Good Read from another site..
04-01-2003 05:34 PM
Bobby C
Senior Member
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Tunica, baby!
Posts: 154
I haven't lobbed an "epic" for a while, so...
I've never written a post like this one. Please, bear with me a minute.
You see, I have a very important paragraph that I just cannot cut out. But it doesn't fit anywhere. I had to take it out of its original place, because it strayed too far from the point I was trying to make, and ruined any momentum I may have been building.
I was going to put it in the "PS", below my signature, but that would take away from my very strong closing lines.
So I have to put it first. This post, like some great movies, is not going to go in chronological order. Remember how "Reservoir Dogs" and "Pulp Fiction" each had a timeline that jumped all over the place? Remember how "Goodfellas" started with a scene that belonged about 3/4's into the movie (Billy Bats in the trunk)?
That's how this post is going to start. With a paragraph that belongs about 3/4's the way down.
You see, later in this post, I will refer to what I feel is "the second-most unconstitutional law" in America. When you use a phrase like that, everyone's first reaction is, "Second? What's first?" So I MUST include my thoughts on the most unconstitutional law in America. It is pertinent enough to this discussion that I could not cut it out in the editing process; it had to stay in.
Here's the displaced paragraph:
(I know that when I use a phrase like, "the second-most unconstitutional law...", most people automatically react with, "If that's in second place, what's the winner?" I'm straying way off-topic here, but since you're curious, THE most unconstitutional law, in my opinion, is the ability of the IRS to force you to testify against yourself on tax forms, where "anything you say can and will be used against you", but you do NOT have "the right to remain silent." Who came up with this rule, Stalin?)
There. That's done. Now we can start on my post :
I can't tell you how much it SICKENS me to see the government mask their "hunting down every taxable dollar" laws with the words "anti-terror".
If you want the IRS snooping around every cash transaction made in America, fine. Just say so. But don't try to disguise this blood-sucking as "fighting terrorists".
They tried the same scare-tactics in the "war on drugs" campaign. Remember the ad they aired during the Superbowl? "If you buy illegal drugs, you may be funding terrorists." I wanted to throw up when I saw that ad.
Now, I've never used illegal drugs, but let me ask a couple of questions to those of you who do:
--Does your drug dealer wear a turban?
--Have you EVER bought your drugs from a middle-eastern-looking guy?
I didn't think so.
Drug dealers do not sponsor terrorism.
Simply put, the US government wants to get its hands on every single dollar. If there is a dollar somewhere, the IRS wants a piece of it.
Are any of you readers familiar with Regulation 6A? This is the federal government's tool to stick its nose in, ERRR, "to apprehend money launderers". Regulation 6A states that any time you enter into a cash transaction of $10,000 or more (usually at your bank, but this would also apply to paying cash for a car at a dealership, or betting large sums of cash in Vegas), the merchant is REQUIRED to get your ID, and fill out a Cash Transaction Report. If you don't want to give him your ID, then he cannot complete the transaction (they can't sell you the car, or accept the wager). The merchant is also EXPRESSLY FORBIDDEN FROM HELPING YOU TO AVOID THIS PAPERWORK. For example, the bookmaker is not allowed to suggest, "Well, if I pay you the $12,000 you won in *cash*, we need to tell the government. But if we were to pay you $3000 of it in *chips*, then less than $10,000 in cash would change hands, and we wouldn't be required to report anything."
To repeat, just to be clear, if you have a ticket to cash that's worth $12,000, it is perfectly legal for you to ask for $9900 in cash, and $2100 in chips. But if you don't know that, it is ILLEGAL for the employees of the sportsbook to suggest it!
Can you *imagine* that? He's not allowed to advise you on what's legal, and what's not? This has to be the second-most unconstitutional law that I've ever heard of! I'm surprised they still let H&R Block give advice on minimizing tax exposure!
When Reg 6A came into being, it was the bane of bookmakers throughout Nevada. "I'm busy enough as it is on Sunday mornings in the fall. Now I'm supposed to stop what I'm doing every time someone bets 10 dimes on a game, to fill out this blasted PAPERWORK???"
It was naturally assumed that all this paper went straight to the IRS. "Oh, heavens no," said the IRS at the time. "We don't even get to see those."
After a couple of years, the IRS finally admitted, "Yeah, we're the ones behind this whole 6A idea."
So why have I wasted so much time explaining Reg 6A, when my post is about how disgusting it is to hide "tax-snoopers" behind the shield of "anti-terror"? Here's why:
After I had to endure countless CTR's (Cash Transaction Reports) throughout several years of bookmaking, I came across the following blurb in the Las Vegas Review Journal (I'm paraphrasing, and the numbers are approximate, except for the FIRST number--I'll never forget that one):
"In the last few years, over SEVENTY-SEVEN MILLION CTR'S have been turned into the Federal Government, under Regulation 6A, which was said to have been put into place to catch money laundering operations. Of those SEVENTY-SEVEN MILLION forms filed, there have been fewer than 200 investigations of money laundering, which resulted in 3 convictions."
77,000,000 pieces of paper resulted in 3 convictions. They don't give a damn about money laundering! They want info on people's personal finances! They want to know who is "holding out on them" at tax time!
Now, instead of pretending to target "money laundering operations", they are pretending to target "terror groups". Nobody is buying the "we're looking for money-launderers" cover-story anymore, so they had to spice it up with scare tactics: "Now we're looking for TERRORISTS who launder money."
It is an INSULT to all of those who died on September 11, 2001, and an INSULT to their families. It's an insult to every soldier, sailor, airman, and marine who's been killed in Afghanistan, Kuwait, and Iraq. It's a disgrace. They should be ashamed. It makes me sick.
Bobby
04-01-2003 05:34 PM
Bobby C
Senior Member
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Tunica, baby!
Posts: 154
I haven't lobbed an "epic" for a while, so...
I've never written a post like this one. Please, bear with me a minute.
You see, I have a very important paragraph that I just cannot cut out. But it doesn't fit anywhere. I had to take it out of its original place, because it strayed too far from the point I was trying to make, and ruined any momentum I may have been building.
I was going to put it in the "PS", below my signature, but that would take away from my very strong closing lines.
So I have to put it first. This post, like some great movies, is not going to go in chronological order. Remember how "Reservoir Dogs" and "Pulp Fiction" each had a timeline that jumped all over the place? Remember how "Goodfellas" started with a scene that belonged about 3/4's into the movie (Billy Bats in the trunk)?
That's how this post is going to start. With a paragraph that belongs about 3/4's the way down.
You see, later in this post, I will refer to what I feel is "the second-most unconstitutional law" in America. When you use a phrase like that, everyone's first reaction is, "Second? What's first?" So I MUST include my thoughts on the most unconstitutional law in America. It is pertinent enough to this discussion that I could not cut it out in the editing process; it had to stay in.
Here's the displaced paragraph:
(I know that when I use a phrase like, "the second-most unconstitutional law...", most people automatically react with, "If that's in second place, what's the winner?" I'm straying way off-topic here, but since you're curious, THE most unconstitutional law, in my opinion, is the ability of the IRS to force you to testify against yourself on tax forms, where "anything you say can and will be used against you", but you do NOT have "the right to remain silent." Who came up with this rule, Stalin?)
There. That's done. Now we can start on my post :
I can't tell you how much it SICKENS me to see the government mask their "hunting down every taxable dollar" laws with the words "anti-terror".
If you want the IRS snooping around every cash transaction made in America, fine. Just say so. But don't try to disguise this blood-sucking as "fighting terrorists".
They tried the same scare-tactics in the "war on drugs" campaign. Remember the ad they aired during the Superbowl? "If you buy illegal drugs, you may be funding terrorists." I wanted to throw up when I saw that ad.
Now, I've never used illegal drugs, but let me ask a couple of questions to those of you who do:
--Does your drug dealer wear a turban?
--Have you EVER bought your drugs from a middle-eastern-looking guy?
I didn't think so.
Drug dealers do not sponsor terrorism.
Simply put, the US government wants to get its hands on every single dollar. If there is a dollar somewhere, the IRS wants a piece of it.
Are any of you readers familiar with Regulation 6A? This is the federal government's tool to stick its nose in, ERRR, "to apprehend money launderers". Regulation 6A states that any time you enter into a cash transaction of $10,000 or more (usually at your bank, but this would also apply to paying cash for a car at a dealership, or betting large sums of cash in Vegas), the merchant is REQUIRED to get your ID, and fill out a Cash Transaction Report. If you don't want to give him your ID, then he cannot complete the transaction (they can't sell you the car, or accept the wager). The merchant is also EXPRESSLY FORBIDDEN FROM HELPING YOU TO AVOID THIS PAPERWORK. For example, the bookmaker is not allowed to suggest, "Well, if I pay you the $12,000 you won in *cash*, we need to tell the government. But if we were to pay you $3000 of it in *chips*, then less than $10,000 in cash would change hands, and we wouldn't be required to report anything."
To repeat, just to be clear, if you have a ticket to cash that's worth $12,000, it is perfectly legal for you to ask for $9900 in cash, and $2100 in chips. But if you don't know that, it is ILLEGAL for the employees of the sportsbook to suggest it!
Can you *imagine* that? He's not allowed to advise you on what's legal, and what's not? This has to be the second-most unconstitutional law that I've ever heard of! I'm surprised they still let H&R Block give advice on minimizing tax exposure!
When Reg 6A came into being, it was the bane of bookmakers throughout Nevada. "I'm busy enough as it is on Sunday mornings in the fall. Now I'm supposed to stop what I'm doing every time someone bets 10 dimes on a game, to fill out this blasted PAPERWORK???"
It was naturally assumed that all this paper went straight to the IRS. "Oh, heavens no," said the IRS at the time. "We don't even get to see those."
After a couple of years, the IRS finally admitted, "Yeah, we're the ones behind this whole 6A idea."
So why have I wasted so much time explaining Reg 6A, when my post is about how disgusting it is to hide "tax-snoopers" behind the shield of "anti-terror"? Here's why:
After I had to endure countless CTR's (Cash Transaction Reports) throughout several years of bookmaking, I came across the following blurb in the Las Vegas Review Journal (I'm paraphrasing, and the numbers are approximate, except for the FIRST number--I'll never forget that one):
"In the last few years, over SEVENTY-SEVEN MILLION CTR'S have been turned into the Federal Government, under Regulation 6A, which was said to have been put into place to catch money laundering operations. Of those SEVENTY-SEVEN MILLION forms filed, there have been fewer than 200 investigations of money laundering, which resulted in 3 convictions."
77,000,000 pieces of paper resulted in 3 convictions. They don't give a damn about money laundering! They want info on people's personal finances! They want to know who is "holding out on them" at tax time!
Now, instead of pretending to target "money laundering operations", they are pretending to target "terror groups". Nobody is buying the "we're looking for money-launderers" cover-story anymore, so they had to spice it up with scare tactics: "Now we're looking for TERRORISTS who launder money."
It is an INSULT to all of those who died on September 11, 2001, and an INSULT to their families. It's an insult to every soldier, sailor, airman, and marine who's been killed in Afghanistan, Kuwait, and Iraq. It's a disgrace. They should be ashamed. It makes me sick.
Bobby
