Skip to comments.United Nations Proposal: World Taxation Without Representation
Posted on 03/15/2006 9:20:22 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Researcher Cliff Kincaid has devoted his life in recent years to studying what is happening at the United Nations. He fortunately has a strong stomach. This amalgamation of nations which continually is envious of the prosperity of the United States convenes to debate new ways that we can be taxed for their benefit.
A few months ago the UN had its sights firmly on the Internet. Thanks to Kincaid and others these designs were exposed early on and the UN was forced temporarily to back off taxation of the Internet. The retreat is only tactical - one step back to take two steps forward.
Kincaid has discovered a meeting at which UN Secretary General Kofi Annan delivered a major but virtually unreported speech to a UN Conference at the end of February and the first of March 2006 at which he challenged delegates to have the courage to levy international taxes. The meeting was hosted by that great friend of America French President Jacques Chirac.
Among the $200 billion in new taxes which the UN is proposing to levy are: Taxes on air transport: this tax, Kincaid reports, was said to make "economic sense." Taxes on aviation fuel: this tax was sold on the basis that it would have a positive impact upon the environment. Taxes on airline tickets: this tax, according to the UN, easily could be implemented because there is no legal obstacle, and it would generate $8 billion per annum.
The UN also seeks an indirect tax on air-flight corridors, which should generate $10 billion per annum, to be followed by an indirect tax on passenger transportation, to raise $20 billion per annum. An international currency tax would generate $60 billion. A tax on carbon emissions which at five cents per gallon of gasoline would bring in a whopping $130 billion per annum. There you have it: the UN proposal to tax us for the first $200 billion.
If the UN were not blocked in this clear usurpation of power the $200 billion would be only the beginning. The United States takes in about $2 trillion in taxes. Surely the UN can figure how to duplicate that amount.
The Chirac-Annan conference was titled "the Paris Conference on Innovative Financing Mechanisms" and apparently behind the back of the United States government the UN is planning its taxation schemes almost immediately.
The matter was raised with GOP House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO), who was instrumental in causing the House to go on record against UN taxation of the Internet. He said he was confident that he could stop the implementation of any of these new taxes. Fine. What would happen after November if the Democrats were in control and they accepted these taxes as part of their budget resolution? George W. Bush would veto that, you say. In the sixth year of his Presidency, he has vetoed nothing. Let us say he would veto it.
Let us also suggest that after the end of Bush's term a Democrat were to occupy the White House. The odds favor that. The only reason George H. W. Bush was elected in 1988 was because Ronald W. Reagan concluded his term in very popular fashion. Bush was seen at a third term for Reagan. If Bush '43 should conclude his term on a note of unpopularity it would be highly unlikely that he would be succeeded by another Republican.
At some point these UN taxes very likely will be imposed upon this country. When that happens we would completely lose our ability to control taxation. President Bush's tax cuts have generated billions more revenue than was projected. He and a handful of other "supply siders" believed this would happen. There is no way that you would be able to convince the UN to cut taxes so additional money would be generated. No, the UN will keep taxes high. Given the types of taxes proposed, the levies will be next to invisible. Not many of us look at an airline ticket to break down the amount of taxation reflected in the price of that ticket.
Annan made it clear that the money generated by taxation will not replace dues money or other forms of aid raised for various causes. The UN Secretary told the UN Conference "Innovative sources of financing should not be seen as a replacement for traditional forms of aid. Rather they are meant to generate even more money for development and to channel resources more effectively. And there are some very promising possibilities on the table." For example, a nation wants to develop an industrial park to promote business and industry. The money thenceforth would come from the UN and not from traditional investments.
The list of US participants appears to have been nominated by the far-left NATION magazine. The United States delegation was composed entirely of liberal globalists. Who named them? How did they get there? Is this something John Bolton can tackle as Ambassador to the UN?
Numerous nations already have begun to implement the various taxes called for at the Paris conference. The old media soon will begin to pressure the United States to pay "our fair share" by implementing these taxes. We fought a revolution in part over "no taxation without representation." Who has represented us at the UN? Ambassador Bolton is doing an excellent job there but is he on top of this? When I met with him recently the subject was not mentioned although he covered the waterfront.
The UN cannot be trusted. The UN continually is looking to shift assets from those who have achieved to those who have not and often to those who would not know how effectively to utilize those shifted assets.
This coming presidential election will be unique. For the first time in half a century no president or vice president will be running. Both parties are wide open. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is the favorite Democrat but who knows if she will run. So every voter of every political stripe should ask candidates of all political parties where they stand on UN taxation. Once this enquiry starts there will be no end to it. While we are at it, we need to support Cliff Kincaid at America's Survival Inc. (Kincaid@comcast.net) We need him as our watchdog, informing us about the latest UN outrages. If he were not on top of these developments we might never know about them in time to act.
Paul M. Weyrich is Chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation.
Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA.
Tyrants want to tax U.S. citizens. Why I am not surprised.
When the UN starts taxing America, that is the day many Americans will simply not pay them any more. Some of us are already mad as hell. One more tax is going to be the straw that breaks the camel's back.
It will also be the day that the American people declate war on the Leftist fanatics who run that particular Stalinist "institution."
I would like to think so, but I have little confidence in that anymore.
If they can levy taxes, they can raise a global bureacracy and a one-world army to impose its will...
Get the USA out of the UN and the UN out of the USA!
I agree with the former statement, but the latter is wishful thinking. No more than 30% of the Americans in the 13 colonies were pro-Revolution. Most folks were pro-status quo or just wanted to keep their heads down. Assuming the American people will stand up against UN taxation is as bad as assuming sheep will fight being sheared. I would not assume that, after a tax is agreed to by the elected President and Congress, an anti-UN stance would get the support of even 20% of Americans, given the years of follow-government-blindly publik-skule indoctrination most Americans have been through.
The UN exists at the pleasure of world bodies wishing to tolerate them.
Nobody elected them world leader with the ability to tax anything.
I feel the UN is the modern day League of Nations, and when it tries this, the first world democracies and republics that fund the UN will pull their funding and the UN will collapse under it's own corrupt and stupidity, much like the actual UN HQ building is doing right now in New York City.
Tyrants want to tax U.S. citizens.
They've been doing it for years.
It's called the "self-employment" tax.
See post 10.
Kelo them. They are not paying taxes are they? A convenience store would bring in more tax revenue, without all the unpaid parking tickets.
We'll all be dead in our graves before that ever happens.
LOL!! I give it five years tops before it happens.
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
The only "world government" I support is the one where I'm referred to as His Royal Majesty, and everyone bows down to me. /sarcastic fantasy
Exactly! First we need to close the borders and secondly the UN can do all the taxing and posturing it wants from Easter Island. There have been great discussions here about the USA being once an isolationist nation or not - but the UN is reason # 1 that we ought to be - or at least cut way back on our availablilty and assistance to the rest of the world. As far as France goes: if their government wants to support this kind of garbage they can eat camel dung soup when the Crescents with their scimitars formally invade.
The globalists on the Right will see to it that the globalists on the Left do not fail.
Remember where the President stands on the Law of the Sea Treaty.
Sounds like a fund raiser.
That's right, take from the have's to develop the have nots. Only thing is that the have nots are in that situation because of corrupt regimes who have soaked their people for all they're worth and now are trying to figure out how to soak the US and western Europe as well. Sickening.
I sure hope you're right. I don't have a lot of confidence in the majority of Americans that seem to just roll over to whatever is thrown at them. As long as we're in "bread and circus" mode they don't think it affects them, just like Germany in the early days of Hitler.
Besides, if this initial tax is a transportation tax, most people who don't fly regularly won't get the point. We will become conditioned to international taxes by first imposing a tax that will impact the least amount of people.
Yea, just declare it "blighted" and claim imminent domain. Seems to work everywhere else!
About 230 years ago Kofi, there was a guy named King George. And this king guy taxed us, but we had no say in his court, or on our land. So one day some old white guys drafted this thing call the Declaration of Independence. After that, we kicked king George's a$$. Just because of taxation without representation.
Isn't that a nice bed time story, Kofi?
They already are taxing US citizens. It is backended through NGO funded programs such as Healthy People 2010
Healthy People 2010
Are you in Idaho?
You already are paying taxes to the UN. It is being funneled through your state that signed on to the NGO funded Healthy People 2010 program
Idaho Idaho Public Health Plan
Thanks for the ping, TSR!
As Ruben Mendez noted in his paper on global taxation:
charges for the use of the global commons, which could fall under the rubric of user fees, would be viewed as a form of global taxation. It is one of the innovations of the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention that royalties may be charged for the exploitation of the deep ocean bed, which is deemed to be part of the common heritage of mankind.
Mendez declared that, despite the opposition of the US and others, I can see industrialized nations with strong environmental lobbies leading the way toward acceptance and implementation of global taxes.
Mendez declared that the Kyoto Protocol, also known as the global warming treaty, considered adopting an approach to regulating global pollution that could lay the groundwork for global taxes. The approach, he said, involved countries issuing and selling pollution permits. If such an arrangement is adopted by developed countries, including the U.S., Mendez says this will lead to their trading in international markets, thus paving the way for a new regime of global taxation.
The article isn't recent but still timely. Worth the read.
>>>If such an arrangement is adopted by developed countries, including the U.S., Mendez says Âthis will lead to their trading in international markets, thus paving the way for a new regime of global taxation.Â
Office of Journal of the European Communities 24.4.8
Council Decision of 16 March 1998 - http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/1998/l_118/l_11819980421en00030063.pdf
Annex Agreement- Commission Decision of 28 November 2003
All pets must be electronically identified according to our EU/WTO
Send the UN to some jihadistan..
$19,705.00US* OECD - Office of Economic Co-operation and Development - one of those huge UN-type pro-globalist bureaucracies you never heard of that your tax dollars nevertheless are squandered to support.
Well of course not!
Our public schools spoonfeed this garbage to our kids.
The UN, thanks to the mountains of US taxpayer dollars it receives, hires and maintains teams of thousands of lawyers to come up with this stuff.
Fancy legalese for the ignorant masses to swallow, which legalizes piracy on a global scale.
AP | 9/15/2005 | KIM GAMEL
UNITED NATIONS -- Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez denounced the U.S.-led war in Iraq on Thursday and told world leaders they should consider moving the U.N. headquarters out of the United States because of it. The leftist leader said the fact that the war was fought without U.N. authorization showed that Washington has no respect for the world body. "There were never weapons of mass destruction but Iraq was bombed, and over U.N. objections, (it was) occupied and continues being occupied," said Chavez, who appeared to step up his frequent criticism of U.S. policies in his speech to the General Assembly...
The OECD was behind Clintons campaign to loot our maritime industries and sell off our ports to foreign ownership.
They are a driving force behind the "free trade" looting of our economy, the corporatist fascist global governance movement and had a hand in creating the WTO and our unconstitutional participation in it.
Have you seen this yet?
And 98% of Americans don't know about the UN's crap or don't care. After it is too late, they still will not care.
Actually, most Americans welcome it.
If they have grown up in the public school system, they have been indoctrinated to believe that the UN is the highest good, and that nationalistic aspirations are bad, and they are inculcated, from an early age with the collective guilt of being American. After all, Americans are the source of the world's ills, while the UN is the savior of the world - world peace is its goal, right?
So, if you send your kids to public schools, you are pretty much ensuring that they will be dutiful little UN supporters. But even if you take them out now, its probably too late. The die is cast.
You are not hearing what I am saying.
Why are you ignoring what I am saying. You would think the first UN tax would be used to repair the UN building.