Follow me on Twitter: @FromKulak The Income Tax is Chattel Slavery. Name one aspect of A 1984 society or chattel slavery that is not in principle part of the income tax. You are observed in every transaction, and your children are born into the same bondage.
This seems like a misunderstanding of what chattel slavery and the income tax are. Chattel slavery refers specifically perpetual inherited bondage that allows people to be treated like commodities. Let’s look at the differences:
The United States government is not allowed to buy or sell people.
Tax payers are able to exit this system by renouncing your citizenship, which is definitely pricy but this is not a thing under chattel slavery. The Roman form of slavery allowed buying your freedom, same thing with indentured servitude. These are easier claims to defend but are still wrong however.
Tax payers are not compelled to work, shares of their labor income are taken by the government. This is more similar to either theft or indentured servitude depending on how you want to describe it.
This is probably your worst piece in that it just comes off as incredibly preachy without making arguments for why the object level is true. You make appeals on the meta level but I didn’t notice anything getting into why income tax is a subset of chattel slavery.
The US government taxing citizens who are outside of the country is probably the most ethically dubious part of income tax. It is pretty easy to conceptualize taxes as basically a rent associated with existing on someone’s property(and all land is government property under english common law, people just own perpetual leases to it). This seems to line up with the monopolization of the powers of nobility by governments. You could probably achieve a better outcome by directly charging a land rent(lvt) however.
If one begins with the idea that each of us owns their own time, then full slavery is the ownership of another person's time. The government claims you wouldn't spend your money, your payment for spending your time productively, wisely so we are taking 50%.
You are forgetting the chattel part and the labor compelled with violence part. If fractions of your income being taken were fractions of chattel slavery, then negative marginal tax rates through things like the EITC would be negative slavery which is an interesting claim to make in a libertarian space about welfare.
Are you forgetting that the money redistributed came from someone who spent their time productively and is given to an unproductive person? The redistributive government is a can of worms that that destroys individual self-worth and allowing governments to restrict free exchange of idea and products between individuals where our slavery starts. Each living entity must use the earth for survival and having to ask permission to use the earth is the first step in violating the right to life. opportunity for success needs to be open to all.
I've written extensively on my takes on property right s here, https://gseine.com/essays/ if you're interested.
Out of time right now, but I'll check out Pearsonomics later.
I have not written anything for it so there’s no need to check out my substack. I am not forgetting that welfare comes at the expense of other people through taxes, I think it is weird to define fractional slavery through your tax rate which leads to edge cases with negative tax rates. Again, you are not being compelled to provide labor and thus taxation is not slavery. The typical libertarian critique that taxation is theft holds a lot more truth.
Consider this: The political class, a group of people which don't create anything, is taking your money from you and giving it to other people that don't work, or lately, they are giving it to Ukraine.
Also consider this: The Federal Reserve Bank is not a governmental organization, yet they control the money from creation to destruction, they control the interest rate, and they help the government with taxation.
Sure, I’m not against the idea that taxation is theft. I am saying it’s not chattel slavery. Words have standard meanings and using them in new ways for arguments is just a way to mislead people with their old associations. Though even when calling it theft, there are a set of negative effects associated with theft that either don’t exist or exist to a much lesser extent.
What's your point? Do you think all of government a waste? If not, how should it be maintained? By charity? If by taxes, what makes income tax special? One of your more preachy pieces.
Correct, but only if the underlying principle is to ensure that the initiation of physical force is limited to restraining those who will not or can not understand individual rights of others. A government with unlimited power will mandate everything , as is happening today.
Government is completely antithetical to universal / spiritual law. It is immoral. No individual has the right to rule over another individual. Thus, no individual can transfer a right they do not themselves possess to another individual or group to rule over others. Minority and majority rule are predicated by coercion and violation of rights..as is taxation.Taxation is both unlawful and immoral (theft).
"You've probably lived in a democracy all your life, "
Not sure where you've been, but the UNITED STATES is a Corporation, masking itself as a Constitutional Republic.
The UNITED STATES is a CORPORATION -
Subsections 15 and 15 (A) of Title 28 US Code §3002 - "the United States means -- (A) a Federal Corporation". It is a FOREIGN CORPORATION. Anyone who works for this foreign corporation is a foreign agent and is knowingly or unknowingly committing fraud against the American people.
To be more specific, that means ALL politicians working in Washington DC and every judge, attorney, police officer, and government agents working throughout the USA are FOREIGN AGENTS. Because they are foreign agents, DO NOT VOTE FOR ANY OF THESE PEOPLE - including the President. Because if you do, you are committing TREASON against the Republic of The United States of America (the 50 Union States).... <--- a REPUBLIC is NOT a democracy 😁
Until people are truly awake to how deep this corruption and evil is, you are still willingly allowing yourself to be enslaved in a completely broken system, income taxes or not..... but it is definitely relevant to income taxes.
Some picky points: 1) income tax, when ORIGINALLY enacted, only taxed MILLIONAIRES. Some experts also aver that "income" was never intended to be defined as wages from actual work. But somehow, over the decades, it has gotten shifted onto the shoulders of working stiffs so that millionaires are now about the only ppl who manage to get OUT of paying income tax. 2) It has also been observed that income tax is the ONLY tax we have that even TRIES to be progressive (or used to, back when only millionaires had to pay it--unless perhaps inheritance tax is still a thing). After all, it takes a certain amount of $$$$ just to live, whether you're rich or poor; but over & above basic subsistence, it's all fun-and-games. Back in the early '60's, when the top income tax rate was around 92%, the rich still managed--somehow--to be RICH! Call me callous, but my heart has a hard time bleeding for billionaires. How is INCOME tax theft, but not sales tax, which even the homeless have to pay if they buy anything to which sales tax is affixed? What about property tax, which kicks ppl out of their primary residence if they don't happen to have enough income to pay the taxes? How come capital gains--you know, money from investments which rolls into the bank accounts of the rich whether or not they bother to roll out of bed in the morning--get taxed at HALF the rate of wages from actual work? IMHO you're ignoring far more serious issues here....
Some random thought I had a few years ago with respect to income tax.
Income Taxes:
Fees extracted for the right to be productive. We don’t fight them because the cost of winning is greater than the reward, a universally accepted aspect but totally unknown, poorly-considered, internal cost benefit analysis. Regrettably, pragmatism defeats principle, hence, in the end, we all pay.
"You've probably lived in a democracy all your life, do these subjects rise to prominence via rational debate? Do the philosophers and accomplished men all get together every quarter and decide on the quarterly priorities and topics of the empire's discussion? Was there some great meeting where it was decided every school-child must now spend countless hours on the subject of race and space-travel and the facts of the requisite engineering will now just be a waning subset of retro-futurism discussed by nerds?
No! It was asserted. It was inflamed. It was bullied into the public discourse and then bullied to the forefront of the discourse, by people willing to be unreasonable, people willing to say the words that will start a fight and keep saying them til that fight was pouring into the streets."
this quote reminds me of "discussion" i read online yesterday. i thought to myself,
it is pointless and will never be resolved until these people meet in one another's presence
to have an honest, respectful discussion. and about moving pictures, YES
it is high time we output our own worthy stories. we do not need the Sound of Freedom,
we need to reCLAIM our individual freedom, our individual and familial prosperity,
for that is the way to encourage each other to prosper and provide great living conditions
I can tell You did not bother to read. Barter is money - anything that accounts for the energy We add into a system is money. That is money's foundational purpose, to ensure We have added Our "fair share" of energy.
Maybe read the article and return with a more knowledgeable response. [smile]
Once you have a lot of influence, you can deliver an idea through repetition and force of will, but until you reach that point you have to use your influence primarily to get more influence.
If libertarianism had as much cultural force as one of the two main party-tribes, they might be able to say something as ridiculous on its face as 'taxation is chattel slavery' and expect to be believed, but they don't have that power.
The income tax is imposed on "taxpayers." A taxpayer is a "person" which is a legal fiction. JOHN H DOE, JOHN DOE, JOHN HENRY DOE, John H Doe, John Doe, etc. are "persons," which is legal or commercial entity. Are you are person? Unless you are Bugs Bunny you are not a person. It's impossible. You cannot be a man or woman and a person. In fact, you can never be a person. By filing you agree to be the responsible party for the tax imposed on the person as trustee of the Cestue Que Trust created by the BC.
The person JOHN H DOE is a creation of government by way of the birth certificate scam. He who creates, owns. He who owns pays. Why would you agree to be responsible for the imaginary debts of an imaginary legal fiction? The United States inc. created the person, let them pay.
This is not a new idea. I was equating taxation to slavery four decades ago. And I was not the first, by far. Every school of libertarian thought which begins with some kind of self-ownership axiom equates taxation with slavery.
This is not a rhetorical kill shot. I've field tested it hundreds of times back in the day. No joy. And I've seen plenty of others use it without success as well.
It is, however, an opening for a machine gun's worth of kill shots by the woke left. Indeed, the pre-woke leftists of my acquaintance would go into woke mode when exposed to "Taxation = Slavery" rhetoric.
Yes, taxation shares many properties with slavery, and the income tax shares more with slavery than certain other forms of taxation.
But the differences between being a modern U.S. taxpayer today and a slave in the U.S. back in the day are brutally nontrivial.
U.S. taxpayers are free to move about the country. Not so for chattel slaves -- or even serfs.
If a U.S. taxpayer opts to be lazy, he pays less tax. The negro servants of yore were subject to corporal punishment for laziness.
And then there was the practice of selling family members separately. That's even more brutal than puzzling through the Earned Income Credit flowcharts.
The descendants of American style slavery have good cause to be offended by anyone equating today's income tax with slavery, and the woke left knows it, and cashes in accordingly.
Sorry to be a Debbie Downer, but this is important. The Great Migration is reversing; Northern Blacks are coming home. If the Republican Party cannot successfully court some of the Black vote, Dixie goes Blue and that's pretty much the end of the U.S. as anything resembling a constitutional republic.
---
If you must persist in this analogy, equate the income tax with Slavery Lite, and then quickly follow up with an explanation showing both similarities and differences.
Or you could use a Venn diagram to show the overlap in the income tax an slavery.
Or you could have a diagram showing a spectrum of enslavement, with American style slavery being somewhere between gulag prisoner and modern income taxpayer.
-----
But in general, I still think even the above watered down versions are a bad idea.
Better to focus on the inherent loss in privacy and the incompatibility of the personal income tax and certain provisions of the Bill of Rights.
This seems like a misunderstanding of what chattel slavery and the income tax are. Chattel slavery refers specifically perpetual inherited bondage that allows people to be treated like commodities. Let’s look at the differences:
The United States government is not allowed to buy or sell people.
Tax payers are able to exit this system by renouncing your citizenship, which is definitely pricy but this is not a thing under chattel slavery. The Roman form of slavery allowed buying your freedom, same thing with indentured servitude. These are easier claims to defend but are still wrong however.
Tax payers are not compelled to work, shares of their labor income are taken by the government. This is more similar to either theft or indentured servitude depending on how you want to describe it.
This is probably your worst piece in that it just comes off as incredibly preachy without making arguments for why the object level is true. You make appeals on the meta level but I didn’t notice anything getting into why income tax is a subset of chattel slavery.
The US government taxing citizens who are outside of the country is probably the most ethically dubious part of income tax. It is pretty easy to conceptualize taxes as basically a rent associated with existing on someone’s property(and all land is government property under english common law, people just own perpetual leases to it). This seems to line up with the monopolization of the powers of nobility by governments. You could probably achieve a better outcome by directly charging a land rent(lvt) however.
If one begins with the idea that each of us owns their own time, then full slavery is the ownership of another person's time. The government claims you wouldn't spend your money, your payment for spending your time productively, wisely so we are taking 50%.
You are forgetting the chattel part and the labor compelled with violence part. If fractions of your income being taken were fractions of chattel slavery, then negative marginal tax rates through things like the EITC would be negative slavery which is an interesting claim to make in a libertarian space about welfare.
Are you forgetting that the money redistributed came from someone who spent their time productively and is given to an unproductive person? The redistributive government is a can of worms that that destroys individual self-worth and allowing governments to restrict free exchange of idea and products between individuals where our slavery starts. Each living entity must use the earth for survival and having to ask permission to use the earth is the first step in violating the right to life. opportunity for success needs to be open to all.
I've written extensively on my takes on property right s here, https://gseine.com/essays/ if you're interested.
Out of time right now, but I'll check out Pearsonomics later.
I have not written anything for it so there’s no need to check out my substack. I am not forgetting that welfare comes at the expense of other people through taxes, I think it is weird to define fractional slavery through your tax rate which leads to edge cases with negative tax rates. Again, you are not being compelled to provide labor and thus taxation is not slavery. The typical libertarian critique that taxation is theft holds a lot more truth.
Consider this: The political class, a group of people which don't create anything, is taking your money from you and giving it to other people that don't work, or lately, they are giving it to Ukraine.
Also consider this: The Federal Reserve Bank is not a governmental organization, yet they control the money from creation to destruction, they control the interest rate, and they help the government with taxation.
So taxation is theft, more than it is slavery.
Sure, I’m not against the idea that taxation is theft. I am saying it’s not chattel slavery. Words have standard meanings and using them in new ways for arguments is just a way to mislead people with their old associations. Though even when calling it theft, there are a set of negative effects associated with theft that either don’t exist or exist to a much lesser extent.
There is nothing so funny as a slave standing up for their masters.
There is no substitute for being right all the time about everything.
What's your point? Do you think all of government a waste? If not, how should it be maintained? By charity? If by taxes, what makes income tax special? One of your more preachy pieces.
All of government is a waste.
Abolish the police, replace them with the second Amendment.
Americans got along quite well with not a single police force in the country before 1840.
Lapenza, his point is that the Income Tax is Chattel Slavery
You still need courts, the military, possibly even the US Marshall.
And these things existed before the income tax
Correct.
Correct, but only if the underlying principle is to ensure that the initiation of physical force is limited to restraining those who will not or can not understand individual rights of others. A government with unlimited power will mandate everything , as is happening today.
Government is completely antithetical to universal / spiritual law. It is immoral. No individual has the right to rule over another individual. Thus, no individual can transfer a right they do not themselves possess to another individual or group to rule over others. Minority and majority rule are predicated by coercion and violation of rights..as is taxation.Taxation is both unlawful and immoral (theft).
A quick reading of the Constitution would answer the question for you.
"You've probably lived in a democracy all your life, "
Not sure where you've been, but the UNITED STATES is a Corporation, masking itself as a Constitutional Republic.
The UNITED STATES is a CORPORATION -
Subsections 15 and 15 (A) of Title 28 US Code §3002 - "the United States means -- (A) a Federal Corporation". It is a FOREIGN CORPORATION. Anyone who works for this foreign corporation is a foreign agent and is knowingly or unknowingly committing fraud against the American people.
To be more specific, that means ALL politicians working in Washington DC and every judge, attorney, police officer, and government agents working throughout the USA are FOREIGN AGENTS. Because they are foreign agents, DO NOT VOTE FOR ANY OF THESE PEOPLE - including the President. Because if you do, you are committing TREASON against the Republic of The United States of America (the 50 Union States).... <--- a REPUBLIC is NOT a democracy 😁
Until people are truly awake to how deep this corruption and evil is, you are still willingly allowing yourself to be enslaved in a completely broken system, income taxes or not..... but it is definitely relevant to income taxes.
Some picky points: 1) income tax, when ORIGINALLY enacted, only taxed MILLIONAIRES. Some experts also aver that "income" was never intended to be defined as wages from actual work. But somehow, over the decades, it has gotten shifted onto the shoulders of working stiffs so that millionaires are now about the only ppl who manage to get OUT of paying income tax. 2) It has also been observed that income tax is the ONLY tax we have that even TRIES to be progressive (or used to, back when only millionaires had to pay it--unless perhaps inheritance tax is still a thing). After all, it takes a certain amount of $$$$ just to live, whether you're rich or poor; but over & above basic subsistence, it's all fun-and-games. Back in the early '60's, when the top income tax rate was around 92%, the rich still managed--somehow--to be RICH! Call me callous, but my heart has a hard time bleeding for billionaires. How is INCOME tax theft, but not sales tax, which even the homeless have to pay if they buy anything to which sales tax is affixed? What about property tax, which kicks ppl out of their primary residence if they don't happen to have enough income to pay the taxes? How come capital gains--you know, money from investments which rolls into the bank accounts of the rich whether or not they bother to roll out of bed in the morning--get taxed at HALF the rate of wages from actual work? IMHO you're ignoring far more serious issues here....
Some random thought I had a few years ago with respect to income tax.
Income Taxes:
Fees extracted for the right to be productive. We don’t fight them because the cost of winning is greater than the reward, a universally accepted aspect but totally unknown, poorly-considered, internal cost benefit analysis. Regrettably, pragmatism defeats principle, hence, in the end, we all pay.
"You've probably lived in a democracy all your life, do these subjects rise to prominence via rational debate? Do the philosophers and accomplished men all get together every quarter and decide on the quarterly priorities and topics of the empire's discussion? Was there some great meeting where it was decided every school-child must now spend countless hours on the subject of race and space-travel and the facts of the requisite engineering will now just be a waning subset of retro-futurism discussed by nerds?
No! It was asserted. It was inflamed. It was bullied into the public discourse and then bullied to the forefront of the discourse, by people willing to be unreasonable, people willing to say the words that will start a fight and keep saying them til that fight was pouring into the streets."
this quote reminds me of "discussion" i read online yesterday. i thought to myself,
it is pointless and will never be resolved until these people meet in one another's presence
to have an honest, respectful discussion. and about moving pictures, YES
it is high time we output our own worthy stories. we do not need the Sound of Freedom,
we need to reCLAIM our individual freedom, our individual and familial prosperity,
for that is the way to encourage each other to prosper and provide great living conditions
for every son and daughter..
[i thank ya, K, i enjoyed the mornin read]
💯💯💯
You forgot to mention that money is the carrier of all "trends," "movements," disinformation, and all. And I must ask...
Money... Do We need it?
https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/money-do-we-need-it
> Money... Do We need it?
Yes, barter isn't very practical.
I can tell You did not bother to read. Barter is money - anything that accounts for the energy We add into a system is money. That is money's foundational purpose, to ensure We have added Our "fair share" of energy.
Maybe read the article and return with a more knowledgeable response. [smile]
I just read your post. My advice to you, lay off the drugs.
And My advice to You? Start learning. You have a lot to catch up on. Love always.
Hear Hear! Once I understood that you cannot get out of it, it immediately hit me that it's a form of slavery.
The enemy today would rather we focus on a slavery that is over so that we DON'T focus on a slavery that is ongoing.
Once you have a lot of influence, you can deliver an idea through repetition and force of will, but until you reach that point you have to use your influence primarily to get more influence.
If libertarianism had as much cultural force as one of the two main party-tribes, they might be able to say something as ridiculous on its face as 'taxation is chattel slavery' and expect to be believed, but they don't have that power.
The income tax is imposed on "taxpayers." A taxpayer is a "person" which is a legal fiction. JOHN H DOE, JOHN DOE, JOHN HENRY DOE, John H Doe, John Doe, etc. are "persons," which is legal or commercial entity. Are you are person? Unless you are Bugs Bunny you are not a person. It's impossible. You cannot be a man or woman and a person. In fact, you can never be a person. By filing you agree to be the responsible party for the tax imposed on the person as trustee of the Cestue Que Trust created by the BC.
The person JOHN H DOE is a creation of government by way of the birth certificate scam. He who creates, owns. He who owns pays. Why would you agree to be responsible for the imaginary debts of an imaginary legal fiction? The United States inc. created the person, let them pay.
Yeah, true, considering that they classify wages, tips, etc. as income, when it's not.
Wages are what my employer pays me for using my experience to make his business safe.
I give him my time, he pays me for my time.
I didn't invest it and expect a return, which is what income really is.
You invest money in a stock and get a return, which is income.
Bitcoin could be considered income, since you don't have to work for it and it holds value.
So, not only is taxation slavery, it's also theft.
This is not a new idea. I was equating taxation to slavery four decades ago. And I was not the first, by far. Every school of libertarian thought which begins with some kind of self-ownership axiom equates taxation with slavery.
This is not a rhetorical kill shot. I've field tested it hundreds of times back in the day. No joy. And I've seen plenty of others use it without success as well.
It is, however, an opening for a machine gun's worth of kill shots by the woke left. Indeed, the pre-woke leftists of my acquaintance would go into woke mode when exposed to "Taxation = Slavery" rhetoric.
Yes, taxation shares many properties with slavery, and the income tax shares more with slavery than certain other forms of taxation.
But the differences between being a modern U.S. taxpayer today and a slave in the U.S. back in the day are brutally nontrivial.
U.S. taxpayers are free to move about the country. Not so for chattel slaves -- or even serfs.
If a U.S. taxpayer opts to be lazy, he pays less tax. The negro servants of yore were subject to corporal punishment for laziness.
And then there was the practice of selling family members separately. That's even more brutal than puzzling through the Earned Income Credit flowcharts.
The descendants of American style slavery have good cause to be offended by anyone equating today's income tax with slavery, and the woke left knows it, and cashes in accordingly.
Sorry to be a Debbie Downer, but this is important. The Great Migration is reversing; Northern Blacks are coming home. If the Republican Party cannot successfully court some of the Black vote, Dixie goes Blue and that's pretty much the end of the U.S. as anything resembling a constitutional republic.
---
If you must persist in this analogy, equate the income tax with Slavery Lite, and then quickly follow up with an explanation showing both similarities and differences.
Or you could use a Venn diagram to show the overlap in the income tax an slavery.
Or you could have a diagram showing a spectrum of enslavement, with American style slavery being somewhere between gulag prisoner and modern income taxpayer.
-----
But in general, I still think even the above watered down versions are a bad idea.
Better to focus on the inherent loss in privacy and the incompatibility of the personal income tax and certain provisions of the Bill of Rights.
Yes I agree. Governments are all grifters making up their own rules. Do not comply!
Yes, but what might one do about it?
It’s comforting to something I can agree with.