Quantcast

zeitgeist movie. WTF?

Da Peach

Outwitted by a rodent
Jul 2, 2002
13,681
4,904
North Van
Holy crap. I searched RM for a thread on this, and didn't find one. I suppose it's in the same vein as the other 911 movie that was on the internet a while back, but this one's got an interesting section on the similarities of all religions.

I gotta say, these movies are enough to make one...queasy.

So? Anyone seen it?

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/

Tinfoil hat time!
 

jasride

Turbo Monkey
Sep 23, 2006
1,069
5
PA
It's funny you bring this up. I just watched it last night. I've just now started to search other areas of the net for more info as to what the hell is going on in this crazy ass world and to learn more about the movie itself. Very interesting movie.
 

Da Peach

Outwitted by a rodent
Jul 2, 2002
13,681
4,904
North Van
So I guess this is either totally old news, or the Federal Reserve agents have put me to sleep and I don't even know it.

Too tired a topic?
 

jasride

Turbo Monkey
Sep 23, 2006
1,069
5
PA
i guess the movie has been out for a few months but I only found out about it recently. I guess i really don't pay enough attention to politics, I can't really trust anyone. I just pay my bills and ride my bicycle.
 

Da Peach

Outwitted by a rodent
Jul 2, 2002
13,681
4,904
North Van
I wonder if those people who decided to stop filing tax reports have been audited yet.

No law which states that you HAVE to pay taxes? Come on...isn't that how they got Capone in the end?
 

RenegadeRick

98th percentile on my SAT & all I got was this tin
I wonder if those people who decided to stop filing tax reports have been audited yet.

No law which states that you HAVE to pay taxes? Come on...isn't that how they got Capone in the end?
There really is no law. And how can one audit a tax return that was never filed?

i deem it unwise to discuss the movie in a public forum.
You sound afraid.
 

rockwool

Turbo Monkey
Apr 19, 2004
2,658
0
Filastin
No law which states that you HAVE to pay taxes? Come on...isn't that how they got Capone in the end?
So you're saying that they're down right lying that up just to get famous and get all the babes, or what? If there is, show it to us then.



Yeah I saw it a few months back and I'm pretty sure that I've recomended that one and Why We Fight to all ya. They're both totally mindblowingly good as is America-Freedom To Fascism, which is a documentary about the federal income tax that came some time before Zeitgeist.
 

RenegadeRick

98th percentile on my SAT & all I got was this tin

SlapheadMofo

Monkey
Jul 29, 2003
412
0
Westminster MA
Nothing anyone ever put in front of those people would be enough to satisfy them and you know it. The 16th Amendment is good enough for me, but then again, I don't lose my mind over the notion that we all need to kick in.
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,669
1,713
chez moi
Does Congress need to pass a law allowing the government to collect taxes?

Does it not suffiice to pass laws:

1) stating what taxes are to be collected
2) creating and funding an institution to collect these taxes
3) stating penalties to be applied if an individual does not pay taxes (part of the federal criminal code.)

??

MD
 

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,649
23
SF, CA
I ran into a great quote today:
People tend to hold overly favorable views of their abilities in many social and intellectual domains....This overestimation occurs, in part, because people who are unskilled in these domains suffer a dual burden: Not only do these people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it.
--"Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments," by Justin Kruger and David Dunning Department of Psychology Cornell University, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology December 1999 Vol. 77, No. 6, 1121-1134.
 

skatetokil

Turbo Monkey
Jan 2, 2005
2,383
-1
DC/Bluemont VA
I base my comment on a simple assessment of how governments work, have always worked, and probably will always work. They employ violence to acquire resources to fund activities that no citizen would consider moral in personal behavior.
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,669
1,713
chez moi

RenegadeRick

98th percentile on my SAT & all I got was this tin
These links do nothing to clarify the original situation--they're clouded with stuff about this guy's trial, etc. Is there a link which gives a concise summary of the matter at issue?

I'm a legal-argument geek, sorry.
Sorry. These sites are all tied up in legal proceedings because as you might expect, the IRS doesn't take too kindly to folks saying that they have no obligation to pay income taxes.

The links I posted were about how the Browns (now imprisoned) offered a $1M reward for anyone who could show them the law. Irwin Schiff (also now imprisoned) has made similar, but lesser offers. The basic premise is that there is no law in the tax code that requires wage slaves to pay income tax because income tax is not a profit, but rather an even exchange for labor. When you read the court documents, you will see that they were prevented from adding frivolous documents (such as the US tax code) into evidence which clearly state that the US income tax employs a system of voluntary compliance.

There are some other good sites to explore on the matter, try looking up Joe Bannister (former IRS agent who believes the IRS fraudlently prosecutes people) at Freedom above Fortune and Bill Benson (who believes the 16th amendment was never properly ratified) at http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com.

EDIT:
Here is a legal filing from Irwin Schiff that explains a bit more on why there is no obligation to pay income taxes.
http://paynoincometax.com/pdf/301_final_motion_no_offenses_charged.pdf
Have fun. The basis is rather well summed up at the bottom of page 4 and onto page 5.
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,669
1,713
chez moi
The sixteenth amendment states that "Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes [Nothing about 'profits'] without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."

So there doesn't need to be a law AUTHORIZING Congress to collect taxes...just laws setting up the devices by which they do it, and establishing the penalties for non-compliance.

I don't get the argument.

Ed: Saw your edit; thanks.

Ed II: Homeboy needs to make his court documents look less like a 12-year old drinking Jolt and obsessed with the bold, italic, and underline keys...still wading through his arguments, but I'm also not a tax lawyer, so I may just have to see what the .gov responds on this one. Anything I think is an amateur opinion...
 

SlapheadMofo

Monkey
Jul 29, 2003
412
0
Westminster MA
Okay, so everyone in the country gets to stop paying federal taxes because they have a beef with certain policies. I find it hard to see a positive outcome to that scenario. Somebody wanna enlighten me?
 

rockwool

Turbo Monkey
Apr 19, 2004
2,658
0
Filastin
I've read this twice and still don't understand what you're saying.
You stated that there has to be a law that say you have to pay federal income tax (or else they wouldn't have gotten Capone).

I asked if you then meant that the film makers just made that **** up (just to get their fame so that they can get the babes and all the **** that comes with it). If it isn't true they've got to be lying, no? Call IRS and ask them to send you the article where it says that you have to pay federal income tax. It's just a phone call..
 

rockwool

Turbo Monkey
Apr 19, 2004
2,658
0
Filastin
People tend to hold overly favorable views of their abilities in many social and intellectual domains....This overestimation occurs, in part, because people who are unskilled in these domains suffer a dual burden: Not only do these people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it.
--"Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments," by Justin Kruger and David Dunning Department of Psychology Cornell University, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology December 1999 Vol. 77, No. 6, 1121-1134.
And that's why it should be mandatory world wide for people to do psychedelic muchrooms and other heavy psychedelic substances.
 

rockwool

Turbo Monkey
Apr 19, 2004
2,658
0
Filastin
The links I posted were about how the Browns (now imprisoned) offered a $1M reward for anyone who could show them the law. Irwin Schiff (also now imprisoned) has made similar, but lesser offers. The basic premise is that there is no law in the tax code that requires wage slaves to pay income tax because income tax is not a profit, but rather an even exchange for labor. When you read the court documents, you will see that they were prevented from adding frivolous documents (such as the US tax code) into evidence which clearly state that the US income tax employs a system of voluntary compliance.
All you guys who haven't seen Zeitgeist and America-Freedom To Fascism has to see them as they give some examples of how sick judges have acted in these cases. Porhibited people from showing them the law while megalomaniacly saying "I am the law"...
 

RenegadeRick

98th percentile on my SAT & all I got was this tin
Okay, so everyone in the country gets to stop paying federal taxes because they have a beef with certain policies. I find it hard to see a positive outcome to that scenario. Somebody wanna enlighten me?
No that isn't it at all. The idea is that payment of income taxes is voluntary.

So there doesn't need to be a law AUTHORIZING Congress to collect taxes...just laws setting up the devices by which they do it, and establishing the penalties for non-compliance.

I don't get the argument.
That is his position. That they haven't done so. Check the tax code he references for confirmation.

...so I may just have to see what the .gov responds on this one. Anything I think is an amateur opinion...
Well he is already in prison, so they have responded already.
That does not mean that there is actually a law, however. Irwin repeatedly offered to concede the case and plead guilty if they could just show him the law. They never did, and never could, because it does not exist.
 

RenegadeRick

98th percentile on my SAT & all I got was this tin
I can read that now...you said something weird about income vs. profit which threw me for a loop...
Well that is part of it too.

here are some good cases from this link:
http://www.voluntarytax.info/Taxes_on_labor.htm

1920: Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189.

Defined income within the meaning of the 16th Amendment as "profit".
Prohibited direct, unapportioned taxation of income of a stockholder. The Sixteenth Amendment must be construed in connection with the taxing clauses of the original Constitution and the effect attributed to them before the amendment was adopted.

In Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co., 158 U.S. 601 , 15 Sup. Ct.
912, under the Act of August 27, 1894 (28 Stat. 509, 553, c. 349, 27),it was held that taxes upon rents and profits of real estate and upon returns from investments of personal property were in effect direct taxes upon the property from which such income arose, imposed by reason of ownership; and that Congress could not impose such taxes without apportioning them among the states according to population, as required by article 1, 2, cl. 3, and section 9, cl. 4, of the original Constitution.

Afterwards, and evidently in recognition of the limitation upon the taxing power of Congress thus determined, the Sixteenth Amendment was adopted, in words lucidly expressing the object to be accomplished:

'The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among [252 U.S. 189, 206] the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.'

As repeatedly held, this did not extend the taxing power to new subjects, but merely removed the necessity which otherwise might exist for an apportionment among the states of taxes laid on income.
U.S. v. Ballard, 535 F2d 400, cert denied, 429 U.S. 918, 50 L.Ed.2d
283, 97 S.Ct. 310 (1976)

"income" is not defined in the Internal Revenue Code
1978: Central Illinois Public Service Co. v. United States, 435 U.S. 21.

Established that wages and income are NOT equivalent as far as taxes
on income are concerned.

"Decided cases have made the distinction between wages and income and have refused to equate the two in withholding or similar controversies.

Peoples Life Ins. Co. v. United States, 179 Ct. Cl. 318, 332, 373
F.2d 924, 932 (1967);

Humble Pipe Line Co. v. United States, 194 Ct. Cl. 944, 950, 442
F.2d 1353, 1356 (1971);

Humble Oil & Refining Co. v. United States, 194 Ct. Cl. 920, 442
F.2d 1362 (1971);

Stubbs, Overbeck & Associates v. United States, 445 F.2d 1142 (CA5
1971);

Royster Co. v. United States, 479 F.2d, at 390; Acacia

Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. United States, 272 F. Supp. 188 (Md. 1967)."
 

RenegadeRick

98th percentile on my SAT & all I got was this tin
Right, so any and all us can stop paying at any time for whatever reason.
That is my understanding of the word "voluntary"...

This is quoted from the same link as above:
1959: Flora v. United, 362 US 145.

Ruled that our tax system is based on voluntary assessment and payment, not on force or coercion. "Our system of taxation is based upon voluntary assessment and payment, not upon distraint."
...So let's say half of us do exactly that. Then what? Dissolve the union? I'm all for less government, but I don't think it should be crippled.
Sounds like you should continue to volunteer to pay income taxes then if you wouldn't be happy with that outcome.
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
11,669
1,713
chez moi
There's no way I'm spending all the time to do a point-by-point refutement of this guy, but I'll just offer my opinion that his legal reasoning is not at all sound, and that his complaint that the legal authorities won't "respond" to his reasoning is that there really is nothing worth responding to...

He may be right about some points of civil law; I know very little about civil stuff. But claiming 18 USC doesn't apply (actually, he states it's 26 that doesn't apply, and 18 by analogy) because there's no specific law part of the code giving jurisdiction seems, to me, ludicrous. (I'm not a lawyer, not a specifically legal professional, just a guy with an opinion.)

Let's look at another example. There is not, to my knowledge, anything in the USC giving federal courts jurisdiction over passport fraud. There are, however, portions of the code establishing regulations over passport issuance and delegating authority to issue them. There are also portions of the criminal code (Title 18) that define various offenses related to passport fraud. Yet no one who committed passport fraud could walk into court and successfully claim that the court had no jurisdiction to prosecute them.

I think this guy is an impassioned amateur without a real clue about what he's arguing; he's committing the classic amateur mistake of latching onto promising and seemingly pertinent details without really understanding the big picture. But hey, outside of a very small arena, I'm an amateur too.
 

SlapheadMofo

Monkey
Jul 29, 2003
412
0
Westminster MA
Sounds like you should continue to volunteer to pay income taxes then if you wouldn't be happy with that outcome.
Probably. Long as I know that any who opt out aren't able to take advantage of any of the benefits. Different prices for anything federally subsidized be they products or services, no access to federal programs, etc. That would be fair. Don't know how we'd keep ya'll off the infrastructure tho; that could get tricky.
 

rockwool

Turbo Monkey
Apr 19, 2004
2,658
0
Filastin
Right, so any and all us can stop paying at any time for whatever reason. So let's say half of us do exactly that. Then what? Dissolve the union? I'm all for less government, but I don't think it should be crippled.
Government has still got the right to tax other things as on everything you buy, transactions, stocks and bonds etc. It's up to you how much you want to consume.



Side note: I find it a sick thing that most of us litteraly break our backs at work to get a normal wage but the Tobin Tax is fought hard by a really small click, a tax that was about 2% (if I remember correctly).