史塔克之路───一位美國人的覺醒（上）
2月18日，就在奧巴馬不顧中國反對，執意會見曾以人皮獻祭的前西藏神權農奴社會頭子達賴之際，德州一位因稅務、退休權益被侵害的軟件工程師史塔克（Joe Stack 1956-2010）駕駛一小型飛機，以9.11自殺攻擊的方式，撞入德州奧斯汀市國稅局辦公大樓，造成2死13傷的慘劇。朋友眼中：“為人正直，不抽煙，不喝酒，關心一些正常人關心的事情。我從不知道他處於某種崩潰的邊緣。在一群人中，他是那種不愛說話的人。”的史塔克事先燒掉自己位於中產階級街區的住房，並在網路上留下一篇三千多字的絕筆：
當你讀到這封信的時候，你無疑會問，“為什麼會這樣（駕機自殺撞擊國稅局大樓）？”簡單地說，原因很複雜而且我對這個事件的籌劃由來已久。許多個月之前，我開始寫這封信，是為了療治我對這個世界悲觀失望的情緒，那是一種意識到這個世界已破碎的事情毫無補救希望的絕望。無需多說，我對這個世界的出離憤怒可以寫下一卷又一卷，如果我願意寫的話。但我發現，寫下這些憤怒的過程讓我沮喪，感到沉悶，而且寫作這些事情可能是毫無意義的...尤其當狂怒的風暴席捲我的大腦時，我無法充分地陳述我的想法。我不知道怎樣才能撫平我內心的創傷，但絕境下我會做出絕望的掙扎。 小的時候我們被灌輸這樣的“常識”：沒有法律就沒有社會，那是無政府主義。悲慘的是，在這個國家（美國），我們從小就被洗腦被意識到，我們對這個國家的奉獻和服務，換來的是政府對正義的主持。我們進一步被洗腦被相信，這個國家是自由的國度，而且我們應當為“崇高的自由主義”隨時準備獻出生命。可曾記得那句名言，“被代表就要被交稅”（選出政府就要給政府納稅）。儘管我們小的時候被洗腦接受這些謬論只用兩三年而已，我花了我整個成年的時間才意識到這純屬扯淡。在現在這個時代，任何人膽敢站起來對這個原理（“被代表就要被交稅”）說不會立刻被打上“瘋子”和“叛徒”的標籤，以及面臨更糟的待遇。
（If you're reading this, you're no doubt asking yourself, “Why did this have to happen?” The simple truth is that it is complicated and has been coming for a long time. The writing process, started many months ago, was intended to be therapy in the face of the looming realization that there isn't enough therapy in the world that can fix what is really broken. Needless to say, this rant could fill volumes with example after example if I would let it. I find the process of writing it frustrating, tedious, and probably pointless… especially given my gross inability to gracefully articulate my thoughts in light of the storm raging in my head. Exactly what is therapeutic about that I'm not sure, but desperate times call for desperate measures. We are all taught as children that without laws there would be no society, only anarchy. Sadly, starting at early ages we in this country have been brainwashed to believe that, in return for our dedication and service, our government stands for justice for all . We are further brainwashed to believe that there is freedom in this place, and that we should be ready to lay our lives down for the noble principals represented by its founding fathers. Remember? One of these was “no taxation without representation”. I have spent the total years of my adulthood unlearning that crap from only a few years of my childhood. These days anyone who really stands up for that principal is promptly labeled a “crackpot”, traitor and worse.）
雖然很少有人對稅收沒有怨言，但我敢肯定這輩子還沒有見過一個政治家能為有我這樣想法和利益的人說話。他們甚至根本不關心我說什麼。 為什麼那撮暴徒和強盜可以犯下無法想像的暴行（比如通用汽車的總裁們好多年以來的所作所為），並且當他們的貪婪和無比愚蠢的行為最終帶來災難的時候，聯邦政府卻可以毫無保留地在幾天甚至幾個小時內救助他們化解危機？於此同時，當我們稱之為笑料的美國醫療保健系統包括那些藥品和保險公司，在每年謀殺數以萬計的老百姓的時候，在掠奪他們（老百姓）的屍體歡呼他們（老百姓）的傷殘的時候，這個國家的領導人卻對此視而不見，反而在積極地救濟他們那些卑劣的“老伙計”（華爾街資本家）。更可悲的是，那些政府的“代表們”（稱呼他們為小偷，騙子和自私的混蛋更貼切）卻在年復一年地空洞地討論“糟糕的醫保問題”而毫無行動。對他們來說，只要死老百姓不擋在他們賺錢的路上，一切危機對他們根本不是問題。
（While very few working people would say they haven't had their fair share of taxes (as can I), in my lifetime I can say with a great degree of certainty that there has never been a politician cast a vote on any matter with the likes of me or my interests in mind. Nor, for that matter, are they the least bit interested in me or anything I have to say. Why is it that a handful of thugs and plunderers can commit unthinkable atrocities (and in the case of the GM executives, for scores of years) and when it's time for their gravy train to crash under the weight of their gluttony and overwhelming stupidity, the force of the full federal government has no difficulty coming to their aid within days if not hours? Yet at the same time, the joke we call the American medical system, including the drug and insurance companies, are murdering tens of thousands of people a year and stealing from the corpses and victims they cripple, and this country's leaders don't see this as important as bailing out a few of their vile, rich cronies. Yet, the political “representatives” (thieves, liars, and self-serving scumbags is far more accurate) have endless time to sit around for year after year and debate the state of the “terrible health care problem”. It's clear they see no crisis as long as the dead people don't get in the way of their corporate profits rolling in.）
什麼正義？搞笑！ 不知道一個有理智的人如何解釋在我們的稅收以及整個法律系統中存在的那些光鮮卻代價沉重的廢物。我們有一個過於復雜的製度，複雜到只有那些最聰明的學者才能領悟。儘管連專家也不知道為什麼需要遵守那些法令，這個系統卻殘酷地要法律的受害者承擔違反法律的責任。法律規定稅收表格結尾處需要納稅人簽名，然而卻沒人完整了解他們到底簽署的是份什麼協議，這不是被脅迫又是什麼？如果這不是極權專制國家的法律，那就沒有法律是了。
（And justice? You’ve got to be kidding! How can any rational individual explain that white elephant conundrum in the middle of our tax system and, indeed, our entire legal system? Here we have a system that is, by far, too complicated for the brightest of the master scholars to understand. Yet , it mercilessly “holds accountable” its victims, claiming that they're responsible for fully complying with laws not even the experts understand. The law “requires” a signature on the bottom of a tax filing; yet no one can say truthfully that they understand what they are signing; if that's not “duress” than what is. If this is not the measure of a totalitarian regime, nothing is.）
我是怎麼知道這些的？ 我對這個制度的反思開始於80年代的美國噩夢。不幸的是，經過16年的學校教育，我才偶然去注意到稅法中那些含糊和傲慢的條令，儘管這些條令都是些最普通的英文。一些朋友推薦我參加一個（普通納稅者組成的）學習小組，閱讀和討論“稅法”。討論的重點是稅法中關於免稅的一章，免稅的對象包括粗俗腐敗卻出奇富有的天主教堂。在這個領域中最“好”的、薪水最高、最有經驗的稅收律師的幫助下，我們（學習小組的成員）仔細研讀了稅法，然後做和那些“大男孩”做的同樣的事情（但我們並沒有像天主教堂那樣打著上帝的名義卻從信眾中騙財以及向政府隱瞞巨額財富）。我們小心地光明正大地做事，遵守所有法令，就像法律允許我們做的那樣。 我們（學習小組）的目的在於獲得一種很有必要的對法律的重新評價，（以便看清）這種法律是怎樣允許宗教團體這種怪物是怎樣通過法律來踐踏誠實老百姓的權益的。不過，通過這種學習，我更加認識到每一種法律都存在兩種“解釋”：一種為富人準備，一種為我們這些“其他人”準備。哦，這些“怪獸們”就是那些制定和執行法律的團體；宗教法庭在今天依然存在在這個國家裡。 愛國的代價就是，4萬美元的花銷，10年的生命以及被清零的退休金。這讓我第一次認識到我生活在一個完全建立在徹頭徹尾謊言的國家。這也同時讓我意識到，對美國公眾，我曾經抱有極其幼稚且無法想像的愚蠢幻想，他們（公眾）居然還相信並沉迷於“自由主義”那一套垃圾...即使是堆積如山的證據擺在他們面前，他們依然能夠繼續視而不見。
（How did I get here? My introduction to the real American nightmare starts back in the early '80s. Unfortunately after more than 16 years of school, somewhere along the line I picked up the absurd, pompous notion that I could read and understand plain English. Some friends introduced me to a group of people who were having 'tax code' readings and discussions. In particular, zeroed in on a section relating to the wonderful “exemptions” that make institutions like the vulgar, corrupt Catholic Church so incredibly wealthy. We carefully studied the law ( with the help of some of the “best”, high-paid, experienced tax lawyers in the business), and then began to do exactly what the “big boys” were doing (except that we weren't steeling from our congregation or lying to the government about our massive profits in the name of God). We took a great deal of care to make it all visible, following all of the rules, exactly the way the law said it was to be done. The intent of this exercise and our efforts was to bring about a much-needed re-evaluation of the laws that allow the monsters of organized religion to make such a mockery of people who earn an honest living. However, this is where I learned that there are two “interpretations” for every law; one for the very rich, and one for the rest of us… Oh, and the monsters are the very ones making and enforcing the laws; the inquisition is still alive and well today in this country . That little lesson in patriotism cost me $40,000+, 10 years of my life, and set my retirement plans back to 0. It made me realize for the first time that I live in a country with an ideology that is based on a total and complete lie. It also made me realize, not only how naive I had been, but also the incredible stupidity of the American public; that they buy, hock, line, and sinker, the crap about their “freedom”… and that they continue to do so with eyes closed in the face of overwhelming evidence and all that keeps happening in front of them.）
尚未從這第一個教訓（這個國家所謂的“正義”）的震撼中解脫，大約1984年，在我從工程學院中畢業並做了5年的納稅人之後，我想要追隨我的獨立創業工程師的職業夢想。 岔開下話題，關於為什麼選擇了工程以及獨立創業的夢想，我覺得我繼承了父親的對創造性解決問題的執著，而且我很小的時候就意識到了這點。 然而直到我大學的前兩年才認識清楚獨立創業的重要性，那時我18、19歲，靠著打工來補助自己在賓夕法尼亞州哈里斯堡讀大學。我的鄰居是個退休的老太太（80多歲對我那個年紀的年輕人來說夠老的了）是個已故鋼鐵工人的遺孀。他的亡夫曾在賓夕法尼亞中部的鋼鐵廠工作，那個大公司和工會許諾她的丈夫，如果工作30年就可以得到退休金和醫療保險。相反，他成了數千被缺乏競爭力的鐵廠和腐敗工會（更別提政府了）拋棄的P民，到頭來一無所獲，他存到養老基金的錢都被廠子和工會掠奪、竊取。老太太只能靠社會最低保障金度日。 想想那個時候，我的處境很窘迫，有時數個月只能吃花生醬和麵包果腹。但在我聽到這個可憐的女人的故事的時候，我覺得她比我還慘（畢竟我還有果醬和麵包）。當她淳淳教導我吃貓食（她吃的東西）比吃果醬和麵包更健康時，我聽的驚呆了。我最終還是下不了決心以貓食度日，不過這給我留下了深刻印象。從此我決定不再信任大公司，不再相信它們會管我的死活，決定以後要自食其力為自己的未來負責。
（Before even having to make a shaky recovery from the sting of the first lesson on what justice really means in this country (around 1984 after making my way through engineering school and still another five years of “paying my dues”), I felt I finally had to take a chance of launching my dream of becoming an independent engineer. On the subjects of engineers and dreams of independence, I should digress somewhat to say that I'm sure that I inherited the fascination for creative problem solving from my father. I realized this at a very young age. The significance of independence, however, came much later during my early years of college; at the age of 18 or 19 when I was living on my own as student in an apartment in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. My neighbor was an elderly retired woman (80 + seemed ancient to me at that age) who was the widowed wife of a retired steel worker. Her husband had worked all his life in the steel mills of central Pennsylvania with promises from big business and the union that, for his 30 years of service , he would have a pension and medical care to look forward to in his retirement. Instead he was one of the thousands who got nothing because the incompetent mill management and corrupt union (not to mention the government) raided their pension funds and stole their retirement . All she had was social security to live on. In retrospect, the situation was laughable because here I was living on peanut butter and bread (or Ritz crackers when I could afford to splurge) for months at a time. When I got to know this poor figure and heard her story I felt worse for her plight than for my own (I, after all, I thought I had everything to in front of me). I was genuinely appalled at one point, as we exchanged stories and commiserated with each other over our situations, when she in her grandmotherly fashion tried to convince me that I would be “healthier” eating cat food (like her) rather than trying to get all my substance from peanut butter and bread. I couldn't quite go there, but the impression was made. I decided that I didn't trust big business to take care of me, and that I would take responsibility for my own future and myself.）
80年代初期，我簽合同成了一個天真的軟件工程師...兩年後，“多謝”差勁的阿瑟·安德森（ArthurAndersen，安達信會計師事務總裁，改事務所所因捲入安然公司醜聞而遭到解體）和同樣差勁的紐約州議員（丹尼爾·帕特里克·莫伊尼漢，DanielPatrickMoynihan），1986年的稅收改革法案以及其中的1706號條令通過議會正式生效。 如果你不熟悉國稅局的1706號條令，這條條令規定了對勞動者（比如合同工程師）的稅收政策。你可以訪問這個鏈接（http://www.synergistech.com/1706.shtml#ConferenceCommitteeReport）來閱讀對1706號條令以及530號修正案的解釋。關於這些法令是如何影響技術服務僱員和他們客戶的討論，閱讀這裡（http://www.synergistech.com/ic-taxlaw.shtml）。 （下面是1706法案的原文的粗略翻譯） 1706節，適用某些技術從業人員 （a）通則：1978年的稅收法案的530節被下屬修正案修正 （d）例外：本節（530節）不適用於下述個人（從而這些職業可以不被法律保護）:....工程師，設計師，製圖師，程序員，系統分析師，或者其他從事類似職業的技術僱工。 （b）生效日期：本修正案對1986年12月31日之後發生的支薪和服務生效。 （1706法案引用結束） 不得不說，你需要閱讀法令原文才能理解其含義，不過理解起來並不復雜。底線就是，我是符合（d）的描述（從而不再受稅法保護）。更進一步說，這個法律還不如直接宣布我是個罪犯和非公民的奴隸。 20年後重讀這個法律，我仍然不能相信這個法案是真的。
（Return to the early '80s, and here I was off to a terrifying start as a 'wet-behind-the-ears' contract software engineer... and two years later, thanks to the fine backroom, midnight effort by the sleazy executives of Arthur Andersen (the very same folks who later brought us Enron and other such calamities) and an equally sleazy New York Senator (Patrick Moynihan), we saw the passage of 1986 tax reform act with its section 1706. For you who are unfamiliar, here is the core text of the IRS Section 1706, defining the treatment of workers (such as contract engineers) for tax purposes. Visit this link for a conference committee report (http://www.synergistech.com /1706.shtml#ConferenceCommitteeReport) regarding the intended interpretation of Section 1706 and the relevant parts of Section 530, as amended. For information on how these laws affect technical services workers and their clients, read our discussion here (http://www.synergistech.com/ic -taxlaw.shtml). SEC. 1706. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN TECHNICAL PERSONNEL. (a) IN GENERAL - Section 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978 is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection: (d) EXCEPTION. - This section shall not apply in the case of an individual who pursuant to an arrangement between the taxpayer and another person, provides services for such other person as an engineer, designer, drafter, computer programmer, systems analyst, or other similarly skilled worker engaged in a similar line of work. (b) EFFECTIVE DATE. - The amendment made by this section shall apply to remuneration paid and services rendered after December 31, 1986. Note: · "another person" is the client in the traditional job-shop relationship. · "taxpayer" is the recruiter, broker, agency, or job shop. · "individual", "employee", or "worker" is you. Admittedly, you need to read the treatment to understand what it is saying but it's not very complicated. The bottom line is that they may as well have put my name right in the text of section (d). Moreover, they could only have been more blunt if they would have came out and directly declared me a criminal and non-citizen slave. Twenty years later, I still can't believe my eyes.）
在1987年，我花了將近5000美元的個人積蓄，以及至少1000小時的時間來寫作、打印和郵寄給議員，政客，領導以及任何願意聽我意見的人。結果就是，沒人願意聽，他們甚至普遍認為我在浪費他們的時間。我花了無數的時間在洛杉磯的高速公路上，去參見會議以及任何想要組織力量反對這一暴政的民間團體。然而，我卻發現我們的努力輕易地就被那些經紀人中的叛徒們破壞了，他們想要開始享受所謂的“自由”了。噢，別忘了，我花了這麼多時間和精力在上面，這給我帶來了收入上的損失。 數月的抗爭換來一場空。我們辛辛苦苦的最好結果，就是來自國稅局發言人的一個聲明，聲明他們不會強制執行那條修正條款（想想被騷擾的工程師和科學家）。很快這個聲明成為謊言，而且這個條款（d）開始影響到我（讓我失去退休金）；這些，當然，也許正是那些立法者想要的結果。 再一次地，我的退休金被席捲一空。如果我有常識，我當時真應該徹底放棄工程這個職業，並且永不回頭。
（During 1987, I spent close to $5000 of my 'pocket change', and at least 1000 hours of my time writing, printing, and mailing to any senator, congressman, governor, or slug that might listen; none did, and they universally treated me as if I was wasting their time. I spent countless hours on the LA freeways driving to meetings and any and all of the disorganized professional groups who were attempting to mount a campaign against this atrocity. This, only to discover that our efforts were being easily derailed by a few moles from the brokers who were just beginning to enjoy the windfall from the new declaration of their “freedom”. Oh, and don't forget, for all of the time I was spending on this, I was loosing income that I couldn't bill clients. After months of struggling it had clearly gotten to be a futile exercise. The best we could get for all of our trouble is a pronouncement from an IRS mouthpiece that they weren't going to enforce that provision (read harass engineers and scientists). This immediately proved to be a lie, and the mere existence of the regulation began to have its impact on my bottom line; this, of course, was the intended effect. Again, rewind my retirement plans back to 0 and shift them into idle. If I had any sense, I clearly should have left abandoned engineering and never looked back.）
然而，浪子不知回頭是金，我仍然沉浸在每個星期100個小時的工作中。然後洛杉磯迎來了90年代早期的大蕭條。我們的國家領導人們決定不再需要南加州那些多餘的空軍基地，這些基地被關閉。悲劇性的結果就是導致該地區的經濟劫難，其後果堪比廣為人知的德克薩斯州的存貸慘案。但是，因為政府是造成這一切的根源，沒人會在乎那些年輕的P民們，（因為失去工作）他們不得不放棄貸款購買的房子，這些房子被有政府補助的富有的借貸公司收回。再一次，我失去了我的退休金。 幾年後，隨著一場不成功的婚姻的結束和我商業上的奮鬥，我發現自己的事業終於有些起色。然而，接下來發生了.com泡沫和911夢魘。那時我們的國家領導們決定把所有的航線都停飛，而且不知何時可以重回運行；隨後很久一段時間，“重點”區域比如舊金山處於數月的安全警告期（航空和地面運輸受政府限制）。這讓我聯絡客戶的費用極大上升。諷刺的是，他們在做了這麼多之後，政府用以數以十億美元計的我們的納稅來補貼航空公司（因為交通限令虧損）...和往常一樣，他們（政府）讓我腐爛和死亡，卻用我的錢來救助那些富有的卻缺乏競爭力的他們的“老伙計”！所有這些不幸的事件之後，我的事業沒了，只剩下一些退休金和儲蓄。
（Instead I got busy working 100-hour workweeks. Then came the LA depression of the early 1990s. Our leaders decided that they didn't need the all of those extra Air Force bases they had in Southern California, so they were closed; just like that. The result was economic devastation in the region that rivaled the widely publicized Texas S&L fiasco. However, because the government caused it, no one gave a shit about all of the young families who lost their homes or street after street of boarded up houses abandoned to the wealthy loan companies who received government funds to “shore up” their windfall. Again, I lost my retirement. Years later, after weathering a divorce and the constant struggle trying to build some momentum with my business, I find myself once again beginning to finally pick up some speed. Then came the .COM bust and the 911 nightmare. Our leaders decided that all aircraft were grounded for what seemed like an eternity; and long after that, 'special' facilities like San Francisco were on security alert for months. This made access to my customers prohibitively expensive. Ironically, after what they had done the Government came to the aid of the airlines with billions of our tax dollars … as usual they left me to rot and die while they bailed out their rich, incompetent cronies WITH MY MONEY! After these events, there went my business but not quite yet all of my retirement and savings . ）
那時，我想著也許該換個環境了。再見了加州，我要去奧斯汀（德州首府）試試運氣。然後我搬到了奧斯汀，卻發現這是個人人自我感覺過好卻少有人腳踏實地做工程的地方。我在尋找工作上從來沒遇到過如此艱難的時刻。薪水只有經濟著陸前的三分之一，因為薪酬被3到4家這裡的大公司所把持，而他們在不斷降薪惡性競爭...這種事情發生和司法機關不無關係，司法機關根本不管P民死活，只在乎他們自己和他們“老伙計”的利益。 為了生存，我不得不靠儲蓄和過早消耗退休金度日，結果個人退休儲蓄賬戶裡的錢越來越少。這一年裡，經營的開銷巨大，收入卻是零。那年我沒填退稅表，我覺得沒必要，因為我的收入是零。然而差勁的政府卻不同意。但是他們卻沒有及時通知我以便讓我能夠及時通過法律手段辯護，當我試圖通過法律申訴時已經太晚，法庭告訴我已經過了申訴期。 “正義”讓我損失了1萬元（罰金）。 然後到了現在。有了和註冊會計師打交道的經驗，在那次商業低谷後我發誓再也不進會計師的辦公室。於是我有了新的婚姻，很多筆灰色收入，更別提一大筆新的商業資產和一部鋼琴（雖然我不知道怎麼彈）。仔細考慮之後，我覺得有責任去尋求一下專業的法律幫助。這後來成為一個極大的錯誤。 當我們收到稅表時我很樂觀地相信一切盡在把握。我把我這些年的信息都給了律師比爾·羅斯，比爾幫我填完了表格，結果和我期待的很接近。儘管他忘了把舍利（人名，可能是史塔克的妻子）沒匯報的一筆收入加進去，那筆錢有12700美元。更糟糕的是，他一直知道這筆未報的收入，卻直到東窗事發後的聽證會上才指出來。而他聽證會上的表現像是在為他自己辯護而不是為我辯護。 這讓我被置於災難的中央，逼迫我為和稅收根本無關的交易辯護，為那些我根本不知道和我太太認為根本不重要的事情辯護。結果就是...看看周圍吧。
（By this time, I'm thinking that it might be good for a change. Bye to California, I'll try Austin for a while. So I moved, only to find out that this is a place with a highly inflated sense of self -importance and where damn little real engineering work is done. I've never experienced such a hard time finding work. The rates are 1/3 of what I was earning before the crash, because pay rates here are fixed by the three or four large companies in the area who are in collusion to drive down prices and wages… and this happens because the justice department is all on the take and doesn't give a fuck about serving anyone or anything but themselves and their rich buddies. To survive, I was forced to cannibalize my savings and retirement, the last of which was a small IRA. This came in a year with mammoth expenses and not a single dollar of income. I filed no return that year thinking that because I didn' t have any income there was no need. The sleazy government decided that they disagreed. But they didn't notify me in time for me to launch a legal objection so when I attempted to get a protest filed with the court I was told I was no longer entitled to due process because the time to file ran out. Bend over for another $10,000 helping of justice. So now we come to the present. After my experience with the CPA world, following the business crash I swore that I'd never enter another accountant's office again. But here I am with a new marriage and a boatload of undocumented income, not to mention an expensive new business asset, a piano, which I had no idea how to handle. After considerable thought I decided that it would be irresponsible NOT to get professional help; a very big mistake. When we received the forms back I was very optimistic that they were in order. I had taken all of the years information to Bill Ross, and he came back with results very similar to what I was expecting. Except that he had neglected to include the contents of Sheryl's unreported income; $12,700 worth of it. To make matters worse, Ross knew all along this was missing and I didn't have a clue until he pointed it out in the middle of the audit. By that time it had become brutally evident that he was representing himself and not me. This left me stuck in the middle of this disaster trying to defend transactions that have no relationship to anything tax-related (at least the tax-related transactions were poorly documented). Things I never knew anything about and things my wife had no clue would ever matter to anyone. The end result is… well, just look around.）
我記得曾讀到以前在大蕭條前股票大跌的時候那些富有的銀行家和商人因為一無所有然後跳樓的事情。諷刺的是，60年後，在這個國家，銀行家和商人找到了如何解決經濟問題的方法；他們從中產階級那裡偷竊（然而中產階級卻蒙在鼓裡，選舉是個笑話）以解決他們的經濟危機。當富人們把事情搞砸時，窮人卻要為富人的錯誤去死...（對富人來說）這難道不是個聰明又漂亮的解決方案嗎？ 談到政府機構，聯邦航空局基本上是個效率極其低下的墓碑機構（不出人命根本不屌你P民），但航空局絕不是唯一的例子。最近的木偶總統喬治布什和他的“老伙計”在其執政8年裡無疑讓我們相信了這種批評適合所有的政府部門。它們不會做改變，除非出了人命或者政府裡的人利益受到威脅。在這個從上到下偽善絕頂的政府裡，P民的人命不值幾個錢，它們的謊言和自利的法律也一樣廉價。 我知道，我絕對不是第一個忍受到極限的人。我無法理解，在這個國家為什麼民眾不願再為自己的自由而獻身，我說的民眾不僅僅限於黑人和貧窮的移民們。我知道，在我之前有無數人為此而死，而我之後也會湧現更多。但是，我想說的是，如果我的生命不能作為“計數”的一個的話，我敢肯定醜陋的事情不會改變。我選擇不再對“老大哥”的扒皮抽骨熟視無睹，我選擇不再忽略周圍發生的事情，我選擇不再假裝事情可以繼續下去。我受夠了。
（I remember reading about the stock market crash before the “great” depression and how there were wealthy bankers and businessmen jumping out of windows when they realized they screwed up and lost everything. Isn't it ironic how far we've come in 60 years in this country that they now know how to fix that little economic problem; they just steal from the middle class (who doesn't have any say in it, elections are a joke) to cover their asses and it's “business-as-usual ”. Now when the wealthy fuck up, the poor get to die for the mistakes… isn't that a clever, tidy solution. As government agencies go, the FAA is often justifiably referred to as a tombstone agency, though they are hardly alone. The recent presidential puppet GW Bush and his cronies in their eight years certainly reinforced for all of us that this criticism rings equally true for all of the government. Nothing changes unless there is a body count (unless it is in the interest of the wealthy sows at the government trough). In a government full of hypocrites from top to bottom, life is as cheap as their lies and their self -serving laws. I know I'm hardly the first one to decide I have had all I can stand. It has always been a myth that people have stopped dying for their freedom in this country, and it isn't limited to the blacks, and poor immigrants . I know there have been countless before me and there are sure to be as many after. But I also know that by not adding my body to the count, I insure nothing will change. I choose to not keep looking over my shoulder at “ big brother” while he strips my carcass, I choose not to ignore what is going on all around me, I choose not to pretend that business as usual won't continue; I have just had enough.）
我希望數字（像我這樣的人的數量）越來越大以至於不能被粉飾掉，以至於喚醒那些沉睡的美國殭屍（麻木的民眾）起來暴動；它會席捲一切。我希望我的行為不可避免地觸動政府作出雙重標準的、下意識的反應，這個反應就是他們推出更多更愚蠢更苛刻的對民眾自由的限制---這些限制會驚醒人民，讓他們看清楚這些高傲的政治暴徒極其走狗的本質。可悲的是，雖然我耗盡此生努力相信暴力可以避免，但我終於醒悟，暴力不只是答案，暴力是唯一的答案。在這個殘酷的笑話裡，高高在上的那堆屎們一直知道真相，卻始終利用真相來愚弄和嘲笑我們這群愚昧的P民。
字典上說瘋狂的定義就是不斷做同樣的事卻希望會出現不同的結果（按：此愛因斯坦之語也）。我終於要結束這種瘋狂了。好吧，國稅局的大哥，我們來玩個新把戲吧，你拿走我的一磅肉，可睡好了。
共產主義信條：各盡所能，按需分配。
資本主義信條：斂自愚民，貪者多得。
約.史塔克(1956-2010) 2010年2月18日
（I can only hope that the numbers quickly get too big to be white washed and ignored that the American zombies wake up and revolt; it will take nothing less. I would only hope that by striking a nerve that stimulates the inevitable double standard, knee- jerk government reaction that results in more stupid draconian restrictions people wake up and begin to see the pompous political thugs and their mindless minions for what they are. Sadly, though I spent my entire life trying to believe it wasn't so, but violence not only is the answer, it is the only answer. The cruel joke is that the really big chunks of shit at the top have known this all along and have been laughing, at and using this awareness against, fools like me all along. I saw it written once that the definition of insanity is repeating the same process over and over and expecting the outcome to suddenly be different. I am finally ready to stop this insanity. Well, Mr. Big Brother IRS man, let's try something different; take my pound of flesh and sleep well. The communist creed: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. The capitalist creed: From each according to his gullibility, to each according to his greed. Joe Stack (1956-2010) 02/18/2010）
