Cremation of Care

[southernmissouri2007]

Is the Cremation of Care a play like acting and actors or is it Satanism or is it both Im trying to prove to people that it is not just a play is it Symbolism ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cremation_of_Care

[southernmissouri2007]

Does anyone know thank you ?

[southernmissouri2007]

Republicans claim to be for lower taxes for everyone but is this realy true they may lower our income taxes but don't the Republicans raise other taxes that we pay like carbon taxes ?

[southernmissouri2007]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_tax

Why Do Republicans Want to Raise Taxes?
by Laurence M. Vance, September 6, 2011

http://www.fff.org/comment/com1109e.asp

How Republicans Raise Taxes
 


Daniel McCarthy     July 7th,

I thought Clark might have been too harsh on Thomas Sowell, but reading the column in question I have to agree with him. Sowell presents the Republicans as gullible innocents tricked by Democrats into raising taxes, when left to their own devices they would not only cut taxes but reduce spending, too. (When Sowell says, “Republicans complain about deficits and the national debt,” the implication is that they really want to do something about deficits and the debt, which can only mean raising taxes or cutting spending.) This is a fantasy. Over the last 30 years, Republicans have indeed cut taxes, but they have never reduced overall federal spending — instead they have financed government with vast deficits.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/2010/07/07/how-republicans-raise-taxes/

[America2]

Republicans claim to be for lower taxes for everyone but is this realy true they may lower our income taxes but don't the Republicans raise other taxes that we pay like carbon taxes ?

Yes, these people say these things b/c they want to say what other people's itching ears want to hear.

Remember too the GOP is *supposedly* the party of the Christians, even though none of the leaders on the GOP barely act Christian. And for that matter too, all the "religious right" members like Robertson and Falwell were trained in the mystery schools.

[southernmissouri2007]

Why doesn't Communism/Marxism/Socialism work ? The idea that everyone is equal and gets paid the same income or wages did this not work in the Soviet Union was there still a Rich/Wealthy Elite ? Marxists believe in collective ownership of the means of production but was there still Business management and owners in the Soviet Union ? Did the Soviet Union really have Income Equality thank you ?

Karl Marx and Frederick Engels

Manifesto
of the Communist Party
1848

II -- PROLETARIANS AND COMMUNISTS

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.

http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/classics/manifesto.html

[WLGarrison]

It works great in primitive hunter-gatherer societies, but complex societies require property rights to function.

[Paranoid Puppet Master]

Marxists believe whatever the Wall Street Bankers tell them to believe. Check out "Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution" by Antony Sutton - highly recommended.

Mirrored...

H.G. Wells Books

Zbigniew Brzezinski Two Books

Antony Sutton Books

George Orwell Books

[Dok]

Why doesn't Communism/Marxism/Socialism work ?

Because they are Jesuit ideas.

[EvadingGrid]

Because they are Jesuit ideas.

Your obsessed !

[egypt]

The 300 million murdered by it should have been asked before they died.

[Geolibertarian]

The most masterful refutation of Marxist socialism I know of is the following book by Single Tax advocate, Max Hirsch:

       http://books.google.com/books?id=D5QWAAAAYAAJ

[worcesteradam]

here is what i say to you if you are a Communist:
Start with the Rothschild and Rockefeller families, take their money off of them first.
If you are successful in impoverishing them, i will consider your ideas
until that point, leave my stuff alone

[RabidSheep]

The 300 million murdered by it should have been asked before they died.

Communism worked out great for those 300 million. (extreme sarcasm)

[Constitutionary]

Collectivism fails cuz it runs out of people to take things from.

Why work if someone is just going to provide it to you ?

This is why collectivism fails.

[Brocke]

It depends on what you mean by "work".

It worked for Stalin, Armand Hammer, the Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Schiffs, Warburgs, Morgans, Harrimans, and Milners.

Communism/Marxism/Socialism may not do what it purports to do but it works alright.

[Geolibertarian]

"Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite." -- John Kenneth Galbraith

[worcesteradam]

funny i thought capitalism was rewarding people for doing socially beneficial work

[Nailer]

just look at obama.LOL

His social security number was ran through E-Verify 'Flags' Obama's Social Security Number..

A closer look at the flag shows the checked reason for the mismatch notice: “SSA record does not verify. Other reason. SSA found a discrepancy in the record.”

After further investigation, we found out that the response is to be interpreted as “Special indicator present.”

As of August 2008, there were nine special indicator codes, eight of which are related to fraud:

False Identity
Noncitizen Not in Status
Multiple SSNs with Different Identities
Scrambled Earnings with New SSN Assigned
SSN Obtained Using Fraudulent Documentation
SSN Assignment Based on Harassment/Abuse/Life Endangerment
Fictitious Identity
Fraud – OIG Investigated
Fraud SSN Misuse


http://us2.campaign-archive1.com/?u=0c63abc741fff5c4813d80e0a&id=3fce429d69&e=8b6f594bd3

[southernmissouri2007]

What is the point of the Book Animal Farm by George Orwell it says some Animals are more equal than others and that the Pigs had most of the Apples annd the Milk and that the Pigs got richer while the other Animals got poorer what does this have to do with Communism/Soviet Union/Stalin/Stalinism were the Communist Party Leaders Wealthy/Rich in terms of having most of the money/wealth/resources ?

Animal Farm
George Orwell

 "Animal Farm" successfully presents how the mechanism of propaganda and brainwashing works in totalitarian regimes, by showing how the pigs could make the other animals believe practically anything. Responsible for the propaganda was Squealer, a pig that "could turn black into white". Squealer managed to change the rule from "all animals are equal" to" all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others". He managed to convince the other animals that it was for their sake that the pigs ate most of the apples and drank most of the milk, that leadership was "heavy responsibility" and therefore the animals should be thankful to Napoleon, that what they saw may have been something they "dreamed", and when everything else failed he would use the threat of " Jones returning" to silence the animals. In this simple but effective way, Orwell presents the tragedy and confusion of thought control to the extent that one seems better off simply believing that" Napoleon is always right".

http://bookreviews.nabou.com/reviews/animalfarm.html

[Freeski]

They changed with power. Amazing book.

[donnay]

"Four legs good, two legs baaad"

This should be required reading along with his other book, 1984.

"The key lesson is that the organization's bosses often manipulate the organization for their own benefit, and end up being as bad, if not worse, than the real or imaginary evils from which they are protecting their followers"

Sound familiar?

Synopsis here

[ekimdrachir]

The teachers confused me with all the 'this means this' and 'that means that' before I even read the book, it makes no sense to me. I get that certain things paralell reality, or past reality, but I don't get it. Just call them what they are don't turn them into animals!

[Letsbereal]

You got it mixed up with "Lord of the Flies" by William Golding.

[JT Coyoté]

There was a little known book written and published in 1850, that was a timely yet not intended, answer to Marx and Engels. It was authored by a frenchman named Fredrich Bastiat and is titled "The Law".

It must be understood from the onset that Fredrick Engels, was Marx's editor, much of Marx was edited and published posthumously by Engels... "He who has unbridled editorial control of any work, sets it's cadence and meaning in the end."

I suggest that everyone take an hour out of their day, and listen to G. Edward Griffin reading "The Law," by Fredrich Bastiat...

http://www.apfn.org/audio/thelaw.mp3

JTCoyoté

"Every science has for its basis a system of principles as
fixed and unalterable as those by which the universe is
regulated and governed. Man cannot make principles;
he can only discover them."
~Thomas Paine

[Charlie Prime]

Your obsessed !

I think you meant to write " You're " which is a contraction of " You are ".

"Your" is the possessive form of "You".

[Dok]

I think you meant to write " You're " which is a contraction of " You are ".

"Your" is the possessive form of "You".

  you made my day.

[JT Coyoté]

There was a little known book written and published in 1850, that was a timely yet not intended, answer to Marx and Engels. It was authored by a frenchman named Fredrich Bastiat and is titled "The Law".

It must be understood from the onset that Fredrick Engels, was Marx's editor, much of Marx was edited and published posthumously by Engels... "He who has unbridled editorial control of any work, sets it's cadence and meaning in the end."

I suggest that everyone take an hour out of their day, and listen to G. Edward Griffin reading "The Law," by Fredrich Bastiat...

http://www.apfn.org/audio/thelaw.mp3

JTCoyoté

"Every science has for its basis a system of principles as
fixed and unalterable as those by which the universe is
regulated and governed. Man cannot make principles;
he can only discover them."
~Thomas Paine

In his little 1850 pamphlet, Bastiat explains exactly why Socialism, Marxism/Communism, and of course, "crony style" protectionism, don't work, can't work. and will never work.

In 1848 he predicted the American civil war citing the causes as the growing use of government protectionist tariffs to exclusive companies, as well as the exploding slave trade in the United States.

The answer he arrives upon to the problems we all face today will surprise a few, but all will see the logic and self righting nature of the system he proposes...

Please give this little book, "The Law," a listen, it will be very enlightening I assure you.

JTCoyoté

"The most important element of a free
society, where individual rights are held
in the highest esteem, is the rejection of
the initiation of violence." ~Ron Paul

[Geolibertarian]

It was authored by a frenchman named Fredrich Bastiat

You may find the following of interest:

---------------------------------------

http://www.progress.org/archive/fold136.htm

The Broken Window

by Fred E. Foldvary
The Progress Report
2000

If someone throws a stone into a shop window, the owner needs to repair it. This puts people to work and increases total output. Since this creates jobs, would we be better off breaking lots of windows and repairing them?

Most folks would say this would be nonsense, since although it would employ labor, there would be no net benefit to society. Yet many similar schemes are promoted by politicians and supported by the public in the name of jobs, jobs, jobs!

This is the "broken window" fallacy exposed long ago by the French economist Frederic Bastiat in his essay Ce qu'on voit et ce qu'on ne voit pas, or "what is seen and what is not seen." Bastiat recognized that what economics should teach us is to understand the economic reality beneath the superficial appearance of everyday economic life.

What is seen is the broken window repairing and the workers that get employed, and the money they in turn spend. What is not seen is that these workers and resources would have been employed in something else if not for the broken window. What ultimately benefits society is not jobs but goods.

There is a minor economics classic book entitled Economics in One Lesson, by the late Henry Hazlitt. Much of the book elaborates on Bastiat, uncovering the unseen economic reality behind bad economic policy. Hazlitt points out that the public will never see the new suit that would have been made had it not been for the broken window.

War is a good example. War puts many people to work. It also puts people to death. After mass destruction, there is mass rebuilding, which is "good" for the economy. Does that make war productive? No, since they just rebuild what was there, or shift resources from other goods that would have added to what was there. Hazlitt noted that "the broken-window fallacy, under a hundred disguises, is the most persistent in the history of economics."

This is the fallacy involved when Congressmen resist closing a military base, because it would cost some jobs. What is not seen is the civilian uses that land could be put to, and the housing and jobs that would replace the useless military work.

Hazlitt noted that "everything we get, outside the free gifts of nature, must in some way be paid for." Government spending ultimately comes from taxes. What is seen is the benefits of the spending, and often they are truly benefits to some people. But what is not seen is the goods that would have been bought had the workers not been forced to pay the taxes from their wages. The public as a whole loses, because the gain to some is less than the overall cost to the taxpayers and consumers.

Another economist good at uncovering what is not seen was Henry George. George noted that workers superficially get paid in money. But in economic reality, they are exchanging labor for consumer goods. Superficially, a homeowner is paying interest on a mortgage. In economic reality, the rent from that land is being transferred to the lender who deposited money that was loaned out.

Superficially, rent control limits the rental paid to the landlord. In economic reality, the rent is not reduced, but split among the landlord and tenant. Superficially, we pay taxes on money income and on sales. In economic reality, wages are transferred from workers to landowners in the form of higher rents due to government-funded public works, and folks pay twice, once as rent and again as taxes.

Superficially, we are living in a wonderland of jobs, high tech, and a booming stock market. In economic reality, Americans are wasting a couple of trillion dollars a year from regulations and taxes. In economic reality, inflated land values and coming higher interest rates and other higher costs will someday cause a massive downturn and a depression. The volcanic forces are building up beneath the surface, where they are not seen.

That is the key function of economics: to help us see beneath the superficial appearance to the reality that can only be understood when we learn a bit of economics. We would then know how foolish it is to break windows just to make a job.

---------------------------------------

[Brocke]

There was a little known book written and published in 1850, that was a timely yet not intended, answer to Marx and Engels. It was authored by a frenchman named Fredrich Bastiat and is titled "The Law".

It must be understood from the onset that Fredrick Engels, was Marx's editor, much of Marx was edited and published posthumously by Engels... "He who has unbridled editorial control of any work, sets it's cadence and meaning in the end."

I suggest that everyone take an hour out of their day, and listen to G. Edward Griffin reading "The Law," by Fredrich Bastiat...

http://www.apfn.org/audio/thelaw.mp3

JTCoyoté

"Every science has for its basis a system of principles as
fixed and unalterable as those by which the universe is
regulated and governed. Man cannot make principles;
he can only discover them."
~Thomas Paine

Thank you!

That is one of the best descriptions of why our life, liberty and property are the most important things to protect and why we need the ability to use force to do so.

[egypt]

In his little 1850 pamphlet, Bastiat explains exactly why Socialism, Marxism/Communism, and of course, "crony style" protectionism, don't work, can't work. and will never work.

In 1848 he predicted the American civil war citing the causes as the growing use of government protectionist tariffs to exclusive companies, as well as the exploding slave trade in the United States.

The answer he arrives upon to the problems we all face today will surprise a few, but all will see the logic and self righting nature of the system he proposes...

Please give this little book, "The Law," a listen, it will be very enlightening I assure you.

JTCoyoté

"The most important element of a free
society, where individual rights are held
in the highest esteem, is the rejection of
the initiation of violence." ~Ron Paul

Thanks JT!

[egypt]

http://www.apfn.org/audio/thelaw.mp3

"...Socialists confuse affairs of society with Law..."

[JT Coyoté]

Actually egypt, these types confuse society with government... not the same at all and bodes no good.

You may find the following of interest:

---------------------------------------

http://www.progress.org/archive/fold136.htm

The Broken Window

by Fred E. Foldvary
The Progress Report
2000

If someone throws a stone into a shop window, the owner needs to repair it. This puts people to work and increases total output. Since this creates jobs, would we be better off breaking lots of windows and repairing them?

Most folks would say this would be nonsense, since although it would employ labor, there would be no net benefit to society. Yet many similar schemes are promoted by politicians and supported by the public in the name of jobs, jobs, jobs!

This is the "broken window" fallacy exposed long ago by the French economist Frederic Bastiat in his essay Ce qu'on voit et ce qu'on ne voit pas, or "what is seen and what is not seen." Bastiat recognized that what economics should teach us is to understand the economic reality beneath the superficial appearance of everyday economic life.

What is seen is the broken window repairing and the workers that get employed, and the money they in turn spend. What is not seen is that these workers and resources would have been employed in something else if not for the broken window. What ultimately benefits society is not jobs but goods.

There is a minor economics classic book entitled Economics in One Lesson, by the late Henry Hazlitt. Much of the book elaborates on Bastiat, uncovering the unseen economic reality behind bad economic policy. Hazlitt points out that the public will never see the new suit that would have been made had it not been for the broken window.

War is a good example. War puts many people to work. It also puts people to death. After mass destruction, there is mass rebuilding, which is "good" for the economy. Does that make war productive? No, since they just rebuild what was there, or shift resources from other goods that would have added to what was there. Hazlitt noted that "the broken-window fallacy, under a hundred disguises, is the most persistent in the history of economics."

This is the fallacy involved when Congressmen resist closing a military base, because it would cost some jobs. What is not seen is the civilian uses that land could be put to, and the housing and jobs that would replace the useless military work.

Hazlitt noted that "everything we get, outside the free gifts of nature, must in some way be paid for." Government spending ultimately comes from taxes. What is seen is the benefits of the spending, and often they are truly benefits to some people. But what is not seen is the goods that would have been bought had the workers not been forced to pay the taxes from their wages. The public as a whole loses, because the gain to some is less than the overall cost to the taxpayers and consumers.

Another economist good at uncovering what is not seen was Henry George. George noted that workers superficially get paid in money. But in economic reality, they are exchanging labor for consumer goods. Superficially, a homeowner is paying interest on a mortgage. In economic reality, the rent from that land is being transferred to the lender who deposited money that was loaned out.

Superficially, rent control limits the rental paid to the landlord. In economic reality, the rent is not reduced, but split among the landlord and tenant. Superficially, we pay taxes on money income and on sales. In economic reality, wages are transferred from workers to landowners in the form of higher rents due to government-funded public works, and folks pay twice, once as rent and again as taxes.

Superficially, we are living in a wonderland of jobs, high tech, and a booming stock market. In economic reality, Americans are wasting a couple of trillion dollars a year from regulations and taxes. In economic reality, inflated land values and coming higher interest rates and other higher costs will someday cause a massive downturn and a depression. The volcanic forces are building up beneath the surface, where they are not seen.

That is the key function of economics: to help us see beneath the superficial appearance to the reality that can only be understood when we learn a bit of economics. We would then know how foolish it is to break windows just to make a job.

---------------------------------------

Thanks Geo...

I had been looking for a copy of this last pamphlet of Bastiat's, in English, a while back and could not find one. Your post here spurred a search and "by golly" I found an English translation on line. Here's the first page...


What Is Seen and What Is Not Seen

In the economic sphere an act, a habit, an institution, a law produces not only one effect, but a series of effects. Of these effects, the first alone is immediate; it appears simultaneously with its cause; it is seen. The other effects emerge only subsequently; they are not seen; we are fortunate if we foresee them.

There is only one difference between a bad economist and a good one: the bad economist confines himself to the visible effect; the good economist takes into account both the effect that can be seen and those effects that must be foreseen.

Yet this difference is tremendous; for it almost always happens that when the immediate consequence is favorable, the later consequences are disastrous, and vice versa. Whence it follows that the bad economist pursues a small present good that will be followed by a great evil to come, while the good economist pursues a great good to come, at the risk of a small present evil.

The same thing, of course, is true of health and morals. Often, the sweeter the first fruit of a habit, the more bitter are its later fruits: for example, debauchery, sloth, prodigality. When a man is impressed by the effect that is seen and has not yet learned to discern the effects that are not seen, he indulges in deplorable habits, not only through natural inclination, but deliberately.

This explains man's necessarily painful evolution. Ignorance surrounds him at his cradle; therefore, he regulates his acts according to their first consequences, the only ones that, in his infancy, he can see. It is only after a long time that he learns to take account of the others.**2 Two very different masters teach him this lesson: experience and foresight. Experience teaches efficaciously but brutally. It instructs us in all the effects of an act by making us feel them, and we cannot fail to learn eventually, from having been burned ourselves, that fire burns. I should prefer, in so far as possible, to replace this rude teacher with one more gentle: foresight. For that reason I shall investigate the consequences of several economic phenomena, contrasting those that are seen with those that are not seen.

1. The Broken Window

Have you ever been witness to the fury of that solid citizen, James Goodfellow,*1 when his incorrigible son has happened to break a pane of glass? If you have been present at this spectacle, certainly you must also have observed that the onlookers, even if there are as many as thirty of them, seem with one accord to offer the unfortunate owner the selfsame consolation: "It's an ill wind that blows nobody some good. Such accidents keep industry going. Everybody has to make a living. What would become of the glaziers if no one ever broke a window?"

Now, this formula of condolence contains a whole theory that it is a good idea for us to expose, flagrante delicto, in this very simple case, since it is exactly the same as that which, unfortunately, underlies most of our economic institutions.

Suppose that it will cost six francs to repair the damage. If you mean that the accident gives six francs' worth of encouragement to the aforesaid industry, I agree. I do not contest it in any way; your reasoning is correct. The glazier will come, do his job, receive six francs, congratulate himself, and bless in his heart the careless child. That is what is seen....

To read the rest... http://www.scribd.com/doc/37641204/Bastiat-Ce-Qu-on-Voit-Et-Ce-Qu-on-Ne-Voit-Pas

JTCoyoté

"There are people who think that plunder loses
all its immorality as soon as it becomes legal.
Personally, I cannot imagine a more alarming
situation." ~Frédéric Bastiat, The Law, 1850

[southernmissouri2007]

I used to be a Democrat I was attracted to the Class Warfare Tax Policy of the Democrats but I have found out that the Rich/Wealthy have ways to avoid Taxes now I support a Flat Tax or a National Sale's Tax which would get rid of all the Tax Loopholes I think the whole Progressive Income Tax is a scam does anyone agree ?

The Shadow Banking System: A Third Of All The Wealth In The World Is Held In Offshore Banks

Economic Collapse Blog
 December 31, 2010
 
You and I live in a totally different world than the ultra-rich and the international banking elite do. Many of them live in a world where they simply do not pay income taxes. Today, it is estimated that a third of all the wealth in the world is held in offshore banks. So why is so much of the wealth of the globe located in places such as Monaco, the Cayman Islands, Bermuda, the Bahamas, and the Isle of Man? It isn’t because those are fun places to visit. It is to avoid taxes. The super wealthy and the international banking elite think that it is really funny that our paychecks are constantly being drained by federal taxes, state taxes and Social Security taxes while they literally pay nothing at all. These incredibly rich elitists make a ton of money doing business in wealthy western nations and then they transfer virtually all of their profits offshore where they don’t have to contribute any of it in taxes. It works out really great for them, but it sucks for the rest of us.

http://www.infowars.com/the-shadow-banking-system-a-third-of-all-the-wealth-in-the-world-is-held-in-offshore-banks/

[Constitutionary]

I used to get laughed at by Unionists for suggesting joining the CP.  They laughed when I told them that the Banks own both parties.  They laughed and laughed....

Now it seems they are waking up.

http://www.believeinamerica.com/index.php  The Forum
 
http://www.constitutionparty.org  The Official Website
 

 
Constitution Party Promotional Video
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_SobkISNrY

[Brocke]

There was a little known book written and published in 1850, that was a timely yet not intended, answer to Marx and Engels. It was authored by a frenchman named Fredrich Bastiat and is titled "The Law".

It must be understood from the onset that Fredrick Engels, was Marx's editor, much of Marx was edited and published posthumously by Engels... "He who has unbridled editorial control of any work, sets it's cadence and meaning in the end."

I suggest that everyone take an hour out of their day, and listen to G. Edward Griffin reading "The Law," by Fredrich Bastiat...

http://www.apfn.org/audio/thelaw.mp3

JTCoyoté

"Every science has for its basis a system of principles as
fixed and unalterable as those by which the universe is
regulated and governed. Man cannot make principles;
he can only discover them."
~Thomas Paine

When I heard the following I laughed and then nearly cried - for now government claims responsibility for changes in the temperature! I wonder what Bastiat would think of that?

The Basis for Stable Government
Law is justice. In this proposition a simple and enduring government can be conceived. And I defy anyone to say how even the thought of revolution, of insurrection, of the slightest uprising could arise against a government whose organized force was confined only to suppressing injustice.

Under such a regime, there would be the most prosperity -- and it would be the most equally distributed. As for the sufferings that are inseparable from humanity, no one would even think of accusing the government for them. This is true because, if the force of government were limited to suppressing injustice, then government would be as innocent of these sufferings as it is now innocent of changes in the temperature.

[MonkeyPuppet]

So, you're advocating an unconstitutional form of taxation upon the American People because you disagree with the current misapplication of federal tax law (making it's application unconstitutional)... I fail to see the logic.

Why not just expose the truth about the proper object and limitation of Congress' power to tax and be done with it.  Why do you want to STEAL from me??  Don't you realize that Congress' plenary taxing power is all that is necessary to fund the federal government?  Applied properly and Constitutionally, which would require the American People to stop being ignorant saps, the income tax is in perfect harmony with the Constitution as it doesn't even apply to the overwhelming majority of Americans living and working within the 50 states.

Flat and national sales tax advocates refuse to learn the truth, so they offer another unconstitutional "alternative"... it's mind boggling.

[Constitutionary]

the income tax is in perfect harmony with the Constitution as it doesn't even apply to the overwhelming majority of Americans living and working within the 50 states.

Could you explain further ?

I thought the 16th Amendment was improperly ratified hence un-Constitutional ?

[Geolibertarian]

Like so many other people, you've bought into a false paradigm -- in this case, the paradigm that wrongly asserts that the only alternative to supporting the "Class Warfare Tax Policy" of the Democrats is to support the "Class Warfare Tax Policy" of the Republicans:

----------------------------

http://savingcommunities.org/issues/taxes/sales/destroyscommerce.html

Sales Tax Destroys Commerce

by Dan Sullivan

Pennsylvania has virtually no shopping malls within 15 miles of Delaware, even though population density in that area is higher than anywhere else in Pennsylvania (and, for that matter, higher than in Delaware). Why the dearth of shopping malls? Because Pennsylvania has a 6% sales tax (7% in Philadelphia), and Delaware has no sales tax at all.

[Continued...]


http://www.progress.org/fold130.htm

Taxes: 19th-century Sales versus 21st-century Rent

by Fred E. Foldvary
The Progress Report
2000

The sales tax is a 19th-century tax that is becoming ever more unsuited for our global mobile 21st century economy. There is no logical or economic reason whatsoever for taxing sales. Yet there are those who advocate expanding this antiquated tax and forcing high transaction taxes on the global commerce of the internet.

It is unfortunate, and may even be a tragedy, that some USA tax reformers, seeing the evil of the income tax, advocate shifting to a national sales tax. This misguided movement for consumption and sales taxes is splitting the tax-reform movement and diverting energy and time away from realistic and beneficial tax reform.

[Continued...]


http://fairtaxfraud.com/book.asp

What it's all about: The Book

The Book, "The FairTax Book", written by right-wing radio talk show host Neal Boortz, is the basis for and Bible for a recent right-wing cult-like movement to replace the current US tax code with a national sales tax. We suggest you familiarize yourself with it by purchasing or borrowing the book from your local library. We want you to be as informed as possible so that you can make a logical decision based on facts, and not on party loyalty or hype.

We consider the FairTax to be nothing more than a smokescreen for a huge tax cut to the wealthiest Americans and a gigantic tax increase for everyone else to make up for it. As you read, ask yourself what you would get from this plan if it was ever made into law. With critical thinking you will find that the FairTax is not only a lie and a scam, but it will throw many Americans into permanent poverty. We believe the FairTax plan taxes hard work - the sweat of our brows and the toil of our labor - while at the same time it makes free welfare money (inheritances, gifts, and capital gains), that wasn't worked for and wasn't earned, completely tax free.

The FairTax increases the size of government making all who sell or trade part of the Big Brother network. This new tax bill gives the government additional powers to rule the poor and literally grants additional rights to the wealthiest people in America. George Orwell would have been proud.

The FairTax is ANTI-FAMILY. The FairTax penalizes poor families for buying food, clothes, shelter, and medical care by taxing all the basic necessities of life. These things are NOT taxed right now (and shouldn't be) but they ARE HEAVILY TAXED under the FairTax plan. Remember this when you get barraged by a FairTax supporter that says the prebate will give you a portion of this additional tax back and you should be grateful to the new Big Brother Government for giving you anything back. The FairTax bill penalizes those who live paycheck to paycheck taxing every dollar spent to make ends meet while UN-TAXING the rich and wealthy who live off of inheritances, trusts, gifts, and old money.

[Continued...]


http://www.jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/fairtax.htm

The FAIRTAX: A TROJAN HORSE FOR AMERICA?

By Claire Wolfe & Aaron Zelman

“Abolish the IRS!”

So goes the cry. And who could disagree? The income tax is unAmerican in the most profound way, punishing people for being successful. The tax code is vast and incomprehensible. The agency that enforces it is universally loathed.

Yes, let's abolish the IRS. And the income tax.

Unfortunately, the statement that usually comes next begins, “And replace it with ...” And there a new round of troubles begin.

Over time, proposals have included replacing the graduated income tax with a flat tax, a VAT (value added tax), or some form of consumption tax. For several years now, the buzz has been growing for a national sales tax. While other “abolish the IRS” reforms have languished, the national sales tax has, as they say, developed legs.

The most durable proposal for a national sales tax – called the FairTax – is promoted by an organization called Americans for Fair Taxation (AFT) (http://www.fairtax.org). A bill to implement that tax (H.R. 25; Senate Bill 1943)(1) was introduced in Congress early in the 108th Congress. The so-called “Fair Tax Act” has 54 co-sponsors as of this writing, plus the outspoken support of both Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert and House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. President George W. Bush expressed cautious support for the act in response to a pre-screened questioner at one of his campaign events. In his acceptance speech at the 2004 Republican Party convention, Bush strongly advocated a total revamp of the U.S. tax system. Although he made no specific proposal, his language was similar to that of the FairTaxers. And at the moment, the FairTax is the only serious tax-revamp proposal on the Congressional table.

Finally, many, many ordinary freedom-loving people, weary of the present outrageous system, are cheering the FairTax as a great improvement.

But it's not.

The FairTax is not only not an improvement. We believe it's UnFair, dangerous, and a disaster in the making.

[Continued...]


http://www.prisonplanet.com/fair-tax-is-a-trap-demand-no-vote-on-h-r-25.html

Fair tax is a trap: Demand NO vote on H.R. 25

Devvy
August 9, 2010

The other night on the boob tube I caught a commercial featuring a talk show host named Neal Boortz, Michael Reagan (adopted son of former president, Ronald Reagan) and the vile Newt Gingrich. All pushing for another dangerous taxing scheme that will not cure the cancer, only continue to feed the beast.

Boortz has been on this “fair” tax bandwagon for years. It’s obvious he has zero understanding of the Federal Reserve and why such a taxing scheme would only continue to steal the fruits of our labor to fund massive government spending.

Michael Reagan is also a talk show host who, like Boortz, has zero understanding of our monetary system and its feeding artery: the IRS.

Newt Gingrich sold out this country decades ago with his votes. Besides being a serial adulterer and ethtically bankrupt, Newt Gingrich is the global master’s trophy boy. He hopes the Republicans take control of Congress in November because there’s no doubt in my mind, Gingrich is out to be president of these united States of America. We can never let that happen. Do you know Newt was caught on tape saying the ridiculous “Contract with America” was nothing but a PR tool for incoming freshmen members of Congress? Yes, that’s a fact. They were obtained by Roll Call. Old Newt pulled a fast one on faithful conservatives. His votes killed MILLIONS of jobs and sent them south of the border and overseas.

In order to understand why H.R. 25 is just another tool of tyrants, you have to go back and see where and when the problem started. Prior to 1913, we had no federal income tax. There was no unconstitutional “Federal” Reserve Banking system and there was no Seventeenth Amendment. This nation thrived in agriculture, manufacturing and industrial output.

The shadow government that has been controlling Congress for almost a hundred years had the downfall of America well planned. First, an income tax to syphon off the fruits of our labor. Even though the Sixteenth Amendment wasn’t legally ratified and did not give Congress any new power of taxation, we all know what that Gestapo criminal syndicate will do to you if you don’t voluntarily submit (with a gun to your head) to looting your earnings.

Full article here

----------------------------

“There’s class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”

-- Warren Buffet, New York Times, November 26, 2006

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnrEHFwZ9hk (Higher Taxes on Top 1% Equals Higher Productivity)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZkfmY1PMng (Ricardo's Law ~ The Great Tax Clawback Scam)

[MonkeyPuppet]

Could you explain further ?

I thought the 16th Amendment was improperly ratified hence un-Constitutional ?

I can explain, but a thorough exploration of the subject is done within the book in my signature.

The 16th Amendment, according to the Supreme Court of the United States, did not extend Congress any new taxing power, nor did it extend the taxing power of Congress to new or excepted subjects.  What this means is that, as far as the overwhelming majority of Americans are concerned, what Congress could do before with regard to taxation did not change with the Amendment.

So, regardless of its proper or improper ratification, it did not and could not affect the average American living and working within the 50 states of the union.

Keep in mind that SCOTUS has also said that Congress has always had the power to tax income.  However, one must first consider jurisdiction.  It is, after all, the FEDERAL income tax.  The Founders were very clear in their writings that the average citizens of the several states most likely would never have any dialog with the federal government, and certainly would not generally engage in activities which would place them under Congress' direct jurisdiction.  Simply trading your labor for an agreed remuneration is an unalienable RIGHT and therefore outside Congress' jurisdiction.

The income tax, as it is written, applies primarily to foreign persons (individuals and corporations making domestic-sourced income) and their withholding agents, and U.S. citizens residing abroad with foreign-sourced income.  Properly applied, the income tax would never affect the average American because there is nothing the average American does to create a nexus for federal jurisdiction... basically the utilization of the federal government as a service (as with international commerce, etc.).

With that said, what makes all the ignorant saps (err, Americans) liable today?  It is, for the lack of a better term, a simple misunderstanding.  Your private payer believes (contrary to fact and law) that they are required to report (using W2's and 1099's) any payments made to individuals whom perform labor for them.  This is a flat out falsehood.  However, with that little piece of paper and nothing else to back it up, the IRS expects some follow-up paperwork from the person named on the little form.  There is nothing in law that requires private sector payers to utilize these forms.  In fact, using them amounts to fraud resulting in theft and conversion fraud.  Essentially, the IRS (and Congress) are using private payers as the henchmen for the misapplication of federal tax law.

This is but an overview.  Get the book.  ALL your questions will be answered... promise