thank you for that, but clearly that asset only exists within the trust. Property called asset is Right of Use. The Asset is the right of use. And typically the asset is Registered on a Trust Asset Registry - typically known as Register of Deeds. Or County Clerk and Recorder. The Property or Asset is wholly dependent upon Survey and Claim. And Use depends on Claim - I mean who has the right to the Use is derived from the Claim. Therefore the Use being put into Trust is split into Legal Use and Equitable Use. And then there are those who do not hold titles and they are just mere "End User" or plain ole "User" by way of Usufruct. A legal right.Originally Posted by shikamaru
Legal goes to Trust. Right goes to Trust property. Therefore Legal Right is Property held in Trust for a User.
I mean how on earth would one come to Possess [another trust term, yes] a new Vehicle - absent some sort of "Legal" [again goes to trust, yes] tender from Within, some trust? Possess is actually incorrect, really Use is a better term.
I hate Collectivism - but thanks to Plato, Kant and Niche who hold that the State is Supreme - we are bombarded daily by the Fasces
Just read Senate Resolution #62 - page 13
If the argument of collectivism appeals to you then we are all one and everything is entangled. Therefore what is man but an expression of God and therefore man is God. Here I cannot go. Pantheism - all is God. Or said another way - the Universe if God. heard that one lately? And yet the proponents of this philo-SOPHY as they claim to be wise also espouse Trust doctrine. I mean just read carefully that [de]finition of "asset". A trust begs a particular society. Therefore a trust excludes a particular society by its very nature. Therefore a Trust is in opposition to the ALL and yet Senate Resolution #62 declares the State is Supreme Person.
How preposterously absurd. Never in my existence has something come to be absent Force or Intent. And yet, these fix that abomination against nature by claiming the Universe just "came to exist." How utterly convenient.
Therefore, it is also convenient that I have choice. My expression of my Faith or Trust - by my own singular purpose absent the need to bundle a bunch of sticks ready for the slayer [axe]. The "covering" of State is interesting indeed - fig leaves. A lie to keep man from Full Liability to his fellow man.
Sorry to go into philosophy when we are talking law but is not all Law a benefit? Therefore a benefit issued by whom? Trusts are quite slippery indeed.
shalom,
mj
Reply With Quote