by Fogyreef » Tue Sep 27, 2005 5:02 pm
I'll get the obvious ones out of the way:<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>How will the country run without our tax money?</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br>The simple answer is that it doesn't run on our "tax money" in the first place. Anytime you hear about wasting tax payer money, that's just a myth. The government's own report proves that no Income Tax revenue goes to paying Federal salaries, buying bombs, funding Nasa, NOTHING. Read this: <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.taxstatement.cc/grace.asp" target="top">With two-thirds of everyone's personal income taxes wasted or not collected, 100 percent of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the Federal debt and by Federal Government contributions to transfer payments. In other words, all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent on the services which taxpayers expect from their Government. </a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br><br><br>Remember, the roads are paid by local gas taxes, schools are paid for by property taxes, etc. To answer the more involved question of where Federal paychecks and military funds actually do come from, you need to study the Federal Reserve Corporation of Puerto Rico for the answers. Just don't think your Income Tax pays a cent of that money.<br><br><br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Why don't they just write another law?</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br>Congress simply doesn't have the authority to write a law that imposes an Income Tax on us. Article 1 of the Constitution forces any Direct Tax, which includes the Income Tax, MUST be done through APPORTIONMENT, meaning that every citizen pays the same dollar figure. You pay $50, Bill Gates pays $50. It does NOT mean we all pay the same flat percentage, because that is not APPORTIONMENT. Your percentage is NOT the same dollar amount as Bill Gates' contribution.<br><br>Actually, it's a LOT more complicated than that, but let's crawl before we walk here.<br><br>It would take a constitutional amendment to allow Congress to lay at direct tax without apportionment.<br><br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>But wait a minute. Doesn't the 16th Amendment do just that?!</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br>It certainly appears that way when you read it, doesn't it: <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration."</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>However, go here and read the details surrounding the following Supreme Court decision: <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.usa-the-republic.com/revenue/true_history/Chap5.html" target="top">The TRUTH About the 16TH AMENDMENT</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Stanton vs Baltic Mining Co. 240 US 103, at 112 (1916)</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> "By the previous ruling, it was settled that <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong><!--EZCODE UNDERLINE START--><span style="text-decoration:underline">the Sixteenth Amendment conferred no new power of taxation</span><!--EZCODE UNDERLINE END--></strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--></em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->, but simply prohibited the previous complete and plenary power of income taxation, possessed by Congress, from the beginning, from being taken out of the category of indirect taxation, to which it inherently belonged..."<br><br><br>The 16th Amendment left the income tax as an indirect excise tax and is to be enforced as such. It is a tax on corporate incomes not requiring the tax to be apportioned! On privileges! This is not my opinion, but a Supreme Court ruling. An important point to remember, is that the Supreme Court rulings must be followed by all lesser courts in this country. That is why I rely almost exclusively on Supreme Court decisions. They cannot be overruled by lower courts!<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
