Posted on 07/30/2012 5:45:37 AM PDT by Kaslin
Thanks for the heads up. I just checked them out and found an HDTV w/ built in DVD player that looks great for the price.
I need an HDTV. I have an older tv and it just isn’t cutting it, lol.
There are sins of commission and sins of omission. I don’t consider them even vaguely equivalent.
Galt and Co. left. They left the world to solve it’s own problems or to suffer from them. It was not their responsibility to be slaves to those who would squander their efforts and deny them any recompense from them. Even more to the point they were being actively vilified for those efforts. It’s hard to have sympathy for a world which blames its saviors for the trouble it suffers.
Yes, I did feel bad for Eddie when he’s abandoned at the end since he really wasn’t a bad sort, but sometimes you can’t save everyone.
Let me ask you a question in return- if Eddie couldn’t save himself, then why was it someone else’s fault?
If the government were faced with a legal tax revolt — the productive taxpayers suddenly going unproductive in order to deprive the government of taxes — the government would surrender promptly and beg for mercy.
There would be NOTHING legal about a tax revolt...
The productive citizens of this country would not be of sufficient numbers to effect a serious threat to the amount of revenue that will still be collected by the government...
Our government will never surrender or capitulate to any loss of revenue due to the insignificant amount of people who would consider falling off the productive scale, and into a nuetral state of feduciary existance...The government WILL always find a way to make up for the revenue shortfall...
We have always had the ability effect change in the way government does things, every two years we get to do this...What has happend is in effect, Americans have grown very apathetic, where only an insignificant amount of people who do see where this is going are saying and trying to fire others up about these issues...
When we lose that ability to effect change at the ballot box, then, I would be concerned...And that is when a few more people will wake up and see what we already see...
You are correct...The people that need to step up are those who have not waken up to the severity of our feduciary predicament...
Truthfully, I do not believe our numbers will swell enough to dramatically effect the change of attitude our government has in regards to utilizing our tax dollars in a responsible manner...
As a member in good standing of the “others,” may I ask to be included in your will?
Of course you may ask.
Wow, I have a scratch the whole length of my left forearm. I wonder where that came from.
Really? Has Directive 10-289 gone into effect, and nobody told me?
The tax revolt I have been referring to is, simply, as in my tagline. Stop making income and you stop paying income tax.
If there's anything illegal about retirement at any age, I do hope you'll instruct me.
Uh oh, too quick-witted for me. May you prosper.
Ideological purity is for morons. ANY philosophy, taken to its logical extremes, becomes madness... and sadly, the numerous times it has been done in practice (Cultural Revolution, etc), millions usually die in the process.
It was a slow pitch ...
My husband and I have 10 children, of whom 8 are under 18. Who do you think is in our Will? We help our needy family members, friends, and church members with cash, a check, or a chicken dinner.
I will pray for you!
The Federal government got along just fine for 140 years with no income taxes, and income taxes only account for 41% of federal revenues. They now take in over $2.2 Trillion (59% of Obama's $3.8 T budget) annually from other sources. "Way back" in 2003, $2.2 Trillion was enough for the entire budget. All we need to do is cut back to the budget numbers from 2003 (when we were doing just fine), and we can eliminate ALL Federal income taxes. Just sayin'.
Work will make you free! ;^)
Ohhhhh, so that’s what you mean...Ok, fair enough...You gave me the impression you were willing to not pay taxes...
And since you didn’t clarify that you are retired, well, nobody I suppose is meant to be a mind reader...I only go by what I see in that post...So you got me there...
And don’t put words in my mouth either, I mentioned nothing about what and when some one should retire...You just mentioned that, and since you did, sure, I have something to say about that as well...Maybe nothing to instruct you with, as I am sure you have it all figured out in the first place...
BTW, why do you think that citing some fictitious directive from a rather popular book like Atlas Shrugged would go into effect in real life???
There would STILL be NOTHING legal about a tax revolt...Dispite the fictional account you discribe...
Now before you get it all up in a wad...I would be with anyone about revolting on tax (revenue generating) issues, based simply upon the application of those revenues for things like entitlements (spending) alone...
But for now, the power to levy taxes rests upon the congress...Wouldn’t it be better to get those taxes revoked within that body, than just not paying which brings more harm to tax code reform than just not paying it...Sure, I could go all out and not pay, but the forces brought upon anyone doing that is probably not condusive to retirement plans most of us have already...It kinda messes that up...
Just my opinion...And certainly open for scrutiny...
Not entirely fair, because while income taxes “as such” provide 47% of revenue, Social Security and ‘Social Insurance’ account for 36% of revenue.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Federal_Receipts_-_FY_2007.png
Now, were those ‘honest’ sources of revenue to provide for SS and ‘Social Insurance’, it would be one thing, but for decades the federal government has been immediately using those revenues as “faux income taxes”, preserving only a theoretical revenue (IOU’s) for SS and ‘Social Insurance’ spending.
But these two together amount for 83% of federal revenues.
Corporate taxes, excise taxes and other make up the other 17%. Far too little for the federal government to survive on. That is, as things are right now (as of 2007), total revenue is $2.3 trillion. With just that 17%, the federal government would have to make due with just $400B.
The Department of Defense alone spends $700B for normal outlays.
You got it so wrong! He did not just go away to hide. He intentionally destroyed the amount of potential plunder that the government looters could confiscate and then took the greatest minds that had created the wealth of the nation, so that the Socialist/Fascist Bureaucrat Thugs would more quickly die in their own pestilence and decay.
I certainly hope so, but I’m not holding my breath because the US has been collectively trying to figure out how to fund the national government since its very beginning.
Lincoln was the first one to use the income tax, and nobody came up with any better idea from then until the 16th Amendment. Though it is and was a perfidious idea, there was probably a great sigh of relief because they finally had something.
Again, I would be more than happy to dispose of the income tax.
You are correct, Lady Lucky !
The IRS says you should take all deductions that you are entitled to. With some research and a good accountant a person can set up a small business and take advantage of many of the 'loopholes' legally. I find it odd so many people parrot complaints about the system without any real knowledge of the power they have to control their taxable income.
Another legal option is to go to the extra effort of doing for yourself what you would otherwise pay to have done. This has the effect of stopping money from changing hands (and being taxed each time) thus reducing your income needs.
Going Galt does not mean that one stops working. It means that you must understand how your actions either benefit or detract from your desired goals.
Galt stopped making income by taking a menial job. He didn't stop working though. Being productive should not be measured by ones income, rather by ones sense of accomplishment.
I would say, where is John Locke?
His original words (which were changed in our declaration) were “Life, liberty, and property”.
http://www.amazon.com/John-Locke-Philosopher-American-Liberty/dp/0983195730/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1344029568&sr=1-1&keywords=john+locke+mary+elaine+swanson
John Locke OF CIVIL-GOVERNMENT
BOOK II CHAP. II
Of the State of Nature
4. TO understand political power right, and derive it from its original, we must consider, what state all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons, as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave, or depending upon the will of any other man....
6. But though this be a state of liberty, yet it is not a state of licence: though man in that state have an uncontroulable liberty to dispose of his person or possessions, yet he has not liberty to destroy himself, or so much as any creature in his possession, but where some nobler use than its bare preservation calls for it.
The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one:
and reason, which is that law,
teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent,
no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions:
for men being all the workmanship of one omnipotent, and infinitely wise maker; ...
Of course Locke’s words and thinking are directly from the Bible,God’s Word, the ultimate source of reason and sanity in thinking through the rights of men in regard to life, liberty and property.
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.
