This Blog Has Moved!

My blog has moved. Check out my new blog at

Your Ad Here

Monday, February 22, 2010

Joe Stack

This story, which you've probably heard about by now, is interesting. A disgruntled software engineer intentionally flew a small airplane into an IRS building. He left a message on his website, explaining his reasons.

The initial web coverage I read said "It was an accident. There are no government offices in that building." Later, it was revealed that it was an IRS office and it was intentional.

The IRS doesn't advertise in neon signs "We have offices here!", for the obvious reason. Joe Stack probably went to the office once as a "customer".

The FBI ordered his website taken down. Via the Streisand effect, this only makes people want to read it. The webhost later retracted the claim that the FBI ordered him to take down the website.

When I read Joe Stack's letter, my reaction was "Someone edited this. Parts were removed." The version circulating on the Internet may not be the original version! His website and computers were seized, so it's impossible to be sure.

The Austin Statesman, a newspaper, was the one who first tweeted "This is the website of the guy who flew the plane into the IRS building". Newspapers are a branch of the State. It is possible that someone from the FBI hacked/edited Joe Stack's website, and *THEN* tipped off the newspaper. Alternatively, the newspaper alerted the FBI before telling their readers.

One person suggested that the entire note is a forgery. FBI agents then pretended to suppress it.

I expected more details of exactly how he'd been abused by the IRS. He should have named the specific judges and IRS agents that abused him. He did name his accountant Bill Ross. Why didn't he also name the State thugs who assaulted him?

I remember the names of most of the parasites who have abused me. If Joe Stack were the victim in an unfair trial, he would definitely remember the name of the judge and prosecutor. Why didn't he mention them by name in his letter? Why did he mention his accountant, but not the judge or prosecutor in his unfair trial?

I didn't notice anyone citing any of the tax trials he was involved in. Sometimes, IRS thugs can steal your property/savings without a trial. The money in your checking account and other State paper investments belong to the IRS and Goldman Sachs more than they belong to you.

[He describes the usual "The income tax is illegal!" argument.]

That little lesson in patriotism cost me $40,000+, 10 years of my life, and set my retirement plans back to 0.
That bit implies he spent time in jail for tax evasion. I didn't see that detail corroborated anywhere else. Maybe he's just referring to the amount of time he spent fighting State thugs on their turf.

On the other hand, Joe Stack might just have been really stressed out. It's impossible to be sure. My gut reaction still is "Someone edited this. Parts were removed."

There was one weird bit. His wife had off-the-books cash income. He complained that his accountant refused to include it on his tax return. WTF is wrong with that? If an accountant advised me to do that, I'd be happy! Now, if State thugs harass me, I can say "I followed my State-licensed accountant's advice!"

Joe Stack obviously was angry at the IRS . If he had read my blog, he would have realized the pointlessness of violently retaliating against State thugs. He lost his life for nothing. The cost of his attack is not paid by State thugs, but externalized to everyone else via higher taxes.

In the late nineteenth century, there was an anarchist movement that tried assassinating State insiders. It failed. First, such an attack only creates sympathy for the State. Second, there's always another State parasite eager for a promotion, willing to take someone else's place. Even if IRS agents are occasionally assaulted, it's still a high-paying job. Third, the State has superior resources. Freedom-seekers are still a tiny minority.

State thugs should be treated like a crazy person on the subway. You don't intentionally start a fight with a crazy person. The correct thing is to ignore them.

Some State comedians are saying "Joe Stack was angry at the IRS and did something stupid. Therefore, everyone who believes 'Taxation is theft!' is evil! Hooray for the State! We need the State to protect us from scum like Joe Stack!"

This is invalid reasoning. Just because someone who believes X also does something stupid, doesn't mean X is false. Also, Joe Stack seemed specifically angry at the IRS, rather than having the more enlightened viewpoint "All taxation is theft!"

"If you're disgruntled, your only option is violence!" is State propaganda. This is a nasty form of pro-State trolling. Agorism is a better strategy. The official State-licensed resistance methods are obviously stupid.
  1. Writing your Congressman is a waste of time. Your Congressman doesn't care what you think.
  2. Voting is pointless. You're picking from two carefully pre-screened pro-State trolls. There are plenty of ways to rig an election, even if an honest candidate or someone like Ron Paul is on the ballot. Ron Paul's 2008 Presidential campaign is an excellent example of the mainstream media fixing an election.
  3. A riot or protest is pointless. That's easily handled with tear gas and rubber bullets.
"Work peacefully within the system!" is obviously stupid. However, "Work peacefully outside the system!" is not publicly discussed as an option. The only remaining choice is violence.

Don't act like a slave begging your master to be less cruel. The best resistance strategy, agorism, is not publicly mentioned. By encouraging disgruntled people to commit pointless violence, this makes it easy to eliminate freedom-seekers.

When State thugs have a disagreement with someone, they resolve it violently. This creates the illusion that violence is the only possible tactic for fighting evil. Violence works for State thugs, because they have superior numbers and resources.

The correct answer regarding the IRS is "All taxation is theft!" The IRS is a particularly egregious example of abuse of State power. The IRS is a terrorist organization, more dangerous than Al Qaeda. More Americans are hurt each year via IRS tax prosecutions, than by Al Qaeda.

Just because some people living in Afghanistan organized a terrorist attack, doesn't mean it's justified murdering everyone in Afghanistan. Similarly, some IRS agents act like thugs. That doesn't mean all IRS agents and all State employees are evil. Using violence to fight terrorism accomplishes nothing, whether it's Al Qaeda or the IRS. The vast majority of State employees are cogs in the machine, unaware that they're participating in a massive crime.

The IRS must employ some intelligent people. Otherwise, State parasites couldn't accomplish anything! If nobody intelligent worked for the IRS, the State wouldn't be able to open an Excel spreadsheet, much less collect and enforce taxes. However, it's unreasonable to expect intelligent people working for the IRS to quit their jobs. You have to earn a paycheck somehow! If you're working for the IRS and discover it's a scam, maybe the best thing to do is to keep your job but "work to rule". Make mistakes that ensure some tax evaders don't get caught. For example, an intelligent State thug ordered to evaluate my blog could write in his report "FSK is a harmless fruitcake."

Joe Stack only has a valid complaint against the specific people who hurt him. Even then, there isn't any way to enforce and collect a claim. On the other hand, "if you wear the colors you're part of the gang". Every State employee is partially responsible for all abuses of the State. However, "They're partially responsible!" doesn't lead to "They deserve to die!"

This bit was interesting. Someone claims that the FBI knew about the attack in advance. This seems like boilerplate for a conspiracy theorist. "Bad thing X happens. Therefore, State spies knew about X in advance. They allowed it to happen, so they could pass laws restricting people's freedom."

A more likely explanation is that someone edited his website after the attack. I don't believe "State spies are omniscient!" However, it is suspicious that he set fire to his home. I'm confused about the timing of "When was his home on fire?" and "When did he crash the airplane?"

911 responded very fast after the airplane hit the building. That proves nothing. If a random joe calls 911, it might take awhile. If State thugs call 911, they don't have to wait. That isn't immoral in this case, given that it was an intentional attack.

This bit of Joe Stack's letter was suspicious.
Our leaders decided that they didn't need the all of those extra Air Force bases they had in Southern California, so they were closed; just like that.
Why is Joe Stack upset that an Air Force base closed? Was he working as a contractor/consultant for someone who writes military software?

It is possible that State thugs discovered Joe Stack's identity before everyone else, and edited his suicide note. Then, they let the edited version circulate as if it were the original. My gut reaction is "This was edited!", but it's impossible to be sure.

There's another interesting bit I read elsewhere. State thugs don't use their real name while working! IRS agents are allowed to use a fake name while working, to lower the risk of violent retaliation from their "customers".

If State thugs assault you, it might be pointless to ask for ID. You might be given a State-sanctioned forgery!

How do State thugs profit by allowing Joe Stack to crash a plane into an IRS building? They can use it as an excuse to pass more laws restricting freedom, or more tightly enforce existing laws. If you take a severe pro-State troll interpretation of the law, it's illegal to write "Taxation is theft! Government is one huge extortion racket!" However, State thugs are focusing most of their effort on people who retaliate violently or advocate violent self-defense.

The Alien and Sedition Acts in the late 18th century were used to arrest people who criticized the new Federal government. During the US Civil War, President Lincoln arrested newspaper editors in the North who criticized the Civil War. Some newspaper editors thought that the Southern states should be allowed to withdraw their consent for the Federal government. The "Communist McCarthy Purges" were primarily used to weed out independent thinkers. Now, the mainstream media is owned by a small handful of people and tightly controlled. However, the Internet is changing the equation.

The mainstream media spin is "Joe Stack is evil. Therefore, all people who complain about taxes are evil." It may lead to a crackdown on people who advocate for freedom. At one point, President Obama was trying to get people who criticized healthcare "reform" classified as terrorists.

Will Joe Stack's actions be used as an excuse for more State power, via "Problem! Reaction! Solution!" Will it be an excuse to crack down on "Tea Party Protesters!"? Will it be an excuse to make it illegal to write "Taxation is theft! Government is one huge extortion racket!"? I don't think so. Politicians might try. If State parasites declared it illegal to write "All taxation is theft!", that would only draw more attention to the issue.

It also was ironic to see "Joe Stack" as the #1 search term on Google Trends. A lot of people are saying "Joe Stack had a valid complaint. However, I disapprove of his tactics."

There's one important piece of missing information. Which judges, IRS agents, and State thugs interacted with Joe Stack? Questioning them might be useful. They probably were severe parasites and pro-State trolls. If I were an FBI agent investigating this incident, I'd talk to all the IRS thugs and judges that interacted with Joe Stack.

If you go into a trial with hostile body language, the judge is likely to treat you more severely. For this reason, I might be at less risk than others. If I adopt a simple "WTF? I thought I wasn't a slave? I'm just trying to earn a living. Why are you bother me?" approach, the judge might be more lenient. A judge does have some discretion to be lenient or harsh. I won't know until I'm forced to try. Hopefully, I can avoid that.

Another evil fnord is that the individual is blamed and not a corrupt system. It's easy to blame Joe Stack and sympathize with the State. Nobody points out that the IRS really is a terrorist organization. Government taxation is one huge extortion racket.

"Tax collectors are scumbags!" is not an original idea. In the 18th century, it was common to refuse to sell food or lodging to someone who was a known tax collector. The modern slave has grown to accept complacently a lot of abuse by State thugs. 100-200 years ago, current taxation/regulation levels would have led to an immediate revolt.

To what extent are individual tax collectors responsible for State evils? You have to earn a living somehow. "Tax collector" is a high-paying job. On the other hand, everyone is responsible for what they do. "I was following orders! I was just doing my job!" is never a valid excuse.

Is my State job evil? I'm writing meaningless risk reports that nobody reads anyway. If someone gets a margin call based on my report, that isn't really evil. I work for the State as much as an IRS agent, although I'm somewhat removed from the process of violence.

Another interesting bit is the tax law Joe Stack cited, section 1706. That bit was out of context with the rest of the document. Anyway, I'll explain that law. In my current wage slave job, I'm the type of person directly affected by that law.

I work as a contractor/consultant at a large financial institution. I'm paid on a W-2 by my headhunter/pimp. For all practical purposes, I'm really an employee of the large financial institution. Most big financial institutions in NYC abuse tax law in this manner. The financial institution pays the headhunter. The headhunter takes a cut, and pays the contractor. Technically, I'm employed by the headhunter, and not the financial institution. By using the third-party headhunter, there's enough of a bureaucratic firewall to prevent getting busted by State enforcers.

It's incredibly inefficient. The headhunter probably bills 2x-3x as much as he pays me. He did have some initial overhead, but the rest is gravy. From my point of view, it's a decent rate, so I accept it. I don't have the option of contracting directly with the large corporation, due to section 1706, so my only option is to go through a headhunter. You might say "Start your own software business!", but it isn't as easy as it sounds. I'm working on that.

Why do large financial institutions use contractors/consultants, especially for software engineers? There are several reasons:
  1. The contractor budget is different than the employee budget.
  2. When/if the contractor is fired, the employer doesn't have to pay unemployment insurance.
  3. When/if the contractor is fired, it doesn't count as a layoff.
  4. The employer doesn't have to pay benefits, but the hourly rate is greater to compensate. For example, I don't get paid vacation or sick time or holidays.
  5. Skilled software engineers can demand a high salary. It's embarrassing if a grunt software engineer gets paid more than high-ranking managers in other parts of the corporation. Hiring the software engineer as a consultant helps avoid non-technical employees and managers from getting jealous.
  6. Everyone else is doing it. Corporate executives tend to copy everyone else's practices.
Some software engineers stay as contractors/consultants for years with the same client. For all practical purposes, they're employees. If State thugs enforced the law as written, this practice would be illegal. From my point of view, I'm getting paid a decent rate; at least it's not one of those sleazy "equity only" startup jobs. If a State thug decided to strictly enforce the law, he'd rule that I was a direct employee of the large financial institution. I'm not too concerned, because nearly every large financial institution in NYC does this.

If there was no State restriction of the market, it'd be easier for me to start my own business. I wouldn't have to pay 50%+ of my labor as tax to a headhunter/pimp.

Section 1706 forces the software engineer to go through a headhunter/pimp, instead of contracting directly with the financial institution. Skilled software engineers had enough leverage that they could demand a direct contract with the large corporation. Section 1706 removed this leverage, making such arrangements illegal.

I'm paid on a W-2 basis. Taxes are automatically deducted from my paycheck. My income is reported to the IRS. My headhunter/pimp gives me health insurance, taking the cost out of my paycheck pre-tax. It's about 1/3 as expensive as an individual policy paid with after-tax money.

If I were paid on a 1099, all sorts of tricks are available. I can set up my own corporation. I can deduct my health insurance expenses pre-tax, giving myself a generous plan. I can give myself a huge pension, leading to a huge tax writeoff. (Given that the US financial system is going to collapse soon, a pension holding State paper assets might be worthless 20 years from now. You can get almost the same tax benefit with gold and silver, provided you buy and sell with cash off-the-books.)

If I had my own corporation, I can write off all sorts of things as a business expense. I probably could write off my computer, my Internet service, my cellphone, my car (if I commute by car), etc.

I also could pay myself a low base salary. The rest of my income could be a dividend, which is taxed more favorably. Your 1099 income is automatically reported to State thugs on a 1099 form, but they can't audit everyone. Taxes are not automatically withheld. For this reason, small business owners are most likely to get audited. Small business owners are at the front lines in the war between State thugs and people who want to do useful work.

Also due to this law, corporations are reluctant to hire individual contractors directly. Before this law, a contractor could get paid directly by a large corporation, without having to give a cut to a pimp/headhunter. Now, only headhunters on the "preferred vendor" list are hired. A State middleman takes an extra cut of your labor. For example, the headhunter bills the corporation for $150/hr, but pays the contractor $50/hr (still a decent rate). Before this law, the contractor could go directly with the large corporation, and take the full $150/hr for himself. The headhunter/pimp is a middleman, profiting from State violence. The owner of the headhunter firm is usually buddies with insiders at the large corporation.

State restriction of the market makes it hard for the software engineer to say "**** this! I'm starting my own business!" I can't start my own large financial institution with a State-backed monopoly. The cost of regulation compliance makes it hard to bootstrap a small business. If I save my salary in State paper investments as seed capital, I get ripped off by inflation. Via the inflation tax and the power to print money, my employer literally gets a cut of *EVERY* on-the-books economic transaction. The banksters directly profit from the violence of IRS/FBI thugs.

Summarizing, if you're paid on a 1099, there's all sorts of tax loopholes you can use. Section 1706 removed this loophole. Section 1706 forced all software engineers working as contractors/consultants to go through a headhunter/pimp, who takes a cut of your wages. It's another tax, in addition to the taxes I pay to the government.

(maybe this bit should also be broken out as its own separate post?)

It's frustrating that Joe Stack's suicide note is so widely read! My blog is better written, and more dangerous, than Joe Stack's suicide note. I'm sticking with agorism as my strategy for profiting and fighting evil. It is frustrating that violence is necessary to get the mainstream media (or Internet virally) to spread a viewpoint.

The income tax originally was originally presented to the general public as a "soak the rich" law. The original income tax law was only a couple percent, applied to only really high incomes. In the present, IRS tax collectors harass everyone, especially small business owners. Small business owners who accept payment from their customers in cash have the most to gain from tax evasion. An executive at a large corporation probably won't resist taxes, because he's already a negative taxpayer. State insiders are tax-eaters and not tax-payers.

There are all sorts of trusts and tax loopholes a wealthy person can use. With $100k in savings, it doesn't pay to spend $50k setting up a fancy trust. If you have $100M+, then $50k in legal/accounting fees is negligible. Wealthy people get tax loopholes. The people lobbying for those tax loopholes are the lawyers/accountants who sell "wealth management/preservation" services!

The income tax works the opposite of the way the average person is brainwashed to believe. The average person pays taxes. The profits go to insiders. Instead of "distribute and share the wealth", the IRS "collects loot and distributes to insiders". A productive worker pays a lot more in taxes than the benefit received. More than half the population are tax-eaters, making it practically impossible to achieve reform by voting. A State parasite can rationally in his self-interest vote for higher taxes on productive workers. Really productive workers are a tiny minority. They will always get a raw deal under a system where laws are determined by a majority vote.

Bailouts, wars, and corporate welfare are all paid with taxes. Laws that restrict freedom are enforced with tax money. If not for the IRS, the huge boondoggle in Afghanistan and Iraq would not be possible. If not for the IRS, trillions of dollars could not be stolen via bailouts, inflation, and corporate welfare. Insiders get a bailout, and I'm struggling to get by. Insiders get a bailout, and my savings are stolen by inflation.

There also is an important connection between the income tax and the Federal Reserve. Superficially, you might think they're unrelated. According to State thugs, income taxes must be paid on every economic transaction.

The only form of payment accepted for income taxes is Federal Reserve Notes. State violence creates an artificial demand for Federal Reserve Notes, even though they're intrinsically worthless.

In a very real sense, IRS/FBI thugs are private debt collectors working for Goldman Sachs and Lloyd Blankfein. Via the income tax and the inflation tax, the banksters get a cut of every on-the-books economic transaction. Taxes enable State parasites to earn huge salaries, without doing any useful work. The money/wealth collected in taxes and paid for "interest on the national debt" doesn't vanish into thin air. It winds up in the pockets of the banksters. Speculating in government bonds is one of the banksters' most lucrative scams.

Only Federal Reserve Notes are accepted as valid for paying income taxes. The only way that new Federal Reserve Notes are put into circulation is via a loan. Via the Compound Interest Paradox and the income tax, every American is literally a slave working for the banksters and State parasites. The income tax is a complete perversion of the idea that we live in a free society.

The banks must be bailed out, because only they can create money. Via the IRS, people need bank-issued money to pay taxes. Without bank-issued money, people can't get permission from IRS bureaucrats to work. That's the reason Federal Reserve Notes are really slave work permission points.

That's the reason so many people get caught up in "The income tax is illegal/unconstitutional!" They assume "what is legal" and "what is morally acceptable" is the same.

The Supreme Court and Federal appeals courts have repeatedly ruled that the income tax and Federal Reserve, as currently implemented, are perfectly legal. That doesn't make it morally acceptable. That just proves that the Supreme Court and nearly every Federal judge is a hopelessly brainwashed pro-State troll. You don't get picked to be a Federal judge unless you're buddies with high-ranking State parasites. You don't get picked to be a Federal judge unless you've been pro-State brainwashed to think in a certain way.

In fact, if you try to make an "The income tax is illegal!" argument in court, the judge will find you in contempt and fine you. That's a pretty severe type of State violence. In a corrupt tax trial, you can be punished just for making certain arguments in self-defense! If the arguments are obviously frivolous, then why are people who make those arguments punished so severely? You don't punish people for saying something obviously false; you punish people for saying something that reflects a hidden truth.

The judge might also find you in "contempt of court" if you make a "jury nullification" argument. I haven't tried it. If necessary, I will present such an argument sui juris. If the judge interrupts me, it'll help make the jury understand that the judge is biased against me.

The role of the Supreme Court is not to protect individual freedom. They are comedians making up clever-sounding excuses for increasing State power.

If you're angry about the income tax and abuse of State power, you won't find justice in a State court.

There was a bit where Joe Stack criticized organized religion. Organized religion gets various tax exemptions. For example, the Amish are exempt from Social Security and Medicare taxes. Otherwise, the tax burden would make subsistence farming unprofitable. You can't say "I'm a religion!" and get a tax exemption. That doesn't work. Only State-recognized religions count.

Organized relation gets some State perks. Organized religion helps keep the slaves complacent. The slaves are brainwashed to accept abuse.

Joe Stack had some of the symptoms of a panic attack. My natural reaction is to avoid conflict. When I started cracking my pro-State brainwashing, I got scared and ran away. I didn't think of trying violence. However, I was very scared about becoming the victim of violence.

When I first had a panic attack, I had the sense that something horrible was about to happen to me. Based on my abuse by the psychiatry/death industry, that fear turned out to be justified.

It seems that Joe Stack had some of the symptoms of someone having a panic attack. He had only partially cracked his pro-State brainwashing. When you see only a tiny bit of the truth, it's very scary. Now, my reaction to seeing the Matrix is "Oh, that again!" Now, when I see State parasites using their body language mind control tricks, my reaction is "WTF? Does that actually fool anyone? It's obvious that this person is evil." Not all politicians are evil. President Obama has the "abused productive" personality type. He is restricted by his pro-State brainwashing and the parasites around him. President Obama really wants to do the right thing, but he's handicapped by his false beliefs.

I wonder if I do have the ability to help fight State evil, without having to use violence or be subjected to violence? If I become a more popular advocate for freedom, then State thugs might decide to target me. It seems that every high-profile critic of the Federal Reserve or IRS winds up in jail as a political prisoner. If you take a pro-State troll interpretation of the law, a State thug can come up with an excuse to arrest/kidnap/torture anyone. Even if a jury ultimately votes to acquit you, you still waste a lot of time and money and stress defending yourself.

That's another point. If you're the victim in a corrupt trial, you might think "The jury voted to acquit you. Therefore, your rights weren't violated." That's not true. You're forced to waste time and energy and stress and money defending yourself, from the moment you're arrested, even if you're ultimately acquitted. Your rights are violated when you're arrested, and not when/if you're convicted. State thugs take advantage of this; they don't have to compensate the victim if there's a trial and acquittal.

If you take a freedom-minded interpretation of the law, agorism is completely legal. That is a distinction between US law and in other countries. In other countries, the official excuse is "People only have rights that the government gives them." In the USA, the official excuse is "Government enforcers have limited powers!", but that's not the way State parasites actually act.

Hopefully, I can become a higher-profile advocate for freedom without being the victim of terrorism. I should also start some agorist businesses. Done correctly, it should be more profitable than my wage slave job.

Another evil fnord is "Pay *YOUR* taxes!" or "Joe Stack didn't want to pay *HIS* taxes." "Your taxes" phrases it in a way that makes it sound like a moral obligation. "My taxes" makes it sound like I consented to it. It's more accurate to say "Pay the IRS's taxes!" or "Pay your tribute to Goldman Sachs!"

Summarizing, the story of Joe Stack has many interesting points.
  • The manifesto circulated may not be the original version. The first person to cite the website was from a State-owned newspaper, who may have sent/received a tip to/from the FBI.
  • It is suspicious that he mentioned his accountant by name, but not any of the IRS agents, prosecutors, or judges by name. Someone may have removed that bit. I remember the names of most of the parasites who hurt me.
  • The bit about his house burning down seems weird.
  • Did the FBI know about the attack ahead of time? That seems to be a generic conspiracy theory accusation whenever anything bad happens. State enforcers are not omniscient.
  • Did someone edit Joe Stack's document before telling other people about it?
  • Will this incident be used as an excuse to further restrict personal freedom?
  • Will the "Tea Party Protesters" be treated as criminals? Will it be a crime to write or say "Taxation is theft!"?
  • Joe Stack was only angry at the IRS, rather than having the more enlightened viewpoint "All taxation is theft!"
  • It's somewhat frustrating that millions of people read Joe Stack's suicide note, while I have about 200-300 regular readers. My blog is more subversive and dangerous than Joe Stack's writing. I'm a better writer than Joe Stack. I'm better at understanding State evil than Joe Stack.
  • My strategy for getting freedom, agorism, is more likely to succeed than what Joe Stack tried.
  • In my wage slave job, I'm directly affected by section 1706, the law Joe Stack complained about. That regulation forces me to contract through a headhunter/pimp/middleman, who takes a huge chunk of my salary. Most large financial institutions in NYC abuse this law, by using consultants hired via headhunters. The headhunter is usually buddies with an insider at the corporation.
  • Section 1706 is a "corporate welfare for headhunters" law. In addition to paying income taxes on my labor to the government, I pay a tax of 50%-66%+ to the headhunter/pimp.
  • Most State regulations are designed to hurt small business owners and favor large corporations. The IRS cracks down on small business owners disproportionately hard.
  • The inflation tax also makes it hard for small business owners to raise capital. The Federal Reserve price fixing cartel gives huge economic power to State insiders.
  • The income tax and Federal Reserve are two closely related evils.
  • Just because someone did something stupid, doesn't mean that all people who know "Taxation is theft!" are evil.
  • If you really think about it, taxation is theft. Government is one huge extortion racket.
  • To what extent is an individual tax collector responsible for State evil?
  • "If you're disgruntled, you're only option is violence!" is a dangerous type of pro-State trolling.
  • A lot of people are saying "I disapprove of Joe Stack's tactics. However, he has a valid complaint about the IRS."
  • If Joe Stack were a regular reader of my blog, he would have realized the futility of violent retaliation. It would have been better for him to start agorist off-the-books businesses instead.
  • Using violence against terrorists doesn't work, whether you're fighting Al Qaeda or the IRS.
  • Even if you could murder some State thugs with no risk of getting caught, someone else would merely take their place. "IRS tax collector" is a high-paying job! State parasites pay their thugs well! The key is to build alternatives to State violence, instead of focusing solely on destructive behavior.
  • The income tax is a complete perversion of the idea that we live in a free country. The income tax literally means that you need permission from State bureaucrats and the banksters whenever you work.
  • State tax collectors are not "Enforcing rule of law!" or "Making sure everyone pays their fair share!" Really, tax collectors are making sure that the slaves pay their tribute.
  • The primary beneficiaries of taxes are State insiders. The average productive worker pays tribute to support State parasites.
  • The law is so complicated that practically anybody can be accused of a crime.
  • When dealing with State thugs, if you have hostile body language, you're more likely to get an unfavorable outcome.
  • The cost of regulation compliance costs small business a larger percentage of their revenue than large businesses. It's a type of corporate welfare. In addition to paying the tax itself, people have the burden of making sure they pay the correct amount of tax and are in compliance with all the complicated paperwork requirements.
  • "The income tax is illegal!" arguments are attractive to some people, because the income tax is immoral. People confuse "legal" and "moral". In the USA, "legal" and "moral" are drifting further and further apart. If you ask a State parasite their opinion, they'll say "State parasites may do whatever they want."
  • Arguing "The income tax is illegal!" is pointless, because it assumes the legitimacy of the government in the first place. "The income tax is immoral!" is more important than any legal or Constitutional argument.
  • The Constitution is not a valid contract. According to State thugs, I don't have the right to withdraw my consent.
  • If you're offended by abuses of the IRS or State, you won't find justice in a monopolistic State court. Members of a criminal gang protect each other as much as possible.
  • Joe Stack may have had some of the symptoms of someone having a panic attack. It's very traumatic to crack your pro-State brainwashing. When you partially crack your pro-State brainwashing, your thoughts are confused and disorganized. It takes awhile to be able to see things really clearly like I can.
"Taxation is theft! Government is a huge extortion racket! The IRS is a dangerous terrorist organization!" are obvious, once you really think about it. It's a huge difference from the way you were pro-State brainwashed to think.

Most people react with extreme hostility the first time they hear "Taxation is theft! The State is an extortion racket!" Most people don't say "That's an interesting point. I never thought about it that way before." Instead, they react emotionally and get very hostile. That is evidence that nearly everyone is insane. For this reason, the corrupt psychiatry/death industry is very closely related to the evils of the IRS, Federal Reserve, and State.

The correct solution is to boycott the Federal Reserve and IRS. To do this, you need to work off-the-books outside of the State economy. As a software engineer, there won't be many counter-economic opportunities until the agorist economy gets more advanced. I'm going to focus on learning other skills. I have useful skills, but the State slave economy doesn't value them due to a non-free market.

The correct solution for fighting State evil is agorism. It's the best strategy I've read about. It seems like a reasonable solution for building free market alternatives to State terrorism, State taxation, and the State violence monopoly.


Anonymous said...

>IRS agents are allowed to use a
>fake name while working, to lower
>the risk of violent retaliation >from their "customers".

A while ago there was a hoo-haa in the United Kingdom about firms of solicitors writing extortion letters to old age pensioners and the like threatening to sue them for watching a video without permisson from the copyright holder etc.

I can`t remember the details, but around that time I also remember people saying they received extortion letters from solicitors AND

1) The letters were not signed
2) There was no name of a human on the letter
3) The law firm was named, but in some cases the law firm was NEVER INCORPORATED and the name was only registered with the Law Society. Still this still means it is a fictitious name.

I read somewhere that under UK law if you are using a fictitious trading name which does not correspond to an incorporated, registered UK company, then YOU CANNOT USE A FICTITIOUS TRADING NAME WITHOUT A NAME OF A HUMAN ABOVE IT.


Does just having a Law Society registration count? I saw this law about having to have a real human name always mentioned in your letters and correspondence in some HMRC booklet.

Yeah, yeah it is nice to be able to write a nasty letter to someone demanding a bag of cash and not have to mention who you are or put a real, proper signature on a letter!

The government should come down hard on these anonymous solicitor clowns demanding money/or property. Give me all your money the clowns say or will we waste months of your life and thousands of pounds in needless legal fees over some bullshit, non-existent matter.

Bas said...

Hi FSK, you mention in this and other posts that "The only way that new Federal Reserve Notes are put into circulation is via a loan."

What about direct government payments? Don't they add to the amount of money in circulation (and thus inflation) without creating a loan? I'm thinking of government employee salaries, welfare checks, social security, government health insurance reimbursements, grants and "stimulus" money?

Anonymous said...

I forgot to mention, these anonymous self-employed solicitor clowns, with no incorporated company, will never actually submit anything to a court.

They are just after easy money and they will target defenseless people without the money to pay for legal fees.

Does the Government do anything? No, of course not, because Parliament is full of MPs that used to be solicitors.

FSK said...


Deficit spending by the Federal government is financed via borrowing from the financial industry via the Federal Reserve. The government doesn't directly print new money, it's indirectly borrowed instead.

The banksters have firm control of the monetary system. They literally have everyone by the balls. That's why they needed to be urgently bailed out, lest the entire scam unravel. If banks can't make new loans, then no new money can be created.

This Blog Has Moved!

My blog has moved. Check out my new blog at