So, why do we tolerate it?
Posted in Of The People by R Lee Wrights on February 4th, 2010 by Ed Lewis
By “it”, I mean direct taxation on our private personal property, including our homes, our motorized conveyances, our right to travel, our right to earn a living as we see fit, our marriages, and so on down the list of rights that are taxed, regulated, and then taxed and regulated some more.
“Honest” Abe Lincoln, even though he is one of the worst traitor/tyrants of this land of ours, said,
“I believe that every individual is naturally entitled to do as he pleases with himself and the fruits of his labor, so far as it in no way interferes with any other men’s rights.”
Hey, if it is our property and it is private and its is obtained by right, then government has no say-so whatsoever in when, how, where, or if we can use it, as private means “not under government control.” If government has no control over private property or the man/woman, then it has no authority to tax or regulate.
Of course, this does not mean that we can just do as we wish anytime we want. That would be chaos of the highest order, especially by those that have no sense of right and wrong. But, those exist no matter what and are beyond control by regulatory rules since they simply do not care.
What it actually means is that we can do as we wish so long as we do not infringe upon the rights of others. Such interference might be unintentional or it might be intentional. If unintentional, it is by accident, but the damaged man or woman or child can seek redress through a suit.
If intentional, and so described as a crime, then the solution is through proper channels directed first by the 5th Amendment and due process mandated by it. But, even that does not mean the accused should be shackled and dragged off and caged like a wild, crazed animal. If the accused is not a danger to others or himself, then he should not suffer incarceration in order to satisfy some bureaucrat and his greed, or some enforcer’s psychopathic lust for power. Of course, the latter, psychopathic lust for power, assures the enforcers will shackle you, and, generally speaking, treat people like the lowest of lowlifes.
Since many of us own our homes, or are buying our homes and the land they sit on, a good example to use is local governments taxing us on them, or losing them through “back taxes due”, as false a premise as there is.
Now, here is a shocker most people do not know or believe. Private property may only be seized as evidence of a crime or when obtained through criminal activities. There are no other means of attaching and executing against private property owned by we by birthright Citizens of these States united. All else is based on fraud and violations of different provisions covered under racketeering statutes (Title 18, Section 1961 et seq), those dealing with justice, and various other federal and state statutes. The statutes control - are you sitting down - the government, its creations, or, in other words, only those areas and persons it has jurisdiction over.
We must understand that when these united States was founded, the sovereignty of the King was divided up equally between all the people. Thus, the people forming these united States are sovereign. We are the King.
Now, think. What King would let his people order him about, demanding tribute from him? And, then take his property because he did not pay up?
The answer is “none.” The King is the sovereign and he is the supreme authority. So are we people. We, whether the whole or part or just one, are sovereign to entities we make up, including the artificial bodies we call “government.”
Furthermore, it is the feudal system our forefathers fought and died to get people away from. You see, the King owned all the property in merry old England. He was the sovereign. The serfs or fiefs paid the King to use “his” property.
Just as you have no authority to order about your neighbors, neither does the whole of the people have the authority to order about just one. Government does not have the authority because we did not have the authority to give to another or a group. Therefore, government is, and must be, subservient to the people or we are not free.
Thus, we people must understand that the government has no authority to tax your private property, just as you do not have the authority to tax your neighbor or demand any sort of tribute from him. His property is his Kingdom, and the whole of the land (these united states) is also his Kingdom - and yours - and mine.
So, how is it that government forces private property owners to pay taxes on homes and conveyances every year so that they can keep using their property, but not always as they see fit? That is rent, no matter how one looks at it. To be quite blunt, it is also theft by government.
It is usurping our Law - that is, Nature’s Law and our Creator’s Law - and the limitations placed on government. Any usurpation of the Constitution is treason. It aids and abets our enemies, both foreign and domestically based.
Giving a few perhaps credit they do not deserve, it seems that most do not realize what they are doing as they increase the governing body politico’s coffers. They are quite often - I would like to say “ignorant” - but the fact is most have the reasoning power and the reading ability of a rock and that might be insulting the rock. Thus, let me phrase it, “dumber than a box of rocks.”
However, there are those that know exactly what they are doing. They act willfully; they are the controlling faction, and know they are acting wrongfully, especially when informed of the exact Law and statutes that prohibit their actions. That puts them in the category of willfully committing high crimes, including treason, rebellion, terrorism, conspiracy, fraud, and multiple other violations against the people and America. And, it puts our people in a foreign jurisdiction.
There are four jurisdictions, or three if one considers the Admiralty and Maritime as the same jurisdiction. How do you know if you are in the Admiralty or Maritime? Easy. You must be on the high seas or you must have an International contract. The definitions are rather hard to pin down so just take it that if you are NOT on the high seas and do NOT have an International contract, then you are not in one or the other.
Another jurisdiction that might demand compelled performance for compelled benefits is the equity jurisdiction. How do you know if you are in it? If you do not have a bona fide contract, that is, a contract you signed knowingly, willingly, and voluntarily AFTER full disclosure, then you are not in the equity jurisdiction.
Hmm, one might think about contracts you might have with a loan institution. Did you sign it after full knowledge, including the knowledge that the bank or other credit organization does not put up a consideration? (Look up the requirements for a valid contract and you will find that parties to the contract must put up a consideration.)
The last jurisdiction stated in the Constitution is Law. This is Common Law but NOT the so-called “Common Law” determined by previous court opinions. This does not mean Common Law did not use trials between adversaries to help determine the Common Law. When I state, “determined by previous court opinions”, I mean that the current attorney cult, legislators, and so on try to use opinions for the last several decades as binding law. They are not. Opinions are just opinions, not law. Do not let others convince you other wise.
Of course, the corrupt designed a system of non-justice revenue creation that accuses and convicts we people for committing “crimes” when there is no victim. Impossible, of course, except in a land ruled by tyrants that use force to coerce compliance.
At any rate, judges make up law from the bench; prosecuting attorneys make up law to suit their purpose; and legislators make up rules that contravene the Constitution. We even suffer legislators that claim they have authority to make law that rules over we people or they misinterpret their own rules. Those that enforce “traffic” regulations on us as law are good examples of this.
Then, there are those that put out false and misleading information on newscasts and other forms of mainstream media that result in our people treated as “wards of the state”.
The Law of Nature and the Laws of our Creator are the basis for our Common Law, simply expressed by the Ten Commandments. As stated before, that is why the Commandments are on, or used to be on, or placed in prominent positions in courthouses.
But, even this is not enough. During the last several millennia, especially the last eight centuries, our Creator’s Laws on morality and righteousness more or less merged with trials determining true justice. In that sense, opinions (of court) either assimilated into what is moral and righteous, or accommodated into our perceptions of justice. The result is justice, or rendering a man what he is due based on right and wrong. This, in essence means giving nothing to one man by taking from another unless it is his due compensation for damages done to the one.
For example, if a man steals from another, then his due is to compensate his victim for the loss. Of course, this seldom occurs, as it is the State that profits by incarcerating the perpetrator, with the result that the victim often never gets back his property or due compensation. However, for now that is another story, a story of how the victim stays the victim in the false system of justice we now suffer.
(By the way, courthouses that house “court” belong to the people and so do the court officials, as we pay them. So how can they legally charge you court costs? Answer - they can’t - - except by force and other coercive measures treating you thereby as in the Maritime [Merchant Law] jurisdiction.)
Here is the Law we must abide by. Do not interfere with the rights, lives, and pursuit of happiness by others.
What are the rules officials must abide by? They must abide by the above simplified law and every one of the many statutes and ordinances and every other form of regulation they write or treat as the damnable “public policy.” The latter is seldom the policy of the public but the exercise of unauthorized power exercised by enforcers of “their” laws. It is also their excuse for violating every premise this land of ours once held dear. In line with this, remember that police forces, agencies, and so on cannot make law and, even if they could, their “how they would like it to be” rules cannot lawfully or legally interfere with our rights.
What about corporations and other government-created artificial persons (one cannot be a natural person any more than day can be night)? What laws must they abide by? The same as the above for officials, since the job of the officials is to govern themselves and their creations. You see, all corporations, including political subdivisions, are false persons, fictions, if you will, that are under the regulatory power of the State.
Their other duty, besides assuring neither they nor any of their creations violate our rights, is that they must protect and manage our public property for us. That is their job, not all the stuff we hear today about how a cop is “just doing his job” after he tasers, kidnaps, jails, beats the holy heck out of a man or woman (and now child with all the attacks by cops on kids), or kills someone that has, in fact, committed no crime to or against his fellow Man.
So, what about property tax?
Truth - the Bane of Government and Its Controllers
The foregoing helped establish a base to work from and to make sure we are on the same page. Add the following to the base. We, no matter what the controlling evil tribe of evildoers thinks, are human beings. Our bodies house and maintain each of us, a living soul. We are free and independent but as tyranny advanced, so did our need to defend our freedom or lose it through the forces used by government to coerce us into compliance. We cannot depend on others, especially government because authority soon corrupts.
If there is one thing that government hates more than anything else, it is truth. As Harry Truman once said, “I don’t give them hell; I just tell them the truth and they think it’s hell.” Of course, Harry, good little controlled politician that he was, still acted against America and the values it once had, but he, as with so many others, knew the right things to say.
Truth always outs but the problem with government is that no matter when it outs, they continue on as if the truth does not exist. Their behavior reminds me of an anonymous writer that stated, “When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest.”
However, what of those that know the truth but act against it willingly? What of the lies and those that maintain the lies, and then use force to make people comply with the lies?
“In short, this war [on terror] has provided an essential civics lesson that the state is not a friend of truth and liberty but rather its enemy.” Lew Rockwell, Jr., Ludwig von Mises Institute, May 27, 2004 (my emphasis)
Of course, Marxists, Communists, socialists, corporists, whatever you want to call those that gain control through false flag operations (the old Hegelian Dialectic of create the problem, get the reaction, and then supply the solution that always expands government) have known and told us the truth about government lies through historical facts. Most of us, though, never paid any attention or believed the re-written history by those that publish books and the like.
“The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” - Joseph Goebbels, German Minister of Propaganda, 1933-1945
None can refute that government uses lies and coercion to force compliance and prevent truth from emerging. The result is that most of us do not care about governments’ actions until such actins affect our families directly. Even then, though, many are too afraid of government to even try to do anything about it because of the State’s power to force compliance.
Additionally, we are, as so many have stated in the last few years, like the frog that is put in water that is gradually heated until the frog is boiled to death. Maybe it cannot believe what is happening either, but surely we are smarter than frogs. Or are we???
“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” — Dresden James
Well, Folks, the time to open up the package has arrived. Actually, it is long overdue.
As many people know, but maybe never think about, the Constitution for the united States of America prohibits “direct taxation” on the people. Many, though, also think that the Constitution applies only to the federal government. But, Article VI shows this is a falsehood, whether told by the government or the people. It demands that every state and political subdivision’s officials MUST abide by and defend/uphold the provisions of the Constitution. Each official must subscribe or affirm to an Oath of Office and, if not done, must either not enter the office or vacate it immediately.
There are only two forms of taxation permitted. One is direct by apportionment. The state share equally based on their apportioned population counts. In other words, Missouri has nine representatives (far too few but that, too, is another story). Thus, the percentage of a debt Missouri must share in is 9/435ths or 2 percent of the whole.
The other form of tax is indirect, such as excise tax. According to Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, “This word is used to signify an inland imposition, paid sometimes upon the consumption of the commodity, and frequently upon the retail sale.” Any government laying this tax must equalize it over all the people.
Is property tax a form of direct taxation that prohibited by the Constitution? Of course it is. This never overturned case states it clearly and is as valid today as it was in 1895, as the Constitution is the same irregardless of those that try to change it with their lies, or try to place us through their frauds all in a jurisdiction foreign to us (equity, Admiralty, Maritime).
“First. We adhere to the opinion already announced, that, taxes on real estate being indisputably direct taxes, taxes on the rents or income of real estate are equally direct taxes.
Second. We are of the opinion that taxes on personal property, or on the income of personal property, are likewise direct taxes.” [Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.][158 U.S. 601 (1895), emphasis added
Our forefathers founded our land on the principles that the people are the sovereignty, or the supreme entities over the government, and religious freedom. Our forefathers intended that the people could never vote away our rights, and that legislators had no power to legislate them away.
Knowing that this is the case, I state without reservation that when a local government demands payment for you living in your house, or making rules and applying them to you and your property, that the government has violated every premise this land was founded on. Does it matter what a judge or justices have said about it if contrary to the principles? No, because anything contrary to the free exercise of our rights is bogus. Such not only usurps our sovereignty, but also the Constitution for these States united and your state's constitution.
Additionally, I believe that your state's statutes support the above and that they apply only to government created entities known as "persons". Legislators (after the people create them) create persons, which are fictions at laws, a well-documented fact. Most of us, however, are NOT fictions at law. But, the crooks taking your property are fictions in their official capacities. The imaginations of men made up their titles.
Get out your contract or warranty deed showing that you are buying or have bought your home and the land it sits on, along with appurtenances. Is the State or county or city listed showing an interest in the property, or is the mortgage (loan) and deed only in you and your spouse's names? Unless the contract or deed lists the government, it holds no proprietary interest in your property.
Did you have to get a license to buy the property?
Did you have to get a franchise to buy?
Were you given some special privilege by the State to buy?
In other words, did you purchase your home, etc., as a right rather than as a privilege granted by government? Or, did you have become a partner by bona fide contract with the State/County/City giving each an equal say-so with you and your spouse (if applicable) in the use and management of your property?
Understand this. Without a contract, no one can compel anyone else to perform for compelled benefits. Therefore, no government lacking a contract showing a proprietary interest in property, whether one's home or other private property, can compel performance for compelled benefits. Remember that we cannot give to government anything we do not have, including proprietary interests in all property.
Thus, one should ask if you have any "compelled benefits" from government that you must accept by contract? Keep in mind that such things as water and sewer does not obligate you any further than the government supplies and you pay at specified intervals based on the amount used.
Did the government put up anything as a consideration when you completed the deal? Was "the government" or some agent of it even present when you "closed"?
If the government is NOT an equal - or some designated percentage of - proprietor of your property, then how is it that it has any say-so in your property, including charging you for the use of it?
Before I use Missouri Law, commonly called the Missouri Constitution, and its Revised Statutes of Missouri as an example (since I know them best), there are terms everyone must become aware of. They are "terms of technical import" or "words of art". Government has used these terms for many years to mislead our people, establishing the myth that we gave government the authority to control our behaviors.
The first of these is "person(s)". Are you a person in statutes and the like, or are you a human being? You see, human beings cannot be regulated by government, while persons can. Thus, person has to be defined someplace in your state's statutes. In Chapter 1 (RSMo), definitions, it begins with this statement:
"1.020. As used in the statutory laws of this state, unless otherwise specially provided or unless plainly repugnant to the intent of the legislature or to the context thereof:"
Then, as for the definition of persons, Chapter 1, 1.020(11) states:
"The word 'person' may extend and be applied to bodies politic and corporate, and to partnerships and other unincorporated associations".
Did this in any manner refer to people, men, women, human beings, all people, or any other term that indicates in common everyday language or even legalese that it applies to the people and their privately owned property?
No, it does not. Therefore, no statute in the Revised States of Missouri (RSMo) actually apply to any other than the artificial entities listed following the words, "extend and be applied to", unless it is clearly defined differently in a particular section.
Here are other phrases we all should be aware of when reading constitutions and statutes/ordinances.
1. "All taxable property" - does it say all property is taxable or does it say "all taxable property"? As one can easily see, it makes a world of difference. "All taxable property" means it refers only to property that is taxable, while the other means that ALL property is taxable. With the latter, there is no need to classify property since it means 100 percent.
2. "As authorized by law" - If law - that is our Law and the supreme Law does not authorize it - the authorization does not exist. Does Missouri Law support this? We shall see in a minute. Also, remember, statutes that are NOT within the confines of the Constitution for these states united and each state's constitution cannot apply to the people.
3. "Those made liable for taxation" - Hmm, it seems not everyone is made liable for taxation but instead it is only those specified. Otherwise, it might say something along the lines of, "Everyone (or all people are) is made liable …"
4. "On all property subject to their taxing power" - so, all property is not subject to their taxing power but only that property made liable by law and statutes.
Well, that is enough to give one an example of why one must read taxing measures carefully and some of the terms and phrases used to mislead people and steal their property, whether earnings, homes, land, cars, trucks, whatever.
Oh, by the way, "taxpayer" is a "person" made liable for taxation. Think about this. There would not be a need for this word of art if everyone was liable, would there?
Now, to Missouri Law provisions. Note that Missouri Law is the original title of the law that is commonly thought of as the Missouri Constitution. At least, that is the name on the organic copy I obtained from the Missouri Archives. Strange thing is, it has the original 13th Amendment in it and did until the 1875 copy that may or may not have been lawfully changed. (I think illegally since the Archives cannot produce any document authorizing the change.) It is food for thought, though, is it not, that the 13th is NOT the same now as the 13th then.
Anyway, we need to discuss very few Sections of Article X. To begin with, the first three sections, shown here, deserve comments.
Taxing power--exercise by state and local governments.
Section 1. The taxing power may be exercised by the general assembly for state purposes, and by counties and other political subdivisions under power granted to them by the general assembly for county, municipal and other corporate purposes.
Inalienability of power to tax.
Section 2. The power to tax shall not be surrendered, suspended or contracted away, except as authorized by this constitution.
Limitation of taxation to public purposes
Section 3. Taxes may be levied and collected for public purposes only, and shall be uniform upon the same class or subclass of subjects within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax.
Let me ask this in reference to Section 3. Let us say you are a Missourian, a human being born as a by birthright American in Missouri, a free republic. Are you a "subject" that may be classed or are you a human being on equal footing with all other human beings?
Also, please note that taxes must be uniform upon the same class or subclass of subjects. Uniformity refers to excise tax, as all excise taxes must be uniform. According to Bouvier's Law Dictionary - This word is used to signify an inland imposition, paid sometimes upon the consumption of the commodity, and frequently upon the retail sale. According to Webster's Online, 1. A tax that is measured by the amount of business done (not on property or income from real estate) (Note - there is no number 2). In other words, sales tax is an excise tax that is placed uniformly on goods or other commodity.
Section 2 means very little since the last phrase allows the constitution to do what the first phrase does not. In other words, it leaves the power to tax as specified no matter what.
I saved the discussion for Section 1 for last, as it contains extremely important information is dispelling the myth of lawful tax placed on private property not gained by privilege (allowed by government). Read it carefully. Does it allow for any taxation except for corporate purposes? Understand that political subdivisions, which includes both counties and cities, are chartered corporations created by the state.
Let me isolate the power given to counties and cities. "The taxing power may be exercised…for county, municipal and other corporate purposes." Remember that the governing bodies politic for your city and country are chartered, or an incorporated entity, and that, in Missouri, both governing bodies are actually "municipalities".
Also, remember that corporations are artificial creations, that they may not regulate any but their own creations, or others by contract (such as an employee agreeing to specific work terms for specific benefits such as pay). They are fictions subservient to the people, a fact that fascism blurs considerably.
As I previously asked, can McDonald's tell you that you have to pay it a certain amount or it will take your home? Well, neither can any other corporation, including the chartered governing body that exists solely to take care of certain duties for the people of the community, whether the county, city, or State.
So, the question is whether the STATE OF, COUNTY OF, OR CITY OF has authority by the constitution of the people to tax the people's private property not obtained by any privilege granted by the STATE. As food for thought, has any one of these chartered entities any authority whatsoever to put certain people in classes above or below the rest or portions of the population? Can the STATE or whatever "class" us? Or does the rule of Law demand that all are treated equally, such as property owners' equality to non-property owners?
Now we are getting to the nitty gritty of property tax and who or what it can be laid on. Since the state you live in is a state of these united states of America, with officials bound by every provision of the Constitution, I believe it is certain that if you study, you will find provisions similar to the Laws of Missouri.
Why do I believe that no matter the state, private property is protected? Because your state was admitted to our union of states and this means (hopefully) that the people that accepted your constitution made sure it agreed with the limitations of the Constitution for the united states of America. (Note: From now on, the latter is just the Constitution, while Missouri's is Missouri Law.)
Equality demands that whatever is good for the public must be paid by the whole of the people. That means every man, woman, and child must pay. This does not include corporations because they are NOT people; they are fictions. They often use our public properties for their own gain, especially in regards to transportation (commercial movement of goods).
Also, keep in mind that large numbers of people in such organizations as law enforcement agencies are not necessary when statutes are properly applied. They could be cut by at least two-thirds were it not for unconstitutionally applying statutes defining crimes to the people. The more people government arrests for victimless crimes, the more money the government makes. The more mala prohibita crimes created, the more private property government seizes by relating some mala prohibita crime to the property.
Section 4 of Missouri Law states the only classes that a property tax may be laid on and defines the classes. Let us look at the title of this section.
Classification of taxable property--taxes on franchises, incomes, excises and licenses.
That is as far as we have to go. Read the below to see why.
"The title of an act is essentially a part of the act and is itself a legislative expression of the general scope of a bill and it may be looked to as an aid in arriving at the intent of the legislation." Tompkins' Estate (Mo.) 341 S.W. 2d 866,
"[t]o the extent the bill’s original purpose is properly expressed in the title to the bill, we need not look beyond the title to determine the bill’s subject.” Hammerschmidt v. Boone County, Missouri877 S.W.2d 98 (Mo. 1994).
“If the title of a bill contains a particular limitation or restriction, a provision that goes beyond the limitation in the title is invalid because such title affirmatively misleads the reader.” Fust v. Attorney General of Missouri, 947 S.W.2d 424 (Mo. 1997).
It does not matter what the rest says because if it is in agreement, fine and dandy. But, if it is not in agreement, any provision outside the limitations in the title is null and void from its inception. Neither legislators nor any other officials are free to interpret it. It says what it means and it means what it says.
Simply put, Missouri governing bodies politic, the STATE, COUNTY, and CITY, may only lay a tax on franchises, incomes (commercial gain) from property, licensed property, and excises (which seems rather stupid to me, since excises are placed as in the above definitions.
That should be enough to invalid property tax on Missouri homes, cars, trucks, other appurtenances, and all other forms of private property, whether tangible or intangible.
As for tangible or intangible, they are words of art legislatively speaking. In common usage, we can touch the property or we cannot, or we own intellectual endeavors or we do not.
Everyone should see that there is nothing complicated about it about this matter. Section 4(a) in Missouri Law does not apply a tax liability to we people and our property, unless the property is gained by license or franchise.
Do you remember this phrase in Section I of Article X, “…for county, municipal and other corporate purposes”?
Well, check out this section.
Immunity of private property from sale for municipal debts.
Section 9. Private property shall not be taken or sold for the payment of the corporate debt of a municipal corporation. If this does not prohibit the taking and sale of private property by a COUNTY OF or CITY OF, since all debts of chartered governments are “corporate debts”, then what does it do? And, this section.
“Taxing jurisdiction of local governments–limitation on assessed valuation.
Section 11(a). Taxes may be levied by counties and other political subdivisions on all property subject to their taxing power,” (my emphasis)
I highlighted this phrase because it shows that not all property is subject to the taxing power of the State or of chartered city and county governing bodies politic. Only that property the law makes liable is taxable, and therefore, Section 4(a) must show it. Officials, in other words, cannot at their whim make any other property liable.
Let us presume that a man acts in a foolish manner and causes the conversion of his private property into property known in statutes (and now in the minds of the public) as “real property” (a term of technical import), and himself into a “person” in the statutes. The people I know that did this did so for alleged “tax” advantages, a myth, because if they had not incorporated themselves, their private property, their land, and so on was not made liable for any tax, including federal income tax. In other words, they made a compact with the devil, so to speak.
However, in our imagined case, the man did it. Can a city, county, or state governing body politic take his home for alleged taxes owed? First, we look at Missouri Law, which states in Article X, Section 6(a):
“Homestead exemption authorized.
Section 6(a). The general assembly may provide that a portion of the assessed valuation of real property actually occupied by the owner or owners thereof as a homestead, be exempted from the payment of taxes thereon,” (my emphasis)
Understand that for taxing laws to exempt one from a tax, the laws must first make one liable for the tax. Furthermore, real property is a term of technical import, or a word of art used to confuse. Land is land, and a house is a house. All other words used to describe such in laws made by men apply only to manmade fictions manmade laws apply to. In the case of this provision, it protects “persons” from their homes being taxed or taken for an alleged tax.
So, what is a “homestead”? Since the general assembly may provide that a portion of the real property is a homestead, we turn to the statutes to find out what the general assembly deemed a homestead. This is found in 513.475 RSMo, which states:
Executions and Exemptions - Section 513.475 August 28, 2009
Homestead defined–exempt from execution–spouses debarred from selling, when.
513.475. 1. The homestead of every person, consisting of a dwelling house and appurtenances, and the land used in connection therewith, not exceeding the value of fifteen thousand dollars, which is or shall be used by such person as a homestead, shall, together with the rents, issues and products thereof, be exempt from attachment and execution. (Note: I did not include the spouse part, as it is not germane to the issue at hand.)
An “attachment” is a writ to seize property in advance of a potentially satisfying demand a plaintiff has against a defendant.
An “execution” is carrying into effect the final judgment of a court.
Come on, Folks, do you honestly believe that this land and its laws meant that a State or lowly political subdivision of a State could take a by birthright American’s home for an alleged tax, or that a tax on property could be lawfully placed on ones’ home? Or, a person as defined by law could have his home taxed and taken, including the equity that can and often does exceed the alleged tax liability? How could one even conceive that this is the case in the land of the free?
Clearly, the intent was NEVER for any body politic to take a man or woman’s home due to an alleged tax deficiency. Note that “person” is an entity - a fiction at law - with his home or homestead protected from incorporated “governments”, or any other alleged debt holder. Missouri Law (and statutes, I might add) fully support this, as does the Constitution, along with the support of literally thousands of high court opinions that private property may only be seized as evidence of a crime or obtained through criminal activities, and that we people owe the State nothing.
To summarize this, Section 4(a) does NOT make private property owned by people, rather than persons, liable for any tax. Then, Section 6(a) in conjunction with 513.475 RSMo exempts the home (homestead) used as a dwelling, the land it sits on (used in conjunction with) up to 15,000 dollars in value) and all appurtenances from attachment and execution.
Missouri Law prohibits both in regards to one’s home, and, of course, neither can be lawfully or legally used when there is no lawful or legal basis for the same. In other words, the STATE, COUNTY OF, and CITY OF cannot use alleged seizure statutes against someone that is not made liable for property tax. Furthermore, even if a person (in law) does have a tax liability, the law exempts his home from a tax liability and against attachment or execution. Is this too complicated for officials and we ordinary people to understand? I think not.
Conclusion
My question for many years was just how the government thought it could tax me on property I own. It did not happen to me until county so-called governments tied tax on homes and the like to the equally illegal tax on our motorized conveyances. I considered that forcing people to pay tax on their own property just does not jive with freedom and equality. Thus, I spent many, many hours researching, especially after getting on the Internet. Now I know - direct tax on property is nothing more than theft by government.
I would bet that every state has similar provisions in its constitution. I would also bet that the legislative rules (administrative statutes) meant to control the government and its artificial creations have similar provisions to Missouri Law and statutes. However, one will never know unless one goes directly to the written words in Law and statutes/ordinances concerning tax and collections.
Contractually speaking, no governing body politic has proprietary interest in your private property, unless you have contracted it as a consideration for not performing acts compelled by the contract. Furthermore, any presumed contract in which one party does not put up a consideration is void from the beginning, and cannot compel performance for some alleged benefit that does not exist. One needs only to study briefly the requirements of a valid contract to understand this.
“The genius of our ruling class is that it has kept a majority of the people from ever questioning the inequity of a system where most people drudge along, paying heavy taxes for which they get nothing in return:” Gore Vidal
Thus, although officialdom will NOT accept the above as it is destruction of the revenue and control system they set up for themselves, they will lie, coerce, commit additional acts of treason, and so on. They will continue lying not because of any genius but because they can and must in order to defend their other lies and keep the revenues (corporate income) coming in. Additionally, they will continue protecting themselves with their guard dogs, other foxes, and acts of terrorism against people by their corporative enforcers of false law.
Thus, this section ends with this statement by Mr. Vidal, as this is not conspiracy theory, a much abused trigger term. It is conspiracy fact that affects every private property owner. I think as Gore Vidal expressed.
“Apparently, ‘conspiracy stuff’ is now shorthand for unspeakable truth.”
This could be the start to the end, the people willing.
Thomas Jefferson had many thoughts that are appropriate to the destruction of America occurring right before our eyes. Here are two for those of us that do not have our eyes glued to the boob’s tube or other matters of no importance in comparison to the loss of the once greatest harbinger of human freedom every known.
“There is only one force in the nation that can be depended upon to keep the government pure and the governors honest, and that is the people themselves. They alone, if well informed, are capable of preventing the corruption of power, and of restoring the nation to its rightful course if it should go astray. They alone are the safest depository of the ultimate powers of government.”
“They [the people in mass] are inherently independent of all but moral law.” - Letter to Judge Spencer Roane, September 6, 1819. “The Writings of Thomas Jefferson,” edited by Andrew A. Lipscomb, vol. 15, p. 213 (1904).
It is of extreme importance that in my studies I did not find one statute, whether federal or state, that legislators did not write within the confines of the Constitution. It is the application that is unconstitutional and, in most cases, illegal and treasonous. That is the sad state of affairs in which we find ourselves.
Also, I would be negligent not to note that this changed under the current conditions with alleged law after law violating not only our inherent, inalienable rights but also even the privileges of persons. Officials in government exhibit no regard for the rights or humanity of men - all men, not just Americans.
We allowed governing bodies to get away with their criminal activities for too long, I fear. Most of our people now depend on government to right wrongs even though most people do not trust officials and the government they form. Rather a strange paradox, don’t you think?
Anyway, the question is, what to do when government commits the wrongs? That is the question that every last one of us will face sooner or later, whether each knows it or not.
Winston Churchill once said,
“Men occasionally stumble over truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.”
Thus, my questions are will the people rise to the occasion after recognizing the truth, and then act on it? Or will they instead simply bow under to the forces used by government to remove all vestiges of human freedom?
That, Folks, is up to you.
Addendum: By the way, if you believe that a lack of property tax on privately owned property would damage such things as education, demand an explanation and analysis by independent auditors of the States’ Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), along with the COUNTY’S, CITY’S, SCHOOLS’, and all other political subdivisions of the STATE. Get the gross income and total expenditures allegedly for the public’s good. You will come to the same decision, that the direct tax taken (as in stolen) is NOT for meeting the duties of the various governments and their subdivisions but for other purposes not revealed to the people. You will come to the same conclusion.
Note: The budget is not the annually required audit, whether called the CAFR or not. The budget merely lists expected outgoes and the commonly known sources of income to meet the costs. It does NOT show complete surpluses, earnings, investments, and all assets of the corporate government or subdivision looked at.
Also, in case I did not make it clear, every subdivision has its own CAFR or annual audit.
Ed Lewis is a columnist at Liberty For All. Contact Mr. Lewis at ofthepeople@cvalley.net.
Twitter Tweets about Obama as of 4. februar 2010 « Obame and Copenhagen said,
February 4, 2010 @ 6:57 am
[...] [...]
So, Why Do We Tolerate It? - Reboot The Republic said,
February 5, 2010 @ 12:33 pm
[...] So, Why Do We Tolerate It? Posted by admin | Filed under Orwell | Feb 5, 2010 | No CommentsFrom Liberty For All [...]