Homestead mailing list

[Leslie <cayadopi AT yahoo.com>]

I can tell you for sure this type of asset forfeiture occurs.  Worked a lot 
of cases involving just that, including attempts to seize property that was 
rented out.
 
And if for some reason the gov't can't seize your property, they can 
legislate your rights away to using your property thru passing various local 
ordinances, as opposed to buying your property from you.  You own it, you pay 
taxes on it, but you can't use it the way you want to.  And then you can't 
sell your property for break-even because nobody else wants to own the 
property under the terms of the ordinance.
 
 
 


 

I have warned people about asset forfeiture, Marie, and they honest to 
goodness
don't believe me.  That is one reason this banking thing has me so upset. 
I'm going to use you as an example , becuase I know what I'm about to
say doesn not apply to you, but might to others on the list.  

Right now, you own a small 60 acre homestead on the edge of the Mark Twain
National Forest.  The Forest Service wants that land (or maybe a developer 
with
good political ties) .  LE pays a 'snitch" to claim you grew and sold
him pot.  LE can confiscate your land on that information alone.  The easier 
way
is to back up the snaitches story by planting some pot.

Lets take it another step.  Say, your imaginary 22 yo son lives with you and
his name is on the deed.  The pot rweally is his, either way, they take your
land.  In the second instance, you have done no economic harm, theough you did
break laws.

Now, Robert Rubin, Former Goldman Sachs and Citigroup Ceo, VConfidant of the
President Elect is reposnsible for destroying a hundred billion dollars in
taxpayer assets.  Has anything from hime been seized?  Have swat teams gone to
his house?  Has he been handcuffed?

How do you teach young people about justice.  How can you, with a straight
face, twell your son or your nephew to trust this government?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------




>From mmcharry AT gmail.com  Sun Dec  7 17:00:14 2008
Return-Path: <mmcharry AT gmail.com>
X-Original-To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id 2FDB24C01C; Sun,  7 Dec 2008 17:00:14 -0500 (EST)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on malecky
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled
        version=3.2.3
Received: from yw-out-1718.google.com (yw-out-1718.google.com [74.125.46.158])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 640294C022
        for <homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Sun,  7 Dec 2008 17:00:13 -0500 
(EST)
Received: by yw-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 9so333646ywk.60
        for <homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Sun, 07 Dec 2008 14:00:12 -0800 
(PST)
Received: by 10.150.201.17 with SMTP id y17mr6608659ybf.68.1228687212883;
        Sun, 07 Dec 2008 14:00:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.151.130.9 with HTTP; Sun, 7 Dec 2008 14:00:12 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <18c9df6e0812071400t1c22947cwea0b9eced19e9437 AT mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2008 16:00:12 -0600
From: "Marie McHarry" <mmcharry AT gmail.com>
To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
In-Reply-To: <493C41A5.9060800 AT bellsouth.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <152243.77446.qm AT web53901.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
        <BAY138-DAV508FDD505A4952BBA0DDBAFFF0 AT phx.gbl>
        <493C41A5.9060800 AT bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: [Homestead] Dog rescues dog..
X-BeenThere: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
List-Id: <homestead.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead>,
        <mailto:homestead-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/homestead>
List-Post: <mailto:homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead>,
        <mailto:homestead-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2008 22:00:14 -0000

On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 3:35 PM, EarthNSky <erthnsky AT bellsouth.net> wrote:
> I think most of the power should lie with the States, not with the
> Fed..I am all for a smaller Federal Government and giving state and
> local government more responsibility when it comes to representing the
> community view.


What do you mean by a smaller federal government? The US State
Department says the from 1960 to 1990, the number of state and local
government employees increased from 6.4 million to 15.2 million, while
the number of civilian federal employees rose only slightly, from 2.4
million to 3 million. Cutbacks at the federal level saw the federal
labor force drop to 2.7 million by 1998, but employment by state and
local governments more than offset that decline, reaching almost 16
million in 1998. (The number of Americans in the military declined
from almost 3.6 million in 1968, when the United States was embroiled
in the war in Vietnam, to 1.4 million in 1998.)
Source: http://economics.about.com/od/howtheuseconomyworks/a/gov_growth.htm
>
>
> Yup...we definitely need less government.  I think we should pare it
> down.  I think, however, with the Dems in control, it will grow.

George Bush has expanded the power and reach of the federal government
within the borders of the US. How do you think Obama will be more
intrusive? Do you think, for instance, that he will continue to
declare selected US citizens as enemy combatants and imprison them
indefinitely? Do you think the Republicans would have reduced Social
Security? What exactly do you mean by this?
>
> I recall that during the election, there was mention of Obama's cap and
> trade policy concerning energy/environmental concerns.  I read a few
> days ago that these cap and trade things benefit only the big
> corporations.  I don't understand all of that-maybe someone here will
> explain, but I know enough to understand that this is not a good thing.
>  To me, it sounded like selling out to special interests, but I will
> defer judgment until someone explains the cap and trade thing to me.

John McCain had his own cap and trade policy. I'm not sure that's the
best way to approach the issue, but affected companies would rather
have cap and trade than mandatory reductions.
>

Marie