Tax Time. Or not.

DarkStarDarkStar Posts: 734
edited January 2007 in A Moving Train
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4312730277175242198&q=

whatever the truth is...effectively, if you don't follow the supposed law...you lose. so i pay. what do you do?

ds
And no one sings me lullabyes
And no one makes me close my eyes
So I throw the windows wide
And call to you across the sky....
Post edited by Unknown User on
«13

Comments

  • NMyTreeNMyTree Posts: 2,374
    There is no law.

    The IRS has failed to provide any Law in writing which fits the parameters of the 16th Amendment, for over 30 years.

    That alone tells you all you need to know.

    If there was such a Law, the IRS, the US Government would have it plastered on the front page of every newspaper across the country, a copy shown on every TV at the beginning of every News Program and a copy mailed to every home.

    It doesn't exist. That's why they have failed to produce it.
  • jeffbrjeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    I pay. I pay against my will. I pay because my government coerces me to. I pay because of threat of violence for non-payment.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • JOEJOEJOEJOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,607
    jeffbr wrote:
    I pay. I pay against my will. I pay because my government coerces me to. I pay because of threat of violence for non-payment.

    Not withstanding the fact that the Federal Govt doesn't spend our tax dollars wisely, do you think its would be right to accept government services if you didn't pay taxes?
  • jeffbrjeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    JOEJOEJOE wrote:
    Not withstanding the fact that the Federal Govt doesn't spend our tax dollars wisely, do you think its would be right to accept government services if you didn't pay taxes?

    No. But there are very few thinks which should be federal government services. And there shouldn't be an income tax. Wages we earn are not profits. They are exchanged for labor we provide.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • JOEJOEJOEJOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,607
    jeffbr wrote:
    No. But there are very few thinks which should be federal government services. And there shouldn't be an income tax. Wages we earn are not profits. They are exchanged for labor we provide.

    IN your opinion, how should our various governments get funds to operate?
  • jeffbrjeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    JOEJOEJOE wrote:
    IN your opinion, how should our various governments get funds to operate?

    Before 1913 we didn't have a federal income tax, and yet we somehow became the most prosperous country in the world without one. We should eliminate or privatize most functions of government. For people who do use services it should be pay to play.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • JOEJOEJOEJOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,607
    jeffbr wrote:
    Before 1913 we didn't have a federal income tax, and yet we somehow became the most prosperous country in the world without one. We should eliminate or privatize most functions of government. For people who do use services it should be pay to play.

    do you think privatizing police, military and all schools will work?

    imagine if kids had to pay an admission fee to play on a jungle gym at the local park?

    i hate how our govt allocates our taxes, and the way that so little money actually goes to providing the actual services, but, the govt will always have to administer certain functions.
  • Pacomc79Pacomc79 Posts: 9,404
    http://www.fairtax.org Make April 15th it just another day.
    My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
  • mammasanmammasan Posts: 5,656
    Pacomc79 wrote:
    http://www.fairtax.org Make April 15th it just another day.


    I'm with you. Hopefully in our life time April 15th will be just another day.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • NMyTreeNMyTree Posts: 2,374
    JOEJOEJOE wrote:
    do you think privatizing police, military and all schools will work?

    imagine if kids had to pay an admission fee to play on a jungle gym at the local park?

    i hate how our govt allocates our taxes, and the way that so little money actually goes to providing the actual services, but, the govt will always have to administer certain functions.

    You're confusing Local Tax with Federal Income Tax.

    The US Government is not in the business of building Jungle Gyms and so forth. Usually, that falls into the Local Tax pool and donations from local citizens.
  • Fight the good fight jeffbr. Bravo.
  • JOEJOEJOE wrote:
    do you think privatizing police, military and all schools will work?

    Work for what? Work for who? The police, military, and schools don't work for me now.
    imagine if kids had to pay an admission fee to play on a jungle gym at the local park?

    Or imagine the much more realistic alternative of parents coming together and collectively funding a local park based on their own discretion and interests.
    i hate how our govt allocates our taxes, and the way that so little money actually goes to providing the actual services, but, the govt will always have to administer certain functions.

    "Always"? "Have to"? Or what?
  • JOEJOEJOE wrote:
    Not withstanding the fact that the Federal Govt doesn't spend our tax dollars wisely, do you think its would be right to accept government services if you didn't pay taxes?

    I'm going to say no...but why not ask the 44 million Americans who now pay no federal income tax?
  • NMyTree wrote:
    You're confusing Local Tax with Federal Income Tax.

    The US Government is not in the business of building Jungle Gyms and so forth. Usually, that falls into the Local Tax pool and donations from local citizens.

    The US National Park Service has an annual budget of $16,500,000,000. Some of that is certainly used for Jungle Gyms.
  • floyd1975floyd1975 Posts: 1,350
    The US National Park Service has an annual budget of $16,500,000,000. Some of that is certainly used for Jungle Gyms.

    If the Federal Government used that for jungle gyms, that would hardly be enough for them to buy one.
  • jeffbr wrote:
    Wages we earn are not profits. They are exchanged for labor we provide.

    BTW, wages certainly should be profits for you. Otherwise, why would you exchange your labor for them?
  • NMyTreeNMyTree Posts: 2,374
    The US National Park Service has an annual budget of $16,500,000,000. Some of that is certainly used for Jungle Gyms.

    They may very well build a Jungle Gym at a National Park, but they're not paying for or building Jungle Gyms across the street or down on the corner from me or you. Unless you happen to live in or nearby to a National Park.

    I'm talking local, here. Not national Parks.
  • do we have access to see where all the taxes collected are being spent?
    you're a real hooker. im gonna slap you in public.
    ~Ron Burgundy
  • NMyTree wrote:
    They may very well build a Jungle Gym at a National Park, but they're not paying for or building Jungle Gyms across the street or down on the corner from me or you. Unless you happen to live in or nearby to a National Park.

    I'm talking local, here. Not national Parks.

    Fair enough. But Federal funds to the tune of about $200 / taxpayer are used every year for those parks, and those parks are typically local to someone. The intent is definitely different, however.
  • do we have access to see where all the taxes collected are being spent?

    Hehe...depends on what you mean. You can start here:

    http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/
  • NMyTreeNMyTree Posts: 2,374
    BTW, wages certainly should be profits for you. Otherwise, why would you exchange your labor for them?


    I disagree.

    Wages are compensation for services rendered or work performed. A fair and equal exchange.

    If you manufactor a product and sell it at a price which brings back the cost of research/development, parts, labor and production, packaging and shipping; as well as monetary gain above those costs, then that is a profit.

    Certainly a corporation should and needs to make some tax free profit to survive and continue to exist.

    If you want to argue that certain occupations retrieve an exuberant amount of compensation, well above reasonable compensation for services rendered or work performed; then I'm with you on that.

    Baseball players earning a wage of 22 million a year can probably be considered to fit into that catagory.
  • NMyTree wrote:
    I disagree.

    Wages are compensation for services rendered or work performed. A fair and equal exchange.

    If you manufactor a product and sell it at a price which brings back the cost of research/development, parts, labor and production, packaging and shipping; as well as monetary gain above those costs, then that is a profit.

    Certainly a corporation should and needs to make some tax free profit to survive and continue to exist.

    If you want to argue that certain occupations retrieve an exuberant amount of compensation, well above reasonable compensation for services rendered or work performed; then I'm with you on that.

    Baseball players earning a wage of 22 million a year can probably be considered to fit into that catagory.

    If I manufacture labor, and sell it at a price higher than its value to me then there is a profit. You may certainly labor for zero or negative profit -- simply demand a wage that is exactly at or below the value of your own labor, to you. Why you would do that is absolutely beyond me, but it's an option. My point does not apply only to baseball players.

    If labor and a wage for that labor were a zero-profit exchange, the fact of the matter is that you would be able to acquire exactly the same value from not working for that wage than you would from working for it. So why would you work for a wage????
  • NMyTreeNMyTree Posts: 2,374
    Compensation is not the equivalent of profit.

    There's a big difference between the two.
  • NMyTree wrote:
    Compensation is not the equivalent of profit.

    There's a big difference between the two.

    Hehe...as a business owner I am "compensated" for my products. Do I not profit?

    There's a "big difference" only in the fact that "profit" is evil, in some people's worlds, and god knows that something millions of average Joes and Janes do could never be evil, right?
  • NMyTreeNMyTree Posts: 2,374
    My point does not apply only to baseball players.

    I didn't say it did. I simply submitted an example.

    Physicians, CEOs, Dentists, Therapists, construction workers, electricians, Rock Stars...what ever.

    My point is, that an argument can made that at some point in an individuals compensation for services rendered or work performed; if the compensation exceeds certain price points- it can be percieved as "profit".

    But then you have market value or the going salary for any given occupation.......supply and demand?

    How would you define what is an exuberent compensation for services rendered or work performed? Where would you draw the line of fair/equal......to "profit"?
  • NMyTreeNMyTree Posts: 2,374
    Hehe...as a business owner I am "compensated" for my products. Do I not profit?

    There's a "big difference" only in the fact that "profit" is evil, in some people's worlds, and god knows that something millions of average Joes and Janes do could never be evil, right?

    Incorrect. You are making some gross assumptions and coming to some inaccurate conclusions regarding my opinion and stance on this issue.

    Did you not read the part where I said ....

    " Certainly a corporation should and needs to make some tax free profit to survive and continue to exist."

    You are compensated for your cost to produce that product, when your cash return on that product pays you back the amount you spent. Anything above that cost is profit.
  • JOEJOEJOEJOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,607
    Work for what? Work for who? The police, military, and schools don't work for me now.

    IT MAY NOT SEEM AS IF THE MILITARY WORKS FOR YOU, BUT IF WE ARE EVER INVADED, WE WILL NEED THEM! (Using all caps to differentiate my words vs. yours...I am not screaming!)

    FUNDING THE MILITARY & POLICE IS SIMILAR TO HAVING INSURANCE...YOU MAY NOT NEED THEIR SERVICES NOW, BUT ONE DAY YOU MAY!



    Or imagine the much more realistic alternative of parents coming together and collectively funding a local park based on their own discretion and interests.

    THATS A GREAT IDEA IN THEORY, BUT IF SOME NEIGHBORHOODS LACK THE FUNDS, WHAT THEN????

    "Always"? "Have to"? Or what?

    ...
  • IT MAY NOT SEEM AS IF THE MILITARY WORKS FOR YOU, BUT IF WE ARE EVER INVADED, WE WILL NEED THEM! (Using all caps to differentiate my words vs. yours...I am not screaming!)

    Umm...what if the military is a primary cause of that invasion?
    FUNDING THE MILITARY & POLICE IS SIMILAR TO HAVING INSURANCE...YOU MAY NOT NEED THEIR SERVICES NOW, BUT ONE DAY YOU MAY!

    Yep...one day I may. One day I may not. Do I have no right to evaluate that on my own, or do you have the right to make that decision for me?
    THATS A GREAT IDEA IN THEORY, BUT IF SOME NEIGHBORHOODS LACK THE FUNDS, WHAT THEN????

    Then no playground. Seems pretty straightforward.
  • Hehe...depends on what you mean. You can start here:

    http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/

    thanks
    you're a real hooker. im gonna slap you in public.
    ~Ron Burgundy
  • JOEJOEJOEJOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,607
    Umm...what if the military is a primary cause of that invasion?

    I AM AGAINST THE WAR, BUT THATS NOT THE ISSUE HERE.



    Yep...one day I may. One day I may not. Do I have no right to evaluate that on my own, or do you have the right to make that decision for me?

    SO IF YOU CHOOSE NOT TO PAY TAXES TOWARDS POLICE/FIRE, YOU WILL BE OK IF THEY DENY YOU THEIR SERVICES DURING A LIFE/DEATH SITUATION?

    Then no playground. Seems pretty straightforward.

    SEEMS AS IF YOU WANT AN EVERY-MAN-FOR-HIMSELF SOCIETY.

    .

    ...
Sign In or Register to comment.