Central Bankers, Stop Stealing Our Money!

[brianempson]

The biggest change we can all make is within our power. With a free source of energy we could all be free from reliance on a central government, and thus, a central bank. Without the people to support it, it will crumble.

[donh6]

please run again for the Presidencey

[JR08620]

Okay, good look getting rid of these big banks.

Good luck getting rid of the IRS.

Good luck getting rid of the lobbyists who are ruining this country.

There is NO WAY the money machine in this country will allow this.

Conservatives and Republicans on WALL STREET do not want the end of the way business is run.

This is the biggest laugh of all.

The funniest people are the POOR wannabe REPUBLICANS.

These people honestly believe they can make change.

[freetubester]

Jimmy Carter is not speaking out because he is surrounded by "Secret" Service men

[mongoose704]

In fact I'd say that the condition of the economy plays a major role in the tax revenues we collect! Look at 2009. Dramatic drop in tax revenues despite little to no change in tax rates. Obamamaniacs are trying to use that to champion Obama as a tax cutter when it's merely a result of a horrible economy.

When you're not working, you're not paying taxes. Furthermore you're not consuming thus paying taxes that are in the cost of every good and service produced in America.

[mongoose704]

We've had nothing but tax payer and federal reserve funded collusion between big business and government since 1913 and the score is 50 trillion....

in debt (counting future obligations.)

The system is broke. It's dead Jim. Let's try a new way, the way of freedom. True free markets, not fascism.

its time for a new way. Let's actually try freedom.

[mongoose704]

@mongoose704 I would like to add that debt isn't bad when its financing production which is why we were able to run trade deficits for 200 years from the early sixteen hundreds...

we were borrowing to produce then until about the late 1800s

[CouchFireMusic]

1) The most prosperous age of all human history was the free market industrial revolution.

2) Conspiracy theorists like me won't give the FED the power it needs? If this weren't such a pathetic statement it would be laughable. The FED has ALL the power.

3) I know Keynesian economics is the standard throughout the world, and look whats happening with the global economy. Our founders, who drafted the constitution you so despise, knew about the true power and corruption that begets central banks.

[makewuvnotwar]

@CouchFireMusic I agree with everything you said, but what these people are doing isn't Keynesian. Keynes believed in pumping money into the system during times of extreme economic downturn, and then recouping the losses through taxes during the upturn. He didn't believe in continual deficit spending, and redistribution of wealth.

[CouchFireMusic]

@makewuvnotwar You are correct, what is happening today isn't even Keynsian, its just flat out looting.

[mongoose704]

@CouchFireMusic KEynes would have advovated a massive tax cut during the downturn.

Unfortunately his idea about running short term deficits ignore long term realities like inflation and bureaucratic and lobbyist power which make it very difficult to enable the spending cuts neessary to reduce deficits. And fiscal stimulus as recommended by Keynes doesn't stimulate. It merely redistributes income.

Aside from a printing press, government cannot create money. It can only redistribute it.

[Stepper11]

Well, it's fine to hope for a peaceful turnaround, but it seems like another Bastille Day may be called for.

[wcarlpdrysdale]

I have a Ron Paul bumper-sticker, each day more and more people sing out a praise for Ron on seeing It <3 .

[squirrelsarecute7]

yawnnnnn.....zzzzzzzzzzz

[stix42k]

Thank you for all you do and speaking your mind Ron.

[eliasmouawad]

Search For

"CIA NEW FIASCO"

hilarious

[1kingconan]

ron paul ftw!

[hergs]

Wow. Ron. Paul. Doesn't. Sound. Like. He's. Reading. A. Script. At. All.

[PrudenceWright]

@hergs at least he wrote it..

[hergs]

@PrudenceWright He doesn't sound like that when he's got 1 minute on the House floor, so I doubt he wrote it.

[PrudenceWright]

@hergs depends on whether he's speaking off the cuff or reading from his written statement.

[sumsard]

@hergs

And then.... ???

[hergs]

@sumsard more fried rice.

[CanadaBoy123]

@hergs Whats. Your. Point?

[hergs]

@CanadaBoy123 Whats. Your. Country? I guess my point is that Paul seems less involved in what he is saying. I get the feeling he's just trying to keep his seat by running hard-right Republican line politics, and verbally throwing Bernie Sanders under the bus when his amendment couldn't get passed in the Senate.

Wait, what do you care? Your shit ain't broke in Canada, and you have a central bank, and socialized health care, and all the scary, scary things we've been warned about by CONservatives

[larasa007]

@hergs yeah keep voting for the Liberals, with all the scandals they are the most corrupt party. Dont forget about all the taxes. New tax called the H.S.T is coming soon, so bend over.. I been following the Canadian politics and I can't get over how anyone can vote for the Liberal party. Ohhh but then again you have a seperatist party sitting on in your parliament hill their only mission is to destroy Canada. Look at all the transfer payment Quebec gets. I can go on and on

[hergs]

@larasa007 I'm not sure how this got on the topic of Canadian politics, we were talking about Ron Paul. By the way, I'm sure Ron Paul would advocate for the Harmonized Sales Tax for America to replace the Income Tax.

However, a high sales tax would only harm those who have to spend all of their income to survive, and is therefore Regressive. It would make the ultra-rich richer, and make everyone else poorer.

[larasa007]

@hergs I love to read about your Canadian politics too, you are friends to the North, and it's a beautiful country. and far as " Ron Paul would advocate for the H.S.T " I strongly disagree and here is why? It will hurt the most vunlerable people, such as seniors and anyone on fixed incomes. sure they get a tax credit but they will spend 2x as much whenever they buy something. Hmmm isn't this the same party that introduced E health, and spend 1 billion dollars of tax payers with no results?

[mongoose704]

@hergs Ron Paul has made it abudantly clear that he would eliminate the income tax and replace it with precisely NOTHING.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 Before the income tax, government was funded by tariffs. But Ron Paul doesn't want tariffs. So what funds the military and the government? You are living in a dream world.

[mongoose704]

@hergs No I live in reality. Income tax is only 26% of our nations total income. Learn the facts before you tangle with me, son.

If we eliminate income taxes we would still have enough to pay for the 2001 budget. Bush's inexplicable expansion of our welfare-warfare state, and Obama's continuation of the same policy is the reason for our incredible deficits of today. Our empire costs a trillion a year alone.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 You're spewing utter bullshit. Bush's tax cuts on the wealthy add nearly a trillion to our debt every year, because he didn't cut spending at the same time, in fact he pushed through Medicare D which is welfare to pharma, not Americans. We probably have some areas of agreement here, but you will never win people over to the idea of cutting all entitlements. It just won't happen.

[mongoose704]

@hergs You are clearly not rooted in reality. Bushes tax cuts soarked big increases in government revenue because they sparked economic growth (and 60% of our government's income comes from taxes within the GDP!)

However 20% year over year increases in government spending for the welfare-warfare state outpaced revenue growth. It's simple math. Blaming the husband's lack income for the wife's credit card bills.

Ron Paul clearly proposes gradual transition to market health care.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 The economic growth we saw had very little to do with those tax cuts, it had to do with deregulation of the housing market, and letting people use their houses as ATM machines. WHICH WAS A BUBBLE. You libertarians are nuts, you credit every success to tax cuts, and every failure to high taxes, even though we are paying the lowest tax rates since the roaring 20s, right before that other little hiccup, remember that?

[mongoose704]

@hergs I said it helped SPARK..

Once again your going tangental to the point which is why our budget is so far in deficit.  You claim it is the husbands fault for not making enough when clearly the facts show it is the wife who is spending too much.

20% increase in spending year over year. Record increases.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 Again, you're not paying attention to the full timeline, nor all conditions present. This period of tax cuts and massive deregulation lead to the biggest economic disaster probably in our lifetimes. And Obama isn't moving quick enough in the other direction. 40 cents out of every tax dollar goes to defense. Can we at least agree that we need to START by cutting that?

[mongoose704]

@hergs Going tangental again eh?

So did my last post exposing you adding FICA and Medicare to income tax to claim that income taxes account for 51% of income knock the wind out of your sails?

You didn't expect me to catch that one. How disingenuous of you to accuse me of twisting numbers only to get caught masterfully by me doing the same!

[hergs]

@mongoose704 You are twisting numbers to suit your irrational argument. Income Tax is rarely below 50% of federal income, and the only way income taxes could have been eliminated in 2001 is because of the surplus left by Clinton, which would be eliminated in 1 year, and then the deficit would drop off a cliff when no income tax revenue came in. And the only reason Clinton had a surplus is because he raised taxes and cut spending. You Ron Paul zombies want to do half of that equation.

[mongoose704]

@hergs Oh you Liberals are so predictable. Like most you include FICA and Medicare into your figures to inflate the number to 51%.

But all I said was INCOME TAX which is 26%. Nice try but your intellectual fraud has been exposed.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 No, actually you've got the faulty numbers.

2001 Total Revenue: $1,991 Billion

2001 Income Tax Revenue: $1,145 Billion

2001 FICA/Medicare: $692 Billion

57.5% of Federal income is from Income Taxes. I'm starting to doubt the veracity of your other claims, lol.

[mongoose704]

@hergs As a percentage of TAX REVENUE, not TOTAL GOVERNMENT REVENUE.

Yep I know tat trick too!

[hergs]

@mongoose704 I thought we were talking Total Federal Revenue? You should not be considering state revenue. We're talking about the Federal Government here. If you consider all income of all states and the federal government, and then take federal income taxes out, it's about 37% in 2001, so your numbers are still off, even if you use that irrational calculation.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 And if you take out other types of revenue from the Total Revenue, it just makes the % higher. So I don't know what you are arguing here. Why don't you lay out some numbers so I can see what you're talking about.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 says "Income tax is only 26% of our nations total income. Learn the facts before you tangle with me, son."

I can't stop #LOL now that I've proven you wrong, and you won't even respond. Take your own advice, buddy, go learn the facts, google "usgovernmentrevenue"

[mongoose704]

@hergs And there is absolutely nothing on that page to refute my claims.

But it refutes your claims and proves you were merely taking the percentage of taxes that income tax accounts for rather than the percentage TOTAL GOVERNMENT REVENUE.

Suck on it. Nowhere does it say 57% of our government revenue is income taxes. You must be utterly humiliated by now. i can't wait to see what else you "make up."

[hergs]

@mongoose704 OK, I know you're middle aged and getting old and everything, so let me spell it out for you. On that pink website, under the Federal tab, choose the year 2001. On the pie chart to the right, the teal blue area says 58%. There is a breakdown with real numbers in the "Federal Revenue by Type" table.

Mmmkay? Grandpa need a new Depends now? Mmmkay.

[mongoose704]

@hergs Why: So you can swallow and regurgitate the shit like you have been for the last 4 hours?

I have already and repeatedly refuted your claim. Liek a dog you return to your vomit.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 LOL, whatever old man, you refuse to look at the real numbers and you only use the ones you pulled straight out of your ass. You have not cited one thing you have claimed, and I have pointed you to proof. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't force that stupid old stubborn redneck horse to drink the cool water of truth. Adios, caballo.

[mongoose704]

@hergs Because you include business taxes with personal income taxes?

I won't lead you to water. A horse's ass is to be led to the toilet.

[mongoose704]

@hergs says: "But Ron Paul doesn't want tariffs."

But RON PAUL SAYS: "All free trade really needs is two words: Low tariffs."

Please state the difference between no tariffs and low tariffs.

Even your opening sentence is transparent attempt to paraphrase a direct Ron Paul Quote: " Prior to 1913, the government operated with revenues raised through tariffs, excise taxes, and property taxes"

Now who is living in la-la-land?

[hergs]

@mongoose704 Actually I wasn't paraphrasing Ron Paul, it's just a fact. Ron Paul doesn't own history. And the greatest portion of federal income prior to 1913 was tariffs. It was our bread and butter.

Low tariffs = no tariffs. Stuff we buy from China comes into our country with an average 2% tariff. If someone in China wants to buy something from the US, it's an average 20-25% tariff. This trade imbalance is what has destroyed the American manufacturing base. I say bring back "Made in USA."

[mongoose704]

@hergs

"Low tariffs = no tariffs"

This ranks as among the most ridiculous of responses I have ever seen. Your claim can be expressed mathematically as "2=0"

[hergs]

@mongoose704 You're nitpicking. A 2% tariff is virtually nothing when compared to minimum 20% export tariffs.

[mongoose704]

@hergs And on that tangental issue you are raising...

being as that there is a global financial crisis, tariffs in other nations won't stay high for long. High tariffs is precisely the error Hoover made during the bginning of the Great Depression. market forces will drive those down.

[mongoose704]

@mongoose704 And I will add that assumes we can eliminate this facade of free trade which is really managed trade.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 LOL, you are diluted. A few may drop tariffs under pressure from the WTO, but not from a rational economic standpoint. Countries like Germany understand that a busy and well paid workforce is necessary to sustain demand.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 2% vs 20%, or for some products 2% vs 40% is not FREE TRADE, it's a pure and simple outsourcing of labor.

[mongoose704]

@hergs You're becoming very tangental here.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 Economic theory is very tangential. There are many factors to consider. That's probably why it's so highly debated. But simplifying everything to: "TAXES, BAD! LOW TARIFFS, GOOD!" doesn't help.

[mongoose704]

@hergs

But not every point...except yours. In fact, every time I pimpslap you, you go on a tangent.

Still sucking in that air after I exposed your intellectual fraud?

[hergs]

@mongoose704 Read the other comments I left, genius, your math logic needs some tweaking.

[hergs]

@mongoose704

usgovernmentrevenue (google it) ... go suck on the numbers for a while.

Let's take a step back. Paul wants to eliminate federal income tax. You can't do that without going back to the system we had before income taxes, which was high tariffs. Paul wants low tariffs. So the system doesn't work. You end up starving the federal govt to the point where they can't defend our borders, and we get invaded by China coming to collect their debts caused by our trade deficit. Great plan.

[SadegoGG]

@hergs

Why don't you go read the Grace Commission Report.

[mongoose704]

@SadegoGG The humanoid known as herg is only concerned with inventing facts and statistics. Such is the norm for socialists and fascists.

[hergs]

@SadegoGG It was ignored by Reagan, who cut taxes by 50% on the rich, and tripled the national debt. What is your point? Government is inefficient so lets starve the beast?

[SadegoGG]

@hergs

What happened when Clinton lowered taxes? Since you're too ignorant to know, tax revenue increased dramatically.

[hergs]

@SadegoGG #LOL Clinton raised taxes. It was a small increase, but an increase nonetheless.

[SadegoGG]

@hergs

Wrong. He decreased taxes by over $740 billion over ten years which just so happens to be the largest tax cut in history over a ten year period. Tariffs are taxes, idiot.

[hergs]

@SadegoGG You didn't specify Ad-valorem taxes. Clinton raised the income tax then. Happy now? And Clinton's Ad-valorem tax cut, otherwise known as "free trade" decimated American manufacturing. Instead of importing raw materials, and exporting finished products (which is the only way to generate real wealth), we're doing exactly the opposite now, and just shifting the same money around our service economy, while astronomically increasing personal debt. So I'm glad you're proud of that.

[SadegoGG]

@hergs

Overall taxes decreased under the Clinton administration and government revenue increased, which was my point from the beginning. Globalized economy is what ruined manufacturing along with every other sector of the American economy, by the way. When America had 1/10 of the world population and half the world's wealth did America bailout foreign countries and give unlimited powers to a centralized bank? No, it ran on free market operations and little government intervention.

[hergs]

@SadegoGG Revenue increased virtually the same year over year under Clinton as it did under Bush 41, in a recession. Obviously there are other factors at work. Like the fact that we have 2 worker households now, where before we only needed 1.

What golden age of free market operations are you talking about? The greatest sustained economic boom in the US was from the 1940s till the late 1970s when the bill came due for Vietnam and stagflation set in. Government programs made that boom possible.

[SadegoGG]

@hergs

What happened after 1970 due to the government spending? Government spending does not work in the long run. The reason we have two worker households now is because of centralized banking driving up prices. Also, Bush accomplished nothing like Clinton's capital tax decrease. Also, it's funny how you admit Nixon and the end of gold ruined the economy, yet you deny that government intervention was the cause. Also, federal reserve increased power also caused the recession.

[hergs]

@SadegoGG the stagflation of the 70s was due to protracted 10 year war in Vietnam and Cambodia being financed off the books. It had nothing to do with the type of government spending that you're referring to.

The reason for two worker households is that Wages stopped tracking Productivity in the 80s, which was the result of Alan Greenspan deciding "worker insecurity" through personal debt was a good way to sustain demand without wages. So I think in some strange way, we agree on this? FED, BAD!

[SadegoGG]

@hergs

It's funny how contradicting you are. Earlier you said the economic problems in the 1970s were due to multiple things and now you are spilling it on one issue. Anyways, the Federal Reserve funded both sides of the Vietnam War and all government spending contributed to the economic crash. You can't just say, this borrowing contributed to this result but other borrowing didn't, that just doesn't make any sense.

[mongoose704]

@hergs Hey Bizarro...

Clinton slightly raised TAX RATES.

Shall I slowly spell out the difference between an income tax rate hike and a tax REVENUE hike (or cut)??? Ever heard of the Laffer Curve which proves tax revenues don't increase linearly with income tax rates?

"No, ME BIZARRO, not like evil supply side!"

neither do I but the Laffer Curve is widely accepted.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 Yeah, I've heard Art talk about his curve, and it's Laffable. He, you, and all CONs seem to miss the point of high tax rates (like top margin 74-91% pre-Reagan) on individuals: It forces people to keep their money invested in their business, instead of siphoning it off to investment banks to gamble with CDOs and CDSs, and all around fucking over the economies of the world. While the top tax rate was 91%, the US had one of the biggest economic booms in history, up until Reagan/Laffer

[mongoose704]

@hergs And what proof do you have of this "missed" point? I see, another tangent off to Bizarroworld. I don't blame you after the repeated curbstompings I've given to your Bizarro head. Ironic that your square head can support tangents.

I'll talk to you when you leave Bizarroworld and come back to earth to speak with the Earthlings.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 I'm sure what I'm telling you does sound like a tangent, considering you have no idea how these segments of economics all connect. It must be fun in mongooseland ... ignorance is bliss in the land of the 40 year old virgin who apparently never even took Econ 101. You must be such a success. Or at least that's what your mom tells you when she comes down to her basement to tuck you in at night. "Who's my big boy? You're my big boy." Get a life.

[mongoose704]

@hergs

Wrong. We can cut spending.  We have much less control over what we make than what we spend so the most rational course of action to balance our budget is to cut spending. Regardless of our manipulation of tax rates we have seen a large reduction in tax revenue and that is due to massive unemployment. We can't decide to raise revenues! We CAn with spending.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 And that doesn't mean all tariffs need to be high, it just means we should protect the domestic industries that are providing jobs to workers here in the US. We don't have a big carved sandalwood industry, so import tariffs on such products should be low. But if we can produce electronics, home appliances, precision machining tools, clothes, shoes, and employ Americans making those things, we should protect those industries with tariffs.

[mongoose704]

@hergs But once again you fail to address the point that you claim Ron Paul is against all tariffs which is an utter falsehood.

The issue here is about raising income for the government lest we forget.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 He wants low tariffs. Which would be fine if other countries lowered their tariffs. But they are not, and they never will. And you are failing to address the trade imbalance issue at all. Low tariffs = low federal income = no where near enough money for national defense.

[mongoose704]

@hergs If we can produce, which we can, trade imbalances can be maintained. We did so for over 200 years.

And finally, the facts do not support you conclusions. Minus income tax we can pay for the entire 2001 budget. We could not pay for today's budget. You're attempting to blame that on not enough revenue. That's like blaming the husband for not making enough when the wife runs up the credit card.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 We didn't have trade imbalances like we have today until Regan, Bush, and especially Clinton kicked open the door to let cheap foreign goods in without rational tariffs to level the playing field. It's why GM and Ford picked up and moved to Mexico, and decimated Detroit. It's why we have HP China selling printers to HP USA, and calling that "free trade." It's why we now have a "would you like fries with that?" service economy, instead of a manufacturing economy that produces wealth.

[mongoose704]

@hergs Furthermore those high tariffs won't exist for much longer unless they want to enter a prolonged depression. We're entering a global downturn here, Tariffs are going down eventually. Protectionism during downturns is absolutely catastrophic to those nations. China and others are already lowering theirs.

[mongoose704]

@mongoose704 Adn they are lowering due to FOOD. Asia will always need food.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 They're not lowering them because they want to, they're being forced to by the WTO.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 Brazil is not lowering tariffs, in fact they are raising them.

[mongoose704]

@hergs Canada's socialized care system collapsed in 2005 and is rebounding due to privatization: That evil free market DemoRATS have been warning us about for years.

Ron Paul's message hasn't changed in 40 years of politics and he votes what he says unwaveringly.

And the "hard-right republican" politics of today come from the Wilsonian Trotskyist faction of the Democrat party, a party they fled in the early seventies.

[hergs]

@mongoose704 You're right, the racists fled the Democratic Party to the Republicans because of Civil Rights legislation. I'm glad you're proud of that.

Many Canadians would be interested to hear that their system collapsed in 2005, especially because it didn't happen.

[mongoose704]

@hergs Nope, not at all.

I left the Republican Party in 2001. I am now independent.

[maximoschmidt]

bernie madoff aint got nothin on these punks. THIS is the scam of the century!

[loismlsx]

terrible very bad!!

[texme]

J.F.K. Assassination! R.E.P. Assassination? if elected.

[continuityofliberty]

Thank you for addressing the combination of Government incurred debt (that we're expected to pay) and fiat currency in the same presentation!

Taken together they come across as ridiculously absurd and it's easy to see the inevitable conclusion of such policies. It's why the Government sees spending as the only option to everything.

These two arms of Governmental "policy" have a stranglehold on us - I particularly like that you compare it to identity theft, because that's what it is.

[EdisunSolar]

Obama makes Bush look good

The Obama plan to spread the wealth is very crude as he plays Gulf

Do you really want health care? Bring home our troops DemoRepublican war mongers

America Under siege - Black on Black is not very bright nor was inside WTC ploys building C and the pentagon.

Wake up America take a closer look - Scared to? another conspiracy waters . 700,000+ barrels a day is Obamas weapon of mass destruction - No amount of money in our life time can clan this up

Wake up America

[VMATT500C]

The Truth.

[theoriginalanomaly]

That was straight talk alright.

[silversobe]

"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and it's issuance." -- James Madison

[jaycedace]

Get your pitchforks people it's time to lynch mob these criminals.

[BeantownJim]

Welcome to Greece!

[captcaveman4201]

get ready for the bankers to say that they need more money sooner thather then later.. Because they are soo dumb they don't realize that they are working within a system that works on an exponental rate. And this time the last bailout is still fresh with in the minds of americans and the rest of the world.

[BabybooR33]

GANDALF = D

[CouchFireMusic]

First, we require a FULL audit of the FED, (and perhaps an Audit of all US gold depositories). Then, the implementation of a Robin Hood Tax on all the FED's transactions with other central banks (until ALL the wealth has been returned to the middle class). Next, CDO's and CDS's (and other synthetic derivatives) shall be banned. Lastly a criminal investigation culminating in the trial of all the FED's shareholders complicit in fraud. America will restore liberty and prosperity.

[Uwiluz60]

@CouchFireMusic They will never go for an audit...A audit of US gold depositories would show there is very little...They should just move some tanks over from the museum at Fort Knox to the depository there and use it for a garage. They sold most the gold at $65 an oz. 40 years or more ago. Its just a matter of time till our dollar fails...Buy 64 and back US silver Quarters and Half dollars and 5.56 and 9mm ammo your going to need it.

[pat442389]

@Uwiluz60 i agree they would never go for an audit, if they ever passed it i feel the fed would stage 1000-5000point loses in the market in a week just to show they can manipulate the economy whenever they please. i feel the best way to end the fed and the strangle hold of the central bankers is to follow JFK's exec. order 11110. issue real currency based on what we have in our reserves to slowly over a few years, but less then a decade cripple the fed till its completely powerless

[Uwiluz60]

@pat442389 For President 2012 ! I agree totally, but that just makes to much sense...Americans love to do everything the hard way...And never learn from past history...Or at least our leaders don't...And don't care, just the year they are running for office. Do you think there are more than 100 bars even in Fort knox ?

[SadegoGG]

@CouchFireMusic

Quit living in the 1700s. The free market only works if you trade random shit for random shit. We only have the current crisis because conspiracy theorists like you won't give the federal reserve the powers they need to do their job. The last thing we need is an audit since it just gives the Fed more to think about. The Constitution obviously doesn't work and economic studies are centralized around banking, that's how mainstream banks are. Ignorant moron.

[MOPEDBRAD]

@SadegoGG I guess I'll be the one to ask: What the fuck are you talking about?

[vibe05jack]

@SadegoGG that was the most ignorant statement I have read,. in a very long time.

[SadegoGG]

@vibe05jack

Really? Then why does every major country in the world have centralized banks and governments?

[CouchFireMusic]

@SadegoGG Central banking and central economic steering is the oldest trick in the book. Kings and emperors used to clip coins (causing inflation) to raise funds for vain wars and over reaching empires. The Roman, British, and Soviet empires were all brought down by over expansion and poor monetary policy. I propose we take monetary out of the hands of a few oligarchs (especially since their dealings at the FED are so opaque to the people) and restore the power to mint sound money to the people.

[SadegoGG]

@CouchFireMusic

Okay, let me get this straight. We should not finance our wars and just let the troops die in vein because you believe in these conspiracy theories regarding the government that top government officials and top lawyers don't even discuss. Don't you think if an innocent person got voted into office they would discuss what was happening and provide evidence? Soviets fell because they lost a war to Afghanistan, by the way. Rome is like 5 thousand years ago...

[CouchFireMusic]

@SadegoGG We should bring our troops home so that more young people don't die. Even if these wars were justifiable, our occupying forces generate resentment of all Americans and thus breed future generations of "terrorists." "Terrorism" is simply a predictable outcome of our foreign policy. NATO has been meddling in the middle east for decades and it only breeds future problems. Our allies one day become our enemy the next. The CIA calls these unintended consequences "blowback."

[CouchFireMusic]

@SadegoGG And just to correct you on a few things. I think you meant "vain" not "vein." The Roman empire was not 5,000 years ago Caesar became Imperator just over 2,000 years ago. If the war in Afghanistan brought down the Soviets, would you still be in favor of the American presence there? How long can the US afford to maintain 500 military basses in over 100 countries, two occupying wars, a war on drugs, and foreign aid? How much inflation can the dollar handle before confidence is lost?

[SadegoGG]

@CouchFireMusic

2,000 or 5,000 years there really isn't a difference. Also, it's importance for American places in said countries because without it more violence would likely strike and cost even more money! And when the bases are built, there already paid for so it really doesn't cost that much. Foreign aid is saving lives and life is worth more than money you abortion lover. I have not seen an official confirmation of the drug war, only speculation by conspiracy theorists.

[CouchFireMusic]

@SadegoGG Nearly everything you've said is demonstrably false (not to mention all the presumptuous name-calling and pseudo-slander.) 2k vs. 5k is a gargantuan difference and further demonstrates your inability to fact check. Maintaining bases is extraordinarily expensive, especially when the government appropriates funds to pay for no-bid contracts for likes of Xe, Halliburton and so on. You haven't seen an "official confirmation of the drug war" Seriously, at this point you must be joking.

[SadegoGG]

@CouchFireMusic

Provide me the sum of funds going to the military bases and compare that to the federal budget. Then go on and prove that the American Federal Government is involved in a drug war, otherwise you have absolutely zero basis for an argument.

[mongoose704]

@SadegoGG

Outside of the 1000 American politicians, 7 American presidents and thousands of law enforcement agents, judges, and hundreds of new laws on the books I haven't heard official confirmation of it either.

BTW: I'm still waiting for official confirmation of Korea, Iraq, Vietnam, etc...I guess those weren't wars.

[SadegoGG]

@mongoose704

Dwight D. Eisenhower has confirmed the Vietnam War.

Statement on Judge Lucy Koh at Senate Confirmation Hearing confirms the Korean War.

[mongoose704]

@SadegoGG As if the massive troop deployments, deaths, bombings, POWs, munitions fire and al the other beauties of war weren't an indicator...

we needed "official confirmation"

Thank you!

[SadegoGG]

@CouchFireMusic

Also, confidence is mostly lost because of you conspiracy theorists making up bullshit.

[PrudenceWright]

@SadegoGG wow, your eyes must be brown because you're full of .....

[SadegoGG]

@PrudenceWright

Typical Republican, rather than arguing the facts resorts to using racism. You're a Nazi.

[PrudenceWright]

@SadegoGG I'm not a republican and you do realize that white people often have brown eyes too. No racism intended.

[SadegoGG]

@PrudenceWright

Really? I thought more arabs has brown eyes than whites. And aren't brown eyes the most common eye color. You are a racist, just like the rest of the tea party group.

[PrudenceWright]

@SadegoGG no, I'm not a racist, you ignorant fool.

[GovermentOfLies]

Greek debt is minuscule compared to the debt of America debt. This thing is being crashed on purpose to create a one world currency and the a one world government. This treason in the highest form against our nation and our people. The people behind this should be tried for treason and hung publicly. Then all of their asset given to the people of our nation.

[pjvaz30]

No more "Fiat Failouts"

[marieatthelake]

Assets of the banks and banksters should be forfeited to pay the debt and they should be tried for treason.

[321lawc]

So what are you people proposing to replace the federal reserve? It has to be digital, we're obviously not going back to weighing ounces of gold.

[Ladyradical]

@321lawc Congress is the only entity authorized to coin and print money, they need to do their job, not allow the Fed to stea from us by way of inflation.

[writertrump]

@321lawc we dont need a fake ass federal reserve, we need a bank, that is open and audited each year, and it should not be owned and run by wall street andf the elite banking families.

[joesub]

@321lawc

Free competition in currency - allow individuals to decide what to use as currency whether it is silver, gold, Francs, Canadian dollars, etc. Absolutely people can use gold and silver for trade. We can easily have a gold and silver accounts and use debit cards for easy transfers even at tiny amounts such as grams and grains. Gold and silver cannot be inflated at will like fiat money. Const. Art 1, Sec 10 requires nothing but gold or silver can be mandated as payment for debts.

[believersunderground]

it's a con from the world bank iccp, HFT and OTC $700 trillion dallar cons. for coming earthquakes and volcano's. Scott (BUG) 2030 report washinton D.C.