[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Roger Stone: AG Pam Bondi Must Answer For 14 Terabytes Claim Of Child Torture Videos! 'Hit Us, Please' - America's Left Issues A 'Broken Arrow' Signal To Europe Cash Jordan Trump Deports ‘Thousands of Migrants’ to Africa… on Purpose Gunman Ambushes Border Patrol Agents In Texas Amid Anti-ICE Rhetoric From Democrats Texas Flood Why America Built A Forest From Canada To Texas Tucker Carlson Interviews President of Iran Mosoud Pezeshkian PROOF Netanyahu Wants US To Fight His Wars RAPID CRUSTAL MOVEMENT DETECTED- Are the Unusual Earthquakes TRIGGER for MORE (in Japan and Italy) ? Google Bets Big On Nuclear Fusion Iran sets a world record by deporting 300,000 illegal refugees in 14 days Brazilian Women Soccer Players (in Bikinis) Incredible Skills Watch: Mexico City Protest Against American Ex-Pat 'Invasion' Turns Viole Kazakhstan Just BETRAYED Russia - Takes gunpowder out of Putin’s Hands Why CNN & Fareed Zakaria are Wrong About Iran and Trump Something Is Going Deeply WRONG In Russia 329 Rivers in China Exceed Flood Warnings, With 75,000 Dams in Critical Condition Command Of Russian Army 'Undermined' After 16 Of Putin's Generals Killed At War, UK Says Rickards: Superintelligence Will Never Arrive Which Countries Invest In The US The Most? The History of Barbecue ‘Pathetic’: Joe Biden tells another ‘tall tale’ during rare public appearance Lawsuit Reveals CDC Has ZERO Evidence Proving Vaccines Don't Cause Autism Trumps DOJ Reportedly Quietly Looking Into Criminal Charges Against Election Officials Volcanic Risk and Phreatic (Groundwater) eruptions at Campi Flegrei in Italy Russia Upgrades AGS-17 Automatic Grenade Launcher! They told us the chickenpox vaccine was no big deal—just a routine jab to “protect” kids from a mild childhood illness Pentagon creates new military border zone in Arizona For over 200 years neurological damage from vaccines has been noted and documented The killing of cardiologist in Gaza must be Indonesia's wake-up call

Business/Finance
See other Business/Finance Articles

Title: Westminster man told to stop running tax scheme
Source: Baltimore Sun
URL Source: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/lo ... story?coll=bal-local-headlines
Published: Dec 4, 2006
Author: AP
Post Date: 2006-12-04 18:32:27 by Starwind
Ping List: *unUsual Suspects*     Subscribe to *unUsual Suspects*
Keywords: Kotmair, Save-A-Patriot Fellowship
Views: 3045
Comments: 200

A Westminster man has been barred by a federal judge from running a scheme in which he promised to help members avoid paying federal taxes, the U.S. Department of Justice announced today.

The "Save-A-Patriot Fellowship" run by John Baptist Kotmair Jr. falsely advised that clients didn't have to pay taxes and could legally withdraw from the Social Security system, U.S. District Judge William Nickerson said in his ruling. Despite legal action by the U.S. Justice Department, Kotmair's organization continued to file frivolous protest letters with the Internal Revenue Service on behalf of more than 800 clients and showed "no inclination ... to cease their activities," Nickerson noted.

Nickerson's order, issued last week, permanently bars Kotmair and his organization from representing or assisting anyone in corresponding with the IRS, or preparing court filings relating to income taxes. Kotmair and his organization must also notify all individuals involved in the scheme of the injunction and provide the Justice Department with the names of the customers, their e-mail addresses and telephone and Social Security numbers.

The injunction also must be posted prominently on the organization's Web sites for a year, and fraudulent promotional materials must be removed from the sites.

Poster Comment:

Kotmair's defense and taxation arguments were inane to put it charitably. His website (where he's to post the injunction) is at http://save-a-patriot.org/

Stupid tax-protestors and their schemes just muddy the water for legitimate tax-protest arguments. Kotmair, Schiff, Schultz, Rose all will become boilerplate examples of tax schemes which will be used unfairly to broad-brush and defeat otherwise legitimate arguments, rasing the cost and complexity to properly take on the IRS.

I cite Joe Banister as an example of how to do it right, intelligently, and the above tax schemes just make it difficult if not impossible for people like Banister to prevail honestly on the merits. Subscribe to *unUsual Suspects*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 168.

#2. To: Starwind (#0) (Edited)

Stupid tax-protestors and their schemes

Many of these "stupid tax protestors" are correct in their assertions. They have researched extensively and know the law. That matters not to the government. They can't let this information become known, let them win, and, of course, are going to make examples of them to scare anyone who may be considering not filing. In the courtroom, the judge's totally ignore the law and, worse, insure that the jury never knows it either. Their job is to protect the corrupt system. See Aaron Russo's Freedom To Fascism to see it in practice. Joe Banister and several other former IRS Agents and many in the Tax Honesty Movement are featured in the film.

christine  posted on  2006-12-04   18:53:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Many of these "stupid tax protestors" are correct in their assertions. They have researched extensively and know the law.

The ones I've listed do not. They haven't a clue. They think they do, but they seemingly can not (or will not) read what the law or code says, or understand court procedures, or how tax accounting is done and how accountants are limited and what lawful means are available to reduce tax liabilities. The "stuff" posted on most tax-protestor websites is some of the most assinine "legal" tripe I've read in years.

That matters not to the government. They can't let this information become known, let them win, and, of course, are going to make examples of them to scare anyone who may be considering not filing. In the courtroom, the judge's totally ignore the law.

Judges can be forced to address the law, but defendants have *no* leverage if their own arguments are incorrect or unsubstantiated on the law. Yes, the system is unfair and the government will indeed pull every trick possible. Yes, the government is trying to supress much of the so-called "information" proclaimed by tax-protestors, but not because the government is afraid of it, no. The government is trying to supress it because most of it is just plain wrong and many naive people are being hurt by it as well as tax revenues potentially taking a big hit if some of these illegal schemes were adopted en- mass, and the resulting prosecutions would further clog up the courts, to no good outcome.

There is a reason most tax-protestors represent themselves. They don't listen to their lawyers or accountants and end up postitioning themselves behind a legal eightball which has no legitimate defense, and most competent lawyers won't touch the tax-protestors "arguments" with a ten-foot pole.

It is said don't go into a gunfight armed with a pocket knife. The mistakes happen long before that. If all one understands is pocket knives, one would do well to listen to the advice of professional gunfighters.

Starwind  posted on  2006-12-04   19:10:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

the IRS code is not the law.

watch Freedom To Fascism. it addresses everything i said above much better. listen in particular to the testimony of the several former IRS agents and the one female juror of the case featured in the film. btw, you wanna see stupid? look at the former IRS commissioner, whose name escapes me at the moment, Russo interviews.

christine  posted on  2006-12-04   19:21:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

the IRS code is not the law.

It is a body of regulations and procedures intended by congress to have the weight of law and be construed as law when courts deem it necessary to review. Same as SEC regulations are "law" for how companies do their bookkeeping and stock transactions.

I won't argue with you that it is an arcane labrynth in which accountability for enactment and empowerment of the IRS (via the Treasury) is difficult to trace. But that doesn't change the reality of what the tax code is and that it has the weight of law. If it were as simple as tax-protestors delude themselves, companies, accountants, and tax lawyers would be using it like they use every other "loophole".

The only way I know to lawfully reduce tax liabilities is through common law establishment of trusts and foundations, but they have to be setup and correctly operated similar to a corporation's transactions being at "arms length" from its CEO and shareholders' personal finances. But the benefits to the individual (grantor) are one-time and the distributions to beneficiaries are taxable, as is any investment income the trust or foundation might subsequently have.

I've seen numerous tax-protestors who claim to be able to prove the law isn't the law, and every single one of them is grossly ignorant of how courts understand the law.

Reading a law dictionary and arguing specious definitions of legal terms of art, or arguing non-existant precedents, and ignoring opposing motions and court orders is the pocket knife in the gun fight.

Starwind  posted on  2006-12-04   19:52:02 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Reading a law dictionary and arguing specious definitions of legal terms

A truly free society enjoys (or should enjoy) the benefit of rational dispute without the threat of incarceration and should be able to redress grievances without hiring a lawyer or becoming one their self.

When an issue is as pervasive as taxation is, having some potential application to every citizen regardless of their financial status or level of education, it would appear reasonable that these mandates should be written in plain enough language, in simple terms understandable to all affected by them.

The necessity to draft regulatory instructions in incomprehensible legal terms, that are defined in law dictionaries, buried within countless volumes of "code", is more likely the result of high tech pettifoggers representing corporate evaders of taxes than the outgrowth of common citizens expecting fair treatment and an honest government, both of which most would admit is a far cry from the situation in America's tax system.

The (legally created) fiction that people and corporations should be treated equally under the law is simply an outrageous fraud. This fraud allows the continuance of an admittedly incomprehensible tax system that defies common sense, especially when combined with a debt based economic system flooded with fiat currency, and dependent on credit. This unholy marriage (consumated in 1913 under questionable circumstances) is only beneficial to powerful bankers, corporate marauders and government thieves ultimately resulting in the ruination of the family unit and the nation by forcing two people to work in order to earn one living after taxes.

The end result is that 20 years after the 1913 Federal Reserve Act and the Income Tax Act were implemented, America was bankrupt. This bankruptcy has been kept quiet while the looters pilfered America's natural resources and abused its populace's labor. Many would argue that we are the greatest nation on earth, we are technologically superior and even that we have a higher standard of living than most of the entire world. I would remind those delusional people that we are the greatest debtor nation on earth today, and many of our counterparts are coming out from under the effects of this assumed grandeur and demanding a return on their investment in American debt instruments that are increasingly devalued.

Anyone refusing to look at the wholesale gutting of America's assets such as ports, national parks, roads, and other critical infra-structure, along with the imposition of the NAU, NAFTA, GATT, WTO, Agenda 21, etc., etc. is in denial or willingly delusional. These activities are not simply the natural progression of a nation state into an international federation, this is imposition of bankruptcy proceedings through international agencies such as the IMF and World Bank that represent the interests of international banking cartels that pit one nation's debt against another's in order to maintain discipline and control of them all.

What I'm attempting to point out is that we can cling to the illusion of greatness and prosperity until it collapses. Our problem in this nation is far more problematic than represented by the antics of Irwin Schiff, Bob Schultz and Joe Banister. But it all starts and ends with the acceptance of fraud. Whether or not we as a nation have the ability to return to simple honesty in our lives devoid of legalese, pettifogging miscreants, crooked judges that fear the IRS, senile thieving perverts in Congress, and an ignorant apathetic population is up for debate, but there can hardly be any question we are headed in the wrong direction like a runaway freight train without an engineer.

When the only way to actually be heard by the government is to hire lobbyists and load them down with bribes for the politicians sometimes the court system looks like the only other alternative. People like Schiff, Kotmair, Schultz, Russo and Banister approach this unseemly venue as a last resort in a vain attempt to salvage whatever unfounded notions of liberty remain ingrained in their pea brains in spite of the obvious. Hoping against hope that there's still one reasonable judge that will sacrifice his career in the interest of liberty and freedom ... when that is not the purpose of the court system ... it's about control, period.

The world has always had laws. The laws have always been used to exploit and control the masses for an elitist class ... nothing new here, it's easier to control slaves that are conditioned to believe they are free. Anyone willing to support the mumbo-jumbo that oozes out of D.C. whether it's a legislative measure, a judicial opinion or an executive imperative does so out of ignorance, fear or for their own gain, not for righteousness sake.

The same courts you and others are so proud to quote have authorized numerous frauds such as slavery in the past, so cut the high minded horseshit and face the facts.

The only proper response to an IRS Summons is ... Fuck you and the horse you rode in on, any attempt by you or any of your bloodthirsty agents to interfere with my life will be considered an act of war and treated as such, I support the 2nd Amendment.

noone222  posted on  2006-12-16   4:06:10 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

When an issue is as pervasive as taxation is, having some potential application to every citizen regardless of their financial status or level of education, it would appear reasonable that these mandates should be written in plain enough language, in simple terms understandable to all affected by them.

While I sympathize with your desire for simplicity and clarity, taxation as applied to everyone is a complex subject and some degree of experience is required to comprehend it. But that is no different than medicine, construction, aviation, navigation, even farming. You have no expectation of being able to diagnose or operate on your own pancreatic cancer. You have no expectation of being able to design and build a bridge, etc. Every discipline has its specialized terminology that has meaning to those experienced in that discipline and the meanings aren't "common". Were I to decide I ought to be able to repair my own roof simply because everybody has a roof, roofs are important, and they're just angled or flat, shingled, tarred, or steel, over some supports - I'd set myself up for a nightmare "home project". I lack the tools. I lack the knowledge of how my particular roof is made. I lack the experience of knowing what materials to buy. I have no practice with either tools or materials. And the "obvious" is seldom so. A "2 by 4" isn't really 2 inches by 4 inches. Shingles can not be butted together, an expansion gap must be allowed. You might try home-remedies for a cold, but you wouldn't try to diagnose or remedy coughing up blood. Complying with or practicing tax law likewise has specialized experience, tools, and terminology. There are simple tax forms for simple circumstances, but if you're going to argue "tax law" or the invalidity thereof, you'll need more specialized knowledge of courts and code.

The necessity to draft regulatory instructions in incomprehensible legal terms, that are defined in law dictionaries, buried within countless volumes of "code", is more likely the result of high tech pettifoggers representing corporate evaders of taxes than the outgrowth of common citizens expecting fair treatment and an honest government, both of which most would admit is a far cry from the situation in America's tax system

No, it is the result of centuries of layering law upon law (fairly or unfairly) to address new circumstances and ever increasingly complex society, and political tinkering with the tax laws to implement social policy. A flat tax, for example, is unfair to the poor, a sales tax is unfair to the consumer, a property tax is unfair to the homeowner, graduated taxes are unfair to the wealthy, corporate taxes are "just passed on", etc. etc. Society wants roads, schools, hospitals, fire departments and armies to be publicly funded. The poor pay no taxes. Businesses make money and lose money. Families make money and lose money. Workers make money and lose money. Balancing out those simple concepts becomes quite complex in the tax laws. And that doesn't even begin to cover everyone's pet "tax loopholes".

Absolutely it is an overly complex and unfair system. But everyone is to blame. Corporations for their lobbying, reporters and teachers for dumbing-down the public, politicians for lying and corruption, the public for tolerance and acquiescence, and also the tax protesters, schemers, and defrauders who spread false legal advice (mistakenly and deliberately). There are honest people as well in all walks of life, but until you learn to recognize the facts of tax law, you'll not recognize honest tax advice either.

The (legally created) fiction that people and corporations should be treated equally under the law is simply an outrageous fraud.

That belief itself is a fiction. Corporations and people are *not* treated equally under the law. That inequality is the source of much of the unfairness. If a worker were recognized to have a cost-basis in their labor, as does a corporation, their taxable "gain" in their wages would be far smaller. OTOH, the tax law would get even more complex. But if you want to make an omelet, you're going to have to break some eggs.

When the only way to actually be heard by the government is to hire lobbyists and load them down with bribes for the politicians sometimes the court system looks like the only other alternative. People like Schiff, Kotmair, Schultz, Russo and Banister approach this unseemly venue as a last resort in a vain attempt to salvage whatever unfounded notions of liberty remain ingrained in their pea brains in spite of the obvious.

It is not the only alternative, but worse, the alternative presented by Schiff, Kotmair, Schultz, etc., is a *false* alternative. It is no alternative. It is based on a false understanding of the tax law, the courts, and the rule of law, and on that basis most people reject it out of hand as something akin to anarchy, not surprisingly. But in the process Schiff, Kotmair, Schultz, et. al., have made the discussion exceedingly more difficult because they foment the very ignorance they claim to battle, and they exhaust the open-mindedness and receptivity to IRS abuses and unconstitutional arguments that once existed. Schiff, Kotmair, Schultz, et. al. inept arguments and advice put the broad brush in the hands of the courts and IRS with which we all get tarred. A study of court history shows it used to be fairly easy to bring constitutional challenges on tax issues. That has become almost impossible, no thanks in part to Schiff, Kotmair, Schultz, et. al.

Yes their attempts were in vain, but because of their own deliberate ineptitude. There was nothing noble or useful about it. To paraphrase General George S. Patton, taxation wars are not won by filing lost arguments. Taxation wars are won by making the other side file losing arguments.

The same courts you and others are so proud to quote have authorized numerous frauds such as slavery in the past, so cut the high minded horseshit and face the facts.

And when Patton would tally his fuel and equipment requirements, when Patton would study Rommel's tank tactics, when Patton pointed out Montgomery's failed strategy, was that pride or realistic analysis of how to defeat his enemy in battle? The only difference between battlefields and courtrooms is the ammunition.

The only proper response to an IRS Summons is ... Fuck you and the horse you rode in on, any attempt by you or any of your bloodthirsty agents to interfere with my life will be considered an act of war and treated as such, I support the 2nd Amendment.

And that, not surprisingly, is why most people stop listening. You opt for the wrong ammunition. We are a nation of laws, of the rule of law, and shooting someone as the "only proper response" and declaring armed warfare on the government's agents is what gets people killed. You may think you're making a noble defense of your liberty, but you'll just get others killed in your crossfire. And for what? To defend the low minded tax arguments of Schiff, Kotmair, Schultz, etc?

Starwind  posted on  2006-12-16   10:30:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

We are a nation of laws, of the rule of law,

are we? only for us little people. not for our elite rulers. bush said it all when he said the constitution is just a goddamned piece of paper. i realize that's simplistic, but in my mind, it really is just as simple as that.

christine  posted on  2006-12-16   10:53:29 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

are we? [a nation of laws, of the rule of law,]

If you really believe we aren't then just stop obeying them and don't expect others to obey them either. Might will make right, and you know who'll win that argument.

bush said it all when he said the constitution is just a goddamned piece of paper.

Violating that piece of paper just got his party voted out of office, and may yet get him impeached, as Clinton was.

For all the faults of the tax code, pretending it doesn't say what it says, doesn't help clear it up any, does it.

Starwind  posted on  2006-12-16   11:04:14 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Might will make right, and you know who'll win that argument.

that's been my point all along. they have all the might. that doesn't make them right.

as for bush being voted out because of that statement and possibly being impeached, i don't believe that will happen. in fact, pelosi et al already said it won't. i'm not a believer in the democrat/republican antipode. nor am i a believer that we vote anyone in or out. it's all about advancing the agenda of the corporate elites and no longer about the welfare of we the people.

what to do about it? i have no idea. we're about to lose our country because of [our] treasonous government as the NAU is in the process of being implemented as we type. sigh.

christine  posted on  2006-12-16   11:45:53 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

what to do about it?

I lean towards trying to call a Constitutional Convention. 23 states allow voter initiatives that might be usable to force those state legislatures to call for a convention (2/3 states needed to call for a convention), and in other states perhaps voter organizations can pressure candidates to "pledge" to call a convention.

Amendments would be:

Tax Uniformity:
All taxpayers are subject to the same laws. No distinctions anymore among corporate vs indivdiual vs organization. No gradations - every payer pays the same percentage on their gain, not on their income and the rules for determining "gain" must be uniform for everyone - no distinctions. Outlaw property taxes, estate taxes, and gift taxes. All local revenue can be generated only by uniform gain tax or local use or sales taxes.

Balanced Budget:
The government can not spend nor enact entitlements for future expenditures of more than 10% over revenues, and that 10% overage can only be approved by 3/4ths of the congress, and that 10% is computed on revenue and never on overage and must be reauthorized every year. (ie 10% overage doesn't carry over and doesn't include any prior overage). In event of revenue shortfalls or extraordinary expenses, other expenditures must be cut until the budget balances. The government can borrow, but only short-term and all borrowing must be paid off by the end of every presidential term. No administration can run up debts to be paid off by future administrations.

Monetary reform:
Zero-inflation targeting: The government can not, in any given year, print more currency than the nominal GDP requires. GDP metrics are based solely on actual prices charged for goods and services - no imputations or adjustments and all weightings are based on actual census figures.

Phaseout Entitlements:
All existing commitments in Social Security and Medicare will be met, but no new entrants will be accepted and existing contributions and obligations will be frozen and never increased. The government is henceforth restricted from any and all entitlement or loan programs. Expenditures only for goods, services, and operations.

Eliminate international obligations:
No more loans or forgiveness of past loans to other countries, with the sole exception being disaster recovery assistance within 180 days of natural disasters and not conflict related, and provided the budget remains balanced. No more contributions to the UN or other treaty organizations disproportionate to what other countries contribute. No funding of IMF or World Bank disproportionate to what other countries contribute.

Term Limits:
Mandatory limits on all national/federal offices. 6 2-year terms for Representative, 2 6-year terms for Senator. Either leave Presidential terms as- is or increase to not more than 3 4-year terms.

Even if the convention never gets off the ground, or never even out of the planning stage, just the idea might be enough to stimulate a more open discussion of what is wrong and how to improve it (if not fix it), and maybe jar congress into some action before it looses control. Adoption of just one of the above amendments would improve things considerably, IMO, one way or another. Candidates up for election are the most susceptible to giving a voice to the ideas even if they shy away from advocating a constitutional convention.

The internet can be a powerful grass-roots tool to spread an idea and organize like-minded people, if there is focus and a concrete goal: Hold a Constitutional Convention, debate the amendments (revised no doubt), vote up or down.

Starwind  posted on  2006-12-16   17:01:59 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Tax Uniformity: All taxpayers are subject to the same laws. No distinctions anymore among corporate vs indivdiual vs organization.

This approach automatically considers its objects of taxation to be subject to government authority. The government can lawfully subject its own creations to its authority (corporations), but has no legitimate right when attempting to use majority rules to subject mankind to its authority.

Simply put, a majority has no legitimate right to impose its rule upon the minority. We are indoctrinated to think otherwise through the use of polls that the media purports authorize certain activity or at least attempt to provide that mindset. It's the two foxes and a chicken deciding what's for dinner.

The Federal Constitution provides the authority for all federal government to exist at all, failure to abide by it constitutes a breach and eliminates that authority to exist by legitimate means, which are generally usurped through police state or military state enforcement policies, in other words "martial law". And for all practical purposes that's what we have in the United States.

Our system claims to be based upon the consent of the governed. Today this requires us to agree to be governed by immoral, self-serving, murderers. Of course the governed by consent claim is window dressing that hides the fraud that more accurately should be described as an executive branch dictatorship. Once the strict boundaries set by the Constitution are violated in the least we enter upon the slippery slope of despotism.

Federal usurpation at the expense of States rights, denies people any opportunity to live in an environment more attuned to their belief system, forcing a universal federal policy upon everyone without their consent. Corporate finances combined with political corruption have brought us to our current state of affairs and the policy you're advocating would leave it unchanged.

I don't believe we can ever go back to the intended limited federal authority envisioned by the framers until we understand that people in the normal course of daily life separated from commerce are untaxable. People have a right to the fruit of their labors that aren't dependent upon government grants of privilege for obtaining them.

Private people living private lives have a right to their privacy until they make themselves subjects of government authority through some voluntary action, otherwise nothing can be considered private or consensual.

We have become, as a society, accustomed to government interference in increments over time, to a point that the system existing today in no manner resembles the original creation, or its intent. This has allowed a welfare/socialist state that has ONLY SUBJECTS beholden to their benefactor, Uncle Sambo.

An example of the lunacy that has become law is the recent U.S. Mint "POLICY" making it illegal to melt down coinage. This policy has determined that what you may have thought was your money because you earned it and were taxed on it, really belongs to the government (or its creditors). Furthermore, some would have us believe that every dollar in circulation is taxable. I am of the opinion this is not so nor was it ever the intent.

The U.S. Treasury is beholden to a cabal of private bankers, that have determined every dollar is theirs and we are enslaved to them because we use it. These private bankers/corporations run our government (contrary to popular belief), for their own "gain" absent any concern for peoples' privacy or rights.

Another example of diminishing rights is that of gun sales. If you decide to purchase a weapon from a federally licensed gun dealer you might have to register it, if you buy from a private party you don't have to register it. What gives ? Or, should you choose to manufacture alcohol for private consumption, you pay no tax nor do you have to be licensed ... there is a such thing as privacy ... but we are allowing it to be stolen a little bit at a time.

noone222  posted on  2006-12-17   6:46:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

This approach automatically considers its objects of taxation to be subject to government authority. ... I don't believe we can ever go back to the intended limited federal authority envisioned by the framers until we understand that people in the normal course of daily life separated from commerce are untaxable.

Article 1, Section 8 gives Congress that authority over "objects of taxation", as intended by the framers. I don't see how you'll argue (successfully) that an individual selling his labor to a company in exchange for a wage is not commerce, or an individual expending his labor to produce a good/service which he then sells is not commerce. But in both cases the worker is tax- disadvantaged in numerous ways the business is not.

What congress has done is apply taxation non-uniformly. Businesses can deduct expenses that the individual can't. Business can declare a basis in its cost of inputs but the worker can't declare a basis against his wage - all of it is considered gain. My intent is simply to allow the worker the same latitude in taxation as is allowed the business, or if congress were to disallow a "loophole" for business, it would be disallowed for the worker as well. If a "flat tax" were implemented, it would apply to all individuals, companies, organizations, trusts, foundations, etc equally.

No gain, no tax, no distinctions.

If you think the proposal extends the "privileges" accorded a business to the "rights" of an indidvidual and thereby converts individual rights into privileges, please clarify how you see that happening, or propose a different amendment that satisfies you.

Corporate finances combined with political corruption have brought us to our current state of affairs and the policy you're advocating would leave it unchanged.

Hardly. Term limits helps prevent the entrenchment of political corruption, The Fed would be prohibited from inflating, the Treasury prohibited from borrowing (more than could be paid off in 4 years from revenues) and giving away money/ military assitance to other countries eliminated. Phasing out social security and medicare phases out the class warfare.

If Corporations pay the same percentage of tax on their profits as the individual pays on his profits, then does that make the corporation less corrupt or the individual more corrupt? Does it matter if politicians can't borrow, inflate, give away, or stay in office forever?

Drain the feeding trough and they'll not come.

Starwind  posted on  2006-12-17   10:43:34 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

#169. To: Starwind (#168)

Article 1, Section 8 gives Congress that authority over "objects of taxation", as intended by the framers. I don't see how you'll argue (successfully) that an individual selling his labor to a company in exchange for a wage is not commerce,

My argument would be that when I "trade" my labor and time with any other entity not already subject to governmental privilege no taxable activity has taken place, there has been an equal exchange of value / not "gain". My ability to labor and time are finite and belong to me unless I forfeit them for some benefit or even an expected benefit such as Socialist Security.

Corporations owe their very existence to government, where I don't. Corporations, some people and companies often have made an alliance with government for some perceived benefit that also requires them to operate within federal guidelines.

God creates man so man is subject to God. Man creates Constitutions which creates government, so government is subject to the Constitution, while men are not. Government is created to "protect" unalienable rights not squash them, tax them, or infringe upon them. They are intended to be "restrained" by the Constitution, not allowed unfettered intervention into men's lives.

On the other hand, when a person subscribes to the Socialist Security System, that person waives his unalienable right to feed himself by the fruits of his own labor and joins the Socialist Democracy that agrees to maintain his privileges (such as unemployment and others) as long as he maintains subservience to the dictates of government. So, when a person with a Social Security Agreement works for a Corporation or company that also has an arrangement with government what actually takes place is the government is allowing their slave to work for the Corporation or company, and wants their lease payment.

In a previous post I asked what you thought of the 14th Amendment mandate that citizens not question the debt. Soon after the 14th Amendment was passed into law by a congress filled with unelected southern congress people they passed this abomination into what we are expected to accept as law.

According to the wording of the 14th Amendment it appears that we're supposed to just shut up and pay whatever debt is amassed by the perps in D.C. ... which my common sense tells me is anathema to everything the original framers of the document had in mind when they determined war rather than submission to the King's statutes. The 14th Amendment violates the intention of everything prior to its implementation.

Here's the bottom line in my little world. The government and corporations are both legal fictions that certainly have an ability to deal with each other based upon their mutual fictional status. We can become legal fictions ourselves by volunteering into the Socialist Security Franchise wherein we are created fictionally as JOHN DOE (all caps spelling just like corps) and John Doe becomes the agent for the fiction.

My grandfather died in 1958 and he was 58 years young. He was the Chief of the Indianapolis Fire Department, a legal fiction of governmental creation. The Social Security Act was in full force during his employment with the City of Indianapolis (another legal fiction). He never had a Social Security Insurance Account or number.

The contrived depression era brought socialism into vogue for the purpose of enslaving the entire nation, and has pretty well subdued the population. You could attend a meeting of staunch Republicans and ask them if any are Socialists. None would admit it while all of them are actually "CARD CARRYING SOCIALISTS". I can't help it if most of America is too stupid to think for themselves and opt to consume every ounce of bullshit they're fed by perverted bureaucraps.

Some day when you aren't too busy arguing in favor of the criminal organization operating in the name of the State or United States, take a look at everything that Identifies you. Your driver license, your socialist security card, your billing statements from corporate legal fictions, credit cards etc., and you'll notice that they ALL refuse to spell your name correctly, as your parents ascribed it to you and as you were taught in school, with a Capital first letter and lower case letters following. They ALWAYS spell it in all capital letters because like a corporation that spelling indicates your "fictionalized legal person status" and you happen to be that legal fiction's "agent".

noone222  posted on  2006-12-17 12:31:55 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]