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.

 

U.S. Decieved Into Believing There is Such A Thing as Fair Taxation

page: 1
27
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+4 more 
posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 08:11 PM
link   
Let us never mind that not a single soul can honestly answer what the subject to the so called "Personal Income Tax" is. Let us never mind that very few know a damn thing about the principles of Constitutional taxation. Let us never mind that even fewer could honestly answer whether this "income" tax is a direct tax upon income as property, or an indirect tax upon some taxed activity where income is used to measure the tax. Let us all instead just mindlessly assume that anyone who earns an income owes the tax, that way we can all engage in class warfare and argue over who should pay their "fair" share to pay for all these "vital" government services.

Taxation is not fair, never has been fair, and never was about fairness. Taxation exists solely to fund government. Congress has the complete and plenary power of taxation and can tax whatever they want to tax as long as those taxes abide by a few rules. The first rule is in regards to direct taxes and requires that all direct taxes be apportioned among the several states. The second rule is in regard to indirect taxes and requires that all indirect taxes be uniform across the several states. That there, is as fair as it is ever going to get, and the pretense that one class should "pay more", or "their fair share" of a tax has nothing at all to do with Constitutional taxation and is nothing more than tired political rhetoric.

What if the vast majority of people currently filing valid tax returns were never made liable for any tax, nor subject to any applicable revenue law by statute and the only thing that ever made them liable was their own contractual signature on valid tax return? What if, regardless of how much you earn, regardless of how much wealth you amass, you're not even liable for any "income tax'"? How fair would it be if the vast majority of people paying this "income tax" were doing so due to mistake of fact, misinterpretation of law and outright fraud? Who cares, right? Isn't it better to envy those richer than us and demand they have their advantage stolen through taxation? Wouldn't that be better than the majority of - rich or poor - us not paying any "income tax" at all because we don't have to? Wouldn't it be better and more "fair" to convince poor people they have an obligation to file a tax return in order to make the soaking of the rich "fairer"?

If the truth is too damned confusing, wouldn't it be better to just go along with the well established lie?


edit on 26-4-2012 by Jean Paul Zodeaux because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 08:20 PM
link   
US Federal Income Tax booklet used to thank us for our "self-assessment and voluntary compliance" that I believe is part of the tax code. I do not recall having seen that little thank you note in any recent tax booklets, not for the past decade or two.


edit on 26-4-2012 by Erongaricuaro because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 08:25 PM
link   
I'm certainly not calling any of your points invalid, Jean Paul, as they are all insightful...

But philosophy aside, we are expected to pay it as citizens, so why isn't every citizen without exception?



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegagefather
I'm certainly not calling any of your points invalid, Jean Paul, as they are all insightful...

But philosophy aside, we are expected to pay it as citizens, so why isn't every citizen without exception?


I spoke to law, not philosophy. Perhaps you can point to the section of the tax code that makes people liable for the tax in question.

P.S. Thank you for joining this thread. I certainly meant no disrespect to your thread, only felt compelled to counter the tired class warfare game with points of law.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 08:36 PM
link   
Yep people been sold a bill of goods that we have to pay income tax that did not exist for the first 80 years or so of this nation's existence.

Now "pay your fair share"!!!!!!!!!



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
Yep people been sold a bill of goods that we have to pay income tax that did not exist for the first 80 years or so of this nation's existence.

Now "pay your fair share"!!!!!!!!!


Certainly those subject to the applicable revenue laws and are liable for the tax have to pay. If only we could intelligently determine just who those people actually are...

...Of course, as Eron pointed out or intimated, our own voluntary self assessment is one way to determine liability...



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


That is most certainly one way but the fact is

The Government doesn't trust us.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


That is most certainly one way but the fact is

The Government doesn't trust us.


Indeed, not even if we do voluntarily self assess our own liability. Even then we are required to sign under penalty of perjury that "all of the above is true and correct". The government doesn't trust us? Thieves always lock their doors.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 08:53 PM
link   
...misedited.
edit on 26-4-2012 by thegagefather because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 08:57 PM
link   
Accidental post
edit on 26-4-2012 by thegagefather because: Whoops! Didn't know this was the philosophy forum!



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 09:00 PM
link   
Not trying to get off on a tangent but I don't think that taxation in and of itself can ever be fair. Taxation is taking money from someone with the threat of force used against them if they don't comply and I simply can't be okay with this. This is the moral and philosophical argument.

As far as an economic argument against taxation, I agree with what Milton Freidman has to say on the subject as far as an individual will spend their money in a much more sensible way than if someone takes it from them and spends it on their behalf.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegagefather
Yes, yes. No taxation without representation. It's not within our law books. Fine and dandy.

You go to prison for tax evasion.

So philosophy aside, why shouldn't -everyone- have to pay their predetermined-in-the-form-of-numbers-fair share? I say philosophy, because thinking you don't have to pay taxes is not reality.
edit on 26-4-2012 by thegagefather because: (no reason given)


"No taxation without representation" has nothing to do with this. If you've been made liable for this tax by statute, that means you can point to the section of the tax code that made you liable. You can keep dismissing law by calling it philosophy all you want....you can dismiss a lion and call it a gazelle all you want to, but that ain't too clever.

Reality, in terms of any tax, means there is an identifiable statute to point to - not some philosophical debate but actual real statute - to demonstrate how it is you, or anyone else has been made liable for this tax. Stop deflecting and either admit you have no clue what statute that would be, or show us what statute it is.


edit on 26-4-2012 by Jean Paul Zodeaux because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegagefather
Mods... If any of you are looking... This post was started by me, and the first 3 pages mysteriously disappeared, and now it says the post was started by Jean.


Brother, there is no mystery. I am parodying your thread and this seems to be the source of your confusion. Your thread still exists.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 09:05 PM
link   
And by "they real" I mean are the "consequences real"

Sorry - my edit button is not working.
edit on 26-4-2012 by thegagefather because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegagefather

You go to prison for tax evasion.


You go to prison for tax evasion as in falsification of information given on your form and sworn to by you. You do not go to prison for tax avoidance - last time I checked. You avoid paying income taxes or filing because you honestly don't believe you are required by law to pay them. I believe that leads to confiscation of property that the IRS claims you owe them, but no jail time.

In many cases, if not most, the IRS has records and knows exactly how much money you made. You file voluntarily and that obligates you to pay them. It also provides another avenue for them to charge you for "cheating" and falsification of your tax forms.

Not sure but now understand the IRS is about as federal as the Federal Reserve, another private entity. Not sure the accuracy of that though. Tax courts mimic courts of law but my understanding is that they are not under the Justice Department.


Mods... If any of you are looking... This post was started by me, and the first 3 pages mysteriously disappeared, and now it says the post was started by Jean.


Got to pay close attention to tax codes and ATS threads, this is a different one than yours.


edit on 26-4-2012 by Erongaricuaro because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Income Tax = State Sponsored Terrorism (at least one form of it)...

Of course, an IRS official would respond, "You have a choice, and that's what makes the tax voluntary. You can choose to pay the tax or you can choose to go to jail. No one forces you to choose to pay the tax, and so it's voluntary."

But the choice between two evils does not convert the choice of one of them into a voluntary act. It is instead a choice between two coerced options.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 09:09 PM
link   


Mods... If any of you are looking... This post was started by me, and the first 3 pages mysteriously disappeared, and now it says the post was started by Jean.


I am sorry but that is the most hilarious thing i have ever read on ats.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 09:10 PM
link   
A tax on income inspires lower productivity and encourages an underground economy. A tax on ALL products and services (only and instead) draws from the underground economy, foreigners, all businesses, illegals, regardless of your income class. No class warfare, everyone is treated equally, no exemptions, no exceptions, no age limits, period. If you use the services and protections afforded by your govt. you need to be a part of that solution if you make $100 a week or $1B.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 09:13 PM
link   
reply to post by tkwasny
 


The way i am taking the op is there will never be a fair tax because parties will always game the system to their advantages the only true "fair tax" is none at all.

The federal income tax is not needed the first income tax was started to repay for the Civil War which has grown to a bigger green eyed monster with every year.

The only thing taxation is now is a progressive beast that has become a burden on this nations citizen instead of helping them.

The fact is the Government has grown to large and has become a detriment to its own general welfare and our own.
edit on 26-4-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by tkwasny
A tax on income inspires lower productivity and encourages an underground economy. A tax on ALL products and services (only and instead) draws from the underground economy, foreigners, all businesses, illegals, regardless of your income class. No class warfare, everyone is treated equally, no exemptions, no exceptions, no age limits, period. If you use the services and protections afforded by your govt. you need to be a part of that solution if you make $100 a week or $1B.


Government is not a pay to play function of American society.

What you are suggesting is the only possible way anyone could be made liable for the "income" tax as it exists today. However, each taxed activity would have to be clearly written as being made liable. Is that what you're suggesting? That Congress create a statute for each and every profession to name all goods and services that flow through a market place?




edit on 26-4-2012 by Jean Paul Zodeaux because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
27
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join