Do I have to pay income tax?

I believe you found a loop hole that no one else has ever found! Don't pay your taxes anymore and take it to court. I am sure you will win and the thousands of people that tried this before you will all be jealous. Just think how famous you will be when you defeat the IRS in court.good luck!

hmmmmmm wrote:

Adams looks so angry wrote:

You don't have to pay anything. You'll go to jail when the government finds out, but hey, you don't HAVE to pay it.

Well if there is no law stating I must pay taxes on my earned income and I went to court with my case, how could they legally put me in jail?

TypicalLetsRunner wrote:

Here is a sample, you are taxed based on your gross income, which is defined as "all income from whatever source derived."

Which is why IRS agents are currently attending all SF Giants' games.

There is a law. The government chose to make this law. It is constitutional as pointed out earlier. That "documentary" is full of crap.

Yeah sure, don't pay your income tax. But then don't expect to use any of the services that your taxes pay for. Forget about the police, fire department, social services, Medicare, unemployment, national defense, road maintenance, public transportation, the post office, public transportation. The list goes on.

It's funny how many people bitch and moan about paying their taxes and then never realize exactly what they get for their tax dollars. Yeah, it sucks to pay taxes. But try paying for all this shit yourself, and you'll find you're paying much more.

Lazy Llama wrote:

Which is why IRS agents are currently attending all SF Giants' games.

Why? Are the Giants having to pay people to come watch Barry?

No, because when someone catches Barry's record ball they will be about $3 million richer when the auction it off.

>>> wrote:

Yeah sure, don't pay your income tax. But then don't expect to use any of the services that your taxes pay for. Forget about the police, fire department, social services, Medicare, unemployment, national defense, road maintenance, public transportation, the post office, public transportation. The list goes on.

It's funny how many people bitch and moan about paying their taxes and then never realize exactly what they get for their tax dollars. Yeah, it sucks to pay taxes. But try paying for all this shit yourself, and you'll find you're paying much more.

Only if you are poor. Middle class and upper class people (the top 4 quintiles) would be better off without the gov't providing those things and instead if the private sector did it. The bottom quartile makes out like bandits right now, they pay so little in and get so much in return while the top 20% pay the majority of the taxes and don't get their money's worth. Privitization would be much more efficient. Those things you listed would be done privately for less money than what we (the middle class) pay now in taxes.

So yeah, pay your taxes, but lobby for them (and the things they pay for) to be reduced so you pay for the things you actually use instead of paying for things other people use and having people pay for things that you use.

Mtn Dew wrote:

Only if you are poor. Middle class and upper class people (the top 4 quintiles) would be better off without the gov't providing those things and instead if the private sector did it

Are you actually suggesting that things would be more efficient with private sector roads, defense, police, and fire? I would love to hear how your system would work. How exactly would you get people to pay for the military?

Well, the biggest problem we have is the need for a military. If we weren't so gung-ho on going into every nook and cranny in the world to do things we really shouldn't be doing our defense budget would be a lot smaller.

Police and fire? That's easy. You pay for those services with your own money. Let's say you pay x per year in taxes for the fire dept., in a private system you'd pay less and would be able to get pretty much the same services.

Mtn Dew wrote:

Only if you are poor. Middle class and upper class people (the top 4 quintiles) would be better off without the gov't providing those things and instead if the private sector did it. The bottom quartile makes out like bandits right now, they pay so little in and get so much in return while the top 20% pay the majority of the taxes and don't get their money's worth. Privitization would be much more efficient. Those things you listed would be done privately for less money than what we (the middle class) pay now in taxes.

So yeah, pay your taxes, but lobby for them (and the things they pay for) to be reduced so you pay for the things you actually use instead of paying for things other people use and having people pay for things that you use.

how many poor people living in the inner cities of america use our phenomenal interstate system? How much do you think that would cost to build privately? The latest highway bill, which was just to fix and expand our current system, was for $280 BILLION! Without cheap government financing and the ultimate economy of scale, there is no way you'd be able to afford driving on a private interstate system.

and more importantly, how much do the bottom quintile stand to lose if we get invaded by a totalitarian foreign power? Nothing- they'd still be peasants in the new regime, just like now. But how much do the upper class professionals with multi-million dollar nest eggs and vacation homes have to lose?? Do you want to fund a private military to adequately defend our entire country? As I've just pointed out, if you are a member of the upper class, you'd have to pay a massive share of the costs.

Would you be required to pay for police and fire? What if you decided not to? How would this be any different than local entities collecting the money and paying the local services? Don't you already get to choose these services since they are funded through levies. Would you also privatize the FBI, ATF, etc? Would a private police force even have police authority under the constitution?

.

evolved creation wrote:

hmmmmmm wrote:

So basically they chose to steal from their people because they can get away with it?

Call it stealing if you want to. The fact is that in return for the money they demand of you they provide you with many services. If you choose not to pay taxes, it would be reasonable to view you as the thief--stealing the government's services without paying for them.

you have been brainwashed. the goverment does all sorts of things they have no business doing, and they are using our money to do it. kinda pisses me off.

Pancho wrote:

Would you be required to pay for police and fire? What if you decided not to? How would this be any different than local entities collecting the money and paying the local services? Don't you already get to choose these services since they are funded through levies. Would you also privatize the FBI, ATF, etc? Would a private police force even have police authority under the constitution?

No, no one should be required to pay for anything they don't agree to pay for. Problem is that no one would insure them. Insurance companies would make sure their clients have some type of police/fire coverage, kind of like having an alarm system.

The Constitution is applicable to how we live now, but what I'm talking about here would be something completely different, without a Constitution.

My main point is that people pay for other people's stuff instead of paying for what they want. We have a lot of income redistribution (I hate that term, but it's the term most people recognize) where people pay for things they don't want for other people. Look at schools and social security. People shouldn't be forced to pay for someone else's child's education and they shouldn't be forced to pay for someone else's retirement.

A private police force has to be one of the worst ideas of all time. How would that ever work? What's to stop them from breaking the laws themselves, from accepting bribes, from creating their own arbitrary laws, from shooting people at random, from creating a police state? You can't privatize public services, it would never ever work.

TickDock wrote:

A private police force has to be one of the worst ideas of all time. How would that ever work? What's to stop them from breaking the laws themselves, from accepting bribes, from creating their own arbitrary laws, from shooting people at random, from creating a police state? You can't privatize public services, it would never ever work.

You're right, the police as it is now never break the law, never take bribes and never shoot people at random.

What you'd have would be competing firms. If one firm went crazy, which would be difficult b/c the people would just stop using them and instead use a different firm.

What public servies can't be privatized? Water? Fire Dept.? Garbage pick up?

Mtn Dew wrote:

TickDock wrote:

A private police force has to be one of the worst ideas of all time. How would that ever work? What's to stop them from breaking the laws themselves, from accepting bribes, from creating their own arbitrary laws, from shooting people at random, from creating a police state? You can't privatize public services, it would never ever work.

You're right, the police as it is now never break the law, never take bribes and never shoot people at random.

What you'd have would be competing firms. If one firm went crazy, which would be difficult b/c the people would just stop using them and instead use a different firm.

What public servies can't be privatized? Water? Fire Dept.? Garbage pick up?

So you are advocating a private police force based on a free market? What would stop a billionaire from hiring an exclusive police force for his private use and turning it loose on his less affluent neighbors? Surely not the market, because he could afford to fund it without assistance from anyone else.

I'm as pro-market as the next guy, and I hate high taxes, but there are certain situations where social services have to be provided and administered by the state.

After all, a burning house doesn't just affect one home, leaving a fire going allows it to grow and spread, causes environmental damage, reduces property values, etc.

I'll even admit private police is a stretch, but I think it's an interesting idea.

What other social services have to be administered by the state in your opinion? Most things would be much more efficient if done by the private sector, like trash collection and mail.

hmmmmmm wrote:

I'll be back later but for now here is a trailer of the documentary I saw:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1616088001333580937

Watch it and tell me what you think.

.

You're incredibly gullible.

Mtn Dew wrote:

What other social services have to be administered by the state in your opinion? Most things would be much more efficient if done by the private sector, like trash collection and mail.

1) National Defense - I challenge anyone to come up with a realistic private system. Much like a presidential voter in Mississippi, nothing would change based on the persons actions. The problem arises when half the population opts-out.

2) Roads - They are a public good necessary for commerce and labor, but most people won't pay the high cost if given the chance. What will you do if they don't pay? Forbid them from driving on them? Forbid them from buying any goods?

3) Environmental Protection - As much as conservatives/libertarians bitch about the EPA, I doubt any of them want to live in a place like Linfen, China. The incentive for each person is to ignore the environment, but in the long term, everyone is worse off.

4) There are others I would list like schools, but reasonable people could disagree about these.