FileCabi.net Forum Index > Everything Else Money and Taxes
Salvaged from Archive: These posts were salvaged from the web archive of the original FileCabi forum (2007–2008). Usernames are as they were then and aren’t linked to today’s accounts.
| Author | Message |
|---|
mousewallrat
Salvaged from Archive | Posted: 27 Jan 2010, 22:40 · [Salvaged from Archive]
The federal government does not spend money
When you buy a coke, you pull a dollar from your limited supply, put it in the machine and as far as you are concerned, it is gone forever. If you want more dollars you have to go get some more. In reality, your ownership of the dollar and trading it away is only a small part of that dollar’s travels. The entity that sold you the coke now has the dollar and will spend it again. If it were not for taxes that dollar would circulate forever.
A government dollar is different. If the US government buys a coke, it immediately gets a portion of the money back through taxes. The fellow that sells you the coke pays income tax, social security tax, sales tax, employment tax, property tax, business tax, etc. out of that dollar. After the taxes are taken out there is only 30 to 60 cents left for the coke seller. When he buys something with what is left, the next fellow gets to pay another round of taxes. By the time the dollar passes through 2 or 4 hands, over 90% of the government dollar has been sent back to its source, the government.
So what the federal government is doing is NOT spending, it is circulating; giving out with one hand and taking it back with the other. The effect is that the people that handled the dollar generated and shared some wealth, stimulating the economy.
Circulated money is not taxpayer money it is government money
Government spending and taxing do not have a hard connection. Did your taxes go down when there was a budget surplus under Clinton? Do your taxes go up when the deficit goes up? Does the government lose its ability to spend when there isn’t enough taxpayer money coming in? The answer to all three questions is “No.”
“The government pays its bills through taxes, debt, and inflation of the currency.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt ) As long as there is a demand for money (that is not everyone is “rich”) and inflation is low, the government can incur more debt and pay the debt by creating more money.
Increased economic activity also increases tax income because when money changes hands faster (the ‘velocity of money’ increases), taxes are collected faster . This is why, to a point, lowering tax rates increases tax income because if people have more money they usually spend more money.
As long as the economy continues to grow, this is sustainable. When the world finally reaches a point of stable or declining population growth, or reduced expectations for standards of living, things will change dramatically.
Taxing
The government placed itself squarely in the economic system (taxing and spending) for the purpose of controlling people. Our government taxes partially to pay for debt but primarily it taxes to control the society. It does this for two reasons. One is that some of our leaders want to be sure that no one gets too rich for too long. Rather than let market forces control the economy, they use taxes to level incomes and spending to redistribute the money. You can thank Karl Marx for expressing this as graduated income tax and it may not be completely bad.
Another reason for taxing and spending is Social Engineering: “Government influence of behavior through incentives and disincentives built into economic policy and tax policy.” The government taxes what it wants to discourage and gives money to what it wants to encourage. So if you look at what is taxed, business, employment, property, sales, alcohol, tobacco, etc. and look at what is subsidized, unemployment, government make-work, social programs that create life-long dependence, disability, out of wedlock children, etc., you have to wonder why would our representatives want to discourage and encourage these things.
Since the government doesn’t spend money but circulates it, the tax rate determines how fast the money gets back to the government. Tax rates control how many times a dollar must be exchanged before it is returned to the source. There is the eternal push and pull over this between the Socialists (Democrats) and Individualists (used to be Republicans). The Socialists want to increase taxes thereby giving government more power to spend and control the people. The Individualists want to reduce taxes thereby leaving the money in the hands of the people longer and giving less control to government people.
The federal government holds the state governments hostage by taxing their citizens and businesses, then giving it back to the states only if the state governments comply with the federal’s wishes. A recent example is Louisiana, which was forced tighten its drinking laws (back door prohibition) or lose sorely needed highway money.
For those who say that the government does not have the legal authority to collect income tax, you may be right (sort of). It seems to be true that the government cannot show the chapter and verse that gives its authority to tax BUT if you fail to pay and try to challenge it in court, you will be tried in an Article I Tribunal (Tax Court) NOT an Article III Tribunal (Constitutional Court). So any attempt to defend yourself by using The Constitution or Law will fail, you will lose your property and go to jail.
Article III tribunals are the Supreme Court of the United States and the 13 United States courts of appeals and 94 United States district courts that make up the judicial branch of the government defined by Article III of the Constitution. These courts have the power to hear cases involving the Constitution or federal law and certain cases involving disputes between citizens of different states or countries. Only Article III courts may judge cases involving life, liberty, and private property rights, with limited exceptions.
The United States Tax Court is an Article I tribunal.
Article I tribunals are certain federal courts having differing levels of independence from the executive and legislative branches. They can be Legislative Courts that review agency decisions, Ancillary Courts with judges appointed by Article III appeals court judges, or administrative agencies. Article I judges are not subject to the Article III protections. The United States Supreme Court has determined that Article I tribunals may exist, but that their power must be circumscribed and when deprivation of life, liberty, property is involved, their decisions are subject to ultimate review in an Article III court.
Constitutional protections don’t apply when it comes to taxes. You are assumed to be guilty until proved innocent. You are required to testify against yourself. People who contest the imposition of a tax may also bring an action in United States District Court or the Court of Federal Claims but ONLY after the tax has been paid first.
The Tax Court is the only place where taxpayers may bring a challenge without having first paid the disputed tax in full. So, if you haven’t paid your taxes, you can’t get your trial moved out of the Tax Court to the Article III court. Guess whom the Tax Court is going to side with.
Copyright 2010 by NotesOnMoney
Updated 01/26/10
[email removed] | MontysDouble
Salvaged from Archive | Posted: 19 Feb 2010, 15:56 · [Salvaged from Archive]
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/u_s_economy_grinds_t…
U.S. Economy Grinds To Halt As Nation Realizes Money Just A Symbolic, Mutually Shared Illusion
February 16, 2010
WASHINGTON—The U.S. economy ceased to function this week after unexpected existential remarks by Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke shocked Americans into realizing that money is, in fact, just a meaningless and intangible social construct.
What began as a routine report before the Senate Finance Committee Tuesday ended with Bernanke passionately disavowing the entire concept of currency, and negating in an instant the very foundation of the world's largest economy.
"Though raising interest rates is unlikely at the moment, the Fed will of course act appropriately if we…if we…" said Bernanke, who then paused for a moment, looked down at his prepared statement, and shook his head in utter disbelief. "You know what? It doesn't matter. None of this—this so-called 'money'—really matters at all."
"It's just an illusion," a wide-eyed Bernanke added as he removed bills from his wallet and slowly spread them out before him. "Just look at it: Meaningless pieces of paper with numbers printed on them. Worthless."
According to witnesses, Finance Committee members sat in thunderstruck silence for several moments until Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) finally shouted out, "Oh my God, he's right. It's all a mirage. All of it—the money, our whole economy—it's all a lie!"
Screams then filled the Senate Chamber as lawmakers and members of the press ran for the exits, leaving in their wake aisles littered with the remains of torn currency.
As news of the nation's collectively held delusion spread, the economy ground to a halt, with dumbfounded citizens everywhere walking out on their jobs as they contemplated the little green drawings of buildings and dead white men they once used to measure their adequacy and importance as human beings.
At the New York Stock Exchange, Wednesday morning's opening bell echoed across a silent floor as the few traders who arrived for work out of habit looked up blankly at the meaningless scrolling numbers on the flashing screens above.
"I've spent 25 years in this room yelling 'Buy, buy! Sell, sell!' and for what?" longtime trader Michael Palermo said. "All I've done is move arbitrary designations of wealth from one column to another, wasting my life chasing this unattainable hallucination of wealth."
"What a cruel cosmic joke," he added. "I'm going home to hug my daughter."
Sources at the White House said President Obama was "still trying to get his head around all this" and was in seclusion with his coin collection, muttering "it's just metal, it's just metal" over and over again.
"The president will be making a statement very soon," press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters. "At the moment, though, his mind is just too blown to comment."
A few U.S. banks have remained open, though most teller windows are unmanned due to a lack of interest in transactions involving mere scraps of paper or, worse, decimal points and computer data signifying mere scraps of paper. At a Bank of America branch in Spokane, WA, curious former customers wandered aimlessly through a large empty vault, while several would-be robbers of a Chase bank in Columbus, OH reportedly put their guns down and exited the building hand in hand with security guards, laughing over the inherent absurdity of the idea of $100 bills.
Likewise, the real estate industry has all but vanished, with mortgage lenders seeing no reason to stop people from reclaiming their foreclosed-upon homes.
"I don't even know what we were thinking in the first place," said former banker Nathan Collins of Brandon, MS, as he jimmyed open a door to allow a single mother and her five children to move back into their house. "A bunch of people sign a bunch of papers, and now this family has no place to live? That's just plain ludicrous."
The realization that money is nothing more than an elaborate head game seems to have penetrated the entire country: In Wilmington, DE, for instance, a collection agent reportedly broke down in joyful sobs when he informed a woman on the other end of the phone that he had absolutely no reason to harass her anymore, as her Discover Card debt was no longer comprehensible.
For some Americans, the fog of disbelief surrounding the nation's epiphany has begun to lift, with many building new lives free from the illusion of money.
"It's back to basics for me," Bernard Polk of Waverly, OH said. "I'm going to till the soil for my own sustenance and get anything else I need by bartering. If I want milk, I'll pay for it in tomatoes. If need a new hoe, I'll pay for it in lettuce."
When asked, hypothetically, how he would pay for complicated life-saving surgery for a loved one, Polk seemed uncertain.
"That's a lot of vegetables, isn't it?" he said. | JACKASS2010
Salvaged from Archive | Posted: 19 Feb 2010, 16:03 · [Salvaged from Archive]
hey monty what do you think of this stephen conroy toolbag? | Josh85
Salvaged from Archive | Posted: 19 Feb 2010, 16:09 · [Salvaged from Archive]
Only fucken Montysdouble would be awake at 6am in the morning on a saturday morning... posting about money and taxes.
Jesus christ man. You don't even take drugs. | JACKASS2010
Salvaged from Archive | Posted: 19 Feb 2010, 16:12 · [Salvaged from Archive]
josh my question applies to you especially | Josh85
Salvaged from Archive | Posted: 19 Feb 2010, 16:16 · [Salvaged from Archive]
josh my question applies to you especially
I have no idea who the fuck steven conroy even is. :omg: | JACKASS2010
Salvaged from Archive | Posted: 19 Feb 2010, 16:18 · [Salvaged from Archive]
I have no idea who the fuck steven conroy even is. :omg:
he is the dude that's trying to censor ausfailias internetz! no more snuffx, no moar 4chan, hell he's even trying to censor small tits and bitches having squirting orgasms. | Josh85
Salvaged from Archive | Posted: 19 Feb 2010, 16:21 · [Salvaged from Archive]
he is the dude that's trying to censor ausfailias internetz! no more snuffx, no moar 4chan, hell he's even trying to censor small tits and bitches having squirting orgasms.
Are you fucking serious?
That's like... 95% of the enjoyment i get out of the internet... snuffx, 4chan.. small tit having petite chicks getting fucked stupid and squirting all over the place.
That's fucking retarded. I refuse to believe that the powers that be would let this kind of thing happen.
I'm kind of certain that it wouldn't happen. We aren't fucking China. We don't need our internet censored. | JACKASS2010
Salvaged from Archive | Posted: 19 Feb 2010, 16:23 · [Salvaged from Archive]
Are you fucking serious?
That's like... 95% of the enjoyment i get out of the internet... snuffx, 4chan.. small tit having petite chicks getting fucked stupid and squirting all over the place.
That's fucking retarded. I refuse to believe that the powers that be would let this kind of thing happen.
I'm kind of certain that it wouldn't happen. We aren't fucking China. We don't need our internet censored.
http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Project_Freeweb | MontysDouble
Salvaged from Archive | Posted: 19 Feb 2010, 16:38 · [Salvaged from Archive]
hey monty what do you think of this stephen conroy toolbag?Yep, he's a toolbag.
The internet filter plan is silly. The stated aim of removing Australians' access to kiddie porn is fair enough, but as the filter is a simple blacklist of sites that host "illegal" (ie: refused classification under Australian law) content won't do a thing to stop people sharing whatever using P2P.
If (when :omg:) the filter plan goes ahead, it might increase server workload- how big is the blacklist going to be? If every page every user clicks through to is checked against a blacklist that could be gigabytes in size, how long will that take? Will it be updated daily or even hourly, maybe from a central location?
Even if the filter works effectively with minimal slowing of the 'net, it's ridiculous to assume a workaround won't immediately be found and widely disseminated.
More worrying (in a slightly tin-foil hat way) is the potential for the filter to be (ab)used to block any site where illegal acts are discussed or advocated. Specifically: Euthanasia is illegal here. While there is a fair amount of discussion in mainstream media, a site that offers specific advice could be blacklisted.
The icing on the cake is that the filter will be mandatory, and places the onus on ISPs to follow govt directions as to what is not OK for us to see online. What if, after the filter's implementation, this is used as a precedent to require ISPs to similarly "filter" email contents or P2P shared files?
All that said, I kind of wish that the filter had prevented me from seeing that Mr Hands video. :wth:
Only fucken Montysdouble would be awake at 6am in the morning on a saturday morning... posting about money and taxes.
Jesus christ man. You don't even take drugs.Err, the post was kind of more about humour but fair call- I'll go out and score some heroin immediately. :p
Happy now Josh? :D
Josh: Stephen Conroy is the minister for telegraph, semaphore and saying "Oh yeah? You STFU" to Telstra. | Josh85
Salvaged from Archive | Posted: 19 Feb 2010, 16:46 · [Salvaged from Archive]
Err, the post was kind of more about humour but fair call- I'll go out and score some heroin immediately. :p
Happy now Josh? :D
Josh: Stephen Conroy is the minister for telegraph, semaphore and saying "Oh yeah? You STFU" to Telstra.
Heroin wouldn't keep you awake and cause you to neglect ur sleeping pattern.
You need to look towards the amphetamine class of drugs. | MontysDouble
Salvaged from Archive | Posted: 19 Feb 2010, 16:53 · [Salvaged from Archive]
Maybe I'm just not man enough to handle the amphetamine Awesome. :p
Here's a link to an article about the filter, currently under trial on a voluntary basis:
http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/soa/Wikileaks-spill… |
Sign in or create an account to reply to this old topic. |
