PDA

View Full Version : Why we pay taxes, who has to pay taxes, and redeeming lawful



Frederick Burrell
04-03-11, 05:15 AM
The American People Can Close the Fed, Demand United States Notes


When Congress borrows money on the credit of the United States, bonds are thus legislated into existence and deposited as credit entries in Federal Reserve banks. United States bonds, bills and notes constitute money as affirmed by the Supreme Court (Legal Tender Cases, 110 U.S. 421), and this money when deposited with the Fed becomes collateral from whence the Treasury may write checks against the credit thus created in its account (12 USC 391). For example, suppose Congress appropriates an expenditure of $1 billion.

To finance the appropriation Congress creates the $1 billion worth of bonds out of thin air and deposits it with the privately owned Federal Reserve System. Upon receiving the bonds, the Fed credits $1 billion to the Treasury's checking account, holding the deposited bonds as collateral. When the United States deposits its bonds with the Federal Reserve System, private credit is extended to the Treasury by the Fed. Under its power to borrow money, Congress is authorized by the Constitution to contract debt, and whenever something is borrowed it must be returned. When Congress spends the contracted private credit, each use of credit is debt which must be returned to the lender or Fed. Since Congress authorizes the expenditure of this private credit, the United States incurs the primary obligation to return the borrowed credit, creating a National Debt which results when credit is not returned.

However, if anyone else accepts this private credit and uses it to purchase goods and services, the user voluntarily incurs the obligation requiring him to make a return of income whereby a portion of the income is collected by the IRS and delivered to the Federal Reserve banksters.

Actually the federal income tax imparts two separate obligations: the obligation to file a return and the obligation to abide by the Internal Revenue Code. The obligation to make a return of income for using private credit is recognized in law as an irrecusable obligation, which according to 'Bouvier's Law Dictionary' (1914 ed.), is "a term used to indicate a certain class of contractual obligations recognized by the law which are imposed upon a person without his consent and without regard to any act of his own."

This is distinguished from a recusable obligation which, according to Bouvier, arises from a voluntary act by which one incurs the obligation imposed by the operation of law. The voluntary use of private credit is the condition precedent which imposes the irrecusable obligation to file a tax return. If private credit is not used or rejected, then the operation of law which imposes the irrecusable obligation lies dormant and cannot apply.

In 'Brushaber v. Union Pacific RR Co.' 240 U.S. 1 (1916) the Supreme Court affirmed that the federal income tax is in the class of indirect taxes, which include duties and excises. The personal income tax arises from a duty -- i.e., charge or fee -- which is voluntarily incurred and subject to the rule of uniformity. A charge is a duty or obligation, binding upon him who enters into it, which may be removed or taken away by a discharge (performance): 'Bouvier', p. 459.

Our federal personal income tax is not really a tax in the ordinary sense of the word but rather a burden or obligation which the taxpayer voluntarily assumes, and the burden of the tax falls upon those who voluntarily use private credit. Simply stated the tax imposed is a charge or fee upon the use of private credit where the amount of private credit used measures the pecuniary obligation.

The personal income tax provision of the Internal Revenue Code is private law rather than public law. "A private law is one which is confined to particular individuals, associations, or corporations": 50 Am.Jur. 12, p.28. In the instant case the revenue code pertains to taxpayers. A private law can be enforced by a court of competent jurisdiction when statutes for its enforcement are enacted: 20 Am.Jur. 33, pgs. 58, 59.

The distinction between public and private acts is not always sharply defined when published statutes are printed in their final form: Case v. Kelly, 133 U.S. 21 (1890). Statutes creating corporations are private acts: 20 Am.Jur. 35, p. 60. In this connection, the Federal Reserve Act is private law. Federal Reserve banks derive their existence and corporate power from the Federal Reserve Act: Armano v. Federal Reserve Bank, 468 F.Supp. 674 (1979).

A private act may be published as a public law when the general public is afforded the opportunity of participating in the operation of the private law. The Internal Revenue Code is an example of private law which does not exclude the voluntary participation of the general public. Had the Internal Revenue Code been written as substantive public law, the code would be repugnant to the Constitution, since no one could be compelled to file a return and thereby become a witness against himself.

Under the fifty titles listed on the preface page of the United States Code, the Internal Revenue Code (26 USC) is listed as having not been enacted as substantive public law, conceding that the Internal Revenue Code is private law. Bouvier declares that private law "relates to private matters which do not concern the public at large."

It is the VOLUNTARY use of private credit which imposes upon the user the quasi contractual or implied obligation to make a return of income. In 'Pollock v. Farmer's Loan & Trust Co.' 158 U.S. 601 (1895) the Supreme Court had declared the income tax of 1894 to be repugnant to the Constitution, holding that taxation of rents, wages and salaries must conform to the rule of apportionment.

However, when this decision was rendered, there was no privately owned central bank issuing private credit and currency but rather public money in the form of legal tender notes and coins of the United States circulated. Public money is the lawful money of the United States which the Constitution authorizes Congress to issue, conferring a property right, whereas the private credit issued by the Fed is neither money nor property, permitting the user an equitable interest but denying Allodial title.

Today, we have two competing monetary systems. The Federal Reserve System with its private credit and currency, and the public money system consisting of legal tender United States notes and coins.
.

One could use the public money system, paying all bills with coins and United States notes (if the notes can be obtained), or one could voluntarily use the private credit system and thereby incur the obligation to make a return of income. Under 26 USC 7609 the IRS has carte blanche authority to summon and investigate bank records for the purpose of determining tax liabilities or discovering unknown taxpayers: 'United States v. Berg' 636 F.2d 203 (1980).

If an investigation of bank records discloses an excess of $1000 in deposits in a single year, the IRS may accept this as prima facie evidence that the account holder uses private credit and is therefore a person obligated to make a return of income. Anyone who uses private credit -- e.g., bank accounts, credit cards, mortgages, etc. -- voluntarily plugs himself into the system and obligates himself to file. A taxpayer is allowed to claim a $1000 personal deduction when filing his return. The average taxpayer in the course of a year uses United States coins in vending machines, parking meters, small change, etc., and this public money must be deducted when computing the charge for using private credit.

On June 5, 1933, the day of infamy arrived. Congress on that date enacted House Joint Resolution 192, which provided that the people convert or turn in their gold coins in exchange for Federal Reserve notes. Through the operation of law, H.J.R. 192 took us off the gold standard and placed us on the dollar standard where the dollar could be manipulated by private interests for their self-serving benefit. By this single act the people and their wealth were delivered to the banksters. When gold coinage was thus pulled out of circulation, large denomination Federal Reserve notes were issued to fill the void. As a consequence the public money supply in circulation was greatly diminished, and the debt-laden private credit of the Fed gained supremacy.

This action made private individuals who had been previously exempt from federal income taxes now liable for them, since the general public began consuming and using large amounts of private credit. Notice all the case law prior to 1933 which affirms that income is a profit or gain which arises from a government granted privilege. After 1933, however, the case law no longer emphatically declares that income is exclusively corporate profit or that it arises from a privilege. So, what changed? Two years after H.J.R. 192, Congress passed the Social Security Act, which the Supreme Court upheld as a valid act imposing a valid income tax: 'Charles C. Steward Mach. Co. v, Davis' 301 U.S. 548 (1937).

source: http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/convincing.html

motla68
04-03-11, 06:06 AM
All this and neither one of those monetary system are yours, if you did not print it you are using someone else's money to buy things and not returning the receipts therefore the tax man will continue to come after you. We can skirt Income taxes and some other taxes with Public Money, but still it is not our money. Courts are not our laws either, unless you formed a committee to help create a law, it is not your law, but we keep making the mistake of interfering in it. The documents you used to get that bank account you deposit that money in is not yours either, all you can really do is make a stand on right of possession and use of the equity in which were created by your energy in exchange for depositing the receipts to treasury.

You want to rebuild the Republic then lets build it, you cannot build it if you keep taking everything out of it.

Frederick Burrell
04-03-11, 06:21 AM
Can't anyone post a thread on this site without you trolling it.

Trolling= fishing for new prospects. Start your own forum. Your religious mumbo jumbo is getting tiresome.

I use things that others have made every day. So what. And so do you. You have this weird fixation on money, get over it. fB

David Merrill
04-03-11, 01:04 PM
Can't anyone post a thread on this site without you trolling it.

Trolling= fishing for new prospects. Start your own forum. Your religious mumbo jumbo is getting tiresome.

I use things that others have made every day. So what. And so do you. You have this weird fixation on money, get over it. fB

I am beginning to think Bean (from SJC) found us here. These mythologies, they are just too common to pin on one internet pundit though.



All this and neither one of those monetary system are yours, if you did not print it you are using someone else's money to buy things and not returning the receipts therefore the tax man will continue to come after you. We can skirt Income taxes and some other taxes with Public Money, but still it is not our money. Courts are not our laws either, unless you formed a committee to help create a law, it is not your law, but we keep making the mistake of interfering in it. The documents you used to get that bank account you deposit that money in is not yours either, all you can really do is make a stand on right of possession and use of the equity in which were created by your energy in exchange for depositing the receipts to treasury.

You want to rebuild the Republic then lets build it, you cannot build it if you keep taking everything out of it.

The comment about why I would ever want to buy Taco Bell food - as an excuse to avoid admitting that he cannot with his specie-based currency proposals; that has me 90% convinced we have Bean under a different nomen.

fB;

What I think that I can do is convince you that Motla68 is worthwhile, at least for now, because I have a complete disk of source documentation to refute whatever he presents and in doing so, we are a cut above any other reading on the WWW!


All this and neither one of those monetary system are yours, if you did not print it you are using someone else's money to buy things and not returning the receipts therefore the tax man will continue to come after you.

That, from other posts can easily be discerned as an indirect description of fiat currency. Bean, er, Motla68 is explaining that our currency is based directly in precious metals. [Btw; the NY tax man came after this suitor to give him his Withholdings (http://img807.imageshack.us/img807/3503/staterefund125adjustmen.jpg)and a $125 school tax credit!] (http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/3503/staterefund125adjustmen.jpg)He says in other words, that the currency of 1863-64, Greenbacks and US Notes are not our currency! This fiat currency is the direct obligations of the US and never to be used as a reserve currency (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode31/usc_sec_31_00005115----000-.html). I lay claim to that government (sovereignty) even if Motla68 will not - more for me that way! Page 1 (http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_approbation1.jpg), Page 2 (http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_approbation2.jpg), Page 3 (http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_approbation3.jpg). [Note especially my blatant use of the Great Seal in my Signature, alongside my thumbprint.]

To cut right to the quick here. That is to say, turn Motla68's trolling into entertainment, the fiat started here (http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/533/gilpinswarmeasureszoom.jpg) (attachments). Directly to the north of that little cabin (http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=210&d=1301834153), on this Golden Spiral/Rectangle (http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/4255/monumentsfibonaccispira.jpg), we find the capital for Colorado (http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=211&d=1299715437), in that sense (there were actually three capitals according to the history books in the Mason Library - attached (http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=212&d=1301834722)).

Colorado set the precedent. The first Secretary for the Territory was Lewis Ledyard WELD, Weld County is the largest county in Colorado still. His code name in the Masons was Lucias as in lightbearer - illuminati (http://img693.imageshack.us/img693/5222/illuminatusninth.jpg)and he brought from his family crest, the Colorado State Seal and Great Seal of Authority (http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/DavidStar.jpg) that you find me utilizing as statesman today (http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/452/docketreport12911.jpg). It bears the same emanations from the penumbra found on the backside of the dollar bill - the eye in the triangle with light coming off it?

So bear with this troll. I have some sway with Admin and I have put out a word of honor, that unless absolutely necessary; short of profane rants and porn, nobody will be banished from StSC. I feel that Motla68 has been indicted for fraud here, pursuading readers that his Coresource Solution can pay for a new roof if you utilize the Treasury as a purse. He can show us convincing documentation of that and be released from that self-indictment any time. Rather he tries to allure people away to go look at convincing arguments and even evidence I presume...

Point being that this post took some time to write and therefore speaking for myself I am not going to go somewhere else looking for what Motla68 could be showing us here. I have provided a great example post right here for you Motla68! You want to convince us of things? Just follow this post as an example. I have shown some pretty damn extraordinary aspects of history - little known esoterics and if anybody challenges the validity of this post and its attachments, links and assertions I welcome that because I have plenty more on disk to dive into; all of which is as fascinating and moreso.



Regards,

David Merrill.

stoneFree
04-03-11, 10:15 PM
Frederick, that appears to be part of the 1984 Freedom League (http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/convincing.html) article. You may want to provide source/attribution (just who wrote that anyway?).

PS. I pay no income tax, I'm paid lawful money.

David Merrill
04-04-11, 12:14 AM
Frederick, that appears to be part of the 1984 Freedom League (http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/convincing.html) article. You may want to provide source/attribution (just who wrote that anyway?).

PS. I pay no income tax, I'm paid lawful money.


http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/83/stanekvwhite3.jpg

http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/convincing.html

Frederick Burrell
04-04-11, 04:47 AM
Frederick, that appears to be part of the 1984 Freedom League (http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/convincing.html) article. You may want to provide source/attribution (just who wrote that anyway?).

PS. I pay no income tax, I'm paid lawful money.

Thank you for the info on the source for this article. I found it on another forum and thought it fit well with the suitors concepts of redeeming lawful money. No source was listed or linked.

doug-again
04-04-11, 08:43 PM
I am beginning to think Bean (from SJC) found us here. These mythologies, they are just too common to pin on one internet pundit though.




The comment about why I would ever want to buy Taco Bell food - as an excuse to avoid admitting that he cannot with his specie-based currency proposals; that has me 90% convinced we have Bean under a different nomen.

fB;

What I think that I can do is convince you that Motla68 is worthwhile, at least for now, because I have a complete disk of source documentation to refute whatever he presents and in doing so, we are a cut above any other reading on the WWW!No i don't think so.....THAT would mean Mikey knows bean! mot has mentioned that it was Mike Joe who brought him over here. i have not seen MJ deny this.
While bean's language and character did change quite a bit - and i am not the only one that thought bean was more than one person - his english was never nearly as broken as mot's, and he never quoted the bible. bean seemed to eschew bible stuff, where mot is more like his own private pope.
The taco bell remark could be explained by mot's admission to having been a member of SJC; hmmm, but he can't remember what his handle was - said "it's been so long now."
Ya, righhht.
Do notice that mot and MJ do not clash.
They are arguably a tag team here.
They both seem to argue from the same premises.
They have similar scriptural paradigms.
Watch how you cut mot, you may slice MJ too.

motla68
04-05-11, 01:30 AM
No i don't think so.....THAT would mean Mikey knows bean! mot has mentioned that it was Mike Joe who brought him over here. i have not seen MJ deny this.
While bean's language and character did change quite a bit - and i am not the only one that thought bean was more than one person - his english was never nearly as broken as mot's, and he never quoted the bible. bean seemed to eschew bible stuff, where mot is more like his own private pope.
The taco bell remark could be explained by mot's admission to having been a member of SJC; hmmm, but he can't remember what his handle was - said "it's been so long now."
Ya, righhht.
Do notice that mot and MJ do not clash.
They are arguably a tag team here.
They both seem to argue from the same premises.
They have similar scriptural paradigms.
Watch how you cut mot, you may slice MJ too.

This whole conversation is quite comical, FBI man still trying to profile me and look up my background rather then being so productive as to let a man correct his mistakes.
This is true that I am not a well spoken man through audible means, this is why I prayed for someone who could come and help out some on at least monthly basis and
then came Onlashuk who said he made the decision to move to the this local area here and then 2 weeks later he heard of our local group, he has been a big help, he is
a bit uncomfortable at times getting up in front of everyone for lack of confidence but I keep trying to convince him that if I can do it he can definitely do it.
To be said of one having broken english and then be called a pope, not sure what to think of that one other then it sound like a bit of an oxymoron.
I challenge any of you to eat all Organic food locally grown, grass fed beef, unpasturized raw goat milk for even 2 weeks then go eat at taco bell and see if your taste has changed any?
I was on SJC for a very short period a very long at all so how could I remember?
You may not see it now but MJ and I have had our fare share of debating, snorting, scoffing, grittin teeth and walking away not talking to each other for about a month especially when I first introduced him to what we are doing, but eventually he found his own way and had a success of his own not ever showing ID for him or his family when a whole police department practically showed up at his door, after that we started to slowly come to a meeting of the minds.

Thanks for the mostly diplomatic response Doug, quite the entertainment for the day.

Peace be upon you.

Michael Joseph
04-05-11, 01:37 AM
No i don't think so.....THAT would mean Mikey knows bean! mot has mentioned that it was Mike Joe who brought him over here. i have not seen MJ deny this.
While bean's language and character did change quite a bit - and i am not the only one that thought bean was more than one person - his english was never nearly as broken as mot's, and he never quoted the bible. bean seemed to eschew bible stuff, where mot is more like his own private pope.
The taco bell remark could be explained by mot's admission to having been a member of SJC; hmmm, but he can't remember what his handle was - said "it's been so long now."
Ya, righhht.
Do notice that mot and MJ do not clash.
They are arguably a tag team here.
They both seem to argue from the same premises.
They have similar scriptural paradigms.
Watch how you cut mot, you may slice MJ too.

I have thought how to respond to this presentment.....

shikamaru
04-05-11, 06:32 PM
Receiving income makes one liable for taxation according to George Gordon.

Michael Joseph
04-06-11, 09:29 PM
Receiving income makes one liable for taxation according to George Gordon.

And he is right.

What you do with what you receive is another thing altogether. See that a Corporation must pay in Federal Reserve Credit. That does not mean I have to USE federal reserve credit.

There must always be choice. And in fact there is a choice. But to make a demand for Lawful Money per 12USC411 while removing one from the Federal Reserve Districts in no way transfers the Legal Right to manage the "Intangible Property" (IP); whereupon, IP is income, money, wages, etc...

stoneFree
04-10-11, 01:40 AM
Good thing I received lawful money and not income.

fishnet
04-28-13, 02:01 AM
On the subject of taxation, back in January one here finally found "taxpayer" defined in the Internal Revenue Manual while researching foreign estate EIN information.

21.7.13.2.1 (10-01-2012) (http://www.irs.gov/irm/part21/irm_21-007-013r.html)
3.
Note:

A taxpayer is a Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, filer and has a Keogh plan, or is required to file excise, employment, or alcohol, tobacco, or firearms returns.

Michael Joseph
04-28-13, 02:17 AM
Good thing I received lawful money and not income.

Brother I would be careful with that assessment. IMHO: Lawful Money would be income to you. But, I believe, it comes with different obligations.

walter
05-27-13, 04:43 PM
WHAT PUT THE WORD “VOLUNTARY” IN FEDERAL TAXATION?

Washington, D.C., December 24, 1872.

According to an act of Congress of that date, 27 Stat 401, assessments of all federal taxes, which were heretofore made by persons in the Offices of Assessor and Assistant Assessor, would, by July 1, 1873, be performed by the Collectors of Internal Revenue or their deputies and the offices of assessor and assistant assessor would be abolished and the duties of those officers would henceforth be transferred to the Collectors of Internal Revenue.

On August 28, 1894, the Collectors of Internal Revenue and Deputy Collectors of Internal Revenue had been assessing, levying, collecting and paying into the Treasury of the United States of America all internal revenue they received less their compensation for more than 20 years.

The Act of August 28, 1894, 28 Stat 553-560, an act to reduce taxation, to provide revenue for the government, and for other purposes, in Section 29 imposed a duty on:

“all persons of lawful age having an income of more than three thousand five hundred dollars for the taxable year, computed on the basis herein prescribed, to make and render a list or return, on or before the day provided by law, in such form and manner as may be directed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, to the collector or a deputy collector of the district in which they reside, of the amount of their income, gains, and profits…”

The imposition of a duty to make a list or return of taxable property made the 1894 Income Tax a direct tax on property, which was the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States in the Income Tax cases, Pollock v. Farmer’s Loan and Trust Co., 157 U.S. 429 (1895) and Pollock v. Farmer’s Loan and Trust Co., 158 U.S. 601 (1895)

Almost 20 years later, after the ratification of the 16th Amendment, Congress enacted another federal income tax law, which the Supreme Court first declared to be constitutional in Brushaber v. Union Pacific, 240 U.S. 1 (1916). As in the 1894 Income Tax, the Collectors of Internal Revenue and Deputy Collectors of Internal Revenue played the significant role in the assessment, levying, collection and payment of internal revenue. The Collectors of Internal Revenue and Deputy Collectors of Internal Revenue continued to pay a significant and critical role in federal income taxation until the 1952 abolition of the all the Offices of the Collectors of Internal Revenue and Deputy Collectors of Internal Revenue

For over 150 years the Collector of Internal Revenue was the Tax Man in the United States. During the 150 years the Collectors of Internal Revenue collected taxes within the United States they had the power of Congress to assess, levy and collect federal taxes and most important they had the power of distraint—the authority to seize the property of the tax debtor for non-payment. Neither the Secretary of the Treasury nor the Commissioner of Internal Revenue could at anytime assess, levy and collect any federal tax, so not possessing authority to tax they could not delegate that power to another.

The Collectors of Internal Revenue survived many forms of novel taxation during their tenure, including the 1894 federal income tax, but the Collector of Internal Revenue couldn’t survive government’s 1952 plan to expand federal income taxation by turning the country into a democracy where anyone could volunteer to pay taxes.

The power of the Congress to tax incomes, reaffirmed in the 16th Amendment, can be traced back to the temporary tax noted in Article 4 of the Northwest Ordinance of July 13, 1787. Income tax assessments and collections began with the appointment by the President of assessors, assistant assessors and collectors and deputy collectors under the Act of July 1, 1862 12 Stat 432. Assessors were to be abolished by July 1, 1873 and the Collectors of Internal Revenue and Deputy Collectors of Internal Revenue were to be gone by December 1, 1952, making 1952 the first year of voluntary federal taxation.

If you would like to learn more about law, government and taxation contact me at edrivera@edrivera.com

Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera

David Merrill
05-30-13, 08:51 AM
On the subject of taxation, back in January one here finally found "taxpayer" defined in the Internal Revenue Manual while researching foreign estate EIN information.

21.7.13.2.1 (10-01-2012) (http://www.irs.gov/irm/part21/irm_21-007-013r.html)
3.
Note:

A taxpayer is a Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, filer and has a Keogh plan, or is required to file excise, employment, or alcohol, tobacco, or firearms returns.

This BATF connection is very revealing. Please notice the date for this process (linked below) and please allow for how much I have learned and changed over the years. There is something in it about the BATF owning the phone line for the US Supreme Court that has always struck a chord - chiefly with your point in post.

Thank you.



http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_Quiet_Rubber_Stamp_1.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_Quiet_Rubber_Stamp_2.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_Quiet_Default_Judgment_1.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_Quiet_Default_Judgment_2.jpg

mariusB
09-27-13, 09:16 AM
Everybody loves to complain about taxes but wants the benefits they provide. Roads, schools and so on have to be paid for, at the federal, state and local levels. State income taxes have been a bit of a hot topic. These taxes are despised by some and several states are taking a look at ditching them, but there is evidence as to how good and bad they really are. Read more: State Income Taxes, Sales Taxes (http://personalmoneynetwork.com/moneyblog/2013/03/04/state-income-taxes/).

David Merrill
09-27-13, 01:41 PM
Everybody loves to complain about taxes but wants the benefits they provide. Roads, schools and so on have to be paid for, at the federal, state and local levels. State income taxes have been a bit of a hot topic. These taxes are despised by some and several states are taking a look at ditching them, but there is evidence as to how good and bad they really are. Read more: State Income Taxes, Sales Taxes (http://personalmoneynetwork.com/moneyblog/2013/03/04/state-income-taxes/).


Thank you Marius;


Overall my gripe is not about taxes, it is about central banking and United Nations municipal combinatoric mathematics. Simply put, that debt has been assigned value and more specifically beyond the creditor, in marketplaces created out of conditioned delirium called Bailout, Derivatives and now Quantitative Easing. That value is cancelled in any new suitor going through the Lesson Plan described here:


1) true identity
2) record forming
3) redeeming lawful money

As I say quite often though, this is not for everybody - the brain trust anyway. We manage a carefully regulated relief valve system for a highly compressed information infrastructure called Money. If everybody suddenly realized how absurd it is to assign value to debt (Special Drawing Rights) then the world's economies would all disappear overnight.




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SA57ix4jimc

Goldi
10-01-13, 05:17 AM
Everybody loves to complain about taxes but wants the benefits they provide. Roads, schools and so on have to be paid for, at the federal, state and local levels. State income taxes have been a bit of a hot topic. These taxes are despised by some and several states are taking a look at ditching them, but there is evidence as to how good and bad they really are. Read more: State Income Taxes, Sales Taxes (http://personalmoneynetwork.com/moneyblog/2013/03/04/state-income-taxes/).

Roads are paid by gasoline taxes, schools are paid by property taxes. Income taxes, according to the Grace Commission report cover letter are used to pay the interest on the US Debt and to transfer payments [social security, welfare, etc.] http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/debt.htm (http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/debt.htm) The only reason income taxes are still in place is to attempt to soak the buying power out of the pockets of the people to keep the sham of a monetary system afloat for as long as possible.

allodial
10-01-13, 05:52 AM
http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/83/stanekvwhite3.jpg

http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/convincing.html

The following seems quite relevant or in parallel:


Topic 431 - Canceled Debt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancellation_of_Debt_(COD)_Income) – Is It Taxable (http://www.tax-freedom.com/originaltariff.pdf)or Not?
A debt includes any indebtedness whether you are personally liable or liable only to the extent of the property securing the debt. Cancellation of all or part of a debt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancellation_of_Debt_(COD)_Income) that is secured by property may occur because of a foreclosure, a repossession, a voluntary return of the property to the lender, abandonment of the property, or a principal residence loan modification.

In general, if you are liable for a debt that is canceled, forgiven, or discharged, you will receive a Form 1099-C (PDF), Cancellation of Debt, and must include the canceled amount in gross income unless you meet an exclusion or exception. If you receive a Form 1099-C (http://www.tax-freedom.com/originaltariff.pdf) but the creditor is continuing to try to collect the debt, then the debt has not been cancelled and you do not have taxable (http://www.tax-freedom.com/originaltariff.pdf)cancellation of debt income.

You must report any taxable amount of a cancelled debt for which you are personally liable, as ordinary income from the cancellation of debt, on Form 1040 (PDF) or Form 1040NR (PDF) (http://www.tax-freedom.com/originaltariff.pdf) and associated schedules, as advised in Publication 4681 (PDF), Canceled Debts, Foreclosures, Repossessions, and Abandonments (for Individuals). You must report the taxable amount of a taxable debt whether or not you receive a Form 1099-C.

Caution: If your debt is secured by property and that property is taken by the lender in full or partial satisfaction of your debt, you are treated as having sold that property and may have a taxable gain or loss. The gain or loss on such a deemed sale of your property is an issue separate from whether any cancellation of debt income associated with that same property is includable in gross income. See Publication 544, Sales and Other Dispositions of Assets, and Publication 523, Selling Your Home for detailed information on reporting gain or loss from repossession, foreclosure or abandonment of property.

Canceled debts that meet the requirements for any of the following exceptions or exclusions are not taxable.

Canceled Debt that Qualifies for EXCEPTION to Inclusion in Gross Income:
Amounts specifically excluded from income by law such as gifts or bequests
Cancellation of certain qualified student loans
Canceled debt, that if paid by a cash basis taxpayer, would be deductible
A qualified purchase price reduction given by a seller
Any Pay-for-Performance Success Payments that reduce the principal balance of your home mortgage under the Home Affordable Modification Program
Canceled Debt that Qualifies for EXCLUSION from Gross Income:
Debt canceled in a Title 11 bankruptcy case
Debt canceled during insolvency
Cancellation of qualified farm indebtedness
Cancellation of qualified real property business indebtedness
Cancellation of qualified principal residence indebtedness
The exclusion for "qualified principal residence indebtedness" provides tax relief on canceled debt for many homeowners involved in the mortgage foreclosure crisis currently affecting much of the United States. The exclusion allows taxpayers to exclude up to $2,000,000 ($1,000,000 if married filing separately) of "qualified principal residence indebtedness."

Generally, if you exclude canceled debt from income under one of the exclusions listed above, you must reduce your positive tax attributes (certain credits, losses, basis of assets, etc.), within limits, by the amount excluded. You must file Form 982 (PDF), Reduction of Tax Attributes Due to Discharge of Indebtedness (and Section 1082 Basis Adjustment), to report the amount qualifying for exclusion and any corresponding reduction of certain tax attributes.

If you received a Form 1099-C and the information is incorrect, contact the lender to make corrections. Refer to Publication 4681 (PDF), Canceled Debts, Foreclosures, Repossessions, and Abandonments (for Individuals), for more detailed information regarding taxability of canceled debt, how to report it, and related exceptions and exclusions. Additional information can also be found in Publication 525, Taxable and Nontaxable Income. If you received a Form 1099-A (PDF), Acquisition or Abandonment of Secured Property, review Topic 160 for additional information. [Source: IRS.]

http://www.kingoftaxes.net/images/PaySvcs/Payroll-Check.gif

http://ww1.prweb.com/prfiles/2010/12/13/11078422/payroll%2520check%2520bottom%2520format%2520s.jpg

Notice the "Bank's position" on the payroll checks vs. on a personal check (below).

http://www.creditrisk.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/personal-checks.jpg


payment (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/payment)(Act of paying), noun acquittal, acquittance, amortization, amortizement, clearance, compensation, defrayment, disbursement, discharge of a debt, liquidation, outlay, quittance, receipt in full, recompense, reimbursement, remittance, restitution, return, satisfaction, settlement, spending, subsidy

Perhaps the significance is in whether you discharge or someone else does?

http://lvbankruptcy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/f1099c.jpg

Chex
10-01-13, 12:15 PM
Roads are paid by gasoline taxes, schools are paid by property taxes. Income taxes, according to the Grace Commission report cover letter are used to pay the interest on the US Debt and to transfer payments [social security, welfare, etc.] http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/debt.htm (http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/debt.htm) The only reason income taxes are still in place is to attempt to soak the buying power out of the pockets of the people to keep the sham of a monetary system afloat for as long as possible.

It is articles like this that shows you that you are not the owner of your land and your just a tenent of the property if you don't pay the tax to live on it.

So then who owns the land?

Treasurer John Petalas said the Internet-driven sale collected that from 1,360 parcels from among a total of 9,000 properties whose owners failed to pay overdue taxes and special assessments. It also represents a bidding frenzy on a smaller amount of commercial sites. He said one property where the tax debt was $14,762 was sold at auction for more than $280,000, and a second property with an $81,000 tax debt sold for $541,000.

Petalas said the $21.6 million figure includes $4.7 million in taxes and late penalties county, municipal and township government officials can keep
(that must be nice, keep and do what with it).

The remaining $16.8 million is the surplus value that will be paid either to the delinquent owners who lost their properties or back to the buyer with a small profit if the owner redeems the property by paying 10 percent of the successful bid.

Petalas credited the success of the online auction conducted by SRI, Indianapolis-based auctioneer, which received bids around the clock from people across the country.

http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/lake/lake-government-strikes-it-rich-from-internet-sales/article_1dbf15b4-552d-5078-bff6-6fa2666704f5.html

Goldi
10-02-13, 10:40 PM
[QUOTE=Chex;11756]It is articles like this that shows you that you are not the owner of your land and your just a tenent of the property if you don't pay the tax to live on it.

So then who owns the land? [QUOTE]

When a property is mortgaged, the singular title on it, the land patent, has to be shelved so the title can be split. The legal title then goes to the occupant of the home, the "owner" and the equitable title is then available to be held by the county assessor/treasurer. When foreclosed, the bank gets the legal title to convey. Who gets the benefit of the profits, fees, rents, surpluses of investing the "res"? The equitable owner. Who pays the fees, fines, taxes? The legal owner. Isn't that what is going on with property taxes? The counties MUST hold an interest in the property to be able to bond it up. That's how they are doing it.

Chex
10-03-13, 01:03 AM
When a property is mortgaged, the singular title on it, the land patent, has to be shelved so the title can be split. The legal title then goes to the occupant of the home, the "owner" and the equitable title is then available to be held by the county assessor/treasurer. When foreclosed, the bank gets the legal title to convey. Who gets the benefit of the profits, fees, rents, surpluses of investing the "res"? The equitable owner. Who pays the fees, fines, taxes? The legal owner. Isn't that what is going on with property taxes? The counties MUST hold an interest in the property to be able to bond it up. That's how they are doing it.

Interesting, thanks for that piece Goldi.

Title is a legal term for a bundle of rights in a piece of property in which a party may own either a legal interest or equitable interest.

The rights in the bundle may be separated and held by different parties. [That would be the township and you the owner.]

It may also refer to a formal document such as a deed that serves as evidence of ownership.

Conveyance of the document may be required in order to transfer ownership in the property to another person.

Title is distinct from possession, a right that often accompanies ownership but is not necessarily sufficient to prove it.

In many cases, both possession and title may be transferred independently of each other.

For real property, land registration and recording provide public notice of ownership information.

In United States real estate law, typically evidence of title is established through title reports written up by title insurance companies, which show the history of title (property abstract and chain of title) as determined by the recorded public record deeds;

[1] the title report will also show applicable encumbrances such as easements, liens, or covenants.

[2] In exchange for insurance premiums, the title insurance company conducts a title search through public records and provides assurance of good title, reimbursing the insured if a dispute over the title arises.

[3] In the case of vehicle ownership, a simple vehicle title document may be issued by a governmental agency.

At common law equitable title is the right to obtain full ownership of property, where another maintains legal title to the property.

[4] Legal title is actual ownership of the property. When a contract for the sale of land is executed, equitable title passes to the buyer.

When the conditions on the sale contract have been met, legal title passes to the buyer in what is known as closing.

Legal and equitable title also arises in trust.

In a trust, one person may own the legal title, such as the trustees.

Another may own the equitable title such as the beneficiary.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_(property)

So there must be a contract describing the terms and conditions when we purchase a building on a piece of property belonging to property abstract and chain of title owner.

Chex
10-03-13, 01:25 AM
So there must be a contract describing the terms and conditions when we purchase a building on a piece of property belonging to property abstract and chain of title owner.

Tenancy in Common http://www.osbar.org/_docs/public/lioa/chapter6.pdf

There are four types of deeds in Oregon and each transfers property differently.
These are:
• Warranty deed; (Common paperwork)
• Special warranty deed;
• Bargain and sale deed; and
• Quitclaim deed.

A warranty deed expressly warrants that title is good. This means that you will guarantee you own the entire property free and clear except for any conditions specifically listed in the deed.

A special warranty deed is most often used in fulfillment of a land sale contract and is similar to a warranty deed except the person selling only warrants their own actions.

There are a few practical matters you should know about completing a deed:

• If the property is located in a subdivision, it must be legally described by lot and block numbers in the deed.

• If the property is not in a subdivision, it must be described by a method called “metes and bounds” or by a sectional description. A tax lot number or street address is not enough.

• The deed must state what was given or paid (called consideration) for the property; generally, the dollar amount paid for the property.

If the property is a gift, the deed can say that the consideration is love and affection.

• Never sign a deed someone else has prepared for you unless you know and understand the outcome.

• The deed must be signed or acknowledged before a notary public.

• Once a deed has been received or delivered, you must record it with the county clerk or recorder for the county where the property is located.

All deeds, mortgages, contracts, and other writings about ownership interests in real property should be recorded.

Recording protects the buyer and the seller. For instance, if you are the buyer, you could lose your title to the property if the deed is not recorded and the property is sold again by the same person who transferred it to you.

An unrecorded deed could create problems with transferring the property in the future.

shikamaru
10-05-13, 09:32 AM
When a property is mortgaged, the singular title on it, the land patent, has to be shelved so the title can be split.

Historically, when property was mortgaged, the title was transferred to the creditor. After complete settlement of the terms of the mortgage, the title was re-conveyed or redeemed by the debtor.

Historically, the letters patent was issued by the king. This patent was not absolute ownership or dominion. A letters patent is still qualified ownership for their would be terms and conditions written into the patent for the benefit of the king.



The legal title then goes to the occupant of the home, the "owner" and the equitable title is then available to be held by the county assessor/treasurer.

I will agree that there is some interest which the county purports to have in the land and appurtenances thereon.
The tenant, in most instances, will have legal and equitable interest in the property. There is some liability attached to the legal title upon tenure of such.



When foreclosed, the bank gets the legal title to convey. Who gets the benefit of the profits, fees, rents, surpluses of investing the "res"? The equitable owner. Who pays the fees, fines, taxes? The legal owner. Isn't that what is going on with property taxes?

With registration and mortgage, the property is treated as a registered investment.
The presumption being that one is in commerce for profit and gain.



The counties MUST hold an interest in the property to be able to bond it up. That's how they are doing it.

Perhaps the counties purport to hold an interest, but no one bothers to research the law and challenge them on such claim? :)

shikamaru
10-05-13, 09:34 AM
Tenancy in Common http://www.osbar.org/_docs/public/lioa/chapter6.pdf

There are four types of deeds in Oregon and each transfers property differently.
These are:
• Warranty deed; (Common paperwork)
• Special warranty deed;
• Bargain and sale deed; and
• Quitclaim deed.

A warranty deed expressly warrants that title is good. This means that you will guarantee you own the entire property free and clear except for any conditions specifically listed in the deed.

A special warranty deed is most often used in fulfillment of a land sale contract and is similar to a warranty deed except the person selling only warrants their own actions.

There are a few practical matters you should know about completing a deed:

• If the property is located in a subdivision, it must be legally described by lot and block numbers in the deed.

• If the property is not in a subdivision, it must be described by a method called “metes and bounds” or by a sectional description. A tax lot number or street address is not enough.

• The deed must state what was given or paid (called consideration) for the property; generally, the dollar amount paid for the property.

If the property is a gift, the deed can say that the consideration is love and affection.

• Never sign a deed someone else has prepared for you unless you know and understand the outcome.

• The deed must be signed or acknowledged before a notary public.

• Once a deed has been received or delivered, you must record it with the county clerk or recorder for the county where the property is located.

All deeds, mortgages, contracts, and other writings about ownership interests in real property should be recorded.

Recording protects the buyer and the seller. For instance, if you are the buyer, you could lose your title to the property if the deed is not recorded and the property is sold again by the same person who transferred it to you.

An unrecorded deed could create problems with transferring the property in the future.

All deeds are color of title.

The original deed or first title deed is the land patent or land grant.

Deeds color who the holder of the patent or grant is for the patent or grant shall be as is without modification.

bobbinville
10-06-13, 12:16 AM
In Massachusetts, things are different in name but not in form. A "warranty deed" says that the seller will warrant and defend the buyer's title against adverse claims by others; but since most sellers do not want to, effectively insure the title on behalf of the buyer, most people use a "quitclaim deed", which in contrast to the use of those words in other states means that the seller will warrant and defend the title ONLY against issues which arose when she or he actually held title. This is exactly like the "special warranty" deed mentioned by shikamaru.

The "bargain and sale" deed and "quitclaim deed" mentioned by shikamaru are called a "release deed" or a "deed without covenants" in Massachusetts. Since, in the normal course of business, no buyer of real estate would ever, in their right mind, accept such a deed, you will only see this kind of deed in a tax sale or foreclosure sale by a governmental entity or a foreclosing mortgagee. In this case, it is solely up to the buyer to review the title for at least the previous 50 years to see if any encumbrances or other title issues exist.

I bought my house 30 years ago this month, using a quitclaim deed to my wife and I as tenants by the entirety. Just for fun, I ran the title as far back as I could, and got to 1688 before the trail ran dry. It turned out that the woman who sold the land then was the daughter and heir of a man who came over with the original 1630 Puritans, and who was given fee simple title to his land by the Crown.

shikamaru
10-06-13, 12:25 PM
In Massachusetts, things are different in name but not in form. A "warranty deed" says that the seller will warrant and defend the buyer's title against adverse claims by others; but since most sellers do not want to, effectively insure the title on behalf of the buyer, most people use a "quitclaim deed", which in contrast to the use of those words in other states means that the seller will warrant and defend the title ONLY against issues which arose when she or he actually held title. This is exactly like the "special warranty" deed mentioned by shikamaru.

The "bargain and sale" deed and "quitclaim deed" mentioned by shikamaru are called a "release deed" or a "deed without covenants" in Massachusetts. Since, in the normal course of business, no buyer of real estate would ever, in their right mind, accept such a deed, you will only see this kind of deed in a tax sale or foreclosure sale by a governmental entity or a foreclosing mortgagee. In this case, it is solely up to the buyer to review the title for at least the previous 50 years to see if any encumbrances or other title issues exist.

I bought my house 30 years ago this month, using a quitclaim deed to my wife and I as tenants by the entirety. Just for fun, I ran the title as far back as I could, and got to 1688 before the trail ran dry. It turned out that the woman who sold the land then was the daughter and heir of a man who came over with the original 1630 Puritans, and who was given fee simple title to his land by the Crown.

Small correction: Chex enumerated the list of varying types of deeds.

bobbinville
10-06-13, 01:23 PM
Thanks! My aging eyes passed right over that....

Chex
10-06-13, 02:35 PM
In Massachusetts, I bought my house 30 years ago this month, using a quitclaim deed to my wife and I as tenants by the entirety. Just for fun, I ran the title as far back as I could, and got to 1688 before the trail ran dry. It turned out that the woman who sold the land then was the daughter and heir of a man who came over with the original 1630 Puritans, and who was given fee simple title to his land by the Crown.

Thanks for that bobbinville.

Looking for the 1630 Puritans I came across some things, never heard of the 1630 Puritans before.

In an unprecedented move designed to further their purposes, the Congregationalist merchants had decided before leaving England to transfer the charter and the headquarters of the Massachusetts Bay Company to New England-what the Crown had given, the Crown could take away. Thus the settlers would be answerable to no one in the mother country, and would be able to handle their affairs, secular and religious, as they pleased. http://brownellfamily.rootsweb.ancestry.com/Pilgrims2.html

The name "puritan" came to be used to describe members of the Church of England who wished to purify it of all semblances to the Roman Catholic Church, in particular the liturgy, vestments and episcopal hierarchy. The Puritans emphasized that they did not wish to destroy the Church of England, nor did they want to separate from it. Their sole aim was to restore it to its original purity. http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h573.html

TO HAVE and to hold, the said part of New England in America, which lies and extends and is abutted as aforesaid, and every part and parcel thereof; and all the said islands, rivers, ports, havens, waters, fishing, mines, and minerals, jurisdictions, franchises, royalties, liberties, privileges, commodities, hereditaments, and premises whatsoever, with the appurtenances unto the said Sir Henry Rosewell, Sir John Young, Thomas Southcott, John Humphrey, John Endecott, and Simon Whetcombe, their heirs and assigns, and their associates, to the only proper and absolute use and behalf of the said Sir Henry Rosewell, Sir John Young, Thomas Southcott, John Humphrey, John Endecott, and Simon Whetcombe, their heirs and assigns, and their associates forevermore; To be holden of us, our heirs and successors, as of our Manor of Eastgreenwich, in the county of Kent, in free and common socage, and not in capite, nor by knights service; Yielding and paying therefore unto us, our heirs and successors, the fifth part of the ore of gold and silver, which shall from time to time, and at all times hereafter, happen to be found, gotten, had, and obtained in any of the said lands, within the said limits, or in or within any part thereof, for, and in satisfaction of all manner duties, demands and services whatsoever to be done, made, or paid to us, our heirs or successors, as in and by the said recited indenture more at large may appear. http://www.lonang.com/exlibris/organic/1629-cmb2.htm

In the United States, land is acquired in basically one of two ways; from the government or from an individual. The first sale of land from the government to a person is called a grant or a patent. Thereafter, the sale of that land from a person is called a deed. https://familysearch.org/learn/wiki/en/United_States_Land_and_Property

The united states became incorporated in 1871 http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080610163253AATSfpu

The United States 'government' is actually the United States Corporation. It was created behind the screen of a 'Federal Government' when, after the manufactured 'victory' in the American War on 'Independence', the British colonies exchanged overt dictatorship from London for the far more effective covert dictatorship that has been in place ever since. http://www.freedom-school.com/the-united-states-is-a-corporation.html

Since most of the Indian nations had supported the British during the Revolutionary War, the Thirteen States were cautious in approaching their former enemies. Populating the frontier with citizens skilled in defense offered the best prospect in enticing other settlers to join them. Veterans were knowledgeable in the use of firearms and in military strategy. Knowing that they would be defended if the need arose was reassuring to many settlers. The state governments also realized that the revenue derived from the sale of vacant lands in the west was badly needed. The extension of settlements on the frontier would, in time, also increase the tax rolls and contribute to the reduction of their Revolutionary War debts. In the aftermath of the war, the states with transappalachian claims ceded some of those claims to the federal government, but not until they had the assurance of being able to fulfill their bounty land commitments. http://www.genealogy.com/24_land.html

Bought this and another presidential land grant at an estate sale for $1 each. This one is signed by Martin Van Buren (1837-41)--who everyone knows--was our 8th president sandwiched between Andrew Jackson and William Henry Harrison. The land grants were issued to veterans of the War of 1812 and other settlers as a means of enticing them to settle lands in the "west." Due to the large number of grants and presidential carpal tunnel (not really), most were signed by a secretary after 1833 and not worth much over $100, but they are somewhat interesting. Click to enlarge. http://www.lancezedric.com/2012/01/presidential-land-grants-1800s.html

Chex
10-06-13, 03:24 PM
Another tidbit: For a long time this nation "We the People" have believed that we are a free nation and have freedom of liberty and Justice for all. We have believed that we own our property and have certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That was true at one point in time but as time past we lost a lot of what we had through the change of language usage. Language usage created what is known as Color of Law. Our entire society today lives under Color of Law (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Color+of+Law). http://www.landpatentlaw.com/Pages/default.aspx

Color of Law Law & Legal Definition (http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/color-of-law/)

To me has a reference with http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?918-Enforcing-R4C&p=11789&viewfull=1#post11789

David Merrill
10-07-13, 04:28 PM
I say that if you think your name is the full or legal name then you automatically swear out just such an oath and take on the color of official capacity, utilizing the trust on social government as your bond. Fine! It is when that same government assigns trusteeship back upon you, and you automatically accept because you do not know your true name that you become unable to effectively refuse for cause that appointment.

Search out METRO organization around here for the suitors Charter of Freedoms and Exemptions Granted to Patroons (1629) bonding the Libels of Review. Bobbinville might feel his Charter supersedes mine but with the METRO organization development since 1958 I argue that municipal jurisdiction, City of XXXXX worldwide prevails.

I enjoy the copyright 1877 for my history lessons. I might get some images about Poppinville's charter for comparison (http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/544/charteroffreedomsandexe.pdf)?



1363

allodial
10-07-13, 06:59 PM
... with the METRO organization development since 1958 I argue that municipal jurisdiction, City of XXXXX worldwide prevails.

Is that to say that the so-called "governments" are able to only function as municipal corporations or subdivisions of municipal corporations and no more--that they are as a result of METRO severely blunted? It seems that cities are favored by some for the same reason scrip is favored. Its interesting that Federal Reserve Banks are always associated with a city (http://thefreedictionary.com/city)(i.e. municipal corporation) rather than with a county (http://thefreedictionary.com/county).


Police officer: Do you live in "the city"?
Respondent: No. I live in my house.
Police officer: Is your house in "the city"?
Respondent: No. Its on the side of a hill.

Note, "the city" vs. "the City of Chicago". (Canada they say means "village".) A village is a type of municipal corporation or municipality. Do you live in the kanata? (However there are some say that Canada is named after the Portuguese (http://www.sealegacy.com/The%20New%20World%20-%20Canada.html)word for river or byway. (Page 159 of this book (http://books.google.com/books?id=MjAvAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false).)) In the village or in the river or in the street? Take your pick?

1364 (http://books.google.com/books?id=dfUCAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false)

truthmonger
10-16-13, 09:45 AM
Really? show me one court case that proffers that... I went down that road years ago to no avail... why because it just is not true. Everything is ours and always has been it is just a slight of hand trick (see above) which convinces one that it is not. We are God so far as "it" or any fiction (government, Bank, corporation etc etc ) is concerned... can you tax God ?? NO! Can you tell God what to do? NO!! So why do you keep enslaving yourself to the toaster you made or bought (exchanged something of substance and value for in exchange) to make you toast?? It is utter hogwash and BS ... your about half way through your studies! Read the Statutes, a few hundred cases and find that they walk a very fine line to stay lawful yet allow morons to be mislead by their ignorance. Not to be rude just been there (bring a mislead moron/dumb ass) done that a few years ago.. Ask yourself one question... did the State create you? No! thus you are not a subject of the State and thus not Subject to the State, Bank, money, all upper case NAME or any of the paper so you are not subject to them!! They "all creations of the State are to benefit the people" just like that damn toaster was created to make your life better and thus "Happiness". Anything less is a malfunction and needs to be corrected.. fix it or throw it away/"throw off" just as you would a rain coat on a sunny day "as it pleases you". If you are happy being yoked with "debt", false obligations etc then keep doing what you've been doing, but do NOT impose it upon any other!!!! Thank you..




All this and neither one of those monetary system are yours, if you did not print it you are using someone else's money to buy things and not returning the receipts therefore the tax man will continue to come after you. We can skirt Income taxes and some other taxes with Public Money, but still it is not our money. Courts are not our laws either, unless you formed a committee to help create a law, it is not your law, but we keep making the mistake of interfering in it. The documents you used to get that bank account you deposit that money in is not yours either, all you can really do is make a stand on right of possession and use of the equity in which were created by your energy in exchange for depositing the receipts to treasury.

You want to rebuild the Republic then lets build it, you cannot build it if you keep taking everything out of it.

David Merrill
10-17-13, 12:03 AM
Motla68 has not been posting for quite some time.

It is however good to hear passion about lessons learned. It puts off potential new suitors how I will tell them they are where I was in the late '90's... So I can relate to how you feel.

Your gist seems to be about not owning or being responsible for anything? I am not getting where you are coming from. Sometimes I can place a pundit's name or doctrine title though.


P.S. I have been studying Science of Mind - no necessarily buying into it - Ernest Shurtleff HOLMES was a channel. A Course in Miracles is also taught under the same roof. That is channeling too.

I have been looking into it enough to comprehend remembering or unity, whatever you want to call the metaphysics of attributing part or all of experiencing this reality as something we create or co-create. - Even miscreate by our ego being in charge...

This is something I read into your proposition therefore - that we own anything in the physical reality at all. If you perceive there is a Creator God, then does not He own everything. That is to say, if God is out there and not within you according to Genesis - the Image and Likeness doctrine.

The money system says, IN GOD WE TRUST. Therefore the money at least declares that God is the Trustee. The declaration went on the money at about the same time the federal government began printing fiat currency. So I suppose it is to say, IN COLORADO WE TRUST being that the first fiat began here based on the GILPIN NOTES (http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/5409/gilpinswarmeasuresp44.jpg).

ariacook
10-28-13, 04:04 AM
Not a soul wants to pay taxes. Every person does, however, want the stuff taxes pay for though some differ on how they should be collected. State income taxes (http://personalmoneynetwork.com/moneyblog/2013/03/04/state-income-taxes/) are despised by some and a few states are considering ditching them, but there's evidence as to how good and bad they really are.

David Merrill
10-28-13, 01:15 PM
Not a soul wants to pay taxes. Every person does, however, want the stuff taxes pay for though some differ on how they should be collected. State income taxes (http://personalmoneynetwork.com/moneyblog/2013/03/04/state-income-taxes/) are despised by some and a few states are considering ditching them, but there's evidence as to how good and bad they really are.


Thanks for posting that.

I am not sure if it is the opening paragraph you quoted or the nature of the article itself you are expressing as interesting. The idea of "fair share" in the topic sentence though, always strikes a sour note with me. It is a very difficult matter to hash out with skeptics who would label me a tax protester.

For 100 years now come December 23 Congress has approved elastic currency and for this nation it has smoothed over, starting with the Great Depression many a missed meal and leaky roof. Then it would seem for a millennium China has build a Wall and studied English and has been buying up bonds of debt so that they might have a nice place to move when the industry poisons geographic China. I posted articles about A-China-Ca as this website was being built years ago.

Then there are the economic woes that spread like Bail-in in Greece - just plain socializing the wealthy.

The Fed act introduced fractional lending that expanded the money supply and was built to be abolished in twenty years. It is now a hundred years. Does that mean it is too late to solve the bad idea in the manner intended by Congress?

Freed Gerdes
11-25-13, 05:38 AM
The Fed now makes sure you pay your 'fair share' whether you choose to do so voluntarily or not, by debasing the currency. I just heard an argument similar to the 'every person wants the stuff taxes pay for' concerning the roads. Who owns the roads? Does the government own the road? They paid for it, but with money they stole from the citizens. Following other arguments presented above, the state exists for the benefit of the citizens, established with their consent. So I consented to let the state build the road, with tax money they took from me at gunpoint (I did not consent to the tax demanded; it was foisted on me by subterfuge and deceit, and since becoming aware of the fraud involved, I have chosen not to pay the tax in the future). Actually, since money is fungible, it is unclear which tax money was used to build the road, although the highway fuel tax is specifically designated for this purpose, and I did consent to pay that tax when I purchased gasoline, so I own the road, and this argument fails.

Now, what is your fair share? That would depend entirely on what services, provided by the government, you expect to consume during the tax year, or maybe all future tax years. A ridiculous concept, and one that is put forward to try to legitimize theft. Your fair share is whatever you choose to voluntarily contribute, since the association with the government is voluntary. And the only legitimate purpose of government (per Lysander Spooner) is to protect property rights and provide for defense against foreign enemies, surely 1% of your income should be sufficient for those legitimate purposes. Everything else the Federal (corporate) government does is organized theft, designed to take the maximum amount of money/resources from one group (in this case Republicans and Tea Party libertarians) and give it to another group (the Free Shit Army, aka Democrat voters, welfare recipients, and illegal immigrants). Since the Federal Reserve is already taking 10% of your earnings every year through counterfeiting of the currency, you have no further obligation to contribute, but of course you can do so out of charity if you choose...

JohnnyCash
11-25-13, 08:52 PM
The simplest way to avoid that 10% inflation hit, Freed, is to use a different currency. For example, if you used bitcoin, a digital currency that bypasses government & central banking altogether (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvIaD8LryZ0), not only would you avoid the Fed debasement, you'd avoid taxation as well. And if you had earlier stored some of your savings in bitcoin, you'd be settin' pretty right about now: https://coinbase.com/charts

Freed Gerdes
11-27-13, 04:15 AM
I am well aware of bitcoin, JC, and have considered putting some assets into it, but I am not that computer literate, and am discouraged by the NSA. Plus bitcoins have not found wide acceptance yet, although that is changing fast. I see the banksters continuing to mess with bitcoin, using pump and dump schemes to cause users to doubt the exchange value of the unit, much as they are manipulating the price of gold to cause the masses to refuse to see it as a stable store of value. If you perceive the lengths the US neocons are willing to go to to keep Iran from selling oil in currency other than dollars, and now refusing to allow Iran to sell oil for gold [see this link: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-24/iran-agrees-to-historic-deal-with-powers-to-rein-in-nuclear-work.html], you will understand that the banksters have a stranglehold on the entire world economy, and they will not give it up without a fight, perhaps using nuclear weapons. So I see a rough road ahead for bitcoins...

Peaceful
01-06-14, 09:33 PM
Freed, I loved your post about roads. So many people can sudden passion for roads when trying to justify taxation. They usually fail to differentiate between taxes at the gas pump or otherwise that pay for roads vs. the misconception that income taxes do. I always love to point out states with no income taxes where I noticed a lot of roads when I passed through them. :)

This may be a bit off topic here, but if you ever have fun dealing with not papers, but PEOPLE agents of a labor board or IRS, I find it amazing how often misconceptions of words play in, this time more dangerous if you fall for it. When agents ask if you or one that pays you if you are "making any money" or were "paid money", at least mentally (watch what you say out loud) the answer should truthfully be "NO." You were not paid in any money. If cash, any "money" you have from working is more likely FRNs (maybe legal tender, but not 'MONEY'), unless said cash includes loose change in coins. That coinage may be 'Money' but not taxable, being there are no federal reserve coins, only minted Treasury coins.

With FRN's, is it not truthful that you neither "made" money (such an odd phrase) by minting your own currency, NOR received money being that FRNs are not 'money' but instead papers you can exchange/trade or CONVERT INTO money? You DID receive money if paid by gold/silver coins or Treasury coins (pennies, dimes, etc.), but why would any agent need to ask you about that non-taxable activity anymore than asking if you ate Lucky Charms cereal for breakfast? If you get paid by check or direct deposit even, I still don't see where anyone was given nor made any lawful definition of 'MONEY'... only an option to convert what was given into money.

Not debating what constitutes as taxable activity, I am aware of the often regurgitated terms agents are trained with to attempt to trip you up. My point here is merely to illustrate the odd, but constant wording that is SPOKEN (vs. written) by agents and the importance to only handle things in writing as best you can.