SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic

Posted: Jul 30 2007 06:53 pm

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56855

This could set off a very dangerous chain of events.

Basically, this guy just proved that Income tax is unlawful, as there are no provisions for it under the constitution.

If americans all stopped paying Income Tax, then many government services would shut down. Some may not be a bad thing. (Homeland Security, ATF, CIA, etc.) BUt others could hurt us all. (Public education, Public Health Care, Social Security, etc.)

Gives you something to think about.

Posted: Jul 30 2007 07:12 pm

This could have drastic and far-reaching effects, including the death of society as we know it.

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

Fuck income tax and the entitlements it supports. Fuck the IRS right in its ass.

Posted: Jul 30 2007 07:24 pm

This story strikes me as fishy. Either it's an outright lie or some sort of misrepresentation of some sort. Anyone who's ever taken any class worth a damn on American governement or the American philosophy of government could tell you that the right of the government to levy taxes is not specifically enumerated in the Constitution. This is very old news. The tax has been challenged numerous times, including BEFORE THE CONSTITUTION WAS EVER WRITTEN. In 1786, there was Shays' Rebellion, where a bunch of farmers armed themselves and refused to pay taxes. The rebellion was eventually put down, but not before it had highlighted the severs flaws and complete ineffectiveness of the Articles of Confederation. These challenges inevitably fail, because the Founding Fathers clearly intended for taxes to be levied.

Another thing to remember is that the Constitution is a living document and the Founding Fathers intentionally left it ambiguous in places. In particular, one should pay special attention to Article I, Section 8, Clause 18:

"The Congress shall have power …To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."

Taxes fall into this department. In order for the government to carry out its duties, it requires money. This money is acquired via taxes. This is a very simple concept and I find hard to believe that this shyster was acquitted. Actually, I guess I don't. The decision was made in Louisiana, a state not known for its intelligence by a jury of people who probably 1) were confused by the defendant's long-winded technical explanations of why he shouldn't pay taxes and 2) were eager to hand down a ruling that would potentially allow their worthless asses to stop paying taxes.

By the defendant's own argument, this is a Constitutional issue. I can tell you right now what's going to happen. This case will work its way up through the appeals courts until it reaches The U.S. Supreme Court, Tom Cryer will get his ass handed to him, and everyone who followed his lead of not paying taxes will end up looking like total fucking pricks... and they will be.

Posted: Jul 30 2007 08:10 pm

Syd Lexia wrote:

This story strikes me as fishy. Either it's an outright lie or some sort of misrepresentation of some sort. Anyone who's ever taken any class worth a damn on American governement or the American philosophy of government could tell you that the right of the government to levy taxes is not specifically enumerated in the Constitution. This is very old news. The tax has been challenged numerous times, including BEFORE THE CONSTITUTION WAS EVER WRITTEN. In 1786, there was Shays' Rebellion, where a bunch of farmers armed themselves and refused to pay taxes. The rebellion was eventually put down, but not before it had highlighted the severs flaws and complete ineffectiveness of the Articles of Confederation. These challenges inevitably fail, because the Founding Fathers clearly intended for taxes to be levied.

Another thing to remember is that the Constitution is a living document and the Founding Fathers intentionally left it ambiguous in places. In particular, one should pay special attention to Article I, Section 8, Clause 18:

"The Congress shall have power …To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."

Taxes fall into this department. In order for the government to carry out its duties, it requires money. This money is acquired via taxes. This is a very simple concept and I find hard to believe that this shyster was acquitted. Actually, I guess I don't. The decision was made in Louisiana, a state not known for its intelligence by a jury of people who probably 1) were confused by the defendant's long-winded technical explanations of why he shouldn't pay taxes and 2) were eager to hand down a ruling that would potentially allow their worthless asses to stop paying taxes.

By the defendant's own argument, this is a Constitutional issue. I can tell you right now what's going to happen. This case will work its way up through the appeals courts until it reaches The U.S. Supreme Court, Tom Cryer will get his ass handed to him, and everyone who followed his lead of not paying taxes will end up looking like total fucking pricks... and they will be.

Well met.

I, for one, am appalled at the fact that there are so many who would feel this way about taxes, as necessary as they are. If given the option, I don't feel many would volunteer their money toward a "charity tax". Our ecomical state is poor enough, let alone some ridiculous ruling whereupon taxes would no longer be mandatory. It does raise a good question about things. As Syd stated, it'll make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where lohic shall prevail as well as a remaining interest in our society as we know it.

Posted: Jul 30 2007 08:27 pm

Personally, I believe in taxes, though I think the entire tax system needs to rebuilt from scratch.

I know right now in Congress, a few senators are trying to get support for a bill that would redo the tax brackets, so that all brackets will pay the same ammount, as well as plugging up many loopholes that corporations exploit. This is the right path for tax reform, rather then trying to eliminate it.

Posted: Jul 30 2007 08:32 pm

I thought because of Shay's Rebellion and the problems wih the Articles of Confederation that the Constitution DID give the government the right to levy taxes? Regardless, this has to be a fake report because no court would ever rule against taxes unless the judge wanted to lose their source of income.

As for a "charity tax", Massachusetts has an optional tax and I'm willing to bet that less than 10% of people pay it. I have no way to back this up as I don't feel like doing research, but the number's gotta be really low.

Posted: Jul 30 2007 09:50 pm

I hope that the Tax Brackets get redone.

Posted: Jul 30 2007 11:34 pm

Syd is correct.

2010 SLF Tag Champ Joined: Jun 07 2006 Posts: 12294

Joined: Jun 19 2007 Location: backwoods, PA Posts: 17

Sounds to me that the reason that this case may have confused a jury is the fact that this Cryer guy probably laid it on thick about what part of a workers wages should be considered "taxable profit" (I think that this was a bigger issue than the article made it seem). He probably ran around spouting off things about "bodily wear and tear" and the cost of other intangibles and that was enough for the people to say that taxes weren't fair. In my experience, the government does whatever the fuck they want anyway, a decent amount of which is unconstitutional AND unnecessary (unlike taxes).....Like the wiretap in my bedroom that I know is there, but can't quite find yet.

Posted: Jul 31 2007 02:32 pm

I think that Cryer and the jurors should all hang for treason.