The IRS Is Struggling with Fraudulent Tax Returns

detectiveconan16

detectiveconan16

CAGiversary!
Feedback
46 (100%)
Even when people get caught with dirt that should put them away for 20 years plus alot of times they just get a slap on the wrist and a year in jail. There aren't stiff enough penalties and the number of fraudulent claims will continue to grow in size and number.
 
Only if it's for people who are hiding a shitload of money. Don't lock up some bum trying to swindle a few thousand. Put those fuckers who are offshoring millions or billions.
 
the problem is identifying fraud vs mistakes made because this country is 30th or whatever in the world when it comes to math...
 
fuck the IRS. If we had a more straightforward tax code, there wouldn't be as many mistakes. Regarding fraud, if people think they are taxed too much, they'll resort to it. It's still outright illegal, but the government brings this sort of stuff on themselves. Here's to hoping the IRS and the Fed go bankrupt and we can fiscally start over again.
 
Let's be honest - a certain segment of the population will resort to fraud regardless if they think they're being taxed too much.

Yes, we need a more common-sense approach to the tax code - but when our commander in chief continues to promote tax cheats to high places, I doubt we'll be seeing too much work on eliminating tax fraud.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Let's be honest - a certain segment of the population will resort to fraud regardless if they think they're being taxed too much.[/QUOTE]

It is true. But the general discontent with the tax system I think validates fraud in many people's minds. I wouldn't do it because the penalties are enough of a deterrant, and my tax liability, while annoying, isn't terrible, but I can understand how others would come to the illegal conclusion.
 
[quote name='berzirk']fuck the IRS. If we had a more straightforward tax code, there wouldn't be as many mistakes. Regarding fraud, if people think they are taxed too much, they'll resort to it. It's still outright illegal, but the government brings this sort of stuff on themselves. Here's to hoping the IRS and the Fed go bankrupt and we can fiscally start over again.[/QUOTE]

You clearly don't understand the way the government works. First of all, the IRS is part of the executive branch and isn't capable of "going bankrupt". The Fed is also part of the government and cannot "go bankrupt" plus it prints the country's money and so by definition can't go bankrupt anyway.

If you want the "IRS and Fed to go bankrupt" then what you're really saying is that you want the whole country to go bankrupt and get rid of the US government, Constitution, and start over. I'm sure there are plenty of people that would love to have a bigger government, eliminate states rights, etc. You people that hate the Federal government's power are foolish to believe that your beliefs would be the ones that would win out if the country fell apart.
 
Ever since tax code was developed to incentivize behaviour things have gone sour. Deductions for having kids were meant to bolster middle and upper class families but instead the poor end up with the "benefit" so to speak.
Mortgage interest deduction? Gee, combine that with sub-prime loans and what happened there?
And so on and so forth. As always, follow the money and it's pretty easy to find out how things actually work.
 
[quote name='nasum']Ever since tax code was developed to incentivize behaviour things have gone sour. Deductions for having kids were meant to bolster middle and upper class families but instead the poor end up with the "benefit" so to speak.
Mortgage interest deduction? Gee, combine that with sub-prime loans and what happened there?
And so on and so forth. As always, follow the money and it's pretty easy to find out how things actually work.[/QUOTE]
Sounds a lot like you're advocating class warfare, you commie! That's my soapbox!:lol:
 
[quote name='dohdough']Sounds a lot like you're advocating class warfare, you commie! That's my soapbox!:lol:[/QUOTE]

Class warfare is one of those terms that people think if they say it first then no one else can say it. I don't recall your political leaning but IMO class warfare is cutting taxes for the rich and paying for it by cutting social security and Medicare.
 
nah, it's when you rub that metal strip on the wooden rulers on your shoe for 30 seconds and then slap the kid next to you. Christ in a Cracker Barrel that hurts!

Ever seen Idiocracy? The whole setup is basically that the educated people who plan out their lives and pregnancies and such have less kids because they want to make sure it's economically feasible while the not so well to do just have kids anyway. The end result being kids that aren't raised with many resources and therefor a lack of access to the advantages that the well to do kid would have further along in life.
 
[quote name='nasum']Ever since tax code was developed to incentivize behaviour things have gone sour. Deductions for having kids were meant to bolster middle and upper class families but instead the poor end up with the "benefit" so to speak.
Mortgage interest deduction? Gee, combine that with sub-prime loans and what happened there?
And so on and so forth. As always, follow the money and it's pretty easy to find out how things actually work.[/QUOTE]

Capitalism was founded on incentivising taxes codes, you will never get rid of one without the other.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='UncleBob']That's not Capitalism. That's Corporatocracy.[/QUOTE]

No, thats capitalism. In order to get off the ground capitalism, both its intellectual and practical branches relied on what Karl Marx termed primitive accumulation, and despite what Adam Smith wrote, it was anything but peaceful. You need only look at the industrial revolution Britain and Europe (birthplace of capitalism) to understand just how exploitative it was, game laws, food taxes, land taxes, and taxes on food producing animals ring any bells? Care to guess who the people instituting these taxes followed or were in some cases? I can assure you they were not mercantilists.

Go back and read the parts of oft repeated luminaries like Adam Smith or David Ricardo (hell go back as far as William Petty and you see the same disturbing trend) that most people brushed over, you know, the boring and seemingly unimportant bits usually focused on things like agriculture. They are more telling than their general whitewashed theories most are accustomed to.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Clak']While I agree, you mentioned Karl Marx, therefore you're a red commie bastard.[/QUOTE]
Took the words right out of my mouth...huurrrrr

...and we don't take kindly to commies up in these here parts.
 
[quote name='Clak']While I agree, you mentioned Karl Marx, therefore you're a red commie bastard.[/QUOTE]

Join us, well make it a party.
communist.png
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Sadly, this is what passes for conversation here on vs.[/QUOTE]

What? Single sentences? Jokes? Arguments over diction rather than content? Passive agressive insults? Isn't your sentence a little pot and kettle?
 
bob doesn't get to complain about the conversations which go on here. More often than not he's the reason they go to shit.
 
It's funny you say that. I started a thread based off a - frankly - ridiculous talking point, making light of it. The very first reply was someone who came in, trying to start ****.

After that, the conversation went on, quite smoothly, all without the usual suspects chirping in and starting **** (aside from one who "got" it).

Looks like I can take part in a thread without it going to ****. Some folks around here, though, just seem to have that quality about them.

The funny thing is that cindersphere actually made a good post worthy of conversation. Then, some jack*** came and posted some bull**** that served no purpose other than derail the thread. So, congrats to that ****nut.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']It's funny you say that. I started a thread based off a - frankly - ridiculous talking point, making light of it. The very first reply was someone who came in, trying to start ****.

After that, the conversation went on, quite smoothly, all without the usual suspects chirping in and starting **** (aside from one who "got" it).

Looks like I can take part in a thread without it going to ****. Some folks around here, though, just seem to have that quality about them.

The funny thing is that cindersphere actually made a good post worthy of conversation. Then, some jack*** came and posted some bull**** that served no purpose other than derail the thread. So, congrats to that ****nut.[/QUOTE]

I don't read the thread to hear you whining. Seriously, if it makes you that unhappy find something better to do with your life.
 
That thread is the one you hold up as a shining example that you can carry on a real conversation? Seriously?
 
[quote name='Clak']That thread is the one you hold up as a shining example that you can carry on a real conversation? Seriously?[/QUOTE]

You do realize, of course, there's a large gap between "real conversation" and "****"?

In spite of the fact that the very first reply in that thread was a usual suspect coming in to start a fight, the thread never turned to "****".

[quote name='camoor']I don't read the thread to hear you whining. Seriously, if it makes you that unhappy find something better to do with your life.[/QUOTE]

There's an ignore feature. If you don't want to read what others post, you can figure it out.
 
So what are we talking about in here? Putting jellyfish on our junk? Cuz I'll bet ten bucks right now I can beat you guys at jellyjunkin'.
 
What I'd rather have a discussion about is what's with bob's asterisks.

Seriously man, what's the fucking point? It's the exact opposite of creative and if you're trying to give yourself some limits on what kind of speech you use, you're not really doing it if you're filling the letters in with symbols. Although, this is emblematic of how you engage debates and rationalize things. It's all superficial nonsense.
 
I am amazed that there are people who will argue that we should allow sick children to die due to lack of money. But will contend that they are having a rational discussion because they don't cuss.

It is like debating with holocaust deniers who take the fact no one takes them seriously as vindication.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top