We don’t need income tax: The Federal Reserve fraud

Published 14 years ago -  - 14y ago 231


tax-468440_1280

Last week, we looked at the shattering ruling by a Memphis court of appeals that the Internal Revenue Code does not require an American in one of these United States to pay income tax. Now that ruling will percolate through the national consciousness; more and more people will ask IRS the same thing Vernice Kuglin did – Where is the proof that I’m required to pay? – and our friends at IRS still won’t be able to prove it.

Like a dying monster that in the throes of death is more dangerous than it ever was alive, IRS will become even more vindictive, as our dear friends there contemplate well-deserved unemployment. Communist world government traitor George W. Bush will as always come to their rescue. Either everyone will be locked up, or the income tax will be replaced by some other extortion, such as a national sales tax.

Loyal Americans hate the income tax, but they continue to love America – despite what Bush and Clinton and other traitors have done to it – and they worry: Without the income tax, would the government they love collapse? I believe that if enough Americans knew it would not collapse, they would force an end to the putrid, totalitarian monster the income tax has predictably become.

Last week, I offered some proof that the income tax never has been needed to run the government. Today, let’s nail that fact down with a question: If the true purpose of the income tax really is to pay for government services, why doesn’t the government just print what it needs? My readers include some of the most knowledgeable people in this country; many of you already know the answer. For those of you who don’t, this simple, devastating question no doubt causes considerable wonderment. Yes, why doesn’t it?

When your paper currency is backed by gold, you must have more gold to print more paper. If the law requires an ounce of gold behind each paper “dollar,” then you must deposit that much gold before you print that “dollar.” And you can’t speak that gold into existence. God did that on one of those memorable six days. Now you need to find it.

On the contrary, when there is nothing behind your currency but the promises of the politicians, you can print as much as you like. And today there is nothing behind our currency. If you take it to the government and ask them to redeem it, they will give you another, newer piece of paper, not gold. So, again, the question asks itself: To raise the money to pay for government, why not just print it? Why subject the people to the horror of the income tax, which has turned them into spies on each other.

Because printing it would cause inflation and the inflation would destroy it. There were terrible financial problems in Germany after World War I. The head of the central bank “solved” them by printing paper “money.” He had three shifts working around the clock. Every day, he would report to the legislature how much he had printed in the preceding twenty-four hours. The members would applaud. You are a financial genius! You are the savior of Germany! It lasted two years. In 1923, it collapsed and paved the way for Adolf Hitler.

Which brings us back to the income tax. What is it for? Beardsley Ruml spent his entire life as a Rockefeller factotum. He was in and out of their foundations. For ten years, he was a director and then chairman of the New York Fed, far and away the most powerful bank in the system. He was the author of “”””””temporary”””””” World War II withholding, known originally as the “Ruml pay-as-you-go plan.” If there has ever been a horse’s mouth, Beardsley Ruml certainly was one.

During the last year of World War II, Ruml read a paper before the American Bar Association. A magazine called American Affairs published it in January, 1946, under the title, “Taxes for Revenue Are Obsolete.” In the introduction to the paper, the editor said this: “. . . His thesis is that given (1) control of a central banking system and (2) an inconvertible currency, a sovereign national government is finally free of money worries and need no longer levy taxes for the purpose of providing itself with revenue. All taxation, therefore, should be regarded from the point of view of social and economic consequences. . . .” (emphasis added)

Before you write a check, you need to deposit “money” to back it. If you don’t deposit “money” your check will bounce. What would happen if the bank said you could keep writing checks, but no longer need to make deposits? Yee Haa!!! That is what the government arranged for itself when it stopped depositing gold (and silver) to back the “dollar.” The “dollars” it printed thenceforth were tantamount to your rubber checks.

Beardsley Ruml himself put it this way: “The necessity for a government to tax in order to maintain both its independence and its solvency is true for state and local governments, but it is not true for a national government. . . .” Ruml says two historic changes have made that possible. “The first of these changes is the gaining of vast new experience in the management of central banks. The second change is the elimination, for domestic purposes, of the convertibility of the currency into gold.”

Ruml was talking about the creation of the Federal Reserve, the nation’s central bank, and about the theft of the people’s gold by mass murderer Franklin Roosevelt (Pearl Harbor). So, if we don’t need taxes to run the government, why do we have them? What are they for? Under the heading, “What Taxes Are Really For,” the Ruml article lists four purposes:

1.As an instrument of fiscal policy to help stabilize the purchasing power of the dollar; 2. To express public policy in the distribution of wealth and of income, as in the case of the progressive income and estate taxes; 3. To express public policy in subsidizing or in penalizing various industries and economic groups; 4. To isolate and assess directly the costs of certain national benefits, such as highways and social security.

According to Ruml, the first of these purposes is by far the most important, his explanation of which deserves quotation at length: “By all odds, the most important single purpose to be served by the imposition of federal taxes is the maintenance of a dollar which has stable purchasing power over the years. Sometimes this purpose is stated as ‘the avoidance of inflation’ . . . .

“. . . If federal taxes are insufficient or of the wrong kind, the purchasing power in the hands of the public is likely to be greater than the output of goods and services with which this purchasing demand can be satisfied. If the demand becomes too great, the result will be a rise in prices and there will be no proportionate increase in the quantity of things for sale. This will mean that the dollar is worth less than it was before – that is inflation. . . .

“The dollars the government spends become purchasing power in the hands of the people who have received them. The dollars the government takes by taxes cannot be spent by the people, and, therefore, these dollars can no longer be used to acquire the things which are available for sale. . . .”

Please go to the library and read this for yourself. Or, you will find it all in my book, TaxScam, How IRS Swindles You and What You Can Do About It, which you can read about on my website,http://www.stangbooks.com. Notice that the true purpose of the income tax, according to Ruml, is to protect the totally unbacked Federal Reserve funny “money” from collapsing like the 1923 German mark. Its true purpose is to pay the people with one hand, and to confiscate with the other; thereby inhibiting the inflationary effect of ravenous government spending.

And the scheme has worked. The income tax has delayed the inevitable collapse of the dollar by offering a safety valve through which the inflationary pressure generated by that spending can more safely be released. The income tax does that by transferring purchasing power from the people to the government. Again, the income tax has nothing to do with supporting the government.

Beardsley Ruml said all this fifty-eight years ago. Is it still true today? On November 21, 2002, Ben S. Bernanke addressed the National Economists Club in the District of Conspiracy. Bernanke is one of seven governors of the Federal Reserve, and belongs to its crucial, top-secret Open Market Committee, so he is another horse’s mouth.

Indeed at a celebration of economist Milton Friedman’s 90th birthday, Bernanke wound up his accolade as follows: “Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton . . . regarding the Great Depression: You’re right, we did it.”

Last November 21st, in the District of Conspiracy, Bernanke told the economists: “Like gold, U.S. dollars have value only to the extent that they are strictly limited in supply. But the U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost. By increasing the number of U.S. dollars in circulation, or even by credibly threatening to do so, the U.S. government can also reduce the value of a dollar in terms of goods and services, which is equivalent to raising the prices in dollars of those goods and services. We conclude that, under a paper-money system, a determined government can always generate higher spending and hence positive inflation.”

In other words, nothing has changed. The Federal Reserve – the billionaire totalitarian socialist conspirators who illegally force us to pay interest to use our own money – needs the income tax. Americans don’t.

Related Articles
Federal Income Tax – Proof of Conspiracy


Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact.”

23 recommended
comments icon 1 comment
1 notes
1780 views
bookmark icon

One thought on “We don’t need income tax: The Federal Reserve fraud

Write a comment...

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *