Posted on 03/27/2006 3:11:32 PM PST by Libloather
You would be amazed at how fast a tax court judge can approve a notice of levy and seizure. I have seen it done in thirty seconds.
The ball's in your court at that point, because the IRS will grab everything and sell it off before you get out of the courtroom (assuming you're there in the first place).
Fight them there, right now, where it's just bankruptcies, and it takes a year or two. Toss another 40 million cases, and it will take bank and government decades to be able to take ANYTHING.
Ever hear the phrase "Possession is nine points of the law?" Once they execute a seizure, you have zero assets to pay for a lawyer--assuming one will take a sure-lose case of not paying your taxes. Also note that Congress can change the laws under which one contests tax cases in ways not favorable to you.
The "other things" were no one would sign on to it. That is the real reason.
And then you will be on the street and on welfare.
And if they won't give you welfare and have taken your livelihood, you will have the RIGHT to steal in order to eat. And you and 40 million others will walk right into the supermarket and do so, and then the authorities will HAVE to put you in jail, or allow the whole system to collapse, or yield.
France demonstrates that a government cannot possibly stand when millions of its own rebel, unless it is willing to gun them down in the streets.
But that is perilous. Because if you issue that order, the Army might arrest YOU, and then it's over.
Ping for later, when I'm not at work. There are obvious differences between the two 'plans'.
Exempt food, housing, and medical ?
Why protect those industries ? The costs of those items would just skyrocket. People need to be free to choose what to spend their money on. Exempt nothing. Tax everything. That is the only way to ensure people are choosing products and services because of the value of those items themselves and not due to tax favoritism.
If you want to untax "the necessities of life", then the FairTax uses a better method -- refund people the taxes that anybody would pay on spending up to the poverty level.
That way you are not untaxing caviar just so you can untax hamburger. If you think you can find a line between "luxury" food items and "necessary" food items, you are dreaming. Caviar and hamburger look easy -- but what about sirloin steak vs. ribeye ? ribeye vs. filet ? Are you going to exclude fast food but tax gourmet ?
Would you exclude housing rent and mortgage payments ? on any home or still tax mansions ? or exclude the mansions as well ? Who gets to define "mansion" ? $500K buys a mansion is some parts of the country and a small condo in others.
Exempting food, medicine, and housing sounds easy, but it is really just social engineering and puts you on a very slippery slope.
Personally, I wouldn't exempt anything and I wouldn't refund anybody either. Everybody should pay taxes. A 10% NRST with no refunds would replace all income taxes. Another 7% NRST would replace the SS/M taxes -- or leave it as a tax on workers and wait for the whole system to implode before addressing the problem.
Nope, tax evaders will not be eligible for welfare. Believe me, that little detail will be taken care of.
And if they won't give you welfare and have taken your livelihood, you will have the RIGHT to steal in order to eat.
And the people you attempt to steal from will have the RIGHT to shoot you.
And you and 40 million others will walk right into the supermarket and do so, and then the authorities will HAVE to put you in jail, or allow the whole system to collapse, or yield.
You can't jail a dead man. And your fellow citizens that you insist on stealing from will shoot you.
But that is perilous. Because if you issue that order, the Army might arrest YOU, and then it's over.
Bzzt. The military will obey orders for one simple reason: if they mutiny, Russia and China might decide that the time to launch a "limited counterforce strike" has come, and the only way to prevent that is to show that the chain of command remains in effect. That was wargamed all the way back in the 1970s, when the military seriously considered removing President Nixon from office by force.
But all of this is hypothetical, because the consequences I outlined earlier will keep the numbers from rising to 40 million. Your fellow Americans are not willing to ditch the house, the cars, and their career mobility over illegal immigration, especially when they're the ones hiring day labor to work on their homes and yards.
So your solution is to live in slavery, in fear of that your owners (the government) will terminate you.
People don't have the right to shoot people for shoplifting in most states.
But that's beside the point.
You are perfectly demonstrating my point: the law is an idol to Americans. You really, truly believe that if there were millions of people refusing to pay taxes, that houses and cars would be seized, and everything else would go on as usual, that somehow, 10 million people would just sit and shiver on streetcorners and starve, or that private law enforcement, in favor of the government, would keep the whole social structure from breaking down.
France is demonstrating right now that a substantial defiance of government can force government to collapse abjectly and retreat with its tail between its legs.
Last night, Jim Robinson posted a question about a Constitutional Convention to combat illegal immigration. FReepers galore suggested that this was dangerous and couldn't be done.
I suggested forming a new political party instead. FReepers told me that couldn't be done either.
So, I've concluded that illegal immigration cannot be stopped, and that we are headed towards a Spanish-speaking, Catholic majority, sooner rather than later.
I've also decided that I don't care.
What difference does it make, really?
So, the system is unsustainable...but it also cannot be changed and everyone will obey it no matter what.
Well, then the rational thing to do is to not worry about it and decide to like the way it's headed, since the political forces driving things are invincible. If you cannot win, live with the new system.
Se habla Espagnol?
The same thing, really, applies to Islam.
I'm a man. Islam takes over, I can have more women, and they can't talk back, and I have a lot more authority in my home. What's the price? Saying "Allah akbar". Ok, man, Allah akbar. Now, where are the women?
Under what you propose, you will have zero recourse.
You are perfectly demonstrating my point: the law is an idol to Americans.
It's such an idol that they'll cheefully break it even as they demand tighter enforcement.
And that's my point: Americans will not cheerfully break the law when the end state is loss of their worldly goods, particularly if said law-breaking is to protest non-enforcement of a law that many of them knowingly break anyway (namely, hiring illegal aliens).
You really, truly believe that if there were millions of people refusing to pay taxes, that houses and cars would be seized, and everything else would go on as usual, that somehow, 10 million people would just sit and shiver on streetcorners and starve, or that private law enforcement, in favor of the government, would keep the whole social structure from breaking down.
No, I'm pointing out that you'd never get to the 40 million mark, Hell, you'd never get to the 1 million mark. You'd be lucky to get to the 10,000 mark.
France is demonstrating right now that a substantial defiance of government can force government to collapse abjectly and retreat with its tail between its legs.
France ALWAYS collapses abjectly and retreats with its tail between its legs. We are Americans, it will not happen like that here.
So, I've concluded that illegal immigration cannot be stopped, and that we are headed towards a Spanish-speaking, Catholic majority, sooner rather than later.
Is that the nature of your complaint? The brown-skinned folks who talk and pray funny are going to take over?
I've also decided that I don't care.
Even as you talk of trying to kick off a revolt?
Good God Almighty, that's pathetic.
God gave you a brain; do Him the homage of using it for something other than posting idiotic misstatements of other people's positions.
"This country belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it." --Abraham Lincoln
"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." --George Washington
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin
"Even as you talk of trying to kick off a revolt?
Good God Almighty, that's pathetic."
Rush spoke of kicking off a tax revolt.
I was playing with the idea.
There's nobody better placed in America to start such a thing as Rush Limbaugh.
And if willing accomplices in the blogosphere shared the message, I think it might have a shot of starting all at once.
The real question is whether or not, if Limbaugh launched it and it spread like the wildfire it could, would I JOIN it? And would you? That's what matters. Not that I'm pathetic or not. I don't pretend to be a leader of anything, and there are very good reasons why I am not.
truth bump
For telling me to do something that will likely get me arrested and thrown in prison?
This "advice" is about as brilliant as me advising him to take an oxycontin pill.
Let the Limbaugh Revolution commence!
No, I'm pointing out that the proposed course of action is unrealistic, because you're not going to get 40 million people to give up the stuff they've worked for over the years to enforce immigration laws, especially when those same people are violating the laws against employing illegal aliens.
Are you always this disconnected from reality?
In other words, you're far too cowardly to actually do it unless a bunch of other folks went ahead of you.
And that is exactly why it won't happen--because your fellow Americans are most likely like you.
No, but neither am I so closed-minded that I dismiss out-of-hand ideas that may hold some promise of reversing the course of an elitist, self-aggrandizing Congress that thinks that they control the country.
Do you always finish you posts with snide comments that do nothing but detract from your argument? If so, feel free to take them with you to DU.
"In other words, you're far too cowardly to actually do it unless a bunch of other folks went ahead of you.
And that is exactly why it won't happen--because your fellow Americans are most likely like you."
Of course.
I am French.
We are universally believed to be cowards.
I am not interested in suicide and pointless self- immolation.
But I do observe that in France, the people routinely face down the government and force it to retreat, because there is the willingness to follow the lead and stand together, in solidarity. Individually? No. You will get your brains beat out by the CRS. But unionized movements and organized movements? Yes. Those things can work. Individuals are weak and powerless. But collectively, they are mightier than government.
Because I am a cowardly French, I am only willing to move en masse with others. And when we do this, our government is beaten and broken and pulls back laws and retreats in fear.
When I am wearing my American hat, the same is true. I am only willing to move en masse with others. I am not interested in being beaten to a pulp by a sherriff to make some sort of pointless "protest" or to be thrown into a jail cell for "Bubba" to rape me. We French are cowards. We will only move en masse. But we Americans? We fear our government much more deeply than the French do. We will not move AT ALL, ever.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.