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.


How are we going to create jobs and rebuild our economy? What is the best path to take?

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in


posted on May, 6 2011 @ 05:05 PM
reply to post by David9176

"We" aren't going to do much of anything to create jobs and build our economy. I think the bulk of 'we' are commoners and wageslaves, unemployed, students, vets, retirees, etcetera. We don't have the millions or billions it takes to change the course of our history and take America from bust to boom times.

We are pretty much dependent on the success of the failed. Instead of carefully guiding the USA economy toward success the men and women running the Federal Reserve led the masses through years of easy credit card mania, and when that lady was so fat she sang & they gave e-z $350k home loans to almost anyone with a full time job. Greed and excess can last so long before everyone has to pay the devil his due.

We watched company after company screw their fellow Americans as manufacturing and other jobs went overseas. We've had a steady stream of wealthy privileged people in government making certain the wealth and privileges of their interests are first priority.

The USA government will find $$$ galore to cover the incompetence of well educated executives who ran successful companies into the ground. Where is this help for all our unemployed relatives, friends and neighbors?


If our Federal Government wanted to they could create a program for affordable homes to be built across America. Maybe they even learned by now how to have Banks make loans properly. This would put all sorts of construction professionals and laborers back to work. This would provide affordable houses for American people. Factories that make siding and windows and doors and hardware and paint and and and --- all those people, back to work, making money, buying things, paying bills. As the loans are repaid the seed money would be repaid to the Banks/Government, heck they would see profit.

Thats just one idea anyone can come up with. It is not hard to get the ball rolling for those in charge.

"We" need to remove the corrupt and the corrupters from the federal and local governments, the fed res, from wall street and the banks, from the police station and the prisons, on and on. We the many have been screwed by those few for way too long. It is obvious IMHO that our oppressors will reign supreme until we end them and their lineage.

posted on May, 7 2011 @ 04:27 AM
reply to post by LargeFries

Really what it comes down to is the faulty premises of the OPs title question.

Firstly, 'creating jobs' was placed in importance before 'rebuilding our economy', as if economic actions primary motive is to provide employment.

So sorry. Economic action in the form of companies exist to produce profits. Period. Jobs are necessarily created by companies seeking profit as a positive necessary by product. The role of the employer is not to employ, but instead to increase productivity and thus profits. Increased productivity = increased job oppertunities. (as produtivity = wealth and wealth = buying stuff which = +jobs)

Secondly, the false question is posed. "what *actions* should be taken to 'rebuild' our 'economy'?"

Simply, an 'economy' is an aggragate grouping of trading within a specific region. These 'regions' or 'nations' consist of millions of people, each acting in their own self interest to maximize their resources and minimize their effort. To say one person, or group of persons, can centrally plan what is in the best interest of each one of millions of individual players, or traders, is to assume that one man can know the mind, and act in the interest, of millions.

In fact one man, or a grouping of men, can only access their own conciouness which is limited by that mans own sphere of perception. Thus one man, or grouping of men, can in no way, *by the very nature of individuated conciousness*, know what is in the best interest of millions of men, who each posses their own individual free will, circumstances, wants and desires. Thus central economic planning is *necessarily* limited by the limited cognition of the central planners.

A free economy, on the other hand, (one that is not *acted* upon violently by misguided and often evil planners), takes into account on the whole each individual 'plan' of each individual trader. Thus in a free situation a process of natural selection arrises, where a multitude of plans are tried, each with varying success, with only the most viable plan being able to survive. Non functional models are discarded continually in favour of whats better, more effecient, and more preferable to the living ecosystem of the uncoerced economy.

Not so with centralized 'action'. When a single course of action is set and backed by will of force, no other alternatives are possible. No competing models are allowed. No comparitive analysis is possible. When the state takes 'action', it necessarliy rules out 'counteraction', which is the basis of any kind of dynamic and improving system. Think natural selection vs bubble boy.

Thus what people should be seeking to recover economic production and thus jobs is freedom to act and trade in all spheres possible, with the ultimate goal in mind to remove all coercive elements from society as a whole. The true path to prosperity is freedom, and centralized *action* by planner is indeed its opposite. Unless what is meant by action is to disempower the state - actions like ending the Fed or returning to a gold standard. (or dare I dream - private currency) In those cases we should *act* to strip as much power from the central planners as possible.

posted on May, 7 2011 @ 01:41 PM
reply to post by David9176

I think there should be heavy taxes and tariffs on imports and companies that send any job out of the country will get heavy taxes. Any manufacturing plant that keeps all the jobs in the US will get some tax breaks. Any company of any kind that keep the jobs in the US get some tax breaks, if they try to send jobs out of the country will get hit with huge taxes. Lets get rid of NAFTA. They should just make it illegal for American companies to send jobs out of the country, better then just taxes. I support social programs, seems most people here does not know how it is like to be poor and have a disability.

posted on May, 7 2011 @ 01:59 PM
be a nation of Independent not rely on another to hire you at subsistance wages & outlandish demands on time/effort/and the skill sets & support you are required to give to the boss.

You then become a 'corporation' and compensation is less than taxes on wages, You can deduct every 'business lunch' instead of just the elites doing it.... Wake Up citizens

all those well paid lobbists have worked to reduce the money stranglehold on Corporations, become a corporate entity yourself and enjoy the fat cats style of life.

posted on May, 8 2011 @ 05:45 AM

They should just make it illegal for American companies to send jobs out of the country

Would you personally initiate force against a business owner who hired someone in India in order to increase his companies productivity?

Do you feel said business owner 'owes' you, or the people who exist around him, a job? Do you feel that the primary role of a business owner is to provide employment?

posted on May, 8 2011 @ 06:46 AM
How does this sound for an opening line of legislation ?

To create a full employment economy as a matter of national economic defense; to provide for public investment in capital infrastructure; to provide for reducing the cost of public investment; to retire public debt; to stabilize the Social Security retirement system; to restore the authority of Congress to create and regulate money, modernize and provide stability for the monetary system of the United States, retire public debt and reduce the cost of public investment, and for other public purposes.

H.R. 6550: National Emergency Employment Defense Act

Introduced in December 2010 by Dennis Kusinich, it can be recalled should the need arise or if the people demand it. Download a pdf copy of the bill and give it a read through.

My only / main issue with HR 6550 at this time is this one;
It does not advocate a "Gold Standard", this I agree with, but there are many that are adamant that a "Gold Standard" is necessary.

I'm not educated enough to say I completely understand both sides fully. My fears are this, if there is a "Gold Standard", whats to stop gold seizures as happened in 1933 I think it was, and the people controlling most of the worlds gold are governments, corporations and those who trade for profit in gold. Surely, surely theses very same people are the ones that need to be marginalised to stop there manipulation of value of gold and therefor value of money.

I am trying to learn / teach myself about these issues, but I do like to hear others comments on it.

There is another small thread on H.R. 6550 (here), where in it appears someone with Economics knowledge who has offered to answer questions on it, and I'm working on credible questions for this person.

Overall H.R.6550 works to address the issues of employment in the USA, and will be great reading for those interested in this thread who are not aware of it.

Edit to add: H.R. 6550 would ABOLISH the Federal Reserve and Fractional Reserve Banking if implemented
edit on 8-5-2011 by ukWolf because: as stated above

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 10:25 AM
Just want to introduce myself first off. The name's SGTGerman, I'm a Brit and have literally just joined the site and may I say - you have quite a range of topics

I tend put myself on the Right of of politics. Obviously the US and the UK have different ties so my ideas my not have effect on the US but I would appreciate your opinions a lot.

1. The UK gets out of the EU. We are paying something like £49 million pounds a day to be a member and we never even got a vote anyway. This is probably the most important one as it will give us back our independence and allow us to carry out the rest of my ideas.

2. We hault all immigration. There ar eno accurate figures on how many assylum seekers there are on benifits because are anti British government have no idea themselves. People who cause trouble will be deported, and hate preachers like Ajem Chaudry (who are on £24,000 a year in benifits - yes, tax payers money). Those who travelled through the "next friendliest country" from their homeland will also be returned. There also 4 - 5 million unemployed in the country, so immigration for unskilled labour is not required, and if it somehow is, we can tightly control who we let in.

3. Stop all foreign aid. Pakistan does not need British tax payers to give them £600,000,000 a year. They have a huge army they maintain so if they are actually interested in helping their own people they can easily do so. The 3rd world had its chance but instead chose to kick us out. Their loss.

4. Armed neutrality. I.e. stop meddling in foreign wars. Libya is a massive con just like Iraq was, and we're paying for it with our soldiers' blood - the greatest resource of any nation. With war comes new bills - specialised equipment, training, intellignet gathering etc etc. There also comes casaulties. Not like we get decent treatment, but its still a costl ordeal looking after wounded personnel. None of these unneeded = no of these unneeded costs.

5. Cut tax - We need everyone to start spending to boost the economy. We in Britain are amongst the most taxed people in the world, therefore we have left to spend. VAT (Value Added Tax) also needs to be cut to maske things cheaper to buy. Less people on benifits, no EU bills and no wars to pay for means less need for tax.

There're the main points.

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 02:39 PM
reply to post by SGTGerman

I think you make great points SGT. I see alot of conservative/libertarian views which I agree with. I think the wars such as Iraq and Libya are obviously pursued for other reasons then what is blasted on the news. I have a hard time believing we would care about Libya's people seeking democracy if Libya's main export was cabbage. The same can be said for Iraq. I often feel like if I was elected president the right choices would be so simple to make and I am sure this is true for many. But I think it is apparent that the elitist agenda is different from mine.

posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:59 AM
reply to post by mynameispablo

Cheers for the reply mate. Being a leader is never easy, but our leaders are now taking the f****** mick. Here in Europe, the liberal elite are planning to turn us into the United States of Europe. They say, that this is a massive step forward for multicultralism, mixing us all together. That's probably why they make such dumb ass descisions - to weaken us and therefore make it out as if unity is the only way.

They are obviously the main points. I've read a through posts on here calling to make it illegal for buissnesses to move abroad. My only concern would be the price of everything going sky high because of high much costs to make the product. I would definetly like to see this done, however I am a massive fan of small buissnesses - more competition and the money is more spread around instead of belonging to to a couple of major giants.

If You'd like here any other of my ideas just ask and I'll explain.

posted on May, 22 2011 @ 02:42 AM

If You'd like here any other of my ideas just ask and I'll explain

*hand up* Since no one will address my points, which I consider to be core, I'll ask you, for fun if nothing more.

So my question is - do you believe that one individual, or group or individuals, is/are capable of making decisions in the interest of the billions of individuals that make up the conceptual aggregate we call the 'economy'?

In other words, do you believe a small group, even with the best of intentions, is capable of deciding for, and acting in, the best interest of everyone else? Do you believe you can plan your own life with total effectiveness? Or the life of your friends or associates?

Would you accept the dictates of any person, no matter how wise, in deciding the affairs of your own personal life? If so, do you believe that you accept such guidance means that everyone else should as well? If not, and you would not accept the dictates of another on any matter, and especially when it comes to how you should spend your scarce resources, do you think its proper to propose solutions that you yourself would not accept personally?

In short, do you believe that it it possible for you to propose to me, and others, what rules I should follow in regard to my own personal property? If so, would you use violence against me in order to enact your will?

posted on May, 22 2011 @ 10:40 AM

Originally posted by Neo_Serf

If You'd like here any other of my ideas just ask and I'll explain

*hand up* Since no one will address my points, which I consider to be core, I'll ask you, for fun if nothing more.

The problem with governining is that the larger and more diverse your people get - the harder it is to please everyone.

Remember that these people making the laws are elected by the people, so people must agree with what they say or what their intentions are. Sometimes I think we should have more nationwide referrendums such as for joining the EU (which we never got) and even possibly declaring war.

Would I force you? I would definetley use force if you continued to spread hate, incite hate or endanger the people i.e. murderering. But I wouldn't stop you protesting peacefully.

So inclusion I believe yes they can on a basic level and without law and order comes chaos and destruction. Does that answer your question?

By the way are you an anarchist?

posted on May, 22 2011 @ 11:15 AM
reply to post by David9176

3. We fight. We increase tariffs on imports and lower taxes to small businesses....with no exemptions except for food and energy.....

We need to rip the heck out of the bloated bureaucracy and get rid of the little Hitlers who are scaring the crap out of anyone thinking of starting a business.

The economy was done in INTENTIONALLY by
1. Leveraged buyouts (Reagan)
2. New Banking laws (Clinton)
3. Trade Agreements - NAFTA & WTO (Clinton)
I did a series of posts on "Traitors in the White House" in the thread Unions and the Truth by OLD HIPPY DUDE. It goes into detail about the laws used to wipe out the US economy.

Until you understand WHY the economy died you can not hope to fix it.

This THREAD on ATS explains another part of the problem:

..John Dollarhite and his wife Judy of tiny Nixa, Mo., have been told by the USDA that, by Monday, they must pay a fine exceeding $90,000. If they don’t pay that fine, they could face additional fines of almost $4 million. Why? Because they sold more than $500 worth of bunnies — $4,600 worth to be exact — in a single calendar year.

At this point, some important facts about the manner in which the Dollarhites conducted their operation are worth reviewing:

The business was carefully conducted on the property of their Missouri home;

The business complied with all applicable state laws;

The bunnies were kept in large, clean and well-maintained cages; and

Not a single bunny was sold across state lines.

....a USDA office in the nation’s capitol. He called the new number, and the lady he reached there was blunt, John said.

“She said,

‘Well, Mr. Dollarhite, I’ve got the report on my desk, and I’m just gonna tell you that, once I review it, it’s our intent to prosecute you to the maximum that we can’ and that ‘we will make an example out of you.”


An ATS member made this comment

...I remember for years my brother chose not to see the light of day, and it was his very employer who should him. He worked for the EPA in oil field site inspections. Consistently he was tasked with fining, and shutting down mom, and pop outfits, but consistently was ordered to leave the big boys like Exxon Mobil alone....


posted on May, 22 2011 @ 12:02 PM
What is the best path to take?

What you are asking for is a utopia.

Humanity as a whole lacks the GOOD morals and ethics to achieve it.
Our way of thinking prohibits a society that provides and maintains a happy healthly life , with equal rights for all.
We lack sympathy and compassion to care for our old, sick, handicaped, hungry,homeless and orphaned.
We believe that for a PRICE , it can be achieved. With this belief , who will pay for it? There will be winners and losers and the losers will be pushed to the side and left behind. Sooner or later we all will be left behind while the rest continue their search for shangrala.

posted on May, 22 2011 @ 12:34 PM

Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
What is the best path to take?

What you are asking for is a utopia.

Humanity as a whole lacks the GOOD morals and ethics to achieve it.
Our way of thinking prohibits a society that provides and maintains a happy healthly life , with equal rights for all.
We lack sympathy and compassion to care for our old, sick, handicaped, hungry,homeless and orphaned.
We believe that for a PRICE , it can be achieved. With this belief , who will pay for it? There will be winners and losers and the losers will be pushed to the side and left behind. Sooner or later we all will be left behind while the rest continue their search for shangrala.

I don't think it "lacks" morals and ethics - we just interperet them differently. Some people think its immoral to eat meat - others beleive its unethical to have an abortion.

This is why a New World Order will not ever work unless we are all educated exactly the same and our diversities crushed.

The way I see it - money makes the world go round. It's how we spend it which is the problem.

posted on May, 22 2011 @ 12:58 PM
I heard things are worse than I even thought. I heard our debt is so large now, we could totally eliminate all defense spending, all medicare and medicaid spending, and all social security spending and our budget would barely even be balanced. I did read somewhere about some plan to have the inflation rate be greater than the interest rate the government is paying. Basically that devalues our currency and everything will become more expensive and our wages and income will be less and less in real terms each year. It helps with debt that we can not ever hope to pay back in a normal healthy way. Will that plan work? I can only hope because all the other alternatives make our currency worthless immediately as soon as we declare we default. Expanding the economy faster than government spending increases and cutting out expenditures that don't promote growth or maintain the health or safety of the people is what politicians need to look for. Government regulations that are anti-business need to get cut. We need to do everything to promote manufacturing and business in this country while applying lean concepts that business already uses. These lean concepts need to be put into practice in government agencies by cutting departments and agencies. Our government has grown too large.

Unfortunately what we have now are a bunch of politicians in office who know nothing about business concepts.
edit on 22/5/11 by orionthehunter because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 22 2011 @ 12:59 PM
Well, from my perspective it's insane to think that the people as a majority will do much of any good from here on out. I think it's insane to follow the corporate-controlled political game as well. Basically, I think it's insane to structure our psyche in boxed, pre 21st century kind of way.

I'm being a deviant.

Screw society. Screw this country. I'm a man on this rock that's got a plan for how to keep my world afloat while the rest may or may not burn down.

We've gotta spread out and calm down. We need to live in a sustainable way. The politicians aren't doing enough. The people are pooing their pants. So phuck it, I'm going it alone.

I'm purchasing cheap, arid land. Learning about permaculture, vermiculture, aquaponics, and algae-oil. I plan on re-greening desert land, and starting up a micro-community. I want it to be totally self-sustainable, and be able to employ a dozen other people...a few families that have their poo together as well.

We need thousands more people who are thinking in these terms. Go out and do it, and show others how to succeed. Market your ideas, plans, and knowledge. Grow your own crops to eat, and sell locally. Convert biomass into fuel, and sell/use that as well.

Get the hell off the grid. Be a 21st century trend setter! The cities will eventually be abandoned. Best to gfto before the chaos finally becomes realized. I'm waiting no damned longer.
edit on 22-5-2011 by unityemissions because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:50 AM
reply to post by unityemissions

....Grow your own crops to eat, and sell locally. Convert biomass into fuel, and sell/use that as well. Get the hell off the grid. Be a 21st century trend setter! .....


Just remember Waco & Ruby ridge. They are not going to LET YOU OF THE GRID!

That is what the blasted "Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010" was all about.

In September 1995, Catherine Bertini, former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Agriculture and Executive Director of the United Nations World Food Program, stated "Food is power. We use it to change behavior. Some may call that bribery. We do not apologize."

..... I have read every document, press release and all the Federal Register documents that USDA has issued with regard to NAIS. I even attended, at my own expense, NIAA's ID Expo in 2006 to learn firsthand about the program. It was there that Dr. John Weimers told me personally that he would drive every back road to find every backyard flock and tag each chicken. It was also there that Indiana's State Vet Dr. Jennifer Greiner said to me she couldn't sleep at night thinking I would be eating diseased meat, that being my own sheep....

Here is the FDA's opinion on YOUR rights to food:

FDA's Response to FTCLDF Suit

* "There is no absolute right to consume or feed children any particular food." [p. 25]

* "There is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds." [p. 26]

* "Plaintiffs' assertion of a 'fundamental right to their own bodily and physical health, which includes what foods they do and do not choose to consume for themselves and their families' is similarly unavailing because plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish." [p. 26]

* "There is no fundamental right to freedom of contract." [p. 27]

I live down a dirt road in the middle of nowhere. I need a PERMIT to build a windmill and the USDA has ALREADY come knocking on the door.

USDA Satellite Imagery used to spy om us.

FAS serves as the repository and manager of the USDA Satellite Imagery Archive. Access is available to USDA subscribers only. The USDA Imagery Archive is the repository for all acquired USDA satellite imagery. The Archive was established in 2001 as a cost-sharing agreement among the various subscribers....

... Combining RFID and GPS systems will allow TransCore to offer fleet, rail/intermodal and shipper customers a complete supply chain visibility ...

...The USDA and the various state agencies tasked with implementing the program will focus on the largest food producers first, Spaulding said. But eventually, other animal owners may be ID’d and their animals tracked.” “Spaulding said ‘misinformation’ about the national program is circulating throughout the country,” and that “false information she (Bishop) has heard include the idea that each premise will be photographed from space to search for unidentified animals and people will be jailed if they don’t comply”. This statement was made as the USDA and partner WSDA was actively engaging in satellite surveillance using Terra Server. The information given was relayed to her by a NASS statistician who was very proud of the surveillance operation.

The very Terra Server utilized by the USDA website claims, “it is great for: commercial farmers, family farms, and ranchers. Satellite imagery provides the agriculture business with a means to monitor land from above. We update aerial imagery as soon as we receive it to ensure that you have the most up to date. Higher resolution imagery also allows you to see crop rows and can sometimes even allow you to see individual trees in tree farms and orchards. The imagery available from TerraServer will allow you to have a visual representation of your land that is only available from the sky.” In fact, on January 12, 2006 headlines splashed across the world that, “Satellite Images Used to Detect Crop Insurance Fraud” were used to hold a man accountable...

Since 2005 our food supply has become increasingly and obviously, even to a casual observer, very contaminated. Secret government contracts obtained under the Freedom of Information Act foretold a day when the food supply would become unsafe and the unwary public would ‘demand’ regulatory programs such as NAIS. As predicted, food contamination escalated and continues unchecked. The plea for safe and local foods resonates within the hearts of average Americans who have no clue as to the battle going on.....

posted on May, 23 2011 @ 08:36 AM
reply to post by crimvelvet

Okay, well you can continue to paint this false picture for members on ATS, but I'm not a chump and am not buying into your extreme views that just don't reflect reality.

Listen, many people are doing just what I said. It depends on which state you're in, and what exactly you want to do, but you can set up just about anything if you do the correct research.

Take your negativity elsewhere.

I'm doing it whether you like it or not.

posted on May, 25 2011 @ 09:00 AM
reply to post by unityemissions

Okay, well you can continue to paint this false picture for members on ATS, but I'm not a chump and am not buying into your extreme views that just don't reflect reality.....


How about reality based on court cases and the actual law?

FDR threatened to pack the Supreme Court by increasing the number of Judges because the Court ruled his "New DEAL" laws unConstitutional. Under this threat the Nine Old Men rolled over and submitted to FDR's will.

The deciding SUPREME COURT CASE is WICKARD v. FILBURN, 317 U.S. 111 (1942)

WICKARD v. FILBURN, 317 U.S. 111 (1942)

317 U.S. 111

WICKARD, Secretary of Agriculture, et al.



Decided Nov. 9, 1942.

Mr. Justice JACKSON delivered the opinion of the Court.

The appellee filed his complaint against the Secretary of Agriculture of the United States, three members of the County Agricultural Conservation Committee for Montgomery County, Ohio, and a member of the State Agricultural Conservation Committee for Ohio. He sought to enjoin enforcement against himself of the marketing penalty imposed by the amendment of May 26, 1941, to the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, upon that part of his 1941 wheat crop which was available for marketing in excess of the marketing quota established for his farm. He also sought a declaratory judgment that the wheat marketing quota provisions of the Act as amended and applicable to him were unconstitutional because not sustainable under the Commerce Clause....

The appellee for many years past has owned and operated a small farm in Montgomery County, Ohio, maintaining a herd of dairy cattle, selling milk, raising poultry, and selling poultry and eggs. It has been his practice to raise a small acreage of winter wheat, sown in the Fall and harvested in the following July; to sell a portion of the crop; to feed part to poultry and livestock on the farm, some of which is sold; to use some in making flour for home consumption; and to keep the rest for the following seeding. The intended disposition of the crop here involved has not been expressly stated....

It is urged that under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, Article I, 8, clause 3, Congress does not possess the power it has in this instance sought to exercise. The question would merit little consideration since our decision in United States v. Darby, sustaining the federal power to regulate production of goods for commerce except for the fact that this Act extends federal regulation to production not intended in any part for commerce but wholly for consumption on the farm...

Hence, marketing quotas not only embrace all that may be sold without penalty but also what may be consumed on the premises.

...Whether the subject of the regulation in question was 'production,' 'consumption,' or 'marketing' is, therefore, not material for purposes of deciding the question of federal power before us. That an activity is of local character may help in a doubtful case to determine whether Congress intended to reach it.... But even if appellee's activity be local and though it may not be regarded as commerce, it may still, whatever its nature, be reached by Congress if it exerts a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce and this irrespective of whether such effect is what might at some earlier time have been defined as 'direct' or 'indirect.'

That appellee's own contribution to the demand for wheat may be trivial by itself is not enough to remove him from the scope of federal regulation where, as here, his contribution, taken together with that of many others similarly situated, is far from trivial....

FROM Cornell University Law School

....Held, that, in any event, and even assuming that the penalties referred to in the speech were those prescribed by the Act, the validity of the vote was not thereby affected. P. 117.

2. The wheat marketing quota and attendant penalty provisions of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, as amended by the Act of May 26, 1941, when applied to wheat not intended in any part for commerce but wholly for consumption on the farm, are within the commerce power of Congress. P. 118.

3. The effect of the Act is to restrict the amount of wheat which may be produced for market and the extent as well to which one may forestall resort to the market by producing for his own needs. P. 127.

4. That the production of wheat for consumption on the farm may be trivial in the particular case is not enough to remove the grower from the scope of federal regulation where his contribution, taken with that of many others similarly situated, is far from trivial. P. 127.

5. The power to regulate interstate commerce includes the power to regulate the prices at which commodities in that commerce are dealt in and practices affecting such prices. P. 128.

6. A factor of such volume and variability as wheat grown for home consumption would have a substantial influence on price conditions on the wheat market, both because such wheat, with rising prices, may flow into the market and check price increases and, because, though never marketed, it supplies the need of the grower which would otherwise be satisfied by his purchases in the open market. P. 128.

7. The amendatory Act of May 26, 1941, which increased the penalty upon "farm marketing excess" and included in that category wheat which previously had not been subject to penalty, held not invalid as retroactive legislation repugnant to the Fifth Amendment when applied to wheat planted and growing before it was enacted, but harvested and threshed thereafter. P. 131.

posted on May, 25 2011 @ 09:23 AM
reply to post by unityemissions

I'm doing it whether you like it or not.

Dude I am building my greenhouse and increasing my supply of meat animals. However it is foolish to deny the fact the Corporations run the FDA and USDA and they want 100% control of the food supply.

I have been in the trenches fighting this takeover for over five years. I was shocked by the actuall reality of what was happening and what is obviously planned for us. After the World Trade Organization was ratified.

The reality is very very simple.

Statistics (courtesy of Bridgewater) showed in 1990, before WTO was ratified, Foreign ownership of U.S. assets amounted to 33% of U.S. GDP. By 2002 this had increased to over 70% of U.S. GDP.

Of the 30% controlled by Americans and not Internationalists, 16% is agriculture. That is the target this time.

This is the weapon


The surveillance element or function is the most intensive of the six functions with respect to resources and personnel. Surveillance includes all activities designed and implemented to identify and locate any possible focus of infection or exposure to diseases of animal/poultry health significance in the livestock, poultry and exotic animal population. TAHC surveys animal populations for possible disease problems by collecting blood samples at livestock markets, on farms or ranches, and at slaughter plants....

This plus the Commerce Clause is what will be used to regulated home grown food. I suggest you read about the Government coming in under that pretext and slaughering a guys animals. ANIMALS not sold as food!

The Henshaw Incident and Henshaw Documents

edit on 25-5-2011 by crimvelvet because: delete extra

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in