The Tax System Perfected
"A country in which nobody is ever really responsible is
Thursday, January 12, 2012, 3:25:32 PM
Justice as
regards taxation has always been an issue and although I assert to have
perfected it here, I admit that while my current assertion is, a perfected tax
system, time will undoubtedly prove that any system of men can and will be
corrupted as an unavoidable result of its own humanity.
The current view in the west is that Communism was defeated by Capitalism. Nothing could be further from the truth. I would agree that a pluralist democracy defeated the ideological tyranny of 20th century communist but that is as far as I can go. In the west we see the battle over Communism as having occurred in the 20th Century and that is FALSE. The battle between communism and capitalism took place in the 19th Century without a shot being fired and the outcome had already been decided long before Lenin or Mao even came on to the scene.
In 1848
when Marx first published his "Manifesto of the Communist Party,"
he described the current state of affairs accurately, in the first half of the
19th Century, when he asserted in his opening statement:
"A spectre is haunting
Europe – the spectre of communism. All the powers of old Europe have entered
into a holy alliance to exorcise this spectre: Pope and Tsar, Metternich and
Guizot, French Radicals and German police-spies.
Where is the party in
opposition that has not been decried as communistic by its opponents in power?
Where is the opposition that has not hurled back the branding reproach of
communism, against the more advanced opposition parties, as well as against its
reactionary adversaries?
Two things result from this fact:
I.
Communism is
already acknowledged by all European powers to be itself a power. (THIS WAS IN 1848)
II. It is high time that Communists should openly, in the face
of the whole world, publish their views, their aims, their tendencies, and meet
this nursery tale of the Spectre of Communism with a manifesto of the party
itself.
To this end, Communists of various
nationalities have assembled in London and sketched the following manifesto, to
be published in the English, French, German, Italian, Flemish and Danish
languages."
Mayer Amschel Rothschild (23 February 1744 – 19 September 1812), the founder of the Rothschild family international banking dynasty, said "Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes her laws" and he gave his opposition the only weapon they would need. Of course the Rothschilds were avariciously driven, but he had expressed the means for the downfall of the economic dictatorships of pure laissez-faire capitalism.
The
Progessives Democratically sanctioned socially directed monetary
policy defeated the unrestrained economic dictatorships of pure laissez-faire
capitalism without a shot fired.
The Rich
say they pay their fair share. The Poor say they are being denied their
fair share by the accumulation of wealth by the Rich. Karl Marx
competently expressed the issue in February 1848[5] when he
published the "Manifesto of the Communist Party," I quote:
"Freeman and slave,
patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master‡ and journeyman, in a word,
oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried
on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended,
either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common
ruin of the contending classes."
The over
zealous implementation of the Manifesto of the Communist Party lead
to violent overthrow of governments and the Cold War. Karl Marx never
proposed violent over throw. During the Cold War the Communist Party used
its unwarranted totalitarian control to stifle its People into submission to
their overly zealous humanly imperfect understanding of Karl Marx's overly
simplified 37 page opinion, The Manifesto of the Communist Party.
Karl Marx never advocated the use of democratically authorized socially
directed monetary policy either. The revolution was now
capitalism it was not communistic it was driven by the inherent justice of
democratically supported socially directed monetary policy.
While this
was going on in the later part of the 19th Century and the
first half of the 20th century in Europe, Asia and the Eastern
Block, We the People in the New World and the west were taking a different
tack. We the People were recovering from our Civil War 1861-1865 and
attempting to eliminate the vestiges of slavery. Rather than an
oppressively focused totalitarian approach to the public welfare, We the People were financing the end
of Slavery in our Civil War with socially directed monetary policy.
Abraham Lincoln financed the Civil War by printing Money, the Greenbacks,[6] to
finance the end of slavery in our Civil War (1861-1865) i.e., socially
directed monetary policy.
Unlike the
violent over throw of monarchs and unrestrained economic dictatorships of pure laissez-faire
capitalism used by Lenin (1917) and Mao Zedong (1949), in the
west, we used democratically established socially directed monetary
policy to settle the disputes between the classes. Again,
Abraham Lincoln financed the Civil War by printing Money, the Greenbacks.
FDR printed money to finance his New Deal and defeat Hitler in World War
II.
Monetary
Policy is the means by which we can justifiably improve if not perfect our Tax
System.
The current
view of the "Rich" is that they pay more than their fair share
because per capita they pay more. And the view of
the poor, the non rich, is that their wealth is less than the total per
capita wealth should be as unevenly divided. The Problem in
this view of taxation is in its reliance on the definition of per
capita.[7]
Per the current interpretation of per capita both
arguments are correct and yet inconsistent at the same time, thus leaving We the People with an unworkable
solution.
What I
propose is a redefinition of the term per capita. For
this example I am going to use the much used analogy of Warren Buffett and his
secretary. Warren Buffett has in effect proposed a redefinition although
not expressly and without anything but altruistic support. What Warren
Buffett does, in his all too altruistic assertion, is take it on the chin for
all those in his tax bracket that have the same issue. And that logically
is UNFAIR to wit, UN Just. Warren Buffett and his Secretary while being
equal as asserted by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, in
economic terms they are not and NEVER will be equal economically.
Economically speaking Buffett is, I would assert, millions of times larger than
his secretary.
In the
bible, King James Version, Matthew 22:21, it says "Render
therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things
that are God's." Today we live in a world that is much larger than
the limits of our neighborhoods although most of us never need nor venture
outside of our neighborhoods. This much larger world is what supports and
maintains Warren Buffett's vast wealth. His secretary, beyond her
immediate dependence on Mr. Buffett for her support, cares not about this
larger world economically.
Mr.
Buffett's secretary could survive without this much larger world, Caesar's
world if you will. Mr. Buffett, with his vast wealth attached, could
not. If we lived in the horse and buggy era, while Mr. Buffett may still
have been successful, most of his Billionaire contemporaries would not have had
their opportunities to succeed. In a smaller world overall wealth is
commensurately reduced. Mr. Buffett and his wealthy contemporaries need a
$14,000,000,000,000 ($14 trillion dollar) economy to sustain their
wealth. Mr. Buffett's secretary could survive without a
$14,000,000,000,000 ($14 trillion dollar) economy, apart from her immediate
dependence on Mr. Buffett,
Karl Marx
in his manifesto made predictions; he predicted that family and religion would
both be less prominent in the future. And for economic reasons that has
indeed been the case. In the early half of the 19th Century
your family and your religion largely defined your economic possibilities.
You were locked into carrying on the religiously sanctioned family business
much more so then than now. Your business practices were defined by your
religion, usury was a sin in the Christian Religion and not so much in the
Jewish Religion. The Rothschilds, a Jewish Family, became the preeminent
bankers.
The origin
of this inequality goes back to the Gold Standard. With the Gold Standard
the amount of tender never changes, but the DEMAND unavoidably increases not
only with the population but with the innovation of New Things.
An arbitrarily fixed monetary supply, DEVALUES people and increases the
intrinsic value of money. Those that have money thus increase their
wealth by mere ownership of it. The wealthy have always unequally enjoyed
this intrinsic increase in money's value, via ownership alone, at the expense
of the middle class and poor. Inflation is the one weapon We the People can use to combat
this otherwise unavoidable devaluation of We the People.
There has
to be a limit or the minority, the wealthy, increase their wealth geometrically
while We the People, the have-nots, have to fight over their
crumbs. This unfairness is what built the Pyramids, the Taj Mahal and the
Palace at Versailles
In
the west We the People have
overcome this inherent inequity with Monetary policy. We print money to
get the stagnate money out of the proverbial mattress in depressed times and we
print money to redistribute wealth so as to inhibit the geometric generational
accumulation of wealth.
The Perfect
Tax system is, as most elegant solutions are simple.
Eliminate taxes all together. Nobody pays any tax. We then fund our
Government solely by the use of socially directed monetary policy,
to wit printing money.
Every
dollar in circulation is thus diminished equally and capital is dispersed and
devalued democratically to achieve socially directed priorities of
the democratic majority. It is elegantly simple. Warren buffet's
wealth is diminished dollar for dollar. And his secretary's buying power
while diminished is not prohibitively inflated. Per capita is redefined
as how many dollars you have, not by the number of heads. The more money
you have the more the inflation of printing money takes from you.
Inflation is good thing!
NO more TAX MAN, smile.
Inflation becomes a good thing that
devalues the minority, the rich, instead of the majority, the poor.
Now can we
do it tomorrow? No, we need to again find our confidence in each other. We
need to reassure ourselves that an essentially stable currency is an
inescapable necessity for ALL. We need to rediscover
that we are all in this together. We need to eliminate all caste, and
nobility. We need to eliminate in essence ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY!!! We
have to FIRMLY establish that EVERYone is subject to the inflation tax.
ANY
assertion of personal ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY, without proof of divinity, is a fraud,
by any standard of Justice in a government of free and equal persons on THIS
PLANET!!!!!
ANY
assertion of governmental ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY, acknowledging un-avoidable human
fallibility, is a fraud, by any standard of Justice in a government of the
people, by the people and for the people on THIS PLANET!!!!!
The
ministerial[8] grant
of "Absolute Immunity,"[9] by
and for ministers, is a massive, at the highest levels, ministerial,
unconstitutional and "unlawful Conspiracy"[10] "before
out of Court"[11] to
obfuscate "false and malicious Persecutions."[12]
"Immunity is given to crime,
and the records of the public tribunals are searched in vain for any evidence
of effective redress." "The courts are in many instances under
the control of those who are wholly inimical to the impartial administration of
law and equity." I say it NOW, 2011!!!
Justice William O. Douglas said it in 1961 and 1967. [13]
Mr. Lowe of Kansas and Mr. Rainey of South Carolina respectively said it
originally in 1871[14].
Impeach the current
Black Robed Royalist Supreme Court FIVE[15] for condoning the denial
of a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right to
justice and
"fraud upon the
court."
Before they have a chance to
screw-up Healthcare for 100 years!
Impeach the current Supreme Court
FIVE for verifiable NOT "good Behaviour,[16]"
denying the establishment of justice and abridging a Constitutionally secured
and congressionally un-abridge-able right, with their deprivation of
substantive 7th Amendment[17] justice
between the government and the people, Connick, District Attorney, et al. v. Thompson No. 09–571
Decided March 29, 2011 and "fraud upon the court"
with Ashcroft v. al-Kidd No. 10–98 Decided May 31, 2011!!!
The Right of Petition is the right
to substantive justice between the government and the people. We do not
have any individually enforceable rights in this country, "Everybody, BUT
the innocent victim, has "ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY"[18]"
for the "deprivation of any rights,
privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United
States of America"[19] e.g., "To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due
Process,"[20] "The Exclusionary Rule," "Grounds for
Impeachment."
Most
of the 99% of Americans have not had the pleasure and are silently intimidated
by the prospect of being dragged through our corrupt COURTS kicking and
screaming!!!!!! I have been kicking and screaming for nearly 8
years. I have suffered through 411 days of illegal incarceration, 4 years
of homelessness and two psychological examinations. I ask you to review Jeep
v Obama 8th Circuit Court of Appeals case #11-2425, Jeep v
United States of America 10-1947," Jeep v Bennett 08-1823, "Jeep v
Jones 07-2614, and the most humble Petition for a Wirt of Certiorari to the
Supreme Court 07-11115."
DGJeep "The Earth and
everything that's in it" (www.dgjeep.blogspot.com)
Thursday,
January 12, 2012, 3:25:32 PM, 2011 11-10-11 Taxation PERFECTED REV
02
David G. Jeep
(314) 514-5228
[1] "And
if you think that is a national problem, consider that the United States is by
far the World's greatest power; it is not accountable to its own people for its
abuses of power, and that abuse of power flows freely into international
circles. Given that reality, there is not a nation in the world that should not
fear us in the same way that a reasonable person fears a child (or
a thief) with a gun." 31 U. WEST L.A. L. REV. ( Summer 2000 )
JOHN E. WOLFGRAM e.g., George Bush's false representations of Weapons
of Mass Destruction in Iraq - Underlining and parenthetical text added
for emphasis.
[2] "Damages"
By Dahlia Lithwick, Slate,
posted Monday, Aug. 8, 2011, at 7:22 PM ET underlining and foot
note added
[3] Mr.
Thompson in the New York Times in response to the Supreme Court's ruling in Connick, District Attorney, et al. v. Thompson No. 09–571
Decided March 29, 2011
[4] In
economics, laissez-faire describes an environment in which transactions
between private parties are free from state intervention, including restrictive
regulations, taxes, tariffs and enforced monopolies.
[5] It will
be important later to note that this was published before the Civil War
1861-1865
[6] A United States Note, also
known as a Legal Tender Note, is a type of paper money that was issued from 1862 to
1971 in the U.S.
[7] Per
capita is a Latin prepositional phrase: per (preposition, taking the accusative
case, meaning "by, by means of") and capita (accusative plural of the
noun caput, "head"). The phrase thus means "by heads" or
"for each head", i.e. per individual or per person. The term is used
in a wide variety of social sciences and statistical research contexts,
including government statistics, economic indicators, and built environment
studies.
[8] Ministerially
created rules are SECONDARY, in a Democratic Constitutional form of government,
to the will of the people as specifically expressed in the Constitution and the
Statute law. For anyone to ministerially grant immunity from the
Constitution and Statute law is to act in direct conflict with the tenor of the
commission under which the MINISTERIAL authority was granted.
[9] "absolute
immunity… for all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who
were integral parts of the judicial process" for the "deprivation of
any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and
laws." Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) @ Page 460 U. S. 335
[10] Lord
Coke Floyd and Barker (1607) "Judge or
Justice of Peace: and the Law will not admit any proof against this vehement
and violent presumption of Law, that a Justice sworn to do Justice will do
injustice; but if he hath conspired before out of Court,
this is extrajudicial; but due examination of Causes out of Court, and
inquiring by Testimonies, Et similia, is not any Conspiracy, for this he ought
to do; but subornation of Witnesses, and false and malicious
Persecutions, out of Court, to such whom he knowes will be Indictors,
to find any guilty, &c. amounts to an unlawful Conspiracy."
[13] Monroe
v. Pape, 365 U. S. 167 (1961) and Pierson v. Ray, 386 U. S. 559 (1967)
[14] Cong.Globe,
42d Cong., 1st Sess., 374 & 394
[15] Antonin
Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Samuel
Alito, Anthony Kennedy, and Chief Justice John G. Roberts
[16] Article
III Section 1 the Constitution for the United States of America "The
Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices
during good Behaviour" Yes it is spelled wrong in the Constitution
[17] Amendment
VII In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty
dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a
jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than
according to the rules of the common law.
[18] "absolute
immunity… for all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who
were integral parts of the judicial process" for the "deprivation of
any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and
laws." Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) @ Page 460 U. S. 335
[20] Mr. Hoar
of Massachusetts stated: "Now, it is an effectual denial by a State of the
equal protection of the laws when any class of officers charged under the laws
with their administration permanently, and as a rule, refuse to extend that
protection. If every sheriff in South Carolina refuses to serve a writ for a
colored man, and those sheriffs are kept in office year after year by the
people of South Carolina, and no verdict against them for their failure of duty
can be obtained before a South Carolina jury, the State of South Carolina,
through the class of officers who are its representatives to afford the equal
protection of the laws to that class of citizens, has denied that protection.
If the jurors of South Carolina constantly and as a rule refuse to do justice
between man and man where the rights of a particular class of its citizens are
concerned, and that State affords by its legislation no remedy, that is as much
a denial to that class of citizens of the equal protection of the laws as if
the State itself put on its statute book a statute enacting that no verdict
should be rendered in the courts of that State in favor of this class of
citizens. " Cong.Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess. p. 334.( Monroe
v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167 (1961), Page 365 U. S. 177) Senator Pratt of Indiana
spoke of the discrimination against Union sympathizers and Negroes in the
actual enforcement of the laws: "Plausibly and sophistically, it is said
the laws of North Carolina do not discriminate against them; that the
provisions in favor of rights and liberties are general; that the courts are
open to all; that juries, grand and petit, are commanded to hear and redress
without distinction as to color, race, or political sentiment." "But
it is a fact, asserted in the report, that of the hundreds of outrages
committed upon loyal people through the agency of this Ku Klux organization,
not one has been punished. This defect in the administration of the laws does
not extend to other cases. Vigorously enough are the laws enforced against
Union people. They only fail in efficiency when a man of known Union
sentiments, white or black, invokes their aid. Then Justice closes the door of
her temples." Cong.Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess. p. 505. (Monroe
v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167 (1961), Page 365 U. S. 178)
To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process
"agere sequitor esse"
"Time is of the essence"
David G. Jeep
http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/E-mail is preferred Dave@DGJeep.com, DGJeep@DGJeep.com
(314) 514-5228
David G. Jeep
c/o The Bridge
1610 Olive Street,
Saint Louis, MO 63103-2316
