>>>> WARNING: Don't waste your time debating with "RetSquid." He's either a paid dis-info agent of the IRS and/or the Federal Reserve, or he's simply a jack-off cheerleader for slavery incorporated.
Scroll through the old comments from this video and others like it, and you'll see he's been trolling them for up to 4 YEARS, spouting the same old arguments again and again. He only trolls videos of this type as well. Strange, don't you think?
can I upload this on my channel Il give you credits,problem is that I have already similar vid but it have so call ID or copyright from The Orchard Music and becouse music in the video( watch?v=ATKMMeSblrA )Il have to delete(if I wont to get more then 15min aproval from theres tube lol,anyway I would stil like to put something about IRS and how they stealing money from American people
@Francescaalejandro as you say we are supposed to be a constitutional republic,but lawyers and bankers have used intellectual dishonesty by twisting common use language and giving it a second legal definition to confuse and distort law through the United States codes,to usurp the constitution and create a form of involuntary servitude, by if you will....voluntary compliance and most Americans are ignorant of this fact...
@RetSquid NO, the land is still there, the country is dissolved and has been for some time. You want to believe in lies then you go right ahead, but I'm not the one that's been lying to your all your life, your fellow slaves have.
Yes, you are a person and an individual, and subject to all of the laws of the United Sates, a country and a corporation. It was never dissolved, nor did it go bankrupt.
@RetSquid USMC = what? u suk mi cok? love u long time! hahaha USMC = uneducated socially moronic cnt? am I getting close? what about... Ug, sum mor charlies You're lucky you're not here. No boyfriends with guns to back you up here. Here a man stands up for himself. Doubt you'd last 5 minutes.
You have got to be one of the stupidest people on YouTube. Go find out what a "squid" is before you put your other foot in your mouth. I doubt you would last anywhere, are you claiming that you are a man? Not much of one from your posts here.
@RetSquid Your 'Congress and Representatives' are worthless partners to have in an argument about a country that does NOT EXIST! It's a CORPORATION and corporations don't have LAWS they have CODES of PRACTICE! Stop crying and grow up. I'm not the one who's been lying to you all your life, your own 'government', for want of a better word, has. Go cry to them and watch them laugh their arses off at you. You're nothing to them! NOTHING! You're not even classed as a person; you're PROPERTY!
WOW, it sure sounds like YOU are the one doing the crying here. I'm posting absolute facts, you keep posting urban legends. By law I, (and you) are individuals and persons.
@RetSquid 'God-given rights'? you show me the documents that 'God' signed, dated and had witnessed, that states that you have any rights at all! Make sure you get the name of this 'god' of yours, as titles are not names and only names are usable in legal documents. Heard this one, 'You have the right to remain silent'? lol The COUNTRY, united states of America went bankrupt and does NOT exist. You're a piece of property owned by the UNITED STATES of AMERICA CORPORATION! You're not free!
@RetSquid You probably still think that the USA is a Republic. " I pledge allegiance to the flag. " You what? A flag? A piece of cloth? Are you guys high? The Original Constitution doesn't apply to you. The second one isn't much use to you either. If you didn't sign it then you're not a 'party' to it. That's your own Supreme Court's ruling! So what rights do you have? Any? None? The right to remain silent? Or are you still hanging onto, 'kill them all and let god sort them out'?
There is only one Constitution of the United States and the CAPITAL letters make no difference. And it is a pact between the Federal Government and the States, so of course it doesn't 'apply' to me, but is does guarantee some of what God-given rights I have.
@RetSquid Want more? Title 26, Section A, Chapter 3 : WITHHOLDING OF TAX ON NONRESIDENT ALIENS AND FOREIGN CORPORATIONS . The USA (UNITED STATES of AMERICA) in all capital letters is classed as a Foreign Corporation, and who are the Nonresident Aliens? Well? That would be the people of the Original united states of America (NOT capitals) which doesn't exist today as it went BANKRUPT! I'm bored with you now. I think I'll do my taxes! hahaha PSYCHE!
@RetSquid Title 26 : Internal Revenue Code. CODE!!!!! Are you retarded? It's NOT A LAW!! It's a CODE! Corporations don't have Laws they have CODES! The USA is a CORPORATION! I'm not making this up. It's all there in public records for anyone to see for themselves. Why would I make it up when it doesn't even apply to me? You're an ignorant USMC brainwashed, knuckle-dragging, Semper Fidelis nut job lying to the American people with every breath you can muster. Got a gun? Go use it!
"The Internal Revenue Code of 1954 was passed by both houses of Congress as House Resolution 8300, and was signed by President Eisenhower on August 16, 1954, at about 9:45 a.m., becoming Public Law 83-591, 68A Stat. 3. The Internal Revenue Code is now known as the “Internal Revenue Code of 1986” as a result of changes made by Public Law 99-514, 100 Stat. 2085 (10/22/1986).
@RetSquid Do you work for the IRS or some other alphabet criminal oganisation? THERE IS NO INCOME TAX LAW for individuals demanding taxes! The USA went bankrupt (3rd time) in 1913 and now does NOT exist. It's now the USC, the United States Corporation. Corporations don't have LAWS they have CODES of Practice!!! The IRS (a private CORPORATION) has NO Legal Stance in the U.S.! And, I think YOU fkn know it too! You're lying to the American People with every breath you take! FKN CNT!
@se7ensnakes says: "So where is the law? Why dont you state it here? Remember the law must state the subject of the tax according to the constitution and the supreme court."
You probably dont know what i am asking. I will make it simple for you. Is the IRS taxing the activity that produces the income or 2) are they taxing property (income)? Now reference your answer to Supreme Court decisions and in particular the opinion of justice white. You know that the government needs to inform people what it is that they are taxing. You know that dont you?
The IRS are Confuse-u-r-us. Retsquid is still confuse as to what an indirect and direct tax is, and well Tubeusercomm just tries to scare everyone. He has no clue why the direct and indirect tax distinction is important. He still dont get it.
6011. General requirement of return, statement, or list
(a) General rule
When required by regulations prescribed by the Secretary any person made liable for any tax imposed by this title, or with respect to the collection thereof, shall make a return or statement according to the forms and regulations prescribed by the Secretary. Every person required to make a return or statement shall include therein the information required by such forms or regulations.
TITLE 26 > Subtitle F > CHAPTER 62 > Subchapter A > § 6151. Time and place for paying tax shown on returns
(a) General rule
Except as otherwise provided in this subchapter, when a return of tax is required under this title or regulations, the person required to make such return shall, without assessment or notice and demand from the Secretary, pay such tax...
The tax income law is found in Title 26 of the United States Code. The requirement to file an income tax return is not voluntary and it is clearly set forth in the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Sections 6011(a), 6012(a), et seq., and 6072(a). IRS was established July 1, 1862 by an act of Congress. Our system of taxation allows taxpayers to determine the correct amount of tax and complete the appropriate forms "voluntarily" rather than have the
So where is the law? Why dont you state it here? Remember the law must state the subject of the tax according to the constitution and the supreme court.
@se7ensnakes says: "So where is the law? Why dont you state it here? Remember the law must state the subject of the tax according to the constitution and the supreme court."
@se7ensnakes says: "So where is the law? Why dont you state it here? Remember the law must state the subject of the tax according to the constitution and the supreme court."
okay nice...so where is the law where the subject of the tax cited? I see them talking about income but i dont see anything about the subject of the tax. Please cite the law.
The subject of the income tax is not the income. The income is the property. Property is not the thing that they are taxing. You have not yet understood what an excise tax is.
Income is the subject of the tax, the event they are taxing is the receipt of that income.
“Finally, the taxpayer argues that because wages are property, a tax on them is a property tax, and because the tax the Commissioner is attempting to collect is not apportioned, it is unconstitutional. However, as we and innumerable other courts have repeatedly explained, wages are income, and income taxes do not need to be apportioned.”
income taxes do not need to be apportioned because they are excise taxes. Excise taxes only need to be uniform. But that evades the question....If they are excise taxes it is a tax on activity and not the income. To claim that the subject is the receipt of income...is redundant. Suppose you pay a toll (tax) to cross a bridge. You claim that paying the tax is the subject. WOW you are really lost retsquid. You are taxed on paying a tax?
Also stop citing lower court cases. I could find you a lower court case that states that the subject of the income tax is property, activity or that the 16th Amendment created a new type of tax. They are just as confuse as you are retsquid.
“Doubtless there were many excises in colonial days and later that were associated, more or less intimately, with the enjoyment or use of property. This would not prove, even if no others were then known, that the forms then accepted were not subject to enlargement.”
RetSquid is a government mouthpiece. He has commented on nearly every YouTube video regarding income tax to attempt to perpetuate the fraud against the monetarily enslaved people of the United States.
The power to tax the domestic earnings of the vast majority of American citizens was never granted to congress by the U.S. Constitution. Working and making a living is a natural or unalienable right not a mear privlage and such a broad direct tax could never pass constitional muster and would most certainly be struck down by the Supream Court. The income tax is a excise tax on a privlage.
"That the authority conferred upon Congress by 8 of article 1 'to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises' is ***EXHAUSTIVE AND EMBRACES EVERY CONCEIVABLE POWER OF TAXATION HAS NEVER BEEN QUESTIONED***, or, if it has, has been so often authoritatively declared as to render it necessary only to state the doctrine." Brushaber v. UPRR Company
“The assertion that the filing of an income tax return is voluntary is, likewise, frivolous. Title 26, United States Code, Section 6012(a)(1)(A), ‘requires that every individual who earns a threshold level of income must file a tax return.’ Failure to file an income tax return subjects an individual to criminal penalty.”
Where did you get the idea that U.S.Citizens are not liable for taxes under U.S. law? The law says "EVERY"..not "some" or "few".
“The determination of where income is derived or ‘sourced’ is generally of no moment to either United States citizens or United States corporations, for such persons are subject to tax under section 1 and section 11, respectively, on their worldwide income.”
Great-West Life Assur. Co. v. United States, 230 Ct. Cl. 477, 678 F.2d 180, 183 (1982)
“…The plain language of the IRC, however, belies this assertion, stating in section 1 that a tax is ‘hereby IMPOSED on the taxable income of every individual’ (emphasis added). Although plaintiff attempts to distinguish between ‘imposing’ a tax and creating a ‘liability’ for a tax, there is no difference. Every individual has an affirmative duty to pay taxes.”
“Finally, the taxpayer argues that because wages are property, a tax on them is a property tax, and because the tax the Commissioner is attempting to collect is not apportioned, it is unconstitutional. However, as we and innumerable other courts have repeatedly explained, wages are income, and income taxes do not need to be apportioned.”
You missed the point again. The income tax is NOT a tax on property, that would be a direct tax. In this case Conner claimed that his income WAS property and the court ruled against him.
You posted I was wrong, but you have no clue what I was saying, it had nothing to do with property or the Supreme Court.
@RetSquid "The Order (group)" or "The Silent Brotherhood" active from 1983 to '84 believed that a ZOG ("Zionist Occupied Government") controlled the country.
Look up all that's in quotations and that will give you a understanding.
Protesters with Death to ZOG protest signs were at Ruby Ridge in 1992.
I pretty sure you actually know what a Zionist is.
RE: Question, what does our income tax pay for, its been bugging me?
President Regan initiated an audit of the Government shortly after taking office. The report is referred to as "The Grace Commission Report" <--search YouTube
What it discovered is that the Federal income Tax is used to pay the interest on the national debt.
So basically it becomes the paycheck of the Federal Reserve Bank, which is not actually a federal institution but a private banking cartel
the constitution prohibits a direct, unaportioned tax on the income of American citizens.
The Internal Revenue Code only requires non-resident aliens who earn money within the states, and U.S. citizens who earn money outside of the 50 states to pay a Federal Income tax. But those specifics seem to be lost on a vast majority of people for some reason, I'm not saying its intentional theft by deception or anything, but there is a video on Google Video called "Theft by deception"
@diamy00 It's because of the complicated maze of codes within the income tax system. Even the IRS agents don't know the truth. I found one who admitted there's no law but he didn't know what to do about it. One I know was imprisoned for exposing the truth about and she's still in prison as far as I know.
Here is what they REALLY said: One-third of all their taxes is consumed by waste and inefficiency in the Federal Government as we identified in our survey. Another one-third of all their taxes escapes collection from others as the underground economy blossoms in direct proportion to tax increases and places even more pressure on law abiding taxpayers, promoting still more underground economy-a vicious cycle that must be broken...
...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.
When the report says that 1/3 of taxes is consumed by waste and inefficiency, isn't it speaking about ALL taxes in general? Not just the income tax exclusively?
regardless of the specifics, the simple fact of my statement is still true. And that is that it found that ALL the income tax that is collected is absorbed by interest on the national debt.
Your statement is NOT true even today, the Federal income tax is over $1.2 trillion...that is what is actually recieved... the payment on the debt was only about $250 billion in '08.
Do the math. You are wrong, your post is just another internet rumor.
Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items, Gross income derived from business, Gains derived from dealings in property, Interest, Rents, Royalties, Dividends, Alimony and separate maintenance payments, Annuities, Income from life insurance and endowment contracts, Pensions...
Sec. 86 And be it further enacted, that on and after the first day of August, 1862, there shall be levied, collected and paid on all salaries of officers, or payments to persons in the civil, military, naval, or other employment or service of the United States, including senators and representatives and delegates in Congress,...
these are only individual that are liable, no one else ever added nor can they be regardless of 16th.
Maybe if you had read just a little bit further you would see this:
Sec. 90 And be it further enacted, that there shall be levied, collected, and paid annually, upon the annual gains, profits, or income of every person residing in the United States, whether derived from any kind of property, rents, interest, dividends, salaries, or from any profession, trade, employment, or vocation carried on in the United States or elsewhere, or from any other source whatevera duty of three per centum
It, therefore, must be imposed as a direct tax, without the apportionment provision, which would make it unconstitutional or outside of the limitations provided, except in the case of an American citizen working overseas or a foreigner working in the US OR a US citizen who voluntarily pays the tax. Your withholding does not fall under either class of federal taxation under the constitution but is legal only if you volunteer.
Does the government claim that the 16th Amendment with its word income imposes the same conditions on your wages and salaries? Yes and no. It has never claimed to be imposing an excise tax on your earnings, measured by the size of your wages. Excise taxes cannot be imposed on an individual or his property. They do claim, however that they are imposing a voluntary tax on your earnings. That voluntary tax cannot fall under indirect or excise tax definitions.
following the law from inception throughout all revisions and updates and still all of those activities are FEDERALLY CONNECTED. The law and statutes are very clear. You can't make them say what they do not and cannot say. Too bad the specifics have never been properly adjudicated.
"This court has repeatedly rejected the argument that wages are not income as frivolous, [citations omitted] and has also rejected the idea that a person is liable for tax only if he benefits from a governmental privilege.
Olson v. United States, 760 F.2d 1003, 1005 (9th Cir. 1985)
Does the Sixteenth Amendment authorize and support this tax and the attendant diminution; that is to say, does it bring within the taxing powers subjects theretofore excepted? The court below answered in the negative; and counsel for the government say: It is not, in view of recent decisions, contended that this amendment rendered anything taxable as income that was not so taxable before.
You could in fact do that for purposes of that section, but the term "income" is never defined. Point being, any time you were to otherwise come across the term "income" it is not synonymous with the term "gross income" or "taxable income" as it is often misapplied and "income" often appears with the connection that does not exist being left up to the reader to make erroneously.
Income: means any money received from any source, including but not limited to remuneration for labor, products or services; money received from governmental assistance programs; tax refunds; prize winnings; pensions; investments; and money received from any other source.
Income may be defined as the gain derived from capital, from labor, or from both combined, provided it be understood to include profit gained through a sale or conversion of capital assets.
the show me the law stuff is beside the point , if anyone files a w4 or w9 making a statement on you the proper legal pathway to correct this is to file a 1040 for the return of the amount withheld by correcting the incorrect w2. it is a matter of liability , a w4 is submitted you have to refute it on a 1040 or it stands. failure to file is assumed liability for the amounts claimed on the w2 or 1099. there is a procedure learn it and how the fraud works read cracking the code visit losthorizon
To stupid ?Too stupid,Stay ignorant and you will get what you deserve.You can argue your case if you understand your situation.Learn and study what is needed BEFOR making wrong moves.Don't believe everything, test ALL things that have to do with "income"ect..Search and study and YOU will begin to see the PICTURE.Which has two sides.
I am trying to figure out the differnece between civil and criminal. I wonder if people were educated on the matter of income taxation (not that I know anything as of now...clearly) if more jury would get people of the hook. Though I wonder because of lawyer fees to fight it, if its worth it depending on your tax bracket. I hope I made sense? I am really trying to figure this out because if so I am filing differnently for 2010. LOL
it's funny to see so many people think we are a democraycy, if this were a democracy we would have elected representitives. we live in a democratic republic.
Nobody can makes sense of the Bible and nobody can make sense of the laws. I think people that want to instill power have a phychological advantage. They know how to instill fear a guilt into you. Sounds evil to me.
No income tax!. The more you buy the more tax revenue for our gov. But tax my labor and I will save. Income tax has to stop putting the squeeze on our earned/labor money. 401K is a perfect example. Put money away tax free. Then when you need it you get tax for the withdraw then again for annual income, if you want to retire earlier or are forced to retire early because of health reasons. They got you coming and going.
CAN THERE REALLY BE LAW OR COURTS OF LAW THAT PERMITS LEGAL STEALING & LEGAL SLAVERY?
NO MORE LEGAL THIEF ARGUMENTS ITS TIME TO BAND TOGETHER. We need unity not legal arguing.
Is freedom that which requires free people to legally pay for anothers dreams, schemes, wants, desires, pleasures, wealth building, failures bailouts & other legal mischief when I cannot force my neighbor to pay for my dreams, schemes...?
How you got 5 (I gave you a thumbs up) is beyond. me. It must be a bunch of 12 year olds just voting for kicks. I feel You Tube should only allow people to vote negitive if they actually have shown there face on camera.
Thanks for the good vote Jim. I'm messin' with RetSquid. I want him to earn his legalized plunder pay. He's a government shill & trolls most of these similar topics with his same redundant message.
This is RetSquid's message in general. "Yes the stealing is all legal". So he had to develop several other channels to mark my comments as negative.
RetSquid got banned from one discussion for SpamOLabeling. He just a gubermint troll is all. Your positive vote made him work more & write less-Thanks
i agree but this one needs to be a peaceful revolution. all the government needs is some whacko to attack them so they can declare a national state of emergency and clamp down on us like communists. and spring their communist revolution on us.
... tell him he should go to jail for life.Tell the lawyer he could have said I see you holding a picture of a tree is there something else on the other side ?.....
Turn towards the lawyer and say why dident you see a FACE.Turn to the judge ask him,why only a FACE ?The other guy is catching on,you get in his FACE screaming."YOU SEEN ME HOLDING A PICTURE OF A TREE WITH A face ON THE OTHER SIDE....."
Of course,everything has a "point" to it. Every word is an expression of the concept ( "Income") No REAL job ?What are you talking about ?Not sure... why would it be unconstitutional ?
This has been flagged as spam show
>>>> WARNING: Don't waste your time debating with "RetSquid." He's either a paid dis-info agent of the IRS and/or the Federal Reserve, or he's simply a jack-off cheerleader for slavery incorporated.
Scroll through the old comments from this video and others like it, and you'll see he's been trolling them for up to 4 YEARS, spouting the same old arguments again and again. He only trolls videos of this type as well. Strange, don't you think?
BRYAN351 1 month ago
can I upload this on my channel Il give you credits,problem is that I have already similar vid but it have so call ID or copyright from The Orchard Music and becouse music in the video( watch?v=ATKMMeSblrA )Il have to delete(if I wont to get more then 15min aproval from theres tube lol,anyway I would stil like to put something about IRS and how they stealing money from American people
TRUTH21SS 3 months ago
WE ARE SUPPOSE TO BE A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC. BUT WOODROW WILSON DID AWAY WITH THE CONSTITUTION. Now it is just a constitutional republic on paper.
Francescaalejandro 7 months ago
@Francescaalejandro
BWAAHAA!!! Yeah right...
RetSquid 6 months ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
@Francescaalejandro as you say we are supposed to be a constitutional republic,but lawyers and bankers have used intellectual dishonesty by twisting common use language and giving it a second legal definition to confuse and distort law through the United States codes,to usurp the constitution and create a form of involuntary servitude, by if you will....voluntary compliance and most Americans are ignorant of this fact...
1210catman 6 months ago
Retsquid Question: What is the subject of the income tax?
se7ensnakes 9 months ago
@se7ensnakes
The income, of course.
RetSquid 9 months ago
@RetSquid NO, the land is still there, the country is dissolved and has been for some time. You want to believe in lies then you go right ahead, but I'm not the one that's been lying to your all your life, your fellow slaves have.
Itsmeeman1 9 months ago
@Itsmeeman1
You have yet to provide any evidence of your claims.
RetSquid 9 months ago
@RetSquid NO, fish girl. 'I' am a person, RetSquid is property.
Itsmeeman1 9 months ago
@Itsmeeman1
Yes, you are a person and an individual, and subject to all of the laws of the United Sates, a country and a corporation. It was never dissolved, nor did it go bankrupt.
RetSquid 9 months ago
@RetSquid Is that it, fish girl?
Itsmeeman1 9 months ago
@RetSquid USMC = what? u suk mi cok? love u long time! hahaha USMC = uneducated socially moronic cnt? am I getting close? what about... Ug, sum mor charlies You're lucky you're not here. No boyfriends with guns to back you up here. Here a man stands up for himself. Doubt you'd last 5 minutes.
Itsmeeman1 9 months ago
@Itsmeeman1
You have got to be one of the stupidest people on YouTube. Go find out what a "squid" is before you put your other foot in your mouth. I doubt you would last anywhere, are you claiming that you are a man? Not much of one from your posts here.
RetSquid 9 months ago
@RetSquid Your 'Congress and Representatives' are worthless partners to have in an argument about a country that does NOT EXIST! It's a CORPORATION and corporations don't have LAWS they have CODES of PRACTICE! Stop crying and grow up. I'm not the one who's been lying to you all your life, your own 'government', for want of a better word, has. Go cry to them and watch them laugh their arses off at you. You're nothing to them! NOTHING! You're not even classed as a person; you're PROPERTY!
Itsmeeman1 9 months ago
@Itsmeeman1
WOW, it sure sounds like YOU are the one doing the crying here. I'm posting absolute facts, you keep posting urban legends. By law I, (and you) are individuals and persons.
RetSquid 9 months ago
@RetSquid 'God-given rights'? you show me the documents that 'God' signed, dated and had witnessed, that states that you have any rights at all! Make sure you get the name of this 'god' of yours, as titles are not names and only names are usable in legal documents. Heard this one, 'You have the right to remain silent'? lol The COUNTRY, united states of America went bankrupt and does NOT exist. You're a piece of property owned by the UNITED STATES of AMERICA CORPORATION! You're not free!
Itsmeeman1 9 months ago
@Itsmeeman1
Too bad you have no backing for your claims, huh?
You think that YOU have no rights, because that is what it sounds like.
Rights: that which is due to anyone by just claim, legal guarantees, moral principles.
This country is still here, obviously, your claims are totally bogus.
RetSquid 9 months ago
Please see my response at PiercingTheIllusion com. Click on the Blog item and drill down to the article USA Inc.
talos4cs 9 months ago
@RetSquid You probably still think that the USA is a Republic. " I pledge allegiance to the flag. " You what? A flag? A piece of cloth? Are you guys high? The Original Constitution doesn't apply to you. The second one isn't much use to you either. If you didn't sign it then you're not a 'party' to it. That's your own Supreme Court's ruling! So what rights do you have? Any? None? The right to remain silent? Or are you still hanging onto, 'kill them all and let god sort them out'?
Itsmeeman1 9 months ago
@Itsmeeman1
There is only one Constitution of the United States and the CAPITAL letters make no difference. And it is a pact between the Federal Government and the States, so of course it doesn't 'apply' to me, but is does guarantee some of what God-given rights I have.
RetSquid 9 months ago
@RetSquid Want more? Title 26, Section A, Chapter 3 : WITHHOLDING OF TAX ON NONRESIDENT ALIENS AND FOREIGN CORPORATIONS . The USA (UNITED STATES of AMERICA) in all capital letters is classed as a Foreign Corporation, and who are the Nonresident Aliens? Well? That would be the people of the Original united states of America (NOT capitals) which doesn't exist today as it went BANKRUPT! I'm bored with you now. I think I'll do my taxes! hahaha PSYCHE!
Itsmeeman1 9 months ago
@Itsmeeman1
Wrong again, go read Section 1.
RetSquid 9 months ago
@RetSquid Title 26 : Internal Revenue Code. CODE!!!!! Are you retarded? It's NOT A LAW!! It's a CODE! Corporations don't have Laws they have CODES! The USA is a CORPORATION! I'm not making this up. It's all there in public records for anyone to see for themselves. Why would I make it up when it doesn't even apply to me? You're an ignorant USMC brainwashed, knuckle-dragging, Semper Fidelis nut job lying to the American people with every breath you can muster. Got a gun? Go use it!
Itsmeeman1 9 months ago
@Itsmeeman1
"The Internal Revenue Code of 1954 was passed by both houses of Congress as House Resolution 8300, and was signed by President Eisenhower on August 16, 1954, at about 9:45 a.m., becoming Public Law 83-591, 68A Stat. 3. The Internal Revenue Code is now known as the “Internal Revenue Code of 1986” as a result of changes made by Public Law 99-514, 100 Stat. 2085 (10/22/1986).
RetSquid 9 months ago
@Itsmeeman1
You don't even know what USMC stands for. The U.S. is a corporation, just like every State, City, Town and County in the U.S.
RetSquid 9 months ago
@RetSquid Do you work for the IRS or some other alphabet criminal oganisation? THERE IS NO INCOME TAX LAW for individuals demanding taxes! The USA went bankrupt (3rd time) in 1913 and now does NOT exist. It's now the USC, the United States Corporation. Corporations don't have LAWS they have CODES of Practice!!! The IRS (a private CORPORATION) has NO Legal Stance in the U.S.! And, I think YOU fkn know it too! You're lying to the American People with every breath you take! FKN CNT!
Itsmeeman1 9 months ago
@Itsmeeman1
Stop posting this crap. I'm here to set liars like you straight about things. Go read Title 26, Section 1 and tell me how it does not apply to you.
RetSquid 9 months ago
Okay thats just says if you owe the taxes you must file.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@se7ensnakes says: "So where is the law? Why dont you state it here? Remember the law must state the subject of the tax according to the constitution and the supreme court."
ROTFL.. You would make a good stand up comic.
Tubeusercomm 10 months ago
You probably dont know what i am asking. I will make it simple for you. Is the IRS taxing the activity that produces the income or 2) are they taxing property (income)? Now reference your answer to Supreme Court decisions and in particular the opinion of justice white. You know that the government needs to inform people what it is that they are taxing. You know that dont you?
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes has never had sex when he wasn't alone.
Tubeusercomm 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes
Go read: Brushaber v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., 240 U.S. 1 (1916)
RetSquid 10 months ago
@RetSquid
I have it memorized.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes
If you did, you would not be posting this crap.
RetSquid 10 months ago
The IRS are Confuse-u-r-us. Retsquid is still confuse as to what an indirect and direct tax is, and well Tubeusercomm just tries to scare everyone. He has no clue why the direct and indirect tax distinction is important. He still dont get it.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes
Direct or indirect does not matter with income tax. Either way, it is Constitutional the way it is imposed.
RetSquid 10 months ago
6011. General requirement of return, statement, or list
(a) General rule
When required by regulations prescribed by the Secretary any person made liable for any tax imposed by this title, or with respect to the collection thereof, shall make a return or statement according to the forms and regulations prescribed by the Secretary. Every person required to make a return or statement shall include therein the information required by such forms or regulations.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes
TITLE 26 > Subtitle F > CHAPTER 62 > Subchapter A > § 6151. Time and place for paying tax shown on returns
(a) General rule
Except as otherwise provided in this subchapter, when a return of tax is required under this title or regulations, the person required to make such return shall, without assessment or notice and demand from the Secretary, pay such tax...
RetSquid 10 months ago
The IRS. Another reason not to have children.
MrBeautifulba1 11 months ago
The tax income law is found in Title 26 of the United States Code. The requirement to file an income tax return is not voluntary and it is clearly set forth in the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Sections 6011(a), 6012(a), et seq., and 6072(a). IRS was established July 1, 1862 by an act of Congress. Our system of taxation allows taxpayers to determine the correct amount of tax and complete the appropriate forms "voluntarily" rather than have the
government do it for them.
Tubeusercomm 1 year ago
@Tubeusercomm
So where is the law? Why dont you state it here? Remember the law must state the subject of the tax according to the constitution and the supreme court.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@se7ensnakes says: "So where is the law? Why dont you state it here? Remember the law must state the subject of the tax according to the constitution and the supreme court."
ROTFL.. You would make a good stand up comic.
Tubeusercomm 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes
Show where the Constitution or the Supreme Court says this.
RetSquid 10 months ago
@RetSquid
says what?
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes
Show where in the Constitution it says that "the law must state the subject of the tax".
RetSquid 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@se7ensnakes says: "So where is the law? Why dont you state it here? Remember the law must state the subject of the tax according to the constitution and the supreme court."
ROTFL.. You would make a good stand up comic.
Tubeusercomm 10 months ago
@Tubeusercomm
okay nice...so where is the law where the subject of the tax cited? I see them talking about income but i dont see anything about the subject of the tax. Please cite the law.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes
The subject of the tax is your income, that is why it's called the 'income tax'.
RetSquid 10 months ago
@RetSquid
The subject of the income tax is not the income. The income is the property. Property is not the thing that they are taxing. You have not yet understood what an excise tax is.
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
Income is the subject of the tax, the event they are taxing is the receipt of that income.
“Finally, the taxpayer argues that because wages are property, a tax on them is a property tax, and because the tax the Commissioner is attempting to collect is not apportioned, it is unconstitutional. However, as we and innumerable other courts have repeatedly explained, wages are income, and income taxes do not need to be apportioned.”
Connor v. Commissioner
RetSquid 10 months ago
@RetSquid
income taxes do not need to be apportioned because they are excise taxes. Excise taxes only need to be uniform. But that evades the question....If they are excise taxes it is a tax on activity and not the income. To claim that the subject is the receipt of income...is redundant. Suppose you pay a toll (tax) to cross a bridge. You claim that paying the tax is the subject. WOW you are really lost retsquid. You are taxed on paying a tax?
se7ensnakes 9 months ago
@se7ensnakes
The "activity" in question is the receipt of the income and the amount of the income determines the amount of the tax paid.
Your example makes no sense at all.
RetSquid 9 months ago
@RetSquid
Also stop citing lower court cases. I could find you a lower court case that states that the subject of the income tax is property, activity or that the 16th Amendment created a new type of tax. They are just as confuse as you are retsquid.
se7ensnakes 9 months ago
@se7ensnakes
Unless you find a case that overrules one that I post, the cases are valid.
RetSquid 9 months ago
@se7ensnakes
“Doubtless there were many excises in colonial days and later that were associated, more or less intimately, with the enjoyment or use of property. This would not prove, even if no others were then known, that the forms then accepted were not subject to enlargement.”
Chas. C. Steward Machine Co. v. Davis
RetSquid 10 months ago
A REPUBLIC !!!
waterchildtera 1 year ago
@waterchildtera A REPUBLIC EVERYONE'S VOICE COUNTS
IN A DEMOCRACY 51% WINS
SO MOB RULE !
waterchildtera 1 year ago
RetSquid is a government mouthpiece. He has commented on nearly every YouTube video regarding income tax to attempt to perpetuate the fraud against the monetarily enslaved people of the United States.
usrowing08 1 year ago 2
@usrowing08
Can you prove that anything I have said is wrong?
RetSquid 1 year ago
demo=mob
DSCW33 1 year ago
It is against the law not to pay taxes, so they say! I ask YOU, when you pay THEM how does it make you FEEL !
sickasso72 1 year ago
Gppd video, faved it.
ColdBoi 1 year ago
The power to tax the domestic earnings of the vast majority of American citizens was never granted to congress by the U.S. Constitution. Working and making a living is a natural or unalienable right not a mear privlage and such a broad direct tax could never pass constitional muster and would most certainly be struck down by the Supream Court. The income tax is a excise tax on a privlage.
Tealy855 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Tealy855
"That the authority conferred upon Congress by 8 of article 1 'to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises' is ***EXHAUSTIVE AND EMBRACES EVERY CONCEIVABLE POWER OF TAXATION HAS NEVER BEEN QUESTIONED***, or, if it has, has been so often authoritatively declared as to render it necessary only to state the doctrine." Brushaber v. UPRR Company
RetSquid 1 year ago
The IRS operates on the publics belief that they owe taxes and are required to file in addition to fear tactics.
Tealy855 1 year ago
@Tealy855
“The assertion that the filing of an income tax return is voluntary is, likewise, frivolous. Title 26, United States Code, Section 6012(a)(1)(A), ‘requires that every individual who earns a threshold level of income must file a tax return.’ Failure to file an income tax return subjects an individual to criminal penalty.”
United States v. Hartman
RetSquid 1 year ago
@RetSquid RIGHT IF YOU ARE LIABLE - 98% of Americans
receiving only domestic earnings - ARE NOT -
You can say 1000 - times - If you have taxable income your are
liable and thats exactly what the code says over and over- and its
be correct - The question is who is liable ? only some foreigners within
within the states are liable - is an ingenious scam - tbut the cats
out of the bag -now
Tealy855 1 year ago
@Tealy855
Where did you get the idea that U.S.Citizens are not liable for taxes under U.S. law? The law says "EVERY"..not "some" or "few".
“The determination of where income is derived or ‘sourced’ is generally of no moment to either United States citizens or United States corporations, for such persons are subject to tax under section 1 and section 11, respectively, on their worldwide income.”
Great-West Life Assur. Co. v. United States, 230 Ct. Cl. 477, 678 F.2d 180, 183 (1982)
RetSquid 1 year ago
@Tealy855
“…The plain language of the IRC, however, belies this assertion, stating in section 1 that a tax is ‘hereby IMPOSED on the taxable income of every individual’ (emphasis added). Although plaintiff attempts to distinguish between ‘imposing’ a tax and creating a ‘liability’ for a tax, there is no difference. Every individual has an affirmative duty to pay taxes.”
Porcaro v. United States
RetSquid 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RetSquid define "income" then you will know. The truth will set you free!
legacykidz 10 months ago
@legacykidz
Income: the financial gain (earned or unearned) accruing over a given period of time.
Anything else?
RetSquid 10 months ago 2
@RetSquid YOU ARE WRONG. THERE IS NOT ONE SINGLE SUPREME COURT CASE THAT STATE THAT THE INCOME TAX IS A TAX ON PROPERTY! Not one....
se7ensnakes 10 months ago
@se7ensnakes
I'm not wrong, but you absolutely are:
“Finally, the taxpayer argues that because wages are property, a tax on them is a property tax, and because the tax the Commissioner is attempting to collect is not apportioned, it is unconstitutional. However, as we and innumerable other courts have repeatedly explained, wages are income, and income taxes do not need to be apportioned.”
Connor v. Commissioner
RetSquid 10 months ago
@RetSquid
From what i see Connor v Commissioner is a tax court case. Do you have any idea what you are talking about?
se7ensnakes 9 months ago
@se7ensnakes
You missed the point again. The income tax is NOT a tax on property, that would be a direct tax. In this case Conner claimed that his income WAS property and the court ruled against him.
You posted I was wrong, but you have no clue what I was saying, it had nothing to do with property or the Supreme Court.
RetSquid 9 months ago
Those made liable within the several states are:
1. non resident alliens with domestic income
2. foreign corporations with domestic income
3.. withholding agents for the above
4. U.S Persons holding the income of the above( 1 and 2 )
U.S. Citizens residing abroad and receiving foreign income are also made liable.
Tealy855 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Tealy855
"As a United States citizen, plaintiff is required to pay federal income tax.”
Betz v. United States
RetSquid 1 year ago
That would be MAD AS HELL videos.
asicit2b 1 year ago
Watch Aaron Russo Made As Hell videos.
asicit2b 1 year ago
watch Aaron Russo's video "Freedom to Facism" and read the book Cracking the Code
adambomb805 1 year ago
@adambomb805
Freedom to Facism is full of crap and the author of CtC is in prison.
RetSquid 1 year ago
Hey, name one Patriot that was saved. Plea bargains don't count.
iwtfunow 1 year ago
@RetSquit the govt of the US
firefox8192 1 year ago
zionist form of government in the US
firefox8192 1 year ago
@firefox8192
Just what is a "zionist" form of government?
RetSquid 1 year ago
@RetSquid "The Order (group)" or "The Silent Brotherhood" active from 1983 to '84 believed that a ZOG ("Zionist Occupied Government") controlled the country.
Look up all that's in quotations and that will give you a understanding.
Protesters with Death to ZOG protest signs were at Ruby Ridge in 1992.
I pretty sure you actually know what a Zionist is.
bruno2260 1 year ago
@bruno2260
Don't care about whack-job fringe groups, they have nothing to do with the legality of income tax.
RetSquid 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RetSquid Just trying to answer your question (since nobody else did) of "Just what is a "zionist" form of government?"
ZOG (Zionist Occupied Government) is a theory created by anti-zionist, of that Jews secretly control the country.
bruno2260 1 year ago
Look into WHY the gold was confiscated in the 1930's
asicit2b 1 year ago
The correct answer is the United States is a federal constitutional republic.
ANGELBLU2042 1 year ago
@ANGELBLU2042
That sounds like a pretty good definition.
RetSquid 1 year ago
This may be an ignorant question on my part but, What is a federal constitutional republic ?
asicit2b 1 year ago
Question, what does our income tax pay for, its been bugging me?
Godsmack0Believe 1 year ago
RE: Question, what does our income tax pay for, its been bugging me?
President Regan initiated an audit of the Government shortly after taking office. The report is referred to as "The Grace Commission Report" <--search YouTube
What it discovered is that the Federal income Tax is used to pay the interest on the national debt.
So basically it becomes the paycheck of the Federal Reserve Bank, which is not actually a federal institution but a private banking cartel
diamy00 1 year ago
So, is that legal, or unconstitutional or something? Or is it just bad because its our mone we do labour for?
Godsmack0Believe 1 year ago
@Godsmack0Believe
The Federal Income Tax (~$1.3 trillion) covers about 43% of the entire budget.
RetSquid 1 year ago
@ Godsmack0Believe,
the constitution prohibits a direct, unaportioned tax on the income of American citizens.
The Internal Revenue Code only requires non-resident aliens who earn money within the states, and U.S. citizens who earn money outside of the 50 states to pay a Federal Income tax. But those specifics seem to be lost on a vast majority of people for some reason, I'm not saying its intentional theft by deception or anything, but there is a video on Google Video called "Theft by deception"
diamy00 1 year ago
@diamy00 It's because of the complicated maze of codes within the income tax system. Even the IRS agents don't know the truth. I found one who admitted there's no law but he didn't know what to do about it. One I know was imprisoned for exposing the truth about and she's still in prison as far as I know.
heartuvgold 1 year ago
WRONG!!!!
Here is what they REALLY said: One-third of all their taxes is consumed by waste and inefficiency in the Federal Government as we identified in our survey. Another one-third of all their taxes escapes collection from others as the underground economy blossoms in direct proportion to tax increases and places even more pressure on law abiding taxpayers, promoting still more underground economy-a vicious cycle that must be broken...
RetSquid 1 year ago
...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.
--Grace commission
RetSquid 1 year ago
@retsquid
When the report says that 1/3 of taxes is consumed by waste and inefficiency, isn't it speaking about ALL taxes in general? Not just the income tax exclusively?
regardless of the specifics, the simple fact of my statement is still true. And that is that it found that ALL the income tax that is collected is absorbed by interest on the national debt.
which is the simple answer to the question.
diamy00 1 year ago
@diamy00
Your statement is NOT true even today, the Federal income tax is over $1.2 trillion...that is what is actually recieved... the payment on the debt was only about $250 billion in '08.
Do the math. You are wrong, your post is just another internet rumor.
RetSquid 1 year ago
Comment removed
asicit2b 1 year ago
Comment removed
asicit2b 1 year ago
Comment removed
asicit2b 1 year ago
the right answer is a republic right?
tifacola 2 years ago
Depends, what is the question?
RetSquid 2 years ago
Comment removed
asicit2b 2 years ago
Title 26 demonstrates that there is a legitimate tax ON a franchise.Answer my question outside of title 26.
asicit2b 2 years ago
And don't give me anything out of Title 26
It is Title 26 that keeps the CORPORATION in check.
asicit2b 2 years ago
"out of Title 26"
That is just STUPID!
You want someone to prove what the law is without citing a law???
RetSquid 2 years ago
Where is the law that requires the average american worker in the PRIVATE sector to pay a direct unapportioned tax on their labor
asicit2b 2 years ago
Comment removed
asicit2b 2 years ago
My compensation.I have no "compensation"Makes it sound like I have no clue to Whom ?
asicit2b 2 years ago
"compensation"
So, you don't do anything or nobody gives you anything for what you have done?
RetSquid 2 years ago
Me receiving an amount over the "threshold"does not make it taxable."Coorrect"
asicit2b 2 years ago
Your compensation is taxable and if you make over a certain amount you pay the lowest rate on it.
Providing these half-thought-out answers makes you sound like you have no clue.
RetSquid 2 years ago
Correct again NO MORE TAX ! Not all "income" is taxable.
asicit2b 2 years ago
"Not all "income" is taxable"
Coorrect, but these ARE taxable:
Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items, Gross income derived from business, Gains derived from dealings in property, Interest, Rents, Royalties, Dividends, Alimony and separate maintenance payments, Annuities, Income from life insurance and endowment contracts, Pensions...
RetSquid 2 years ago
original income tax enactment
Sec. 86 And be it further enacted, that on and after the first day of August, 1862, there shall be levied, collected and paid on all salaries of officers, or payments to persons in the civil, military, naval, or other employment or service of the United States, including senators and representatives and delegates in Congress,...
these are only individual that are liable, no one else ever added nor can they be regardless of 16th.
MrEurowolf 2 years ago
Maybe if you had read just a little bit further you would see this:
Sec. 90 And be it further enacted, that there shall be levied, collected, and paid annually, upon the annual gains, profits, or income of every person residing in the United States, whether derived from any kind of property, rents, interest, dividends, salaries, or from any profession, trade, employment, or vocation carried on in the United States or elsewhere, or from any other source whatevera duty of three per centum
RetSquid 2 years ago
No more??
RetSquid 2 years ago
It, therefore, must be imposed as a direct tax, without the apportionment provision, which would make it unconstitutional or outside of the limitations provided, except in the case of an American citizen working overseas or a foreigner working in the US OR a US citizen who voluntarily pays the tax. Your withholding does not fall under either class of federal taxation under the constitution but is legal only if you volunteer.
MrEurowolf 2 years ago
Does the government claim that the 16th Amendment with its word income imposes the same conditions on your wages and salaries? Yes and no. It has never claimed to be imposing an excise tax on your earnings, measured by the size of your wages. Excise taxes cannot be imposed on an individual or his property. They do claim, however that they are imposing a voluntary tax on your earnings. That voluntary tax cannot fall under indirect or excise tax definitions.
continued below
MrEurowolf 2 years ago
Retsquid are u sure about item 2 in your previous message???
(2) Gross income derived from business;
MrEurowolf 2 years ago
Everyone who receives ----"income"--- above the ----"permitted"---Threshold of taxable $ amount.Forget the $ amount argument,who is the "Everyone"?
asicit2b 2 years ago
"who is the "Everyone"? "
Individuals who had income per Title 26.
RetSquid 2 years ago
following the law from inception throughout all revisions and updates and still all of those activities are FEDERALLY CONNECTED. The law and statutes are very clear. You can't make them say what they do not and cannot say. Too bad the specifics have never been properly adjudicated.
MrEurowolf 2 years ago
"This court has repeatedly rejected the argument that wages are not income as frivolous, [citations omitted] and has also rejected the idea that a person is liable for tax only if he benefits from a governmental privilege.
Olson v. United States, 760 F.2d 1003, 1005 (9th Cir. 1985)
Post something to try and prove your 'point'.
RetSquid 2 years ago
EVANS v GORE, 253 US 245 (1920):
Does the Sixteenth Amendment authorize and support this tax and the attendant diminution; that is to say, does it bring within the taxing powers subjects theretofore excepted? The court below answered in the negative; and counsel for the government say: It is not, in view of recent decisions, contended that this amendment rendered anything taxable as income that was not so taxable before.
MrEurowolf 2 years ago
what exactly is income? how about a decent explaination not that retarded gain or profit bs
MrEurowolf 2 years ago
Income defined in Title 26:
(1) Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items;
(2) Gross income derived from business;
(3) Gains derived from dealings in property;
(4) Interest;
(5) Rents;
(6) Royalties;
(7) Dividends...
RetSquid 2 years ago
Incorrect. That is the definition for "gross income".
dagrimreaper7822 2 years ago
It is the definition of "gross income", a list of "incomes" that are to be included in your "gross income".
Each of those items are defined as "income", so you are 'incorrect'.
RetSquid 2 years ago
No I'm not. § 63 defines "taxable income" § 61 defines "gross income". That list is not a list of "incomes" but "GROSS incomes".
No section defines "income".
dagrimreaper7822 2 years ago
"§ 61 defines "gross income". "
Each is a form of "income" that when combined are "gross income".
If something is not defined you use the everyday, normal definition.
RetSquid 2 years ago
You could in fact do that for purposes of that section, but the term "income" is never defined. Point being, any time you were to otherwise come across the term "income" it is not synonymous with the term "gross income" or "taxable income" as it is often misapplied and "income" often appears with the connection that does not exist being left up to the reader to make erroneously.
dagrimreaper7822 2 years ago
Income: means any money received from any source, including but not limited to remuneration for labor, products or services; money received from governmental assistance programs; tax refunds; prize winnings; pensions; investments; and money received from any other source.
RetSquid 2 years ago
Income, as defined by the Supreme Court, means gains made through corporate activity.
TacoEqualsFtw 2 years ago
Incorrect
Income may be defined as the gain derived from capital, from labor, or from both combined, provided it be understood to include profit gained through a sale or conversion of capital assets.
Eisner v. Macomber
RetSquid 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
the show me the law stuff is beside the point , if anyone files a w4 or w9 making a statement on you the proper legal pathway to correct this is to file a 1040 for the return of the amount withheld by correcting the incorrect w2. it is a matter of liability , a w4 is submitted you have to refute it on a 1040 or it stands. failure to file is assumed liability for the amounts claimed on the w2 or 1099. there is a procedure learn it and how the fraud works read cracking the code visit losthorizon
IRSFRAUDEXPOSED 2 years ago
Federal Rule of Evidence 402 or 404 (b)
Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of civil procedure
Capitation,specialized,distinguishable revenue or economic activity.
asicit2b 2 years ago
What is your point?
RetSquid 2 years ago
To stupid ?Too stupid,Stay ignorant and you will get what you deserve.You can argue your case if you understand your situation.Learn and study what is needed BEFOR making wrong moves.Don't believe everything, test ALL things that have to do with "income"ect..Search and study and YOU will begin to see the PICTURE.Which has two sides.
asicit2b 2 years ago
I am trying to figure out the differnece between civil and criminal. I wonder if people were educated on the matter of income taxation (not that I know anything as of now...clearly) if more jury would get people of the hook. Though I wonder because of lawyer fees to fight it, if its worth it depending on your tax bracket. I hope I made sense? I am really trying to figure this out because if so I am filing differnently for 2010. LOL
JimTL1000R 2 years ago
In criminal court they also have to prove that your tax infraction was 'willfull'.
To get off you need to prove you were to stupid to know you had to pay taxes.
You can't argue against the tax law in court.
In civil case they just need to prove you had income and didn't pay the tax.
RetSquid 2 years ago
Democratic Republic ? or Did you mean Constitutional Republic.
asicit2b 2 years ago
it's funny to see so many people think we are a democraycy, if this were a democracy we would have elected representitives. we live in a democratic republic.
Keldrath 2 years ago
Nobody can makes sense of the Bible and nobody can make sense of the laws. I think people that want to instill power have a phychological advantage. They know how to instill fear a guilt into you. Sounds evil to me.
JimTL1000R 2 years ago
No income tax!. The more you buy the more tax revenue for our gov. But tax my labor and I will save. Income tax has to stop putting the squeeze on our earned/labor money. 401K is a perfect example. Put money away tax free. Then when you need it you get tax for the withdraw then again for annual income, if you want to retire earlier or are forced to retire early because of health reasons. They got you coming and going.
JimTL1000R 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
CAN THERE REALLY BE LAW OR COURTS OF LAW THAT PERMITS LEGAL STEALING & LEGAL SLAVERY?
NO MORE LEGAL THIEF ARGUMENTS ITS TIME TO BAND TOGETHER. We need unity not legal arguing.
Is freedom that which requires free people to legally pay for anothers dreams, schemes, wants, desires, pleasures, wealth building, failures bailouts & other legal mischief when I cannot force my neighbor to pay for my dreams, schemes...?
CAMPAIGNforLIBERTY*COM
RESTOREtheREPUBLIC*COM
TRUTHATTACK*ORG
ifreemantoo 2 years ago
How you got 5 (I gave you a thumbs up) is beyond. me. It must be a bunch of 12 year olds just voting for kicks. I feel You Tube should only allow people to vote negitive if they actually have shown there face on camera.
JimTL1000R 2 years ago
Comment removed
ifreemantoo2 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Thanks for the good vote Jim. I'm messin' with RetSquid. I want him to earn his legalized plunder pay. He's a government shill & trolls most of these similar topics with his same redundant message.
This is RetSquid's message in general. "Yes the stealing is all legal". So he had to develop several other channels to mark my comments as negative.
RetSquid got banned from one discussion for SpamOLabeling. He just a gubermint troll is all. Your positive vote made him work more & write less-Thanks
ifreemantoo2 2 years ago
Every sane person is your enemy.
RetSquid 2 years ago
The TREE of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants....Im growing weary of gov......HR1207
asicit2 2 years ago 2
i agree but this one needs to be a peaceful revolution. all the government needs is some whacko to attack them so they can declare a national state of emergency and clamp down on us like communists. and spring their communist revolution on us.
Keldrath 2 years ago
Took this long to figure that out.Makes more sense than the 'Income" tax. just ask me so i can scan your response.
asicit2 2 years ago
Cool I got thumb reaction !!!! Now I will go in front of the MIRROR and tell myself how well i did.
asicit2 2 years ago
you're nuts:)
RetSquid 2 years ago
No thought provoked. cancel cyber brain reconstruction......
asicit2 2 years ago
Watch the video Electronic payments tax reporting....Interesting discussion
asicit2 2 years ago
Not ment to be funny.Thought provoking.Kinda like Image control.Care to interpret what it means ?
asicit2 2 years ago
Not thought provoking just long and drawn out.
Care to say what this has to do with income tax?
RetSquid 2 years ago
...tell him(the lawyer) he should go to jail.Look at the judge,he is defiantly not confused,and says "Go to jail"THE END
asicit2 2 years ago
Is the table high enough so i can work standing up ? Bigger than a cubicle ?
asicit2 2 years ago
somewhat funny.
But not that much, kind of like your picture tale.
RetSquid 2 years ago
So I am breaking what law if i choose not to file a 1040 as it "applies" to me ?
asicit2 2 years ago
Yes.
RetSquid 2 years ago
... tell him he should go to jail for life.Tell the lawyer he could have said I see you holding a picture of a tree is there something else on the other side ?.....
asicit2 2 years ago
If nobody paid personal 'Income" taxes (as misapplied) there would be no need for tax RETURNS !
asicit2 2 years ago
But people do pay income tax and income tax returns are required by law.
RetSquid 2 years ago
Turn towards the lawyer and say why dident you see a FACE.Turn to the judge ask him,why only a FACE ?The other guy is catching on,you get in his FACE screaming."YOU SEEN ME HOLDING A PICTURE OF A TREE WITH A face ON THE OTHER SIDE....."
asicit2 2 years ago
Of course,everything has a "point" to it. Every word is an expression of the concept ( "Income") No REAL job ?What are you talking about ?Not sure... why would it be unconstitutional ?
asicit2 2 years ago