Forum Post: The only demand we need is this; END THE WHOLE SYSTEM!
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 9, 2011, 1:22 a.m. EST by steve005
(256)
from Cincinnati, OH
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Yeah we need to end it all, start over with open source government, they will be there to "protect" our rights, not there to "give" us rights
we need to start over based off the constitution
The constitution was written by moneyed interest for moneyed interest. I prefer the articles of confederation under which the country worked fine and concluded a successful war against the most powerful opponent on the planet. But then farmers and veterans tried to get paid for their labor and demanded not to be thrown in debtors prison (whiskey and shay's rebellion), and wham! New government and a standing army.
Nailed that on the head Dank...
we just need to scrap the constitution, because it was essentially an agreement/contract of bankruptcy. I'd be willing to advocate a return to the system under the articles of confederation.. then at least the States and the People could keep more control over their respective states and therefor there living environment
I agree. A central government over a country as large as this one just invites corruption. Either let the US be a loose confederation of independent states or just break it up into entities too small to bother with.
you mean go back to the Articles of Confederation??? I'm down with that!
Or Athenian democracy..which is what Anarchists are usually promoting.
I dont know what Athenian democracy is, i'm sure the federal experiment is a dismal failure only because of the consolidation of power. with no federal government/ constitution, the states could conduct their affairs more in line with the PEOPLE that actually live there. things like monetary policy and immigration are a few things that affect the people most and would be best controlled locally by the people in the local states according to their needs. Not dictated by a pompous group of out of touch politicians hundreds or thousands of miles away.
I agree smaller governments, by which I mean more accessible to the people not necessarily smaller in scope (though it may be time for that also) are better at being responsive to the needs of their constituents. Though I'm not sure why you limit your logic to State governments, the same could be said for the divestiture of power to an even more local level like counties or municipalities..By Athenian democracy I mean that which arose briefly in Athens Greece in the 5th century BC. The main point being that it was a direct democracy (not a representative one, if one can even still call that democracy) every enfranchised person had the right to vote in the assembly on the issues at hand. They did not elect others to vote for them. Think ballot referendums like they have in some states. Interestingly, they also got an annual vote for who was to be banished which effectively prevented anyone from garnering enough influence onto themselves to pervert their democracy. At least for a time. 2500 years later the availability of the internet could allow us simply vote on the laws themselves instead of for candidates to vote for us.
I only limit my logic to state governments because I see that as an easy way to fix the problem, eliminate the federal government and return to a system that was already in place, but in my opinion was never given the time to prove its self. Secondly I fully support the idea of integrated internet in government. under a return to the articles of confederation this would prove invaluable to the States people as they would have a direct say in issues that affect them locally. such as monetary creation and control.
Ok, good we agree. Now how do we do it? ;) FYI I haven't read the Articles, my earlier point was illustrative not advocative. But because of this conversation I'm actually gonna go and read them.
Republican forms of government that were small enough to really hear what people had to say and were loosely affiliated with one and other for common defense and commerce. Hope you enjoy the read
I just edited the wikipedia to remove the completely unsubstantiated OPINION in the first paragraph that the Articles "proved to weak". Shamefully they didn't have the full text except in eligible photos. Wow, found it. PS - It was awesome.
I disagree. The fundamental nature of our government is pretty solid. The problems we're facing are primarily economic. The biggest issue is the massive and increasing disparity of wealth. There's something wrong when the bottom 50% of the nation owns just 2.5% of the wealth, down from about 4% just a few years ago.
What's happening is that businesses have set up a system where money is being shipped from the 99% to the 1%. Basically, the working class is not being paid anything close to their actual worth. We've reached the end of that line; the working classes no longer have any real money to spend. We're now cannibalizing ourselves, doing without our vital needs just to keep going a little longer.
How do we solve this?
We require all medium and large businesses to meet or beat the poverty rate in their hiring practices. If the poverty rate in a given region is 10%, at least 90% of a company's workforce must be paid at or above the poverty rate. No medium to large business in this region may hire more than 10% of their employees below that rate.
Doing this, the siphon is shut off without resorting to socialism, without resorting to redistribution schemes.
yeah but you're still forcing people to do things. You aren't getting to the root of the problem, which is; the central bank and the system that let them take power(corrupt system)
The increasing disparity of wealth would exist regardless of the banking system. While I don't discount the possibility that the central banking system exacerbates the problem, I respectfully disagree that it is the root of the problem.
But, do you happen to have a solution to the problems you've observed?
yes! end the FED bank! and the system, and start over, we need local control
Ending them isn't itself a solution. What would you replace them with?
many banks, anyone could open a bank
Each issuing their own currency?
sure if they want
This year the citizens of Iceland wrote their Constitution, open sourced: http://stjornlagarad.is/other_files/stjornlagarad/Frumvarp-enska.pdf
It should be required reading for EVERY US citizen - an easy read, plain English (interpretation). Here's a line from their pre-amble:
"The government shall endeavour to strengthen the welfare of the country‘s inhabitants,..."
We Have Permission to Change the System http://www.JeffBlock2012.com
I wonder, not necessarily to "end" the system, but what if we gave our Federal Government 1 year off, a skeleton crew left behind to administer what needs to be administered...but can't we at least do without Congress for a year? Can't we live with the laws already on the books? What good is a budget if we're continually looking to approve last minute bills that aren't in the approved budget?
Keep it simple. Return to Constitutional government first. Take out the jugular of the financial system's corruption by exposing the Federal Reserve.
The Fed has been kiting checks. Treasury owes nothing to the Fed. (national debt $0)
Yup
I agree. It stinks to high heaven. We need local systems of barter, alternative currencies, local systems of food production. In the U.S., this is doable.
Along the same lines, we need a reboot. The debt is too high to ever pay back, and those criminals know it. Universal debt forgiveness. We default on the national debt. Personal debt is forgiven. Private debt is forgiven. Student loans are forgiven. Much of the debt is fraudulent anyhow. And the banks make ever more money by repackaging and reissuing debt - look at the IMF. Oh yes, then they finance themselves off of the backs of taxpayers.
I think prostituting the crimes of the 1 percent would be a good start. You steal---you are treated as thief. You murder---you're treated accordingly. For all these years these 1 percenters have been given a pass on everything; they've been permitted to break the most recognizable laws.
we can do that too, or let god take care of that!
The US government is, and has always been, a fraud perpetrated against the people. The Constitution is a cleverly crafted document design to maintain power for a privileged class. Collusion between business and the government is at the heart of American democracy.
Support Revolution 2.0 - Their idea restructures the government to where the people oversee the actions of the government – even overturn governments’ decisions when the majority deem it necessary - true representation. We just have to want it badly enough! http://www.osixs.org/Rev2_menu_intro.aspx Overview: Welcome to the beginning of the second American Revolution. The purpose is to educate and to move the United States and the rest of the world forward. We all know that something is terribly wrong with our country but we don't have a clue what to do about it. But we do know we cannot continue to sit around and do nothing. We are so confused, we don't realize how dangerous it is to continue voting for democrats and republicans. We've become mentally crippled and dependent on two parties and our current form of government. They can't help you. The best people to help the people are the people. Until you figure that out, you will remain lost. Welcome to the Revolution. Revolution 2.0 is a revolution in ideas and technology along with a vision to move this country forward. Read common sense 3.1 and the rest of the pages on the menu. This will give you a clear understanding of what the problems are, what we need to do about them and most important, how to proceed by taking real action. Our government didn't create itself and it can't fix itself. Problems never solve themselves… Common sense 3.1 is a call to action to address the problems of the nation. http://www.osixs.org/Rev2_menu_commonsense.aspx The second bill of rights are the baseline expectations and goals for Revolution 2.0 http://www.osixs.org/Rev2_menu_billofrights.aspx The Declaration of Dissolution and Termination (DDT) is a formal and legal declaration of grievances prepared by the people of the United States to be served to the government of the Untied States. The declaration is also a formal and legal order by the people to the government of the United States to cease and desist specific government operations in accordance with instructions laid down by the Execution of Dissolution and Termination. http://www.osixs.org/Rev2_menu_Intro_DT.aspx The Execution of Dissolution and Termination (EDT) is the formal process and rules for dissolving parts or all of the old government and then terminating the old government after the new government has been fully implemented. http://www.osixs.org/Rev2_menu_Execution.aspx Yes, you guessed it - this ain't no tea party. What I do like about this movement, is that it gets the job done without violence. If violence breaks out; the government can and will impose martial law and the rest of your rights will be stripped from you. With your rights gone; your vote; your signature; and your opinion are irrelevant. With the frustration that is building in America; I can envision this possibility. Revolution 2.0 sidesteps this pitfall. If you like what you see at this site; please vote here and let them know of your support: http://www.osixs.org/Vote.aspx When the representative body have lost the confidence of their constituents, when they have notoriously made sale of their most valuable rights, when they have assumed to themselves powers which the people never put into their hands, then indeed their continuing in office becomes dangerous to the State, and calls for an exercise of the power of dissolution.
I agree. Here's what I think is what we should be doing now to achieve that aim http://occupywallst.org/forum/how-we-win-one-perspective-on-where-we-go-from-her/
If you call for violent revolution you will lose most of the 99%. We want to save our constitution and Republican Democracy from corporatism and the corruption of the political system with money.
I am with a group of lawyers and students and we would love your input on our action plan to organize and petition the government to redress grievances under the 1st Amendment. Please let us know if you have any suggestions:
Declaration: https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/
Action Plan: https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/home/the-steps-to-non-violent-revolution
We need to organize and its really not that hard!
"There's a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious—makes you so sick at heart—that you can't take part. You can't even passively take part. And you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop. And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all."
finally, someone with a coherent message!
Thank you!
Who will be left alive to start a new one?
anyone smart enough to know what to do
Survivalists will star the new system?
if they survive
lol
We are members of the reality-based community. We have no need for a utopianism that throws the baby out with the bathwater. We seek real solutions to real problems. That's why our just demands will be realized.
I saw this great musican Luba Dvorak this afternoon. He sang this new original song, "What's it All Worth" that was a really inspiring protest song. Sounds kind of like a Neil Young song... I found them playing it on youtube check it out and spread it... this could be our voice... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaqPX0bfrUM
I saw this great musican Luba Dvorak this afternoon. He sang this new original song, "What's it All Worth" that was a really inspiring protest song. Sounds kind of like a Neil Young song... I found them playing it on youtube check it out and spread it... this could be our voice... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaqPX0bfrUM
AMen
We merely started a new one
-
www.republicofolancho.com
-
Well said
Although I'm all in favor of taking down today's ineffective and inefficient Top 10% Management Group of Business & Government, there's only one way to do it – by fighting bankers as bankers ourselves. Consequently, I have posted a 1-page Summary of the Strategic Legal Policies, Organizational Operating Structures, and Tactical Investment Procedures necessary to do this at:
http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategic_legal_policy_organizational_operational_structures_tactical_investment_procedures
Join
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/
if you want to support a Presidential Candidate Committee at AmericansElect.org in support of the above bank-focused platform.
Yes, let's end the whole system, crash the entire world economy, and lead to the deaths of millions upon millions of people due to starvation, wars for resources, water and more.
YES! GREAT IDEA!
hey I didn't say all that bad stuff would happen, thats just your assumption
No. Put your thinking cap on. What will happen if economies around the world crash? Think hard and deep. Take a bong hit if you have to.
no I think less will die if it happened now, the nif it happened in five years. there is no question it will happen just a matter of when. history repeats
Don't you wish there was a reset button somewhere?
and here is how: http://www.radiokazoo.net/OPV/
I completely agree with you and have been thinking along the same lines for some time too.
OPV is a bit too much, I like the idea but you seek to limit my freedom as a living breathing person. If i wanna run my car on gasoline i should have that right. But if you want to force corporations to make their fleets all electric I can support that because Corporations do not have the same natural rights as living breathing men and women.. I hope you caught the point i was trying to make.
is it worth the ecological risks that come with oil extraction if there is an alternative free energy source. There are many technologies that have been discovered and then bought and supressed by oil company interests developed. Would you want to run your car on petrol if you could have a free alternative?
of course free alternatives are better for me and better for the Earth. I was just trying to make the point that the Idea of OPV as outlined takes away too much personal freedom. If I had a 1969 chevelle SS i want it running on Gasoline, but I could care less if my mini van runs on electric, seaweed gas or whatever
A Muscle Car converted to EV just wouldn't be the same really would it.
would be a muscle car without muscle. I am all for renewable energy as long as it does not interfere with my freedom. Please notice i did not say liberty.. Liberty can be cancelled by the captain at any time.
What? oh. lol i do see your point for sure but with the elimination of the use of fossil feuls there wont be any gas stations to fill your car up. and we wouldnt necessarily "force" anybody to do anything thats the point. we can manufacture our own cars, we dont need the auto makers but we will gladly accept their help. its up to the individual. if you want to read books for the rest of your life then you should be able to do that. it is your life and we should have the right to spend our time and efforts on what we want. and thats real freedom.
Agreed
WOW! My iPad seems to have a monkey translation app. Cool! You guys are complete and total fools.
uh what?
i know it's difficult for liberals to think, but, you know....the zoo...monkeys...chimps....donkeys....sh*ting on themselves and making noise....that's you guys...lol
this isn't about liberals, dems or rep. it's about the fact that your political system has been hijacked and no longer works for the majority. you sir are a tard.
Blanket statements like this dont mean anything. Wait I just made one by saying that!
It's difficult for liberals to think?!?
Unions are the reason why this system is so messed up!!! Look at the teachers.. They keep thinking they would be making more money in the private sector vs the public??/ Yeah .. Stress, having to perform, Having to answer for the failures... having to work a full year... But in the private sector they have Healthcare for life, Keep getting raises when 90% dont deserve them and a part time job that pays full time.
In NY when the market crashed our taxes were raised to pay their pensions becasue we had to fill the gap.. They are the enemies
Yeah, damn unions controlling everything..oh wait they don't even represent more than 8% of the private sector so that arguments toast.
the enemies are the international bankers that control everything in our society through their control of money. From teachers to hollywood movies that promote their ideas and ideal to the mass of the people. Our true enemy is the international bankers as outlined in the book "Creature from jeykel island" Make no mistake about that if We the People can stand together against the money interests and take away control of our money supply from them we will all live a better life.
Resourced Based Economy, money has been the cause of this whole mess. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDhSgCsD_x8
thats the dumbest thing ever! no money hasn't been the cause. Letting a private bank control the printing of paper money has been the cause. we need sound money!
this is a great video showing how dumb the venus project really is, really funny too!
of course money has been the cause. No money = No Corporate greed. The fed is owned by private corporates - corporate greed - money. Resource based economy would be the only way to fix this problem and ensure you never end up here again.
oh so its that simple? lol. you are insane
dude why don't you provide some examples of why you would be against shifting to a resource based economy. rather than just saying I'm insane?? I mean seriously have a bit of respect for what people have started here.
because it's not freedom, you want to force people to do things against their will, otherwise how would it work?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2xbtBvmpiE&list=PLA80EDD1F77C6EBF2&index=37
I believe this video is satire of our current directions TZM, TVP, and Ron Paul. The video made all of them look dumb. But that's the point of a satire. The truth is in his concluding lines.
I mean it would be dumb for a musician because he then has nothing to talk about in his lyrics. Furthermore, what would people do if they weren't able to consume. America's primary attribute, consumption. Spread the wealth with meaningless material and starve others for collateral. Sound money, and more meaningless empty words and expressions to justify an illusion.
(I think we need sound people first)
lol, we have sound people, I am. anyway no the vidoe doesn't make ron paul look dumb only the venus project; because it is dumb
Sound People?
you made up the term, did you forget? lol
Money is an issue because it is based on scarcity.
Money is required for many to access the goods and services they need to survive.
So job markets must be created/remain open which either aren't necessary or could be automated. If too many people are out of work, not enough people have the ability to purchase goods and the economy crashes.
To remain profitable companies must find some way of gaining an advantage over their competition so they seek ways to game the system. Artificial scarcity is created (e.g. crop destruction), planned obsolescence (items are designed to be replaced by new version), and technologies are held back (e.g. fermilabs antimatter). So once again, the corrupt gradually rise up the ranks because they constantly seek ways to get ahead and money rewards scarcity.
Money itself creates haves and have nots. It restricts access to goods/services which then must be enforced and protected.
Replace money with technology and politics with evidence based decisions.
Have a better system in mind? Go with whatever system creates the most sustainable abundance, simple as that.
We need to move towards getting the $ out of our elections...the one movement we could all joing together on while we have the chance. Talking about ending the system divides and will never get our voice back.
that wouldn't work, media is too biased for that to make any difference
We give the media all it needs to divide us because we cannot focus on one simple unifying issue. We debate the fine points amongst ourselves and that is what the media focuses on. Both sides can rally together on this, and it is going to take a united effort to make any real change to the current corrupt system.
Start using Bitcoin NOW! That will change the WHOLE SYSTEM!
bitcoins are for buying drugs, and computer nerds who can "mine" them with their high tech stuff, thats why they're so many people online selling bitcoin idea
Our government is actually fairly advanced and useful. It just needs to be tweaked
..at its roots.
Yes, but our constitution is sound.
Sound at what? Protecting our rights, they're written there in black and white and still are circumvented. At protecting our democracy? We don't have one. We have a republic where even the president can be elected while losing the popular vote. Our equality? Electoral power is apportioned by where you happen to reside (A voter in Vermont is far more powerful than one in California because of representation in the Senate). I won't even touch the 3/5ths clause..
It is not the constitution's job to protect our rights, it is a paper. It is there to remind us our rights. It is our job to protect them.
We have a democratic republic, yes I would like some more direct democracy, but a republic can work, we just need proprtional representation instead of a single member state. About the President, we have an election, the votes are counted, the one with most votes wins: That is fair. If you think somewhere along the lines someone is breaking our right to fair presidential election, see the first section of this post. I do think that a president should have more than 50% of the votes or we do a reelection but that is a subject for a different rant.
You complain that a voter in vermont has more say in the senate than a voter in NY. YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT! That is the point. Because in the House of Representatives, the voter in NY has more say, because they have more representatives. It evens itself out. One or the other wouldn't be fair. But together they are sound. The senate represents the state evenly, and the House of Representatives is meant to represent the citizens proportionally. Though I feel that Proportional representation elections would do this better.
The Constitution works. It is flexible enough not to be irrevalent, yet solid enough to be a base. If we don't like how people interpret it, or use it. THEN IT IS OUR JOB AS AMERICANS TO DISSENT.
Ultimately the Constitution through its interpretation by the courts IS the basis of those rights, not a reminder but a LEGAL BASIS. You are avoiding the fact that it is the votes of the ELECTORAL COLLEGE (generally not elected by the citizenry at large) and not those of the CITIZENRY that are counted to determine the presidency. So what we have here is: elected representatives electing representatives to elect a representative, sounds a lot like a derivative of a derivative of a derivative (remind you of any current mess). A system, enshrined in the Constitution to dilute what little democracy is present in our "democratic republic" as if that phrase somehow has any meaning different than republic. Sounds more democratic but isn't. I am aware of the purpose of the Senate; to ensure that money is adequately represented in policy by forcing candidates to run expensive statewide campaigns. What it evens out to is an unequal representation based solely on geography..you fail to substantiate why a state with many more citizens should not actually have more representation in government. Sure the Constitution works, but for whom? and to what end? - In solidarity.
Okay, you have made some valid points.
However, let me shed some perspective on the history of America and the Constitution. The founding fathers wrote the constitution in a time when education was low, boys often left school at 8 years old to work on the farm, and woment could not vote. It was a common fear that "The PEOPLE" would not be able to make educated decisions for the country. I proper concern at the time. So they used a republic instead of direct democracy. This way they can increase democracy, but still leave the final decisions to the well educated. This was also based on England's government. Also, they were afraid of centralized government due to England's abuse of power. So they wanted their staes to have the power, and the federal government to just handle issues that panned the whole country. So they made the representatives of congress representatives from the states. They understood that, since the states had ultimate say, they needed to have an even vote for each state. They also realized that some states had larger populations than others, and that the Senate would lead to an unfair advantage. So to control for that, they made the House of Representatives, This is another part of congress that has equal say when it comes to new legislature. To make sure a state with more citizens have an equal representation based on POPULATION COUNT not geography, House of Representatives is filled with multiple representatives from each state. The number of representatives is proportional to the total population of that state.
So now you know why the did it, now here is how it works.
-----------------------------Congress makes and passes laws
-----------------------------Senate (equal voice for each state) makes a law and votes whether they like it or not.
-----------------------------House of Representatives (Each state has only as much power as the number of it's population.) Votes whether to make it official.
President can veto, and the process starts over.
The reason:
Senate is necessary because without it, smaller states would have no say.
House of Representatives is necessary because without it, the smaller states would have too much say.
When I say SMALLER I am referring to population, not geography. I hope that was a typo on your part, if not...
Question: We are all "educated now, we should have direct democracy now, not a republic. Right? Wrong. You ask your neighbor the best way to implement the decentralization of a bank with roots in foreign soil and a deep investment in our economy. What will he say? He will scoff at you for acting like a know it all, or spout something he saw on tv BECAUSE WE ARE TOO BUSY IN OUR DAILY LIVES TO THINK ABOUT THESE DETAILS CONSTANTLY! Believe me, I know. I can't stop thinking about them.
The republic is necessary so that the educated can create laws and judge their use. What we should ALSO have is a direct democracy veto system. We should all be able to vote on laws that are passed to veto them. So that congress can't pull a fast one on us. Obviously 2/3rds votes would be necessary.
If you can come up with a better system tell me.
I think you just did in less than 40 words..."Senate is necessary because without it, smaller states would have no say." What you meant to say was smaller states would have a say equal to their share of the population. Again, which would be bad, why?
Because, they are a form of government. Look at it this way:
Senate represents the state government (No state's government is better than another)
The HoR represents the Individuals of that state.
States have very different people in them. Are you suggesting that those in Vermont should all move to a larger state because Texas has more say? No, that is wrong. I think it is safe to say that people in VT and people in TX are fairly different. If it wasn't for the senate, smaller states would just be engulfed by larger states and we would have a country of about 5 states by now.
I don't understand your because..If you don't have proportional representation aren't you suggesting that people in Texas should need to move to Vermont if they want their interests adequately represented in Congress. The states are sovereign entities, so no reason to think they would be subsumed by larger states. Only logical inference of abolishing the Senate would be that the interests those living in more populist states would be accurately represented in federal policy. Why is that bad?
Here is what happens.
Senate - Every state is equal
HoR - Larger states are more powerful
After some basic math we see:
Larger states are still more powerful and have more say. There just isn't as much disparity between the minorities and majorities.
If we ONLY had the HoR, There would be too much disparity and the compramise wouldn't exist. There would be ruling states and underling states.
The senate just lessons the Gap in power. It doesn't make them all completely equal.
Not confused as to the structure of government. More populous states have their justifiably (because they represent more people) greater influence in government circumscribed by the Senate. But that isn't the same as "isn't as much disparity [of power] between the minorities and majorities." What you really mean is that geographically based minorities (large minorities or majorities in small population states) are given disproportionate power to obstruct the interests of most people. Why is that desirable?
Okay, if you don't get it, you don't get it. I have a hundred comments to respond to. Please, go ask your history teacher why they are important. It is called checks and balances.
Your slipping anon, if I don't agree that's desirable than I should re-educate myself is troll talk and you are obviously not that.
I am just tired, and have a lot of work to do. Yes, your opinion is valid, but the states would have a huge disparity. Remember the senate is where states converse. The House of Representatives is where parties converse.
Senate looks pretty monied and partisan to me..do your thing. - in peace and solidarity.
I guess its too much to ask for people to just learn about how the present system works. because it actually works fine except the bankers have hidden the asset wealth of the American people from us. As Henry ford once said, "It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." I know how the banking system works, its not bad if used by the people correctly.
no your wrong, the system is inherently flawed
with access to the trust fund the government is holding you can buy anything you want with the stroke of a pen
but how would I buy something off my neighbor or friend?
Through the treasury via an order to pay. Ferderal Reserve notes ARE NOT money. So you could not even PAY your neighbor anyway. The only thing you can do with a federal reserve note is discharge the debt. Discharge and payment ARE NOT the same monetary transactions
ok so how would i discharge a debt without something I would be able to hold in my hand?
the same basic way a credit card is used. A credit card or debit card transfers fictitious digital funds from one accounting ledger to another. And you said "it's too long term for you to wrap your mind around" about me - too funny.
you're a kook. take your meds
I counter that you are simply ignorant or one of the trolls, (I put my thumb on my nose and wiggle my hand at you)
ok so you understand and disagree?why do you disagree.
ok so your saying I need to have a credit card now? and a way to be linked in to the tresury? that involves expensive stuff dude so now I have to get that stuff just to have simple transactions, would bartering be illegle?
wow I can see i need to start from the basic with you. 1) i never said you need a credit card I just tried to find a simple way to illustrate how one could make a transaction (buy something) with nothing in ones hand. this sort of transaction happens every day. To but something with your funds held in your name in various government agencies you simply make an order to pay. Very similar to writing a check. If you want to barter with your neighbor I never consider that soet of deal to be illegal OR unlawful
you only say that because you don't know how the system works. I bet you don't even know that there is no money. Also that All People fund their own mortgages with their own promissory note. you see with some basic understanding of the finance and monetary system you would see that everything on this planet is prepaid. Corporations are using CREDIT to manufacture everything, and corporations can not create credit only living breathing men and women can create credit, because credit comes from labor something corporations can not preform...
a corporation is an entity(people) limiting their risk to their investment.
correction: A corporation is a persons not one of the People. Persons is a legal term that can be found in Blacks law dictionary. Persons is not the proper way to pluralize person according to the rules of the English language. We the People or people does not include corporations OR governments as they are mere creations of the people.
a corporation is made up of shareholders(people). by the way, under the law 'persons' under a corporation have the same rights as 'natural' people.
agreed, but what is legal and what is lawful are very different things. I also believe that corporations have enough rights in government via their shareholders. But what might be missed here is that corporation protect People from liability. I think if a corporation does something wrong the people behind it should bear full liability.
No I do understand how the scam works, it's the same scam they use over and over again, it started with grains, now it's happining with gold, it's too long term for you to wrap your mind around
Also I do not blame you for your not understanding the financial and monetary system Its been going on for about 100 years. Henry Ford said "It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning."
I do understand. maybe you don't.
How dare you make an accusation about me like that you do not even know me. Its sounds like you are more of a problem than part of a solution. You sound like a classic example of Sheeple A person who is afraid of the unknown. Maybe a little research can return you to to peoplehood, I suggest HJR-192. its a good place to start. Its the solution the bankers came up with when Senator Charles Lindberg Sr. discovered the scam of the bankers and was about to levy charges of treason. HJR-192 allows the People to set off their taxes without payment, because with no money ( gold or silver) there can be no payment
What are you talking about I didn't make any accusation about you, this is a scam too and you seem to be part of it,-troll
you said, it's too long term for you to wrap your mind around, Implying I am some sort of an idiot that can not comprehend ideas over extended time periods. I assure you I fully understand what your talking about, I even know what its called, Yes there is a name for it.
Anyway, they took gold away and now they can print as much or as little as they want, and that causes many many problems ok.
This one is a bit more complicated but judging by the questions you ask and the knowledge you have shown you already have i'll try and briefly lay it out, forgive me in advance if i miss something. When a Person is born in the USA the first thing done is the mom signs an application for a certificate of live birth. this in effect transfers all your credits based on your calculated future earnings to a trust in your name administered by the Gov. This is done legally in part because you are not able to sign contracts until you are 18 years old. Then when We turn 18 we are supposed to "claim back" if you will, control of the trust funds. We never do because we are kept stupid about money and finance. These funds are used by governments and international bankers to fund their projects such as wars and building governments so they can continue their control over MONEY SUPPLIES, Because "who controls the money controls the people" What I am suggesting is a massive reclamation of those trust funds using the system already in place but hidden form 95% of the American people to do 2 things 1) enrich every American allowing the to purchase what everything they want ( because the trust funds are worth trillions) 2) take back control of all the credit being used by governments and international bankers to fund their afore mentioned programs immediately restoring peace to the planet earth
but then you'll completly wipe out the middle class throuhg the hidden inflation tax, whta about that?
there is no inflation on lawful money, the trust funds are based on labor and therefore lawful. inflation only exists in fiat monetary systems. the federal reserve system is a fiat based monetary system. and through inflation and deflation they have made us penniless on the continent our fathers conquered, Just like Jefferson warned. At this stage of the battle it would be more prudent to pull the lifeblood (credit that belongs to the people) from the governments and international bankers that control our present fiat money supply.
yes I agree; lawful money, which is gold or silver. I don't know what the hell your talking about but whatever it is it's a theory, I'm talking about real shit here, were is the "lawful money" you speak of?
lawful money can also be labor, as it has always been used in barter transactions. The ideas behind lawful money come from the common law principle of substance exchanged for substance. I guess that's why gold and silver and copper can be considered lawful money as there is a great amount of labor used to mine transport and refine such metals. But back to the point. My idea is not a theory as there is a handful of Americans that have made claims that they have accessed their trust funds. the trust fund are based on labor and therefore can be construed as a lawful medium of exchange. iffegardless, by claiming control of the trust funds We the people can take away the credit being used by international bankers against us.
only lawful money is gold and silver because it says so in the constitution.
the constitution stated only gold and silver can be a tender in payment of debt. there is no direct mention of lawful money. The constitution was an agreement more for the King of England than for the Americans. Seems to me is made sure we could only pay our " debt" with gold and silver. and lets not forget the constitution was a document conceived by the barrel of a gun (Rhode island delegates) in secret with no official record. Not one drop of blood was shed by the minutemen for any Constitution they died for a form of government more like what we had under the Articles of Confederation.
No you have it backwards, also if gold and silver are only to be used for the tender of payments of debts then wouldn't that make that the only lawful money? if not I must be missing something, do you have another meaning your using for "lawful money"?
Substance in exchange for substance its the rule of common law ie: lawful. Since biblical times labor has been the medium of exchange in barter transactions
Then why are pennies made from copper and have been since prior to the civil war. I mention civil war because that when non lawful money appeared in the United States, Lincolns green backs and the "Nickel" 5 cent piece. we had silver half dimes we did not need a 5 cent coin made from nickel.
pennies are copper-plated zinc after 1982
for smaller demominations yes, how many people do you think bought a house or car with copper though? it wouldn't make sense, only for small transactions
well if since colonial times copper was accepted as money then for the sake of argument we can say it is a lawful money too similar to gold and silver. Also in the charter for Jamestown the King reserved All the gold, silver and copper among other things for himself.
where are the trust funds you ask? here is a clue from a claiming document. I am approaching you in your Office a trustee as you are a member of the Social Security Administration, a branch of U.S. Post Office known as the Post Office Management Service Section overseeing the security of the Assets of the United States of America, the peoples assets.
thats insane, so we can sell our souls pretty much, that sounds sic.
a money system based on labor is fair and untouchable by those who do not labor ie: produce anything of value to society at large
come on steve, You got to realize nothing on this planet get done with out labor. Its the oldest form of currency on the planet. Also the most secure currency
Yeah if you want to be a slave, the only way to do that would be to trade "future" labor, because labor thats already been done always can be represented with something tangable
thats where the "credit" for federal reserve notes comes from. And Yes I 100% agree its slavery or rather voluntary servitude because its done by contract. And Its wrong, but its the present system we have today.
we need to get rid of it
if We the People do not Claim the trust funds, the international bankers will continue to use it. My idea is similar to taking the gas away from an engine, no gas no go. As long as we the people continue to ignore the fact that these funds exist AND are being used against us we are all doomed to lives of servitude. as long as those funds exist and are available to governments and banking cartels they will use them.
so you want to get money based off your future labor, spend it, and be indebted? thats lol
and there is part of the argument for looking at the resource based economy...
And we are occupying because it is not being used correctly. Also, wall street is the politicians, and the politicians are wall street. It is a revolving door...
[Deleted]
If People would only take the time to learn about how banking and finance really work they would discover they are all very wealthy. The Government is holding our assets. We just need to order the government to act as the trustees they are and instruct the people on how to access their funds. America is not the richest country in the world, The American People are the richest group of people in the world, We just don't know it... But some of us now know and want to share the knowledge with everyone.
I can agree that the wealth exists a plenty, but you can't instruct the government to do that without rewriting the rules to make them more accountable to their constituents in perpetuity through more democratic institutions than the constitution.
in actuality the rules are already in place. they are the laws of trust. specifically regarding the fiduciary duties of a trustee. Also the rights of the grantor, as We the people are the grantors of the trusts being held in our names by the governments of the united states. the trouble is We the People about 95% don't even know these trust accounts even exist. so the funds are used by governments that pawn them off to international bankers. All the ills of the world come from the fact 95% of the American people don't even know they have these trusts AND that they are administered behind their backs.