There is that old and reliable indicator of when a politician is lying: his mouth is open. There is, however, an exception to this rule: when he’s talking about raising taxes. Then you can trust his announcements.
For this reason, it is no surprise that the word “tariff” derives from an old Arabic root meaning “announcement.” It was assumed that any government “announcement” was going to cost you something. Eventually, the word referred to officially-published lists of customs duties throughout the shipping world. A tariff traditionally, then, is a tax on imports or exports. In the U.S., tariffs can only be levied constitutionally on imports.
Tax” is more general. It comes from the Latin word taxare which means “to handle,” in the sense of “examine personally for the purpose of assessment”—a euphemism for “invade one’s privacy.” Taxare is likely a form of the Latin tangere which means “to touch,” as in “touch what ain’t yours.” Thus, the taxman first invades one’s privacy, then takes their property. The taxman’s “touch” should be considered equivalent to a TSA “enhanced patdown.” The latter has his hand squarely in your crotch, the other in your pocket. One takes your dignity, the other your substance. It’s government as usual.
The “hand in your pocket” image should be the official logo of the IRS and the SSA, although, granted, the eagle they both use now is even better: the eagle first spies its prey, then grasps it, then flies off with it, and then consumes it.
As I said in the last installment, taxation in this land used to be extremely low—low by standards of the time, microscopic compared to today. Yet, while taxes were very minimal, there never was a time when we actually were “free” in regard to taxation. So, this section is not quite exactly “How freedom was lost.” Nevertheless, it is close enough—as they say—for government work (what’s good for the goose . . .).
Before we begin in earnest, let me say that the history of taxation in this country (in virtually any country) is almost inseparable from that country’s history of war. The taxes and tariffs that helped spark the American Revolution, for example, were George III’s attempt to pay off his war debts from the prior debacle of the French and Indian War. And since we’re talking about sovereign debt, the story is also inseparable from central banking. We will have separate topics for both finance and war later in this project. For now, know that the whole picture of taxation—though gruesome in itself—is without context unless we factor in both wars and central banking.
It is obviously no revelation that our historically-low levels of taxation—“not quite freedom”—were lost, but it will surprise many readers just how quickly and systematically they were lost. For example, as I said before, the revolutionary sentiments were raised in response to the Townshend Acts of 1767. These were a second attempt, after the failed Stamp Act, to raise revenues in the American colonies. The duties imposed were resisted and ultimately repealed on everything except tea, leading to the Tea Act of 1773 and then the Boston Tea Party. So, for the principle of self-government, no doubt, but for the specific case of an 8.33% import tax on tea, American colonists were willing to fight and die if necessary. The irony here is that the Tea Act lifted Tariffs paid by the British East India Company. These were far higher than what the colonists paid, and thus the Tea Act actually dropped the price of tea significantly for the colonies overall. But they still hated the tax. “No taxation without representation!” “Liberty or death!”
So how was this level of freedom lost?
The Continental Congress struggled trying to get the States to raise revenues to pay off the debts of their War for Independence—again, war debts. After several failed attempts, the delegates were convened in Philadelphia, and the deed we have referred to so much already was done—the Constitution was written. I have already discussed under Localism how the opponents of that move created a public outcry over the centralization of powers—and one of the most crucial of those decried powers was taxation. Recalling those previously rehearsed comments and warnings, my short answer to the question of how freedom in taxation was lost is simple: the Constitution.
Let’s just do a quick comparison. Americans, I have just said, were willing to shed their blood to fight off Britain over a very moderate tax on one item. Even the Townshend Acts had only placed duties on imported paper, paint, lead, glass—just a few items. In other words, George III tried to impose very limited taxes to pay off war debts—and Americans revolted.
After the Constitution, however, Congress (led by Hamilton’s designs) immediately raised tariffs on their countrymen—again in order to pay off war debts—but this would be beyond anything the people could have imagined under Britain. Here’s the list of items taxed from five to ten percent (more in some cases) under the first Hamilton Tariff of 1789 (Hint: you don’t really need to read the whole list; just scroll down, skim it, and keep reading the meat of this article). There were duties
On all distilled spirits of Jamaica proof, imported from any kingdom or country whatsoever, per gallon, ten cents.
On all other distilled spirits, per gallon, eight cents.
On molasses, per gallon, two and a half cents.
On Madeira wine, per gallon, eighteen cents.
On all other wines, per gallon, ten cents.
On every gallon of beer, ale or porter in casks, five cents.
On all cider, beer, ale or porter in bottles, per dozen, twenty cents.
On malt, per bushel, ten cents.
On brown sugars, per pound, one cent.
On loaf sugars, per pound, three cents.
On all other sugars, per pound, one and a half cents.
On coffee, per pound, two and a half cents.
On cocoa, per pound, one cent.
On all candles of tallow, per pound, two cents.
On all candles of wax or spermaceti, per pound, six cents.
On cheese, per pound, four cents.
On soap, per pound, two cents.
On boots, per pair, fifty cents.
On all shoes, slippers or goloshoes made of leather, per pair, seven cents.
On all shoes or slippers made of silk or stuff; per pair, ten cents.
On cables, for every one hundred and twelve pounds, seventy-five cents.
On tarred cordage, for every one hundred and twelve pounds, seventy-five cents.
On untarred ditto, and yarn, for every one hundred and twelve pounds, ninety cents.
On twine or packthread, for every one hundred and twelve pounds, two hundred cents.
On all steel unwrought, for every one hundred and twelve pounds, fifty-six cents.
On all nails and spikes, per pound, one cent.
On salt, per bushel, six cents.
On manufactured tobacco, per pound, six cents.
On snuff, per pound, ten cents.
On indigo, per pound, sixteen cents.
On wool and cotton cards, per dozen, fifty cents.
On coal, per bushel, two cents.
On pickled fish, per barrel, seventy-five cents.
On dried fish, per quintal, fifty cents.
On teas imported from India or China. On all teas imported from China or India, in ships built in the United States, and belonging to a citizen or citizens thereof, or in ships or vessels built in foreign countries, and on the sixteenth day of May last wholly the property of a citizen or citizens of the United States, and so continuing until the time of importation, as follows:
On bohea tea, per pound, six cents.
On all souchong, or other black teas, per pound, ten cents.
On all hyson teas, per pound, twenty cents.
On all other green teas, per pound, twelve cents.
On teas imported from Europe. On all teas imported from Europe in ships or vessels built in the United States, and belonging wholly to a citizen or citizens thereof, or in ships or vessels built in foreign countries, and on the sixteenth day of May last wholly the property of a citizen or citizens of the United States, and so continuing until the time of importation, as follows:
On bohea tea, per pound, eight cents.
On all souchong, and other black teas, per pound, thirteen cents.
On all hyson teas, per pound, twenty-six cents.
On all other green teas, per pound, sixteen cents.
On all teas imported, in any other manner than as above mentioned, as follows:—
On bohea tea, per pound, fifteen cents.
On all souchong, or other black teas, per pound, twenty-two cents.
On all hyson teas, per pound, forty-five cents.
On all other green teas, per pound, twenty-seven cents.
On all other goods imported from India or China, 12 1/2 per centum ad valorem. On all goods, wares and merchandises, other than teas, imported from China or India, in ships not built in the United States, and not wholly the property of a citizen or citizens thereof, nor in vessels built in foreign countries, and on the sixteenth day of May last wholly the property of a citizen or citizens of the United States, and so continuing until the time of importation, twelve and a half per centum ad valorem.
On other enumerated articles, 10 per centum ad valorem.
On all looking-glasses, window and other glass (except black quart bottles),
On all China, stone and earthen ware,
On gunpowder,
On all paints ground in oil,
On shoe and knee buckles,
On gold and silver lace, and
On gold and silver leaf,
On other enumerated articles, 7 1/2 per ct. ad valorem.
On all blank books,
On all writing, printing or wrapping paper, paper-hangings and pasteboard,
On all cabinet wares,
On all buttons,
On all saddles,
On all gloves of leather,
On all hats of beaver, fur, wool, or mixture of either,
On all millinery ready made,
On all castings of iron, and upon slit and rolled iron,
On all leather tanned or tawed, and all manufacture of leather, except such as shall be otherwise rated,
On canes, walking sticks and whips,
On clothing ready made,
On all brushes,
On gold, silver, and plated ware, and on jewelry and paste work,
On anchors, and on all wrought, tin, and pewter ware,
On playing cards, per pack, ten cents.
On every coach, chariot or other four wheel carriage, and on every chaise, solo, or other two wheel carriage, or parts thereof
On all other goods, except certain articles, 5 per cent. on the value at the time and place of importation.
On all other goods, wares and merchandise, five per centum on the value thereof at the time and place of importation. . . . [there is more!]
Now that’s quite an oppressive list. George III’s tyranny was mild in comparison to Congress’ and Hamilton’s. But this was just a beginning. Within a year, they increased the rates in some cases by a factor of two or even three. Then they did it again in 1792.
Tariffs ultimately became a sectional war between northern manufacturing and southern agriculture—and the political battle led to the Civil War.
At the same time they began levying excise taxes—taxes on specific domestic items. The first of these came with the “Whisky Act” of 1791—a tax on all domestically distilled spirits. This led to rural producers revolting in the so-called Whisky Rebellion—a tax revolt not much different than the Tea Party and other tax revolts against Britain before the revolution. But this time, instead of having their Continental government behind them, and the option of calling militias from other States to choose whether or not to fight and on what side, the rebels watched their government conscript an army of 13,000 men to be used against them. Washington and Hamilton—reliving old glory-days on the battle field—personally led the charge on horseback.
So the American government almost immediately became a tyranny measurably many times worse than Britain herself would have ever considered. Taxation with representation did not look as great up close as it had at a distance.
Then, things got really bad. How was the freedom lost, you ask?
It was lost with thsoe Hamilton Tariffs of 1789, 1790, and 1792.
It was lost with the Whisky Tax of 1791.
It was lost with the excise taxes raised to offset the loss in tariff revenue during the War of 1812.
It was lost with the Tariffs of 1816 (raised to pay off the debts of the War of 1812).
It was lost with the protectionist Tariff of 1824, and its sister Act—the “Abomination”—in 1828 which raised the rates.
It was lost with the Morrill Tariff in 1861. This established the highest rates in U.S. history, and set a precedent that reigned until Woodrow Wilson.
It was lost with the first income tax in 1861, and again in 1862. The Confederacy did the same thing in 1863. Income tax was a bipartisan (North and South) abuse. This lasted for ten years. After a landmark Supreme Court case in 1895, blanket income taxes were considered unconstitutional. Congress sulked. Wait! No problem! Just pass an Amendment to the Constitution!
It was lost then again in 1913 with the Sixteenth amendment and the Revenue Act of 1913. This measure was championed by progressives of both the Democrat and Republican stripe. Since that time, the income tax brackets have been monkeyed with a few dozen times: the lowest tax bracket has not dipped below 10% since 1933. The highest has reached as high as 92%, though is currently at 35% due to the “Bush tax cuts.”
It was lost during and immediately after the Civil War in a series of excise taxes on, again, liquor. This led to the whole legacy of ridge-runners, moonshiners, and their enemies, the revenuers. This led also to the creation of two agencies involved, respectively, with alcohol and the taxation of it—the ATF and the IRS.
It was lost as federal excise taxes today persist on alcohol, tobacco, firearms, tanning, fuel sources, gas mileage, coal, phone line usage, trucking, vaccines, water transportation, fishing gear, harbor maintenance, airline tickets, jet fuel, and tires.
It was lost when FDR invented “Social Security.”
It was lost as Social Security taxes have been raised 20 times since 1933 to keep propping up the failed socialistic system (beginning at 1%, and reaching to 6.2% today)
It was lost when LBJ piggy-backed Medicare onto Social Security, in 1965. The result meant another payroll tax on top of Social Security.
It was lost as Medicare taxes have been raised eight times since 1965—beginning at the promised 0.35%, and ending at 1.45% today, an increase of 414%.
And this is considering only federal taxes. Local and especially State governments impose their own versions of these same taxes on top of the Feds. I have seen “total tax burden” per nation considered as a “percentage of GDP”; the U.S. comes in high among western nations with just under a 30% total tax burden. But this is misleading in only regarding income taxes. This does not consider Social Security and Medicare, as well as State, Federal, and Local taxes of every stripe. Including these would send the American percentage much, much higher (to say nothing of the total in other countries).
How was the freedom lost? It was lost for many reasons throughout many phases. We trusted the Federal government. We trust all levels of government to treat us well. They have instead financially raped us. From 1789 until today, we have watched as Washington has gradually taken our money and spent it on frivolities and money pits. Meanwhile, great ideas have come and gone, garnering barely an acknowledgement from the masters above.
Need we say more? We had something close to freedom in taxation. It was lost. And, it was lost decisively in the areas of income, and public choice in schooling, hospitals, etc. There is no doubt taxes are not only too high, but out of control.
We have seen how freedom in regard to taxation was lost. The question is, of course, how to get it back. We will talk about that in the next discussion.
Joel McDurmon, M.Div., Reformed Episcopal Theological Seminary, is the Director of Research for American Vision. He has authored four books and also serves as a lecturer and regular contributor to the American Vision website. He joined American Vision's staff in the June of 2008. Joel and his wife and four sons live in Dallas, Georgia.
Eriudite comments all…May I pose a few thoughts to be considered by the sages here in attendance.
Individuals barter labor or skill for something of value, either federal reserve notes or chickens. Thus levying a tax on a man’s sweat is feudalistic servitude.
A progressive, indirect, unapportioned tax is immoral.
The IRS formerly the BIR is a private trust domiciled in Puerto Rico. It confiscates money and other forms of property, NOT to fund legitimate government, but to pay interest on the trillions of immaginary dollars UNITED STATES OF AMERICA INC. borrows from the IMF via it’s U.S. franchise the FED a privately-owned banking cartel.
The 16th ammendment confirs no new taxing authority on congress. Thus only apportioned/indirect taxes are constitutional.
We are enjoined to render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, NOT what Caesar merely CLAIMS belong to him.
There is and will ever be one to solution for taxation and maintaining freedom . That would be a national sales tax on everything except food and medicine and medical treatment . This tax would have to large enough so that it would replace ALL other taxes , even property and all community taxes . The internal revenue service would have NO enforcement powers over the people and would only collect and distribute taxes from those businesses as they do for sales now . This tax collector /distributer would then have to be audited every year to be sure there aws no unauthorized distribution . Please don’t expect anything like this to happen , the feds would lose too much power over us .
Here is the problem with a Sales tax: How are you going to deal with the Black market that will most surely come from it? If say we had the 18% national sales tax(what we are realistically looking at today) and got rid of the IRS, that much tax would assure criminal activity(a black market) for virtually every good it applied to.
The Department that would then be formed to police this, likely would make the IRS look tame in comparison.
The title was “Taxes: how freedom was lost”
Yet the State Governments of the Articles of Confederation had Tarriff Wars(Trade Wars) with each other before the Constitution. It caused economic chaos…but Tarriffs started then. So if “Freedom was Lost”, it wasn’t by Hamilton but instead by the State Governments.
This was one of the disasters that lead to the Constitution, I imagine in a system in which Counties were doing this you could literally end up with 1000′s of counties around the country adopting their own Tarrifs opposed against the other 1000′s of counties, instead of the 13 states doing this and the disaster that was.
Hamilton is known as being the greatest Treasury Sec. in part for stopping these internal Wars(State vs. State Tariff wars), and coming up with a uniform standard for the country. Along with the fact that many wanted the country and States to simply Repudiate their debts. Hamilton knew how bad and immoral that would be and assumed the debts of the States, later paying these debts off with interest and securing the Credit Worthiness of the United States.
There is also another side to Tariffs that should never be forgotten, like what happened between the States(Trade Wars), with one state levying Tariff against other states imports, than that State responds and so on…
Same thing happened to us, as a Nation with the British Tariff Act of 1787 as one example. They took their huge market away from Americans to encourage imports from their remaining colonies. In a lot of ways our Tariffs were in response to that, to hurt Britain back and level the playing field as the thinking goes.
Along with it being the main source of Revenue and the most politically Feasible way to do it at the time. With Hamilton refusing to Repudiate our debts, one of the wisest moves in world history.
Way off on the 16th Amendment and Social Security:
“Indeed, from another point of view, the Amendment demonstrates that no such purpose was intended, and on the contrary shows that it was drawn with the object of maintaining the limitations of the Constitution and harmonizing their operation. We say this because it is to be observed that although from the date of the Hylton Case, because of statements made in the opinions in that case, it had come to be accepted that direct taxes in the constitutional sense were confined to taxes levied directly on real estate because of its ownership, the Amendment contains nothing repudiation or challenging the ruling in the Pollock Case that the word ‘direct’ had a broader significance, since it embraced also taxes levied directly on personal property because of its ownership, and therefore the Amendment at least impliedly makes such wider significance a part of the Constitution, -a condition which clearly demonstrates that the purpose was not to change the existing interpretation except to the extent necessary to accomplish the result intended; that is, the prevention of the resort to the sources from which taxed income was derived in order to cause a direct tax on the income to be a direct tax on the source itself, and thereby to take an income tax out of the class of excises, duties, and imposts, and place it in the class of direct taxes.” – (Emphasis added) page 19 – Brushaber v. Union Pacific R. Co., 240 U.S. 1 (1916).
Redfield v. Fisher, 292 P. 813, 135 Or. 180, 294 P. 461, 73 A.L.R. 721 (1931)
In this case, the following is clearly stated:
“The individual, unlike the corporation, cannot be taxed for the mere privilege of existing. The corporation is an artificial entity which owes its existence and charter powers to the state; but the individuals’ rights to live and own property are natural rights for the enjoyment of which an excise cannot be imposed.”
Railroad Retirement Board v. Alton Railroad Co, 295 U.S. 330, 55 S. Ct. 758 1935)
In this case, the Supreme Court limited the federal power to enact mandatory acts:
“The catalogue of means and actions which might be imposed upon an employer in any business, tending to the satisfaction and comfort of his employees, seems endless. Provision for free medical assistance, nursing, clothing, food, housing, and education of children, and a hundred other matters might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. Can it fairly be said that the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce extends to the prescription of any or all of these things? It is not apparent that they are really and essentially related solely to the social welfare of the worker and therefore remote from any regulation of commerce as such? We think the answer is plain. These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power”. – Railroad Retirement Board v. Alton Railroad Co, 295 U.S. 330, 55 S. Ct. 758 1935).
Treasury Financial Manual
Their Treasury Financial Manual available at http://www.fms.treas.gov/tfm/index.html clearly states whom levy can be made on per the following:
Section 4080-Levy for Unpaid Tax Liability
The IRS collects delinquent Federal taxes by levy on the accrued salary or wages of any officer, employee, or elected official of the United States or the District of Columbia. Since the levy is served against the take-home pay of the employee, agencies should not permit employees to increase any voluntary allotment after notice of levy has been received until the tax liability is liquidated or other arrangements satisfactory to the IRS are made.
In the above, one must use the definitions within the taxing statutes. Note that it is in agreement with IRC section 6331(a). Now, in TFM 4080.10 and 4080.20 connect the bolded and underlined portions:
4080.10-Service of Levy
An IRS agent serves notice of levy on wages, salary, and other income of individuals. See TFM subsection 4080.20. The agent serves the notice in person or by mail. Service by mail is limited to the United States, its territories and possessions, and ships at sea. The notice includes the original and four copies. All copies must be signed and dated, and the time of receipt entered on the forms. The employer agency returns the original to the IRS agent and keeps one copy. IRS or the employer agency forwards one copy to the employee.
The person designated under TFM subsection 4080.20 honors all applicable notices of levy, whether served in person or received by mail. The General Accounting Office makes no disallowance nor does it raise charges against any disbursing officer or designated person for complying with notices of levy.
Above, notice who the levy is served to. It references it as being a person designated under TFM subsection 4080.20, which is as follows:
4080.20-Designation of Individuals to Receive Service of Notice of Levy
Each Government agency should designate one or more persons on whom notice of levy for delinquent taxes of the agency’s employees may be served. These designees receive written statements from such employees regarding exemptions for dependents as provided for in the IRC.
Therefore, the fact that it is individuals of “government agencies” who are designated to receive the Notices, it is evident that what is stated in IRC section 6331(a) is valid.
Enough for this agency that is suffering from Alzheimer’s, let’s move to the next henchman.
I am one of your dispensationalist nemeses, but I am desperately hoping to see your credibility established in topics like this concerning America. I hope when you bring in your next version that you again hammer us with God’s threshold of slavery dealing with 1 Samuel 8:15-17. Rather than have the churches hammer us with Levitical type tithes, that were NOT all given to the storehouse, the churches of today do NOT get storehouse tithing, but offerings. We can use the tenth that demonstrates our servility to Christ, or that we are servants of God in any ministry we privately or ecclesiastically participate in. If the church is the ONLY medium of service to God, then the church should appropriately receive all of the ten percent. But churches harping on the Levitical methods or manner of tithing shoot their own foot when it is discovered that much of the tithe was consumed by the parties giving them at the multitude of the feasts the Israelites were obligated to attend to. There IS no second or third tithe, but every one of these “specialty” mentioning of tithes in the Hebrew scriptures applies to the standard tithe applied at different years to different projects, and even not all the tithes were to be stored in the Jerusalem storehouse but distributed as alms to the poor on occasions and to the local Levites found among the regions about Israel. In other words, even in the Levitical economy, the tithe was the individual’s stash to do whatever ministry to God he can…and yet, the tithe was not the maximum but a minimum that they dedicated to God, for there were offerings, first fruits, and special dedications, etc.
For the Christian, while the tithe is still the minimum to be set aside for the Lord’s work, he is NOT to tithe to government because to do so would mean that we are the servants of the government (and why I desired you to continue hammering us with 1 Samuel 8:15-17). To see what I mean, we must go to 1 Corinthians 7:
1 Corinthians 7:20-24(KJV)
20Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called.
21Art thou called being a servant? care not for it: but if thou mayest be made free, use it rather.
22For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord’s freeman: likewise also he that is called, being free, is Christ’s servant.
23Ye are bought with a price; be not ye the servants of men.
24Brethren, let every man, wherein he is called, therein abide with God.
Were we to be born into slavery, we have been instructed how to become the BEST slaves, even as Joseph, when enslaved, demonstrated to the glory of God. But what if we were NOT slaves, then it is our obligation within our power to NEVER be reduced to slavery. Check out the intro verse into the thought above and the exiting verse. Both of these say the same thing of abiding in God in whatever state we are found, whether slavery or freedom. And if we are made free to USE IT…to function with Liberty or the freedom to do that which is right, and for the Christian to know that which is right, that which is right in the sight of God. By God having the authorities placed in our lives a ministry of His where the politician is a servant of God, than we as free men can enter into politics in order to be servants of men, but actually servants of God…outside of that, then in order for us to function as non-governmental entities, we must BE FREE, and that means we give what is owing to government and rendering unto Caesar (were we ever to be ruled by Caesar) ONLY that up to 9.99 percent of what can be called our increase.
I see that the writer of the article talks not of only the abusive tax of the Federal government but the added expenses of State and Local taxing entities. My solution to that is have these three taxing entities, Federal, State, and Local duke it out among themselves THEIR SHARE of that up to 9.99 percent they can extract from us and we continue to be free men.
One way for the Christians to band together is to have them understand that government is only to protect the innocent LIVES, LIBERTIES (remember, only the freedom to do right), and the possessions of the people for their good. Public Education which has Christian principles driven out of it is but a failed experiment of the founders and their immediate successors, and this and governments intrusion into charity (which as unconditional love governments can never accomplish because of their demand for mandates, strings, conditions and overt and covert demands for political remuneration) is government usurpation of the responsibilities of the people, and thus government is entangled in RELIGION. The Bible has this to say about WHO is to do charity, and what the responsibility of governments to be…of those that interface with the people.
Luke 3:10-14(KJV)
10And the people asked him, saying, What shall we do then?
11He answereth and saith unto them, He that hath two coats, let him impart to him that hath none; and he that hath meat, let him do likewise [ONLY THE PEOPLE TO DO CHARITY].
12Then came also publicans to be baptized, and said unto him, Master, what shall we do?
13And he said unto them, Exact no more than that which is appointed you [NOT DEMAND BEYOND 9.99% OF THE INCREASE OF THE PEOPLE].
14And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages [HEAVENS TO WISCONSIN PUBLIC WORKERS UNITIONS].
Wow, talk about today’s headlines and scriptures.
I forgot to give you the significance of the doubling of the idea found in 1 Corinthians 7:20 & 224. I mention Joseph and he gives the core or root understanding of the Torah law of two or three witnesses that establishes a matter:
Genesis 41:25-32(KJV)
25And Joseph said unto Pharaoh, The dream of Pharaoh is ONE: God hath showed Pharaoh what he is about to do.
……………………………
32And for that the dream was DOUBLED unto Pharaoh TWICE; it is because the thing is ESTABLISHED by God, and God will shortly bring it to pass.
The doubling of the ideas in the Corinthian verses by Paul is his device to show the importance of what he encloses between the two verses. In other words, THE CHRISTIAN MUST BE FREE.
Government is NOT to be a terror to good works, but to the evil (Romans 13:3) and we are to pay that which is OWING (Romans 13:7-8)
Romans 13:7-8(KJV)
7RENDER therefore to all their dues [OWINGS]: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
8Owe [a form of the same word found in verse 7] no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
Now we know that whatever is considered Caesar, we are to render unto him that which we can rightly owe to him, no more than 9.99 percent, and since we have three aspiring Caesars, the Federal, State, and local taxing authorities, they must share in that 9.99%. This does not even mean that 9.99% be the tax rate for the combined taxes but the upper limit. See how much Liberty when the people take on more of their responsibilities to do their own charity and to educate their own schools, leaving the rest of the money for governments to arm their magistrates to the effective ability to protect US accomplishing our duties as FREE MEN (people – in case a feminist is listening in).
OH! Concerning Joseph, if ten percent to God is slavery, then 20% is abject slavery of those without their own property and placed on land that was once theirs and given an allowance of grain by the government to grow for the general welfare some Pharaoh has enslaved (to be fair, these folk in Genesis 47 sold THEMSELVES into slavery – and this is what God forbids us to do in 1 Corinthians 7:20-24).
Genesis 47:18-26(KJV)
18When that year was ended, they came unto him the second year, and said unto him, We will not hide it from my lord, how that our money is spent; my lord also hath our herds of cattle; there is not ought left in the sight of my lord, but our bodies, and our lands:
19Wherefore shall we die before thine eyes, both we and our land? buy us and our land for bread, and we and our land will be servants unto Pharaoh: and give us seed, that we may live, and not die, that the land be not desolate.
20And Joseph bought all the land of Egypt for Pharaoh; for the Egyptians sold every man his field, because the famine prevailed over them: so the land became Pharaoh’s.
21And as for the people, he removed them to cities from one end of the borders of Egypt even to the other end thereof.
22Only the land of the priests bought he not; for the priests had a portion assigned them of Pharaoh, and did eat their portion which Pharaoh gave them: wherefore they sold not their lands.
23Then Joseph said unto the people, Behold, I have bought you this day and your land for Pharaoh: lo, here is seed for you, and ye shall sow the land.
24And it shall come to pass in the increase, that ye shall give the fifth part unto Pharaoh, and four parts shall be your own, for seed of the field, and for your food, and for them of your households, and for food for your little ones.
25And they said, Thou hast saved our lives: let us find grace in the sight of my lord, and we will be Pharaoh’s servants.
26And Joseph made it a law over the land of Egypt unto this day, that Pharaoh should have the fifth part; except the land of the priests only, which became not Pharaoh’s.
I guess that it is not just a phenomenon in American taxation for a tax to go on forever, once established, if reading verse 26 has any predictive value.
OH! thanks for the forum Brother McDurmon. LOL, I am glad that my name HALE was taken from an English HALE, even though I am Irish and Cherokee and my Cherokee great-grandfather who was an Acres or Akers was adopted by this kind gentlemen. While I could live with a scottish McHALE, I would terribly not wish to have had him as an IRISHMAN, having a name of O’HALE. I am already having folk use my name in vain, and have to resort to conjuring up my mother’s memory in that her name was MARY, but it was my son Nathan who was born on December 25th.
LOL!!!
“The Constitutional Republic’s tax system can be compared to golfing: You drive hard to get to the green, only to wind up in the hole. Amendment 16’s graduated income tax [not to mention all of the other taxes, as mentioned by Joel] is a cunning way by which a person’s profits and at least a portion of his children’s inheritance is confiscated. Under Yahweh’s economic system, every man twenty years and older pays the exact same percentage on his increase and the exact same amount for the head tax. That is equity!…
“A flat increase tax and fixed poll tax are due to the God Yahweh. A graduated income tax is due to the god WE THE PEOPLE. Choose carefully your god and the laws by which you wish to live.”
Excerpted from “Amendment 16: Graduated Income Tax vs. Flat Increase Tax” at http://www.missiontoisrael.org/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt25.php.
Hi Joel,
Great article, and very eye-opening.
I was wondering what your thoughts are on the “hidden” tax of inflation (by increasing money supply as with the Fed, thus reducing purchasing power). Many believe that this is the most notorious taxation scheme of all, since it goes relatively unnoticed over a long period of time. I just noticed you have factored in all of the known, un-”hidden” taxes, and I am curious with inflation taken into account how much we are really being raked over the coals. Would love your thoughts on this.
I will deal with inflation under the topic of money. Yes it is indeed a hidden tax, and it is noxious.
Your history is off again, the Tariffs started during the Articles of Confederation under State Govts, see George Clinton of NY, in which States imposed Tariffs against other States as well as other Countries into their state(See NY under Clinton during Articles of Confederation)….which was detrimental and lead Hamilton to many of his views in reaction.
Again, from Ron Chernow’s “Hamilton”
http://books.google.com/books?id=4z5eL5SGjEoC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Ron+Chernow+hamilton&hl=en&src=bmrr&ei=GRqGTrKEPY2atweh3rw1&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Tariff&f=false
some “Freedom” by your own definition.
Not including something is the same as being “off.” Argument from silence. By that fallacious standard, every work of history is “off” to some degree. I will gladly chastice the State governments pre-Constitution for the same type of infractions which Hamilton made worse by nationalizing.
Joel,
I appreciate your work and research. I’ve read and studied this stuff for the past forty years and am always edified by your insights into areas that have needed to be dealt with. Don’t slow down.
By the way, do you reckon Preparation H comes in 55 gallon drums?
Are you in favor of Repudiating debts instead of paying them off instead?
Or are you coming from Gary North land advocating the Revolution was wrong and we would’ve been better off under the thumb of the British. Today still being part of the British Empire….unless Napoleon who nearly had an army on our Door Step if not of the La. Purchase, had taken us…..or some other beast that came along?
I’m loving it, Joel.
As someone with great interest in history – especially the history of diet – I actually found the list of taxable items very interesting.