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.

 

when did the US government become greedy?

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 05:32 PM
link   
after all the morals and rights the US was built upon i was wondering when the US government became obsessed with oil, money and power? Im not trying to say the US is evil but a lot of its foreign policy seems to be based on economic factors and how it can benefit itself or US companies financially




posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by detective_gray
 


Well, when you say the US is greedy you may be right, but I don't think we can say that is necessarily the governments fault.
After all we elected them, and they are obtaining resources to fill our greedy hands.

If you and I (I'm assuming your an American as I am, sorry) didn't spend so much time in our gas guzzlers driving to Wal-Mart to consume more electronics and food we don't need, then maybe our govt. (that we elected would not have to beat third world nations into submission to get more resources).

I think it falls on us as Americans in general. We elected this govt, and they think they are doing what is necessary to the country going.

Now, this does not make it right, but if the US is greedy it is because you and I are.

I should also note that we are not the only "Greedy" nation. There are many others (nations) out there that would be doing the same thing if they had the influence that we have.



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 06:09 PM
link   
governments aren't greedy.. only the "dynastic" families that control them... politicians are puppets looking for employment....



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 06:13 PM
link   
reply to post by never_tell
 


It does appear that way at times, but I don't think all govt posts are ran by the "elites" as some call them.

I think we must accept some blame as the regular American populous.



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by defuntion
 


sure, average people make mistakes... but all in all, it's a "top down" world.... that's thing about "conspiracies"... they seem so convoluted when looking from the bottom up... but when you're on the top of the hill, it just takes the smallest bit of snow to start an avalanche



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by defuntion
reply to post by detective_gray
 


If you and I (I'm assuming your an American as I am, sorry)
I think it falls on us as Americans in general. We elected this govt, and they think they are doing what is necessary to the country going.



no i am british but have been to the US often and worked there last summer, i ask because i love the people and the excitment of your country but i feel sorry that you have a government that does not reflect the people.

i agree the UK also has a lot to be ashamed of but it seems to me my government has a far more balanced view on the world. and i dont mean greedy as just in terms of oil, they will also use other governments and groups to get what they want then disregard them when they are not needed (saddam hussien)



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 06:26 PM
link   
As soon as the politicians realized they could tax the people into providing great wealth for the political 'class.'

Pretty much like the CEO's of America did when they started looting the country...

Does anyone really trust either one of these groups?



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 08:17 PM
link   
reply to post by detective_gray
 


How cynical an answer would you like?

One might argue that the American Revolution was led by aristocrats who wanted America's land wealth for themselves.

Thomas Jefferson wrote: "debts had become hereditary from father to son, for many generations, so that the planters were a species of property, annexed to certain mercantile houses in London." So the aristocrats convinced all these farmers to rebel, and then the aristocrats claimed former British property (including slaves) for themselves.

It is a myth that only the south participated in slavery. Many Northern cities, such as New York, had huge slave populations.

www.thenation.com...

Slavery did not officially end in New York until 1827, but even after that, Northern cities remained important ports and financial hubs for southern slave traders and for products (such as cotton) made with slave labor.

Abraham Lincoln did not end slavery out of any sense of justice, but rather, as a means to undermine the Southern war effort. He wrote:

"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that."

Lincoln did next to nothing to provide employment or shelter for freed slaves, beyond allowing freed slaves to join the northern military in the Civil War.

Prior to the Civil War, the US Government's sole source of income was tariffs on imported goods. The Income tax was started in 1862 to fund the Civil War.

In 1895, the US Supreme Court ruled the income tax unconstitutional. Which brings us to President Woodrow Wilson and his advisor Edward Mandell House. In 1913, House pushed the 16th Amendment through Congress, legalizing the income tax. That same year, House pushed legislation through Congress that created the Federal Reserve, a private central bank.

Thomas Jefferson wrote:

"The central bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the Principles and form of our Constitution. I am an Enemy to all banks discounting bills or notes for anything but Coin. If the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their Property until their Children will wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered."

So 1913 proved to be a watershed year, when America was handed over to the bankers.

By 1918, the US government was collecting $1 billion on income taxes.

By 1920, the US government was collecting $5.4 billion on income taxes.

By 1945, the US government was collecting $43 billion on income taxes.

Which brings us to the Cold War. For 50 years we had two ideologically motivated nuclear powers engaged in a struggle for global dominance. Each was willing to destroy all human life in the process. Some people think it's good thing that the Soviets lost. "We'd all be in gulags otherwise." When I think about the victor, however, I can't help but notice that the United States accounts for 5% of the world's population while holding 25% of the world's prison inmate population. We have private prisons here, Americans still making money off human captivity. And we have the military budget of the next nine most industrialized countries combined, which we use to stick our noses all up in other countries' business, from South America to the Southeast Asia to Babylon. So we're still making money off the subjugation of politically-convenient "others."

During the Cold War the CIA made money off coc aine sales. Now it's Afghan opium. So we like to make money off addiction: tobacco, coc aine (used during slavery to keep slaves alert and to prevent them from escaping), opium.

And we fight wars for oil because we shudder at the thought of having to use public transportation, and we sell off stockpiles of outdated munitions to inner-city gangsters, and we sell people mortgages they can't possibly pay off to turn a profit selling that debt overseas, and keep people up to their eyeballs in credit card debt because its the only way to get a good credit rating, and turn college graduates into indentured servants who spend a decade or more paying off college loans, and while we're happy to have itinerant Mexican laborers provide us with cheap produce in winter heaven forbid we allow them to drive or go to school or speak their own language, and we're probably going to elect Hillary Clinton as the next president because we're so fond of what political royalty has to offer - foreign imperialist occupations aside - that we shudder at the thought of any substantive candidate who asks us to consider the consequences of our way of life.



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 09:56 AM
link   
They have always been greedy because the Queen is the one with an upper hand.
I find this to be an interesting theory.

www.youtube.com...



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 01:41 PM
link   


after all the morals and rights the US was built


...what? From day one we were a group of slave owners who came from a region notorious for religious persecution. We colonized this continent by killing off of natives. What morals and rights are you speaking of?



wondering when the US government became obsessed with oil, money and power?


Think of it this way: Do you accept that, government aside, there are people who obsessed with money and power? Ok...so wouldn't governmnent (read: position of authority over society and people) be a natural place for them to place themselves?



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by LordBucket
 


i just thought the US was created in retaliation to the corrupt, old fashioned intollerant governments in europe at the time. you know the whole 'we the people' bull# lol

i get your point but why does the US flip its policy to maximise its benefit and overlooks supposed enemies if they offer them something e.g would they have no problem with musharraf running pakistan if he didnt support the war on terror? because as a dictator he should be against everything america supposedly stands for



posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 08:53 PM
link   


why does the US flip its policy
to maximise its benefit and overlooks supposed enemies if they offer them something


I think you answered your own question. Gain is the desired end result. If "gain" is what you want...doesn't it make a lot of sense to "maximise benefits?" Doesn't it make sense to overlook the actions of people who "offer something?"

Policy is a tool to achieve benefit. When the potential benefits change, the policy will change as well.

What's the confusion?



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 05:58 AM
link   
I think some trust fund money is missing. May include social security, govt pension money. What happened? It was co-mingled with general revenues and spent on pork projects, the military and black budget items.

The US has let in possibly 30 million illegal aliens, signed illegal agreements for a north American union, prepared for martial law in the event of an economic crash.................



posted on Nov, 25 2007 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by detective_gray
 



America became greedy when the Europeans retrieved this land from the natives that were here thru colonialism and martial law. Then came greed based on economics and politics that would effect everyone involved with this great country,My theory is america used vampirism to an agree to obtain it's wealth quickly.I also think a nation is shaped by it's people and culture.




top topics



 
2

log in

join