Archive for the ‘Taxes’ Category
by Nicholas Testaccio
I have struggled over the last few months to complete an article. It’s not because I don’t have something to contribute to the latest problems. It’s certainly not because there aren’t many issues that should be commented on in the face of the propaganda that is being spewed out to the general public. It’s definitely not because there isn’t a myriad of questions that never seem to be asked.
I am frozen by the fact that despite the evidence
placed right in front of us, most Americans will do nothing at all, while some
will do nothing more than contribute to the downfall by either applying the
same methods that are proven failures, or actually promoting the divide.
One of the issues we face today regards immigration. Let’s
set the record straight right from the start so that readers will go into this
article with a clear picture. I am not against lawful immigration wherein a country
has the Sovereign authority to protect its borders, and its people from harm of
any type.
The Declaration of Independence reads that “[King George] has endeavoured to prevent
the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for
Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their
migrations hither…”
At the time that our first law was ratified, the
population of the Colonies was approximately Thirteen Million people who occupied approximately Four Hundred Thirty Thousand, square miles,
or more than Two Hundred Seventy-Five
Million acres.
America was sparsely populated, and would certainly
benefit from an influx of people, particularly those who would be needed
tradesmen. There was also the fact that Westward of what was to become the
United States, was a vast landmass. The Founders were cognizant of the fact
that there were Hundreds of Millions of
acres that could become productive parcels of land.
Simply put, the Colonies needed an influx of migrants
who were capable, adventurous, and hungry for Liberty as it was hitherto unavailable
to the World’s population. America needed immigrants willing, and able to
create a great nation.
Do we need migrants today that are unskilled? Do we
need to have millions come across our borders who pillage our coffers? Do we
need to have those entering the country and shouting that we should leave here
as it is no longer our country? Do we need to have violent gang members coming
here to establish their brand of crime?
The answers to these questions should be obvious. We
need to protect our sovereignty, and not allow this nation to become a staging
ground for civil war, and the loss of all our rights.
Next up is the question of taxation. Despite what may
or may not be believed about this point of law, taxation as it is today saps
billions of dollars out of the economy and accomplishes next to nothing other
than pilfering the wealth of the nation in order to promote an oligarchy. It is
done by convincing the people that taxing provides for the running of government,
offers assistance to the needy, and a host of other, often unnecessary, and
unconstitutional acts.
Taxation as it is applied today is unlawful to begin
with. As the Supreme Court stated in Stanton v Baltic that “it was settled that the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no
new power of taxation”. So why are we paying a direct tax on the wages, or
income we receive?
In 1947, undersecretary of the Treasury Beardsley Ruml
concluded that if we start withholding small amounts of money from paychecks of
Americans that they would simply go along with it. 26 U.S.C. requires that the
Secretary send, by December 31 of that particular year, a notice to anyone who
owes money to the government. Ruml reasoned that people would not voluntarily
comply with a large bill received at the end of the year. However, taken in small
doses there would not be any pushback.
While there is no law that anyone can find that
requires the individual living and working in the United States to pay a direct
tax on the money he earns, the government takes Trillions of dollars from the American people by the hands of an
unchartered agency that the Supreme Court has stated was not created by any
organic act of Congress. It simply exists to terrorize the public into handing
over their property to an out of control government.
So, the question often comes, why do people who don’t pay taxes go to jail? Simply put, we currently lack the courage, spirit, and knowledge to act as the Founders of this nation did and had hoped that future generations would. However, there are a few out there who rise to the occasion, listen, comprehend, and act accordingly; see The Government v Whitey Harrell.
What Marcy Brooks, the foreman in the above case, did was
to go beyond the indoctrination, and take a stand for justice. That jury did
something that most would never consider. They rendered a just decision based
in fact as applied to law, and justice.
Next up, the legal profession and the courts. Those
who opposed the Constitution during the ratification debates realized that given
time, and the position that they were granted, the judiciary would corrupt the
rule of law, and centralize power to the government. It should be fairly
obvious that we now have a judiciary that does not follow the limited delegated
authority granted by We the People in our Constitution. The judges placed in
such high positions work to implement their own agenda, and thereby place
liberty in jeopardy.
Anyone who has gone through the court system can tell
you that it does not serve justice at all, it functions to create a criminal
base, and therefore wealth for those who belong to the private organization
known as the Bar. It is also creating a class of elites who are not brought to
justice for any of their crimes.
While I could go on about the condition of our legal
system, none said it better than H.L. Menchen who wrote; “All the extravagance and incompetence of our present government is
due, in the main, to lawyers, and, in part at least, to good ones. They are
responsible for nine-tenths of the useless and vicious laws that now clutter the
statute-books, and for all the evils that go with the vain attempt to enforce
them. Every ...
No Comments »
He is back! And so are we.
RTR is proud to back the man Dr. Ron Paul this coming election. Come on America! Restore The Republic. Vote for Ron Paul 2012.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUNIeOB0whI=320&h=240]
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMxca8hhGhs=320&h=240]
No Comments »
We haven't posted any Ron Paul Speeches, videos, in a while on the main page of RTR. This is a very good interview with the good doctor in which he explains the causes and cures of the "Crisis" are living currently.
If only his colleagues on Capital Hill would listen. "Obey The Constitution" Damn Right.
Oh wait a minute, they cant obey the Constitution, that would make them "Domestic Terrorists". The Modern Militia Movement.
Also another interesting video posted "The British Ron Paul" Mr. Hannan has been getting alot of attention lately on the internet.
Remember, The Bank of England and the Federal Reserve are not government owned/controlled organizations, and do not act within the public's interest, but act in their own. Spread The Word.
RTR
No Comments »
That's right! After a trial of a hearing on a Florida Bar Association complaint alleging that Charles Chuck Behm, a Florida attorney, had violated bar rules by committing a criminal act by refusing to file federal income tax returns since 1999 Judge Tyree Boyer ruled that Behm committed no criminal act.
The Florida Bar was obviously assisted by either DOJ, the IRS or both because its presentation, right down to including the standard name calling and the stale half truths was DOJ SOP. From opening statement to close the DOJ's fingerprints were all over the case. The only new twist was DOJ's latest slam against patriots, introducing a new name for what it calls anti-government groups like "tax protesters", "tax defiers" and, now "Constitutionalists"!! (Behm's defense attorney, TA's Tom Cryer, had plenty to say about that in his response.)
In his cross examination of the Bar's "expert witness", Cryer was able to force the witness to admit that he could not cite any specific authority making Behm liable for the income tax and that the absence of such a statute is not among the official list of "frivolous arguments". The witness also admitted on cross that he did not really have a clear definition of "income", that he knew of no lawful authority for the IRS's "zero basis" policy applied only to working Americans' gross receipts and that the zero basis for "zero basis" is not on the IRS's list of "frivolous arguments."
Chuck Behm then testified that his research into the code and Supreme Court authorities forced him to conclude that he is not liable for the federal income tax and, therefore, not among those required to file returns; that he had no income within the meaning of the Constitution and the Sixteenth Amendment and that he is engaging in no activity that is within the federal government's power to tax. Chuck was very thorough and precise in describing his research and the authorities, making a very clear and convincing account of his command of the subject.
In her closing, the Bar Counsel argued that people depend upon attorneys to set an example by following and supporting the government and its laws. Cryer rebutted that argument by contending that people do not depend on attorneys to support the government, but to support the Constitution, to protect their rights and to stand up to the government when it abuses either.
Judge Boyer ruled that Behm had committed no criminal act by refusing to file federal income taxes, but the case is far from over. He also ruled that the failure to file was unlawful although he could give no specific basis for that finding. Now the case goes to the Florida Supreme Court for its ruling and in that process the Court will be challenged to show what law subjects Behm to liability and, hence, a lawful duty to file returns and pay income taxes.
Free Enterprise Society
Steve Hempfling, Director
4 Comments »
Ron Paul Before the House Financial Services Committee, Humphrey Hawkins Hearing, February 25, 2008
Mr. Chairman,
We find ourselves mired in the deepest economic crisis to afflict this country since the Great Depression. Yet, despite the failure of all the interventionist efforts to date to do anything to improve the economy, each week seems to bring new proposals for yet more bailouts, more funding facilities, and more of the same discredited Keynesian ideas. There are still relatively few policymakers who understand the roots of the current crisis in the Federal Reserve's monetary policy. No one in government is willing to take the blame; instead we transfer it onto others. We blame the crisis on greedy bankers and mortgage lenders, on the Chinese for being too thrifty and providing us with capital, or on consumers who aren't spending as much as the government thinks they should.
One aspect that needs to come to the fore once again is that of moral hazard. When the government acts as a backstop to insure losses that come about from making poor decisions, such poor decision-making is rewarded, and thereby further encouraged in the future. Such backstopping took place through the implicit government guarantee of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, it takes place through FDIC deposit insurance that encourages deposits in the fundamentally unsound fractional-reserve banking system, and it has reached its zenith in the TARP program and its related bailouts.
When banking giants are reimbursed for their losses through redistribution of taxpayer money, what lesson do we expect them to learn? Can anyone in Washington say with a straight face that these banks will shape up their business practices when they are almost guaranteed billions of dollars in taxpayer funds? Even if this does provide a temporary lifeline, it only delays the inevitable collapse of a banking system built on an unsustainable model. Fractional-reserve banking is completely dependent on faith in the banks' abilities to repay depositors, and when that ability is thrown into doubt, the house of cards comes crashing down. The Federal Reserve may be able to manage public confidence, but confidence only goes so far. When banks are required to hold a maximum of ten percent of their deposits on reserve, the system is fundamentally insolvent. Such a system cannot be propped up or bailed out, except at the cost of massive creation of money and credit, which would result in a hyperinflation that would completely destroy our economy.
Chairman Bernanke and others in positions of authority seem to gloss over these systemic instabilities and assume an excessively rosy outlook on the economy. I believe we are at another major economic crossroad, where the global financial system will have to be fundamentally rethought. The post-Bretton Woods dollar-standard system has proven remarkably resilient, lasting longer than the gold-exchange system which preceded it, but the current economic crisis has illustrated the unsustainability of the current dollar-based system. To think that the economy will begin to recover by the end of this year is absurd. The dollar's supposed strength exists only because of the weakness of other currencies. The Fed's increase of the monetary base and establishment of "temporary" funding facilities has set the stage for hyperinflation, and it remains to be seen what results.
If banks begin to lend their increased reserves, we will see the first steps towards hyperinflation. Now that the Fed has increased the monetary base, it finds itself under pressure to withdraw these funds at some point. The question, however, is when? If it withdraws too soon, banks' balance sheets collapse, if too late, massive inflation will ensue. As in previous crises, the Fed's inflationary actions leave it compelled to take action that will severely harm the economy through either deflation or hyperinflation. Had the Fed not begun interfering 18 months ago, we might have already seen a recovery in the economy by now. Bad debts would have been liquidated, inefficient firms sold off and their resources put to better use elsewhere. As it is, I believe any temporary uptick in economic indicators nowadays will likely be misinterpreted as economic recovery rather than the result of Federal Reserve credit creation. Until we learn the lesson that government intervention cannot heal the economy, and can only do harm, we will never stabilize the economy or get on the road to true recovery.
2 Comments »
Recent Form Posts