An income tax is inconsistent with the historical definition of freedom. Today in America government has a claim on every person’s labor, just as feudal lords, the government of that time, had claims on the labor of serfs and nineteenth century plantation owners had on slaves. FULL ARTICLE
|
 |
57 comments ↓
Taxation is theft. As long as we continue to be taxed we are not truly free.
I’ve always thought – well, we need to have taxes for a civil society, but I don’t think we’re getting what we paid for. This ain’t civil, everybody.
This is such a week argument. This article does nothing more than falsely tie our “freedom” with the notion of government taxation. Our founding fathers did not consider taxation a form of serfdom. When drafting our constitution, our founding fathers were concerned about TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION.
More Spooner:
“If the government can take a man’s money without his consent, there is no limit to the additional tyranny it may practice upon him; for, with his money it can hire soldiers to stand over him, keep him in subjection, plunder him at discretion, and kill him if he resists. And governments always do this, as they everywhere and always have done it, except where common law principle has been established. It is therefore a first principle, a very sine qua non of political freedom, that a man can be taxed only by his personal consent. “
Zoomad said: “This article does nothing more than falsely tie our “freedom” with the notion of government taxation.”
The income tax also ties in with voting. People associate paying taxes with voting. People who vote pay taxes and support the system. When was the last time you got something in return for paying your taxes? All the system does is TAKE away freedoms. That’s what taxes do: TAKE TAKE TAKE.
“Our founding fathers did not consider taxation a form of serfdom.”
Taxation WITHOUT CONSENT is taxation WITHOUT REPRESENTATION. When was the last time you consented to be taxed? If you are paying because you “have to,” then the government is taxing you without your consent.
Brilliant, thank you. Keep writing, keep shaking, Americans will wake up eventually.
Do you want to change this shameful practice? Do you really want representation for your taxes? Do you know how to do it?
Haven’t you been given a scenario whereby you can take back your government? Once you take back your government , you can certainly make changes. So why haven’t you done it?
Remember how to eat an elephant?
Join me in never voting for a Republican Candidate again and while exercising this still existing right , lets join together to form a new party; Or to enhance a new party. To replace the departed.
That’s how to regain your freedoms.
Alisa said: “When was the last time you got something in return for paying your taxes? All the system does is TAKE away freedoms. That’s what taxes do: TAKE TAKE TAKE.”
While I understand your point of view, it is quite extreme. You didn’t get ANYTHING in return for paying your taxes? Ever? Really? The government has never enforced your ownership rights? The government has never provided you with police protection? Running water? A standing military? Federally-backed student loans?
You may not agree with everything your government spends your tax money on (I surely don’t), but to say that all the government does it “TAKE TAKE TAKE” is kind of a ridiculous overstatement.
“Taxation WITHOUT CONSENT is taxation WITHOUT REPRESENTATION.”
Go read a history book. Obviously, you’ve never take a civics class. If governments had to obtain your consent to collect taxes, governments would not exist. Remember something called the Boston Tea Party? Where the colonists/founding fathers were upset that the King of England was taxing them without receiving any representation in Parliament?
A long quote, but I think this says it all, from Lysander Spooner:
“The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: ‘Your money, or your life.’ And many, if not most, taxes are paid under the compulsion of that threat. The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the roadside, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful. The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act. He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit. He does not pretend to be anything but a robber. He has not acquired impudence enough to profess to be merely a ‘protector,’ and that he takes men’s money against their will, merely to enable him to ‘protect’ those infatuated travellers, who feel perfectly able to protect themselves, or do not appreciate his peculiar system of protection. He is too sensible a man to make such professions as these. Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you, as you wish him to do. He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful ’sovereign,’ on account of the ‘protection’ he affords you. He does not keep ‘protecting’ you, by commanding you to bow down and serve him; by requiring you to do this, and forbidding you to do that; by robbing you of more money as often as he finds it for his interest or pleasure to do so; and by branding you as a rebel, a traitor, and an enemy to your country, and shooting you down without mercy, if you dispute his authority, or resist his demands. He is too much of a gentleman to be guilty of such impostures, and insults, and villanies as these. In short, he does not, in addition to robbing you, attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave.”
All that the government can do is take – it creates nothing without taking from someone else, and it’s always by the use or threat of force.
The federal government (where the income tax goes to) does not provide police protection, does not provide running water, and provides us with a standing military that actually makes us less safe by stationing it all around the world and meddling in everyone’s affairs.
While the feds still provide student loans, I would stay strongly on the side that I’d rather have no federal government than the polluting, lying, stealing, mass murdering one we have today.
Gotta give a shout out to Dave Anderson’s last comment here. I think he nailed it! Way to go, my friend!!
“ If governments had to obtain your consent to collect taxes, governments would not exist.”
Obviously you do not understand what NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION is or means. Representation is having a VOICE in government: When we the People speak, Government listens. No VOICE = No representation. And do not tell me that we do have a VOICE in government, because we don’t. The only people who get representation are the TAXPAYERS; Tax protestors are out of sight out of mind, never to be heard from again VOICE of the past. As the author of the article says: NO 1ST AMENDMENT FREEDOM OF SPEECH RIGHTS.
The only way Government can survive is if people want it. Most people want less government, not more, which is why Government doesn’t listen. Less government means little or no taxes on the people; and that’s the way Government should be, but it never is.
It is impossible to refute the entire litany of belief that is forever repeated in articles such as this. It is not possible to understand the world as it is by forever resorting to words that are abstractions. Especially when the words and phrases are fundamentally false in their description of the real world.
Never is their any attempt to understand how the ruling class, with it’s total control of mass media, make use of symbols and words to further maximize their economic and political exploitation of society.
Corporate capitalism is forever equating it’s “freedom to maximize profit” and “freedom”from regulation as equal to the “freedom of the individual”.
“Free Trade” and “privatization” are great abstractions to befuddle millions of “rugged individualists” who take up the banner of unregulated gangster capitalism.
The unending wars for oil, resources and profit now carried out by the Obama administration, are rooted in the decline of U.S. capitalism.
The vast economic and social inequality now evident even in the U.S. are intrinsic to the capitalist economic system. Economic inequality of such proportions are not simply a function of “individualism”. Nor are they a function of a (perverted) notion of Darwin’s “survival of the fittest”.
For a radical (root) understanding of current affairs try reading the daily World Socialist Web Site: http://www.wsws.org
Taxation without representation? Hell, I haven’t been represented for years! Have you?
The last time I went to my represenative regarding taxes, the IRS told her that I wasn’t “in compliance.” In other words, they couldn’t help because I was complaining about taxes. They help taxpayers, not tax complainers. My representative (so-called) didn’t have a word to say after that.
On the state level, I requested help from the alleged “Senator” Don Perata. I got no help from him either for the same reasons. Mr. Perata now wants to be ”Mayor” of Oakland.
How on earth these people get their votes, I’ll never know.
They make it extremely difficult, and nearly impossible ,for anyone that wants to stop paying. It’s possible–just not easy.
We have NO representative government, anywhere.
Go to youtube.com and do a search for ”Adrian Salbuchi” and listen to the videos entitled “Will it be a One World Government”. 5 and 10 minute videos.
Here’s a comment recently posted by him:
Right. Also… let’s not forget that WE THE PEOPLE are the State and all their “rights” over us are there as long as they behave legitimately. Otherwise we have the right to defend ourselves. “No taxation without representation” and believe you me, the American people are NOT represented by the FED and their banker cronies… It’s going to be tough in the US, in Argentna and elsewhere, but what must be done, must be done… Good luck to all of us!
Regards and Happy Easter! Adrian Salbuchi
Dave Anderson said:
“All that the government can do is take – it creates nothing without taking from someone else, and it’s always by the use or threat of force.
The federal government (where the income tax goes to) does not provide police protection, does not provide running water, and provides us with a standing military that actually makes us less safe by stationing it all around the world and meddling in everyone’s affairs.
While the feds still provide student loans, I would stay strongly on the side that I’d rather have no federal government than the polluting, lying, stealing, mass murdering one we have today.”
Yes Dave, the government does create. One example, it creates weapons of mass destruction. It does this by investing trillions of dollars into private companies that, in turn, fight each to create the craziest weapons man has ever seen. Mass murdering is wrong, don’t get me wrong, but we do create crazy stuff.
Another example, the government/federal reserve creates fiat money; money that is walking a tightrope with trillions of dollars on its shoulders. There isn’t enough gold in this world to support an international economy. Your only other option is to forever stunt development in order to maintain distinct and separate economies.
Ironically (and I’m not saying this is my view point, I like capitalism), one can argue that private companies create nothing of value. When one company does well, inevitably, another company must suffer. The money is merely redistributed from one to another. New industry always replaces old industry, and so on.
And yes, VOTING is your voice. The founders made ours a federal republic, not a true democrac, in order to resist extreme populist action destroying the union. Unless there is a revolution (as some of the founders also suggested should occur from time to time), or you have gobs of cash, this is what we have.
You suggest no government at all. That’s a pretty scary idea. It’s like all the scary things you are bitching about with our government, but intensified. That’s Africa. And if that’s case, I want myself the deadliest weapon man has ever seen so no one else in this country of 300 million people f*cks with my life or property by the USE OF FORCE. And let me tell you something, I don’t have the money to arm myself.
Yeah, I’d like to vote. I just wished enough of us Americans were properly informed of the matters that relate to the functioning of our government and civil society. They way, we could vote with reason and informed intellect rather than disinformation and religious fanaticism. Including all those zoroastrian, quaker, scientologist, muslim, and christian extremists out there.
I’d like to see a government where every law of national debate would be put under a constitutionally-mandated referendum so we can vote on it. That amendment should also allow for the automatic ouster of 1/2 of Congress every 10-20 years to prevent powerful incumbents from accumulating too much power.
This has been a healthy debate. Thanks.
-zoomad
It is IMPERATIVE that Americans learn the TRUTH about the federal income EXCISE tax. For that is what—and all—it is, an EXCISE tax on federally-privileged activity(s), with the money (or in-kind) income derived therefrom used merely as the measure of gain or profit garnered from such federally-privileged activity(s). It is NOT an unapportioned capitation, which is still to this day unconstitutional. The vast majority of Americans, including, apparently, Paul Craig Roberts, are completely bamboozled and ignorant of the legislative history, case-law history, and actual statutory provisions surrounding and underlying the federal income EXCISE tax. But you can self-educate up to speed fairly easily. Visit http://howyoubecomeliable.com/, then visit http://www.losthorizons.com/Newsletter.htm and, more specifically, http://www.losthorizons.com/Intro.pdf to learn more. Don’t just sit passively and whine about it—become a Warrior for the Rule of Law. Paraphrasing slightly the great James Madison, Liberty and the Rule of Law, and thus Justice, must be constantly proclaimed and upheld, lest they be forever lost in the pursuit…
It’s also imperative that I emphasize that the vast majority of Americans do NOT engage in federally-privileged activity(s) in the normal course of going about living their lives. Neither working-for-a-living per se (and certainly not in the private-sector), nor engaging in (non-federally-connected) business pursuits of whatever sort, are federally-privileged activity(s) at all whatsoever, and are NOT subject to federal income EXCISE taxation. The United States Supreme Court, in numerous cases, has made it abundantly clear that (1) working-for-a-living, whether by selling one’s labor or operating one’s own (private-sector) business producing a good or service for sale, is a fundamental (i.e., meta-legal, meta-political) human RIGHT, protected by the Constitution, and that (2) neither a Union-State nor the federal government can excise-tax (or otherwise indirectly tax) the exercise of a fundamental RIGHT, nor the enjoyment of the fruits thereof. So then the question becomes, how does it come about that I appear (to the IRS, and, at least nominally, under the law) to have engaged in federally-privileged activity(s) and garnered income associated therewith and derived therefrom, and thus nominally subject to such a federal income EXCISE tax? That is precisely what you will learn when you visit the websites listed above. It reads almost like a Len Deighton or Robert Ludlum tale in spots, as it is, ultimately, the story of one of the most gigantic and unconscionable frauds of the 20th century (the other being, of course, the Federal Reserve System, which is neither federal nor has any reserves [other than the pilfering of the American People’s gold once sequestered at Fort Knox], but this is another topic for another time…). Investigate, learn the truth, then TAKE ACTION. Uphold Liberty, Justice, and the Rule of Law, otherwise, to slightly paraphrase the great James Madison, they shall be forever lost in the pursuit…Never let it be said that I didn’t do what I could to educate my fellow citizens about this TYRANNY under the color of law and what they can do to rid themselves of it!!
Zoomad, yes I am an Anarchist, but I’m also a realist. Anarchy is totally impossible. No one actually believes that government could wither away, or will ever wither away. No government has, and I’ll guarantee you, that no government, made up of men, is ever going to– that, you can be absolutely certain of.
In Anarchyal type of government, you would have to have a society where no one would cheat, no one would lie, no one steal, and we would all think and agree to all matters of importance- Impossible, wouldn’t you say?
The ideal government, by Lysander Spooner:
All legitimate government is a mutal insurance company, voluntarily agreed upon by the parties to it, for the protection of their rights against wrong-doers. In its voluntary character it is precisely similar to an association for mutal protection against fire or shipwreck. Before a man will join an assocation for these latter purposes, and pay the premium for being insured, he will, if he be a man of sense, look at the articles of the association; see what the company promises to do; what it is likely to do; and what are the rates o insurance. If he be satisfied on all these points, he will become a member, pay his premium for a year, and then hold the company to its contract. If the conduct of the company prove unsatisifactory, he will let his policy expire at the end of the year for which he has paid; will decline to pay any further premiums, and either seek insurance elsewhere, or take his own risk without any insurance. And as men act in the insurnace of their ships and dwellings, they would act in the insurance of their properties, liberties and lives, in the political association, or government.
The political insurance company, or government, have no more right, in nature or reason, to assume a man’s consent to be protected by them, and to be taxed for that protection, when he has given no actual consent, than a fire or marine insurance company have to assume a man’s consent to be protected by them, and to pay the premium, when hi sactual consent has never been given. To take a man’s property without his consent is robbery; and to assume his consent, where no actual consent is given, makes the taking none the less robbery. If it did, the highwayman has the same right to assume a man’s consent to part with his purse, that any other man, or body of men, can have.
While I dispute Robert’s notion that taxation on the wealth of individuals was based on envy (it was, after all, the wealthy and powerful who passed those laws), I tend to agree with his central thesis: that taxation of wages is theft.
zoomad states: “I just wished enough of us Americans were properly informed of the matters that relate to the functioning of our government and civil society.” Yet it is he who exhibits a profound misunderstanding about the history and underlying political philosophy of our nation and its founders.
“Our founding fathers did not consider taxation a form of serfdom,” he says. James Madison said, “armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few.” John Adams said, “”A law contrary to the Constitution is void. Man’s right to liberty and property is inherent, unalienable. Man’s right to freedom is higher than the state’s right to collect revenue.”
zoomad states: “If governments had to obtain your consent to collect taxes, governments would not exist.” And that’s the very reason that our government must violate its own constitution (and numerous federal court decisions) that determine income taxation to be voluntary.
zoomad states, “The founders made ours a federal republic, not a true democracy, in order to resist extreme populist action destroying the union.” While it was, unfortunately true that most of the elites who founded this nation (with the notable exception of Jefferson) mistrusted the “rabble”, it’s never-the-less also true that the power-sharing federation was meant to be quite different from the central governments of Europe against which we rebelled. The Constitution they wrote created a voluntary association of sovereign states with a strictly limited federal government to “establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.” Direct federal taxation of individuals was specifically prohibited.
But “There is no art which one government sooner learns of another, than that of draining money from the pockets of the people.” – Adam Smith (1776), Wealth of Nations.
The Commentor # MCP2012 is correct. All other talk is “barking up the wrong tree.”
MCP 2012 is correct because another man: Lee Brobst discovered years ago that the so called “income tax” is truly an excise tax. That’s the reaon why tax protesters lose in court. The court is an admiralty court because it deals with the subject matter of contracts with the IRS ( W-4, F-1040, etc. and with excise taxes. It’s a magnificent scam. Even the IRS Code pretends to be mostly about “income tax”. So that IRS code generates a lot of court activity, money for the admiralty court judges, prosecutors,etc. The protestor is barking up the wrong tree. He thinks he is protesting the tree of income taxes, but it does not contain income taxes, it contains excise taxes. It’s the wrong tree. The right tree is true income tax which we don’t have. So there is not subject matter ground to stand on ( standing ) in a constitutional court. Therefore all actions proceed in admiralty court; court of contract, equity and excise taxes. Lee Brobst is the first man to discover this diabolically devious system of enslaving the people. Will Paul Craig Roberts, whom I respect for his other very valuable knowledge read this, my blog? I am only a finger pointing to Lee Brobst website: http://www.the-law.biz. I have no monetary or other interest in that website. Lee Brobst also has an article, a big one in the website of “freedom-school.com”. It’s called, USA, The Republic, The house that no one lives in. That article is 18 years old but truth is never old. It has current relevance. Lee wants people to come to his current site to learn what has worked in court. You must go to “the-law.biz” to get a Case Brief of what a user of his information succeeded in doing. The cost is extremely small compared to what many, half-truth freedom sights offer and charge.
I don’t mind putting my name here because I’m quite sure of this knowledge and will defend it against all detractors.
Charles Labianco
We are constanty reminded that black people were once slaves. The only thing that has changes is that white people in America are now also slaves as no one is free if they pay taxes on their bodys labors. Black people were never freed except to borrow money. The constitution states that a tax is legal for 2 years only if there is war on our own soil and the tax was to be apportioned according to the census. The census was ment to count the people not to pry into every aspect of our lives. When congress illegally created the FRB all power vested in the government was lost (” the borrower is servent to the lender”) Ever ask yourself where the few people who own the money system got zillions of dollars to loan the government and you and I? If not you are in a deep asleep and when you wake up your dreams will become a living nightmare. How many million have died in wars created by the FRB who loaned the money to both sides? Horror stories could go on and on but remember this, America had no debt before the income tax of the 1940’s was created to make war. All elected are puppets of the FRB or they are voted out either by scandal or to spend time with their families. The churches and schools are ruled by the IRS ( the right hand of the FRB) through grants or incorporation. WERE DONE BECAUSE WE ARE A STUPID AND GULLIBLE PEOPLE. WE GET WHAT WE HAVE ALLOWED AND GOD GETS THE BLAME.
If there was a tax collector reading this blog I’m sure he would be smiling broadly. It demonstrates why there is little change taking place in America any more. We can obviously never reach a consensus on any given issue, and without consensus there is no change. We will continue to argue with each other over technicalities while the country slips into an overt police state, and then we’ll argue about whether it is or isn’t so. I sometimes wonder whether this wasn’t why they allowed us to have the internet–so we could argue all day and never take concerted action. I guess nothing is going to change because nothing changes. Do I hear any arguments?
Clabianco:
I do not agree that the income tax is an excise tax. Why? Because income itself is not an excise. It has never been an excise until people started arguing the “‘income tax” in court. It was ruled by the supreme Court that the income derived from certain sources was in the nature of an excise. Never before in history of the USA was “income” an excise until the supremes decided it was an excise, starting with Pollock.
The supreme Court is supposed to be a common law court in that it is supposed to base decisions on what other courts of the past had said about excises. Since there were no court decisions in the past stating income is an excise, the supreme Court decisions in the early 1900s were all made-up by the supreme Court, not in the interest of justice, but in the interest of whoever was influencing them at the time.
The court system is a little more complex, in that if you go in and argue income is an excise, that will be okay with the court, because they don’t have to make decisions based on previous Supreme court decisions, because those cases were also, not constitutionally based. In other words, it’s up to the Court to do their own will. And it has been that way since “income” became an official “tax” (not a war based tax).
I don’t advertise my strategy on the Internet because I know for a fact there would be a consensus [could be dangerous to my health if I advertised).
By the way, everything I said above is not based in “law” but “Public Policy” - that is, the courts make decisions based on the [public] consensus of what income is, not what the law says it is.
Alisa,
I am not saying that Income is an excise tax. I’m saying that I have learned from Lee Brobst of http://www.the-law.biz that the so-called “income tax” is really an excise tax based on your use of private coporate debt notes, the FRN’s, and Interstate Banking: use of Charge cards to pay interstate debts to credit card companies. The amount of tax levied is measured by the amount of “activity” you engaged in as further measured by the amount of “FRN’s that you receive as “incoming revenue”. That’s why when you go to a tax court, ( an Admiralty Law court, not a Constitutional Law court ) that you lose by trying to argue “constitutional law” and “can’t tax income or wages or labor”. It’s the wrong court and the wrong subject matter. Is this explanation clearer than my prior?
Charles Labianco
clabianco@gmail.com
An excise tax has never been based solely on the use of private corporate debt notes, FRN’s, or Interstate Banking. That would make everything you do, as it relates to the exchange of FRNS, excise taxable. That theory is not based on any US law, although I understand what you’re saying.
I know the courts are not constitutional and that they will not make decisions as it relates to taxes based on the constitution. The courts are not constitutional courts but chancery courts, courts shrouded in secrecy and overshadowed by conspiratorial forces, otherwise known as “Star Chamber” courts.
Yes, I understand what you’re saying now.
Alisa,
An excise tax, which is the so-called income tax, is based on the use of FRN’s , private money paper) , and on interstate banking via credit cards, both of which Congress can regulate and tax as an excise activity. You volunteered to pay these by your use of them. Also, you are part of an implied charitable trust, the Social Security Trust. The fact that you say “it would make everything you do …excise taxable is stated by you as a justification of your prior statement that “an excise tax has never been based solely on? FRN’s or Interstate Banking.” The fact is “everything you do” is excise taxable because you use FRN’s. The methods of collecting, defending this imposition is what is called the IRS Code and the Admiralty courts. The fact that “everything you do would be” is implying, without stating, that therefore it can not be an excise tax because it would be “absurd” to think that we are legally liable to pay such taxes for “everything we do.” The fact that you think it is absurd is not a logical argument, ( reductio ad absurdem “ is your attempt in your argument ). Of course there is Constitional Law directly related to this issue: that of Congress to regulate and tax interstate commerce and to excise tax it there with those same powers. Congress is not taxing your labor but your use of FRN’s and interstate commerce. It is measuring this tax by the amount of money you generate, from whatever source derived ( 16h amendment ). They do not say this clearly because they would be out of a job. Their “grand style of living, working ( ? ) or playing all day would end. And they would have to toil like the rest of the Middle and Lower Classes. Do you know that they have a untouchable retirement package, completely separated from Social Security? They get full pay at retirement. What a life! Getting back to the subject. To argue that Congress can not tax our labor is “barking up the wrong tree.” They are not taxing our labor. When you get Paid, you get paid in a check or in cash. Cash is FRN’s. Checks are Interstate Banking. FDIC is the Federal Depositors Insurance Corp. An arm of congress relating to insurance. They can excise tax insurance. You are dealing with an agency of the US Government. “Anyone who has business with the US Government is subject to taxation relating to the amount of business that such a person, individual, or corporation has with the government. It is measured differenly in the discernably different cases: example: individual taxes vs corporate taxes. IRS and others want you to argue the “can’t tax my labor” because you lose and they win, money, and control. You lose because they are truly not taxing your labor. They are only measuring the amount of excise tax by the amount of revinue, money, income, that you generate. If it’s by working or other activity, it does not matter: from whatever source. PLEASE GO TO THE FREEDOM-SCHOOL.COM WEBSITE AND READ THE LEE BROBST ARTICLE ( USA The Rebulic, The house that no one lives in.) TYPED OR ASSISTED BY A MR. BEDDOE. THEN GO TO http://WWW.the-law.biz. You will get all your answers there. If you think that my meager explanations is adequate, you are sadly mistaken. I humbly admit that all the important things that I learned were from two main sources: the freedom-school, but particularly from Lee Brobst. He has a hundred times the knowledge that I have. Go there and your eyes ( mind ) will be opened. Lee has things that you can do, not talk about, not theorize about but actually do in order to extricate yourself from the web of taxation and congressional deceit and control.
Your humble friend,
Charles Labianco
And if there is no US law upon which US taxes are based then collection of taxes is not possible, except by theft.
Yes, paying taxes sucks, but I don’t agree with this argument. As citizens, we NEED to pay taxes or our government would collapse. And I understand that some people don’t agree with the way our government works, and so therefore they don’t want to financially support it, but you must be realistic. Taxes provide sources that every person uses every single day. The police, for example, are a necessary part of our society. I don’t agree with every law (especially drug laws) but every single day I reap the benefits of a police force (as in they help prevent me from being murdered, robbed, raped, etc.). Obviously police can’t literally stop someone from killing me in every situation but the fact that they’re THERE, ready to catch and punish, is a deterrant to criminals. Everytime I drive or ride the bus I’m utilizing government services: roads, bridges, traffic lights, traffic laws. Everyone who has an education has utilized government services through public schools, and even if you went to a private school government still sets standards that those schools must meet. Did you get college loans? Well, yep, those came from taxpayers, too! Our government sets standards on food, housing, building structures, medical care, and countless other things in order to protect us (although some laws protect companies more than people, I digress.) I enjoy knowing that the pasta I’m eating is at least mostly sanitary and that the house I’m in wasn’t made of gorilla glue and cardboard and will collapse at any second. I don’t agree with war or bombs, but if the US didn’t have a good military then we would face some serious problems from other nations (I know I don’t want my home invaded by some other country. It’s just what happens throughout history; someone’s always looking to invade.) Federal and state government really do a lot to contribute to our daily lives. I think paying income taxes is a fair exchange for all these services. And if we didn’t have an income tax, this system really would collapse. Sure we could still have property, sales, and inheritance taxes etc. but people can easily get around those and it just wouldn’t work. Really, we have to be realistic about this.
I agree with you Veronica. We need a way to fund the services provided by Government. And this article is a good one, and the premise that it all started with the Fed Act is one of the contributing factors, but the real problem and I think this is what most on here mean, is the arrangement by a corrupt Government to sate the financial appetites of the “Elite” at the expense of the “Little people”.
And that is what is happening. We have been having a re-distribution of wealth for some time now, from the have-nots to the Elites, and it is accelerating. Greed is the most powerful sin on earth and that is what drives, what I call the Shadow Government , a group that I describe as the small group who has a strangle hold on the purse strings of America and their willing accomplices, immoral Corporations who have no problem plundering the taxpayer, enabled by corrupt Party Politics, and bought congress and White House, and yes this article identifies one of the tipping points that made the hijacking of our country easier.
What we call taxes today are not really taxes. Congress borrows money from the Federal Reserve for various spending into the economy without taxpayer approval. The second problem is the loan never gets paid off, which is why there is never an end in sight for the taxpayers. The interest on the loan is never paid off– it is carried over to the next loan, and when the interest on the next loan is not paid, it is too added to the next loan, and what the taxpayer ends up paying for is nothing but high interest and when that interest is not paid, penalties are added. Congress borrowing money and the people paying it back with interest and penalties is not the way taxes are supposed to be raised and collected. The current method of raising taxes is not raising taxes at all– it is paying back a loan we never consented to.
Every dollar that is spent into the economy is borrowed and has to be paid back with interest. Congress is supposed to LAY and COLLECT taxes, but in our current system Congress does neither. Instead, they BORROW and then SPEND for projects and programs we never approved of and IRS collects it back in the form of taxes. Right now you don’t know what you are paying for- because NOTHING is ever paid for. The police are never paid for, the schools are never paid for, the roads are never paid for, the bridges, the traffic lights— does anyone ever know for sure what they are paying taxes for? No, because you believe what they want you to believe – which isn’t much.
With all due respect to my colleagues and fellow-citizens commenting here, the discussion subsequent to my two posts evinces there is still rather abysmal ignorance regarding the nature of the federal income excise, how one comes to seem to have incurred liability for such a tax (and thus be subject to the provisions of Title 26 USC, the Internal Revenue Code, which is itself, btw, non-enacted and acutally serves as merely a condensed compilation/compendium of the actual underlying Statutes At Large), and what the proper remedy is (in order to get back the money erroneously and fraudulently withheld by private-sector companies from their workers’ pay).
With all due respect to Charles Labianco and the work(s) of Lee Brobst, the TRUTH about the federal income excise tax is to be found a Pete Hendrickson’s superb website, listed in my first comment, above, and in his excellent book, Cracking the Code: The Fascinating Truth About Taxation in America. The income (usually, but not necessarily, money-income) is merely the measure of one’s gain or profit from having engaged in FEDERALLY-privileged activity(s) of one sort or another (such as working for the federal government, holding federal office, or deriving dividend (or other investment-related) income from federally-connected, federally-privileged entities of one sort or another (most typically, federally-chartered “national” banks and federally-charterd railroads). If one’s income is not associated with and derived from federally-privileged activity(s) (and the vast majority of Americans’ income is indeed not), then (1) one is surely NOT liable for any federal excise tax, and (2) one’s income (pay, earnings) are certainly NOT, a fortiori, usable as a measure of one’s gain or profit from federally-privileged activity(s), since one didn’t engage in the latter in the first place! It really is as simple and straightforward as that, folks! The legal terms, “wages”, “employee”, “employer”, “trade or business”, and “self-employment income” (among others) are all specially-defined legal terms which mean different (or at least more narrowly-circumscribed, federally connected) things than their colloquial, homographic counterparts. Unless your income (pay, earnings) can ultimately be traced back to (and, indeed, ultimately causally stems from) the federal government in one or another of its many guises, then your pay or earnings CANNOT be “wages” and/or “self-employment income” as these terms are specially-defined and contemplated within 26 USC!—i.e., your income is not federally excise-taxable income!!—PERIOD!! That’s it, folks, in a nutshell.
The best, and, really, the only place to learn the straightforward TRUTH about the federal income excise tax is at Pete Hendrickson’s website, http://www.LostHorizons.com. See also, again, http://www.howyoubecomeliable.com for an introduction. Become informed, knowledgeable: Then put that knowledge into practice: FORCE the IRS, and the federal government generally, to FOLLOW THE LAW.
Alisa: Your latest comment is spot-on, however, as far as the machinations of Congress and the Federal Reserve go.
The truth is not to be found in Peter Hendrickson’s books. Not all people get their money back. Some people, like myself, are harassed and threatened with $500 penalties. Two of those penalties were simply added to the two tax years I filed zero returns. I don’t want to get into arguing about Pete’s method here. I will simply say caveat emptor (let the buyer beware) and don’t believe everything you read!
And I’ll say it again just in case you are tempted to talk about Pete’s method again: I don’t want to argue about it, so please save your prat for someone else!
Charles Labianco wrote: “To argue that Congress can not tax our labor is ‘barking up the wrong tree.’ They are not taxing our labor. ”
I don’t argue what they can or cannot tax anything. I don’t argue anything in their code for that matter. When they do not have any authority to COLLECT the tax in the first place, what does that tell you about their codes, or what other patriots say in their self-published books about the tax? Of course one cannot tell IRS they have no collection authority, because nobody has any PROOF, so they ARGUE. Well, I have PROOF. End of argument! So spare me!
Alisa: I’m stunned!! The IRS will oftentimes try to intimidate a citizen into recanting their position (which is, of course, blatant witness intimidation, i.e., tampering, in blatant violation of 18 USC), but what one has to do isSTAND ONE’S GROUND and write them, the IRS, back and simply quote the LAW to them.
And, Alisa, Pete’s “method”, as you put it, is found in the LAW—it’s simply the LAW itself (would you like me to quote you the sections?). So there is no “Pete’s method” (implying something hare-brained and cooked-up), there is simply the LAW which applies if you’ve had erroneous/fraudulent 3rd-party information returns filed against you. You say you’re harassed—the fight back, don’t knuckle-under and kow-tow. If you’re sure of your legal position (have you thoroughly read the law itself, Alisa?!), then, again, stand your ground. Did you also file a Form 4852 to rebut any erroneous/fraudulent W-2’s issued against you? Did you correct any other 3rd-party ‘information returns’ that may have been filed vis-a-vis you purporting to have paid you excise-taxable (federally-connected) income? For if you haven’t done the latter, then they still stand as contradicting your (so-called) “zero return”, and thus you could legally-legitimately be deemed to have filed a “frivolous return” under IRC sect. 6702. I happen to be a J.D., though not at this time a practicing attorney, and know my way around a law library reasonably well. I have verified every jot and tittle of the contents of Pete Hendrickson’s book, Cracking the Code, as well as his website, LostHorizons.com, and I can assure you and the rest of the readers that Pete is absolutely spot-on correct. Pete merely quotes and discusses the LAW (including legislative history and case-law history). So, Alisa, with all due respect, it is YOU who are merely prattling, and simply don’t know what you’re talking about. Yes, the IRS will try to intimidate a person who actually files a proper return concluding with a refund for erroneously-withheld income excise taxes. One might even have to take them (the IRS) to court. In sum, and contrary to your arbitrary and baseless position about Pete’s, the TRUTH about the federal income excise tax (which is to say, about the LAW itself regarding federal taxation in general and income excise-taxation in particular) IS indeed to be found in Pete’s work(s): After all, he merely QUOTES THE LAW.
So: Again with all due (and sincere!!) respect and collegial affection, I’m not the one “prat[tling]“, Alisa; YOU are, to the detriment of our colleagues here.
You are stunned??? Good! Keep believing in fairy-tales for all I care. There is no “LAW,” Peter Hendrickson believes. I’m sure he’s reading this list as well as his detractors from quatloos! I hope they are enjoying this!
“Since the bankruptcy in 1933, all corporations are insolvent and there is no way to pay a debt. If there is no way to pay a debt, there is no way to execute a LAW (no payment is possible), and laws, including the facts upon which they are based, become irrelevant. Courts are no longer about law, fact of law, or anything real for that matter. They cannot be because THERE IS NO WAY TO PAY!”
Jefferson believed in a pay as you go government with a balanced budget. The Hamiltonians believed in close ties of government, banking and business. Government would borrow from the banks at interest to pay the businesses that supplied the government. Then the government would tax the “people of no particular importance” to pay the banks.
Hamilton won.
Right you are Steve. Hamilton won – not only on this, but on the central banking question, and much, much more. And it doesn’t matter if there’s a law for the income tax or not…why? Because they have the guns and they say so. The way this government is run is unsound, unjust, and totally immoral – whether it’s following their own laws or not.
By the way, I hear Tom DiLorenzo’s new book, Hamilton’s Curse, is quite good…
I read some article, recently, by a disgruntled Repug who said that the country was going down the tubes because the evil Democrats had undermined the Hamiltonian fiscal policies that had kept the nation healthy and prosperous for so long. (Hamilton was in favor of a limited monarchy, too.) I have to chuckle. In 1976, I started working on a book about Jefferson and Hamilton and their fiscal policies. Then I realized that, by the time I finished, the bicentennial would long be over and it would never see print, so I scrapped it. My thesis was that, if we didn’t get rid of the Hamiltonian fiscal policies that we were following, exactly the same thing was going to happen as finally has.
In those days, we might have actually headed it off.
I keep rattling on about the Shadow Government etc. Could I get you all to go here and read this entire lengthy thing, then tell me how you think freedom was lost:
http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/NWO/Council_Foreign_Relations.htm
Folks, despite Alisa’s comments, just carefully check-out the law that is actually on the books regarding the federal income excise tax. The easiest and quickest, most straightforward way to do this is to visit, in addition to the specific URLS listed in my previous posts, is to acquaint yourself with the following: http://www.losthorizons.com/Newsletter/NutshellSmallPamphlet.pdf and http://www.losthorizons.com/Newsletter/IncomeTaxFlowchart.pdf
Go in peace, sister Alisa!!
All this talk about laws, and rules and excise taxes and on and on and on – while somewhat interesting – they all totally miss the mark.
If the income tax amendment was ratified properly, if the whole system was legit and within the laws of this country, if there were no questions about the legality of it all…
It would still be wrong and I would oppose it. Why? Because taking money from a person – while threatening them with violence if they don’t comply – is stealing.
Theft is wrong. Even if there were a law saying it was “legal”
The legality of theft started with Congress’ Legal Tender Acts in the late 1800s. A legal tender can only be coin, not paper. The first case on the Act was shot down by the supreme Court as unconstitutional; subsequent opinions overruled it. Those decisions legalized theft and opened the doors for the enactment of the Federal Reserve Act, which Act further approved of legalized theft.
Frankly, all this nit-picking and arguing aobut legality and illegality reminds me of a cartoon I saw years ago.
Scene: Dungeon. Two guys in rags are hanging about ten feet up the wall, suspended by chains and manacles to their wrists. One looks over at the other and whispers, “Now here’s my plan.”
They’ve managed to blend the good with the bad ( legal and illegal) over the years so that no knows the difference between right /wrong / good or bad/ anymore. It’s called decline in morality.
Not to continue to stir the pot, but Alisa is right and so is just about everyone else – including me.
But Steve really brought the discussion to a head with “Here’s my plan”.
All the arguing about who is right and who is wrong won’t fix the problem no matter who is right and who is wrong.
Can we all agree that the most significant problem is that WE have allowed our Government to become a slave of Special Interest as opposed to being a Representative ( Servant ) of the people?
If you will agree with that, then “Here’s my plan”!
Lets take back our government and right the wrongs.
You know how I would do it, now let us hear your plan.
If I was in command, my plan would be to secede from the Union. Right now the states don’t have enough reason to secede. However, they will when things really get ugly in the states: Martial law, foreign occupation, the military, and the whole nine yards.
So…. there you have it… My plan.
There’s a lot of talk out there about ”saving” the Constitution. Bad idea, when it was the Constitution that got us into this mess in the first place.
Alisa, there are a lot of problems in this country today, but the Constitution itself is not one of them. It was devised with enough checks and balances in it to keep us from ever being controlled by an oligarchy or a dictatorship.
Those checks and balances were predicated upon We the People electing people of good will to represent us. The Congress was expected to be elected from amongst the people. They were to have the interest of the country at heart, to legislate with wisdom and compassion, and to guard us against centralization of power into too few hands.
Unfortunately, We the People have become fat and lazy. We pay little attention to what gets into office, or how it does it. The result is what we see today; the entire government is run by wealthy special interests who care nothing for the people who have let themselves be duped into electing them. They only answer to their owners or handlers.
If we ever manage to “throw the rascals out” without electing new rascals, then reaffirming the Constitution would be a good starting place for rebuilding the nation. Ironically enough, a number of the populist regimes that have tried to build up their own countries have patterned their own government after our own Constitution. Most of those nations have been destroyed by our own, who will brook no real freedom, here or abroad. Again, not the fault of the Constitution, but of what we have allowed the government to become.
Read the Constitution carefully, from beginning to end. It is a remarkable document. It is not perfect, but it is way ahead of whatever is in second place. IF it were the rule and guide of our nation as it still was when I was a kid, we wouldn’t see the wholesale corruption that we do now. Unfortunately, almost every kid now has a role model that tells him (or her) that whatever you can steal and get away with is OK. For them, the only sin is to get caught and not have enough to bribe your way out. There have always been crooked politicians, but now they have achieved a quantum leap. I don’t know whether we have the courage, and willingness to sacrifice, necessary to curb all this and return to a rule of law or not. I guess only time will tell.
Dear Alisa,
Your comment that “it was the Consitution that got us into this mess in the first place.” indicates that you did not go to the websites that I said to go to. I’ll repeat them. http://www.freedom-school.com, find the article :USA, The Republic, the house that no one lives in., and the website: the-law.biz ( Lee Brobst )
Until then I must sadly say that you are ignoring truth and considering your comment about the Constitution, your comments indicate that you are possibly either a communist or your thinking is being led by them or their thoughts or social/political philosophy. This is not a criticism upon your personality or character, but upon the ideas or comments that you posted in regard to taxes and the Constitution.
Furthermore, any more discussion by anyone on these subjects, tax etc. indicates that they too ignored my information. If you do not visite the websites, you would be examples of the saying: “Ignorance is bliss.”
It’s time that you stop all your dialogues based on lack of true knowlege. When you have true knowledge, you will not dialogue but will point people to the truth: the websites and articles that I wrote to you about herein.
This is directed also to all others who are in sympathy with you.
Rembember that “the truth will set you free.”
Your friend that has your best interest at heart.
And to make it easier for any of you to get this information, you may email me at clabianco@gmail.com
I honorably and proudly afix my name.
Charles Labianco
Steve, I have read the Constitution. I am the one who discovered the missing enabling clause, remember? Sorry, but I will never agree that the Constitution is a “remarkable document” as you call it. I believe in keeping government small, and a Constitution of 50 united States is hardly what I would call “small” government.
Good luck with your Constitution.
Well, you’re wrong on all accounts, Charles: I am not ignoring the truth, I am not a communist and my thoughts are not being lead by them. I have a mind of my own and will not be lead by anyone, including you. You know nothing about me or what I have read, however I do know what you have read, and it is the same material that I have read in the past. I am familar with all the information in the links you provided. You may not believe me but trust me, I have been in this so-called “freedom” movement since 1995. I am an avid reader and have read more books on the subject of taxes and government than you can imagine– I occasionally go back to them to refresh my memory, but I’m not into them anymore, sorry.
“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.”
from lysander spooner. and he’s right.
Leave a Comment