The relevency is in the process, not in conspiracies. If you want to claim, or dismiss, conspiracies, better to look at overall government tendencies as the Founders warned. I'm not "touting" anything, except perhaps education, books like "Dependent on DC", by Twight, as one example.
There are certainly tax protesters who opt out of the system. I don't happen to be one. It's a civic duty thing.
I'm glad you're chipping in your share
Your welcome. Maybe I'm chipping in some of yours, too ...
A lot of attornies and CPAs deal with the tax system as their profession, and even while publicly complaining, defending it is essentially defending their income. If you are one of them, that puts you on the other side of the desk from rest of us taxpayers, as far as credibility. The same problem exists for government officials, who see our taxes as their income.
Another part of civic duty is examination of careless legislation, and especially careless documents like the 16th Amendment, part of the deterioration of the Republic in a move towards what can increasingly be described as an all-powerful central government so beloved by presidential administrations, none more than the current one.
Anything that reexamines current tax policy, questions the assumptions of runaway government, is worth attention.
Since you claim to be authoritative, what is it about Lucas v. Earl and Helvering v Horst that makes those cases relevent ? |
