jimbrown

Sure, I can. You live in a constitutional republic based on democratic principles. The constitution was amended to add a provision for income tax. You can pay that tax, or you can go to prison.Quote Let me explain something to you, Kennedy, as you may have missed civics class that day. You see , the Rights enumerated in The Bill of Rights weren't granted to the people by the government. Oh no, you see the People hold these Rights and many others just by the fact of their being people. As the Rights weren't granted by government they also can never be denied by any *legitimate* government. The Fifth Ammendment clearly states that private property cannot be confiscated for public use without just compensation. My money is my property. I don't think I'll be going to prison if someone seeks to deny me my God given Rights. You may be but I'm not a punk. Peace, Jim B.

Don Jardine...? ??? Peace, Jim B.

Quote It seems to me that everyone who claims that taxes are unconstitutional or "theft" should present explicit alternative mechanisms for either funding such services, or ensuring that those who can pay but refuse to do so derive no benefit, direct or indirect, from these services.Quote OK here we go , Georgia Don, the US government has a huge number of taxes other than income tax which could quite adequately fund the nations' necessarry day to day running expenses . The reason for the income tax is simply to pay the interest on the national debt. Every income tax dollar collected goes toward the interest on the debt. The debt is to a private bank, the Federal Reserve Bank. The Constitution saves to Congress alone the authority to coin monies. With the creation of the Federal Reserve Bank the Constitution was subverted and now our nation has debt which should never have been. Peace, Jim B.

Sand , Surf, Sun, gotta Love it !!! I'm just not so fond of dressing up daily as Captain Red Beard and engaging in the national past time. Baseball is more to my liking and I think I'll stay right here ,have some hot dogs, apple pie and insist that my Rights not be denied. Peace, Jim B. And you want to stay here for a free ride.... and not pay for that which you use... Hmmm that sounds all too familiar. As I've related to you earlier, not one dime of income tax goes toward running the country. It all goes to private bankers. Free ride? I work for a living and I pay my way. I don't see where I should donate my hard earned cash to a consortium of private bankers(Federal Reserve). Can you explain to me why you do or why you think I should? Peace, Jim B.

As stated , I'm not arguing. I've presented facts. Obviously you can't dispute those so instead you want to paint me as "Irrational". Have a nice day ,Andy. Peace, Jim B.

Sand , Surf, Sun, gotta Love it !!! I'm just not so fond of dressing up daily as Captain Red Beard and engaging in the national past time. Baseball is more to my liking and I think I'll stay right here ,have some hot dogs, apple pie and insist that my Rights not be denied. Peace, Jim B.

The Fifth Amendment is proof that there is no income tax debt. This argument has been addressed, in detail in this thread. You simply choose to ignore it. Your only "rebuttal" to the response that virtually the entirety of the federal judiciary (including the SCOTUS) has consistently and unanimously ruled against that position for the past 100 years is that the federal judiciary should recuse itself. I say again: you're simply not being rational. And I learned a long time ago not to waste time arguing with irrational. I'm not "arguing ". I'm simply stating fact. It is a fact that every Federal judge has a huge conflict of interest problem when it comes to deciding Federal income tax cases. That conflict is due to the fact that he/ she derives his/her income from one of the parties involved in the dispute. Those are Facts! If you believe that jurists with a conflict of interest should not recuse themselves then I believe you may want to take an ethics and law refresher course, counselor. Peace, Jim B.

[By that (il)logic, every federal jurist in the country would have to recuse him/herself from hearing any income tax case. Frankly, you're not speaking rationally. Yes they would. But if you are advocating judges presiding over trials where the judge has a serious conflict of interest, I question your rationallity. Peace, Jim B.

Amazon, would you be suprised to learn that every dollar paid to income tax goes toward paying the intrest on the debt? Yes that is very true. Not one income tax dollar goes toward anything else Peace, Jim B. But you can always pray for a few drops of TRICKLE from on HIGH to sustain you. Amazon, you might want to ask yourself, to whom are we paying this intrest? The answer is that we pay intrest on the loan to our country to the private bank which was created just before the 16th ammendment was put up to vote. We pay the interest to the Federal Reserve Bank. Peace, Jim B.

The Fifth Amendment is proof that there is no income tax debt. Peace, Jim B.

Something you might want to consider ,Andy, is that as each of the political appointees on the Supreme Court get their paychecks from the Federal Government their may have been a wee bit of conflict of interest and any moral jurist would have recused him/herself from deciding that case. Peace, Jim B.

I liked your answer a LOT...

Actually.. , I have a life. I don't spend all of my time on the boards. Sorry . Peace, Jim B.

So are you in agreement that the criteria of"just compensation" isn't there? No. Rich people in this country have FAR better protection over their property interests than poor. FFS wars are fought to protect them. So what about "just compensation"? Do you think that every citizen giving a dollar to the government gets a dollar return in services? Peace, Jim B.

"Your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose." Their property, their rules. Don't like it - don't go on their property. Their property their rules huh? OK , what if their rule is that any female entering their property has waived their Right to sovereinity and will be sold to other visitors of the property as a sex slave? Their property their rules. Peace, Jim B. If you want to use stupid examples there's no end of people that will give you equally stupid responses in return - let's keep it rooted in reality and not some slave-harem fantasy, m'kay? You are making the argument that YOUR rights overrule THEIR rights - what happened to your statement of 'my rights are limited but equal to the rights of others', above? In further argument, you stated and then deleted, above, that 'you hope the cops disarm them before they cross your line' - why do you feel that you can dictate if someone is armed on YOUR property, but they cannot dictate if someone is armed on THEIR property? Listen , I can put up a million signs. That doesn't neccesarily mean they have any legal effect. Right now around my garden I'd like to have a sign forbidding rabbits and deer from chewing the greenery. I don't think they will abide by my regulations. Which brings us back to which Rights can a property owner deny visitors of the property? Can your 2nd ammendment Rights be suspended? How about the first? Can a property owner sell you into sexuall slavery if you step onto their property? I guess what I'm trying to figure out here is where is the line drawn between private citizens Rights ,and the rights of property owners. Peace, Jim B.

Report a crime in Watts and another in Beverly Hills and see if the services are the same. So are you in agreement that the criteria of"just compensation" isn't there? Peace, Jim B.

Wasn't Jack great in that movie? I love you Doll. Jim B.

Not exactly!! Look Shawn, I forgive you that pa . I also hope the monitors will over look it. I'ts ok greenies, me and Shawn are just josstlin' .No harm no foul. Peace, Jim B. Gatorade, its got electolites!".....stupid.

You don't think that safety, protection and services that allows you to make wages are not "just compensation"? I understand your argument but how about if together we take another look at this from a different perspective. Sure , "safety,protection and servces that allow" one to make wages are compensation. The question is are they , as required by the Fifth Amendment, "just compensation". I contend that considering the progressive tax code, those government services which you mention could never live up to the requirement of "just compensation". The simple reason for my view is that someone paying no tax and someone paying $100,000 in tax recieve the same services from the government therefore those services cannot be considered as "just compensation". Peace, Jim B.

What Rights do you believe I waive when I enter private property? . "Your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose." Their property, their rules. Don't like it - don't go on their property. Their property their rules huh? OK , what if their rule is that any female entering their property has waived their Right to sovereinity and will be sold to other visitors of the property as a sex slave? Their property their rules. Peace, Jim B.

Let me explain something to you,billvon(and this would be more fun over a beer at the dz afterthe planes are tied down), the Fifth ammendment speaks of one of the Rights of Men. It says that government cannot confiscate private property for public use without "just" compensation. So you kinda see where that is, basicly the government cant take your shit unless they pay you for it. If Airborne division needs a few new rigs they cant just come to the dz and scarf up any rig on the packing mat unless they provide "just compensation". In order for government to confiscate your property, according to the Fifth Ammendment" ,they must pay you for it. That's in the Bill of Rights. Now here is an interesting tid bit about Righs ; no government gave you any Rights, you gained your Rights not through the works or deeds of any Man. No,simply by your birth you were entitled to Rights. And no one ,no government, can legitimately take those Rights away from you. So what was it you were saying,billvon, about the 16th ammendment? Were you demonstrating that the government is illegitimate? Peace, Jim B.

Oh yes, I definately do. As long as my carrying of fire arms doesn't deprive anyone of their Rights. Can you site an example of where my carrying would deprive another of their Rights? Peace, Jim B.

No. You do NOT have the right to carry a gun on MY property if I say you don't. Quote Ok , I'm not disagreeing with you out of hand but I would like to further discuss your theory. Are you saying that when I enter your property I have forfieted all of my Rights? I mean you seem to think that when I enter your sheikdom my 2nd are gone on your declaration. What about my Right to not be a slave. When I enter your sheikdom have I waived that one also? What Rights do you believe I waive when I enter private property? Peace, Jim B.

Could you refresh us on the wording of the Fifth Ammendment? Peace, Jim B.

You don't pay property taxes? Here in the U. S. you have to use "private property of wages" to pay taxes owed. unless you have some other means of paying taxes with private property that isn't yours. "Gatorade -It has electrolytes" Peace, Jim B.