Connect with us

Everything

Why the government owns everything

Published

on

I want to ask you a question. Do you have the right to own property in this country? I’m not talking about a cell phone, clothing, and so forth. What I am mean is, do you have the right to own land?

The reason I ask this is that most people believe that we do own property in this country. When you buy a home, you not only pay for the house, but you pay for the land. Therefore, if you pay for it, you must own it, right? The answer is no, unfortunately, and here’s why.

First, let’s begin with a typical home purchase. Most people don’t have enough money to pay for a home outright. They usually get a mortgage from a bank and pay it off over 30 years. During that time if you stop paying your mortgage the bank will eventually foreclose on the property and take it away.

Why do they have that right? They have that right because they still own it until the day you fulfill the contract and pay off the mortgage. The day after you paid the mortgage off the bank has no right or authority to foreclose. They have no ownership or interest in the property.

At this point, most people would now say they own property, but most people are wrong. The reason they are wrong is you will never stop paying. You might have stopped paying the bank, but you never stop paying the government.

You see, when you pay property tax what you are doing is paying the government to lease the land from them. Like the bank, if you stop paying the mortgage they will foreclose on you. In the same way, you stop paying your property tax the government will come and seize your property and auction it off.

Why does the government have the right to do this? The reason is that you don’t own the land. All you did was spend a lot of money to acquire the right in order to lease the land from the government. The government is the sovereign landowner of every single piece of land property in America.

For this reason alone, is why I abhor property tax above every other tax. I understand a sales tax or an income tax. I understand the need for the government to collect money to provide services. I’m okay with that. But I’m not okay with is paying taxes on the same thing over and over again.

If you want to add a one-time tax like a stamp duty, that is reasonable and something we can argue over what the percentage should be. But you can’t tell me that it is moral and right for the government to come and seize a person’s property because they can’t afford to pay their property tax. Kick them out of their home and keep most if not all of the value of the property.

For instance, according to Kelly Phillips Erb from Forbes, in 2011 in Pennsylvania, a widow with three children named Eileen Battisti lost her home because in 2008 she did not pay interest of $6.30 for being late eight days on her property tax payment. By 2011, with fees and cost that 2008 property tax bill ballooned to $255.84. Therefore, the county seized and sold her property for nearly $120,000. She was lucky in the sense that she was entitled to $108,039 after taxes and costs were deducted from the sale. But we don’t know what the value of the home was, what happens if the house was worth $250,000? The new owner got the deal of the century. The government got their money and change. The only person that got hurt was Eileen Battisti and her fatherless children and all for $6.30.

In some counties around the country, you are not even entitled to any money back after a sale. You could own a million dollar home, and the government can sell it for $500,000 and keep that entire amount.

You see just how immoral and wrong property tax is. It deprives you of your rights to own property. It also fundamentally changes the structure of who is sovereign in this great country of ours. I thought, “We The People” were the sovereign in this country. I thought were supposed to be a People with a Government, instead of a Government with a People.

As conservatives, we fight to conserve principles that have been proven to be the best for man and the human condition. Unfortunately, our Founding Fathers didn’t get everything right. They were imperfect like us. Even though they had property taxes doesn’t mean they were right in doing so.

In days of our Founding Fathers, they would not have been called Conservatives. They were Liberals or known today as Classical Liberals. Their ideas and philosophies were brilliant, and that is why we call ourselves conservatives because we wish to conserve these principles.

On property taxes, we cannot be conservatives. We must be Classical Liberals and fight to enlighten the American people on the evils of property tax, and if we are to be a country of the people, by the people, and for the people then we must fight to take our property back from the government and once and for all abolish property taxes in this country.

Mr. Roditis a candidate for California State Controller. He is an entrepreneur and owns several companies. He graduated from UCSD with a B.A. in Political Science/International Relations. He's a former City Commissioner with the City of Anaheim, CA. He's a Conservative Constitutional Federalist. Follow him on Twitter @KonRoditis

Continue Reading
Advertisement
2 Comments

2 Comments

  1. Michelle

    July 31, 2017 at 5:37 am

    In West Virginia, the county doesn’t even have to notify you that your property is being sold on the courthouse steps. I have been talking about this subject for a long time and consider this the biggest issue gutting the American Dream, today.

    • Konstantinos Roditis

      July 31, 2017 at 7:42 am

      Michelle, this is one of the biggest issues of our day and whenever I have spoken to people about the fact that you don’t own land and you lease the land in the form of property tax from the government, they all say, you’re right I never thought about it that way. Even progressives agreed with me. Property tax drives the elderly and the poor to greater despair and is killing the American Dream.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Democrats

Forget lowering unemployment, Bernie Sanders will eliminate it!

Published

on

During his 2016 Democrat primary campaign, Bernie Sanders was “absolutely sympathetic” to the idea of a universal basic income; however, he felt that his plans for a $15/hr. minimum wage, expanding Social Security to pay for guaranteed healthcare, and providing free college would do more than creating just another government handout.

But now Bernie has apparently found a way to accomplish his goals as well as the goals of the universal basic income crowd.
Yesterday, we learned that the self-proclaimed Democratic-Socialist is ready to announce a plan that will guarantee every American “who wants or needs one” a lifetime government job paying at least $15/hr. and proving paid family and medical leave plus retirement, health, and vacation benefits.

While the details are still being worked on, Bernie has admitted that he currently has no idea exactly how much his plan will cost or where the money to pay for it will come from. However, if his 2016 campaign is any indication, the cost will be irrelevant, and the money to pay for it will come from “the billionaires and oligarchs” he refers to as the “top one percent of income earners.”

While it would be tempting to shrug off Bernie’s plan as the rantings of a socialist loon living to the left of the left-wing, we should remember how his Marxist beliefs concerning income inequality caught fire with a generation of Constitutionally ignorant voters raised on the socialist ideology taught in today’s public schools indoctrination centers.

And a poll conducted during the 2016 primary season showed that a majority of millennials rejected capitalism.

Democrats would see a huge voter advantage by creating a new state-run workforce dependent upon them for their jobs. And politicians from both parties would have a new voter-bloc to advance their ideological and political agendas.

Bernie’s plan is being called a guaranteed-jobs program, but the only guarantee it gives us is the destruction of capitalism and Constitutional America.


Originally posted on The Strident Conservative.

 

David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook. Subscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

In UK, Ancient Heathenism Reigns Supreme

Published

on

Several minutes had passed since the medical examination of the newborn had begun. They stood inspective over the infant, occasionally murmuring to one another in a hushed tone.  The babe’s father stood nearby, pacing: his eyes intractably fixed on the small group of elders in a desperate attempt to interpret each subtle lift of an eyebrow or pinch of the lips.

Then came that dreaded nod…

The tormented father wept as the judge read the decision aloud: “as thinking it neither good for the child itself…” the child must die.

The above description is not a reference to the United Kingdom’s government-ordered killing of little Alfie Evans, nor the United Kingdom’s government-ordered killing of little Charlie Gard.

The infant’s death-order, described above, was merely the price of societal perfection for his father, living in the Statist abyss of Ancient Sparta.

In Lives: Lycurgus 16, Greek historian Plutarch (48-122 A.D.) wrote of the medical inspections of infants by “elders,” and of the state-ordered murder of infants in Ancient Sparta under the rule Lycurgus, a tyrannical central-planner:

“Nor was it in the power of the father to dispose of the child as he saw fit (as was his right in most heathen societies). He was obliged to carry (the newborn) child before certain men at a place called Lesche; these men were some of the elders of the tribe to which the child belonged; their business was to carefully view the infant, and, if they found it stout and well made, they gave order for its rearing and allotted to it one of the nine thousand shares of land above mentioned for its maintenance, but, if they found it puny and ill-shaped, ordered it to be taken to what was called the Apothetae (“depository”), a (large cave) under Mt. Taygetus (in the Peloponnese); as thinking it neither for the good of the child itself, nor for the public interest, that it should be brought up, if it did not, from the very outset, appear to be healthy and vigorous.” (emphasis mine)

Undesirable Infants – those either deemed unfit in some way, were conceived through rape, were unwanted, or were female – were often exposed, meaning that these infants were tossed into pits or over cliffs, or were abandoned in the wilderness and then left to starve or to be eaten by wild animals.

Such was life in the pagan purgatories of Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome.

Such has life begun to be again, today, in the United Kingdom.

As I type, a toddler lies in the hospital, a prisoner, detained by the pagan pride of evil monsters, by his own Statist government.

The “elders” in the UK have sentenced little Alfie Evans to die, “as thinking it neither for the good of the child itself. Alfie may not be alone in the wilderness, but he is being exposed by the sword of starvation.

Right now, a tormented father weeps for his child.

The cruel winds of an evil-ridden history are circling ’round again.

 

Once Christianity came upon the scene, Christians began to regularly rescue exposed infants.

As Tertullian stated, “Christians sought out the tiny bodies of newborn babies from the refuse and dung heaps and raised them as their own or tended to them before they died or gave them a decent burial” (Early Church History).

“The Christian idea that each individual person has worth because they were created by God was foreign to the lies of pagan society where the State, the tribe, the collective was the only value they knew” (Early Church History).

One can even visit these once abandoned babes at the Catacomb of Praetextatus. “The catacombs are filled with very tiny graves with the epitaph ‘adopted daughter of…’ or ‘adopted son of…’ inscribed on them. These inscriptions refer to the many babies and young children Christians rescued from the trash over the centuries” (Early Church History).

Unlike during the times of Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece, however, today’s United Kingdom prevents Christians from aiding Britain’s exposed children.

Christians from across the globe have offered aid and open arms to little Alfie Evans. Pope Francis has faithfully attempted to save the ailing child, arranging medical transportation for Alfie so that he might fly via air ambulance to the Vatican’s hospital.

Still, the prideful “elders” cling mercilessly to their pagan heathenism, determined to deny any and all Christian charity for little Alfie.

 

Alas! One thing is now crystal clear: in the United Kingdom, ancient heathenism reigns supreme.

For a glimpse of the future, listen to these famous voices from the past:

In On the Laws 3.8, Cicero (106-43 BC) states:

“Deformed infants shall be killed.”

Posidippus, a Greek poet, wrote:

“Everybody raises a son even if he is poor, but exposes a daughter even if he is rich.”

In On Anger 1.15, Seneca (4 BC-65 AD) wrote:

“…mad dogs we knock on the head…unnatural progeny we destroy; we drown even children at birth who are weakly and abnormal.”

In Politics 7.1335b, Aristotle (364 BC-322 BC) wrote:

“As to exposing or rearing the children born, let there be a law that no deformed child shall be reared;  but on the ground of number of children, if the regular customs hinder any of those born being exposed, there must be a limit fixed to the procreation of offspring, and if any people have a child as a result of intercourse in contravention of these regulations, abortion must be practiced on it (the child).”

In Theaetetus, the Greek philosopher Plato (quoting Socrates) wrote of the important societal task of killing infirm infants:

“For we must take care that we don’t overlook some defect in this thing that is entering into life; it may be something not worth bringing up, a wind-egg, a falsehood. What do you say? Is it your opinion that your child ought in any case to be brought up and not exposed to die? Can you bear to see it found fault with and not get into a rage if your first-born is stolen away from you?”

In Ad Nationes, Tertullian (155-220 A.D.) recorded the frequency of pagan infanticide in the Roman Empire during the late 100’s and early 200’s A.D.:

“…because, although you are forbidden by the laws to slay new-born infants, it so happens that no laws are evaded with more impunity or greater safety, with the deliberate knowledge of the public, and the suffrages of this entire age…But then you make away with them in a more cruel manner, because you expose them to the cold and hunger, and to wild beasts, or else you get rid of them by the slower death of drowning.”

In Book 3 of Instructor, Clement of Alexandria (150-215 A.D.) wrote of Roman women caring more for animals than for children:

“And though maintaining parrots and curlews, they do not receive the orphan child; but they expose children that are born at home, and take up the young of birds, and prefer irrational to rational creatures.”

 

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

New California law voids religious freedom to advance LGBT agenda

Published

on

In the war on American culture waged by the Marxist Rainbow Jihad and LGBT terrorists, there has been perhaps no greater battlefield than the state of California. And as the front where many of the battles are fought, it is also where we find the greatest number of casualties, usually children.

Government authorities working as a type of Gay Mafia have turned public schools into LGBT indoctrination centers where acceptance of deviant lifestyles is mandated by the state in the name of so-called tolerance. In these indoctrination centers, parents are denied the right to teach their kids the values they believe in, and children as young as five-years-old are disciplined as “bullies” for “misgendering” their gender-confused classmates.

Not content with brainwashing young minds, however, LGBT radicals in the CA legislature want to make it a crime for parents, pastors, and professional councilors to engage in “sexual orientation change efforts with an individual.”

Under a banner of so-called consumer protection, the bill (AB-2943) defines “change efforts” as:

“Any practices that seek to change an individual’s sexual orientation. This includes efforts to change behavior or gender expressions, or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same sex.”

The bill furthers the LGBT agenda in one more way; it codifies LGBT lifestyles as normal and scientific:

“Contemporary science recognizes that being lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender is part of the natural spectrum of human identity and is not a disease, disorder, or illness.”

With this language added to the bill, freedom of speech and freedom of religion concerning LGBT issues will be essentially eliminated . . . by law!

I once wrote an article about how the LGBT culture war was one more reason for parents to take their kids out of public schools, but now that won’t be enough. This war has grown into a full-fledged assault on religion and traditional moral values.

We can no longer accept the “live and let live” ideology of the left under the mistaken belief that equality is their only goal. It’s time to fight for the souls of our children and the future of America while we still can.


Originally posted on The Strident Conservative.

 

David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook. Subscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.