POLL: Income Tax

[Mr Neutron]

i'm afraid you have a bit more rosy view of the people than i do.

I'll admit that I do struggle to maintain a positive opinion of the "sheeple".
Thank you for your contribution to the thread.

 

[BendBrewer]

Ever notice that those people who claim that America is the greatest Country in the World are the same ones that complain about having to pay for it?

Ever notice that?

What spoiled fucking brats they are. They expect to be kept safe at every turn, drive on decent roads, have the police and fire departments at their beckon call.......but they kick and scream like immature children when asked to help pay for any of it. They expect to live in the greatest country in the world for fucking free.

Ever notice that?

The citizens of the United States currently pay the lowest tax rates that Americans have ever paid and less than just about every other citizen of an established Country yet some Americans STILL bitch about this. You Spoiled Fucking Brats.

"Don't pass on our debt to our children and don't you dare ask ME to pay for it!!!!!!!" Sounds pretty silly when you say it out loud huh?

Ever notice that?

 

[Mr Neutron]

Ever notice that those people who claim that America is the greatest Country in the World are the same ones that complain about having to pay for it?

Ever notice that?

What spoiled fucking brats they are. They expect to be kept safe at every turn, drive on decent roads, have the police and fire departments at their beckon call.......but they kick and scream like immature children when asked to help pay for any of it. They expect to live in the greatest country in the world for fucking free.

Ever notice that?

The citizens of the United States currently pay the lowest tax rates that Americans have ever paid and less than just about every other citizen of an established Country yet some Americans STILL bitch about this. You Spoiled Fucking Brats.

"Don't pass on our debt to our children and don't you dare ask ME to pay for it!!!!!!!" Sounds pretty silly when you say it out loud huh?

Ever notice that?

Another assumption based on emotion rather than reason.
Who are the ones expecting to be kept safe at every turn? Roads, as responded to TWICE already in THIS thread, are paid for by gasoline tax. Police and fire departments are paid for with income taxes.
Who is that screaming like immature children? Sound like YOU. Ever notice THAT?
"The citizens pay the lowest tax rate ever paid" REALLY? Are you honestly going to stick with that? Maybe you didn't know this but there was a time when the US had NO income tax.
All of your BS aside. If taxing wages was legal, then why isn't there a law that says that? Why does the IRS and subsequently our government (and you) continue this fraud?
You are arguing for an illegal scam, a lie, theft and extortion.

 

[BendBrewer]

Are you honestly going to stick with that? Maybe you didn't know this but there was a time when the US had NO income tax.

Then go live in 1910 America. Tell us how you enjoy living in a Third World.

What non tax Country would you prefer to live in? You can choose anyone that you like as long as the sky is blue in that world. Americans are currently under-taxed and it is having negative effects across the board. Americans need to quit crying and pay their share. They are an embarrassment to our ancestors who did sacrifice for this country.

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.

What you call an "Illegal Scam", others call the 16th Amendment to the Untied States Constitution. Maybe you should read it or at the very least, learn to appreciate it in its entirety.

 

[mame]

Interest on the debt, waste, fraud and over-budget spending.

...
...
...

OK! Here's what you will have to give up in order to not pay a slave tax (income tax).
+ No more fear of IRS audit
+ No more losing %15, %20 or more to withholding
+ No more sending your kids to school, not to learn basic language skills, math and science but how to be politically correct and feel good about yourself
+ No more sexual assaults on airline travellers
+ No more assisting Mexican drug lords attain weapons
+ No more invading sovereign nations, whether under false pretenses or not
+ No more foreign welfare (foreign aid)
+ No more endless wars against fictitious enemies
+ No more government run by central banks (stealing our countries wealth)
+ No more fear of government arresting me or invading my home, by mistake or otherwise.
+ No more holding back on medicines that are available elsewhere in the world but not here because of pharma controlled FDA
+ No more veterans languishing in pain and suffering, sometimes suicide because we will have more than enough money to treat them properly
+ No more paying farmers to NOT grow
+ No more corporate welfare
+ No more bailouts
+ No more "too big to fail"
+ No more mistrust and disdain for government, at home and abroad because it will be manageable and under control. Any mistakes or abuses will be minuscule
in comparison
I could go on, bit I think most will get the picture. I'm sure you will paint a much different one. Just remember this, we've been trying it your way for the last 100 years or so and it is not working. I think it is time to try a new approach.

This is what I mean... Federal spending in 2010(in a pie chart! wont upload for some reason).

In normal times(full employment), personal Federal income tax is just under half of federal revenue. In 2010, Entitlements made up ~57% of the federal budget, military ~19%, interest on debt is just under 5% and the rest falls under "discretionary" spending. You may be on your idealogical high horse feeling as if "people will accept" cuts but that's just it - your idealogy blinds you from reality. Fact is, no politician could surivive the wrath of the voters if they were to, for example, eliminate medicare. And for good reason - you dont have to eliminate "entitlements" at all; Reform, especially targetting medical costs via bending the curve, can produce a sustainable entitlement system. I know you dont personally believe in "welfare" but most people do, and you argue that these are things that are not the federal governments "constitutional responsibilities", right? I'd argue you have a better chance of amending the constitution to include Federal spending on "social safety nets" than you do abolishing them all.

Thank you for the "teabaggers".

"Obamacare".

Whether those who would oppose such measures are a majority or not, does not matter.
"Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it"

And what is so wrong with helping to care for the elderly when they can no longer work? For example, my grandmother gets over half of her income from medicare. She worked her whole life for 40+ hours a week as a single mother, mostly as a waitress (so lots of tips) and was never able to save much... What she was able to save has already ran out because it was so little. My point is, you can't just end these programs and expect your magical libertarian fairy dust to ensure granny has an income... These are real people, and there are real consequences to ending the programs that improve quality of life for members of society that would otherwise be unable to support themselves, the elderly and/or disabled especially.

If you lived in the mid 18th century, I suspect you would be against independence and side with King George.

I dont believe in taxation without representation, so I surely would be a patriot just as I am today and I'm sure most people on these boards would say the same thing. I feel represented for the most part, but acknowledge that my opinion is not the only one and that our system is slow and in many ways flawed(we would obviously argue about how though, idealogy and all) so it's not really the same.

Finally, there are a lot of people who profess that they are for freedom until they find out that means protecting EVERYBODY'S freedom, even those you do not like. Here, in this forum, we have debated whether or not ALL drugs should be legalized, not just marijuana. It's plain to see the disparity in thought. You're either for freedom for everybody or none at all. Do I have to mention that freedom does not allow for bringing harm to others?Just remember the "Golden Rule", THAT, really is the only law we need.

That's just really not the case, as I've argued tons of times. No country has had any real stability without both libertarian and authoritarian principles in governing just as there aren't any successful countries that are purely capitalist or socialist.

There is a balance, we can argue about whether or not government is too big or too small but the "all or nothing" attitude is just not realistic 100% of the time. I mean, a lot of people both on the right and left feel like the SCOTUS's decision on the Citizens united case was wrong - even though it follows the "all or nothing" creed of protecting free speech at all costs - it also further fucks up our already too-dependant-on-money-via-special-interests election system; I dont know your thoughts on this but plenty people believe that "money is equal to free speech(and we dont have to tell you about it!)" is damaging to the election system and many would go further arguing that there should be more oversight and regulation of money in elections. The SCOTUS majority opinion is a good example IMO of an "all or nothing" position that actually causes more harm than good and therefore we as a people should be able to lay down fair rules to the game.

 

[Mr Neutron]

Then go live in 1910 America. Tell us how you enjoy living in a Third World.

What non tax Country would you prefer to live in? You can choose anyone that you like as long as the sky is blue in that world. Americans are currently under-taxed and it is having negative effects across the board. Americans need to quit crying and pay their share. They are an embarrassment to our ancestors who did sacrifice for this country.



What you call an "Illegal Scam", others call the 16th Amendment to the Untied States Constitution. Maybe you should read it or at the very least, learn to appreciate it in its entirety.

A third world country? I don't know what it is you're smoking but I think you better lay off a while. Oh that's right, before 1913 there wasn't anything here except a bunch of cavemen running around dodging dinosaur droppings.
You do realize that the Founding Fathers had no intention for the citizens to EVER be coerced into handing over their property. Perhaps you would do better to stop regurgitating what you've been indoctrinated with and educate yourself.
I have listed some of what makes it a scam earlier in THIS thread, if you are too lazy to read the whole thread, I have nothing more to say to you.

 

[BendBrewer]

Regurgitating the United States Constitution? You are a loon.

You are claiming that the United States Constitution is a scam. I got that. The vast majority of Americans couldn't disagree with you any more.

I don't care what you have 'listed'. You post utter nonsense. Complete bullshit. Here, let's look at what you 'listed'

If taxing wages was legal, then why isn't there a law that says that?

See? You have no idea what you are talking about. Why should I care what someone who doesn't know what they are talking about 'LISTS'? You are talking out of your ass.

What I listed makes it clear that you are ignorant. Go read the 16th Amendment if you think it's illegal. You are dead wrong. The United States Constitution isn't something that you have the right to pick and choose from. What part of that don't you understand?

 

[BendBrewer]

[SIZE=+2]T[/SIZE]he Progressive Era lasted from 1895 until World War I. This was a period of unrest and reform. Monopolies continued in spite of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. Social problems flourished in the U.S. During the 1910s labor unions continued to grow as the middle classes became more and more unhappy. Unsafe working conditions were underscored by the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire in which 145 female workers were killed. Children were hired to work in factories, milles, and mines for long hours in unsafe and unhealthy conditions. Though efforts to pass a federal law proved unsuccessful, by the middle of this decade every state had passed a minimum age law. A commission found that up to 20% of the children living in cities were undernourished, education took second place to hunger and while children worked, only one-third enrolled in elementary school and less than 10% graduated from high school. The status of the Negro worsened. Skilled negro workers were barred from the AF of L. Women were also striving for equality.The first suffrage parade was held in 1910 - the 19th amendment finally ratified in 1919.

Enjoy your suffrage Neutron!!!!!

 

[Mr Neutron]

Fact is, no politician could surivive the wrath of the voters if they were to, for example, eliminate medicare.

Ever heard of Ron Paul?

Reform, especially targetting medical costs via bending the curve, can produce a sustainable entitlement system

By mandating that everybody must buy health insurance? That is not healthcare reform.

I know you dont personally believe in "welfare" but most people do

"Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority believe it"

"Obamacare".

This is not an attempt at an insult. It is simply identifying what this legislation is. It is NOT healthcare reform, as advertised. In attempting to reform a segment of society or commerce, shouldn't there at least be some discussion of alternate views? The President chose not to do this (as have many others in the past), but instead imposed on us another burden to further shackle us into submission.

And what is so wrong with helping to care for the elderly when they can no longer work? For example, my grandmother gets over half of her income from medicare. She worked her whole life for 40+ hours a week as a single mother, mostly as a waitress (so lots of tips) and was never able to save much... What she was able to save has already ran out because it was so little. My point is, you can't just end these programs and expect your magical libertarian fairy dust to ensure granny has an income... These are real people, and there are real consequences to ending the programs that improve quality of life for members of society that would otherwise be unable to support themselves, the elderly and/or disabled especially.

This is a deliberate scare tactic. You know very well that nobody is advocating ending these programs immediately and throwing the recipients out in the cold. People have been conditioned to this system and it will take some time to change but change it must.
I have some personal stories of my own. Like how my mother was refused assistance because she lived in house that was paid for. They gave her a 10 pound brick of cheese and told her not to come back. She was a real person, too.

That's just really not the case, as I've argued tons of times. No country has had any real stability without both libertarian and authoritarian principles in governing just as there aren't any successful countries that are purely capitalist or socialist.

Yes, it is the case. A while back the SCOTUS ruled in favor of those people who demonstrate at the funerals of our fallen soldiers. While I think these people are wrong, I agree with the decision. I am sure there is probably many who will disagree with my view but they would be wrong, also.
The SCOTUS has also ruled that "wages" are not income and are not subject to tax, while "income" is not wages but a profit from corporate activity or investment. Yet, here we are arguing that taxes are good and we should pay these, not only unconstitutional but immoral taxes to support a government that we shouldn't be burdened with in the first place.

There is a balance, we can argue about whether or not government is too big or too small but the "all or nothing" attitude is just not realistic 100% of the time. I mean, a lot of people both on the right and left feel like the SCOTUS's decision on the Citizens united case was wrong - even though it follows the "all or nothing" creed of protecting free speech at all costs - it also further fucks up our already too-dependant-on-money-via-special-interests election system; I dont know your thoughts on this but plenty people believe that "money is equal to free speech(and we dont have to tell you about it!)" is damaging to the election system and many would go further arguing that there should be more oversight and regulation of money in elections. The SCOTUS majority opinion is a good example IMO of an "all or nothing" position that actually causes more harm than good and therefore we as a people should be able to lay down fair rules to the game.

I agree that things are not always "black and white". But in this case they are. It's called the Constitution of the United Staes of America. It's all right there.
If our elected officials were to adhere to their oath to defend our Constitution, we wouldn't be in this mess.

 

[Mr Neutron]

Regurgitating the United States Constitution? You are a loon.

You are claiming that the United States Constitution is a scam. I got that. The vast majority of Americans couldn't disagree with you any more.

I don't care what you have 'listed'. You post utter nonsense. Complete bullshit. Here, let's look at what you 'listed'



See? You have no idea what you are talking about. Why should I care what someone who doesn't know what they are talking about 'LISTS'? You are talking out of your ass.

What I listed makes it clear that you are ignorant. Go read the 16th Amendment if you think it's illegal. You are dead wrong. The United States Constitution isn't something that you have the right to pick and choose from. What part of that don't you understand?

So why don't you go collect the $50K reward if you're so smart?

 

[BendBrewer]

Socialized Medicine.

I don't bother to get covered, go to the hospital when needed and have all of you pay for it. That's Socialized Medicine.

The Individual Mandate has been a Core Conservative Principle since Richard Nixon. Until a Democrat actually got it passed. There is no pleasing an Obama Hater. They made that clear since day 1. Now they hate what they used to embrace because a guy they have irrational hatred towards got it done.

Individual Mandate. Core Conservative Principle. Go look it up.

 

[NoDrama]

If you grow old, worked hard all your life and have nothing to show for it, well thats your problem not mine. Some people save more than they make, even if they make Min Wage. Thats how you become wealthy.

 

[NoDrama]

So why don't you go collect the $50K reward if you're so smart?

He doesn't understand that there is a definition for "Income" and that definition does not include wages.

 

[BendBrewer]

26 U.S.C. § 61 ​

(a) General definition ​

Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, gross income means all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items:
(1) Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items;
(2) Gross income derived from business;
(3) Gains derived from dealings in property;
(4) Interest;
(5) Rents;
(6) Royalties;
(7) Dividends;
( Alimony and separate maintenance payments;
(9) Annuities;
(10) Income from life insurance and endowment contracts;
(11) Pensions;
(12) Income from discharge of indebtedness;
(13) Distributive share of partnership gross income;
(14) Income in respect of a decedent; and
(15) Income from an interest in an estate or trust.
(b) Cross references For items specifically included in gross income, see part II (sec. 71 and following). For items specifically excluded from gross income, see part III (sec. 101 and following).

It's funny that you actually think you know what you are talking about.

Ignorance - The Root of All Frustration.

If you would like to try and site specific cases go ahead. I'll continue to point out how you are wrong. When the Court has actually defined the term "income," the definition has always included wages. You may get over it whenever you want.

​

 

[BendBrewer]

The federal income tax is unconstitutional because it is a “direct tax” that must be apportioned among the states in accordance with the census.

False. It is true that there is an apportionment requirement in the Constitution for “direct taxes,” but the 16th Amendment clearly eliminates the apportionment requirement for all taxes on incomes.

Class dismissed.

 

[Mr Neutron]

It's funny that you actually think you know what you are talking about.

Ignorance - The Root of All Frustration.

If you would like to try and site specific cases go ahead. I'll continue to point out how you are wrong. When the Court has actually defined the term "income," the definition has always included wages. You may get over it whenever you want.

​

I don't see wages in there, anywhere. refer 26 USC; 61

"In substance, the Supreme Court holds that the 16th Amendment did not empower the federal government to levy a new tax."
The New York Times, 1/25/1916

"Based on research by the Congressional Research Service, there is no provisions which require an individual to pay an income tax."
Sen. Daniel Inoue's office

"If you examine (16th Amend) carefully, you would find that a sufficient number of states never ratified that amendment."
US District Court Judge, James C Fox, 2003

I'd also like to add that the Federal Reserve Act was passed during a Christmas recess, when most of Congress was away.

Eisner vs McCumber, Stanton vs Baltic Mining, Coppage vs Kansas, Brushaber vs Union pacific Railroad... to mention a few.

 

[HighLowGrow]

It's unfortunate that the tax court judges are paid by the IRS. IF someone was to win the fight against paying taxes you would never know. IT wouldn't happen. When you sign your tax return, you are agreeing to pay tax. DON'T SIGN THE FUKN TAX RETURN and put a big $0 where it says income earned.

Unfortunately it's not that easy, but you can decrease your taxable income considerably. EVERYONE needs to own a business.

I'm self employed and my wife started a childcare business a year and a half ago just for the write offs. The kids have access to about 3/4 of the house. There is a time/space formula I get to use. Let's just say the number worked out to 40%.

I now can write off 40% of:

PGE
Propane
Garbage
Phones
Mortgage
Newspapers/magazines
Groceries (This one gets real interesting LOL)
100% Paint for the house. (I mean paint for the converted garage/playroom)
100% Gas for the mower (Got to keep the place pretty) and/or the boat
FFOF soil, nutes, pots, plants, shovels, hoes
Ect...There's more. Can't think of them at the moment.

Cash and checks written to her goes into the pocket. The rest is used for "groceries" mainly.

There is no "law" to pay taxes. I do so because I signed on the line of my OIC to pay tax for the next 5 years. It was that or come up with $163,000 plus penalties and interest.

So now I'm paying off $30,000 @ $500/month. No interest. The IRS is a big scare tactic. Scared the shit our of me for 3 years.

 

[BendBrewer]

You might want to look into the fact that you are confusing Income Tax and Direct Tax. I don't have to as I already know that you are.

The 16th Amendment was ratified by more than 3/4 of the states. That is why it was Ratified.

Go read Cheek v United States. It can't be made any more clear that you are wrong to assume teh SC has ruled that Wages are not Income. Long and short:

Further, the case was remanded for a re-trial. In the re-trial, the jury rejected Mr. Cheek's argument that he actually "believed" that wages were not taxable. He was again convicted.

I would just hate to see you allow your ignorance to get you convicted too. Wages are income. So says the SCOTUS and Article 26 U.S.C. § 61.

Period. And just think, just hours ago you falsely assumed that there was no law about income taxes. Feel better?

 

[Mr Neutron]

Class dismissed.

That's quite an act you got there. You make up the questions that you have the answers (or think you have the answers) to. And the one at the top of the page about Socialized Medicine. Where in this thread did you see "Socialized Medicine"?
You're trippin' aren't you. Yeah, some acid or shrooms or something.
One more thing. When confronted with opposing views, it helps not get so emotional and call people names and insult their intelligence and/or character. It only makes you look foolish and your beliefs, ignorant.

 

[BendBrewer]

I have no problem with opposing views. What I don't like is people ignorantly blowing smoke up others' asses.

You are trying to claim that wages are not income. That is false. Completely false and you need to be called out for saying as such. You can have your own opinion but not your own facts. That's where I come in.

And it's Beer 30. Cheers!