palani
8th January 2012, 08:27 AM
http://adask.wordpress.com/2012/01/08/more-evidence-of-this-state/
It appears that the government has abandoned the States of the Union (each loosely referred to as “The State”) and substituted a new set of territories and/or administrative divisions of a single territory owned by the “United States” that are each generally referred to as “this state”. If you’re not already familiar with this theory, you can find other articles offering more explanation at “The State vs this state“.
Under this theory, it appears that “The State of Texas” (a State of the Union) has been supplanted by the territory of “Texas,” “TEXAS,” “STATE OF TEXAS” and/or “TX”. Similar replacements have apparently taken place for all of the States of the Union.
If the theory sounds unbelievable, there is supporting evidence. For example, the Texas Tax Code declares in part:
TITLE 2. STATE TAXATION
SUBTITLE E. SALES, EXCISE, AND USE TAXES
CHAPTER 151. LIMITED SALES, EXCISE, AND USE TAX
SUBCHAPTER A. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 151.001. SHORT TITLE. This chapter may be cited as the Limited Sales, Excise, and Use Tax Act. Acts 1981, 67th Leg., p. 1545, ch. 389, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1982.
. . . .
Sec. 151.004. ”IN THIS STATE“. “In this state” means within the exterior limits of Texas and includes all territory within these limits ceded to or owned by the United States. Acts 1981, 67th Leg., p. 1545, ch. 389, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1982.
Insofar as “in this state” was not defined in relation to “Texas” before A.D. 1982, it’s possible that “this state” did not exist in relation to “Texas” until that time.
“This state” is within the exterior limits of “Texas” (a territory, in my estimation) rather than within geographic borders of “The State of Texas”—the State of the Union.
If I recall correctly, in Texas vs White, the post-Civil War Supreme Court of the United States defined a State of the Union to include: 1) a fixed geographic territory; 2) a State government; and 3) the People of the State. The court admitted that a State could exist without fixed borders or even without a State government, but had to have People.
A State is required to have People. The constitutional states went away when everyone decided they could only serve one master and that master was evidenced by claim of U.S. citizenship over state citizenship. The U.S. is dealing only with territories now with administrative governments rather than sovereign governments.
If this is what you wanted then you ought to be satisfied because this is what you GOT!
It appears that the government has abandoned the States of the Union (each loosely referred to as “The State”) and substituted a new set of territories and/or administrative divisions of a single territory owned by the “United States” that are each generally referred to as “this state”. If you’re not already familiar with this theory, you can find other articles offering more explanation at “The State vs this state“.
Under this theory, it appears that “The State of Texas” (a State of the Union) has been supplanted by the territory of “Texas,” “TEXAS,” “STATE OF TEXAS” and/or “TX”. Similar replacements have apparently taken place for all of the States of the Union.
If the theory sounds unbelievable, there is supporting evidence. For example, the Texas Tax Code declares in part:
TITLE 2. STATE TAXATION
SUBTITLE E. SALES, EXCISE, AND USE TAXES
CHAPTER 151. LIMITED SALES, EXCISE, AND USE TAX
SUBCHAPTER A. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 151.001. SHORT TITLE. This chapter may be cited as the Limited Sales, Excise, and Use Tax Act. Acts 1981, 67th Leg., p. 1545, ch. 389, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1982.
. . . .
Sec. 151.004. ”IN THIS STATE“. “In this state” means within the exterior limits of Texas and includes all territory within these limits ceded to or owned by the United States. Acts 1981, 67th Leg., p. 1545, ch. 389, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1982.
Insofar as “in this state” was not defined in relation to “Texas” before A.D. 1982, it’s possible that “this state” did not exist in relation to “Texas” until that time.
“This state” is within the exterior limits of “Texas” (a territory, in my estimation) rather than within geographic borders of “The State of Texas”—the State of the Union.
If I recall correctly, in Texas vs White, the post-Civil War Supreme Court of the United States defined a State of the Union to include: 1) a fixed geographic territory; 2) a State government; and 3) the People of the State. The court admitted that a State could exist without fixed borders or even without a State government, but had to have People.
A State is required to have People. The constitutional states went away when everyone decided they could only serve one master and that master was evidenced by claim of U.S. citizenship over state citizenship. The U.S. is dealing only with territories now with administrative governments rather than sovereign governments.
If this is what you wanted then you ought to be satisfied because this is what you GOT!