Income tax is theft

Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Doer said:
Interesting, stipulated....and the point?

We can opine that some plot or other by one side or other, got out of hand, and the People bought in. "State after State......."

But the People bought in. The most telling phase in this article and still true to day, is "...liberals of both parties...."

WE are ruling ourselves and quite stupidly at times in many respects. But, successfully, we hope.
Click to expand...

When some people rule others, there will always be stupidity. Peaceful self rule is a concept that some fail to grasp so expect continued stupidity.
 
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
When some people rule others, there will always be stupidity. Peaceful self rule is a concept that some fail to grasp so expect continued stupidity.
Click to expand...
We agree there. I only expect continued stupidity. But, I live in self actualized, self secured, self rule, quite peacefully right now....listening to Beatles tunes...right now.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Mr Neutron said:
Would you have a problem with it if you discovered that it was fraudulent?
Click to expand...
sounds like someone is butthurt and got fined for sending back a "frivolous return".

the only way to not pay taxes is to not sign a W4, and no one is making you do that.

give up the grudge already, tiffany.
 
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
Mr Neutron said:
Would you have a problem with it if you discovered that it was fraudulent?
Click to expand...
WTF...what is with this sparse comms style? ...problem with 'it" if "it" was fraud???? Dude? I think you mean, would I support the 16th if it was re-amened?

You have to re-amend big C. The fraudulent question was settled long ago. Your chance to sue for fraud, was over before you were born.
 
Mr Neutron

Mr Neutron

Well-Known Member
Doer said:
WTF...what is with this sparse comms style? ...problem with 'it" if "it" was fraud???? Dude? I think you mean, would I support the 16th if it was re-amened?

You have to re-amend big C. The fraudulent question was settled long ago. Your chance to sue for fraud, was over before you were born.
Click to expand...
OK, I'll make it easy for you. Would you still NOT have a problem with income taxes if you discovered that they were being enforced via fraudulent interpretation of the law?
 
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
Mr Neutron said:
OK, I'll make it easy for you. Would you still NOT have a problem with income taxes if you discovered that they were being enforced via fraudulent interpretation of the law?
Click to expand...
OK, that's seems simple and if not on a 300 baud modem, certainly easy enough for you to be more clear.

If SCOTUS does so declare, I'm all for it. But, it's quite the stretched hypothetical, that's why it went by me...If this, if that.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
ilikecheetoes said:
i didnt read all 29 pages. but has anybody been down the "it wasnt ratified by enough states" rabbit hole?
Click to expand...
The problem with that rabbit hole is it still provides an external entity, the state, with the ability to determine if you "consent". What's the difference between the FEDS or a state taking a persons money without their consent? The difference is just the size of the thief.
 
C

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
Doer said:
We agree there. I only expect continued stupidity. But, I live in self actualized, self secured, self rule, quite peacefully right now....listening to Beatles tunes...right now.
Click to expand...
Except if you want to drive to Florida with an ounce and chill in the Everglades while smoking a bowl. Then you will go to jail and have a felony and no longer be allowed to vote or own firearms. You are allowed self rule in the restrictive, to believe otherwise is to fool yourself. It works out OK if what you like is what is allowed, but what about the rest of us who aren't OK with table scraps?
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
The problem with that rabbit hole is it still provides an external entity, the state, with the ability to determine if you "consent". What's the difference between the FEDS or a state taking a persons money without their consent? The difference is just the size of the thief.
Click to expand...
if you don't consent, don't sign the W4. simple as that. i'll leave it to cheesus to call you the whiny little bitch.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Carthoris said:
Except if you want to drive to Florida with an ounce and chill in the Everglades while smoking a bowl. Then you will go to jail and have a felony and no longer be allowed to vote or own firearms. You are allowed self rule in the restrictive, to believe otherwise is to fool yourself. It works out OK if what you like is what is allowed, but what about the rest of us who aren't OK with table scraps?
Click to expand...
or you could move out of that regressive shit hole and come to oregon.*

i mean, you say if the blacks don't like sitting on the back of the bus, they could just risk life, limb and fortune settling the frontier. what's to keep you from relocating then? it's much easier than settling the frontier.

i won't leave this one up to cheesus, i will go ahead and be the one to call you a whiny little bitch.
 
C

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
The problem with that rabbit hole is it still provides an external entity, the state, with the ability to determine if you "consent". What's the difference between the FEDS or a state taking a persons money without their consent? The difference is just the size of the thief.
Click to expand...
One could argue that is why we vote. I think we are to the point where we should be able to vote for each major change individually instead of by party lines. We have the technology and ability to set this up. Seems like we wouldn't have to compromise so much if we could vote for individual amendments to the constitution(the states do this) and not vote for someone else based on whoever seems to be the least of a douche and accepting his vote on hundreds of things that we may or may not agree with him on. I would side with Democrats on some things and Republicans on others, but I have to vote based on either who I hate the least or my conscience which screws me in having a say on issues.
 
C

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
or you could move out of that regressive shit hole and come to oregon.*

i mean, you say if the blacks don't like sitting on the back of the bus, they could just risk life, limb and fortune settling the frontier. what's to keep you from relocating then? it's much easier than settling the frontier.

i won't leave this one up to cheesus, i will go ahead and be the one to call you a whiny little bitch.
Click to expand...
Dear Shitstain,

I am moving to NH. Why would I want to go to Oregon? One could also call you a whiney bitch for not moving to Europe where they have socialized medicine and live in a welfare state since that is what you want from life.

If there was a frontier, I would settle it. My kind is who built this country. Just as soon as they settled the frontiers the useless bitches like you followed act as leaches to success. California sure wasn't founded by lifeless societal leaches, you took it over though once it became successful. Good job.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Carthoris said:
Dear Shitstain,

I am moving to NH. Why would I want to go to Oregon? One could also call you a whiney bitch for not moving to Europe where they have socialized medicine and live in a welfare state since that is what you want from life.

If there was a frontier, I would settle it. My kind is who built this country. Just as soon as they settled the frontiers the useless bitches like you followed act as leaches to success. California sure wasn't founded by lifeless societal leaches, you took it over though once it became successful. Good job.
Click to expand...
FAIL!

i'm quite happy with how things are here. you're the whiny little bitch with one standard for blacks and another standard for yourself.

sounds like you hold the blacks in an inferior light. no surprise from you there!
 
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
Carthoris said:
Alaska isn't any more a frontier than Florida. It is just colder.
Click to expand...
I can disagree there. FL has very little to it that not accesable by dirt road. In Alaska you need an airplane.

You can subsist in FL so the scum bags are wimps. In Alaska the scum bags will be not your problem. Bears, wolves, moose. Ice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top