• donnay's Avatar
    Today, 04:52 AM
    Matthew 6:9-10 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.
    2410 replies | 274034 view(s)
  • Mach's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:49 PM
    Mach replied to a thread Bill Maher Thread in U.S. Political News
    He knows he will lose his career if he ever applied that... he believes in climate change, but flies in his own private jet.
    12 replies | 1382 view(s)
  • Mach's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:34 PM
    White single parent homes has risen for many decades, but the murder rate has not kept up.
    31 replies | 553 view(s)
  • otherone's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:17 AM
    otherone replied to a thread Was Lincoln a Tyrant? in History
    "Had to"? Why? To benefit whom?
    43 replies | 11147 view(s)
  • donnay's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:10 AM
    John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
    2410 replies | 274034 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    03-24-2023, 02:57 PM
    Nor does the Sixteenth Amendment declare: ”The Congress shall have power to lay and collect direct taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.” Now, let us keep in mind that on June 17th, 1909, Senator Brown offered the following Joint Resolution (S. J. R. 39) to amend the Constitution relative to TAXES ON INCOMES: ”Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of both Houses concurring), That the following section be submitted to the legislatures of the several States, which, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the States, shall be valid and binding as a part of the Constitution of the United States: “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect direct taxes on incomes without apportionment among the several States according to population." CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ___ SENATE, June 17, 1909, Page 3377
    56 replies | 2011 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    03-24-2023, 01:46 PM
    I see you are back to applying the Humpty Dumpty theory of language to the meaning of our Constitution: “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean- neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master-that’s all.” But, however hard you try, the words in the Sixteenth Amendment remain the same and do not say:
    56 replies | 2011 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    56 replies | 2011 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    03-24-2023, 01:04 PM
    Well, I see you quoted the amendment correctly and it certainly does not say: ”The Congress shall have power to lay and collect direct taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.” Nor does the Sixteenth Amendment declare: “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on earned wages, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”
    56 replies | 2011 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    03-24-2023, 11:50 AM
    Why didn't you answer the question? How do you arrive at the conclusion that the Sixteenth Amendment was intended to allow a tax on earned wages? Today's federal tax on earned wages is not in harmony with the original objective of adopting the Sixteenth Amendment which was to allow for a federal tax on “unearned” incomes as can be contrasted from “earned” wages. Today’s federal tax on a working person’s earned wages takes the form of a direct tax, is not being apportioned, and thus violates the constitutional protection requiring direct taxes to be apportioned. Finally, and in respect of the Sixteenth Amendment and calculating a federal tax on incomes, “ . . . it becomes essential to distinguish between what is and what is not "income," as the term is there used; and to apply the distinction, as cases arise, according to truth and substance, without regard to form. Congress cannot by any definition it may adopt conclude the matter, since it cannot by legislation alter the Constitution, from which alone it derives its power to legislate, and within whose limitations alone that power can be lawfully exercised.” EISNER v. MACOMBER , 252 U.S. 189 (1920)
    56 replies | 2011 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    03-24-2023, 11:24 AM
    How do you arrive at that conclusion? Today's federal tax on earned wages is not in harmony with the original objective of adopting the Sixteenth Amendment which was to allow for a federal tax on “unearned” incomes as can be contrasted from “earned” wages. Today’s federal tax on a working person’s earned wages takes the form of a direct tax, is not being apportioned, and thus violates the constitutional protection requiring direct taxes to be apportioned. Finally, and in respect of the Sixteenth Amendment and calculating today’s federal tax on earned wages “ . . . it becomes essential to distinguish between what is and what is not "income," as the term is there used; and to apply the distinction, as cases arise, according to truth and substance, without regard to form. Congress cannot by any definition it may adopt conclude the matter, since it cannot by legislation alter the Constitution, from which alone it derives its power to legislate, and within whose limitations alone that power can be lawfully exercised.” EISNER v. MACOMBER , 252 U.S. 189 (1920)
    56 replies | 2011 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    03-24-2023, 11:03 AM
    What I acknowledged was the wording of the Sixteenth Amendment as being the law. And now you ask "What remains to discuss?" I stated that in the title of the thread "Today's Federal tax on earned wages may violate our Constitution", and in the OP:
    56 replies | 2011 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    03-24-2023, 09:58 AM
    And? Where have I suggested the Sixteenth Amendment is not the law? Did I not write the following in the OP? What does you post have to do with what I wrote? JWK Why have a written constitution, approved by the people, if those who it is meant to control are free to make it mean whatever they wish it to mean?
    56 replies | 2011 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    03-24-2023, 09:29 AM
    What "change"? Where is the constitutional amendment repealing, Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4 which states: “No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.”?
    56 replies | 2011 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    03-24-2023, 07:58 AM
    I believe the poster is referring to the often cited case Springer v. United States, 102 U.S. 586 (1881) which upheld a tax on "income" as not being direct. But the fatal flaw in citing Springer as confirmation that a tax on income could not have been considered a direct tax by our Founders, and thus requiring apportionment, is found in Justice Swayne's own words: "The very elaborate researches of the plaintiff in error have furnished us with nothing from the debates of the State conventions, by whom the Constitution was adopted, which gives us any aid. Hence we may safely assume that no such material exists in that direction . . . " Well, the assumption was wrong! In fact, there is evidence in the State ratification debates which do articulate characteristics which distinguish a direct tax from one which is indirect.
    56 replies | 2011 view(s)
  • donnay's Avatar
    03-24-2023, 05:55 AM
    67348 replies | 1106553 view(s)
  • donnay's Avatar
    03-24-2023, 02:35 AM
    Psalm 62:7 In God is my salvation and my glory: the rock of my strength, and my refuge, is in God.
    2410 replies | 274034 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    03-23-2023, 05:02 PM
    In regard to the question (". . . why is the capitalist allowed, and rightly so, to deduct their capital investments from money coming in, to arrive at their taxable income as per Eisner, while the wage earner is not" ) you say the Supreme Court and every other court in the country . . . cut for brevity. Your answer ignores how one arrives at taxable income as stated in Eisner by our Supreme Court: "After examining dictionaries in common use (Bouv. L. D.; Standard Dict.; Webster's Internat. Dict.; Century Dict.), we find little to add to the succinct definition adopted in two cases arising under the Corporation Tax Act of 1909 (Stratton's Independence v. Howbert, 231 U.S. 399, 415 , 34 S. Sup. Ct. 136, 140 ; Doyle v. Mitchell Bros. Co., 247 U.S. 179, 185 , 38 S. Sup. Ct. 467, 469 ), 'Income may be defined as the gain derived from capital, from labor, or from both combined,' provided it be understood to include profit gained through a sale or conversion of capital assets, to which it was applied in the Doyle Case, 247 U.S. 183, 185 , 38 S. Sup. Ct. 467, 469 (62 L. Ed. 1054). Brief as it is, it indicates the characteristic and distinguishing attribute of income essential for a correct solution of the present controversy. The Government, although basing its argument upon the definition as quoted, placed chief emphasis upon the word "gain," which was extended to include a variety of meanings; while the significance of the next three words was either overlooked or misconceived. " Derived — from — capital;" — "the gain — derived — from — capital," etc. Here we have the essential matter: not a gain accruing to capital, not a growth or increment of value in the investment; but a gain, a profit, something of exchangeable value proceeding from the property, severed from the capital however invested or employed, and coming in, being "derived," that is, received or drawn by the recipient (the taxpayer) for his separate use, benefit and disposal; — that is income derived from property. Nothing else answers the description." . The bottom line is, wage earners, who work for their money, do make capital outlays and various kinds of investments and other outlays, which are essential to make their labor possible, and reading through the Eisner case, those who have money working, as opposed to those who work for their money, get to deduct from money coming in as quoted above. What is the reasoning as to why the same rules do not apply to the wage earner who works for their money?
    56 replies | 2011 view(s)
  • donnay's Avatar
    03-23-2023, 03:09 AM
    Romans 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
    2410 replies | 274034 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    03-22-2023, 03:03 PM
    I too do not demonize the investor. I follow the rule of law, and not what some pretend it means. Having said that, and to confirm what you say above about the investor allegedly not doing anything to earn a profit, see the following defining “profit” which is found in my 1925-26 Bouviers Law Dictionary: "This is a word of very extended signification. In commerce, it means the advance in the price of goods sold beyond the cost of purchase. In distinction from the wages of labor, it is well understood to imply the net return to the capital of stock employed, after deducting all the expenses, including not only the wages of those employed by the capitalist, but the wages of the capitalist himself for superintending the employment of his capital or stock. Adam Smith, Wealth of Nat. b. i. c. 6 and M’Culloch’s Notes; Mill, Polit. Econ. C. 15" That quote inspired my thinking a long time ago about the wage earner's investments and outlays made, that make the wage earner's labor possible when selling the property each has in their own labor. Should we not apply the same rules for deductions to compute a wage earner's profit as the capitalist rightfully uses to arrive at a profit, and or gain? JWK
    56 replies | 2011 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    03-22-2023, 01:02 PM
    Your post has nothing to do with what I actually wrote in the OP. In any event, and with regard to the meaning of "incomes" as it appears in the Sixteenth Amendment, we find that meaning in Eisner v. Macomber 252 U.S. 189, 206 (1920): "After examining dictionaries in common use (Bouv. L. D.; Standard Dict.; Webster's Internat. Dict.; Century Dict.), we find little to add to the succinct definition adopted in two cases arising under the Corporation Tax Act of 1909 (Stratton's Independence v. Howbert, 231 U.S. 399, 415 , 34 S. Sup. Ct. 136, 140 ; Doyle v. Mitchell Bros. Co., 247 U.S. 179, 185 , 38 S. Sup. Ct. 467, 469 ), 'Income may be defined as the gain derived from capital, from labor, or from both combined,' provided it be understood to include profit gained through a sale or conversion of capital assets, to which it was applied in the Doyle Case, 247 U.S. 183, 185 , 38 S. Sup. Ct. 467, 469 (62 L. Ed. 1054). Brief as it is, it indicates the characteristic and distinguishing attribute of income essential for a correct solution of the present controversy. The Government, although basing its argument upon the definition as quoted, placed chief emphasis upon the word "gain," which was extended to include a variety of meanings; while the significance of the next three words was either overlooked or misconceived. " Derived — from — capital;" — "the gain — derived — from — capital," etc. Here we have the essential matter: not a gain accruing to capital, not a growth or increment of value in the investment; but a gain, a profit, something of exchangeable value proceeding from the property, severed from the capital however invested or employed, and coming in, being "derived," that is, received or drawn by the recipient (the taxpayer) for his separate use, benefit and disposal; — that is income derived from property. Nothing else answers the description." So, we now learn that all money that comes in is not “income” within the meaning of the 16th Amendment, but only that portion which represents a “profit” or “gain”. Keep in mind also that “profits“ or “gains, are calculated by deducting all necessary expenses and outlay from gross receipts …the remaining portion being “profit” and or “gain“!
    56 replies | 2011 view(s)
  • johnwk's Avatar
    03-22-2023, 10:15 AM
    . For the record, let us all acknowledge that the Sixteenth Amendment is part of our Constitution, and it declares: ”The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.” Now keep in mind the Sixteenth Amendment does not declare: ”The Congress shall have power to lay and collect direct taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”
    56 replies | 2011 view(s)
  • donnay's Avatar
    03-22-2023, 08:48 AM
    Where are all the militant feminists?
    14 replies | 491 view(s)
  • donnay's Avatar
    03-22-2023, 07:38 AM
    https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2023/03/22/great-reset-setback-govt-party-demands-adjustments-to-green-agenda-after-farmers-win-dutch-election/
    2 replies | 153 view(s)
  • donnay's Avatar
    03-22-2023, 05:25 AM
    Ezekiel 18:30b Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin.
    2410 replies | 274034 view(s)
  • DamianTV's Avatar
    03-21-2023, 11:56 PM
    https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-03-21-fairway-grocers-nyc-facial-recognition-profile-customers.html Soon, these will be the ONLY places that you are ALLOWED to buy LEGAL food. Yes FOOD will be ILLEGAL if it is not POISONED. If you speak against it and try to buy from places like this, well thats when those still asleep will realize exactly what this FACIAL RECOGNITION is for. To DENY a person the ability to buy FOOD, and MURDER THEM BY STARVATION.
    13 replies | 537 view(s)
  • Mach's Avatar
    03-21-2023, 06:55 PM
    I never knew Danny Carey of Tool was arrested on assault charges. ---
    2 replies | 104 view(s)
  • donnay's Avatar
    03-21-2023, 07:03 AM
    Matthew 18:21-22 Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times? Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.
    2410 replies | 274034 view(s)
  • Mach's Avatar
    03-20-2023, 03:02 PM
    Richard Ward, 32, was shot three times in the chest during an encounter with deputies on Feb. 22, 2022. The Tenth Judicial District Attorney’s Office cleared both deputies involved in the call in October, arguing the deputy who fired was justified in his use of force. Misc. Bonus video.
    1 replies | 183 view(s)
  • Mach's Avatar
    03-20-2023, 02:52 PM
    Woman get released from hospital, sits outside not wanting to leave, is gone off on and arrested then goes unconscious in the police car, then dies. How do these people get hired?
    1 replies | 105 view(s)
More Activity

3 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
    Just wanted to say thank you for the +rep and kind words about my video. (That was the second upload...slightly revised. The first one had over 5,000 views and was starting to get a lot of traffic, then youtube suddenly removed it.) Anyway... keep searching for the truth and thanks again.
  2. View Conversation
    You're right, I am hateful. I hate liberal and progressive bullshit and I hate when people promote taxation.
  3. View Conversation
    Thanks for the +rep!
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 3 of 3
About Weston White

Basic Information

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Displayed city:
Fresno, CA
Activist Reputation (Self-Rated):
5
Display site reputation bars.:
Display site reputation bars.
Select if you "Stand with Rand":
I Stand with Rand (This will add a "Stand with Rand" badge by your name badge by yourr name in all posts.)
Political Campaign Skills
Copywriters:
Typing, Researcher
Graphics:
Web Designer / Developer
Computer and Technical:
WebMaster
Legal:
Para-Legal

Signature


The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding one’s self in the ranks of the insane.” — Marcus Aurelius

They’re not buying it. CNN, you dumb bastards!” — President Trump 2020

Consilio et Animis de Oppresso Liber

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
4,904
Posts Per Day
0.87
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
3
Most Recent Message
12-06-2016 02:41 PM
General Information
Last Activity
12-07-2020 03:24 PM
Join Date
11-16-2007
Referrals
1
Home Page
http://www.iwarrior.net

14 Friends

  1. DamianTV DamianTV is offline

    Member

    DamianTV
  2. Deborah K Deborah K is offline

    Member

    Deborah K
  3. donnay donnay is offline

    Member

    donnay
  4. Douglass Bartley Douglass Bartley is offline

    Member

    Douglass Bartley
  5. jmdrake jmdrake is offline

    Member

    jmdrake
  6. johnwk johnwk is offline

    Member

    johnwk
  7. Lindsey Lindsey is offline

    Member

    Lindsey
  8. Mach Mach is offline

    Member

    Mach
  9. morfeeis morfeeis is offline

    Member

    morfeeis
  10. otherone otherone is offline

    Member

    otherone
Showing Friends 1 to 10 of 14
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
View Weston White's Blog

Recent Entries

Letter to representatives concerning Biden/Harris

by Weston White on 11-09-2020 at 04:24 PM
Good day:

Due to information that has now come to light I am writing to inform your office that I voted in person at my assigned polling station on 11/3/20, which is located at 7170 N. San Pablo Ave, Fresno CA, 93650. I wish to inform you that I witnessed the following at my assigned polling station: (1) each voting station there provided only black sharpie markers, (2) a new ballot was printed out from a printer and handed to me to complete and submit (and informed me I could not

Read More

Updated 11-09-2020 at 05:44 PM by Weston White

Categories
Uncategorized

United States Enumerated Causes of Death per Annum

by Weston White on 09-01-2014 at 05:49 PM
  • 38,325 DIE every year in America from drug related overdoses (30,006 are determined to have been intential SUICIDES); and another 2,463,020 are treated in hospital ER’ for drug abuse
  • Smoking related illness: 480,000 DEAD
  • Abortions: 266,000 DEAD
  • Accidental mishaps: 126,438 DEAD
  • Automotive collisions: 33,783 DEAD
  • Redlight collisions: 893 DEAD
  • Intersection collisions: 8,706 DEAD
  • Falling: 27,483 DEAD
  • Poisoning: 36,280 DEAD
  • Medical error: 195,000 DEAD
  • Heart disease: 597,689 DEAD

Read More

Updated 01-12-2015 at 10:14 AM by Weston White

Categories
To Keep & Bear Arms

A Discourse on the Crux of the Federal Taxation of Individuals

by Weston White on 08-03-2013 at 09:30 AM
After have worked full-ahead over the last two-months I have finally completed a massive undertaking that I’ve wanted to accomplish for at least the last couple of years. Basically, I compiled much researching along with articles I have written over the course of the last many years; revising, expanding, and cleaning them up as I went. The final result is the preliminary edition of what I have entitled: “A Discourse on the Crux of the Federal Taxation of Individuals”. I plan on actually completing

Read More

Let Us NOT Give Up on the Constitution

by Weston White on 01-15-2013 at 01:02 PM
This is my personal response to Georgetown law professor Louis Michael Seidman's "OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR LET’S GIVE UP ON THE CONSTITUTION" article.

Countering Evilness, Hypocrisy, and Lunacy: Giving Up on Progressivism

Updated 01-15-2013 at 01:05 PM by Weston White

Categories
Constitutionalism

Ashes Over York

by Weston White on 09-09-2012 at 05:22 PM
~ Ashes Over York ~


Quietness unto
The clandestineness havoc
Approaching without kindness nor cause
Visions within, seizing and stilled
Moments throughout ennoble
Those myriads of many
Responders serve timely and just
Their tact turned heroically fable
With lives lorn and lost, beneath imploring ash
Pith be the corps; newly banded, now entrenched
Tasking singly endured, for if a gloam more
Hopefulness

Read More

Updated 01-02-2013 at 12:19 PM by Weston White

Categories
Poetry

09-15-2017


05-18-2016


04-19-2016


No results to display...
Page 1 of 20 12311 ... LastLast

11-06-2021


11-05-2021


09-11-2021

  • 10:19 AM - Hidden

11-11-2020


11-10-2020


11-06-2020


11-05-2020


11-04-2020


11-03-2020


11-02-2020


10-27-2020


10-26-2020


10-24-2020


08-19-2020


07-29-2020


04-02-2020



Page 1 of 20 12311 ... LastLast