Gene Karl wrote:
> The Original Spark of the American Revolution
>
> Instead of taxes being used to pay interest to the international bankers,
interest should be used to pay all the taxes.
>
> Benjamin Franklin knew this when he printed colonial scrip for the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
>
> That's what a real American Commonwealth was. We had four of them.
Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Virginia and Kentucky. They had taxes back then,
but the Commonwealths were on their way to eliminating all of them. The colonial
scrip was good sound currency because the scrip was actually backed up by
property. When the English Parliament outlawed the colonial scrip, the American
reaction was the spark that lit the fuse to the American insurrection of 1776.
>
> But it wasn't so much that the crown wasn't getting their money, it was the
fact that the international bankers weren't getting theirs. That's why the
bankers sent the Hessian soldiers over here to help the British crown crush the
insurrection.
>
> Then the founding scoundrels, the Masonic Lodge members and other
international banker's men destroyed the Commonwealths when they wrote the U.S.
CONstitution. It prohibited the states from emitting bills of credit. It has
been debt and taxation ever since.
>
> It's now 2009.
> Enter Eric WhoRU, who has a plan to eliminate all taxation. It's called a 28th
Amendment to the U.S.CON. It's time to bring control of the money system back to
the people. A money system that will eliminate all taxation with changes to the
mortgage system so that mortgage payments are not front end interest loaded. A
mortgage system that is simple interest, not compound interest. A way to enable
the average homeowner to pay off their house in 8 to 10 years.
>
> It's time for NoTaxesNow.org.
>
>
>

Hello Gene,

interesting site. If I'm not mistaken the suggested program is that of
the Social Credit ovement, which shortly explaind for those who are
unfamiliar with it, to finance the state's activities by means of the
central bank's seignorage (the profit that comes from minting currency,
that is the difference in face value of fx. a coin, and its resourse
cost, which for fiat currency today is very high), and use the
siegnorage income to abolish taxes.

Its an interesting idea, and the prospect of abolishing taxes is a dream
of many libertarians to be sure. The page also contains many things I
consider to be true, fx that taxes are basically armed robbery.

Where the proposed program fails is in the idea that taxation via
inflation (which is what increased payoff from seignorage is) isn't
theft because it doesnt happen directly, the way taxes do. WHat
inflation does is reduction of the purchasing power of the coins in your
pocket, because more money enters circulation, and the market adjusts
due to an inflow of minted money. (This is due to the market's tendency
to seek out equilibrium - to use a slightly flawed analogy, if there are
100 loaves of bread being produced in a town everyday, and one of the
townsfolk's wealthy uncle (who lives out of town) dies, more money will
be in circulation in the town, and the person to inheret start spending
more money on bread than usually; following this, the bakers will raise
their prices, because they can - the newly rich person can afford it
(assuming he wishes to spent his money primaily on bread, but let's not
stretch the tale :). But the fact that loaves cost more after this event
doesnt necessarily mean that there are more of them being produced
(again, stretching it, as higher demand and prices tends to increase
supply), and that more money is spent on bread then usually or that the
town is richer, but i digress).

Sure, it isn't robbery, but it still happens to funnel the exchange
value of currency out of the pockets of people by indirect means; so
it's not robbery, but more like theft. Compare to items removed from teh
household of a man who's sound asleep and besides won't the things are
missing before it has been gooing on for a while.

Enacting SC would initially seem agreeable, but I'm concerned that by
removing the more visible aspect of state plunder from people's vision,
would incite the government to worse excesses and corruption, because
people would see less of it's nasty effects on their lives, and thus
slower to react to the misuse, if a reaction would come at all.

The Social Credit scheme does indeed remove the more visible sting of
the state's procuring of funds, but it doesnt remove the state and it's
ilk, it does not remove the harm done from the "empowering" aspects of
state activities (redistribution: welfare, be it corporate or private),
and it doesnt address that the chief cause of inequality, insolidarity
and societal decay isn't taxes as much as it is privilege, and
specifically privilege in landholding, that is; that some get the
natural resources essentially for free, and the rest get to subsist on
working for those who got to the table first.

Georgism seeks to address this problem; Social Credit seems, which
certainly very agreeable, to cure symptons, and not causes of the ills,
and as such shouldn't be the area where effort should be focused. (Also
because the reliance of a central banking insitution also entails to
maintain the existing centralization of power and privilege, which is
contrary to the intent of this list, which is autonomy and de-centralism).

--
regards, Peter Bjørn Perlsø
+45 2685 5909
http://titancity.com