Talk:Tax protester

	This Pseudolaw related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>

, (new)

"Right of government to tax" vs "legality of taxation"

From the article:

Individuals who protest taxes for one reason or another, while not denying the government's right to tax, are called tax resisters.

Wouldn't be more accurate to say "while not pretending that there a loopholes which mean that taxation is not legally enforceable?" There are people who deny that the government has a moral right to tax the people, but don't claim that there's any silly legal loopholes regarding taxation. -- Matthew Cline (talk) 03:56, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

RE: Tax protestor

this article makes references to people that protest taxes as morons, but you clearly state within this article that the courts will enforce the taxes regardless of any argument put forward.(by force) I do not believe that you quite get where these people are coming from. The very fact that the government has the will and might to enforce their will on innocent people shows that they are unlawful in their actions.

"Every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowman without his consent." [Cruden v. Neale, 2 N.C. 338 (1796) 2 S.E.]

Yes it might be legal but not lawful. These are bully tactics by the Governments around the world to milk energy value from the people, note that the gold standard was abolished in favor of fiat currency with the gold standard being able to be traded for money ( Gold and Silver) and Fiat currency being traded for human energy. So these people aren't protesting tax for the sake of it but rather to keep their worth, ( their energy value). NO one can claim ownership over your energy value except the owner or creator. by saying taxes are lawful they must have had consent..i.e you must have either agreed to pay in some form or another, either by being or becoming a member of that society ( citizen) or by force or slavery.The tax obligation lies with the employer not the employee,.. a fee for trading within that society. Taxes are truly voluntary since it is your value that created the fiat currency that represents your energy value whether it be minimum wage or a salary, except where you are a citizen or have agreed to pay. When you are a citizen then you are a member of that society and fall under the rules that govern that society thus an agreement exists that you will pay taxes and levies and registration etc. The freeman movement see this, and aims to bring a discussion framework and work within the realm of the law so as to create a peaceful understanding of their beliefs and standing, anything else would require war. which no one wants. to call these people morons shows a one sided approach to this informational topic which is not in the best interest of education and understanding. ^{— Unsigned, by: Flyblown / talk / contribs}

Let's enumerate the ways you are wrong:

1. There is nothing unlawful about the government enforcing laws. The clue is in the words 'unlawful' and 'law'. The distinction between 'legal' and 'lawful' you are trying to make does not exist in reality.
2. "Fiat currency being traded for human energy." Just plain wrong. The value of fiat currency is only the faith in the government that controls it.
3. "but rather to keep their worth, ( their energy value)." Except, they do not have any. What they do have is labour, which they can sell in exchange for currency.
4. "NO one can claim ownership over your energy value except the owner or creator." This is a nonsense as your idea of 'energy value' is bunk.
5. "by saying taxes are lawful they must have had consent." That's not how laws work. Laws do not require consent. Otherwise, anyone could rob banks all day with no penalty by claiming they had not consented to the laws regarding bank robbery.
6. "tax obligation lies with the employer not the employee" It commonly lies with both, actually, but income tax is applied to what the employee earns, one way or another.
7. "Taxes are truly voluntary " Hilariously inaccurate.
8. "it is your value that created the fiat currency", again, displaying a fundamental misunderstanding of what fiat currency is.
9. "When you are a citizen then you are a member of that society and fall under the rules that govern that society" We actually have an almost accurate statement here, except that non-citizens are equally subject to those rules when they are in that jurisdiction, whether they want to be or not.

In short, everything underpinning your weird diatribe is not true. Like other freemen, you have a mixed-up idea of how the world works and what law is, and seem curiously unable to appreciate that the rest of the world is under no obligation to play along with those delusions. Queex_{chthonic murmurings} 21:57, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

@Queex Tax protesters, in short... Reverend Black Percy (talk) 22:18, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Thirteenth Amendment

I changed the part about "Due Process of Law" and the Thirteenth Amendment with a detailed explanation of why as it didn't make sense to me the way it was - it implied Congress could just pass a law legalizing slavery and that would be OK. But then, after saving, I realized "Due Process of Law" doesn't even appear in the 13th Amendment - that's the 14th, talking about depriving someone of life, liberty, or property (which is probably another tax protester argument, but isn't mentioned.) The Thirteenth makes an exception for a crime of which one has been duly convicted, not for Due Process of Law. Which is probably why it didn't make sense to me. So clearly it's not a rebuttal to anything about the 13th Amendment. Though the original argument is rather ridiculous to begin with, and the 16th Amendment would supersede the 13th anyway.

And if someone can verify that tax protesters actually claim the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits income tax on the "Life, Liberty, and Property" clause, we can add that in too. And in that case, I'd say income tax would be considered "Due Process of Law" and in any case the Sixteenth supersedes it. Gak92 (talk) 03:13, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

UK taxation 2017

Should there be some mention of the UK Chancellor being forced to backtrack on the National Insurance payments - and the complaints about Business Tax rates?

The problem with the community charge, unlike taxation on buildings etc is that persons can 'disappear off the tax base' much more easily. 82.44.143.26 (talk) 18:16, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Class envy and rage politics

I would argue this article doesn't do enough to interrogate the resentment at economic inequality that fuels the tax protester movement. Tax protesters see that the super-rich evade taxes all the time through loopholes built into the system, and wonder why the poor can't as well. Rather than consider the fundamental injustices of this system of inequity, they are simply mad that they don't get to share in the grift. It's the same impetus behind cryptocurrency, some people saw 2008 and, rather than get mad at the fact that this could be allowed to happen, get mad at the fact that they weren't able to get in on the mortgage grift in 2006. It's resentment politics all the way down. Carthage (talk) 04:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)