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.
Income is different of salary. Seem irs don't care as long they got their money.
Fact:
If salary is same like income why we called it salary?
Salary are paid after, incomes paid before
Salary is paid for a work, income for a service
Etc...
Income is different of salary. Seem irs don't care as long they got their money.
Fact:
If salary is same like income why we called it salary?
Salary are paid after, incomes paid before
Salary is paid for a work, income for a service
Etc...
So why tax on salaries?
Well, we shouldn't pay tax on salaries but it has nothing to do with the semantic game you're playing. We shouldn't pay tax on salaries because we shouldn't pay tax on income in the first place.
Well, we shouldn't pay tax on salaries but it has nothing to do with the semantic game you're playing. We shouldn't pay tax on salaries because we shouldn't pay tax on income in the first place.
This is correct. The whole issue boils down to governments illogical position that you have no cost basis in your own labor. This is an easily refutable logical fallacy as labor is the only true measurement of wealth.
Money only represents labor.
The government treats wages as 100% profit, refusing to recognise that in fact the money your received in wages were offset 100% by the labor you gave in return. There was no profit on the transaction because you exchanged your labor at market value.
Income is the same no matter what it is called. It is money your receive from ANY source from inheritance, insurance salary or loot. It should be added up and taxed at a progressive rate after a deduction equal to the 95th percentile.
Let the people that own the country pay for the wars.
This is correct. The whole issue boils down to governments illogical position that you have no cost basis in your own labor. This is an easily refutable logical fallacy as labor is the only true measurement of wealth.
Money only represents labor.
The government treats wages as 100% profit, refusing to recognise that in fact the money your received in wages were offset 100% by the labor you gave in return. There was no profit on the transaction because you exchanged your labor at market value.
Yeah, it's illogical except to the rest of the people of the US who are not tax protesters. Every single tax protester, and freeman on the land, argument has failed. Usually resulting in increased fines, and jail time, to the idiot who tried it.
Tell you what, how about you go on your legal war against taxes. Prove to the nation how illogical all these things are. I will eat my words if you win. Considering you have been posting about it here for a good 7 years and haven't done a single thing...it's pretty safe to say you are just full of hot air.
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.
