PDA

View Full Version : Are we not serfs? -- "I'm Worried"


highnote
04-10-2012, 02:06 PM
If you owe taxes your passport can be revoked so that you can not flee the country. This is what happened in Rome and lead to medieval serfdom.

Read the whole column here:

http://www.johnmauldin.com/images/uploads/pdf/mwo041012.pdf


"The task of controlling men in economic detail proved too much for Diocletian's expanding, expensive, and corrupt bureaucracy. To support this officialdom – the army, the courts, public works, and the dole – taxation rose to such heights that people lost the incentive to work or earn, and an erosive contest began between lawyers finding devices to evade taxes and lawyers formulating laws to prevent evasion. Thousands of Romans, to escape the tax gatherer, fled over the frontiers to seek refuge among the barbarians. Seeking to check this elusive mobility and to facilitate regulation and taxation, the government issued decrees binding the peasant to his field and the worker to his shop until all their debts and taxes had been paid. In this and other ways medieval serfdom began."

mostpost
04-10-2012, 07:33 PM
If you owe taxes your passport can be revoked so that you can not flee the country. This is what happened in Rome and lead to medieval serfdom.

Read the whole column here:

http://www.johnmauldin.com/images/uploads/pdf/mwo041012.pdf
What is your objection to paying taxes that you legally owe?
The article you linked to is full of inaccuracies. According to the article Diocletian froze prices and bound tax evaders to their land and business in AD 3.
An impressive achievement considering he was not born until 244 AD. To say that this led to medieval serfdom is nonsense. In the first place the people who were effected were land owners and business owners not serfs. There was a long interval between the Rome of 300AD and the serfs of the middle ages. The feudal system of the middle ages came about because the king needed someone to administer is vast lands. So he gave title to portions of his land to his underlings. In return these barons paid him taxes or other fees.

Serfdom came about because those landowners needed someone to work their lands, not because someone in Rome didn't pay their taxes. I can't believe you would actually believe the latter.

bigmack
04-10-2012, 07:43 PM
What is your objection to paying taxes that you legally owe?

While you stay fixed on things happening in 100AD, I thought I'd post the actual legislation for people here on Planet Earth.

LOS ANGELES (CBS) — A bill authored by a Southland lawmaker that could potentially allow the federal government to prevent any Americans who owe back taxes from traveling outside the U.S. is one step closer to becoming law.

Senate Bill 1813 was introduced back in November by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Los Angeles) to “reauthorize Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction programs, and for other purposes” .

After clearing the Senate on a 74 – 22 vote on March 14, SB 1813 is now headed for a vote in the House of Representatives, where it’s expected to encounter stiffer opposition among the GOP majority.

In addition to authorizing appropriations for federal transportation and infrastructure programs, the “Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act” or “MAP-21″ includes a provision that would allow for the “revocation or denial” of a passport for anyone with “certain unpaid taxes” or “tax delinquencies”.

Section 40304 of the legislation states that any individual who owes more than $50,000 to the Internal Revenue Service may be subject to “action with respect to denial, revocation, or limitation of a passport”.
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/04/04/owe-the-irs-bill-would-suspend-passport-travel-rights-for-delinquent-taxpayers/

mostpost
04-10-2012, 08:44 PM
While you stay fixed on things happening in 100AD, I thought I'd post the actual legislation for people here on Planet Earth.


http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/04/04/owe-the-irs-bill-would-suspend-passport-travel-rights-for-delinquent-taxpayers/
Simply put, if you want to keep your passport, pay your taxes. Note that you have to owe over $50,000 to be affected. I think if you owe over $50,000 in delinquent taxes, you should be put in debtors prison.

bigmack
04-10-2012, 09:00 PM
No one has paid less in taxes and remains a staunch advocate for higher taxes and a hardliner on collecting delinquent taxes than Mostie.

Headline from '09.
Unprecedented Level of Tax Evasion Among Obama Appointees

highnote
04-10-2012, 09:07 PM
What is your objection to paying taxes that you legally owe?

I don't see anywhere in my post that I said I object to paying taxes that I legally owe. Can you point out where I said that? To be honest, I don't even know why you would ask that question unless you are intentionally trying to provoke me.


The article you linked to is full of inaccuracies. According to the article Diocletian froze prices and bound tax evaders to their land and business in AD 3.
An impressive achievement considering he was not born until 244 AD.

Given that he was quoting Will and Ariel Durant's "The Lessons of History" I'd say it's a typo. Diocletian's "Edict of Maximum Prices" (edictum de pretiis) was made in AD 301. Seems like a typo to me.

To say that this led to medieval serfdom is nonsense.

The author said "this and other things" led to medievel serfdom.

In the first place the people who were effected were land owners and business owners not serfs.

It isn't clear from the column how much businessmen and landowners were affected. It says peasants were tied to their lands and workers to their shops. Does he mean peasants who were also landowners or peasants who worked for landowners?


There was a long interval between the Rome of 300AD and the serfs of the middle ages. The feudal system of the middle ages came about because the king needed someone to administer is vast lands. So he gave title to portions of his land to his underlings. In return these barons paid him taxes or other fees.

The point the author is making is that the seeds of feudalism were sown with the actions of rulers like Diocletian. You can trace back to the ancient Greeks many things about the way the U.S. is today. Our institutions are direct decendents of the institutions of Rome and Greece.

Serfdom came about because those landowners needed someone to work their lands, not because someone in Rome didn't pay their taxes.

I think you're missing the point. Serfdom came about after the Roman empire collapsed and because the Roman empire collapsed. Of course the landowners needed someone to work their lands. Feudalism had a pyramid structure. The king at the top awarded land to barons who conscripted peasants and serfs to work the land and provide soldiers for the military.

According to Wikipedia: "Feudalism traditionally emerges as a result of the decentralization of an empire." Isn't this exactly what happened as a result of the fall of Rome? I think the point the author is making is that as the U.S. declines as an empire Feudalism could emerge because some of the same forces, political and economical, that happened in ancient Rome are happening here, today.

Had Rome not collapsed the world would probably have very different political, social and economic institutions today.

There is a cause and effect relationship. It may have taken many generations for medieval serfdom in Europe to form, but its roots can be traced back to Greece. Sure, there are lots of influences, but serfdom didn't happen in a vacuum.

I can't believe you would actually believe the latter.

I can see why so many people on the board don't like you. I was merely posting an article I found of interest and yet you use words that are meant to make you feel superior by putting others down.

Fortunately for me, it takes more than words to hurt me.

But I ask you, why do you want to start a fight? Why not just have a discussion? I have no problem with you disagreeing with the column or with me, but your lack of civility in the PaceAdvantage community is disappointing.

mostpost
04-10-2012, 10:29 PM
I don't see anywhere in my post that I said I object to paying taxes that I legally owe. Can you point out where I said that? To be honest, I don't even know why you would ask that question unless you are intentionally trying to provoke me.
You post an article which you preface by saying.
If you owe taxes your passport can be revoked so that you can not flee the country. This is what happened in Rome and lead to medieval serfdom.
What other conclusion can I come to other than that you are opposed to this method of compelling adherence to our tax laws.

Given that he was quoting Will and Ariel Durant's "The Lessons of History" I'd say it's a typo. Diocletian's "Edict of Maximum Prices" (edictum de pretiis) was made in AD 301. Seems like a typo to me.
OK



The author said "this and other things" led to medievel serfdom.



It isn't clear from the column how much businessmen and landowners were affected. It says peasants were tied to their lands and workers to their shops. Does he mean peasants who were also landowners or peasants who worked for landowners?
The law would have affected landowners who were not peasants. Peasant, whether landowners or not, were already tied to their lands through their masters.




The point the author is making is that the seeds of feudalism were sown with the actions of rulers like Diocletian. You can trace back to the ancient Greeks many things about the way the U.S. is today. Our institutions are direct decendents of the institutions of Rome and Greece.



I think you're missing the point. Serfdom came about after the Roman empire collapsed and because the Roman empire collapsed. Of course the landowners needed someone to work their lands. Feudalism had a pyramid structure. The king at the top awarded land to barons who conscripted peasants and serfs to work the land and provide soldiers for the military.

According to Wikipedia: "Feudalism traditionally emerges as a result of the decentralization of an empire." Isn't this exactly what happened as a result of the fall of Rome? I think the point the author is making is that as the U.S. declines as an empire Feudalism could emerge because some of the same forces, political and economical, that happened in ancient Rome are happening here, today.
This could very well be true, but what is the article saying? It is blaming the fall of the Roman Empire in part on a law that required Romans to pay taxes or not be able to travel. There are a lot of reasons the Empire fell and this one is far down the list.

Had Rome not collapsed the world would probably have very different political, social and economic institutions today.

There is a cause and effect relationship. It may have taken many generations for medieval serfdom in Europe to form, but its roots can be traced back to Greece. Sure, there are lots of influences, but serfdom didn't happen in a vacuum.

But that is what the author is trying to convince us is happening. Barbara Boxer introduces a law that will deny passports to anyone owing over $50,000 in back taxes. The Romans had a similar law. The Roman empire collapsed. Feudalism ensued. Therefore, if we pass this law we are going down the road to feudalism. And here I thought we were supposed to be worried about Socialism.




I can see why so many people on the board don't like you. I was merely posting an article I found of interest and yet you use words that are meant to make you feel superior by putting others down.

Fortunately for me, it takes more than words to hurt me.

But I ask you, why do you want to start a fight? Why not just have a discussion? I have no problem with you disagreeing with the column or with me, but your lack of civility in the PaceAdvantage community is disappointing.


I said I can't believe you would believe something because I couldn't. How is that insulting you? Have you seen some of the things that have been said about me here? Have you seen what Bigmack has been calling Robert Goren.
Nothing I said was in any way discourteous or lacking in civility.

Tom
04-10-2012, 11:04 PM
If you don't pay your taxes, Obama will put you in charge of the Treasury.

newtothegame
04-10-2012, 11:21 PM
If you don't pay your taxes, Obama will put you in charge of the Treasury.
Or, Obama might have you as a spokesman to tell all of america how his secretary pays more in taxes, (Lie), and then get himself in trouble for not paying his "fair share" lol

highnote
04-10-2012, 11:53 PM
I said I can't believe you would believe something because I couldn't. How is that insulting you? Have you seen some of the things that have been said about me here? Have you seen what Bigmack has been calling Robert Goren.
Nothing I said was in any way discourteous or lacking in civility.

I probably misinterpreted you. I regretted making these comments not long after I posted them.

I didn't say you insulted me. I said, more or less, that it seemed like you were trying to insult me. It's tough to insult me, but many have tried. :D

I suppose it's not what you said, it's the way your words are interpreted.

Now, I have to figure out how to respond to your post with the embedded quotes. I've never done a triple embedded quote, but I'll give it a shot.

I haven't seen bigmack's comments to Goren, but I did read Boxcar's comments to lsbets and vice-versa on the Trayvon/Zimmerman thread. Name calling is not a good way to achieve a resolution. But being a poster here, I live in a glass house. I've probably done my share of namecalling.

bigmack
04-10-2012, 11:58 PM
Have you seen what Bigmack has been calling Robert Goren.

Let's be clear. What I said was Goren is BY FAR the biggest buffoon at this joint. With every post he shows his ignorance, his lack of knowledge of virtually every subject & shows knee-jerk reactions to issues that border on idiocy.

Other than that, he seems fine.

highnote
04-11-2012, 12:16 AM
You post an article which you preface by saying.


If you owe taxes your passport can be revoked so that you can not flee the country. This is what happened in Rome and lead to medieval serfdom.


What other conclusion can I come to other than that you are opposed to this method of compelling adherence to our tax laws.

You can assume whatever you want. I merely stated facts. (1) If you owe taxes you might not be allowed to leave the country. (2) People who owed tax in Rome were not allowed to leave. (3) Not allowing people to leave a country on their own free will because they owe taxes was one of the causes of serfdom.







The law would have affected landowners who were not peasants. Peasant, whether landowners or not, were already tied to their lands through their masters.

I don't know if that was true then, but I'll take your word.




The point the author is making is that the seeds of feudalism were sown with the actions of rulers like Diocletian. You can trace back to the ancient Greeks many things about the way the U.S. is today. Our institutions are direct decendents of the institutions of Rome and Greece.



I think you're missing the point. Serfdom came about after the Roman empire collapsed and because the Roman empire collapsed. Of course the landowners needed someone to work their lands. Feudalism had a pyramid structure. The king at the top awarded land to barons who conscripted peasants and serfs to work the land and provide soldiers for the military.

According to Wikipedia: "Feudalism traditionally emerges as a result of the decentralization of an empire." Isn't this exactly what happened as a result of the fall of Rome? I think the point the author is making is that as the U.S. declines as an empire Feudalism could emerge because some of the same forces, political and economical, that happened in ancient Rome are happening here, today.


This could very well be true, but what is the article saying? It is blaming the fall of the Roman Empire in part on a law that required Romans to pay taxes or not be able to travel. There are a lot of reasons the Empire fell and this one is far down the list.

I'm sure there were a lot of reasons for the fall, but I don't know how far down the list this was.




There is a cause and effect relationship. It may have taken many generations for medieval serfdom in Europe to form, but its roots can be traced back to Greece. Sure, there are lots of influences, but serfdom didn't happen in a vacuum.



But that is what the author is trying to convince us is happening. Barbara Boxer introduces a law that will deny passports to anyone owing over $50,000 in back taxes. The Romans had a similar law. The Roman empire collapsed. Feudalism ensued. Therefore, if we pass this law we are going down the road to feudalism. And here I thought we were supposed to be worried about Socialism.

I think he is correct. The U.S. seems like an empire in decline. It may take many generations for the U.S. to fall. Or maybe the U.S. will last another millenium. Or maybe the U.S. is just experiencing a bump in the road. Who knows? All we can do is look back at history and try to avoid mistakes that were made in the past. Socialism didn't work in Diocletian's time. Communism didn't work for Marx and Lenin and the Soviet Union and China. It worked for awhile, but not long. Socialism seems to be doing OK in Sweden, although, there are entreprenuers there who want to build businesses, but socialist bureacracy gets in the way innovation.

Iran is on the rise. According to a recent Stratfor article, Iran deceptively convinced the U.S. that the U.S. could win in Iraq. If things go badly in Syria, Iran could emerge as a very strong regional power. Turkey is emerging and becoming economically stronger.

Russia is re-emerging. China and India are growing powers.

The interval between the U.S. and her rivals is narrower now than, say, 25 years ago. Will these rivals overtake the U.S. at some point?

We have fewer freedoms than 25 years ago due to the fear of external threats. Diocletian also feared external threats, so he clamped down on internal liberties. I see a correlation here with the U.S.

mostpost
04-11-2012, 12:16 AM
Now, I have to figure out how to respond to your post with the embedded quotes. I've never done a triple embedded quote, but I'll give it a shot.

We're probably better off if you don't do that. Obviously I did not do a very good job, but I couldn't figure out how to fix it. Just say your piece and I will try to understand.

highnote
04-11-2012, 12:19 AM
We're probably better off if you don't do that. Obviously I did not do a very good job, but I couldn't figure out how to fix it. Just say your piece and I will try to understand.


You'll have to go back to post #12 to see my post. Double-embedded only.

ElKabong
04-11-2012, 12:36 AM
Simply put, if you want to keep your passport, pay your taxes. Note that you have to owe over $50,000 to be affected. I think if you owe over $50,000 in delinquent taxes, you should be put in debtors prison.

Charley Rangel is laughing his ass off at you

johnhannibalsmith
04-11-2012, 12:44 AM
... I think if you owe over $50,000 in delinquent taxes, you should be put in debtors prison.

For how long? And then you've paid your "debt" to society? Wouldn't getting the fifty large be a better outcome than losing the fifty and losing out on more tax income by housing the debtor? It's tough to make money in prison and even harder to get a job once you've been there.

bigmack
04-11-2012, 12:55 AM
Just say your piece and I will try to understand.
Apple.

RkZC7sqImaM

rastajenk
04-11-2012, 07:45 AM
When did Los Angeles become a state?

Robert Goren
04-11-2012, 08:20 AM
I haven't seen bigmack's comments to Goren, but I did read Boxcar's comments to lsbets and vice-versa on the Trayvon/Zimmerman thread. Name calling is not a good way to achieve a resolution. But being a poster here, I live in a glass house. I've probably done my share of namecalling.Bigmack has only one retort to my arguments that he can't refute. He calls me an idiot or something similar. That is his right. It is also my right not to listen. Which is what I do. He is the only person on my ignore list. It is too bad. At one time he use to try to use some well-reasoned arguments to refute me and on one occasion he actually changed my mind on something. Even when I disagreed with him I respected his opinon. But for whatever reason, he stopped doing that and started calling me names instead.

PaceAdvantage
04-11-2012, 10:42 AM
I agree his name calling is uncalled for and unwanted here, and I have edited his posts when I have caught them...don't understand why he can't get the hint.

bigmack
04-11-2012, 11:13 AM
I make no apologies for reacting to the breathtakingly boneheaded posts of Goren.

I realize there are all types on here, and there are some real doozies, but this goof takes the cake on every level.

Part of my work here is help stave off the wave of complete stupidity harboring in the minds of dolts.

Arguably, technically, Goren should be stripped of his moniker to something more fitting.

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/4588.jpg

mostpost
04-11-2012, 12:05 PM
For how long? And then you've paid your "debt" to society? Wouldn't getting the fifty large be a better outcome than losing the fifty and losing out on more tax income by housing the debtor? It's tough to make money in prison and even harder to get a job once you've been there.
Thank you for your serious answer to my tongue in cheek post. :rolleyes:

boxcar
04-11-2012, 12:20 PM
Part of my work here is help stave off the wave of complete stupidity harboring in the minds of dolts. (emphasis mine)

I gotta ask, Mack: Are you getting paid for this gig? :lol:

Boxcar

johnhannibalsmith
04-11-2012, 03:08 PM
Thank you for your serious answer to my tongue in cheek post. :rolleyes:

Put a tongue or a cheek in there somewhere to give a guy a hint.

Greyfox
04-17-2012, 12:21 PM
Simply put, if you want to keep your passport, pay your taxes. Note that you have to owe over $50,000 to be affected. I think if you owe over $50,000 in delinquent taxes, you should be put in debtors prison.

Hmm? Some of your former co-workers or bosses might fit that category.

In Friday's news-

"The Massachusetts Republican said that a recent report by the Internal Revenue Service showed that in 2010, 98,000 federal employees owed a combined $1 billion in back taxes."

More at link -> http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/politics/sen-brown-bill-targets-tax-scofflaws-in-congress-20120413

TJDave
04-17-2012, 01:03 PM
If you can't afford to pay your taxes why would you need a passport? ;)

mostpost
04-17-2012, 04:05 PM
Hmm? Some of your former co-workers or bosses might fit that category.

In Friday's news-

"The Massachusetts Republican said that a recent report by the Internal Revenue Service showed that in 2010, 98,000 federal employees owed a combined $1 billion in back taxes."

More at link -> http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/politics/sen-brown-bill-targets-tax-scofflaws-in-congress-20120413

Why is it that I can find a thousand, maybe a billion, references to this story on Google; yet had to search an hour to find back taxes owed by Americans as a whole. I finally found it by going to the IRS site. Here is what I found. Bear in mind that the comparisons are not 100% because the data from the IRS is from 2006 and the data in your link is from 2010.

In 2010 there were 4.43M people working for the federal government. Those 4.43M people owed a collective $1B in back taxes.

Now how much money do you think the country as a whole owed in back taxes? The most recent figures I could find (2006) tell us the amount was $385B

http://www.irs.gov/pub/newsroom/tax_gap_map_2006.pdf

The average delinquent tax liability for a federal government worker $225.00
The same figure for all American workers $1600.00

These figures ($225.00 and 1600.00 take into account ALL workers. The 98,000 federal employees who owe back taxes owe an average of $10,000, but I could not compare that amount with the amount owed by non federal employees, because I have no statistics on how many of the 237M civilian workers are delinquent.


The point of this whole exercise is that someone is trying to demonize federal workers for not paying their taxes, while ignoring taxes owed by other segments of society.

Back taxes owed by federal employees are .25% of total taxes owed. That's one quarter of one percent. It seems you should be more concerned about that other 99.75%. But then you would not be able to criticize the evil government. :rolleyes:

bigmack
04-17-2012, 04:12 PM
The point of this whole exercise is that someone is trying to demonize federal workers for not paying their taxes, while ignoring taxes owed by other segments of society.

Back taxes owed by federal employees are .25% of total taxes owed. That's one quarter of one percent. It seems you should be more concerned about that other 99.75%. But then you would not be able to criticize the evil government.
Did it ever occur to you while doing your homework that you can't box up a whole nuther group? Do you need stats on babysitters that owe back taxes so you can have a group to go after like the G-Folk flunkies?

The point of the issue is that your beloved brethren, are PAID with tax money!

I'll help when I can but sooner or later you're going to have to start thinking of these things on your own.

Do you have it in you, is the only question left.

Greyfox
04-17-2012, 04:34 PM
The point of this whole exercise is that someone is trying to demonize federal workers for not paying their taxes, while ignoring taxes owed by other segments of society.

Back taxes owed by federal employees are .25% of total taxes owed. That's one quarter of one percent. It seems you should be more concerned about that other 99.75%. But then you would not be able to criticize the evil government. :rolleyes:

1. Tax payers are paying Government employees to do their job.

2. If Federal workers are not paying their taxes and also ignoring taxes owed by other segments of society, those Federal workers are not doing their jobs.

What part of that don't you get??

mostpost
04-17-2012, 05:34 PM
1. Tax payers are paying Government employees to do their job.

2. If Federal workers are not paying their taxes and also ignoring taxes owed by other segments of society, those Federal workers are not doing their jobs.

What part of that don't you get??

Your #2 is like the #2 our parents used to ask us if we had to do when we were three years old.

What would make you think that federal workers are ignoring taxes owed by other segments of society. Does a congressional aid have tax collection as part of his job description? Is a secretary in the Interior Department expected to knock on doors on her off hours and ask if the residents have filed their taxes. Ignoring? That is another in a long list of dumb things I have read on this forum.

And #1 is not much better. A federal employee is paid just like any other employee; by an employer to do a job that the employer needs done. A federal job is not a charity. It is a job.

Greyfox
04-17-2012, 07:04 PM
Ignoring? That is another in a long list of dumb things I have read on this forum.



Dumb? Glad you recognize that.
It was written by Mostpost in post 27 of this thread.

mostpost
04-18-2012, 12:26 AM
Dumb? Glad you recognize that.
It was written by Mostpost in post 27 of this thread.

You're actually going to go there?
Here is my quote from #27.
The point of this whole exercise is that someone is trying to demonize federal workers for not paying their taxes, while ignoring taxes owed by other segments of society.

Now here it is color coded so even you can follow the references.

The point of this whole exercise is that someone is trying to demonize federal workers for not paying their taxes, while ignoring taxes owed by other segments of society.

The blue is my introductory statement.
The red describes actions taking by certain group and the hypocrisy of those actions.
The green merely clarifes the first red statement.

In other words "someone" is the subject of both "trying to demonize Federal workers" and "ignoring taxes etc."

While I am typing this, I am thinking "he knows this; he's just playing with me." Funny, I can't convince myself of that.

johnhannibalsmith
04-18-2012, 12:52 AM
Let's tone down the colorful language, eh?

NJ Stinks
04-18-2012, 01:04 AM
Let's tone down the colorful language, eh?



Pretty good, John! :lol: