I am so SICK of people spreading lies about the income tax

Fortune Favors the Bold

I tried explaining this point before. The sixteenth amendment was a direct response to the court ruling cited in FTF. Hence their arugment is a bit spacious.

The reason Ron Paul argues it is unconstitutional is because of the fifth amendment, and the way the IRS operates. It shifts the burden of proof that one is in compliance with the law to the accussed, as oppossed to the state.

The income tax goes against the principles of America. The income tax basically means the government owns your production (communism) and says how much of it you will take home.

Even though it is backed by a constitutional amendment, I'll argue that it still remains unconstitutional.

The reason lies in the fact that we live in a Republic, not a Democracy. The 16th amendment is a direct contradiction of Article 1, Section 9..."no capitation, or other direct tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken."

The power to amend the constitution was a power intended not to change, but to add to it. It's what makes us a Republic, free from the whims of the times.

Ask yourself this...if a amendment was to be passed saying "Congress now has unrestricted ability to make laws which restrict religious expression and freedom of speech." Would that be a constitutional law?

The constitutional amendments do not give the government the power to write laws at will which are in direct contradiction to the intent of the constitution.

I believe that this is not a living document, rather, that it is the very document which gives the government authority over specific aspects of my being. If it is not followed in entirety, it is invalid.

http://webskeptic.wikidot.com/system:list-all-pages

we need proof that it was ratified....and it just isnt being shown to us at the moment.

Even advocates of rescinding the income tax are tired of false assertions.

But whether the income tax is "constitutional" or not, it is certainly, as implemented, a vehicle for violating the spirit of representative government; and I say so on at least 2 counts.

1. We are needlessly forced to pay interest on debts we in fact have certified;

2. Monies taken under the guise of taxation for a stipulated purpose are robbed for other purposes.

These activities do not just violate implied agreements and responsibilities to the people; the violations ultimately (and have already) accumulate even terminal sums just of public debt. After all, the so called Federal Reserve System further imposes upon us a system which can only multiply private debt to collapse.

So all these things are signs of a renegade, if not wholly unlawful government, bent on denying its people representation.

There is one solution to all these things; and that is mathematically perfected economy. In our Parable of Perfect Economy, Benjamin Franklin tells a story of funding government without even the need for taxation. While the proposition is practical, what we need on the contrary to do (if we are to solve the imperfections of monetary and taxation systems), is for those who use the bridge to pay for the bridge as they consume of it -- which costs of course, are minimalized to the extreme by mathematically perfected economy. The bridge for instance might be paid directly and with complete elimination of personal taxpayer overhead (as imposed by "income" tax implementations) by a fuel tax, which of course would distribute costs according to use of the asset which we have decided to create jointly through representative government. Here's the story, if you'd like to give Parable of Perfect Economy a read:

http://perfecteconomy.com/pg-parable-of-perfect-economy.html

But in any case, if you want to eliminate the income tax and all other destructive consequences of the unjust taxation and monetary systems, you best give mathematically perfected economy immediate scope.

Regards,

mike montagne -- founder of PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy, and author of mathematically perfected economy (1979)

http://www.perfecteconomy.com/

"One thing is clear: The founding Fathers never intended a nation where citizens pay nearly half of everything they earn to government." --Congressman Ron Paul, July 17 2001

You might also be interested in this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qPkZWDsf3U

if when you went down to a Social Security card and when they hand it to you you said, "excuse me there seems to be an error on this card. This is not me. I have never used all caps for my name could you please get me one that does not use all caps. When they say we cannot do that this is how all ovf them are done. You then ask who a person is suppose to talk to about an error in the data on the Card. Keep demanding to have the write information on the card. I wonder what they would do if you fought that in court?

Under the income tax you do not have a right, under the law, to claim even one penny of your earnings as yours and yours alone.
The government now claims the right to tax from the first penny to the last, at any rate it deems necessary, up to, and theoretically exceeding, 100%.
Does this seem like a type of taxation contemplated by those adopting the Constitution?

So you were converted that it is unconstitutional and you read one article on the internet you have not corroborated and are now convinced it is constitutional... I call BS!

But just in case like others have said you need to study the issue. What is unconstitutional is a direct income tax on individuals. Trading labor for compensation is not defined as income that is where the fraud comes in.

The 16th amendment was ruled to impose no new taxes by the US Supreme Court. So please explain if it imposes no new taxes how it makes individual taxes on compensation for labor constitutional?

Do your research or you will prove yourself ignorant at best, a troll at worst.

-----
Please Visit New Freelanders
Self Reliance & Preparedness Forums