The Income Tax Implies that Government Owns You
Posted by freedomforall 8 years ago to Government
"The income tax is enshrined into law but it is an idea that stands in total contradiction to the driving force behind the American Revolution and the idea of freedom itself. We desperately need a serious national movement to get rid of it – not reform it, not replace it, not flatten it or refocus its sting from this group to that. It just needs to go.
The great essayist Frank Chodorov once described the income tax as the root of all evil. His target was not the tax itself, but the principle behind it. Since its implementation in 1913, he wrote, “The government says to the citizen: ‘Your earnings are not exclusively your own; we have a claim on them, and our claim precedes yours; we will allow you to keep some of it, because we recognize your need, not your right; but whatever we grant you for yourself is for us to decide.”"
The great essayist Frank Chodorov once described the income tax as the root of all evil. His target was not the tax itself, but the principle behind it. Since its implementation in 1913, he wrote, “The government says to the citizen: ‘Your earnings are not exclusively your own; we have a claim on them, and our claim precedes yours; we will allow you to keep some of it, because we recognize your need, not your right; but whatever we grant you for yourself is for us to decide.”"
Great thought and spot on! I would be that this is one of the reasons the Founding Fathers rejected the notion of an income tax - it is antithetical to freedom.
http://www.angelfire.com/az/sthurston...
https://youtu.be/OQYBVnc-6KE
He told me I needed to be a leader and to openly refuse to pay my income tax to inspire others to do the same.
"Are you a leader or are you a follower?" he'd stress.
Finally I told him I wasn't stupid. I'm not some charismatic leader of people anyway.
Later it dawned on me that the slimy snake only hoped to dupe an open conservative into going to prison.
I investigated Panama as an alternative home base years ago and while there I met Snipes' tax "mentor", Eddie Kahn. It wasn't a business setting and I have no info regarding the Snipes or Kahn trials or arrests. Kahn may have violated some obscure IRS rules with the advice he sold to Snipes and many others. I also met people in NZ who were in tax trouble with the NZ version of the IRS due to Kahn's advice. However, according to people on the scene in Panama City, Panama, Kahn was illegally taken into custody there and effectively kidnapped by Treasury agents to "extradite" him for tax prosecution in the US.
Legalities mean very little to the Treasury Department when they want to make an example to the serfs. If they can't find something in the maze of laws to prosecute you, they will create "evidence" from your internet habits to support arrest.
Now I'm reminded how Dinesh D'Souza, who after making a film critical of King Barry, got nailed with some obscure campaign contribution law to be made an example of also.
He got off easier than Snipes, though.
The income tax is unique in that it directly discourages productivity and encourages more government spending when someone subject to the income tax is productive. As a result it is a more heinous tax than the others (although I can find objections to all non-voluntary taxes.)
I recall a lot of instances where the state decided something was bad and then oops! that wasn't bad after all.
This is not the government's job and they have no constitutional power to do so. They should NEVER be allowed to wield such power and any public servant who does should be punished severely for violating his constitutional oath.
Then you're saying you're against all mandatory taxes. That's related to my point. If govt takes 30% income taxes vs 30% in sales taxes, they are different but not very different compared to if they could cut spending it and make it 10% or if they could somehow make it voluntary.
However, I do agree that a tax on consumption is less harmful than a tax on production as long as it is tax only on things that I can choose not to consume and still survive. That would exclude for example basic food, water, shelter, etc, and anything that I am forced by law to consume (e.g., vehicle insurance.)
As previously alluded to, I also agree that government is at least 10 times the size allowed under constitutional authority and it should cut spending by 90%. Eliminate social security retirement and medicare for everyone under 50 and fund a fixed amount based on donations made to date for everyone under 50 into a free market retirement and aged medical care system with all future additions to be made voluntarily by each person. Lease or sell federal assets to fund it including all the buildings in the swamp except the Washington and Jefferson monuments (since 90% of them will no longer be needed for government functions.).
End all pensions and other retirement benefits to retired elected officials who have assets exceeding $1 million USD and put active and future public servants in the same free market system as everyone else. Let the damned retired traitorous presidents pay for their own security. Looters!