 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
I've already explained (earlier in this thread) why the payment of land rent is compulsory regardless of whether it's collected publicly or privately. And just as I expected, you completely ignored that explanation, because the perceived validity of your anti-LVT argument depends entirely upon people buying into the right-wing fantasy that it's compulsory only when collected publicly.
Anyone,
My goal is to converse with the competitive, welcome, reasonable viewpoint, but the dictatorial viewpoint appears to be overpowering. Appearances can be deceiving.
Taxes can be voluntary, to say otherwise is dictatorial.
A tax can be as simple as an insurance policy. The concept is easy to understand. A person decides to buy into an investment with a promise of a return, so long as the recipient of the transfer of purchasing power remains solvent, and does as promised.
If the transfer of purchasing power does not pan out as promised, the effect is the same effect published as a warning by Thomas Paine as such:
Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.
Person A fears something, anything, and inspired by that fear the person seeks an equitable method by which those fears can be addressed. How about the fear of being tortured by people currently running the thing that people call The Federal Government?
Suppose such fears grew in one person, then many more, than a whole lot of people, and that large number of people eventually constitutes something similar to the 20 million people murdered by the thing that people called Stalin's Bolshevik version of Dictatorship, or whatever term you find appropriate.
What can be done?
Tax the land, send that money to Stalin, and see what happens?
Suppose the fearful one's, those 20 million, buy into an insurance policy, and if one of them is taken, sent to the gulag, tortured, and murdered, the rest of the 20 million allow their pool of funds to aid the survivors in that family. Suppose the entire family is sent to the gulag, even while they are forced to pay their land taxes, as told, by Stalin, or the latest dictator, Stalin's successor to be, right here in this forum, what happens then?
What happens if one of the policy holders, who voluntarily bought into the scheme to insure each other against the dictators, past, present, and future, when their entire family is wiped out by the dictators?
How about a closer look?
Each potential victim fearing the latest dictatorial regime, as the dictators collect land tax, or as they collect families, involuntarily, each volunteer volunteers to add a portion of their own surplus power to a central location, a voluntary insurance policy, and from that voluntary insurance policy a payment will be sent to a policy holder if the policy holder is abducted by the dictators, and that is a simple arrangement.
What happens if the policy holder's whole family is abducted by the current dictators who enforce this method of having the victims supply the means by which the victims suffer, with the involuntary land tax, the thing that has to exist, and cannot not exist, according to that false, misleading, and destructive lie?
More for everyone else?
Is there more for everyone else if the fund that is produced specifically to aid the policy holders, against loss by dictators, runs into the problem of having an entire family tortured to death by the dictators, what happend in that case, who is paid in that case?
Is there then more for everyone else, as a number of policy holders are bulldozed into a ditch, so as to please the dictators with their lies about the impossibility of avoiding involuntary taxes?
That question is aimed at reasonable people, not the dictator running this despotism, here, where a welcome forum member is verbally abused by the regime, for the crime of offering a competitive viewpoint.
Can there be a better example of what can go wrong inside someone's brain?
Naturally I disagree, for reasons already given. Now can we agree to disagree, or are you going to insist we go around in endless circles?
The endless circle, sounds a lot like a situation whereby an involuntary tax is enforced, whereby the taxed people are then forced to provide the means by which they suffer at the hands of the people doing the taxing. The reason why it is endless is understandable from the dictators viewpoint; since killing off all the victims will result in the need to actually do productive work, so the dictators, with their involuntary taxes, such as the land tax fraud, must keep the productive one's alive, and reproducing, so as to have enough good things to steal, that way, perpetually.
As to what the forum dictator refers to I can look to find out, and quote the exchange as it was published by the dictator ruining this show, or running it, whichever viewpoint you choose as your own.
The dictator libeler quotes my words and then responds with the reference to an "endless circle".
My words:
That is the dictators choice. I prefer to call them Legal Criminals, since they are not mere criminals, they are the hi-bred criminal types who access the rule of law, so as to make crime legal.
I'm at a loss as to how my words turned out to be an "endless circle". I can guess. When the dictator constructs a false reality, whereby there must be an involuntary tax enforced by the tax collecting group, upon the tax paying group, such as this land tax scam, then that lie must be defended with another lie, and then two more, and then four more, and that may be the "endless circle" being foisted up and slung at me, to see if that lie will stick, this time.
I don't see that lie sticking to me. I'm not buying into the inevitability of the involuntary tax, not the land tax, and not the income tax, and if there must be, on the road to liberty, a tax between a Federal government and separate, competitive, State governments, then I would look into that tax as that tax was collected under The Articles of Confederation, to see how well, or how poorly, that tax worked.
Did the Federal governors, those congress people, charge a land tax upon each set of State governors during the time when The Articles of Confederation were working?
The design of a Democratic Federated Republican experimental, competitive, form of government is such that the Federal governors tax the State Governors, not The People in each State, and if in one State the governors collect land taxes, and the people don't like it, they can move to another State, where The People prefer not to be paying land taxes, and that is how that is supposed to work, by that design, and that is expressly not an involuntary land tax, unless all the States are collecting land taxes, and then The People are, by that definition, providing the means by which they suffer, when they are left without a choice: pay the land tax nation wide, or get out.
Unless, unless, there is an option, unless there is another federation somewhere, where honest productive people are welcome, and where the hired governors don't enforce a land tax, then the people can vote with their feet that way.
There are solutions to the supposed involuntary land tax frauds, and their invented problems, as they, by their dictates, and their lies, and their threats, and their violence, enforce no alternatives. The victims may have to invent options, since the dictators make sure that options are not options. They like to invent arguments that go on, and on, without resolution. That is their business, and they are good at their work, from their viewpoint. From my viewpoint a lie, to the victim, is not good. From my viewpoint an involuntary tax, land or otherwise calculated, is not good for the victim. From my viewpoint libel, to the victim, is not good. From my viewpoint a forum, with forum rules, where the forum operators rise themselves above the rules is not good for those who still obey the rules.
Call my disagreeing with you censorship if your ego is that fragile.
Libel is verbal abuse, and the obvious inspiration to resort to libel, as this person has done, is a case of shooting the messenger, which is merely censorship, and my ego, or my person, or my personality has nothing to do with the message I offer. Turning a discussion into a personal attack is an old tactic, recognizable as the nose on my face. The concept is easy to understand as the perpetrator of libel resorts to other means, other than factual transfers of information.
This coming from someone who all but accused me of being the anti-Christ.
That is a mixture of tactics, including the tactic of creating a Man of Straw. The idea is to create this false being, and then the creator of the false being speaks for the false being, and then the creator of the false being associates his target, which is me in this case, with his own creation, and the audience is supposed to belief that I said the words spoken by the creator of the false being.
The believers in the falsehood, created by the dictator, can search for my words, and find, if they want to question their blind belief in the falsehood created by the dictator, and what they will find is someone publishing the words that have been attributed to me, and I will not have published those words, those words are published by the creator of the false being, the Man of Straw.
The dictator is factually a dictator, measurably so, as the dictator dictates, one way, his way.
I don't take dictation, so what is the point? I see a possible, obvious motive: censorship.
So far my work on this forum has been removed, not deleted, but removed from the topic that my work had been published into, which was a thread that was created by the dictator, if I recall, and then the dictator dictated the title of the new thread where he placed my work, which is another measurable example of what a dictator does, when a dictator dictates.
Will Josf ever get to the friggin point?
I think I have, competitively, gotten the point. The dictator claims that involuntary taxes are inevitable, the involuntary taxes must be collected, there is no other choice, and therefore involuntary land tax, according to this dictator, must be the only solution to some manufactured problem. My point is the point at which the victims have had enough of those manufactured problems, whereby the dictators claim that the only solution to the problem is the cause of the problem, but not in those words, the dictators fabricate nice clothes to place on their manufactured problems and their use of their manufactured problems as the solution to their manufactured problems are hidden behind those false fronts.
I think my point is competitive. You may not.
Calling me a "dictator" over and over again is not contributing anything of substance to this topic, but is merely flamebaiting, and flamebaiting is against forum rules. So if you don't like being "punished" for violating forum rules, then, instead of whining like a spoiled child when those rules are enforced, simply stop violating them.
As with many cases, such as who fired the first shot when the ATF agents tortured and mass murdered all those innocent babies in Waco, I can use the same forum that everyone uses, to quote the first shot:
If your idea of "participating" in this topic means blabbing ad nauseam about things that have little or nothing to do with this topic (just to hear yourself talk), then yes.
Actual facts mean nothing to dictators who have stolen the power to injure innocent people, so my guess as to what happens next is that the dictator here will censor the message he doesn't like in more ways than just libel.
I could be wrong.
Is anyone willing to wager, at what odds?
This accusatory, off-topic troll post of yours has convinced me that you're incapable of rational discussion, so I hereby propose once again that we agree to disagree. Will you be a mature adult and accept this offer, or do you have a personal obsession with me now?
I think an apology is in order. But absent that, I can make a deal. If you wish to enforce your land tax, be my guest, that is fair, and I'll protest against it. How is that for a deal?
If you resort to deceit, so as to enforce your land tax, let's be fair, and I'll call you on it.
Example:
This accusatory, off-topic troll post of yours has convinced me that you're incapable of rational discussion, so I hereby propose once again that we agree to disagree. Will you be a mature adult and accept this offer, or do you have a personal obsession with me now?
That is libel.
You are being called on that libel.
If you resort to threats, let's be fair, I'll call you on it - OK?
Calling me a "dictator" over and over again is not contributing anything of substance to this topic, but is merely flamebaiting, and flamebaiting is against forum rules. So if you don't like being "punished" for violating forum rules, then, instead of whining like a spoiled child when those rules are enforced, simply stop violating them.
That is a threat.
Violence may be your last resort, to enforce your land tax, but you have a lot of help in that department, but I think your helpers have bigger fish to fry than me.
Good luck.