Why the IRS?

[Bossobass]

What scares me is that the USA Patriot Act can be used to call your revolts against the IRS and taxes 'terrorism', in which case all of the arguments against the current tax laws go flying out the window.

The same can be said about the drug laws that allow for property search and siezure based on nothing more than an anonymous tip, as well as planted evidence.

With RFID, all that's needed is for the Feds to shut off your chip.

We are no longer innocent until proven guilty. The opposite is true, unless you're an illegal alien, in which case you're innocent despite being guilty.

This country's laws are changing so fast it's unwise to plan your future based on anything that is currently the case.

Strong arguments for supporting and voting for Ron Paul, as well as voting out the perpetrators and collusionists in Congress.

Bosso

 

[RonPaul4President]

Income tax was "created" as a direct result of the Federal Reserve. It was a scam to create wealth from nothing for a few people. Ironically, the wealthiest people on earth. Income tax is used to wage wars and pay on the national debt's interest. WAR is debt. Debt is profit. It's a never-ending cycle that has gone on for centuries with "the people" footing the bill without even knowing it. It is a scam. A lie.

 

[kylejack]

You are correct. BUT, on the moving train analogy - we MUST remember, Congress AUTHORIZES spending, the President spends it. HE ALONE is the executor ("I'm the decider!").

For example, before the election of 2006, the Congress passed a buill to build a border fence. Money was alotted for this. GW could build it today. But he hasn't. So, where did the money go? Did he spend it on something else? NO...it didn't get spent at all!!

Thus, Ron can do the same thing with all of the frivolous spending authorizations Congress gives him, and the spedning will be cut in no time.

Congress authorizes, the Executive Branch carries out and spends...

Weeeell, not exactly. Congress appropriates direct spending and discretionary spending. The President only has control of discretionary spending.

 

[CJLauderdale4]

I stand corrected...thanks!!
So, why was the border fence discretionary?? And if not, when is that (never) going to happen??

 

[dude58677]

With a small Constitutional government, there just isn't a reason to have an IRS.

 

[jfer45]

Clause 4. No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.


16th Amendment:
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

With the passage of the 16th Amendment, Congress does have the power to impose direct taxes on income without apportionment. The primary question seems to be whether or not the IRS is an actual, legal agency.

 

[hambone1982]

Clause 4. No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.


16th Amendment:
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

With the passage of the 16th Amendment, Congress does have the power to impose direct taxes on income without apportionment. The primary question seems to be whether or not the IRS is an actual, legal agency.

The supreme court ruled that the 16th amendment gave the federal government "no new taxing powers."

I wonder if the supreme court is as corrupt as the rest of the government today. I wonder if a new IRS case came before the court if they would ignore the facts and rule corruptly. I have a sinking feeling that they are as corrupt as the rest of the lot (after seeing their ruling following the 2000 election (I thought that ruling was wack and I voted for Bush in 2000 - before my eyes were opened ;-).

 

[mconder]

One bad thing about an income tax (among several others) is that the gov't agents pretend that your financial affairs and how much money you have/earn the are any of their f***ing business and require you to give up your 5th amendment rights and show them your personal papers.

No kidding. It's pretty obvious the right to privacy was written to keep one's financial affairs private from the state. Who can argue this was not the intent?

 

[Swmorgan77]

Why does Ron Paul want to abolish the IRS? Don't they just collect taxes and enforce tax law?

The IRS is very interesting. If you look at the laws, there is actually no act of congress that authorizes their existence or operation as an arm of the government.

They "claim" to be an arm of the "Treasury" but when you really look into it, they are effectively tied into the Federal Reserve acting as a collection arm under a Federal Reserve "Treasury" department. They are not a department of the actual, United States Department of Treasury. If they were, again there would have to be an act of Congress creating them.

This is all probably too complex to explain to somone in an electioneering "get out the word" situation.

When people raise the issue of "how will the government pay for ____" in response to abolishing the IRS I just point out that all of the Income Tax goes to pay the interest on the national debt, and not to pay for services. The services are run up on a massive, unlimited line of credit (enabled by the FED).

The other good thing is to point out that Ron Paul is not opposed to taxation in general, just unconstitutional ones. The Constitution allows for many of the taxes we have that pay for important things like Roads, etc. It also allows for even more taxation at the state level, since the states have to compete with each other and this keeps taxes low. Minimal taxation (like the Constitution mandates) would necessarily mean minimal government.

Just ask people if they think they are getting a good deal for what they pay to the Federal government. If the investment were so great, the government wouldn't have to FORCE us to pay it.

 

[angrydragon]

Well, I just hope we're all in agreement with Ron in dropping the IRS and the Fed. income tax. It's just a huge burden on us. Once that's done, state income taxes should be easier to fight.

To those in states without both the income tax and sales tax, how does the state and local governments get their money? User fees? other taxes?


If everyone were given the option not to pay taxes for 3 years or whatever, who would pay?

 

[mikelovesgod]

There won't be no taxes to replace what's currently happening. More than likely Dr. Paul would enforce a flat tax of buying goods and services over the IRS.

It would encourage the free market and really increase revenue so he could continue to cut other taxes and make the country buy and sell their taxes fairly and evenly. You want a big boat and large home? Pay for it and get taxed on it. You cut the deficit, balance the budget, and make the burden for the tax-payer fair.

 

[Aeschylus]

There won't be no taxes to replace what's currently happening. More than likely Dr. Paul would enforce a flat tax of buying goods and services over the IRS.

There won't be a need for any such thing. Ron Paul has already made it quite clear his position on this. He will eliminate the IRS and replace them with NOTHING.