Income tax = slavery

[KG4JYD]

Ask yourself whether Americans are for or against slavery. You might say, 'What are you talking about? We fought a war that cost over 600,000 lives to end slavery!' To get started, we might find a description that captures the essence of slavery. A good working description is: slavery is a set of circumstances whereby one person is forcibly used to serve the purposes of another person and has no legal claim to the fruits of his labor.

"The average American worker toils from January 1st to the end of April, and has no legal claim to the fruits of his labor for that period. Federal, state and local governments, through the tax code, take what he produces. A small portion of the fruits of his labor is used to provide for the constitutional functions of government. Most of what's taken, up to two-thirds, is given to some other American in the forms of farm and business subsidies, Social Security, Medicare, welfare and hundreds of other government handout programs. As in slavery, one person is being forcibly used to serve the purposes of another person."


-- "Are Americans Pro-Slavery?" by libertarian syndicated columnist Walter Williams

http://www.creators.com/opinion/walter-williams/are-americans-pro-slavery.html

[AE6IP]

Social Security, the main reason Williams can say "up to two-thirds" isn't a handout.

But even including Social Security, Williams numbers are wrong, unless you think of national defense as a "handout."

But then, paying taxes isn't slavery.

You really should stop reading the nutter fringe, Matt.

[W5GA]

Ask yourself whether Americans are for or against slavery. You might say, 'What are you talking about? We fought a war that cost over 600,000 lives to end slavery!' To get started, we might find a description that captures the essence of slavery. A good working description is: slavery is a set of circumstances whereby one person is forcibly used to serve the purposes of another person and has no legal claim to the fruits of his labor.

"The average American worker toils from January 1st to the end of April, and has no legal claim to the fruits of his labor for that period. Federal, state and local governments, through the tax code, take what he produces. A small portion of the fruits of his labor is used to provide for the constitutional functions of government. Most of what's taken, up to two-thirds, is given to some other American in the forms of farm and business subsidies, Social Security, Medicare, welfare and hundreds of other government handout programs. As in slavery, one person is being forcibly used to serve the purposes of another person."


-- "Are Americans Pro-Slavery?" by libertarian syndicated columnist Walter Williams

http://www.creators.com/opinion/walter-williams/are-americans-pro-slavery.html

And it'll stay that way too, until the 16th ammendment is repealed and we switch to the Fair Tax.

[kb3laz]

YA YA YA, we have heard this all before, paying taxes is unconstitutional.
Yet people go to jail if they dont pay them.
Lets see pay taxes or go to jail? Gee I think I will pay my taxes, lol.

[N4VGB]

libertarian syndicated columnist Walter Williams


Oy vey Matt! Now you're quoting the guy that fills in for Limbaugh while on vacation! :o

Here's another :o for you!

[N2RJ]

I really would like to see how this (or any) country would run without taxes.

The only countries I know without an income tax are rich, oil producing countries like Qatar.

The money to run essential services has to come from somewhere.

[kb3laz]

I really would like to see how this (or any) country would run without taxes.

The only countries I know without an income tax are rich, oil producing countries like Qatar.

The money to run essential services has to come from somewhere.

Yep our pockets, lol.:p

[K7JEM]

If we were slaves, we would be told what to do, how to do it, when to do it, where to live, what to eat, who to marry, etc. And we would have no money. The income tax requires none of us to do any of these things.

Taxes have always been paid. They are referred to in the Bible. They are nothing new or unusual.

People have always complained about taxes, too. That is not likely to stop either.

A debate could be made about whether or not our taxes are too high. Comparing taxes to slavery is a non-starter, however. Only a whack-job would buy into this.

I like WW. I listen to him sometimes when Rush is gone. But he says a lot of goofy things, along with some stuff that makes sense. But that's why I listen to him. Entertainment radio.

Joe

[K5FH]

The 13th Amendment outlawed slavery.

The 16th Amendment reinstated slavery...just in a different form.

Either way, you're still pickin' cotton for the massa.

[N0WVA]

There is only one reason why taxes of any kind should be imposed on a "free" society. That would be for a military.

Everything else is "slavery".

[n2ize]

Ask yourself whether Americans are for or against slavery. You might say, 'What are you talking about? We fought a war that cost over 600,000 lives to end slavery!' To get started, we might find a description that captures the essence of slavery. A good working description is: slavery is a set of circumstances whereby one person is forcibly used to serve the purposes of another person and has no legal claim to the fruits of his labor.

"The average American worker toils from January 1st to the end of April, and has no legal claim to the fruits of his labor for that period. Federal, state and local governments, through the tax code, take what he produces. A small portion of the fruits of his labor is used to provide for the constitutional functions of government. Most of what's taken, up to two-thirds, is given to some other American in the forms of farm and business subsidies, Social Security, Medicare, welfare and hundreds of other government handout programs. As in slavery, one person is being forcibly used to serve the purposes of another person."


-- "Are Americans Pro-Slavery?" by libertarian syndicated columnist Walter Williams

http://www.creators.com/opinion/walter-williams/are-americans-pro-slavery.html

I'll believe you are really committed to all this fringe constitutionalist junk when I see you get rid of those GOVERNMENT ISSUED call letters.

[N5NPO]

And it'll stay that way too, until the 16th ammendment is repealed and we switch to the Fair Tax.

I second that notion.
Who do we belong to? Ourselves or our governement. We have to pay the governement to earn a living. We have to pay the governement to live on our land.

http://www.fairtax.org/

[ka5s]

...slavery is a set of circumstances whereby one person is forcibly used to serve the purposes of another person and has no legal claim to the fruits of his labor.

Slavery and taxation are historically different institutions. A tax on income does not turn the taxpayer into a slave to be owned, sold, bought, used, or abused at the pleasure of his owner.


Cortland
KA5S

[G4ALA]

I forget who said

"The only two certainties in this life are death and taxes."

Neither one appeals.At least we are free to moan, which is about all we can effectively do between life events and elections.

73

G4ALA

[W3MIV]

Slavery and taxation are historically different institutions. A tax on income does not turn the taxpayer into a slave to be owned, sold, bought, used, or abused at the pleasure of his owner.

More discharge from the bowels of the Ayn Rand workshops.

It surely brings into question the taste of anyone who would make such a shallow and odious comparison. I suppose Williams was being "clever," making a comparison that he knows would appeal to his peculiar constituency (and for which he cannot be challenged on the basis of racial bigotry), but it detracts substantially from any merit his arguments against taxation may hold. That it exerts such a powerful grip on his target audience is revealing of the standards of that group.

[N5NPO]

Slavery and taxation are historically different institutions. A tax on income does not turn the taxpayer into a slave to be owned, sold, bought, used, or abused at the pleasure of his owner.


Cortland
KA5S

Try not volunteering to pay the volunteer income tax and see who ownes who.
It is none of the governements D@MN bussiness how much money I make. It should not matter to government what I earn from the friuts of MY labor, unless they mean to regulate and control what people can keep from the friuts of THEIR labor....
We as individuals are on this planet, in this plane of existance for X amount of time. You trade a certain amount of that time (X) for money in the form of (YOUR) labor. The amount of the time you are trading YOUR labor to pay for something you have no control over is not YOUR own time or fruit from YOUR time. It is involuntary. Try not volunteering. You are a slave until you pay the amount the government says you own. They will get it, one way or another. You will loose your freedom over it.

FAIRTAX.ORG

[N2RJ]

There is only one reason why taxes of any kind should be imposed on a "free" society. That would be for a military.

Everything else is "slavery".

And as long as the military is used for defense, that's fine.

Unfortunately money is being wasted on useless wars that have nothing to do with defense.

[G4ILO]

A good working description is: slavery is a set of circumstances whereby one person is forcibly used to serve the purposes of another person and has no legal claim to the fruits of his labor.

So what's the difference between employment and slavery, then?

Proud to be my own boss... not that anyone else would employ me. :)

[K7JEM]

Try not volunteering to pay the volunteer income tax and see who ownes who.
It is none of the governements D@MN bussiness how much money I make. It should not matter to government what I earn from the friuts of MY labor, unless they mean to regulate and control what people can keep from the friuts of THEIR labor....
We as individuals are on this planet, in this plane of existance for X amount of time. You trade a certain amount of that time (X) for money in the form of (YOUR) labor. The amount of the time you are trading YOUR labor to pay for something you have no control over is not YOUR own time or fruit from YOUR time. It is involuntary. Try not volunteering. You are a slave until you pay the amount the government says you own. They will get it, one way or another. You will loose your freedom over it.

FAIRTAX.ORG

These may be valid arguments. The problem is in comparing taxation to slavery. If that is the case, then most people worldwide are slaves, since most people pay some sort of tax.

Taxation is not akin to slavery, on any level. We are not forced to do things. We have a say in what we do, the direction of our lives. Our jobs, our careers, our families, our homes.

How does this compare to slavery? Is there ANY connection, other than that you have to give up some of your income?

If taxation is slavery, then so is military service, the draft, jail and prison, marriage, parenthood, union membership, and so many other things in life.

I get so tired of whack-job, simplistic comparisons.

Joe

[W5GA]

These may be valid arguments. The problem is in comparing taxation to slavery. If that is the case, then most people worldwide are slaves, since most people pay some sort of tax.

Taxation is not akin to slavery, on any level. We are not forced to do things. We have a say in what we do, the direction of our lives. Our jobs, our careers, our families, our homes.

How does this compare to slavery? Is there ANY connection, other than that you have to give up some of your income?

If taxation is slavery, then so is military service, the draft, jail and prison, marriage, parenthood, union membership, and so many other things in life.

I get so tired of whack-job, simplistic comparisons.

Joe

With one exception, all that you mention are voluntary contracts you've entered into with both eyes open. The exception is the draft, which fits the definition of slavery to a "T".

[AK7V]

http://books.google.com/books?id=soH6h3x3-wAC&dq=social+contract&pg=PP1&ots=tidh8zAMrI&sig=sZGG9R2gOYnUHI0Jz0fqSHkAJLc&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result

Like it or not.

[K7JEM]

With one exception, all that you mention are voluntary contracts you've entered into with both eyes open. The exception is the draft, which fits the definition of slavery to a "T".

Well, no.

You get paid to be in the military, even if you are drafted, and your service is for a term. You can get out of military service under many different rules. You are not owned by the military, they cannot sell you. They cannot tell you who to marry, or prohibit normal "free" activities when you are not in their specific service.

It is an injustice to real "slavery' to compare any of these things to it. It minimizes it's reality. "Oh those slaves had it pretty good, just like being drafted/paying taxes/being married/etc". It's like the people that compare Bush to Hitler, or Republicans to Nazis, or democrats to Communists.

This tax comparison is among the worst. The people that pay the most tax are the least like slaves. When someone gets to the point of paying 25% of their income for income tax, they're making pretty good money, and shouldn't be comparing themselves to slaves.

Joe

[W5GA]

Well, no.

You get paid to be in the military, even if you are drafted, and your service is for a term. You can get out of military service under many different rules. You are not owned by the military, they cannot sell you. They cannot tell you who to marry, or prohibit normal "free" activities when you are not in their specific service.

It is an injustice to real "slavery' to compare any of these things to it. It minimizes it's reality. "Oh those slaves had it pretty good, just like being drafted/paying taxes/being married/etc". It's like the people that compare Bush to Hitler, or Republicans to Nazis, or democrats to Communists.

This tax comparison is among the worst. The people that pay the most tax are the least like slaves. When someone gets to the point of paying 25% of their income for income tax, they're making pretty good money, and shouldn't be comparing themselves to slaves.

Joe

This sure sounds like slavery to me:

bondage: the state of being under the control of another person
the practice of owning slaves
work done under harsh conditions for little or no pay
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

It also pretty well describes military service. It's just worse if you're drafted into it.

[K7JEM]

This sure sounds like slavery to me:

bondage: the state of being under the control of another person
the practice of owning slaves
work done under harsh conditions for little or no pay
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

It also pretty well describes military service. It's just worse if you're drafted into it.

But it is not what is being referenced in the original post. That refers to the outlawed practice of slavery. Not hyperbole being generated by someone who is not really a slave.

This definition could apply to about anyone, anywhere. Children fit the first part, and many jobs fit the last. Only the middle part doesn't fit today, since no-one owns any slaves (here).

Military only loosely fits the first definition, and maybe, maybe not on the last. The Nuremberg trials proved that. Tax payment fits NONE of the definitions, since the gov't isn't "controlling" us by requiring payment of taxes.

Being a slave is being under real control of all of your activities. Slaves had no possessions, no money, no property, no rights, and no say.

Joe

[KG4JYD]

But then, paying taxes isn't slavery.You're right. But the income tax is slavery because you are not allowed to own the fruits of your labor.

[K7JEM]

You're right. But the income tax is slavery because you are not allowed to own the fruits of your labor.

Then any tax, no matter the type or amount, would fit that definition. And most of the world is a slave. The people that are not live a very sheltered and backward lifestyle, one you would not care for.

Do you really want to equate taxes to slavery?

Ask yourself, if you believe this, would you rather have the taxes as presented or actually work as a slave from Jan 1 to April, and be exempt from taxes for the rest of the year?

This is such a stupid analogy as to be unbelievable on it's face. You have no concept of what true slavery is, and the hardships facing such people in those situations.

Joe

[N9MOQ]

. .

[KG4JYD]

And it'll stay that way too, until the 16th ammendment is repealed and we switch to the Fair Tax.We should just abolish the income tax and replace it with nothing.

Less than 1/3 of federal revenue is derived from it. And for over half of the US existence we never had an income tax. We don't need it. It simply keeps people from upward class mobility.

[K7JEM]

It amazes me that people have to be told they are slaves, or just figuring this out now.

There has never been any doubt in my mind that I am a slave.

The moment I stop working for the master, or paying him off with taxes, my house gets taken away and I go to prison.

The moment you break any law, you could go to prison. The difference that a slave has is that he has no income, he has no house, and he can be punished at any time. Prison might be a relief.

You have choices as to what work you do (or if you do any work at all) where you live, the ability to buy things and keep things.

Do you really believe that you are a slave? Someone forcing you to do what THEY want, with no pay to you? Living in a shack provided by them? Getting a beating for not wanting to work, or complaining about working conditions?

The list goes on and on. You guys demean slavery by comparing it in this way. You DO recognize that the lifestyle you lead bears absolutely no resemblance to slavery, don't you?

Joe

[AE6IP]

You're right. But the income tax is slavery because you are not allowed to own the fruits of your labor.

Go invest in a good dictionary, Matt.

Learn what "slavery" really is.

It doesn't matter what kind of tax it is, taxation is not slavery.

Onerous, yes. Slavery, no.

[N2RJ]

Less than 1/3 of federal revenue is derived from it.

So where do they get the other 2/3 from?

[AE6IP]

The moment I stop working for the master, or paying him off with taxes, my house gets taken away and I go to prison.

Sucks to be you. I, on the other hand, live in the United States, where such things don't happen.

I get a lot of services from the government. They pick up my garbage, handle my recycling, provide me with usable water, police my neighborhood, repair my roads, fight fires on my behalf, run a library for me, maintain nice open spaces for my use, and a host of other things. If I lived in the next town north, they'd also provide my electricity, and high speed internet.

I pay for these various services in different ways. Sometimes I'm billed directly, as I am for garbage pick up. Sometimes I pay-as-I-go, as for access to some parks. Sometimes I pay indirectly by use, as with excise taxes on my gasoline consumption. Other times I pay in ways that aren't directly related to the uses that the funds are put to, in sales, income, and property taxes.

None of these things are services that would magically get done if I didn't pay for them. History has shown that the overwhelming majority of them are better provided by a common government than by private enterprise.

Do I pay more than I'd like? Absolutely. Are there abuses in the system? Certainly. Do I pay for things I'd rather not? Yup, just like paying for all those channels I never watch on cable; it's all part of the package.

It's plain silly to treat taxes like slavery. Taxes are one way we pay for services provided by the government. It makes sense to debate whether the method of collection fairly burdens the users of the services. It makes sense to debate, on a service by service basis, whether a given service is best provided by government or private enterprise. It makes sense to debate whether the government is doing a good job of wisely applying the revenue to provide the services.

It doesn't make sense to rail against taxes as if they were "slavery".

[N5NPO]

Income tax is social engineering. Punish your enemies, reward your friends. The governemnt needs to keep tabs on who has what and how much, otherwise, why does it matter what you get for the fruits of your labor.
They want CONTROL.

[N2RJ]

I get a lot of services from the government. They pick up my garbage, handle my recycling, provide me with usable water, police my neighborhood, repair my roads, fight fires on my behalf, run a library for me, maintain nice open spaces for my use, and a host of other things. If I lived in the next town north, they'd also provide my electricity, and high speed internet.

Out of that, the Government only does the following for me:

police my neighborhood, repair my roads,un a library for me,

With regards to this:

maintain (some) nice open spaces for my use,

A new dog park just opened up about 5mins from my house, funded entirely by donations.

None of these things are services that would magically get done if I didn't pay for them. History has shown that the overwhelming majority of them are better provided by a common government than by private enterprise.

Trash service I pay for from a private company is a lot better than getting it from the Government.

Volunteer FF's don't go on strike like municipal fire departments.

I haven't been to the library in ages.

Our electricity is provided by a cooperative and is cheaper and more reliable than some neighboring towns which use investor owned or municipal utilities.

The dog park, as I mentioned, runs really well funded by private donations.


Do I pay more than I'd like? Absolutely. Are there abuses in the system? Certainly. Do I pay for things I'd rather not? Yup, just like paying for all those channels I never watch on cable; it's all part of the package.

I'd much rather have a-la-carte programming. That's pretty much why home BUDs were driven out of existence by the pizza dish providers.

It's plain silly to treat taxes like slavery. Taxes are one way we pay for services provided by the government. It makes sense to debate whether the method of collection fairly burdens the users of the services. It makes sense to debate, on a service by service basis, whether a given service is best provided by government or private enterprise. It makes sense to debate whether the government is doing a good job of wisely applying the revenue to provide the services.

It doesn't make sense to rail against taxes as if they were "slavery".

Excessive taxation certainly is like slavery. Some Government employees get benefits and sometimes pay and overtime far in excess of what they'd get in a job in private industry. They also have to keep around underperforming workers whereas private industry will fire them and replace them with workers who actually care about it. Who pays for it? You and I. The taxpayers. That's not service. That's waste, and we don't have much choice.

[K5FH]

It doesn't make sense to rail against taxes as if they were "slavery".

To imply moral equivalence between taxation and slavery (classic definition) is not really fair, as others have mentioned. Slavery, as it existed when the constitution was drafted, bears little similarity to taxation, even egregious taxation.

Section 1 of the Thirteenth Amendment says:

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

It is relatively easy to make a case for moral equivalence between the income tax and involuntary servitude, at least in the academic sense. The courts, however, won't listen to any argument based on that theory; they will simply rule that there is no legal equivalence so pay your damn taxes or else.

Note to Matt:

Every possible permutation and combination of arguments purporting to "prove" the unconstitutionality of the income tax has been tried and none have been successful. We can engage in academic debate all we want but the reality is that the courts will not listen to any argument that challenges the income tax on constitutional grounds.

[W5GA]

Every possible permutation and combination of arguments purporting to "prove" the unconstitutionality of the income tax has been tried and none have been successful. We can engage in academic debate all we want but the reality is that the courts will not listen to any argument that challenges the income tax on constitutional grounds.

Quite true, even the one that says the 16th ammendment wasn't properly ratified. In spite of what the historical record clearly shows (that it wasn't properly ratified), the courts chose to side step the issue by saying it was a matter for Congress to rectify, not the courts.

[N0WVA]

If I could actually own my property, instead of renting it from the government, then I wouldnt need public utilities, roads to go to work, schools to make my kids stupid.

I would have time to grow my own food and meat, raise and teach my kids, and run the whole thing off renewable energy. I wouldnt have to go anywhere. You know kinda like 75% of this country used to be like 100 years ago.

Id love to do all of that. Too bad I am FORCED to use unka scams money. And thats why this is not a "free" society. The "American Dream" is all a delusion people have thinking that government will somehow leave them alone when they have worked 60 years.

You cant eat concrete, and the only way this whole thing will continue to work is if we get back to some type of self-dependence. However, I think there is no going back, and the gov. makes it harder and harder to break loose of the system.

[K8ERV]

The money to run essential services has to come from somewhere.

I agree. It should all come from Glen.

TOM K8ERV Montrose Colo

[ka5s]

Try not volunteering to pay the volunteer income tax and see who ownes who.
It is none of the governements D@MN bussiness how much money I make. It should not matter to government what I earn from the friuts of MY labor, unless they mean to regulate and control what people can keep from the friuts of THEIR labor....
We as individuals are on this planet, in this plane of existance for X amount of time. You trade a certain amount of that time (X) for money in the form of (YOUR) labor. The amount of the time you are trading YOUR labor to pay for something you have no control over is not YOUR own time or fruit from YOUR time. It is involuntary. Try not volunteering. You are a slave until you pay the amount the government says you own. They will get it, one way or another. You will loose your freedom over it.

FAIRTAX.ORG

You're not a slave. Arguably, you and the rest of us may be victims of robbery with threats; that's the crime you describe.

But if it's TAXES you hate, make less money and pay less tax, simple as that. Thrift is a political weapon, so use it.

Cortland
KA5S

[K7JEM]

It is relatively easy to make a case for moral equivalence between the income tax and involuntary servitude, at least in the academic sense. The courts, however, won't listen to any argument based on that theory; they will simply rule that there is no legal equivalence so pay your damn taxes or else.



Involuntary servitude is not equivalent. This indicates that you have no way to get out of serving. Tax laws allow you to quit working at any time, thereby not creating the issue of servitude.

Unless you are being forced to work, against your will, involuntary servitude does not exist.

Joe

[N2RJ]

Tax laws allow you to quit working at any time, thereby not creating the issue of servitude.

That only addresses income tax.

What about property taxes? It seems to me that no matter where one lives, they have to pay money to the Government to stay there.

I believe the only exception would be Alaska where I heard they actually pay residents to live there. I know we have a few Alaska residents here, so is it true?

But then again I enjoy a nice warm summer, and I hate bitterly cold winter so Alaska is out for me.

[K7JEM]

That only addresses income tax.

What about property taxes? It seems to me that no matter where one lives, they have to pay money to the Government to stay there.

I believe the only exception would be Alaska where I heard they actually pay residents to live there. I know we have a few Alaska residents here, so is it true?

But then again I enjoy a nice warm summer, and I hate bitterly cold winter so Alaska is out for me.

Property tax assumes you own property. Involuntary servitude still doesn't exist, since you are not required to work to pay those taxes. This is where the analogy to slavery and involuntary servitude fails.

Whether or not property or income taxes are good or bad is another matter, but neither one qualifies as slavery or involuntary servitude.

What happens is that certain nut-cases out there don't want to pay taxes. Rather than say "I don't want to pay my taxes", they try lame arguments like fifth amendment or slavery.

Joe

[KG4JYD]

paying taxes is unconstitutional. No one said that paying taxes is unconstitutional. :rolleyes:

[AE6IP]

Excessive taxation certainly is like slavery. Some Government employees get benefits and sometimes pay and overtime far in excess of what they'd get in a job in private industry. They also have to keep around underperforming workers whereas private industry will fire them and replace them with workers who actually care about it. Who pays for it? You and I. The taxpayers. That's not service. That's waste, and we don't have much choice.

It's not "slavery", either. But private industry keeps around plenty of underperforming workers. and while "some" government employees get what you suggest, the vast majority don't.

I have friends in MT who've been in the MT civil service for their entire career. They make less than a quarter of what I make, less than half what the equivalent salaries for in-state commercial jobs pay, and with lousy benefits by comparison to those jobs.

There are abuses of the government payroll, but it has not been my experience that they're worse than the abuses in industry.

It's nice that some of those services work out for you in private hands. That's not, however, been the general case.

For an example, read the history of NYC and commercial fire fighting. Pay particular interest to the origin of the term "plug ugly".

Volunteer fire fighting works out if the population density is sufficiently low, and the populace sufficiently self-insured. Unfortunately, that's becoming a smaller and smaller segment of residential US.

Plus it's really hard to get people to volunteer to fall out of perfectly good airplanes into raging forest fires -- and to keep it up for an entire fire season.

[AE6IP]

If I could actually own my property, instead of renting it from the government, then I wouldnt need public utilities, roads to go to work, schools to make my kids stupid.

I would have time to grow my own food and meat, raise and teach my kids, and run the whole thing off renewable energy. I wouldnt have to go anywhere. You know kinda like 75% of this country used to be like 100 years ago.



I take it you've never actually tried to be self sustaining. It's not a life you'd enjoy.

Id love to do all of that. Too bad I am FORCED to use unka scams money. And thats why this is not a "free" society. The "American Dream" is all a delusion people have thinking that government will somehow leave them alone when they have worked 60 years.

Nobody's "forcing" you to do any such thing. Move to rural Idaho or North Dakota, where services are thin on the ground and taxes pretty low. Try making a go of it on your own.

You cant eat concrete, and the only way this whole thing will continue to work is if we get back to some type of self-dependence. However, I think there is no going back, and the gov. makes it harder and harder to break loose of the system.

When I was a kid, I spent my summers living and working my grandparent's hoemstead. No electricity. No indoor plumbing. You only think you want that life because you've never tried it.

You could do it now. By a property near Lincoln, MT, and move your family there. Don't take any paying jobs, and live "off the land". You won't pay income tax. Montana has no sales tax, and the annual property tax on a piece of unimproved land in that part of the state is paltry.

If you make it through the first winter, I'll be bloody impressed.

[N5NPO]

I take it you've never actually tried to be self sustaining. It's not a life you'd enjoy.



Nobody's "forcing" you to do any such thing. Move to rural Idaho or North Dakota, where services are thin on the ground and taxes pretty low. Try making a go of it on your own.



When I was a kid, I spent my summers living and working my grandparent's hoemstead. No electricity. No indoor plumbing. You only think you want that life because you've never tried it.

You could do it now. By a property near Lincoln, MT, and move your family there. Don't take any paying jobs, and live "off the land". You won't pay income tax. Montana has no sales tax, and the annual property tax on a piece of unimproved land in that part of the state is paltry.

If you make it through the first winter, I'll be bloody impressed.

You could move to Alabama... Our property tax is supposed to be the lowest in the nation and the winters are not so bad... Summer is another thing entirely though...

[KG4JYD]

Now you're quoting the guy that fills in for Limbaugh while on vacation! I had no idea.

[N4VGB]

YEP!:D

And we do have protection from losing our property in TN from not being able to pay our property taxes also. The handicapped and elderly have their city & county property taxes paid by the state here, unless their income is above a certain amount. Not sure on the amount of income limit, but my maternal grandparents didn't have to pay any property taxes for many years of their lives. They just signed the back of the forms and mailed them back yearly.

I believe the poor also have that option, but I've never had reason to investigate the income limits?

Sooo, at least some states have protection from losing property via an inability to pay property taxes. I'm fairly sure TN is not unique in this practice.

[k2bkt]

Taxation means something like excise or duties or tariffs or toll roads - that's what taxes usually were - the American Revolution was not fought because of INCOME TAX and when they complained about 'taxation without representation' they weren't talking about income tax, they were talking about tariffs and duties. And if the Brits had tried to impose income tax on the colonies, there would not have been even one American siding with the British - they would have all banded together and shot down every Brit without a moment's thought.

I don't believe the Founding Fathers ever dreamed of something like income tax, because it is tantamount to slavery. That's one reason why it required an amendment to the Constitution. And even after the amendment, it's not clear that taxing the fruits of a man's labor was included - it may only be applicable to profits from business etc. But the bandits in Washington made sure they got their mitts on everything, like they always do.

INCOME TAX is slavery because the labor of your body is taxed, and if you don't pay it, the government is empowered to grab your land, your home and your body and do with them as they please - just as any master can do with his slave. If you don't believe it, try not paying your taxes for a while and see what happens... And even if the government is grabbing only 50% of your wages, you are 100% a slave - because they can take you away if you refuse to pay even one penny of that 50%.

[K7JEM]

Do any of you guys recognize a difference between slavery and robbery?

[n9yb]

I really would like to see how this (or any) country would run without taxes.

The only countries I know without an income tax are rich, oil producing countries like Qatar.

The money to run essential services has to come from somewhere.

yep, where the gov't owns everything....

[N5NPO]

Do any of you guys recognize a difference between slavery and robbery?

Robbery...... Robed of liberty via taxation..... Yeah, it fits.
Might be better description than slavery....

[N0WVA]

I take it you've never actually tried to be self sustaining. It's not a life you'd enjoy.



Nobody's "forcing" you to do any such thing. Move to rural Idaho or North Dakota, where services are thin on the ground and taxes pretty low. Try making a go of it on your own.



When I was a kid, I spent my summers living and working my grandparent's hoemstead. No electricity. No indoor plumbing. You only think you want that life because you've never tried it.

You could do it now. By a property near Lincoln, MT, and move your family there. Don't take any paying jobs, and live "off the land". You won't pay income tax. Montana has no sales tax, and the annual property tax on a piece of unimproved land in that part of the state is paltry.

If you make it through the first winter, I'll be bloody impressed.

You have no idea from where I come.

Until I was 12 there was no indoor plumbing. You think twice whether to run for the outhouse in the winter. Either that or you end up carrying crap buckets and dumping them. Water was drawn from a hand pump and shallow well for a while. We butchered and produced hay for the cattle,milked them and my, that was good milk. My brother ground milo and we had cereal from that. I helped my mom can every summer and fended off many a copper head in that garden near the creek. It worked, and worked well. We had very little in the form of bills. We wrapped apples in newspapers to keep them through the winter.

Electric was a welcome thing, but I know now it could be produced locally by a small turbine on the creek. No need to pay for it.

I wish I could go back to those times.

Thats why I say you can eat pavement if you like. I know what will work and what wont.

[AE6IP]

I wish I could go back to those times.

So why haven't you bought that land near Lincoln?

Plenty of opportunities to return to a primitive life on this planet.

[KG4JYD]

I really would like to see how this (or any) country would run without taxes. The US existed for over more than half of it's life without an income tax. The income tax is only about 1/3rd of the federal government's intake. Abolishing the income tax would only take the federal budget back to the same level 10 years ago. Do you honestly think we can't cut enough spending to spend the same amount that we spent 10 years ago?

[n2ize]

The US existed for over more than half of it's life without an income tax. The income tax is only about 1/3rd of the federal government's intake. Abolishing the income tax would only take the federal budget back to the same level 10 years ago. Do you honestly think we can't cut enough spending to spend the same amount that we spent 10 years ago?

Yes, I honestly think we can't. Well maybe if we fire all the politicians and cut off all services to ex-politicians.

[kb3laz]

So why haven't you bought that land near Lincoln?

Plenty of opportunities to return to a primitive life on this planet.

I wouldnt be so quick to snap as we may all go back to a primitive lifestyle someday. Technology will only carry us so far before destroying itself.
To many people have become reliant on technology and could not fend for themselves if necessary. I have a few relatives that live off of their land and that alone. I tell you this they would not call it primitive but rather freedom.
They have solar power, windmills,watermill, hunt/fish(for food not sport), farm for themselves and commercially (to an extent). Granted they have indoor pluming but no TV or radios. Ill tell you what that is peaceful, no Tv or any other distraction just me and a book in the woods. I dont know if I could live like they do but it makes for a nice vacation.:p Now If I were to hit the lottery Id live like that except I would not rely on the land alone.:D

[n2ize]

I wouldnt be so quick to snap as we may all go back to a primitive lifestyle someday. Technology will only carry us so far before destroying itself.
To many people have become reliant on technology and could not fend for themselves if necessary. I have a few relatives that live off of their land and that alone. I tell you this they would not call it primitive but rather freedom.
They have solar power, windmills,watermill, hunt/fish(for food not sport), farm for themselves and commercially (to an extent). Granted they have indoor pluming but no TV or radios. Ill tell you what that is peaceful, no Tv or any other distraction just me and a book in the woods. I dont know if I could live like they do but it makes for a nice vacation.:p Now If I were to hit the lottery Id live like that except I would not rely on the land alone.:D

Times have changed. There are too many people and not enough land to "live off". Besides, not everyone wants to go back to a primitive lifestyle. Mankind has continually evolved and taken advantage of new inventions and ideas and there is no turning back. Relics of the old days are nice and often bring back memories.

And lets not forget, before all the new technology life was not all peace and quiet. Life expectancies were much lower, childhood deaths were much more common. Illnesses that we consider minor today were considered life threatening back then. Food poisoning, plagues, famines, and general misery was quite common. It's true we haven;t solved all the problems today and we've also created a few new problems. But there is much we take for granted today and simply overlook that would come back to haunt us if we were to thrust ourselves back into primitive (and not so primitive) times.

For me, I'll pass on going primitive. A like a lot of the new stuff we have today.

As far as technology only carrying us so far and then destroying itself, on what do you base this assumption ? I highly doubt it's going to destroy itself in the future. The only thing that will destroy itself are people;e via ignorance, arrogance, greed and sheer stupidity Those are the three most destructive forces on the planet and they are abundant within the human race.

[kb3laz]

Times have changed. There are too many people and not enough land to "live off". Besides, not everyone wants to go back to a primitive lifestyle. Mankind has continually evolved and taken advantage of new inventions and ideas and there is no turning back. Relics of the old days are nice and often bring back memories.

And lets not forget, before all the new technology life was not all peace and quiet. Life expectancies were much lower, childhood deaths were much more common. Illnesses that we consider minor today were considered life threatening back then. Food poisoning, plagues, famines, and general misery was quite common. It's true we haven;t solved all the problems today and we've also created a few new problems. But there is much we take for granted today and simply overlook that would come back to haunt us if we were to thrust ourselves back into primitive (and not so primitive) times.

For me, I'll pass on going primitive. A like a lot of the new stuff we have today.

As far as technology only carrying us so far and then destroying itself, on what do you base this assumption ? I highly doubt it's going to destroy itself in the future. The only thing that will destroy itself are people;e via ignorance, arrogance, greed and sheer stupidity Those are the three most destructive forces on the planet and they are abundant within the human race.

Ok I will rephrase my statement, we will destroy ourselves with our technology. We will use it to wage war and inevitably destroy ourselves or at least the world as we know it. Which in turn will lead us back to the beginning, as human beings we are eternally trapped in a paradox so to speak. That is if any of us survive, we are parasitic by nature after all. Humans feed off of their surroundings until all is depleted, which includes our brethren. So in a way not only are we parasitic but cannibalistic as well.

[n2ize]

Ok I will rephrase my statement, we will destroy ourselves with our technology. We will use it to wage war and inevitably destroy ourselves or at least the world as we know it. Which in turn will lead us back to the beginning, as human beings we are eternally trapped in a paradox so to speak. That is if any of us survive, we are parasitic by nature after all. Humans feed off of their surroundings until all is depleted, which includes our brethren. So in a way not only are we parasitic but cannibalistic as well.

I don't entirely agreee. The human race may someday reach a point of extinction, either by it's own hand or from natural causes. Who knows for sure what the future has in store. One thinf for sure. Nothing is certain.

[AE6IP]

I wouldnt be so quick to snap as we may all go back to a primitive lifestyle someday. Technology will only carry us so far before destroying itself.

Perhaps.

To many people have become reliant on technology and could not fend for themselves if necessary. I have a few relatives that live off of their land and that alone. I tell you this they would not call it primitive but rather freedom.

You may have such relatives, but the people you describe below are not them.

They have solar power, windmills,watermill, hunt/fish(for food not sport), farm for themselves and commercially (to an extent). Granted they have indoor pluming but no TV or radios. Ill tell you what that is peaceful, no Tv or any other distraction just me and a book in the woods. I dont know if I could live like they do but it makes for a nice vacation.:p Now If I were to hit the lottery Id live like that except I would not rely on the land alone.:D

People with solar power and windmills are rarely self-sufficient. Unless by 'solar power' you mean only heat, they've got a lot of equipment that'll eventually wear out and need replacement. Likewise, windmills and watermills have moving parts that need lubrication, wear out, and need replacement.

technology is a genie you can't put back in the bottle.

[kb3laz]

Perhaps.



You may have such relatives, but the people you describe below are not them.



People with solar power and windmills are rarely self-sufficient. Unless by 'solar power' you mean only heat, they've got a lot of equipment that'll eventually wear out and need replacement. Likewise, windmills and watermills have moving parts that need lubrication, wear out, and need replacement.

technology is a genie you can't put back in the bottle.

Ok I see your point to an extent. Maybe its not 100% self sustaining but they are closer than we are, lol. Also windmills have been use to create power since before there was electric, they were used to pump water.

As for the genie part you cant put it back but once it becomes free it is mortal, there for it can die.

[KG4JYD]

Taxes have always been paid. They are referred to in the Bible. They are nothing new or unusual.

People have always complained about taxes, too. That is not likely to stop either.I am not complaining about having to pay a minimal amount of taxes. I am complaining about an unjust income tax which ROBS be of the fruits of my labor which is the same thing that slavery did.

[k2bkt]

What does being self sufficient have to do with income tax? Not relying on the government to do everything doesn't mean you have to live a primitive life style.

Private enterprise always does better than the government, which always caters to the lowest common denominator, doesn't allow open competition and doesn't have to worry about a bottom line.

Can we exist without the post office? Of course. UPS does a much better job than USPS - how long do you wait on line in a UPS office, and how long do you wait on line at the post office?

How many great inventions has the government come up with? Did Marconi have a zillion dollar research grant from the government? Did Edison? Did Morse? Bell? Maxwell? Telsa? Faraday?


The government started regulating 'energy production' to death and look what happened - 30 years and NOT ONE STEP FORWARD. If it was up to private companies and inventors, would we be paying $5.00 a gallon? No - we would have had nuclear power plants and electric cars by 1980.

Smart people keep us advancing, not the government and its punitive, confiscatory WASTEFUL taxation.

[K7JEM]

Can we exist without the post office? Of course. UPS does a much better job than USPS - how long do you wait on line in a UPS office, and how long do you wait on line at the post office?

How many great inventions has the government come up with? Did Marconi have a zillion dollar research grant from the government? Did Edison? Did Morse? Bell? Maxwell? Telsa? Faraday?



I'm not sure any entity could stay in business if it had to deliver envelopes door to door for 42 cents. UPS may do a better job than the PO, but the minimum charge they have to deliver a package is around $6.

All of the inventors you mentioned lived 100 years ago, or more. Single source invention is pretty much gone today, taken over by the large research arms of large corporations.

Joe

[K7JEM]

I am not complaining about having to pay a minimal amount of taxes. I am complaining about an unjust income tax which ROBS be of the fruits of my labor which is the same thing that slavery did.

The effects of slavery were many, including robbery. Income tax is not like slavery in so many ways, and only like it in a couple. Income tax is more like robbery or extortion, but even then there are differences.

Joe

[k2bkt]

K7JEM - Joe -

Shut down the post office and see what happens to the price of letters.

Yes, those inventors lived 100 years ago. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates did not, nor did the guy who invented the spreadsheet. And today, cutting edge research is not done by the government - did the government invent new cancer treatments? Did the government invent the artificial heart? The kidney transplant? Innovation and advancement don't need the government.

'Government is the problem, not the solution'



"slavery had many effects"? We're not talking about any specific slavery at any particular time- slavery has existed always, and still exists today in some parts of the world. And when a person cannot toil on his own land with his own hands and mind his own business without being carted off to make license plates for the state and having his property confiscated, that is slavery.

[AE6IP]

Private enterprise always does better than the government, which always caters to the lowest common denominator, doesn't allow open competition and doesn't have to worry about a bottom line.


History shows this statement not to be true. As I mentioned earlier, take a look at the history of private fire fighting companies in New York City, for a very good example.

Unregulated private enterprise has a bad habit of cheating, which is why we have regulation in the first place, for example.

Nor does private enterprise or the marketplace provide any mechanism for adjudicating between conflicting rights.

Private police forces are nearly always abused. See, for instance, the history of the Pinkerton relationship with labor.

Private armies are worse than private police forces.

Without the rule of law, civilization reverts to "might makes right", and so private enterprise is a bad way to make or enforce law.

If you think UPS always does better than USPS, I welcome you to try and send a single page document via UPS and see how close you can get to the rate charged by the USPS. Bulk carriers are more efficient for unpredictable bulk delivery. A postal service is more efficient for routine day-to-day delivery, and this is, pretty much, the system we have now.

Read about the canal system in England, or the history of toll roads in the United States, to see why governments are, and should be, in the business of providing transportation infrastructure.

Private industry has a terrible track record at maintaining public lands for public use, even when under government supervision.

And all that fire fighting, policing, law making, road maintaining, and postal delivery has to be paid for somehow. Some of it, like the postal service is paid for by user fees, but some of it, like fire fighting and policing don't have natural user-fee models, and so are paid for by taxation.

[K7JEM]

K7JEM - Joe -

Shut down the post office and see what happens to the price of letters.

You think that UPS will charge less than 42 cents to deliver a one ounce letter across country, and door to door?



"slavery had many effects"? We're not talking about any specific slavery at any particular time- slavery has existed always, and still exists today in some parts of the world. And when a person cannot toil on his own land with his own hands and mind his own business without being carted off to make license plates for the state and having his property confiscated, that is slavery.

That is NOT slavery, it is something else. Find out what slavery actually is. It is being forced to work at a job with no pay, one that you might not want to be doing, and being under the total control of another. You have no possessions or money. You have no rights.

Taxes are mandated by law, so when you don't pay them, you break the law. You might be incarcerated for that, or maybe not. But either way, the reason you are hauled off to jail is because you are breaking a law, not because "income tax=slavery".

Now you can argue whether or not tax laws are fair, or what the punishments should be, but you cannot argue that tax laws are akin to slavery, they just don't match up.

Joe

[AE6IP]

How many great inventions has the government come up with?

A few. The intarweb comes to mind. The Von Neumann architecture (IE, the modern computer) does as well. GPS. If I spent a few minutes, I could probably think of others.

There's an interesting phenomena at work in science right now: as government funding for research has tried up and researchers have had to turn to industry for funding, so has advance in basic science.

[k2bkt]

So how did 'basic science' always manage to advance until 40 years ago without draining tax dollars to do it?

But again the conversation is getting skewed - nobody said anarchy was an option, or that we don't need the government to manage police and fire and defense - those things are provided for by the Constitution. As is the post office, so maybe that isn't the best example. Regardless, but if we paid 10% of our wages in taxes that were used only for what the Constitution actually provides for, we'd have no problem paying more for a letter than 0.42. I'd glady pay $2.00 for a letter in exchange for my taxes dropping by 30%.

BTW, that the internet ended up being a huge success had nothing to do with the government - it was completely unintentional on their part. It was private enterprise that made it what it is today. (In spite of what Al Gore claims...)

As far as slavery goes, if I could keep all my wages, I would not work the job I have to work at - I would find something less stressful. And if you think you own property, try not paying your income tax for money you earned through the fruit of your own labor done with your own resources on your own land. You'll find that you won't be able to sell it...

[N2RJ]

Can we exist without the post office? Of course. UPS does a much better job than USPS - how long do you wait on line in a UPS office, and how long do you wait on line at the post office?

First of all, in our USPS post offices here in northwest NJ, the lines are short. 2-3 people at most.

The reason that UPS lines are shorter are that UPS only deals with packages and urgent letters rather than first class mail.

If you tossed first class mail to UPS they'd be just as bogged down as the post office!

The very reason that the USPS lines are so long is because Brooklyn and New York is overpopulated and the price for the service can't be beat. It's the same reason that COstco (a private company) has such long lines at checkout.

The USPS post office is also in every town and city. My closest UPS location is 30 miles away!

I don't know about you but my experiences with UPS have been subpar, and certainly worse than the post office. UPS has damaged packages I've received many times and a $5000 SteppIR delivered to my neighbors' house even though my house number was clearly written on a reflective sign right by my driveway. Furthermore, when I lived in Queens the UPS guy would never ring my doorbell. He would just write out an infonotice and stick it on the door and quietly sneak away. Then when I tell the person at the customer counter that this keeps happening, his attitude was "eh, maybe you were on the dumper... I'm sure my guy rang the bell." Just to check I waited inside to see if he'd ring the bell, and lo and behold I caught the UPS guy doing the same hit and run nonsense. Is that what you call better service?

I'd say given the amount of mail it has to handle, the USPS does a fantastic job. Never had ANYTHING lost or damaged by the postal service.

BTW, I think you and my XYL were at the same VE session at KCRA. You both have sequential callsigns (hers is KC2OYY).

[N2RJ]

K7JEM - Joe -

Shut down the post office and see what happens to the price of letters.

I have a better one - take away Government regulation on energy trading and see what happens to gas prices.

hmmmmmmmmmmmm..........

[N4VGB]

I have a better one - take away Government regulation on energy trading and see what happens to gas prices.


What regulations do you believe exist?

[AE6IP]

So how did 'basic science' always manage to advance until 40 years ago without draining tax dollars to do it?

It didn't. Basic science has been funded by the state at some level since kings were patrons to 'natural philosophers'.

BTW, that the internet ended up being a huge success had nothing to do with the government - it was completely unintentional on their part. It was private enterprise that made it what it is today. (In spite of what Al Gore claims...)

Wrong again. DARPA was getting ready to kill the internet, because it wasn't research any more and they didn't feel like funding it. At that time it was small enough that it could have easily died. It was mostly through NSF net, mainly funded as a consequence of Gore's support, that we kept the net alive long enough to get it out of the hands of the military and into a position where it could be commercialized. Had Gore not come along and had the foresight to push for that funding, we'd have let the internet die on the vine, and commercial networking would have returned to the hodgepodge of vendor-specific, non-interoperable networks it was in the 70s.

It was, by the way, if you wish to be precise, pornography that made it what it is today, commercially. Early attempts at commercialization, outside of the porn industry, were failures, and look embarrassing in comparison. As late as 2000, a good decade after we'd allowed commercialization, nobody other than the pornographers had a handle on how to make money off the net.

But even the commercialization has relied heavily on government funding, as many of the ensuing technologies were developed out of research grants. Had the government subsidies (which still continue) ended any time prior to 2000, the net would probaby have died on the vine.

[N2RJ]

What regulations do you believe exist?

The "enron loophole" that exists now has served to exempt electronic energy futures trading from US regulations. Ever since that horrible law was enacted, oil has been going up with no end in sight and with no plausible explanation as to why.

[N4VGB]

The "enron loophole" that exists now has served to exempt electronic energy futures trading from US regulations. Ever since that horrible law was enacted, oil has been going up with no end in sight and with no plausible explanation as to why.

And exactly how do you plan to force the rest of the world to comply with U.S. regulations? :confused:

[N2RJ]

And exactly how do you plan to force the rest of the world to comply with U.S. regulations? :confused:

Oil is still traded in US dollars, and the futures market is run by US traders.

[n9yb]

Oil is still traded in US dollars, and the futures market is run by US traders.



If you created an impediment to that....it would simple go to a European exchange and be denominated in Euros.

[N4VGB]

Oil is still traded in US dollars, and the futures market is run by US traders.

And Hong Kong already has a commodities futures market and will have a crude oil futures segment traded in U.S. dollars in place by Jan. '09.

Seeing a plan taking shape here Ryan!?

Or did those Dumbocrat Congress critters really have you believing they were about to accomplish something by "cracking down" on crude oil futures traders in the U.S. marketplace during their silly little hearings!?

Well it looks like they did accomplish something, got the market moved!!! Oh well, the WalMart plan has worked so well that we may as well deliver the final blow to ourselves. Conquered by China and Mexico in concert and the firing of a single shot in anger was not necessary.

[k6wcs]

I suggest that we vote for all folks that will eliminate any and all taxes. Oh! By the way, if your property happens to catch fire, you will need to pay for the fire fighting and they are likely to take only cash. Also, it is likely there will be no police so you will have to conger up your own force to deal with those that choose to relieve you of the responsiblity of watching your assets. Plus no military to keep those that would like to take over our country. Yup! Sure works for me. No taxes is an absolutely wonderful idea.

[W4HAY]

Mallard Fillmore (http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/mallard/2000/MFT20080703.jpg)