All of this is based on fear of death. When this fear is monetized to what extents will some exceed?

Actually I do businss with a number of smaller chinese companies and personnel- by the large they are very honest and trustworthy. However, from what I understand that doesnt carry over to the CCP at all. Just as a general comment, what is anyone doing fooling around with dangerous viruses which could get out from some procedural screwup and cause massive deaths.

Not to be trite... what about the Chinese view of the USSA? I have a friend who immigrated from China 12 years ago. I need to ask some questions regarding the views of his peers and his regarding this incident.

My friend Dennis filed under UCC to exempt himself from the system. Took 2-1/2 years. Feds and State threatened for another 2 years and gave up. He has been involved in mortgage underwriting for decades. When Dodd Frank was passed he became a Federalized employee again and the tax agencies were waiting.

I just think that given the potential for accidental release and the devastating consequences, it is unwise to invest new and more powerful virus= partocularly by a communist run lab

Yes, I know someone who did lots of research and exited the system. The feds make it nearly impossible to stay out and there are lots of hurdles and lack of conveniences we take for granted.
The free market would provide all those conveniences at a fair price if the banking cartel et al weren't preventing competition and maintaining their near monopolies.

Understood. If one never uses their SSN they are passive / aggressively excluded from banking, perhaps employment and schooling. It is a corporate way of shunning non-participants. It is very anti-capitalist. Here are "tools" that can make life more equitable, and I can't have them if I don't enroll.

No legal status to contract at that age, not that it matters in the Just-US system.

Kaiser, Pfizser, Bayer....https://www.rankingthebrands.com/The-Brand-Ra....
All of these businesses have labs....same as in Wuhan. Similar testing.
A friend of mine spent almost 20 years at Eli Lilly in Indianapolis occupied as a chemist and internal regulatory compliance auditor. If you have questions I can put you in contact with her.

"Sixteenth Amendment does indeed make the personal income tax - and by extension the corporate income tax - not only a legality but a reality."

Until 1936 personal income tax was not legal. Chartered business and as extension, corporations were taxable. So, how does a natural born sovereign citizen become a corporate entity? Enrollment into The Corporation.....Social Security Act. The most heinous of this mechanism is that most have been enrolled as children. Never having the choice or materials published to learn of the obligations of this "citizenry". Pretty good trap huh?

As of last year the Corp tax rate was dropped to 21%. It became more advantageous for me to declare business profit than personal income. It will take 3 to 5 years to see any real affect as manufacturing gears up to produce. I am already seeing this in the work I am quoting from long term and new businesses.

I have already stated what happens in the kangaroo tax courts. "Making an argument" there would likely result in incarceration and seizure of my assets, not justice. The banking cartel will not allow either of our solutions to see broad application. They have everything to lose, control over the media and the con-gress, and the power to create money from nothing to control the narrative. I think there is no peaceful solution.

You're welcome to make your arguments in court if you choose. I'll certainly grant that its a novel legal theory you propose. Personally, I prefer the route of just passing a new Amendment which explicitly repeals the 16th Amendment. I favor a distinct separation of powers and feel like its a double-edged sword to continuously rely on SCOTUS interpretation of law that all too often has fallen against liberty.

The 16th was before the Brushaber decision so it can't override it.
First, the 16th was not ratified as required. So its not law. That aside,
The decisions by the Supreme Court merely say that the 16th is not a new taxing power. That's all they ever said. So in reality, the power to tax "income" existed before the 16th existed. That makes the 16th irrelevant also.
However, the definition of "income" in law did not and does not include exchange of labor for a fee. There is no "income" in that exchange and it can't be taxed as income under the constitution with or without the 16th amendment. Everything about the Income Tax is a fraud. When asked, the government can't even produce the law that makes people liable for "income" tax. It doesn't exist.
But they have the guns and they will prosecute you in their "TAX Court" ignoring all your rights until you are bankrupt trying to get a fair hearing. Judges do not allow your constitutional rights or supreme court decisions to even be presented in a case regarding "income" tax. Once every so often a jury will ignore the judge's strict instructions and find against the government, but it doesn't happen often because juries are selected who don't want "tax cheats" to get away when they, the jury, had to pay. With the federal reserve act it really is the biggest scam in history and it has enslaved the American people. We will never be free until we stop doing as ordered by looters who control us with threats of violence.

This one is pretty recent and goes over the applicable precedents and clarifications: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPD...

It cites the original Brushaber ruling and how the Sixteenth Amendment overrides Brushaber, along with the Parker ruling (1984). It also issues several clarifications to lower court rulings which were either ambiguous, poorly worded, or otherwise erroneous.

Now, I don't see anything in here challenging the validity of ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment as per your note, so I would offer that a challenge to the Constitutionalty of the Sixteenth Amendment based on irregularities in its ratification may indeed prevail. That topic would be germane in that a Constitutional Amendment allowing for elimination of the Electoral College passed, but failed to be ratified by the necessary number of States prior to its expiration. Even Ruth Bader Ginsburg shot down the notion that it could be resurrected simply by another State's ratification nearly 50 years too late...

What is the supreme court ruling on income tax that you are referring to?

Unfortunately, the Sixteenth has been ruled legal by the Supreme Court. Until it is overturned by Amendment or a new challenge to its Constitutionality, it remains the law of the land whether I like it or not. (The same can be said of Roe v Wade.)

Regarding the climbing debt problems. I do agree that they are only going to exacerbate our existing debt problems because we aren't making any effort to dig out of the hole. And the structural underpinnings of our economy are rotten to the core and ripe for a fall. I fear that when that fall, happens, however, it's going to be very ugly.

I agree corporations don't pay taxes; we do. But at least those taxes do not violate the constitution. I'm in favor of stopping those, too.
The 16th is only legal if it was legally agreed to by enough states in the required time. It wasn't. Sec of State Knox fraudulently said that it was. He lied. https://givemeliberty.org/features/ta...
Make taxes voluntary for individuals and corporations. If there is good enough reason to fund something, then convince us one by one.
Off topic, sort of. We have been taken to the cleaners for a century. We should stand up and tell the bankers to drop dead. The $2 trillion recovery funding is just another in a long series of bailouts that benefit banks. The recovery probably won't happen.

It was very interesting but in the history book I just finished it explained the origins of corporations in the United States - and this threw me. Originally, the only corporations were ones which existed via official charter or sanction of the Legislature (either national or State). They were state-sponsored monopolies given specific duties or tasks such as building canals, improving waterways, building turnpikes, etc. In today's world we might call them "utilities." (Also please note that there were no individual income taxes or corporate taxes during the 1800's. The only taxes were excise taxes, i.e. transaction taxes set on certain goods sold in the United States - aside from import tarriffs.)

It wasn't until Americans in general began looking for ways to invest that didn't require a government charter, ie a corporation, that people began reinventing what a corporation actually was in the first place and the practice of corporate "charters" was retired, with "corporations" pretty much being able to be formed by anyone for any purpose whatsoever - including charities, foundations, and even scientific study groups. The main reason people formed corporations was to attract investment capital - for which a profitable business would then pay dividends.

Unfortunately, the Sixteenth Amendment does indeed make the personal income tax - and by extension the corporate income tax - not only a legality but a reality. That it was a blatant bait-and-switch which has been used to expand government tyranny, suppress free speech, and leverage governmental authority is not disputed by me. I would point out, however, that "corporate" taxes are simply a tax on consumers cleverly redirected so that the corporations act as tax collectors and remitters. Any basic accounting class will teach you that your cost of goods (or services) always has to include the taxes or you go out of business.

My ideal would be to eliminate both personal and corporate income taxes (and to eliminate the government welfare state which depends on these taxes). I simply proposed cutting the corporate tax rate to bring our manufacturing back because its realistic in the current environment.

Knock off the individual income tax instead. It is unconstitutional. The tax on corporations is constitutional. It's the humans who matter. corporate taxes exist overseas. It's the other government meddling that reduces competition (as designed by the large companies who help make the meddling laws) and prevents small business innovation from growing small businesses. Kill the federal reserve bank whose idea of helping small business is to raise interest rates. The system has been a perverted con by banking against the people since 1913. It destroys the productive and feeds the non-productive.

If our manufacturers could switch from making cars to making ventilators to meet demand, I'm pretty sure they can manufacture pharmaceuticals. I think the biggest disincentive is our high corporate tax rate. Cut that down to say 5% (from the current 30%+) and I think we could start making all kinds of US industries more economically viable.

I would generally agree with your suggested response. But....regardless of the huge current problems, we gotta get control of making our own medicines here in this country before we hit back too hard. I suspect China knows this and is counting on it.
Also, does anyone else see the convenience of circumstances with regard to our upcoming election. China really want easily controlled democrats in charge here. Not four more years of Trump killing them with tariffs and trade.

I can say that we are starting to find alternate suppliers in Vietnam and Cambodia to take the place of existing Chinese suppliers. Also finding northern China suppliers that are substantially less expensive than existing Chinese silliest in the south

Hi, Lucky!
Do you really expect a communist regime to be honest and free of paranoia about reputation risks?
They are incapable of both. It seems obvious, after more than a century with communists in power somewhere.
Stay free … of the virus, among other things!
Cordially,
Maritimus

Yes, it would, if they knew what competitive products to buy instead. There would be a greater effect if heads of certain companies acted as patriots instead of as traitors.