The safeguard would be the expereince and memory of the personal and noncorporate income tax, bracket creep, unkept government promises, most tax increase refredums fail in the US, payroll tax, property tax, sales tax, custom duties, excess taxes, not many citizens had a previous experience with the income tax but there is no gurantee, repealing the 16th amendment would help but even there it is no gurantee.--- In [email protected], Urmas Järve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What exacly is a corporation and what is a small business? > > Also this kind of tax would only be a tax on the minority just like the first proposed income tax what was ruled unconstitutional. > > What would be the "safeguards" of that tax being in place at that level? The second time income tax was proposed in US it was 2% and the proponents made fun of their counter parts who argued it could raise to 20% or more. That argument was considered absurd and look at where we are now. > > Also does popular tax mean it is the right course of action? Does popular justify stealing? > > Best wishes, > Urmas > > On 07/01/2006 19:58, terry12622000 wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "terry12622000" > > wrote: > > > > > > Polls show that only 5% say corporations pay to many taxes, so > > ending > > > the tax on individuals and non corporations ( which are mostly > > small > > > busineses) would i'm sure be vastly popular. It's basically the > > > political wonks who can't see it.--- In > > > [email protected], "terry12622000" wrote: > > > > > > > > Actually a corporate tax would not be a tax in most cases it > > would > > > be > > > > a user fee for the service of incorporating, it would be a tax > > when > > > a > > > > group was forced to incorporate or when individuals and groups > > are > > > > forced to deal with corporations. Still ending all direct taxes > > on > > > > individuals and noncorporate and non limited liablity businesses > > > and > > > > nonprofits would put the political class establishment to the > > test > > > ( > > > > can it create enough value to sustain itself) while freeing up > > > > billions, possibly into trillions of dollars for people to > > > > participate in alternative markets and mutual aid.-- - In > > > > [email protected], "John Stroebel" > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought of you all as I was readying this post for a few > > other > > > > groups. > > > > > I thought of the reaction I got over the federal gov't paying > > an > > > > agreed > > > > > sum (adding up to a pittance) to the Ute people for a contract > > > > (treaty) > > > > > signed in the 20's. Man. Some folks really got them panties in > > a > > > > twist > > > > > over having to be 'indebted' for THAT deal! ;-) > > > > > > > > > > Well, I saw THIS little charm....so why is it that, I wondered, > > > that > > > > > these Libertarians aren't cryin' a river over an estimated 500 > > > > BILLION > > > > > DOLLARS cost for these lil' occupations the government is > > > carrying > > > > out > > > > > in our name? > > > > > > > > > > Ute easier pickins???? > > > > > > > > > > ahemmm....the post. ;-) > > > > > > > > > > THREE LIL' LIES WE ALL SWALLOWED > > > > > > > > > > hmmm...while I am still wondering, what IS this course we are > > > > staying??? > > > > > > > > > > The estimated costs for this useless, needless, obscene war of > > > > > aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan by 2007...500 Billion. Wanna > > > see > > > > it > > > > > in digits? $500,000,000,000. > > > > > > > > > > But I digress....this is an excellent article about three > > > wonderful > > > > > myths we Americans have fallen for....WMD, Zarqawi and Iraqi > > > > > sovereignty. enjoy! ;-) > > > > > > > > > > (did I say myths? Why of course I meant bald faced lies. Bush's > > > > pants on > > > > > fire.) > > > > > Cost of wars in Afghanistan & Iraq 2 top $500 BILLION in 2007 > > > > Three > > > > > Iraq Myths That Won't Quit > > > > > > > > > > By Scott Ritter > > > > > http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13764.htm > > > > > > > > > 06/26/06 > > > > > "AlterNet" -- -- It is hard sometimes to know what is real and > > > what > > > > is > > > > > fiction when it comes to the news out of Iraq. America is in > > > > its "silly > > > > > season," the summer months leading up to a national election, > > and > > > > the > > > > > media is going full speed ahead in exploiting its primacy in > > the > > > > news > > > > > arena by substituting responsible reporting with headline- > > grabbing > > > > > entertainment. So, as America closes in on the end of June > > and > > > > the > > > > > celebration of the 230th year of our nation's birth, I thought > > I > > > > would > > > > > pen a short primer on three myths on Iraq to keep an eye out > > for > > > as > > > > we > > > > > "debate" the various issues pertaining to our third year of war > > > in > > > > that > > > > > country. The myth of sovereignty Imagine the president of the > > > > United > > > > > States flying to Russia, China, England, France or just about > > any > > > > other > > > > > nation on the planet, landing at an airport on supposedly > > > sovereign > > > > > territory, being driven under heavy U.S. military protection > > to > > > > the > > > > > U.S. Embassy, and then with some five minutes notification, > > > > summoning > > > > > the highest elected official of that nation to the U.S. Embassy > > > for > > > > a > > > > > meeting. It would never happen, unless of course the nation in > > > > question > > > > > is Iraq, where Iraqi sovereignty continues to be hyped as a > > > reality > > > > when > > > > > in fact it is as fictitious as any fairy tale ever penned by the > > > > > Brothers Grimm. For all of the talk of a free Iraq, the fact is > > > Iraq > > > > > remains very much an occupied nation where the United States > > (and > > > > its > > > > > ever decreasing "coalition of the willing") gets to call all > > the > > > > shots. > > > > > Iraqi military policy is made by the United States. Its borders > > > are > > > > > controlled by the United States. Its economy is controlled > > > largely > > > > by > > > > > the United States. In fact, there simply isn't a single major > > > > indicator > > > > > of actual sovereignty in Iraq today that can be said to be free > > of > > > > > overwhelming American control. Iraqi ministers continue to be > > > shot > > > > at by > > > > > coalition forces, and Iraqi police are powerless to investigate > > > > criminal > > > > > activities carried out by American troops (or their mercenary > > > > > counterparts, the so-called "Private Military Contractors"). > > The > > > > reality > > > > > of this myth is that the timeline for the departure of American > > > > troops > > > > > from Iraq is being debated (and decided) in Washington, D.C., > > not > > > > > Baghdad. Of course, as with everything in Iraq, the final vote > > > will > > > > be > > > > > made by the people of Iraq. But these votes will be cast in > > > > bullets, not > > > > > ballots, and will bring with them not only the departure of > > > American > > > > > troops from Iraq, but also the demise of any Iraqi government > > > > foolish > > > > > enough to align itself with a nation that violates > > international > > > > law by > > > > > planning and waging an illegal war of aggression, and continues > > to > > > > > conduct an increasingly brutal (and equally illegitimate) > > > > occupation. > > > > > The myth of Zarqawi I have said all along that the poll figures > > > > showing > > > > > Americans to be overwhelmingly against the war in Iraq were > > > > illusory. > > > > > Only 28 percent of Americans were against the war when we > > invaded > > > > Iraq. > > > > > The ranks have swelled to over 60 percent not because there has > > > > been an > > > > > awakening of social conscience and responsibility, but rather > > > > because > > > > > things aren't going well in Iraq, and there is increasing angst > > > in > > > > the > > > > > American heartland because we seem to be losing the war in > > Iraq, > > > > and no > > > > > one likes a loser. So when the word came that the notorious > > > > terrorist, > > > > > Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, was killed by American military action, > > the > > > > > president suddenly had a "good week," and poll numbers adjusted > > > > slightly > > > > > in his favor. However, the facts cannot be re-written, even > > by > > > a > > > > > slavish American mainstream media. Zarqawi was never anything > > > more > > > > than > > > > > a minor player in Iraq, a third-rate Jordanian criminal whose > > > > exploits > > > > > were hyped up by a Bush administration anxious to prove that the > > > > > insurgency that was getting the best of America in Iraq was > > > > > foreign-grown and linked to the perpetrators of the 9/11 terror > > > > attacks > > > > > nonetheless. The reality of just how wrong such an assessment > > is > > > > (and > > > > > was) has been pounded home in blood. Since Zarqawi's death, the > > > > violence > > > > > has continued to spiral out of control in Iraq, with Americans > > > > > continuing to die, Iraqis still being slaughtered, and Zarqawi > > > and > > > > his > > > > > organization, successor and all, still as irrelevant to reality > > > as > > > > ever. > > > > > The war against the American occupation in Iraq is being fought > > > > > overwhelmingly by Iraqis. The insurgency is growing and becoming > > > > > stronger and more organized by the day. This, of course, is a > > > > reality > > > > > that the Bush administration cannot afford to have the American > > > > people > > > > > know about in an election year, as a compliant media, having > > sold > > > > its > > > > > soul to the devil in hyping of the virtues of an invasion of > > Iraq > > > > back > > > > > in 2002-2003, continues to dance with the party that brought > > them > > > by > > > > > supporting the Republican position, by and large, that the > > > conflict > > > > in > > > > > Iraq is a winnable one for America. Good ratings, more dead > > > > Americans > > > > > (and Iraqis, but who is counting?) and a war that will never > > end > > > > until > > > > > the United States finally slinks out, defeated, its tail tucked > > > > firmly > > > > > between its legs. The myth of WMD Regardless of what Sen. Rick > > > > > Santorum and the lunatic neoconservative fringe want to think, > > no > > > > > weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq. Citing a > > > > classified > > > > > Department of Defense report that claims some 500 artillery > > > shells > > > > have > > > > > been found in Iraq by U.S. forces since the invasion and > > > subsequent > > > > > occupation of Iraq in March 2003, Santorum and his cronies in > > the > > > > > right-wing media have been spouting nonsense about how Bush got > > > it > > > > right > > > > > all along, that there were WMD in Iraq after all. He > > conveniently > > > > fails > > > > > to report that there is nothing "secret" about this data, it > > has > > > all > > > > > been reported before (by the Bush administration, nonetheless), > > > and > > > > that > > > > > the shells in question constitute old artillery munitions > > > > manufactured > > > > > well prior to 1991 (the year of the first Gulf War, and a time > > > after > > > > > which the government of Saddam Hussein stated -- correctly, it > > > > turned > > > > > out that no WMD were produced in Iraq). The degraded sarin > > > nerve > > > > agent > > > > > and mustard blister agent contained in the discovered munitions > > > had > > > > long > > > > > since lost their viability, and as such represented no threat > > > > > whatsoever. Furthermore, the haphazard way in which they were > > > > > "discovered" (lying about the ground, as opposed to carefully > > > stored > > > > > away) only reinforces the Iraqi government's past claims that > > > many > > > > > chemical munitions were scattered about the desert countryside > > in > > > > remote > > > > > areas following U.S. bombing attacks on the ammunition storage > > > > depots > > > > > during the first Gulf War. Having personally inspected scores > > of > > > > these > > > > > bombed-out depots, I can vouch for the veracity of the past > > Iraqi > > > > > claims, as well as the absurdity of the claims made today by > > > > Santorum > > > > > and others, who continue to hold personal political gain as > > being > > > > worth > > > > > more than the blood of over 2,500 dead Americans. These three > > > > myths -- > > > > > WMD, Zarqawi and Iraqi sovereignty -- are what members of > > Congress > > > > > should be debating in their halls of power, the American media > > > > should be > > > > > discussing either in print or across the airwaves, and that > > > > discussion > > > > > should constitute the foundation of a movement towards > > > > accountability, > > > > > where the citizens of the United States finally point an > > > accusatory > > > > > finger at those whom they elected to represent them in higher > > > > office, > > > > > and who have failed in almost every regard when it comes to > > Iraq. > > > > But > > > > > then again, silly me for thinking this way, believing that > > there > > > > was an > > > > > engaged constituency within America that knows and understands > > the > > > > > Constitution of the United States and seeks to live each day as > > a > > > > true > > > > > citizen empowered by the ideal and values set forth by that > > > > document. I > > > > > had overlooked the Fourth Myth -- that American citizens are > > > > engaged in > > > > > our national debate. Scott Ritter served as chief U.N. > > weapons > > > > > inspector in Iraq from 1991 until his resignation in 1998. He > > is > > > the > > > > > author of, most recently, " Iraq Confidential: The Untold > > Story > > > > of the > > > > > Intelligence Conspiracy to Undermine the U.N. and Overthrow > > Saddam > > > > > Hussein " > > > (Nation > > > > > Books, 2005 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> See what's inside the new Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/2pRQfA/bOaOAA/yQLSAA/KlSolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
