Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Castle -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (510)	11/15/2002 10:45:54 AM
From: MSI	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7936

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 ?