35 votes

Americans Losing Homes For Unpaid Bills

The Washington Post:

On the day Bennie Coleman lost his house, the day armed U.S. marshals came to his door and ordered him off the property, he slumped in a folding chair across the street and watched the vestiges of his 76 years hauled to the curb.

Movers carted out his easy chair, his clothes, his television. Next came the things that were closest to his heart: his Marine Corps medals and photographs of his dead wife, Martha. The duplex in Northeast Washington that Coleman bought with cash two decades earlier was emptied and shuttered. By sundown, he had nowhere to go.

All because he didn’t pay a $134 property tax bill.

The retired Marine sergeant lost his house on that summer day two years ago through a tax lien sale — an obscure program run by D.C. government that enlists private investors to help the city recover unpaid taxes.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2013/09/08/le...

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I agree property taxes suck.

I agree property taxes suck. They keep us from ever really owning anything (coupled with the tax on inheritance) it keeps most of us slaves to the Federal Reserve scam.

Where is his bail out????......

He should have broken back into his home and changed the locks, once they have walked away and start the evicting process all over again. If everybody did this the banks could not reposess the homes and it would stop. Nobody should be quietly walking away when told to go by the banks. They caused the mess, not ordinary people.

If you know people in this situation, tell them to do this. Help them to do this if you can.

Property Taxes Keep The Poor, Poor.

So long as Property is insecure - Freedom can never be present.

John Locke, Second Treatise on Civil Government:

139. But government, into whosesoever hands it is put, being as I have before shown, entrusted with this condition, and for this end, that men might have and secure their properties, the prince or senate, however it may have power to make laws for the regulating of property between the subjects one amongst another, yet can never have a power to take to themselves the whole, or any part of the subjects' property, without their "own consent";

for this would be in effect to leave them no property at all.

And to let us see that even absolute power, where it is necessary, is not arbitrary by being absolute, but is still limited by that reason and confined to those ends which required it in some cases to be absolute, we need look no farther than the common practice of martial discipline. For the preservation of the army, and in it of the whole commonwealth, requires an absolute obedience to the command of every superior officer, and it is justly death to disobey or dispute the most dangerous or unreasonable of them; but yet we see that neither the sergeant that could command a soldier to march up to the mouth of a cannon, or stand in a breach where he is almost sure to perish, can command that soldier to give him one penny of his money;

nor the general that can condemn him to death for deserting his post, or not obeying the most desperate orders, cannot yet with all his absolute power of life and death dispose of one farthing of that soldier's estate, or seize one jot of his goods; whom yet he can command anything, and hang for the least disobedience.

Because such a blind obedience is necessary to that end for which the commander has his power -- viz., the preservation of the rest,

but the disposing of his goods has "NOTHING TO DO WITH IT" to do with it.

140. It is true governments cannot be supported without great charge, and it is fit every one who enjoys his share of the protection should pay out of his estate his proportion for the maintenance of it. But still it must be with his "own consent" -- i.e., the consent of the majority, giving it either by THEMSELVES OR their representatives chosen by them;

for if any one shall claim a power to lay and levy taxes on the people by his own authority, and without such "consent of the people", he thereby "invades the fundamental law of property", and "subverts the end of government".

For what property have I in that which another may "BY RIGHT" take when he pleases to himself?

141. Fourthly. The legislative cannot transfer the power of making laws to any other hands, for it being but a delegated power from the people, they who have it cannot pass it over to others.

(APP Note: The United Nations Has No Powers because the United States having limited delegated powers cannot arrogate new powers nor transfer powers, not existing or contrary to the peoples rights, of the United States, to others)

The people alone can appoint the form of the commonwealth, which is by constituting the legislative, and appointing in whose hands that shall be. And when the people have said, "We will submit, and be governed by laws made by such men, and in "SUCH FORMS"," nobody else can say other men shall make laws for them; nor can they be bound by any laws but such as are enacted by those whom they have chosen and authorised to make laws for them.

142. These are the "bounds" which the "trust" that is put in them by the society and the law of God and Nature have set to the legislative power of every commonwealth, in all forms of government.

First: They are to govern by promulgated established laws, not to be varied in particular cases, but to have one rule for rich and poor, for the favourite at Court, and the countryman at plough.

(APP Note: See these exact words in the Rights of the Colonists)

Secondly: These laws also ought to be designed for no other end ultimately but the good of the people.

Thirdly: They must not raise taxes on the property of the people without the consent of the people given by themselves or their deputies.

And this properly concerns only such governments where the legislative is always in being, or at least where the people have not reserved any part of the legislative to deputies, to be from time to time chosen by themselves.

Fourthly: Legislative neither must nor can transfer the power of making laws to anybody else, or place it anywhere but where the people have...."

American Patriot Party.CC

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

Why isn't this posted under the 2nd Amendment section

of the dailypaul? Or should I say, another failed 2nd Amendment story. After all the 2nd Amendment is proven to be one of the biggest failures time and time again.

Anyone want to help get rid of property tax?

Hi people,

I've always hated the idea of paying for things that you own. I think that when you pay off a mortgage of a house, you own it. If you want to turn off the power, sewage, and everything else you should be able to. You should be able to live in a house and not be charge property tax or anything else. Anyways I've looked into petitions and the numbers you need to succeed is staggering. Anyways I was thinking of doing this by myself, but perhaps with the help of others, it just might succeed.

Can you draw up a more

Can you draw up a more precise outline and create a thread so that it may be discussed and vetted?

If done correctly, this may be something that can be initiated at all local levels, and possibly be placed on the ballots.

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

I hate land Tax

I have a problem with land tax. The idea that one can steal your home from past due taxes. That being said having ones home stolen for small amounts of back taxes has been a common thing for a very long time. There have been systems dedicated to buying these properties, fixing them up, an flipping them for decades. Land tax is one of the reasons the government is so eager to artificially increase property value. I had a big issue with local governments continuing to tax land / home values at peak bubble prices for YEARS after the crash. They won't voluntarily lower your taxes based on the new assested value. These parasites get addicted to any revenue increases and with additonal increases to revenue comes increased spending. When reality sets in rather than adjusting their spending to come in line with revenue they borrow the difference and set out looking for new revenue generating techinques to bring revenues back to peak. Manipulation of asset prices seems to be one of the higher priorities these days.

Damned be the name of the State

If you still believe property rights exist you're stupid. The State giveth, and the State taketh away, Damned be the name of the State.

The government loves amnesty

The government loves amnesty when it supports their agenda - illegal immigration; but the sure love the "rule of law" when it suits them as well.

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."

The greatest irony of the civil war

All of this country's problems in this respect started during the civil war, when congress created what amounts to a central banking system. The greatest irony of the civil war is that we eliminated slavery over some in exchange for slavery over all.

Theives dont care

They are just doing their job.

At what point does the theft stop?


These mofos....

Make me ill. Is there no end to the BS we will put up with???

Oh...you own your home free and clear....just kidding. We are gonna repo it so the rulers can have a nice lunch or round of golf.

Where will these people draw the line? When will they finally say "Enough is enough!" I see no valid redress by ballot....which leaves but one option. And I think the slumbering masses are far,far from ready for that. However we won't know we have reached the threshold until we are there. Damn...I wish I had a crystal ball.

That will teach him, and everyone, who is to be feared, right?

After all, that $134 was owed to his plantation master, the D. of C.!

The fact that this medal-earning, former U.S. Marine veteran is black, only underscores the irony that this man was made homeless just a few miles from where another man of similar race-resemblance seems to care little for men who serve/d as Mr. Coleman, by sending so many of ALL races into capricious, unauthorized wars.

Comparing Coleman's tax debt, Obama probably spent less on his most recent round of golf, during any one of his frequent vacations, anywhere in the world. Ironically the president's golf was paid for, in part, by Coleman himself.

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

why property values are not going to stay up

finally we can put this Syria business behind us and focus on the real issues. Oh wait, to early to call the news fake?

-quiet engineer

It Has To Do With "ENUMERATED" - Not UNENUMERATED Taxation

The "ORIGINAL" Constitution was written to safeguard against such corruption and abuse of power. All taxation had to be ENUMERATED BEFORE CONSENSUALLY being collected, it was also derived from imports, collected simply from viewing the finished product; so your business affairs, income and papers were private:



Original Constitution:

Article 1 Section 9: "No Capitation, or OTHER direct, Tax shall be laid, "UNLESS" in "Proportion to the Census or "ENUMERATION" herein "BEFORE" directed to be taken. "

....This allows you the time and means to grant your "CONSENT" before it is "taken".


Amended Constitution:

Amendment XVI: "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and "WITHOUT REGARD" to any census of "ENUMERATION"."

The Federal Government Takes your money FIRST in a "FLAT" PERCENT ...THEN decides what THEY are going to spend it on "AFTER" they TAKE IT. ......"WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT".


Can you SEE THE NECESSITY of ENUMERATED TAXATION!!! ...The Founders did!!






NOTE: The income tax was found unconstitutional twice by the Supreme Court before corruption entered and renamed a direct tax a "indirect tax" and used as an excuse to arrogate new powers expressly prohibited - It is in fact still unconstitutional and still an new arrogated power; Further, ALL taxes are DIRECT; a "INDIRECT" tax is simply a "DIRECT" tax taken from you in a different way or made to be taken from you by someone else first -

Redefining a tax as indirect is NO EXCUSE to tax you without your CONSENT or as a means to arrogate a taxing and spending power beyond the very limited DELEGATED powers.

See "Declaration of Independence" - "17th Grievance" Quote below defining Taxation without CONSENT is TYRANNY.


More at these Links:

Consensual Enumerated Taxation a Reserved Natural Right:


The APP: "A" Anonymity Tax System:

The APP: "A" Anonymity Tax System FAQ:

American Patriot Party.CC

The American Patriot Party is now on Facebook:

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

The "A" or "Anonymity Tax" - Federal Import and State Toll.

American Patriot Party "A" Tax System:

The "A" or "Anonymity Tax" is a Constitutionally (Required) "ENUMERATED" Federal Import Tax and State Toll Tax.

APP: "A" Tax System:

FAQ on the "A" Tax System:

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

How does a

tax have anything to do with "free market?"

Governments impose taxes. What is wrong with this persons brain?

when government imposes taxes

sooner or later they tax one person more than another. Now a product is cheaper not because someone makes it better or more efficiently but because the government gives them an advantage in the market place.

For taxes not to interfere with the free market you would have to tax two people the exact same way but instantly you have both people trying to lower their taxes instead of making the best product for the best price.

What happens is pretty soon a person who already owns a business and doesnt want competition tries to keep away competition because it his competitions best interest to sell the same product at a better price or a better product at the same price. The best way for the business owner to keep away the competition is to have the government raise taxes on all new business, but call it licenses or inspections or whatever.

Could use help

A very liberal friend of mine linked this very same article on facebook, albeit he tagged it "Witness the invisible hand of the free market."

Now I'm struggling to leave a calm, rational comment that may educate someone else who sees his post. I cannot get past my rage directed at the stupidity of his comment long enough to think of one though. Any thoughts?

The key word in free markets is voluntary transactions.

Government is force.

Free includes debt-free!

A Free Market Charges Fees

In a free market, if he wanted services he'd have paid fees for them. Fire protection? Fees. Police response? Fees. Streets? Pay a fee (when all cars ran on gas, a gas "tax" could be considered a fee; but now, electric cars don't pay their share).

Of course, your free-market mortgage lender (actually highly regulated) will insist you have insurance, and your free-market insurance agent (actually highly regulated) would insist you pay for fire response, but if you didn't have a mortgage lender, you'd never lose your house in a tax sale, and if you didn't have insurance it would be your own risk.

The invisible hand would gently encourage buying protective services, without the cruelty of the hand of government.

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

a free market wouldnt have taxes

A free market would have no need for lawyers. a free market is when someone has a good or service that is either better or cheaper than someone else, and fights to have their service be better and cheaper than the competition. What this story is an example of is legal robbery.

I dare suggest

that your friend wouldn't know a "free market" from a hole in the ground. The United States has nothing close to a free market. What you are witnessing is a market completely controlled by the government, the Non federal reserve, and huge corporations. Truly free markets do not have bailouts for banks and insurance companies who make bad bets, give subsidies for growing or not growing certain crops, and they certainly don't bail out huge car companies because they refuse to change their business models to fit the changing times. You are witnessing the ugly truth behind the neo Amerikan fascist state, where government and business are married, while the citizens are simply considered the red headed stepchildren. (No offense to red headed step children)

I haven't a clue how he came

I haven't a clue how he came to the conclusion that this was the fault of a free market.

Perhaps I should have just left him with "We have a free market?" and moved along to something more productive. I don't think there's any hope for this one. Oh how I try though.

Thanks for the suggestions!



it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

“That’s a failure on the part

“That’s a failure on the part of government,” said Stephen Fuller, director of the Center for Regional Analysis at George Mason University. “This has punitive consequences. People have been damaged.”

Should say unpaid tax bills? Government looting is a crime.

Cant's wait to vote these bums out and replace them with new bums. It's American insanity.

To bad the idea didn't catch on. Did Thoreau guess how bad it would get.

Henry's friends shouldn't have paid his tax, they should have joined him by the millions.

Free includes debt-free!

His Marine buddies.

This is heartbreaking to read.

I was thinking of Henry David Thoreau.

I hadn't thought of his buddies.

Yes, It was a sad thing to read.

Free includes debt-free!


Gotcha :)
I think I was still in shock.