Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How would our government pay for all the social programs?
That's just it. They wouldn't pay for it. they would just begin to round you all up and ship you off to the "Happy Camps" for re-conditioning for being a rebel to their cause. And if you refuse to accept your re-conditioning, you would become part of the menu for the cows, pigs and chickens in the next field. Soylent Green style.
I'd add to that divesting of any investments of Corporatons that aid Obama in pushing his agenda. Don't support their stock or corporate bonds, don't buy/use their products, etc... .
Which brings me to an interesting observation. Has anyone noticed General Electric suck-ups are now running ads about Ronald Reagan to make you try to forget their Obama ties and dealings in Iran? I never laughed so hard when I saw them. I've picked 3 businesses to boycott and they are Number 1. AARP would be Number One but to boycott you have to "stop" doing something and I haven't opened their mail in 6 years.
How would our government pay for all the social programs?
They wouldn't. We are very near a place where we will have to default on our national debt. Or more precisely print in down (monetize it). The results of this will be hyper inflation with the worlds reserve currency.
I'd add to that divesting of any investments of Corporatons that aid Obama in pushing his agenda. Don't support their stock or corporate bonds, don't buy/use their products, etc... .
As far as doing something about the current dismal state of affairs in the body politic, The corporations are currently buying politicians. We can do that as well. $10 per person per year for 100 million people is $1 billion a year this is about the same amount of money that is currently being spent on the winning election campaigns in the US.
They wouldn't. We are very near a place where we will have to default on our national debt. Or more precisely print in down (monetize it). The results of this will be hyper inflation with the worlds reserve currency.
This can be done through deeming it all Odious debt since the American people/citizens never agreed to the bogard tactics instittuted by our Governement to get us in such dire straits
What are odious debts?
Excerpt from The Doctrine of Odious Debts,
Chapter 17 of the book Odious Debts: Loose Lending, Corruption, and the Third World's Environmental Legacy by Patricia Adams
.
The legal doctrine of odious debts was given shape by Alexander Nahum Sack a quarter of a century after the settlement of the Spanish-American War. Sack, a former minister of Tsarist Russia and, after the Russian Revolution, a professor of law in Paris, authored two major works on the obligations of successor systems: The Effects of State Transformations on Their Public Debts and Other Financial Obligations and The Succession of the Public Debts of the State. With colonial territories becoming independent nation states and colonies changing hands, with monarchies being replaced by republics and military rule by civilian, with constantly changing borders throughout Europe, and with the ascendant new ideologies of socialism, communism and fascism overthrowing old orders, Sack's debt theories dealt with the practical problems created by such transformations of state. Like many others, Sack believed that liability for public debts should remain intact, for these debts represent obligations of the state — the state being the territory, rather than a specific governmental structure. This he based not on some strict dictate of natural justice, but on the exigencies of international commerce. Without strong rules, he believed, chaos would reign in relations between nations, and international trade and finance would break down.
But Sack believed that debts not created in the interests of the state should not be bound to this general rule.
Some debts, he said, were "dettes odieuses. "If a despotic power incurs a debt not for the needs or in the interest of the State, but to strengthen its despotic regime, to repress the population that fights against it, etc., this debt is odious for the population of all the State. This debt is not an obligation for the nation; it is a regime's debt, a personal debt of the power that has incurred it, consequently it falls with the fall of this power. The reason these "odious" debts cannot be considered to encumber the territory of the State, is that such debts do not fulfill one of the conditions that determine the legality of the debts of the State, that is: the debts of the State must be incurred and the funds from it employed for the needs and in the interests of the State. "Odious" debts, incurred and used for ends which, to the knowledge of the creditors, are contrary to the interests of the nation, do not compromise the latter — in the case that the nation succeeds in getting rid of the government which incurs them — except to the extent that real advantages were obtained from these debts. The creditors have committed a hostile act with regard to the people; they can't therefore expect that a nation freed from a despotic power assume the "odious" debts, which are personal debts of that power. Even when a despotic power is replaced by another, no less despotic or any more responsive to the will of the people, the "odious" debts of the eliminated power are not any less their personal debts and are not obligations for the new power.... One could also include in this category of debts the loans incurred by members of the government or by persons or groups associated with the government to serve interests manifestly personal — interests that are unrelated to the interests of the State.
Evidently you have a gripe about your federal employee benefits. That's your problem chiefgirl. But the subject is about politicians stating that they will stop working because they are unhappy with democracy. My feeling is how dare they pull off such a stunt. "Lavish" to me is a salary and perts that most Americans will never realize. Yet these selfish Republicans want to keep their goodies while denying fellow Americans any chance at decent health care and then decide they aren't going to work. Apparently that crime doesn't seem to bother you. Your choice and your loss in my opinion.
Do you honestly think you are being offered the same health care politicians receive? If that were the case, why would they exempt themselves from the recently passed health care bill? Why write a separate bill at all? Why not just extend their health care coverage to the American citizens? That's not what happened. You do realize that Congress has access to medical services and doctors right there on site, right? You think you're getting that deal? Wow...your rainbow farting puppy world is awesome!
Which brings me to an interesting observation. Has anyone noticed General Electric suck-ups are now running ads about Ronald Reagan to make you try to forget their Obama ties and dealings in Iran? I never laughed so hard when I saw them. I've picked 3 businesses to boycott and they are Number 1. AARP would be Number One but to boycott you have to "stop" doing something and I haven't opened their mail in 6 years.
A friend and I were speaking of this very thing while watching tv last night. What a bunch of hypocrites. GE is also on my boycott list as is AARP.
Which brings me to an interesting observation. Has anyone noticed General Electric suck-ups are now running ads about Ronald Reagan to make you try to forget their Obama ties and dealings in Iran? I never laughed so hard when I saw them. I've picked 3 businesses to boycott and they are Number 1. AARP would be Number One but to boycott you have to "stop" doing something and I haven't opened their mail in 6 years.
I saw those commeercials last night. I thought they wer weird too at this time.
as a self employed carpenter who has only worked 6 days this year i dont have a choice. at least the unemployment people get something. but health care is more important than our economy.
And illegals are next....they are more important than you working....Just ask Obama, Nancy and Harry.....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
