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.

 

Taxes Are Not A Duty

page: 3
21
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Certainly Jefferson was opposed to a private central bank.

That's what I just said.

Did you not read what I wrote?



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 04:53 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Well maybe we should be more patient with her. Socialists many times struggle with concepts because they think they know everything. The worst ones are the ones that went to college, because then they are sure they know everything because they have a piece of paper to prove it.

Loved your indan analogy. They werent exactly living in anarchy without a big central government.

The thing that amazes me is that this country made it to 1913 without a federal income tax. That is over half the life of the country, and I just don't know how we became such a powerhouse without it. According to these guys, our great grandparents should have been dying of disease, covered in their own excrement, starving, and being eaten alive by the giant trash piles. Good for us our grandparents figured out how to burn or bury their trash. God, they must have been geniuses compared to modern man.

[edit on 23-2-2010 by Mr Sunchine]



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


According to these guys, Jefferson should have been living in an armed bunker defending himself from zombie American's intent on looting him of his gasoline.



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


I believe you are mistaken. There was nothing before 1913. The Sun never rose. Children did not play. Nothing but darkness. The few people who managed the difficult and painful task of existing were lucky to make it past the age of 5.

At least that's what I learned in government school.



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 05:00 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Ok, but you also said that "all central banks" are monopolies, and government monopolies are just as bad as private monopolies. I disagree with that and so did our fore-fathers.

Having many private banks will cause confusion and chaos.



Lincoln also took on the bankers and that brave bold step may also have cost him his life.

During the Civil War (from 1861-1865), President Lincoln needed money to finance the War for the North. The Bankers were going to charge him 24% to 36% interest. Lincoln was horrified and greatly distressed, and he would not think of plunging his beloved country into a debt that the country would find impossible to pay back.

So Lincoln advised Congress to pass a law authorizing the printing of full legal tender Treasury notes to pay for the War effort. Lincoln recognized the great benefits of this issue. At one point he wrote: "... (we) gave the people of this Republic the greatest blessing they have ever had - their own paper money to pay their own debts..."

The Treasury notes were printed with green ink on the back, so the people called them "Greenbacks". Lincoln had printed 400 million dollars worth of Greenbacks (the exact amount being $449,338,902), money that he delegated to be created, a debt-free and interest-free money to finance the War. It served as legal tender for all debts, public and private. He printed it, paid it to the soldiers, to the U.S. Civil Service empoyees, and bought supplies for the war.



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Yeah and after Franklin discovered electricity a drunken mob would have beaten him to death with his own kite and shoved both the key and the kite up his behind. But that wouldn't have killed him. It would have been the disease infested rats that ate his corpse, because without government intervention humans were unable to rid themselves of either trash or have been able to figure out how to care for an injured human, or to cart off and bury a dead body.

[edit on 23-2-2010 by Mr Sunchine]



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


I believe you are mistaken. There was nothing before 1913. The Sun never rose. Children did not play. Nothing but darkness. The few people who managed the difficult and painful task of existing were lucky to make it past the age of 5.

At least that's what I learned in government school.


My bad. I went to private college and they weren't able to teach us anything because they refused to let the government help them.



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


I believe you are mistaken. There was nothing before 1913. The Sun never rose. Children did not play. Nothing but darkness. The few people who managed the difficult and painful task of existing were lucky to make it past the age of 5.

At least that's what I learned in government school.


LOL

dead.

I heard that prior to 1913 God didn't exist either.

Apparently his second coming arrived in Obama, with Ben Bernanke's body harboring the Apostle Paul's spirit.

"And Obama looked out on the 7th day of his presidency upon the unwashed masses and said, 'Lo my children, where there once was darkness now there is light. Where there once was poverty, now there is prosperity. Guns have solved all of our problems."

Praise Mao.



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Praise Mao, indeed!

I think we need to rewrite the history of man based on this new found FACT that man is incapable of doing, discovering, inventing, or even functoning without big government and mass taxaton.

I will start with the Civil War. "And there the dead bodies of both union and confederate soldiers laid for nealry the next 80 years until FDR funded a huge government work program to both find the means and the workers to bury the stinking, rat eaten skeletons of the fallen."



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


Take it back to the Pilgrims and how without the crown's full financial support they never would have been able to flee the crown and build a new life and settlement.

Maybe there's a federal grant I can get to fund my secession?



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


Take it back to the Pilgrims and how without the crown's full financial support they never would have been able to flee the crown and build a new life and settlement.

Maybe there's a federal grant I can get to fund my secession?


hahhaha

What a great question.

Its like the 8th wonder of the world.

Without the Crown to create jobs in the New World, I don't see how the colonists managed to survive more than a week.



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Sunchine

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by Mr Sunchine
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


LMAO, I don't know anything about anarchists other than they are a bunch of pot smokers, but Libertarian/Conservatives don't live in lala land like you suggest.

It is the socialist that lives in a lala land where they think everyone should have everythign provided to them by the government and then expects everyone to work as hard as possible to end up with the same reward as the laziest in the group. Socialists think someone will invest to create jobs and new businesses just so they can get all their profits taken away in the form of taxes. Now that is delusional for you.


So only the working people should pay taxes? Are they suckers or what?

You got a distorted view my friend or your not good with words, I am not sure which is true.


Not sure where you are going with this because you don't make a damn bit of sense to me. However, only working people and companies do pay taxes that actually net a "profit" for the government. People living on entititlements and government workers produce a net "loss" for the government. If you cannot figure that out in under five minutes maybe you should retake basic math.


Yeah ok I get it tough guy, but PERCENTAGE WISE who pays the most?

The middle class, rich people or corporations? Most working people earning less than lets say $100,000 a year cannot afford tax attorneys or even if they can, they don't stand to save much as the wealthy because all the loopholes favor them.

Thats why the tax code is so damm complicated! And I would not worry about the poor because they are not exactly living it up in las vegas or eating lobster more than once a month.



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 




Yeah ok I get it tough guy, but PERCENTAGE WISE who pays the most?

The middle class, rich people or corporations? Most working people earning less than lets say $100,000 a year cannot afford tax attorneys or even if they can, they don't stand to save much as the wealthy because all the loopholes favor them.


The top 5% pay the most. That top 5% pays nearly half of the taxes in this country. I am not sure what your point is about tax attorneys and tax code. If your beloved government didn't create such complicated tax code then people woudnt need a tax attorney and there woudnt be loopholes. How about a flat tax or a national sales tax to replace this mess?

Personally, I have never understood why the rich and corps are taxed more than middle class americans. The poor and middle class use way more government services than any rich person. So basically we are making rich people pay more for less service. That is like saying if you go to McDonalds the poor person pays 1 penny for a biggiesized big mac combo meal, and the rich person pays $1000 for something off the dollar menu. Is that fair?

[edit on 23-2-2010 by Mr Sunchine]



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Yeah ok I get it tough guy, but PERCENTAGE WISE who pays the most?

The middle class, rich people or corporations? Most working people earning less than lets say $100,000 a year cannot afford tax attorneys or even if they can, they don't stand to save much as the wealthy because all the loopholes favor them.

Thats why the tax code is so damm complicated! And I would not worry about the poor because they are not exactly living it up in las vegas or eating lobster more than once a month.


Perhaps we should do away with the tax code so working families don't have to worry about paying for a tax attorney.

zing!



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Sunchine
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 




Yeah ok I get it tough guy, but PERCENTAGE WISE who pays the most?

The middle class, rich people or corporations? Most working people earning less than lets say $100,000 a year cannot afford tax attorneys or even if they can, they don't stand to save much as the wealthy because all the loopholes favor them.


The top 5% pay the most. That top 5% pays nearly half of the taxes in this country. I am not sure what your point is about tax attorneys and tax code. If your beloved government didn't create such complicated tax code then people woudnt need a tax attorney and there woudnt be loopholes. How about a flat tax or a national sales tax to replace this mess?

Personally, I have never understood why the rich and corps are taxed more than middle class americans. The poor and middle class use way more government services than any rich person. So basically we are making rich people pay more for less service. That is like saying if you go to McDonalds the poor person pays 1 penny for a biggiesized big mac combo meal, and the rich person pays $1000 for something off the dollar menu. Is that fair?

[edit on 23-2-2010 by Mr Sunchine]


The tax code is complicated because it has a lot of loopholes favoring the wealthy and corporations. I am of the european "old school" mentality which says if you make more, you can afford to contribute more. Nothing wrong with this provided we don't go to extremes.

Granted the 39% tax bracket brought in by obama is too steep, but the wealthy and corporations through various legal manipulations manage to send a lot of money offshore, and thus avoid paying tax on the full amount of income. I guess the government compensates this by increasing the suppossed rate. If everyone was more honest and government actually cared about collecting every last penny the rate would be much lower.



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


What makes you think the rich use less government services?



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


What makes you think the rich use less government services?


What makes you think the rich don't?



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


People generally take there money off shore because the tax rate is too high. Just look at what happened when Reagan lowered tax rates and ended up with more tax revenue as the result of people moving their money back into the country once tax rates became reasonable.

Now days, with the global economy it is even worse. They don't just take their money off shore to avoid taxes and regulation. They take the whole damn company and all the jobs with it.

[edit on 23-2-2010 by Mr Sunchine]



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


What makes you think the rich use less government services?


They don't.

They use government services more.

See the 23.7 trillion dollars the government just gave to private banking interests.

AND as you point out, while the rich do pay the vast majority of the income taxes in this nation, they do not pay a proportionate amount of their income compared to the working class.

You're undoing your own arguments in favor of taxation for me.

The rich typically don't pay much over 15% of their total earnings as taxes, while the typical working class family pays as much as 40% of their income in taxes and fees.

Again, taxes are for the little people.

We would be far better off without them at all.

Rich corporatists use taxes as a weapon against competition. By keeping the working class poor through taxation, they severely restrict competition from forming. Working class people are not able to save enough capital to invest in a startup corporation.

At the same time, politicians use taxes as a weapon to keep people dependent for the same reasons. Politicians have an incentive to raise taxes as this keeps people impoverished and dependent - keeps em voting democrat.

Democrats don't want low taxes because low taxes eliminates government dependence.

A person earning 10,000 dollars a year and taking government handouts earns on average 2,000 more take home cash annually than a person earning 25,000 a year working full time.

There is a clear reason why the tax code is structured this way.


Again, taxes are not only violent in nature, they oppress the working class and are used as an economic weapon against them.

Hence, abolish them.



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


Thats more like a catch-22 if you ask me. What came first, the chicken or the egg? Face it, we are all being manipulated by a corporate government, but the middle class is getting shafted much deeper and much harder.


We need to get rid of the CORPORATE government and install a PEOPLES government, with a PEOPLES BANK. The Federal Reserve is robbing everyone blind and why does the american government need to borrow money from foreign countries?? Sounds like an international pyramid scheme perpetrated by the illuminati bankers.




top topics



 
21
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join