well said! in Commiefornia local bureaucrat fat pigs wanted $50,000 to review a property owner’s plans to make improvements with his older house and lot. The bureaucrat stressed him out so much that I believe it affected his health and took a few years off his life. His property only got partially upgraded. he just wasn’t going to pay this bureaucrat more money. I think this was during the 2000s housing bubble.
The 2 biggest taxes that can ruin a life, income tax and property tax. I want to put a building up in neighborhood that has had to look at an overgrown run down lot for years. But... I need the nanny state to tell me it's OK for a fee. How has it got this far?
Indeed. It is stronger than that, though: We are the embodiment of rights, meaning by nature, of nature, with nature, for nature, we are rights. Anything else is dependent upon the courtesy of authorization.
.gov can only do something IF .... EXPRESSLY ENUMERATED as a power.
Inventing more is a big nono and ... most importantly:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
So, where.gov only has certain rights, it is meant to go about it's business in such a way as to protect the rights of its creator: man.
.gov shall not break the compact. People in government, having sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution, must therefor be very careful in their dealings. It is rather a moral question than a political one.
Hence, as soon as .gov projects its interest unto a right retained by the people, because it has not expressly been authorized for the .gov to do so, the people can simply disregard it.
License for this that and the other.
Nope, mr Government. It is not expressly authorized for you to do so. As matter of fact, in certain cases you are expressly prohibited from doing so:
1st amendment, 2nd amendment, 10th amendment.
As Ron Paul is used to say: If we followed the Constitution we would not have:
I have gone on, about the Process and Particulars many times on How to remove Lands from the tax Rolls which also removes them from the City and County Registry....
It is the Land Patent or Land Grant, which can be found by doing a Deep Search via an, Abstract, Land and Title Company, all the way back to the Original Grant or Patent....
It's a bit Expensive, but worthwhile doing, and if you work with the Bureau Of Land Management, and the County Tax Assessor, you can get ALL the important things out of the way FIRST, like outstanding Land Taxes, if those aren't brought current, all the rest is for naught....
As you go through the whole Process, beginning at County Level, and going all the way to State Level, and then Federal, you may encounter places that will ask for Fees, pay them....
DO NOT apply for Lands that you do not have any Rights to own, that can get you into some very bad trouble....
Once you have applied for and have Received the Land Patent or Grant in Your Name, for Your Lands, go to the County Clerk, and bring in the tax Assessor, and UNRegister your Lands from the Commercial Properties lists....
Thanks for sharing this. It is a process I am interested in researching, especially, with regards to a different jurisdiction. The details (though quite important) may vary, but the basic idea remains the same.
Well, this kind of fits in with the entire ""Lands"" thing, I wrote this a long time ago::
Shouldn't be allowed to Vote if you Don't Own Land.... The Original Standard, and yes, Women Owned Land, hence Women Voted......
It wasn't about "I pAy TaXeS", it was about being picky on what Tax Laws were to be allowed, because Only Land Owners paid Taxes.....
Therefore, only Land Owners were Represented because Only Land Owners were Invested in their States....
It was very simple...
Odd thing is that in the last year I have explained this process multiple times to many people, and it should be IN my Comments History, on Two Dot Win sites....
That's exactly how ALL Nations begin, Land Owners have the Power, so they Pay Taxes that influence All Laws, and All Other Taxes....
Then here comes the ""Progressive"" and keeps pushing for Others who are Not Directly Invested it their Nation, to have ""Equal Rights"", only because they pay Sales Tax....
Well, Sales Tax is a Commercial Thing, so they should specifically be Purposely Excluded....
But generally, that is what .gov is working with. As a consequence, the salient point, i.e. being the embodiment of rights, is a matter totally pushed backward in the judicial process.
The same can be said of: laws pursuant to the constitution. When a law does not encompass, strengthen, reiterates the same salient point as in the C, then such a law is void. What reason could there be that such laws are billed and signed into law?
Because these represent clear evidence of violation of the oath of office, and enforcing them is making war on the constitution.
New powers can be granted to .gov, only when a constitutional convention is held and such a power is resulted. But, by the same token, powers can also be taken away by annulment of a power via a constitutional convention, and the resultant amendment.
But, that is hypothetical and the one example we have was just political grand grandstanding.
well said! in Commiefornia local bureaucrat fat pigs wanted $50,000 to review a property owner’s plans to make improvements with his older house and lot. The bureaucrat stressed him out so much that I believe it affected his health and took a few years off his life. His property only got partially upgraded. he just wasn’t going to pay this bureaucrat more money. I think this was during the 2000s housing bubble.
The 2 biggest taxes that can ruin a life, income tax and property tax. I want to put a building up in neighborhood that has had to look at an overgrown run down lot for years. But... I need the nanny state to tell me it's OK for a fee. How has it got this far?
Indeed. It is stronger than that, though: We are the embodiment of rights, meaning by nature, of nature, with nature, for nature, we are rights. Anything else is dependent upon the courtesy of authorization.
.gov can only do something IF .... EXPRESSLY ENUMERATED as a power.
Inventing more is a big nono and ... most importantly:
So, where.gov only has certain rights, it is meant to go about it's business in such a way as to protect the rights of its creator: man.
.gov shall not break the compact. People in government, having sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution, must therefor be very careful in their dealings. It is rather a moral question than a political one.
Hence, as soon as .gov projects its interest unto a right retained by the people, because it has not expressly been authorized for the .gov to do so, the people can simply disregard it.
Nope, mr Government. It is not expressly authorized for you to do so. As matter of fact, in certain cases you are expressly prohibited from doing so: 1st amendment, 2nd amendment, 10th amendment.
As Ron Paul is used to say: If we followed the Constitution we would not have:
and the list goes on.
I have gone on, about the Process and Particulars many times on How to remove Lands from the tax Rolls which also removes them from the City and County Registry....
It is the Land Patent or Land Grant, which can be found by doing a Deep Search via an, Abstract, Land and Title Company, all the way back to the Original Grant or Patent....
It's a bit Expensive, but worthwhile doing, and if you work with the Bureau Of Land Management, and the County Tax Assessor, you can get ALL the important things out of the way FIRST, like outstanding Land Taxes, if those aren't brought current, all the rest is for naught....
As you go through the whole Process, beginning at County Level, and going all the way to State Level, and then Federal, you may encounter places that will ask for Fees, pay them....
DO NOT apply for Lands that you do not have any Rights to own, that can get you into some very bad trouble....
Once you have applied for and have Received the Land Patent or Grant in Your Name, for Your Lands, go to the County Clerk, and bring in the tax Assessor, and UNRegister your Lands from the Commercial Properties lists....
Thanks for sharing this. It is a process I am interested in researching, especially, with regards to a different jurisdiction. The details (though quite important) may vary, but the basic idea remains the same.
Well, this kind of fits in with the entire ""Lands"" thing, I wrote this a long time ago::
Shouldn't be allowed to Vote if you Don't Own Land.... The Original Standard, and yes, Women Owned Land, hence Women Voted......
It wasn't about "I pAy TaXeS", it was about being picky on what Tax Laws were to be allowed, because Only Land Owners paid Taxes.....
Therefore, only Land Owners were Represented because Only Land Owners were Invested in their States....
It was very simple...
Odd thing is that in the last year I have explained this process multiple times to many people, and it should be IN my Comments History, on Two Dot Win sites....
It is all gone....
Indeed. I was reading the Tsilio and the welsh confederation contained the same kind of ideas.
Landownership was key to civil rights and duties.
That's exactly how ALL Nations begin, Land Owners have the Power, so they Pay Taxes that influence All Laws, and All Other Taxes....
Then here comes the ""Progressive"" and keeps pushing for Others who are Not Directly Invested it their Nation, to have ""Equal Rights"", only because they pay Sales Tax....
Well, Sales Tax is a Commercial Thing, so they should specifically be Purposely Excluded....
Fuck them....
Difference between have and being.
Two concepts:
I do not understand it either.
But generally, that is what .gov is working with. As a consequence, the salient point, i.e. being the embodiment of rights, is a matter totally pushed backward in the judicial process.
The same can be said of: laws pursuant to the constitution. When a law does not encompass, strengthen, reiterates the same salient point as in the C, then such a law is void. What reason could there be that such laws are billed and signed into law?
Because these represent clear evidence of violation of the oath of office, and enforcing them is making war on the constitution.
New powers can be granted to .gov, only when a constitutional convention is held and such a power is resulted. But, by the same token, powers can also be taken away by annulment of a power via a constitutional convention, and the resultant amendment.
But, that is hypothetical and the one example we have was just political grand grandstanding.
It might be a good thing to put this Entire post in PDW, aka Patriots, or The Donald....