California Senate Leader Admits: "Half Of My Family" In Country Illegally With "False Social Securit

[fhl]

.....and the rest of the story.

There was no income tax when Abe took office. But it didn't take long. He passed the first income tax our country ever had six months later.

But the citizens up north didn't like his war and many of them began to flee the country so they wouldn't have to fight in it.
Abe couldn't let them get away with that, could he?

Hence, Abe created the law that makes US citizens pay income taxes no matter whether they live in the US or not. We're the only country in the world that does that.

Economic Policy: What countries besides the U.S. tax their non ...
https://www.quora.com/Economic-Policy-What-countries-besides-the-U-S-tax-their-non...
So agree with it or not, the US is the only country which truly has citizenship based taxation. The USA is one of the few countries of the world which levies personal income tax on all its citizens: not only on its residents – citizens or non-citizens – but also on its citizens who do not live in the country.


The income tax that was established in 1861 only lasted about a decade.
But the law requiring citizenship taxation survived. And we still have it.

Thanks, Abe.

 

[gwb-trading]

He said there would be no violence or bloodshed unless it was forced upon him to do so. And then he outlined how it could be forced upon him.
By the south not paying their taxes.

That's not the way most historians or myself read it at all.

 

[fhl]

That's not the way most historians or myself read it at all.

Of course not. And most historians still push the propaganda that Lincoln fought the civil war to free the slaves, too. That it was all about slavery. Is that how you read that first inaugural address? That he fought the war to free the slaves? And don't forget to include Lincoln's letter to Horace Greeley.

If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery.

https://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/greeley.htm


edit:

reasons for civil war googled:

"A common explanation is that the Civil War was fought over the moral issue of slavery. In fact, it was the economics of slavery and political control of that system that was central to the conflict.
Causes Of The Civil War | History Detectives | PBS
www.pbs.org/opb/historydetectives/feature/causes-of-the-civil-war/"


There are still historians all over the place claiming that slavery caused the war. It's easy to find them using google.

Slavery was but One of the reasons the south seceded. The war was entirely to keep the south from seceding. Not about slavery.

So much for what historians think.

 

[gwb-trading]

Of course not. And most historians still push the propaganda that Lincoln fought the civil war to free the slaves, too. That it was all about slavery. Is that how you read that first inaugural address? That he fought the war to free the slaves? And don't forget to include Lincoln's letter to Horace Greeley.

If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery.

https://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/greeley.htm

Actually at the time of his first inaugural address, Lincoln could care less about the slaves. Even later in the war he was not inclining to free the slave in all the states. He only freed slaves with his Emancipation Proclamation in the confederate states with the intent of creating chaos in these areas.

Lincoln's intent was solely to preserve the Union. He was willing to allow slavery to continue to exist in the South in these states. I never stated ever that Lincoln went to war to free the slaves.

 

[fhl]

Actually at the time of his first inaugural address, Lincoln could care less about the slaves. Even later in the war he was not inclining to free the slave in all the states. He only freed slaves with his Emancipation Proclamation in the confederate states with the intent of creating chaos in these areas.

Lincoln's intent was solely to preserve the Union. He was willing to allow slavery to continue to exist in the South in these states. I never stated ever that Lincoln went to war to free the slaves.

My reason for stating that was because you seemed to have place a great deal of weight on what the historians think. A shitload of them think it was all about slavery.

 

[fhl]

Here's an article from livescience about busting civil war myths.
http://www.livescience.com/13673-civil-war-anniversary-myths.html

They went to the 'expert historians' to bust civil war myths.

"Myth #1: The Civil War wasn't about slavery.

The most widespread myth is also the most basic. Across America, 60 percent to 75 percent of high-school history teachers believe and teach that the South seceded for state's rights, said Jim Loewen, author of "Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong" (Touchstone, 1996) and co-editor of "The Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader: The 'Great Truth' about the 'Lost Cause'" (University Press of Mississippi, 2010).

"It's complete B.S.," Loewen told LiveScience. "And by B.S., I mean 'bad scholarship.'"

In fact, Loewen said, the original documents of the Confederacy show quite clearly that the war was based on one thing: slavery."


See, we have lincoln's inaugural address. We have his letter to Horace Greeley. And yet 'historians' are still bound and determined to claim it was all about slavery.

And that's why I don't give a tinker's damn about what 'the historians' have to say about any of it.

The war was not about slavery and he did threaten the use of force if they didn't pay taxes.
It's all right there in the inaug address.

 

[gwb-trading]

My reason for stating that was because you seemed to have place a great deal of weight on what the historians think. A shitload of them think it was all about slavery.

For many of the supporters for going to war in the North, the entire issue was about slavery and nothing else. This includes my ancestors in Pennsylvania who were prominent abolitionists.

However for Lincoln the issue was preserving the Union.

 

[fhl]

For many of the supporters for going to war in the North, the entire issue was about slavery and nothing else. This includes my ancestors in Pennsylvania who were prominent abolitionists.

However for Lincoln the issue was preserving the Union.

But it wasn't about slavery until the war started looking very dicey for the north, and then Lincoln had to drum up help from the abolitionists, to get them to enlist, and he did that with the emancipation proclamation. To save his ass from losing.


On another note about the tax issue, congress passed the Morrill Tariff and it was signed into law two days before Lincoln's inauguration, by President Buchanan. It raised import tariffs from 17% to 37%.
Here's how congress voted:
"Thus the sectional breakdown was 96–15 in the north, 7–9 in the Border, and 1–39 in the south."

Doubled the taxes that the south opposed, presumably because they were the ones primarily targeted by the tax, and then Lincoln says two days later they're going to pay it or he would be forced to use violence.

 

[Snarkhund]

Very interesting thread, both sides.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

I wonder how many liberals still think forcing the South to remain in the Union was such a great accomplishment? How many would love to be rid of the South now?

We have reached the point where there seems to be a consensus between the right and left that we need to rethink the idea of a country with the current 50 states. Hopefully, we can deal with the issue rationally and not have another monster like Lincoln who kills half a million people to force his view on everyone.