Oh, here’s a nice one, if the meaning of “nice” includes having the State’s Big Dick shoved up your ass in real time:
Government Will Track Every Dime You Spend
- Under this new digital currency, any transfer of funds to family, friends, charities, or clients would be able to be tracked by the nation’s central bank that issued this virtual money. Big Brother will be in your wallet every hour or every day. You will not be able to buy a stick of gum without a Federal Reserve computer knowing where, when, and to whom you just put down a buck.
- We should be rightfully concerned about inflation, energy independence, aggressor nations armed with nuclear weapons, and woke public policies that denigrate the very foundation of this great country. But these are jabs compared to the enormous destructive power of a digital currency “option” slipped into Executive Order 14067.
Read the whole article to get a full flavor of this bastardy.
And by Executive Order, not through law voted on by Congress. My suggestions:
Here’s a headline which made the news recently:
BBC star Gabby Logan and her husband Kenny were paid more than £500,000 to promote major tax avoidance scheme to their celebrity friends
The tax avoidance scheme sparked a huge public backlash when it was exposed
…followed WAY down the page by this little admission:
There is no suggestion of illegality on the part of Mr or Mrs Logan, or any other celebrities mentioned.
In other words, these folks used their popularity and names to pimp a legal product to their friends. Happens every day, so why the fuss?
some most people in Britishland seem to think that tax avoidance is the same as tax evasion — which they aren’t of course; the first is not only legal but praiseworthy, while the second is a crime, ask Boris Becker — the lovely Gabby and her handsome hubby are going to be “called as witnesses” in a court case which they aren’t involved with.
And let’s not even talk about the “public backlash” from the Perpetually Envious Set, who think that the government is “owed” tax money (when in fact it’s extorted at gunpoint).
Anyway, the pics of Gabby in the linked article are total crap. Here are a couple of good ones, from my files:
All part of the service, no need to thank me.
Several of you sent me this lovely little bit of governmental stupidity:
More than 140 people experiencing homelessness in Denver will each be provided up to $1,000 in cash a month for up to one year as part of a basic income program designed to help “lift individuals out of homelessness,” the city announced last week.
The $2 million contract with the Denver Basic Income Project was approved by the City Council and will provide direct cash assistance to more than 140 women, transgender and gender non-conforming individuals, and families in shelters.
Civic altruism and wokism, all subsidized by taxpayer dollars. And I hate to break it to these Colorado morons, but “up to” a grand is going to lift precisely nobody out of poverty. It will, however, encourage more people in similar circumstances to come to Denver…
Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of socialists.
Is any government agency hated more than the IRS? I don’t mean at any specific time, just in general. Here’s their latest little escapade:
After an initial backlash over its facial recognition feature, the Internal Revenue Service said Monday it started a new option that will allow taxpayers to sign up for online accounts without the use of the controversial biometric data.
Taxpayers wanting to use its services online will still have to use ID.me to register, but people will have the option of verifying their identity during a “live virtual interview” instead of uploading a video selfie.
“This is consistent with the IRS’s commitment earlier this month to transition away from the requirement for taxpayers creating an IRS online account to provide a selfie to a third-party service to help authenticate their identity,” the IRS said in a statement.
ID.me said in its own statement that the verification process with an agent will take from 5-10 minutes, not including the wait time for the next available video chat agent.
The IRS said taxpayers will still have the option to use facial recognition if they like through ID.me.
Of course, this is just to help us, the victims of their godless theft, and would never ever cross-our-hearts be shared with any other Gummint Alphabet Agency, oh no.
Hey, instead of facial recognition, how about a simple digital signature? Here’s mine:
“Well Kim,” you may ask, “how was your trip to the tax guy yesterday?”
About the same as your dog getting its temperature taken for the first time:
What I love most about the tax code for retirees is that no matter how large the “contributions” you paid into SocSec, you don’t get enough to live on when you do finally retire; then as a retiree, when you earn a little extra money trying to make ends meet, your SocSec income is taxed.
So how do I really feel?
That was my reaction to this latest bit of Government bastardy:
The Biden administration has made clear its plan to beef up IRS auditing by expanding the agency’s funding and power. Biden’s latest proposal would require banks to turn over to the Internal Revenue Service bank account information for all accounts holding more than $600.
“There’s a 99 percent compliance rate on wages – because wage earners get their earnings reported to the IRS,” a fact sheet says that was handed out by the White House to lawmakers to sell them on the plan. “But the super wealthy who get their income from unreported sources are able to hide their income and avoid paying the tax they owe. In fact, each year the top 1 percent chooses not to pay more than $160 billion in taxes.”
Just out of curiosity: if the “super wealthy” are not paying those taxes, how is the IRS able to put an actual number on that “uncollected” amount? Or is it just an estimated, i.e. invented number?
I note that there’s been some pushback:
“While the stated goal of this vast data collection is to uncover tax dodging by the wealthy, this proposal is not remotely targeted to that purpose or that population,” the letter said. “In addition to the significant privacy concerns, it would create tremendous liability for all affected parties by requiring the collection of financial information for nearly every American without proper explanation of how the IRS will store, protect, and use this enormous trove of personal financial information. We believe that this program is costly for all parties, not fit for purpose, and loaded with potential for unintended and serious negative consequences.”
That’s telling them. And it will be roundly ignored, as usual.
I don’t even want to talk about the intrusiveness of this motherfucking proposal because it just makes me want to sharpen my bayonet and oil the rope. As it is, my bayonet is sharp enough and if I oil the rope any more, it’ll be too difficult to tie the knot.
(for information purposes only)
At what point do we say, “Enough is enough?”
Asking for a friend. Read more