Do we all know about the value of property? In the Declaration of Independence, the founders listed 3 unalienable rights: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But they almost listed them as life, liberty and property. Property was scratched at the last minute and pursuit of happiness put in its place. The right to own, use and dispose of property, (or the fruits of one's labor), was well known to the founders, and indeed to freedom thinkers since ancient times. The General Authorities of the Church also knew it. (D&C 134:2).
The founders thought that everyone was entitled to keep the fruits of their labor (property) and no one, not even the government, had the right to take it from someone unless they had violated law. But that brought up a conundrum.
How could they fund a government that would enforce property and contract rights, unless they took property (through forceful taxation) from the citizens, even though the citizens had violated no laws? They thought and thought about that.
Their solution was the use of excise and import taxes. What are they? They are called use taxes. That is, in order to use the facilities of government, one must pay for them, but no one is forced to do so. For instance, if one wanted to drive on the local roads, they could pay a gasoline (excise or use) tax but no one is forced to do so. They could walk or stay home. Most people see the logic of paying for the things we use, so most do not object to such taxes. The same applies to import taxes.
The founders thought that if other nations wanted to sell products in America, they could do so, but they would be taking advantage of an American justice system, roads and other facilities that would help and protect foreigners as they sold products in America. However, they didn't pay any American taxes in order to do so. So, the founders imposed import taxes to make the importers pay for the use of American logistical support when they sold their products here. But remember, this is a use tax because no foreign manufacturers were forced to sell products in America. And they always kept the import taxes uniform, in accordance with the Constitution.
Thus, the founders could fund a small but efficient government sufficiently through these use taxes without taking property through forceful taxation. What a beautiful concept! Today note how far we have drifted from that concept. Below is a quotation on the subject:
"Government is instituted to protect property...This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own...that is not a just government, nor is property secure under it, where the property which a man has...is violated by arbitrary seizures of one class of citizens for the service of the rest." --James Madison
The Brethren were of a similar opinion.
I remember coming home from my mission and attending Mesa Community College. I had a liberal history professor that put up the following words on the blackboard one day. They read: Human Rights vs. Property Rights. He explained that the rich have so much property they don't deserve that it behooves us to pass laws that take property from the rich and distribute it to the poor because human rights are more important that property rights. The old Robin Hood theory. But the truth, if it were displayed on that blackboard, would have said: Property Rights ARE Human Rights. The right of humans to use and dispose of property. One cannot dissociate one human right from the rest or play one off against the others without putting all human rights in jeopardy. Human rights are a complete package.
Today, we are bombarded with numerous taxes. More than half our income goes to federal, state and local taxes of one kind or another. We have become economic slaves. So why do we continue to elect politicians that violate their oath of office to defend the Constitution by supporting more taxes, or at least by not passing tax eliminating laws? Rather, they keep them in place and come up with new taxes. We as a people will pay for this violation of our God inspired Constitution.
Some say that the United Order and the Law of Consecration are just communism in disguise. That is patently false. the United Order is based on the concept of private property. Here are some quotes that prove this:
"The United Order is not a communal system; it is not one under which all things are held in common..." -- Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 813
"In the first place I repeat again, the United Order recognized and was built upon the principle of private ownership of property; all that a man had and lived upon under the United Order, was his own. -- J. Reuben Clark Jr., Conference, October 1942
Some scriptures imply that early saints held everything in common, but that is refuted clearly by W. Cleon Skousen in The Naked Communist 343-346. The quotation is too long to go into here, but get the book and discover it for yourself. He said that the Untied Order is merely free enterprise capitalism with a heart.
The founders thought that everyone was entitled to keep the fruits of their labor (property) and no one, not even the government, had the right to take it from someone unless they had violated law. But that brought up a conundrum.
How could they fund a government that would enforce property and contract rights, unless they took property (through forceful taxation) from the citizens, even though the citizens had violated no laws? They thought and thought about that.
Their solution was the use of excise and import taxes. What are they? They are called use taxes. That is, in order to use the facilities of government, one must pay for them, but no one is forced to do so. For instance, if one wanted to drive on the local roads, they could pay a gasoline (excise or use) tax but no one is forced to do so. They could walk or stay home. Most people see the logic of paying for the things we use, so most do not object to such taxes. The same applies to import taxes.
The founders thought that if other nations wanted to sell products in America, they could do so, but they would be taking advantage of an American justice system, roads and other facilities that would help and protect foreigners as they sold products in America. However, they didn't pay any American taxes in order to do so. So, the founders imposed import taxes to make the importers pay for the use of American logistical support when they sold their products here. But remember, this is a use tax because no foreign manufacturers were forced to sell products in America. And they always kept the import taxes uniform, in accordance with the Constitution.
Thus, the founders could fund a small but efficient government sufficiently through these use taxes without taking property through forceful taxation. What a beautiful concept! Today note how far we have drifted from that concept. Below is a quotation on the subject:
"Government is instituted to protect property...This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own...that is not a just government, nor is property secure under it, where the property which a man has...is violated by arbitrary seizures of one class of citizens for the service of the rest." --James Madison
The Brethren were of a similar opinion.
I remember coming home from my mission and attending Mesa Community College. I had a liberal history professor that put up the following words on the blackboard one day. They read: Human Rights vs. Property Rights. He explained that the rich have so much property they don't deserve that it behooves us to pass laws that take property from the rich and distribute it to the poor because human rights are more important that property rights. The old Robin Hood theory. But the truth, if it were displayed on that blackboard, would have said: Property Rights ARE Human Rights. The right of humans to use and dispose of property. One cannot dissociate one human right from the rest or play one off against the others without putting all human rights in jeopardy. Human rights are a complete package.
Today, we are bombarded with numerous taxes. More than half our income goes to federal, state and local taxes of one kind or another. We have become economic slaves. So why do we continue to elect politicians that violate their oath of office to defend the Constitution by supporting more taxes, or at least by not passing tax eliminating laws? Rather, they keep them in place and come up with new taxes. We as a people will pay for this violation of our God inspired Constitution.
Some say that the United Order and the Law of Consecration are just communism in disguise. That is patently false. the United Order is based on the concept of private property. Here are some quotes that prove this:
"The United Order is not a communal system; it is not one under which all things are held in common..." -- Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 813
"In the first place I repeat again, the United Order recognized and was built upon the principle of private ownership of property; all that a man had and lived upon under the United Order, was his own. -- J. Reuben Clark Jr., Conference, October 1942
Some scriptures imply that early saints held everything in common, but that is refuted clearly by W. Cleon Skousen in The Naked Communist 343-346. The quotation is too long to go into here, but get the book and discover it for yourself. He said that the Untied Order is merely free enterprise capitalism with a heart.
No comments:
Post a Comment