Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Slavery was a law, not a declaration of the role of gov't. One of the main justifications for abolishing slavery was b/c it expressly went against what duty of the gov't was to do. The Constitution lays out that one of the duties of gov't is collecting taxes, and that's what it's been since Day 1.
Otherwise, how do you fund building roads?
Look ... pay attention .... no one is suggesting that government doesn't have the power to collect taxes, nor is anyone suggesting that it shouldn't. But it's not government's "duty" to do it .. it is a "granted power" to collect taxes. And where does government get it's power? From the people ... by consent of the governed, and not because government has bigger guns.
And I think it is safe to say that most reasonable people understand that all of the elements that make up a well functioning country requires revenue to pay for those things ... and by and large, the American people have always been willing to "pay a fair share" of those costs. But government doesn't get to decide to spend money like drunken sailors on things that 1) don't benefit the people ... 2) on activities contrary to the will and good conscience of the people 3) to enrich the crony capitalist international banker gangster mafia. Is it possible to get that through a few thick skulls here .. or am I casting pearls before swine?
Just to give you and others a bit of perspective in regard to what I'm talking about here ... when I was born in 1957, the total Federal budget was about 76 Billion dollars ... that's everything ... soup to nuts, total federal expenditures ... and the taxes collected were 79 Billion. Those numbers seem very small by todays standards as we often hear the word "Trillion or TrillionS" in conversation.
Another interesting fact is that corporations paid about 30% of that total tax collected, while the individuals paid the other 70%. Today ... corporate entities pay around 7%, and individuals pay 93% of the bill. But that's not where the REAL CRIME is occurring .... the REAL CRIME is that today we are paying roughly 250 Billion annually in just INTEREST PAYMENTS TO THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANKER CARTEL ... which reflects an amount over THREE TIMES THE TOTAL FEDERAL BUDGET just 50 years ago. TRIPLE THE ENTIRE FEDERAL BUDGET OF 1957 in just interest payments to international bankers who we allow to "lend" us our OWN MONEY !!!!
That's right ... they lend us our own money, and charge us interest. These CROOKS, and the crooked corporations that they own funnel in hundreds of millions of dollars to finance the campaigns of your elected officials who then keep spending and borrowing Trillions each year now, adding to the total debt, and increasing the amounts of "interest" owed to the banker gangsters, and crying about how they need to raise taxes to pay for it all. And they sell you this bill of goods about how it is YOU who is at fault ... the welfare recipients ... the unemployed ... the old folks on Social Security ... etc. What do they choose not to blame? Well they choose not to blame the 500 Billion spent on defense each year, which is over 10 TIMES what the entire federal budget was in 1957. They don't mention little details like the 2.3 Trillion Dollars that the Pentagon "misplaced" .... Donald Rumsfeld made that little announcement on September 10, 2001 ... and you'd think that might be big news ... wouldn't you? Well, then 911 happened the very next day, and this missing 2.3 Trillion was simply forgotten. Do you realize that 2.3 Trillion is 30 TIMES the total federal budget for 1957? 30 TIMES .... 30 YEARS worth of money that just vanishes?
Well, I could go on an on here, but I'll simply close by saying that those of you who don't think we are being ROBBED BLIND in the greatest systematic theft in all of human history .... well, you all should just SHUT-THE-FRACK UP until you have something remotely intelligent to say.
If this is the case, Mr. Schiff may be an knowledgeable economist but he is sorely ignorant of government or law. So let's put this taxes as theft meme to rest once and for all.
Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property,without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
DUE PROCESS
It means according to the law of the land, including the Constitution with its guaranties and the legislative enactments and rules duly made by its authority, so far as they are consistent with constitutional limitations." Ekern v. McGovern, 154 Wis. 157, 142 N.W. 595, 620 (1913), cases cited.
Article 1 - The Legislative Branch Section 8 - Powers of Congress
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Amendment 16 - Status of Income Tax Clarified
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.
Now whether Mr. Schiff or anyone else likes the above facts is irrelevant. Within our constitutional framework, the imposition of taxes is a power held by Congress, granted by the Constitution and as such cannot in any way shape for form give rise to an illegal seizure of property, i.e., theft. The argument is a non-starter.
It's real funny how a lot of wackos think the government is "stealing" from them by paying taxes, so... let's grant them that wish. Let's give them zero taxes--municipal, state, AND federal.
...BUT! They will no longer be allowed to drive on public roads, use public transit, stand under streetlights, use public parks, call the cops if their brother's killed or house is robbed or whatever, call the fire department if their house or business catches fire, eat any food that has been inspected for safety by the government, get Social Security checks when they're older... so on and so forth.
(Just in case anyone reading this missed the quite obvious point: taxes are the dues we pay for having infrastructure and programs as a society. It is NOT theft because the government does stuff for us in return for collecting taxes.)
It's real funny how a lot of wackos think the government is "stealing" from them by paying taxes, so... let's grant them that wish. Let's give them zero taxes--municipal, state, AND federal.
...BUT! They will no longer be allowed to drive on public roads, use public transit, stand under streetlights, use public parks, call the cops if their brother's killed or house is robbed or whatever, call the fire department if their house or business catches fire, eat any food that has been inspected for safety by the government, get Social Security checks when they're older... so on and so forth.
(Just in case anyone reading this missed the quite obvious point: taxes are the dues we pay for having infrastructure and programs as a society. It is NOT theft because the government does stuff for us in return for collecting taxes.)
So what you are saying is... IF NOT because of government, we will have none of these?
So how do you think roads were build before big government in the start of 20th century? How do community protect themselves? All foods must be poisonous before FDA.
Social Security check? Another tax we are forced to paid into and that was started at 1% of our income, now at 15.3%? You calling that social security?
Nothing wrong with the document in it's original form, with regard to tax collection. The framers understood finance and economics, and built an honest system. Subsequent changes, much of which are antithetical to the constitution have created ALL OF THE PROBLEMS.
Without going into painfully verbose details, the gist of it is that the original structure for taxation prohibited a direct tax or capitation on the people, with all legal "income taxes" applied to foreign commerce only. There were other taxes like excise taxes and so forth, but income tax was applicable to "Production", and there are important benefits to this. When government revenue is tied to production (making and selling things to foreigners outside the country) then government will craft policies that encourage that production because it is the only way to increase it's revenue. That's good for the country as a whole, and good for the people too, because production means jobs and incomes for Americans, and that is good news for the general economy.
BUT ... that was changed, and a direct tax was applied to domestic income of the people that was not related to production. And slowly that rate of taxation increased any time government needed more money, without having a corresponding increase in production (remember this .. it's the key economic factor). So, taxes increase and government spends more ... and they spend more because they can increase taxes at will. The corporations which slowly take over and have government do it's bidding (restructuring tax laws, import export law, removal of tariffs, free trade agreements, etc.) setting up the environment to move this "production" off shore (including the jobs for Americans) to increase their profit margins, and reduce their tax liabilities that the people then have to pay more to make up the short fall (even though there are less people working due to the loss of jobs) .. ... you have now created a situation where government is consuming it's citizens, rather than government living off a portion of the production (profit) of it's citizens. This leads to wealth destruction because we are consuming ourselves, rather than producing goods and selling them overseas. Keep in mind, when you buy a hamburger from Burger King, there is no new income or wealth created ... it is simply a transfer of existing wealth from one pocket to the next. It's like a company cafeteria .... a company cannot survive on selling lunch to it's employees ... it has to sell it's products .. the lunch service is just a service, not the profit center of the company. And that is the same thing with our country ... the movie theater ... the restaurant .... all of these things are consumption, not production. Eventually, without production (just like the company cafeteria) all you have is consumption, and no profit from selling your products. What happens then? Well the company must do one of three things .. 1) sell products (increase production), 2) borrow money to keep operating 3) cut expenses. Companies will lay off workers if it can't increase sales, because banks won't lend money indefinitely to failing companies. But with government's cozy relationship with it's bank (the Federal Reserve) they can borrow money indefinitely, and that is what has been occurring. Production keeps decreasing (jobs and production moving off shore) ... people lose their jobs and the tax revenue they were paying goes away with the jobs. So government has to borrow more money to offset the loss and pay unemployment .. and this is a chain reaction type event since those people who lost their jobs no longer can go to the restaurants and movies and burger joints and those businesses suffer and lay off more people, and the economic fire continues to feed itself. Here's the dirty little secret ... the bank (federal reserve) gets it's money by lending ... so as the economic situation worsens, and government has to borrow more and more money .. that's good for the bank ... not good for the country or the people. Unfortunately, the situation is, the Bank now dictates government policy ... and just what policy do you think the bank will encourage? Any policy that results in more borrowing!!! And that is the exact opposite of what is in the best interests of the country and the people ....
How did this entire mess happen? It happened the moment production was no longer government's main source of income, and it began directly taxing the existing wealth of it's citizens.
It's real funny how a lot of wackos think the government is "stealing" from them by paying taxes, so... let's grant them that wish. Let's give them zero taxes--municipal, state, AND federal.
Wackos huh? You calling someone else a wacko, then type this trash? Lord have mercy on your soul, because I'm afraid the mind is beyond such divine assistance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Serge
...
BUT! They will no longer be allowed to drive on public roads
Public roads are supposed to be funded by gas tax
use public transit
But doesn't the fee you pay to ride the bus, or the subway pay for the "privilege"? And, other than the cities, does the subway and the bus go out to the rural areas? Huh? Duh? Should farmer brown who has never even ridden a bus or even seen a subway car except on TV have to pay for your bus fare, bubba?
stand under streetlights use public parks,
Isn't that a cost the State wherein you reside pay for? Out of your property taxes and local sales taxes? I had no idea that I had a federal street light outside my house ... who knew?
call the cops if their brother's killed or house is robbed or whatever
Do you call the FBI or the US Marshall Service or the ATF or the DEA, or TSA for such things, or do you call the local police, paid for by your LOCAL TAXES ?
call the fire department if their house or business catches fire
The federal fire department? I had no idea that Austin Fire Department was a federal agency ... wait ... it ISN'T ... I just checked .... it's paid for by the City of Austin!!!!
eat any food that has been inspected for safety by the government
Some people don't know when to quit ... and you must be one of them. Oh yeah baby, what would we do without the FDA .. the Food Disaster Agency ... Soy oh so good for you .... GMO eat some mo .... fluoride in my water, I'm so grateful for the reduced IQ and increased cancer rates .... except, I spend the money to filter that crap out of the water I drink ... and you should too
get Social Security checks when they're older
Social Security is broke ... and we pay for it ... it is a SEPARATE charge not funded from income tax.
(Just in case anyone reading this missed the quite obvious point: taxes are the dues we pay for having infrastructure and programs as a society. It is NOT theft because the government does stuff for us in return for collecting taxes.)
Just in case you missed my earlier post and that recommendation, I'll repeat ...
Anyone who doesn't now realize how BADLY WE ARE BEING ROBBED BLIND needs to shut-the-frack up until they have something remotely intelligent to say.
Nothing wrong with the document in it's original form, with regard to tax collection. The framers understood finance and economics, and built an honest system. Subsequent changes, much of which are antithetical to the constitution have created ALL OF THE PROBLEMS.
Without going into painfully verbose details, the gist of it is that the original structure for taxation prohibited a direct tax or capitation on the people, with all legal "income taxes" applied to foreign commerce only. There were other taxes like excise taxes and so forth, but income tax was applicable to "Production", and there are important benefits to this. When government revenue is tied to production (making and selling things to foreigners outside the country) then government will craft policies that encourage that production because it is the only way to increase it's revenue. That's good for the country as a whole, and good for the people too, because production means jobs and incomes for Americans, and that is good news for the general economy.
BUT ... that was changed, and a direct tax was applied to domestic income of the people that was not related to production. And slowly that rate of taxation increased any time government needed more money, without having a corresponding increase in production (remember this .. it's the key economic factor). So, taxes increase and government spends more ... and they spend more because they can increase taxes at will. The corporations which slowly take over and have government do it's bidding (restructuring tax laws, import export law, removal of tariffs, free trade agreements, etc.) setting up the environment to move this "production" off shore (including the jobs for Americans) to increase their profit margins, and reduce their tax liabilities that the people then have to pay more to make up the short fall (even though there are less people working due to the loss of jobs) .. ... you have now created a situation where government is consuming it's citizens, rather than government living off a portion of the production (profit) of it's citizens. This leads to wealth destruction because we are consuming ourselves, rather than producing goods and selling them overseas. Keep in mind, when you buy a hamburger from Burger King, there is no new income or wealth created ... it is simply a transfer of existing wealth from one pocket to the next. It's like a company cafeteria .... a company cannot survive on selling lunch to it's employees ... it has to sell it's products .. the lunch service is just a service, not the profit center of the company. And that is the same thing with our country ... the movie theater ... the restaurant .... all of these things are consumption, not production. Eventually, without production (just like the company cafeteria) all you have is consumption, and no profit from selling your products. What happens then? Well the company must do one of three things .. 1) sell products (increase production), 2) borrow money to keep operating 3) cut expenses. Companies will lay off workers if it can't increase sales, because banks won't lend money indefinitely to failing companies. But with government's cozy relationship with it's bank (the Federal Reserve) they can borrow money indefinitely, and that is what has been occurring. Production keeps decreasing (jobs and production moving off shore) ... people lose their jobs and the tax revenue they were paying goes away with the jobs. So government has to borrow more money to offset the loss and pay unemployment .. and this is a chain reaction type event since those people who lost their jobs no longer can go to the restaurants and movies and burger joints and those businesses suffer and lay off more people, and the economic fire continues to feed itself. Here's the dirty little secret ... the bank (federal reserve) gets it's money by lending ... so as the economic situation worsens, and government has to borrow more and more money .. that's good for the bank ... not good for the country or the people. Unfortunately, the situation is, the Bank now dictates government policy ... and just what policy do you think the bank will encourage? Any policy that results in more borrowing!!! And that is the exact opposite of what is in the best interests of the country and the people ....
How did this entire mess happen? It happened the moment production was no longer government's main source of income, and it began directly taxing the existing wealth of it's citizens.
I disagree, I think the document was drafted as a measure of control rather than fairness and equality. You're seeing how that could manifest today.
And the document actually does nothing but serve the partisan gridlock because it is very, very flexible and now you have both parties interpreting it to fit their personal agenda. The Supreme Court is becoming infected.
And it does this through social issues, let alone monetary or fiscal ones.
The situation you outline is rather benign, within the framework. Taxation in the scenario you present is entirely fair. But, again, the Constitution is too flexible and why flexibility is bad is because that flexibility serves the state more than the individual.
But I do agree had we thwarted the Federal Reserve like we did originally.. Things would be much, much more civil right now.
It is argued by many, that general welfare also includes the fact that it benefits the country as a whole, to have it's citizens healthy (which would entail be sheltered, fed, etc)
That might be true when the objective would be to have a citizenry that can contribute to the rest of society....a difference which escapes those that endorse applying it to any and every body whether they contribute or not.
I believe it says general welfare of the United States, not of individuals. Go back and re-read it, and let us know.
I say taxation is a form of slavery.
Try keeping all the fruits of your labor and see how free you are.
Slaves don't get to keep any of the "fruits" of their labor. Free men on the other hand are free to move to any place where they think they can get a better deal.
We MAYBE have 30 years left before we collapse under debt.
It has to happen now.
You must not be aware of the collapse in 1933.
The U.S. government went bust, and was foreclosed, and run under new management, sans that pesky limitation known as the U.S. constitution.
Senate Report 93-549
War and Emergency Powers Acts
"A majority of the people of the United States have lived all of their lives under emergency rule. For 40 years (as of the report 1933-1973), freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by states of national emergency."
Constitutional U.S.A. (1787 - 1933) R.I.P.
Can you guess what happened in 1933 that triggered the "emergency"?
Here's a hint:
Legal Tender Status
" Federal Reserve notes are not redeemable in gold, silver or any other commodity, and receive no backing by anything. This has been the case since 1933. The notes have no value for themselves..."
From 1933 forward, private possession and ownership of gold was illegal for U.S. citizens. Any refusal to return one’s gold was punishable by a fine of $10,000 and 10 years in prison.
"Free" Americans could no longer own lawful money.
Curious?
Go read the law for yourself.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
