Posted on 01/03/2016 4:13:57 PM PST by Kaslin
Your “facts” are wrong.
"omg"?
The Constitution describes the structure of the federal government, the powers granted by the people to the federal government, the scope of federal law and jurisdiction, the method of adopting and amending the Constitution, and is followed by the Bill of Rights.
There is no "list of duties" in the document.
If you were knowledgeable concerning them, you would have something interesting to say.
Property taxes have been the reality of the Western world since the Roman republic.
Remember that one holds one's property either according to the law, or according to how much strength one has to prevent others from taking it.
Okay, so we’re arguing over definitions now. Does the federal government have a basic duty to serve the nation? Yes. Has it been given a list of the powers available to it in order to fulfill that duty? Yes. Can those powers therefore also be described as duties? Who freakin’ cares.
I sometimes feel like the people on FR are only here to limit their guilt for inaction. Why would the Feds KEEP the land in the first place? What great national need is served here? Why not cede the land to the States and let THEM decide how to use the land? Isn’t that PRECISELY the theory of the Republic? MORE power to smaller units- people, family, church, county, state, etc. LESS power to the central power? Why is this hard to understand?
Go back to the basics.
1. The Law, Fredric Bastiat.
2. The Federalist.
3. Common Sense, Thomas Paine
4. Declaration of Independence
Should take you a week.
Because it's theirs?
Why not cede the land to the States and let THEM decide how to use the land?
Why not let the states buy the land and do with it what they will?
They purchased it. Important distinction.
If you pay taxes on land you do not own it, you are a renter. This is a basic concept. Some States do NOT have property taxes, proving that your idea that they are a necessity to be patently without merit.
Calling the Constitution a "list" is not just a semantic error, it's a factual one.
Can those powers therefore also be described as duties?
No they can't.
A power is something that you may use.
A duty is something you must perform.
Meaningless, mindless drivel. It matters not how the land was acquired, what matters is it disposal. The Feds maintain control of land that serves NO NATIONAL PURPOSE. It is therefore antithetical to the BASIC idea behind the Constitution.
Like I said, meaningless, mindless, drivel. The Federal government serves itself. This is not the purpose of its existence. It’s PURPOSE, or DUTY, is to use the few enumerated powers it was GRANTED to serve the STATES. The States are responsible for the PEOPLE within their borders. No thinking individual would have thought at the time of the Founding that the framers would have presumed that the federal government had any jurisdiction over any individual within the borders of any State. SAME for the lands within the States.
I don't need to reread documents I have already closely studied, although I do like to reread The Federalist for pleasure from time to time.
I am not the one who mistook the Constitution for a list.
After they devalued it.
Here is how they operate:
http://www.landrights.org/ActionAlerts/HageMorrison_120904.pdf
OMG... The powers enumerated are a list of ... I give up. Wake up Neo.
No, it isn't.
Our entire legal system of land ownership is based on the common law, and almost all private land in the US is held in fee simple.
Some States do NOT have property taxes
But almost all municipalities do, even if the state itself does not.
It is a very rare thing in the Western world to pay no property taxes of any kind.
your idea that they are a necessity
Oh, I don't think they are a necessity. But the power to tax is essential to fee simple land holding.
I see English has escaped you as thoroughly as your powers of argument.
Again, the government is not obliged to exercise all of its powers at all times.
You are confusing obligation with ability.
A fair point.
So if someone were to decide that you were not disposing of your land properly, they are entitled to use it the way they would prefer?
No, I'm afraid how land was acquired matters very much.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.