North Dakota Voters Considered Repealing Property Tax

This story was interesting. In North Dakota. there was a ballot proposal to amend North Dakota’s constitution, eliminating the property tax. Unfortunately, the law didn’t pass, by a vote of 75%-25%.

I’m disappointed that the law didn’t pass. However, it was encouraging! 25% of the people voted for greater freedom!

A pro-State troll says “75% of the people voted for the property tax! Therefore, the property tax is a valid law!” The majority does not have the right to steal from the minority. Why should those 75% be allowed to steal from the 25%, via property taxes?

As an individual, you do not have the right to steal my home. Therefore, you cannot authorize the government to tax/steal my home. Voting does not legitimize taxes, because you can’t delegate a right that you don’t have.

The most evil taxes are the income tax, the inflation tax, the property tax, and the regulation compliance tax. Via the income tax, the State steals a huge chunk of your labor. Via the inflation tax, the State steals your savings. Via property tax, the State steals your home, at a rate of a couple percent per year. The cost of regulation compliance is added to the bill whenever you buy something. Regulations make it hard for a new small business to compete with an established large corporation.

Some people argue about which tax is most evil. All taxation is theft, no matter how it is collected or how big the tax is.

The property tax is evil, because you never really own your land or home. All property is owned by the State. Via property taxes, all Americans are homeless slaves, living on property owned by their masters.

Via the property tax, you only own a perpetual transferable lease. Your landlord, the State, can arbitrarily raise the rent/tax at any time. As the voting outcome in North Dakota shows, voting does not prevent State thugs from increasing the tax/tribute.

People’s savings and salaries don’t keep pace with true inflation. Property taxes do keep pace with true inflation, as State parasites demand an increasing slice of a shrinking pie. The property tax forces retired people out of their homes, as the tax rises and their savings shrink.

In some parts of the country, the housing bust was really bad.  In some areas, the annual property tax due is greater than the value of the house!  In that case, there’s no reason to pay; abandon your home when the tax foreclosure occurs.  Under normal circumstances, property tax is only 1%-3% per year, so you don’t notice that the State is gradually stealing your home.  If there were no property tax, home values would be much higher; the tax is a drag on housing prices.

That’s why I advise physical gold and silver over real estate as an investment.  With real estate, you can be robbed via increasing property taxes.

The property tax makes subsistence farming not viable. Suppose you have a farm that produces just enough food to feed yourself and your family. That isn’t good enough, because you also must pay property tax. Either you need surplus food to sell, or take a wage slave job to earn money to pay the property tax. The property tax forces you to participate in the State economy, earning money to pay the property tax. Once in the State economy, you’re subjected to the income tax and inflation tax, further enhancing the ability for the State to rob you.

If the law did pass, “Move to North Dakota!” would be a serious option for a hardcore anarchist. If North Dakota had no property tax, a hardcore agorist in North Dakota could pay practically zero taxes! Allegedly, in New Hampshire and the Free State Project, many people are avoiding the income tax and inflation tax, but they still bend over and pay property tax.

The only way to raise money to pay property tax, is to sell goods and services to members of the State economy. With a system of corrupt debt-based money, new money is only created by banks. The property tax makes all slaves dependent on banksters, so they can get State money to pay the property tax.

The property tax also is regressive. Middle class and wealthier people tend to own a single-family home. Poorer people tend to rent. In NYC and most states, the property tax rate for apartments is greater than the property tax rate for single-family homes! The renters don’t know the true property tax cost, because it’s merely added to their rent.

In California, there’s a ballot law that limits property taxes and other tax hikes. There also are California ballot laws that require money be spent on certain things, leading to California being a mess.

There was an amusing bit. State employee unions lobbied against the property tax repeal! It is unfair that a State employee, dependent on taxes for his salary, can vote against a tax decrease or lobby against a tax decrease. That isn’t democracy. That’s corruption.

It is almost impossible to shrink the State by voting. People dependent on the State will always vote against or lobby against shrinking government.

Paradoxically, wealthy people and insiders like high taxes, because they’re negative taxpayers. It’s no hardship to pay $500M in taxes when you receive a State perk worth $1B+. Besides, the super-wealthy have many trusts and tricks, to avoid taxes. Taxes make it hard for successful small business owners to bootstrap with reinvested earnings and compete with insiders. Taxes make it hard for me to save and start a business. Warren Buffet likes high estate taxes, because heirs of successful small business owners are forced to sell to him to pay the estate tax.

That answers the question “Who really owns your home?” Via property taxes, you don’t own your home, the State owns it. More precisely, your home is owned by politicians, State employees, and other parasites who earn a living leeching off the government. Your home is actually collectively owned by State parasites. They provide you with the illusion that you own it, as long as you keep paying the tax/tribute.

A pro-State troll might say “Wait a minute! The teacher also pays property taxes!” If would be logically equivalent to say that the teacher owed no property tax, but the salary was reduced by an equivalent amount. State employees actually pay zero taxes. That’s just an illusion. Instead, their salaries could be reduced by the tax paid, and it would be logically equivalent.

Similarly, a bankster pays zero taxes. He receives direct and indirect State subsidies, but then pays a tax of part of the stolen money. If you steal $2B and pay back $1B, that’s logically equivalent to stealing $1B.

All taxation is theft. The property tax is evil. The property tax reduces American workers to homeless slaves, renting their home from their masters.

6 Responses to North Dakota Voters Considered Repealing Property Tax

  1. Anonymous Coward June 15, 2012 at 6:59 pm

    Property tax is the most evil tax of all.

    It is even more evil than income tax.

    Suppose I work for myself. Only if I make money do I pay tax and it is proportional to my income. If I get no work for a few months, I pay no tax. While I am waiting for sales to ramp up, I will hardly pay any tax.

    However if my work does poorly for a few months, I won’t be able to afford the property tax and so I will be thrown out of my home. Without a home I don’t have anyway to work. If I have to pay high rent to someone else, then it makes it harder to me to be self-employed on a modest salary.

    PROPERTY TAX IS THE MOST EVIL TAX OF ALL. MORE EVIL THAN INCOME TAX. LOSE YOUR JOB OR MAKE LITTLE MONEY AND YOU WILL LOSE YOUR HOME. YOU WILL BE GIVEN NO TIME TO GET BACK ON YOUR FEED. THE CROOKS WILL TAKE YOUR HOME.

  2. Anonymous Coward July 2, 2012 at 4:40 am

    So the vote passed 75%:25%.

    Perhaps 25% are in the real, productive economy. 25% are unemployed. 50% are on government welfare on some kind or in government jobs or are dependent on government violence such as lawyers.

  3. I am not a fan of property taxes either. But it seems to me that you can’t just have a vote on whether or not to pay property taxes, without having a corollary vote on whether or not to totally privatize non-legislative municipal operations.

    What if this vote had passed? Then the constitution would permit people not to pay their taxes, but these people would still avail themselves of roads, sewers, parks, water treatment facilities, police, fire brigades and so on. Without a new organizational structure through which these same people who are no longer paying property tax could be charged for their use of these services, there would be no funding and therefore no services. Imagine if the city Fire Department ran out of money — home insurance rates are dependent on the distance of a home to fire hydrants and to stations. I wonder if the money saved on no longer paying property taxes would end up being gobbled up in premium increases?

    Of course you might argue, “The state does not apply every tax dollar collected to the building and maintenance of infrastructure anyway”, and that is almost certainly true. But we are talking about taking the money applied from X% of taxes collected, to $0. And here more than many things, the law of unintended consequences absolutely applies.

    • A majority vote does not authorize theft via taxes. Even if 99.9% of the people favor taxes, taxation is still theft.

      “Taxation is theft!” is a universal truth, like gravity. Just because it isn’t the majority opinion right down, doesn’t mean I’m wrong!

      There are alternative structures for handling roads, sewers, parks, water, etc. You’ve been brainwashed to only see the pro-State viewpoint. These alternative methods are only theoretical right now, due to the State violence monopoly. Just because something hasn’t been tried before doesn’t mean it won’t work!

      That’s one big problem with taxes. Once politicians have your money, they can spend it on whatever they want, including wasteful things. If you tried to steal $1 from everyone, it’s impossible. With taxes and government, you can easily steal $1 from everyone, by lobbying politicians for favor. Each individual act of theft is “just $1 or $0.50 from everyone”, but when you add them all up it’s a lot of money.

      • I’m not arguing the basic principle that taxation is theft.

        But the existence of the current system complicates undoing that error. The nature of infrastructure at present is such that if half the people on Elm Street vote to stop paying property tax, they can’t just “unhook” from utilities while the other half continues to rely on the city for their provision.

        What I am arguing is that a vote to repeal property taxes entails a lot more than just amending a piece of the constitution because a tax-driven infrastructure already exists. And the same argument (99.9% of people can’t vote themselves permission to steal from me via taxes) can be turned on its head to argue that 0.1% of people can’t vote to sponge off of tax-supported infrastructure.

        So in effect, a unanimous vote seems required, because otherwise the “Bob can’t use voting to force Peter to live a certain way” argument — which I totally agree with you about — becomes hypocritical.

        I’m a little offended that you call me brainwashed, when in reality I am simply indicating that the transition to a totally libertarian society isn’t going to magically happen with one vote. It entails a lot of nitty gritty complications that will pose some interesting philosophical problems for someone who is truly all about personal choice and personal freedom without trampling on the rights and choices of others.

        But once we get there, I agree, it’ll be great.

        • I thought you were making the other argument, “It’s impossible to provide for roads/water/garbage collection/utilities without a State-backed monopoly.”

          Getting freedom is more work than voting.

          I say that bootstrapping agorist businesses is the best solution, and solve problems as they arise. The biggest problem for agorists is dealing with theft/kidnapping by the State.

          For another example, California’s Proposition 13 is a disaster. It severely limits the government’s taxation power, while other laws require spending at a certain rate.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>