they dont realize that we already pay taxes on the gas which is supposed to go to repair the roads. most of the money goes elsewhere so then the people pass bills for 500million+ to repair the roads which chances are again will not go to the roads yet again. we pay more and more taxes for roads when it doesnt even go there. most of society is stupid really, they believe what the media tells them rather than read the whats actually going on.

my proof on that is that when govt Arnold Schwarzenegger game into office he was put into a complete mess with the budget. so he held what the media called a "special election" which they said was for his own purposes to take money away from us! one of the bills was to take 2billion from education but not entirely. before he did the election he gave the schools an additional 4 billion and when he was trying to balance the budget he decided to take 2billion back of money they had not even recieved. all the teachers where outraged because they thought he was taking money they actually had away from them when it wasnt even in the school boards hands. they complained about it for so long and had a huge campaign against the governor because of that. they still to this day say he stole the money even though since all his bills to balance the budget which was needed badly got voted down they got to keep the 2 billion and an additional i believe 1.5 billions MORE so they got 5.5 BILLION dollars instead of 4billion. people where stupid and believed everything he was trying to do was bad. people need to stop listening to the media entirely and actually read whats happening but then again people are usually too stupid for that and would take what has been spoon fed to them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quick note on this, (I finally have a use for my econ class), the government cant just print up more money, that would drive up the inflation rate, which basically means that the US dollar loses value on the international level, and on the domestic level which means stuff costs more, and yes there are ways to combat inflation its just hard to get the government to act in time or correctly, most less act correctly in time.

Anyways yes I believe income tax is legal, Congress does have the power to levy taxes ESPECIALLY to fund the war on terror

Article 1 Section 8 of the US Constitution reads as follows

The Congress shall have power
to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

which means, if that is a bit confusing for you, Congress can make taxes specifically to fund a war, or to fund social security if they so desire but the taxes must apply equally across the states
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (jaker29902 @ Jul 18 2007, 07:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Quick note on this, (I finally have a use for my econ class), the government cant just print up more money, that would drive up the inflation rate, which basically means that the US dollar loses value on the international level, and on the domestic level which means stuff costs more, and yes there are ways to combat inflation its just hard to get the government to act in time or correctly, most less act correctly in time.

Anyways yes I believe income tax is legal, Congress does have the power to levy taxes ESPECIALLY to fund the war on terror

Article 1 Section 8 of the US Constitution reads as follows

The Congress shall have power
to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

which means, if that is a bit confusing for you, Congress can make taxes specifically to fund a war, or to fund social security if they so desire but the taxes must apply equally across the states


it can be interpreted alot of ways thats whats fun about being a lawyer i guess. Id have to check that myself but anyways, IMO we are being taxed excessively. Isnt that why we seperated from brits? sry JD :-P Well actually it was taxation without representation. but still :-Pim pretty sure we were mad at all the high taxes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with you, here crook, a FL jury is one thing, but the Supreme Court has its own agenda and if the case is pursued it will go whichever way benefits the IRS. Thats the cynic in me talking, but oh well.

A simple solution to all this (rhetoric here) would be to calculate how much money you are going to have to pay in income taxes and steal the money to compensate you for your taxes. Money is just an exchange medium for labor and time, right? So it really doesn't matter.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

actually you have it backwards sonthert. the supreme court has consistently ruled in favor of the citizens not the irs, its the lower courts who rule in favor of the irs.
the supreme court has stated that the 16th amendment to the constitution did not grant congress any new taxing powers. in another case they ruled that the 16th amendment to the constitution was un-constitutional.
now if i understand u.s. law correctly the supreme court is the supreme law of the land and what they say goes and lower courts have to obey their rulings. if someone is charged for not paying income tax then that charge should be null and void right, because the supreme court has ruled that the particular amendment was against the law and thus not enforceable in the lower courts.
the judge in the browns case refused to allow the supreme court rulings to be presented in his court room. in the florida case the judge did allow previous supreme court rulings to be submitted.
if the browns were able to do the same would they have been found not guilty, i don't know that depends on the jury but i do think they would have had a fair trial if they were able to use them.
to every one that says its legal i've got a challenge for you. theirs a group out their that runs a contest the prize is $50,000 if you can find the law that requires you to pay income taxes you win $50,000. irs agents have tried it and failed. why don't you give it a go? Edited by dcrooksjr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (nestormakhno @ Jul 20 2007, 03:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Meh, taxes are the price you pay for civilization.

And who's holding this contest? I'm also wondering what retarded IRS agent doesn't know how to search through the tax code. It's in there, people. :-)



Its the We the People Foundation who runs the contest, www.givemeliberty.org

Watch this clip here to see an Irs agents interview about the contest, http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=16...h&plindex=2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen something related. Interestingly enough, even though I have never worked for the IRS, never filed a tax return in my life, and still mooch off Mommy and Daddy to deal with the fine people of the Internal Revenue Service for me, I was able to find the law in fifteen minutes. How odd...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...