Feds: Banks Should Call Police if Customer Withdraws More Than $5k in Cash

[OGEvilgenius]

Hmm, I see the problem here. You and I have a difference of opinion on the meaning of coercion.

Yeah, you apparently don't know the meaning of the word.

1.
the act of coercing; use of force or intimidation to obtain compliance.

 

[see4]

Yeah, you apparently don't know the meaning of the word.

thank you so kindly for that.

Unfortunately for Rob Roy's and your argument is that coercion is subjective as it applies to the person feeling coerced.

I personally don't feel coerced into paying taxes, I in no way feel intimidated or threatened. And more on point of topic, I don't feel coerced at all that the government must be notified if I withdrawal $5,000 from the bank. We can thank HSBC and the like for that, Im sure.

I find it reasonable and prudent that the government take a portion of my earnings to fund the military and programs that help the less fortunate and provide social services in the form of public education, fire and police to name a few. You however seem to think that's just absurd.

Which get's me back to my "me", "them" argument I made with NoDrama.

You are only concerned about you. Where I am concerned about both me and others.

You wouldn't happen to be a member of any sort of militia would you?

 

[OGEvilgenius]

thank you so kindly for that.

Unfortunately for Rob Roy's and your argument is that coercion is subjective as it applies to the person feeling coerced.

I personally don't feel coerced into paying taxes, I in no way feel intimidated or threatened. And more on point of topic, I don't feel coerced at all that the government must be notified if I withdrawal $5,000 from the bank. We can thank HSBC and the like for that, Im sure.

I find it reasonable and prudent that the government take a portion of my earnings to fund the military and programs that help the less fortunate and provide social services in the form of public education, fire and police to name a few. You however seem to think that's just absurd.

Which get's me back to my "me", "them" argument I made with NoDrama.

You are only concerned about you. Where I am concerned about both me and others.

You wouldn't happen to be a member of any sort of militia would you?

LOL

I'm fine with socialism that isn't forced. Those kind of socialist programs tend to have to listen to those who are contributing to them (see for example a lot of charities). They don't put a gun to your head and say give your fucking money or go to jail. The latter type of program assuredly, 100% of the time in history, leads to horrible abuses and misallocations that do not benefit those who contribute. The prior program almost assuredly will have folks try to abuse it as well, but they don't have the power to put a gun to your head to continue the abuses no matter what you believe.

Thanks for being completely and totally intellectually dishonest in everything that you've stated in this thread though. I mean obviously because I don't like giving sociopaths huge power to control others I don't believe in helping others. Seriously, GFY.

 

[OGEvilgenius]

Btw, since you appear confused on what coercion means - a non coercive government would ask you for your money to invest in the programs it wants to run to help others. They wouldn't demand it. And you would give it because they do a good job and it helps everyone. That would be non coercive. Of course why would the government (run by power hungry control freaks) want to put itself in a position to compete with other entities for your dollars?

 

[see4]

Btw, since you appear confused on what coercion means - a non coercive government would ask you for your money to invest in the programs it wants to run to help others. They wouldn't demand it. And you would give it because they do a good job and it helps everyone. That would be non coercive. Of course why would the government (run by power hungry control freaks) want to put itself in a position to compete with other entities for your dollars?

You seem to be confused that the term coercion is not open to interpretation, subjective to the individual who FEELS coerced.

I would try to get away from using "feelings" when trying to debate facts. I know its a Republican talking point, but it really holds no basis in rational argument.

I do get what you are saying, but I just don't believe in your logic.

Are you implying that the government not require we pay taxes, but rather if we feel like giving, we give? If that is your argument, you live in a fantasy world, and you need to snap out of it. Because that will never happen, no matter who's in political power.

Anyway.. let's boil it down to what you want. What exactly do you want? Give me specifics, not generalities.

 

[see4]

LOL

I'm fine with socialism that isn't forced. Those kind of socialist programs tend to have to listen to those who are contributing to them (see for example a lot of charities). They don't put a gun to your head and say give your fucking money or go to jail. The latter type of program assuredly, 100% of the time in history, leads to horrible abuses and misallocations that do not benefit those who contribute. The prior program almost assuredly will have folks try to abuse it as well, but they don't have the power to put a gun to your head to continue the abuses no matter what you believe.

Thanks for being completely and totally intellectually dishonest in everything that you've stated in this thread though. I mean obviously because I don't like giving sociopaths huge power to control others I don't believe in helping others. Seriously, GFY.

At no point in time did I become uncivil with you, I'd like the same in return. Calling me intellectually dishonest and telling me to GFY is neither civil nor genuine. I was actually beginning to think about taking your opinion seriously, but that is all but lost now.

Oh well, so much for that conversation.

 

[see4]

LOL

I'm fine with socialism that isn't forced. Those kind of socialist programs tend to have to listen to those who are contributing to them (see for example a lot of charities). They don't put a gun to your head and say give your fucking money or go to jail. The latter type of program assuredly, 100% of the time in history, leads to horrible abuses and misallocations that do not benefit those who contribute. The prior program almost assuredly will have folks try to abuse it as well, but they don't have the power to put a gun to your head to continue the abuses no matter what you believe.

Thanks for being completely and totally intellectually dishonest in everything that you've stated in this thread though. I mean obviously because I don't like giving sociopaths huge power to control others I don't believe in helping others. Seriously, GFY.

Again, if you are so upset by all this, why not simply renounce your citizenship? It really would be no skin off my back or anyone else's if you follow up on that.

 

[see4]

LOL

I'm fine with socialism that isn't forced. Those kind of socialist programs tend to have to listen to those who are contributing to them (see for example a lot of charities). They don't put a gun to your head and say give your fucking money or go to jail. The latter type of program assuredly, 100% of the time in history, leads to horrible abuses and misallocations that do not benefit those who contribute. The prior program almost assuredly will have folks try to abuse it as well, but they don't have the power to put a gun to your head to continue the abuses no matter what you believe.

Thanks for being completely and totally intellectually dishonest in everything that you've stated in this thread though. I mean obviously because I don't like giving sociopaths huge power to control others I don't believe in helping others. Seriously, GFY.

If your theory is true, why is there still world hunger problems? All the socialist programs are funded and run by charitable individuals, yet we still have ever increasing amounts of world hunger problems.

Or do you mean the social welfare program to save Haiti? Yea, that charity program worked out real well.

The reason why american charities, these socialist programs you refer to, seem to be ok, is because they are overseen by government agencies, otherwise they would all be like the two examples I mentioned.

And a note on civility, your fellow Klansmen seem to demand civility of me, I should expect the same in return.

 

[panhead]

I know for me im still with fuk the government knowing anything about wtf i do with my " After Tax " income or savings , when i paid my legally demanded tax my obligation to explain my finances to the government ended , im ok with paying my taxes & paid them now they can leave me the hell alone .

I pay taxes on my income , then yearly i fill out tax returns & pay any owed monies , what n the fuk gives them the right to say my spending habits need police assistance ?

Im not good at debating like some of you folks but for the life of me i cant fathom how any sane person can think its ok their bank calls the cops on them for using their after tax dollars as they see fit .

What the fuk is next ? I go to withdraw $5,000 & the cops show up & question me , i explain im buying a new cd player , cop uses his judgement & says anybody claiming to spend $5 grand on a cd player is suspicious because his cheap ass shops at best buy & buys plastic Bose garbage , then seizes my cash & i have to hire a lawyer & prove my intent to buy a $5,000 cd player to a judge ??????

Wtf , how can anybody support that rationality?

 

[sheskunk]

Ahhh, now it's all making sense now.

I completely agree. FDD was/is a complete fucking loser, but he certainly did not deserve jail time. Though interstate commerce without FDI is a crime in itself, notwithstanding the thing being distributed is federally illegal. But whatev's.

but desert dude is really the lowest of the low, and a total coward. he is much worse than i originally thought.

I wonder how FDD feels about desert dude. I wonder if he would try to ban desert dude or cry about him to moderators like he did/does to me. sheskunk, have anything to add to this subject?

lol

 

[OGEvilgenius]

If your theory is true, why is there still world hunger problems? All the socialist programs are funded and run by charitable individuals, yet we still have ever increasing amounts of world hunger problems.

Or do you mean the social welfare program to save Haiti? Yea, that charity program worked out real well.

The reason why american charities, these socialist programs you refer to, seem to be ok, is because they are overseen by government agencies, otherwise they would all be like the two examples I mentioned.

And a note on civility, your fellow Klansmen seem to demand civility of me, I should expect the same in return.

Klansmen? I see you're sinking further into the intellectual hole you've dug yourself. You have far more in common with those folks than I do given your general ignorance and apparent hatred of me for simply pointing out your lies (go figure Klansmen get upset when you point out their lies too).

Haiti has an incredibly corrupt government that's been propped up by other governments. That government has a monopoly on instruments of power. So that government runs amok. Yay government though right.

 

[UncleBuck]

No I don't. Since the Federal government is largely financed by income taxes, all of it is inherently coercive.

yet every single person who pays income taxes agreed voluntarily to do so.

agreeing voluntarily to do something and coercion do not collide.

 

[UncleBuck]

The only way it's not a regulation on freedom is if you completely change the definition of the word freedom.

common sense gun laws make us more free. if not for common sense gun laws, then i would be a lot less free. i'd be constantly constrained by the worry of some mentally deficient person like you buying guns up and slinging them around even though you don't understand the consequences of your actions due to your mental deficiency.

 

[UncleBuck]

Btw, since you appear confused on what coercion means - a non coercive government would ask you for your money to invest in the programs it wants to run to help others. They wouldn't demand it.

who pays income taxes without signing a voluntary withholding agreement first?

anyone?

has anyone ever been forced by the government to sign a withholding agreement?

nope.

 

[UncleBuck]

Klansmen? I see you're sinking further into the intellectual hole you've dug yourself. You have far more in common with those folks than I do

klansmen believe in this super small government that you do, want to abolish the 16th, and so on and so forth.

 

[OGEvilgenius]

yet every single person who pays income taxes agreed voluntarily to do so.

agreeing voluntarily to do something and coercion do not collide.

If you make enough to live, you have to pay income taxes. I don't see where it's voluntary. The IRS certainly doesn't view it as voluntary.

 

[OGEvilgenius]

common sense gun laws make us more free. if not for common sense gun laws, then i would be a lot less free. i'd be constantly constrained by the worry of some mentally deficient person like you buying guns up and slinging them around even though you don't understand the consequences of your actions due to your mental deficiency.

You can't make this case. Don't even try.

 

[OGEvilgenius]

who pays income taxes without signing a voluntary withholding agreement first?

anyone?

has anyone ever been forced by the government to sign a withholding agreement?

nope.

Nice semantics here. Typical dishonest bullshit though. But of course, if you don't and you earn over X (I think it's around 10k - less than enough to live!) amount the IRS will most assuredly come after your ass if you do not file yourself.

 

[OGEvilgenius]

klansmen believe in this super small government that you do, want to abolish the 16th, and so on and so forth.

Nice false equivalency. Klansmen are dishonest, ignorant fuck tards. Sort of like you and your buddy See4.

 

[UncleBuck]

If you make enough to live, you have to pay income taxes. I don't see where it's voluntary. The IRS certainly doesn't view it as voluntary.

better tell dick that he is dead then.

well, he is, but not because he didn;t pay income taxes.