CtC "Warriors" on Social Security

[LPC]

Probably the most pathetic, bathetic, and ironic LH threads are those in which they question whether the IRS should be levying on Social Security benefits.

I wonder who (or what) they think *pays* for Social Security benefits?

[webhick]

Probably the most pathetic, bathetic, and ironic LH threads are those in which they question whether the IRS should be levying on Social Security benefits.

I wonder who (or what) they think *pays* for Social Security benefits?

I get the feeling that the standard canned TP answer is either "interest on the national debt" or the beating heart of a virgin. You know...whatever kicks the hamster off the wheel.

[Gregg]

I've noticed a few threads over there now that are probing what constitutes "federal connections" in employers. The orignal theory was something akin to "my labor is paid for by a non federally connected payer, who is therefore not an "employer". But then it turns out some of them had some federal connection, such as the guy who works for a company that has highway contracts, (not federeal conncetion to you, you are not getting federal money, your payer is) and of course the guy who is a pilot (having a federal license to be a pilot is not excersising any federal priviledge, because anyone can get a pilots certificate) etc... As if the whole idea isn't wrong on it's face, they seem to be able to jump through any hoops they need to concoct some reason that what they do has no federwal connection. Followed through to it's logical conclusion, they could find a way that someone who lives in DC, works for the Treasury Department and has some kind of federal certification for what they do isn't a taxpayer because of some arcane and tortured language that makes them some kind of sovereign something....

[LPC]

I've noticed a few threads over there now that are probing what constitutes "federal connections" in employers. [...] As if the whole idea isn't wrong on it's face, they seem to be able to jump through any hoops they need to concoct some reason that what they do has no federwal connection.

Inconsistent, "ad hoc" reasoning is a feature of almost every tax denial theory.

What sets the crackheads apart is their nauseatingly hypocritical bleating about the "rule of law." If the "rule of law" means anything, it means consistent, predictable results. And yet these guys can't come up with any coherent explanation for why the IRS processes their returns in the way it does, or even (as you point out) why their incomes aren't taxable.

And, because Hendrickson and his followers have consistently lost in court in the past, the "rule of law" (aka stare decisis) means that all other crackheads should lose in the future as well.

[Judge Roy Bean]

I still believe part of the underlying motivation for many of these types of schemes is not only to keep more of their money out of the hands of the evil gubmint but to try and get enough people in on it to supposedly collapse the tax system. Couple that with a sense that the IRS will be so hopelessly overwhelmed that the chances of them actually finding, let alone prosecuting all of the ctc filers makes it worth trying.

The Dorean scheme was also counting on that kind of herd/mob mentality to bring down the mortgage lending industry and the court system that protects it from crackpots.

Hopefully with Hendrickson enjoined and eventually incarcerated this branch of the TP "movement" will wither.

[rant=on] My biggest gripe with quack promoters like Hendrickson is that people with financial problems might turn to this lunacy to try and find their way out of the quicksand that they may not have been responsible for in the first place. Desperate people can and will do really stupid things, including fall for anything that keeps or puts money in their pocket quickly.[rant=off]

[Prof]

I still believe part of the underlying motivation for many of these types of schemes is not only to keep more of their money out of the hands of the evil gubmint but to try and get enough people in on it to supposedly collapse the tax system. Couple that with a sense that the IRS will be so hopelessly overwhelmed that the chances of them actually finding, let alone prosecuting all of the ctc filers makes it worth trying.

The Dorean scheme was also counting on that kind of herd/mob mentality to bring down the mortgage lending industry and the court system that protects it from crackpots.

Hopefully with Hendrickson enjoined and eventually incarcerated this branch of the TP "movement" will wither.

[rant=on] My biggest gripe with quack promoters like Hendrickson is that people with financial problems might turn to this lunacy to try and find their way out of the quicksand that they may not have been responsible for in the first place. Desperate people can and will do really stupid things, including fall for anything that keeps or puts money in their pocket quickly.[rant=off]

JOINING IN THE RANT:

Empirical research continues to show that most individuals (i.e., human beings) file bankruptcy because of life-disrupting events, the most common today apparently being uninsured and unanticipated medical expenses. In my experience, the most common have been, in no particular order, loss of a job or reduction of hours/overtime hours, medical problems which cause one spouse to leave employment, including pregancy and child birth, and divorce. Note: Serious financial problems often cause divorce, too; that divorce "horse" can be in front of or behind the cart.

When these sorts of things happen, desparate people will seize on any solution, no matter how ultimately absurd, if the crook promoting the scheme seems to show them a way to preserve some decent standard of living and some way out of Judge Roy's proverbial quicksand. Dorean is one example. CTC seems another. Any "get out of debt" scheme qualifies, no matter how otherwise seemingly legal, including the "debt consolidation" sellers.

And, the whole "buy now, pay later" advertising, retailing, credit card structure of modern consumer finance just greases the skids.

RANT OFF.

[LPC]

I still believe part of the underlying motivation for many of these types of schemes is not only to keep more of their money out of the hands of the evil gubmint but to try and get enough people in on it to supposedly collapse the tax system.

That was Larken Rose's plan as well. He actually hoped to bring down the US government in a "bloodless coup."

[absdes96]

I still believe part of the underlying motivation for many of these types of schemes is not only to keep more of their money out of the hands of the evil gubmint but to try and get enough people in on it to supposedly collapse the tax system. Couple that with a sense that the IRS will be so hopelessly overwhelmed that the chances of them actually finding, let alone prosecuting all of the ctc filers makes it worth trying.

That actually crossed my mind recently. I almost raised that question on another discussion thread. I would liken it to a person who can fend off 3 or 4 stinging hornets, but when a person gets swarmed, she/he is left with no alternative but to collaspe to the ground and roll around.

I don't think it is beyond the pale to say that there may be groups of people who form pacts to make "a run on the IRS" - perhaps because they feel they have nothing else to lose or live for.

I suspect the younger generation does not see the consequences the same way the older generations do. It is seen as game one plays with the IRS - like Vegas or Wall Street.

[Number Six]

It was one of Lynne Meredith's hopes. The IRS, or other branch of government has been the nemesis for many a "freedom fighter". How likely is it that the US would revert to the pre-65 silver coinage, i.e. "Constitutional" or "Biblical" money if the US dollar fell?

These folks are being very disrespectful to their parents and parents' parents who would not have imagined their descendents would pull this crap. The Fifth commandment carries a promise. It also pertains to siblings and cousins.

As an aside, the William Tell story is not about tax defiance--it's about not bowing down to a local two-bit thug. That's what you get when the rule of law fails, petty dictators.

[grixit]

That actually crossed my mind recently. I almost raised that question on another discussion thread. I would liken it to a person who can fend off 3 or 4 stinging hornets, but when a person gets swarmed, she/he is left with no alternative but to collaspe to the ground and roll around.

When i was 11 i lived in an area that had hornets. When they got to be a problem, i used to make up a thick solution of detergent and ammonia in a sprayer and soak the nest.

[LPC]

When i was 11 i lived in an area that had hornets. When they got to be a problem, i used to make up a thick solution of detergent and ammonia in a sprayer and soak the nest.

Should we be thinking along the same lines for tax protesters?

[jg]

I was thinking more along the lines of:

Mind-control Ray Gun
Undoubtedly the eAc's most popular piece of equipment, the standard issue MCRG is an essential tool for every agent and field operative. It's clever camouflage makes it appear like a child's toy, further enhancing its deployment capability. The latest model incorporates a new ion discharge intercepting overkill trigger (IDIOT) mechanism for mind-numbing effectiveness.

For more items see http://evilatheistconspiracy.org/en/eaclabs.htm

[RyanMcC]

For more items see http://evilatheistconspiracy.org/en/eaclabs.htm

Don't visit that site if you suffer from Hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia.

[Thule]

Hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia.

Darn, now you triggered my Hippopotomonstrosesquipedaliophobia.

[The Observer]

When i was 11 i lived in an area that had hornets. When they got to be a problem, i used to make up a thick solution of detergent and ammonia in a sprayer and soak the nest.

Should we be thinking along the same lines for tax protesters?

I just checked Title 18 and Title 26 and found nothing in the codes that would authorize this. Maybe we need Demo to talk to her contacts in Congress about new legislation.

[Kimokeo]

Maybe they figure that enough of their court cases will overwork the government into submission.

Then, they can get a deal that will eventually be provided to the New York Times for public knowledge.

Afterwards, another will attempt to challenge the deal only to be rebuffed because of lack-of-imaginative-concept doesn't equally match this equally viewed idiocy.

I don't think they have enough court cases. Too spread out.