Nhân Loại Đang Trả Giá Cho Tín Lý Nhà Nước của Họ

Người ta, nhất là những người tự nhận là vô thần có óc “khoa học” (Atheism), thường tấn công lên án và mỉa mai  rất đúng đắn rằng trong tín lý tôn giáo đầy dẫy những ngây ngô phi lý và nghịch lý. Nhưng những nghịch lý trong niềm tin tôn giáo cũng chỉ là TÍN LÝ TƯỞNG TƯỢNG; ai tin thì tin, không tin thì thôi, nó không hiện thực áp chế những nghịch lý phi lý vào đời sống thực tế của con người.  Nhưng với tín lý của định chế nhà nước chính phủ, những nghịch lý và phi lý nó áp đặt một cách bạo ngược vào chính đời sống thực tế hàng ngày của mọi người.

Tại Mỹ, ngoài luật “cấm hứng nước mưa”, cấm không được giúp đỡ người không nhà cửa, cho tiền kẻ ăn mày khốn khó v.v Nhà nước Mỹ hiện còn có luật cướp tiền mặt, nhà cửa của dân chúng với lý cớ SỐ TIỀN, NHÀ CỬA PHẠM TỘI, không phải chủ nhân!!!  Cảnh sát chỉ bắt giữ kẻ có tội là SỐ TIỀN, CĂN NHÀ… và CHỦ NHÂN phải chờ Tòa án xét xử SỐ TIỀN, CĂN NHÀ vô hạn định đến mức phải “tự nguyện từ bỏ” những tài sản này!

(Luật Pháp và Pháp Quyền cướp Tiền Tài Sản của Dân Chúng CIVIL FORFEITURE)


Tưởng chỉ có xứ Mỹ, giờ đây tại Ý, nhà nước đã chứng tỏ quyền lực cao hơn, đánh thuế “cái bóng hiên của hiệu” của các cửa hàng!!!

Không phải chuyện tiếu lâm hay “thuyết âm mưu” đâu! Đang xảy ra thực tế!

Nhà nước và luật gia của nhà nước Ý “lý giải” rằng: CÁI BÓNG CỦA MÁI HIÊN, TẤM CHE phủ phần đường phố, nghĩa là sử dụng  tài sản công cộng do nhà nước quản lý, thì phải trả tiền, nghĩa là trả thuế!

Tưởng chỉ là một chuyện cá biệt ở Ý, nhưng ở Áo quốc (Austria) nhà nước còn bắt cửa hiệu nào dùng không gian (không khí) công cộng trả tiền nữa! Dù chưa chính thức đánh thuế THỞ, nhưng bắt trả tiền khoảng không khí sử dụng thì coi như cũng gần như thế! Nhưng rồi sẽ đến mức đó thôi, nhà nước đã đánh “thuế thở” trong ngành du lịch rồi! Đánh thuế toàn diện đời sống chỉ còn là vấn đề thời gian. Chúng khôn khéo đi từng bước “nho nhỏ” trước mà thôi.

Ngày xưa giáo hội Công giáo còn bán “phép tha tội của Chúa” cho những ai phạm tội để được tha và lên thiên đường cùng Chúa Giời Lòng Lành nữa! Người ta tin rằng giáo hội là “trung gian, đại diện duy nhất của Chúa”, cho nên Gáio hội “tha” thì đương nhiên Chúa phải chấp nhận! Các đại gia, quí tộc thời bấy giờ cứ tỉnh bơ phạm tội và  đua nhau mua “phép tha tội”, khiến giáo hội Vatican trở thành cực giầu có. Đây là một trong những lý do chính khiến phong trào phản đối và ly khai giáo hội công giáo của Martin Luther và Calvin! Nhưng việc “mua bán thiên đàng cõi phúc” này không phải đã chấm dứt, hay chỉ có giáo hội Vatican ứng dụng, ngày nay, hầu hết các loại giáo hội tôn giáo đều cổ động tín đồ đóng góp tiền xây dựng đền đài …mua “công đức”.

Xét ra tôn giáo vẫn tử tế hơn. Chỉ kêu gọi khuyến khích Ai TIN và CÓ TIỀN thì cứ mua công đức.

Với Nhà nước “đóng góp xây dựng hạnh phúc an ninh” là CƯỠNG BỨC. Cái giá “không tuân thủ” mỗi cá nhân chúng ta có thể đã biết rồi. Cái hầu hết chúng ta không biết là CHÚNG TA ĐANG LÀ NÔ LỆ vì tự lừa dối chính mình với tín lý nhá nước tận thiện!

Nhân loại đã gấu ó chém giết nhau hàng thế kỷ cho đến nay chưa chấm dứt vối niềm tin rằng “GIỐNG NÒI DÂN TỘC, BẢN SẮC VĂN HÓA  của chúng tao độc đáo và tôn quí hơn chúng mày”; và rằng Thượng Đế của chúng tao- con đường giải thoát khổ đau, yêu thương nhân loại của chúng tao đúng hơn của chúng mày”, và hiện đại lại thêm  “hệ thống nhà nước của chúng tao tốt đẹp hơn hệ thống nhà nước của chúng mày”! Và cứ cắm đầu hô hào đua nhau nhảy vào giết nhau!

Dù rõ rệt như thế, hôm nay vẫn còn một lũ cắm đầu lải nhải chì chiết cộng sản thế này, Mác Xít thế kia! Khuynh tả thế nọ, khuynh hữu thế ấy  v.v Làm như nếu không phải cộng sản, Mác Xít, khuynh tả, thì coi như  định chế sẽ trở nên tốt đẹp! Và ngược lại, một lũ đối nghịch vẫn lải nhải bọn tư bản chúng thế này, bọn hũu khuynh thế nọ v.v làm như hễ từ bỏ tư bản, hữu khuynh là cái định chế nhà nước nó trở nên tốt lành , tận thiện cho mọi người!

Chẳng có đứa nào nhận ra, dùng bằng chứng hàng ngàn năm cho đến nay, chính cái bản chất định chế nhà nước băng hoại và hủy hại nhân tính tự do. Nó khoác áo mang danh hiệu khác nhau tùy mức “thiếu hiểu biết” của từng xã hội, nhưng nội chất hành xử và mục tiêu chỉ là một . Mục tiêu xuyên suốt chưa hề gia giảm, mà càng ngày càng chặt chẽ tế vi, kết hợp rộng lớn hơn bao giờ!

Bạn muốn gọi nó là “nhà nước ẩn tàng” hay “trật tự thế giới mới” v.v tùy ý.

Bạn trả giá cho niềm tin của bạn, DÙ BẤT CỨ NIỀM TIN LOẠI NÀO mà bạn giao khoán quyền quyết định cho một người, một nhóm, một định chế. Hay nói ngắn gọn là niềm tin vào một thứ quyền lực ngoại thân ban phát cho bạn!

Bạn có nhớ rằng nhân loại đã bị tàn sát hàng loạt xuyên suốt hàng chục ngàn năm cho đến nay vì tin vào giáo hội, vương quyền, nhà nước giai cấp, nhà nước tư sản, nhà nước dân chù hay không?

Tùy bạn kiểm nghiệm và suy ngẫm vậy!

22-03-2015
NKPTC

NGUỒN DẪN THAM KHẢO:

Evolution of Taxes: Italy Taxes “Shadows”, Tax on Breathing Next?

Zero Hedge had an interesting article today called In Italy, They’re Now Taxing Shadows.
This is one of those stories where you expect the headline to be a bit of an exaggeration. It wasn’t.

As Italian newspaper Leggo reports, store owners in Conegliano are now faced with the unfortunate (albeit comically absurd) proposition of paying taxes on shadows.
The rationale appears to go something like this: an awning casts a shadow on public property and therefore you must pay to use that property.

Tax on Breathing Next?
I pinged that article off Pater Tenebrarum at Acting Man. He lives in Austria. Pater responded …

They actually got that idea from Austria, where we have the so-called (put down the coffee) “air tax”. No, it’s not a tax on breathing just yet. But if you have a shop sign that “occupies airspace”, you must pay a tax for it!

In Vienna this is garnished additionally with the “subway levy”, which has to be paid regardless of whether one uses the subway or not. In fact, I think there is no government on the planet more inventive with regard to taxes, levies and imposts of all sorts.
Illinois Tax Proposals
Earlier today I noted Proposed Illinois Tax Hikes: Financial Transactions, Millionaires, Guns, Sweetened Beverages, Satellite Providers, Fireworks, Progressive Income

image: https://phiquyenchinh.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/ace22-illinois2btax.png

Additional tax-hike proposals are being thrown around without any idea of how much they might raise. State Rep. Rita Mayfield, D-Waukegan, proposed a 3.75% tax on guns and gun parts.
When asked how much revenue it would raise, she said she didn’t know but thought “if we can get a good million or so, I’ll take it.
State Rep. Lou Lang, D-Skokie, recently said that “creative lawmakers can come up with many options for new revenue.”
Creative Options
Let’s hope Lou Lang does not look at what’s happening in Italy or Austria, or proposed tax on shadows or even breathing will soon be on the way.

==

In Italy, They’re Now Taxing Shadows

inShare6

As Greece struggles to convince the world it’s serious about adopting a series of reforms designed to bolster its economy including cracking down on rampant tax evasion, the Syriza government may want to look to Italy for creative ideas on how to boost government revenue. As Italian newspaper Leggo reports, store owners in Conegliano are now faced with the unfortunate (albeit comically absurd) proposition of paying taxes on shadows. 
The rationale appears to go something like this: an awning casts a shadow on public property and therefore you must pay to use that property. Here’s more:
Via Google Translate:

CONEGLIANO – is another incoming wave of taxes for merchants Conegliano that this time they have to pay the tax “on the shadow.”
At first glance it might seem a joke, but it’s one of those imposts hidden (but then not so) in the folds of the Italian rules. If a store or a bar has an awning outside the shadowing on public property, must pay a fee that is part of the public land use, tax on employment of public land. While employment is obviously only virtual. “It’s absurd – says Mathias Doimo, owner of the grocery store” La Dispensa “via Vital -. We will pay for this too, but not really talk about it. It’s a shame.
Mathias, 31, has taken over the shop in 2008. Outside, to protect the window from the sun so that the foodstuffs are not directly exposed to light, has installed a curtain of four square meters. A few days ago he received from Abaco, the company that manages the tax on behalf of the City, the payment request. The tax is charged at EUR 8.40 per square meter and the fee is calculated based on the area of ??the tent. In his case the tent is 4 square meters, and has to pay 33.6 euro that comes with various rounding to 34 euro.

The best thing about this policy (if you’re the government) is that taken to its logical extreme, you could charge everyone a fee on sunny days as unless you’re a vampire, you probably are using public land by casting a shadow. We would also note that this gives new meaning to the term “shadow banking.”
===

Roman Catholic Church in 1500

The “rotteness” of the Roman Catholic Church was at the heart of Martin Luther’s attack on it in 1517when he wrote the “95 Theses” thus sparking off the German Reformation. 
At the start of the C16, the Roman Catholic Church was all powerful in western Europe. There was no legal alternative. The Catholic Church jealously guarded its position and anybody who was deemed to have gone against the Catholic Church was labelled a heretic and burnt at the stake. The Catholic Church did not tolerate any deviance from its teachings as any appearance of ‘going soft’ might have been interpreted as a sign of weakness which would be exploited.
Why was the Roman Catholic Church so powerful?
Its power had been built up over the centuries and relied on ignorance and superstition on the part of the populace. It had been indoctrinated into the people that they could only get to heaven via the church.
This gave a priest enormous power at a local level on behalf of the Catholic Church. The local population viewed the local priest as their ‘passport’ to heaven as they knew no different and had been taught this from birth by the local priest. Such a message was constantly being repeated to ignorant people in church service after church service. Hence keeping your priest happy was seen as a prerequisite to going to heaven.
This relationship between people and church was essentially based on money – hence the huge wealth of the Catholic Church. Rich families could buy high positions for their sons in the Catholic Church and this satisfied their belief that they would go to heaven and attain salvation. However, a peasant had to pay for a child to be christened (this had to be done as a first step to getting to heaven as the people were told that a non-baptised child could not go to heaven); you had to pay to get married and you had to pay to bury someone from your family in holy ground.
To go with this, you would pay a sum to the church via the collection at the end of each service (as God was omnipresent he would see if anyone cheated on him), you had to pay tithes (a tenth of your annual income had to be paid to the church which could be either in money or in kind such as seed, animals etc.) and you were expected to work on church land for free for a specified number of days per week. The days required varied from region to region but if you were working on church land you could not be working on your own land growing food etc. and this could be more than just an irritant to a peasant as he would not be producing for his family or preparing for the next year.
However, unfair and absurd this might appear to someone in the 1990’s it was the accepted way of life in 1500 as this was how it had always been and no-one knew any different and very few were willing to speak out against the Catholic Church as the consequences were too appalling to contemplate.
Do note, if you did not go to heaven then the likelihood was that your soul had been condemned to Hell. Heresy was visibly punished with public burnings which you were expected to attend. John Huss was accused of heresy and granted a safe passage to Constance in modern Switzerland to defend himself at trial. He never got his trial as he was arrested regardless of his guarantee of a safe passage by the Catholic Church and burnt in public.
The Catholic Church also had a three other ways of raising revenue.
Relics: These were officially sanctioned by the Vatican. They were pieces of straw, hay, white feathers from a dove, pieces of the cross etc. that could be sold to people as the things that had been the nearest to Jesus on Earth. The money raised went straight to the church and to the Vatican. These holy relics were keenly sought after as the people saw their purchase as a way of pleasing God. It also showed that you had honoured Him by spending your money on relics associated with his son.
Indulgences: These were ‘certificates’ produced in bulk that had been pre-signed by the pope which pardoned a person’s sins and gave you access to heaven. Basically if you knew that you had sinned you would wait until a pardoner was in your region selling an indulgence and purchase one as the pope, being God’s representative on Earth, would forgive your sins and you would be pardoned. This industry was later expanded to allow people to buy an indulgence for a dead relative who might be in purgatory or Hell and relieve that relative of his sins. By doing this you would be seen by the Catholic Church of committing a Christian act and this would elevate your status in the eyes of God.
Pilgrimages: These were very much supported by the Catholic Church as a pilgrim would end up at a place of worship that was owned by the Catholic Church and money could be made by the sale of badges, holy water, certificates to prove you had been etc. and completed your journey.
It was the issue of indulgences that angered Martin Lutherinto speaking out against them – potentially a very dangerous thing to do.

MLA Citation/Reference

“Roman Catholic Church in 1500”. HistoryLearningSite.co.uk. 2014. Web.
==

The ‘breathing tax’, and 10 other ridiculous air travel charges

Plans for a so-called “breathing tax” were unveiled in Venezuela last week. Here are 10 more controversial fees

87

144

0

10

241

Email

‘Kiss and drop’ charges have proven particularly contentious Photo: ALAMY

By Oliver Smith

11:23AM BST 14 Jul 2014

70 Comments

Plans for a so-called “breathing tax” were unveiled by Venezuela’s biggest international airport last week, prompting outrage among social media users.

Maiquetia International Airport in Caracas announced that all passengers will now have to pay a 127 bolivar (£12) per-person tax upon departure to cover the cost of a newly-installed air purification system.

The system will “protect the health of travellers” and eliminate bacterial growth, the country’s Ministry of Water and Air Transport claims, but has been described by those who use the airport as a tax on the oxygen they breathe.

Here are some other ridiculous and controversial charges air travellers are expected to pay.

Fat tax

Last year Samoa Air became the first airline to charge passengers according to how much they weigh. The policy may not be a ridiculous as it sounds – a poll by Telegraph Travel suggested that nearly 80 per cent support “pay as you weigh” air fares.
£1 for a cigarette
Back in 2011, Belfast International Airport introduced a £1 charge for passengers wishing to access the dedicated smoking area, angering fliers in need of a pre-flight cigarette.
Plastic bags
Luton Airport was accused of profiteering in 2007 when it began charging passengers £1 for two resealable plastic bags, items necessary to comply with the 100ml liquids rule.
Carry-on luggage
Wizz Air became the first European airline to charge passengers for hand luggage last autumn. Bags larger than 42cm x 32cm x 25cm, but smaller than 56cm x 45cm x 25cm, can be placed in an overhead locker – for a £12 fee.
But it is US airlines that have taken the lead. Frontier Airlines, a low-cost carrier based in Denver, charges passengers up to $100 (£64) to take a bag on board. That is the fee when paid at the airport. If it’s paid online, it is $25 (£16). Spirit Airlines and Allegiant Air, two more US carriers, have similarly high fees for carry-on baggage.
“Kiss and drop”
Belfast, Birmingham, Bristol, East Midlands, Leeds Bradford, Newcastle and Luton airport all charge drivers to use drop-off zones. The most expensive charges are at Leeds Bradford and Luton. Both charge a minimum of £2 – for 30 minutes at the former airport and 15 minutes at the latter. Drivers who stay beyond 30 minutes at Leeds are charged £5; those who stay beyond an hour must pay £10. The waiting time at Luton is capped at 15 minutes – those who exceed the limit can expect an £80 fine.
$16 for a blanket
Norwegian, which launched low-cost flights from Gatwick to the US this month, charges $5 for use of a blanket. But the figure pales in comparison to Allegiant Air, which charges between $17 and $25.
The EU261 levy
Until recently, Ryanair charged all passengers a €2/£2 “EU261 levy” to offset the cost of paying compensation for flight delays and cancellations under EU regulations. Rather cheeky considering it touted itself as Europe’s most “on-time” airline.
Name change fees
Dozens of airlines do it – but Ryanair remains the worst, charging passengers a staggering £110 (or £160 at the airport) if they need to correct a spelling mistake on their ticket. Mercifully, they waive the fee if the error is spotted within 24 hours of booking.
“Airport development” charges
Passengers flying from Newquay, Durham, Norwich and Blackpool are essentially charged twice to use the airport. While taxes and fees are included in your airline ticket, those using these four must pay an additional “airport development fee” of up to £10 before they can take off.
Fuel surcharges
Despite the fluctuating price of fuel during the past decade, fuel surcharges have only gone in one direction.
In 2012, for example, Telegraph Travel reported that airlines had, between April 2011 and July 2012, increased their surcharges by 53 per cent, while oil prices had risen by just 24 per cent. BA during that time had risen by around 40 per cent, to between £75 and £119.50 per person. And this is one area where no-frills airlines, which don’t levy them, shine.