It's not that I necessarily disagree, but you're largely arguing semantics. If government takes receipt of moneys from the public, it's a tax. Fees are for specific services rendered such as issuance of permits and licenses, etc. to which a nominal value may be ascertained. I'm not sure how you would set the value for such basic services as law enforcement, fire protection, roads, etc. The practicality aspect leaves me scratching my head.

Government should always be a constrained government. I share your concerns about the recent funding for more IRS thugs and agree that it can only lead to tyranny.

Unworkable LibertyBelle. If someone called 911, how could the police know whether the caller had paid their fees?

By the way, are you on the Galt's Gulch Facebook? I haven't gotten on it yet because of the long Terms of Service which usually accompany such a site. (And it seems that it's not going to be possible to have it printed and take it home to read, from what the librarian told me.) But it would be nice to be able to send you an e-mail, if you didn't mind. Your handle seems to indicate that you are from the UK. Is that so?

Yes, maybe you have been seriously reading Ayn Rand, and not just engaging in knee-jerk "conservatism".

I consider FDR the worst of that bunch. When I was young, I read about his pushing more government control; he was presented as something of a hero, but I didn't agree. But saying something like that was not widely accepted. But a few years ago, I heard Glenn Beck on the radio say, "The man was an evil son of a b---h!" and I was comforted that now a remark like that can be made in public. (Beck also referred to his violation[s] of civil liberties; I assume he meant the round-up of Japanese-Americans, American citizens, on account of their ancestry.) It is encouraging that people have been learning something.

It wouldn't be a "voluntary tax", because it wouldn't be a tax. It would be a Law Enforcement Fee--a fee paid, like other voluntary insurance, as an insurance against crime (and, indirectly, also against foreign invasion). And if a citizen refused to pay it, he would suffer the disadvantage of being in danger due to his being left without the government's protection against criminals.

Thanks to whoever down voted me. Nullification would be one hell of a lot better than a bloody revolution

First of all a voluntary tax is a contradiction in terms. "There are no contradictions in the Gulch" John Galt.

Secondly, in order to repeal an amendment requires that a new amendment be agreed to and passed. http://www.obolerlaw.com/2018/03/cons...
Same rules.

Trying to let them off on an insanity plea, huh?

I don't see why it couldn't be covered by the voluntary sales "tax" (or Law Enforcement Fee) I mentioned. with a certain percentage (say 25%) of whatever was in the state's coffers going to the Federal government, a citizen would know that when he was paying the Law Enforcement Fee, he was also paying for national defense.

Nobody owes anybody anything for the remnant of Medieval serfdom (slavery) that existed in early America - until it was eradicated on explicitly moral grounds, for the first time in human history. Because (News Flash!): The perps have been dead for at least a century.

Where do we start and where do we stop with the analogies? If having white skin makes someone in 2022 guilty of crimes committed ca. 1600-1860 by people who had white skin because the 2022 person... has white skin... means that anyone who has long, straggly hair and crazy-looking eyes should be jailed for the crimes of Charles Manson and his traa-laa-lalalala-live-for-to-daaaay hippie-dippy Family;

Anyone who wears dorky glasses should be jailed for the crimes of Jeffrey Dahmer;

As the meme goes, anyone who's Japanese should be jailed for the attack on Pearl Harbor;

Anyone who's Russian should be jailed for the crimes of Stalin;

Anyone who's German should be jailed for the crimes of National Socialist Hitler;

Anyone who's Cambodian should be jailed for the crimes of Pol Pot;

Anyone who's Cuban should be jailed for the crimes of Guevara and Castro;

Anyone who's Korean should be jailed for the ongoing atrocities of the Kim regime;

Anyone who's Chinese should be jailed for the ongoing atrocities of the Xi regime;

And BTW: Anyone who's black should be jailed for the crimes of the black slavers who rounded up other blacks in Africa, to hand over to the slave traders who were anchored at the shore;

...etc.

"When is enough enough?" is a concession to the irrationality and evil that is the premise that "You're guilty for someone else's crime because.... well you kinda-sorta look like him." The entire premise and the entire wash of lunacy that's been constructed atop it, is a gargantuan scam.
.

The white "liberals" go along with it; probably it is because they are elitists. They want to see themselves as the powerful aristocracy, giving out the "benefits" to the peasant-types who "don't know what is best" for themselves, and wouldn't be competent to produce what they need. Why wouldn't they? Who knows? But in the minds of these elitists (including "limousine liberals" like FDR,)the "peasant-types " are helpless incompetents.
And as for the ones who teach the kids, it is easier to manipulate children than adults (I found the petty officers in Naval boot camp to be more respectful of human dignity than my former teachers in elementary school), and if gives them an outlet for their power-lust.

As I said, we need to abolish public schools.

It is easier for people to get hyped-up on their emotions and get into a mob, and yell for a given cause, than to think and reason about basic principles.

We could get rid of forced taxation, if we set up a laissez-faire nation. Once the government was chopped down to its proper functions, there could be something like the present sales tax, except voluntary. What would be the incentive to pay? If the storeowner refused to collect/turn in the money, he would simply be told, "All right. Suit yourself. But if a hold-up man comes in here, it won't do you any good to call 911, because this address/phone number will be on a list of those who have refused to pay the Law Enforcement Fee, and nobody will come." The storeowner would then be left to be in danger. (In the case of his discovering a burglary that had taken place overnight, he also would not be allowed to go after the burglar and seek/take private revenge, because that would be taking the law into his own hands.)
As to Federal function, there could be a rule that a certain percentage of whatever was in the State's funds (which would have arrived there by the above voluntary means), perhaps 25%,would go to the Federal government, to pay for the military, etc. Also, copyrights and patents would be paid for by fees; people should be willing to pay for what they want.

"Stalin would be proud." And Marx and Obama and Xi and Clinton(2)...et alia

Repeal by Nullification is possible. If 30 million to 40 million citizens decided not to file their income taxes, it would force the those in government to reconsider their position in regards to personal property.

It would be tough as there are way too many stake holders in the present system profiting from a thing called "compliance". The loss of revenue to tax lawyers alone would be enormous upon repeal, not to mention thousands of accountants and tax preparers right on down to the least paid employee of companies like H and R Block and tax software companies. In spite of the fact NOTHING is produced and ZERO wealth is created by the whole "compliance" industries the amount of money changing hands is enormous. That and the power of the IRS to destroy any politician that even hints at such a repeal makes repeal unlikely. Keep in mind the 87000 new IRS jobs is also part of the "compliance" industry and that part makes the IRS even more powerful.

The lack of limits on income taxation is a concept not missed by the Neo Communists who desire total government ownership, control, and redistribution of all the wealth in the economy in the communist fashion. The IRS as has become today is a communists dream. Stalin would be proud.

Liberalism is a mental disorder.
-- Michael Savage

As I have said before, Let's abolish government education. I mean it.

The "Liberals" pretended to stand up for individual liberty. Now it appears that they were a bunch of contemptible hypocrites. But maybe they will learn their lesson (that is, maybe the white "limousine liberals" will,) when they find themselves being condemned along will George Wallace and his ilk.

Can't we repeal Amendment #16, as #18 was repealed?

Oh, it's not only the melanin. It's also the eye shape and the hair texture, don't you understand?(Just BS-ing). Racism is racism, regardless of your color or which race you belong to. I never thought race segregation was right when I was a kid and it was going on. I'm not going to take the blame for it now that it's gone. A racist is a racist, regardless of his race.