No property taxes in the USA prior to the 1930s?

[Famspear]

I found this drool in, uh, "another forum" today:

The failure of the Federal Government to ratify the 16th Amendment raises legal question as to any tax lean [sic]. Prior to the 1930’s Americans owned their land under Allodial Title and there was no tax on land or property. Allodial Title formed a core concept to the formation of the U.S.A. in that people were secure on their land from government intrusion and tax.

When the Federal Reserve Bank artificially induced the Great Depression, they placed in government agents of that privately held bank who implemented Socialism, FCC, SEC and the IRS which created an induced cash and interest flow for the privately held Federal Reserve Bank’s Notes. Secretary of State Philander Knox simply announced the 16th Amendment was ratified when it was not. It has been well established up to the Supreme Court level that the 16th Amendment was not ratified and added no new taxing authority. The IRS, Federal Government and local County Tax collectors assume authority that is not theirs and operate a criminal enterprise collecting taxes under the color of law. Nevada is one of the States who still offers their citizens a means of perfecting Allodial Title on their property, eliminating all future tax on the land.

(bolding added).

Here's the web site that was cited:

http://www.libertyforlife.com/constitut ... cation.htm.

Setting aside the usual TP rhetoric about the Federal Reserve System, the SEC, Nevada, allodial title, the federal income tax, etc., etc. (especially the stunning implication that the poster may actually be stupid enough to believe that the UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT has ruled the 16th Amendment to be invalid), I am still reeling at the distinct possibility that a minimally sentient American with a formal education beyond the 11th grade could honestly believe that there were no property taxes in the USA prior to the 1930s.

[Imalawman]

I found this drool in, uh, "another forum" today:

The failure of the Federal Government to ratify the 16th Amendment raises legal question as to any tax lean [sic]. Prior to the 1930’s Americans owned their land under Allodial Title and there was no tax on land or property. Allodial Title formed a core concept to the formation of the U.S.A. in that people were secure on their land from government intrusion and tax.

When the Federal Reserve Bank artificially induced the Great Depression, they placed in government agents of that privately held bank who implemented Socialism, FCC, SEC and the IRS which created an induced cash and interest flow for the privately held Federal Reserve Bank’s Notes. Secretary of State Philander Knox simply announced the 16th Amendment was ratified when it was not. It has been well established up to the Supreme Court level that the 16th Amendment was not ratified and added no new taxing authority. The IRS, Federal Government and local County Tax collectors assume authority that is not theirs and operate a criminal enterprise collecting taxes under the color of law. Nevada is one of the States who still offers their citizens a means of perfecting Allodial Title on their property, eliminating all future tax on the land.

(bolding added).

Here's the web site that was cited:

http://www.libertyforlife.com/constitut ... cation.htm.

Setting aside the usual TP rhetoric about the Federal Reserve System, the SEC, Nevada, allodial title, the federal income tax, etc., etc. (especially the stunning implication that the poster may actually be stupid enough to believe that the UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT has ruled the 16th Amendment to be invalid), I am still reeling at the distinct possibility that a minimally sentient American with a formal education beyond the 11th grade could honestly believe that there were no property taxes in the USA prior to the 1930s.

I'm not especially. My wife, who graduated first in her high school, college, and law school classes would not know that if there were property taxes before 1930 or not - although she would be skeptical about that assertion. The difference is she would ask someone credible who knew about taxes, aka moi, before writing something on the internet about it. Sometimes we tax buffs forget that basic knowledge of taxation isn't a priori, but rather learned through education.

[Cpt Banjo]

I am still reeling at the distinct possibility that a minimally sentient American with a formal education beyond the 11th grade could honestly believe that there were no property taxes in the USA prior to the 1930s.

You really shouldn't be surprised at the stuff some people believe. Look at all the people who believe in astrology -- they must outnumber the tax denier kooks by a long shot.

[Famspear]

Imalawman wrote:

My wife, who graduated first in her high school, college, and law school classes would not know that if there were property taxes before 1930 or not - although she would be skeptical about that assertion. The difference is she would ask someone credible who knew about taxes, aka moi, before writing something on the internet about it. Sometimes we tax buffs forget that basic knowledge of taxation isn't a priori, but rather learned through education.

You're right; I overstated my case.

Cpt Banjo wrote:

You really shouldn't be surprised at the stuff some people believe. Look at all the people who believe in astrology -- they must outnumber the tax denier kooks by a long shot.

Cpt Banjo, you're right as well.

Actually, I guess I should have posted this in Ranting and Raving anyway.

[Famspear]

UGA Lawdog wrote:

There's nothing you can make up too stupid or bizarre where you can't get at least some folks to believe it.

What gets me is how many people are indeed willing to say or write preposterous things without doing even minimal fact-checking. Of course, where the "contributor" is anonymous (often the case on the internet), I guess the desire to be careful about accuracy is just very weak for some people.

I love it when they (the TPs) make these preposterous statements. I do experience a certain quasi-illicit Schadenfreude every time I see these pompous, self-righteous, incompetent blowhard, delusional, narcissistic jerks publicly (albeit usually anonymously or pseudonymously) humiliate themselves as a result of their own carelessness and intellectual dishonesty.

One of my personal favorites was a posting in another forum where the clown had the temerity to proclaim with great confidence that the entity known as "Internal Revenue Service" is not mentioned anywhere in the Internal Revenue Code (there are actually about 200 or more specific places in the Code where "Internal Revenue Service" is indeed mentioned). In an age where the actual text of the United States Code is readily available to someone with an internet connection, you would think .......

[Cpt Banjo]

I do experience a certain quasi-illicit Schadenfreude every time I see these pompous, self-righteous, incompetent blowhard, delusional, narcissistic jerks publicly (albeit usually anonymously or pseudonymously) humiliate themselves as a result of their own carelessness and intellectual dishonesty.

Don't hold back, Famspear, tell us what you really think.

Seriously, at times it's hard not to fall into complete cynicism and to believe, along with H. L. Mencken, that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.

[LPC]

When I read tax denier drivel, I sometimes amuse myself by seeing how many lies I can find in each sentence. What's really interesting is when you can find more lies in a sentence than there are words.

(Confession: I stole this idea from Dashiell Hammett, but I can't remember the name of the story.)

[Demosthenes]

(Confession: I stole this idea from Dashiell Hammett, but I can't remember the name of the story.)

The Golden Horseshoe.

[Judge Roy Bean]

I've long believed that some of the posts out there that contain this kind of nonsense are the products of an automatic word/phrase generation project. It's like someone built an analogous model of Van Pelt's writing process. You feed an otherwise intelligible paragraph into it, select a few options and all of a sudden you are a tax/finance/law guru.

The most common flaw that reveals its use is an assumed but nonsensical pretense as part of an introductory phrase, i.e., "...because the sun is bright purple with dark green spots, [insert randomly-chosen other gibberish]."

[Famspear]

. . . from somewhere in a galaxy far, far away (see above):

It is not difficult to see that a state-created Birth Certificate, with an all-caps, name is a document evidencing debt the moment it is issued.

Once a state has registered a birth document with the U.S. Department of Commerce, the Department notifies the Treasury Department, which takes out a loan from the Federal Reserve.

That's just too much. When I read it, my first instinct was to try to write a parody of it. And then I thought, how do you parody that? I mean, how would I go about writing an imitation that could be any more comedic or ridiculous than the original verbiage?

[RyanMcC]

Being considered a fool and an idiot by an attorney is one of the highest honors attainable on this board.

That says it all right there..

[Joe Dirt]

I'd like to add a few compassionate things to Lawdog's advice for the foundation of the new republic. 1. A laminated copy of the Magna Carta in the original Middle English, 2. A large supply of fence building materials and 3. A large inventory of power tools with the safety instructions removed...

[ErsatzAnatchist]

I'd like to add a few compassionate things to Lawdog's advice for the foundation of the new republic. 1. A laminated copy of the Magna Carta in the original Middle English, 2. A large supply of fence building materials and 3. A large inventory of power tools with the safety instructions removed...

Why remove the safety instructions? They would not be read anyway.

[notorial dissent]

Point of order, the Magna Carta was written in Latin, not English of any high middle or low variety, not that it would be any easier to read, despite some their beliefs that Latin phrases have magical significance.

[Gregg]

Point of order, the Magna Carta was written in Latin, not English of any high middle or low variety, not that it would be any easier to read, despite some their beliefs that Latin phrases have magical significance.

Really? I thought it was in French, which was the court language of the Angevins, although Latin doesn't really surprise me. I think I may have seen the ACTUAL document at The British Museum. Fun Fact! The ORGINAL Magna Carta was later repudiated by King John and the Pope, but upon accension it was forced on Henry III, who was only 12 at the time.
(I spent entirely too much time in Western CIv, didn't I?)

[notorial dissent]

You probably did see at least one of the original copies, there were many. All legal documents of the time were written in Latin since it was the only language read consistently throughout the then known world. The document itself is to my eyes largely illegible due to the old Latin, the calligraphy of the day, and the fact that they were not big on punctuation at the best of times. The French the ruling families would have been speaking would have actually been Norman, and it was not widely spoken except by the upper classes, and or course the Norman peasantry, and even the aristocracy of the time were mostly illiterate and could barely write their own names. And the aforementioned document.


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... _Carta.jpg

[The Observer]

If you squint closely at about middle of the page, you can make out the words "refused for cause" stamped in Latin...

[grixit]

Hey i already noted that just under "John Plantagenet" it says "under Duress and Coercion".

[Gregg]

You probably did see at least one of the original copies, there were many. All legal documents of the time were written in Latin since it was the only language read consistently throughout the then known world. The document itself is to my eyes largely illegible due to the old Latin, the calligraphy of the day, and the fact that they were not big on punctuation at the best of times. The French the ruling families would have been speaking would have actually been Norman, and it was not widely spoken except by the upper classes, and or course the Norman peasantry, and even the aristocracy of the time were mostly illiterate and could barely write their own names. And the aforementioned document.


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... _Carta.jpg

Not only could King John mot read or write, he also spoke virtually not a word of English, his son, Henry III was the first Norman king who spoke english.

Rufusica nostu honerium
John Plantagenet
is that even close?

[Gregg]

Jeffery Plantagenet, wife of the Empress Matilda, whose son was Henry II and grandfather was William the Conquerer. Jeffrey wore a sprig of Planta Ginista (I know that's spelled wrong, but you get the gist) in his hat as an ornament.
Upon the death of Henry I, Matilda had the more legitimate claim to the styles King (Queen) of England, Duchess of Normandy. Jeffrey, who was the Count of Anjuo (hence the name "Angevins" for the dynasty) married Matilda. Matilda's brother, Steven, siezed the throne and Matilda waged a half war to recover it, unsuccessfully. Jeffrey did conquer Normandy and after his death his son Henry went to England to renew the fighting with Steven, eventually a deal was struck whereupon Steven was allowed to die on the throne if he would name Henry his heir. Henry, and his wife Eleanor of Aquataine, accended the throne of England in 1154. Upon his accension, Henry became the most powerful monarch since the breakup of the Roman Empire being King of England, Duke of Normandy, Duke of Aquataine, Count of Anjou and Earl of Brittany, a realm that extended from Scotland to the the northern border of Spain.

Just for the record I did that from memory, not from google etc....and the movie Becket with Peter O'Toole and Richard Burton was one of my all time favorites which led me to do a little reading on the people involved.

next