JoaquinPhoenix.com - The place for Joaquin Phoenix fans
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline admin  
#1 Posted : Saturday, March 23, 2013 9:27:44 AM(UTC)
admin
Rank: Administration

Reputation:

Groups: Administrators
Joined: 5/8/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,661
Man

Thanks: 331 times
Was thanked: 577 time(s) in 409 post(s)
We know Joaquin doesn't shy away from hard topics and speaking his mind about important issues. So, in that spirit, I thought i'd start another "Not about Joaquin" thread seeing as it's a slow Joaquin news days  A little perspective on Politicians (or "parasitic-bought-and-paid-for-scum" as i like to call them) and the tax system in the U.S. (and similar around the world) and how it controls the populous. Just doing my bit to spread the word! 



Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does.

You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? John Boehner. He is the leader of the majority party. He and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility.. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.

If the Army & Marines are in Iraq and Afghanistan it's because they want them in Iraq and Afghanistan.

If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy","inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.

Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess.


Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.

What you do with this article now that you have read it is up to you. This might be funny if it weren't so true. Be sure to read all the way to the end:

Tax his land,
Tax his bed,
Tax the table,
At which he's fed.

Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes
Are the rule.

Tax his work,
Tax his pay,
He works for
peanuts anyway!

Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.

Tax his ties,
Tax his shirt,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.

Tax his tobacco,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he
Tries to think.

Tax his cigars,
Tax his beers,
If he cries
Tax his tears.

Tax his car,
Tax his gas,
Find other ways
Taxes to pass

Tax all he has
Then let him know
That you won't be done
Till he has no dough.

When he screams and hollers;
Then tax him some more,
Tax him till
He's good and sore.

Then tax his coffin,
Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in
Which he's laid...

Put these words
Upon his tomb,
'Taxes drove me
to my doom...'

When he's gone,
Do not relax,
Its time to apply
The inheritance tax.

Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Excise Taxes
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Gross Receipts Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Personal Property Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Service Charge Tax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Sales Tax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Recurring and Nonrecurring Charges Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax


STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY?
Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, and our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.

What in the heck happened? Can you spell 'politicians?'

I hope this goes around THE USA at least 545 times! YOU can help it get there!!!

Edited by user Saturday, March 23, 2013 9:34:15 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

admin @ joaquinphoenix.com
Sponsor
Good Girls Fake It
Offline joy  
#2 Posted : Sunday, March 24, 2013 7:43:14 AM(UTC)
joy
Rank: Master of Joaquin

Reputation:

Groups:
Joined: 8/21/2012(UTC)
Posts: 1,236
Location: Where the heart is.

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 39 time(s) in 31 post(s)

That is a lot of taxes…

Admin, if we vote all of the politicians out of office, who will we replace them with to clean up the mess?

Is the writer suggesting that moms who work are to blame too? Why say that – “and mom stayed home to raise the kids”?

Offline admin  
#3 Posted : Sunday, March 24, 2013 7:59:47 AM(UTC)
admin
Rank: Administration

Reputation:

Groups: Administrators
Joined: 5/8/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,661
Man

Thanks: 331 times
Was thanked: 577 time(s) in 409 post(s)
joy wrote:
Admin, if we vote all of the politicians out of office, who will we replace them with to clean up the mess?

A good start would actually get people in who are qualified in the particular sector they are suppose to be managing! i.e. someone with a history or qualifications in transportation to be the minister for transport. At present we just have a bunch of entities who aren't qualified for much, and they get shuffled around once in a while... one year a person may be the minister for transport, the next they are the minister for health... and they're qualified for neither! madness!

Unfortunately, this whole "voting" charade we go through every 4 years is just to give us the illusion of choice... all political parties answer to the same masters behind the scenes and those masters couldn't care less who we vote in. There's a reason all political parties turn out to be the same despite what they promise, because they are the same! It's nothing more than a show... just like WWE wrestling!

joy wrote:
Is the writer suggesting that moms who work are to blame too? Why say that – “and mom stayed home to raise the kids”?

No Joy, the writer is basically saying that it used to be the case that a family could have a good standard of living with just one parent going out to work (usually the father in those days) and that the other parent was able to stay at home with the children (and all the benefits that brought to the children's upbringing). But these days, for a decent standard of living, and because cost of actually living is so high, both parents are required to earn a wage, meaning there is no one left to stay home with the children if required (and the detrimental effects that can have on the children's upbringing).
admin @ joaquinphoenix.com
Offline joy  
#4 Posted : Monday, March 25, 2013 8:17:21 AM(UTC)
joy
Rank: Master of Joaquin

Reputation:

Groups:
Joined: 8/21/2012(UTC)
Posts: 1,236
Location: Where the heart is.

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 39 time(s) in 31 post(s)

Thanks for your replies, Admin. I'm tired now so going to sleep - will write something later.

 

 

Offline joy  
#5 Posted : Tuesday, March 26, 2013 6:21:04 AM(UTC)
joy
Rank: Master of Joaquin

Reputation:

Groups:
Joined: 8/21/2012(UTC)
Posts: 1,236
Location: Where the heart is.

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 39 time(s) in 31 post(s)
admin wrote:
A good start would actually get people in who are qualified in the particular sector they are suppose to be managing! i.e. someone with a history or qualifications in transportation to be the minister for transport. At present we just have a bunch of entities who aren't qualified for much, and they get shuffled around once in a while... one year a person may be the minister for transport, the next they are the minister for health... and they're qualified for neither! madness!
 

 Admin, we have some common ground here in that I also think ministers should be experienced and qualified in the sectors which they oversee. Do you have any ideas how to ensure that qualified people get the jobs?

 
admin wrote:
Unfortunately, this whole "voting" charade we go through every 4 years is just to give us the illusion of choice... all political parties answer to the same masters behind the scenes and those masters couldn't care less who we vote in. There's a reason all political parties turn out to be the same despite what they promise, because they are the same! It's nothing more than a show... just like WWE wrestling!
 
There's some truth in this. Who do you think these 'masters' are? Do we need to get rid of them too before any real difference can be made?
 
admin wrote:
No Joy, the writer is basically saying that it used to be the case that a family could have a good standard of living with just one parent going out to work (usually the father in those days) and that the other parent was able to stay at home with the children (and all the benefits that brought to the children's upbringing). But these days, for a decent standard of living, and because cost of actually living is so high, both parents are required to earn a wage, meaning there is no one left to stay home with the children if required (and the detrimental effects that can have on the children's upbringing)
.
 
So, if America gets rid of the politicians and reverts to how it was 100 years ago everything would be great? Your paragraph is loaded!
 
 
Offline admin  
#6 Posted : Tuesday, March 26, 2013 11:05:30 AM(UTC)
admin
Rank: Administration

Reputation:

Groups: Administrators
Joined: 5/8/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,661
Man

Thanks: 331 times
Was thanked: 577 time(s) in 409 post(s)
joy wrote:
Admin, we have some common ground here in that I also think ministers should be experienced and qualified in the sectors which they oversee. Do you have any ideas how to ensure that qualified people get the jobs?

I think we need to start by waking up to the fact that the current system is nothing more than a sham/illusion. I don't vote... taking part in the charade only gives it credibility. If no one voted it would be a massive signal that the fake democracy system we have has no credibility... but people still carry on, in a brainwashed state, every 4 years... and they'll do it again and again until they croak and nothing will change:






joy wrote:
There's some truth in this. Who do you think these 'masters' are? Do we need to get rid of them too before any real difference can be made?


It's the same ultra-rich families that have been in control for centuries. There are a few families in the world (Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Morgans et al) that have more wealth than some entire countries. These families, that have been going centuries, didn't just disappear or lose their fortune... they just chose to not be public and instead pull the strings behind the scenes instead towards their agenda for the world. Famous producer Aaron Russo (producer of movies such as "Trading Places") got to know some of these family members personally, see what he had to say:



 
joy wrote:
So, if America gets rid of the politicians and reverts to how it was 100 years ago everything would be great? Your paragraph is loaded!

No Joy, i'm just pointing out that the cost of actually living has gone up so much in the last 50 years that both parents in a family now have to work for a decent standard of living for a family. The real root of all problems in the world, war, hunger, health, quality of life etc is... the monetary system... and most people in world have no idea how the monetary system works... and more worryingly, they don't want to know! And, yet, it's the reason they get up and go to a job every day, day in, day out for the majority of their lives. In their lifetime, they spend more time with the people they work with (who they had no choice about) than they do with their families and loved ones. It's a strange reality this.


Edited by user Tuesday, March 26, 2013 11:21:23 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

admin @ joaquinphoenix.com
Offline joy  
#7 Posted : Wednesday, March 27, 2013 7:44:32 AM(UTC)
joy
Rank: Master of Joaquin

Reputation:

Groups:
Joined: 8/21/2012(UTC)
Posts: 1,236
Location: Where the heart is.

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 39 time(s) in 31 post(s)

Hi Admin,

The amount of people voting in General Elections in the UK is actually decreasing:

Turnouts in UK elections have declined dramatically in recent decades. As Figure 2.1s shows, general election turnouts from 1945 to 1992 typically fluctuated between 70 and 80 per cent, with a peak turnout of 84 per cent in 1950. In 1997, turnout dropped to 71.5 per cent, which although not substantially lower than at most elections since the mid-1960s, nonetheless represented a post-war low. This nadir was soon to be eclipsed, however, by the 59.1 per cent of registered electors who cast ballots at the 2001 general election. While turnouts began to recover from this low point, resulting in a modest two point increase in 2005 and a further four point increase in 2010, Figure 2.1s makes plain that the four lowest turnouts in post-war general elections have all been recorded since 1997.

http://democracy-uk-2012.democraticaudit.com/public-participation--confidence-in-elections

Since you don’t believe in the voting system, why your original post? The author suggests: "Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees. We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess." Yet you don’t believe this. He also blames 545 Government people for all the problems (facing USA) yet you say it’s the people behind the politicians who are responsible – the ‘masters’. So why ‘do your bit’ in publicising something you don’t believe in?  I can see why you’ve posted this topic in the ‘Not about Joaquin’ section of the forum but why change it to members-only access? Wouldn’t it be a good way to ‘spread the word’ by having everyone who comes to the forum able to read this?

Thanks for the videos - I'm familiar with all of this.

Yes, the cost of living has gone up but that’s not the only reason both parents go to work. A lot of women go to work because they want to, for instance. Also, we live in a very consumerist society these days and our expectations of what constitutes a ‘decent standard of living’ has changed. Would you like to tell us how the monetary system works?
Offline admin  
#8 Posted : Wednesday, March 27, 2013 8:47:20 AM(UTC)
admin
Rank: Administration

Reputation:

Groups: Administrators
Joined: 5/8/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,661
Man

Thanks: 331 times
Was thanked: 577 time(s) in 409 post(s)
joy wrote:

Hi Admin,

The amount of people voting in General Elections in the UK is actually decreasing:

Hi Joy, 

OK, i see where you're going with this ,

Unfortunately, I think less and less people are voting due to apathy and laziness rather than the fact they have awaken to the crooked system and how it really works. I hear it time and time again in my own life around voting time, e.g. "Did you vote yesterday? No, i was going to, but it was raining and i had to do such and such instead" or "I was going to vote, but I wasn't sure where to go, so didn't bother".

joy wrote:
Since you don’t believe in the voting system, why your original post? The author suggests: "Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees. We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess." Yet you don’t believe this. He also blames 545 Government people for all the problems (facing USA) yet you say it’s the people behind the politicians who are responsible – the ‘masters’. So why ‘do your bit’ in publicising something you don’t believe in?

The original posts was more to point out the obvious really... sometimes the problem is so in your face that people can't see it. It was to illustrate that over time the system drains more and more from the person. It's a system that the people serve, rather than to serve the people as a system should and which we are told the system is there for. That's simple modern day slavery.

It was also to show that the power is concentrated into the hands of the few (no matter who those few actually are), i.e. over 300 million people in the U.S. and their lives are dictated by 545 people. That's some ratio! Those 545 people may just be "actors", or the public face of the hidden real power players... but they are still complicit, they know what they are doing and they know the role they play, so they are as guilty as the people they help protect from public view. At least "voting them out" would send the signal that belief in the system is at an end.

joy wrote:
I can see why you’ve posted this topic in the ‘Not about Joaquin’ section of the forum but why change it to members-only access? Wouldn’t it be a good way to ‘spread the word’ by having everyone who comes to the forum able to read this?

Fortunately there are more and more places on the internet highlighting how the system really works  The information is there for people who wish to know, "You can lead a horse to water and all that". If we were getting thousands of readers a day i would make this section public, but we're not quite there yet, despite what a great actor Joaquin is! And, unfortunately, if i made this section public and readable by search engines, would penalize the sites rankings in searches because having a section of the site that "isn't Joaquin related" would make the site seem less focused and then less and less people who find the forum!

joy wrote:
Yes, the cost of living has gone up but that’s not the only reason both parents go to work. A lot of women go to work because they want to, for instance. Also, we live in a very consumerist society these days and our expectations of what constitutes a ‘decent standard of living’ has changed.

Yes, of course Joy, women make the choice to work a lot these days. But the fact that both people in a relationship are now forced to work just to generate enough income to live shows that the people serve the system. Seriously, how many people do you know where just one person goes to work these days? or could even contemplate doing that and still be able to get by? How many could possibly afford a home without two incomes? When, even a few decades ago, it was very possible to buy your own home with just one income.

People may be under the illusion that quality of life has increased over that of previous decades... American's are often told that the children will always have a better quality of life than their parents. But when you understand that the "improved" quality of life is an illusion and is all based on debt and the fact that our quality of life in the "western world" is subsidized by some poor unfortunate person in the far east working 18 hour days for peanuts, so you and i can have a nice TV and phone at an affordable price, then you know the system is a sham and an illusion.

joy wrote:
Would you like to tell us how the monetary system works?

There's plenty of people who have taken the time and effort to do that for us, in a nice cartoony way 






admin @ joaquinphoenix.com
Offline joy  
#9 Posted : Thursday, March 28, 2013 7:50:10 AM(UTC)
joy
Rank: Master of Joaquin

Reputation:

Groups:
Joined: 8/21/2012(UTC)
Posts: 1,236
Location: Where the heart is.

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 39 time(s) in 31 post(s)

Hi Admin,

Quote:
OK, i see where you're going with this ,

Round in circles?

OK, so we vote these people out and replace them with….? And who decides who the replacements are? Who is going to clear up the mess? You & me?

Quote:
Seriously, how many people do you know where just one person goes to work these days? or could even contemplate doing that and still be able to get by? How many could possibly afford a home without two incomes?

I personally know a few people who are the sole income providers and some of those are single people or single parents. Some own their own homes.

 

Married couple households in minority for first time, 2011 census shows

Number of married people stays constant at 21.2 million while number of single adults rises by three million compared with 2001

The traditional family based around a married couple is now the preserve of a minority with the number of single-adult households overtaking the number of couple households with dependent children, the census shows.

Figures from the official count show that married and civilly partnered couples, for the first time, now make up under half (47%) of all households – down from 50.9% in 2001. In the decade to 2011, the number of married people stayed constant at 21.2m but the number of single adults rose by more than 3m to 15.7m.

In the same period, the number of lone parents rose by 400,000 and the number of people who had been divorced or had a partnership dissolved rose by 600,000.

With the census recording 105,000 civil partnerships, a status for gay people which only arrived in 2005, families in Britain appear composed of an ever-broadening mix of relationships, despite the political furore over gay marriage.

Most notable has been a dramatic rise in one-person households – with more than 500,000 created in the decade covered by the census. By contrast the number of households with married or civilly partnered couples dropped by more than 150,000 to 7.5m.

There were almost 4m working-age single person households, so-called singletons, in England – 600,000 more than there were married couples with dependent children.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/dec/11/census-2011-marriage-single-adults

 

 

Admin, you don’t have to preach to me – despite what you might think; I know about all of this. What I’m interested to know is what do we do when we all wake up? I know what I do, but what is your solution to all of this? How do we combat the system? What do we replace the system with?

 

Thanks for the videos. I haven't watched them yet (they're quite long) but I will.

 

PS: Are you David Icke?

 

 

 

Offline Ex-Fedupandstressed  
#10 Posted : Sunday, December 29, 2013 11:43:35 PM(UTC)
Ex-Fedupandstressed
Rank: Joaquin Enthusiast

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 12/20/2013(UTC)
Posts: 191
Woman
Location: Spain

Was thanked: 6 time(s) in 4 post(s)
i love this subject... politicians, taxes and deficit... unfortunately the global economy has made us equal in the bad things. I'm ivolved in a citicien movement which goal is to change the system... To me the real trouble aren't the taxes...  but the destiny of the money and resources... if we create a community where richest people pay taxes related to the money that they earned and every one pay related to everyone salary... it would mean that rich paid more and with the money we could have a strong public system to keep everybody to have access for free or by a cheap price to the basic necessities...healthcare or education, protect our environment, public aids, etc... So the trouble is not the tax, but the fact that the money of the taxes is given to trusts which control the market and buy our politicians to they keep their power making laws which help them to be everytime richer becoming a bussiness every one of our necessities... soy we have to pay for study or our health... 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF.NET | YAF.NET © 2003-2021, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.463 seconds.