Rage against the machine

http://freedom-1st.com/

I know this has nothing to do with ultimate, but it seems like
something everyone in ultimate would want to know.  Try getting your
checks written in your Christian name. Instead of reading PHIL JONES
have it read, Phil Jones.  Good luck.  You know you don't have to pay
taxes under the constitution.  People know about this stuff?

http://freedom-1st.com/

Fact #1: "In examining the history of the debate and ratification of
the 16th Amendment, this book will show that there is no evidence upon
which the government can rely for their claim that the American People
desired to have their wages and salaries taxed. No evidence can be
found in the law journals of the time, not in the journals on
political economy or economics, not in the Congressional Record nor
other Congressional documents, nor in any of the newspapers of record
of the time. In other words, the government's position that wages and
salaries equals income within the meaning of the 16th Amendment is
'wholly without foundation.'" Phil Hart, Constitutional Income: Do You
Have Any? page 10, (Alpine Press, 2001).

Fact #2: A tax on wages payable by the wage earner is a Capitation
Tax. So says the premier authority on the issue, Adam Smith author of
the timeless work Wealth of Nations. See ibid. pp. 141-145.

Fact #3: Capitation Taxes are direct taxes and are required by the
Constitution to be apportioned among the 50 States. The 16th Amendment
had nothing to do with Capitation Taxes. Ibid. pp. 250 - 253.

Fact #4: In the few hours just prior to the Senate's passage of the
16th Amendment the morning of July 5, 1909, the Senate twice by vote
rejected two separate proposals to include direct taxes within the
authority of the 16th Amendment. Ibid. pages 193-200.

Fact #5: In briefs and argument before the Supreme Court in the case
of Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad, both Brushaber and the
Government claimed that the 16th Amendment provided for a direct tax
exempted from the Constitutional apportionment rule. The High Court
called this claim an "erroneous assumption...wholly without
foundation." Ibid. pp. 204-210.

Fact #6: Just weeks after the Brushaber Case was decided, Mr. Stanton,
in the case of Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co. again claimed (35 times)
that the 16th Amendment created a new class of constitutional tax,
that being a direct tax exempted from the apportionment rule. The High
Court said in this case that the 16th Amendment created "no new tax."
Ibid. pp. 212-220.

Fact #7: In the Stanton and Brushaber Cases, the Supreme Court ruled
correctly by excluding direct taxes from the 16th Amendment. The
intent of the American People and that of Congress was never to
directly tax the American People, but only to tax income severed from
accumulated wealth. Ibid. pp. 244 - 270.

Fact #8: When the Supreme Court stated in the Eisner, Stanton, and
Doyle Cases that "Income may be derived from capital, or labor or from
both combined" all these cases dealt with corporations and had nothing
to do with the "Are wages income?" question. Ibid. pp. 239-244 and
272-274.

Fact #9: The genesis of the 16th Amendment was the income tax plank of
the Democrat Party's Presidential Platform of 1908 which clearly
reveals the intent of that Amendment:
"We favor an income tax as part of our revenue system, and we urge the
submission of a constitutional amendment specifically authorizing
Congress to levy and collect a tax upon individual and corporate
incomes, to the end that wealth may bear its proportional share of the
burdens of the federal government." Ibid. p. 48.

Fact #10: There is not, and never has been, any delegation of
authority from We the People to the government for the collection of
an unapportioned direct tax on the wages and salaries of the American
People. It has been a maxim of English Law since the Magna Carta of
1215, that the People must consent to all taxation. "We are being
taxed without our Consent!" Ibid. p. 278.
To read these above quotes in context, buy a copy of Constitutional
Income: Do You Have Any? This book is the only exhaustive analysis of
the intent of the American People in supporting an income tax
amendment to the Constitution. Constitutional Income: Do You Have Any?
proves without a doubt that the purpose of the 16th Amendment was to
bring tax relief to wage earners.