[Previous entry: "Banks As Deadly As Bullets"] [Main Index] [Next entry: "BARELY A BLOG..."]

01/22/2007 Entry: "Tu, felix Australia, tributum exige!"

Tu, felix Austria Australia, nube tributum exige!

A letter sent TODAY by John Zube, not to Our/some Lord in Heaven, but to one of our typical Lords on Earth. May hundred of millions of people write millions of similar letters all the time to assert their natural rights. The title above is of course by CB, not by JZ.

X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2
From: "John Zube" <jzube@acenet.com.au>
To: "Philip Western" <valuergeneral@lands.nesw.gov.au>
Cc: "Christian Butterbach" <cb@panarchism.info>,
    "Richard C.B. Johnsson" <>,
    "Benjamin Marks" <>,
    "Uwe Timm" <>,
    "Thomas Greco -- CIRC2" <>,
    "Ron Manners" <>,
    "Gian Piero de Bellis" <>,
    "Thomas Zube" <>
Subject: 07 01 22 Philip Western Valuer General, Notice of Valuationas at 1 07 06 rec. today. Coal rights, land rate, land taxes, land ownership. OBJECTION TO THIS EVALUATION, Panarchism, Voluntary Taxation, Individual Secession
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 20:57:10 +1100
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028
X-AntiVirus: checked by AntiVir MailGuard (Version: 7; AVE:; VDF:

Joern Manfred Zube                 22. 1. 07
35 Oxley St., Berrima, NSW 2577
or P.O. Box 52, Berrima, NSW 2577
(02) 48 771 436

Philip Western, Valuer General
GPO Box 15 Sydney NSW 2001

Re: Notice of Valuation, Land Value as at 01 07 2006


I do object against that evaluation of my residentional block:


"7/35/758098/ 1/879471 (Lot 1 - Coal Rights Only)"

Dear Sir,

         firstly, your notice is unclear and confusing:

At first it speaks only of Coal Rights and then it speaks of the general land value and the rates that would be based on it.

No distinction is made between my surface rights and their value and the subsurface rights and their value. They are not separately mentioned.
Only a total is given of $ 354 000.00

Firstly, according to my memory, if I remember right, that is about 5 times as much as the last valuation
at about $ 72,000.--
Has the price of coal increased five times since then?
Certainly, my income has not increased five times, not even in further inflated monopoly and legal tender government paper money, and, lastly, all taxes, even on capital property, have to be paid out of income, particularly as far as unused capital values are concerned, like coal deposits, not yet mined.

With the tax to be expected on this valuation I might be driven out of house and home in my old age, I am 73 now, and had hoped to live to the end of my life in this largely self-built home.

You treat me like a feudal lord would, who wants to drive his tenants of "his" land, although you are merely supposed to be a public servant in a representative democracy.
You act thus even when your victims do possess a supposedly "freehold" land title.
How little this private property is respected by you is revealed by your taxes & your other monopoly charges for services.

Well, the percentage of the elderly in the population is increasing and via such official measures these victims of their supposed "representatives" often do not feel represented at all.
I do hope that this dissatisfaction will be strongly expressed in the next election returns.
On the other hand, you and your like may have cowed them already all too much and for all too long, to put up a resistance at least at the polls.

If the valuation for the surface rights had been given separately to the coal rights, then one could come to a reasonable decision on this matter.

Many years ago and all too quietly - I did not read anything about this in the papers or heard anything on this in broadcasts - at least the coal rights under private properties, if not other mineral rights as well, were nationalized by the NSW government of those days - without notifying each individual owner, which should have been the least of what should have been demanded and, moreover, without offering him or her any indemnification.

Then, some time later, an indemnification was offered - upon application within a certain limited period.
Many people may have overlooked that offer. I did not and did apply.
After a prolonged correspondence and as a result of long calculation, covering many pages and costing, probably, in postage alone, not to speak of your and my labor involved, more than $ 10, I was finally notified that my indemnification was to be $ 10.
I was "generously" allowed to refuse that not so generous "offer" - and I did.

Now you are writing me that the coal rights or land rights plus coal rights are according to you worth $ 354 000.00!!!

Are you making me a purchase offer for these seemingly so valuable coal rights, according to this, your evaluation, and if so, would you offer me again only a ridiculous $ 10, but, at the same time, still insist that I ought to be annually taxed according to your "evaluation" of "my" coal rights capital value?

I can see in this only an extremely abusive kind of State Socialism and State Feudalism, for which you were never formally authorized by the public, by a referendum, far less by individual consent and power of attorney.

Almost everyone in this district knows about the crooked land deals that a former NSW minister for lands ( later even Premier! ) attempted in this district alone. I know of at least two such cases, in which he tried to enrich himself through his position and insider information. Luckily, he did not get away with these two attempts. I do not know how often he did succeed with other such endeavors, elsewhere in NSW.

But I am under the impression that his kind of crookedness, this time for public revenue purposes, continues, as a tradition, in this department.

In my case the subdivision of this block and then building on the subdivision is severely restricted.
Your evaluation takes no notice of this fact and treats the land as if it were under no such restrictions.

I wanted to pass on, cheaply, for only a nominal amount, half of my block to my second son or to any of his four children, so that they could build a home there. But present restrictions would not allow that.
Recently I read that even if I were allowed to pass on the title of half of my block to my son or grandchildren, I would still be taxed as if I had sold it at your evaluation!
Is that the kind of justice I can expect from you and your cohorts?
Gifts evaluated by strangers and charged with a high tax!

Not only do I have to continue paying high surface land rates for the unused lower half, but I have to keep mowing it, too, regularly, too. Always in the knowledge that these of my labors will be highly taxed, via the rates, too, not only in the petrol I use up in the process.

My income is so low, that I did not have to pay taxes this year but got a refund out of small investments that were pretaxed etc.

Your evaluation would put me into a high land tax bracket, leading to a land tax with which I might be altogether unable to cover from my low income.
Then your evaluation would amount for me to an expropriation! I would be driven out of my house and home!For then I might have to sell my home and this under pressure, in a relatively short period, i.e. under its market price, which would, probably, be very different from your official evaluation.

So I suggest that you reveal to me, separately, the coal rights valuation and the surface rights evaluation and make me an offer to buy the coal rights or arrange for such an offer to be made to me.

I do not really want the lower half of my block but neither would I be willing to pass them over to you for a mere $ 10.
Fair is fair and ridiculous is ridiculous.

Many years ago I have already sold off the blocks right and left of this one and other people have built their homes upon them.
I certainly do not want to contribute to the land shortage, hoping for a profit from a future sale at a high price.

That above-mentioned "indemnification" amount offered was so ridiculously low that I may still continue with an old plan to publish all the correspondence on this subject in a brochure, or online or on disk. This would, merely by its facts, ridicule the Department of Lands and the Valueer General Office and their activities.

Naturally, you would use your coal "rights" title to extort further taxes in the future from coal miners and thus from their customers.

It is a racket indeed, in which you are involved.

The other compulosory taxes, even progressive taxation, do not have my consent, either.
The communists, who propagated compulsory taxation first, abolished it even before at least some Western governments did. Most "Western" governments still follow the ancient communist party line in this, already expressed 1848 in the Communist Manifesto of Marx and Engels.

All compulsory taxation should be abolished and replaced by prices, subscriptions and insurance premiums or voluntary taxation - for wanted, ordered and competitively supplied services only.

All communities should become confined to volunteers and exterritorial autonomy only.
Territorialism leads to wars, civil wars, bloody revolutions, insurrections, military uprisings and private terrorism
as well - and, lastly, to the general Holocaust with WMD. History is full of proofs for that statement. I have also written two books on the subject.

Almost every territorial State - apart from some mini-ones - has all too much in common with a criminal protection racket like that of the Mafia.
All the democratic pretences about it are just so much camouflage or propaganda.

A territorial & "representative democratic" government is ethically, morally, by rights, no more the rightful owner of a whole country and all its inhabitants and their properties and incomes than ever an absolute king or emperor was, regardless of the laws passed by that government to suit that government.
Nevertheless, they continue to treat us, to a large extent, as their property, likewise our real estate, other property and earnings.

Until a government allows dissenters to peacefully secede from it, individually and in voluntary groups, and tolerates all kinds of exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers within its former borders, it is not based upon genuine consent, in spite of all its braying about its "mandate".
As a compulsorily territorial State, with involuntary subjects and taxpayers, it remains, more or less, a "warfare State" and a State for the official exploitation of its subjects, under the pretence of serving them.

The Nazis passed laws, too. That did not make them right.

Not only the Aborigines have some reason to consider the later comers as invaders and as an occupation force.

Now territorial "white" governments organized an occupation force, legalized themselves and treated all their subjects, regardless of their skin color, religion, ideology and individual preferences, apart from the occasional more or less farcical "free" elections and referendum, to a large extent as their property, to use or abuse as they please, under the pretence that they would be acting democratically. - People treated as property!

How undemocratically even the Australian governments are is indicated by the fact that they have still not published or subscribed to a decent declaration of individual rights and liberties.
Admittedly, the Nazis and the Communist Totalitarian Regimes didn't, either.
But should we continue to follow their examples?
Did we ever have a referendum e.g. on the kind and level of taxation?

Not recognizing the right to migrate and settle for all peaceful people, the Federal Government has even introduced concentration camps in Australia for illigal immigrants, their wives and children included!
Territorial laws are forced upon these victims, too, all too largely with the consent of the public which has been miseducated and misled via the nationalized "education" system and the still all too government controlled broadcasting and the government's "media policy".

Should we still be proud to be Australians and consider it to be a free country and ourselves free?

PIOT, John Zube          

(Panarchy In Our Time or: To each the government or non-governmental society of his or her choice!)

Powered By Greymatter