Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Straw Man on February 02, 2010, 08:30:11 PM
-
Hey 333 - you keep ranting about all the Marxist/Communist in our country (including the POTUS). Can you show me one thing on this list that even comes close to what we have today
The following is from WIKI: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto
According to the Communist Manifesto, all these were prior conditions for a transition from capitalism to communism, but Marx and Engels later expressed a desire to modernize this passage.
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of the population over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.[8]
According to the Communist Manifesto, all these were prior conditions for a transition from capitalism to communism, but Marx and Engels later expressed a desire to modernize this passage.[9]
-
1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 10 are all being aggressively pursued by liberal Democrats, especially through excessive taxation and federal regulation.
-
Straw, maybe you should have done some more research before posting, like brixton said lots of these are being pursued.
-
Straw, maybe you should have done some more research before posting, like brixton said lots of these are being pursued.
well.....I've been pretty busy
no excuses though
let's start with#1
why should I be worried about the abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes?
-
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
________________________ ________
We are quickly approaching that with massive property taxation to the point where you dont actually own your property.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
________________________ ________________________ _
Who is screaming for that Straw? The left. BTW - many on the left like yourself think taxes are too low and need to go much higher. Additionally, the end of the Bush tax custs effectively hikes the effective tax rates.
The only fair tax is the national flat sales tax with no exemptions whatsoever.
3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
________________________ ________________________ ________
Again - who pushes for that Straw - the right or left. in the year 2010 there is no estate tax because of the bush tax custs, however, next year it goes to 45%! and then 55%! Its pure fucking bullshit because the money has already been taxed many times over and often leads families to take out expensive insurance policies and/or sell of productive assets like farms or businesses to fund the criminals in govt.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
________________________ ________________________ __________
Why bother? The criminal govt already confiscates the property of residents as it is.
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ _________
We already have that via the Federal Reserve. BTW - I see all the time on DU and HP the marxists like yourself screaming for nationalization of the banks by the Govt.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ _____________
"Fairness Doctrine" anyone? ? ?
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
________________________ ________________________ ____________________
Takeover of GM, "open space" laws, "sustainable development" laws, etc. Again who pushes all this crap Straw?
8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
________________________ ________________________ ________________________
Dont know exactly what that means. "Card Check" comes to mind though.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of the population over the country.
________________________ ________________________ _____________________
We are rapidly approaching that with the Fedzilla passing along all sorts of mandates to localtieis which in essence make the localties subservient to the Fed Govt. It was never supposed to be that way. I caN GIVE YOU HUNDREDS OF EXAMPLES OF THIS.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.[8]
________________________ ________________________ ____
We already have that.
________________________ ________________________
Straw, good list and I did not realize how close the left wing of this country actually are to being full blown communists.
-
Yeah that worked out well Straw.
-
Yeah that worked out well Straw.
I did not even realize how close my assertions are.
-
I did not even realize how close my assertions are.
that's because none of them are close
I thought you'd jump on the graduated tax thing first.
You realize that even with rolling back the Bush tax cuts our rates would be exactly what they were under Clinton and lower than they were under Reagan. Were we headed toward Communism when Reagan was in office? And of course taxes are much lower now than they were in the 60's and 70's. Were we closer to communism then than we are now?
Going back to #1 - are you high man?
Property taxes vary widely by state but and even within the state depending on when you bought the property (my neighbor pays 1/3 of what I pay and we have the same house). How does property tax equate to "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes"?
Explain that to me sufficiently and then I'll address the rest of your absurd responses
-
that's because none of them are close
I thought you'd jump on the graduated tax thing first.
You realize that even with rolling back the Bush tax cuts our rates would be exactly what they were under Clinton and lower than they were under Reagan. Were we headed toward Communism when Reagan was in office? And of course taxes are much lower now than they were in the 60's and 70's. Were we closer to communism then than we are now?
Going back to #1 - are you high man?
Property taxes vary widely by state but and even within the state depending on when you bought the property (my neighbor pays 1/3 of what I pay and we have the same house). How does property tax equate to "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes"?
Explain that to me sufficiently and then I'll address the rest of your absurd responses
This is why you are a marxist stooge yourself. You are so brain-dead you dont realize what you are.
I gave brief but accurate statements on each of them. And by the way moron, we have not always had the income tax to fund the govt.
As for your statement about property tax, the higher taxes, regulations, impediments, restrictions, etc, basically make your property not really yours. Dont pay your property taxes and see what happens.
Place a fence within the setback requirements and see what happens.
Cut down some bs tree on some dumb list and see what happens.
You own you property in theory, not reality. You are merely a renter to the govt since if you dont pay your taxes they can insitute foreclosure proceeedings. You dont own squat, you only think you do.
And what about the others Straw?
-
that's because none of them are close
I thought you'd jump on the graduated tax thing first.
You realize that even with rolling back the Bush tax cuts our rates would be exactly what they were under Clinton and lower than they were under Reagan. Were we headed toward Communism when Reagan was in office? And of course taxes are much lower now than they were in the 60's and 70's. Were we closer to communism then than we are now?
Going back to #1 - are you high man?
Property taxes vary widely by state but and even within the state depending on when you bought the property (my neighbor pays 1/3 of what I pay and we have the same house). How does property tax equate to "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes"?
Explain that to me sufficiently and then I'll address the rest of your absurd responses
We have been headed this way for a long time now. Not just under Bush or Obama.
It's sad you aren't worried about private property rights. It's a mainstay of what this country was founded on.
It doesn't matter what the tax rate is...it doesn't address the progressive tax issue which is very unfair, complicated, and meant to cause distrust and disruption among the working class. That is all it is designed to be. You keep arguing about the rate while not addressing this main issue...government loves it, the people don't; what does that tell you?
Big government isn't the answer. Never has been and it never will be.
-
We have been headed this way for a long time now. Not just under Bush or Obama.
It's sad you aren't worried about private property rights. It's a mainstay of what this country was founded on.
It doesn't matter what the tax rate is...it doesn't address the progressive tax issue which is very unfair, complicated, and meant to cause distrust and disruption among the working class. That is all it is designed to be. You keep arguing about the rate while not addressing this main issue...government loves it, the people don't; what does that tell you?
Big government isn't the answer. Never has been and it never will be.
Straw believes in every nearly every tenent of the communist manifesto as listed above yet doesnt have the balls to call himself a communist.
-
This is why you are a marxist stooge yourself. You are so brain-dead you dont realize what you are.
I gave brief but accurate statements on each of them. And by the way moron, we have not always had the income tax to fund the govt.
As for your statement about property tax, the higher taxes, regulations, impediments, restrictions, etc, basically make your property not really yours. Dont pay your property taxes and see what happens.
Place a fence within the setback requirements and see what happens.
Cut down some bs tree on some dumb list and see what happens.
You own you property in theory, not reality. You are merely a renter to the govt since if you dont pay your taxes they can insitute foreclosure proceeedings. You dont own squat, you only think you do.
And what about the others Straw?
Bingo! Take it from a surveyor that deals with these things everyday! You don't own your property! Habeus Corpus wasn't intended for private developers to take your land but guess what? They can and do use it in court. Fucking sad.
-
Anyone who truly believes they own their property is delusional. Its a complete farce and Straw needs to STFU before this thread really backfires on him since I have not even gone into depth on these issues.
Almost every thing he listed I can discuss at length as to how it is occuring here daily and pushed by the left wing.
-
Anyone who truly believes they own their property is delusional. Its a complete farce and Straw needs to STFU before this thread really backfires on him since I have not even gone into depth on these issues.
Almost every thing he listed I can discuss at length as to how it is occuring here daily and pushed by the left wing.
I live in a deed state
I absolutely own my property
you're a lawyer right?
-
I live in a deed state
I absolutely own my property
you're a lawyer right?
Don't pay your property taxes and see how much you "own".
Try cutting down a "protected tree" on your property and see what happenes.
Read the "Kelo" decision on eminent domain and see how the courts now regard your property rights.
You think you own it, but you really dont.
-
A Layman's Look at the Communist Manifesto
by John Keller
www.lewrockwell.com
________________________ ________________________ ________-
The Communist Manifesto is one of those documents I was aware of, but had never taken the time to actually read. As a woefully undereducated product of the public education system, I somehow managed to slip by the class that required reading of the old Marx and Engels classic. So, in the course of continuing liberty self-education, I found a translation on the web in order to better understand this failed canon of anti-freedom. My reaction: wow. The Communist Manifesto, written in 1848, looks a lot like the Democratic Party Positions, written in 2000.
The Pseudo-History of Class Warfare
The first chapter of the Manifesto is a rambling pseudo-history that rails against the bourgeois as the historically re-incarnated oppressors vis-à-vis the continually oppressed proletariat. I was reminded of the slave reparations, minority oppression, women oppression, and other Democratic Party class based arguments. The second chapter is a lengthy list of "Bourgeois" complaints against the generally perceived Communist aims, and the communist response to them. Among the Bourgeois complaints the manifesto defends are: abolition of family, abolition of religion, socialization of education, and abolition of nations. Does this remind us of current complaints within the political system? Interestingly, the manifesto presents the following observation regarding the abolition of nations:
National differences and antagonism between peoples are daily more and more vanishing, owing to the development of the bourgeoisie, to freedom of commerce, to the world market, to uniformity in the mode of production and in the conditions of life corresponding thereto.
This is a fairly prescient assessment, given the franchise-ization of the world. As an aside, I spent 9 months in various cities as part of my job in 1998. The thing that surprised me most in my tour of 30-odd medium and large American town was the uniformity. Like Edward Norton in Fight Club, I found the same hotel soaps in the same hotels, next to the same Applebee’s or Chili’s. It was Generica, not America. That, however, is a different article; one that addresses how government zoning laws and tax schemes aide and abet big business in destroying small, local competition. Back to the original point, however, I wonder what Marx and Engels saw as the downside to the vanishing of "antagonism between peoples" that bourgeoisie and freedom of commerce had brought about. I suppose it was their follow-on predication, which is wrong.
The supremacy of the proletariat will cause them (national differences and antagonism) to vanish still faster.
The Tyranny of Democracy
Like any wacko manifesto, the Communist Manifesto has just enough facts, just enough history, and just enough lucid observations to cover the other 90% of it, which is utter crap. One of the lucid observations in the Manifesto, is that the proletariat constitute the majority of the population. The communists realized that by organizing the proletariat politically, they could just vote themselves more power. This is one of the two the real gems of chapter two. It explains a great deal about the tyranny of democracy, and the modus operandi of our current political parties.
The Politics of Jealousy
The other gem in chapter two immediately follows the observation that the proletariat must first seize control of "political supremacy". Once that is accomplished, well, Marx and Engels say it best: "The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the state…" The Democrats, like the Communists, realize that by dividing people into groups, all with a chip on their shoulder against the oppressor, they can vote themselves chunks of the oppressors’ property. Let’s call this the politics of jealousy and victimhood. I suppose this explains how communism could organize itself, at least initially. There will always be people of extraordinary talent running businesses, inventing new things, and generally pushing the boundaries of science, technology, and commerce. Let’s use Bill Gates as an example of this natural elite. For every Bill Gates, there are a thousand Joe Programmers at Microsoft who are smart and talented. They are the second line of the elite, in Marx’s view, the bourgeois. For every Joe Programmer at Microsoft, there are a thousand Mary Secretaries, a thousand Bob Lawnmower, a thousand Doug Factoryworker, and Susie Governmentbureaucrat; these are the proletariat in the Marxian view. None of them have the combination of mental ability, circumstance, and determination that Bill Gates has, and most of them know it. However, these thousands have a lot more votes than Bill and his programmers. Those votes are political power, and the Marxists know it.
The 10 Measures of Communism
And how will the proletariat use their political clout to wrest capital away from the capitalists? With the 10 measures Marx and Engels laid out in 1848. As the master communists aver, the exact implementation will vary slightly from county to country, but will follow the general thrust of the measures.
Here are the 10 measures the proletariat will use to bring about the full realization of the communist utopian dream, once they have the political power:
Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.
Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.
Take a second to compare them with the Democratic Party Positions. Note that the communists speak in terms of oppressed and oppressor, guilty rich, and noble worker, just like the Democrats. Solely by observing the title link of the various positions, you can see the Democrats place no value on Americans in general, but play race and class warfare by dividing people into ethnic, social, gender, and special interest groups.
Observations on The Communist Goals
Here are the 10 points from the Communist Manifesto again, with a few observations.
Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
The communist revolution is about half successful here. Private property rights are eroded daily in this country. Property Tax in most areas goes directly to fund the "public purpose" of public education. (confer #10). The US government is the single largest land owner, but instead of selling off "public" land, the government continues to acquire more under the guide of "protecting wilderness" or some other such nonsense. The land under direct federal control is not the only property held by the government. The use of executive branch regulatory edicts to put severe restrictions on private property has the effect of putting much more property in the hands of the government. Do you really own that South Florida beachfront property if you can’t build a beach house on it? As long as it’s to save the Red Mangrove, Loggerhead Turtle, and Brown Pelican, you see.
A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
Can someone please explain how a flat tax RATE is not already graduated? A truly flat tax would be something like $500 per person per year. A graduated tax is 5% per person per year. A punitive tax on innovation and achievement is our current manipulative system. When historians look back at the United States, they will ask how, in this day and age of instant access to information and history, a people could fail to see the obvious parallels between the Gestapo, the KGB, and the IRS. They all use fear, intimidation, spying, and invasion of privacy to keep people in line. This awful agency should be abolished and replaced with nothing. The tax code is such an obvious tool of social manipulation that it absolutely disgusts me. Do you think its any coincidence that the tax code has a marriage penalty, and the number of unmarried couples living together has gone up? Check off one of the previously stated goals of the communists as partially achieved: abolition of the family.
Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
Well, the current Estate Tax rate of 55% means we’re just over half way towards this one. Part of the communist goal of ultimate state power is the destruction of the family (outlined in chapter 2 of the manifesto). One of the ties that bind families together, as well as encourage parents to work for the betterment of their children is the promise of leaving an estate or inheritance. By legislating that the property owned and accumulated over a lifetime can’t be passed on, we help replace the idea of the parent and family with the idea of a benevolent state. Further, the idea of ownership of one’s labor and the property earned by it is undermined. One of the tests of ownership is the ability to grant a thing to another person. If you aren’t free to do that, you don’t really own something.
Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
The US has relatively few emigrants, but we have plenty of rebels. While assorted tax resistors and government regulatory resistors fall in the rebel category, the new favorite catch-all prosecutorial group is "suspected" drug dealers. Suppose I sell my 1986 Honda CRX for $800 cash, then drive to the bank to deposit it, get stopped on the way, searched (under duress, naturally), and the cop decides the cash might be used for drugs. Buh-bye cash. I just might be a drug dealer. I’m suspected, and suspicion is all it takes. No need to worry about due process or anything, kind of like Salem, circa 1692. This is the drug war. Police Forces can confiscate your entire house if they find one pot leaf in it. The same holds true for your car, or boat. Having a pile of money that could be used to buy drugs is suspicious.
The drug war has flown this one in under the Radar of most commie-fighting Republicans who roundly support the new prohibition, but as Marx and Engels noted "The forms these take will vary from country to country". The Communists are ends-justify-the means kind of folks.
Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
Done. Don’t think so? Quick, who’s Chairman of the Federal Reserve? That’s right, our good friend, Alan Greenspan. He and the rest of the board set the prime-lending rate, and control the money supply. In my Keynesian slanted Macro Economic class, they called this "fiscal and monetary policy". After a good dose of Austrian economics, I now spot it as "Objective 5 of the Communist Manifesto – Government Command Economy" or "taxation via inflation". Control of the banking system by the fed is so complete that Wall Street, the supposed paragon of free-market capitalism, wags up and down to the mumblings of a single un-elected bureaucrat.
Centralization of the means of communication and transport in he hands of the state.
AT&T was a government sanctioned monopoly for 70 years. Thanks to the heroic Carter Phone Company making a phone other than black, and suing to break the government imposed monopoly, the communications industry has been making spectacular progress after begin stifled for three-quarters of a century, thanks to Uncle Stalin, errr, Sam. Jeremy Sapienza asks if we might not be online in 1950 if not for Intellectual Property restrictions. Given that the telephone took 67 years to get to 50% of US households thanks to the strangling effects of monopoly status, compared with 6 years for the World Wide Web to hit 50%, Mr. Sapienza may be right.
While the free market has broken the communications impasse electronically, the real world still has only one choice for "first class" mail, and the transportation system is still in the hands of the state. Think about this the next time you’re in traffic. When was the last time you went to a grocery store where the checkout lines were routinely so frustratingly long that the patrons started shooting each other. I would love nothing better than for a private company to start leasing tracts of land on the north side of Atlanta, build an outer perimeter based on profit sharing of toll revenue collected from wireless tags, and then watch the MARTA and highway planning goofballs tear their hair. What kind of organization actually plans 20 years down the road when traffic jams are driving people bonkers today? A government agency of course. Back to the communist aspects of this, the central planners love the idea that everyone has the same kind of transportation. How dare we express individuality, or class distinction based on the kind of car we drive.
Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
Governor Gray Davis of California has a few things to say about this: namely, he’s all for it. In fact, having wrecked havoc on California’s electric and utility companies through price controls, he’s proposed confiscating them and giving them to the state to run. Governor Davis, welcome to the pantheon of fellow communist confiscators: Mao, Stalin, and Castro.
Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
Marx and Engels knew that growing food in a collective commune would require some of the very productivity advances brought about by capitalism and the industrial revolution in order to supply anything above a subsistence level. The solution for them was that everyone would work, and agriculture would use industrial techniques. In this analysis, they were correct: agriculture in the 21st century is often referred to as agribusiness. It looks a lot more like steel refining than the picturesque farmer of yore, tilling his fields behind an ox, or the post Great Depression family farmer on his tractor. Hurray for it. Getting food was the daily occupation for most of humanity for as long as we’ve been on this planet. In 1800, it’s estimated that 80% of the American workforce was involved in farming. In 1990, it’s estimated that 3% of the American workforce was involved in farming. 3% of the population provides food for the other 97%, of their own free will, without hoarding, price fixing, or the other bugga-bears of the free market.
The modern form of the industrial army is undeniably the union. Just like an army, unions use force to get their way. Sometimes its physical force, other times political force. I fully support the freedom of and freedom from association. If a group of workers wants to form a club and bargain collectively, so be it. If their employer wants to fire them all together, well, that’s fine too. Naturally, the unions, consisting of the democratic mob, have passed legislation making it legal for them to organize, but illegal for their employer to terminate them. Forward the communist army!
Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
The original aim of this communist policy seems to be melding the oppressor and oppressed classes: a mass of proletariat concentrated in the city, a countryside of peasant farmers, and a few aristocracy with massive tracts of hereditary land. Notice the reference to "equable distribution" of the populace. This can only be accomplished by land redistribution. The communists saw the distinction between city dwellers, townies, and country folk. They knew the city, filled with factory workers, was their natural base from which to mount an assault on the property rights conscious farmers and aristocratic landowners. While moving people into the countryside seems antithetical to today’s environmental movement, the two are actually after the same goal: reduction of property rights. The greens realize the communist goal by forcing the people out of the country, and into the city and suburbs. Think Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge in reverse. Thus, the common thread in these nihilistic, authoritarian political movements is revealed.
Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.
Well, we’ve certainly reached the education camp ideal espoused in the communist manifesto. Instead of universal access to "free" education, we now have universal compulsory indoctrination. Look at the assault on home-schoolers for further proof. I asked a friend of mine who recently graduated with an education degree what she learned in her degree major classes. The response frightened me; she had learned how to control classroom behavior. She told me it usually "takes 3 or 4 years before children are broken in to the idea of a teacher in charge". She teaches 2nd graders. Stories of public school officials promoting political agendas are legion. Almost universally, that agenda takes its cues from the communist manifesto, and its modern keepers.
Back to point 10 of the Manifesto. The combination of education with industrial production looks exactly like the work to school programs that find such favor with our public education system. The abolition of factory slave labor, and the preservation of third world "habitat" are two verses in the same tribal chant of the neo-communist environmental movement. This is all in the name of preventing the third world country de jour in cahoots with Nike from wrecking the natural habitat of their beautiful swamps and deserts while exploiting the children, of course. The natural consequence that the now unemployed children will have to beg or prostitute themselves to stay fed is ignored by our enlightened watermelon (red with a thin green skin) protestors.
Conclusion
Am I suggesting some massive conspiracy to infiltrate the Democratic (and to a lesser degree the Republican) Party by the International Commune? No. What I am suggesting is that communists gravitate towards political parties that see no wrong in enforcing edicts via state control. I am also suggesting that people with authoritarian tendencies will never come out and directly say that they want to run your life. They’ll tell you to support some piece of legislation in the name of fairness, or the environment, or safety, or the children, or "our" future, or humanitarian intervention, or national security. Those who oppose are branded heartless, or selfish, or sadistic, or cowardly, or stupid, or greedy. The collectivists make the claim to the moral high ground based on the false assumption that they know what’s best for someone else, and how dare you get in the way. The worst part may be the fact that most Americans don’t realize the stated goals of communism, and the means to achieve those goals are at work in our society today. I suppose most people assume the communists will come out and say they want to run your life. No one can be enslaved all at once; no one would volunteer for it. But the incremental approach to control is insidious, and dishonest. It doesn’t speak its name, since detection would render people alert to it, and ready to destroy it. Well, folks, here’s your wakeup call. You will know the authoritarians are attempting to gain control by reading their Manifesto in their own words. It’s plain as day if you take the time to read it.
________________________ ________________________ ______
Exactly what I said above on almost all points.
-
A "deed" state?
You "absolutely" own your property?
Give me a break. Wake up and smell the coffee straw. You couldn't be more wrong on this stuff.
The rule against perpatuities, the death tax, the estate tax, EPA regulations, property taxes, zoning restrictions, eminant domain, etc.-- Regulation after regulation after regulation errodes the value of your ownership rights and most do not realize it.
-
I live in a deed state
I absolutely own my property
you're a lawyer right?
333 has you on that one. What about if you have any utility easements running through your property? While they are needed they are not your property yet you pay for the taxes on that property and are required to maintain it. Why would you pay for, get taxed, and have to maintain property that you don't own?
-
A "deed" state?
You "absolutely" own your property?
Give me a break. Wake up and smell the coffee straw. You couldn't be more wrong on this stuff.
The rule against perpatuities, the death tax, the estate tax, EPA regulations, property taxes, zoning restrictions, eminant domain, etc.-- Regulation after regulation after regulation errodes the value of your ownership rights and most do not realize it.
"Adverse Posession" as well GW. Remember those cases?
-
Don't pay your property taxes and see how much you "own".
Try cutting down a "protected tree" on your property and see what happenes.
Read the "Kelo" decision on eminent domain and see how the courts now regard your property rights.
You think you own it, but you really dont.
you think if I don't pay my property taxes that proves I don't own my property?
you think because some cities have ordinances regarding trees that I don't own my property?
from the little I know about it, I don't agree with the Kelo decision but that really has to do with state/local governments.
Oddly, Bush issued an executive order instructing the government to use emminent domain and I'm not aware that Obama has done so. Wouldn't that make Bush more of a Commie that Obama.
I live in a nice residential subdivision and when the government starts wiping these out en masse to build communist re-edcuation centers then you might be on to something. Right now you're just completely deluded on this subject
-
You realize that even with rolling back the Bush tax cuts our rates would be exactly what they were under Clinton and lower than they were under Reagan. Were we headed toward Communism when Reagan was in office? And of course taxes are much lower now than they were in the 60's and 70's. Were we closer to communism then than we are now?
Going back to #1 - are you high man?
Property taxes vary widely by state but and even within the state depending on when you bought the property (my neighbor pays 1/3 of what I pay and we have the same house). How does property tax equate to "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes"?
Explain that to me sufficiently and then I'll address the rest of your absurd responses
What are you smoking ?
When Reagan was elected, the top Income Tax was already at 70%, and before he was done, it was at 28%
Take a look: (Reagan was elected in 1980, and his last year in office was 1988)
(http://s158.photobucket.com/albums/t106/OnlyObvious/Tax_Rates/TopTaxBracket_TaxRate.jpg)
http://s158.photobucket.com/albums/t106/OnlyObvious/Tax_Rates/TopTaxBracket_TaxRate.jpg
-
you think if I don't pay my property taxes that proves I don't own my property?
you think because some cities have ordinances regarding trees that I don't own my property?
from the little I know about it, I don't agree with the Kelo decision but that really has to do with state/local governments.
Oddly, Bush issued an executive order instructing the government to use emminent domain and I'm not aware that Obama has done so. Wouldn't that make Bush more of a Commie that Obama.
I live in a nice residential subdivision and when the government starts wiping these out en masse to build communist re-edcuation centers then you might be on to something. Right now you're just completely deluded on this subject
Kelo was a SC decision that changed eminent domain laws radically. Read on it. In fact, that decision to me was the one I was begging Palin would spit out in the Couric interview.
If anyone asked me that question, KELO would have come out immediately since it was such an assault on property rights.
-
you think if I don't pay my property taxes that proves I don't own my property?
you think because some cities have ordinances regarding trees that I don't own my property?
from the little I know about it, I don't agree with the Kelo decision but that really has to do with state/local governments.
Oddly, Bush issued an executive order instructing the government to use emminent domain and I'm not aware that Obama has done so. Wouldn't that make Bush more of a Commie that Obama.
I live in a nice residential subdivision and when the government starts wiping these out en masse to build communist re-edcuation centers then you might be on to something. Right now you're just completely deluded on this subject
Did you read the article I posted?
-
What are you smoking ?
When Reagan was elected, the top Income Tax was already at 70%, and before he was done, it was at 28%
Take a look: (Reagan was elected in 1980, and his last year in office was 1988)
(http://s158.photobucket.com/albums/t106/OnlyObvious/Tax_Rates/TopTaxBracket_TaxRate.jpg)
http://s158.photobucket.com/albums/t106/OnlyObvious/Tax_Rates/TopTaxBracket_TaxRate.jpg
Reagan raised taxes 11 times (and Bush 1 raised them too) including the largest corporate tax increase in history, increased social security withtholding (and then was the first POTUS to borrow against it) and, oh yeah, massively increased the federal debt too
http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/01/newsflash-ronald-reagan-raised-taxes-you-idiots/
-
Reagan cut the top bracket by 42%
To this day, many Democrats still blame Reagan for cutting taxes too much
-
Kelo was a SC decision that changed eminent domain laws radically. Read on it. In fact, that decision to me was the one I was begging Palin would spit out in the Couric interview.
If anyone asked me that question, KELO would have come out immediately since it was such an assault on property rights.
I'm not a fan of this decision at all (seems odd that Bush would sign an executive order affirming it - why don't you ever call him a Commie).
It seems unless you have absolute sovereignty over your property then we must be slouching toward a communist state. There is no middle ground right? It's either all or nothing and if you don't have "all" then we must be heading toward communism. If that's what you choose to believe thats your choice. Nothing you provided so far convinces me to agree with you but I'm certainly still open to more information.
Shit, if you're a real Commie Hunter you should be outing Bush for his land grab of the property surrounding Ranger Stadium. Let me know when Obama starts doing something like that
-
I'm not a fan of this decision at all (seems odd that Bush would sign an executive order affirming it - why don't you ever call him a Commie).
It seems unless you have absolute sovereignty over your property then we must be slouching toward a communist state. There is no middle ground right? It's either all or nothing and if you don't have "all" then we must be heading toward communism. If that's what you choose to believe thats your choice. Nothing you provided so far convinces me to agree with you but I'm certainly still open to more information.
Shit, if you're a real Commie Hunter you should be outing Bush for his land grab of the property surrounding Ranger Stadium. Let me know when Obama starts doing something like that
Dude - this is way too easy.
Have you read what Obama did to many of the GM & Chrysler dealerships?
-
Reagan cut the top bracket by 42%
To this day, many Democrats still blame Reagan for cutting taxes too much
they probably wouldn't have minded if only he hadn't racked up the federal debt more than all the other POTUS's before him put together
what's the point of tax cuts when you leave behind massive new debt?
-
you think if I don't pay my property taxes that proves I don't own my property?
you think because some cities have ordinances regarding trees that I don't own my property?
from the little I know about it, I don't agree with the Kelo decision but that really has to do with state/local governments.
Oddly, Bush issued an executive order instructing the government to use emminent domain and I'm not aware that Obama has done so. Wouldn't that make Bush more of a Commie that Obama.
I live in a nice residential subdivision and when the government starts wiping these out en masse to build communist re-edcuation centers then you might be on to something. Right now you're just completely deluded on this subject
Yes, if you don't pay your property taxes you lose your property. Therefore you don't own it. A city ordinance should never matter on your own private property. What about government owned easements that you paid for when you bought the property, you pay taxes on that property, and you have to maintain it.
You are missing the point once again by simply comparing Obama to Bush and vice versa.
-
I'm not a fan of this decision at all (seems odd that Bush would sign an executive order affirming it - why don't you ever call him a Commie).
It seems unless you have absolute sovereignty over your property then we must be slouching toward a communist state. There is no middle ground right? It's either all or nothing and if you don't have "all" then we must be heading toward communism. If that's what you choose to believe thats your choice. Nothing you provided so far convinces me to agree with you but I'm certainly still open to more information.
Shit, if you're a real Commie Hunter you should be outing Bush for his land grab of the property surrounding Ranger Stadium. Let me know when Obama starts doing something like that
Yes, I should have COMPLETE sovereignty over my own property as private property is a mainstay of our Republic. Our government has eroded our rights away for some time now and it has to stop. You keep thinking you own your property and don't pay your taxes on it. Just do it to see what happens. The ownership of private property is what made this country great...it seems your okay with government having a say so over your property.
-
they probably wouldn't have minded if only he hadn't racked up the federal debt more than all the other POTUS's before him put together
what's the point of tax cuts when you leave behind massive new debt?
Good point and the same can be said why should we be raising taxes if we are still having a huge deficit, no straw?
The issue is and has always been the outrageous level of spending on all levels and the govt making committments it cannot ever hope to meet.
-
Yes, I should have COMPLETE sovereignty over my own property as private property is a mainstay of our Republic. Our government has eroded our rights away for some time now and it has to stop. You keep thinking you own your property and don't pay your taxes on it. Just do it to see what happens. The ownership of private property is what made this country great...it seems your okay with government having a say so over your property.
When you believe in the tenents of the far left, they dont even consider property rights as being important by and large.
As for the income tax situation, when coupled with all the other taxes we are forced to pay, I simply dont know why people dont make a moral argument that it is inherently immoral to have to work 50% of the year for the govt.
To me that is slavery.
-
Good point and the same can be said why should we be raising taxes if we are still having a huge deficit, no straw?
The issue is and has always been the outrageous level of spending on all levels and the govt making committments it cannot ever hope to meet.
Obama "raising of taxes" is mostly letting the Bush tax cuts expire (the very tax cuts that helped exacerbate the deficti and debt of the last 8 years)
Spending is a tougher issue. History has shown that federal spending in our own economy during times of economic downturn can help but if Obama really wanted to tackle spending he would start with military spending. If that's off the table then any other spending cut is merely a token
-
Yes, I should have COMPLETE sovereignty over my own property as private property is a mainstay of our Republic. Our government has eroded our rights away for some time now and it has to stop. You keep thinking you own your property and don't pay your taxes on it. Just do it to see what happens. The ownership of private property is what made this country great...it seems your okay with government having a say so over your property.
do you own property?
has it ever worked in a way that gives you complete sovereignty.
for example - should you be allowed to buy a residential property and then turn it into a business such as an auto repair shop for example. Should you be allowed to dispose of toxic chemicals on your property. Afterall, you own it and you should be able to do whatever you want with it right? You probably would like running water and eletricity but you don't think utilities should have easments on your property to provide such services. You'd probably like the road in front of your home to be maintained but you don't want the government charging you property tax to pay for it right?
-
do you own property?
has it ever worked in a way that gives you complete sovereignty.
for example - should you be allowed to buy a residential property and then turn it into a business such as an auto repair shop for example. Should you be allowed to dispose of toxic chemicals on your property. Afterall, you own it and you should be able to do whatever you want with it right? You probably would like running water and eletricity but you don't think utilities should have easments on your property to provide such services. You'd probably like the road in front of your home to be maintained but you don't want the government charging you property tax to pay for it right?
The difference is that those things are usually dealt with a fine on the homeowner, not a lien, encumbrance, or mark on the title.
-
Straw, you think that laws vary state to state regarding the rights of home ownership yet which party wants to eliminate state's rights (or render them ineffective) and decide everything with a FEDERAL mandate or regulation?
-
do you own property?
has it ever worked in a way that gives you complete sovereignty.
for example - should you be allowed to buy a residential property and then turn it into a business such as an auto repair shop for example. Should you be allowed to dispose of toxic chemicals on your property. Afterall, you own it and you should be able to do whatever you want with it right? You probably would like running water and eletricity but you don't think utilities should have easments on your property to provide such services. You'd probably like the road in front of your home to be maintained but you don't want the government charging you property tax to pay for it right?
Let me clarify...I shouldn't have said complete sovereignty.
No, people shouldn't be able to do that in residential areas. I'm well aware of zoning ordinances and those are needed but at the same time do not cost the homeowner/property owner anything directly.
1. Roads are supposed to be paid for with gas taxes. Even here that's what they are SUPPOSED to pay for. Can't say that they are.
2. Easements themselves are not the problem...It's the fact that I don't own the property and am being taxed on it(hence easement statements on recorded plats). They run across your property as we all know; the point is they are still NOT your property yet you have to pay for them when you buy the property(which increases profits for the developer) and also pay taxes on every year. I pay for my utilities which private companies maintain, and also install when a subdivision is being built. I shouldn't be paying the government taxes on property that I don't own and have to maintain. Not to mention the fact that easements take up yard space and can not be improved upon. You are just thinking easements in the realm of utilities. I have seen, worked on, and drawn drainage and ingress/egress easements that take up more than half of the yard. Again, why is a person having to buy said property(they will NEVER own) and then pay taxes on it.
3. Again, it doesn't change the fact that if you don't pay your property taxes you lose your property.
-
they probably wouldn't have minded if only he hadn't racked up the federal debt more than all the other POTUS's before him put together
what's the point of tax cuts when you leave behind massive new debt?
Reagan's tax cuts shows that, as a result of the cuts, tax revenues increased substantially in the next 10 years.
The Democrats controlled Congress. Reagan tried to get Tip O'Neil to cut spending, but to no avail.
-
Reagan's tax cuts shows that, as a result of the cuts, tax revenues increased substantially in the next 10 years.
The Democrats controlled Congress. Reagan tried to get Tip O'Neil to cut spending, but to no avail.
Democrats complaining about spending by Reagan and Bush are complete phonies since they always neglect to mention the congresses they deal with. Yes bush did horribly when he had the narrow GOP majority, however the spending ramped up when Pelosi took over.
Additionally, the Democrats' biggest complaint was that Bush or Reagan did not spend enough!
-
Let me clarify...I shouldn't have said complete sovereignty.
No, people shouldn't be able to do that in residential areas. I'm well aware of zoning ordinances and those are needed but at the same time do not cost the homeowner/property owner anything directly.
1. Roads are supposed to be paid for with gas taxes. Even here that's what they are SUPPOSED to pay for. Can't say that they are.
2. Easements themselves are not the problem...It's the fact that I don't own the property and am being taxed on it(hence easement statements on recorded plats). They run across your property as we all know; the point is they are still NOT your property yet you have to pay for them when you buy the property(which increases profits for the developer) and also pay taxes on every year. I pay for my utilities which private companies maintain, and also install when a subdivision is being built. I shouldn't be paying the government taxes on property that I don't own and have to maintain. Not to mention the fact that easements take up yard space and can not be improved upon. You are just thinking easements in the realm of utilities. I have seen, worked on, and drawn drainage and ingress/egress easements that take up more than half of the yard. Again, why is a person having to buy said property(they will NEVER own) and then pay taxes on it.
3. Again, it doesn't change the fact that if you don't pay your property taxes you lose your property.
If you don't pay property tax you will lose your property. Is that really such an injustice?
If this were actually a communist country in the traditional sense you wouldn't have to worry about property tax because you would never get to own property. According to some here that's where we're headed so I don't really need to worry about my taxes because the state will soon step in and take my property and probably make it housing for communist party workers
you may not like or agree with property tax but you know the rules going it
you always have the choice of not purchasing property or moving to a state with very low property taxes (the variances are huge from state to state)
-
If you don't pay property tax you will lose your property. Is that really such an injustice?
If this were actually a communist country in the traditional sense you wouldn't have to worry about property tax because you would never get to own property. According to some here that's where we're headed so I don't really need to worry about my taxes because the state will soon step in and take my property and probably make it housing for communist party workers
you may not like or agree with property tax but you know the rules going it
you always have the choice of not purchasing property or moving to a state with very low property taxes (the variances are huge from state to state)
Straw, but what happens when the local govts ramp up the property tax so high that:
No 1. it effectively forces people from "their land"
and/or
No. 2 it makes your home unmarketable and or worth less due to the afixed price tag that comes in year after year etc?
Where I live, people pay insane taxes and it is driving people out of the state. Its horrible.
-
Straw, but what happens when the local govts ramp up the property tax so high that:
No 1. it effectively forces people from "their land"
and/or
No. 2 it makes your home unmarketable and or worth less due to the afixed price tag that comes in year after year etc?
Where I live , people pay insane taxes and it is driving people out of the state. Its horrible.
I live in CA and we have prop 13 so my neighbor who owns the same house as me pays about 1/3 of what I pay in property taxes
-
I live in CA and we have prop 13 so my neighbor who owns the same house as me pays about 1/3 of what I pay in property taxes
Its truly a bad way to finance the govt since you are basically a target with a big fat bullseye on your chest since there is little you can do about.
-
Its truly a bad way to finance the govt since you are basically a target with a big fat bullseye on your chest since there is little you can do about.
I can always choose not to buy property
-
thats hilarious...3333 is so predictable...its sickening now...grasping at straws...no pun
-
If you don't pay property tax you will lose your property. Is that really such an injustice?
If this were actually a communist country in the traditional sense you wouldn't have to worry about property tax because you would never get to own property. According to some here that's where we're headed so I don't really need to worry about my taxes because the state will soon step in and take my property and probably make it housing for communist party workers
you may not like or agree with property tax but you know the rules going it
you always have the choice of not purchasing property or moving to a state with very low property taxes (the variances are huge from state to state)
Yes, because that negates the benefits of owning private proeperty which again is a basic tenet of our Constitution. You say that a person can choose not to own land but that is exactly what the government wants. The lack of private land ownership just creates more dependency on said government...private land ownership is a very real right in this country and property taxes only help to discourage and even prevent that right.
-
Again, you are turning this discussion away from your initial question. You don't own the land if the government can take it away from you in any way, shape, or form period!
-
thats hilarious...3333 is so predictable...its sickening now...grasping at straws...no pun
Like what Mal? Name one thing I said that does not apply?
Did you read the article I posted?
Probably not of course.
-
We are quickly approaching that with massive property taxation to the point where you dont actually own your property.
Dude thats just not true...At all.. What the shit is that crappy ass Glen Beck type link...1+2=6
::)
-
We are quickly approaching that with massive property taxation to the point where you dont actually own your property.
Dude thats just not true...At all.. What the shit is that crappy ass Glen Beck type link...1+2=6
::)
Have you read any of the MANY posts explaining how you dont own your home or are you just spouting ignorant crap again with no understanding of the issue?
If the govt can tax you from your home and foreclose on you for not paying property tax, EVEN AFTER YOU PAID YOUR MORTGAGE, than who really owns your home Mal?
-
Have you read any of the MANY posts explaining how you dont own your home or are you just spouting ignorant crap again with no understanding of the issue?
If the govt can tax you from your home and foreclose on you for not paying property tax, EVEN AFTER YOU PAID YOUR MORTGAGE, than who really owns your home Mal?
So youre saying obama invented property tax cha cha?
-
So youre saying obama invented property tax cha cha?
Did I say that anywhere in this thread?
-
"(including the POTUS). Can you show me one thing on this list that even comes close to what we have today"
And then you went on with your tirade
-
Again, you are turning this discussion away from your initial question. You don't own the land if the government can take it away from you in any way, shape, or form period!
seriously - what % of homeowners have lost their property (I'm guessing it's a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of 1%) and they dont just "take it" and not in any way, shape or form.
-
"(including the POTUS). Can you show me one thing on this list that even comes close to what we have today"
And then you went on with your tirade
It wasnt a tirade, I posted facts and realities for each of the ten things.
As far as Obama goes, I posted months ago the huge impact the Crap & Tax bill had on real estate. That treasonous POFS bill created a national building code, had retro-fit mandates before you could sell your home, etc.
I forgot that in my initial post. Thanks for reminding me Mal.
So yes, Obama did try to do this crap.
-
Haha 333 getting owned! Obama isn't a Commie in fact i doubt you would even know what a commie was/is if he/she looked you in the face. You're obsessed with something that isn't true. Yet again.
-
Haha 333 getting owned! Obama isn't a Commie in fact i doubt you would even know what a commie was/is if he/she looked you in the face. You're obsessed with something that isn't true. Yet again.
Did you even read the fucking thread you fool?
I posted eough evidence on this thread along with others showing very clearly that the agenda of the RAT party is directly aligned with rhw communist manifesto.
Please show me where I was "owned"? In fact, it is your left wing clown car, by very definition of Marx himself, that are textbook marxist communists.
-
Please, 33's destroying people in this thread. I almost feel ba....nah, I guess I don't.
-
Please, 33's destroying people in this thread. I almost feel ba....nah, I guess I don't.
I wish it were a little harder The Skip.
I did not even bring up Obama, and then Mal did, and then I remembered some of the provisions in the Cap & Trade bill, such as the retrofit mandates and then I wish I would have included Obama in the first place.
As for KC - he is an admitted marxist, so I have no idea what the hell he is talking about since everything he wants is in Straws Top 10 wish list by Marx.
-
Did you even read the fucking thread you fool?
I posted eough evidence on this thread along with others showing very clearly that the agenda of the RAT party is directly aligned with rhw communist manifesto.
Please show me where I was "owned"? In fact, it is your left wing clown car, by very definition of Marx himself, that are textbook marxist communists.
I don't care to read your drivvle 333. It's the same scare mongering words. The same bullsh*t. It's just fun to watch you squirm under the microscope and scramble to back up your nonsense. You've proven nothing other than you believe in some conspiracy by the left to make America a communist country. ::)
-
I don't care to read your drivvle 333. It's the same scare mongering words. The same bullsh*t. It's just fun to watch you squirm under the microscope and scramble to back up your nonsense. You've proven nothing other than you believe in some conspiracy by the left to make America a communist country. ::)
So you did not read the 10 goals of communism by Marx and my response to how it applies to our society today?
Sir, it appears you are the "owned" one since you are commenting on things you did not even read or have given any consideration to.
-
So you did not read the 10 goals of communism by Marx and my response to how it applies to our society today?
Sir, it appears you are the "owned" one since you are commenting on things you did not even read or have given any consideration to.
Oh i read the first few points but after that it got boring seeing you clutch at straws. I mean really you're nothing but a fool who spends too much time thinking everyone is out to get him.
-
Oh i read the first few points but after that it got boring seeing you clutch at straws. I mean really you're nothing but a fool who spends too much time thinking everyone is out to get him.
Insults aside, can you give a substantive response?
I guess not?
My comments were directly in line with the article I posted which is based on fact. If you have something credible to share to dispute my, and others as well, points and arguments, please share to advance the discussion.
If not, STFU and go eat off your Obama memorial dinner plate.
-
I'm still waiting of 333 to sufficiently address the first point
from what I've learned so far I apparently don't really own my property and it's only a matter of time before the Obama administratin confiscates it to provide housing for a communist party worker.
-
I'm still waiting of 333 to sufficiently address the first point
from what I've learned so far I apparently don't really own my property and it's only a matter of time before the Obama administratin confiscates it to provide housing for a communist party worker.
Don't forget he'll lead us to slaughter according to Beck oh wait did he say that? I'm not sure? hahaha
-
I'm still waiting of 333 to sufficiently address the first point
from what I've learned so far I apparently don't really own my property and it's only a matter of time before the Obama administratin confiscates it to provide housing for a communist party worker.
What the hell are you talking about? We have already proven beyond a shadow of a doubt how the tenents in your post are related to what is occuring, and where THE DEMOCRAT PARTY wants to move this country is in direct alignment with the communist manifesto.
-
What the hell are you talking about? We have already proven beyond a shadow of a doubt how the tenents in your post are related to what is occuring, and where THE DEMOCRAT PARTY wants to move this country is in direct alignment with the communist manifesto.
::) okay 333 time to take off the tin foil hat there buddy
-
::) okay 333 time to take off the tin foil hat there buddy
HOW ABOUT YOU ADRESS THE ORIGINAL POST?
-
What the hell are you talking about? We have already proven beyond a shadow of a doubt how the tenents in your post are related to what is occuring, and where THE DEMOCRAT PARTY wants to move this country is in direct alignment with the communist manifesto.
you haven't provided one thing that proves that the "DemocraTIC party wants to move the country in direct alignment with the Communist Manifesto"
Let's examine your statement as it relates the first item on the list.
Can you tell me one piece of legislation (proposed or actually passed by Dems since Obama took office) that supports the "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes"
Don't mention a SC case that happened under Bush (that he supported via an Executive Order) and that has no effect on virtually anyone.
We're talking here about the Obama Admin so try to stay on point
-
you haven't provided one thing that proves that the "DemocraTIC party wants to move the country in direct alignment with the Communist Manifesto"
Let's examine your statement as it relates the first item on the list.
Can you tell me one piece of legislation (proposed or actually passed by Dems since Obama took office) that supports the "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes"
Don't mention a SC case that happened under Bush (that he supported via an Executive Order) and that has no effect on virtually anyone.
We're talking here about the Obama Admin so try to stay on point
I addressed your post already with facts.
Cap & Trade has a retro fit provision to where you CANT sell your home unless you get a govt "Green" permit. What do you call that Straw?
What do you call Obama unilaterally shutting down profitable Chrysler dealerships in favor of those who gave campaign contributions to the DNC?
And no, read your orioginal post, its not about only Obama, its about the govt as a whole. Stop you bullshit Straw - you have already been destroyed in your own thread and should not make this beatdown worse than it has to be.
As for the inheritance tax - who is pushing that?
Who is pushing for highrer progressive tax rates on income?
Who is pushing for more laws on communications?
Who is pushing for more unionization?
Who is pushing for more Federalization of the economy and laws?
-
again, we're talking about the first item on this list.
Show me something that the Obama administration has passed or proposed that supports the "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes"
just pick one thing and explain it to me in detail on how it supports that statement. If have more than one that's fine but just remember to show me how it directly supports the ABOLITION of property and the application of all rents to the public purpose
-
again, we're talking about the first item on this list.
Show me something that the Obama administration has passed or proposed that supports the "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes"
just pick one thing and explain it to me in detail on how it supports that statement. If have more than one that's fine but just remember to show me how it directly supports the ABOLITION of property and the application of all rents to the public purpose
Lets see:
1. Obama has already, via another bailout of Fannie and Freddy, guaranteed the mortgages of trillions in home loans. What do you call that? That is the Government taking ownership of private property.
2. Obama floated a plan earlier in the year where people would give their homes to the govt and they could rent it back from the govt at a lower rate. You probably missed that proposal right?
I will get the link for you from the WSJ later.
-
Obama mulls rental option for some homeowners-sources
Tue Jul 14, 2009 3:07pm EDTRelated NewsUPDATE 3-Fannie, Freddie ease terms for mortgage refinance________________________________________________
Wed, Jul 1 2009NEW YORK, July 14 (Reuters) - U.S. government officials are weighing a plan that would let borrowers who have fallen behind on their mortgage payments avoid eviction by renting their homes instead, sources familiar with the administration's thinking said on Tuesday.
Regulatory News | Bonds
Under one idea being discussed, delinquent homeowners would surrender ownership of their homes but would continue to live in the property for several years, the sources told Reuters.
Officials are also considering whether the government should make mortgage payments on behalf of borrowers who cannot keep up with their home loans, tapping an unused portion of a $50 billion housing aid kitty.
As part of this plan, jobless borrowers might receive a housing stipend along with regular unemployment benefits, the sources said. (Reporting by Patrick Rucker; Editing by Diane Craft)
-
Oh i read the first few points but after that it got boring seeing you clutch at straws. I mean really you're nothing but a fool who spends too much time thinking everyone is out to get him.
Boom.!!!! your boy use the "Obama rhymes with Osama so he is a terroist" logic with anything...now i sw why fox has so many viewers....people like dude.. thinks of a conclusion and then later (while looking through the lenses of his assertions) he tries fit factors that will give him that predetermined conclusion. Very sad
-
We are quickly approaching that with massive property taxation to the point where you dont actually own your property.
In the state of CT you never own a damn house, you own a paper that says you have the right to pay taxes on the place for x amount of years..
-
Boom.!!!! your boy use the "Obama rhymes with Osama so he is a terroist" logic with anything...now i sw why fox has so many viewers....people like dude.. thinks of a conclusion and then later (while looking through the lenses of his assertions) he tries fit factors that will give him that predetermined conclusion. Very sad
Hey Mal - read the thread and the posts and articles. If you want to post drivel, thats your perogative, but you are just making a fool of yourself by not posting anything of substance disagreeing with anyones' posts.
Straw posted specific tenents of the communist manifesto and some of us have posted clear examples of those tenents in action. If you cant dispute it, just say so.
-
seriously - what % of homeowners have lost their property (I'm guessing it's a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of 1%) and they dont just "take it" and not in any way, shape or form.
Again, it doesn't matter what percentage lost their property due to this. The fact remains that it can happen. Yes, they do take it...it's called a tax sale. The government then auctions off the property for the tax bill so they get their money. Taxing a property does not mean it is yours.
Thanks for answering the easement question too. ::)
The government is doing things at the local and federal level to make it harder to truly own private land. It has nothing to do with Obama.
You guys are getting owned by 333...I don't know where you guys are getting this crap that you think he is saying in his posts. I see a bunch of insults and no answers with any substance.
-
Who said anything about the Obama administration doing this? This has been going on for a while. Now people are bringing up FOX news etc.?
I see some Glen Beck shit going on in this thread and it isn't from 333. Some of you are pulling clown hats out of your asses.
-
Lets see:
1. Obama has already, via another bailout of Fannie and Freddy, guaranteed the mortgages of trillions in home loans. What do you call that? That is the Government taking ownership of private property.
2. Obama floated a plan earlier in the year where people would give their homes to the govt and they could rent it back from the govt at a lower rate. You probably missed that proposal right? I will get the link for you from the WSJ later.
1. bailing out fannie freddie not not equal taking ownership of private property. Technically the two companies are in receivership because they are bankrupt. That's very different from ABOLITION of property. Come on 333 - you know this stuff
2. the proposal is to let people who will lose their home thru foreclosure be able to remain in their home. It is not the same thing a seizing the home of someone for no reason. This proposol is a good idea. It's keeps the family in the home it helps maintain the neighborhood etc... and of course no one is going to be forced to do this. They can always choose to let the proerty go ino foreclosure an walk away. Again, do yo really not see the difference? I'm beginning to understand why you so confused and cared
-
Boom.!!!! your boy use the "Obama rhymes with Osama so he is a terroist" logic with anything...now i sw why fox has so many viewers....people like dude.. thinks of a conclusion and then later (while looking through the lenses of his assertions) he tries fit factors that will give him that predetermined conclusion. Very sad
What's sad is that you're not capable of counter arguing the points so you devolve into attacking Fox News.
KC hasn't even read what's going on.
And, Strawman is just playing TheLuke's game. If he posts proof that you don't like or agree with, you just deny it.
Straw, 33 has not said we are a communist nation. He's said we are moving in that direction. Do you know the difference?
-
1. bailing out fannie freddie not not equal taking ownership of private property. Technically the two companies are in receivership because they are bankrupt. That's very different from ABOLITION of property. Come on 333 - you know this stuff
2. the proposal is to let people who will lose their home thru foreclosure be able to remain in their home. It is not the same thing a seizing the home of someone for no reason. This proposol is a good idea. It's keeps the family in the home it helps maintain the neighborhood etc... and of course no one is going to be forced to do this. They can always choose to let the proerty go ino foreclosure an walk away. Again, do yo really not see the difference? I'm beginning to understand why you so confused and cared
Or we can always do what 100's of years of legal precendent calls for and allow these homes to go into foreclosure and back on the banks' balance sheets and/or sold on the open market.
Why dont liberals want to just follow the law as it is written?
-
What's sad is that you're not capable of counter arguing the points so you devolve into attacking Fox News.
KC hasn't even read what's going on.
And, Strawman is just playing TheLuke's game. If he posts proof that you don't like or agree with, you just deny it.
Straw, 33 has not said we are a communist nation. He's said we are moving in that direction. Do you know the difference?
Its unreal Skip. Dumpling, myself and others have posted clear irrefutable evidence and just because Straw KC, and MAL dont like the fact that their belief system is in line with the Communist Manifesto, they deny reality.
-
Why dont liberals want to just follow the law as it is written?
Kinda reminds me of the gun laws, eh? Why enforce the bazillion or so that are on the books? Let's just create new ones, lol.
-
What's sad is that you're not capable of counter arguing the points so you devolve into attacking Fox News.
KC hasn't even read what's going on.
And, Strawman is just playing TheLuke's game. If he posts proof that you don't like or agree with, you just deny it.
Straw, 33 has not said we are a communist nation. [size=1p5t]He's said we are moving in that direction. Do you know the difference?[/size]
Absolutely. That was the point of this thread. These ten points of the Communist Manifesto were prior conditions for a transition from capitalism to communism
I haven't seen anything yet that supports the first item on the list. We haven't even gotten to the other 9 items.
I addressed this to 333 becaue HE has been the main person on this board ranting about how Obama and his administratin are all secret communists. I don't recall him saying that about Bush or Clinton.
-
Again, it doesn't matter what percentage lost their property due to this. The fact remains that it can happen. Yes, they do take it...it's called a tax sale. The government then auctions off the property for the tax bill so they get their money. Taxing a property does not mean it is yours.
Thanks for answering the easement question too. ::)
The government is doing things at the local and federal level to make it harder to truly own private land. It has nothing to do with Obama.
You guys are getting owned by 333...I don't know where you guys are getting this crap that you think he is saying in his posts. I see a bunch of insults and no answers with any substance.
Hardly - Obama didnt' create emminent domain and the US govt has been forcing the sale of private property since it's existence (think railroad, highways, public works, etc) and yes I'm aware this is different from forcing the sale of private property and to RE Developers (and Obama isn't doing that either) which I agree is bullshit
Still waiting for a single example of how the current administration is proposing the "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes"
-
Absolutely. That was the point of this thread. These ten points of the Communist Manifesto were prior conditions for a transition from capitalism to communism
I haven't seen anything yet that supports the first item on the list. We haven't even gotten to the other 9 items.
I addressed this to 333 becaue HE has been the main person on this board ranting about how Obama and his administratin are all secret communists. I don't recall him saying that about Bush or Clinton.
He is not a secrete communist Straw:
1. His mother and father were communists.
2. His mentor was a communist.
3. His priest is a marxist.
4. In college he sought out the marxists for friends, AS PER DREAMS OF MY FATHERS
5. His class-warfare rhetoric is communist.
6. His political mentor Saul Alinsky was a communist.
7. Many of his appointments are avowed communists.
8. we was a member of the socialist party at one time.
You want more Straw?
-
Hardly - Obama didnt' create emminent domain and the US govt has been forcing the sale of private property since it's existence (think railroad, highways, public works, etc) and yes I'm aware this is different from forcing the sale of private property and to RE Developers (and Obama isn't doing that either) which I agree is bullshit
Still waiting for a single example of how the current administration is proposing the "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes"
Bro - we have given you dozens of examples and you still ignore it. Incredible.
-
Hardly - Obama didnt' create emminent domain and the US govt has been forcing the sale of private property since it's existence (think railroad, highways, public works, etc) and yes I'm aware this is different from forcing the sale of private property and to RE Developers (and Obama isn't doing that either) which I agree is bullshit
Still waiting for a single example of how the current administration is proposing the "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes"
It isn't about what this administration is doing. This has been going on before Obama and is currently going on.
-
Bro - we have given you dozens of examples and you still ignore it. Incredible.
give me your best single example of how the Obama administration attempt toward the "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes"
I'll address it.
pick your best one
-
Straw- you name perfectly fits you because that is what you put up - STRAW MAN ARGUMENTS.
You started this thread about the communist manifesto and the govt, not only Obama, and now you are trying to make this about Obama only, its not.
He definately in a communist in my mind, by your own damn list in fact, but he is not alone in this.
I have given you plent of evidence of the policies of the left wing as to how they clearly relate to the communist manifesto, all 10 of them, and yet you ignore 99% of the list in favor of one straw man argument on one tenent which still you were owned on.
Communism, as you stated is a progression, its not an event.
-
Straw- you name perfectly fits you because that is what you put up - STRAW MAN ARGUMENTS.
You started this thread about the communist manifesto and the govt, not only Obama, and now you are trying to make this about Obama only, its not.
He definately in a communist in my mind, by your own damn list in fact, but he is not alone in this.
I have given you plent of evidence of the policies of the left wing as to how they clearly relate to the communist manifesto, all 10 of them, and yet you ignore 99% of the list in favor of one straw man argument on one tenent which still you were owned on.
Communism, as you stated is a progression, its not an event.
where is your best example?
-
give me your best single example of how the Obama administration attempt toward the "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes"
I'll address it.
pick your best one
I already freaking did Bro and Dumpling and I have already proven that you dont own your property as it is and Obama is undermining your property rights by his proposals.
-
I already freaking did Bro and Dumpling and I have already proven that you dont own your property as it is and Obama is undermining your property rights by his proposals.
you've listed a bunch of different things, none of which I could find that supported the statement.
maybe I missed it
list your best one and I'll address it directly
-
What's sad is that you're not capable of counter arguing the points so you devolve into attacking Fox News.
KC hasn't even read what's going on.
And, Strawman is just playing TheLuke's game. If he posts proof that you don't like or agree with, you just deny it.
Straw, 33 has not said we are a communist nation. He's said we are moving in that direction. Do you know the difference?
Just because i dont ascribe to the "the sky is falling" or the "its them against us (even though we are all Americans)...i just dont...wait for the outcome of a situation. I dont speculate. I look at factors of a situation and see what contributed to the outcome..Fear mongering and speculation arent in my DNA...sorry
-
Just because i dont ascribe to the "the sky is falling" or the "its them against us (even though we are all Americans)...i just dont...wait for the outcome of a situation. I dont speculate. I look at factors of a situation and see what contributed to the outcome..Fear mongering and speculation arent in my DNA...sorry
I didnt give speculation in my points to Straws list. If you would have read the thread instead you would have noticed that.
-
you've listed a bunch of different things, none of which I could find that supported the statement.
maybe I missed it
list your best one and I'll address it directly
Oh I forgot - canceling the bondholders' rights in the Chrysler & the GM. matter.
-
Oh I forgot - canceling the bondholders' rights in the Chrysler & the GM. matter.
so that's the one you're going to go with to support the Abolition of property, etc..?
-
so that's the one you're going to go with to support the Abolition of property, etc..?
Hold on Straw - first off, you started this thread and it was not exclusive to Obama. Despite that, I have given multiple instances of his actions directly attacking property rights.
Second, there are 9 other items on your list, most of which are much more relevent and on point and you want to make this about one tenent. When you take all of these as a whole there is absolutely no argument whatsoever that the far left, which you are part of, agree with the major tenents and goals of communism.
-
This is like watching two juveniles argue with Albert Einstein over physics.
Do you guys even know how to read?
99% of what you are saying in response to 333 has absolutely nothing to do with the original topic of this thread.
The other 1 % is complete and utter nonsense from a logical standpoint.
Typical braindead liberal responses-- Facts and figures are fear mongering and speculation, a straight forward analysis based on the available evidence is Fox news propaganda and history is "skewed" by the right wing conspiracy machine. ::)
Some of you guys are really total fucking morons.
-
This is like watching two juveniles argue with Albert Einstein over physics.
Do you guys even know how to read?
99% of what you are saying in response to 333 has absolutely nothing to do with the original topic of this thread.
The other 1 % is complete and utter nonsense from a logical standpoint.
Typical braindead liberal responses-- Facts and figures are fear mongering and speculation, a straight forward analysis based on the available evidence is Fox news propaganda and history is "skewed" by the right wing conspiracy machine. ::)
Some of you guys are really total fucking morons.
GW - I gave specific policies, examples, etc and yet, Mal, KC, Straw, just hurl insults. Its incredible.
Even Marx said communism was a process not an event, yet Straw is asking me to prove communism as an event, which even Marx said does not happen.
GW - check this quote out.:
________________________ _______________________
The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under
the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist
program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without
knowing how it happened."
by:
Norman Thomas
(1884-1968) six-time U.S. Presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America
-
STRAW if you think living in a residential area means you own your property, look at what happened in Arlington Texas to the residents that lived where jerry Jones convinced the state, county and city to let him build his new stadium. They literally kicked people out with less than a months notice in some cases and didn't even give people enough to afford a decent apartment , so why don't you go ask those people just what you really own . Or the Texas Motor Speedway in north Ft Worth TX. Same thing happened, there were some people that weren't even done moving as the cranes were plowing their houses over, and the city barely paid these people 1/4 of what the house and land was worth, and hate to break it to you but Texas is a deed state too
-
STRAW if you think living in a residential area means you own your property, look at what happened in Arlington Texas to the residents that lived where jerry Jones convinced the state, county and city to let him build his new stadium. They literally kicked people out with less than a months notice in some cases and didn't even give people enough to afford a decent apartment , so why don't you go ask those people just what you really own . Or the Texas Motor Speedway in north Ft Worth TX. Same thing happened, there were some people that weren't even done moving as the cranes were plowing their houses over, and the city barely paid these people 1/4 of what the house and land was worth, and hate to break it to you but Texas is a deed state too
Not to mention we still have 9 other tenents to go. This may be an epic beatdown thread on Straw. ;D
-
I could go on and on about the properties that I have seen taken from deed holders, and in Texas, one of the most conservative states in the union, so he needs to calm down with all that talk about owning things. You may temporarely use something. Until the government comes across an agenda that better suits them financially, then all the sudden your deed means nothing and is good for starting a fire in the fire place. The only thing we really own is our body, and that fucktard commie is trying to fundamentally change that too.
-
The "Communist Party USA" endorsed Obama in the last Presidential Elections.
-
I could go on and on about the properties that I have seen taken from deed holders, and in Texas, one of the most conservative states in the union, so he needs to calm down with all that talk about owning things. You may temporarely use something. Until the government comes across an agenda that better suits them financially, then all the sudden your deed means nothing and is good for starting a fire in the fire place. The only thing we really own is our body, and that fucktard commie is trying to fundamentally change that too.
Not to mention the increasingly insane civil forefeiture laws to where the govt can confiscate your property without a full and fair hearing. The accusation that your property was used as "an instrumentality in a crime", as the govt defines, it can result in you losing your home, cash, cars, etc over even relatively minor offenses.
Add that one to the list Straw Man.
This is getting fun. Tell me when you want to move on to the next item Straw.
-
Wow. Epic thread backfire. Like the scarecrow in The Wizard of Oz, straw says to himself "If I only had a brain".
-
Wow. Epic thread backfire. Like the scarecrow in The Wizard of Oz, straw says to himself "If I only had a brain".
I'm actually glad Straw posted this thread.
We can finally clear the air on my calling most liberals "marxist/communists" and I can show just how accurate the term is considering the stated agenda most libs profess to be in favor of.
-
I bet there will be some people getting screwed out of their land and property in Tampa for the commies rail system he thinks he has to have. So Straw you need to find these people and tell them that they own their land and the government cant take it since you know they supposedly own it lol
-
Everything listed in Straw's thread describes marxism to a tee. Straw Is your daddies name Carl?????? Dont lie...
-
Straw - when do you want to discuss item No. 2?
That one should be fun.
-
Everything listed in Straw's thread describes marxism to a tee. Straw Is your daddies name Carl?????? Dont lie...
Thats the communist manifesto bro!
I know it sounds exactly what the liberal left want by their own proclamations, but its not a joke.
240 has jumped all over me for calling out people as marxists, but now I see via Straws thread just how accurate I was and am in that belief.
Thanks Straw!
-
Well sooner or later all liberal/marxist/commies, show their true colors. Watch next he will deny and say that we aren't reading the thread right, then after that failure he will change the subject, then after that failure he will just refer to baseless name calling, just like his hero's in the far left
-
Well sooner or later all liberal/marxist/commies, show their true colors. Watch next he will deny and say that we aren't reading the thread right, then after that failure he will change the subject, then after that failure he will just refer to baseless name calling, just like his hero's in the far left
I cant wait till we debate No. 2 with Straw.
Straw since we destroyed you on property rights, can we discuss the "progessive income tax" now?
-
I WONDER IF STRAW KNOWS WHO AND IN WHAT YEAR THE PROGRESSIVE INCOME TAX WAS CREATED AND FOR WHAT REASON?
-
I WONDER IF STRAW KNOWS WHO AND IN WHAT YEAR THE PROGRESSIVE INCOME TAX WAS CREATED AND FOR WHAT REASON?
I am going to keep this thread going until we have fully discussed every tenent and Straw becomes a raging member of the VRWC.
-
Yea i am interested to see how he justifies all this and explains it as well , or just slithers out of the situation like his daddy obama would do
-
Yea i am interested to see how he justifies all this and explains it as well , or just slithers out of the situation like his daddy obama would do
Yeah, I want Mal, Blacken, KC, Benny, Al Doggity, and the rest of them to discuss this topic and let the chips fall where they may.
Its going to be like: "But no one ever told me I was a communist before until seeing this"
-
those guys are not going to chime in on this, it deals with fact and truth, they are affraid of that there is nothing to spin or twist on this subject, they will be silent
-
those guys are not going to chime in on this, it deals with fact and truth, they are affraid of that there is nothing to spin or twist on this subject, they will be silent
They don't understand that often times I just hold back a lot and can swoop in for the kill any time I like on a ton of subjects.
This is one of them.
-
yea i know its not that hard to disprove just about everything they comment on but it doesn't do any good, they love obama and his agenda to the point of being oblivious, or they live of the government handouts and don't want it to go away
-
whoa, 333386 is kicking ass all over the place in here.
-
Straw- you name perfectly fits you because that is what you put up - STRAW MAN ARGUMENTS.
You started this thread about the communist manifesto and the govt, not only Obama, and now you are trying to make this about Obama only, its not.
He definately in a communist in my mind, by your own damn list in fact, but he is not alone in this.
I have given you plent of evidence of the policies of the left wing as to how they clearly relate to the communist manifesto, all 10 of them, and yet you ignore 99% of the list in favor of one straw man argument on one tenent which still you were owned on.
Communism, as you stated is a progression, its not an event.
I was referring to the Obama Admin because I've never seen you rant about any other administration leading us toward communism besides the current one.
Hey 333 - you keep ranting about all the Marxist/Communist in our country (including the POTUS). Can you show me one thing on this list that even comes close to what we have today
Communism is where the state owns the means of production and all the property. This list includes 10 items from the Communist Manifesto that were prior conditions for a transition from capitalism to communism. The first item was the "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes". Would you like me to address your GM bondholders example or do you want to give me something better?
-
STRAW if you think living in a residential area means you own your property, look at what happened in Arlington Texas to the residents that lived where jerry Jones convinced the state, county and city to let him build his new stadium. They literally kicked people out with less than a months notice in some cases and didn't even give people enough to afford a decent apartment , so why don't you go ask those people just what you really own . Or the Texas Motor Speedway in north Ft Worth TX. Same thing happened, there were some people that weren't even done moving as the cranes were plowing their houses over, and the city barely paid these people 1/4 of what the house and land was worth, and hate to break it to you but Texas is a deed state too
I'm well aware of the Ranger Stadium fuck job on the people of Arlington. I even mentioned it at the top of page 2 of this thread. Is this an example of Communism or is it more an example of fascism or just very shady business. The people of Arlington got screwed but it was NOT the USA fucking them. It was corrupt local governemt in bed with corrupt businessmen so not at all an exmple of communism. The bizzare part was that the people of Texas voted for Bush to be governor after this happened
-
not ranger staduim , the new cowboy stadium, football , not baseball, and yes you were right , government , federal or local its still government, that took from a citizen for no reason other than a special interest
-
not ranger staduim , the new cowboy stadium, football , not baseball, and yes you were right , government , federal or local its still government, that took from a citizen for no reason other than a special interest
they took it and gave a sweetheart deal to private parties.
it absolutely sucks (I grew up in Dallas and my whole family still lives in TX) but it's not an example of communism
-
Its an example of just because you live in a deed state doesn't really mean anything, the government can come in and take it from you faster than you could take candy from a baby, even in a residential area. In your posts you gave the impression that as long as you have a deed its yours, when indeed it can be swept out from under you quite easily. I lived in Arlington when it all was going down alot of people got royally fucked , and same with the Texas motor speedway when brutan smith wanted to buy up that land and build on it. I am not saying that is communism specifically however they are examples that really you don't own things at all, and an example of how government can take things.
-
I was referring to the Obama Admin because I've never seen you rant about any other administration leading us toward communism besides the current one.
Communism is where the state owns the means of production and all the property. This list includes 10 items from the Communist Manifesto that were prior conditions for a transition from capitalism to communism. The first item was the "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes". Would you like me to address your GM bondholders example or do you want to give me something better?
Why are you ignoring the many examples myself bodypro dumpling have already gave showing how the govt has effectively rendered your "ownership" of property a sham and not absolute?
BTW - I have voiced my beefs with GWB MANY times. If you want to start a thread about that fine.
As for the list, its not a progression in that 1 must follow 2 must follow 3.
Clearly many on your list have already been accomplished. Now, do you want to discuss the income tax?
-
Its an example of just because you live in a deed state doesn't really mean anything, the government can come in and take it from you faster than you could take candy from a baby, even in a residential area. In your posts you gave the impression that as long as you have a deed its yours, when indeed it can be swept out from under you quite easily. I lived in Arlington when it all was going down alot of people got royally fucked , and same with the Texas motor speedway when brutan smith wanted to buy up that land and build on it. I am not saying that is communism specifically however they are examples that really you don't own things at all, and an example of how government can take things.
my point of a "deed state" was that I have title to my home which is currently secured by a deed of trust but I'm still the owner. I can sell it, I can encumber it, I can gift it to my heirs. I did not mean to imply that I could not be forced to sell if for some reason the govt wanted it.
-
they took it and gave a sweetheart deal to private parties.
it absolutely sucks (I grew up in Dallas and my whole family still lives in TX) but it's not an example of communism
No but it is an example where the govt is undermining private property rights and placing the needs and wishes of the govt over the individuals' rights in his "property".
The expansion of eminent domain laws is very dangerous on many levels.
-
Why are you ignoring the many examples myself bodypro dumpling have already gave showing how the govt has effectively rendered your "ownership" of property a sham and not absolute?
BTW - I have voiced my beefs with GWB MANY times. If you want to start a thread about that fine.
As for the list, its not a progression in that 1 must follow 2 must follow 3.
Clearly many on your list have already been accomplished. Now, do you want to discuss the income tax?
I don't recall you ever make the "commie /marxist" charge to Bush or anyone other than Obama and people in his administration but maybe I missed it. How far back does this commie plot goe anyway?
We're not done with #1 yet.
I don't recall any specifc valid example other than your usual vomit of gripes including Cap and Trade, etc..
Give me your best example of what the Obama Admin (or however wide your Commie plot goes) is doing to abolish private property and seize all rents for the public use.
I've seen not one example to support that claim but perhaps I missed it (I had client meetings all afternoon) so please be so kind as to repeat it. Try to remember that the basic definition of Communism is "is a social structure in which classes are abolished and property is commonly controlled"
-
No but it is an example where the govt is undermining private property rights and placing the needs and wishes of the govt over the individuals' rights in his "property".
The expansion of eminent domain laws is very dangerous on many levels.
good - so we're in agreement that it's not an example of communism
-
good - so we're in agreement that it's not an example of communism
Straw - these are a progression to collectivism/communism etc to where you may have private ownership in some theorectical way, but effectively, the govt controls and has an ownership interest in your property.
And they are not going to come out and say: "We hereby delare, this this the 3rd day of Feb. 2010 you no longer have private ownership rights in your property."
Things dont work that way. Myself and other have given you plenty of examples already in how th government has irecxtly undermined your property rights.
-
Straw - these are a progression to collectivism/communism etc to where you may have private ownership in some theorectical way, but effectively, the govt controls and has an ownership interest in your property.
And they are not going to come out and say: "We hereby delare, this this the 3rd day of Feb. 2010 you no longer have private ownership rights in your property."
Things dont work that way. Myself and other have given you plenty of examples already in how th government has irecxtly undermined your property rights.
yet you still refuse to even restate one example
The Govt has been taking property that it wants since as long as there has been a govt (and long before Communism ever existed) so that one doesn't work
Is the bondholder example in the GM Chapter 11 the one you want to go with?
Is that really the example you want to use to convince me that I don't own my property and the govt will soon abolish my personal ownership of my property and/or seize my rental income should I chose to rent this property
-
yet you still refuse to even restate one example
The Govt has been taking property that it wants since as long as there has been a govt (and long before Communism ever existed) so that one doesn't work
Is the bondholder example in the GM Chapter 11 the one you want to go with?
Is that really the example you want to use to convince me that I don't own my property and the govt will soon abolish my personal ownership of my property and/or seize my rental income should I chose to rent this property
Bro - re read the thread for fucks sake. We gave you tons of examples already.
s for Obama:
1. Chrysler Bond holders screw job.
2. The idea to have the govt seize the property and rent it back to you.
3. Takeover of Fannie/Freddy
4. Retrofit Mandate in Crap & Tax bill.
5. National Building Code
6. Attempted health care bill by cxontrolling your income via mandates to purchase private products, essentially seizing your property before you get to it.
7. GM takeover.
8. Bank takeover.
9. Attempted health and energy takeover.
-
Bro - re read the thread for fucks sake. We gave you tons of examples already.
s for Obama:
1. Chrysler Bond holders screw job.
2. The idea to have the govt seize the property and rent it back to you.
3. Takeover of Fannie/Freddy
4. Retrofit Mandate in Crap & Tax bill.
5. National Building Code
6. Attempted health care bill by cxontrolling your income via mandates to purchase private products, essentially seizing your property before you get to it.
7. GM takeover.
8. Bank takeover.
9. Attempted health and energy takeover.
we're talking about the "abolition of real property in land" and the application of all rents of land to public purpsoses
what does Cap and Trade have to do with that?
what does the auto makers coming to capital hill and BEGGING for a public bailout have to do with that?
what does a proposal to let foreclosed homeowners being able to stay in their property have to do with that (you do know the differnence between someone in default on a mortgage and someone who is not right?)
what does the receivership of Fannie/Frieddie have to do with that
Are you starting to get the picture
We're talking about Abolishing private ownership in real property - remember the first thing on the list of things that mark the transition from capitalism to communism
-
We're talking about Abolishing private ownership in real property - remember the first thing on the list of things that mark the transition from capitalism to communism
No, the argument from the begining is that we are moving in that direction. And you've been given sufficient examples, but because you disagree you're trying to claim that the examples are not valid. Classic move ala TheLuke.
Why not address #2?
-
No, the argument from the begining is that we are moving in that direction. And you've been given sufficient examples, but because you disagree you're trying to claim that the examples are not valid. Classic move ala TheLuke.
Why not address #2?
the argument from the beginning is that these 10 things mark the transition from Capitalism to Communism
these are the things that have to occur
has anyone yet seen the abolition of property rights (I'm talking on a mass scale which we all know is what they were talking about and not Stadium deals etc..) and the confiscation of rents on private property to be applied toward the public purpose
I haven't seen anything like that so if no one else has either then we can move on to #2
-
the argument from the beginning is that these 10 things mark the transition from Capitalism to Communism
these are the things that have to occur
has anyone yet seen the abolition of property right (I'm talking on a mass scale which we all know is what they were talking about and not Stadium deals etc..) and the confiscation of rents on private property to be applied toward the public purpose
I haven't seen anything like that so if no one else has either then we can move on to #2
Unreal Straw - its not an all or nothing list and we are already positive on a few of those items without question.
And even on the 1st item, we have given you dozens of examples of the govt undermining property rights and moving towards a more collectivist stance on all fronts via mandate, taxation, regulation, etc and yet you act blind to that?
Unreal.
-
the argument from the beginning is that these 10 things mark the transition from Capitalism to Communism
these are the things that have to occur
has anyone yet seen the abolition of property rights (I'm talking on a mass scale which we all know is what they were talking about and not Stadium deals etc..) and the confiscation of rents on private property to be applied toward the public purpose
I haven't seen anything like that so if no one else has either then we can move on to #2
(http://rlv.zcache.com/silly_stubborn_donkey_poster-p228315073428415742tdcz_210.jpg)
-
Unreal Straw - its not an all or nothing list and we are already positive on a few of those items without question.
And even on the 1st item, we have given you dozens of examples of the govt undermining property rights and moving towards a more collectivist stance on all fronts via mandate, taxation, regulation, etc and yet you act blind to that?
Unreal.
I still haven't seen one example from you on the "abolition of real property in land" and "the application of all rents of land to public purposes". remember Marx and Engels wrote that this and the other 9 items were the prior conditions that would mark the transistion from capitlism to communism
it's a pretty simple statement
examples of eminent domain don't count since we've been doing that since the birth of our country and long before communism even existed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain
you still haven't provide one valid example, much less a pattern, of the abolition of real property/applicatoin of rents for public purposes.......have you?
-
I still haven't seen one example from you on the "abolition of real property in land" and "the application of all rents of land to public purposes". remember Marx and Engels wrote that this and the other 9 items were the prior conditions that would mark the transistion from capitlism to communism
it's a pretty simple statement
examples of eminent domain don't count since we've been doing that since the birth of our country and long before communism even existed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain
you still haven't provide one valid example, much less a pattern, of the abolition of real property/applicatoin of rents for public purposes.......have you?
Bro - you are hopeless. Seriously hopeless. Dumpling and I gave you tons of examples and you ignore it where the govt is clearly unrming individual property rights to make it such that you dont own your own property.
Additionsally, that book was written what 150 years ago? If it was traslated into today's language and lingo pehaps they would not have used the same terminology.
Regardless, you dont see not because its not there, but because you refuse to see anything whatsoever.
-
.
-
Although Marx advocated the use of any means, especially including violent revolution, to bring about socialist dictatorship, he suggested ten political goals for developed countries such as the United States. How far has the United States -- traditionally the bastion of freedom, free markets, and private property -- gone down the Marxist road to fulfill these socialist aims? You be the judge. The following are Marx's ten planks from his Communist Manifesto.
1. Abolition of private property in land and application of all rents of land to public purpose.
The courts have interpreted the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (1868) to give the government far more "eminent domain" power than was originally intended, Under the rubric of "eminent domain" and various zoning regulations, land use regulations by the Bureau of Land Managementproperty taxes, and "environmental" excuses, private property rights have become very diluted and private property in landis, vehicles, and other forms are seized almost every day in this country under the "forfeiture" provisions of the RICO statutes and the so-called War on Drugs..
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
The 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, 1913 (which some scholars maintain was never properly ratified), and various State income taxes, established this major Marxist coup in the United States many decades ago. These taxes continue to drain the lifeblood out of the American economy and greatly reduce the accumulation of desperately needed capital for future growth, business starts, job creation, and salary increases.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
Another Marxian attack on private property rights is in the form of Federal & State estate taxes and other inheritance taxes, which have abolished or at least greatly diluted the right of private property owners to determine the disposition and distribution of their estates upon their death. Instead, government bureaucrats get their greedy hands involved .
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
We call it government seizures, tax liens, "forfeiture" Public "law" 99-570 (1986); Executive order 11490, sections 1205, 2002 which gives private land to the Department of Urban Development; the imprisonment of "terrorists" and those who speak out or write against the "government" (1997 Crime/Terrorist Bill); or the IRS confiscation of property without due process.
5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
The Federal Reserve System, created by the Federal Reserve Act of Congress in 1913, is indeed such a "national bank" and it politically manipulates interest rates and holds a monopoly on legal counterfeiting in the United States. This is exactly what Marx had in mind and completely fulfills this plank, another major socialist objective. Yet, most Americans naively believe the U.S. of A. is far from a Marxist or socialist nation.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the state.
In the U.S., communication and transportation are controlled and regulated by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) established by the Communications Act of 1934 and the Department of Transportation and the Interstate Commerce Commission (established by Congress in 1887), and the Federal Aviation Administration as well as Executive orders 11490, 10999 -- not to mention various state bureaucracies and regulations. There is also the federal postal monopoly, AMTRAK and CONRAIL -- outright socialist (government-owned) enterprises. Instead of free-market private enteprrise in these important industries, these fields in America are semi-cartelized through the government's regulatory-industiral complex.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
While the U.S. does not have vast "collective farms" (which failed so miserably in the Soviet Union), we nevertheless do have a significant degree of government involvement in agriculture in the form of price support subsidies and acreage alotments and land-use controls. The Desert Entry Act and The Department of Agriculture. As well as the Department of Commerce and Labor, Department of Interior, the Evironmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Mines, National Park Service, and the IRS control of business through corporate regulations.
8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of Industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
We call it the Social Security Administration and The Department of Labor. The National debt and inflation caused by the communal bank has caused the need for a two "income" family. Woman in the workplace since the 1920's, the 19th amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, assorted Socialist Unions, affirmative action, the Federal Public Works Program and of course Executive order 11000. And I almost forgot...The Equal Rights Amendment means that women should do all work that men do including the military and since passage it would make women subject to the draft.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.
We call it the Planning Reorganization Act of 1949 , zoning (Title 17 1910-1990) and Super Corporate Farms, as well as Executive orders 11647, 11731 (ten regions) and Public "law" 89-136.
10. Free education for all children in government schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc. etc.
People are being taxed to support what we call 'public' schools, which train the young to work for the communal debt system. We also call it the Department of Education, the NEA and Outcome Based "Education" .
-
333 - why don't you try answering the question in your own words
I already share your opinion on eminent domain and I also know there are huge problems with the drug seizure laws and agree with you there too and I might even agree with you on BLM too.
Obviously none of that stuff is Obama's fault but I've only heard you talk about him as the commie/marxist.
how far back does your theory go?
who else is involved?
-
Additionsally, that book was written what 150 years ago? If it was traslated into today's language and lingo pehaps they would not have used the same terminology.
do you think the phrase "real property in land" and "rents" are translation error and misunderstanding of parlance?
"abolition of real property in land" and the application of all rents of land to public purpsoses
-
do you think the phrase "real property in land" and "rents" are translation error and misunderstanding of parlance?
"abolition of real property in land" and the application of all rents of land to public purpsoses
Straw if you want to play deaf dumb and blind, thats fine, however nearly everyone agrees, BUT YOU, that I have won this point.
As for rents, you already pay rent to the govt for your "private property" in the form of property tax. You dont pay the tax you lose your home and get foreclosed upon.
You also dont really own your property since the government dictates many things you can and cant do on your alleged "private property."
Try any of the following on your property and see how much you really own:
1. Walk around naked.
2. Paint a huge swatika on your driveway.
3. Try putting in a bathroom or improvement without paying the government the permit and license fee.
4. Build a fence on the property line or within the setback footage.
5. Let your grass grow to three feet tall.
Can we talk about progressive tax rates or do you insist on continuing to make a fool of yourself?
-
Straw read this wake the hell up Bro. Stop spending so much time at DU!
________________________ ________________________ ____________________-
Communism in America - Alive & Kicking!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ten planks of the communist manifesto and how to apply them
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Larry Warrick
Friday, September 26, 2008
Communism in America Alive and Kicking!
When considering taxation, there are three choices:
The Communist Manifesto was created by a man named Moses Mordecai Levi under the alias Karl Marx. There are ten planks to the Communist party platform, each covering distinct areas of government and society and providing for a self-perpetuating, mindless system whereby no other possible alternatives are considered or tolerated.
In this essay, I intend to show that though the cold war is indeed over, and with the United States of America still expending trillions of dollars a year to maintain its military industrial complex, Communism is still alive and well in the United States and is indeed thriving in the gradual implementation of the Ten Planks of Communism through Federal and State governments' social and industrial programs disguised as necessary or essential checks, balances and "fixes" on our "capitalist" society.
From the first steps toward the abolition of land ownership to the assumption of the parental responsibility of educating our children, this manifesto is being implemented before our very eyes, and the State educated populace, through no fault of their own, is blind to these changes and in many cases, unwittingly accepts their political leaders' assurances as being righteous and necessary. Let's consider each plank of this manifesto and consider how the designs of Communism are being achieved in the United States today.
First plank: "Abolition of all property and land ownership and the application of all rents for public purposes".
Property tax. The property owner has an equity position in real property (land) but is required to pay "rent" to the State or be forcibly deprived of the property in question by invocation of the fourth plank described later. Under this system, a person never really owns the property as he is required to pay the State to allow him to keep possession of it every year, thus implying that the State owns the property and allows the real owner to retain its utility upon payment of a yearly fee. This fee is then added to the general treasury funds and redistributed by government fiat to pay for other social, government and welfare* programs that the hapless property owner never sees and has no need or want of, including (this is not a misprint) the collection and enforcement of property taxes.
*Note that the word welfare, as used in this document, does not just refer to recipients of government welfare checks, but includes government funding of corporate welfare projects and enforcement of monopoly privilege or industry-specific restrictions (usually designed to eliminate open competition) used to repay political supporters, including the multi-trillion dollar military industrial complex.Second plank: "Heavy progressive income tax".
Internal Revenue Service. The federal government and many States require each adult to fill out a personal income tax form and remit a considerable portion of their earnings each year, based on their success in profiting from their efforts. Failure to do so will invoke sanctions under the fourth plank described later. Approximately 40% of the Federal Treasury income is derived from direct income taxation. These funds are then added to the general treasury and redistributed by government fiat to pay for Federal government enforcement ranging from social and welfare programs to maintaining an overseas empire, that the hapless taxpayer never sees and has no need or want of, including the collection and enforcement of direct income taxes (am I being redundant?). Interestingly enough, if the entire direct income system of taxation were abolished, Federal government receipts would still equal 1995 levels.
In the first two planks, we see that each property owning, working individual is required to pay taxes in order to retain ownership of personal property, asin the case of property taxes and maintain his personal liberty, asin the case of income taxes. Under this system, it is obvious that the State or Federal governments assume ownership of persons and their property, albeit on a partial basis. The average taxpayer works for approximately 6 months of the year in order to pay all of the required taxes and tariffs imposed by all branches of government, local and Federal. In other words, government assumes ownership of all that a person produces or owns and allows him to retain a government-designated portion of his property by fiat. Under a generous definition, we may call this theft; it is more properly described as slavery.
Third plank: "Abolition of all rights of inheritance".
Under the probate court system, the State assumes ownership of the estate, not the rightful heirs. A person who dies intestate (leaving no will or trust) effectively leaves his worldly possessions to be disposed by the State, which happily liquidates the assets and absorbs this income. The rightful heirs are then required to sue the State for possession of their rightful property, paying all fees and charges that in many cases are more than the value of the estate in question. If a person does leave a will, the State taxes the heirs based on the value of the estate before allowing transfer of assets. Once again, the State assumes ownership and allows transfer of a portion of rightfully owned property by fiat. In many cases, the heir is forced to sell off portions of the estate to pay the taxes.
Fourth plank: "Confiscation of property of all immigrants and rebels".
Tax rebels are routinely and methodically stripped of all rightful assets and deprived of their constitutional rights and personal liberty through the prison system. Those who challenge this system of taxation and imprisonment are subjected to lengthy and invasive inquiries and costly legal proceedings whereby they are given the impossible task of proving a negative, ie, that they are guilty until proven otherwise. The proceeds are then added to the general treasury and used to fund, amongst many other things, (you guessed it) IRS actions against tax rebels.
Fifth plank: "Centralization of credit by the creation of a national bank".
The Federal Reserve System. Since the enactment of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, debts of all descriptions are not paid in specie (gold or silver). The only legal tender is a fiat currency issued by the Federal Reserve Bank. Under this system, monetary policy is set by a cartel of central banking monopolists and implemented by government fiat. Money as we know it is simply created out of thin air by the use of the printing press or electronic transfer and the supply is then further inflated by a cartel of fractional reserve banks who create multiple simultaneous loans of the same funds and charge interest on money that they do not own and do not even have in their possession! In this way, a single dollar created by the Federal Reserve is used to pyramid loans to the tune of ten thousand dollars in the marketplace (once again, not a misprint). Besides having a destabilizing effect on the market through mal-investments (entrepreneurs borrow based on artificially low interest rates) thus causing needless bankruptcies, monetary inflation causes a chronic rise in the general pricing structure (more money chasing the same amount of goods causes prices to rise over time). Rising prices cause consumers to spend their earnings more quickly before the prices rise again, suppressing savings and artificially raising demand. In this way, through the central banking cartel, government controls and manipulates markets to its own ends and those of its political contributors, often to the detriment of the consumer, who is left with static wages and spiraling prices.
Sixth plank: "Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State".
US Department of Transportation and State equivalents. Haulage trucks are routinely forced to drive in and out of DOT scales to provide proof that they are not carrying more goods than the government allows and that they are carrying goods approved of by the government. Failure to stop at a designated weigh station and submit to search results in sanctions under the fourth plank above (rebellious behavior will not be tolerated). Sanctions are brought against any trucker or trucking company found to be in violation of any of the literally thousands of DOT laws and arbitrary standards. The added expense to ensure DOT compliance for industry is incalculable but runs into the billions or trillions of dollars every year. This added cost is passed to the consumer in the form of higher prices in the marketplace. Private vehicles are tagged with unique identifiers bearing the yearly rental fee sticker (car tax). A vehicle owner who refuses to pay the fee is deprived of his property (vehicle is towed) and disallowed from using the transportation system by having his license suspended until the tax is paid and all accompanying fees are satisfied, such as the towing and storage fee and license reinstatement fee. These taxes and fees are purportedly used for road maintenance and improvements, in practice, they are applied to the general treasury to await government fiat. Once again, honest people are burdened with a system of taxation that is to their detriment.
Seventh plank: "Government control of factories and the instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of wastelands and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan".
The Bureau of Land Management, Department of Agriculture, Environmental Protection Agency, Food and Drug Administration, their individual State equivalents and many other government bureaus, agencies and authorities are all part of the ideology that government is responsible for approving the placement of factories, operation of mines, quantity and quality of production from agriculture, declaration and operation of National Parks, etc, etc, etc. The list of examples of government interference in private enterprise under this plank is practically endless. For instance, the Department of Agriculture routinely pays farmers NOT to plant certain crops or even to leave the fields fallow in order to manipulate the commodities markets. More recently is the refusal of the United States Congress to allow oil exploration in the ANWAR region of Alaska because such activity may disturb a few moose! By interfering in the sovereign right of individuals to dispose of their possessions (including land) as they see fit, government distorts the marketplace and damages the interests of both producers and consumers.
Eighth plank: "Equal obligation of all to work, establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture".
By implementing the first two planks of the Communist Manifesto, government takes great strides to ensuring that this eighth plank is implemented. The requirement that taxes be paid on income, automobiles and real property each year has the effect of forcing many to work (if even part-time) simply to keep what they already own. Under the fifth plank, steady inflation of the money supply causes the (now familiar and almost un-remarked) chronic rise in prices, forcing yet more to work simply to maintain their present standard of living as the value of their fixed income is systematically eroded. Since this plank was written, agricultural technology has improved to the extent that a single operator is capable of achieving the work of many hundreds of manual workers of the nineteenth century. However, with the implementation of agricultural mechanization, we have seen the gradual decline of the family run farm so typical of the American way of life in favor of huge corporate farming interests with enormous presence in the Congressional lobby. Through farming subsidies in the amount of billions of dollars and protective tariffs, these industrial farming interests manipulate markets to their own advantage and to the detriment of consumers.
Ninth plank: "A combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries, gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country by a more equitable distribution of population over the country".
The Federal Emergency Management Agency assumes the risk associated with living in less desirable, or more dangerous, regions of the country. Those parts of the country prone to natural disasters such as wind, flood, earthquake, landslide, or other natural or man-made disaster; would be prohibitive to live in economically except that the federal government, through FEMA, assumes the risk for these natural occurrences, a function traditionally carried out by private insurance. The existence of FEMA gives previously untenable, disaster-prone land the illusion of viability, thus redistributing the population more evenly over the entire country. Under these conditions, natural phenomena such as hurricane Katrina, that a hundred years ago would have only impacted the lives of several thousand people and caused limited collateral damage, today has impacted the lives of hundreds of thousands and cost billions of dollars in collateral damage. It boggles the mind that after such an experience, the Federal government would not only provide financial and material support for those affected (a function much better left to private charity organizations), but encourages residents to rebuild on a hurricane-prone river delta that is slowly sinking further below sea level each year.
Tenth plank: "Free education for all children in public schools, abolition of children's factory labor in its present form and conform education to industrial productions".
On average, 75% of property taxes in any given State go to support the public school system. Parents are forced by law to tithe their children to the State education system or risk having them forcibly removed from the home by the State and placed in State-run foster homes, possibly never to be seen by their parents again! Children who are home-schooled are required to take State designated tests at given intervals and those who fail to meet the State-specified standard are forced into the public school system, once again, against the parents' wishes. This system forces homeowners (who may or may not even have any school-aged children) to subsidize the State educational requirements of their neighbors, and even that of people they have never even met and likely don't know exist! More and more, State education provides more emphasis on industry-driven content and less on the practical ability to solve issues of a moral or discerning nature. Ask any 5-year-old if it is wrong to steal and the majority will respond in the affirmative. Follow up and ask "why" and the waters get a little murkier. Some may say because Mommy or Daddy doesn't like it; some because the deprived party will get mad about it; some because the policeman will come and take you away; rarely will you hear that it is morally wrong to deprive someone of their rightful ownership and utility (natural law of property ownership). Some may blame the parent for this lapse: Bear in mind that the school-aged child spends half of his waking life in the public school system, where the moral responsibilities of natural law are not on the curriculum.
-
Jesus Christ-
You ask the man a question. He answers it in his own words on a dozen different occasions. You persist in the same line of questioning so he posts articles that outline the substance of his answers. You then respond by asking him to answer the question in his own words.
Straw give it up dude. Asked and answered ( about 20 times).
-
Jesus Christ-
You ask the man a question. He answers it in his own words on a dozen different occasions. You persist in the same line of questioning so he posts articles that outline the substance of his answers. You then respond by asking him to answer the question in his own words.
Straw give it up dude. Asked and answered ( about 20 times).
And I even went into more depth on the question after pondering it some more and coming up with more evidence to boot!
-
Straw if you want to play deaf dumb and blind, thats fine, however nearly everyone agrees, BUT YOU, that I have won this point.
As for rents, you already pay rent to the govt for your "private property" in the form of property tax. You dont pay the tax you lose your home and get foreclosed upon.
You also dont really own your property since the government dictates many things you can and cant do on your alleged "private property."
Try any of the following on your property and see how much you really own:
1. Walk around naked.
2. Paint a huge swatika on your driveway.
3. Try putting in a bathroom or improvement without paying the government the permit and license fee.
4. Build a fence on the property line or within the setback footage.
5. Let your grass grow to three feet tall.
Can we talk about progressive tax rates or do you insist on continuing to make a fool of yourself?
you're joking right
you think "rents" is simply property tax
so you think "the application of all rents of land to public purposes" refers to charging property tax? I guess we've been on the road to communism since the first property tax then.
how does the requirement of a building permit for a bathroom remodel = the abolition of real property in land and the application of all rents to public purposes
you've failed in any way to show evidence of #1 on that list
Communism means the state owns the means of production, no private property, etc....
this is simple stuff man
you think a few emient domain cases and the fact that I need to get a building permit or the fact that I have to cut my grass is evidence of #1 on that list?
-
Jesus Christ-
You ask the man a question. He answers it in his own words on a dozen different occasions. You persist in the same line of questioning so he posts articles that outline the substance of his answers. You then respond by asking him to answer the question in his own words.
Straw give it up dude. Asked and answered ( about 20 times).
yeah but all his answers were nonsense
and I can't just ignore that fact
-
yeah but all his answers were nonsense
and I can't just ignore that fact
Thats utter fucking shit Straw and your idiotic opinion. Every poster, other than yourself agreed that my points are valid.
I supported every damn oiiunt I made with fact, analysis, and specific examples.
Bro - keep your head up your ass, thats a perfect place for it.
-
Thats utter fucking shit Straw and your idiotic opinion. Every poster, other than yourself agreed that my points are valid.
I supported every damn oiiunt I made with fact, analysis, and specific examples.
Bro - keep your head up your ass, thats a perfect place for it.
every poster agrees that because I have to cut my grass and get a building permit that proves "abolition of real property" or is that proof of "the application of all rents to public purposes"?
-
every poster agrees that because I have to cut my grass and get a building permit that proves "abolition of real property" or is that proof of "the application of all rents to public purposes"?
No you fool, we pointed out that the property tax and all the other inherhent restriction on your property means you dont actually own it, but rent it since if you dont pay your rent , i.e. property tax, you lose your home.
If you cant even see that point, bro you are so clueless its not even worth discussing anything with you.
Serious Straw - are you doing drugs or drinking?
-
You know...333 was laying the smack down and has clearly won this so I was going to stay out of this thread, but you know what? I couldn't resist! ;D
Straw...once again, you keep mentioning on "a mass scale" of the abolition of private property rights in this country. 333, Bodypro, and myself have given you several examples on different levels of government on how this is being done and yet you still persist. Even Hugo in other threads has made it clear...you WILL NOT see "a mass scale" of the abolition of private property rights; that's not how the elite and/or government work. You will see a very slow decline in all rights until they are gone and we are all just shaking our heads and asking, "How did this happen?". The point is that our rights(not only private property rights) are slowly being eroded, so while you may make this about Obama even though that was not the original intention of your thread, it in reality has nothing to do with Obama and everything with the current state of affairs which has been brought to where it is today by greed and corruption and the American people being asleep at the wheel and buying into politicians' lies. The points you listed are very real and are happening right now...so please continue trying to make this about Obama because your points were addressed and you didn't like those answers, and keeping your head in the sand while our country declines further because of you inability to see what is right in front of your face. While we may not be in another Cold War Communism is still a real threat because of its progression; not because of its out right replacement of capitalism or any other economic and government system. It is one of those things that gives more power to the few as has been observed by us especially through this recession.
Let's continue with your other points shall we?
-
You know...333 was laying the smack down and has clearly won this so I was going to stay out of this thread, but you know what? I couldn't resist! ;D
Straw...once again, you keep mentioning on "a mass scale" of the abolition of private property rights in this country. 333, Bodypro, and myself have given you several examples on different levels of government on how this is being done and yet you still persist. Even Hugo in other threads has made it clear...you WILL NOT see "a mass scale" of the abolition of private property rights; that's not how the elite and/or government work. You will see a very slow decline in all rights until they are gone and we are all just shaking our heads and asking, "How did this happen?". The point is that our rights(not only private property rights) are slowly being eroded, so while you may make this about Obama even though that was not the original intention of your thread, it in reality has nothing to do with Obama and everything with the current state of affairs which has been brought to where it is today by greed and corruption and the American people being asleep at the wheel and buying into politicians' lies. The points you listed are very real and are happening right now...so please continue trying to make this about Obama because your points were addressed and you didn't like those answers, and keeping your head in the sand while our country declines further because of you inability to see what is right in front of your face. While we may not be in another Cold War Communism is still a real threat because of its progression; not because of its out right replacement of capitalism or any other economic and government system. It is one of those things that gives more power to the few as has been observed by us especially through this recession.
Let's continue with your other points shall we?
Good post and we know why Straw Man does not even want to go on to Point No. 2. That one is going to leave Straw speechless after we are done with him.
As for Point No. 1, we could add hundreds of pages to this thread as to how the govt is undermining your PRIVATE PROPERTY rights daily. Yet because Straw thinks the deed in his safe deposit box actually means something, he wont see anything else, no matter how much evidence exists to the contrary.
Dumpling, do you really believe Straw wants to have to admit to himself after we are done with him that in essence he supports the communist agenda?
-
You know...333 was laying the smack down and has clearly won this so I was going to stay out of this thread, but you know what? I couldn't resist! ;D
Straw...once again, you keep mentioning on "a mass scale" of the abolition of private property rights in this country. 333, Bodypro, and myself have given you several examples on different levels of government on how this is being done and yet you still persist. Even Hugo in other threads has made it clear...you WILL NOT see "a mass scale" of the abolition of private property rights; that's not how the elite and/or government work. You will see a very slow decline in all rights until they are gone and we are all just shaking our heads and asking, "How did this happen?". The point is that our rights(not only private property rights) are slowly being eroded, so while you may make this about Obama even though that was not the original intention of your thread, it in reality has nothing to do with Obama and everything with the current state of affairs which has been brought to where it is today by greed and corruption and the American people being asleep at the wheel and buying into politicians' lies. The points you listed are very real and are happening right now...so please continue trying to make this about Obama because your points were addressed and you didn't like those answers, and keeping your head in the sand while our country declines further because of you inability to see what is right in front of your face. While we may not be in another Cold War Communism is still a real threat because of its progression; not because of its out right replacement of capitalism or any other economic and government system. It is one of those things that gives more power to the few as has been observed by us especially through this recession.
Let's continue with your other points shall we?
he won in your mind...but you are most likley a neo con, republican...i know im right so dont try to say "na im actually a liberial but 333 just makes good points.."
3333 has made a living off speculation, fear mongering and toting the party line line at all costs.
the dude thinks sarah palin is qualified to be president AFTER she quit..
So his views and points fall on hella deaf ears...
sorry but thats whats goin down
-
Good post and we know why Straw Man does not even want to go on to Point No. 2. That one is going to leave Straw speechless after we are done with him.
As for Point No. 1, we could add hundreds of pages to this thread as to how the govt is undermining your PRIVATE PROPERTY rights daily. Yet because Straw thinks the deed in his safe deposit box actually means something, he wont see anything else, no matter how much evidence exists to the contrary.
Dumpling, do you really believe Straw wants to have to admit to himself after we are done with him that in essence he supports the communist agenda?
Thank you.
Hmmm...I don't think he supports the Communist agenda per se even though it may sound like that. I think he is just of the train of thought that big government is okay and won't do anything to harm us. Which in itself is naive at best as we know better than that, and many on this board and others have been warning against for a long time.
I hope this thread doesn't die because I think we should address all 10 points don't you?
-
he won in your mind...but you are most likley a neo con, republican...i know im right so dont try to say "na im actually a liberial but 333 just makes good points.."
3333 has made a living off speculation, fear mongering and toting the party line line at all costs.
the dude thinks sarah palin is qualified to be president AFTER she quit..
So his views and points fall on hella deaf ears...
sorry but thats whats goin down
Do you care to adress any of my, GW, Bodypro, Dumpling, Skip, or others,arguments as to Point No 1 in the Communist Manifesto or do you persist in making a fool of yourself?
-
he won in your mind...but you are most likley a neo con, republican...i know im right so dont try to say "na im actually a liberial but 333 just makes good points.."
3333 has made a living off speculation, fear mongering and toting the party line line at all costs.
the dude thinks sarah palin is qualified to be president AFTER she quit..
So his views and points fall on hella deaf ears...
sorry but thats whats goin down
No...that's not what is going down homie.
You are just as ignorant for the left as many on this board are for the right. I'm not a neo con republican, never have been a republican, and never will be. Just because I consider myself a conservative does not make me a republican or any other right wing extremist, or labeled into a certain political party.
Don't come into this thread and try to insult me with that "I know I'm right bullshit", because you clearly don't know anything about me; nor have my any of my posts made any connection to that extreme way of thinking.
Get off your high horse and come down to reality.
-
No you fool, we pointed out that the property tax and all the other inherhent restriction on your property means you dont actually own it, but rent it since if you dont pay your rent , "i.e. property tax, you lose your home.
that answer is NONSENSE
the fact that I have to pay property tax, cut my grass or get a building permit (all things I know before I choose to purshase) is not an example of the "abolition of real property in land"
rent's refer to the charging of a fee BY A PROPERTY OWNER for the use of that property (in the time of Marx this probably meant farm land).
I'm really kind of amazed that you're a lawyer and you don't understand these basic these concepts
-
that answer is NONSENSE
the fact that I have to pay property tax, cut my grass or get a building permit (all things I know before I choose to purshase) is not an example of the "abolition of real property in land"
rent's refer to the charging of a fee BY A PROPERTY OWNER for the use of that property (in the time of Marx this probably meant farm land).
I'm really kind of amazed that you're a lawyer and you don't understand these basic these concepts
I'm actually surprised at how dense you are Straw.
Straw - dont pay your property for a year or two and see what exactly you own Bro.
Your inane view on this is indicative on why those of you on the left are laughed at by 85% of the population. You are so out of touch and clueless you dont even realize it.
You dont own shit when the govt dictates the terms of your alleged ownership. If you cant see that, than shame on you for your ignorance.
We have owned, destroyed, obliterated, and completely refuted you on Point No 1 and it is time to move on to Point No. 2.
-
I'm actually surprised at how dense you are Straw.
Straw - dont pay your property for a year or two and see what exactly you own Bro.
Your inane view on this is indicative on why those of you on the left are laughed at by 85% of the population. You are so out of touch and clueless you dont even realize it.
You dont own shit when the govt dictates the terms of your alleged ownership. If you cant see that, than shame on you for your ignorance.
We have owned, destroyed, obliterated, and completely refuted you on Point No 1 and it is time to move on to Point No. 2.
333 - let me make sure I understand you correctly
does the fact that I have to pay property tax = the abolition of real property in land or is it an exmple of "application of all rents to public purpose"?
which one is cutting my grass?
-
333 - let me make sure I understand you correctly
does the fact that I have to pay property tax = the abolition of real property in land or is it an exmple of "application of all rents to public purpose"?
which one is cutting my grass?
Did you read any of the articles I posted?
You dont own shit. You have partial ownership stake along with the govt in the property. If you dont do what the govt wants, whether it means paying property taxes, paying for variance permits, etc, you lose your property.
What is so hard for you to grasp Straw? Dumpling also provided a clear post to you yet you never addressed it that this is a process, not an event.
-
Did you read any of the articles I posted?
You dont own shit. You have partial ownership stake along with the govt in the property. If you dont do what the govt wants, whether it means paying property taxes, paying for variance permits, etc, you lose your property.
What is so hard for you to grasp Straw? Dumpling also provided a clear post to you yet you never addressed it that this is a process, not an event.
3333 - your premise is that I don't own my property because I have to cut my lawn and adhere to building codes and pay property taxes
right?
and you're saying that's what Marx meant when he and Engels published the Communist Manifesto in 1848 and wrote about the abolition of real property in land?
-
3333 - your premise is that I don't own my property because I have to cut my lawn and adhere to building codes and pay property taxes
right?
and you're saying that's what Marx meant when he and Engels published the Communist Manifesto in 1848 and wrote about the abolition of real property in land?
No jackass, our point to you was that despite the fact that you may pay your mortgage every month, you dont have an unfettered and unilateral ownership interest in your property when the government can come in and steal it from you if you dont do what it wants, whether it be property taxes, variances, permits, zoning, etc.
-
No jackass, our point to you was that despite the fact that you may pay your mortgage every month, you dont have an unfettered and unilateral ownership interest in your property when the government can come in and steal it from you if you dont do what it wants, whether it be property taxes, variances, permits, zoning, etc.
none of that means I don't "own" my property
I can encumber it, sell it, etc...
you know full well that "abolition of real property in land" does not refer to the fact that I have to pay property taxes, follow building codes, zoning requirements etc...
your argument is nonsense
-
none of that means I don't "own" my property
I can encumber it, sell it, etc...
you know full well that "abolition of real property in land" does not refer to the fact that I have to pay property taxes, follow building codes, zoning requirements etc...
your argument is nonsense
Pure nonsense Straw - lets say you put a bathroom in without a GOVERNMENT permit. Guess what Straw - you cant sell your home until you get the govt's permission.
Guess what happens if you dont pay your taxes? - the liens follows the property and the govt can foreclose on said property.
Guess what happens if you have a spill of oil or some toxic substance? The govt effectively owns the property.
Bro - you are clueless.
Have you ever gone before a Zoning Board of Apeals on an issue? I have!
Have you ever tried to aggrieve property taxes? I have!
Have you ever dealt with building inspectors and city agencies on issues? I have.
You dont own squat. You own a mortgage bill and tax bill and thats it.
-
so the Commie revolution started with zoning boards, building codes and property taxes?
.....and somehow even though I own my property and can sell if I choose I don't really own it because the city (not federal) government might be able to make me cut the lawn or follow building codes. I don't really own my property unless I can sell it to someone else with bad plumbing, faulty wiring and and overgrown front lawn
and you think that's what Marx intended when he wrote about the "abolition of land in real property"?
you seem sane
-
so the Commie revolution started with zoning boards, building codes and property taxes?
.....and somehow even though I own my property and can sell if I choose I don't really own it because the city (not federal) government might be able to make me cut the lawn or follow building codes. I don't really own my property unless I can sell it to someone else with bad plumbing, faulty wiring and and overgrown front lawn
and you think that's what Marx intended when he wrote about the "abolition of land in real property"?
you seem sane
Yes, it has incrementally eroded your property and ownership stake in said property to where you really cant do anything without a government blessing or sign off.
Tell me when we go on to No 2 since you have been utterly embarassed on this issue.
-
Yes, it has incrementally eroded your property and ownership stake in said property to where you really cant do anything without a government blessing or sign off.
Tell me when we go on to No 2 since you have been utterly embarassed on this issue.
the only emotion I feel is amusement
I just found a leak in my roof over the weekend
those fucking commies with their building codes are probably going to make me fix that but I guess since I don't own my property that the state will just take care of that for me
mother fuck - if only we lived in an America where I didn't have to fix my roof. I think I might start my own counter-commie revolution and let that water keep leaking just to prove I'm a free man
-
You are not a free man. You are a slave to the govt. Do you want to discuss Point No. 2 since 7 pages have been devoted to destroying your argument on Point No. 1?
BUMP FOR NO. 2 ON THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO AS STRAW RETREATED ON THIS
-
7 pages later and all we've learned is that you think if the county can asses property taxes and the city can enforce building codes that you think that's equivalent with the "abolition of real property in land and application of all rents to the public purpose"
I truly thought as an attorney you could come up with a better argument or at least a rational argument
It's not wonder you're in constant state of panic over Commie infiltration when your standards are so utterly absurd.
-
7 pages later and all we've learned is that you think if the county can asses property taxes and the city can enforce building codes that you think that's equivalent with the "abolition of real property in land and application of all rents to the public purpose"
I truly thought as an attorney you could come up with a better argument or at least a rational argument
It's not wonder you're in constant state of panic over Commie infiltration when your standards are so utterly absurd.
biggity boom
-
These two are probably more appropriate
-
Straw - without a doubt you are probably the dumbest poster here.
For 7 pages many posters, not just myself, have utterly embarassed you on every level and sent you packing to DU and KOS with your fellow communists on this one point which you made Obama. In spite of that you were completely owned on every level yet dare I say, cling to STRAW MAN arguments as you know where 2-10 will lead you.
Bro - you have been destroyed in this thread and we have not even gotten to No. 2!
-
Straw - without a doubt you are probably the dumbest poster here.
For 7 pages many posters, not just myself, have utterly embarassed you on every level and sent you packing to DU and KOS with your fellow communists on this one point which you made Obama. In spite of that you were completely owned on every level yet dare I say, cling to STRAW MAN arguments as you know where 2-10 will lead you.
Bro - you have been destroyed in this thread and we have not even gotten to No. 2!
na you pretty much just came with a bunch of far out shit...nothin that said 1+1=2....you got all this "by the way of this and that..this could happen maybe"
-
na you pretty much just came with a bunch of far out shit...nothin that said 1+1=2....you got all this "by the way of this and that..this could happen maybe"
Maybe thats because we dont exactly yet have a full out communist coountry? However, the examples many of us gave have shown that we are far downb the path of you and I losing our private property rights to the govt.
That path leads to the complete ownership of private property of the govt, whether it be in real or de facto, purposes.
For you to not see that is just blinders on your part since you know where this whole list is going and we have not even gotten to the more germain issues.
-
na you pretty much just came with a bunch of far out shit...nothin that said 1+1=2....you got all this "by the way of this and that..this could happen maybe"
it was more like "1 + 3 - W / 17 = popcorn"
just complete jibberish
-
it was more like "1 + 3 - W / 17 = popcorn"
just complete jibberish
Oh right Straw - because unless something comports with your far left communist views it does not exist. ::) ::)
Dumpling myself and others completey destroyed you on this point to where you dont have real private property rights and now you are doing anything possible to avoid moving on to Point No. 2.
-
Maybe thats because we dont exactly yet have a full out communist coountry? However, the examples many of us gave have shown that we are far downb the path of you and I losing our private property rights to the govt.
That path leads to the complete ownership of private property of the govt, whether it be in real or de facto, purposes.
For you to not see that is just blinders on your part since you know where this whole list is going and we have not even gotten to the more germain issues.
333 - I literally laughed out loud at your first sentence
thanks man - that made my day
Have you ever considered writing a book about the slipperly slope from building codes, zoning laws, and lawn maintenace to Communism? I'm sure it would be fascinating and it would be great to see you on Beck's show doing the Venn Diagram on his chalkboard. Maybe you can find a way to tie in fluoridation too
-
Oh right Straw - because unless something comports with your far left communist views it does not exist. ::) ::)
Dumpling myself and others completey destroyed you on this point to where you dont have real private property rights and now you are doing anything possible to avoid moving on to Point No. 2.
I'm far left?
that's news to me
the only issue I have with your views is that they make no sense
-
Bro - you are so clueless you dont even realize it. I guess ignorance is truly bliss.
Dumpling and others, take , myself out of it, complete destroyed you yet you act blind to the fact that you do dont really own shit and your private property writes are being eroded daily. We have proved that on the legal front, regulatory front, tax front, etc, and you still cling to your bs beliefs.
Unreal. Thats your game, deny deny deny, regardless of the plethora of evidence otherwise. I'll tell you what, other and I will move on to No. 2 since your idiotic self wont allow you to see what many others have explained to you.
-
Bro - you are so clueless you dont even realize it. I guess ignorance is truly bliss.
Dumpling and others, take , myself out of it, complete destroyed you yet you act blind to the fact that you do dont really own shit and your private property writes are being eroded daily. We have proved that on the legal front, regulatory front, tax front, etc, and you still cling to your bs beliefs.
Unreal. Thats your game, deny deny deny, regardless of the plethora of evidence otherwise. I'll tell you what, other and I will move on to No. 2 since your idiotic self wont allow you to see what many others have explained to you.
333 - the problem is that your explanations are NONSENSE
keep giving me absurd explanations and I'll keep telling you the same thing
-
333 - the problem is that your explanations are NONSENSE
keep giving me absurd explanations and I'll keep telling you the same thing
What was nonsense? We gave you DOZENS of examples and you dismiss every one of them because in your moronic view it does not matter. WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU BRO?
GW, a lawyer, agreed with me on my points.
Dumpling, a surveyor of real property, agreed with me on my points.
BodyPro, a buisness owner, agreed with me on my points.
So tell me Straw, where am I wrong on the specifics?
-
What was nonsense? We gave you DOZENS of examples and you dismiss every one of them because in your moronic view it does not matter. WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU BRO?
GW, a lawyer, agreed with me on my points. Dumpling, a surveyor of real property, agreed with me on my points. BodyPro, a buisness owner, agreed with me on my points.
So tell me Straw, where am I wrong on the specifics?
"Abolition of property in land" = the governments takes complete ownership of all property
It doesn't mean property taxes, building codes or even the very occassional occurence of eminent domain.
"application of all rents of land to public purposes" = the government takes all of your rental income away and puts it in the public coffers
It doesn't mean property taxes, building codes or lawn maintenance
-
"Abolition of property in land" = the governments takes complete ownership of all property
It doesn't mean property taxes, building codes or even the very occassional occurence of eminent domain.
"application of all rents of land to public purposes" = the government takes all of your rental income away and puts it in the public coffers
It doesn't mean property taxes, building codes or lawn maintenance
Unreal - did you even read the articles I posted or are you such a knee-jerk marxist yourself that you still believe the garbage you read on DU?
No one said we are a communist nation right bow, but the increasing impositions of the things we all listed are clearly moving us in that direction.
Again, its a process, not an event. The govt is not going to overnight declare your property void. Its doesnt have to do that when it can basicallt control it and exact rent from you now in the form of confiscatory taxes.
Seriously, what is wrong with you bro?
-
Unreal - did you even read the articles I posted or are you such a knee-jerk marxist yourself that you still believe the garbage you read on DU? No one said we are a communist nation right bow, but the increasing impositions of the things we all listed are clearly moving us in that direction. Again, its a process, not an event. The govt is not going to overnight declare your property void. Its doesnt have to do that when it can basicallt control it and exact rent from you now in the form of confiscatory taxes.
Seriously, what is wrong with you bro?
on "abolition of real property in land" and all you cited was eminent domain which I pointed out has existed since the beginning of our country (prior to communism), is very very rare, and certainly doesn't rise to the defintion "abolition of real property in land"
on "application of all rents to public purposes you've cited property tax which is not the same thing as rents and certainly not the same thing as "all rents" and you know full well that's not what the statement is referring to. After that you veer off on building codes, zoning requirements and lawn maintenance and I think you threw Cap and Trade in there too
-
on "abolition of real property in land" and all you cited was eminent domain which I pointed out has existed since the beginning of our country (prior to communism), is very very rare, and certainly doesn't rise to the defintion "abolition of real property in land"
on "application of all rents to public purposes you've cited property tax which is not the same thing as rents and certainly not the same thing as "all rents" and you know full well that's not what the statement is referring to. After that you veer off on building codes, zoning requirements and lawn maintenance and I think you threw Cap and Trade in there too
1. No, re - read the thread as far as aboltion of property rights. That was not the only example we gave.
2. Yes, property tax is the same thing as rent. You dont pay your tax you are evicted. The money is going to the govt no?
3. All of the items I listed are clear impostitions of control by the govt over your alleged property you think you own. The second you do anything the govt says you cant and you lose your property or have a mark on the title or a lien of some sort.
What is so damn hard for you to grasp in this.
I have come to the conclusion that you are either hopelessly ignorant or just being disagreeable because you dont want to concede a point to anyone.
There is no other conclusion in the fac of such overwhelming evidence others and myself have presented.
-
Ok- we could have ended this thread 6 hours ago based on Straws last stand posted above.
Obviously, this country is not a Communist Oligarchy. 333 never said it was. You posted 10 points and asked 333 to address them. He has ad nauseum.
Your last response illustrates that no matter how 333 responds, you will be convinced he lost the argument because he cannot show definitively that this country is completely communist right now. However, that was not the question that was posed when this thread began. 333 and others have said repeatedly that this country is moving toward communism because of the governments excessive involvement in private industry and the continual erosion of the individuals property rights by the state.
Here is one of many examples that explain what 333 is talking about-Has eminent domain always existed ( in constitution)? Yes. In recent years has it been repeatedly abused by the government? Absolutely. Does this help 333's argument---- Yes, which is why you are tripping over your shoelaces in semantics instead of addressing his point.
So, to recap; No America is not a communist country, but the expansion of government under the current administration ( and previous ones as well) is moving us in that direction. Case closed.
-
1. No, re - read the thread as far as aboltion of property rights. That was not the only example we gave.
2. Yes, property tax is the same thing as rent. You dont pay your tax you are evicted. The money is going to the govt no?
3. All of the items I listed are clear impostitions of control by the govt over your alleged property you think you own. The second you do anything the govt says you cant and you lose your property or have a mark on the title or a lien of some sort.
What is so damn hard for you to grasp in this.
I have come to the conclusion that you are either hopelessly ignorant or just being disagreeable because you dont want to concede a point to anyone.
There is no other conclusion in the fac of such overwhelming evidence others and myself have presented.
what was your other point beside Eminent Domain
Rent is charged by owners to tenants
Property tax is not rent but if you want to play semantic games that's fine. If I don't occuppy my property then how can tax = rent?
Moreover property tax in the US precedes Communism so by that standard we've been sliding toward Communism since before it existed.......and it's taking a pretty fucking long time to get here too. Again, that's all based on your silly belief that property tax = "application of all rents of land to public purposes"
-
The Ten Planks of Communism
By Nickolie Greer
________________________ ________________________ ______
160 Years ago in 1848, a man named Carl Marx decided to enter a competition which was sponsored by the Socialist Union in Paris, France. Carl Marx called his submission The Communist Manifesto and within this manifesto Marx wrote down 10 Planks. These 10 Planks are the basic building blocks to a perfect Communist society. In this article I will go through each plank and ask to see if you personally are practicing any of them. Try to rate yourself and see what percentage of communism you are practicing. Most Americans are practicing Communism and they don't even know it. Carl Mark's Communist Manifesto did win the competition.
The First Plank
This one is pretty simple it calls for: Abolition of property in land, and application of all rents of land to public purposes. Lets find out if this is going on right here in America today. Within the state of Idaho, 64% of the land is held in a 'trust' the public either by the state or federal governments. And if you try or any citizens of Idaho decide to use the land, we will have to find the appropriate government agency and rent the property or pay the government royalties on anything that we wish to remove from it.
And were dose this money go to, it goes in to the states or federal treasury. Do you have something like this in the state in which you live in? Also, with the rental of public lands, we have taxes on private property. Staying with Idaho, if the 64% is under public policy, that means only 36% has to be held in private property right. I wouldn't bet on it, The state then levies a property tax (ad valorem tax), on the so called private land, and guess what happens if you don't pay this tax.
The property then goes into foreclosure and is sold on the court house steps. So the state is going to get there money one way or another. If you don't pay it, then you lose your property. To me it sounds like the term "property owner" really means in law "property renter"? Do you have something like this in your state? If you do then you are at least one tenth communist.
So what is the conclusion, it comes down to this. Americans have lost there right to hold property in Allodial freehold. And now we only hold it in feudal serfs living on the governments land and paying are fees.
And for those of you who ask how things should be, let me give you a quote from scripture. In Leviticus 25:23 you'll find "The land shall not be sold forever, for the land is mine; for ye are strangers and sojourners with me". This is totally different from government agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) & Bureau of Land Management (BLM) using the power of eminent domain to take property.
The Second Plank
If we take a look at the second plank in the Communist Manifesto, you will read: A heavy and progressive, or graduated income tax. Now I don't think I need to explain this one, but for the people who I do need to here it goes. In 1913, Congress passed the 16th Amendment to the US Constitution, creating the federal income tax along with creating the Federal Reserve System, but more on this in the Fifth Plank.
The Federal Government and the States, with exception of 5 (at last count) are imposing a form of income tax. And the opposite again can be found in the Scripture. In Malichi 3:8-12 reads: "Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.
Ye are cursed with a curse for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation. Bring ye all the tithes unto the storehouse that there may be meat in mine house and prove me now herewith, saith the Lord of host, if I will not open you to the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to received it. And I will rebuke the devourer for your sakes, and he shall not destroy the fruits of your ground; neither shall your vine cast her fruit before the time in the field, saith the Lord of Host". Now that's a big difference in filling out and filling out your 1040 Form with the IRS.
Do you pay the income tax in the place in which you live? If so then you are at lest two tenths communist.
The Third Plank
The third plank is a short one it only reads: Abolition of all rights of inheritance. A lot of us will say that this one is in force today, because you still get the people who just recently died left them all there money. But my question is this. How much they leave you and how much went to the state? What is the reason why the states get anything? They didn't know the recently deceased.
Here is the reason, the state gets into the picture is the result of a marriage license. Have you ever heard of the saying "Read the Contract", well did you read it, I didn't think so. When somebody signs a marriage license, you are entering into a 3 party limited general partnership. The 3 people are you, the wife or husband and the State and you all are equal partners in this contract.
Now over the life of this contract, the active parties, the wife and husband work and create and produce things. You know things like money, children and all the stuff you have laying around in your house. And then that one day comes and your spouse dies and after the funeral, You have to decide what you have to do.
When the death certificate comes around you usually see someone from the State comes and knocks on your door asking for there part of the inheritance tax. Now what they are really asking for is the third plank, asking for there share of the inheritance. See you and the state are still in a partnership and this agreement hasn't be dissolved, and the state wants out, so you have to buy them out. The state role is it pays for the kid's education, school lunches.
Things like the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). So the state has done there part in making sure the partnership is working and they want a third of everything. If you look at each state law you will see that the inheritance tax is around 28% to 35% or a third.
The Fourth Plank
Going on the fourth plank, when you read it you will see: Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. This one might confuse some people, so Ill give you time to think about it...Got it yet. Alright ill give you a hint have you ever heard of Waco, Ruby Ridge or the Montana Freemen.
If you have then you will understand out the Fourth plank is in full force today here in America. The state using Policing power and means that if you get hostile and belligerent to the government, they can not only take everything you own away from, and in most cases imprison you.
The Fifth Plank
The fifth plank is a big one, it reads: A Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly. Now contrary to popular believe, The Federal Reserve is a Central Bank, don't believe me, go to there home page and read there header.
Also what most people don't understand that the Federal Reserve has nothing to do with the Federal Government? It is a Private bank and is owned by the top banks like JP Morgan & the Rothschild Family and others. And it is run for profit not for a stable economy growth. Furthermore, do you think it is real money that you have. Its not, Article 1 Sec. 10 of the U.S. Constitution reads;
"No state shall ...; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts;"
So here in America, only gold & silver is a payment of debt at law. So what are these things we use? They are called Federal Reserve Notes. And these notes is what called a bill of credit and these Federal Reserve Notes no not pay a debt at law. What Federal Reserve Notes do is they discharge the debt; it passes on the debt to the Federal Reserve. Think of them as IOU issued out by a private bank.
So think about it, have you every use gold to buy something. No, well then you are practicing the first plank to the Communist Manifesto. See 1st plank. You don't own anything, which is why the Federal Reserve can do this.
They do, because they are the issuer of the note. Here in America we have a dual monetary system, one in which everything is on credit, the one that everybody uses and the second one that under the Constitution a bimetallism monetary system. So the bottom line is, if you want to own something here in America, you have to pay for it in gold or silver, you can not use Federal Reserve Notes.
The Sixth Plank
The Sixth Plank Reads: Centralization of Means of Communication and Transport in the hands of the State. Have you figured this one out yet. Well if you have a Drivers licenses and have to register your vehicle then you practicing the sixth plank. Although it is private transportation it is still regulated by the state.
They make the rules you follow them. But if we look at public transportation, thinks like planes, trains & the bus system. Aren't they regulated by the government? What about the Centralization of Communication in the hands of the State.
Well you might now them as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). They have total control over what goes over the TV, radio & newspapers. Have you ever read Executive Order #10995 & #10999. These give the government direct control over all transportation and the media.
The Seventh Plank
Going on to the seventh plank, this one is complex and it reads: Extension of factories and instrument of production owned by the State. The Bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. Wow, I bet you are saying we don't have any we don't have any factories own by the state like Communist Russia do we?
Here we have big companies like GM, Ford, US Steel, Wal-Mart or Microsoft and they are privately owned. Well you might want to take another look. Every factory or business operates and exists on the vote of the Government. Though getting the business licenses and follow its regulations and on its activities they return a portion of the proceeds, we call it taxes. To me that qualifies ownership.
Over the last 150 years corporations have expanded immensely. And to the cultivation of wastelands, have you see the Colorado damn. While they do produce and product called electricity. All you have to do is ask any farmer what the purpose for. They will say it's for water irrigation. The improvement of soil generally with a common plan. Here in America we call it the Agricultural Stabilization Center (ASC)?
If you live in a rural city then you have probably heard of them. How many farmers to you think have taken hand outs and participated in theses government programs.
Well it looks like the Seventh Plank is alive in America today.
The Eighth Plank
Take a look at the Eighth Plank: Equal liability of all to labor, establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. This idea of being a good citizen means you have to have a job and pay taxes. I can't for the life of me think why anybody would want a job. Now I'm not saying that the idea of work is wrong.
Work should be your closes friend. But what the government is implementing is that you have to work on their terms. You must have a Social Security number, you have to have insurance and you must file a 1040 form eve April 15th. So what are industrial armies? Way back in the 1930s and look at the Civilian Conservations Corps (CCC), today it's called Americorps?
Do you have a Social Security Number, Well I hate to say it but your are practicing the eighth plank.
The Ninth Plank
Now the ninth plank is kind of ambitious and it reads: Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries with a gradual abolition of the distinction between cities and country by an equitable distribution of population over the country.
Let's break this down into two parts. First is easy and simple, have you heard of Archer Daniel Midland, it's the world largest agricultural processors of soybeans, corn, wheat and cocoa. Between the multinational agri-conglomerates and the factories farms we all see. Now the second part is difficult to understand.
Many people think that this part hasn't been implemented here in the USA. You might want to look again. During the 1920s the US population was around 100 Million and the majority around 44 million of them were living on the farm. So 44% of the population lived on farms and were self-standing.
Over the years though millions of American now life in cities and towns. Only about 4 percent of the total population lives on farms now. That is the gradual abolition of distinction between cities and country part.
The Tenth Plank
Finally we get to the tenth plank which calls for: Free education for all children in public school and abolition of children's factory labor in its present form; combination of education with industrial production. So I have to ask, did you go to public school, do you have kids that are attending public school.
Even school that you might think are private, if they accept government money, they have to do what the government says so they become public schools aswhile. Now the first public school started in the 1830s and even by World War I, many of public school weren't common outside the big cities and towns.
And now they are everywhere, in every city no matter how big. And for the abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. That was gone before WWI, they just shipped it overseas. We are following the Japanese's and the Germans, where you have to take tests to see what you have learned. And if you don't get good grades, you are doomed to work at places like Mc Donald's and settle with low pay.
We call that home schooling. Instead of taking 30 to 50 kids and putting them in a classroom and testing them to death, with a underpaid babysitter to watch them. It seems like the 10th plank is alive a well here in America.
So in spirit of the 10th plank, let's take a test. For each plank that you participate in or which affect you, give yourself 10 points. Now I'll bet you will not give yourself a 100. But I'm willing to bet that you have at least 50 points or more. But if you think about it, if you get any points at all, that means that you are a practicing communist. I don't think you realized that, it's just were the rubber meets the road.
-
what was your other point beside Eminent Domain
Rent is charged by owners to tenants
Property tax is not rent but if you want to play semantic games that's fine. If I don't occuppy my property then how can tax = rent?
Moreover property tax in the US precedes Communism so by that standard we've been sliding toward Communism since before it existed.......and it's taking a pretty fucking long time to get here too. Again, that's all based on your silly belief that property tax = "application of all rents of land to public purposes"
Clueless on so many levels. Read GW's post.
-
Ok- we could have ended this thread 6 hours ago based on Straws last stand posted above.
Obviously, this country is not a Communist Oligarchy. 333 never said it was. You posted 10 points and asked 333 to address them. He has ad nauseum.
Your last response illustrates that no matter how 333 responds, you will be convinced he lost the argument because he cannot show definitively that this country is completely communist right now. However, that was not the question that was posed when this thread began. 333 and others have said repeatedly that this country is moving toward communism because of the governments excessive involvement in private industry and the continual erosion of the individuals property rights by the state.
Here is one of many examples that explain what 333 is talking about-Has eminent domain always existed ( in constitution)? Yes. In recent years has it been repeatedly abused by the government? Absolutely. Does this help 333's argument---- Yes, which is why you are tripping over your shoelaces in semantics instead of addressing his point.
So, to recap; No America is not a communist country, but the expansion of government under the current administration ( and previous ones as well) is moving us in that direction. Case closed.
addressing it is one thing but that doesn't mean I've got to believe his nonsense
Eminnet Domain has existed since the country has existed so by that silly standard we've been slipping towards towards communism since the late 1700's
a few eminent domain cases (very very very few) does not equal"Abolition of property in land". Am I really supposed to be worried about communism because the federal government occassionally forces the sale of private property to build a road, airport etc...?
the few notable cases in recent years had private proprty being given to another private party (or group) so how is that abolition of real property in land when another private party now owns it. The whole ED argument is nonsense. You might have a point if it happend all the time but its very very rare and allowed for in the 5th ammendment to the Constitution so I guess we've been a Communist country since the beginning
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain
In the US, eminent domain (ED) first became law via the 5th Amendment and, to a lesser extent, the 3rd Amendment to the US Constitution. During the Revolutionary War, due to a lack of facilities such as tents, soldiers forcibly sought housing in whatever homes were near their military assignments. The 3rd Amendment was enacted in 1791 as part of the US Constitution's Bill of Rights. It provided that the quartering of soldiers on private property could not take place in peacetime without the landowner's consent. It also required that, during wartime, established law had to be followed in housing troops on private property. Presumably, this would mandate "just compensation", a requirement for the exercise of eminent domain in general per the 5th Amendment to the Constitution [2] In addition, all US states have legislation defining ED procedures within their respective territories.[3]
The most common reason ED is exercised in the US is for building new or larger roadways, airports or government buildings.
-
Straw you said you have family in dallas, try do do the things i list below with the things you think you own
-park YOUR CAR anywhere on YOUR property that isnt paved
-park YOUR box trailer in YOUR back yard, even with a privacy fence,
-let YOUR grass on YOUR protery get too high
-let YOUR trash cans get too full
- add onto YOUR existing fence
-keep too many of YOUR pets in YOUR house
- dont keep YOUR property up to government standard
-put in a pool YOU pay for
- in some areas cut down trees on YOUR property
- park too many cars in YOUR driveway
AND THE GOVERNMENT IS MAKING IT MORE HARD TO DO ANYTHING WITH YOUR OWN PROPERTY, BUT EASIER FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO TAKE YOUR SHIT, NO WE ARENT COMMUNIST , BUT IT STARTS WITH LIL THINGS LIKE THESE, THEN BEFORE YOU KNOW IT GUESS WHAT
-
addressing it is one thing but that doesn't mean I've got to believe his nonsense
Eminnet Domain has existed since the country has existed so by that silly standard we've been slipping towards towards communism since the late 1700's
a few eminent domain cases (very very very few) does not equal"Abolition of property in land". Am I really supposed to be worried about communism because the federal government occassionally forces the sale of private property to build a road, airport etc...?
the few notable cases in recent years had private proprty being given to another private party (or group) so how is that abolition of real property in land when another private party now owns it. The whole ED argument is nonsense. You might have a point if it happend all the time but its very very rare and allowed for in the 5th ammendment to the Constitution so I guess we've been a Communist country since the beginning
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain
In the US, eminent domain (ED) first became law via the 5th Amendment and, to a lesser extent, the 3rd Amendment to the US Constitution. During the Revolutionary War, due to a lack of facilities such as tents, soldiers forcibly sought housing in whatever homes were near their military assignments. The 3rd Amendment was enacted in 1791 as part of the US Constitution's Bill of Rights. It provided that the quartering of soldiers on private property could not take place in peacetime without the landowner's consent. It also required that, during wartime, established law had to be followed in housing troops on private property. Presumably, this would mandate "just compensation", a requirement for the exercise of eminent domain in general per the 5th Amendment to the Constitution [2] In addition, all US states have legislation defining ED procedures within their respective territories.[3]
The most common reason ED is exercised in the US is for building new or larger roadways, airports or government buildings.
But for your ignorance, this could have been a decent thread. GW owned you, I owned you, dumpling owned you, bodypro owned you, etc.
As for ED, you are clueless on the recent jurisprudence on that so dont even go there and as act as though the KELO decision didnt happen and has been upheld in other courts.
Typical STRAW MAN arguments you offer and little else.
-
try to add a room onto YOUR house without permission from the government
try to put a sprinkler system in YOUR lawn
I CAN GO ON FOREVER WITH EXAMPLES LIKE THIS and i havent even started on what the government can do to YOUR business YOU think YOU may own in america
-
try to add a room onto YOUR house without permission from the government
try to put a sprinkler system in YOUR lawn
Body - I have presented so much evidence that I could win a criminal trial, let alone a civil trial on this matter,
I cant wait till we move to No. 2.
Straw will get utterly decimated on that one.
-
the scary part of this is that people like straw probably vote
-
heres a good one for straw.... spank YOUR child or YOUR dog and look what the government can do
-
heres a good one for straw.... spank YOUR child or YOUR dog and look what the government can do
We will get to that Body, we still have to get to No. 2.
-
The Ten Planks of Communism
By Nickolie Greer
________________________ ________________________ ______
333 - just because you quote someone else opinion rather than using your own words doesn't make it credible.
I read the section you highlighted and I even said in a post a few pages ago that you and I might actually be in agreement on some issue regarind the Bureau of Land Management.
Based on some of your claims is seems the Communist Revolution in this country mus have started a long time ago. Can you give me some of your insight on when it started. I mean the 5th ammendment to the Consitution allows Eminent Domain so is that the starting point or is it somewhat later. I know you think we're alreay pretty close but just not quite yet a full communist country
Maybe thats because we dont exactly yet have a full out communist coountry?
-
Straw you said you have family in dallas, try do do the things i list below with the things you think you own
-park YOUR CAR anywhere on YOUR property that isnt paved
-park YOUR box trailer in YOUR back yard, even with a privacy fence,
-let YOUR grass on YOUR protery get too high
-let YOUR trash cans get too full
- add onto YOUR existing fence
-keep too many of YOUR pets in YOUR house
- dont keep YOUR property up to government standard
-put in a pool YOU pay for
- in some areas cut down trees on YOUR property
- park too many cars in YOUR driveway
AND THE GOVERNMENT IS MAKING IT MORE HARD TO DO ANYTHING WITH YOUR OWN PROPERTY, BUT EASIER FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO TAKE YOUR SHIT, NO WE ARENT COMMUNIST , BUT IT STARTS WITH LIL THINGS LIKE THESE, THEN BEFORE YOU KNOW IT GUESS WHAT
[/b]
What? ???
-
If i really have to answer that for you then you are truely as clueless as people say heres a hint, the opposite of capitalist
-
try to add a room onto YOUR house without permission from the government
try to put a sprinkler system in YOUR lawn
I CAN GO ON FOREVER WITH EXAMPLES LIKE THIS and i havent even started on what the government can do to YOUR business YOU think YOU may own in america
zoning laws and building codes = communism
what country to you live in?
-
If i really have to answer that for you then you are truely as clueless as people say heres a hint, the opposite of capitalist
oh right
of course
how could I have missed that
::)
-
if YOU really own things how can all these laws be placed? And who makes them? hmmm the government, these laws werent as picky and harsh 30 years ago, so like i said it all starts somewhere and every year there are more and more regulations put on us and what the government lets people think is theirs.
-
Your last response illustrates that no matter how 333 responds, you will be convinced he lost the argument because he cannot show definitively that this country is completely communist right now. However, that was not the question that was posed when this thread began. 333 and others have said repeatedly that this country is moving toward communism because of the governments excessive involvement in private industry and the continual erosion of the individuals property rights by the state.
That's exactly the problem. 33's posted ample evidence for his argument, Straw Man simply disagrees and he's not bright enough to distinguish the difference.
Move on with the next point already.
-
This Thread =
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=315050.0;attach=358025;image)
;D
-
if YOU really own things how can all these laws be placed? And who makes them? hmmm the government, these laws werent as picky and harsh 30 years ago, so like i said it all starts somewhere and every year there are more and more regulations put on us and what the government lets people think is theirs.
If you own things how can laws be placed? Really that's your question? So according to you if you owned something you should be able to do anything on it. Like say kill someone right? I mean it's your land you should be, in your opinion, immune to the laws.
-
yea kc i think you should be able to kill people lol wow you arent too bright , but i cant say i am surprised
-
yea kc i think you should be able to kill people lol wow you arent too bright , but i cant say i am surprised
I'm just trying to understand your logic. You believe if you own something you should be able to do whatever you want on it, regardless of laws, bylaws, etc. It was an extreme example but hey i don't fu*k around owning the right wing.
-
yea kc i think you should be able to kill people lol wow you arent too bright , but i cant say i am surprised
Straw - look at you original argument, you asked me to point out any of the tenents of the communist manifesto. Most people agree I have provided ample evidence for my argument on No 1.
Shall me move to No 2 on the Progesive income tax?
-
does me adding a room onto my house affect your livelyhood no me killing you in the room does, it should be nobodies business including the gov if i want to add a room or pool to my property or park my racecar trailer in my back yard, these are very different from killing someone on the property
-
yes lets discuss and burry straw on #2
-
yea kc i think you should be able to kill people lol wow you arent too bright , but i cant say i am surprised
Straw - look at your original argument, you asked me to point out any of the tenents of the communist manifesto. Most people agree I have provided ample evidence for my argument on No 1.
Shall me move to No 2 on the Progesive income tax?
-
333 - just because you quote someone else opinion rather than using your own words doesn't make it credible.
I read the section you highlighted and I even said in a post a few pages ago that you and I might actually be in agreement on some issue regarind the Bureau of Land Management.
Based on some of your claims is seems the Communist Revolution in this country mus have started a long time ago. Can you give me some of your insight on when it started. I mean the 5th ammendment to the Consitution allows Eminent Domain so is that the starting point or is it somewhat later. I know you think we're alreay pretty close but just not quite yet a full communist country
There has always been a push by people to implements tenents of the communist manifesto in this country. We can deal w that on another thread.
As for No 2. - Straw do you agree with a progressive income tax? If so, why?
If so, if we are all supposed to be treated equally under the law, isnt it more fair to have a flat tax where everyone pays an equal tax rate on the income they earn?
-
That's exactly the problem. 33's posted ample evidence for his argument, Straw Man simply disagrees and he's not bright enough to distinguish the difference.
Move on with the next point already.
I have not been presented with anything that supports the "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes."
Think about when this was written. Property was owned by a tiny fraction of the population.
They were talking about abolition of private ownership of property.
They weren't talking about property tax, eminent domain, zoing laws, lawn maintenance or parking your camper in the back yard etc... They were talking about abolition of private ownership of real property (land)
All I've been presented with are pathetically weak arguments and then bitching and moaning that I won't accept them
-
does me adding a room onto my house affect your livelyhood no me killing you in the room does, it should be nobodies business including the gov if i want to add a room or pool to my property or park my racecar trailer in my back yard, these are very different from killing someone on the property
the city has an interest in maintaining zoning requirements and building codes and it's got nothing to do with communism.
-
I have not been presented with anything that supports the "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes."
Think about when this was written. Property was owned by a tiny fraction of the population.
They were talking about abolition of private ownership of property.
They weren't talking about property tax, eminent domain, zoing laws, lawn maintenance or parking your camper in the back yard etc... They were talking about abolition of private ownership of real property (land)
All I've been presented with are pathetically weak arguments and then bitching and moaning that I won't accept them
Bro you are helpless and brain dead.
-
I have not been presented with anything that supports the "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes."
No, you've been presented with 8 pages of supporting material to indicate that we are moving in that direction. He's never said we are there. Personally, I think we sometimes move in that direction and sometimes we move away from it. But, I have the capacity to distinguish the fact that he's provided ample evidence to support and justify his opinion.
As I said, you lack the mental capacity to understand that there are other worthy opinions besides your own.
-
the city has an interest in maintaining zoning requirements and building codes and it's got nothing to do with communism.
Hey 333 - you keep ranting about all the Marxist/Communist in our country (including the POTUS). Can you show me one thing on this list that even comes close to what we have today
Straw - rather than going in circles with you over this since you are never going to concede squat, lets move on to others since you only asked me to prove one, not all 10.
Shall we deal with No. 2?
-
Hey 333 - you keep ranting about all the Marxist/Communist in our country (including the POTUS). Can you show me one thing on this list that even comes close to what we have today
Straw - rather than going in circles with you over this since you are never going to concede squat, lets move on to others since you only asked me to prove one, not all 10.
:
Shall we deal with No. 2?
Can't move on until you concede you have no evidence of the abolition of property in land. In fact private ownership of property has been steadily rising for 50 years
Can't move on until you concede you have not even given one valid example of "application of all rents of land to public purposes". Your only weak attempt was to confuse property tax with rent. You haven't shown one example where the govt seizes rents from a private owner much less ALL rents which is how the statement is written.
8 pages of failure on your part but you can concede now or keep trying. You still have 9 more chances to be right.
remember - Abolition of Private Ownership in Real Property and Confiscation of ALL rents from real property
-
Can't move on until you concede you have no evidence of the abolition of property in land.
Can't move on until you concede you have not even given one valid example of "application of all rents of land to public purposes". Your only weak attempt was to confuse property tax with rent.
LOL, dude...can you really not see the childishness of your argument? You can't proceed unless he concedes to your point of view?
C'mon man, I would expect that type of argument from retards like Blacken or Mons...but certainly not you.
You've made your point clearly. He's made his point clearly. How about the tax issue?
-
LOL, dude...can you really not see the childishness of your argument? You can't proceed unless he concedes to your point of view?
C'mon man, I would expect that type of argument from retards like Blacken or Mons...but certainly not you.
You've made your point clearly. He's made his point clearly. How about the tax issue?
I'm willing to keep talking abou this issue and I'm amazed its gone 8+ pages on the first point.
I don't feel it's been resolved but if 333 will answer a few questions I will move on
1rst question is: What is the definition of the word abolition?
-
The act of doing away with or the state of being done away with;
THERE YOU GO STRAW I HOPE THIS WARMS YOUR ASSHOLE OK ON TO NUMBER 2
-
BPS - try to relax
I said a"few" questions and I asked 333 not you
I'm willing to keep talking abou this issue and I'm amazed its gone 8+ pages on the first point.
I don't feel it's been resolved but [size=1p4t]if 333 will answer a few questions[/size] I will move on
1rst question is: What is the definition of the word abolition?
Since you answered the first question you can take a shot at the second question (it's MUCH easier)
Do you see the state of "being done away with" of the private ownership of real property" anywhere around you?
Does private ownership of real property still exist?
Yes
or
No
?
The act of doing away with or the state of being done away with;
THERE YOU GO STRAW I HOPE THIS WARMS YOUR ASSHOLE OK ON TO NUMBER 2
-
yES I GAVE MANY EXAMPLES OF THIS LOL WOW
-
Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. THIS WOULD BE AN INTERESTING NEXT TOPIC
-
yES I GAVE MANY EXAMPLES OF THIS LOL WOW
you're saying that private ownership of real property still exists right?
-
you're saying that private ownership of real property still exists right?
Bro - you created a bogus argument and question. No one is arguing or claiming we live in the communist country. Yet you insist on us admitting to something we never claimed.
Additionally, you asked me to provide support for even one of the list, not the entire list on every point. We are dealing with the first one and many others, including myself, have provided clear evidence that you and we have all lost much of our property rights.
What I have said, and which I have backed up with fact, example, evidence, logic, law, etc is that we have lost of ton of our private property rights to the point where it is simply not true to say you own your property outright. Its simply false for you to claim otherwise and everyone on this board agrees with me, not your idiotic views.
Whether its civil forfeiture laws, expansion of eminent domain laws, "open space" laws, restrictive zoning, insane property taxes, govt. easments, etc, the path we are on is towards communism and collectivism, not more private property rights. That is undeniable to anyone with a thinking brain. Oh thats right, you are the Straw Man from the Wizard of Oz who . . . . didnt have a brain.
When the govt can foreclose upon your home for failure to pay property taxes, simply don't own your home outright. Can the govt confiscate your cell phone if you dont pay your cell phone tax? No. Can the govt foreclose on your home if you dont pay youe energy tax or tax on gas? No. Thus, you have lost this debate Straw, deal with it since the property tax is in essence a rent you pay to the govt and the money used to pay for what the government wants. If you dont pay, you lose your home.
This debate is over, you lost. Deal with it and now on to the progressive income tax.
-
Bro - you created a bogus argument and question. No one is arguing or claiming we live in the communist country. Yet you insist on us admitting to something we never claimed.
I never said we live in a Communist country. You're the only one that has even come close to suggesting it.
Maybe thats because we dont exactly yet have a full out communist coountry?
The task is SIMPLE
According to the Communist Manifesto, all these were prior conditions for a transition from capitalism to communism
Prior Conditions = They must have occurred or come to pass.
Simple Question - Does private ownership of real property still exist in this country?
Do tens of millions of private parties still own real property in this country?
Yes
or
No
?
-
I never said we live in a Communist country. You're the only one that has even come close to suggesting it.
The task is SIMPLE
According to the Communist Manifesto, all these were prior conditions for a transition from capitalism to communism
Prior Conditions = They must have occurred or come to pass.
Simple Question - Does private ownership of real property still exist in this country?
Do tens of millions of private parties still own real property in this country?
Yes
or
No
?
Not absolutely, and increasingly less so. You simply dont own your home outright with the government taking a de facto ownership interest in your home.
Bro - do you even read what anyone else writes? You did the same bs on the Barney Frank and his gay lover running the escort service.
Face it 99% of the posters agree with me on this not you. Take a clue - you lost this debate.
On to No 2.
-
Not absolutely, and increasingly less so. You simply dont own your home outright with the government taking a de facto ownership interest in your home.
dude - you're parsing words and playing games
I own my property, just like you and tens of millions of other people in this country
When that list was written private ownership of property was in a tiny fraction of the elite
Fast forward to 2010 in the United States and you have private ownership of real property in the by tens of millions of people
private ownership has not been abolished
-
dude - you're parsing words and playing games
I own my property, just like you and tens of millions of other people in this country
When that list was written private ownership of property was in a tiny fraction of the elite
Fast forward to 2010 in the United States and you have private ownership of real property in the by tens of millions of people
private ownership has not been abolished
Private ownership has been eroded greatly by the measures all of us have explained to you.
Communism is a process not an event and we are moving towards that with increasing property taxes, increasing zoning restrictions, increased mandates and fees, increased civil forfeiture laws, increased eminent domain jurisprudence, etc.
But keep holding onto to your delusions bro. Just tell me how much you own when you dont pay your property tax for a year or two.
-
Private ownership has been eroded greatly by the measures all of us have explained to you.
whether private ownership has been eroded or not is not the question (I don't think it has but again, that's not the question)
it still exists and in HUGE numbers
it has not been abolished
-
whether private ownership has been eroded or not is not the question (I don't think it has but again, that's not the question)
it still exists and in HUGE numbers
it has not been abolished
Its doesnt have to be accomplished with the road we are on since the government basically gets out of it what it wants anyway.
1. You lose your home if you dont pay the Government RENT that it then uses for its own purposes.
2. It tells you where and what you can build.
3. It can place an easment across your property.
4. It can take your property via eminent domain.
5. It can restricvely zone your property impeding your enojyment of your own property to what it, the government deems fit.
6. It can seize your property via civil forefeiture laws solely on an allegation and bogus indictment.
And on and on.
So you actually think you own your land, you dont! You have a financial interest in it, subject to government mandates, taxes, restrictions, laws, etc that render your "ownership" of the same merely in name only.
But keep up the delusions you have, dont pay your tax for a year, and tell me what you own.
-
Its doesnt have to be accomplished with the road we are on since the government basically gets out of it what it wants anyway.
1. You lose your home if you dont pay the Government RENT that it then uses for its own purposes.
2. It tells you where and what you can build.
3. It can place an easment across your property.
4. It can take your property via eminent domain.
5. It can restricvely zone your property impeding your enojyment of your own property to what it, the government deems fit.
6. It can seize your property via civil forefeiture laws solely on an allegation and bogus indictment.
And on and on.
So you actually think you own your land, you dont! You have a financial interest in it, subject to government mandates, taxes, restrictions, laws, etc that render your "ownership" of the same merely in name only.
But keep up the delusions you have, dont pay your tax for a year, and tell me what you own.
333 - you can parse words and play semantic games all day
I still own my property
guess who has to pay the property taxes
THE OWNER
that would be me
private ownership has NOT been abolised
-
333 - you can parse words and play semantic games all day
I still own my property
guess who has to pay the property taxes
THE OWNER
that would be me
private ownership has NOT been abolised
You are the one parsing words, not me. I said we are on the road to communism, but are not there yet.
We have 10 items on your list and no one said No 1. has to be accomplished first followed by No 2.
Did it ever occur to you that things dont happen all at the same time?
Look at your damn list bro - on most items we are far closer to communism than the item you are harping on, and even at that, most people here agree that my points are more accurate than yours.
-
We never said it has been, and that wasn't your original question either and you know it. This is getting silly...you accuse him of playing word games yet the intent of your original post turned to him blaming Obama(which he never did in this thread), to zoning laws, to the complete abolishon of property rights. You are the one that keeps leading this thing in circles.
No, there is no abolition of property rights...yet. It can happen, and will happen if people don't watch out for their own rights. That's history and the nature of governments from both sides of the political spectrum. It is up to the people to guard against them because obviously government can't and won't do it.
The process that we are currently in can lead us to Communism. That answers number 1 of the original point of this thread.
On to #2...
-
BRO - RE-READ YOUR OWN DAMN QUESTION TO ME:
Hey 333 - you keep ranting about all the Marxist/Communist in our country (including the POTUS). Can you show me one thing on this list that even comes close to what we have today
1. You said "comes close", not necessarily occuring as a matter of fact. I have listed ton of examples that everyone agrees with me on No. 1. Thus, I have won this debate since it was never my obligation to prove your claim "has private property been abolished?"
2. You gave a list of ten items and asked me to provide 1 example among the ten, not all ten.
Shall we move to No. 2 now?
-
One of the most radical ideas proposed by Marx in his Manifesto was that of "A heavily progressive or graduated income tax." (Marx 230) A progressive income tax is one that taxes the public based on their income; people with higher incomes are taxed more than those with lower incomes. On February 12, 1913, the Sixteenth Amendment was added to the United States Constitution.
It states, "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration." Before this Amendment, the United States only levied regressive taxes, such as property and sales taxes, which still persist.
After the Amendment, the tax rate was progressive; 1 percent of all income up to $20,000 was to be paid to the government, and this rate rose to 6 percent after $500,000. Over the years, it has become increasingly progressive, with 15 tax brackets of differing incomes and rates. This system was designed to take more from those who have more, and redistribute the income to those who have less. Later, Social Security would formalize this through the direct redistribution of income. These ideas are obviously Communist in nature, as they attempt to close the financial gap between the so-called bourgeois and proletarians.
________________________ ________________________ _________
Who Likes a Progressive Income Tax?
The Institute for Policy Innovation’s Dr. Merrill Matthews says not the formerly communist countries.
Karl Marx’s vision of a socialist society included a progressive income tax, where higher income people pay not just more tax, but higher rates on their income.
Ironically, while the U.S. and Western Europe tend to embrace capitalism, they adopted Marx’s progressive income tax. Yet nine of the East European and formerly communist countries have abandoned it for a flat tax, where only one tax rate is applied to all income.
And now Bulgaria and the Czech Republic are considering joining the flat taxers with a single 10 percent rate.
Having spent decades under communist rule, formerly communist countries are ready to cast off Marxist policies that stifle economic growth—like the progressive income tax.
So when will the capitalist countries also abandon their Marxist policies?
-
BRO - RE-READ YOUR OWN DAMN QUESTION TO ME:
Hey 333 - you keep ranting about all the Marxist/Communist in our country (including the POTUS). Can you show me one thing on this list that even comes close to what we have today
I don't think we've come close to the ABOLITION of private ownership in this country.
Right now you can make a paltry 3.5% down payment and get an FHA loan. If anything, it's easier to get a loan now than it was was 20 years ago and certainly easier than 50 of 100 years ago.
Look at how private ownership in property has been abolished (or even your new definition of ABOLISH which seems to be "erode") in the last 40 years
-
I don't think we've come close to the ABOLITION of private ownership in this country.
Right now you can make a paltry 3.5% down payment and get an FHA loan. If anything, it's easier to get a loan now than it was was 20 years ago and certainly easier than 50 of 100 years ago.
Look at how private ownership in property has been abolished (or even your new definition of ABOLISH which seems to be "erode") in the last 40 years
Just stop now. You are embarassing yourself. The homeownership rate was a function was the federal reserve and banking system giving away free money.
That figure, which is nonsense, has absolutely no bearing on what I and others have posted.
-
I don't think we've come close to the ABOLITION of private ownership in this country.
Right now you can make a paltry 3.5% down payment and get an FHA loan. If anything, it's easier to get a loan now than it was was 20 years ago and certainly easier than 50 of 100 years ago.
Look at how private ownership in property has been abolished (or even your new definition of ABOLISH which seems to be "erode") in the last 40 years
Wow, just wow, before you had a couple of good points. Are you fucking with us? Are you trying to just get us riled up?
If you buy a house unless to write a check, or put it on your credit cards(unsecured debt) you still don't own your home. The bank does...come on, you're smarter than that.
-
Wow, just wow, before you had a couple of good points. Are you fucking with us? Are you trying to just get us riled up?
If you buy a house unless to write a check, or put it on your credit cards(unsecured debt) you still don't own your home. The bank does...come on, you're smarter than that.
Straw - shall we deal with the progressive income tax now that you have lost this one?
-
Just stop now. You are embarassing yourself. The homeownership rate was a function was the federal reserve and banking system giving away free money.
That figure, which is nonsense, has absolutely no bearing on what I and others have posted.
I guess they've been giving away free money for the last 40 years too and I guess they are still doing it too.
This is sales data from my part of the country: http://www.dqnews.com/Articles/2010/News/California/Bay-Area/RRBay100121.aspx
The secret Commies who run this country sure have a weird way of Abolishing private ownership in property.
-
I guess they've been giving away free money for the last 40 years too and I guess they are still doing it too.
This is sales data from my part of the country: http://www.dqnews.com/Articles/2010/News/California/Bay-Area/RRBay100121.aspx
The secret Commies who run this country sure have a weird way of Abolishing private ownership in property.
Bro - your making yourself look even worse.
Cut your losses now, you lost this debate.
Now for No. 2, which by definition is already in place and effect. Do you want to discuss that since you lost No 1. You cant keep changing the goal posts in No. 1 to hide the fact that you lost the basic argument to your question, which was never are we a communist nation. Your original question was to name even one item to where we are close.
On that question, the way you presented it, you have lost the debate since we already showed you how the govt is progressively and increasingly eroding your private property rights.
Straw- you lost - deal with it or better word your questions next time.
-
Bro - your making yourself look even worse.
Cut your losses now, you lost this debate.
Now for No. 2, which by definition is already in place and effect. Do you want to discuss that since you lost No 1. You cant keep changing the goal posts in No. 1 to hide the fact that you lost the basic argument to your question, which was never are we a communist nation. Your original question was to name even one item to where we are close.
On that question, the way you presented it, you have lost the debate since we already showed you how the govt is progressively and increasingly eroding your private property rights.
Straw- you lost - deal with it or better word your questions next time.
who said anything about ERODING
again - the term is ABOLITION
all the evidence points toward a long term increase in the private ownership of real property
you've parsed words and played semantic games for 10 pages but have completely failed to show that an "ABOLITION of property in land"
-
who said anything about ERODING
again - the term is ABOLITION
all the evidence points toward a long term increase in the private ownership of real property
you've parsed words and played semantic games for 10 pages but have completely failed to show that an "ABOLITION of property in land"
right..he be thinkin someone dumb and sant see through that shit. Dude you out here bending words and makin stupid ass inferences...still 1+1=7 in your book 3333, fox news has turned your brain into mush
-
who said anything about ERODING
again - the term is ABOLITION
all the evidence points toward a long term increase in the private ownership of real property
you've parsed words and played semantic games for 10 pages but have completely failed to show that an "ABOLITION of property in land"
Hey numbnuts, read Dumplings' post - YOU ARE THE IDIOT PLAYING WORD GAMES.
Read your damn questions again.
This is getting stupid now. You run away when getting owned and change the issue when you lose. Just stop. Accept your defeat and we will go on to No 2.
-
right..he be thinkin someone dumb and sant see through that shit. Dude you out here bending words and makin stupid ass inferences...still 1+1=7 in your book 3333, fox news has turned your brain into mush
Everyone but you and Straw disagree.
Read the original question, my and everyone elses' posts, and it is clear as day Straw lost this one.
Bro - can you even formulate an argument yourself? I seriously don't think so.
THE ORIGINAL QUESTION
Hey 333 - you keep ranting about all the Marxist/Communist in our country (including the POTUS). Can you show me one thing on this list that even comes close to what we have today
Can you idiots read?
1. He said pick one of the ten, not all ten. I gave answers on all ten yet Straw is harped up on a hyper technical definition that his question did not even call for!
2. What was required was finding one of the ten "that even comes close" . He did not say I had to prove it unquestionably as a matter of fact, only that it comes close, which I did.
3. Straw insists on claiming victory to this debate by having me concede something that was never asked in the first place or was ever claimed.
So who is playing word games Mal - Straw or myself?
-
Everyone but you and Straw disagree.
Read the original question, my and everyone elses' posts, and it is clear as day Straw lost this one.
Bro - can you even formulate an argument yourself? I seriously don't think so.
Dude you and i know that you have never proven anything... Your tactic is 1. Use extreme hyperbole, mixed with a bunch of shit that is related but dosent show a strong coorelation, finally you add a few far out instances and factors, and presto, you have PROVEN something...you and i know thats what you do...just call it what it is.
-
Dude you and i know that you have never proven anything... Your tactic is 1. Use extreme hyperbole, mixed with a bunch of shit that is related but dosent show a strong coorelation, finally you add a few far out instances and factors, and presto, you have PROVEN something...you and i know thats what you do...just call it what it is.
I'll tell you what - why dont we have others who have not posted in this thread judge?
-
Hey numbnuts, read Dumplings' post - YOU ARE THE IDIOT PLAYING WORD GAMES.
Read your damn questions again.
This is getting stupid now. You run away when getting owned and change the issue when you lose. Just stop. Accept your defeat and we will go on to No 2.
Let's look at my question again since you've taken 10 tortured pages of bullshit to avoid the obvious answer:
Hey 333 - you keep ranting about all the Marxist/Communist in our country (including the POTUS). Can you show me one thing on this list that even comes close to what we have today
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
We have no evidence of Abolition of property in land
You say we have “Erosion” and but the facts show a long term increase in private ownership
You say we have “Erosion” but then say the government has been “giving away free money” to support home ownership
You say we have “Erosion” but you can still buy a home with 3.5% down payment and get a fixed rate near 5%
You say we have “Erosion” yet the government has programs in place (Making Home Affordable) in an attempt (flawed in my opinion) to help people KEEP their homes
You say that property tax, zoning requirements, building codes are all proof of the “Erosion” or private ownership yet those things have been in place for years and all during the time that home ownership has grown and every single homeowner knew those things existed before they choose to purchase. Guess what, zoning requirements and buildng codes are good things and promote ownership in property.
You FAIL on the first half of #1
Do you want to work on the 2nd half or would you like to concede the entire point and move on to #2?
-
Let's look at my question again since you've taken 10 tortured pages of bullshit to avoid the obvious answer:
We have no evidence of Abolition of property in land
You say we have “Erosion” and but the facts show a long term increase in private ownership
You say we have “Erosion” but then say the government has been “giving away free money” to support home ownership
You say we have “Erosion” but you can still buy a home with 3.5% down payment and get a fixed rate near 5%
You say we have “Erosion” yet the government has programs in place (Making Home Affordable) in an attempt (flawed in my opinion) to help people KEEP their homes
You say that property tax, zoning requirements, building codes are all proof of the “Erosion” or private ownership yet those things have been in place for years and all during the time that home ownership has grown and every single homeowner knew those things existed before they choose to purchase. Guess what, zoning requirements and buildng codes are good things and promote ownership in property.
You FAIL on the first half of #1
Do you want to work on the 2nd half or would you like to concede the entire point and move on to #2?
No wonder you voted for Obama - you will buy into any rubbish you think sounds good.
You are asking me to concede something:
1. That was never claimed.
2. Something you never asked me to prove.
-
Are things better under Barry...no
Has he spent more of our money...yes
Are more people now dependent on barry...yes
Has government grown...yes..Hi GM
Does his party more closely identify with left wing leaders like Castro and Chavez..yes...hi Black Congressional caucus
The list is endless...forget it...his a leftwing nutbag.
-
No wonder you voted for Obama - you will buy into any rubbish you think sounds good.
You are asking me to concede something:
1. That was never claimed.
2. Something you never asked me to prove.
The list were 10 thing that were prior conditions for a transition from capitalism to communism
#1 on this list has NOT happened, has not come close and in fact all EVIDENCE points to the exact opposite happening. Private Ownership has been increasing.
it's f'ng amazing to me that you are actually a lawyer
-
The list were 10 thing that were prior conditions for a transition from capitalism to communism
#1 on this list has NOT happened, has not come close and in fact all EVIDENCE points to the exact opposite happening. Private Ownership has been increasing.
it's f'ng amazing to me that you are actually a lawyer
Straw - your an idiot.
You are mixing up all sorts of shit now.
Your alleged "ownership" is illusory and not absolute when the govt can foreclosure upon your home EVEN AFTER ITS PAID OFF for not paying property tax, i.e. rent.
Why is it so hard for you to understand that concept?
-
Straw - your an idiot.
You are mixing up all sorts of shit now.
Your alleged "ownership" is illusory and not absolute when the govt can foreclosure upon your home EVEN AFTER ITS PAID OFF for not paying property tax, i.e. rent.
Why is it so hard for you to understand that concept?
it's not hard to understand
it's just a flawed argument
the fact that I have to pay my property tax or risk losing my home to foreclsure doesn't mean I don't own the property
now we're up to 11 pages of you trying to parse the definition of "own"
-
it's not hard to understand
it's just a flawed argument
the fact that I have to pay my property tax or risk losing my home to foreclsure doesn't mean I don't own the property
now we're up to 11 pages of you trying to parse the definition of "own"
If you dont pay your cell phone tax - does the govt confiscate your phone?
Bro - you lost the debate deal with it.
You dont own shit if after having paid for the item, i.e. your house, the govt can seize it if you dont pay the "rent" they charge.
But keep dreaming bro. It must be nice being so dumb and blind to reality.
Watch this and wake up.
-
If you dont pay your cell phone tax - does the govt confiscate your phone?
Bro - you lost the debate deal with it.
You dont own shit if after having paid for the item, i.e. your house, the govt can seize it if you dont pay the "rent" they charge.
But keep dreaming bro. It must be nice being so dumb and blind to reality.
keep spinning man
that's the only way you're going to remain dizzy enough to believe your own bullshit
-
Straw how about a lil project? Dont pay any tax what so ever on everything you own and dont register your vehicle or get it inspected for a year, and drop your insurance and then see how many of these things you own are still in your possession. Until then how about # 2 or 5???????
-
keep spinning man
that's the only way you're going to remain dizzy enough to believe your own bullshit
I'm not spinning shit - you just are too small-minded to understand that fact that you "ownership" in real property is mostly illusory since if you fail to pay the rent that the govt tells you to pay you lose it. Thats not ownership, its more of a license if anything.
If that simply concept is so hard for you to understand, its no wonder this thread has lasted so long.
-
I'm not spinning shit - you just are too small-minded to understand that fact that you "ownership" in real property is mostly illusory since if you fail to pay the rent that the govt tells you to pay you lose it. Thats not ownership, its more of a license if anything.
If that simply concept is so hard for you to understand, its no wonder this thread has lasted so long.
again - not hard to understand but just semantic bullshit
and you know it
-
again - not hard to understand but just semantic bullshit
and you know it
No its not - I was going to post about civil forfeiture laws by why bother? You dont consider any viewpoint other than your own regardless of the facts that many around you present.
You think you own something that ultimately you do not.
Again simple question, if the government can foreclose on your property after you have paid off your mortgage, do you truly have sole ownership of the same? No you do not.
Either way, this is going in circles since no matter what anyone says, GW, BPS, Dumpling, Skip, HH6, anyone you dont even consider it because it disagrees with you.
As for No. 2 - you are dead in the water on that and we should just move to No. 3 since No. 2 is a no brainer in that we are already there on that.
-
333 - I don't remember if you even own property or not
-
Straw read this with an open mind
________________________ ________________________ ___________-
Do You Reallly Own
Anything Except Toilet Paper?
By Ted Twietmeyer
tedtw@frontiernet.net
9-27-6
This is a subject not unlike the chicken-egg story. What exactly IS "ownership?" We'll look past the obvious fiat currency (Federal Reserve Notes) everyone carries in their pocket. But before we really delve into this subject, let's see what the "mainstream" thinking is about this word. After all, everything you have from the chair you're sitting on to the computer you're reading this with, to the roof over your head - all hinges on the *perceived* security of ownership. Even renting may be perceived as a form of ownership. While you're the tenant you have control of an apartment or house and you define who can come and go, who can stay with you, etc... until your lease expires. The past five years have seen new restrictions and laws quietly placed on renters and property owners.
The Merriam-Webster's dictionary definition of "ownership" with just one small sentence: "the state, relation, or fact of being an owner." [1] Isn't that a real fountain of information to answer our question!
However, Britannica does a far better job of defining "ownership:"
"the legal relation between a person (individual, group, corporation, or government) and an object. The object may be corporeal, such as furniture, or completely the creature of law, such as a patent, copyright, or annuity; it may be movable, such as an animal, or immovable, such as land. Because the objects of property and the protected relations are different in every culture and vary according to law, custom, and economic system and the relative social status of those who enjoy its privileges, it is difficult to find a least common denominator of "ownership." Ownership of property probably means at a minimum that one's government or society will help to exclude others from the use or enjoyment of one's possession without one's consent, which may be withheld except at a price." [2]
Now we have something more definitive to look at. It describes a "legal relationship" between a person and an object which can be anything like an intangible or non-physical asset such as a patent or intellectual property, to having real estate. It's interesting the phrase "creature of law," which seems to imply law has a life of it's own. But for ownership, it is the law that defines what you are and are not allowed to own. Some things come and go in popularity. For example, ammonium nitrate isn't a material anyone should brag about owning. A large volume of it can bring on a storm trooper visit from the men in the black suits. The last phrase indicates that ownership isn't a certainty, by stating that "probably" the government or society will defend your right to ownership by excluding use by others. Certainly no one can own the simple right to privacy anymore. That wasn't just recently taken away, but it happened decades ago. The government is just now getting around to let you know this, and how good it is for you.
What's quite fascinating about all this is how money makes it possible to do illegal acts - legally! For example, going fishing or hunt without a license. Sooner or later a you'll hear a voice behind you in the woods saying, "Game warden - let me see your license." Having a license for anything - whether it be driving a car, hunting, fishing, boating or many other activities will make that illegal act OK! Makes perfect sense, right? So what does this have to do with ownership? Actually, quite a bit. Because the common denominator for both licenses AND owning anything is the use of money to pay for all licenses. No other means of payment will be accepted. And that money of course, is the infamous Federal Reserve Note. Remember that although the note states "legal tender for all debts..." it absolutely doesn't mean that anyone else can pay a debt in full simply by handing someone a note. A "note" implies debt. Period. The privately run "Federal Reserve" has illegally been given the right to do this against Constitutional law, which has created this defacto standard way of creating money out of nothing more than rags, special paper and thin air.
But wait a minute - those notes you use to pay for everything you "own" are worthless. What then? This is where is gets even more interesting. The entire American economic system (and probably those of other countries even though not publicly stated) are based on NOTES. These glorified "IOUs" are backed by absolutely nothing tangible. The note trick is nothing new - the Knights Templar hundreds of years ago started this by issuing notes to travelers. At the start of a long journey, travelers went to a local Templar and in return for giving him all their cash, he issued the traveler a note and provided protection where needed during the trip. At the end of the journey the traveler cashed it and got their money back, minus a fee. This was the first version of a traveler's check! If somehow the traveler was robbed on the highway, he/she would have no money to lose. The Templar note would be useless to anyone else. Today we're still using notes - but with a big difference. We CANNOT cash them in for real money! If you walk into any bank and ask a teller to give you change or real money for a "legal tender" $100.00 bill, you'll be handed more fake notes in exchange for your fake note! The same is true for checks, too. You cannot cash anything in no matter what, since notes are used to pay for notes. You can use the notes to buy gold, but gold is no longer considered legal tender to pay debts. You'll have to convert the gold back into a useless note to use it!
One doesn't have to be an economic wizard like Joseph Stiglitz to see the giant house of cards this scheme represents.
Now let's assume that somehow you could obtain REAL currency. Some think the Euro dollar is real money, since it's "supposedly" backed by gold. But to date, there have been no photos of the skyscraper-sized pile of gold this would require to back all the Euro currency in the world for all of Europe. Someone right now is yelling "you idiot, the gold is scattered all over the world in banks and vaults!" Yes, that MAY be true. So I say, show me ONE big gold pile shrink wrapped in plastic with a sign on it "Reserved for Backing the Euro - cannot be sold or traded."
Personally, I think the Euro is just another *note* without real backing, just like the US dollar is. The Europeans are simply not telling anyone about it, or perhaps are lying. Of course, in today's mindset people think only the US government will lie and no other governments will (except dictatorships.) There was a highly successful business organization better known as the Knights Templar, which grew in wealth to back the Holy See and monarchies of Europe. Can we believe that this highly profitable organization became extinct? After a just a few years in business proving travelers an important service, these men were perceived as threatening and too powerful. Eventually Philip the Fourth attempted to exterminate them.[3] Many historians believe they just went underground. After almost 1,000 years, now they may be running the entire planet's currency - keeping it based on notes.
So let's forget the Euro dollar and think bigger by using real GOLD to pay debts. If you could get the bank to accept gold (and not notes which is the only "legal tender" today) can you really own your home free and clear, and live there for free the rest of your life? No. There are the endless taxes "levied" every year on your home. These are really just rent to allow you to live there, even if you own it free and clear. One can also look at it as a form of RENT paid to the state. You can own your home AND the land it sits on free and clear of any mortgage - but you still must pay yearly taxes (i.e. rent) forever.
There's no way to call a house moving company and remove the actual "land" (i.e., the top 10ft. of soil) and the land that your home is actually attached to, separating it from the dirt below. Of course, you could move just the home itself. But that will cost you at least $20,000+ to move it a few feet or hundreds of feet. But now what? You'll have to move that house down the road - to yet ANOTHER piece of land for which you will have to pay taxes (i.e., rent.) This will accomplish nothing.
You may own an automobile like millions do. But you need a registration to drive it! And a state inspection sticker, too. (Really just another license.) And to drive? You'll need a license for that, too. It's completely illegal to drive anything on the road, but buying a license (and filling out endless forms) makes it legal for awhile until it expires. Therefore, you actually need at least three licenses just to drive the car you "own" down the road. In fact, you just might end up paying more concealed rent - disguised as a fee at a toll booth.
OK, let's forget about trying to own or rent a home. Do what the late Chris Farley screamed at the rebellious children in a famous SNL skit - "you're gonna be livin' on a steady diet of government cheese, in a van .....down by the river!" What if you did live down by the river? You'll still have to buy soap to wash your clothes on the rocks and purchase toilet paper. Leaves will make you chaff in no time when fall comes. You'll need monopoly fiat notes to pay for that river life - including the toilet paper.
Although everything is now purchased using worthless notes - the principal still exists that you can never actually be debt-free until you settle up for ALL the notes you ever used in your life to buy things with. That's the principal behind debt forgiveness with NESARA.[4] Paying off all these notes in your pocket with real money is IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to accomplish. There is no known form of payment that the Federal Reserve will take for these notes. Why? Simply because they were worthless to begin with, and taking payment for them would make the Federal Reserve guilty of fraud. Every bank loan is fake "money" created out of thin air when the document is signed by a bank officer.
So what's the bottom line? It doesn't matter whether you work at a job or receive investment or interest income to live on. You still receive a fiat note when you cash in your checks, make a withdrawal or receive a direct deposit. But about that employer or investment house who just paid you? They owe for their notes just like you do! So you are paid with worthless paper since none of it can ever be paid off. This is why at the beginning of this article I called this the chicken-egg syndrome. President Kennedy wanted to stop this madness - and he was quickly rewarded with lead poisoning.
BEYOND NOTES
But we're not done yet. Think about what ownership really is...and what it REALLY means outside of the note problem. At one time there was a payment system that worked well for centuries. People exchanged something valuable for something they needed to have. You cannot really OWN anything forever even if its paid for - because when you die everything stays behind. And then a relative or friend takes possession of it until they die or give it away, too. (Now you know the secret of yard sales - junk passing from one yard sale to another. Just like the dreaded fruit cake showing up at Christmas time.) The one thing you own and we all have used is toilet paper. A single-use item no one wants to take home. You can be certain that after you die your possessions will be picked through by teary-eyed vulture-relatives. But if a substantial amount of toilet paper is still on a roll, at least one enterprising person will take that unused roll home with them. It might even "surface" at their next yard sale. Then it can be sold (using yet another note) to someone else.
In the final analysis, everything you own can be considered as simply borrowed. Whether you own it or not, that doesn't matter. The same is true of any item like a car, furniture or computer, regardless of how many payments you made. If you die before the lease term is up, then the item must go back to the store. And all those payments you made all your life by paying for notes with notes? The bottom line is that it was all for nothing. Ownership truly is simply a disguised rental.
You can move to Africa or South America, and live in the jungle to try and escape it the problem. But that won't work either, as in most tribes no one really owns anything - and everything must be shared. Did you say you are going down there and you are MARRIED? Oh, I am sorry to hear that! You might want to re-think that decision and consider the implications of sharing your spouse with others.
Perhaps it's far better to simply not to be a materialist in the first place...
Ted Twietmeyer
www.bookonmars.info
________________________ ________________________ _____________________
Straw - open your mind and see the reality for what I have been arguing for the past 11 pages. You dont own squat.
-
Straw read this with an open mind
try speaking for yourself
Do you own your home?
-
333 - I don't remember if you even own property or not
I have real estate, two cars, a boat, stocks, bonds, cash, firearms, the office space where my business is located, a large library of books, etc.
What is the point of your question?
-
I have real estate, two cars, a boat, stocks, bonds, cash, firearms, the office space where my business is located, a large library of books, etc.
What is the point of your question?
i own an xbox 360 with 8 games...in yo face beyooch
-
I have real estate, two cars, a boat, stocks, bonds, cash, firearms, the office space where my business is located, a large library of books, etc.
What is the point of your question?
I didn't ask about your cars or guns, etc..
what do you mean by you "have" real estate
-
I didn't ask about your cars or guns, etc..
what do you mean by you "have" real estate
I have an ownership interest in my home and my office building that the government is partners with me in until it or they are sold.
-
I have an ownership interest in my home and my office building that the government is partners with me in until it or they are sold.
the government is your partner?
do you share the cost of maintenance?
do you share the cost of insurance?
does the government pay it's share of the property tax?
when you sell, if you make a profit, does the government get half (let's assume for the sake of this question that you're single, have a gain of less than 250k, etc.. you know the tax rules on cap gains)
If someone falls through the stairs in your home and breaks their leg does the government share in the liability
.
.
.
.
do you see the silly semantic game you are playing to avoid the obvious?
-
the government is your partner?
YES - BY THE ABILITY TO TAX ME AND TELL ME WHAT MY HOUSE IS WORTH FOR ASSEMENT PURPOSES.
do you share the cost of maintenance?
YES - I WRITE OFF THE COSTS ON MY TAXES FOR AUTO AND OFFICE MAINTENCE AS IT RELATES TO BUSINESS
do you share the cost of insurance?
NO.
does the government pay it's share of the property tax?
NO. IT ACTUALLY SCREWS OVER THE TAXPAYER BY OCCUPYING SO MUCH SPACE THAT ARE TAKEN OFF THE TAX ROLLS AND STICKING THE REST OF US WITH THE TAB.
when you sell, if you make a profit, does the government get half (let's assume for the sake of this question that you're single, have a gain of less than 250k, etc.. you know the tax rules on cap gains)
YES. I "OWN" COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AND ANY GAINS ARE TAXED BOTH LOCALLY, STATE WIDE, AND CAPITAL GAINS TAX SINCE I HAVE OWNED IT OVER A YEAR. THE COMBINED RATE IS HIGH, BUT UNTIL I SELL IT I DONT KNOW WHAT THE EXACT RATE IS.
If someone falls through the stairs in your home and breaks their leg does the government share in the liability
Ridiculous question since my property is not being sued, I would be as an individual. Tort cases are not in rem proceedings.
do you see the silly semantic game you are playing to avoid the obvious?
YOU ARE THE ONE PLAYING WORD GAMES AND EVERY HERE OTHER THAN MAL AGREES WITH ME, NOT YOU.
-
#2 ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
-
#2 ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Straw dont want to go near No. 2. You know that.
-
I know I just want to hear the excuses and see him squirm, like his daddy obama does under a tough question
-
I know I just want to hear the excuses and see him squirm, like his daddy obama does under a tough question
The best part is that he lost this debate just by how he framed his question to me. All I have to do is name 1 out of the 10 that comes close.
Off the bat he is DOA on at least 2 of the 10 without any debate at all.
-
Yea but he doesnt get, it and never will as long as his nose is so far up obamas ass that it will snap off if obama turns too fast, like I said, I would like to see him stop paying taxes on property and cars and shit, and see what he has left, Its too bad that some people dont understand that there are things that pave the way for communism , its not just a black and white cut and dry change over night.
-
Yea but he doesnt get, it and never will as long as his nose is so far up obamas ass that it will snap off if obama turns too fast, like I said, I would like to see him stop paying taxes on property and cars and shit, and see what he has left, Its too bad that some people dont understand that there are things that pave the way for communism , its not just a black and white cut and dry change over night.
You and I both are business people and know this stuff.
Straw does not.
So lets go to the rest of the list:
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. - DONE AND INCREASING.
3. Abolition of all right of inheritance. - HEAVY ESTATE TAX OF 50% COMING NEXT YEAR AND MANY STATES LEVY AN ESTATE TAX ON TOP OF THE FED.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. - need to research that but have read convincing arguments.
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. - DONE - FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. - 1/2 WAY THERE AT LEAST. I WILL PROVDE DETAILS LATER. THIS IS ANOTHER NO BRAINER THAT WE ARE MOVING TOWARDS THIS.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. - MANY STEPS ARE BEING TAKEN IN THIS DIRECTION. AGAIN - WILL PROVIDE DETAILS LATER AFTER WE DEAL WITH NO. 2.
8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. - SEE ANSWER TO NO. 7
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of the population over the country. - ANSWERED ON FIRST PAGE.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combinati
on of education with industrial production.[8] - DONE.
-
Straw read this with an open mind
________________________ ________________________ ___________-
Do You Reallly Own
Anything Except Toilet Paper?
By Ted Twietmeyer
tedtw@frontiernet.net
9-27-6
This is a subject not unlike the chicken-egg story. What exactly IS "ownership?" We'll look past the obvious fiat currency (Federal Reserve Notes) everyone carries in their pocket. But before we really delve into this subject, let's see what the "mainstream" thinking is about this word. After all, everything you have from the chair you're sitting on to the computer you're reading this with, to the roof over your head - all hinges on the *perceived* security of ownership. Even renting may be perceived as a form of ownership. While you're the tenant you have control of an apartment or house and you define who can come and go, who can stay with you, etc... until your lease expires. The past five years have seen new restrictions and laws quietly placed on renters and property owners.
The Merriam-Webster's dictionary definition of "ownership" with just one small sentence: "the state, relation, or fact of being an owner." [1] Isn't that a real fountain of information to answer our question!
However, Britannica does a far better job of defining "ownership:"
"the legal relation between a person (individual, group, corporation, or government) and an object. The object may be corporeal, such as furniture, or completely the creature of law, such as a patent, copyright, or annuity; it may be movable, such as an animal, or immovable, such as land. Because the objects of property and the protected relations are different in every culture and vary according to law, custom, and economic system and the relative social status of those who enjoy its privileges, it is difficult to find a least common denominator of "ownership." Ownership of property probably means at a minimum that one's government or society will help to exclude others from the use or enjoyment of one's possession without one's consent, which may be withheld except at a price." [2]
Now we have something more definitive to look at. It describes a "legal relationship" between a person and an object which can be anything like an intangible or non-physical asset such as a patent or intellectual property, to having real estate. It's interesting the phrase "creature of law," which seems to imply law has a life of it's own. But for ownership, it is the law that defines what you are and are not allowed to own. Some things come and go in popularity. For example, ammonium nitrate isn't a material anyone should brag about owning. A large volume of it can bring on a storm trooper visit from the men in the black suits. The last phrase indicates that ownership isn't a certainty, by stating that "probably" the government or society will defend your right to ownership by excluding use by others. Certainly no one can own the simple right to privacy anymore. That wasn't just recently taken away, but it happened decades ago. The government is just now getting around to let you know this, and how good it is for you.
What's quite fascinating about all this is how money makes it possible to do illegal acts - legally! For example, going fishing or hunt without a license. Sooner or later a you'll hear a voice behind you in the woods saying, "Game warden - let me see your license." Having a license for anything - whether it be driving a car, hunting, fishing, boating or many other activities will make that illegal act OK! Makes perfect sense, right? So what does this have to do with ownership? Actually, quite a bit. Because the common denominator for both licenses AND owning anything is the use of money to pay for all licenses. No other means of payment will be accepted. And that money of course, is the infamous Federal Reserve Note. Remember that although the note states "legal tender for all debts..." it absolutely doesn't mean that anyone else can pay a debt in full simply by handing someone a note. A "note" implies debt. Period. The privately run "Federal Reserve" has illegally been given the right to do this against Constitutional law, which has created this defacto standard way of creating money out of nothing more than rags, special paper and thin air.
But wait a minute - those notes you use to pay for everything you "own" are worthless. What then? This is where is gets even more interesting. The entire American economic system (and probably those of other countries even though not publicly stated) are based on NOTES. These glorified "IOUs" are backed by absolutely nothing tangible. The note trick is nothing new - the Knights Templar hundreds of years ago started this by issuing notes to travelers. At the start of a long journey, travelers went to a local Templar and in return for giving him all their cash, he issued the traveler a note and provided protection where needed during the trip. At the end of the journey the traveler cashed it and got their money back, minus a fee. This was the first version of a traveler's check! If somehow the traveler was robbed on the highway, he/she would have no money to lose. The Templar note would be useless to anyone else. Today we're still using notes - but with a big difference. We CANNOT cash them in for real money! If you walk into any bank and ask a teller to give you change or real money for a "legal tender" $100.00 bill, you'll be handed more fake notes in exchange for your fake note! The same is true for checks, too. You cannot cash anything in no matter what, since notes are used to pay for notes. You can use the notes to buy gold, but gold is no longer considered legal tender to pay debts. You'll have to convert the gold back into a useless note to use it!
One doesn't have to be an economic wizard like Joseph Stiglitz to see the giant house of cards this scheme represents.
Now let's assume that somehow you could obtain REAL currency. Some think the Euro dollar is real money, since it's "supposedly" backed by gold. But to date, there have been no photos of the skyscraper-sized pile of gold this would require to back all the Euro currency in the world for all of Europe. Someone right now is yelling "you idiot, the gold is scattered all over the world in banks and vaults!" Yes, that MAY be true. So I say, show me ONE big gold pile shrink wrapped in plastic with a sign on it "Reserved for Backing the Euro - cannot be sold or traded."
Personally, I think the Euro is just another *note* without real backing, just like the US dollar is. The Europeans are simply not telling anyone about it, or perhaps are lying. Of course, in today's mindset people think only the US government will lie and no other governments will (except dictatorships.) There was a highly successful business organization better known as the Knights Templar, which grew in wealth to back the Holy See and monarchies of Europe. Can we believe that this highly profitable organization became extinct? After a just a few years in business proving travelers an important service, these men were perceived as threatening and too powerful. Eventually Philip the Fourth attempted to exterminate them.[3] Many historians believe they just went underground. After almost 1,000 years, now they may be running the entire planet's currency - keeping it based on notes.
So let's forget the Euro dollar and think bigger by using real GOLD to pay debts. If you could get the bank to accept gold (and not notes which is the only "legal tender" today) can you really own your home free and clear, and live there for free the rest of your life? No. There are the endless taxes "levied" every year on your home. These are really just rent to allow you to live there, even if you own it free and clear. One can also look at it as a form of RENT paid to the state. You can own your home AND the land it sits on free and clear of any mortgage - but you still must pay yearly taxes (i.e. rent) forever.
There's no way to call a house moving company and remove the actual "land" (i.e., the top 10ft. of soil) and the land that your home is actually attached to, separating it from the dirt below. Of course, you could move just the home itself. But that will cost you at least $20,000+ to move it a few feet or hundreds of feet. But now what? You'll have to move that house down the road - to yet ANOTHER piece of land for which you will have to pay taxes (i.e., rent.) This will accomplish nothing.
You may own an automobile like millions do. But you need a registration to drive it! And a state inspection sticker, too. (Really just another license.) And to drive? You'll need a license for that, too. It's completely illegal to drive anything on the road, but buying a license (and filling out endless forms) makes it legal for awhile until it expires. Therefore, you actually need at least three licenses just to drive the car you "own" down the road. In fact, you just might end up paying more concealed rent - disguised as a fee at a toll booth.
OK, let's forget about trying to own or rent a home. Do what the late Chris Farley screamed at the rebellious children in a famous SNL skit - "you're gonna be livin' on a steady diet of government cheese, in a van .....down by the river!" What if you did live down by the river? You'll still have to buy soap to wash your clothes on the rocks and purchase toilet paper. Leaves will make you chaff in no time when fall comes. You'll need monopoly fiat notes to pay for that river life - including the toilet paper.
Although everything is now purchased using worthless notes - the principal still exists that you can never actually be debt-free until you settle up for ALL the notes you ever used in your life to buy things with. That's the principal behind debt forgiveness with NESARA.[4] Paying off all these notes in your pocket with real money is IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to accomplish. There is no known form of payment that the Federal Reserve will take for these notes. Why? Simply because they were worthless to begin with, and taking payment for them would make the Federal Reserve guilty of fraud. Every bank loan is fake "money" created out of thin air when the document is signed by a bank officer.
So what's the bottom line? It doesn't matter whether you work at a job or receive investment or interest income to live on. You still receive a fiat note when you cash in your checks, make a withdrawal or receive a direct deposit. But about that employer or investment house who just paid you? They owe for their notes just like you do! So you are paid with worthless paper since none of it can ever be paid off. This is why at the beginning of this article I called this the chicken-egg syndrome. President Kennedy wanted to stop this madness - and he was quickly rewarded with lead poisoning.
BEYOND NOTES
But we're not done yet. Think about what ownership really is...and what it REALLY means outside of the note problem. At one time there was a payment system that worked well for centuries. People exchanged something valuable for something they needed to have. You cannot really OWN anything forever even if its paid for - because when you die everything stays behind. And then a relative or friend takes possession of it until they die or give it away, too. (Now you know the secret of yard sales - junk passing from one yard sale to another. Just like the dreaded fruit cake showing up at Christmas time.) The one thing you own and we all have used is toilet paper. A single-use item no one wants to take home. You can be certain that after you die your possessions will be picked through by teary-eyed vulture-relatives. But if a substantial amount of toilet paper is still on a roll, at least one enterprising person will take that unused roll home with them. It might even "surface" at their next yard sale. Then it can be sold (using yet another note) to someone else.
In the final analysis, everything you own can be considered as simply borrowed. Whether you own it or not, that doesn't matter. The same is true of any item like a car, furniture or computer, regardless of how many payments you made. If you die before the lease term is up, then the item must go back to the store. And all those payments you made all your life by paying for notes with notes? The bottom line is that it was all for nothing. Ownership truly is simply a disguised rental.
You can move to Africa or South America, and live in the jungle to try and escape it the problem. But that won't work either, as in most tribes no one really owns anything - and everything must be shared. Did you say you are going down there and you are MARRIED? Oh, I am sorry to hear that! You might want to re-think that decision and consider the implications of sharing your spouse with others.
Perhaps it's far better to simply not to be a materialist in the first place...
Ted Twietmeyer
www.bookonmars.info
________________________ ________________________ _____________________
Straw - open your mind and see the reality for what I have been arguing for the past 11 pages. You dont own squat.
You know the old saying holds true here 3
YOU CAN LEAD A HORSE TO WATER, BUT YOU CAN'T MAKE HIM DRINK....
Sadly in america many home owners learned the hard way that they really don't own anything, when they found themselves living in tent cities, shelters, moving in with parents, on the streets etc etc. Straw obviously does not own a single thing lest his understanding would be acutely higher than where it is today. Just scrolling through these posts is mind boggling that people do not understand that in all actuality they are at best LEASING the land and house that they "own". Even when mortgages are paid off, land is fully acquired, property is purchased with receipts stamped paid in full, the government will take any and all of it for failure to pay taxes on land and/or a house of which the "owner" has already made full payment on. Seems Straw must understand that though property tax is illegal (unless there is a business being run from that property) the government will still take the property and sell it for failure to pay taxes on it. This is nothing new...it has been around since taxes were levied on properties. There is an old film called THE GRAPES OF WRATH (I suggest everyone watch it) that shows how the government, in another staged financial collapse (Depression), went through the farming belt areas of america and literally bulldozed down homes adn snatched properties and sold them, from people who could not pay the taxes. It is a sad movie, but a record of history showing how government, taxes, bankers etc have all worked toward the destruction of people, families, businesses, homes, land etc.
-
Even when mortgages are paid off, land is fully acquired, property is purchased with receipts stamped paid in full, the government will take any and all of it for failure to pay taxes on land and/or a house of which the "owner" has already made full payment on
________________________ _________________-
This has been my point from page one.
-
lets see how he rufutes and trys to twist 2-10
-
lets see how he rufutes and trys to twist 2-10
No. 2 is a slam dunk.
-
yea that is why he wanted to cling to #1 lol and its even better in the fact that if you dont do number 2 as a citizen they will come in and do #1 but he still disputes this , you dont pay your income tax and they can take everything, even your pay check but he still thinks he really owns shit lol
-
yea that is why he wanted to cling to #1 lol and its even better in the fact that if you dont do number 2 as a citizen they will come in and do #1 but he still disputes this , you dont pay your income tax and they can take everything, even your pay check but he still thinks he really owns shit lol
This might be the biggest backfire thread ever.
-
and most comical too
-
and most comical too
Can anyone address No. 2 please or do we agree that we already have a progessive income tax and meet the criteria of the communist manifesto?
-
I dont think any of the liberal goof troop want anything to do with this thread cause they know its the truth and cant be twisted denied or excused.
-
I dont think any of the liberal goof troop want anything to do with this thread cause they know its the truth and cant be twisted denied or excused.
Straw, Blacken, Mons, Lurker, Benny, KC, Al, anyone on No 2?
-
Maybe they are just to busy trying to dig something up on palins grand baby and watching racheal maddaw
-
Maybe they are just to busy trying to dig something up on palins grand baby and watching racheal maddaw
Since there has been utter silence on No 2, I will take that to mean everyone admits No 2 of the communist manifesto is already in America.
On to No 3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
Lets see, 45% estate tax, probate court, state inheritance tax, and libs left and right arguing for its aboltion - Straw by definition, will you agree we are 50% of the way there on this?
-
Can anyone address No. 2 please or do we agree that we already have a progessive income tax and meet the criteria of the communist manifesto?
Alright...I'll give it a shot based on previous arguments.
My view is right, yours is wrong. You're just parsing words, you're clearly wrong. We cannot move onto #3 until you admit you are wrong, and agree with my point of view. You haven't been posting any evidence. You are wrong. You have been owned.
I have destroyed you into oblivion with my denials of your evidence (which I refuse to admit is evidence). You will not recover. Once you agree that you will not recover and give me high fives, we can then move on to #3.
-
lol that shit is funny skip
-
I will throw a wrench in on the number two issue of taxes..
Here is just a partial list of the TAX americans are forced to pay...mind you I said just a PARTIAL list of taxes...and some think a heavy progressive or graduated income tax does not exist or is not a problem. At least in Canada, Europe and other nations their heavy taxes allow free medical, free education up to PhD level and a lot of other benefits
Estate Tax
capital Gains Tax
Estate Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
CDL License Tax
Auto Registration Tax
Food License Tax
Gasoline Tax (50 cents per gallon)
Inheritance tax
Fishing License Tax
Dog License Tax (this is ridiculous)
Building Permit Taxes
Hunting License Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges (tax)
Liquor Tax
Local Income Tax
Luxury Tax
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Real Estate Tax
Septic permit Tax
Service Charge tax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Sales Tax
Recreational Vehicle TAX
School Tax
Road Toll Booth Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
TElephon Universal Fee Tax
Telephone Federal/State/Local Surcharge Tax
Telephone Minimum Usage Tax
Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Recurrign and Non Recurring Tax
Telephone statae and Local Tax
Toll Bridge Tax
Toll Tunnel Tax
Traffic Fine Tax
Trailer Registration Tax
Utility Tax
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Water Craft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Comp Tax
And this is just a partial list...It was Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall who said " The Power To Tax Is The Power To Destroy"... Ya don't say..
-
Can't believe I'm saying this, but damn good post SAMSON!
-
Can't believe I'm saying this, but damn good post SAMSON!
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Where did Straw go? HERE STRAW, STRAW, STRAW, STRAW???????????????????
-
Do many of the planks listed apply to America as it is today? Yes.
Is America slowly becoming a communist country? No.
The reason this is so is because America has always incorporated elements of socialism into its political makeup. America is not a democracy and the founding fathers never described it as such. Their blueprint for the country was a compilation of the most practical planks from various political ideologies. There are some elements of socialism, but it is wholly distinct from socialism because it contains a heavy focus on capitalism and personal liberty.
I think Straw hit all of the most relevant points in regards to number one. Land is a finite resource so owning it comes with conditions that are community-minded. If you must call that socialism, then so be it. However, property taxes predate socialism. Property taxes are as old as civilized society.
And, yes, we have a graduated tax system, but it's funny because that significantly relates to plank one on a big scale. You've spent almost a dozen pages arguing about how ownership isn't real because the government wants to take all of your shit, but part of the logic behind graduated taxes is making sure those with the ability to pay do and those who can't are protected. The gov't doesn't want to be in the business of owning stuff. They just want the tax revenue. That's always been the case.
Flat taxes have been tried at various points throughout the countries' history and, as they were instituted, they were usually shown to be fundamentally problematic. Aside from the above paragraph, one of the major problems with flat taxes is that the rich just had better avenues to avoid taxes. I skipped over a lot of this thread, but I did catch the post someone made about how tax revenues rose during Reagan's admin because he cut the top tax rate. That's not accurate. One of the major things Reagan did along with the tax cut was tightening loopholes in the tax code. He actually raised taxes every subsequent year of his presidency to the point that he had repealed more than half of the 1981 tax cut by the time he left office. And tax revenues rose faster in the following decade.
So, just on those two points we see that while our system of government may share similarities with socialism, they are a means to a different end. Many taxes are ridiculous, but some are reasonable and necessary. This country was built on them. It fostered capitalism, as did regulation.
-
Can't believe I'm saying this, but damn good post SAMSON!
I still want to call in a jDAMs on ur hut but great list.
U forgot the tax or fee for holding a yard sale.
The " u just moved to Texas..here's a fee" tax..I'm sure other states have that as well
There are two taxes in MO associated with "owning" a dog. I would say that I don't own the dog, we live with the dog, he's my friend and lacks the thumbs to live on his own.
-
I will throw a wrench in on the number two issue of taxes..
Here is just a partial list of the TAX americans are forced to pay...mind you I said just a PARTIAL list of taxes...and some think a heavy progressive or graduated income tax does not exist or is not a problem. At least in Canada, Europe and other nations their heavy taxes allow free medical, free education up to PhD level and a lot of other benefits
Estate Tax
capital Gains Tax
Estate Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
CDL License Tax
Auto Registration Tax
Food License Tax
Gasoline Tax (50 cents per gallon)
Inheritance tax
Fishing License Tax
Dog License Tax (this is ridiculous)
Building Permit Taxes
Hunting License Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges (tax)
Liquor Tax
Local Income Tax
Luxury Tax
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Real Estate Tax
Septic permit Tax
Service Charge tax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Sales Tax
Recreational Vehicle TAX
School Tax
Road Toll Booth Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
TElephon Universal Fee Tax
Telephone Federal/State/Local Surcharge Tax
Telephone Minimum Usage Tax
Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Recurrign and Non Recurring Tax
Telephone statae and Local Tax
Toll Bridge Tax
Toll Tunnel Tax
Traffic Fine Tax
Trailer Registration Tax
Utility Tax
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Water Craft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Comp Tax
And this is just a partial list...It was Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall who said " The Power To Tax Is The Power To Destroy"... Ya don't say..
Bang. No. 2 is done. On to No 3. We are by definition taxed to death, and in fact AFTER DEATH as well.
-
So folks we are on to No. 3. correct?
No. 2 is a no-brainer and we have that. So Straw has already lost this debate.
As for No. 3 - in 2011 - the Bush tax cuts expire bringing back a massive inheritance tax. This tax starts at 45% and in many states has a state component as well. However, the threshhold is very low relatively speaking and the rate goes to 55%.
Most states also have harsh probate courts to where the govt controls the distribution of assets.
So Straw - by definition we are at least 50% of the way on Plank No. 3 to implementation of that tenent of the Communist Manifesto No?
-
I think Straw will be MIA on this threat from now on ...... Its the easiest way to deny something, which is the first step of the liberal way. Deny, then pass blame, then hurry to change the subject.
-
I think Straw will be MIA on this threat from now on ...... Its the easiest way to deny something, which is the first step of the liberal way. Deny, then pass blame, then hurry to change the subject.
By definition he has to agree that for No. 3 we are already 50% the way there.
What a moron to post this thread thinking he got in some trap or something. Straw doesnt realize I have read his manifesto at least three times already and have good knowledge and understanding of the things I write about.
Straw - do you agree that we are 50% of the way there on the inheritance issue?
-
Here is the wrench I am throwing in for number three.... So whether property is held by a citizen or an emigrant or a rebel it can and will be taken if the government so desires..."the machinery is already in place"
CONFISCATION OF PROPERTY
"Now it doesn't require expropriation or confiscation of private property or business to impose socialism upon a people. What does it mean whether you hold the deed or the title to your business or property if the government holds the power of life and death over that business or property? Such machinery already exists. The government can find some charge to bring against any concern it chooses to prosecute. Every businessman has his own tale of harassment. Somewhere a perversion has taken place. Our natural, inalienable rights are now considered to be a dispensation from government, and freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp as it is at this moment."
This famous quote was made by Ronald Reagan... former president of the US
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ _________________
Notice in this article how property can and is taken even when no charges have been filed and/or the person IS INNOCENT!!!! I saw on the news how in California a law to seize homes was put into place if a person was caught growing marijuana or involved in drug trafficking. The person would then be jailed on top of this. A investigation arose later over teh amount of homes being taken, revealed that LAPD were deliberately planting marijuana and/or making claims against homes in nice areas so that the home could be taken and sold to their friends, families, politicians and even themselves!!!...so once again THE CORRUPT "MACHINERY IS IN PLACE ALREADY"
Government Has Property Rights – To Your House
by M. Anthony Carr
http://realtytimes.com/rtpages/20021011_govtrights.htm
In the United States of America your property can be seized, condemned and turned over to another owner if the government finds a good enough reason to do so. In addition, if you are suspected of being involved in the drug market, your house could be confiscated and sold by local authorities – before you’ve even been tried or convicted of a crime.
"No criminal arrest or conviction is necessary to subject property to forfeiture," according to the American Civil Liberties Union’s web site (www.aclu.org). "Indeed, nearly 80 percent of the victims of forfeiture have never been indicted of a crime. All the police have to do is satisfy a requirement of probable cause that the property was used in an illicit activity or was purchased with funds from illicit activity."
The concept of taking your property is not a theory, but a hard cold reality. In the area of law enforcement, many crime-ridden communities have been cleaned up using this particular practice, but many innocent citizens have also been victimized by this mode of law enforcement.
An online piece by FindLaw.com "If the Government Wants Your Property," states, "If you’ve been convicted of a crime, the federal government can seize any property used in the crime, including your house. The property may then be sold and the proceeds used to further the government’s crime-fighting efforts. So if you own a crack house, your arrest and conviction may lead not only to jail time but to permanent loss of the house and your equity in it."
The above mentioned legal action can also be taken against a property owned by an investor who has a tenant suspected or convicted of illicit drug activity.
Fortunately, Congress amended the above mentioned laws a couple of years ago to protect innocent homeowners from aggressive civil forfeitures. FindLaw.com reported: "The new law prohibits the government from confiscating property unless it can show ‘by a preponderance of the evidence’ that the property is substantially connected to the crime. This is a much higher standard of proof than 'probable cause' . . . If a property owner successfully challenges the seizure in court, the government has to pay legal fees. And if the confiscation causes substantial hardship to the owner, the government just may release the property."
If you find yourself in this type of land forfeiture situation, by all means, contact an attorney. Please don’t waste your time emailing me or any other real estate writers, for that matter. Call an attorney. Period.
Unfortunately, even people who stay away from the crime scene can have property condemned and forcibly sold to the government if a local jurisdiction decides there’s a better use for the house. Such is the case of one elderly lady in Illinois.
"In Des Plaines, Ill., Irene Angell still lives in the house where she was born more than 80 years ago," reports Castle Coalition. "The city is currently threatening to condemn her home for a Walgreens drugstore. Ironically, Ms. Angell worked for Walgreens many years ago and met her husband there."
This process of property seizure is called "eminent domain." The Internet is full of sites operated by a lot of irate people who have had their homes and property taken through the process of eminent domain. There are also many sites for eminent domain professionals – the people who use eminent domain as a means of acquiring property for transportation and commercial development. One such site is EminentDomainOnline.com.
LawInfo.com contains a clear explanation of how eminent domain works:
"Eminent domain is the right of the government to take ownership of privately-held real estate regardless of the owner's wishes. Land for schools, freeways, parks, public housing, and other social and public interests are obtained in this manner and the structures on the existing land may be condemned and destroyed. Quasi-public organizations, such as utility companies and railroads are also permitted to obtain land needed for utility lines, pipes, and tracks. The property owner must be paid the fair market value of the property taken from him or her."
To be fair, eminent domain is not entered into lightly. Most eminent domain actions are for the greater good of the larger community, however, if you find yourself at the "taking" side of the eminent domain stick, contact a lawyer first to find out your rights under the law, then get a good Realtor to help you get the best price on your property.
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ________________
Still another mechanism and reason to confiscate property that you "THINK" you own...
Castle Watch Daily
Official Blog of the Castle Coalition
Documentary on Eminent Domain to Air in Seattle on PBS
http://www.castlecoalition.com/
Greetings from Asbury Park will be airing on Seattle’s local PBS station January 22 at 12PM! This compelling documentary details the effects of eminent domain abuse on a community—a familiar story to so many of you.
The film has already gained national exposure from airing on several local stations across the country. It tells the incredible saga of 91-year-old Angie Hampilos, who learns that her seaside home of more than fifty years has been targeted for seizure by eminent domain.
The reason? City officials and private developers thought her property could be “better utilized” by luxury condominiums. Not only her home, but an astonishing 56 acres of private homes were slated for the wrecking ball. By combining rare archival footage, home videos, and intimate conversations with local residents and property owners, the film documents the greed of city officials in their quest for more tax revenue.
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ _________________
I guess this former Army Corporal was deemed a REBEL for not going along with the plan and therefore had his property confiscated...
FBI Confiscates Personal Property Of Former U.S. Army Corporal Who Blew Whistle On 1976 Government funded "Perfect Terrorist Plan" To Topple Twin Towers
by Greg Szymanski, July 31, 2005
(Posted here by Wes Penre, August 1, 2005)
Timothy McNiven says he has been harassed by the FBI and now had DOD card taken without a warrant ever since trying to alert the American people about the government's prior knowledge of 9/11.
A former U.S. Army corporal who blew the whistle on a 1976 government funded study to topple the Twin Towers using jetliners, Arab terrorists and box cutters on July 6 had four FBI agents threaten to "tear his apartment apart" if he didn't turn over his legally obtained Department of Defense ID card.
Timothy McNiven, who said he was threatened and harassed by agents in the hallway outside his Bellingham, WA., apartment, claims to be a part of a military unit stationed in Strasbourg, Germany, during the 1970s, assigned the task to brainstorm "the perfect terrorist plan" and what turned out to be the exact same scenario that took place at the WTC on 9/11.
McNiven said his military unit's 9/11-like assignment, lasting over six months and funded by Congress under the guise of airline safety preparedness, proves the government had "plenty of foreknowledge" about possible airline attacks at the WTC.
He even suggested what seemed like a harmless military airline safety study may have been used later to perfect a way to bring down the WTC in order to create another Pearl Harbor like event to facilitate a world wide climate of war.
And since 9/11, McNiven has tried in every way possible to alert the American people about his unit's mock military assignment, creating even more suspicion of the government's hand in 9/11, by first creating a web site and then telling his story in March to The American Free Press and The Arctic Beacon news web cast.
McNiven's accusations about the hidden purpose behind the Congressional study are also included in a signed affidavit as part of a 9/11 related federal conspiracy (RICO) lawsuit filed against President Bush and others in 2004 by Philadelphia attorney Phil Berg.
The publicized version of the study, commissioned by Congress, was to identify security lapses and submit corrective measures to lawmakers," said McNiven. "However, the real purpose of the study was to brainstorm how to pull off a terrorist attack using the exact same 9/11 scenario."
To back up his story, he passed a credible lie detector test, the same type of credible test taken by Daniel Ellsberg and other famous whistle blowers as well as providing many names of the men his unit who also participated in the mock WTC assignment.
McNiven claims, however, since going public and being a part of the law suit, his efforts have been met with government indifference, outright harassment and constant FBI monitoring, the July 6 FBI visit to his Bellingham home another example.
"Our commanding officer back in 1976, Lt. Michael Teague, gave our unit of about 100 a direct order and assignment to brainstorm how to bring down the Twin Towers using jetliners and even box cutters," said McNiven this week from his apartment in Bellingham about the study commissioned to C-Battery 2/81st Field Artillery, U.S. Army, stationed in Strasbourg, Germany.
"I remember Lt. Teague changed the scenario from a 100 story building to the Twin Tower, acting on specific orders from unknown superiors. He then said it was very strange to be asked to devise a plan to blow up your own home town as he was from New York.
"But as I watched the Twin Towers really collapse on the morning of September 11th, I realized I was watching the very same thing we devised in the 1976.
McNiven recalls at first Lt. Teague demanded strict silence regarding the assignment, but later took him aside, giving him a direct order to "never stop alerting the American people" about the government's obvious hand in working on a plan to bring down the Twin if it ever really happened.
"I still feel I am under this direct order and have no intention of disobeying it," said McNiven, adding he still feels his active military duty has not ended due to 9/11.
Regarding the FBI visit to McNiven's home on July 6, a spokesperson from the Bellingham, WA., office confirmed agent Lance Boyer and three others confiscated McNiven's DOD card outside his apartment on the date mentioned, but refused to comment further about the nature, legality or purpose for taking his personal property.
The FBI spokesperson added that his property was taken without a proper warrant, McNiven claiming he only gave it up after being "threatened and harassed" by the four agents in the hallway outside his apartment.
"Agents did go to Mr. McNiven's home and did take his ID card, but that's all we can say right now," said the Bellingham FBI spokesman several hours after the incident occurred.
Although the FBI refused to elaborate, McNiven said he has been singled-out, intimidated and harassed for going public about the mock 1976 "perfect terrorist plan."
"This visit was not to get information but to harass me. I got a reply from the ACLU and they said that I had a legal case but they did not have the resources to take it on," he said.
"In May 2004, I wrote to several FBI offices asking them to do some research for me and to help find the members of C-Battery 2/81st FA, US Army, the men who also worked on the 1976 mock terrorist study. I have kept a copy of the email to the FBI and this is the reason why they I think they showed up."
McNiven said in the past he has tried to relocate many of his former unit members, years ago finding one member, Sgt. Riggs, who was reluctant to talk since Riggs claimed he and his family members had already experienced death threats over going public about the 1976 airline safety study.
Elaborating further on the FBI visit, McNiven recalls in detail facts indicating agents had been tracking his movements for at least a year.
"We started talking in the hallway of my apartment and they asked me if I was a federal agent and I said yes I had an ID to prove it. We walked to my room and I showed them my DOD ID card," said McNiven.
"Then we talked a little more, with one guy doing the questioning, and then two of the other guys started to make smart-ass comments, one of these guys being Agent Boyer."
He said the agents then insisted on seeing his ID card again, McNiven giving it to Agent Boyer but then ripping it out his hand after the agents questioned the validity of his identification.
"One of the Hispanic agents then began to threaten me, saying if I did not give them my ID that they would go and get a bunch of Bellingham Police and come back and tear my place apart," said McNiven.
"So I gave them the ID after, although asking for a receipt, which they gave me. It was strange, though, they knew about my trip to the Pentagon in August 2004 and the letter I sent to the personnel office, which they asked me if the Bellingham Police had come to talk to me about and I said they hadn't.
"I told them that the only people I had ever contacted about getting a new DOD card, as I used to work under cover for them but recently stopped, were lawyers like Gerry Spence, DOD personnel and Federal Judge Coughenour from the Seattle Federal Court. I also gave them the envelope and letter that came along with the ID, saying that it was a federal judge who helped me get this ID in the first place."
McNiven said the FBI has not returned his DOD card or has not contacted him since the July 6 incident, saying he believes they are "waiting for my next move" which McNiven said will be made before a court of law.
Regarding the validity of his DOD affiliation, McNiven said he went through the proper official channels, needing to renew his ID card last year in order to officially carry out his orders given to him by Lt. Teague as a result of 9/11.
McNiven added he is no stranger to DOD as he worked in the late 1980s and early 1990s as an undercover agent on several drug related government investigations.
"A DOD card is a government agency ID just like any other, in this case giving me authority for my military mission to alert the American people about the 1976 plan to topple the Twin Towers," said McNiven.
"I also have the authority to arrest on federal charges like treason or espionage and through Interpol for crimes against humanity and war crimes, which were recently expanded when the International Criminal Court went into effect."
At the time of the FBI visit, McNiven had also just sent the first installment of a proposed book about his life and participation in the 1976 mock terrorist assault on the Twin Towers to an editor of First Amendment Publishing affiliated with The American Free Press.
For more informative articles, go to www.arcticbeacon.com.
-
Notice in this article how property can and is taken even when no charges have been filed and/or the person IS INNOCENT!!!! I saw on the news how in California a law to seize homes was put into place if a person was caught growing marijuana or involved in drug trafficking. The person would then be jailed on top of this. A investigation arose later over teh amount of homes being taken, revealed that LAPD were deliberately planting marijuana and/or making claims against homes in nice areas so that the home could be taken and sold to their friends, families, politicians and even themselves!!!...so once again THE CORRUPT "MACHINERY IS IN PLACE ALREADY"
________________________ ________________________ ________
Its called civil forefeiture laws.
I have dealt with this a few times in my practice and it sucks!
I represented a young black guy who has a full carry permit and opened a small wing joint near me.
The cops accused him of drug dealing with no evidence. He had to surrender his CCW and the $5,000 cash he had on him.
I had to go to court to get his permit back, which took a few months and the cops only let him have back $4,000 of the money back because in the law it said that he was responsible for the associated costs of actiuon. He did not want to deal with more legal proceedings etc, so he just took it.
This was all with no conviction of a crime!
Straw is absolutely brain dead.
Civil forefeiture laws are extremely dangerous and when the govt says that your property "is used in the instrumentality of the crime" they can seize your home!
Most people are absolutely clueless of how far reaching these civil forfeiture laws are.
-
Now that are are dealing with the inheritance tax - its obvious why the marxists want it. That includes you Straw Man since I have never seen you once EVER argue or advocate getting rid of any tax whatsoever.
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ __________
Kill the Death Tax
What is the Death Tax -- Death Tax History -- Current Fight -- Repeal the Death Tax
The outdated death tax has been found to destroy roughly 1.5 million jobs. It impacts thousands of family business owners, and costs America’s economy billions in valuable capital.
The articles below explain how permanent Death Tax repeal will help family business owners recover, create new jobs, and restart America’s economy.
The Death Tax:
Destroys Jobs and Economic Growth
Ruins Family Business Owners and Farmers
Redistributes Private Property
Handicaps America
Punishes Those Who Save and Invest
Impedes Upward Mobility
Is Double Taxation
Destroys Jobs and Economic Growth
1.5 million. That’s how many jobs would be created if Congress made Death Tax repeal permanent, according to a study by economist Dr. Douglas Holtz-Eakin.
The Death Tax destroys jobs by reducing the stock of capital – the funds which businesses use to open new operations and create jobs. The Joint Economic Committee found that the Death Tax reduced overall capital in the economy by $847 billion over a 10-year period.[ii]
The Death Tax reduces capital in two ways. It directly destroys capital by confiscating it from the businesses when the owner dies, and indirectly destroys capital by forcing business owners to use complex tax planning strategies to reduce their Death Tax liability. These tax planning strategies may help a family business to survive the Death Tax, but the resulting compliance costs (such as paying for an accountant or attorney, purchasing life-insurance, and otherwise misallocating capital) impose a heavy financial burden.
A leading economist formerly with the Clinton administration, Alicia Munnell, found that the compliance costs of the Death Tax is nearly the same as the federal revenue it raises – an amount equal to roughly $18 billion annually.[iii] This makes the Death Tax proportionally the most costly tax in existence.
When businesses lose capital, they are less likely to expand and often must cut existing operations. The employees are the first to feel this cut.
Ruins Family-Owned Businesses
The Death Tax falls hardest on those who maintain a family business, often forcing family business owners to sell the business in order to pay the tax.
Family-business owners and farmers are typically described by tax planners and accountants as “asset rich but cash poor.” That is to say, they often have considerable assets in the form of property, inventory, business equipment, productive land, crops and livestock, but little or no cash. This means that their “wealth” (on-paper) may be very large, making them liable for a hefty Death Tax bill. However, without cash, they are forced to sell some of their property to pay the tax. For many family-business owners and farmers, selling even a fraction of their business or farm makes it less competitive and unprofitable, forcing the ultimate sale of the entire operation.
AFBI's Death Tax testimonies document examples of family businesses and farms impacted by the Death Tax. Consider Victor Mavar of Louisiana, who sold his seafood processing and pet-food manufacturing business due to the Death Tax. Another is farmer Gary McCall of Iowa, who nearly lost his farm when his father died, and who is unsure as to how he can save it for his son. These stories give just a glimpse of the social and economic havoc of the Death Tax on family owned businesses.
When asked about the Death Tax, family businesses say that the Death Tax is one of the leading causes of failure. Nearly two-thirds (64 percent) of respondents in one survey of family businesses reported that the estate tax makes survival of the business more difficult.[iv] In another survey, 98 percent of heirs cited “needed to raise funds to pay estate taxes” when asked why family businesses fail.[v]
Family-owned businesses are the pillars in small communities throughout the country. The owners and managers have personal ties the community and a direct stake in its existence. It is in the interest of small communities for family-businesses to thrive and grow, not to be destroyed by the Death Tax.
Redistributes Private Property
As defined by the IRS, the Death Tax is a tax on your right to transfer property. The Death Tax mocks the idea of fundamental property rights. By its intrinsic operation, the Death Tax confiscates life-earnings and prevents families from passing a legacy of hard-work and delayed gratification down to the next generation.
Thomas Jefferson wrote that the “The laws of civil society….give the property of the parent to his family on his death, and in most civilized countries permit him even to give it, by testament, to whom he pleases.”[vi] Jefferson understood that government must protect – not inhibit – the right to acquire and dispose of property as one chooses. One of Jefferson’s acts as President was to repeal America’s first Death Tax.[vii]
As it turns out, the idea behind the Death Tax was first proposed by the Communist theorist Karl Marx. In the Communist Manifesto, Marx recommended that the government “abolish all rights of inheritance.”[viii]
Marx did not believe in property rights, and he advocated that government should forcibly break apart family property. It should come as no surprise that Marx is the ideological predecessor to the Death Tax.
The modern American Death Tax was born out of the “progressive” political ideology which held that government should use tax policy to redistribute property. The Death Tax was intended to “equalize” wealth by confiscating the life-earnings of “property owners.”[ix]
The Death Tax stands in stark contrast to the promise of America’s founding that government exists to secure the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
Handicaps America
What do Russia, China, Canada, Mexico, Singapore, and Israel have in common? None of them have a Death Tax. In fact, they are among more than 25 nations that do not have a Death Tax. Among the 25 nations that do have a Death Tax, the average rate is 24% - slightly more than half the 2009 U.S. rate (45%).
Prior to repeal on January 1, 2010, the U.S. Death Tax was the third highest in the world. The Death Tax imposed a heavy penalty on American business owners and discouraged entrepreneurs from starting new businesses.
While many countries have eliminated their Death Tax and others such as France, Finland, Hungary, and Jamaica are considering repeal or significant reduction, Congress threatens to shackle American companies with a reinstated Death Tax.
Punishes Those Who Save and Invest
The Death Tax effectively punishes those who save and invest, while exempting those who spend their money away.
Even liberal conomists Joseph Stiglitz and David Bern admit that the Death Tax encourages consumerist behaviour. They explain: "Of course, prohibitively high inheritance tax rates generate no revenue; they simply force the individual to consume his income during his lifetime."[xi]
Economist Art Laffer aptly described the perverse incentives of the Death Tax in a recent Wall Street Journal article: “Today in America you can take your after-tax income and go to Las Vegas and carouse, gamble, drink and smoke, and as far as our government is concerned that's just fine. But if you take that same after-tax income and leave it to your children and grandchildren, the government will tax that after-tax income one additional time at rates up to 55%.”[xii]
Impedes Upward Mobility
Inheritances can be one of the primary means for a family to improve their economic condition.[xiii] By confiscating inheritances, the Death Tax is an obstacle to improved living standards and the promise of the American dream.
The Death Tax poses particular trouble for minorities. According to one study, 87 percent of black-owned businesses said that the Death Tax is a major impediment to survival.[xiv] A survey of Hispanic business owners found that two out of three respondents said that the Death Tax affects their ability to meet company goals by distracting their attention and wasting resources. Half of all respondents in that survey report knowing of a Hispanic small business that has experienced hardship because of the estate tax liability, including “selling off” equipment or the business.[xv]
The Death Tax is bad for everyone, but particularly for those who are trying to move up the economic ladder.
America is the land of opportunity. Making Death Tax repeal permanent is one of the best ways to make sure it stays that way for everyone.
Is Double Taxation
The Death Tax is a form of double taxation, which means that it taxes assets which have already been subject to the federal payroll, income and/or capital gains taxes. The Death Tax is an additional burden on top of other federal taxes. Consider the example of “Joe” who manages to get taxed three separate times due to the Death Tax.
Joe is an electrician who recently started his own business. He takes home earnings of roughly $60,000 per year. All of his income is subject to the income tax (1st tax layer).
Joe wants to improve his family’s standard of living, and so he is frugal and saves his money and invests it in diversified mutual funds. Over the course of his life, he invests $500,000 of his income, where it grows to over $1,000,000. Upon selling his stock, Joe owes capital gains taxes on the profit above his original $500,000 (2nd tax layer).
Joe dies after enjoying a good life and nice retirement. Joe leaves his investment returns – along with his house, boat, and other belongings – as an inheritance for his son and daughter. Joe’s business, savings, and other belongings are valued at $11.5 million. Any inheritance that he leaves in excess of $7 million ($3.5 million if he is single) is subject to the Death Tax (3rd tax).
Hence, Joe has been taxed three separate times on the same dollar: once when he earned it, again when he invested it and later sold the investment, and again when he died. Is it right for Uncle Sam to nail Joe three separate times on the same dollar? Shouldn’t Joe pay taxes once and then be done with his obligations to the taxman?
Are you confused by arguments against repeal? See our "Common Misconceptions" page for a brief explanation of the most common misconceptions about the Death Tax.
Citations
Douglas Holtz-Eakin and Cameron T. Smith, “Changing Views of the Estate Tax: Implications for Legislative Options,” American Family Business Foundation, February 2009.
[ii] “Cost and Consequences of the Federal Estate Tax,” Joint Economic Committee, May 2006.
[iii] Alicia H. Munnell, “Wealth Transfer Taxation: The Relative Role for Estate and Income Taxes,” New Englad Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston (November/December 1988): 19.
[iv] Joseph H. Astrachan and Roger Tutterow, “The Effect of Estate Taxes on Family Business: Survey Results,”Family Business Review 9, no. 3 (Fall 1996): 303-314.
[v] Russ Alan Prince and Karen Maru File, Marketing to Family Business Owners (Cincinnati, OH: National Underwriter, 1995), 35
[vi] Thomas Jefferson, “letter to Thomas Earle, 1823,” in The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, ed. Albert E. Bergh, (Washington: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1904), Vol. 15, p. 470.
[vii] “Fact Sheet: History of the U.S. Tax System,” U.S. Department of Treasury, http://www.ustreas.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/ustax.shtml.
[viii] Karl Marx, “The Communist Manifesto,” 1848, http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/classics/manifesto.html.
- “New International Survey Shows U.S. Death Tax Among Highest,” American Council for Capital Formation, August 1, 2007.
[xii] Art Laffer, “Spent it in Vegas or Die Paying Taxes,” Wall Street Journal, April 2, 2009, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123863067877680693.html.
[xiii] “Cost and Consequences of the Federal Estate Tax,” Joint Economic Committee, May 2006, 22.
[xiv] Joseph H. Astrachan and Craig E. Aronoff, “A Report on the Impact of the Federal Estate Tax: A Study of Two Industry Groups,” (Marietta, GA: Kennesaw State college, Family Enterprise Center, 1995).
[xv] “Five-State Executive Interview Study of 100+ Hispanic Family-Owned Businesses on Federal Estate Taxes,” Impacto Group LLC, (Washington, DC: Impacto Group LLC, 7/14/2004).Take Action:
________________________ ________________________ ________________
Straw - where are you?
We proved No 1 and 2 to you and No 3 is at least 50% there.
-
Straw dont want to go near No. 2. You know that.
I'll be glad to talk about #2 as soon as we finish #1.
I want to address your personal definition of ownership but first I want to confirm that, other than your personal definition of the word own as it relates to real property, that you agree that private ownership of real property in land has not been abolished and that private ownership* has actually increased over the past 40 years and that the government has actually done many things to increase private ownership
*again - we'll get back to the word own but let's isolate that since it seems the only area on the first point that we have yet to agree on.
-
I'll be glad to talk about #2 as soon as we finish #1.
I want to address your personal definition of ownership but first I want to confirm that, other than your personal definition of the word own as it relates to real property, that you agree that private ownership of real property in land has not been abolished and that private ownership* has actually increased over the past 40 years and that the government has actually done many things to increase private ownership
*again - we'll get back to the word own but let's isolate that since it seems the only area on the first point that we have yet to agree on.
Bro - you lost the argument - deal with it. I know having to accept you lost a debate to me is horrible to you, but you did, deal with it.
You are creating a bogus STRAW MAN argument and no one buys it. You are denser than a brick and dont grasp anything beyond your ill-conceived notions.
Everyone on this board has proved you wrong. Just read Samsons' post. No one argued that we are in fact already a communist nation. The argument is that:
1. We are approaching that, which we are via increasing govt control over your property and what you can do with it.
2. That you dont really own your property even after you have paid the mortgage in full, which you dont. You merely have the illusion of ownership and something more akin to a leasehold interest.
3. Property Taxes give the govt a partial ownership interest in your property since they can foreclose on the property if you dont pay, not merely have a lien attaching to the property.
Bro - you lost this argument, deal with it.
-
Bro - you lost this argument, deal with it.
again - isolating our dispute over the definition of the word "own" as it relates to real property do you agree that
private ownership still exists
private ownership has grown substantially
the government has enhanced private ownership through "free money" (your claim) and things like FHA mortgages, Making Home Affordable etc..
if we can agree on that then all we have left is your personal definition of the word own as it relates to real property
-
again - isolating our dispute over the definition of the word "own" as it relates to real property do you agree that
private ownership still exists
private ownership has grown substantially
the government has enhanced private ownership through "free money" (your claim) and things like FHA mortgages, Making Home Affordable etc..
if we can agree on that then all we have left is your personal definition of the word own as it relates to real property
You have an ownership interest in the property with the government, that is ever increasing. One day you will wake up and say - how did we get here when you have no control whatsoever over your property.
Your question originally to me was - NAME ONE THING THAT COMES EVEN CLOSE AT OUT OF THE 10 LISTED.
No 1. is perhaps one of the least close, and even at that many including myself have presented evidence that we are moving in that direction via increased zoning, increased taxation, increased regulation, and increased govt involvement in what you can and cant do with your property.
Like we have all said, after you pay your mortgage and home off, dont pay your taxes for one year and tell me what you own.
Now for No 2. - that is a done deal. There is no reason to argue over that.
-
Your Home is Your Cottage
Mises Daily: Thursday, September 08, 2005 by Adam Summers
www.mises.org
________________________ ________________________ _____________________
Property rights are in trouble just about everywhere. The latest trend hits an economic right Americans have traditionally taken for granted: the right to build or buy the biggest home you can afford.
The L.A. City Council recently approved, on an 11-0 vote, an "anti-mansionization" ordinance prohibiting smaller homes from being torn down and replaced by larger houses in the Sunland-Tujunga area. The ordinance limits houses on 8,000-square-foot lots or less to 2,400 square feet or 40 percent of the lot size, whichever is greater. Burbank and Glendale have similar laws, and other San Fernando Valley communities such as Valley Village and Valley Glen are lobbying for such restrictions.
This all begs the question: If "activist" neighbors, politicians, and bureaucrats can place restrictions on what you can do with your property, do you really own your property?
According to anti-mansionization proponents such as Councilwoman Wendy Greuel, who made the motion for the ordinance, "Homes are being built larger than is necessary."
But who is Ms. Greuel to judge how large someone's home may be or what is best for the homeowner? Different people have different wants and needs, and they should be free to pursue their happiness as they see fit, provided they do not violate the rights of others in the process. No third party — government official or not — has the capacity to determine what is right for everyone else, much less dictate how everyone else must use their private property.Next, you will have to trade in your Hummer for a Mini Cooper because a nosy neighbor or heavy-handed bureaucrat thinks your vehicle is "larger than necessary."
Anti-mansionists also argue that by limiting how large one can build his own house on his own land they are, as Greuel said, "preserving the unique character of the community." But homeowners do not own all of the homes in a community. They only control the one they live in.
What? You don't remember the old lady down the street with all the cats signing the deed to your house? Too bad. According to anti-mansionization activists, she has just as much right to decide what you do with your property as you do.
There is no basis on which to believe that the "character" of a community should remain unchanged in perpetuity. Housing demands are not the same as they were in the 1970s or the 1950s. Community make-ups often change drastically over time. Why should communities be rigidly "preserved" as though they were stuck in time?
This is not to say that a group of homeowners who each choose to establish and maintain a certain community character should not be free to do so. Indeed, many people join homeowners associations for just this reason. These groups may self-regulate the size, shape, and color of homes, as well as numerous other things, in order to preserve a certain community look and feel. Those not bound by such voluntary restrictions, however, should not be forced, through the power of government, to comport with the whims of an overzealous politician, bureaucrat, or neighbor.
Large-house supply is merely meeting large-house demand. The increase in housing size is a long-term trend. According to U.S. Census Bureau statistics, the average house size more than doubled from 1950 to 1999. As interest rates rise, savings levels approach zero, personal debt skyrockets, and adjustable and interest-only home loans continue to flourish, the inevitable bursting of the housing bubble in California markets may reverse this trend, however.
At the heart of the debate is whether we should embrace individual rights or "community rights." Councilman Greig Smith offered the chilling assertion that "while we have personal rights to property, we also have community rights to property."
The problem is that individual property rights and communal rights are mutually exclusive: either you have the right to control your property or political entity does. You do not really own something if you have to put anything you do with it up to a public vote. If everyone "owns" something, no one owns it.
Murray Rothbard dealt effectively with the notion of communal rights, the "rights of society," in For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto:
We have talked at length of individual rights; but what, it may be asked, of the "rights of society"? Don't they supersede the rights of the mere individual? The libertarian, however, is an individualist; he believes that one of the prime errors in social theory is to treat "society" as if it were an actually existing entity. "Society" is sometimes treated as a superior or quasi-divine figure with overriding "rights" of its own; at other times as an existing evil which can be blamed for all the ills of the world. The individualist holds that only individuals exist, think, feel, choose, and act; and that "society" is not a living entity but simply a label for a set of interacting individuals. Treating society as a thing that chooses and acts, then, serves to obscure the real forces at work. If, in a small community, ten people band together to rob and expropriate three others then this is clearly and evidently a case of a group of individuals acting in concert against another group. In this situation, if the ten people presumed to refer to themselves as "society" acting in "its" interest, the rationale would be laughed out of court; even the ten robbers would probably be too shamefaced to use this sort of argument. But let their size increase, and this kind of obfuscation becomes rife and succeeds in duping the public. (p. 37)
It has been said: "'Society' is everyone but you." A "society" — or "community" — is nothing but the sum of the interactions of a group of individuals. It is a label. It does not possess its own special rights or privileges. In short, not only do "community rights" not supersede individual rights, there are no "community rights" to private property, only individual rights. The deed to your house does not give you a partial interest in mine as well.
Everyone has the right not to like what their neighbors do to their homes. You do not, however, have the right to impose your preferences on another's property. As much as you are repulsed by your neighbor's pink flamingo lawn ornaments or garden gnome collection, you do not have the right to prevent him from displaying them any more than you have the right to go over to his yard and steal or destroy them. You just have to suck it up and deal with it; it's not your property!
Ironically, unlike prolific garden gnomes, larger houses may even increase the value of surrounding homes because they are more desirable these days. This leads to higher resale values for homeowners and higher property tax revenues (which governments normally prefer) for local governments. It thus appears that local officials are shooting themselves in the foot by denying themselves funding for needed services in order to maintain a community's stagnant character. (Note: This should not be construed as an endorsement of property taxes, merely an observation of the consequences of restricting home size under the current tax system.)
A man's home is his castle, even if he decides to build it next door to you. Individuals should be less concerned with their neighbors' lack of respect for a perceived "community character" or their tacky lawn displays and more concerned with the way government is whittling away their fundamental property rights. Remember John Locke's natural rights of life, liberty, and property, upon which the Declaration of Independence was based? That shadow looming over you is not that of the large mansion your neighbor just built, it is the shadow of government enveloping your property rights.
-------
Adam Summers is a policy analyst for the Reason Foundation (asummer1@san.rr.com). Comment on the blog.
-
Your Home is Your Cottage
just so you know - I don't even read stuff like this
I'm asking the question
pay attention - aside from our disagreement about the word own (which is the crux of your whole argument) doess private ownership still exist
yes or no
once we can agree on that we'll move on to the word own and we'll get this one wrapped up
-
just so you know - I don't even read stuff like this
I'm asking the question
pay attention - aside from our disagreement about the word own (which is the crux of your whole argument) doess private ownership still exist
yes or no
once we can agree on that we'll move on to the word own and we'll get this one wrapped up?
Private Ownership IN REAL PROPERTY exists to the extent that you do what the government tells you.
You NEVER asked me to prove or disprove this. You asked me to pick any of the ten that "even comes close". If you want re-phrase your question, fine, the question, as written by you, is what it is.
So yes, the government on every level is moving closer to abolishing private property via the things myself and everyone else has listed in the past 13 pages.
-
Private Ownership IN REAL PROPERTY exists to the extent that you do what the government tells you. You NEVER asked me to prove or disprove this. You asked me to pick any of the ten that "even comes close". If you want re-phrase your question, fine, the question, as written by you, is what it is. So yes, the government on every level is moving closer to abolishing private property via the things myself and everyone else has listed in the past 13 pages.
Finally - we agree that private ownership still exists
Of course I would argue against your last point that the government is moving closing to abolishing it and in fact quite the opposite is actually true:
1. private ownership has increased steadily over the years (undeniable fact)
2. government has promoted homeownership by making highly leveraged mortgages available via FHA (undeniable fact)
3. Government incentivizes home ownership by making mortgage interest and property tax deductible. (undeniable fact)
4. Governmant is trying to actually help people underwater on their home but who have been makign the payments to refinance via Making Home Affordable (now up to 125% ltv via Freddie Mac) (undeniable fact)
there is simply no evidence that "the government on every level is moving closer to abolishing private property" and in fact an abundance of evidence that quite teh opposite is true.
do you want to address your personal definition of the word own or more precisely owner as it relates to real property?
That definition and the fact that property tax exists is pretty much all we have left that we haven't yet come to agreement on......right?
-
You own things IF you do what the government tells you, lol that isnt ownership straw and there are being more and more laws, rules and regulations being put in place that the government tells you YOU HAVE to do or they will take the property they are letting you think is yours, once again nobody said we are communist now, however the adding of all these taxes for this and that and rules for this and laws for that is evolution towards communism. Like i said, make your car payment but without the tax added in, bank will take it, dont pay your property taxes, government takes it, dont pay the tax for you boat, and the slip you keep it in, it gets confenscated, That is not ownership straw that is lending you something with a lil bit of blackmale in there so that the government is sure to get their cut and keep their tabs on you and what you have access to, piss them off and it is swipped out from under you.
-
You own things IF you do what the government tells you, lol that isnt ownership straw and there are being more and more laws, rules and regulations being put in place that the government tells you YOU HAVE to do or they will take the property they are letting you think is yours, once again nobody said we are communist now, however the adding of all these taxes for this and that and rules for this and laws for that is evolution towards communism. Like i said, make your car payment but without the tax added in, bank will take it, dont pay your property taxes, government takes it, dont pay the tax for you boat, and the slip you keep it in, it gets confenscated, That is not ownership straw that is lending you something with a lil bit of blackmale in there so that the government is sure to get their cut and keep their tabs on you and what you have access to, piss them off and it is swipped out from under you.
are you 333?
-
NO but we are both business owners, I live in Texas. I have seen first hand people get their shit taken from them for not doing what the government tells them, and boy, dont screw with the IRS they will have your ass on the curb, so to say that you really own and control something is obserd, bro the government will clean your slate, even if you have a deed, title , sales recipt, it dont matter, they dont care and will get what they want from you. Like i said, dont pay property taxes man they will show you just indeed how little you really own, dont pay your income taxes and they will show you exactly what you dont own, and the laws that enable them to do this to americans are growing. EVOLUTION not a REVOLUTION, that way the american people dont notce until its too late. Just like if you drop a frog into boiling water it will jump out cause it notices it, put a frog in cold water and slowly warm it to a boil and its too late before it notices it and its dead
-
NO but we are both business owners, I live in Texas. I have seen first hand people get their shit taken from them for not doing what the government tells them, and boy, dont screw with the IRS they will have your ass on the curb, so to say that you really own and control something is obserd, bro the government will clean your slate, even if you have a deed, title , sales recipt, it dont matter, they dont care and will get what they want from you. Like i said, dont pay property taxes man they will show you just indeed how little you really own, dont pay your income taxes and they will show you exactly what you dont own, and the laws that enable them to do this to americans are growing. EVOLUTION not a REVOLUTION, that way the american people dont notce until its too late. Just like if you drop a frog into boiling water it will jump out cause it notices it, put a frog in cold water and slowly warm it to a boil and its too late before it notices it and its dead
I don't have time to deal with both of you
btw - your frog story is an urban myth but it doesn't suprise me at all that you believe it to be true
-
I wave done it before just to prove apoint , so you better check before you make a claim. lol I didnt believe it either until I did it myself
-
dont have time to deal with us both, straw us 2 along with everyone else who has posted is telling you the same thing lol
-
I wave done it before just to prove apoint , so you better check before you make a claim. lol I didnt believe it either until I did it myself
you've slowly boiled a live frog to prove this point?
who were you trying to prove it to?
I think you're lying but if you'd like to make a video to prove it I'll be happy to retract my statement
you could also just check snopes
-
dont have time to deal with us both, straw us 2 along with everyone else who has posted is telling you the same thing lol
you're like 333's retarded brother
and this thread was directed at him not you
-
bro my brother and i did this probably 12 years ago when we were teenagers after seeing it on t.v. i dont have to make a vid, are you not capable of this? But straw dont let this distract you from the point, of evolution slowly so americans dont see it until its too late, rather than revolution which obammer knows wouldnt fly, I know you dont think obammer would lie but just let me say c-span
-
bro my brother and i did this probably 12 years ago when we were teenagers after seeing it on t.v. i dont have to make a vid, are you not capable of this? But straw dont let this distract you from the point, of evolution slowly so americans dont see it until its too late, rather than revolution which obammer knows wouldnt fly, I know you dont think obammer would lie but just let me say c-span
ok - if you want to speak for 333 - I've asked him this question before but he never answers
when did this Commie plot start, who started it and who's involved.
-
well I hate to burst your bubble but I have a masters in organic chem, a bachelors, in business, and one in nutrition and have had a successful business for 9 years and I am 29 years old, if you call that retarded then I will gladly accept that name
-
I dont want to speak for 333 he handle that good on his own, I just cant see how you can say that just because you have a deed to something that it is yours for good and cant be taken, when indeed it can be taken pretty easily, from the government if you dont do what the government tells you to do, that is not ownership bro
-
well I hate to burst your bubble but I have a masters in organic chem, a bachelors, in business, and one in nutrition and have had a successful business for 9 years and I am 29 years old, if you call that retarded then I will gladly accept that name
I'm not call that retarded
I'm calling you retarded
now fill me in on the Commie conspiracy - you know that the one that happening slowly so we won't notice it happening
-
I'm not call that retarded
I'm calling you retarded
now fill me in on the Commie conspiracy - you know that the one that happening slowly so we won't notice it happening
The only SLOW thing that is happening Straw is YOU....
-
you say you own what you have a deed to.
dont pay property tax- government kick you out of house and off property
dont register your car- get 2 tickets it gets repo and if you cant afford fee government sell your car
keep your dog on chain rather than in cage- peta will take your dog
spank your child- government take them if they want
That is government control and it is growing, How is that not slowly heading towards complete government control or communism? If health care passes that gives the government control of weather you need medical services and they will force the doctors to do what they say by means of high taxes for those who dont listen in order to tax them out of business and tax breaks for those who do what the government says. That is complete control over you, your body, and your property!!! This has to start somewhere and grow from there, and we are growing straw. Straw I bet in germany in 1922 people never thought that a couple of lil new rules and laws put in place by the government was ever going to lead to the holocost, but look what happened when these lil small laws and regulations were put in place slowly, no body noticed until it was too late. Ask your family how the points system works in Dallas when it comes to traffic law, they will put so many fees on you that you will never be able to afford to legaly drive your car, and if they catch you driving illegally they impound your car and to get it back they add up all prior fees and the towing and storage, and if you dont meet there pay dead line they take it and sell it. how is that ownership??????
-
The only SLOW thing that is happening Straw is YOU....
well it did take me 13 pages to get 333 to admit that private ownership in real property still exists and I didn't think it would take that long
-
Thats because anyone with half a brain living in todays society would never venture to say that you own something, if you simply dont pay taxes uncle same will clean you out, weather you have a deed or not.
-
333,
Isn't Straw the one that said a while back that he "would invest in the US Postal Service" if it were possible ?
-
Thats because anyone with half a brain living in todays society would never venture to say that you own something, if you simply dont pay taxes uncle same will clean you out, weather you have a deed or not.
I clarified what I meant by the term "deed state" about 10 pages ago.
do you own real estate?
-
yes i do , and i owned land close to where the texas motot speed way was build , and i saw what happened to people that did not do what the gov asked
-
yes i do , and i owned land close to where the texas motot speed way was build , and i saw what happened to people that did not do what the gov asked
wasn't that the county government?
are you saying there are commies in local government in TX?
btw - isn't eminent domain part of the constitution?
have we been a commie country all along?
what's your opinion on Rick Perry?
-
I dont like rick perry , there isnt anyone running that i think would do a better job, government is government state, county fed , they all get their money from people in the private secter, and if you interprit what the constitution says about eminent domain as similar to what is going on today with all the tax regualtions and the ability of the government to just come in and take shit, then you really need to take another look and like i said no we are not a communist country, however , the further the progressive movement gets the closer we will come to it.. let me ask you something straw, when the term progerssive is used what do you think they are trying to progress to? its not capitalism cause thats what they want to get away from. what else is there? marxism, socialism, these in themselves are just the building blocks to a full blown communism. So what is it they are wanting to progress to?
-
I dont like rick perry , there isnt anyone running that i think would do a better job, government is government state, county fed , they all get their money from people in the private secter, and if you interprit what the constitution says about eminent domain as similar to what is going on today with all the tax regualtions and the ability of the government to just come in and take shit, then you really need to take another look and like i said no we are not a communist country, however , the further the progressive movement gets the closer we will come to it.. let me ask you something straw, when the term progerssive is used what do you think they are trying to progress to? its not capitalism cause thats what they want to get away from. what else is there? marxism, socialism, these in themselves are just the building blocks to a full blown communism. So what is it they are wanting to progress to?
beats me - I guess it must be communism
::)
can you tell me when this commie revolution started, who is involved etc..
-
you need to reread my thread i never said there has been a revolution, that would be too quick of a change and would not fly. But since the progressive movement started there have been many many laws, rules and regulations been put in place that very easily prove that communism could be evolving since the early 1900s. Once again I am not saying we are communist, but there are many things that have been put in place and that are trying to be put in place that could make it happen more easily in this country then it could have happened even back in 1950.
-
In all seriousness straw what are the progressives trying to progress to? they want to do away with capitalism, or anything described in the constitution or bill of rights, this attemped grab at huge government, and power proves that so what else is there to progress to?
-
you need to reread my thread i never said there has been a revolution, that would be too quick of a change and would not fly. But since the progressive movement started there have been many many laws, rules and regulations been put in place that very easily prove that communism could be evolving since the early 1900s. Once again I am not saying we are communist, but there are many things that have been put in place and that are trying to be put in place that could make it happen more easily in this country then it could have happened even back in 1950.
I don't know what thread you want me to re-read by why don't you just give me an example of "there are many things that have been put in place and that are trying to be put in place "
-
In all seriousness straw what are the progressives trying to progress to? they want to do away with capitalism, or anything described in the constitution or bill of rights, this attemped grab at huge government, and power proves that so what else is there to progress to?
examples would helpful in making your point
-
I'm not call that retarded
I'm calling you retarded
now fill me in on the Commie conspiracy - you know that the one that happening slowly so we won't notice it happening
Im not call that retarded?
LOL talk about the pot calling the kettle balck... lol
-
well income tax is a perfect example, the fed, the switch from studing constitutional law to case law , federal funding for special interest groups, unions, and most recently the stim bill and the attemped take over of the healthcare system, the taking over and bailing out of banks, gm and the auto industry, the attmps and talks to globalize the economy and the government,
-
answer the question straw , what are the progressives trying to progress to? they will openly admit not capitalism, and openly say capitalism is going to fail. so what is it?
-
well income tax is a perfect example, the fed, the switch from studing constitutional law to case law , federal funding for special interest groups, unions, and most recently the stim bill and the attemped take over of the healthcare system, the taking over and bailing out of banks, gm and the auto industry, the attmps and talks to globalize the economy and the government,
so the income tax is an example of communism
the auto bail out (that the automakers BEGGED for) is an example of communism?
sames goes for the banks - Paulson begged for the bailout - is he a commie too (I assume so).
-
more than half the people on obammers staff have openly said they dont want capitalist, so what else is there to progress to if not capitalist?
-
never said it is communist, i said it could be used as a means to promote communism and a big government agenda, do you even read my posts, i have never said we are communist right now , i say that there are being more things put in place that could make the change easier for progressives and supporters of communism if they try , you need to read my posts , for real
-
straw ???? what are anti capitalist progressives trying to progress to?
-
straw ???? what are anti capitalist progressives trying to progress to?
what is an anti-capitalist progressive
there is not even a progressive party
I have no clue what you're even so afraid about?
-
not afraid just wondering, an anti capitalist progressive is a progressive that is against a capitalist system, more than half of obammers staff openly admit that they do not want capitalism in america, they also call themselves progressives. so my question is if not capitalist, what is it that they want america to progress to?
-
not afraid just wondering, an anti capitalist progressive is a progressive that is against a capitalist system, more than half of obammers staff openly admit that they do not want capitalism in america, they also call themselves progressives. so my question is if not capitalist, what is it that they want america to progress to?
I've never heard of an anti-capitalist progressive
did you make up that term
-
nope i have heard it used and read it many times, nevermind that straw what is it that progressives are trying to progress to? its not capitalism they openly admit that, why are you dodging that question?
-
nope i have heard it used and read it many times, nevermind that straw what is it that progressives are trying to progress to? its not capitalism they openly admit that, why are you dodging that question?
I'm not a member of a progressive party or group so I have no idea what they are progressing towards. Where are the statements where they "openly admit" things as you say.
Why not just post them and answer your own question
-
I'm not a member of a progressive party or group so I have no idea what they are progressing towards. Where are the statements where they "openly admit" things as you say.
Why not just post them and answer your own question
Straw - honestly bro - you are lost. You posed a question to me which I answered many times.
You phrased your question in a certain way.
NAME ONE ON THIS LIST THAT EVEN COMES CLOSE.
You did not require that I prove all of them. You only asked that I come close on one. For that I have already and you lost. Get over it. your thread backfired on you miserably.
-
Bump for Straw on No. 2 - 10.
-
Private Ownership IN REAL PROPERTY exists to the extent that you do what the government tells you.
You NEVER asked me to prove or disprove this. You asked me to pick any of the ten that "even comes close". If you want re-phrase your question, fine, the question, as written by you, is what it is.
So yes, the government on every level is moving closer to abolishing private property via the things myself and everyone else has listed in the past 13 pages.
I'm still on # 1
do you think we've come close to the Abolition of Property in Land?
I've shown you how private ownership has increased over the last 50 years.
You yourself said that the govert was giving away free money (not true but I know what you're referring to)
I've shown you how the government has institutions and programs in place to promote private ownership in real property (FHA and to a lesser extent Fannie/Freddie)
I've shown you that the government has programs in place to help homeowners keep their property (Making Home Affordable program)
so #1 has not happened and more importantly IS NOT EVEN CLOSE
to be clear WE ARE NOT EVEN CLOSE TO ABOLISHING PRIVATE OWNERSHIP in real estate
if we can agree on those points I'll move on to your made up definition of "ownership" and show you why it's moronic and has no legal leg to stand on (you know, the profession you claim to be in) and then we can move on to #2
I won't move on until we resolve #1 but I am prepared to go to #2 when we finish this one
-
...
-
...
Ha ha. Hysterical.
No. 1 is going in circles. Straw is a mile wide and an inch deep on this issue since his limited capacity for understanding does not allow him to understand the points that all but him have been making.
No one has argued that private property is outlawed. The argument is that your private property rights have been greatly dilluted and infringed upon by the government to the point where you may own the property in some senses, but overall, and in reality, you dont own shit. The reasons why have been exhausted in this thread, and I am going to deal with No. 2 since Straw is intent of clinging to his hypertechnical definition of a word that does not comport with the overall reality that you really dont own shit when the govt can take "your land" after having paid off your mortgage for failure to pay property taxes, not abiding by zoning, green nonsense, etc.
-
No one has argued that private property is outlawed. The argument is that your private property rights have been greatly dilluted and infringed upon by the government to the point where you may own the property in some senses, but overall, and in reality, you dont own shit. .
and I've shown you why that argument is complete nonsense
1. eminent domain has been in existence since the beginning of this country and is used so infrequently (especially by the Federal Government) as to be no threat to anyone
2. You claim erroneously that if you have to pay property taxes then the Govt (again you don't even pay property taxes to the Federal Govt) must be your partners but if you tried to make that claim in a court of law you'd be laughed out of the building. The property rights you have are granted and enforced by the state and they have every right to collect taxes, enforce building codes, etc..
3. I've given you ample proof that private ownership in real property has grown, has been promoted by the Government through the availability of highly leveraged financing and other government programs, etc..
All of the above are statement of FACT
Everyone on this board knows them to be true
The only thing you have is your bitching and moaning about property tax which is something the state and county have every right to collect (see above) and which you knew about before you purchased the property
Again - the question was (as you've pointed out) "even come close" to abolishing real property in land and you've shown me nothing that even comes close and I've told you why. Feel free to address my arguments or point out anything I've said above which is not true
-
and I've shown you why that argument is complete nonsense
1. eminent domain has been in existence since the beginning of this country and is used so infrequently (especially by the Federal Government) as to be no threat to anyone
2. You claim erroneously that if you have to pay property taxes then the Govt (again you don't even pay property taxes to the Federal Govt) must be your partners but if you tried to make that claim in a court of law you'd be laughed out of the building. The property rights you have are granted and enforced by the state and they have every right to collect taxes, enforce building codes, etc..
3. I've given you ample proof that private ownership in real property has grown, has been promoted by the Government through the availability of highly leveraged financing and other government programs, etc..
All of the above are statement of FACT
Everyone on this board knows them to be true
The only thing you have is your bitching and moaning about property tax which is something the state and county have every right to collect (see above) and which you knew about before you purchased the property
Again - the question was (as you've pointed out) "even come close" to abolishing real property in land and you've shown me nothing that even comes close and I've told you why. Feel free to address my arguments or point out anything I've said above which is not true
Bro - no one has claimed we are a communist nation yet. You decided to latch on to what might be perhaps the weakest of the 10 things you listed when you and everyone else knows that there are others much closer than No. 1.
I have argued, and everyone agrees but you that your private property rights are greatly being dilluted. The govt will wipe its ass with your stupid deed if you dont do what it wants.
-
Bro - no one has claimed we are a communist nation yet. You decided to latch on to what might be perhaps the weakest of the 10 things you listed when you and everyone else knows that there are others much closer than No. 1.
I have argued, and everyone agrees but you that your private property rights are greatly being dilluted. The govt will wipe its ass with your stupid deed if you dont do what it wants.
I didn't latch on to #1. It's simply first on the list and I directly addressed your arguments.
the list is of 10 things that must come to pass from the transition from capitalism to communism.
#1 has not come to pass and is not even close (which was my question) and in fact has grown steadily in the opposite direction
those are all FACTS
your bitching about property tax and your feeling that your private property rights is not the question though I've addressed those as well and again, they are nonsense and I've told you why and you've failed to refute them.
If you have such a problem with that state which grants and enforces your property rights also charging your property tax and enforcing building codes, etc.. then why did you choose to purchase property in the first place. Again, this is a completelty separate discussion from the questions about which this thread is based but I'm willing to entertain it.
On the question of are we even close to the ABOLITION of private ownerwhip of real property you fail
-
No its not just taxes, read the damn thread.
Its the increasing control over the terms of your "ownership" that we have been discussing via not only taxes, but the expansive scope of eminent domain, expansive scope of zoning, "green" laws, etc.
BTW, as far as all those programs you listed, yeah that worked out great didnt it? Those wonderful programs only helped lead us to fiscal ruin and bankruptcy.
The question you need to ask yourself is whether you are gaining more control over "your" property or losing control over what to do with your property and where that is going in the whole scheme of things.
-
No its not just taxes, read the damn thread.
Its the increasing control over the terms of your "ownership" that we have been discussing via not only taxes, but the expansive scope of eminent domain, expansive scope of zoning, "green" laws, etc.
emminent domain has been around forever and I'm more likely to be struck by lightening than lose my home to eminent domain. Further on that point, the governmen is the one that grants and enforces property rights so it's hard to justify that they don't have the right of emminent domain, especially since it's in the Constitution since the founding of the country.
You seem to think that once you purchase property that you're some sovereign country existing within the USA and that your property rights supercede the very entity which grants and enforces those rights
BTW, as far as all those programs you listed, yeah that worked out great didnt it? Those wonderful programs only helped lead us to fiscal ruin and bankruptcy.
irrelevent to the topic - go back and read the question
The question you need to ask yourself is whether you are gaining more control over "your" property or losing control over what to do with your property and where that is going in the whole scheme of things.
nothing changed for me since the day I purchased my property and I went in knowing the rules fo the game which I presume you did too
-
emminent domain has been around forever and I'm more likely to be struck by lightening than lose my home to eminent domain. Further on that point, the governmen is the one that grants and enforces property rights so it's hard to justify that they don't have the right of emminent domain, especially since it's in the Constitution since the founding of the country.
You seem to think that once you purchase property that you're some sovereign country existing within the USA and that your property rights supercede the very entity which grants and enforces those rights
irrelevent to the topic - go back and read the question
nothing changed for me since the day I purchased my property and I went in knowing the rules fo the game which I presume you did too
This is why you are a liberal idiot Straw - you are brain dead, don't read, dont comprehend, and have no ability whatsoever to see beyond the extremely narrow blinders of your left wing nonsense.
Did anyone argue that Eminent Domain was not here? No. Thats another STRAW MAN argument you made up.
What has been discussed and pointed out is the expansive nature of eminent domain and the increasing justifications and purposes the government is using it for beyond what was originally envisioned. Same with zoning, same with civil forfeiture, same with "green laws", same with property taxes, same with "environmental" laws mandating what you can and cant do with your property etc, all acting to increasing dillute what it means to "own" your property.
Of course that concept is greatly beyond your abilities, so look it up.
-
This is why you are a liberal idiot Straw - you are brain dead, don't read, dont comprehend, and have no ability whatsoever to see beyond the extremely narrow blinders of your left wing nonsense.
translation = I don't share your paranoid delustion
Did anyone argue that Eminent Domain was not here? No. Thats another STRAW MAN argument you made up.
where did I say it did not exist? I've said it's ALWAYS existed, it's in the Constitution and it's justifiable and very very very very rarely used. It's certainly no imminent threat to me and nothing I'm going to get panicked about (as you seem to be)
What has been discussed and pointed out is the expansive nature of eminent domain and the increasing justifications and purposes the government is using it for beyond what was originally envisioned. Same with zoning, same with civil forfeiture, same with "green laws", same with property taxes, same with "environmental" laws mandating what you can and cant do with your property etc, all acting to increasing dillute what it means to "own" your property. Of course that concept is greatly beyond your abilities, so look it up.
I've already told you I don't agree with using it to enhance private party ownership but even that happens so rarely as to not be a real threat to anyone and certainly not proof that the govt is on the path the abolitioin of private property. Shit all the exampes granted the rights to yet another private property.
All the things you're bitching about are things you knew about before you chose to purchase
Your arguments are akin to someone bitching that because they have a car they should be allowed to drive 100 mile an hour and on sidewalks and through parks
All your arguments do is show how untethered you are from reality which is something I suspect you have in common with many of your fellow TeaBaggers
-
hey straw, dont pay tax on one single thing you think you own for a year or two and dont pay income tax, and wait and see what you really own after uncle sam is done with your ass, deed or not
-
i think that the term ownership needs to be discussed, cause that is what keeps this going in circles
-
OWNERSHIP is the state or fact of EXCLUSIVE rights and control over property, which may be an object, land/real estate or intellectual property.
When the govenment can come in and take anything that you did not give them your permission is not ownership, like i have said in the past
dont pay income tax- assets seized
dont pay proprty tax- booted out of house, and off land
dont register your car- gone, and you better hope you have enough extra money to pay to get it out of the pound or its permenently gone
in some stated park your car on an unpaved part of YOUR yard- gone
dont insure your vehicle- gone
dont mow your yard- get fined, go to jail
keep your dog on a chain- gone
keep too many cars in your driveway for too long- gone
need i post more straw? I am sitting here looking at the code enforcement page on the net and the list they can do to you is rather lengthy, and i did compare it too a list from 1984 which was as far back as i could find right now and the list isnt half as long so that proves my point of evolution.
Just cause the government is creating programs to get people in houses does not mean these people own these houses, just as easy as the government put these people in, watch what happens if these people dont obide by the stipulations put on them from this program, they are kicked out faster than they got put in. And the simple fact that the government puts rules and regulation on the terms on which one can be incentivised into a home disprove ownership. I gave the definition of ownership above, and for the government to have say in the terms of how you occupy the property is not exclusive, therefore not ownership
-
Once again...private property ownership is not going up.
1. I think this economy has proven that with the amount of foreclosures.
2. If you have a mortgage you don't own your home! The bank does. Keep thinking you do though Straw.
-
Once again...private property ownership is not going up.
1. I think this economy has proven that with the amount of foreclosures.
2. If you have a mortgage you don't own your home! The bank does. Keep thinking you do though Straw.
For gods' sake already - this whole thread is stalled cause Straw is intent on denying the obvious. That's fine. Lets agree to disagree on No 2 and go to No. 2 ok Straw?
-
i think that the term ownership needs to be discussed, cause that is what keeps this going in circles
it's pretty simple.
there is the legal definition and that's it
I'm the "on title" owner of my property ..... period
If you're confused in any way on that then consult an attorney (not a glorified bill collector like 333) and he/she will explain it to you.
Having to pay property tax and adhere to building codes, zoning laws, etc.. doesn't change the fact that I am the owner nor does it make the government a part owner, partner, etc....
everything else is just TeaBag induced paranoia and or just ordinary stupidity
-
i just gave the definition of ownership you cant spin that straw, exclusive, control and rights, if any other party has any say so its not exclusive, and therefore not ownership (any party including government) anything you own cant be taken unless its stolen illegally, however it is leagal for government to take your things, i.e. not ownership. you cant change or spin the definition straw face it. sorry
-
i just gave the definition of ownership you cant spin that straw, exclusive, control and rights, if any other party has any say so its not exclusive, and therefore not ownership (any party including government) anything you own cant be taken unless its stolen illegally, however it is leagal for government to take your things, i.e. not ownership. you cant change or spin the definition straw face it. sorry
make up all the definitions that you'd like
I'm going to stick with the actual legal definition as that's the only one that actually matters
If you don't like eminent domain, or property taxes or zoning laws then you free to choose to not purchase property
-
i got the deffintion from the online websters lol so you can define it however, but i invite everyone to look it up
-
i got the deffintion from the online websters lol so you can define it however, but i invite everyone to look it up
I am moving on to No 2 as Straw refuses to see the forest through the trees on this.
The Progressive Income tax is no brainer so we need to move to No 3.
-
If you don't like eminent domain, or property taxes or zoning laws then you free to choose to not purchase property
Yeah and if you don't like your phone being tapped you can always choose not to have one. So why not keep the Patriot Act in full force and use. ::)
Encroachment on our liberties, freedoms, or properties can be justified by an endless litany of reasons, but we have to balance out what's reasonable and what's not. You think the current laws on property are reasonable, they don't. Agree to disagree and move on.
-
Yeah and if you don't like your phone being tapped you can always choose not to have one. So why not keep the Patriot Act in full force and use. ::)
Encroachment on our liberties, freedoms, or properties can be justified by an endless litany of reasons, but we have to balance out what's reasonable and what's not. You think the current laws on property are reasonable, they don't. Agree to disagree and move on.
I have been trying that for 13 pages now.
-
I have been trying that for 13 pages now.
Uh...I think at this point it's my obligation to say, "I TOLD YOU SO". :P
-
Uh...I think at this point it's my obligation to say, "I TOLD YOU SO". :P
Skip - No 2 is a progressive income tax. Does anyone deny we have that one covered? Or will it take 13 pages of stammering by Straw on that?
-
Skip - No 2 is a progressive income tax. Does anyone deny we have that one covered? Or will it take 13 pages of stammering by Straw on that?
If I have to take a guess, I'll say he's probably going to hang up on the word "Heavy" in #2. But, I'm in agreement so feel free to go to #3!
-
I have been trying that for 13 pages now.
hey 333 - you claim to be a lawyer right?
Let's pretend that someone fell through the stairs in your home and was injured (let's say they were paralyzed).
Would the court accept your argument that you were not the owner of the property and therefore not responsible?
Yes or No?
-
hey 333 - you claim to be a lawyer right?
Let's pretend that someone fell through the stairs in your home and was injured (let's say they were paralyzed).
Would the court accept your argument that you were not the owner of the property and therefore not responsible?
Yes or No?
You're still just trying to confuse the issue of being a communist nation vs moving in that direction. Do you really think you've got anybody fooled?
-
hey 333 - you claim to be a lawyer right?
Let's pretend that someone fell through the stairs in your home and was injured (let's say they were paralyzed).
Would the court accept your argument that you were not the owner of the property and therefore not responsible?
Yes or No?
Thats a ridiculous argument because renters can be sued by guests who slip and fall as well,
-
Thats a ridiculous argument because renters can be sued by guests who slip and fall as well,
would the court agree with your argument that, as the "on title" owner, that you were not responsibe because you didn't really own the property?
yes or no
simple question
-
Thats a ridiculous argument because renters can be sued by guests who slip and fall as well,
Hahahaha...now that's a punch in the fucking mouth. Arguing legal stuff with a lawyer can be painful.
-
would the court agree with your argument that, as the "on title" owner, that you were not responsibe because you didn't really own the property?
yes or no
simple question
No, because I have possession of the same and am responsible for guests on the premises, the same as If I rented, leased, or even just assumed respnsibility for the premises as a caretaker, maintence person, or otherwise.
-
No, because I have possession of the same and am responsible for guests on the premises, the same as If I rented, leased, or even just assumed respnsibility for the premises as a caretaker, maintence person, or otherwise.
yeah - if you were a tenant and assumed the responsibility as caretaker, maintenance etc..then you would be responsible but that's not the example I gave you.
Let's say the person was in your home (note counselor that I phrased the question as your "home" and not your "property").
your home
someone injured
the "owner" is responsible
who is the "owner"?
isn't that the word we're all pretending to argue about
-
If I have to take a guess, I'll say he's probably going to hang up on the word "Heavy" in #2. But, I'm in agreement so feel free to go to #3!
I'm not the one who starting parsing the word "own" or "abolition" am I?
-
yeah - if you were a tenant and assumed the responsibility as caretaker, maintenance etc..then you would be responsible but that's not the example I gave you.
Let's say the person was in your home (note counselor that I phrased the question as your "home" and not your "property").
your home
someone injured
the "owner" is responsible
who is the "owner"?
isn't that the word we're all pretending to argue about
Yes, the deeded owner may be responsible. However, if I were a renter many owners have hold harmless clauses etc absolving himself of liability for guests etc. Same thing w the govt where it absolves itself of liability in many instances unless being put on specific notice of a defect or hazardous condition.
I am not arguing that we live in a commie nation. I have argued that we are moving in that direction via the items we have listed and that you dont have absolute ownership of your home in the same way you do yout tv set or clothes or shoes or computer, etc.
-
I'm not the one who starting parsing the word "own" or "abolition" am I?
You're the one who's attempting to restructure the argument into us acutally being a communist nation vs moving in that direction. In his own words...
"I have argued that we are moving in that direction..."
-
Yes, the deeded owner may be responsible. .
in your opinion
will you be successful in arguing that you are not really the owner of the property due to the fact that you have to pay property tax, follow zoning laws, and could face the remote possibility of eminent domain?
-
You're the one who's attempting to restructure the argument into us acutally being a communist nation vs moving in that direction. In his own words...
"I have argued that we are moving in that direction..."
who are you quoting?
-
who are you quoting?
Lol, do actually read 33's posts?
Dude, you've clearly made your point on #1, he's made his. Why not move on?
-
Lol, do actually read 33's posts?
Dude, you've clearly made your point on #1, he's made his. Why not move on?
it would be helpfull if both you and 333 would read
look at my question
on #1 we are not CLOSE and neither 333 or you can provide any evidence of his statement that we are moving in that direction
eminent domain - part of the Constitution and the legal framework of this country since the beginning so we are no closer now than we were since the country started
property tax/zoning laws have been around for 150+ years and also not evidence of "being close" or even "moving in that direction"
Can you show me one thing on this list that even comes close to what we have today
-
it would be helpfull if both you and 333 would read
look at my question
on #1 we are not CLOSE and neither 333 or you can provide any evidence of his statement that we are moving in that direction
eminent domain - part of the Constitution and the legal framework of this country since the beginning so we are no closer now than we were since the country started
property tax/zoning laws have been around for 150+ years and also not evidence of "being close" or even "moving in that direction"
I've read every single one of your posts in this thread and I understand your points perfectly. That doesn't mean anybody has to agree.
So show some maturity and move on to #2. I'm interested in hearing your counter-arguments on the tax issue.
-
it would be helpfull if both you and 333 would read
look at my question
on #1 we are not CLOSE and neither 333 or you can provide any evidence of his statement that we are moving in that direction
eminent domain - part of the Constitution and the legal framework of this country since the beginning so we are no closer now than we were since the country started
property tax/zoning laws have been around for 150+ years and also not evidence of "being close" or even "moving in that direction"
You dont even read do you?
I have argued the INCREASING USE OF ZONING & the INCREASING USE AND ABUSE OF EMINENT DOMAIN are acting to dilute your property rights, not the existence of zoning and eminent domain themselves. I cited the KELO decision to you and that is what I am arguing; that the government is increasingly regulating and controoling the terms of your ownership.
Is this that hard for you to grasp?
-
You dont even read do you?
I have argued the INCREASING USE OF ZONING & the INCREASING USE AND ABUSE OF EMINENT DOMAIN are acting to dilute your property rights, not the existence of zoning and eminent domain themselves. I cited the KELO decision to you and that is what I am arguing; that the government is increasingly regulating and controoling the terms of your ownership.
Is this that hard for you to grasp?
in the example I gave you would you be successful in arguing that you are not the owner due to eminent domain, the requirement to pay property tax etc...
yes or no?
-
OWNERSHIP is the state or fact of EXCLUSIVE rights and control over property, which may be an object, land/real estate or intellectual property
ON TO NUMBER THREE OR HELL 5 WOULD BE AWSOME
-
OWNERSHIP is the state or fact of EXCLUSIVE rights and control over property, which may be an object, land/real estate or intellectual property
ON TO NUMBER THREE OR HELL 5 WOULD BE AWSOME
I am going to deal with No. 2 since Straw is arguing with himself at this point.
-
in the example I gave you would you be successful in arguing that you are not the owner due to eminent domain, the requirement to pay property tax etc...
yes or no?
3333
yes or no?
simple scenario and simple question
-
3333
yes or no?
simple scenario and simple question
No. How many times do we have to go over this already? You are asking me to concede to points I never made in the first place.
-
No. How many times do we have to go over this already? You are asking me to concede to points I never made in the first place.
you made up your own defintion of "ownership" as it pertains to real property
if your definition won't work in a court of law then what compels me to accept it here?
-
you made up your own defintion of "ownership" as it pertains to real property
if your definition won't work in a court of law then what compels me to accept it here?
Forget it bro - I am not even going to argue with you anymore. You make shit up that no one ever claimed.
I am going to deal with no. 2 on my own as many others and myself have exhuasted No. 1 and you simply cannot even comprehend what everyone else is telling you.
-
Forget it bro - I am not even going to argue with you anymore. You make shit up that no one ever claimed.
I am going to deal with no. 2 on my own as many others and myself have exhuasted No. 1 and you simply cannot even comprehend what everyone else is telling you.
"bro" - you know exactly what I'm talking about
you wouldn't go into a court and try to argue that you're not liable (in the example I gave) on grounds that you're not really the owner because you have to pay property tax, follow zoning laws and could potentially lose your property to eminent domain
you know it's a bullshit arguement and would never work in the only place that matters
-
"bro" - you know exactly what I'm talking about
you wouldn't go into a court and try to argue that you're not liable (in the example I gave) on grounds that you're not really the owner because you have to pay property tax, follow zoning laws and could potentially lose your property to eminent domain
you know it's a bullshit arguement and would never work in the only place that matters
No one has ever freaking argued we live in the commie nation! How dense are you?
-
No one has ever freaking argued we live in the commie nation! How dense are you?
who's talking about that
I'm specifically addressing your lame objection that you don't actually own your property
I'm sure you'll recall that was your gambit to avoid the obvious fact that private ownership is plentiful and we're not even close to the abolition of real property in land
come on 333 - go back and read your own posts either than or just stop pretending to play dumb
-
who's talking about that
I'm specifically addressing your lame objection that you don't actually own your property
I'm sure you'll recall that was your gambit to avoid the obvious fact that private ownership is plentiful and we're not even close to the abolition of real property in land
come on 333 - go back and read your own posts either than or just stop pretending to play dumb
I'm done with you Straw - argue with yourself. You make things up people never said, cant comprehend basic concepts, ignore peoples' arguments, and constatly change the debate, dont even acknowledge the original question you asked and how you framed it, etc.
No. 2 is a no-brainer so I'll deal with No. 3 later. Unless of course you are going to be equally dense and try to argue we dont have a progressive income tax?
-
I'm done with you Straw - argue with yourself. You make things up people never said, cant comprehend basic concepts, ignore peoples' arguments, and constatly change the debate, dont even acknowledge the original question you asked and how you framed it, etc.
No. 2 is a no-brainer so I'll deal with No. 3 later. Unless of course you are going to be equally dense and try to argue we dont have a progressive income tax?
so you're agreeing that #1 has not happened (obviously) and is "not even close"
correct?
-
so you're agreeing that #1 has not happened (obviously) and is "not even close"
correct?
I agree that No. 1 has not happened in the technical sense of the definition and have never argued that we are a commie nation. I have argued that via INCREASED PROPERTY TAXATION, INCREASED & EXPANDING USE OF ZONING, INCREASED AND EXPANDING USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN BEYOND TRADITIONAL USES, and INCREASING REGULATIONS over what you can do with your property has greatly dilluted your ownership rights and that we are moving towards more control and regulation, not less.
What dont you understand about that?
-
333 i think straw doesnt understand a stop sign and would argue with it. lets just talk about 3 4 and 5
-
333 i think straw doesnt understand a stop sign and would argue with it. lets just talk about 3 4 and 5
BUMP -
STRAW ARE YOU UP FOR THIS DEBATE TO BE CONTINUED?
-
BUMP -
STRAW ARE YOU UP FOR THIS DEBATE TO BE CONTINUED?
Straw what about the progressive income tax and centrilazation of credit?
-
Straw what about the progressive income tax and centrilazation of credit?
sure but first we'll have to agree on the defintion of "heavy" so we don't waste another 17 pages like we did when you pretended that because you have to pay property tax and follow zoning guidelines you don't really own your home.
here's the full statement. maybe just to be say we should agree on the definitions of all the words first before continuing the discussion:
A heavy progressive or graduated income tax
-
sure but first we'll have to agree on the defintion of "heavy" so we don't waste another 17 pages like we did when you pretended that because you have to pay property tax and follow zoning guidelines you don't really own your home.
here's the full statement. maybe just to be say we should agree on the definitions of all the words first before continuing the discussion:
A heavy progressive or graduated income tax
What part of "or" do you not understand?
-
What part of "or" do you not understand?
let's agree on the word "heavy" first
we both know that's subjective right?
-
let's agree on the word "heavy" first
we both know that's subjective right?
No, we are not going to agree on that because that is not what the manifesto calls for. It clearly says "or" so you lost on that.
-
No, we are not going to agree on that because that is not what the manifesto calls for. It clearly says "or" so you lost on that.
now you're going to parse the sentence and pretend that heavy only applies to the word progressive and not to the word graduated?
what's the difference between progressive and graduated?
I say the work heavy clearly applies to either word so we either agree on a definition of the word heavy or we're at an impasse
-
now you're going to parse the sentence and pretend that heavy only applies to the word progressive and not to the word graduated?
what's the difference between progressive and graduated?
I say the work heavy clearly applies to either word so we either agree on a definition of the word heavy or we're at an impasse
Fine - in my mind, we have a grotesqly high graduate rate when you add in all the taxes together. You think anything less than 100% is too light.
-
Fine - in my mind, we have a grotesqly high graduate rate when you add in all the taxes together. You think anything less than 100% is too light.
when did I ever say that?
come on 333 - I'm trying to make an attempt to take you seriously
so can we agree that that word "heavy" applies to both "progressive" and "graduated" (and that those words are pretty much synonymous
-
when did I ever say that?
come on 333 - I'm trying to make an attempt to take you seriously
so can we agree that that word "heavy" applies to both "progressive" and "graduated" (and that those words are pretty much synonymous
Fine, its subjective, however, to me we have a extremely high rate. Additionally, back then they did not have all the other types of taxes in addition tot he income tax, so when you add EVERYTHING up, we have what to me seems an undeinably high rate FOR EVERYONE WHO WORKS.
-
Fine, its subjective, however, to me we have a extremely high rate. Additionally, back then they did not have all the other types of taxes in addition tot he income tax, so when you add EVERYTHING up, we have what to me seems an undeinably high rate FOR EVERYONE WHO WORKS.
let's try to stay on point
didn't the requirement clearly specify INCOME tax?
-
let's try to stay on point
didn't the requirement clearly specify INCOME tax?
Yes, which we do.
In NYS we pay 9% in additional to Federal. So the top rate is now near 50%. That is not high to you?
-
Yes, which we do.
In NYS we pay 9% in additional to Federal. So the top rate is now near 50%. That is not high to you?
the top federal rate is 35% (on anything over 372,950)
so your math is a bit off but that's not the point
Are we closer now to communism then we were in say 1980 when the personal and corporate rates were even higher.
Personal and Corporate taxes were much higher in 1980 right?
-
the top federal rate is 35% (on anything over 372,950)
so your math is a bit off but that's not the point
Are we closer now to communism then we were in say 1980 when the personal and corporate rates were even higher.
Personal and Corporate taxes were much higher in 1980 right?
Yes and no. They implemented the AMT and got rid of many deductions so more people are paying a higher rate. Additionally, those top rates were rarely if ever paid due to the many loop holes and exemptions that were in effect at the time.
-
Yes and no. They implemented the AMT and got rid of many deductions so more people are paying a higher rate. Additionally, those top rates were rarely if ever paid due to the many loop holes and exemptions that were in effect at the time.
didn't Reagan actually get rid of many of those loopholes?
let's go back to the 1950 and 1960 when we were actually engaged in the cold war
We're both corporate and personal taxes much higher then (this is prior to AMT)
I think we had a 91% bracket in 1961
we must have been closer to being communist in 1961 then we are today......based on the standard of a HEAVY progressive income tax
I think we can both agree that 91% is pretty heavy right?
-
didn't Reagan actually get rid of many of those loopholes?
let's go back to the 1950 and 1960 when we were actually engaged in the cold war
We're both corporate and personal taxes much higher then (this is prior to AMT)
I think we had a 91% bracket in 1961
we must have been closer to being communist in 1961 then we are today......based on the standard of a HEAVY progressive income tax
I think we can both agree that 91% is pretty heavy right?
Yes it was, but like i said that top rate was really nominal since not many people ever paid that.
On a simple note, Straw - what rate do you believe qualifies as "heavy"? to me, anything over 10% qualifies.
-
Shut up, Straw.
You are probably some lazy idiot getting government assistance with everything you have.
Everyone is taxed too much. That is not a perception, it is a fact. Government is too large, thanks to the Democrats, and that is why they have to keep hiking up taxes. If not direct income tax, they tax you on goods you purchase or on services used because corporations are also getting killed with taxes.
You don't know since you don't work.
-
Yes it was, but like i said that top rate was really nominal since not many people ever paid that.
On a simple note, Straw - what rate do you believe qualifies as "heavy"? to me, anything over 10% qualifies.
when you say many people didn't pay it I ask SO WHAT (and I'm not even sure you're correct about that anyway)
would you call a 91% tax bracket a HEAVY PROGRESSIVE INCOME TAX?
yes or no? (come on 333 - this is an easy one)
-
when you say many people didn't pay it I ask SO WHAT (and I'm not even sure you're correct about that anyway)
would you call a 91% tax bracket a HEAVY PROGRESSIVE INCOME TAX?
yes or no? (come on 333 - this is an easy one)
Of course it is.
-
Of course it is.
ok - so by the standard of a heavy progressive income tax we were closer to being a communist state in 1961 (during the depth of the cold war) than we are today
agreed?
-
ok - so by the standard of a heavy progressive income tax we were closer to being a communist state in 1961 (during the depth of the cold war) than we are today
agreed?
Since 1913 we have moved in the absolutely wrong direction in that way.
-
Since 1913 we have moved in the absolutely wrong direction in that way.
fine - so your CT goes back long way but you didn't answer my question
By the standard of a heavy progressive income tax we were closer to being a communist state in 1961 (during the depth of the cold war) than we are today
agreed?
-
fine - so your CT goes back long way but you didn't answer my question
By the standard of a heavy progressive income tax we were closer to being a communist state in 1961 (during the depth of the cold war) than we are today
agreed?
Yes we are, but I am way to busty right now to give you a long description on this.
Do me a favor. go read this.
-
Yes we are, but I am way to busty right now to give you a long description on this.
Do me a favor. go read this.
You get proceeds from the sale of the book or something? ::)
-
Yes we are, but I am way to busty right now to give you a long description on this.
Do me a favor. go read this.
good - so we're in agreement that by the standard of a heavy progressive income tax being an indication of transition to a communist state we're atually farther away now than we were in 1961
isn't it cool when we can come to agreement so quickly
would you like to move on to #3 now?
-
Hey 333 - you keep ranting about all the Marxist/Communist in our country (including the POTUS). Can you show me one thing on this list that even comes close to what we have today
The following is from WIKI: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto
According to the Communist Manifesto, all these were prior conditions for a transition from capitalism to communism, but Marx and Engels later expressed a desire to modernize this passage.
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of the population over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.[8]
According to the Communist Manifesto, all these were prior conditions for a transition from capitalism to communism, but Marx and Engels later expressed a desire to modernize this passage.[9]
BUMP
-
You lost on 1 and 2 and then you gave up
-
You lost on 1 and 2 and then you gave up
I gave up? Not true - read through the thread - you refuse to accept anything anyone else says EVER.
-
I gave up? Not true - read through the thread - you refuse to accept anything anyone else says EVER.
I read it (and wrote it)
you lost on 1 and 2 and gave up
I even hinted that their was one on the list that I would concede but you still gave up
-
bump
-
65 Ways That Everything That You Think That You Own Is Being Systematically Taken Away From You
TEC ^ | 4-12-2011
65 Ways That Everything That You Think That You Own Is Being Systematically Taken Away From You
April 12, 2011
Everything that you own is slowly being taken away from you. It is being done purposely and it is being done by design. Many Americans like to think of themselves as "well off", but as will be demonstrated below, we don't "own" nearly as much as we think that we do. The truth is that most of us have to frantically run around accumulating wealth as rapidly as we can so that we can somehow stay ahead of the rate that wealth is being taken away from us. The entire system is designed to take what you have away from you. There are many ways that this is accomplished - taxation, inflation, debt, interest, fines, fees, tickets, government seizures and good old-fashioned corporate greed. If you tried to just sit back and do nothing but hold on to the wealth that you already have you would find out that it would disappear rather quickly. When you take the time to really analyze our system the conclusion is undeniable - everything that you think that you own is being systematically taken away from you.
There is a reason why the wealthiest one percent of all Americans control 40 percent of all the wealth in the United States. The system is designed to funnel all of the wealth to them and to the government. Average Americans are experiencing a declining standard of living and it is not by accident.
Just check out some of the ways that our wealth is being taken from us....
#1 Do you think that you own your house? You might want to think again. Most Americans that "own a home" are paying a mortgage. If you stop paying that mortgage you will lose that home. Over a million American families were kicked out of their homes last year. This year a million more American families will get the boot.
But when those families get booted out onto the street they don't get their down payments back. They don't get all the mortgage payments that they have made back. The banks get to keep all of the money and all of the houses.
Perhaps you don't have a mortgage. Does that mean that you "own your home"?
No, not really. Just refuse to pay your property taxes and watch what happens. At best you can say that you have the right to rent your home from the government.
In any event, the reality is that the banks now own more of "our homes" than we do. During the most recent recession, the total amount of U.S. home equity owned by the banks surpassed the total amount of U.S. home equity owned by the rest of us for the first time ever.
Things used to be far different in this country. Once upon a time American families owned most of the houses and most of the land in this nation.
But now the banks own most of it. Sadly, most American families that believe that they "own homes" are actually enslaved to 20 or 30 year debt contracts.
#2 Do you think that you own your car? You don't own it if you are still making payments on it. If you stop making payments you will rapidly lose that car.
But even if your car is paid off, you can only operate that car if you do the following....
*You must pay the license fee
*You must pay the car registration fee
*You must pay the emissions inspection fee
*You must pay the property taxes on that car (if that applies in your area)
*You must pay the tire taxes
*You must pay the gas taxes
If you have paid all of those taxes, then you are permitted to drive only where the government allows you to drive and only under the rules that the government sets for you.
But at least you "own" your car, right?
#3 What about your possessions? Do you own them?
Well, yes, you probably own some possessions.
But that doesn't mean that they are not enslaving you.
After all, did you use a credit card to pay for any of them?
If so, you could end up paying much more for your possessions than you originally thought that they cost.
For example, if you only make the minimum payment on your credit card each month, a $6,000 credit card bill could end up costing you over $30,000 (depending on the interest rate).
#4 Do you own your education? Well, it is undeniable that nobody can ever take it away from you. But if you took out student loans that debt may end up enslaving you for decades.
The borrower is the servant of the lender and student loan debt is more of a financial drain on Americans than ever before. Americans now owe more on student loans than they do on credit cards. As hard as that is to believe, that is actually true. Americans now owe more than $903 billion on student loans, which is a new all-time record.
#5 Will you protect your wealth if you put your money in the bank?
No, in fact your wealth will be systematically destroyed in the bank.
Inflation is a hidden tax on every single dollar that you own. It destroys the value of all dollars in existence. There are some Americans that have been saving money for decades, but those savings are being taxed into oblivion by inflation. Many experts are now projecting that the average price of a gallon of gasoline will hit $5 by the end of the year. So the next time you go to the gas pump just take a moment to think about how your wealth is being drained away by inflation.
#6 Insurance costs continue to soar. After insuring everything in our lives many of us barely have any money left over to actually live our lives with. In particular, health insurance premiums have become completely and totally ridiculous. According to the Los Angeles Times, Blue Shield of California plans to raise rates an average of 30% to 35%, and some individual policy holders could see their health insurance premiums rise by a whopping 59 percent this year alone. So how are American families supposed to survive if they keep on handing over bigger and bigger chunks of their income to the health care industry?
#7 State and local governments all over the nation have turned to ticket writing as a primary revenue source. In fact, in some areas of the country traffic citations are soaring at a crazy rate. For example, 110,000 more traffic citations were written in Los Angeles County last fiscal year than were written in the fiscal year immediately prior to the last recession.
The truth is that the police even realize what is going on. Just consider the following quote from from Police Chief Michael Reaves of Utica, Michigan....
"When I first started in this job 30 years ago, police work was never about revenue enhancement, but if you’re a chief now, you have to look at whether your department produces revenues." #8 Some states have decided to simply confiscate wealth even if nothing has been done wrong. For example, the state of California is aggressively seizing "unclaimed" safe deposit boxes. If you have a safe deposit box that you have not checked on in a while you might want to make sure that it is still there.
#9 You might end up losing your valuables when you cross the border. It is being reported that U.S. border agents are now regularly seizing laptops and other electronic devices as people cross the border. In many cases those items are never returned.
#10 If you don't pay your property taxes, you will lose your house and it will likely be a big Wall Street bank that will be taking it from you. As I have written about previously, the big Wall Street banks are buying up thousands upon thousands of tax liens and are making a killing by socking distressed homeowners with predatory interest, outrageous penalties and almost unbelievable legal fees.
#11 Of course the biggest way that our wealth is being drained is through federal income taxes. The reason that the Federal Reserve and the IRS were established back in 1913 was to redistribute wealth. Wealth is transferred from the American people to the U.S. government and then ultimately to the elite and to the causes that the elite favor.
But federal taxes are only one of the taxes that we pay. The truth is that the average American pays dozens of different taxes each year. Just check out a few examples of the different taxes that drain our wealth....
#12 Accounts Receivable Taxes
#13 Building Permit Taxes
#14 Capital Gains Taxes
#15 CDL License Taxes
#16 Cigarette Taxes
#17 Corporate Income Taxes
#18 Court Fines (indirect taxes)
#19 Dog License Taxes
#20 Federal Unemployment Taxes (FUTA)
#21 Fishing License Taxes
#22 Food License Taxes
#23 Gasoline Taxes
#24 Gift Taxes
#25 Hunting License Taxes
#26 Inheritance Taxes
#27 Inventory Taxes
#28 IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax)
#29 IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
#30 Liquor Taxes
#31 Local Income Taxes
#32 Luxury Taxes
#33 Marriage License Taxes
#34 Medicare Taxes
#35 Payroll Taxes
#36 Property Taxes
#37 Real Estate Taxes
#38 Recreational Vehicle Taxes
#39 Road Toll Booth Taxes
#40 Road Usage Taxes (Truckers)
#41 Sales Taxes
#42 Self-Employment Taxes
#43 School Taxes
#44 Septic Permit Taxes
#45 Service Charge Taxes
#46 Social Security Taxes
#47 State Income Taxes
#48 State Unemployment Taxes (SUTA)
#49 Telephone federal excise taxes
#50 Telephone federal universal service fee taxes
#51 Telephone federal, state and local surcharge taxes
#52 Telephone minimum usage surcharge taxes
#53 Telephone recurring and non-recurring taxes
#54 Telephone state and local taxes
#55 Telephone usage charge taxes
#56 Toll Bridge Taxes
#57 Toll Tunnel Taxes
#58 Traffic Fines (indirect taxation)
#59 Trailer Registration Taxes
#60 Utility Taxes
#61 Vehicle License Registration Taxes
#62 Vehicle Sales Taxes
#63 Watercraft Registration Taxes
#64 Well Permit Taxes
#65 Workers Compensation Taxes
Even the future is being taken away from us. The future is literally being stolen from our children and our grandchildren. They will be inheriting the 14 trillion dollar (and still rising) national debt that we have accumulated. What we have done to future generations is unthinkable, and yet we continue to endlessly borrow more money. The Congressional Research Service estimates that the U.S. government will need to borrow $738 billion between April 1st and September 30th. Faith in U.S. Treasuries is falling so rapidly that now the biggest bond fund in the world, PIMCO, is actually shorting U.S. Treasuries.
When you base an entire economy on debt, eventually you end up with money problems that never seem to end. As a nation we are now enslaved to a vicious spiral of debt that is going to destroy everything that our forefathers worked so hard to build.
As the debt loads of our federal, state and local governments become even more burdensome, they are going to want even more money from us. For decades we gave in to new tax after new tax thinking that it would finally satisfy them. But it never seems to be enough. They always want more.
It is the same thing with the banksters. They are never satisfied either. They always want more assets and they always want more Americans to be enslaved to debt.
Unfortunately, most Americans are so caught up in the "rat race" that they never take much time to think about who designed the race or why they are running it.
Hopefully more Americans will wake up and will realize that our entire economy and our entire financial system need to be reformed. Our current system is inherently flawed and it will eventually impoverish the vast majority of us if we allow it to.
-