Expanded Thinking

[Questor]

Now the purpose of this article is not to berate anyone or denigrate them in any way, but merely to point out a few things that I've observed over the years. Especially the last few. If you don't agree with me, that's fine. Just please tell me in a nice way if you want me to take you seriously.

This may seem like some kind of plug for his book, but after reading George Mercier's book Invisible Contracts, I've gained a MUCH greater appreciation for the concept of looking at situations from another's point of view.

Here's what I'm talking about. Well first off, close your eyes and relax for a few seconds. Take a few deep breaths in through your nose, then hold and exhale through your mouth. OK, now please consider this: there are always at least two sides to every story. And though we may be well acquainted with one of them, that doesn't mean that there is only one side to look at, does it?

Let's start off with the term "taxpayer". If there are indeed "taxpayers", then doesn't it follow that there must also be "non-taxpayers" as well? And I'm not just referring to some dead bodies buried in the ground now. The definition of a "taxpayer" per the IRC is one who owes the tax, regardless if he or she pays the tax. So how does this owing aspect come about? If one goes to a store to procure some goods, then one owes the store owner something in exchange for them. And this is as it should be. So maybe what we need to do is find out just exactly what it is that we are doing which brings about our owing a tax upon our earnings. Now the list can go on for quite a long time if we were to list out all of the things for which we may actually owe some reciprocity for, so let's take an easier route. How about consulting the taxing authorities for just exactly what it is that we are being billed for, and demanding that list of items in writing so that we can pare it down more to our liking? And if we get a rebuffment that we can't pick and choose which items we don't want to pay for, then we need to reject ALL of them outright. Just say no. If a merchant were to say that you had to pay for 3 bottles of wine which you don't even like to drink, what would you do? I'd stop going to that store is what I'd do!!

Can it really be so simple? Mercier seemed to think so back when he wrote his book, and since I don't see any principles of Nature changing over time, it should be just as valid today. Or is it now the law that one must purchase whatever the store owners say we must buy?

What I am doing is offering up a point of debate. Let's gather up some data to either prove or disprove this line of thinking, and then analyze it from all angles. Petty bickering and name calling does not solve any problems. Careful inspection of them does.



Questor

[TheBlackTruth]

<font color=darkblue face=verdana>Questor,



Failing an argument of semantics, I can't think of anyone on this site who would disagree with the thesis of your discussion. You are dead on with your reasoning, in my humble opinion.



With every benefit comes necessarily a corresponding liability. Identify the benefit and dispose of it, and as such your liability should follow.



-BT[/color]

this is exactly what cornforth has been saying, where is the proof of my liability? just like a speeding ticket, produce the contract which gave way to the liability. see, i learned all this AFTER letting them trick me into signing a "contract" in a family law court. i tell people now, never, ever,ever,ever sign anything from a court unless u have to under duress. it is ALL ABOUT CONTRACTS!!! the problem is, now that weve discovered that they have been defaulting us under contracts, they wanna pretend we cant do the same to them.

Filing bankruptcy against alleged tax debts revealed the truth of these unstated, implied, unknown, unknowable, yet legally enforced "contracts."



I.E., the alleged debt, itself, is considered a "secured" debt.



The interest and penalities? Unsecured.



Question:



What, exactly, is the "security" for these alleged debts?



Answer:



They don't know, don't care, dont' have to know, and don't have to prove anything.



Welcome to America.

[Ice]

I think it is spelled AmeriKa when dealing with IRS issues.

Nice post questor. Invisible Contracts is certainly on my list of things I still want to read. For anyone interested, just type the book and author in google and free downloads are everywhere. The only problem is that the last chapter is not available for some reason if I remember correctly. Another option is to pay LRG like $40 bucks for it.



-squirrels