poweralert stage 2.....

Status
Not open for further replies.
lexity said:
What does your contract say, about deductions at source?
Click to expand...
Doesn't really matter, because it's the law that they must deduct PAYE and UIF from all employees and pay that over to SARS unless those employees are exempt from it.

Unless your employer violates that law, your tax is getting paid. i.e. you personally, can't do it.

Doesn't really matter what your contract says. Even if it's worded in some stupid or ambiguous way that supposedly says you can demand your company not deduct. They don't have to honour that because it violates the law. Nobody is required to abide by a clause in a contract if that clause violates the law.

I eagerly anticipate your next post which undoubtedly will contain an example of what the average middle class Saffer can do here.
 
porchrat said:
Doesn't really matter, because it's the law that they must deduct PAYE and UIF from all employees and pay that over to SARS unless those employees are exempt from it.

Unless your employer violates that law, your tax is getting paid. i.e. you personally, can't do it.
Click to expand...
So, you don't consent to having your property confiscated.

If your consent doesn't matter, I would take that as a 'yes'.
 
lexity said:
So, you don't consent to having your property confiscated.

If your consent doesn't matter, I would take that as a 'yes'.
Click to expand...
The law requires that they deduct that PAYE and UIF. My consent in that particular matter is not required. It's the law.

I can choose not to work there... but then I'm choosing just not to work I'm afraid because all companies are bound by that same law.

I can't however insist that they not deduct that PAYE.

The only way a tax revolt works is if all major companies across the country collectively agree to not pay that PAYE amount over to SARS. Good luck getting profitable companies earning a bucket for their owners to risk that.
 
lexity said:
So, you don't consent to having your property confiscated.

If your consent doesn't matter, I would take that as a 'yes'.
Click to expand...

You go tell your employer not to pay over the tax to the taxman, then report back to us how that meeting goes.
 
That's such an American Nut style response. "I don't consent, I Don't consent shouting style."
You cant just shout it and suddenly 1000s of years of laws and precedents don't apply to you.

As @porchrat said The law is the Law, no company is going to risk a battle with SARS over your "principles" they going to stay in business.
lexity said:
So, you don't consent to having your property confiscated.

If your consent doesn't matter, I would take that as a 'yes'.
Click to expand...
 
DStvNothingOn said:
That's such an American Nut style response. "I don't consent, I Don't consent shouting style."
You cant just shout it and suddenly 1000s of years of laws and precedents don't apply to you.

As @porchrat said The law is the Law, no company is going to risk a battle with SARS over your "principles" they going to stay in business.
Click to expand...

Well it might be more along the lines of the business not consenting to have the non-consenting type of crazy on their workforce anymore. The business will then have properly implemented P7.9879813's version of FoA.
 
ToxicBunny said:
You go tell your employer not to pay over the tax to the taxman, then report back to us how that meeting goes.
Click to expand...
I can only inform my employer that if he withholds any part of what is legitimately mine, without my consent, then if everyone is equal under the law, that he runs the risk of prosecution for theft.

p.s. Whether or not he is ultimately to blame, the court - if everyone is equal under the law - will have to determine who my employer is being threatened by, or if he is acting under his own determinism.

You can't just say sorry I was only following orders. If you look at the Nuremberg trials, employment officers compliant with the statues were found guilty and hung.

"I was only following orders" is never a legitimate defense.
 
DStvNothingOn said:
That's such an American Nut style response. "I don't consent, I Don't consent shouting style."
You cant just shout it and suddenly 1000s of years of laws and precedents don't apply to you.

As @porchrat said The law is the Law, no company is going to risk a battle with SARS over your "principles" they going to stay in business.
Click to expand...
I take it you also do not consent to having your property confiscated.

Am I right?
 
ToxicBunny said:
lexity said:
So, you don't consent to having your property confiscated.

If your consent doesn't matter, I would take that as a 'yes'.
Click to expand...

You go tell your employer not to pay over the tax to the taxman, then report back to us how that meeting goes.
Click to expand...
I take it you also do not consent to having your property confiscated.

Am I right?
 
lexity said:
I can only inform my employer that if he withholds any part of what is legitimately mine, without my consent, then if everyone is equal under the law, that he runs the risk of prosecution for theft.
Click to expand...
It's not legitimately yours though. It's required by law to be paid over to SARS. That money is owed. Whether you personally choose to acknowledge that or not is irrelevant. It remains so.

I'm under no illusion here that failure to pay those funds over is against the law. That's the revolt part of the tax revolt. The thing is it's not you that's revolting, it's your employer. They're the ones obligated to deduct that money and pay it over, not you.

You cannot demand that your employer violate the law and ever expect that demand to be respected. Sorry mate.

You're joking though right? This impotent idea isn't the example you're attempting to provide right?
 
DStvNothingOn said:
That's such an American Nut style response. "I don't consent, I Don't consent shouting style."
You cant just shout it and suddenly 1000s of years of laws and precedents don't apply to you.
Click to expand...
The legal precedent tells me that you would be part of the lower classes, right now, were it not for a minority deciding the law should be an accurate reflection of their core values.

The US secession from Great Britain, was the result of and continuation of just such a precedent. That precedent is what enabled a middle-class to emerge.

Are you sure you are happy to nonchalantly drag that precedent, and yourself, back into the stone-age?
 
1 - Taxes are of course abused, but that doesn't mean they aren't legit as well. Public services & facilities have to be paid for and like it or not services that look after the less able are widely needed.
The now very old Libertarian argument here that private enterprise-minded opportunists (and soft hearted volunteers) will always offer to do work currently done by public systems means nothing when it comes to needs that must be fulfilled even when there is no such interest. System examples off the top of my head suggest like with sewage works and public-litter collection, but there will be many more even if you can't see it with those.
Again, there is no working example of such a system anyway. Why? It isn't practical.

2 - Few think this can work, so few will ever climb onboard. So it's never going to catch on.

3 - Many people don't care anyway, a bit of abuse is considered normal and they're happy enough if left alone with their own lives for not interfering.
It may be sad but it's a fact in this reality, bullies are always around to take advantage. How much depends on each culture.


It takes a very serious disturbance to motivate most to such a degree.
Largely off topic here so likely done.
 
lexity said:
The legal precedent tells me that you would be part of the lower classes, right now, were it not for a minority deciding the law should be an accurate reflection of their core values.

The US secession from Great Britain, was the result of and continuation of just such a precedent. That precedent is what enabled a middle-class to emerge.

Are you sure you are happy to nonchalantly drag that precedent, and yourself, back into the stone-age?
Click to expand...
The amount of stupid coming from you is absolutely fascinating to see
 
Is this the Power Alert Thread or a place where middle class keyboardists argue about how you can change SA.?

In a Democracy there is the opportunity to affect change - at the polls.
There's a vote coming up on 29 May, that's your opportunity.

Alternatively, volunteer to assist the political party you most identify with.

Or do what Guy Fawlkes tried and kill these useless fokkers.

Now, back to how the grid is doing
 
Mannydefreitas said:
Is this the Power Alert Thread or a place where middle class keyboardists argue about how you can change SA.?

In a Democracy there is the opportunity to affect change - at the polls.
There's a vote coming up on 29 May, that's your opportunity.

Alternatively, volunteer to assist the political party you most identify with.

Or do what Guy Fawlkes tried and kill these useless fokkers.

Now, back to how the grid is doing
Click to expand...
It's a lexity conspiracy theory P7. 978663 thread now.. And if you don't like it you can secede to your own thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X