It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

So how come the IRS doesn't just send a bill?

page: 6
4
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueRaja
 



Whether funds are disbursed directly to the children (who are, for the most part too young to enter into legal contracts and/or bank accounts on their own), or to their parents/legal guardiens, is immaterial.


If, for whatever reason, the child's parents/relatives either cannot, or will not, provide support, the burden must then fall to the government; either at the state or federal level.

The only remaining options would be:

-Privately funded charitable organizations (who recieve their funding through contributions from the likes of you and me - that's called "indrect taxation" by some),

-Putting the children to work so that they earn (or at least contribute to) their own keep. This of course presumes that there is/would be a market demand for uneducated/unskilled underage children. Other than the "asinine" suggestion of the kiddie-sex trade, can You think of any alternate occupations?

-Or, as postulated, letting the children die in the streets as "Somebody Else's Problem".



You can't stop people, whatever their socio-economic and/or adjudged fitness to reproduce might be, from having kids.

Unless you want to somehow require everyone to obtain a "License to Breed".

But then how would you enforce such a law? Even with a governmentally funded, bureaucratic agency to over-see them (which you wouldn't have because there wouldn't be any taxes to pay for it!), you still couldn't keep folks from committing "un-sanctioned procreation".

Unless you also want to start a program of "mandatory sterilization" and apply it to those deemed "un-worthy" to reproduce.

Can you say "Eugenics"?

Can you say "Seig Heil!"?



I live in a community. It is a community that extends far beyond merely the end of my fingertips. I am not so cossetted by immaturity to believe that need and neglect in my community has no import for me.

Just as my community supports me, or, tries to support me, it is my obligation to support it, or at least try to support it.

Granted, the needs of the community may far exceed my personal needs; the quid pro quo may seldom be equal, but I rejoice in the fact that my needs are so much less than those of others: "There but for Fate, go I".

Taxation is not a matter of Priviledge but of Obligation; Obligation in consideration for the priviledge of living in a social community, as a member entitled to the benefits provided by the society.


If you cannot reconcile your percieved value of those benfits with the cost of those benefits, then by all means,


Leave.


You owe it to yourself.

Just be sure not to use any of those benfits on your way out; you ain't paying for them, you ain't entitled to them.




posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 08:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Bhadhidar
 


I don't believe anybody owes anyone anything. I don't believe in government programs that reward irresponsible behavior, by taking my money to pay some lazy SOB, that can't keep their legs together, or from sticking a needle in their arm. Your plan encourages behaviors we don't want to see more of. My plan is to say you will show that you're attempting to get a job, an education, a vocational skill in order to receive government funding with tax payer money. Obviously if someone is disabled, then they should be exempt, but able bodied individuals have no business sitting around, getting knocked up, to get more money out of our pockets. It may sound cold hearted, but tough love is what these types need, rather than coddling. I'm not suggesting letting anyone starve to death, so don't try to pin that view on me. There needs to be accountability to the tax payers though, in order for benefits to be given out.



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 08:17 AM
link   
they do send a bill. but your the one responsible to do your work. it's hard to figure out your tax.

usually what I do is finish my taxes. send the forms and wait for the bill. it takes about a month to get a bill from them..

I never get a refund, being single with no dependents.



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by jedimiller
 


You do know that they charge you interest and penalties for filing the return and not paying the taxes due, right?



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 08:29 AM
link   
reply to post by jedimiller
 


what bill is this you speak of? what does it say exactly?



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur

You do know that they charge you interest and penalties for filing the return and not paying the taxes due, right?


In theory. but over the last five years. I've had to pay no interest or late fee's. perhaps because my taxes with the IRS always come out pretty even. usually I only pay about 100. I've had not see any penalties as of yet. I think that's after 90 days.



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by scientist


what bill is this you speak of? what does it say exactly?


it's like a credit card bill. it says pay within a certain time. you clip it off, write a check or money order and sent it back in an envelope..just like paying your bill.



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 09:00 AM
link   
So, the exact thing I am proposing here already exists, and you have used it before? Not a single person has brought this up yet.

I'm confused, please forgive me for assuming that you have something mistaken. Normally I would give benefit of doubt....



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 12:28 AM
link   
It is stated by the IRS that paying income is "voluntary". Most people think that's just the IRS being kind. But, what it means is simply the IRS has a loophole that allows it to keep the money it receives. Without the loophole it would be obligated now or in the future to return money paid in error. For example if you where a non-member of an organization and they only accepted donation from members, and you made a donation. They would be obligated to let you know and if they didn't and in the future you informated them they made a mistake they would be obligated to give you your money back. With the "Voluntary" (Donation) loophole, the IRS can keep you money and you can't get it back when you realize you've been scammed.

If you are a citizen of the United States and earning you living from within the United States. You have no obligation to pay taxes by the Constitution of the United States itself. There is nothing in the Regulations and Status of the IRS that disagrees with that. The IRS can tax non-citizens, foreign corporations and people earning money in the federal zone (D.C., Puerto Rico, Guam, etc.). The IRS doesn't bill you because if it sent you a bill it would have to tell the truth and the truth is the bill would mostly likely be $0.00! The IRS is 90% bluff (Lie). It is a Mafia, run out of Puerto Rico and all moneys received go to pay the Federal Reserve debt.



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 01:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bhadhidar
Whether funds are disbursed directly to the children (who are, for the most part too young to enter into legal contracts and/or bank accounts on their own), or to their parents/legal guardiens, is immaterial.


Let me ask you a question since you continue to suggest most funds are for children.

You have a family of two parents with five kids and both parents are on welfare just like their parents are too. Those five kids will have a miserable life with welfare also in their future. Many of these types of situations lead to horror stories of the kids in these situations and it is these situations that feed the gangs in America with kids looking for anyone to care for them no matter how warped it might be.

How do you fix this?

This is our point…this needs fixing. These people need to enter the working class and those kids should get a better life than they will get. The 500 billion is wasted in fixing this. No one disagrees with helping anyone but that help should be to get people back on their feet and not something for them to rest their feet on.


[edit on 14-2-2008 by Xtrozero]



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 06:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


How do we fix the situation?

To honest, I haven't a bloody clue.


The "Simple" alternatives: sterilize the "Unfit"; let those children, whose parents/guardians cannot/will not care/provide for them, die in the streets; make the children work for their own keep or barter them for compensation,

These "solutions" are an anathma to our society; and rightly so.


Ideally, everyone in the society should be a productive member of the society.

But we do not live in an ideal world.


I have no problem whatsoever with the idea that anyone who brings a child into the world has a responsiblity to provide for the support of that child...To the best of thier ability.


But what is Your solution to the problem of those parents/guardians who cannot, or simply refuse to provide support for thier offspring?

Granted, continuing to fund parents who care more for their next fix than for the lives of thier kids, does nothing to break the cycle of dependency.

But what is the alternative?

Cutting off payments to the parents does nothing for the children; beyond further endangering thier welfare and/or lives.

Removing the children from the parent's custody simply shifts the burden of support to another agency that must be funded (likely with tax revenues); or to another individual, who will likely expect to be adequately compensated for his/her efforts, again likely through the payment of funds collected as tax revenues.

And of course, either of the above methods results in the State (incarnate as either the Federal government or a state/local jurisdiction) becoming the De Facto parent. That, by extension, means, one way or another, You and Me!


My prior postings were made to point out that whether we like it or not, there is a segment of our society which presents as an unfair burden on us all. We must accept this unhealthy and unproductive blight because, as a just and compassionate society, to do otherwise would be counter to all that we stand for as a society.


The underclass must be recognized as one example (twisted though it may be) of the epitome of capitalist philosophy:

They have figured out the means to generate the greatest amount of return in thier benefit for the least amount of effort on their part.

And they know that society will work to maintain a status quo beneficial to them, becuase of the jeopardy they pose to the society if the status quo is not maintained.



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Bhadhidar
 


One simple solution is to remove the incentives to stay on the government teat. If folks understand that they're not gonna get paid more, to have more kids, and that they're only gonna receive benefits for a finite time, this will enourage them to modify their behaviors. Additionally, if you add the requirements like I mentioned(actively looking for a job, schooling/vocational training) as a prerequisite to recieve assistance, that'll give them a skill to earn a living with. We also need to fix the public education system, so you don't have people falling through the cracks, and ending up destitute.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join