More Pesky Questions about Florida Adverse Possession

10 November 2011 By Bob Hurt

Roxann from Broward County Florida called and informed me of Fitzroy Ellis sentencing related to Adverse Possession, and to ask about AP of a house of a deceased, intestate, heirless owner.   Lola from Duval County Florida called and informed me of Statewide Prosecutor Nick Cox persecution of Demetrius Lewis and Chris McDonald for AP-related crimes, and to ask about AP of an abandoned, moldy, overgrown place bought by the lender for $100 at auction.

I estimate that only a high appeals court like the state Supreme Court can adequately and with reasonable finality answer the questions.  They involve an understanding of the English Law of Florida with roots 600 years deep.  And neither the courts nor the Florida Legislature have ever published that law fully for the people to know and use.

I pointed the callers to Florida Statutes Chapter 86 and my article on AP strategy.  Questions arose that might provide topics for declaratory judgment naming Sheriff, State Attorney, Statewide Prosecutor, Attorney General, Police Chief.

·         Why does lender get property for only $100 at auction (auction sham works like a scam)?

·         Why does clerk turn down opposing bids?

·         How does court determine fair market value of foreclosure auction property?

·         If APer makes repairs and improvements can APer put lien on property for costs?

·         Can APer prevail in a law suit against owner for payment of such lien?

·         Can owner prevail in a lawsuit against the APer for rent or unauthorized changes like adding on a room, re-landscaping the property, planting a garden where grass existed, uprooting a tree, etc.?

·         Does chapter 82/83 apply  - must owner sue for ejectment/writ of possession to eject adverse possessor who possessed realty more than 30 days, or may owner remove APer with mere trespass warning filed with sheriff?

·         How much time does APer have to vacate property on receipt of writ or possession or trespass warning?

·         Does time of filing Notice of AP affect the above, given that law requires AP Notice only within the first year of AP?

·         For abandoned realty with house open to the air, should County health dept check air quality and other inhabitability issues like mold/rats/pigeons/insects/vermin in A/C ducts, attic, main house?

·         Can APer hold owner liable for health problems resulting from mold/rats/pigeons/insects/vermin?

·         Does the English Law of Florida provide that AP statutes/common law constitute only a remedy for adverse possession or also a right adversely to possess untended realty?

·          Does Florida statute violate the English Law of Florida, by removing a common law right without providing a suitable statutory substitute, such as by requiring notice to the property appraiser and owner and Sheriff/police, such that police harass the APer without complaint by owner?

·         Does sheriff/police violate APer rights by harassing, and warning APer of arrest for entry on AP property?

·         Must notice to owner of record include notice to both equitable owner (mortgagor) and legal owner (mortgagee/lender/assignee)?

·         Does such notice require uniting or mortgage and note under one common beneficiary?

·         Does such notice become unduly burdensome when beneficiary has assigned note in blank?

·         Does APer have right to rent the AP realty to someone else?

·         What law or principle of law prohibits an APer from taking AP of numerous realties, fixing them up, and renting them out, so long as APer does not misrepresent the APer’s status as an APer, or the fact that the owner of record might act to repossess the realty within the statutory period?

·         Does the APer have the right to demolish a structure unfit for its intended use (such as human habitation) on the AP realty and replace it with a new one or not replace it at all?

·         Approximately how much would it cost to prosecute a declaratory judgment lawsuit on these and related questions, seeking injunctions against law enforcers and prosecutors from harassing APers or acting against APers criminally, and forcing harassers to compensate victims of such harassment?

·         If an APer takes AP of a house that belonged to a free-and-clear owner who died without will or heirs, what right does the APer have to defend possession against the State of Florida and any probate court?

·         What if the owner did have heirs but no will?  Does APer have any priority of right over the heirs, and if so, what?

·         What if the owner had a will that ignored the  house, and no heirs?

·         At a foreclosure auction where lender takes realty for the “value” at a cost of $100, why does the auction detail not list the purported value instead of $100 as the purchase price?

·         Why do courts not (in equity) force lenders to cram down loan balances to present actual value minus paid in equity – why does lender as sophisticated investor who caused the collapse of values not have to shoulder the brunt of equity loss?

A white paper answering the above questions could become a good promotional item for a title attorney.

*******************

A law buddy responded to the above comments as follows:

Answers are pretty simple.   First of all you need to define an APer.   One does not have the right to make any claim for adverse possession until one has resided and paid taxes for at least seven years.  Once that requirement is met, one can then file an action in court seeking a judicial decree as to whether he or she has adverse possession rights.   Whether one does depends on all the facts and circumstances of that particular case.

So anyone taking possession of property without the permission of the owner is a trespasser for the first seven years and has absolutely no adverse possession rights.  Hence, anyone taking possession of property without the property owner’s permission can be prosecuted as a trespasser.   The law does not require the police or the state attorney’s office to have permission of victims to enforce the law. 

The law does evolve and change.   You raise some good issues as to why it should change in this area.   One is looking at spending at least $100,000 to handle a test case to take up to the Florida Supreme Court. 

*******************

I responded to him as follows:

I understand your comments, but I have an alternate view.  I believe an adverse possessor engages in adverse possession upon taking possession adversely, not upon filing notice or lasting on the realty through the statutory limitation period and associated quiet title action.  Such an action perfects possessory rights against the owner and terminates the adverse possession period.  Thus, AP lasts from initial possession, through continuous possession, for the statutory period.

I therefore believe that ONLY THE RIGHTFUL OWNER OF RECORD has any right to complain against the APer with any legal effect.  And I believe you can prove this IF YOU HAVE FULL, UNFETTERED ACCESS to the English Law of Florida (which you probably do not have).  Our state government has the legal duty to provide all Floridians with the English Law of Florida, as amended and updated, annually, in printed and on-line form so that Floridians may avail themselves of its rights and operate according to its limits and obligations.  Only a successful prosecution of this point through the Florida Supreme Court will force the government to obey its responsibility to provide us with the law in writing. 

As a case in point, the Supreme Court in Kluger v White (1973) opined that the legislature cannot remove a common law right without providing a suitable statutory substitute, and later that year that the Court could, as the source of common law, CHANGE the common law to suit the evolved needs of society.  Thus, any interpretation of criminal law that would impede adverse possessors, other than trespass warning by the rightful owner, operates as a removal of the common law right of adverse possession. 

Thus, AP does NOT constitute trespass UNLESS the owner demands that the APer leave the realty AND the APer refuses to leave .  THEN and ONLY THEN does AP constitute trespass.  400 years of English law prior to the founding of the USA seem to support this.

Essentially, nobody can actually steal realty, other than the objects on it.  Only an idiot would leave his wallet lying on the front seat of an unlocked car.  Even though the law punishes theft of the wallet, catching the thief presents a problem, so most such thieves succeed without penalty.  

However, with realty, we have a different situation.  Because no one can steal it, one cannot commit grand theft of it if abandoned.  One cannot deprive an owner of use of the realty if the owner does not use it, and shows no sign of caring for or cultivating it. 

Owners owe themselves and the community a duty of care for their realty.  Without such care the realty becomes a danger to the community and to the owner and any future occupant through mold infection, pest infestation, and invitation to vandals and thieves.


Thus, the owner owes the care to the community, not merely to himself, and adverse possession therefore purges the community of the harm related to abandonment.  AP has for that reason, not just for taxes and cultivation, ALWAYS operated as a benefit to the community, the owner, any mortgagees, and the government.  And for that reason, GOVERNMENT has the DUTY to protect the APer against all possession adversaries other than the owner of record.  

Let us not forget in this discussion that all governments ultimately took the land by conquest, wresting it from the control of predecessors.  They accomplished this because predecessors failed adequately to care for the land and inclusively to defend their possession.  Today, our government keeps such land only by consent of the governed, and so both government and governed owe mutual duties of care, utilization - putting the land to its highest, best use-,  and defending possession, ultimately ousting from the land those who ignore those duties.  In this sense, "might" indeed makes "right."

The question also arises regarding right to possess any item discarded or thrown away, such as realty abandoned in foreclosure.  NO rhyme or reason supports the faulty notion that an owner of record cannot discard realty, nor that an adverse possessor cannot claim it as his “found” property.  The same remains true when a person dies intestate, and the government has slept on its own obligation to put the realty and other assets of the deceased into probate proceeding.  Government has no less obligation than the rightful owner to prevent the property from becoming a danger to the community or, conversely, to put the property to its highest, best use.

*******************

# # #

***

Bob Hurt    bh  Blogs 1 2 3 • Email • Law • Donate    f      t 
2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, Florida 33763 •727 669 5511

***

Mississippi Prop 26 - What is a Human?

[Editor's Note:   also see http://bobhurt.blogspot.com/2011/11/with-respect-to-my-what-is-human-scott.html]

Proponents of Mississippi’s 8 Nov 2011 ballot measure “Proposition 26” seek to define the term person to “include every human being from the moment of fertilization.”  The proposition impacts a pregnant woman’s access to health care, including abortion. The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists released an opposition statement calling the proposition “vague and overly broad”.

I don’t believe personhood begins till the Heavenly Father bestows the personality upon the child, whether that happens in our out of the womb.  I believe the seven

adjutant mind spirits must first become functional in the mind so that personality bestowal will have meaning and function.  The spirits go by the names

·         intuition,

·         understanding,

·         courage,

·         knowledge,

·         counsel,

·         worship, and

·         wisdom

Personality has qualities including

·         Self-consciousness – awareness of awareness,

·         Ability to exercise moral will – to choose between right and wrong,

·         Ability to communicate thoughts, ideas, and ideals to other persons,

·         Ability to desire to do good to others – to love, and

·         Ability to crave to know God and to grow to know him,

I do not know how much of the brain must function, nor in what way, before the adjutant mind spirits can function in association with it.  I imagine it must become sufficiently developed for the baby to seek nourishment before the Father bestows personality upon the genetic entity.

The typical child does not exercise moral will (begin to exhibit wisdom) until the fifth year of life.  So, I don’t believe minimal personhood requires full exercise of the prerogatives of personality.  Since premature babies can survive with care and nourishment, I believe it safe to say that a baby does not have to experience natural birth in order to become human. 

However, if a baby cannot survive outside the womb at some age with personality prerogatives intact, regardless of the care given, and become a normal human, then that baby does not have the requisite characteristics of a human being with real personality.  And, neither government nor people should seek to keep it alive if the mother dies while pregnant. Nor should government confer personhood status on such an entity.

I believe we should exercise common sense in determining when human life starts, such as by the above factors.  I do not believe conception constitutes the beginning of human life, nor that a human zygote or embryo constitutes a “human.”

***

Bob Hurt    bh  Blog1 •Blog2 • Email • Law • Donate    f      t 
2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, Florida 33763 •727 669 5511

***

He Is Gone

A Tribute to Norman Eugene Hurt (13 Mar 1948 – 19 Oct 2011)

Copyright © 6 November 2011 by Bob Hurt.  All rights reserved.

He is gone,

But he still lives on,

In every heart and mind

Of those he left behind.

Folks truly loved him much,

Because their souls he touched.

And he loved them so,

That they won't let him go.

He gave their hearts a tickle

That always made them giggle.

Closer they would wriggle

Till he felt them jiggle.

Then he'd give a piercing look

And open up that book.

He'd speak into our hearts

Of our adventures in the stars

He'd share with us a dream

Of what our lives could mean

If we work to be like he

Who gave it up for you and me.

And then he'd say…

[Mountain Spiritual Rap interlude]

Night falls early in the desert of a life.

It cuts off the day like the edge of a knife.

Don't wait till dark to do your day's work,

Or you'll lose the fruit of everything shirk.

[Back to the main tune…]

And now he is gone,

But he still lives on

In every heart and mind

Of those he left behind.

Norman Eugene Hurt (13 Mar 1948 - 19 Oct 2011) Eulogy

I have posted this eulogy for my brother Norman.  His life affected the lives of many who loved him as I did.


Norman Eugene Hurt (13 Mar 1948 - 19 Oct 2011) Eulogy by Bob Hurt

Political Bible Lesson

Ecclesiastes  10:2 – good political guidance

 

·        "A wise man's heart [is] at his right hand; but a fool's heart at his left."(KJV)

·        "The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."(NIV)

Pay attention to these principles:

 

1.       People should voluntarily treat their fellows liberally - generously and with tolerance, patience, and assistance in times of need. 

2.       People naturally treat the deserving liberally.  Beneficiaries behave better to please benefactors, reducing crime and increasing responsibility.

3.       Government should treat people conservatively so as not to destroy the voluntary nature of liberal treatment. 

 

 

***

Bob Hurt    bh  Blog1 •Blog2 • Email • Law • Donate    f      t 
2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, Florida 33763 •727 669 5511

 

***

 

I woke in the wee morn with these words aborn

Journey from Tipperary

Copyright © 28 September 2011 by Bob Hurt.  All rights reserved.

 

We left in dark of night from Tipperary,

Three of the girls I could, but two I couldn’t, carry.

The wee ones I nestled warmly in a potato sack.

Faith, I heaved my bag of treasures o’er my back,

The bigger girls took bundles under arm.

We skittered from our loft at Widow’s farm.

I had tried to save my wife Oh Lord I tried,

But she worsened in that terrible winter and died.

I couldn’t pay the fees for inn or car,

So we stole out before dawn to go afar.

We slid down the rooftop, covered in soot,

And betook our torturous journey on foot.

The wind howled at our departure from the town.

We trekked the hills and woods; rain poured down. 

We warmed us beside fires of sticks and peat,

And sucked cows’ milk fresh from the teat.

The girls smiled with my tales of elf and fairy,

To forget their dead, cold mum in Tipperary.

Now and then we’d stop; I’d dry their tears;

Give hope for better lives; calm their fears.

In a week and more our travel finally ended;

The girls’ aching, broken hearts eventually mended.

I found stevedore work in Cleggan, by the sea

And a cottage on a farm for my girls and me.

Though they grew up happy, fine men did marry,

Sure, we miss her still who stayed in Tipperary.

 

###

Yes, I woke in the wee morn with these words aborn.  I won’t fret their lack of meter and clumsy rhyme. This morn well before nine (no clue what brought it to mind) I gave them the best of my daily time. 

I don’t know how I saw those pictures in the wake of my sleep.  Did I labor over them as I tossed and turned?  Did I dream them in a flash just before I woke?  I don’t know.

I just knew I must set them from my keyboard, or they wouldn’t keep.

I’d lose them like I did that vision of printed circuit etching of the matrix grid of pyramids, layer upon layer of find gold, 50 thousandths of an inch each, each connected at base and apex, to become radiated magnetically as well as with high-frequency current, the matrices lain layer upon layer near one another to fracture water between them and produce hydrogen-oxygen gas.  I saw the energy in my sleep, and the mass of bubbles rising in the water.

Yes, I saw that in a dream and somehow the wake of it lingered in my thoughts when I awoke.  Though I had forgotten it, I now remember.

So, I try to learn to write what wakes me.  Though it may mean nothing, the Journey from Tipperary did precisely that.  It woke me with an urgency to write.  I have no clue why a vision from a rented loft in a farmhouse on the edge of town in a dank and dreary winter’s end in old Ireland, and a family with a sick and dying wife and a passel of small daughters would grace my dreams.  But it did. 

And now I have forever set it free.

 

***

Bob Hurt    bh  Blog1 •Blog2 • Email • Law • Donate    f      t 
2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, Florida 33763 •727 669 5511

 

***

 

Who won the Fox News / Google Debate?

Newt Gingrich won the Orlando debate of 20110922, of course.  Ron Paul a close second.  Cain a good third

The others acted way too smarmy, manipulative, or hungry.

But NONE of them addressed these tormenting issues:

• Why the US still contains and supports 85 million stupid people.
• Why government doesn't impose a minimum IQ level of 115 for all immigrants
  
• Why government allows the stupid, irresponsible, dependent, children, and abysmally ignorant tovote
• Why government ignores Art I Sec 10 gold and silver coin requirements, produces fiat money and allows fractional reserve banking
  
• Why the US does not protect the states from oligarchies caused by integration of state bars into state supreme courts
• Why the US won't push to preserve  grand jury powers to investigate gov't crooks throughout the states
• Why the US won't rein in the IRS from abusive collection of income tax the people don't owe
• Why government does not let people prosecute their own cases against criminals
• Why judges and others have full or qualified immunity.
• Why we don't have a goverment-owned and controlled banking system
• Why government has not nationalized precious mineral resources and sold mining concessions
  
• Why government has not sponsored crisis energy programs like water fracturing to produce hydrogen-oxygen gas for heat and electricity
• Why the war powers act still applies
• Why we let an illegal alien become and remain President
  

Bob Hurt    Blog 1 2 3 f t 2460 Persian Drive #70 Clearwater, FL 33763 Email; Call: (727) 669-5511 Law Studies: Donate   Subscribe Learn to Litigate with Jurisdictionary

The Genocide of Forced Integration - Google Docs

The Genocide of Forced Integration - Google Docs:

'via Blog this'

First Romantic Kiss

First Romantic Kiss

Copyright © 14 September 2011 by Bob Hurt.  All rights reserved.

In hushed and velvet dark of sultry night,

My mind awhirl in urgent, fearsome fright,

Just shortly after we as one did dance,

She and I, we saw and took our chance,

I embraced her, breasts and waist and all,

She somewhat short, I somewhat tall,

On the walk beside the park, senses so alight,

In hushed and velvet dark of sultry night

I her hungry lips did kiss and kiss,

Then stumbled home in shock and yearning bliss.

And thus began my hunger and my thirst

For kisses of which this became my first.

Bob Hurt        Blog 1 2 3   f  t  2460 Persian Drive #70 Clearwater, FL 33763 Email; Call: (727) 669-5511 Law Studies: Donate   Subscribe Learn to Litigate with Jurisdictionary

Bizarro Compassion Suppresses Genuine Charity

Bizarro Compassion

Government-Enforced Generosity Almost Suppresses Genuine Charity

Overview 

Bob Hurt discusses the concepts of government-enforced welfare, a kind of “bizarro compassion,” with Darryl.  Bob proposes solutions to the chasm between broke and poor and shows the right perspective from which to view the issues.

Introduction

From: Joyce T
Sent: Thu, September 8, 2011 5:15:52 AM

http://www.pjtv.com/?cmd=mpg&mpid=56&load=5851 (this fired Darryl up)

 

From: Joseph B

That was VERY Interesting! (this really fired him up)

Darryl’s Position

From: Darryl H
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 11:16 AM
Subject: The difference between interesting and Bull Shit

Boys and Girls,

I do not know who all is on this list.  I do not know who all, on this list, grew up poor.  I do not know who all, on this list, is experiencing financial challenges now, or is concerned about their future.

But, I'm not buying the Heritage Foundation's claim that the difference between poor, and 'doing OK' is so small.  I know better, and so should you.

I remember Claudia told me one time that she was poor.  I said, "Darling, you live in a brand new condo, with brand new furniture, you have a closet full of silk dresses from Lord and Taylor, all your blue jeans have been dry-cleaned, there's a new cougar in the driveway, and just last month you put $1,500 on your credit card to have your AC repaired.  You're not poor, you're broke."

The difference between poor and broke is BIG.  When you're broke, a few months pay 'might' well set you 'right' again.  When you're poor, you're fucked.

Yes, the poor may indeed have a refrigerator, but the only thing in it, is the light that comes on when you open the door hungry.

I could go on, but won't - shouldn't need to. 

One thing for sure, if you are EVER given an opportunity to swap places with a poor person, don't.  But, if you do, I want to see your video - see if the tune changes.  It will, you know.

LaYaOil,

darryl

PS.  Ever sleep under a bridge, in a drizzling winter rain, on an empty belly, and the only thing between living and freezing was an old damp greasy stinkey scratchy wool army blanket you got from Goodwill?  dh

PSS.  Me neither.  dh

PSSS.  May God bless the poor and homeless.  Amen.  dh

PSSSS.  Father, help us avoid tuning a blind eye to those in need.  Amen.  dh

PSSSSS.  "That which you do for the least of mine, you do for me."  JC

 

***********************************************************************

Bob Hurt Responds:

 

Darryl:

You do cast an interesting perspective on the matter, and you always have.

But I believe you missed the point by pressing so hard on the sympathy-because-I-coulda-been-there button.

·         The Broke have no ready cash.

·         The Poor have none either.

·         The Broke expect some ready cash soon. 

·         The Poor don’t

·         The Broke have the intellectual and physical resources to bring some cash in.

·         The Poor don’t.

·         The Broke don’t stay broke.

·         The Poor do.

·         A cure exists for Broke.

·         Poor has no cure.

 

The vast majority of poor people at any time in history had every modern convenience the well-to-do had 8 to 15 years earlier.  I mean vast, like over 90%.  When only Danny Glover had that big cumbersome “portable” cell phone in the 1987 movie Lethal Weapon, most well-off people didn’t have one and no poor people had one.  Now every poor person in America has a cell phone and 225 free minutes per month at government expense.  They don’t need one except in emergencies, for they could always use the neighbor’s if they didn’t have one.  And most of the poor abuse their cell phones, blabbing for fun instead of seeking employment.

America has a serious problem related to the differences between Poor and Broke – STUPIDITY.

Stupid people don’t have the raw intelligence to make it through high school, not even if they try their very best and study 4 hours every night.  Their brains cannot and will not make rational decisions or evaluate relative importances to correct conclusions.  So they won’t even bother studying because they put study so low on their priority list below basic urges like food, sex, booze, drugs, and hanging in the hood. 

The stupid notoriously make stupid choices, which explains why others call them stupid.  The stupid gravitate toward crime and welfare abuse to get by, so they end up legally or illegally mugging others for their sustenance.  You might say that proves their condition doesn’t include stupidity.  But those who tend toward crime usually get arrested, and so jails and prisons have huge, stupid populations.

For the majority of the mentally disabled who can’t graduate from high school, poverty has become not only a wrong and essentially unavoidable choice, but also an occupation.  The hardest work of the poor in America consists of traveling to the food pantry or mailbox to get food or a welfare check, or actually walking down to the store to cash in some food stamps.

The rest of the poor, effectively stupid, who actually could find a well-enough-paying job if they tried, often suffer from substance abuse that wrecks their intellects and make them useless as family members or citizens. Or they have PTSD from the stress of warfare or life and cannot function normally.  They become unproductive, and they end up legally mugging the more productive through Medicaid, and welfare or crime.

Aside from children, a few feckless people exist somewhere between vegetative and ambulatory who must become wards of the state or families, and absolutely cannot care for themselves, but I would not refer to them as poor so much as “boat anchors.”  We don’t mean them when we say poor.  So they don’t count in the discussion.

Generally, the poor have choices they can make to improve conditions, but because of mental or substance abuse-related handicaps, they always make wrong decisions.  Some don’t even have the sense to apply for welfare.  For those reasons, poverty has become the only way of life possible to them.  We can empathize with them.  We must care for them.  But we need to rid the planet of them through benign eugenics programs.

Their procreation by clinically insipid parents ought to become a crime every bit as evil and unconscionable as injecting people at random with a serum that makes them stupid for life.  Someday civilized societies will sterilize their defective and degenerate people of this kind so that they cannot procreate, no matter what.  And that will become the most enlightened government mandate of the millennium when it happens because it will pretty much cure the problem of the “poor.”

Continuing to feed and care for the chronically poor essentially constitutes a criminal enterprise, not altruism, when doing it through government welfare.  It sticks up and robs those who have resources, forcing them to contribute their sustenance to the so-called poor.  This becomes socially insane and civilizationally suicidal when doing it to the exclusion of the eugenics program I suggested.  Adults with IQ below 90 have no business coming into existence except in an agrarian or manufacturing society with no machines to do farm or factory work.  We no longer have such a society, so we have no excuse for actually cultivating and encouraging the procreation of degenerate, inferior, stupid people.

On top of all this, we voters do not insist on programs that will make sterilization and work for others the main conditions for obtaining welfare for subsistence.  People who receive undeserved largess from government ought to

·         Work daily in an organized and personal enterprise to help others.  By personal, I mean they ought to do physical work to care for needy and suffering people, if trustworthy, getting to know them in the process, and also work in group activities under supervision.  THEN, after doing 4 hours in a day of such work, the prospective recipient of welfare may collect that day’s portion of welfare, or have some held in an account to accrue for month’s end payments of necessary expenses for living.

·         Submit to sterilization for the duration of welfare.  Violent criminals ought to suffer permanent sterilization if only we had a trustworthy police and trial system.  People whom society cannot trust to feed and care for themselves should have no power to procreate.

 

Sensible citizens ought frankly to face the foregoing facts and take action, BENIGN action, to cure the problems.  We have people occupying powerful leadership positions in government who suffer from such myopia on the foregoing realities and pragmatisms, that they will not even discuss them sincerely.  Worst of all, they press heavily and dishonestly on people’s sympathies, implying that productive, sensible folk ought to suffer lifetime involuntary servitude (in violation of the 13^th Amendment) to feed, clothe, house, medicate, educate, train, and suffer crime and other abuse from the chronically, professionally POOR.  THAT makes no sense on this planet or any other planet that I can imagine.

I intend no personal assault, Darryl, on your sympathetic feelings for the POOR.  But I do wonder at your unwillingness ever to propound a single benign and practical solution to their very curable problem which you have raised more than once.  You seem to want to suggest that no solution worthy of contemplation exists, and yet I have suggested two very good solutions:  sterilization of the stupid, and requirement or daily toil in exchange for subsistence.

Maybe if you think really hard, you can come up with some even better ones OTHER than to continue bleeding productive people against their will to support the poor.

You have suggested with your conundrum that we all ponder, contemplate, and muse over the problem of poverty.  I have done my part.  Now why don’t you do yours?  YOU suggest some solutions that DON’T consist of ROBBING the productive at gunpoint to provide subsistence for the poor.

Now, I have shown you the difference between interesting (your poverty dilemma) and bullshit (continuing to rob the productive without curing the cause of the poverty).  NO difference exists.  Both constitute bullshit.  I see and have prescribed workable, cheap cures for the poverty.  I have done this repeatedly over the years.  You just keep citing the same old problem, but no cures.

Would you care to explain why?

 

One more thing, Darryl: 

At the end of your comments you bring up God, Jesus etc., apparently to encourage compassion for the poor.  That cannot become the issue here.  Nobody doubts that all should feel compassion.  But you ought to note that Jesus never forced others to feel compassion or behave compassionately, nor did he punish them for failing to do so.

You didn’t bother to bring this up or to analyze Jesus’ reasoning.  People should love one another and serve one another unselfishly and lovingly.  But they should NOT point a gun or use government power to FORCE others to pretend to behave lovingly and compassionately toward the needy, for such does not comply with the meaning of “Compassion,” “Love,” or “Sincerity.”

·         Love – the DESIRE to do good to others

·         Compassion – sympathy for the suffering of others that motivates one to demonstrate unselfish loving service to them.

·         Sincerity constitutes the prime ingredient in both love and compassion.  It means genuine and without falseness of hypocrisy.  One must Talk the Think and Walk the Talk in order to fulfill the obligation of sincerity in either love or compassion. 

 

Do you see anything about FORCE AT GUNPOINT in any of these meanings?  No?  Why not?  Because Love and Compassion constitute voluntary yearnings or desires.  Neither any person nor any government can or should use real or threatened physical or other FORCE to cause someone to feel love or compassion.  Any associated behavior against one’s compunctions deprives the behavior of sincerity, love, and compassion, makes it phony, and converts it to extortion, robbery, or legalized plunder, not true or genuine generosity or charity.

This should explain to all but the most obtuse why government welfare constitutes a crime against humanity and forms the very soul of evil because it has hypocrisy at its base.

The truth in this point suggests that those who would legislate welfare in fact loathe and want to steal from the productive members of society who have demonstrated sufficient intelligence, responsibility, and ability to evolve the power to contribute their sustenance to others.  The politicians behind welfare feel jealous and envious of the wealth of others and want to force those others to become relatively impoverished in order to support the so-called needy.  This remains true even though many needy, through sloth, greed, criminal intent, and the like, contrive not to produce what they could if sincere and industrious.

Such politicians do not tax themselves into relative poverty.  They make themselves into oligarchs who would change the law for the sake of forcing the able to support the less able.

For further understanding, one must confess the truth of genuine social welfare programs administered by churches and communities for their poor and less able.  Those who generously give of their own sustenance for such support of others do it out of love and goodness, not because of government or church force.

At the same time, such donors typically know or at least know of the prospective recipients of their gifts.  Deacons, community leaders, and better-off neighbors typically know which of their fellows suffer from lack or hardship, and feel compassion for them as a consequence.  Some shirkers receive from that generosity.  However, the donors and leaders complain against donating to those who abuse the gift such as by spending the money on drugs, booze, gambling, prostitutes, lavish and profligate excesses, or other vices.  Such abuses diminish as a consequence of the complaints and reduced charity.  Local welfare recipients begin to exercise more responsibility as a result.  They typically cannot fool local church deacons and civic leaders, so they behave better in order to obtain the community’s largess.

The widespread government welfare system never properly administers the money or properly requires honorable and appreciative behavior from recipients.  So, much abuse and waste occurs.  And Government collects much of the welfare money through taxes that impose severe hardships on the less needy, but STILL needy, lower middle class families that struggle to put food on the table and pay monthly living and medical expenses.

Above all other points here stands the core reality that most Americans of means have generous spirits and give abundantly to good causes, particularly people in need.  See the incredible proof of this in United Way, Red Cross, 9-11, Christian and other religious and secular charities, and other donation programs.   The nation has never needed to employ real or threatened government force to harvest massive voluntary contributions for helping others.  Donors keep donating in spite of the widespread government Robin Hood programs robbin’ from the haves and givin’ to the alleged have-nots.

In other words, America does not have an even remote need for enforced welfare.  Therefore, legislating it constitutes an egregious crime against the people of the land. 

I guarantee you that JESUS CHRIST WOULD NEVER ENDORCE ENFORCED CHARITY in any form, including government welfare.  And if you read both the Bible and Urantia Book, you will find that he never did endorse it.  I have guaranteed it on both the basis of logic and the history of Jesus’ teachings.

Note finally that Government has numerous ways of coercing people to support charities, though the people of America have never needed such coercion as a motive to give to support the needy.

Government provides lavish tax deductions for money people give to charities or spend on government’s ideal projects.  I consider this utterly crooked, but not as crooked as enforced welfare.  Government says “we won’t tax you on contributions you make to OUR choice of charities.”  Like I said:  crooked. Why?  Because government collects tax at gunpoint.  If you don’t give to those charities it will force you to pay a corresponding tax, often enough to put you in a higher tax bracket.  So, it remains an abusive mechanism of robbing from the haves to give to the haven’ts.

Darryl, I have done my best to explain why your invocation of the names of God and Jesus amounts to greater bullshit than any of your prior comments.  You have clearly sought to use them to evoke and prey on guilt and sympathy against a selfishness that you only presume exists in those who hate the enforced welfare system.  In reality you know that Americans generally have a generous nature and most give to charity.  You surely must know that most would give even more if government did not rob them blind for that very purpose. 

Thus, your invocation of God and Jesus in this matter constitutes a transparently obvious philosophic fraud, typical political speechmaking.  Why?  Because enforced welfare, no matter how justified, amounts to nothing more than a colossal scheme of plunder legalized by government having sufficient weaponry to enforce it.  As I have already shown, God and Jesus have nothing to do with legal plunder, PERIOD.  They want voluntary first-person compassion, not enforced third-person Bizarro-compassion.

By this commentary I do not mean to insult you, hurt your feelings, or demean your honorable notions promoting generous charity.  You have shown substantial generosity in your life time.  I know for a fact that you walk the talk, and you talk the think of such generosity.  I admire you for that.

I do mean to offer you an incentive for straightening out your thinking on this matter of legal plunder and enforced welfare.  We have discussed this for decades, you always insisting on the socialist angle of forcing every productive earner to become the keeper of unproductive citizens.  At first I thought you might have done it merely to antagonize, as you have done since your 6^th year of life.  A decade or so ago I began to wonder whether alcohol had fuzzied your mind somehow.  Now I wonder whether you have a psychological kink like Post Traumatic Stress Disorder as a remnant of the abuse you suffered as a child, or maybe you can’t help just wanting to get even with me somehow, such as by completely discounting logic, history, and common sense when discussing such issues with me.

America has many pressing problems that your fine intellect and sensitivity to the human condition could help solve in noble, benign ways if you only decided to apply yourself to discovering means that do not promote or require legal plunder for their implementation.

 

Bob Hurt    bh  Blog1 •Blog2 • Email • Law • Donate    f      t 
2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, Florida 33763 •727 669 5511