Do You Agree With Income Tax

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

One of the biggest reasons I don't like federal reserve system and the IRS or equivelent agencies in the world is who actually came up with the idea.

Members of the Rothschild family showed up to the white house during a critical time during the American Civil War. They told Abraham Lincoln they would help finance his war by creating something like the Federal Reserve system in America. Good old Honest Abe told them to get out of his office and never come back again, because the next time they offered that he would have them shot on sight. Abraham Lincoln was assassinated.

After the Federal Reserve happened, and the Rothschild's did have the ability to manipulate American Politics, one of the ways they did so was through the CIA. That is why there are so many cases of the CIA being sued for really illegal practices they did on the America Public. But during the bay of pigs, John Fitzgerald Kennedy realized the evil that the CIA was capable of, because he realized they were trying to start WW3. He set in motion something to wipe the CIA off the map of America. He was assassinated in Houston Texas.

Ronald Reagan decided to study where all the money from Income Tax goes, and found out almost every single cent goes to paying off the interest of the loans from the Federal Reserve, the brain child of the Rothschild family. Ronald Reagan was the target of an assassination attempt.

Hmmm, looking at the people who have opposed the Rothschilds in the past, or did something that made them angry, something unfortunate happened to each in American History, two are dead, on one was 'warned'.

Faith and reasoning suggests the Rothschilds are evil, and the fact we are 'enjoying' their economic system makes me cringe. The Rothschilds are pieces of filth who really need to repent and turn away from their evil ways and turn towards God.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Cure of Ars' post='1513827' date='Apr 29 2008, 08:46 AM']-The government is using inflation to manage its debit. This is why the value of the dollar is going down and the price of everything is going up. The government and the rich benefit most from this because they get to use the money first before the value of the money is affected.

-Inflation is a hidden tax that affects the poor more than the rich since the rich have their wealth in assets that keep its value through inflation. Inflation can help the poor if they are in debt but because of how the system works, once the poor get behind, they are not going to be able to get out of debt (because the interest rates rise so much) so this does not help them much. In the long run inflation hurts the poor because their wages don’t have the same purchasing power.

-High inflation makes saving less attractive. If inflation is 10% and you are getting 3% on your money in the bank you just lost 7% of the value of your money. This encourages speculative investment which can be good (because is drives innovation) but it also leads to bubbles which destabilize the economy.[/quote]
Inflation is particular bad for the elderly or retired people in general.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

I'm going to buy a plot of land somewhere, pay minimal property tax, and live off the land. This is outrageous.

[StColette]

[quote name='Raphael' post='1513927' date='Apr 29 2008, 11:46 AM']I'm going to buy a plot of land somewhere, pay minimal property tax, and live off the land. This is outrageous.[/quote]

I know what all the different soil nutrient deficiencies look like and how to fix them! Aren't you glad you married me! I can also milk cows! Let's go live in the country!

[Aloysius]

... my crazy plans sound better and better all the time, huh?

oh, and in even more ridiculosity, there is actually a way that they make farmers pay income tax based upon how much they grow. you might be able to swing in under some limit so long as you were just growing for yourself and not selling any.

[dairygirl4u2c]

as i mentioned earlier... a million dollars a minute increase in the debt, and a fifth of what everyone owes going to the debt, to nothing,.... is not wise or fair.

but... with taht said... i haven't really seen any substantial reasoning that says income tax shold be compltely done away with.

al said... let the corporations pay to keep thir customers safe. first, i don't know if this is saying, we should voluntarily pay taxes? cause if that's a case, it's definitely a game of chicken, which might work, but i don't know. also it's putting a presures on the wealthy, cause the common man will find a way to justify his idea that he needn't contribute to society, when that wouldn't be fair that the rich are paying to protect others who don't pay.
second, if he's saying the corporations should be taxed, and not the people.... how is that fair? i'm not one to say things like that, given that i'm a bit of a fighter for the common man, but i don't see how they should be targetd.

laud said he thought it was wrong to tax labor, but didn't really say why, and pointed to some countries that don't have the income tax without saying why they don't.

i mean.. it doesn't have to be an income tax per se,,, but there has to be a tax, where everyone is taxed somewhat. if that means an income tax, so be it. do people really think those hermits can live wihtout paying for the military, or their representatives or other things that taxes pay for that they benefit from? how is that fair?

Edited April 29, 2008 by dairygirl4u2c

[Aloysius]

so simply being alive and being human and living in the United States endebts you to the government? I believe every human has the right to have the capacity to live like a hermit... there are different roles for different people in society and some peoples roles will involve raising money for the common defense through the things they sell and the business they do... but only transactions that occur in the public domain are taxable by the public government in my opinion; and an individual income does not qualify as that in my estimation. sales do, and corporate income does because it is by its very nature already out in the society; but money given to an individual ought to be freely received by that individual because it is given to him to become his private property.

all personal income is private property, and private property is not taxable in my opinion.

a tax on a transaction is acceptable; except for transactions on basic necessities such as food. sales taxes should be limited to non-luxury items if they are used at all.

tariffs are the principal legitimate way for the government to receive its revenue. it's on a purely public domain occurrence and does not punish productivity but ensures that industries pay for the right to use the public to conduct business. industries are who owe the government some money for the right to conduct business safely within its borders, not average individuals.

I personally do not feel morally endebted to the government of the United States of America for one dime. The only thing I owe the government is being a good productive citizen who obeys the laws and contributes to the wellbeing of society. They, in turn, owe me safety if I live up to that end of the bargain. They can afford that safety because as the productivity of the country runs smoothly, money is generated by the industries which build the overall wealth and esteem of the nation.

[kujo]

[quote name='Deb' post='1512471' date='Apr 28 2008, 12:01 PM']Shouldn't the fix then be to start taxing all corporations at a higher rate and leaving us alone? Corporations get tax break after tax break and some years, multi-billion dollar businesses pay less actual tax than I do. Something has always been wrong about that.[/quote]

If you tax corporations, the price of the goods they supply will go up to pay for the taxes that they have to pay.

Your idea is socialist and borderline communist.

We should get rid of the IRS, institute the Fairtax and be done with it.

[Aloysius]

think of it this way: a big bully on the playground does not have the moral right to go around to each individual on the playground and make them pay him money to keep them safe from the other bullies... but say that bully used his protection powers to ensure the the kids on the playground had the opportunity to voluntarily engage in a great game safe from all the other bullies, and that game generated money/profit for them... then the bully could share in the profit that he helped to cause in order to finance his continuing protection of them.

ok, so the analogy fell apart halfway through, the point is still there...

[Aloysius]

[quote name='kujo' post='1514005' date='Apr 29 2008, 02:02 PM']If you tax corporations, the price of the goods they supply will go up to pay for the taxes that they have to pay.

Your idea is socialist and borderline communist.

We should get rid of the IRS, institute the Fairtax and be done with it.[/quote]
I'm all for not taxing corporations either. It is tariffs which have traditionally been the major funder of the federal government and those are what I'm principally talking about when I say that industry should generate the funds that the federal government collects

Fairtax as in flat rate income tax? no deal. no dice. big deal, we get less paperwork... woopididooda.
Fairtax as in flat nation wide sales tax? slightly better than the better system and more in line with what I'm saying, especially if it excludes the sale of food and houses/land. overall I'd like to see enough fiscal responsibility that the federal government could operate only from the tariffs it collects... government spending would not go down with a national sales tax replacing the IRS, the sales tax would just keep increasing

[dairygirl4u2c]

i guess it's a simple inherent difference of opinion.

cause saying things like how you play nice and help society function.... justifies everyone else paying money for your safety and interests, doesn't sit well with me. police, and military, and representatives. etc

if you use the police, you should at least pay a tax, as far as that goes. in theory anyway.

these are all your interests, not anyone else's.... so it seems like a cop out to me to put the burden on others, but not that it is necessarily if you disagree.

i really do like the idea of being a hermit if you want.... but i haven't seen a good alternative that taxes those safety and interests similar to taxing gas for roads, that would justify it.

the bottom line: "cause i play by the rules and help society function, i want others to pay out of their own money for my interests and well being"

[dairygirl4u2c]

cause you have to weigh the interests.... i value someone being able to live a hermit life with no taxes... but i also value people pulling their weight... i consider it minimally intrusive to make a hermit pay a little, rather than making me pay for him so that he can live his hermit lifestyle without concern and his interests protected.

the altnernative doesn't make sense to me... it's minimally instrusive to make me pay for the hermit's interests and concerns... to justify that the hermit can live free from concern about his interests etc?

it's not equitable. but that's just me.

i mean... it doesn't have to be a lot, but it should be something, however you want to tax it.

Edited April 29, 2008 by dairygirl4u2c

[kujo]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1514013' date='Apr 29 2008, 02:09 PM']I'm all for not taxing corporations either. It is tariffs which have traditionally been the major funder of the federal government and those are what I'm principally talking about when I say that industry should generate the funds that the federal government collects

Fairtax as in flat rate income tax? no deal. no dice. big deal, we get less paperwork... woopididooda.

Fairtax as in flat nation wide sales tax? slightly better than the better system and more in line with what I'm saying, especially if it excludes the sale of food and houses/land. overall I'd like to see enough fiscal responsibility that the federal government could operate only from the tariffs it collects... government spending would not go down with a national sales tax replacing the IRS, the sales tax would just keep increasing[/quote]

The latter. I think that there should be a flat retail tax that doesn't include food and houses/land. The easiest way to collect MORE money from society without penalizing individuals with obscene things like taking more money from them when they get a pay raise.

[CatherineM]

I've heard the suggestion that a national sales tax would at least generate income from people who do not pay income taxes, like drug dealers, prostitutes, and mobsters.

Those of you that want to go to ground, live off the land, and separate from the government, I think there's going to be some land for sale soon in Texas. The former owners were mostly women and children. Of course there's probably some land left for sale in Waco too.

[Aloysius]

yeah... because the desire for self-sufficiency inherently means you have to be crazy... nice little psychological trick the modern secularist culture had planted in our heads I say. what's so crazy about wanting to own your own land and not pay property or income tax?

it's not wanting to sit back and let everyone else pay for it. it's wanting those who import foreign goods into the country to pay for it (tariffs) and wanting a portion of the wealth which is generated by the free-flowing economy to supplement that.

I only accept the government skimming off the top of public transactions as payment for it allowing those public transactions to take place in safety, not invading private property. why all the hate (don't hate, appreciate) (don't hate (don't hate, appreciate), appreciate) on anyone who can get by without engaging in such public transactions reaping the benefits of safety? that just means that person is a different part of society...

oh no, it's so unfair that they're protected by the same police I'm protected by because part of what I paid for that television funds the police and crazy old man river down the road never even bought a television! woe is me!... it just seems so ridiculously petty and illogical to me.

but again, even better than a sales tax would be fiscal responsibility coupled by the payment of tariffs by importers and maybe some form of tax on the overall wealth generated by corporations as that wealth is generated as a result of the free public domain established by the common defense offered by the government.

and again, this keeps the government honest and responsible, because it keeps the balance even between it and who it's dealing with. corporations have power, like it or not, so the government really can't trick them into huge increases on their taxes to build bridges on the moon... they're evenly matched when dealing with corporations.

but for all any of you know: you've already paid taxes to pay for building bridges on the moon. think about that

the federal government dealing with individuals ALWAYS amounts to bullying which amounts to damage being done to freedom. I say let the powerful titans duke it out over how the federal government's gonna be funded... governments vs. large corporations... it is absolutely fair that the money generated by corporations be that which is skimmed off the top for national defense, and as an added bonus the government has a balance to its check of trying to levy taxes in the form of businesses which are powerful enough to call them out on their croutons (nope, not the fiddler, I spelled out croutons)