It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The 40 hour work week conspiracy

page: 6
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 01:19 AM

Originally posted by wutone

There are two American politicians who had the same vision and the power to make that vision come true.

Abraham Lincoln gave the U.S. the greenback dollar which financed the U.S. through its most difficult period.

JFK wanted to reintroduce the greenback/U.S. note.

The U.S. note is not debt based, there is no central bank or banker who are owed 13 trillion, and the government can print it to facilitate circulation and tax it to prevent inflation.

(TLDR version at the bottom)

The value of the U.S. note is fiat. That fiat value is not based on gold or silver which are being bought by the boatloads and stored by the elites. That value is based on the natural wealth of the United States. The United States is the breadbasket of the world, has tremendous energy resources in coal and natural gas, has large coastlines bordering on 3 oceans, and is located in a geo-politically stable are of the world. The U.S. is truly wealthy. The U.S. note would be valuable because of this. Not many countries are so lucky.

The existing Federal Reserve Note (the dollar) is based on the wealth of the country

The notes have no value for themselves, but for what they will buy. In another sense, because they are legal tender, Federal Reserve notes are "backed" by all the goods and services in the economy. The United States Note functions the same.

Both United States Notes and Federal Reserve Notes are parts of our national currency and both are legal tender. They circulate as money in the same way. However, the issuing authority for them comes from different statutes. United States Notes were redeemable in gold until 1933, when the United States abandoned the gold standard. Since then, both currencies have served essentially the same purpose, and have had the same value. Because United States Notes serve no function that is not already adequately served by Federal Reserve Notes, their issuance was discontinued, and none have been placed in to circulation since January 21, 1971.

The difference is that the Fed is a (privately held) bank and all the Federal Reserve Notes in existence is a loan/debt, that must be paid back with interest. It doesn't take half a brain to realize why the U.S. is so deep in debt. As for the U.S. note ....United States Notes (characterized by a red seal and serial number) were the first national currency, authorized by the Legal Tender Act of 1862 and began circulating during the Civil War. The Treasury Department issued these notes directly into circulation, and they are obligations of the United States Government ...The Treasury is a branch of government which means it belongs to the people so such a currency can easily be controlled and the government would have political interest in controlling such a currency to maximize its benefit to the economy. Such currency is not debt based, if the economy needs more money, the government prints it, too much money, the government taxes it and destroys it, simple. Same purpose and strength as the Federal Reserve note but without the ball and chain debt.

A U.S. note in place of a debt based Federal Reserve note (dollar) would eliminate the giant government debt. Because the Fed note is debt based, it is only natural that Americans would be deep in debt on average. Because the Fed Note is debt based it is only natural that costs would increase and monetary value decreases. Because the Fed note is debt based, companies have to take out loans (and pay interest) to expand and the cheapest way to do this is by shifting labor overseas. Yes other countries have debt based currency but they also have a de-facto legalized slavery system.

A U.S. note currency, in addition to sensible tariffs (hey other countries do it) would make the U.S. and Americans in general so wealthy and so full of potential that no one would care whether or not they worked 20 hours, or 40, or 70. Imagine those trillions of dollars in liabilities that cripple Americans becoming an asset instead. Instead of trillions to those who own the debt, the country and the government would be free of any debt burden and can achieve anything.

A U.S. note would allow the government to advance ANY special project it desires. It can be space travel or it can be giant state worker union pensions. It can combat terror or combat poverty. So long as the government prints enough money to facilitate economic growth and destroys excess currency through smart taxation (prevents inflation), a fiat non-debt based U.S. Note would solve many economic problems.

(TLDR version)

The problem with the U.S. note is that there would be no mega powerful banking class that virtually runs the economy.

And the two powerful politicians who wanted such a currency, Abraham Lincoln and JFK shared something else in common.

A bullet to the head.

That is an excellent summery of the difference between the Federal Reserve dollar and the The United States dollar and I expect fairly accurrate. I don't think I've seen it that well explained anywhere else.

So essentially the private bankers are holding the United States government hostage in order to pursue an agenda that is not really in the best interest of the United States.

[edit on 7-6-2010 by Freedom or Death]

posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 05:10 AM

Originally posted by slane69
reply to post by Three Legs

Families were fine when there was only a single wage earner, then both husbands and wives started working. Guess what happened prices went up accordingly,.. supply and demand. The OP makes a valid point, if 20 hour work weeks were mandated we would all be fine, prices would adjust.

That said it won't work without mandates and a global government. If 20 hour work weeks in USA and 60 in China, competitive advantage = China. When in control the NWO could accomplish this and make it work,... I think I'll just be happy working my 40-50 hours per week. That alternative is nasty.

On a lighter yet darker note the OP, according to his signature, would have to kill himself if his idea were implemented in a way that would work as I don't think the NWO is all about "freedom".

just when was it that the women weren't working, earning money???
I know it wasn't during the last three or four generations, since me, my mom, my grandmother, and her grandmother (putting the date before the 1900's) worked to help support their families! was it before industrialization?? got news for ya, my grandmother and her mother earned cashed making clothing and quilts in their home!!!
industrialization took those opportunities away from the home and placed them within factories....drawing the women to the factories!
families did fine before all these middle men came along taking a rather large percentage of the profits from their labors!!!!

posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 05:59 AM
20 hours of work is good. However there are always alternatives like outsourcing to the third world. As an employer, I have to give kudos to whoever invented this scheme. After all, business is all about profits.

new topics
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in