reply to post by ownbestenemy
I think you are correct that we should do what we can locally and on a state level to reign in the federal government, but doing so politically seems
to be a difficult proposition. What should we do, keep electing politicians to do this? I think Thomas Jefferson was right on the money when he
"Whenever a man has cast a longing eye on offices, a rottenness begins in his conduct."
There have been a few posters in this thread who have insisted that Ayn Rand and even her fictional character John Galt, sought to impose a "ruling
elite" upon the people. However, this is entirely untrue, what Rand and certainly Galt advocated was the freedom to govern oneself. I believe the
insistence that Rand or Galt was advocating fascism is nothing more than they accusing them of their own crimes.
I think there are many people across the world who do not at all advocate self government and believe with a passion that people are not capable of
self government. These people will do all they can to lobby for and ensure an expanding government that would do all they can to reign in the
freedoms of the people. It is for this reason that I question the plausibility of affecting change towards more personal freedom by way of
representation. Although, I am not entirely sure this is what you are getting at.
It seems to me that turning to a government to ensure freedom is as silly as attempting to domesticate lions, tigers and bears...oh my! Freedom is
not granted it is taken, and this is what we must do. We must take back our freedoms, not by attempting to legislate them or enforce them, (a paradox
if there ever was one.), but simply by being free. We are fortunate enough to have, in the U.S. a Constitution that serves as the Supreme Law of the
Land, and can be an effective leash on an ambitious government.
I stand with you firmly in warning of imprudent calls to arms and violent revolutions in this current age where a push for a one world government has
created a global army in the guise of the U.N., and global economic agencies such as the IMF and other institutions, that would surely do all they
could to quell any armed revolution. That said, there comes a time in any march towards freedom when diplomacy no longer works and other options
must be considered. However, I have said it before and I will say it again, now is not the time for an armed revolution!
There are just too many options available to us before even considering such violence in the name of freedom. First, allow me to address your
assertion that we can take on the IRS however, that we can not evade taxation. It is true, if we are to have a government at all, and I believe we do
need a limited and effective government, then taxes are necessary. However, people should only pay the taxes they owe! If one has been made
liable for a tax
then they are subject to
the revenue laws that would enforce such taxation.
The big question is, in regards to this so called "Personal Income Tax", are YOU liable for that tax
and subject to
Revenue Code? Are YOU? How could you possibly know until you've read the Code for yourself and even then, given the ambiguity of the text, the
circumlocution of definitions, and the disordered chronology of sections, how can YOU or I or anyone actually understand what the hell this tax code
is about? Of course, we are all presumed to know the law, and expected to do our due diligence in knowing any particular law.
So, how many of We the People have truly done their due diligence in coming to understand the Internal Revenue Code and this so called "Personal
Income Tax"? How many of YOU were taught to file a valid tax return
in a public school by a teacher who relies upon taxation in order to get
paid? For those of YOU who were taught to file a valid tax return in this manner, how many of you pointedly asked your teacher what was the
subject of the tax
How many of YOU have declared that; "as a taxpayer
I have rights"? How many of YOU are even aware that the term "taxpayer" has been
statutorily defined? How many of YOU are aware there is actually a taxpayers bill of rights
? When one compares the "taxpayers bill of
rights" to the actual Bill of Rights found in the Constitution, it should be extremely clear that as a "taxpayer" that you don't have rights, and
it is not being a "taxpayer" that gives you rights at all.
Again, if You or I owe a tax, then We should pay that tax, but how many people are paying taxes they don't even owe? Would you pay your landlord for
13 months of rent each year, or more correctly 16 to 18 months of rent each year? Wouldn't such a notion strike you as ludicrous and if your land
lord came knocking on your door in January demanding back rent and you show him the receipts that prove you paid each month of the previous year, and
then your landlord informs you that that is for only 12 months and you are required to pay 16 months rent each year, wouldn't you think your land
I use the term land lord because very few people own their own homes outright. Meaning, most people who are "homeowners" finance a loan through a
bank to "buy" that home and do not own that home until the entirety of the loan is paid. Thus, even "homeowners" tend to have landlords. Imagine
being charged for a pound and a quarter for a pound of beef. Imagine being charged for 15 gallons of gas for only 10 gallons. Who would tolerate
such nonsense? Yet, We the People have tolerated a tax code none of us understand, and those who have made the attempt to understand it and have
surmised from this effort that they were never liable for a tax to begin with, get labeled as "tax protesters" rather than being recognized for
being the sane people they are.
Indeed, those who have tried to rely upon the court system to challenge the jurisdiction of the tax collectors are often threatened with psychiatric
evaluation, simply because they had the audacity to read the tax code and failed to find anywhere in that code where they had been made liable for a
tax. Instead of showing through incontrovertible evidence they are liable, the government will rely upon fallacious arguments to bully these "tax
protesters" into submission.