February 29, 2004
Columnist James Kilpatrick shills for IRS
Originally Published on May-09-2001
WHEN ADVOCACY BECOMES INCITEMENT
by James Kilpatrick
Robert Bernhoft and Robert Raymond are "intelligent men." The 7th U.S. Circuit Court so certified them last September. Why, then, did they disseminate "false or misleading speech intended to incite imminent unlawful activity"?
Good question. The answer is that the two gentlemen believe passionately that the federal income tax, despite the terms of the 16th Amendment, violates other provisions of the Constitution. In 1995 they created and sold a three-volume program for avoiding the tax, and now they're in the U.S. Supreme Court defending their First Amendment right to proclaim their views.
The high court is not likely to grant their petition for review, but the case invites a fresh look at old doctrines of prior restraint. This is the story.
WHEN ADVOCACY BECOMES INCITEMENT
by James Kilpatrick
Robert Bernhoft and Robert Raymond are "intelligent men." The 7th U.S. Circuit Court so certified them last September. Why, then, did they disseminate "false or misleading speech intended to incite imminent unlawful activity"?
Good question. The answer is that the two gentlemen believe passionately that the federal income tax, despite the terms of the 16th Amendment, violates other provisions of the Constitution. In 1995 they created and sold a three-volume program for avoiding the tax, and now they're in the U.S. Supreme Court defending their First Amendment right to proclaim their views.
The high court is not likely to grant their petition for review, but the case invites a fresh look at old doctrines of prior restraint. This is the story.
February 28, 2004
The IRS Claims New Patriot Act Type Powers to Punish Political Dissenters
The IRS Claims New Patriot Act Type Powers to Punish Political Dissenters
by Robert R. Raymond
November 28,2003
In a precendent-setting case, the IRS wielded new power to punish the political speech of those who "espouse views" the government considers "inconsistent" with government-held beliefs. In a hearing originally closed to the public in a secret tribunal on a military island, but moved to a public location after protests from the press and the public, the IRS wants to wield this power against a former IRS whistleblower, who was forced to resign upon his discovery of fraud in the agency. After monitoring and taping the whistleblower's appearances on Sixty Minutes, talk radio shows, and political publications where he rebroadcast his findings of IRS fraud, the IRS initiated this inquisition against their former whistleblower. This new power may find new political targets soon enough.
The IRS, through the small office of "Director of Practice," claims the authority to wield carte blanche authority over all the other powers of government -- the authority to monitor, surveil, and eavesdrop on political dissenters, the authority to pry into the private financial records of banks, businesses, and taxpayers, the authority to conduct secret investigations under a criminal grand jury, and the authority to censure political dissenters by branding on them a badge of infamy and stripping
them of governmentally-protected licenses. In short, under the guise of a "practice" investigation, the IRS claims the right to wield all intrusive and invasive powers of government available.
A "license" to practice before the IRS -- even for people who have never requested such a license or actually practiced before the IRS, but are given one as a matter of law if they are accountants -- "licenses" the IRS to conduct private audits without notice to the taxpayer, confer with criminal prosecutors without disclosure, and bring special "disbarment" proceedings
against disfavored dissenters, even if the alleged "disreputable" conduct has nothing to do with any "practice" before the IRS.
The IRS now claims it can use these so-called "practice" investigations of anyone who Congress licenses to practice before the IRS -- regardless of whether they actually practice before the IRS -- to surveil the public appearances of dissenters, eavesdrop on the political conversations of dissenters, benefit from secret grand jury investigations, hold secret conferences with the criminal investigators, surreptiously tap the private
database of taxpayer information, including taxpayers who merely have some financial "connection" to the accused, audit the political dissenter's personal financial records, and use all this information against the dissenter in the "practice" proceeding.
Under the guise of a "practice" investigation, the IRS can ignore all the normal procedural protections against an illicit audit while it conducts such an audit. Simultaneously, the IRS can ignore all the legal protections afforded a person accused of a crime while conferencing with the people conducting a criminal investigation. Indeed, the IRS can even ignore the sunshine laws, as the records of such "practice investigation" are exempt
from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, as are grand jury proceedings.
The IRS claims it can exercise this authority in a secret proceeding without allowing a person the opportunity to cure any alleged mistakes, the opportunity to prepare a defense by knowing the exact facts they are accused of, without any opportunity for discovery, without any opportunity to call
witnesses necessary for their defense, without any opportunity to cross examine their accusers, without any opportunity to testify at their own hearing about the merits of their position, without being forced to testify against themselves without such an assertion being held against them, and without even an opportunity for a hearing on the evidence.
This power of this little office with a Napoleonic vision goes even beyond the Patriot Act type authority and stories of FBI monitoring of war protestors.
Too Hoover-ish to be true in modern America? Just read the case of the IRS against Joe Banister scheduled for a "hearing" -- a hearing where the IRS prohibited Banister from introducing any witnesses or presenting any evidence as to his defenses, and even discussing the sincerity, the truth or the "reasonableness" of his positions -- on December 1 in the city by the bay, in the Tax Court chambers of the federal courthouse in San Francisco.
History is being made.
Joe Banister's web page.
http://www.freedomabovefortune.com/
http://www.rraymond.org/art.htm
by Robert R. Raymond
November 28,2003
In a precendent-setting case, the IRS wielded new power to punish the political speech of those who "espouse views" the government considers "inconsistent" with government-held beliefs. In a hearing originally closed to the public in a secret tribunal on a military island, but moved to a public location after protests from the press and the public, the IRS wants to wield this power against a former IRS whistleblower, who was forced to resign upon his discovery of fraud in the agency. After monitoring and taping the whistleblower's appearances on Sixty Minutes, talk radio shows, and political publications where he rebroadcast his findings of IRS fraud, the IRS initiated this inquisition against their former whistleblower. This new power may find new political targets soon enough.
The IRS, through the small office of "Director of Practice," claims the authority to wield carte blanche authority over all the other powers of government -- the authority to monitor, surveil, and eavesdrop on political dissenters, the authority to pry into the private financial records of banks, businesses, and taxpayers, the authority to conduct secret investigations under a criminal grand jury, and the authority to censure political dissenters by branding on them a badge of infamy and stripping
them of governmentally-protected licenses. In short, under the guise of a "practice" investigation, the IRS claims the right to wield all intrusive and invasive powers of government available.
A "license" to practice before the IRS -- even for people who have never requested such a license or actually practiced before the IRS, but are given one as a matter of law if they are accountants -- "licenses" the IRS to conduct private audits without notice to the taxpayer, confer with criminal prosecutors without disclosure, and bring special "disbarment" proceedings
against disfavored dissenters, even if the alleged "disreputable" conduct has nothing to do with any "practice" before the IRS.
The IRS now claims it can use these so-called "practice" investigations of anyone who Congress licenses to practice before the IRS -- regardless of whether they actually practice before the IRS -- to surveil the public appearances of dissenters, eavesdrop on the political conversations of dissenters, benefit from secret grand jury investigations, hold secret conferences with the criminal investigators, surreptiously tap the private
database of taxpayer information, including taxpayers who merely have some financial "connection" to the accused, audit the political dissenter's personal financial records, and use all this information against the dissenter in the "practice" proceeding.
Under the guise of a "practice" investigation, the IRS can ignore all the normal procedural protections against an illicit audit while it conducts such an audit. Simultaneously, the IRS can ignore all the legal protections afforded a person accused of a crime while conferencing with the people conducting a criminal investigation. Indeed, the IRS can even ignore the sunshine laws, as the records of such "practice investigation" are exempt
from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, as are grand jury proceedings.
The IRS claims it can exercise this authority in a secret proceeding without allowing a person the opportunity to cure any alleged mistakes, the opportunity to prepare a defense by knowing the exact facts they are accused of, without any opportunity for discovery, without any opportunity to call
witnesses necessary for their defense, without any opportunity to cross examine their accusers, without any opportunity to testify at their own hearing about the merits of their position, without being forced to testify against themselves without such an assertion being held against them, and without even an opportunity for a hearing on the evidence.
This power of this little office with a Napoleonic vision goes even beyond the Patriot Act type authority and stories of FBI monitoring of war protestors.
Too Hoover-ish to be true in modern America? Just read the case of the IRS against Joe Banister scheduled for a "hearing" -- a hearing where the IRS prohibited Banister from introducing any witnesses or presenting any evidence as to his defenses, and even discussing the sincerity, the truth or the "reasonableness" of his positions -- on December 1 in the city by the bay, in the Tax Court chambers of the federal courthouse in San Francisco.
History is being made.
Joe Banister's web page.
http://www.freedomabovefortune.com/
http://www.rraymond.org/art.htm
The IRS has an Income Tax problem
The IRS has an Income Tax problem
By Robert R. Raymond
January 19, 2004
The IRS has an Income Tax problem. Tens of millions of Americans no longer file the form 1040. Why is that? Well, besides the fact that government consumes 40 percent of the fruits of our labor and people sometimes have to make a choice between feeding their families or feeding Uncle Sam; people are tired of IRS abuses, lack of candor about the law and the need for true due process when American’s interact with the IRS. The greatest abuse being the IRS's and our elected officials refusal to tell the people what law makes them liable to pay the Individual Income tax.
This silence on the part of our elected officials is responsible for the mood of distrust and ever growing suspicion of government at all levels. This is exactly what the IRS hoped to avoid when it came out with the kinder, gentler version of the IRS that we are supposed to have today. You know, customer friendly. Their own mission statement tells us so.
Introduction and Mission
The Internal Revenue Service is the nation's tax collection agency and administers the Internal Revenue Code enacted by Congress. Its mission: to provide America's taxpayers with top quality service by helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and by applying the tax law with integrity and fairness to all.
The problem with the millions of non-filing American's is self-inflicted. The IRS refuses to tell the American people what law makes them liable for the Individual Income tax. I got to tell you folks; this is no minor omission. The government has a duty to inform the people of our obligations under the law; anything less is immoral and un-American. There are four questions that need to be asked and answered for the people to have confidence that the law is being applied correctly.
1. What is the definition of the word Income as used in the Internal Revenue code? Please cite the source of authority?
2. Is the Income tax a Direct tax or Indirect tax?
3. What statute makes me liable for the Individual Income Tax?
(Please cite statute and corresponding regulation).
4. What form is required by law to pay the Individual Income tax and where does the law say that?
(Please cite statute and regulation).
Lets look at the four questions and see why they are important and need to be answered.
1. What is the definition of the word Income as used in the Internal Revenue code?
Gross Income, taxable income, adjusted gross income are words defined in the Income tax code. They are subspecies of the word income. One cannot understand the meaning of these terms without having a definition of the word income. There is no definition of the word income in the income tax code. We want the official definition of the word. (Hint: Income, profit separated from its capital source). Note/ Please do not cite court cases. The executive branch of government enforces the law. What law are you enforcing?
2. Is the Income tax a Direct tax or an Indirect tax?
The constitution allows for two types of taxation with specific rules that govern each specie of tax. A direct tax must be apportioned and indirect taxes must be uniform. I know if it’s a direct tax that the income tax is not apportioned and if it’s an indirect tax it’s not uniform. So what is it?
3. What statute makes me liable for the Individual Income tax?
Not one person, lawyer, accountant or tax preparer that I've asked this question can answer it, and I have asked many. Not one. If I called the County Sheriff and asked him what statute would I be violating if I take my neighbors car without asking him, he would say Wisconsin State statutes § XXXXXXXX Grand Theft Auto. The law can be looked up in a book of Wisconsin State statutes. It is knowable. The same cannot be said about the income tax law. I've looked. Ask a government official the same question and they act as if the law that requires someone to pay the Individual Income tax is classified information. I wonder what they are hiding?
4. What form is required by law to pay the Individual Income tax and where does the law say that.
Government agencies promulgate rules governing its interaction with the public in accordance with the laws passed by congress. They are published in the Code of Federal Regulations. This one should be easy for the IRS. So what say you, IRS?
We live in a nation where the rule of law governs. I am not against taxes. I understand the government’s need for revenue to meet the legitimate functions of government. The legitimate needs of all the people will never be met if the government refuses to meet its obligation to inform us of the laws we are accountable for. Its time to stop playing hide the ball. The American people have a right to answers from their elected officials. Our elected officials must do their fair share to resolve this problem. You can all help me get the answers to these important questions. I have officially sent a letter to the IRS requesting answers to these questions. I have copies of the letters and this article on my web site at http://www.rraymond.org/. I will pay out of my own pocket the cost of placing the IRS's replies in the paper so you will know the answers and can feel confident that the laws are being applied correctly. Please take part in our effort to get answers to these important questions. You can help by sharing this information with your friends and family. Lets make sure that every American is aware of this issue. If you can, consider paying to run this article in your local paper. Or make a donation so we can run this article in all the major newspapers around the country. Thousands of your fellow Americans, your neighbors, are being abused daily without knowing the legal foundation for their abusers actions. Don't let them suffer another day without getting straight answers.
http://www.rraymond.org/irs_let.htm
© 2004 -Robert R. Raymond All Rights Reserved
Robert R. Raymond is the past Independent candidate for the U.S House of Representatives for Wisconsin's 5th District in the 2002 elections. A political activist for the past eight years he represents the People for Truth in Taxation Organization. He can be reached on his web site http://www.rraymond.org/ or by e-mail at rr@rraymond.org. Republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact.
By Robert R. Raymond
January 19, 2004
The IRS has an Income Tax problem. Tens of millions of Americans no longer file the form 1040. Why is that? Well, besides the fact that government consumes 40 percent of the fruits of our labor and people sometimes have to make a choice between feeding their families or feeding Uncle Sam; people are tired of IRS abuses, lack of candor about the law and the need for true due process when American’s interact with the IRS. The greatest abuse being the IRS's and our elected officials refusal to tell the people what law makes them liable to pay the Individual Income tax.
This silence on the part of our elected officials is responsible for the mood of distrust and ever growing suspicion of government at all levels. This is exactly what the IRS hoped to avoid when it came out with the kinder, gentler version of the IRS that we are supposed to have today. You know, customer friendly. Their own mission statement tells us so.
Introduction and Mission
The Internal Revenue Service is the nation's tax collection agency and administers the Internal Revenue Code enacted by Congress. Its mission: to provide America's taxpayers with top quality service by helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and by applying the tax law with integrity and fairness to all.
The problem with the millions of non-filing American's is self-inflicted. The IRS refuses to tell the American people what law makes them liable for the Individual Income tax. I got to tell you folks; this is no minor omission. The government has a duty to inform the people of our obligations under the law; anything less is immoral and un-American. There are four questions that need to be asked and answered for the people to have confidence that the law is being applied correctly.
1. What is the definition of the word Income as used in the Internal Revenue code? Please cite the source of authority?
2. Is the Income tax a Direct tax or Indirect tax?
3. What statute makes me liable for the Individual Income Tax?
(Please cite statute and corresponding regulation).
4. What form is required by law to pay the Individual Income tax and where does the law say that?
(Please cite statute and regulation).
Lets look at the four questions and see why they are important and need to be answered.
1. What is the definition of the word Income as used in the Internal Revenue code?
Gross Income, taxable income, adjusted gross income are words defined in the Income tax code. They are subspecies of the word income. One cannot understand the meaning of these terms without having a definition of the word income. There is no definition of the word income in the income tax code. We want the official definition of the word. (Hint: Income, profit separated from its capital source). Note/ Please do not cite court cases. The executive branch of government enforces the law. What law are you enforcing?
2. Is the Income tax a Direct tax or an Indirect tax?
The constitution allows for two types of taxation with specific rules that govern each specie of tax. A direct tax must be apportioned and indirect taxes must be uniform. I know if it’s a direct tax that the income tax is not apportioned and if it’s an indirect tax it’s not uniform. So what is it?
3. What statute makes me liable for the Individual Income tax?
Not one person, lawyer, accountant or tax preparer that I've asked this question can answer it, and I have asked many. Not one. If I called the County Sheriff and asked him what statute would I be violating if I take my neighbors car without asking him, he would say Wisconsin State statutes § XXXXXXXX Grand Theft Auto. The law can be looked up in a book of Wisconsin State statutes. It is knowable. The same cannot be said about the income tax law. I've looked. Ask a government official the same question and they act as if the law that requires someone to pay the Individual Income tax is classified information. I wonder what they are hiding?
4. What form is required by law to pay the Individual Income tax and where does the law say that.
Government agencies promulgate rules governing its interaction with the public in accordance with the laws passed by congress. They are published in the Code of Federal Regulations. This one should be easy for the IRS. So what say you, IRS?
We live in a nation where the rule of law governs. I am not against taxes. I understand the government’s need for revenue to meet the legitimate functions of government. The legitimate needs of all the people will never be met if the government refuses to meet its obligation to inform us of the laws we are accountable for. Its time to stop playing hide the ball. The American people have a right to answers from their elected officials. Our elected officials must do their fair share to resolve this problem. You can all help me get the answers to these important questions. I have officially sent a letter to the IRS requesting answers to these questions. I have copies of the letters and this article on my web site at http://www.rraymond.org/. I will pay out of my own pocket the cost of placing the IRS's replies in the paper so you will know the answers and can feel confident that the laws are being applied correctly. Please take part in our effort to get answers to these important questions. You can help by sharing this information with your friends and family. Lets make sure that every American is aware of this issue. If you can, consider paying to run this article in your local paper. Or make a donation so we can run this article in all the major newspapers around the country. Thousands of your fellow Americans, your neighbors, are being abused daily without knowing the legal foundation for their abusers actions. Don't let them suffer another day without getting straight answers.
http://www.rraymond.org/irs_let.htm
© 2004 -Robert R. Raymond All Rights Reserved
Robert R. Raymond is the past Independent candidate for the U.S House of Representatives for Wisconsin's 5th District in the 2002 elections. A political activist for the past eight years he represents the People for Truth in Taxation Organization. He can be reached on his web site http://www.rraymond.org/ or by e-mail at rr@rraymond.org. Republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact.
February 27, 2004
Heading for a fall, by fiat?
The government's total future liabilities are much larger. In fact, according to a forthcoming book by Laurence Kotlikoff, an economist, the present value of the American government's future obligations, taking into account promised pensions and health-care benefits, is a staggering $45 trillion.
February 25, 2004
Taxes Made Simple
The overriding operative standard in most financial decisions is their tax implications. While most people will deny this parameter, the effective net result is that an unconscious disconnect from strictly economic factors, permeates business judgments. The most basic rules for assessing the specific merits and beneficial reward for a transaction is violated by the ultimate silent partner - the taxman. This is reality, wearing its most unpleasant face.
No one can escape the tax codes. Moreover, the pretenses for their administrative function and influence is continually disavow from official acknowledgment. The facts of life can never be admitted by the bureaucratic. Taxes exist not for collective revenue, but for controlling behavior.
Who pays taxes? Only those who are engaged in some aspect of commerce, have regular sessions with tax accountants and qualify for business deductions understand the nature of the game. Those who work for wages only see taxes as a deduction from a paycheck. Those who don't work, only complain about sales or property taxes. Those who live on the street, could not be bothered with a 1040.
Analyze the pecking order. The more financially successful one becomes the greater the likelihood is that tax laws and their endless confusion in interpretation, dominate your waking hours. Forget about just making pure profit, the question becomes can you afford the extra income? Pass on the absurdly low interest rate on that new car; pay cash, after taking out a deductible home equity loan.
Maybe a list of conduct to beat the system might help!
1) Never take a paycheck that involves withholding taxes.
2) Never take income today when it can be deferred into the future.
3) Never pay cash when you can negotiate a deductible interest loan.
4) Never purchase equities that pay an income dividend.
5) Never loan money to a bank that will earn taxable interest.
6) Always opt for your own business so you can withhold taxes from your employees and have the privilege of playing a government tax collector.
7) Always load up on all the debt you can find that qualifies as a deduction.
8) Always pay your bills as late as possible so you can pay your quarterly tax estimates.
9) Always be as creative as possible with inventing right-offs, investing in tax loses and uncovering those few remaining tax shelters.
10) Always be prepared to file for bankruptcy at any sign of falling short of paying your taxes.
This is the drill for the modern day businessman. Hired help, move to the back of the bus. Your only relief is an IRA or a 401 (k) or those magnificent saving plans for your kids college.
Now isn't that great? If you are lucky enough to aspire to upgrade to a larger house, will you be able to afford that steep property tax increase on the inflated value you will need to pay for that dream? Maybe the mortgage rate is low enough, but now you must add in the escrow. Staying where you are, may start to look better.
But you say the government needs to raise the revenue to pay for all those social services that are so necessary. Well, do they? Is it really necessary to collect taxes to pay for public expenditures? If that fantasy axiom was really true, there would be no need for civic borrowing that only future generations will be forced to endure. Today's taxpayer is already tapped, so those wonderful intentions for the "children" will have them stepping up to the plate . . . and place them on a diet . . . for the rest of their lives.
Tax codes are the best of all possible worlds. In the grand scramble to get an edge, the lobbyists stroke the legislature to get their little favorable treatment. The inside fix allows for real returns, when none existed before. Now that's the way to dance with the tax revenue office! As long as your government is wedded to the Keynesian clan, deficits and disappearing purchasing value from all those taxes won't matter. If the State gets into a temporary bind, they can always raise the rates, discover a few new user fees and reduce any remaining deductions.
We all know that the size of government can't afford to downsize. Since so many living wage jobs have disappeared, expanding the safety net is more important than ever. Don't forget that the tide of government prosperity will rise your boat too. Just tax the rich for obeying those ten tax commandments. They didn't play fair. They never cared about you! And they are greedy. Paying taxes is your duty, don't complain, when doing your civic charge. Suck it up, so what if you have to work a few more years; your government needs the help.
How many compassionate politicians sing that tune and sucker the regimented jerks that accept and pay to support such a fraudulent tax system? When was the last time any mainstream 'poll' addressed the totality of the tax insanity? Until the tax code is removed as a factor in business decisions, the transfer of wealth from productive to the dependent will continue. Government produces nothing of wealth and value. The State never produced prosperity. Decreed government fiat cannot deliver affluence. It only takes and re-distributors, with skimming off the lion share off the top. How long can the fundamentals be masked and insolvency delayed? For you not long, for them - forever - as long as you play along . . . by the rules of their sham.
SARTRE - November 10, 2003
No one can escape the tax codes. Moreover, the pretenses for their administrative function and influence is continually disavow from official acknowledgment. The facts of life can never be admitted by the bureaucratic. Taxes exist not for collective revenue, but for controlling behavior.
Who pays taxes? Only those who are engaged in some aspect of commerce, have regular sessions with tax accountants and qualify for business deductions understand the nature of the game. Those who work for wages only see taxes as a deduction from a paycheck. Those who don't work, only complain about sales or property taxes. Those who live on the street, could not be bothered with a 1040.
Analyze the pecking order. The more financially successful one becomes the greater the likelihood is that tax laws and their endless confusion in interpretation, dominate your waking hours. Forget about just making pure profit, the question becomes can you afford the extra income? Pass on the absurdly low interest rate on that new car; pay cash, after taking out a deductible home equity loan.
Maybe a list of conduct to beat the system might help!
1) Never take a paycheck that involves withholding taxes.
2) Never take income today when it can be deferred into the future.
3) Never pay cash when you can negotiate a deductible interest loan.
4) Never purchase equities that pay an income dividend.
5) Never loan money to a bank that will earn taxable interest.
6) Always opt for your own business so you can withhold taxes from your employees and have the privilege of playing a government tax collector.
7) Always load up on all the debt you can find that qualifies as a deduction.
8) Always pay your bills as late as possible so you can pay your quarterly tax estimates.
9) Always be as creative as possible with inventing right-offs, investing in tax loses and uncovering those few remaining tax shelters.
10) Always be prepared to file for bankruptcy at any sign of falling short of paying your taxes.
This is the drill for the modern day businessman. Hired help, move to the back of the bus. Your only relief is an IRA or a 401 (k) or those magnificent saving plans for your kids college.
Now isn't that great? If you are lucky enough to aspire to upgrade to a larger house, will you be able to afford that steep property tax increase on the inflated value you will need to pay for that dream? Maybe the mortgage rate is low enough, but now you must add in the escrow. Staying where you are, may start to look better.
But you say the government needs to raise the revenue to pay for all those social services that are so necessary. Well, do they? Is it really necessary to collect taxes to pay for public expenditures? If that fantasy axiom was really true, there would be no need for civic borrowing that only future generations will be forced to endure. Today's taxpayer is already tapped, so those wonderful intentions for the "children" will have them stepping up to the plate . . . and place them on a diet . . . for the rest of their lives.
Tax codes are the best of all possible worlds. In the grand scramble to get an edge, the lobbyists stroke the legislature to get their little favorable treatment. The inside fix allows for real returns, when none existed before. Now that's the way to dance with the tax revenue office! As long as your government is wedded to the Keynesian clan, deficits and disappearing purchasing value from all those taxes won't matter. If the State gets into a temporary bind, they can always raise the rates, discover a few new user fees and reduce any remaining deductions.
We all know that the size of government can't afford to downsize. Since so many living wage jobs have disappeared, expanding the safety net is more important than ever. Don't forget that the tide of government prosperity will rise your boat too. Just tax the rich for obeying those ten tax commandments. They didn't play fair. They never cared about you! And they are greedy. Paying taxes is your duty, don't complain, when doing your civic charge. Suck it up, so what if you have to work a few more years; your government needs the help.
How many compassionate politicians sing that tune and sucker the regimented jerks that accept and pay to support such a fraudulent tax system? When was the last time any mainstream 'poll' addressed the totality of the tax insanity? Until the tax code is removed as a factor in business decisions, the transfer of wealth from productive to the dependent will continue. Government produces nothing of wealth and value. The State never produced prosperity. Decreed government fiat cannot deliver affluence. It only takes and re-distributors, with skimming off the lion share off the top. How long can the fundamentals be masked and insolvency delayed? For you not long, for them - forever - as long as you play along . . . by the rules of their sham.
SARTRE - November 10, 2003
Taxes - the People and the Government
The reality of taxes is an axiom of life. In whatever form it takes or methods they are collected, the certainty that governments organize society and are financed to operate is one of those nasty truths that we all really hate to admit. It will be left for superior theorist to postulate worlds of more perfect designs, but for us mere mortals, we are faced with the pain of rendering our cupboards clear, all too often.
In order to understand the nature of this fact and the relationships among all parties, we need to develop and accept some basic principles. Each individual has natural rights and life has intrinsic value. If the veracity of these two truths are denied; intelligent discourse, let alone cooperative organization will be impossible. Most inquiry seeks to define the relationships between the person and the government, from an error in assumption. These positions attribute rights and privileges to society, separate from the source of conferred authority. Simply stated: "Consent is Necessary to Establish Legitimacy."
Creative thinking does not require that all society must be turned on its head. A little dose of common sense, can go a long way to clarify subtle distinctions and remove the false conclusions of inexactness. Therefore, let us apply some of the same standards in our daily life to the topic of taxes. We are all consumers of goods and services. The practical, prudent and frugal habits that we all employ in shopping at the super market are abandoned when we are assessed another charge from, one more governmental agency. How often is the levy challenged, not from the perspective that it is illegitimate, but from the standpoint that it is a bad value. If the tax payer would adopt the attitude of a consumer and the view the bureaucracy as a vender of service, that is being purchased by the individual, we may just be able to reconstruct a relationship that may solve problems!
Of course compliance with the threat of coercion is the method that government takes to procure tariffs. But the hidden and not always too abstruse motive of behavioral modification is the actual reason that taxes are disguised as deductions, inducements and incentives. The fallacy that underpins this approach, is that pro Statists, argue that government has a pre-existing claim against the wealth and property of the individual. The rightful principle is undeniable; government is NOT an owner of property, but is strictly a steward of the public trust. Government is not a creator of wealth, but an end user of public funds. It depletes resources that are produced from the labors, ingenuity and risk of the private sector.
The deed to land may have the name of a government jurisdiction on it, but it never earned the money from business commerce, to purchase the assets. This point is extremely crucial, because within a free enterprise system bureaucracy may control significant portions of the economy. It actually ends up competing against business, with the distinct advantage that the government entity is exempt from the very tax structure that funds their venture. Quasi state entities postulate themselves as fiefdoms of superior eminence, exempt from rules and regulations that are imposed upon the rest of society. Now is this a consumer partnership or what! How could people turn their back on their own self interest and routinely accept this condition as natural?
The rationalization, throughout all of history, is always; what can be done. The mere resignation of hopelessness, becomes the most lethal weapon of the plunders of YOUR wealth. Do you not care that you are subjected to insult and injury, and justify your docile demeanor as the practice of a loyal citizen? Or are you willing to open your mind to achieve even a modest degree of your own self respect?
Waste and inefficiency within any organization is proportional to the lack of competition that it receives. Mismanagement and indifferent performance becomes institutionalized. Where government agencies are concerned, the notion that a different and potentially a better way could be found, to provide their function is incomprehensible. Well, within that smugness lies the formula for major reform. But this redress requires your demand of value for money spent.
If you continue to allow excessive expenditures and fraud to continue, and accept this as the inherent condition, you are willingly inviting your own servitude. How many of you would allow yourself to be treated like that when buying a car or the gasoline to run it? You bargain don't you? So why is it any different when it comes to your representatives and officials? If you are unwilling to confront them personally, you acknowledge that their false claim upon you is acceptable. Their claim will still be invalid, even though you bow to their demands. Just the kind of example to set for 'the children' . . .
Public funds should be raised for functions that are essential, vast in scope and unable to be accomplished efficiently and realistically, within the private sector. The goal is for limited government and services at a minimal level, that a straight consumption tax, across the board; will finance the necessary services. NO EXCEPTIONS, for anyone or any entity, and that includes government bureaucracies themselves. The reality that monies from profits derived from commerce, needs to be emphasized as the source of tax revenue. The cost to government needs to be real, and have a penalty to those who administer programs, when waste is routinely ignored.
When you get serious about the way your own money is squandered, maybe you will demand value from your taxes. Teach the hired help that it is YOUR money and THEY work for you! If you are unwilling to become a wise taxpayer/consumer, you deserve to be ripped off. Gee, isn't that exactly the spot you find yourselves? Force a little competition into the equation, it keeps everyone honest.
SARTRE - June 10, 2001
In order to understand the nature of this fact and the relationships among all parties, we need to develop and accept some basic principles. Each individual has natural rights and life has intrinsic value. If the veracity of these two truths are denied; intelligent discourse, let alone cooperative organization will be impossible. Most inquiry seeks to define the relationships between the person and the government, from an error in assumption. These positions attribute rights and privileges to society, separate from the source of conferred authority. Simply stated: "Consent is Necessary to Establish Legitimacy."
Creative thinking does not require that all society must be turned on its head. A little dose of common sense, can go a long way to clarify subtle distinctions and remove the false conclusions of inexactness. Therefore, let us apply some of the same standards in our daily life to the topic of taxes. We are all consumers of goods and services. The practical, prudent and frugal habits that we all employ in shopping at the super market are abandoned when we are assessed another charge from, one more governmental agency. How often is the levy challenged, not from the perspective that it is illegitimate, but from the standpoint that it is a bad value. If the tax payer would adopt the attitude of a consumer and the view the bureaucracy as a vender of service, that is being purchased by the individual, we may just be able to reconstruct a relationship that may solve problems!
Of course compliance with the threat of coercion is the method that government takes to procure tariffs. But the hidden and not always too abstruse motive of behavioral modification is the actual reason that taxes are disguised as deductions, inducements and incentives. The fallacy that underpins this approach, is that pro Statists, argue that government has a pre-existing claim against the wealth and property of the individual. The rightful principle is undeniable; government is NOT an owner of property, but is strictly a steward of the public trust. Government is not a creator of wealth, but an end user of public funds. It depletes resources that are produced from the labors, ingenuity and risk of the private sector.
The deed to land may have the name of a government jurisdiction on it, but it never earned the money from business commerce, to purchase the assets. This point is extremely crucial, because within a free enterprise system bureaucracy may control significant portions of the economy. It actually ends up competing against business, with the distinct advantage that the government entity is exempt from the very tax structure that funds their venture. Quasi state entities postulate themselves as fiefdoms of superior eminence, exempt from rules and regulations that are imposed upon the rest of society. Now is this a consumer partnership or what! How could people turn their back on their own self interest and routinely accept this condition as natural?
The rationalization, throughout all of history, is always; what can be done. The mere resignation of hopelessness, becomes the most lethal weapon of the plunders of YOUR wealth. Do you not care that you are subjected to insult and injury, and justify your docile demeanor as the practice of a loyal citizen? Or are you willing to open your mind to achieve even a modest degree of your own self respect?
Waste and inefficiency within any organization is proportional to the lack of competition that it receives. Mismanagement and indifferent performance becomes institutionalized. Where government agencies are concerned, the notion that a different and potentially a better way could be found, to provide their function is incomprehensible. Well, within that smugness lies the formula for major reform. But this redress requires your demand of value for money spent.
If you continue to allow excessive expenditures and fraud to continue, and accept this as the inherent condition, you are willingly inviting your own servitude. How many of you would allow yourself to be treated like that when buying a car or the gasoline to run it? You bargain don't you? So why is it any different when it comes to your representatives and officials? If you are unwilling to confront them personally, you acknowledge that their false claim upon you is acceptable. Their claim will still be invalid, even though you bow to their demands. Just the kind of example to set for 'the children' . . .
Public funds should be raised for functions that are essential, vast in scope and unable to be accomplished efficiently and realistically, within the private sector. The goal is for limited government and services at a minimal level, that a straight consumption tax, across the board; will finance the necessary services. NO EXCEPTIONS, for anyone or any entity, and that includes government bureaucracies themselves. The reality that monies from profits derived from commerce, needs to be emphasized as the source of tax revenue. The cost to government needs to be real, and have a penalty to those who administer programs, when waste is routinely ignored.
When you get serious about the way your own money is squandered, maybe you will demand value from your taxes. Teach the hired help that it is YOUR money and THEY work for you! If you are unwilling to become a wise taxpayer/consumer, you deserve to be ripped off. Gee, isn't that exactly the spot you find yourselves? Force a little competition into the equation, it keeps everyone honest.
SARTRE - June 10, 2001
use rss for Tax Tyranny
