It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Warren Buffett Had The Answer To End Deficit - Plus 28th Amendment Proposal

page: 2
19
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 09:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: RomeByFire

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Realtruth

Are they better or more deserving than the people they serve?


Of course not.

But don't tell them that. they think they are.

From a democracy, we've created a ruling class.


We don't live in a democracy. We haven't in a very, very long time. The word you're looking for is oligarchy/plutocracy.

And yes - there are "good politicians," out there as politicians are PEOPLE just as there are "good cops," out there as they too are PEOPLE - it just so happens that whether or not their intentions are "good," or "bad," they both still remain loyal shills of a borderline oppressive regime.

Warren Buffett is a tool that is also a shill for this same regime.


Regardless what is thought of Warren Buffet, I actually think his proposal is a great idea. Term limits would root out corruption. I think the debt to GDP ratio idea would cause half of America to fall on their faces financially though. But, over time I think most of our bigger issues would iron themselves out.




posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 09:07 AM
link   
Brilliant idea for the amendment... return congress to the people that truly want to serve the republic rather than the shysters we have in congress now.



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 10:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Realtruth

This all sounds very good but, in reality, no new amendments need to be added. As a mater of fact, 2 amendments need to be repealed to solve this problem. They are the 16th and 17th amendments. Repeal these 2 that created this disaster and the tiger becomes a neutered kitten....



posted on Apr, 6 2016 @ 01:41 AM
link   
Won't work because the U.S. economy is dependent on debt and spending, and voters won't support politicians who don't ensure both.



posted on Apr, 6 2016 @ 07:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: monkeyluv
Won't work because the U.S. economy is dependent on debt and spending, and voters won't support politicians who don't ensure both.



Unfortunately I'm going to agree with your statement. Heck the USA can just print more money if it needs to.



posted on Apr, 6 2016 @ 10:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Realtruth

Unfortunately I'm going to agree with your statement. Heck the USA can just print more money if it needs to.


FWIW, money is generally printed when loans are made.


edit on 6-4-2016 by monkeyluv because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 12:30 PM
link   
Warren Buffet is demanding a new great financial crisis, but I have a question for him: What was he doing with Cheney on a C4ISTAR "doomsday plane" on the morning of Sept. 11th 2001 ? What was it ... got in the wrong gate at the airport? Trying to be fancy? .... Make a show landing at Offut AFB Nebraska.....

What you gonna do this semptember ? ... After witnessing what is shaping up to be the worst summer in NATO's history.... Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Ukraine ...
edit on 9-7-2017 by Flanker86 because: c



posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 07:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: amicktd
Regardless what is thought of Warren Buffet, I actually think his proposal is a great idea. Term limits would root out corruption. I think the debt to GDP ratio idea would cause half of America to fall on their faces financially though. But, over time I think most of our bigger issues would iron themselves out.


I'm not so sure. If there's term limits, then politicians approaching the limit lose their incentive to do good for their electorate and sell out to the highest bidder. If you think that's bad now, imagine if we had another 20 leaving the Senate every 2 years due to term limits. There would be a lot of corporate positions open to these guys, especially in lobbying. I don't think that's the solution.

Instead, I think the solution is to think smaller. Smaller districts, more in congress. We're currently too diverse to be represented properly, and gerrymandering is a stopgap solution to a much larger problem. Lets get back down to the 1:10000 representation level. The only issue there is that would require 320,000 members of congress. So lets start compartmentalizing them. Give congressmen more power, but only in narrow circumstances and then have them only talk to who is of interest. Rather than a state bridge inspector it should be under one person in Congress to manage bridge inspections for their state, and their votes should be limited to only what they can justify as part of that.

This would have a four fold benefit: 1. It limits corruption. 2. It reduces governmental power. 3. It makes people competent at their jobs. 4. It's too large for political parties to manage.




top topics



 
19
<< 1   >>

log in

join