endorsing and SS.......a big question!

[motla68]

The debate over wages and taxes has been argued for way too long, so as such is lawful money versus fiat currency. It all falls under other property to which is the after thought of man, not the creator. It's time to stop beating ones head against the wall expecting different results, how about changing direction once in for all, this could go on for days.
We cannot all save the world, maybe Jesse just does not want to open up to other possibilities and is just happy with whatever he is doing currently ? Cannot change someones mind unless they want to change. (free will and right to self determination).

Here is another issue worth debating, are you a label or are you part of the land (natural resource). Check out this fascinating blog post a friend of mine wrote:
http://onlashuk.wordpress.com/2011/0...l-entry-point/
Another group discussion on this has been started here as well:
http://groups.google.com/group/born-...7065930ec2d9bf

- Part of the Peaceful Inhabitant vs. Enemy Combatant series of thought, you know from the JAG manual for armies in the field, how do you want to be marked and identified from the military occupation? Yes, they do use a procedure called identity markers in their computer systems to which are linked together and talk to eachother and that also includes I*R*S*.

[jesse james]

Jesse, Your speech indicates you do pay taxes; show us some proof you don't. And your attempts to sow division, fear & derail the thread is duly noted. HENDRICKSON says the Fed Income Tax is an excise on THEIR stuff (I suspect most here would agree). Unfortunately for him, he didn't discover the 2 capacities of our currency - private credit v. public money. Federal Reserve credit v. lawful money. He endorsed private credit and was administrated against via operation of statute. It's deception writ large. It's a scam and a fraud. And it's all coming down. The end of the Keynesian experiment is upon us, the end of unbacked fiat money is at hand! You've lost Jesse. You've lost the argument and you're losing the war.

Oh really john!
The excise is participating and earning 3121(a) "wages".
Want proof?
Here it is John!

3111. Rate of tax
(a) Old-age, survivors, and disability insurance
In addition to other taxes, there is hereby imposed on every employer an excise tax, with respect to having individuals in his employ, equal to the following percentages of the wages (as defined in section 3121 (a)) paid by him with respect to employment (as defined in section 3121 (b))—

If the employer is taxed an excise tax for having in his employ individuals earning "3121(a) "wages" in respect to 3121(b) "employment" then reason and logic says"employment" is the excise.
It only stands to reason that without "employment" an "excise" doesnt exist.
And wouldnt you know it what were Americans doing before 1939????
They were working the same jobs John.
My grandfather worked the same job prior 1939 until the outbreak of the war in 1941. He wasn't taxed until he applied for a ssn in 1941 where now the pay was considered a taxable "wage".
This isnt rocket science!

[jesse james]

The debate over wages and taxes has been argued for way too long, so as such is lawful money versus fiat currency. It all falls under other property to which is the after thought of man, not the creator. It's time to stop beating ones head against the wall expecting different results, how about changing direction once in for all, this could go on for days.
We cannot all save the world, maybe Jesse just does not want to open up to other possibilities and is just happy with whatever he is doing currently ? Cannot change someones mind unless they want to change. (free will and right to self determination).

Here is another issue worth debating, are you a label or are you part of the land (natural resource). Check out this fascinating blog post a friend of mine wrote:
http://onlashuk.wordpress.com/2011/0...l-entry-point/
Another group discussion on this has been started here as well:
http://groups.google.com/group/born-...7065930ec2d9bf

- Part of the Peaceful Inhabitant vs. Enemy Combatant series of thought, you know from the JAG manual for armies in the field, how do you want to be marked and identified from the military occupation? Yes, they do use a procedure called identity markers in their computer systems to which are linked together and talk to eachother and that also includes I*R*S*.

No Motla68, "wages" and taxes hasnt been argued properly!
Why do you want to derail and change the subject of my thread?
You sound like controlled opposition......steer away from the truth kinda thing.

[motla68]

No Motla68, "wages" and taxes hasnt been argued properly!
Why do you want to derail and change the subject of my thread?
You sound like controlled opposition......steer away from the truth kinda thing.

No, more like come into the enlightenment away from all that distracts one from the truth.
If you really even had put in any effort to digest what I have said you would see how
pointless this thread really is. Dog chasing tail.

[jesse james]

No, more like come into the enlightenment away from all that distracts one from the truth.
If you really even had put in any effort to digest what I have said you would see how
pointless this thread really is. Dog chasing tail.

Thats because what you said doesnt address the imposition correctly

[stoneFree]

That's it? That's the proof you don't pay taxes nor participate in SS, Jesse? You're comical. The SSA sent me a SS number when I was a teenager, but once I learned I could opt-out of paying into SS by redeeming lawful money, I did. And it worked. I haven't owed, nor paid, employment taxes nor income taxes in years. You appear to be suggesting the statutory route into "wages" is solely responsible for SS tax. Do you think the banksters running this scam have laid out the true nature of their currency scam for all to see?

The question in my mind is... what will you do when it hits the fan Jesse? You can't hide your role in support of this decades old scam. Do you plan to hide from the truth commission? In what corner of the globe?

[jesse james]

That's it? That's the proof you don't pay taxes nor participate in SS, Jesse? You're comical. The SSA sent me a SS number when I was a teenager, but once I learned I could opt-out of paying into SS by redeeming lawful money, I did. And it worked. I haven't owed, nor paid, employment taxes nor income taxes in years. You appear to be suggesting the statutory route into "wages" is solely responsible for SS tax. Do you think the banksters running this scam have laid out the true nature of their currency scam for all to see?

The question in my mind is... what will you do when it hits the fan Jesse? You can't hide your role in support of this decades old scam. Do you plan to hide from the truth commission? In what corner of the globe?

Thats it .....what?
Who are you to think you can demand me to show you something?
I've shown how the IRS assesses a tax and this endorsement idea after the fact isnt gonna stop them when you have deductions being withheld. Thats my point!
None of you have realized this and just want to argue.

It doesnt matter what you use to get out of participating. The bottom line is you must stop having W3's reported other wise you are having information being reported to the SSA which the IRS uses to determine a refund or deficiency.

So what do you tell people who have deductions taken out and tell them to put exempt on the W4 for no withholdings and endorse their paychecks to rceive lawful money?
You dont realize that the employer is still matching his percentage he required to match for FICA and thats leaving a door wide open for the IRS to come and investigate.
That to me is misleading.

Here an example, lets say a fellow decides to endsorse his paycheck to redeem lawful money and his employer is matching and reporting what his 3121(a) "wages" along with 3401(a) "wages".
Now hes endorsing the check, receiving lawful money and saved enough up to pay fopr a truck out right.
Now a year goes by and the IRS sends him a letter stating he had income the following year and didnt file. So over a course of a few letters the IRS decides to come by and seize the truck for payment of delinquent taxes.
But the truck was paid for with lawful money which is techically lawfully his and cannot be seized because it was paid for with lawful money.
Now what?

[EZrhythm]

Thats it .....what?
Who are you to think you can demand me to show you something?
Although this is a type of forum where it is common to see demands for proof, I didn't see one in his reply.

I've shown how the IRS assesses a tax and this endorsement idea after the fact isnt gonna stop them when you have deductions being withheld. Thats my point!
None of you have realized this and just want to argue.

It doesnt matter what you use to get out of participating. The bottom line is you must stop having W3's reported other wise you are having information being reported to the SSA which the IRS uses to determine a refund or deficiency.
Rebut them by affidavit until the reporting stops.

So what do you tell people who have deductions taken out and tell them to put exempt on the W4 for no withholdings and endorse their paychecks to rceive lawful money?
You dont realize that the employer is still matching his percentage he required to match for FICA and thats leaving a door wide open for the IRS to come and investigate.
That to me is misleading.

Here an example, lets say a fellow decides to endsorse his paycheck to redeem lawful money and his employer is matching and reporting what his 3121(a) "wages" along with 3401(a) "wages".
Now hes endorsing the check, receiving lawful money and saved enough up to pay fopr a truck out right.
Now a year goes by and the IRS sends him a letter stating he had income the following year and didnt file. So over a course of a few letters the IRS decides to come by and seize the truck for payment of delinquent taxes.
But the truck was paid for with lawful money which is techically lawfully his and cannot be seized because it was paid for with lawful money.
Now what?

That's a speculation that hasn't been reported yet. Again, rebut the presumptions by affidavit.

[jesse james]

That's a speculation that hasn't been reported yet. Again, rebut the presumptions by affidavit.

Yeah and I'm ridiculed for being painfully honest.
And just like hendrickson who had a better stance of his premise as he had definitions to go by the rebutals didnt fair well for him or for a major part of his readers who used Ctc did it? Like i said.........look at this upside down, inside out, backwards.....every angle under every scenario to see if it holds water.
Rebutals dont work when the law says otherwise. See the hendrickson trial.
You have to stop participating in Social Security period to stop any and all reporting from the employer to the SSA.
Nothing can be reported other wise theres a breach.
5,000.00 penalties are handed out.....can you afford 1, 2 or maybe 3 $5,000.00 penalties because it takes that many before you realize you left a door open?
How do you rebut something you have been participating in the whole time?
The nature of Social Security is you cannot rebut while participating because there are immediate benefits attached. Rebuttals dont work because you wait all year to rebut something at the end while having benefits at your disposal if you need them.
Do you get to ask for the money back from an insurance company at the end of the year because you didnt have any claims for the insurance company to reimburse?
No it doesnt work that way. Social Security works the same way as the insurance scenario!
You either participate and pay the associated taxes (3101 and 3402) or you dont!

[Life's-a-Psyop]

Rebut them by affidavit until the reporting stops.

EZrhythm,
Do you happen to have an example of an affidavit rebutting the presumptions for SS taxes that you could post?