Prof said: "> so that at ... Not true! There is nothing that says that no tax on incomes does not need apportionment! The SC has clearly ruled that the 16th...
"The 16th Amendment means exactly what it says, folks. Live with it." As Edmunster would say, text without context is error. The face value of the 16th is...
... And the tax deniers continue to wave this quote around as if it were a crucifix intended to ward off a vampire, when in fact it has nothing to do with...
And Tarrifs have to do with foreign commerce !!!! So I guess the 'income tax laws' have to do with foreign commerce Statutes !!!!!??? That WOULD make sense...
Since you SOLD it, frank, that means you TRANSFERRED the ownership. Therefore, what you got for the property is INCOME. No Income Tax requires apportionment,...
With all that rhetoric you can't get past the truth that whatever you are paid for your labor is a gain derived from your labor. As such, to tax that gain...
The truth ed? You would be the last one that I would expect to tell the truth. You bounce around the truth more than a golf ball bounces around in a tile ...
The name of an act of Congress does not necessarily reveal all that is within the contents of the act. The Act of 1913 clearly imposed an Income tax law....
Which Act of 1913 ed? Still confused? Tariff or Tax? You said Tariff and messed up. Not willing to admit it? A real man will admit his mistakes. Childish men, ...
This should be interesting. Please provide any ruling post 16th Amendment that held some income tax required apportionment. (It will soon be obvious that frank...
The bottom line is, yes, an INCOME TAX IS A TAX ON INCOME. You provided the case yourself- Stratton's Independence. The Corporation Excise Tax of 1909 was NOT...
... Well not all. Because some income tax acts were ruled unconstitutional. ... True. Considering that definition of income. I can agree to cut Bobs' lawn for...
Too bad Prof, that YOU don't understand what the 16th Amendment MEANS !!!!!!!! I guess you would elect to tax your own earnings !!! Were you born with the...
... Yet the same Constitution whose Preamble you quote explicitly grants Congress the power to levy taxes, including income taxes. That is the law, like it or...
Baloney, Ed !!!! Prove that money is income !!!!!!!!! And you deceive the truth by interchanging "FOR" and "FROM" !!!!!!!! You have been publicly exposed and...
What are you getting at, stokes? Wages are Income. Section 1 imposes a tax on taxable income. Your wage would be included in that tax among all of your other...
You are paid money for your labor. That is an exchange. Whether or not that money is income is a totally different question. Income is a gain derived from...
... How does that change the MEANING of income? It doesn't. ... Why can't Joe derive a gain from his own labor? The definition does not limit the meaning of...
So you DO believe that I have an unalieanable RIGHT to take some of your property !!!!!!!!! And exactly WHO do you think is this CONGRESS that IS the "We the...
I have been GIVEN money, for my labor ! The exchange is DONE ! My laboring, has acquired ME a greater value of property OWNERSHIP! Is the greater value, of...
Hey, Prof is deceiving us again ! Those are classes of PROPERTY !!! the law taxed incomes from other classes of property than real estate and invested personal...
... No, they aren't. They're things people do to earn income. If they were property, then the Pollock court would have held that a tax on the income derived...
frank keeps posting "THE CONCLUSION REACHED IN THE POLLOCK CASE...", now you are doing it. Why? The 16th Amendment did away with "the conclusion reached in...
Yes, Prof, they are classes of PROPERTY !!!! Nothing could serve to make this clearer than to recall that in the Pollock Case, in so far as the law taxed...
Having problems with message search?
Fill out this form to ensure your group is one of the first to be migrated to the new message search system.
Offline 
Send Email