"From Freedom to Fascism" (Full Documentary)

[HoustonMilfDebbie]

http://youtu.be/kE8RtL3azDg

[Mr MojoRisin]

That's a very good video. I am glad you posted it. Makes you really wonder what the hell is really going on. If there is no real Law requiring us to file Income Tax then why are we doing it. The word is conditioning a whole century's worth of conditioning. Since I am a kid at heart, I posted this video, it's animated and explains this subject at a different angle.

Jim

http://youtu.be/8NBSwDEf8a8

[HoustonMilfDebbie]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

That's a very good video. I am glad you posted it. Makes you really wonder what the hell is really going on. If there is no real Law requiring us to file Income Tax then why are we doing it. The word is conditioning a whole century's worth of conditioning. Since I am a kid at heart, I posted this video it's animated and explains this subject at a different angle.

Jim

http://youtu.be/8NBSwDEf8a8

Watch this people, my fellow Americans, and please share:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKXs...ature=youtu.be

[Yssup Rider]

Snick

[CuteOldGuy]

1913 - The year freedom died.

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

1913 - The year freedom died.

Maybe we should start blaming Woodrow Wilson instead of Bush, lol. I wonder, what if every American boycotted the Federal income Tax and didn't file. They can't put us all in jail, besides there is no law saying we have to file a Federal return.


Jim

[Old-T]

I always find it laughable in a sad, pathetic way when people latch on to a small piece of the elephant and think they know the whole picture.

OK, stop paying income tax. Then what? There will be less money. No problem, quit all the waste. Fine, we'll stop X, Y, and X. NO!!!! You MUST keep spending money on THOSE!!! Cut everything else I don't need!!! Cut the other guy's stuff!!!

I know it is inconsiderate of the world, but things have become just a little more complex than that. We stole an almost limitless three thousand mile wide swath of riches and thought it was infinite and free. It wasn't either.

We convinced ourselves that the oceans were a free natural barrier to the outside world. Then some idiots invented airplanes and ICBMs.

We assumed the US would be an agrarian based country forever, and developed a political system that matched it. Then the industrial and information revolutions changed the essence of what we were governing, but we were fixated on "tradition".

But through it all we want to pretend the world is as it was in 1776.

So tell me everyone, in detail, how do you eliminate income tax, zero out the deficit, and do it equitably and in a way that preserves what you think is important?

I am sure there ARE ways, but the country and world are so interconnected I really doubt any of the exceedingly simple approaches I might read on here will work. Maybe I'm wrong, but I doubt it. The problem is that nasty little word "equitable". Most folks can come up with something that meets THEIR needs, and tells the other 50% of people to just adapt. Trouble is, your neighbor has an equally great plan that puts you in the 50% that must seriously adapt--and you call that "unfair and anti-American".

[Guest123018-4]

Stop depending n government for the answers.


Government at best is extremely inefficient. The majority of laws that are enactred are for the benefit of one group over another and or to exercise additional control over our liberty.

At what point did this nation decide that it is our responsibility to stick our noses in the business of other nations that have different cultures from our own to try to make them over in the image we think we believe all while telling the people, citizens of this nation, that we must accept the cultures of the immigrants that come here. It is sort of an oxymoron dont you think.

There are those that look at the budget for foreign aid and declare we do not give enough yet they fail to see the hidden and disguised amounts of money that come out of the military or defense budget to support the nations where we believe we need to buy a safe harbor to "protect our interests".

The main reason for income taxes was to fund war. Typical of government, once they have a pipeline of money they never want to close it but increase the flow and add more pipelines to siphon off the hard earned money of the citizenry. Then come the progressives that see the ability to steal from those that have earned it and give it to those that have not in order to insure they will always have a base from which to extract their votes.

Yes governemtn is fucked up and has become a monster that feeds off of our hard earned money with an appetite that has grown so large that we are feeding it with money that has not yet been printed by generations to come. Generational spending is taxation without representation.

The idea that our Constitution is old and outdated and based on an agrarian society is bullshit. the founding fathers had the vision to understand that without limiting government we would eventually collapse under the weight of it. No standing army was to be funded for more than two years because they knew the cost of having an army. This is why the second amendment exists.
The only required military force under the Constitution is a navy.

There was a reason our Senators were appointed by the states and not elected and it is because we are a republic and not a democracy. This was done to prevent the loss of the identity of the states and to stop the government from exceeding the restrictions placed on it n the Constitution. The progressives were able to change that with the 17th amendment effectively moving us closer to socialism and communism.

Restore the power to the states where it belongs and eliminate everything that is not permitted and we can reduce the size of the federal government and virtually eliminate the federal income tax. The money to operate the federal government should come from the states after they have taken care of themselves.

[Old-T]

That all sounds nice, but.....

Do you REALLY want no professional army or air force? As I said, the navy was seen originally as the critical defensive element because the oceans were indeed a great fortress like barrier. Now it takes over 2 years to make an F-22 pilot truly competent. Agrarian was replaced by technological--a standing army became a necessity.

Agrarian was replaced by commerce as the backbone of the economy. That means isolationism, which many of the founding fathers essentially favored, is no longer possible. Raw materials were vital to what we have become, and that drove involvement--or interference as some would say--in other countries. If we revert to the "original" mindset and focused on being mostly self-sufficient, we could do so. But the country would not look like what it does today.

Your argument about the direct election of Senators does not follow. The citizens of Alabama--for example--still elect their Senators, only now it is directly instead of once removed by electing the governor who would appoint them. In theory it is the same people who should directly or indirectly be spoken for. What the change actually did was give the masses more say, since the governor in any state was and is more likely to be from the wealthier strata, be it lib or con.

Restore the power to the states? Is that because so many of them--Mississippi, West Virginia, New Mexico, etc., do it so well? Go look at the net $$$ flows from the other thread, adjust for the things a federal government would pay for, whatever you think that is, and then see how you think the "bottom" third of the states would survive in that scenario? Some would be just fine--others would not.

As to the federal money coming from the states, again, that was a viable model in the late 1700s. The invention and application of the internal combustion energy--i.e. mobility--broke that paradigm. It gave us vastly more freedom of movement--and in one sense freedom of choice--but it was not free. It made a loose union of 50 states a non-viable, or at least a frought-with-problems, model. It also--for good or bad, was one of the major reasons for the death of the traditional multi-generational family unit as the "norm".

You can want to go back to the 1776 world, but it can't be done. And if it could be, it would be far from the utopia many think it would be.

I am not someone who wants dependency on the federal government, but I do comprehend that a world with a rising military power in China, another in India, and a US population that has become enamored with coffee, electronics, cheep clothes made with 15 cents an hour labor, and many other things we can't/don't produce--well, that world requires more federal centralization than we would otherwise need. Do we have too much? Yes, I agree we do. The problem is getting agreement on what to cut.

[Solemate62]

Without some form of a democratic style of government, are we not inviting a Lord of the Flies type of Society? Really, that's going to be better?

[Anthony Guido]

the game the government plays over and over. first thing they threaten to cut is police, fireman, and what the people that need help get. social security, ssi....welfare.. housing,, food...

they could cut soooo much before they even get to that... but don't....
get rid ofthe federal department of education,federal department of homeland security, department of energy,,stop regulating businesses to go else where and cut jobs.

sometimes peeps with their heads in the sand will never understand till its tooo late.

[CuteOldGuy]

I beg to differ, 2Dogs. The purpose of the income tax was not to fund war, it was to control the population, and to provide an effective means of transferring power and money from the middle and lower classes to the ruling elite.

[Guest123018-4]

The backbone of our economy is now and has been for a long time, ENERGY and we have an administration that wants to destroy it rather than allow it to continue to grow as our driving force.
We still are able, as a great energy producer all over the world to feed many parts of the world that would otherwise go hungry.

We will more than likely never agree as I believe in a small federal government that is constrained by the Constitution as it should be, and you believe in a behemoth of a federal government that controls all aspects of your lives.

[Yssup Rider]

Stop funding everything, 2Dog/shit. Move to Mexico!

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

The backbone of our economy is now and has been for a long time, ENERGY and we have an administration that wants to destroy it rather than allow it to continue to grow as our driving force.
We still are able, as a great energy producer all over the world to feed many parts of the world that would otherwise go hungry.

We will more than likely never agree as I believe in a small federal government that is constrained by the Constitution as it should be, and you believe in a behemoth of a federal government that controls all aspects of your lives.

I assume you are referring to my posts since most the others agree with you.

Energy is one of the major supports of the economy, but so are several other areas--what they are is not critically important, but my point was the fact that we have evolved into a much more complex, interconnected society.

As to the size of government, I am not in favor of a behemoth that controls all aspects of my life--though I am sure my ideal government size would likely be larger than yours. I definitely want protection from my fellow citizens, especially the huge corporate ones. I am much more concerned about the dangers of an unfettered Microsoft or the old AT&T who can do far more to invade my privacy than
NSA could ever manage. I am more concerned about a JPMorgan allowed to operate with no anti-trust oversight than the federal reserve. And imagine a national monopolistic power grid. There ARE things scarier than big government. As is always the case in the real world--what is the balance?