Social issues of all forms plague one division of society or another at all times. Despite our natural inclinations to push blame and responsibility on others, turning to the government for solutions to social ills does more to damage society than heal it. Our nation began with the notion of strictly limiting the federal government to prevent authoritarian control centralized in few hands. The more people beg the government to take responsibility, the more power government gains. In an age of rampant externalization, no one seems to take responsibility for themselves anymore. Once apathy sets in at this level, massive government takes over and the people are led into slavery without even knowing it.
One of the best quotes about politics states that "The price of apathy is to be ruled by evil men." I quite understand this point of view because I see it clearly in our current government. Even worse, the root of the cancer in our government is not even a part of the government. The puppet masters that control the politicians operate in anonymity from behind a cloak of secrecy. I speak of the international bankers mostly, but the Bilderberg Group stands out as well. Since 1913, the government has been controlled by the powers behind the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank. The Federal Reserve creates all of the money for the government 'At Interest' and since the borrower is servant to the lender, the government is servant to the central bankers. 1913 marked the legalization of this system under the Federal Reserve Act, but America has existed under a debt based money system since 1863 when the National Bank Act was passed and international bankers gained control over the US money supply by issuing Bank Notes backed by US Bonds.
This system enslaves the people and the government for if the government pays off its debt to the central bank, there would be no collateral to back the money supply and hence, there would be no money. All money is created out of debt under this system. Congress holds the express power to coin money as given by the Constitution, so enslaving the nation to a debt based money system amounts to treason against the Constitution. The scam is so obscure and confusing and holds up so well under scrutiny that no one individual could stand before historians as a traitor except the international bankers themselves. However, they wouldn't really be traitors because, by definition, they were not Americans. They were International Bankers setting up a private, for profit money system in the greatest nation in the world for the sole purpose of destroying its prosperity.
Having the government issue US Notes instead of US Bonds to back Federal Reserve Notes is not a radical solution. It's been done by five different presidents. This is the ONLY way to pay off the debt to the Federal Reserve without destroying the money supply. Fiat currency (currency by decree) is not the enemy. Debt based fiat currency is. Gold standards may belay many monetary problems, but it is not the final answer.
Pegging a US Note fiat money supply to the current census would also prevent inflation. So when the Fed speaks of inflation, what do they mean? Inflation is simply the expansion of the money supply by buying more US Bonds. How is this important to you and me? Dollars work the same as any other commodity. Supply and demand dictate the value. So as more and more dollars are pumped into the system, they become worth less and less. You can not save money because its value is eaten away by inflation. This is a hidden tax and amount to more collateral for the financial enslavement of every American. So, why don't they stop expanding the money supply? Because it's a hidden tax.
The government gets to use the new money generated by the Fed before it is devalued. Also, as the national debt to the central bank grows, so do the interest payments. So, if the money is not inflated, the government would not be capable of paying the interest on the money in circulation. The system maintains an inflate or die polic. Even with this policy in place, there does come a point, even with inflation, where the dollar will be worth so little that the United States will become insolvent and have to borrow money from the Fed to pay the interest on the debt to the Fed. Once this occurs, it goes down hill fast.
The international bankers have been at this scam for hundreds of years though, so I am sure that they have a plan for when the dollar is worth nothing. Could it be that when all the citizens of the nation are starving that the central bankers will swoop in with the Amero to save the day? This is typical propaganda used by international bankers to appear as the saviors whilst creating the problems they are 'fixing'.
Patrick Bolling is a distributor of Republic Magazine (download your free copy now) and the Web Master of 'Liberty Articles' where you can find the FDIC Troubled Banks List.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Patrick_Bolling
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Why Did Barack Obama Flip on the Wiretap Bill?
Barack Obama had previously opposed any provision that would have granted immunity to telecommunications companies in any proposed wiretap legislation. Mr. Obama has changed his mind and has now voted in favor of a bill that does include provisions that would shield telecommunications companies from civil lawsuits aimed at retribution for their participation in domestic spying on behalf of the Bush Administration.
Mr. Obama said revisions to the legislation had alleviated his concerns and "Given the choice between voting for an improved yet imperfect bill, and losing important surveillance tools"; he chose to support the FISA compromise. Mr. Obama's statement sheds precious little light on his real reasons for the flip-flop. Why did he flip on this issue disappointing his left wing constitutionalist supporters and enabling the McCain Camp to include it in their flip-flop list?
Could it be that Mr. Obama is attempting to preserve his elect-ability if either of the following scenarios should occur between now and the presidential elections?
1. A terrorist attack occurs between now and the elections allowing the Republican's to accuse Mr. Obama of being week on terror because he was on the "wrong side" of the FISA bill. This attack doesn't have to have any relationship to the FISA bill to be effective.
2. A terrorist attack is thwarted between now and the elections with alleged use of information received from telecommunications companies. Again allowing the Republican's to accuse Mr. Obama of being week on terror. Keep in mind that any information about the planned attack would be subject to national security opaqueness so that Mr. Bush could paint a picture of our national heroes: the telecommunications companies.
As any politician knows, getting elected to office is the first order of business. However, Mr. Obama should be very careful when he makes sudden jibs such as this. His supporters may have a hard time getting to their polling stations if they are suffering from whiplash.
http://billada.blogspot.com
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Wayne_Nolen
Mr. Obama said revisions to the legislation had alleviated his concerns and "Given the choice between voting for an improved yet imperfect bill, and losing important surveillance tools"; he chose to support the FISA compromise. Mr. Obama's statement sheds precious little light on his real reasons for the flip-flop. Why did he flip on this issue disappointing his left wing constitutionalist supporters and enabling the McCain Camp to include it in their flip-flop list?
Could it be that Mr. Obama is attempting to preserve his elect-ability if either of the following scenarios should occur between now and the presidential elections?
1. A terrorist attack occurs between now and the elections allowing the Republican's to accuse Mr. Obama of being week on terror because he was on the "wrong side" of the FISA bill. This attack doesn't have to have any relationship to the FISA bill to be effective.
2. A terrorist attack is thwarted between now and the elections with alleged use of information received from telecommunications companies. Again allowing the Republican's to accuse Mr. Obama of being week on terror. Keep in mind that any information about the planned attack would be subject to national security opaqueness so that Mr. Bush could paint a picture of our national heroes: the telecommunications companies.
As any politician knows, getting elected to office is the first order of business. However, Mr. Obama should be very careful when he makes sudden jibs such as this. His supporters may have a hard time getting to their polling stations if they are suffering from whiplash.
http://billada.blogspot.com
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Wayne_Nolen
The Government Is In The Wrong Business
Just like so many failed communist, socialist, and dictator run countries in the past, instead of staying in the citizen protection business as the Constitution mandates, the federal government became involved in the regulation business. Once the federal government began to regulate, it became the focal point for every special interest in the world. Special interests were then able to focus their strength and money and become much more effective.
As a result, 150 years later, we find ourselves facing failures and disasters in most of the important areas of our society. The basic component of successful human existence, the family, has been torn apart by economic pressures. Parents are no longer able to structure their lives around caring for each other and their children and children are forced to come home to empty homes. Parents who would normally get involved with problems, like drugs and violence in schools, just trudge on hoping that someone else will deal with the problems and dangerous choices that their children must now deal with and make alone. As a result, families have become collections of self-centered individuals instead of the tightly knit supportive groups that they are supposed to be. You're on your own is the law of the land.
If the government was not in the regulation business, special interest groups would not have been able to seek money or regulations favoring their particular country, cause, or industry. Less money would have been required to run the government, pass out as foreign aid, pay for social programs, or pay for the regulations themselves. The creation of all of this additional money has been the primary cause of the inflation that has brought so much pressure on American citizens. As the money to pay for these things has been stripped from the population, the economy has suffered. In order for the economy to be strong, the population has to have money.
By becoming involved in the regulation business, the government has become the focal point for all problems and the population has been trained to expect the government to fix things that the government knows nothing about. As a result, we have failures in education and social services. Without regulation, the Citizens would have fixed things themselves better and they would have had the money to do it. Any problems that did arise would have been state problems, not national problems, and would have been easier to fix and not as devastating to the country and the population overall.
If the government was not in the regulation business, environmental groups would not have had a focus point, much to the delight of foreign oil, and we would still be drilling for oil. It may have been stopped in a couple of states like California but it would not have been stopped in Alaska, Louisiana, and many other states. We would not be sending $700 billion out of the country every year creating a need for more money and inflation.
If the government was not in the regulation business and corporations were left to make their own trade agreements, they would not have made trade agreements where the corporations buy their products, and they don't buy the corporations' products, until the corporations run out of money and are forced to eliminate jobs.
If the government was not in the regulation business, the privately owned Fed might exist under a different name but it would not have control of the nation's currency and be able to drive favorable legislation and create economic bubbles that pop causing most of the down turns in the economy. Bank failures would not have been national.
If the government was not in the regulation business, the economy would regulate its self as a result of the population buying what it wants and needs. There would not be so many gold rushes with businesses appearing and disappearing overnight. The businesses that did appear would be as a result of need instead of greed and more stable. People would not rush into jobs only to lose them a few weeks later. Careers would be more permanent.
If the government was in the citizen protection business like it's supposed to be, it would be much harder for corporations to abuse foreign workers visas. Congressmen and Senators would not be trying to sneak visa increases and illegal alien amnesty legislation through by attaching it to unrelated bills. Of course, the government would actually be protecting our borders and we would not have so many illegal aliens taxing our social infrastructure.
The government would still be the focal point of the military industrial complex, but one could argue that this is necessary. Historically, in times of peace, governments have failed to maintain a military force adequate for their country's protection. They need a little prodding to do this.
The government needs to first get into the actual deregulation business. Actual deregulation means that not only the portions of regulations that would benefit special interests need to be eliminated, but the entire regulation.
Once the regulations are gone, they need to tell everyone, "Not my job".
Copyright July 2008, Web Smith
For more articles go to http://ewebsmith.com/info
Web Smith has been writing and developing documentation for technology companies for over 30 years. He has been the founder of 7 technology companies and created the collateral that launched them.
He is an industry consultant and currently owns ewebsmith.com, ewebtelecom.com, and ewebproducts.com. He runs his own copywriting business from http://ewebsmith.com/copywriting
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Web_Smith
As a result, 150 years later, we find ourselves facing failures and disasters in most of the important areas of our society. The basic component of successful human existence, the family, has been torn apart by economic pressures. Parents are no longer able to structure their lives around caring for each other and their children and children are forced to come home to empty homes. Parents who would normally get involved with problems, like drugs and violence in schools, just trudge on hoping that someone else will deal with the problems and dangerous choices that their children must now deal with and make alone. As a result, families have become collections of self-centered individuals instead of the tightly knit supportive groups that they are supposed to be. You're on your own is the law of the land.
If the government was not in the regulation business, special interest groups would not have been able to seek money or regulations favoring their particular country, cause, or industry. Less money would have been required to run the government, pass out as foreign aid, pay for social programs, or pay for the regulations themselves. The creation of all of this additional money has been the primary cause of the inflation that has brought so much pressure on American citizens. As the money to pay for these things has been stripped from the population, the economy has suffered. In order for the economy to be strong, the population has to have money.
By becoming involved in the regulation business, the government has become the focal point for all problems and the population has been trained to expect the government to fix things that the government knows nothing about. As a result, we have failures in education and social services. Without regulation, the Citizens would have fixed things themselves better and they would have had the money to do it. Any problems that did arise would have been state problems, not national problems, and would have been easier to fix and not as devastating to the country and the population overall.
If the government was not in the regulation business, environmental groups would not have had a focus point, much to the delight of foreign oil, and we would still be drilling for oil. It may have been stopped in a couple of states like California but it would not have been stopped in Alaska, Louisiana, and many other states. We would not be sending $700 billion out of the country every year creating a need for more money and inflation.
If the government was not in the regulation business and corporations were left to make their own trade agreements, they would not have made trade agreements where the corporations buy their products, and they don't buy the corporations' products, until the corporations run out of money and are forced to eliminate jobs.
If the government was not in the regulation business, the privately owned Fed might exist under a different name but it would not have control of the nation's currency and be able to drive favorable legislation and create economic bubbles that pop causing most of the down turns in the economy. Bank failures would not have been national.
If the government was not in the regulation business, the economy would regulate its self as a result of the population buying what it wants and needs. There would not be so many gold rushes with businesses appearing and disappearing overnight. The businesses that did appear would be as a result of need instead of greed and more stable. People would not rush into jobs only to lose them a few weeks later. Careers would be more permanent.
If the government was in the citizen protection business like it's supposed to be, it would be much harder for corporations to abuse foreign workers visas. Congressmen and Senators would not be trying to sneak visa increases and illegal alien amnesty legislation through by attaching it to unrelated bills. Of course, the government would actually be protecting our borders and we would not have so many illegal aliens taxing our social infrastructure.
The government would still be the focal point of the military industrial complex, but one could argue that this is necessary. Historically, in times of peace, governments have failed to maintain a military force adequate for their country's protection. They need a little prodding to do this.
The government needs to first get into the actual deregulation business. Actual deregulation means that not only the portions of regulations that would benefit special interests need to be eliminated, but the entire regulation.
Once the regulations are gone, they need to tell everyone, "Not my job".
Copyright July 2008, Web Smith
For more articles go to http://ewebsmith.com/info
Web Smith has been writing and developing documentation for technology companies for over 30 years. He has been the founder of 7 technology companies and created the collateral that launched them.
He is an industry consultant and currently owns ewebsmith.com, ewebtelecom.com, and ewebproducts.com. He runs his own copywriting business from http://ewebsmith.com/copywriting
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Web_Smith
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)