Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Fix Congress, Not Wall Street

Posted 3 years ago on Oct. 14, 2011, 3:34 p.m. EST by Wihomer66 (1)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

People wake up. The greed and corruption on Wall Street has been perpetuated by our elected politicians for decades. Until we get 535 Congressmen and a President who care more about the American people than corporations nothing will change (no this isn't an indictment of BO or GW, its an indictment of all politicians who put corporations before citizens of this great country)

Congressional Reform Act of 2011

The 26th amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months & 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded it. That was in 1971…before computers, before e- mail, before cell phones, etc.

Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the land…all because of public pressure.

I’m asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum of twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise.

In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one idea that really should be passed around.

Congressional Reform Act of 2011

  1. Term Limits.

12 years only, one of the possible options below..

A. Two Six-year Senate terms B. Six Two-year House terms C. One Six-year Senate term and three Two-Year House terms

  1. No Tenure / No Pension.

A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.

  1. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.

All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people.

  1. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.

  2. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

  3. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.

  4. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.

  5. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/12.

The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.

Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.

If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three days for most people (in the U.S. ) to receive the message. Maybe it is time.

THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!!!!!

GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!!!

58 Comments

58 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by FtheSystem (4) 3 years ago

We need Obama's 1 Billion dollar "corporate" campaign fund to keep this thing going. Think Obama would ever help us? Don't hold your breath. He would never ever sell out the corporations!! Hi is the center (right now) of Crony Capitolism.

[-] 1 points by kainesandrolling (7) 3 years ago

This book says it all. If you haven't already, it's worth checking out. Wildfire;The Legislation that Ignited the Great Recession. It gives real world solutions to America's greed problem.

[-] 1 points by PeoplehaveDNA (305) 3 years ago

You took my idea for term limits idea I originally said twelve years too. I think twelve years is enough for anyone and if these people are really worth a damn they would be able to maneuver in an out of state politics based on reputation. We also need new blood in there to combat corruption. But the largest and most effective cause is to get the damn money and special interest groups out of politics.

[-] 1 points by Bernie (117) 3 years ago

You missed the most important ingredient to get back our Congress back. Money in politics, no private, corporate, union, or individual donations to any Federally elected official. All campaign costs will come from the Federal general fund. Any politician accepting any remuneration from other than the Federal general fund gets one year in jail.

[-] 1 points by elamb9 (112) from Portland, OR 3 years ago

THIS idea is so reactionary and will not do anything to help our cause. www.getmoneyout.com ...the real issue they fear!

[-] 1 points by Maxx (8) 3 years ago

The root of the issue is more that Corporations put in place those who owe them to their benefit, not so much how long they stay in office. Here is some reasoning...http://occupywallst.org/forum/objectives-for-ows-and-oks-occupy-k-street/

[-] 1 points by Rick1926 (3) from Cedar Grove, NJ 3 years ago

We need a million man march and occupation with THIS plan as the demands list! The people on the side lines will love it! The media will love it and clamor on board! Hell the tea party and independents will love it! The liberals would probably support this.

You don't leave the occupation until this is signed into law effective immediately not "phased in" It's simple, not muddied with a gazillion distracting side item that will not gather broad support.

[-] 1 points by navin (4) 3 years ago

" Hazare has also called for an amendment to the election laws to require that voters always be offered the option of “None of the Above.” When it prevails, parties would have to come up with better candidates."

New York Times, October 30, 2011, Beyond Occupy By BILL KELLER

Now here's a marvelous idea worth importing from India that will fit nicely into American culture of bumper stickers and Twits to get the message across very effectively. The timing is ideal as close to 90% of people disapprove of Congress and there are no viable third party candidates running for office. Just imagine the election night coverage and the headlines next morning announcing the election results - Republican 20%, Democrat 20% , 'None of the Above' 60%. No party will be able to claim a mandate and go on to serving their own special interests. The power will still remain with the people. I am not sure if our constitution or election laws will allow to put 'None of the above" on the ballot to officially tally that. But, our ballots already have a space for a "write in" candidate and exit polls will give a good enough count of "None of the above". 2008 Senate race in Alaska proved that enough people will exercise the "write in" option if energized enough. This is the best way to frustrate the politicians and special interests who bankroll billions to get them above the magic 50% mark. It will show that after spending millions of dollars our politician-emperors have no clothes.

October 30, 2011

[-] 1 points by Rick1926 (3) from Cedar Grove, NJ 3 years ago

I entirely agree with the "This is how you fix congress" except for the "term limit" section. The fix to pensions, pay, health care will take care of all problems.

[-] 1 points by atki4564 (1259) from Lake Placid, FL 3 years ago

Replace Congress by starting our own banks to double the income of the Bottom 99% of Workers, for many more people will come to your side when you are proactive (for “new” Business & Government solutions), instead of reactive (against “old” Business & Government solutions), which is why what we most immediately need is a comprehensive “new” strategy that implements all our various socioeconomic demands at the same time, regardless of party, and although I'm all in favor of taking down today's ineffective and inefficient Top 1% Management System of Business & Government, there's only one way to do it – by fighting bankers as bankers ourselves, and thus doubling our income from Bank Profits which are 40% of all Corporate Profits; that is, using a Focused Direct Democracy organized according to our current Occupations & Generations. Consequently, I have posted a 1-page Summary of the Strategically Weighted Policies, Organizational Operating Structures, and Tactical Investment Procedures necessary to do this at:

http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategically_weighted_policies_organizational_operating_structures_tactical_investment_procedures-448eo

Join http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/ because we need 100,000 “support clicks” at AmericansElect.org in support of the above bank-focused platform.

Most importantly, remember, as cited in the first link, that as Bank Owner-Voters in your 1 of 48 "new" Business Investment Groups (or "new" Congressional Committees) you become the "new" Online Congress, and related “new” Businesses, REPLACING the "old" Congress, and related “old” Businesses, according to your current Occupations & Generations, called a Focused Direct Democracy.

Therefore, any Candidate (or Leader) therein, regardless of party, is a straw man, a puppet, a political opportunist, just like today; what's important is the STRATEGY – the sequence of steps – that the people organize themselves under in Military Internet Formation of their Individual Purchasing Power & Group Investment Power. In this, sequence is key, and if the correct mathematical sequence is followed then it results in doubling the income of the Bottom 99% of Workers from today's Bank Profits, which are 40% of all Corporate Profits.

Why? Because there are Natural Social Laws – in mathematical sequence – that are just like Natural Physical Laws, such as the Law of Gravity. You must follow those Natural Social Laws or the result will be Injustice, War, etc.

The FIRST step in Natural Social Law is to CONTROL the Banks as Bank Owner-Voters. If you do not, you will inevitably be UNJUSTLY EXPLOITED by the Top 1% Management System of Business & Government who have a Legitimate Profit Motive, just like you, to do so.

Consequently, you have no choice but to become Candidates (or Leaders) yourselves as Bank Owner-Voters according to your current Occupations & Generations.

So JOIN the 2nd link, and spread the word, so we can make 100,000 support clicks at AmericansElect.org when called for, at exactly the right time, by an e-mail from that group, in support of the above the bank-focused platform. If so, then you will see and feel how your goals can be accomplished within the above strategy as a “new” Candidate (or Leader) of your current Occupation & Generation.

[-] 1 points by seaglass (671) from Brigantine, NJ 3 years ago

We need to come up with a Fast fix to overturn Corp. person hood as well.

[-] 1 points by Benny14 (101) 3 years ago

Wall street owns Congress why go after Wall street employees? go after there boss

[-] 1 points by gizmopigon (68) 3 years ago

Give congress 401k, BCBS healthcare coverage what normal people get , give them pay like 75k a years salary similar to what politicians in Europe or Canada are paid. Politician cannot pick voters drawing their political districts to ensure reelection. If a politician wins by more than 10% points they should have their political district redrawn to make it competitive regardless of party or ideology.

[-] 1 points by rmmo (262) 3 years ago

Get money out of politics!

[-] 1 points by ChristopherABrown (550) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

Absolutely, we all agree. Big question. "How does the movement gain the authority to have any effect what so ever? Comprehensive strategy actually exists.-

http://algoxy.com/ows/strategyofamerica.html

[-] 1 points by seaglass (671) from Brigantine, NJ 3 years ago

Good luck on that idea.

[-] 1 points by certifythem (2) 3 years ago

Certify them: like approved drugs or foods, politicians should be certified. The ultimate power of the people cannot be only by voting. If financial planners, doctors and other professionnals need to pass exams and must follow codes of conduct, how come any nice looking communicator can sit in a legislative assembly, issue rules , take your money, without being formally approved regarding his/her ethics and real competence?

[-] 1 points by commonsense11 (195) 3 years ago

Who will certify them? The certification is only as good as the panel that approves them and currently there is no one we can trust to do this. You are right though it's a problem, there just isn't an easy solution.

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

Okay, that is logical. I feel that after a number of very sensitive and difficult truths are exposed, that Americans will take this matter seriously. Americans need to be educated into the problem and exactly what causes this behavior. Article 5 of the constitution, our first constitutional right is the way to deal with this.

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

I love it. A certified human being willing to reasonably understand and use law in compliance with law.------

How would you suggest they be certified?

[-] 1 points by certifythem (2) 3 years ago

Certify them: like approved drugs or foods, politicians should be certified. The ultimate power of the people cannot be only by voting. If financial planners, doctors and other professionnals need to pass exams and must follow codes of conduct, how come any nice looking communicator can sit in a legislative assembly, issue rules , take your money, without being formally approved regarding his/her ethics and real competence?

[-] 1 points by kookla (79) 3 years ago

with out public financing of elections and an end to the legalized system of corruption term limits will not do a thing but force them to cycle their handpicked puppets more often...

[-] 1 points by commonsense11 (195) 3 years ago

I agree! I can't believe we continue to elect career politicians to office. I just heard on the news today that the Republican Party is unhappy about Cain's popularity. They say he isn't qualified. The news anchor commented that someone forgot to tell the voters this. I happen to lie Cain but even if you don't take note that the Career Politicians and the heads of the Republican and Democratic Parties want to limit your choices when it comes to elected officials. Sure you have a choice as long as they have approved them. It's time we wise up and start electing officials that possess common sense and view an opportunity to represent us as an honor, not a career path.

[-] 1 points by coolnyc (216) from Stone Ridge, NY 3 years ago

I don't think it's either / or. Fix Congress. Then fix Wall Street. If you don't fix Congress, there's a rats ass chance in hell that you'll even reform our financial system.

[-] 1 points by seaglass (671) from Brigantine, NJ 3 years ago

Chicken and egg dilemma. The Tea Party people only see the Gov't part of this problem and many on the left only see the Wall st./ Corp. side. The truth is both these evaluations are wrong because Corporatism / Fascism (our system) is the merging of both into a semi- organic whole. Corps. have the $$ to elect the people that help alter the rules of the game to make them more $$ which they use to buy more Gov't and so on and so forth. If your part of the system high up its grand, believe me I know more then a few of these people. For them it works and even if they wanted to change it they couldn't or wouldn't. No change will come from within this system. The only way to Change it is to defeat it from outside. I doubt a leaderless movement such as #OWS will be able to do it, no offense to anyone here.

[-] 1 points by coolnyc (216) from Stone Ridge, NY 3 years ago

I agree that it must be defeated from the outside, but not sure how that happens. The first step is awareness and education, and OWS has jump started that process very successfully. You either have to vote out the politicians who refuse to support reform, or you have to go the constitutional convention route and shove the reform down their collective throats. But you are right, neither will be successful without credible leadership. And if you don't want a fracturing of the 99% into it's natural constituent parts, the process of developing leadership needs to be carefully done so as to be maximally inclusive. You may not need the support of 99%, but we better have 70% if this is going to ultimately succeed.

[-] 0 points by seaglass (671) from Brigantine, NJ 3 years ago

"but we better have 70% if this is going to ultimately succeed." I agree, because as you drop towards 50% the chances of anything happening shrink to zero quickly. If the 1% can harness 50% were sunk and so far they've been doing just that.

[-] 1 points by occupypitt17 (24) 3 years ago

The only way we can make this happen with a partisan and corrupt congress is through a constitutional convention like we used to overturn prohibition. My thread on it here: http://occupywallst.org/forum/this-should-be-our-1-demand-and-here-is-how-we-mak/#comment-131681

[-] 1 points by ChristopherABrown (550) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

Congratulations your thread made the OWS forum default logic list of: "Oops, wrong target OWS -:(?" An award of your focus as a thread author and American.

Others who think like you think. Oppose the infiltration of pointless repetition nonsensically hijacking the forum. Post in these for now. WIth unity we might find an evolution of a limited list of evolving threads so our very cognitive presense is clear and associated with the law of the land.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/corporate-influence-in-government-and-its-effect-o/ http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-system-can-it-be-fixed-or-must-it-be-replaced/ http://occupywallst.org/forum/we-need-to-fight-the-source-not-the-symptom/ http://occupywallst.org/forum/fix-congress-not-wall-street/ http://occupywallst.org/forum/please-consider-this-everyone-focused-on-1-thing/ http://occupywallst.org/forum/poll-more-people-blame-washington-than-wall-st/

[-] 1 points by kelliej1313 (5) 3 years ago

Amen!!!!!! Someone sent this idea to me and it's been through my little email posse several times. Let's demand it! Let's do it!!!!!!!

[-] 1 points by MyHeartSpits (448) 3 years ago

How does this prevent them from being bought by lobbyists?

[-] 1 points by Howtodoit (1232) 3 years ago

I agree. How about this? Here's how we can easily Reform Wall Street: Take away their powers "once again." And a Million People March on The Hill will help get it done!

For example, "We are here Congress because we want to bring REINSTATE the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 http://www.investopedia.com/articles/03/071603.asp#axzz1aPEc3wX which help saved our country from the Great Depression by preventing investment companies, banks, and insurance companies from merging and becoming large brokerage firms; instead of just being Banks and Insurance companies--why can't we learn a history lesson here Congress? Btw, why did most of you vote for its final repeal in 1999? http://www.counterpunch.org/2008/09/19/shattering-the-glass-steagall-act

Think about where we are now, it all started in 1999 with the subprime loans Senator Phil Gramm was peaching on Senate floor. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKQOxr2wBZQ&feature=related

Furthermore, we also want you to CHANGE the Commodities Future Modernization Act of 2000 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_Futures_Modernization_Act_of_2000 BACK to where it was before 2000, which since has deregulated energy markets and consequently allowed for such scams as The Enron Loophole; whereas in the early 2000's Enron Corp. was charging 250 bucks plus for a kilowatt hour...They all when to jail for this. But, the Enron loophole is still not closed, for example, allowing speculators to resell barrels of oil over and over again before it reaches the gas station owner. It's basically, legal gambling at our expense. What were those lawmakers thinking then? What are you thinking now? Either do the right think, or you're part of the 1%."

Why are oil prices high? The Enron Loophole

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbdtTGYQBMU&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNp0y0SjOkY&feature=related

Rolling Stones Reporter: Truth about Goldman Sachs--how they have cornered the markets--basically, The Enron Loophole and the Repeal of Glass-Steagall Act in 1999. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waL5UxScgUw

Let's get focused and bring back Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, they got it right 1933, we don't need to REINVENT the wheel because bringing this Act back will create an even playing field once again....and let's finally Close the Enron Loophole, which allowed Enron to charge what they wanted for energy; they went to jail for this; but no one closed the loophole, why? Re-election Monies from the banks and oil companies! The writing is on the wall.

[-] 1 points by eric1 (152) from Corona, CA 3 years ago

Do you think Congress is going to propose any amendments that will severely curtail their own power? I don't. The remedy you seek is in Article V of the Constitution---a provision for a National Constitutional Convention. This is for when the Federal Branch itself is the source of the problem. Use it or lose it . . . and your standard of living in the process. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NationalConstitutionalConvention06

[-] 1 points by Marquee (192) 3 years ago

Well said! Do you remember what Mr. Cain said about protesting the White House instead of Wall St.? In many ways he is right, but the location needs to change to Capitol Hill. Until we get the boughten senators and congresspeople recalled we're just haccking at the branches of the tree without uprooting the tree that we're trying to uproot. It's my opinion that T. Jefferson meant to water the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants, not their lackeys and/or shepherds. Please, folks, let's focus on the root of the problem(s) rather than the fruit thereof. Congress is corrupt and must go in order to regain our independence. A government of,by and for the people must be re-established. A strong Congress of people who TRULY represent ALL Americans will make any changes necessary in order to insure fairness and equality in every area of life.

[-] 1 points by DSams (-71) 3 years ago

An Open Letter to Occupy Wall Street Protesters

Congratulations! You are successfully focusing public attention on the root cause of our political ills. Moreover, you are doing so with dignity and grace -- qualities which will not only influence more people, but make it far harder for the Establishment and their political agents to employ their normal repressive methods. You occupy the moral high ground; do not give it up no matter the provocation.

But, as surely you must know, this act is only the first in a long drama. The system you protest is robust and designed to withstand challenge. The banks and corporations from whom you wish to wrest power are well organized and have, over many long years, fully institutionalized their political and social controls. Our adversaries have waged class war for well over a century, have much invested, and everything to lose -- a long and difficult struggle lies ahead.

With this in mind, now is the time to consider and shape a second act, even as the first continues to unfold. To be successful, this act must not only engender widespread protest but also dramatically enumerate that discontent. Or else, as is happening already, your efforts will simply be dismissed as theatric, but essentially meaningless, commentary by an insignificant fringe of malcontents.

And therein lies the essential contradiction -- the only undeniable measure of and outlet for public discontent is the ballot box. Yet elite control of both political parties makes this a futile exercise. Past well-organized and powerful protest movements were defused and broken by an electoral process dominated by party candidates. Third parties have, historically, been marginalized and had little practical effect. Moreover, time is short -- the next election is barely a year away.

But what might happen if you inject some unpredictability into this well ordered system? If you explicitly reject both party's candidates? What will their media report on election night if millions of us join your protest by writing in "None of the Above" on our ballots?

What might happen indeed...

[-] 1 points by Marquee (192) 3 years ago

I promise to vote 'none of the above'. NOTA!!!

[-] 1 points by ChristopherABrown (550) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

Good stuff! And to do any of it an Article V convention is needed.------

To control an Article V convention one overwhelmingly important issue needs to be forced upon congress by 3/4 OF THE STATES. This elimnates congress having any real control. In fact, if they try, it will have to be collusively through the states, which will expose government corporate ties.

If you don't know about Article V, it is because congress didn't want you to know. That was for a reason, they loose control.-----

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_to_propose_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution "Congress acted preemptively to propose the amendments instead. At least four amendments (the Seventeenth, Twenty-First, Twenty-Second, and Twenty-Fifth Amendments) have been identified as being proposed by Congress at least partly in response to the threat of an Article V convention."

If the logic of this is perceived, then we only have to decide what the most immportant issue is. That would be the issue that empowers and protects us the most after the convention, so the elite cannot retaliate and disable further convention in someway. I believe they would sink the ship to prevent such, and the fact that the economy was driven to where it is by unconstitutional war evidences that asstertion.

[-] 1 points by peacejam (114) 3 years ago

I like some of your suggestions, some I think are too extreme, but if that's what you would like to see please spread the word.

but i think you are neglecting a few really important things in your plan (please add it?): stop protecting money under the 1st amendment (money is not speech), end lobbyist influence (I'm personally fine with lobbyists still serving as ambassadors between Washington and corporations/interest groups, but no money can be exchanged in the process. if it is, it will be criminal bribery), and put a cap on campaign contributions from individual donors to something that all (almost) Americans can afford or fund raise for (like $100 or less).

if you like these ideas, you might want to sign the petition at www.getmoneyout.com which proposes Constitutional amendments to limit money's influence on our politicians. There are over 190,000 signatures already.

[-] 1 points by libertarianincle (312) from Cleveland, OH 3 years ago

If you do that, then corporate taxes should be reduced to be the lowest in the world or to nothing. I don't like that corporations can influence elections, but I also understand why they want a voice when government can directly affect their bottom line through the tax code.

[-] 1 points by peacejam (114) 3 years ago

Lol are you negotiating with me libertarianincle? If so, I decline your offer.

Corporations intrinsically have advantaged political influence because they have such a high concentration of all the world's wealth. If corporations want a voice, their employees will vote for the candidates that best represent their employer's interests. They already do that. That is influencing the system plenty. Corporations shouldn't be able to determine outcomes of elections like they do now SOLELY because they have more money than the people who work for them. Our government needs to aspire to work for something more important than money. Did you know that 94% of the winners of the US 2008 elections had the most campaign funds? And that right now the vast majority of those campaign funds come from only the 1% wealthiest interests of the world? It should come as no surprise then that taxes for the wealthiest tax bracket are the lowest they've been in decades. Candidates, both left and right, have incentive to protect the interests of the wealthiest people, to ensure they have the most campaign dollars.

Lowering taxes is many times the right idea, and lowering taxes on the rich is sometimes the right idea, but definitely not now.

[-] 1 points by libertarianincle (312) from Cleveland, OH 3 years ago

You do realize that my company of 15 people, of which (even the CEO) are not "the rich" are affected by corporate taxes right? And there are 10s of thousands of other small companies like mine whose bottom line is DIRECTLY affected by a high corporate tax rate. Either lower our taxes or give us a voice. I prefer the former than then latter myself.

[-] 1 points by peacejam (114) 3 years ago

Tax rate is an understandable subject of debate. I believe taxes should be increased on the wealthiest percent because I think it will increase the quality of life of people more broadly. But if you have a different theory, I can understand that.

What do you think about the bank bailouts? I personally find it outrageous that there hasn't been an official investigation of the banks for improper banking practices! I mean, all the evidence of sub-prime mortgage backed securities being advertised as AAA when they knew they were toxic assets and bet against them to fail? (If you're not familiar with this, I'd be happy to explain the story and cite articles.) Maybe we disagree on whether to raise or lower taxes, but what do you think about "banksters" having an unfair advantage, escaping proper investigation because of political influence rather than social justice?

[-] 1 points by libertarianincle (312) from Cleveland, OH 3 years ago

I think what you mentioned, about the bank bailouts is crux of the problem. It is the reason there is no incentive for big business to regulate its self. When there is no risk of failure, why not take unnecessary risk when the potential payoff is huge, and the government is there to bail you out?

[-] 1 points by peacejam (114) 3 years ago

I agree. I'm happy we have some common ground. There is a horrendous amount of moral hazard in a system that gives lucrative rewards (worse: bailout money!) to people for doing a disastrous job.

Our government should have kept commercial and investment banking separate (should not have repealed Glass-Steagall) . That was one major deregulation that let the wheels come off our economy.

I see libertarian in your name. So, would you want Glass-Steagall to stay repealed, because you don't want regulation? Or are there some economic regulations you would support? Like, regulations and demand for transparency on the unregulated derivatives market? I'm curious because, while I like some libertarian ideas in the sense that I think people and corporations should pay for their mistakes, but I am very afraid of what financial system collapses could have at least in the short term and maybe longer on the quality of life for most Americans and people across the world.

I just feel like sometimes throughout history the little guys need to demand the wealthiest give up more of their resources than they would like so a majority of the population has an improved quality of life. I think raising people out of poverty is pretty much the essential issue to bringing us a more peaceful planet. I know this is essentially a socialist mindset, but maybe at different points of history, it's the right thing to put more restrictions on the levels of wealth people are allowed to hold on to?

[-] 1 points by BHicks4ever (180) 3 years ago

Fix both they both suck.

[-] 1 points by LincolnCA (160) 3 years ago

God Bless America, and God Bless You for a very well thought out and provoking post.

[-] 1 points by USAManufacturer (5) 3 years ago

Well said...

[-] 1 points by FtheSystem (4) 3 years ago

We need Obama's 1 Billion dollar "corporate" campaign fund to keep this thing going. Think Obama would ever help us? Don't hold your breath. He would never ever sell out the corporations!! Hi is the center (right now) of Crony Capitolism.

[-] 1 points by Wihomer66 (1) 3 years ago

BO is a hypocrite. Bashes the rich and tells them they pay more taxes and then holds his hand out looking for more campaign contributions from the very same people.

He is in it for himself and his cronies period. The rest of us are getting driven over a cliff.

[-] 1 points by ChristopherABrown (550) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

We will wish he is just a hypocrite after he's done. His behavior indicates WAY more than hypocricy.

We need an Article V convention NOW! It is our first constitutional right. Info on Article V.---

http://algoxy.com/poly/article_v_convention.html

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

Article 5 is how you bypass congress, then replace it.

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

Definitely the right idea. I have a feeling that if we knew the truth we would fix a whole lot more than that. No wonder media only entertains and misleads in exploitation only created a consumer culture dependent on corporations.-----

Let us get the whole truth democratically with article 5 of the constitution and nothing but the truth for justice in defense of the constitution BEFORE we amend any further. Attempting any social movement except that, in this environment of secrecy is foolhardy.

Article 5 convention NOW!

Article V conference, Mark Meckler Lawrence Lessig at harvard 9/25/11-video comments http://vimeo.com/31464745

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-7ikbvu0Y8

Lessig power point on article V http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gpbfY-atMk

[-] 0 points by gr57 (457) 3 years ago

You don't need to regualte that with an amendment, you vote them in every year. You don't like them, stop voting for them

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

Yes, congress has been unconstitutional for probably 70 years, and so we are in deep trouble now. Article 5 of the constitution is the only way out.

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

Fix congress by going over their head in lawful democratic action.

A effort each evening to create a web conference to discuss Article 5 is beginning. Going after Washington is logical, Article 5 is functional strategy--

A effort each evening to create a web conference to discuss Article 5 is beginning.--

http://www.articlevmeeting.info/

Comprehensive strategy.---

http://algoxy.com/ows/strategyofamerica.html

[-] 0 points by LazerusShade (76) 3 years ago

Honestly the best way to fix congress is to change how they are able to campaign. Limit the way they get fund contributions to individual people, and under a certain amount. Say no more than $10,000.00 from any one person. No union corporate or any other organization may contribute. 2nd change No one who makes more than the 80% middle may run for office excluding the super rich, and the super poor from taking office.