eklypse0 (August 29, 2008 at 12:23 pm)

Military spending is _way_ out of control now. Far beyond the governments limitations of their lawful means. Lawfully, any excess spending for Military and etc needs to be brought up in Congress as a Bill as a Direct Tax that must be apportioned between the states. This is something that needs to be handled Annually or Bi-Annually. It is not something that is a 'permanent until repealed', but something that requires renewing.

eklypse0 (August 29, 2008 at 12:12 pm)

It wasn't misapplied for nearly 100 years, it just started getting momentum after 1954, when the IRS was founded. Before that time, less then 10% of the population paid Income Taxes. So it was only after the IRS was created that the laws started being misrepresented. "Your liqueur tax is a 100% enforced tax. Income Tax is 100% voluntary. The two are as different as night and day." Congressional Record

eklypse0 (August 29, 2008 at 4:43 am)

The same lawyers have been known to get sanctions and dismantle IRS employee carriers. in the process of defending their clients within Federal Courtrooms.

sk8erchase (August 29, 2008 at 4:42 am)

do you know what income tax pays!!?? when you get money its not yours its loaned to you through private banks, with interest!!! the interest rate is determined by how much money is being put out, BY THE PRIVATE BANKS income tax is paid to cover that debt from the interest and goes strait to THE PRIVATE BANK OWNERS POCKETS!!!!! its all an unconstitutional scam that the american people NEED to wake up to soon before its too late

eklypse0 (August 29, 2008 at 4:39 am)

How about Federal Court Case James and Pamela Moran were convicted of 64 charges of 'tax crimes' in 2004 of a Federal Court Room with a possible jail time of 108 years. The case was appealed and they were found not guilty on every single one of the 64 charges in 2007.

eklypse0 (August 29, 2008 at 4:26 am)

You haven't read the history on why it was passed. It was passed so that Profit separated from Capitol is taxable. It was not before because it would have been a tax on property. The main situation was primarily due to Railroad investment which the courts decided was not taxable. Again, by 1945, 23 years after the 16th amendment, less then 4% of the American population paid an income tax. If it was a general tax on receipts, it would have been closer to 96%, instead.

eklypse0 (August 29, 2008 at 4:21 am)

[Article 1 Gives the power to tax] But only the power to tax indirect, or direct though apportionment. It doesn't allow the government to tax rights. That would interfere with the right for private contract. [16th amendment gives it the power to tax incomes] Incomes as defined are any federal privileged source of money. The Money is not what is taxed, but is the measure of the tax. [Title 26] Title 26 is not 'positive law'. Therefor it is a special or limited law, not a general law.

ColBrokov (August 29, 2008 at 4:21 am)

"Just because Congress doesn't complain about it is no excuse." Ever hear the saying that silence is consent? Isn't it congress's job to pass laws? And wouldn't it be their job to clarify the intention of a law if it were, as you are charging, misapplied for nearly 100 years? Couldn't it be that Congress saw their intention correctly applied by the supreme court, and thus did nothing? Honestly, isn't that a more reasonable interpretation of the facts?

ColBrokov (August 29, 2008 at 3:59 am)

What don't you get? Article 1 gives congress the power to tax and the 16th amendment gives it the power to tax incomes. The Supreme court has interpreted the law to mean individual incomes. Title 26 section 1 of the US Code details the income tax and has routinely been upheld by the courts as such. Don't like it? Start a movement to repeal the 16th amendment, as was done with the 18th amendment.

ColBrokov (August 29, 2008 at 3:53 am)

Yeah, check out the 16th amendment. It was passed explicitly to make the income tax constitutional. Again, Tell me you don't like the tax, tell me you want to change it, but don't tell me that it isn't real. It's there for anyone who cares to read it.