MY value of the time/energy I spend working is less than MY value
of the money I receive from customers (or an employer, if I had
one.)

Spending MY time/energy doing something else is less valuable (in
MY eyes) compared to the money I can earn by working at my job.

The customer's/employer's value of the money is less than THEIR
value of the time/energy it would take for them to accomplish the
work results themselves.

Along with the commission or wages they pay being less valued (in
THEIR eyes) than their revenue received as a result of that
contractor's/employee's labour.

Say you sell your labour to an employer for five bucks an hour.
That means that you value your hour (e.g. of leisure time) as
less than five dollars.

And the employer views your hour's work contribution to be worth
more than five dollars, in helping them to pull revenue.

You have described the basis of all free trade -- the difference in value
placed on things traded by the various people doing the trading. Value is
always relative, and different people place different values on things,
based on how much they want them and how much they want other things
instead. Sadly, it's a simple concept that many people don't understand.

A man negotiates a trade with another. That's the end of it.

A man contracts to work a given amount of time for a specified payment.
Once done, the transaction is complete and they both walk away.

That's free trade in free markets by free men.

You likely know all about business overhead, ledger systems and tax law,
so I'm going to give it to you straight, most people don't care. Most
people know that complexity breeds plenty of ways to get screwed. Most
people are practical. They have what is known as common sense.

The federalist constitution says that there may be a head tax IF it
is equally apportioned. This means that the federal government *may*
tax each citizen an equal share of the nation's cost of government.

So, figure up the total, divide by the number of citizens, and
send them each a bill at the end of each year. This is the only way
to fairly and reasonably tax.

That won't happen because thieves and opportunists disguised as
fair-minded, rational people have a stake in ventures that screw their
fellow citizens.

The income tax amendment and all its legalistic BS is manipulative and
inherently unfair as is its partner in crime, the central banking system
and debt money. They have survived and kept the public at bay due to
constant physical expansion and growth. Thus we now have preemptive
wars and phony trade agreements designed to create new consumers and new
markets, but this is approaching the end.

Thousands of colonial supporters of King George along with their
families were killed and their properties taken by fellow colonists.
Some were simply shot or hung while others were burned to death. Many
thousands more were run out of the Americas between 1775 and 1781. They
were Tories, opposed to free trade in free markets by free men.

Maybe you'll get lucky and miss the next purge.





time,

Carries no cost.


sweat,


Carries no cost.




labor,


Carries no cost.




for tangible goods.


Then you have income in the amount of the goods received.




Even exchange.


But it's not.




No tax.


But there is.





----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----

knews4u2c...@yahoo.com> wrote

An exchange of labor for anything of value is not a "gain."

Sure it is.

It is a even exchange,

It's absolutely not even.

Why would an employer pay you exactly the amount of revenue you generated?

The employer isn't going to pay you 100% of what you generate. They never
have, and never will.

That doesn't have anything to do with your exchange of labor for

time,

Carries no cost.

It cosy my parents plenty to create my life, my time here.

sweat,

Carries no cost.

If I had to walk twelve miles to get water in me to make the sweat it

labor,

Carries no cost.

for tangible goods.

Then you have income in the amount of the goods received.

Bullshit. I made an even trade.

Even exchange.

But it's not.

No tax.

But there is.

Because you say so?

--
If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons?
----------------
Paul A. Thomas, CPA
Athens, Georgia

"strabo" <str...@flashlight.net> wrote in message

news:1172216143_6719@sp6iad.superfeed.net...





Paul Thomas, CPA wrote:
knews4u2c...@yahoo.com> wrote
An exchange of labor for anything of value is not a "gain."

Sure it is.

It is a even exchange,

It's absolutely not even.

Why would an employer pay you exactly the amount of revenue you
generated? The employer isn't going to pay you 100% of what you generate.
They never have, and never will.

A man contracts to work a given amount of time for a specified payment.
Once done, the transaction is complete and they both walk away.

Of course there is a gain for the provider of the labor. Before working,
he had nothing but his body. After working he still has his body, and
whatever he received for providing the labor. His labor cost him nothing
to provide except the expenditure of time than cannot be bought. All of
the receipt from the provision of this labor is gain. Gain is determined
by FMV received, less BASIS (cost to provider) given.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The basis of my labor is incalculable.

None the less IT IS STILL MINE

and the CONSTITUTION says I have
"freedom of contract."

That means I don't have to let the government
into my private affairs and dealings.

It becomes measurable as I exchange it for other things.

On Feb 20, 2:48 am, "Dale E" <"Dale E"@synapticsparks.info> wrote:

cpt banjo wrote:


And you didn't even have the guts to rely on Section 861 in your
defense, did you? Instead, you avoided the snake oil that you peddle
to others and relied instead on a Cheek defense -- that is, instead of
trying to convince the judge that your view of Section 861 was legally
correct, you abandoned what you profess to believe and tried to
convince the jury that you has a good faith belief that your views on
the law were correct, so that you didn't "willfully" evade taxes. But
the jury didn't buy it, did they?

Those that were at that trial know it was as much of a sham as any
other federal tax trial.


Which still doesn't answer the question: why didn't Rose raise his 861
argument with the judge? Could it be he knew it was nonsense?

And Rose still hasn't explained why he refused to pay his PA taxes.

Perhaps you mis-read the header. My name is Dale Eastman NOT Larken Rose.

Double negatives cancel: The following items are considered to be
taxable... ("For federal tax purposes") and, thus, may have expenses,
losses, or other deductions allocated and apportioned to them:

(A) In the case of a foreign taxpayer (including a
foreign sales corporation (FSC)) computing its
effectively connected income, gross income (whether
domestic or foreign source) which is not effectively
connected to the conduct of a United States trade or
business;

A foreign taxpayer's gross income is taxable. That's not me.

The federalist constitution says that there may be a head tax IF it
is equally apportioned. This means that the federal government *may*
tax each citizen an equal share of the nation's cost of government.

So, figure up the total, divide by the number of citizens, and
send them each a bill at the end of each year. This is the only way
to fairly and reasonably tax.

In article
1172180164.241093.123950@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
cptbanjo@aol.com says...
On Feb 22, 2:47 pm, knews4u2c...@yahoo.com wrote:

An exchange of labor for anything of value is not a "gain."
It is a even exchange, time, sweat, labor, for tangible goods.
Even exchange. No tax.
No apportionment, no legal tax.


Sigh...another one who doesn't know that gain isn't measured by the
difference in value of the things exchanged.


From a certain angle, it is measured that way.

MY value of the time/energy I spend working is less than MY value
of the money I receive from customers (or an employer, if I had
one.)

Spending MY time/energy doing something else is less valuable (in
MY eyes) compared to the money I can earn by working at my job.

The customer's/employer's value of the money is less than THEIR
value of the time/energy it would take for them to accomplish the
work results themselves.

Along with the commission or wages they pay being less valued (in
THEIR eyes) than their revenue received as a result of that
contractor's/employee's labour.

Say you sell your labour to an employer for five bucks an hour.
That means that you value your hour (e.g. of leisure time) as
less than five dollars.

And the employer views your hour's work contribution to be worth
more than five dollars, in helping them to pull revenue.

On Feb 23, 1:19 am, "Richard Macdonald" <rmacdon...@verizon.net
wrote:
"strabo" <str...@flashlight.net> wrote in message

news:1172216143_6719@sp6iad.superfeed.net...





Paul Thomas, CPA wrote:
knews4u2c...@yahoo.com> wrote
An exchange of labor for anything of value is not a "gain."
Sure it is.
It is a even exchange,
It's absolutely not even.
Why would an employer pay you exactly the amount of revenue you
generated? The employer isn't going to pay you 100% of what you generate.
They never have, and never will.
A man contracts to work a given amount of time for a specified payment.
Once done, the transaction is complete and they both walk away.
Of course there is a gain for the provider of the labor. Before working,
he had nothing but his body. After working he still has his body, and
whatever he received for providing the labor. His labor cost him nothing
to provide except the expenditure of time than cannot be bought. All of
the receipt from the provision of this labor is gain. Gain is determined
by FMV received, less BASIS (cost to provider) given.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The basis of my labor is incalculable.
None the less IT IS STILL MINE and the CONSTITUTION says I have
"freedom of contract." That means I don't have to let the government
into my private affairs and dealings. If I want to exchange my spit
for Not Federal No Reserve NOTES, I don't have to tell anyone or share
in my exchange, EXCEPT UNDER APPORTIONED LEGAL TAXES.
It becomes measurable as I exchange it for other things.

knews4u2c...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Feb 23, 1:19 am, "Richard Macdonald" <rmacdon...@verizon.net
wrote:
"strabo" <str...@flashlight.net> wrote in message

news:1172216143_6719@sp6iad.superfeed.net...

Paul Thomas, CPA wrote:
knews4u2c...@yahoo.com> wrote
An exchange of labor for anything of value is not a "gain."
Sure it is.
It is a even exchange,
It's absolutely not even.
Why would an employer pay you exactly the amount of revenue you
generated? The employer isn't going to pay you 100% of what you generate.
They never have, and never will.
A man contracts to work a given amount of time for a specified payment.
Once done, the transaction is complete and they both walk away.
Of course there is a gain for the provider of the labor. Before working,
he had nothing but his body. After working he still has his body, and
whatever he received for providing the labor. His labor cost him nothing
to provide except the expenditure of time than cannot be bought. All of
the receipt from the provision of this labor is gain. Gain is determined
by FMV received, less BASIS (cost to provider) given.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The basis of my labor is incalculable.
None the less IT IS STILL MINE and the CONSTITUTION says I have
"freedom of contract." That means I don't have to let the government
into my private affairs and dealings. If I want to exchange my spit
for Not Federal No Reserve NOTES, I don't have to tell anyone or share
in my exchange, EXCEPT UNDER APPORTIONED LEGAL TAXES.
It becomes measurable as I exchange it for other things.

Still full of it, aren't you SuperDummy. The law is what the Supreme
Court of the USA says it is.

To this there is no appeal and no evasion
that does not incur governmental sanction. Your failure to understand
this leads to the idiocy you repeatedly display here.
FK- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

"strabo" <str...@flashlight.net> wrote

Why would an employer pay you exactly the amount of revenue you
generated? The employer isn't going to pay you 100% of what you generate.
They never have, and never will.

A man negotiates a trade with another. That's the end of it.

But why would you negotiate to a point of not feeling that you've gotten the
best deal?

Face it, both sides feel they are getting, not an even deal, but
that each is feeling that they're coming out ahead.

Both sides feel they
are getting a gain on their costs, and both sides are right.

You are very naive'.

The worker is getting a wage for that time that otherwise would not be
sellable (once time lapses, it can't be sold).

So?

The employer is getting a greater value from that worker than he pays the
worker (otherwise he'd hire someone at a lower wage).

Not if the isn't anyone available.

Both sides gain, both pay tax on that gain.

Only fictitious entities created by government sanction are taxable.

A man contracts to work a given amount of time for a specified payment.
Once done, the transaction is complete and they both walk away.

And both will probably owe taxes on their respective gain.

Under the current fraud you are prosecuted for not complying. Some

That's free trade in free markets by free men.

Sure, the trade is "free", in that no one is compelling you to trade at all.

But the gains are taxable.

No gains. I make an even trade.

You likely know all about business overhead, ledger systems and tax law,
so I'm going to give it to you straight, most people don't care. Most
people know that complexity breeds plenty of ways to get screwed. Most
people are practical. They have what is known as common sense.

Interestingly I've seen many instances of that not being true.

The federalist constitution says that there may be a head tax IF it
is equally apportioned. This means that the federal government *may*
tax each citizen an equal share of the nation's cost of government.

But we don't have a "head tax".

So, figure up the total, divide by the number of citizens, and
send them each a bill at the end of each year. This is the only way
to fairly and reasonably tax.

People smarter than you decided that it wasn't fair or reasonable to tax in
that manner.

Who says they are smarter?

That won't happen because thieves and opportunists disguised as
fair-minded, rational people have a stake in ventures that screw their
fellow citizens.

They've seen from history that a "head tax" is not fair or equitable to all
citizens.

Why not?

Snip lunatic rant

Maybe you'll get lucky and miss the next purge.

Threat noted.

Is that all you have? And you have to hide your name while you make it.
What a man you turned out to be.

--
If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons?
----------------
Paul A. Thomas, CPA
Paid stooge tax collector of the government.

On Feb 24, 5:56 pm, Fred Kasner <fkas...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:



knews4u2c...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Feb 23, 1:19 am, "Richard Macdonald" <rmacdon...@verizon.net
wrote:
"strabo" <str...@flashlight.net> wrote in message

news:1172216143_6719@sp6iad.superfeed.net...

Paul Thomas, CPA wrote:
knews4u2c...@yahoo.com> wrote
An exchange of labor for anything of value is not a "gain."
Sure it is.
It is a even exchange,
It's absolutely not even.
Why would an employer pay you exactly the amount of revenue you
generated? The employer isn't going to pay you 100% of what you generate.
They never have, and never will.
A man contracts to work a given amount of time for a specified payment.
Once done, the transaction is complete and they both walk away.
Of course there is a gain for the provider of the labor. Before working,
he had nothing but his body. After working he still has his body, and
whatever he received for providing the labor. His labor cost him nothing
to provide except the expenditure of time than cannot be bought. All of
the receipt from the provision of this labor is gain. Gain is determined
by FMV received, less BASIS (cost to provider) given.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The basis of my labor is incalculable.
None the less IT IS STILL MINE and the CONSTITUTION says I have
"freedom of contract." That means I don't have to let the government
into my private affairs and dealings. If I want to exchange my spit
for Not Federal No Reserve NOTES, I don't have to tell anyone or share
in my exchange, EXCEPT UNDER APPORTIONED LEGAL TAXES.
It becomes measurable as I exchange it for other things.

Still full of it, aren't you SuperDummy. The law is what the Supreme
Court of the USA says it is.

"The (sixteenth) ammendment created no new powers of taxation." It
changed NOTHING. That means there is no "income" tax on wages that are
not apportioned to the states by population.

To this there is no appeal and no evasion
that does not incur governmental sanction. Your failure to understand
this leads to the idiocy you repeatedly display here.
FK- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Plain old fascist lies.
Who pays the courts salaries?
The exchange of labor for tangible goods is not taxable.