Personal security has never been the responsibility of the government. That red herring is meaningless. Care to try again?
There's no need for the state to run schools. Anyone can run a school. Nor is there any need for the state to build and maintain roads. Anyone can do that. Same with fire departments. There are countless volunteer fire departments. I take it you want to eat. Why don't you want taxes to pay for your food every day?
So you are volunteering to pay the highest rates or would you like others to subsidize your portion of these things that you desire?
It's fairly straight forwards. Your OP stated that tax is theft because there is no "public approval" and I'm pointing out that there is "public approval", just via a different system to the one you propose.
Robert, How can the Constitution itself be illegal? Isn't that like saying any of the other Amendments are illegal? And it would seem to me that if levying income taxes is authorized under the U.S. Constitution, that the Congress may pass laws for its enforcement. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/7201 You asked for the law. There it is, isn't it? Seth
I don't fully understand your question. But we all pay taxes for these things. The costs of these things are spread out among all taxpayers and our money is pooled together to pay for these things.
Seth Very nice attempt. Joe explains why the 16th amendment, upon which the code you cite is based, is not valid. Did you read what Joe says? Years ago prior to his fee arrangement with his readers,I believe I read his entire case. I have heard him at a meeting go into more details. Joe has been a speaker nationally. Aaron Russo pleads with the IRS to cite the law for him on film. And yet they do not give the reply you just did. They just won't answer him. Let me bring you up to date more. To amend the constitution, it shows in writing the way to amend the constitution. It involves enough states approving a proposed amendment. It is far more than just Joe making a very sound argument, but lawyers have as well. I am not suggesting anybody become an outlaw. The gist of Joes research shows there were not sufficient states to create the 16th amendment. If you won't watch and study Joe, himself a former law enforcement official, you won't know more than I just told you. I don't ask anybody to take my word. But i am in great company when so many have the same outcome as Joe has.
You know Seth, I have tried and tried to name any state that has income tax laws, that did not correctly do it. Here Joe and Congressman Ron Paul are interviewed on national TV Give them both a look and let me know what they tell the audience that is wrong. [video=youtube;-PvaNWrkFeQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PvaNWrkFeQ[/video]
Audience, watch this video where an attorney lays out the case. [video=youtube;0sQRSS24Kwk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sQRSS24Kwk[/video]
Audience: I do not question that the country does things for the public. I do not question those worthwhile things must be paid for. I hate to have to question the constitution, but question it I must. I feel those who questioned slavery also felt this way, they had to question the constitution. I do not advise you to take action. I only advise you to learn. And when you conclude a path, follow it. Keep this in mind too. This very government excuses millions of paying income taxes to the IRS. You must first hit a magic number then they want taxes paid. (Side note) I advocate for the FAIR TAX to be in the law, thus i am not seeking or proposing we quit paying taxes. Taxes are needed since we will all agree we need the things done by Government. So, it does no good to try to smear me, or my arguments, given the government itself forgives millions of paying income taxes to them. I have read complaints from Democrats over corporations they say pay no income taxes. This of course is well known to the IRS and they do not put those corporate officers in jail. The officers simply follow law. This is my main mission. To get you to follow law.
Look, I truly respect fair and honest discussion. What if you knew that the 16th amendment did not actually get approved by the number of states specified by the constitution itself? Does it violating the terms of the constition create a law that is legal? Joe Banister, far more up to date on this than i am, though I did meet him around 2001 I believe, has a very sound case. Joe was one of those scary IRS guys that carried a gun and arrested people for a living. For him to move from wearing his gun to resigning a high paying job has to count for something one supposes. Look at Joe's many arguments on YouTube and then explain to me if he is correct or wrong. I look at Joe like one looks at a police officer who sees unlawful things taking place and blows the whistle. [video=youtube;4rAC3-0rw_k]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rAC3-0rw_k[/video]
Joe Bannister explains that the income tax is Marxist and was taught by Marx to govern the public. The video just above details it. Do not miss the video in post 137
Do you accept us providing for our own security by when outside our home, we carry our security on our hip or in a shoulder holster? Since you absolve government of security. If I must die to get the cops going, that is a terrible deal with the public.
Is that acknowledgement that the basis of your OP was fundamentally flawed? I'm no Constitutional expert but I believe it's legal until such a time as it's successfully challenged in the Supreme Court (or repealed). That's not hugely relevant to my comments though. It seems to me that your issue here is really about the IRS in the US but your OP statement was very generic - Income taxes are theft because there is no "public approval". After all, I pay income tax to the UK state so there's no constitutional issue (well, not the same one at least) and exactly the same form of "public approval" as there is in the US. I think the lesson here is that you need better clarity in your arguments and also what actual consequences you wish to see as a result. Are you opposed to any and all income taxes (and taxes in general)? Do you think they simply shouldn't exist at all? That would be a massive shift in how modern society works and thus needs much wider and deeper explanation. Are you only opposed to the IRS in the US because you don't believe it was established in a legal manner? Does that mean if a new or replacement amendment was legitimately implemented allowing the IRS to legally operate in pretty much the manner is currently does, you'd be happy? Or do you just not like seeing so much of your pay packet in the "tax" column and are just seeking specific targets for what is really a generic moan or the relatively wealthy?
Question one to me. No, My argument is sound. As to legal challenges in the USA. Note to you. I hold no view of any sort on the taxing laws of England. If you have problems with them, please fill us in. To fill you in, we have many layers of income taxes. Matter of fact, my state, CA has imposed income taxes on we that live here. I have not tried to see if that income tax law is valid or not but I suppose it could be. Some states do not collect income taxes. Some states pay their citizens out of a fund so it all varies. I see the confusion for a citizen of England. We in America are pretty familiar with our own taxes and believe me, they are so varied, so correct in cases and not correct in others one can spend weeks just taking on each state and it's tax laws. I think my comments have been clarified to the discussion over federal taxes since those are collected due to the IRS. Taxes can't be done away with. I have suggested, along with many others, using a new system, called the FAIR TAX. Some advantages is the Feds collect at point of sale. As it now is, the IRS depends on the citizen to volunteer to pay income taxes. Supreme Court rulings state to avoid taxes is fine. But to evade them is wrong. I suggest avoiding taxes. Follow the law. If you will watch the videos I present, your questions get answered. But by actual experts. I prefer experts explain this vs me trying to do their job. We should perhaps recall the voting by the states to make certain the 16th amendment is proper. I have no argument against the 16th were the states actually to have approved the amendment. I think the US fell a few states short of getting them to agree. To give you a hint, some of them did not like the way the amendment was written so created their own wording. That shows lack of agreement. As to my personal situation, I am not liable for Federal or state income taxes so the correct law won't help me at all. This does not mean I do not pay taxes. Just not income taxes.
as long as there have been governments, there have been taxes. Taxes are the price we pay for an ordered society and are an investment in the common good. It is preposterous to believe otherwise. Taxes today are very low even at the top. Complaining about them is childish, it is far better to spend your time understanding the value we all receive in return for our various governments activities. I have lived in nations with low tax participation rates, you don't want to go there.
The individual income tax is absolutely theft, it is the reason the government can spend out of control and place the burden on future generations. The Founders' saw no need for individual income taxes, and they have proven their brilliance time and again. Only idiot progressives, like the ones that created and voted for the 16th, and modern idiot progressive support theft from the individual to pay for the unproductive and purchase votes cycle after cycle...
Well, let's be fair. The People voted more for Clinton.b If you want who the people spoke for, Clinton should be president. Trump will be selected by a bunch of establishment party lackeys, who are beholden to the establishment Republican party. Is that what you wanted?
Do you always believe what you see on some internet video? https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26
Theft is "Definition: The unlawful taking, carrying, leading, or riding away of property from the possession or constructive possession of another." https://www.justia.com/criminal/docs/uniform-crime-reporting-handbook/larceny-theft.html Taxes are not unlawful taking. Ergo, taxes are not theft. Unless you want to make up other meanings of "theft".
Oh gosh no. But since I have been to a meeting with Joe Banister, I do believe him. But why not? Joe graduated San Jose State, College with a degree as an accountant. He was certified by CA as a Public accountant. He was hired to work for the Federal Government as a law enforcer. So, one need not believe me, but I see no reason not to believe Joe Banister. Do you? [video=youtube;GKePl2gW_3M]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKePl2gW_3M[/video]
Lets get it local. Suppose one AM, you got home to see a street sign banning you from parking at your home. Is that a legal law?
The actual argument you've moved on to; possibly. The argument as expressed in your OP; not at all. As I said, the lesson here is to be clearer in your arguments in the first place and not to try to use flawed and over-generalised metaphors are an alternative to laying out actual facts and opinions.
Bcause it sounded like he was telling there were no tax laws. I just showed you a pile of them. Doesn't that make you question what he's telling you? So what. Maybe. So what. The question is, when he mislead you so blatantly about the tax laws, why would you believe him? Why would I believe someone who says there are no tax laws when I know that is a lie? Why do you?
This is the problem with the logic stated just above my sentences. Think of the USA as you think of the EU. Each nation has it's elected leaders. Each has courts. Each has lawmakers. So, let's say a country has a huge population. (think of CA for instance) and the majority of countries vote to go to war, is it correct to claim the country with the most public votes decides the outcome.? We can reverse this just for the heck of it too. Majority wants no war yet the largest populated country wants war. Which is right? CA is not part of any other state. They should not suffer due to our population.
