Replacement “Revenue”

Guest Post by Eric Peters

Do you remember when repeal Obamacare became repeal . . .  and replace? In other words, government managed and government-enforced “health care” is now a given.

The government will simply diddle with the particulars.

And diddle us.

It will be the same with speed-limited cars, once those are fatwa’d here – as is now all-but-inevitable given they have just been fatwa’d there  – in Europe, where about a third of new cars sold here are made and so will be made with the same tech embedded in them and ready to go.

Think DRLs – the absurdly always-on headlights that almost all new cars have had since the ’90s, when GM began installing them in all its new cars because some of them were built (or sold) in Canada, which required them.

It will be the same with Intelligent Speed Assist – the euphemism for the EU-mandated electronic nanny which will force cars – force drivers – to obey all speed limits.

But this raises a practical problem.

Speed limits are designed to collect “revenue” – via selectively applied “fines” (a euphemism for taxes) applied to drivers who ignore them. Which is almost every driver.

On purpose.

For exactly that purpose – i.e., to collect as much “revenue” as possible by making almost every driver a de jure “speeder” ripe for a roadside mulcting. The fact that everyone who drives has received a “ticket” – that is to say, has been roadside taxed – is certain proof of a confected rather than moral offense.

The whole point of speed limits is to make everyone an “offender” – so that everyone can be made to pay. In principle and  – eventually – in fact.

But if drivers can no longer “speed” because their cars won’t allow it, what about all that lost “revenue” – which is many millions of dollars and upon which many counties and cities depend for their various make-work/wealth-transfer schemes?

The answer comes easily enough.

The government will simply raise other taxes, which are applied generally – rather than selectively (as “speeding” fines – i.e., taxes – are). For example, they could just increase current registration “fees.”

Or, it could create new taxes.

How about a “carbon tax” or “green tax” on cars? This could be your “contribution” – and mine – to the Green New Deal. Does it seem fanciful that President AOC would impose such a thing?

The most likely route, however, is probably a simple mileage tax. These are already in use, so it’s not a hypothetical. And most new and probably all future new cars could very easily have their accrued mileage monitored – and their owners docked – in real time. Imagine a parking meter situation – except for driving.

Of course, the fly in the soup here is that speed limited cars will have less and less appeal, so people will buy and drive them less and less. Which is the macro goal of these things, in my opinion.

So there will need to be taxes on things unrelated to driving and cars.

Also easy enough.

Why not, for example, simply raise existing property taxes to account for the “lost revenue,” for the sake of “the children,” of course. “The schools” can’t be allowed to deteriorate – and those poor “teachers” (i.e., government drones who have “certifications” to impart government hagiography and cripple critical thinking skills in children, so as to render them, per George Carlin, into obedient workers) need a raise… .

The principle that your home is subject to endless – and in principle, unlimited -mulcting by the county or city in which you live has been cemented into the law as well as accepted by the majority of Americans who consider themselves, falsely, free men and women. It does not occur to them that political freedom cannot exist in the absence of economic freedom – that if one can never be free of having to make payments to the government in order to be allowed to continue living in one’s own home, then one does not own that home – no matter how many decades have passed since the last mortgage payment to the bank was sent in.

And that people who cannot legally own anything are not and can never be free.

These deluded, bamboozled people – having accepted a lien in perpetuity on their property – have no defense in law or in logic against increases in the payments demanded by the lien holder.

That will be one way the “revenue” could be recovered.

But here’s another – darker – source:

A federal tax on property.

Why not?

Most people already pay both federal and state taxes on their income. The principle of dual income taxation has already been established in law and so, in logic, there is no logical reason why the practice ought not to be expanded to encompass tiered taxation on property.

You pay a federal property tax in addition to the local county/state property tax – in order to be permitted to continue to reside in the home you paid off decades ago. Uncle becomes the second lien-holder on “your” property – just as he is already the primary claimant on your income.

Read your Karl Marx (here).

Most Americans, of course, have not and so remain cognitively dissonant – and, accordingly, defenseless.

There is no reason whatsoever that a federal tax on property could not be added to their already exorbitant burdens. The government – federal, state, county or city – merely need assert a “need” and then impose it. There is certainly nothing in principle, recognized in law, to prevent it.

The principled counter to it – that “taxation,” as it is styled, is merely theft euphemized and that it is a moral wrong to steal, irrespective of need – isn’t merely an abandoned principle, it is a forgotten one.

The people having been conditioned to forget it. This conditioning being the primary purpose of “the schools” which serve as the main pretext for taxes on property, nicely completing the circle and making a sick joke of Massa Tom’s comment about the odiousness of compelling a man to furnish money for the propagation of views he considers abhorrent.

It’s not just abhorrent views being propagated in “the schools.”

It is legions of well-conditioned useful idiots who never think to question government lien-holding of property but are conditioned to regard the disposition of every other person’s property (and thus, their own) as subject to considerations of “public good” – which sounds good, as a turn of phrase, but in practice simply means the money-grubbing and mulcting of the politically stronger at the expense of the politically weaker.

What H.L. Mencken called the “advance auction of stolen goods,” in reference to elections.

So, there is no sound, impregnable or even defensible argument – among those accepted for the disposition of “public” questions – to prevent the current, selective, Speed Tax being replaced by far more remunerative general taxes, either brand-new or expanded.

This, too, is likely part of the macro plan.

Observe that it all trends in the same direction, which cannot be accidental or coincidental. We are to be relieved of the burden of self-controlled mobility just as we are already relieved of a third to half or more of our income. Both being the mechanisms by which we are being systematically relieved of our freedom.

The free range cow is becoming the feed lot cow.

And we all know what comes next.

-----------------------------------------------------
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal

-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
Click to visit the TBP Store for Great TBP Merchandise
As an Amazon Associate I Earn from Qualifying Purchases
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
9 Comments
Iska Waran
Iska Waran
March 30, 2019 5:23 pm

Of course I’m against speed controllers on cars, but this article make me wonder how many speeding tickets Peters gets. I haven’t gotten one in almost twenty years. I just generally don’t drive around like a madman.

Donkey Balls
Donkey Balls
  Iska Waran
March 30, 2019 9:45 pm

Come on, Iska, it’s the principle. Are we free or not. Of course we aren’t.

TampaRed
TampaRed
  Iska Waran
March 31, 2019 12:21 pm

iska,
if you’re doing much driving outside of the hours when the roads are congested,in most cases i’d say it’s luck as much as responsible driving that keeps one from getting speeding tickets–

DD
DD
March 31, 2019 8:02 am

“There is no reason whatsoever that a federal tax on property could not be added to their already exorbitant burdens. The government – federal, state, county or city – merely need assert a “need” and then impose it. There is certainly nothing in principle, recognized in law, to prevent it.”

Let me take you right on across that bridge, Billy Goat Gruff. The troll on the other side has a big fat sign that says “Reparations paid here on whitey’s property.”

I saw this coming when Obama said “You didn’t build that.”

Seriously. There is going to be not only a NEED for federal taxes on whitey’s property but justification for it when a set of statisticians hired by a corrupt bunch of politicians prove that all private property in this country is owned by racist homophobes (if they are white) who need to pay and pay and pay and pay and Holly? How many “pays” did you add to make that statement of yours so very poignant?

Entitlement. A big word that means nothing and costs the taxpayer a lot of money and grief.

P.S. Dorothy, we are back in Kansas and the jacuzzi got filled in with concrete and some bastard banged on the door at 5 a.m. and said “Hey! It’s time to get on the road.” I might as well have booked the Econolodge again. And it fucking rained all the way here and my cruise control went out. Signed Toto.

Brokedicknation
Brokedicknation
March 31, 2019 8:38 am

The U.S. is a 3,794,101 square mile penal colony and plantation. So go ahead and drive to the cotton field of your choice, just don’t speed.

gilberts
gilberts
March 31, 2019 12:37 pm

And yet, it seems to me, this will only work if we let it. If they put monitoring software on cars, what will stop people from hacking it? If they put a tracker on your car, what will stop you from putting a Faraday Cage on it? If they try to put a physical governor on your car, what will stop you from tampering with it? And what will stop you from just not driving a new computerized crapmobile and sticking with an old F150?
I’ve said it before – there is a massive untapped market here for hacker/mechanics who can de-program or “jailbreak” cars for those who want all the capabilities of a new car without all the headaches. A modern car with the emissions controls removed, software limits on how the engine runs removed,safety nonsense, deadly airbags, and the tracking and inter-car comms removed, might be very appealing to some people.

anonsortof
anonsortof
March 31, 2019 12:40 pm

A federal property tax seems like the logical next step in the federalization of education. States will then probably lower their property taxes (to compensate), and raise their income taxes (to compensate for the loss of revenue from state property taxes), and ultimately raise the local property taxes back to previous levels (to compensate for the poor quantity and quality of educational funds and services given by the federal government).

martin
martin
  anonsortof
March 31, 2019 3:59 pm

Originally the FedGov attained its revenue from tariffs and the Whisky Tax, however when Prohibition was proposed and became adopted in various states it presented a revenue problem for the Feds, which is why they passed the Income Tax to off set the losses that a Prohibition Amendment would create.

Aside from its religious proponents Prohibition was pushed by the mainstream of the day as a way to save grain, to help the WWI war effort, and sold the the public as a ban on Whiskey not wine or Beer, too bad it was not so specified in the Amendment itself, also those folks behind it as a way to help the war effort (the original Don’t let a crises go to waste crowd) did not let the fact that the war ended before it was fully enacted, dissuade themselves from pushing through the final ratification.

The proponents of the Income Tax Amendment claimed that it would only ever be 3%, and a tax on the rich, (folks making less than 8K a year would be exempt, which was most people), but they conveniently failed to put that in the amendment
I believe that the Income Tax was the point all along, and the Prohibitionists were the early Useful Idiots who gave us the Leviathan that the Government became funded by an Income tax
Of course soon after Prohibition and the Income Tax amendments were passed the push for repeal began, but only of the Prohibition Amendment not the Income tax one,
and o yea once repeal became law, well the federal government went back to taxing alcohol as well