"To make its way into the good will of its victims, taxation has surrounded itself with doctrines of justification."

"It is not the cost of the services which calls for taxation, it is the cost of maintaining political power."

"The state does not give; it merely takes."

http://www.mises.org/story/2500

Really.

quote:

Originally posted by Paul:


"The state does not give; it merely takes."

I'll tell them that next time they try to take my money for a police service, fire brigade, army , roads......

The word conspicuously missing from Frank's rant is 'democracy'. He writes as if "the state" were an evil and alien entity that fell from the sky one day, then started collecting taxes and disseminating pro-tax propaganda. People, sensibly, vote for this kind of system because some things are more efficiently organised and paid for collectively. Who pays how much is always going to be a messy compromise. If people don't like it, they're free to vote in a government of libertarians or other "every man is an island" nuts.

The other problem with Frank's piece is this assumption that "private property" should be sacred. Why? It's more of a childish impulse, or a reductio ad absurdum of capitalism, than a fundamental. Of course, rights to private property are important and useful, but they're not the be all and end all. It's silly to elevate them to that status - when you do so you get those libertarian nuts who argue that slavery is OK, for example, contracts and the right to private property trumping all other considerations.

The fantasy is that if there were total freedom everyone could just keep all that he earned and with it buy whatever he wanted. But that system has disappeared in Europe and North America. We (our culture) made it disappear. We chose to pay some taxes in return for conveniences like paper currency, roads that don't just stop in the middle of nowhere, being able to call a cop if someone decides to drop into our hovel and make him/themselves at home.

If you want to see true, untaxed luxury, go to where the warlords are in control: you could start in Afghanistan. Look around you. See the strong guys with the guns? Meet your new boss. See the big dirty guys around him, armed to the teeth? They don't want you to intrude. He's their nucleus, and they won't share their power with you. So do what you're told, or its a rifle butt to the skull for you. And, oh yes, there really are four women to every man. That's because the men kill each other at such an impressive rate.

Oh, and where's the luxury? Well, you see, the boundaries shift so quickly, due to endemic war, that you really can't accumulate much, because it's hard to carry stuff when you're on the run half the time and trying to chase and catch someone the other half. So just learn to love hunger, dirt, and sleeping on the ground or hiding in a cave, depending on your current fortunes.

Only little boys have such fantasies. Grown up people understand that money (for most of us) just represents work that we have done. So you can give part of your money to the state; or you can work part of the time for nothing for the war lord. Whichever you prefer.

At least if you fail to pay your taxes, you can hire a tax lawyer before getting the rifle butt to the head.

I pay all the taxes for which I am Liable. The federal income tax is not one of my liabilities unless i volunteer (give my consent).

Once again, Paul chooses to ignore the 16th Amendment to the US Constitution. Others who have done so have paid stiff penalties, and at least one may have been imprisoned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the..._States_Constitution

I remember when Joan Baez withheld the portion of her income tax that was going to support the war in Vietnam. She was a conscientious objector to the war on religious grounds. Yep, they clinked her. Her mother did the same, and they clinked her too.

Whether you're born in the U.S. or an immigrant, you become subject to its laws. That's why in those days the bumper stickers read '"Your country - love it or leave it."

By they way, I hear they're recruiting for the Taliban.

That's weird - it won't let me edit my post and I only posted about five minutes ago!

Anyhow, Paul, what makes you think you can opt out of any legal requirement of your country? I happen to believe that the new speeding law is absurd here in Canada, but I can't just announce it doesn't apply to me and just ignore it. Well, actually, I can, but I'll go to jail eventually if i do.

Tax-protestors seem to persistantly misunderstand the concept of a 'voluntary tax'.

Tax Myths – Paying Taxes Is Not A “Voluntary” Choice

I'm disappointed. I thought that, posting that article, Paul had moved on from all those futile arguments about the legalities of the US tax system, into more interesting discussion of the principles of taxation in general. I guess not.

Ahhhhh! Thanks, NNN.

Well heck, we have the same system here, except that it's called self-assessment.

It's less intellectually challenging that way, I guess.

It just means that at the end of the year we total up our income and our exemptions, calculate what tax we owe (based on the tax anyone with that net income must pay) and send Revcan a check, or claim a refund.

Revcan has the right to check our math! And if we've made a mistake, they will ask for the difference, if we owe, and charge us interest as of May 1st! If they owe us, they send us a check.

I suppose somewhere in Canada there is a nest of cuckoos who might argue that self-assessment means that every Canadian has the right to assess him/herself and decide how much tax, if any, he or she should pay.

But I don't think so. We're pretty grown up about that sort of thing.

Someone, please show me the "Legal" requirement!

“Indeed, as we have repeatedly held, the entire Internal Revenue Code was validly enacted by Congress and is fully enforceable.” United States v. McDonald, 919 F.2d 146 (10th Cir. 1990); United States v. Studley, 783 F.2d 934, 940 (9th Cir. 1986).

From: Statutory Fallacies - "The Internal Revenue Code is not law"

And to think that all this nonsense grows out of the use of the term 'voluntary tax' instead of 'self-assessment'!

I suppose if Paul was told that a certain woman was inscrutable, he would not ask her out on a date.

Babs, you should have your own T.V program!!!

In December 1913 while many members of Congress were home for Christmas, the Federal Reserve Act was rammed through Congress and was later signed by President Wilson. At a later date, Wilson admitted with remorse, when referring to the Fed."I have unwittingly ruined my country".

The income tax was only needed to pay interest to the bankers for our money that they loan to our government. Yes, you read that right, the Fed, mostly on paper and computer, creates money or pays the treasury a small printing fee for currency, and then loans this money to our government. Our taxes pay them interest on this loan that cost the FEDS virtually nothing to make, what a sweetheart of a deal they have going for them.

As of March 6, 2006, the national debt stands at 8.2 trillion dollars. The American taxpayers have paid the FED banking system $173,875,979,369.66 in interest on that debt in just five short months, from October, 2005, through February, 2006. No con artist or group of con artists in history has ever perpetrated a scam that even approaches the scope of this one.

Henry Ford once said "It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning".

In the nearly 100 years of the existence of the Fed, it has NEVER been audited and they don't pay income tax on the billions of dollars they take from us.

According to Congressional record the U.S. Government can buy back the FED at any time for $450 million. That's about half the amount of money we pay them daily.

Do we have the most stupid and/or the most corrupt leaders in the world, or what? It seems their # 1 concern is getting re-elected, they seem to think nothing of shirking their responsibilities to the people who elected them to their powerful prestigous high paying jobs.

Congress likes the Fed because they can spend all they want with no restraints, they just put our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren into debt.

Article 1, section 8, of the Constitution reads:
The Congress shall have the Power.....To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof,....
Nowhere in that document does it give Congress the authority to delegate this responsibility to anyone, much less a bunch of private bankers.

The Federal Reserve, United Nations, Council of Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, the Illuminati, the Bilderbergers and other elites of the hidden government are leading us into The New World Order and they are leading us fast. You are not going to like it when we get all the way there, and we are over half way there now.

Only we can save this Republic!!!

I suppose we should open up the topic and talk about anarchy which as you know, Frank, is rooted in the idea that humans should live free of all compulsion.

But it's like the recipe for tiger stew; the recipe is simple enough, it's getting the tiger into the pot that's tricky.

"Compulsion" is defined variously as arising out of

- patriarchal power (the world is governed by an old-boys'-club who get together and set rules which constrain the young [young men into the military, young women into sexual service] and then teach that these rules were divinely ordered)

- the tyranny of property (if property can be 'owned', then we need a police force, and we need to pay taxes to support it, and so on)

- and above all, the tyranny of the state (if a state is allowed to exist, then a military is needed to close and protect its boundaries).

But it's sort of like the domestication of animals as pets. Some people claim all animals should live free. It may be romantic to think of the herds running free, and the picking off of only the sick and the weak by predators. In real life, though, most wild animals have a short, violent life, and are plagued by parasites and diseases, and suffer from intermittent starvation as their population outstrips their food supply. Pets on average live much longer than their wild counterparts.

So we could think of human society and civilization as a coming-together of people to overcome the problems of being 'wild'.

* Farming allows for storage of food

* Cities provide us an opportunity to trade our labor for food and shelter

* Civilization promotes technical progress and education, so that we can learn to protect ourselves from parasites and disease, and we can produce tools and weapons that require sophisticated materials and manufacturing techniques

* The state allows us to coordinate defense so that we aren't surprised in our tents by the raiders, the best response we might manage is to reach for a rock.

And above all, the democratic state moves to protect individuals which in other forms of government may be exploited: minorities from slavery, the young from exploitation, and so on.

So we impose limitations of freedom on ourselves in order to create a more safe, comfortable and stable society.

There are fewer and fewer places in the world where a group of people can go to live with a lot of freedom.

No people live 'wild'. The most primitive people have rules, taboos, roles to play. The only people who could be said to live free of constraint are hermits who sustain themselves by hunting or eating wild-grown plants. Even they prefer high tech rifles and pickup trucks.

And the roads to run them on. He wants to use the road but depends on others to build and maintain it. It is at this point that the anarchist becomes a parasite, and earns the disdain and hatred of the rest of us slaves.

Paul, I have a question. You cite

"The Congress shall have the Power..... To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof,....
Nowhere in that document does it give Congress the authority to delegate this responsibility to anyone, much less a bunch of private bankers."

Those little dots sure leave a lot out, Paul. Here's the full text of that part:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money , regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and Post Roads ;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.


But Paul, in these other articles which I've shown in bold print, and here I'll quote your own words,
Nowhere in that document does it give Congress the authority to delegate this responsibility to anyone...

So what can we infer from your argument, Paul?

That the members of congress must themselves go out and smelt metal and cast coins sufficient to serve the economic needs of the U.S. ?

That the members of congress must go out and build post offices and roads? They cannot delegate this work by using tax dollars to pay others to do it?

Then, returning exhausted to Washington, D.C., they find that some naughty sailors have committed piracy on the high seas, and must be punished. So away the congressmen must all go, and tie the miscreants to the mast, and flog them mercilessly. This important task cannot be delegated.

Now, barely able to stagger, they return again to Washington, only to be reminded by an indignant voter that they have not provided a navy, let alone maintained it! They have not even built one ship!

Then they all resign, and Britain comes back and reclaims the colonies. One thing about those Brits, they really know how to run a colony.

Oh, just one more thing, Paul. I looked at your profile and find you are a minister. Would it be very wrong of me to wonder if you mailed away $25 to one of those little ads in the backs of magazines and became a 'minister' so that your 'church' could avoid paying taxes?