Fundamentals of Law?

[anotherlife]

The Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution specify, that governments derive their legitimacy from the governed. Also, the universal foundation of law is the strong reciprocity between rights and responsibilities.

That is, if you have rights then you have responsibilities. Also, if you have responsibilities then you have rights. And the opposite is also true, if you have no responsibilities then you have no rights. And if you have no rights then you have no responsibilities.

This has been true forever everywhere on Earth until 1913. For example a Wild West judge or a 3rd world tribal chief has the legitimacy to dispense judgement for responsibilities because each tribesman has a right to their cattle or farmland.

But now, the law says that the right of ownership is exclusive to the government only, and you can only rent it simply through taxation. So you are now a serf, and no longer have rights.

Therefore, what legitimacy does a modern government have, to dispense judgement for responsibilities?

Let me guess, the answer is not a legal one. The answer is simply that the government can kill you.

Discuss.

 

[JBvM]

"if you have no responsibilities then you have no rights?" really?

"the law says that the right of ownership is exclusive to the government only?' really?

faulty premises lead to faulty conclusions

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Yeah, I didn’t follow the jump to the government is the only entity with right of ownership. I suppose you’re suggesting that I have to pay taxes in some form that I am merely renting what the government owns. I don’t buy that interpretation. In a civilized society with a central government, money is needed to fund the government. That money has to come from a source like taxes or tariffs, primarily taxes. So without taxes, we get it all from tariffs or...where? Where will the money come to fund the government?

 

[anotherlife]

"if you have no responsibilities then you have no rights?" really?

"the law says that the right of ownership is exclusive to the government only?' really?

faulty premises lead to faulty conclusions

The premises are not fault, se Dale Smith's post in the thread "are property taxes ethical":
Allodial rights to property was lost due to the Chapter 11 bankruptcy of USA.INC and all property (as well as our labor) was pledged as surety against the debt.

Senate Document # 43; SENATE RESOLUTION NO. 62 (Pg 9, Para 2) April 17, 1933. "The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State; individual so-called "ownership"is only by virtue of Government, i.e., law, amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State".

 

[anotherlife]

Yeah, I didn’t follow the jump to the government is the only entity with right of ownership. I suppose you’re suggesting that I have to pay taxes in some form that I am merely renting what the government owns. I don’t buy that interpretation. In a civilized society with a central government, money is needed to fund the government. That money has to come from a source like taxes or tariffs, primarily taxes. So without taxes, we get it all from tariffs or...where? Where will the money come to fund the government?

Here is the quotation to the law about the government's exclusive right to ownership. And governments did have revenue sources even before property taxes were invented and ownership rights were removed in 1933. American taxation didn't start in 1933.

Senate Document # 43; SENATE RESOLUTION NO. 62 (Pg 9, Para 2) April 17, 1933. "The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State; individual so-called "ownership"is only by virtue of Government, i.e., law, amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State".

 

[JBvM]

"if you have no responsibilities then you have no rights?" really?

"the law says that the right of ownership is exclusive to the government only?' really?

faulty premises lead to faulty conclusions

The premises are not fault, se Dale Smith's post in the thread "are property taxes ethical":
Allodial rights to property was lost due to the Chapter 11 bankruptcy of USA.INC and all property (as well as our labor) was pledged as surety against the debt.

Senate Document # 43; SENATE RESOLUTION NO. 62 (Pg 9, Para 2) April 17, 1933. "The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State; individual so-called "ownership"is only by virtue of Government, i.e., law, amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State".

Allodial rights?

You're one of those nutjobs?

Ok, don't pay any taxes. Assert you are a sovereign person LOL

You people are so demented.

 

[anotherlife]

"if you have no responsibilities then you have no rights?" really?

"the law says that the right of ownership is exclusive to the government only?' really?

faulty premises lead to faulty conclusions

The premises are not fault, se Dale Smith's post in the thread "are property taxes ethical":
Allodial rights to property was lost due to the Chapter 11 bankruptcy of USA.INC and all property (as well as our labor) was pledged as surety against the debt.

Senate Document # 43; SENATE RESOLUTION NO. 62 (Pg 9, Para 2) April 17, 1933. "The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State; individual so-called "ownership"is only by virtue of Government, i.e., law, amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State".

Allodial rights?

You're one of those nutjobs?

Ok, don't pay any taxes. Assert you are a sovereign person LOL

You people are so demented.

I am talking only about such specific taxes, that turn your rights into rentals, not all taxes in general. This is not a tax debate, this is about the fundamentals of law, what your responsibilities may be after your rights are taken away from you.

 

[JBvM]

I am talking only about such specific taxes, that turn your rights into rentals, not all taxes in general. This is not a tax debate, this is about the fundamentals of law, what your responsibilities may be after your rights are taken away from you.

no ones rights were taken away from them

and therein lies your problem

 

[JBvM]

I love this one because it simplifies the argument and straightens out the myth(s) and bullshit about so-called land rights (I have the link bookmarked)

Popular Misconception

A land patent is useful to help define the extent of real property ownership. Unfortunately, a land patent will not anoint the property owner with the sovereignty of a king, nor establish the patch of land as a private fiefdom. You cannot dodge taxes with a land patent. You cannot avoid land use regulation with a land patent.

This seems to be the goal of many proponents of land patent rights. Unfortunately, that is one of those urban myths – like sending a letter to the IRS renouncing all federal benefits in order to avoid paying income taxes. Nice try, but don’t bet the farm.​

Land Patents: a Real Myth

 

[JBvM]

I especially like two sections: History - and - Effect on Land Patent

History

As the population of the United States grew, the federal government was interested in moving people off the east coast, into the woods out west. To that end, the Land Office was created to sell land...

Effect on Land Patents

So what did this do to the land patents from the federal government? Today, some people believe...Unfortunately for these libertarian idealists, this is a myth.

In Michigan, land patents are still statutorily protected, and are still useful to establish ownership interests in real property. However, land patents do not affect the manner in which someone may use their property.​

 

[JBvM]

and this is a nice little place to visit: Do Land Patents Trump Property Taxes ?

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Yeah, I didn’t follow the jump to the government is the only entity with right of ownership. I suppose you’re suggesting that I have to pay taxes in some form that I am merely renting what the government owns. I don’t buy that interpretation. In a civilized society with a central government, money is needed to fund the government. That money has to come from a source like taxes or tariffs, primarily taxes. So without taxes, we get it all from tariffs or...where? Where will the money come to fund the government?

Here is the quotation to the law about the government's exclusive right to ownership. And governments did have revenue sources even before property taxes were invented and ownership rights were removed in 1933. American taxation didn't start in 1933.

Senate Document # 43; SENATE RESOLUTION NO. 62 (Pg 9, Para 2) April 17, 1933. "The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State; individual so-called "ownership"is only by virtue of Government, i.e., law, amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State".

Thanks, I interpret that as an eminent domain type statute. I am not at all concerned that the government will begin seizing “private” property.