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.

 

Why More U.S. Expatriates Are Turning In Their Passports

page: 6
93
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:11 PM
link   
reply to post by WWJFKD
 





Maybe its been BS from the beginning, but some of us bought it and we wanted it and we imagined what it could be and now we demand that it be what we all know it can be.


The future does not have to be equal to the past.

The truth is our forefather's ideals and notions were not unique or even new, they were just new for the times.

They were ancient in origin, pioneered by the Greeks, and then the Romans of the Roman Republic, that eventually gave way to the Tyranny of the Roman Empire, and the Monarchs from Europe.

Democracy accordiing to the Greeks is giving each person a voice, and considering all voices. A republic according to the Romans and to us, is giving representatives a voice, that in theory are supposed to listenn to the people.

Yet as in Rome as is here, eventually those representatives to a Republic become corrupt, and start listening only to the people who can do the most for them.

People who dream of Empire. Just like we have created an Empire.

An empire that serves those few people, but has to be paid for at the expense of the people who are no longer listened too.

The truth is in today's age of technology we could be just like the Greeks were and meet virtually, and all have a say, and all have a vote, for a true democracy, and do away with the corruption of the Republic and the Empire it has transformed into.

Bush saw himself as a Great Decider, and Obama has even taken those dictatorial powers further.

Yes we were sold a bill of goods, but its never too late, the future does not have to equal the past.



[edit on 21/4/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]




posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Zerbst
 


Thanks my friend, I don't know the answer in regards to Social Security, I do know a huge number of expatriated Americans are retirees living in places like Mexico and Costa Rica and the old Yugoslavia and other places in Eastern Europe because their Social Security goes a lot further there because of exchange rates and costs of living.

It does appear you have to pay an exit tax if you want to drop your citizenship, you have to buy your freedom!

I do know that when I was younger and working as a travelling professional musician I had to pay social security to countries like Canada and England when I was earning money there. I have Social Security Cards from these countries even though I am not a citizen of them.

I know that the U.S. Congress agreed during the Regan years that the Queen of England is entitled to Social Security from the U.S. from income she has earned here.

As long as you don't surrender your Social Security Number, then your account with it, should be honored.

If there ever comes a time you or anyone has to live on just Social Security you would be in an income bracket that pays no tax.

Thanks for posting my friend, and joining in on the discussion, as usual, you have some great questions, and answers too!



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by simon2k7
 


All you have to do is file an amended return and an extension. You don't get in trouble for not having the money, you get in trouble for filing false information.

Yes you owe the money. However if you are in the bottom 45% of wage earners, you don't pay any anyway. Depends on your income level. It would only really hurt you if you are in say the top ten percent.

I often wonder if people not from here realize that nearly all taxes are paid by the top twenty five percent and that almost half of us pay no income taxes at all. Lord knows the US haters try to hide that fact all of the time.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


You will still pay sales taxes, gasoline taxes, cigarette taxes, liquor taxes, registration fees, licensing fees, insurance, real estate taxes and additional taxes on airline tickets if you travel.

If you pay taxes, and by the way Self Employed people pay nearly twice the tax rate as W-2 Employees, a Self Employed Person who has no wife and children, who makes 35,000.00 per year, will pay about 8,000.00 in Federal Taxes, or about 22% of what they make, but all the other state and local taxes will easily eat up another 22% if not more.

The great myth is that people who don’t pay Federal Income Tax don’t pay taxes, and that is completely false. If they purchase anything they pay taxes, depending on what they purchase they pay more taxes, and if they own anything of value like a car or a home, they pay taxes, licensing and fees, and Insurance which is a gamble, is also a form of a tax on the people.

No one gets away without paying some taxes, except for some American Indians who never shop off of reservation.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:40 PM
link   
I apologize.

[edit on 4/21/2010 by Blaine91555]



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:50 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


I own a Sole Proprietorship with 7 employees.

I'm fully aware.

I produce the same as I did ten years ago. My income dropped by about 30% in the same time period. Mostly from giving my people raises. I now earn about the same as my highest paid employee, but I pay more in taxes so she ends up with more than I get. I started with under $200, a skill and a borrowed car while sleeping on a friends couch.

What keeps me going is my Wife earns the same as I do.

I'll tell you right now, I'd not consider leaving but if I could manage the time and money, I'd be at all of the PEACEFUL marches in DC.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


You say what I have been thinking for so long and you word it so perfectly and fluidly. Yes democratic ideals have been around for ages.

A dictatorship has potential as long as you get a truly good human being as the dictator. Bureaucracies make it difficult for good people to do good things. but the same can be said about bad people doing bad things.

There are a lot of good people out there that would make benevolent dictators, but unfortunately they have no interest in politics because of the corruption. I think most of the ATSers would be shocked at how many truly good people there are in this world. We forget sometimes, being wrapped up in the conspiratorial nature of the world.

Also TPTB would have us believe that there are no good people. All the easier to make us complacent slaves, for who can we trust if we can't trust ourselves? The government is there to protect us from ourselves because we are inherently bad. How convenient.

Most of the pro-government big government folk out there that are all afraid of each other murdering and raping and mugging to no end if there was no government are the perfect subjects. Most of us would get along very well without a government.

A majority of us are truly good people when push comes to shove. I promise.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 





I own a Sole Proprietorship with 7 employees.


That's worth a star there!

The truth is, if you could cut your Tax burden you would probably have 8 employees!

So you could spend more time with the lovely Mrs!

One of the reasons the economy is being so manipulated right now, is to keep people from being able to afford protesting.

It's why they have been transfering the jobs overseas for decades, to impoverish us, and hide inflation with cheap foreign made goods.

Where they can't hide inflation though is in gasoline and in food.

The truth is most people don't have to money for gas or food, to go protest anything these days.

The people are slowly being completely disenfranchised!



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 11:02 PM
link   
Very Very interesting topic. makes me want to think twice before i become a u.s. citizen. I love this country but the people who run it f*** suck. If what happen here has always happened then it will always will. Somebody had mentioned that illegal aliens dont pay taxes. well they do believe me i know. has always been around me when i use to be illegal. I have family that are illegal and they still pay taxes even if they dont get anything back. But to have the change to live a better life in this country they make sacrifices if they have to. I dont know why people say illegal aliens dont pay taxes when they dont get payed cash. They take whatever the federal and state tax and stuff right from there check.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 11:12 PM
link   
reply to post by dbloch7986
 




A dictatorship has potential as long as you get a truly good human being as the dictator. Bureaucracies make it difficult for good people to do good things. but the same can be said about bad people doing bad things.


The real problem with dictatorships is succession. Sure you get your good Caesars but then you have a whole lot more bad ones in the long run.

Ultimately power corrupts, and its kind of a dual edged sword, because government by committee, where people can’t agree, and egos are involved are almost as bad as bad dictators if not worse.

Ultimately the problem is that Government is a business, but it’s the people’s business, but in business, if you really want to succeed in a quality way that is going to truly please your customers, you have to inspect what you expect.

Societies have grown too large for people in real power, to inspect what they expect.

The solution ultimately for corrupt nations, is to reduce population through wars, disease, forced emigration, etc.

The real solution though would be smaller tribal like nations, like the American Indians have, many of them have learned to turn a good profit, and they give back to the people. The Indians where I live here in South Florida on average receive a minimum of 48,000 per year and more for every additional child by about 12,000.00 per child, just to live.

The Tribal Government turns a profit, even hiring non Indians to do it, and actually splits that profit with the whole tribe.

They pay no tax, the Tribal Government is in business, it earns it’s own money, and then it pays them, to pretty much do what ever they want too. If they want to work in one of the Tribe’s operations they can make more money in addition to their stipend. If they just want to sit around fishing every day, they can.

We really are missing the boat. Our government is making trillions for corporations in Iraq and Afghanistan, owns all kinds of lands, and business and concessions, and we pay for all of it?

Please!

There are real solutions. Micro nations, like micro breweries make money, treat their citizens well, and enjoy a high quality of life.

Rome ultimately failed because it just go too big, too many people, to much corruption, to few people hording all the resources.

Same thing today.

What these expatriates are finding is better lives in SMALLER nations.

No they don't have militaries that can use USA we are number 1 gunboat diplomacy to throw their weight around, but it us the citizens who pay for that vanity, to make a few corporate interests rich, and they do not return the wealth.

Micro, Tribal Nations are the real way to go.

Mine would have a Led Zepellin song for the National Anthem!

Probably be clothing optional too!



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Josephus23
 





I am not too sure where you are getting your information from, but here are some references. Here is a link to the Supreme Court decision in Pollock versus Farmers' Loan and Trust that states that any taxes imposed directly must be apportioned. (In case you can't grasp what this decision is stating, then I will tell you. It means that a direct unapportioned tax is BLATANTLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL)


I am not questioning your opinion of direct taxes, either apportioned or unapportioned. And I am familiar with Pollock and its consequences.

I am questioning your opinion of the 16th Amendment and how part of the Constitution can be unconstitutional.

You obviously need a history lesson.

The 16th Amendment was issued and adopted after and in response to Pollock.

Pollock only found tax on SOME income classifications, such as income derived from property rental to be a direct tax, and struck down only those taxes. That happened in 1895.

In 1909 an amendment was proposed to remedy the situation complained about in Justice Harlans dissent in the Pollock case:



from Supreme Court Justice Harlan in Pollock v Farmers Loan & Trust Co

When, therefore, this court adjudges, as it does now adjudge, that Congress cannot impose a duty or tax upon personal property, or upon income arising either from rents of real estate or from personal property, including invested personal property, bonds, stocks, and investments of all kinds, except by apportioning the sum to be so raised among the States according to population, it practically decides that, without an amendment of the Constitution — two-thirds of both Houses of Congress and three-fourths of the States concurring — such property and incomes can never be made to contribute to the support of the national government.


In other words, the Constitution effectively barred tax on the income derived from investments (like rental property, shares, bonds, etc) that were concentrated in the hands of very few (this was the age of the 'robber baron' don't forget), and comprised a huge proportion of the wealth of the nation. Congress wanted to remedy this situation and proposed the amendment to allow income to be taxed, no matter what its source is.



The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.


The 16th Amendment was ratified by Delaware on 3 February 1913 becoming the 36th of 48 states to do so. That made the necessary three fourths of the states. Furthermore New Mexico and Wyoming ratified it on the same day. It was ratified by New Jersey on the 4th and by Vermont on the 19th. On the 25th of February 1913, the Secretary of State declared the amendment approved. With more than enough states having approved it.

Now your statement was that the 16th Amendment is blatantly unconstitutional. It is not, it is part of the constitution.

If you meant to say that any income tax is unconstitutional, it isn't and has never been. Tax on income derived from rental property, shares, bonds, and like investments was unconstitutional before ratification or the 16th Amendment, but other forms of income are and have always been perfectly constitutional.

If you meant to say that income tax on rental income, stocks, bonds and the like is unconstitutional, you are still wrong. It is completely constitutional since 1913 when the 16th Amendment was ratified.








[edit on 21/4/2010 by rnaa]



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by D377MC
 


Please see Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution: Adoption

You have been misled.

It was passed by more than enough states before the Secretary of State declared it ratified. It was afterwards passed by the remaining states.

(Edit: spelling)

[edit on 21/4/2010 by rnaa]



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by simon2k7
 


All you have to do is file an amended return and an extension. You don't get in trouble for not having the money, you get in trouble for filing false information.

Yes you owe the money. However if you are in the bottom 45% of wage earners, you don't pay any anyway. Depends on your income level. It would only really hurt you if you are in say the top ten percent.

I often wonder if people not from here realize that nearly all taxes are paid by the top twenty five percent and that almost half of us pay no income taxes at all. Lord knows the US haters try to hide that fact all of the time.




At least some folks are talking sense and refused to be manipulated.

The rich are winning with each protest against taxation.

What is taxes all about? It's not going to line the pockets of the federal or state administrators. It is use to meed social needs such as education, healthcare, infrastructure, etc. Everyone, including the rich will ultimately benefit from it.

As a society grows, so too will its social needs to meet an ever higher increase in majority citizens expectations.

The minority and are poor who have no such lofty expectations are taken into account as well - they pay no taxes and need not spend on luxury goods, healthcare or education and thus avoiding taxes.

It is only right that those who go overseas to be taxed if they earn a substantial income. They were beneficiaries of the American system while growing up and should therefore return a debt to american society.

No man does it alone, not even Bill Gates. For all his wealth, he could never pay for the communications infrastructure construction bill that he earned his wealth from.

Furthermore, those americans working overseas are paid substantially higher with expat priviledges - home, cars, subsidised education, etc, paid by the company. He would be more likely living in a 3rd world nation, where expenses are considerably lower.

While his freedoms may be curtailed living there, it is his choice sacrificed on the alter of greed or neccesity. He would thus have very much funds left over for savings, if he does not opt for opulent living.

It is only fair that he contributes instead such oppulence and share his wealth from overseas ( not talking about local companies and workers here), a small portion of it, back to his society.

There will be many arguments on how a society's fund should be spent, and the most critical of all is - spending on borrowed money. It must end. Those interest payments to the rich could have built more hospitals to save lives.

But the problem is not taxes or the concept of it. It is how it should be spent, and this is the vital point that the rich and poor should excercise their vote upon, and not to cut or lower taxes, as it will only benefit the fat cats who sponged off society for the past years and seek to manipulate the masses to protest in their favoured aspect on tax issues.

Peace.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by rnaa
 


Wonderful, so in essence all you have said, beyond you live in Australia, and don't pay any U.S. Taxes yourself, is that, once the Robber Barons figured out how to rape the American People the Government decided to join in the fun.

Have you actually considered your arguments?




posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by simon2k7
 


All you have to do is file an amended return and an extension. You don't get in trouble for not having the money, you get in trouble for filing false information.

Yes you owe the money. However if you are in the bottom 45% of wage earners, you don't pay any anyway. Depends on your income level. It would only really hurt you if you are in say the top ten percent.

I often wonder if people not from here realize that nearly all taxes are paid by the top twenty five percent and that almost half of us pay no income taxes at all. Lord knows the US haters try to hide that fact all of the time.


I would agree with you, if it wasn't for the fact that in reality, it's the middle class who bears the brunt of taxation. Rich folks, most of whom own a corporate license, find ways to write off everything they can to get out of paying taxes. This includes profit and loss statements that consistantly report extravagant losses, and other shady tax tactics that inevitably will bring their tax liability down to zero. So... all those 'business' luncheons, trips abroad, and extravagant gifts to relatives who are written off as business relations - guess who pays for them?

If they're accepted for value by the IRS, which they normally are, then it's everyone else who pays taxes that pays for these things - a very sneaky way to deprive the hard working human of their money.

So, in reality, the rich pay nothing, and get what they want, with those with very little, having to paying for it.

point in case? Go over to the Businessweek website and review the tax brackets of major corporations such as exxon-mobil. They made profits globally of 18 billion dollars, however reported so many losses on their tax forms here in America that they actually claim the government owes them millions of dollars. pretty cool huh?

You can realize a profit of 18 billion dollars outside of America, yet don't have to claim it as income on American Tax forms, as an entity operating in america. then, you write off your losses and business expenses and whalla! the government actually now owes you millions of dollars in losses...

Go figure.

the American system of operations is absolutely criminal, and the rest of the world needs to beware American involvement. America needs to be reformed from the inside out - WHAT IN THE HELL ARE AMERICANS WAITING FOR?

I'm aware that this kind of speech will get me in trouble, here in the land of free speech, and people would warn me to be careful.

WOW.... I never ever thought that America would become what it has become to this day...

just, WOW..... ...



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 11:47 PM
link   
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 




What is taxes all about? It's not going to line the pockets of the federal or state administrators. It is use to meed social needs such as education, healthcare, infrastructure, etc. Everyone, including the rich will ultimately benefit from it.


Makes me wonder where you are seeking the truth from?

This is a total falsehood, and I can't believe anyone would be so foolish to say it!



The amount devoted to Education in the Federal Budget is actually less than the interest payments on past Military endeavors that were financed.

Social Security is a seperate Tax, Medicare is a Seperate Tax.

Your Federal Taxes go to paying for a whole lot of MILITARY and INTEREST not education.

It's a shame we can't have an intelligent conversation about taxation!



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by D377MC
 


Just so you know:

Your link to the Freedom Law School challenge contains the following 'statement':



Although the IRS and the modern American Courts claim that the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution permitted the Income Tax to be imposed on the compensation for labor of the average working man, this Amendment was not properly added to the U.S. Constitution.


You need to understand that that sentence contains two completely false assertions.

1) the the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution DID NOT PERMIT the Income Tax to be imposed on the compensation for labor of the average working man.

That permission is granted in the first sentence of Section 8 of the Constitution. The 16th Amendment extended the power of Congress to impose tax on the income of those who were NOT the "average working man", and derived their income not from their labor, but from their investments such as rental property, stocks, and bonds.

The Freedom School has completely twisted the purpose of the 16th Amendment back to front. That is an unconscionable lie on their part.

2) The 16th Amendment was properly ratified according to the provisions contained in the Constitution for amending it and has been properly added to the Constitution.

That is another lie on their part.

As to their challenge, I expect there are any number of cases at all level of the courts system that demonstrate the fallacy of their assertions. That it hasn't been taken up is probably due to the FS not being able to pay anyway, setting unachievable conditions on the challenge, and people just not wanting to get into the mud with insane people.

[edit on 22/4/2010 by rnaa]



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


I have stated it before and will state it again, UNLESS.....unless you were BORN in federal territory, YOU ARE NOT a U.S. citizen. You are an AMERICAN National.

Has anyone ever bothered to actually read any laws? The U.N. states in article 13, I believe, that you have the right to leave your country and to return freely.... WITHOUT restriction. A passport IS a restriction.

When are people going to wake up. There are no terrorists, the only people who cause terror, are those in the alphabet agencies trying to keep "government" in control of the people through fear. The corporate U.S. is being run by covert ops, they use the corporate policy to punish and enforce their rules upon unsuspecting Citizens. If you don't know you have any rights, then you don't have any rights.

Another good thread by ProtoplasmicTraveler



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 12:08 AM
link   
reply to post by rnaa
 


The key to your entire argument is the definition of the word "income"

Income is defined as any type of money made that is considered to be profit.

Monies that are given in exchange for our labor are not considered profit because it is an exchange for our labor.

Also...

I never said that the 16th was never ratified.
You are pulling the straw man fallacy on that one.

What I did say is that it does not matter if it was ratified or not.
The founding fathers knew that Congress could become corrupt and that was the purpose of setting up our judicial system the way it is set up.
That is the purpose of the concept of jury nullification.

It is late on the east coast, so I will finish my response in the morning, but you should take the time to watch the SEVERAL videos that I have posted.

Or google Sherry Jackson, who is an ex IRS agent who realized that the 16th is unconstitutional and is now being illegally detained for supposedly "not paying her taxes".

Let me repeat myself.

****It is entirely possible for Congress to ratify an amendment that is not constitutional.*****

That is the crux of this argument.

And the reason that a juror cannot be held liable for their decision.

We the people are the last defense against tyranny.
We have the final veto power over all laws.

It is a concept known as JURY NULLIFICATION.

And when juries have been properly informed as to the law, then they have overwhelmingly decided AGAINST the 16th.


[edit on 4/22/2010 by Josephus23]



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 12:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Zerbst
 


According to our local retired US law dog. Your SS payments will continue, SS support for surviving dependent children are paid but may be eliminated/reduced if the surviving parent is not a US citizen. I think the current formula is each child gets $x.xx, and the surviving parent also gets $x.xx for additional support. If the parent is not a citizen, no payment.
Due to some bank and nation rules and regs you may want to try for direct deposit though that may also have draw backs. Some here in the PI have the SS payments dumped in their stateside accounts and draw from there.
Also you have to file tax returns on this money.
Don't know about how the Health laws are going to affect this if at all.



new topics

top topics



 
93
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join