Comments on: “Property Taxes” and the Consent of the Governed

By: Hoodamanow

Hoodamanow — Sat, 13 Aug 2011 01:51:41 +0000

After the Revolution we where given Allotial titles to the land. WE the People created Congress we give them privileges not the other way around. Abraham Lincoln we the people are the rightful masters of Congress and the Courts. Bill of Rights is only thing that matters, The Constitution should support the Bill.
we own the House not the Land. You’ re paying rent on the Land. We were tricked into Contracting with and being Co – owners with the state of everything we own first when your Parents Married they signed a Application which gave the Government rights to a portion of everything that came from that Marriage, I read you married so you also signed a contract Giving the Government a Portion to all that comes from your Marriage….

By: Brad

Brad — Sat, 13 Aug 2011 01:19:06 +0000

Hoodamanow,

In a republic an elected mob rules. That’s the only difference.

By: Hoodamanow

Hoodamanow — Sat, 13 Aug 2011 01:12:52 +0000

We Do Not Live in Democracy we live in a republic .. In a Democracy the Mob Rules, were in a republic the minority wins over the Majority. Example: We are going to Vote on if we should Take your House.. You can vote to.. Anyone want to vote if we take this Guys House? This is a Democracy In a republic (small r) This is your house and your rights come first.

By: kevin

kevin — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 03:10:32 +0000

I think that property taxes are unethical. How does the state have the right to tax you for something that you own. That’s like saying, “hmmm. We as a state need to find a way to get more money flowing through for our frivilous spending habits. Let’s see, that guy over there owns an ipod, we can charge him taxes for owning it.” Sure, an ipod is alot different than a property but the principle are still the same. Oh, to the guy who knows it all and tried to slam the one who wrote this blog, every site has one of you, the ones who seem to enjoy taking from behind when it comes to the government, the ones who think “oh the gov can’t do no wrong. They have legitimate reason for everything”. I do not understand that self destructive way of thinking. You seem to want to be subject to everything.

By: DSH Dollar Sign Historian

DSH Dollar Sign Historian — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 06:41:49 +0000

Ian, In the late 1980’s I sent a certified letter asking the Los Angeles County Tax Collector the same question. 2,651. . . what? Ounces, pounds, gallons, WHAT? I never did get a response. Until new information becomes available I have come to the following position. First, there are 4 dollar signs that we know of. The first DOLLAR SIGN is an S with a U superimposed over it. This first dollar sign was defined in the coinage act of 1792 as a silver coin of a specified weight and purity and patterned after the Spanish Milled Dollar that was at that time used and accepted by merchants around the globe. [you can goggle the coinage act]. The SECOND DOLLAR SIGN is an S with two vertical lines superimposed over it. Our best guess is that this sign is legally defined as a paper Silver Certificate that could be used to claim the US silver dollar defined in the Coinage Act. The THIRD DOLLAR SIGN is and S with one vertical line superimposed over it [$] and is the most commonly seen dollar sign. Our best guess is that the legal definition of this dollar sign is that it represents a Federal Reserve Note [an IOU obligation of the federal government backed by the future labor of the American people. THE FOURTH DOLLAR SIGN is an S with a short line sticking out of the top of the S and a short line sticking out of the bottom of the S. I occasionally see this sign used in stock and mutual fund Prospectus’. NOW HERE IS THE INTERESTING PART. Article 1 Section 10 of the Constitution, [which is still binding on the States] prohibits the States from using anything “but gold or silver coin a tender in payment of debt”. A county, which is a subdivision of the State is also bound by this restriction. So the county is in a legal pickle, if they bill you for PROPERTY TAXES using the FIRST OR SECOND DOLLAR SIGN, no one could pay the bill because there are none of those “dollars” in circulation. And if the county billed you using the THIRD OR FOURTH DOLLAR SIGN they [the state and county] would be in violation of Article 1 Section 10. It appears that for the past 80 to 100 years the County has side stepped the problem by sending out property tax bills with numbers only, [no unit such as dollars, cents, pounds, bushels] and waited too see what the mind numbed sheep would send them. An Interesting foot note, The County of Los Angeles began using the THIRD DOLLAR SIGN in the year 2000, An I notice that the county of Riverside California is using the FOURTH DOLLAR SIGN. My letters to the U. S. Treasurer and the House Banking Committee have also gone unanswered. I’d be interested in comments from other states and counties. My Email address is deercreek@usa.com signed DSH

By: EthanAllen

EthanAllen — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 00:36:48 +0000

The problem is that Ian and others can’t articulate a reasonable alternative to the social contract theory with poly-centric law theory that makes any sense to anyone.

Where is the alternative?

By: maulotaur

maulotaur — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 09:00:32 +0000

I was recently passing through the city and decided to stop into the city hall building to ask some questions about property taxes. When I stated that one of my questions was specifically concerning the authority of tax collection, I was told that I would have to speak to the tax collector who was conveniently on vacation for the next two weeks. I then asked if the two weeks was including that day or after that day. The answer was then revised to say that she would be in on one particular day in the morning but then leaving, etc. After wasting some time with this, I was told that I could also go upstairs for more information. Apparently a very quick call to upstairs was made, because I got there, they were waiting for me. I don’t know how many others have been in there asking similar questions, but they almost seemed amused by it.

By: Curt Springer

Curt Springer — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 22:53:35 +0000

Mrs. Alther is indeed a nice lady to respond to this nonsense.

She answered your questions, but if you want more specifics:

NH constitution:
Part First
[Art.] 3. [Society, its Organization and Purposes.] When men enter into a state of society, they surrender up some of their natural rights to that society, in order to ensure the protection of others; and, without such an equivalent, the surrender is void.

June 2, 1784

Part Second
Article 1. [Name of Body Politic.] The people inhabiting the territory formerly called the province of New Hampshire, do hereby solemnly and mutually agree with each other, to form themselves into a free, sovereign and independent body-politic, or state, by the name of the State of New Hampshire.

June 2, 1784

GENERAL COURT

[Art.] 2. [Legislature, How Constituted.] The supreme legislative power, within this state, shall be vested in the senate and house of representatives, each of which shall have a negative on the other.

June 2, 1784

[Art.] 5. [Power to Make Laws, Elect Officers, Define Their Powers and Duties, Impose Fines and Assess Taxes; Prohibited from Authorizing Towns to Aid Certain Corporations.] And farther, full power and authority are hereby given and granted to the said general court, from time to time, to make, ordain, and establish, all manner of wholesome and reasonable orders, laws, statutes, ordinances, directions, and instructions, either with penalties, or without, so as the same be not repugnant or contrary to this constitution, as they may judge for the benefit and welfare of this state, and for the governing and ordering thereof, and of the subjects of the same, for the necessary support and defense of the government thereof, and to name and settle biennially, or provide by fixed laws for the naming and settling, all civil officers within this state, such officers excepted, the election and appointment of whom are hereafter in this form of government otherwise provided for; and to set forth the several duties, powers, and limits, of the several civil and military officers of this state, and the forms of such oaths or affirmations as shall be respectively administered unto them, for the execution of their several offices and places, so as the same be not repugnant or contrary to this constitution; and also to impose fines, mulcts, imprisonments, and other punishments, and to impose and levy proportional and reasonable assessments, rates, and taxes, upon all the inhabitants of, and residents within, the said state; and upon all estates within the same; to be issued and disposed of by warrant, under the hand of the governor of this state for the time being, with the advice and consent of the council, for the public service, in the necessary defense and support of the government of this state, and the protection and preservation of the subjects thereof, according to such acts as are, or shall be, in force within the same; provided that the general court shall not authorize any town to loan or give its money or credit directly or indirectly for the benefit of any corporation having for its object a dividend of profits or in any way aid the same by taking its stocks or bonds. For the purpose of encouraging conservation of the forest resources of the state, the general court may provide for special assessments, rates and taxes on growing wood and timber.

June 2, 1784
Amended 1792 changing “president” to “governor.”
Amended 1877 changing “annually” to “biennially.” Also amended to prohibit towns and cities from loaning money or credit to corporations.
Amended 1942 to permit a timber tax.

RSA 72:6 Real Estate. – All real estate, whether improved or unimproved, shall be taxed except as otherwise provided.

RSA 47:1 In General. – All the powers vested by law in towns, or in the inhabitants thereof, shall be exercised by the city councils by concurrent vote, each board having a negative on the other.

RSA 47:14 Appointive Officers. – They shall appoint a city marshal, and one or more assistant marshals if they think it necessary, a collector of taxes, constables, police officers and watchmen, and may remove them from office for sufficient cause; and may require the marshal and constables, before entering on their duties, to give bonds, with sufficient sureties to any reasonable amount, upon which like proceedings and remedies may be had as in case of bonds required to be given by constables of towns.

Keene City Charter:
SECTION 1. INCORPORATION. The inhabitants of the City of Keene shall continue to be a body politic and corporate under the name of the “City of Keene,” hereinafter sometimes referred to as “the City,” and as such to enjoy all the rights, immunities, powers, and privileges and be subject to all the duties and liabilities now appertaining to or incumbent upon them as a municipal corporation. All existing property of the City shall remain vested in it, and all its existing debts and obligations shall remain obligatory upon it, under this revised Charter.

SECTION 52. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Charter was effective January 2, 1970 with a complete charter revision. Sections 2, 5, 6, 8, 11, 12, 16, 19, 21, 25, 28, 29 and 49 were amended November 6, 1973, by Charter Commission and Referendum. Sections 3, 5, 7, 8, 9 12, 13, 15, 19, 20, 21, 23, 26, 28, 33, 35, 36 (b&c), 38, 39, 40, 41, and 53 were amended November 7, 1978, by Charter Commission and Referendum. Sections 2, 3, 7, 14, and 18 were amended November 2, 1981, by Referendum. The 1983 Municipal Election will be from revised wards as established by the 1981 Municipal Election. The revised wards will be in effect January 1, 1984. Section 2 was amended November 5, 1991, by referendum. The revised wards will be in effect January 1, 1992. Section 2 was amended November 6, 2001, by referendum. The revised wards shall take affect June 1, 2002. When this Charter amendment takes affect the incumbents of all elected offices shall continue to hold the same until the expiration of their respective terms. Sections 16, 25 and 45 were amended November 2, 2004, by referendum.

By: Sovereign1

Sovereign1 — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 03:09:03 +0000

Patrick Shields,

Thank your for rebutting my essay. Perhaps you are currently writing the essay that provides the detailed explanations that you didn’t provide in your rebuttal? Well anyway, here is what I would appreciate if you could include in it:

Please explain what holes are in my argument.

1. Please explain what the degrees of freedom are.

2a. Is declaring the truth considered imposing? I propose that it would only be imposing on those who are enemies of the truth. Please explain what isn’t true about what I said.
2b. Please explain how the social contract is part of our system of law. It would be great if you could provide references to it from the founding fathers’ writings.

You are basically saying that everyone must obey all laws because of some imaginary social contract. Very well, please provide the original “social” contract that I signed. Or two uninterested witnesses that will provide testimony that I agreed to it verbally.

By: nick

nick — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 02:00:25 +0000

“I just now received an email for David Z’s comment. It is weird that it took so many days to be informed through email.” – Patrick

David’s comment was stuck in a spam filter for several days for whatever reason. I just recently saw it there and released it.