Posted on 01/13/2003 1:26:05 PM PST by heyhey
Edited on 04/13/2004 3:30:09 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
HARRISBURG, Pa. - A tax protester who allegedly promotes a bogus legal loophole to convince people they owe no taxes was ordered by a federal judge to stop the practice and turn over his clients' records.
The order came Friday in the government's effort to force Thurston Bell of Hanover to stop giving clients allegedly false tax advice and charging large fees for filing tax returns.
(Excerpt) Read more at bayarea.com ...
Which is what confidential informants always say. Technically true--but irrelevant.
I don't know with certainty. All I know is that many of the folks who spread your flavor of BS aren't averse to sharing their customer lists with the IRS for a relatively modest fee.
Wrong answer.
I've seen what happens when ideologues claim to know all and see all. They ignore those nasty second-order effects--and the dead people thus entailed--as merely the necessary sacrifices to bring about their utopia.
We have a Constitution. If you think you can actually get 70 million taxpayers to stop paying taxes, then you can shut off the income tax without doing so, using the mechanisms of the Constitution. But that's a little too much like hard work, so a lot of "conservatives" shy away from it.
Bottom line: we didn't get this way overnight. It will take a lot of hard work to get back to something more suited to American ideals and basic sense. The very system that kept us from getting to where we are in a few years is what keeps it from moving back with that rapidity.
The income tax is, sadly, constitutional. It is a foolishly stupid way to raise the necessary revenues to run a government. However, foolishness and stupidity in governmental affairs are not unconstitutional. Preventing our government from being that stupid and foolish is up to the citizenry.
Maybe the testiness just means he has a conscience.
It's a refusal to suffer fools gladly--more properly, a refusal to suffer fools at all.
" In less than three months, which is the time horizon you'd try to force them to act within?"
You have one hell of an imagination. I didn't say either of the things that you attribute to me. You are pathetic.
No, you just made a big production out of saying that I'm the anti-Christ because of who I have worked for, and who my brother works for.
Again, in a technical sense you're correct--but it's the sort of correct that is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
Like I said, you started the game...I just played it better than you did. Tango Sierra.
Now that is a pretty silly response.
Judges really do understand that they are not truly independent and their economic well being comes from a government flush with money. They are not thinking about all the wasted spending, they have no control of that. They have to keep the money coming in to cover all the spending and still pay their salaries.
We, on the other hand want to stop the stupid spending. The best way to do that is starve the beast into submission.
The tax code is only a small part of a very deep problem. On that I suspect we agree. Everything is out of whack, not just the MEANS by which we gather revenue. The Federal Government should be operating on a revenue about 1/100000000 the size it now collects!
You want to see the horrific results of utopian thinking, just stick around for a few more years. We will continue to spread our troops thin, continue to strengthen the criminals who run China, continue to feminize the military while our culture becomes more and more nightmarishly androgenous, continue to sell our sovereignty to the UN, and continue to embark on perpetual wars against general evils, which will drift us toward one of only two possible outcomes: chaotic civil war, or a brutal police state.
But, as Edmund Burke said, "it is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free." THAT is why we are drifting into a nightmare. The storm isn't here yet, but man, look at those blue clouds!
It's about the only way you'd get the ruling you want.
Judges really do understand that they are not truly independent and their economic well being comes from a government flush with money.
OK, now you're saying that they are too stupid to be judges.
They are not thinking about all the wasted spending, they have no control of that. They have to keep the money coming in to cover all the spending and still pay their salaries.
Wrong. They are FIRST in line, Constitutionally, to be paid, and their salary may not be decreased.
Congress would be on the hook for a Constitutional tax code.
We, on the other hand want to stop the stupid spending. The best way to do that is starve the beast into submission.
And all those nasty second-order effects are just the price of making an omelet, eh?
In case this didn't occur to you, if you had enough people willing to do as you propose, it would have happened ALREADY. If you got even close to that many people willing to not pay taxes, then there'd be a sea change in Congressional politics.
LOL I love your optimism.
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.