April 12, 2008, 10:30am – noon

WSTC/WNLK 1350/1400 AM

Lisa Wexler: Zak Maymin is a Russian immigrant to this country who believes in freedom. He is a committed libertarian. In fact, he is the dad of Phil Maymin, who has been on as guest many times, who ran as the Libertarian Candidate for Congress in 2006.

Lisa: Against Congress Shays and Diane Farrell.

Nick: Run twice, wasn’t it?

Lisa: Did he win…did he run twice? No -

Nick: He’s been on the show twice.

Lisa: Oh yeah, he’s been on the show, absolutely, a lot of times. He’s one of my favorite guests. And Zak is also the dad of Senia Maymin, who’s been on this show, who’s a prominent local psychol…well she’s taking psychology, and she is interested in the study of positive psychology, and she’s great. So you had two great kids, Zak.

Zak Maymin: Yes.

Lisa: You have four great kids, but I haven’t met two of the four.

Zak: <Laughter>

Lisa: …I know the two of the four. Zak has just published his first novel, “Publicani.” It’s a thriller. It asks questions about how far the government can go to invade individual privacy in pursuit of its own interests. Zak Maymin, welcome to “Live! With Lisa,” today.

Zak: Thank you.

Lisa: Sure. So let me just ask you to tell us the shorter version, if you can, because I know every story has its twists and turns. But when did you come here and why?

Zak: Well, I came here in 1980, at the point when I realized that there wouldn’t be many opportunities for my children left in Russia and the Soviet Union. And frankly, I believed that the Soviet Union was a dead body at that point and time, where it was. And I was very much surprised about how things happened. And you know, now it’s alive, and well, and kicking.

Lisa: And how did you get here in 1980, under what basis?

Zak: It was a part of the Jewish immigration.

Lisa: Oh, okay.

Zak: For Russia.

Lisa: So the Jewish community -

Zak: They -

Lisa: Sort of helped the immigration.

Zak: Yeah, the Soviet Union didn’t like…didn’t want Jews in Russia at that time too much, because of the relationship with Israel and many Jews worked in some companies related to defense industries. And when they immigrated, it created some headaches for the Russian government, so they didn’t mind when Jews were leaving.

Lisa: So, okay. So they were happy to say goodbye for a short period of time.

Zak: Yes.

Lisa: All right, and so you and your family came. Where did you settle, by the way?

Zak: When we came here?

Lisa: Yeah.

Zak: In Lynn.

Lisa: In where?

Zak: In Massachusetts.

Lisa: In Lynn, Massachusetts. You know where that is? That is very close to where my husband’s family settled from Romania, like 50, 60 years ago -

Zak: Wow!

Lisa: From Massachusetts. Isn’t that interesting?

Zak: Everybody comes to Lynn.

Lisa: And they came to Lynn, and they…they had a factory eventually in Leominster. Isn’t that sort of not too far from that area, that whole area in there?

Zak: I don’t…I don’t really know.

Lisa: Yeah, yeah, that’s very interesting. And Lowell…Lowell, Massachusetts.

Zak: Lowell, Massachusetts, it’s near Andover, Massachusetts.

Lisa: Okay.

Zak: That’s where we lived also when our kids went to Andover.

Lisa: Yeah, that’s part of where they settled also.

Zak: Yeah, when Phil and Senia went to Phillips Academy, we moved to Andover, so they would be day students there.

Lisa: Yeah, we should talk about that off the air, actually.

Zak: Okay.

Lisa: Because my husband to Andover, and my daughter’s…well all right, we’ll talk about that off the air.

Zak: Okay.

Lisa: Okay. So now, you’ve written this book, “Publicani.”

Zak: Yes.

Lisa: And I want you to tell me what the book is about.

Zak: It’s a thriller. It’s an action thriller about a family fighting against the government. There is a certain procedure that the government invented in the near future, and this procedure affects this family, and they’re against the wall, and they’re fighting back.

Lisa: Okay and this procedure that you talk about is something…well, tell us what the procedure is. Do you not want to tell it; you want people to read the book so that they know what it is?

Zak: Well…I can tell it. It’s in a way, the government comes to a person, and takes part of his intellect, and wants to share it with other people.

Lisa: That’s right.

Zak: Because, for the good of the society and for the good of this person. And actually, this book, is anti-income tax.

Lisa: I -

Zak: I wrote it with the goal of fighting against income tax.

Lisa: So …Zak, I don’t get that. I don’t get…I read the book. I like the book. The book is a great thriller on its own. It’s a real thriller, but I don’t see anything about income tax in the book.

Zak: I’m so happy. It means I did such a good job. I never mentioned income tax in the book. I wanted it to be entertaining. I didn’t want it to be a moral lesson, a lecture, “income tax is so bad,” which is I think is the root of all evil in the United States.

Lisa: You think income tax is the root of all evil?

Zak: The root of all evil, yes.

Lisa: The root of “all” evil, Zak?

Zak: All evil.

Lisa: Has <laughter> -

Zak: If you give me time, I’ll prove it to you like a mathematical theorem.

Nick: So you like Weicker [sarcastic]. Isn’t Weicker the one that introduced income tax in Connecticut?

Lisa: Yeah, you wouldn’t like Weicker.

Nick: No, I was just joking, sarcastic <laughter>.

Lisa: Exactly. You’re being sarcastic, right. Oh, I agree, yeah.

Nick: That’s right <laughter>.

Lisa: Did you move to Connecticut before we had the income tax in Connecticut?

Zak: No….

Lisa: Oh.

Zak: We were already here…

Lisa: We did. We moved the year before it came in.

Zak: <Laughter>

Nick: <Laughter>

Lisa: <Laughter> We always have great timing.

Zak: I don’t mind that much State Income Tax, by the way. I mean, I…I’m sure it will disappear once Federal Income Tax is gone, but Federal Income Tax, that’s the evil.

Lisa: Why do you say that?

Zak: That State Income Tax is okay and why I -

Lisa: No, why do you say that Federal Income Tax is the root of all evil?

Zak: It’s the clearest example of violence against a group of people that I can think of -

Lisa: Violence.

Zak: In the modern times, yes.

Lisa: Why do you say it’s violent to raise money? Tell me.

Zak: What do you mean “raise money”? You don’t raise money. You don’t ask people for money. You come to people with a gun, and tell them, “I want so much of your money, and this you can keep for awhile.”

Lisa: Well, yeah.

Zak: It’s -

Lisa: The gun –

Zak: Right, yeah but it -

Lisa: The gun meaning the implicit threat that if you’re not a law abiding citizen, you go to jail. I understand that.

Zak: Not implicit. And it’s…it’s stealing. You don’t look it as stealing.

Lisa: No, I don’t look at it as stealing.

Zak: Well let’s see, what does stealing mean? It means to take something forcefully from a person that belongs to him. Would you agree with this?

Lisa: Yes.

Zak: Okay. Do…how is income tax different from this?

Lisa: I’ll tell how I disagree with you.

Zak: Okay.

Lisa: I think that the reason – one of the main reasons – that people in this country are so prosperous and earn what they earn is based on our system of government. And if our government needs some money to run to keep that system in place, that there’s an element of fairness to pay that back for the common good.

Zak: Okay. Is…do you believe in the concept that there is something that is yours? That is yours to the degree that you can kill it, burn it?

Lisa: Yes, I think your book hits at that.

Zak: Okay.

Lisa: Yes, I think my intellect is mine.

Zak: Okay. Your body, is it yours?

Lisa: Yes.

Zak: Okay. The money in your pocket, is it yours or not?

Lisa: Not…I don’t feel the same attachment to it that I do to my body and my intellect.

Zak: But how come? You use your body to make this money. You give away…suppose you -

Lisa: Money is a commodity.

Zak: Suppose -

Lisa: Money is not my soul.

Zak: Suppose you sold part of your kidney to get the money.

Lisa: Yeah, well if I did -

Zak: The money is yours?

Lisa: Yes, ah…yes, the money is mine.

Zak: Okay, suppose you use your intellect to make money. The money is yours?

Lisa: Yes, it’s mine, but the money – the money is – the money is mine, but money…you know money, Zak, is meant to be shared with the universe. I mean is not…money is a commodity. Money is not meant to horded.

Zak: I can say that your body is meant to be shared with the universe.

Lisa: No, you can’t.

Zak: Why not?

Lisa: Because -

Zak: What’s the difference?

Lisa: You…I…because I think there is a diff…I think money is separate than the essence of me.

Zak: What if you sell part of your body to make the money?

Lisa: But I don’t.

Nick: Or you go to a blood bank and you donate your blood.

Zak: But you do.

Lisa: I would donate.

Nick: Okay, yeah.

Lisa: <Laughter>

Zak: But you do. Lisa, you do. You…you know, you come here…I…you…I supp…I suppose that you’re making some money from it or -

Lisa: Don’t suppose it, but we’ll go into that on another…another -

Zak: Okay <laughter>.

Nick: <Laugher>

Lisa: Conversation.

Nick: When you’ve assumed <laughter>.

Zak: <Laughter> Ok…bad example. Let’s assume that -

Lisa: Exactly, bad example.

Zak: For the purpose of this discussion <laughter> -

Lisa: <Laughter> You can assume I want to.

Zak: Okay, let’s assume -

Lisa: Assume I want to, that’s for sure <laughter>.

Zak: No, for – I need … to make my conclusion, I need to assume <laughter> that you’re making money.

Nick: I make…I make money here.

Lisa: <Laughter> All right.

Zak: Okay.

Lisa: Okay.

Nick: Very little, but yes.

Zak: You’re making…you’re making money. You’re using part of your body, your intellect, your nervous system to make this money. It’s not that you use… something else. It’s not that you’re making some miracles of getting this money out of thin air. You work. You could have…you know, you could have watched TV, basketball, or, you know, just taken a nap, or something. You work, not necessarily – even if you want to, for the purpose of the discussion, suppose you hate it.

Nick: Um-hm.

Zak: But you have to make money. Many people have to make money.

Lisa: Of course, most people.

Zak: And the only thing you can make your money is by using your body. There is nothing else that you have.

Lisa: Okay.

Zak: Maybe if you have capital in some situations, but this capital also was created by somebody using his body, and the body is his. How come the result of this is it doesn’t belong to you? How come $5 bucks that you have in your pocket, somebody can come and say, “You know, it’s fair – it belongs to the society. We’ll give you a quarter.”

Lisa: All right, wait, Zak, we’re going to have to go to a commercial, but I want to come back with this afterwards and ask you what you think about things like sales tax. In another words, do you think that that’s reasonable when you buy as a consumer that you should have to pay a tax on that because…or do you not believe in any tax whatsoever? I want to ask you that question after we go commercial. This is Lisa Wexler. You’re listening to 1400 WSTC/1350 WNLK.

<Music>

Lisa: We’re back. It’s Lisa Wexler and I’m speaking with Zak Maymin, author of “Publicani,” which is a great thriller, and I encourage you to read it. Actually, you can get it on Lisa’s Amazon Bookstore on livewithlisaradio.com. It’s right there on the front page. It’s a great book, but we’re talking about the philosophy behind the book. Zak Maymin is a committed freedom fighter, a freedom lover.

Zak: Yes.

Lisa: But you are a law-abiding citizen, even though you don’t -

Zak: Yes <laughter>.

Lisa: So…so, you pay your income tax?

Zak: Yes, and I don’t even take practically no deduction. I am very conservative.

Lisa: Okay.

Zak: I’m afraid of government, very much.

Lisa: I can understand that with you -

Zak: Okay.

Lisa: So growing up in the Soviet Union, that would make sense.

Zak: Yes.

Lisa: <Laughter>

Zak: Coming…you know observing things that are happening in United States…

Lisa: Without question.

Zak: …right now, that also makes sense.

Lisa: Absolutely.

Zak: And coming from Soviet Union, I feel like I came from your future.

Lisa: Yeah, well that’s really a frightening thing to hear.

Zak: Okay, you understand? You do…you obviously understood why I said that, right?

Lisa: Yeah, I do.

Zak: Because -

Lisa: We’ve been doing a lot of shows on that in fact.

Zak: Because we have…we had free health care, we had free education, we had happy and smiling people, we had total political participation of all people in the election process. Something you probably want -

Lisa: But it was -

Zak: As American you can -

Lisa: But it was mandatory and they didn’t really have choices.

Zak: Well, but how can you get health care, which is not mandatory? …The government doesn’t have any money. Government has to take this money from somewhere, from somebody.

Lisa: So do you think that…so let’s…let me ask you the question I asked before the break. Do you think any kind of taxation is appropriate, for example, sales tax on goods?

Zak: Yeah, there is such notion – are you familiar with direct taxation and indirect taxation?

Lisa: Go ahead, explain.

Zak: Direct…direct taxation – it means the government comes to you, personally, and tells you to pay, to give money. Indirect taxation – it’s a process, a procedure that government establishes, that if you do something, you pay taxes. Like sales tax or like lottery tax.

Lisa: Well what about business taxes? You’re in business. You’re doing something.

Zak: Yeah, I’m doing something, but business tax is okay. It’s not…it’s not important. I mean if…if you get rid of Federal -

Lisa: Do you know how…do you know that I have to pay $450 in Connecticut and $300 every other year in New York just to sustain my law license? Do you know how offensive I find that? I worked very hard for that license. Why should I have to pay a licensing fee?

Zak: Yeah, I -

Lisa: It’s very onerous to me.

Zak: I even…I even go a step further; I don’t think people…only licensed people should be able to conduct a law, to be attorneys and stuff like that. Anybody should be able to do this. People should…you know, bar exams should be abandoned. All of this is created so that people – other people -it will be harder entry to this profession for other people.

Lisa: Well, that’s true.

Zak: So it’s protection. It’s like union protection.

Lisa: Well, so Zak, um, looking at this world right now, and telling us that the Soviet Union’s our future, which from someone like you, is very frightening – and cannot be dismissed – to hear. Is there a country in the world right now that if you had to chose to immigrate to, you would go?

Zak: Ah <sigh>, no, United States is still the best country.

Lisa: Yeah, what about like a country like Iceland?

Zak: What about…Iceland is…?

Lisa: It’s a free country, transparent, not socialist. It’s smaller.

Zak: It’s not socialist? I think they have some…they have private health -

Lisa: They probably have free health care.

Zak: Yeah, well -

Lisa: But -

Zak: How could they – it may look peaceful for a while, like Russia was peaceful, like Germany was peaceful. You know because middle class, when you rob somebody else and create an…an illusion that everything is okay, then it could last a long time.

Lisa: So do you think -

Zak: But sooner or later, you know, it’s…it’s burning inside.

Lisa: So…so, you think this country is evolving in the wrong direction?

Zak: Yes, and it’s very dangerous right now – especially now. You know, I read a book about a bird – a big bird, Lawrence probably wrote it – it had a huge beak, and when [Lawrence] put his eye near it, the bird would move [his beak] away, so as not to hurt him. So, even nature created some mechanism for big animals so that they wouldn’t hurt others.

But we – you know we’re becoming stronger and stronger everyday. Look at the weapons of mass destruction. I can imagine that in 30 years, 10 years, maybe we’ll have small briefcase H-bomb, that every…that will be freely available to everybody. We are becoming stronger and more dangerous, but our software, our mind, is still the same that we can do something to violate another person because we feel it’s better for the society.

Lisa: The time is 11:00. We’re going to go to the news with Kathryn Grant. Zak Maymin you have intrigued me with lots of different political philosophies. Your book, “Publicani,” is an indirect reference to those. It’s a good thriller. It stands on its own. I wish you great success with the sale and thanks so much for producing all these wonderful kids out in the world.

Zak: Thank you.

Lisa: And we’ll…you’ll be back on the show to talk more about what you believe and why you believe it. This is Lisa Wexler.

<Music>

From the “MaryAnne Show” on WGCH (1490am) on Friday 4/11.

Q. Once again, we are speaking to Zak Maymin. He wrote a book “Publicani.” He came over here with his family from Russia in 1980. He is here about 28 years now and we are happy you do. So, Mr. Maymin, you are not happy with the government of the United States, or you were not?

A. I was happy, I am not happy right now.

Q. You are not happy right now?

A. And it’s not just the government, I am not happy with the people.

Q. The people?

A. Yes, and I want to change…

Q. You want to change?

A. Yes, I want to change certain things that people think about, the way they think about it.

Q. So, I understand, so…

A. Government is just mirror, it’s just a reflection of the people. We keep voting this government to the power, right?

Q. That’s correct. That’s correct. So, you would like to make a difference in the United States of America.

A. Yes.

Q. And you gonna do that.

A. Yes. I am doing that.

Q. You are doing that?

A. Yes.

Q. You are doing that with this book Publicani?

A. I am doing it right now on your show.

Q. I like that!

A. We are doing it already.

Q. Ha-ha-ha! So, wait a minute, maybe this is one of the first things we could do on my show, we could start changing things!

A. We are already changing things. The fact that we are talking about this, talking that there is a problem in this country, we are changing things.

Q. But you know, Mr. Maymin, I never talk politics on my show.

A. Call me Zak.

Q. Thank you very much Zak, I will. I never talk politics on my show. I never tlak about religion. Religion, I talk about going to Church on Sundays, things like that. But… everyone is different. Jewish, Catholic, Muslim, Lutheran, Episcopalian, everyone’s different, but there’s one God.

A. Ok.

Q. I believe this. And I don’t think the world changes, I think the world stays the same. I think the people become different.

A. I am not sure the people are becoming that different. In a sense we are still running in the jungle. And if we see something that somebody else has and we don’t, we can justify how we can come to this person and take it from him. And that’s the main problem that I see in today’s America.

Q. Do you work with a group of people that feel the same? Like an organization?

A. No, I am not a politician either. I am not starting any religion or any movement, nothing like that.

Q. Right.

A. I am just a private citizen who is sick and tired of other people coming to me and taking something from me and explaining to me that’s it’s done in my own interest.

Q. Ok, so you don’t feel like it’s done in your own interests at all?

A. It’s not even that. It’s not a good reason to take something from me. Even if it’s in my interest? Who are you? If I don’t volunteer it, don’t take it forcefully from me.

Q. In other words, you should give it with your heart, or don’t give it at all.

A. Yes.

Q. I understand. So this is why Mr. Zak Maymin is on my show right now. He is gonna make a difference in the United States of America. Correct?

A. Correct.

Q. You gonna make a difference with the people.

A. Yes.

Q. Change the people.

A. Yes.

Q. I’ll tell you, I wish you luck

A. Thank you very much.

Q. So, tell me Mr. Maymin, how you gonna go about changing people, people’s thinking. People are people. You know, you can’t really change people. Do you think you can?

A. Yea.

Q. You do? Ok.

A. Sometimes, you drop a pebble in to the ocean and the wave start and the same way some of big movements started with somebody saying “No.” You saw these examples in Civil Rights Movement in the United States, right?

Q. Right, aha.

A. There are… it’s possible to move people. When you are on the right, eventually people will understand that.

Q. You know, maybe you are right, maybe you can change people, and I just give you a whole lot of credit for trying because you are doing something that you truly believe in.

A. Yes.

Q. Isn’t it wonderful…Any questions for Mr. Zak Maymin, please give us a call. He wrote a book Publicani. Actually, it’s changing, you wanna change United States a little bit?

A. Right.

Q. Correct?

A. To begin with. The Idea is to change the entire world but let’s start with one country at a time.

Q. You don’t wanna start with Russia.

A. No.

Q. No?

A. Not yet.

Q. You can’t change Russia?

A. Not yet.

Q. Not yet. But you gonna work on it?

A. Yes.

Q. I give you a lot of credit because you truly believe in what you are doing.

A. Yes. And actually it’s very dangerous if you don’t change because there are weapons of mass destruction that are easily obtainable. Practically every country already has it.

Q. Right.

A. And maybe in 10-15 years every high school will have them. And probably Greenwich High school already have H-Bombs as far as I know, because I had two children going there. Small suitcase, you can put an H-Bomb in there and blow up cities and stuff and nothing in our software, in our mind, prevents us from doing that. We still believe that if this is done for good, then we can do it.

Q. Uhu. I understand.

A. Look at Iraq.

Q. Yea.

A. We do it for good. For good of America, for good of Iraqi people,. And we kill people. And we displace [millions of] people. And that’s what we do. My main problem is Income Tax.

Q. Ts, oh, ok, ok, you are not for the income tax.

A. I am strongly, passionately against income tax. I think it’s the root of all evil.

Q. The root of all evil?

A. Yes.

Q. You don’t believe that people should be paying income tax?

A. No, I don’t believe it.

Q. Ok, all right. Well we are all entitled to our freedom of opinion.

A. I can see you are shocked, but if you think a little bit and stay with me you’ll…

Q. No, I am not shocked with you, Sir. No, no, no…

A. Especially during this happy tax season people should at least think on whether we should be forced into doing the same thing.

Q. Well, we have to pay our taxes. See, it’s not that I am shocked with you, Mr. Maymin, Zak, I am not. I am so used to it. I am accustomed of doing it. It’s a routine. A routine.

A. Once I said Income Tax I became Mr. Maymin right away. I am not Zak anymore.

Q. Ha-ha-ha! Ok, Zak, all right, Zak, let’s do it. So as to me it’s what we do. I am programmed. It’s what we do, every year, every year, every year. My husband and I, every year, every year. So I am programmed to do it. So I can’t say I am against it because that’s all I know. Do you understand?

A. Yes.

Q. So if you show me different things to think about, maybe I’ll think about something else. Excuse me, one minute. Hello? Hello? Ok. There is a question on the phone for you. Hello, welcome to the MaryAnne show.

Caller. Hi, this is Nick. I am actually calling to ask the author question.

Q. Sure, go ahead, please.

Caller. Hi, there.

A. Hi.

Caller. What’s the main idea that you want me to really question and to think about changing along with your book. You are talking a lot about change, but I am not sure exactly what we really should consider.

Q. We don’t have a lot of time. So…

A. It’s three words. Don’t initiate the force. That’s all.

Caller. Three words?

A. Yea, if you don’t use abbreviations and count “the”, then it’s five words: Do Not Initiate The Force. But it’s “Don’t initiate the force.”

Caller: Oh. Well, thank you.

Q. Ok?

Caller. By-by.

Q.Thank you very much.

A. You can you force to defend yourself, but don’t initiate the force. Don’t steal money from other people. Don’t come to their doors and say: You have to pay this, or otherwise I’ll bring IRS and federal agents to get this money from you.

Q. You don’t like that part. Ok. Ok, Nick?

Caller. Thanks.

Q. Thank you very much.

Caller. Bye-bye.

Q. Bye-bye.

Q. Zak, I wanna thank you for being my guest today, you were wonderful. Thank you very much.

A. Thank you.

Maymin: Good morning Tony. Thank you.

Savino: And Zak, tell us first of all about the title of the book, “Publicani,” what does that refer to?

Maymin: “Publicani,” those are tax farmers, tax collectors during biblical times. It’s like IRS agents who were during the time of Jesus Christ, collecting taxes.

Savino: I see. Okay. And the book is about government intrusion. It’s about the government that has a way of taking the thoughts or the intelligence from one person, transferring it to another. Tell us about that, a little bit about the plot of the book if you could. Without giving away, too much because you want people to read it.

Maymin: That’s about it! <Laughter> What you just mentioned.

Savino: But is it your scenario that this could happen in real life or is it a metaphor for something else?

Maymin: It is both. Actually, mainly it is a metaphor, a metaphor for something that people get used to, and don’t even pay attention, don’t even think twice about it, which I find very disturbing, and may be the main problem that we have right now in America. Namely, it’s the income tax. So, it is a metaphor for this.

But also it is entirely possible that in the future it will be happening. Because there is technology already developing that analyzes certain spots in our brain, where smart people would have certain activities, and there are new studies coming everyday and…I can see it is possible.

Savino: Uh-huh, and the question that’s asked throughout is that… well, first of all, two…two things perhaps. One is that it has public support; the other is that, well, if it’s for the good of society, then what’s wrong with it.

Maymin: Okay, the end justifies the means — that’s a problem and it’s a huge… you know, I don’t want to even…I came from Russia in 1980, and I know that, sometimes I feel even that I came from the future to United States. I have the experience that not many Americans had, namely, I know that it’s possible that the entire country is wrong.

People that you know, people that are smart, that you like, and they could be very much wrong. Like, it happened in Germany during Hitler’s time, it happened in Russia, during Communist Russia, when I was there.

And Americans, it’s hard to understand this, to have this experience and I already had it. And also, the fact that the income tax is becoming…it’s especially an important threat right now, because we’re becoming strong and stronger everyday. I can see that in 10, 15 years, one person may have means to destroy an entire nation, maybe, with you know, nukes, H-bombs, and stuff like that.

So we have to learn not to initiate force. And whatever we think is good, we shouldn’t force people to do this.

Savino: Your son, of course, is Phil Maymin, who ran for Congress a couple of years ago, and is on the Libertarian Party -

Maymin: Yes.

Savino: And yet, you say you’re not a member of the Party, but you believe in a lot of the tenets.

Maymin: Right, I’m not a member of the Party. But I believe, I do not necessarily agree with all the policies of the Libertarian Party, but I certainly believe in libertarian principles, and those were the principles of our founding fathers.

Savino: And one of the questions I had is I’ve heard some people that are libertarians say that especially, now with threats of terrorism, things like that, that we’re going to be giving up our rights for the good of society. Do you see things in those terms also?

Maymin: Yes. We are already giving up our rights. You know that America is about 5% of the world population and there are about 25% of all prisoners are sitting in prison in America. We are losing our rights everyday, we were losing our rights under the Clinton Administration and the Bush Administration. And it is terrible.

It’s again… the government was created to protect our rights, not to give up our rights to protect us from something else.

Savino: Uh-huh. Now as far as the book is concerned, this is the first book you’ve written?

Maymin: Yes, yes.

Savino: Okay. And, what made you want to write the book?

Maymin: Well, I see that we are losing this fight against income tax by using reason only. People just ignore it. You give all kind of logical reasons; I think it’s possible even to mathematically prove that you cannot be free if you have income tax.

It’s like telling a slave, “Ah, you are free to vote. You have all other freedoms. It’s just you can’t keep fruits of your labor.” So you’re a slave by definition if you have income tax, and we are losing this logic. So I thought maybe, I can put it in the moral stance, and maybe in an entertaining way, I’ll force people to think, “Is it moral or not to come to somebody, take something that belongs to him, and give it to others because it’s for the good?”

Savino: Uh-huh. You had many biblical references, other cultural references; did you do a lot of research on those?

Maymin: Yes, yes I did. I found out by the way, not many people know what happened to Jesus Christ. It looks like according, you know many people think that he was born, and then suddenly about 30 years later, he showed up when he was 30 years old, and started making all these miracles. And there is an interesting period during which he was trained, and prepared for this mission, and I write about it in the book.

Savino: And one thing that I remember you wrote is, it could be controversial among other things, would be in the Garden of Eden. You’re calling basically, you were calling, Eve, Eve disobeyed God, but you’re saying, God is like the government.

Maymin: Yes. Exactly. Yes and there is meaning, the book has certain references to the Bible, and the Torah which is for Jewish religion. And I think the entire Bible is a story of people fighting for freedom. If you look at it, if you analyze it, that’s what actually, the message the bible sends us is, you have to fight for individuals’ freedom, for freedom of individuals.

Savino: And are you planning on writing any more books?

Maymin: I’ll have to see how well this book is accepted, and you know, it’s a very time consuming, it takes a lot of time, and resources from you, and you really have to like it. I like it, but you have to be sure that it produces some results.

Savino: Right, because there was about 200 pages, but how long did it take you to write it?

Maymin: Several years.

Savino: Is that right?

Maymin: Yes.

Savino: All right, Zak. Thanks very much for joining us this morning. And the book is available if people want to get it?

Maymin: Yeah, on Amazon, “Publicani,” and also you can read it free online on publicani.com.

Savino: All right great. Zak Maymin, of Greenwich, our guest this morning. The name of the book is “Publicani.” Thanks very much for joining us Zak.

Maymin: Thank you Tony.

Savino: WGCH News Center time is 8:28. Traffic and weather together coming up next.

]]> http://www.publicani.com/what-if-the-government-could-transfer-the-intelligence/feed/ 0 http://www.publicani.com/to-keep-yourss/ http://www.publicani.com/to-keep-yourss/#comments Mon, 08 Dec 2008 19:15:57 +0000 Zak Maymin http://www.publicani.com/?p=150 My son, Phil Maymin, wrote an article in Fairfield Weekly about me, Publicani, and the income tax.
Here it is:

“You never hear people badmouth the income tax anymore. Not even this week, when each of our three hundred thousand Fairfield County households will on average fork over twenty thousand dollars, hundreds of pieces of private and personal information, dozens of otherwise enjoyable hours, and all of our self-respect.

Maybe it’s the Helsinki Syndrome in action, where, as hostages, we begin to sympathize with our captors who punish and rape us. Whatever the reason, it’s nearly impossible to say the income tax is evil. You’re either labeled a nut, an insurgent, or a greedy bastard. But is it really crazy to observe that an income tax penalizes effort? Is it really unpatriotic to want your country to be free? Is it greedy to want to keep what’s yours?

There are so many things wrong with the income tax—inefficiency, unfairness, counterproductivity—that it’s hard to know how best to argue against it. One local author has figured it out.

His name is Zak and he has written a work of fiction called Publicani. You’ve probably heard him on various radio shows over the past week or so, both in English and in Russian. Not everybody can get an interview with him. It helps if you’re his son.

Zak Maymin came from the Soviet Union to America with his family, yours truly included, in 1980, and, despite knowing barely any English, earned his Ph.D. in mathematics from MIT that first year. He says he feels he has “come back from the future.” He can see which direction our country is going and he knows the end result: “I came from a country that had free health care, free education, complete job security, total political participation of all the people. Most of the people were happy and smiling. Good family values. All of these, that are discussed as goals for America, were implemented in the country I came from and which was an evil empire, as Reagan said. And I don’t want America to become an evil empire and that’s the major reason why I wrote this book.”

“Publicani is a family vs. government thriller. “Something that belongs to an individual, nobody can take it from him forcefully,” my dad explained. “And if it is taken, the individual has the right to defend himself.”

“The income tax is never mentioned in the book, but on some level, every word on every page is about it. The original “publicani” were Roman tax farmers during the time of Jesus. “There are, by the way, several chapters in the book where I discuss some religious history and how this principle of individual freedom was traced in other religions and how it is related to Jesus Christ—and where was he, by the way, before he showed up at 30 years old and started doing all these miracles?” Publicani answers this question.

“But why the income tax? Of all the bad things that could motivate a work of fiction, why this?

“To kill a vampire, you cannot shoot him. You cannot cut his arms and legs. You have to drive a wooden stake through his heart, and it should be wooden and not a silver stick or an iron stick. You have to find one target that is the worst and that is the root of all this evil that is happening in this country, and in my opinion, that’s the income tax.”

“But why is the income tax the root?”

“It is immoral. It takes by force from others what belongs to them. And it’s the clearest example of stealing that government does.”

And what is the best possible thing that could happen with this cross between Enemy of the State, Fiddler on the Roof, and Atlas Shrugged, all of which were commercial successes but did not stem the growth of government?

“The problem with the federal income tax is not the government but the fact that people support it. People actually like it. Five percent of the population pays about half the taxes. Other people don’t really care. The same way people who were not peasants in Russia and who were not Jews in Germany, they didn’t think too much about those things. That’s who is the real target of this book. Not the government, but the people who think this way and I hope that maybe I’ll be able to change some people in this thinking.”

Sold on Amazon.com, etc., the entire text of Publicani is also available for free online at publicani.com/book. [Not currently - ZM] Now you can badmouth the income tax all you want. You are no longer alone.”

I recently started a discussion on RonPaulForums. com forum with this question: What is the best argument against income tax? Here is a shorter version of this discussion. Paraphrasing Einstein, I still don’t know the answer, but I don’t know it on a much higher level.

Publicani: I will be interviewed on TV this Tuesday about my new book, Publicani. The major topic will be the Income Tax, which I passionately hate. Help me to make an argument against it. What do you think is the most convincing reason for abolishing the income tax?

Danke: Because it is enforced against those generally not liable. Mainly due to the convoluted way the IRC is written.

[IRC stands for Internal Revenue Code.]

Truth Warrior: It’s theft AKA robbery by and under threat of force and violence for non obedience and non compliance.

Publicani: I believe it is a theft. It’s not hard to make this argument. It’s immoral. It’s invasion of privacy. But why the income tax is the greatest evil?
And why if we abolish income tax, things will be good?

torchbearer: In a monarchy, the Kind had the Divine right. And he had the Right to tax his SUBJECTS.
The subjects had no rights.

Now ask the question.
What happens if I don’t pay the income tax?
You will be imprisoned.
How does the government get that right? Well, the government must have Right over your labor.
Thus, you don’t own your labor, the King, I mean, the government owns your labor. Thus have RIGHT over it.

That is why the income tax is immoral.

Same with property taxes. Property Taxes makes you a serf of the King, i mean, government. Who has the RIGHT to take your property if you don’t pay the Kings taxes, i mean, the government property tax.

Publicani: I believe it is a theft. It’s not hard to make this argument. It’s immoral. It’s invasion of privacy. But why the income tax is the greatest evil?
And why if we abolish income tax, things will be good?

Truth Warrior: Was the USA a better place to live, in many many respects, before 1913?

Publicani: OK, in what respect?
There are also countries without income tax, such as Bahamas, Bermuda, Kuwait, Somalia. Are people there better off than here? More freedom?

Truth Warrior: What was the budget of the Federal government in 1913?
What is the budget of the Federal government in 2008?

Zolah: There is no income tax for individuals in Monaco, I’d say that is a much better example in relevance to the United State’s income tax, look into Monaco’s history for more info.
What price salvation?

Cleaner44: I would argue that the Federal Income Tax is not nessesary.

The revenues gained are not used for any of the services that most Americans feel they need from the government. Without the Federal Income Tax we would still have our roads maintained by the taxes on gasoline, we would still have 911 service from the taxes on our phone service, we would still have all of the essential services as provided by the many other taxes we pay.

The Federal Income Tax is simply not needed and robs money from our economy that Americans would otherwise spend on products and services that they find valuable.

Since most people would rather not have the Federal Income Tax and we the people govern ourselves, why do we continue to have the Federal Income Tax?

ClayTrainor: what tax funds the military? actually a better question would be…

What exactly does the income tax pay for?

my point being, having a strong military is necessary…

weslinder: I understand the philosophical arguments, but there’s also the practical ones. There is a general rule of thumb for public policy that when you tax something, you get less of it. A tax of income suppresses income. The more progressive that income tax is, the greater the effect.

Danke: According to RP, if we went back to the year 2000 budget, we wouldn’t need the revenue from the income tax.

So I guess, cut spending is the answer.

Cleaner44: I would also mention that nine states currently do not collect income tax and they are perfectly able to provide the required services.

Seven states that have no state income tax:
Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington and Wyoming.

Two states that tax only dividend and interest income:
New Hampshire and Tennessee.

ClayTrainor:The Grace Commision found in 1984 that the Federal Income Tax pays for one thing, the interest on our national debt.

We do need to have national security as provided by our military and that can be paid for without a Federal Income Tax. Certainly we were not weak and unable to defend our nation before 1913, right?

Publicani: My point is that even if the income tax is used for good purpose, whatever it is, defense or something, and is not wasteful, income tax is still evil, immoral, and should be abandoned. Would not you agree? How do I convince others?

Cleaner44: The list of good causes could be long enough to tax 100% of our income, so where do we draw the line? The government must operate within a budget just like the citizens.

In my opinion, 6% of our income should be the limit. These days we pay in the neighborhood of 30%. Even at that rate our government is still spending more than they take in and that is quite immoral. Spending too much, creating a debt, interest payments for our children that will consume their income, all quite immoral.

I don’t know that you can convince others but you can ask questions.

Do you feel you pay too much in taxes?
Do you believe our government is wasteful?
Do you believe in borrowing money to give military dictators?
Do you believe in wealth redistribution?

Publicani: Suppose we cut spending and have, as somebody suggested here, only 6% income tax. I don’t see a big difference.
It’s still a theft of my property. It’s still a violation of my rights. It’s still somebody deciding how much pain could be inflicted on me for the good of others.

BillyDkid: Do you mean legal argument or practical argument? There are all sorts of practical reasons why taxing income is very bad. I am less clear on the legal part. I have heard it said that it is unconstitutional, but I don’t know enough to say. It is horrible the way we get taxed on the same money over and over again. I would be curious to know just how much of our money actually goes to taxes. I know we have that “tax freedom” day thing, but that only takes into account income taxes. There is a boat load of other moneys we pay out of that same money to various levels of government, sales tax, registrations fees, import taxes and on and on and much of it is hidden from us so never really get a good feel for just how much of our incomes goes to the government.

JenHarris: There are a lot of reasons why Income tax is bad but for me the biggest reason is that you are penalizing the productive people of society for doing their best to earn a living and at the same time you are positively reinforcing negative behavior from all the people who get stuff for free from the taxes we pay. Why would someone go out and get a job when they can take advantage of all the programs out there and be better off? It’s just one more way that the government is stripping the people of this country of their personal responsibility.

Publicani: “Do you mean legal argument or practical argument?” Neither. A moral argument.
I think the income tax is bad. I am not sure it’s illegal. I don’t care if it’s practical or not. At least for the purpose of this discussion.
The book I wrote, Publicani, is based on the assumption that somebody can come and take a part of your intellect. Whether it’s legal, or practical, I think it’s immoral.
The same way it’s with the income tax. That’s why I fully expect the interview will discuss the income tax and I want to use the opportunity to change people’s opinion. What do you think is the best argument? Is there a single argument that would convince any reasonable person that the income tax should be abolished?
What would convince you?

hypnagogue: I agree that I see no inherent wrong, and certainly not evil, in income taxes. Obviously service related taxes are superior, ie gas tax for roads, but what then should be taxed to cover those things which all citizens utilize? Things like the military, the courts, etc.

Obviously it must be a tax which applies to everyone, and the more equally it applies the better. Honestly, I can think of nothing more indispensable and universal than income. If anyone has a superior suggestion, I’d be very eager to hear it, since I’ve actually thought on the alternatives fairly heavily.

I will say though that a sales tax seems to me to be inferior to an income tax, as it would more heavily affect the poor than the rich, since the rich have the option of saving much more of their wealth than the poor. Additionally, a sales tax would artificially encourage savings over spending, which ideally should be left to the market. An income tax by contrast is neutral to the issue of spending vs. saving, and in my opinion, less likely to alter the actions of those subject to it. It’s easier to influence someone to buy less, than it is to encourage them to make less money.

Publicani: “Learn why they came up with the income tax and to whom it applies.” My income is my property. Why should I care about their reasons to take it from me?

Cleaner44: Let me make myself clear, I am 100% against any Federal Income Tax. The number I used of 6% was meant to illistrate the point that I believe our government does need money to operate, but much less than what they currently take from us. I think that an income tax is the worst possible way to collect the needed revenues.

Collecting taxes to send to Saddam Hussien, Osama bin Laden, Israel, Pakistan, Peru, South Korea, or any other bullshit, I am completely against. I am also against redistribution of wealth in any way and believe our taxes should be very low and are only needed to fund very limited things, such as police departments, fire departments, small military, roads, etc.

Collecting taxes to pay for these services is not theft in my opinion. I would gladly pay taxes to have a fire department and most Americans probably would too. Having a 6% national sales tax to pay for all services would work for me. Then it would be up to our representatives to budget accordingly.

BillyDKid: Well, for one, and doctor paul is explicit about this, it amounts to slavery. You legally obligated through the threat of force to work for half the year and give your earnings to the government. It is forced labor and not different that the way serfs were required to give half of their crop to the nobles. I would say that is immoral. But even if it were not immoral, it punishes productivity and hard work.

micahnelson: 1) We are a government of the people.
2) An overwhelming majority of people do not want to pay an income tax.

There. Thats a pretty simple thought process.

Publicani: I am not sure about 2). 50% of the income earners don’t pay any tax – why should they be against it? And even if 99% are for it – does it make it right? Moral? What if we all vote to force Bill Gates to pay all his income in taxes? We have the majority, does it make it right?

And I am not sure whether “practicality” is a factor in deciding whether income tax should be abolished. What if for some reason it does not punish productivity?

Cleaner44: I have never in my life met someone that wants the Federal Income Tax.

I have to question your 50% figure, that does not sound at all acurate to me. Did you make this up or do you have some evidence?

No need to worry about 99% of the people unless you live in a Democracy. Democracies are bad which is why our founding fathers setup a Republic.

Publicani: The Top 50% pay 96.54% of All Income Taxes

Another reference – According to the National Taxpayers Union
http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6

For the year 2005
Top 1% pays 40% of all taxes
Top 5% pays 60%
Top 10% pays 70%
Top 25% pays 86%
Top 50% pays 97%

Cleaner44: Yes, but you said:
Quote:
50% of the income earners don’t pay any tax
This is quite different.

It is not true that 50% of income earners do not pay any (income) tax.

hypnagogue: This all just seems to me to be anti-tax sentiment rather than anti-income-tax. It would be useful if those who declare income tax ‘evil’ to give an example of a just tax and to demonstrate the material difference between that and the income tax.

micahnelson: Arguments against any tax are all philosophical. We are made to pay because they have the monopoly on force. It is like telling the mob how unethical it is for them to collect dues.

You do raise a valid point, however. Taxes are needed to carry some legitimate functions of government.

As far as I am concerned, taxes should raised specifically from people who make use of the service funded. For instances, gas taxes which pay for roads make sense to me. If you are buying gasoline, you are making use of the roadways and therefore should contribute. Building roads is a legitimate government function. (not trying to anger the libertarians here, i realize you dont NEED government for roads, but its part of how we do things here.)

Low taxation in general, apportioned specifically to those who will benefit from the program. Some form of broader taxation would be needed to fund the military, but certainly not an income tax.

States have a broader brush with which to paint to cover whatever civic programs the state determines to be of value. I personally would want to be in a state with low low taxes and little government expansion, but certainly places like California would want to extend the arm of government. Thats up to the Californians.

DriftWood: Appart from the moral argument taxes are bad because of its consequences.

Tax is bad because it diverts capital from where it is most needed, to where it will be wasted. If people where allowed to keep all their money they would use it for whatever thing they needed the most. When govt takes money from people only to give it back by charity, some is lost to corruption and other is wasted on things that each person does not need the most. Say if the money goes to public schools, some of the people in the school would rather have used the money to buy food, medicals, clothes or something else instead they get something that is not as urgently needed. Taxes translate into central spending plans, one size fits all. One size does not fit all, everyones needs and priorities are different. This is why taxes are bad. It destroys wealth.

Also when the govt take money from productive people and give it to unproductive people, they are encouraging unproductivess. You get more of it. The problem gets worse the more govt tries to fix it.

Curlz31: Well the best argument for me is the base philosophical argument. Income tax is stealing. The government claims it requires the tax to fund government programs that help poor people, however it is not justified to steal people’s money just because you want to help others.

People need to make an individual decision to help poor people. If they are forced to pay the government then they start becoming dependent on government and start to see government as all-knowing. This actually compounds problems because people have no sense of self-responsibility when it comes to the proportion of their income they get to keep. This further compounds government intervention. This is why socialism is self-perpetuating. It’s like Heroin. You start needing more and more, even though it is killing you. You become dependent.

Then you can argue the practicalities. it is inefficient etc etc. but to me, this is secondary to the basic immorality of stealing property.

TruthWarrior: The income tax is a plank in the “Communist Manifesto”, as are central banks, BTW.

Publicani: Thanks, everybody. Interesting arguments, stimulating discussion. Helpful. Sorry if I misunderstood or misquoted anybody.
This post does not mean to end the discussion, please keep your comments coming.
The book, by the way, is a fiction. It never mentions income tax even though the plot is driven by a similar concept. It is available free online at
http://www.publicani.com/book/
if you like it, please comment on
http://www.amazon.com/Publicani-Zak-…/dp/1419683497
- maybe somebody else will read it and start thinking about the issue.

ams5995: Theft is aggression. Taxes are theft. Taxes are aggression. We could run this whole mother country without one single tax. YES WE CAN!!!! CHANGE!!!!!!!

CuriousOnlooker: Where would the funds be raised to pay for a strong national defense? (NOT offense.)

torchbearer: the states would be responsible for their own territories.
The federal government was never ment to have a standing army. Only the states.

hypnagogue: You need only contrast the requirements for a modern effective armed forces to recognize how totally impracticable that would be. Could you imagine getting 50 independent armies to function as a single responsive unit. The logistics and POLITICS should run a man’s blood cold.

I know this is a reviled argument sometimes around here, but it’s undeniable that times have changed. The science of modern warfare nowhere near resembles what the founders had to provision for, and no doubt would have been unimaginable even in their wildest nightmares.

 If you want to skip the introduction, slide the tape to 08:58.