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.

 

Ron Paul: US Should Declare Bankruptcy

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by michael1983l
There is no point starting again as it will only be a matter of time until you reach the same situation again. The problem is not the debt, it is the system or capitalism a.k.a. Greed. there is enough money in America to be clear of debt but the problem is that it all lies with private individuals. The billionaires who keep on accumilating money are taking it all from the working man. Why does any one person deserve to live such a luxourious life when somebody sleeps on the streets.

The problem is WEALTH DISTRIBUTION, not the lack of wealth.


What is the difference between capitalism and communism? In capitalism man exploits man and in communism it is the other way around.

The problem is most assuredly debt. Debt is slavery. Debt is bondage. Debt is bad. In a scene from hamlet Polonius advices his son Laertes: "Neither a borrower nor a lender be; For loan oft loses both itself and friend,
And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry." It was sage advice then, and remains so today.

Of course, it makes sense a fervent anti-capitalist would excuse debt while attacking not just "capitalism AKA greed", but here we have a collectivist declaring individualism as the enemy!

The pretense that greed can just be washed away with an ideology is beyond naive, it is shameful propaganda intended to amass followers towards a political aim. Those who understand the aim are the greedy ones, their followers become the useful idiots.

As an individual, when you stumble upon a person sleeping on the street, you have the choice to comfort that soul, and even to offer him a bed in your home if you can. If you are so inclined to do so, then do so. If you are not inclined to do so, then don't, but don't you dare, either way, insist that everyone else has an obligation to accept tax liabilities so that government can act as charity. It is the most dishonest of all propaganda's, that government will act in benign ways and is more effective in charity than private individuals.

Plunder is plunder, and legalized plunder is still plunder. Even worse, however, are the plunderers who do so while embracing debt.




posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by morder1
 


I tend to agree. It is a more realistic one than, "lets just borrow MORE and cut all social programs."

Ultimately, I think thats what many nations are going to have to end up doing, eventually, when all this debt shuffling around the world ceases to convince anyone something is being solved by it.
edit on 30-6-2011 by Illusionsaregrander because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 10:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Who is talking about communism here? I am not. I am saying that capitalism doesn't work as capitalisim is like a pyramid scheme,it is all well and good whilst the pyramid keeps building, but eventually once the wealth is taken out by a small minority of people the pyramid collapses because there is no new wealth to put in at the base to keep the pyramid going.

You could clear Americas debt over night by passing a law to take a one off payment in proportion to each tax payers total assets. Say 5%, so the richest would pay the majority of the debt whilst the poor would pay nothing if they had no assets. There is only so much resource in the world and when resources are accumilated on the scale of what the Rockerfellas and Rothchilds of this world have then somebody else is always going to have to go without.

I am not saying have a state that distributes wealth socially, I am saying lets have a celing on how rich you are actually allowed to get, in order to make sure it is distributed more evenly lower down the food chain.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 10:42 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


Now, now. Dont be a drama king. China could not nuke us for not paying our debts, we have nukes too.

And you might be surprised about what the majority of Americans might be willing to vote for. I personally think you COULD sell Americans on the idea of disbanding the Federal Reserve and not paying them their interest and telling our creditors that they could wait until we pulled out of the crisis and we would see about paying them then, or they could piss off.

An awful lot of Americans have had to default on debt themselves, or seriously consider it. I dont think they would be as averse as you think.
edit on 30-6-2011 by Illusionsaregrander because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 10:42 PM
link   
Obama for four more years....YES! NOT! Good ole RP the great white hope is much much better than any canidate running.

Besides, who cares, we'll all be toast by 2012 anyway.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 11:00 PM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 





Who is talking about communism here? I am not. I am saying that capitalism doesn't work as capitalisim is like a pyramid scheme,it is all well and good whilst the pyramid keeps building, but eventually once the wealth is taken out by a small minority of people the pyramid collapses because there is no new wealth to put in at the base to keep the pyramid going.


Let's not pretend that a poster who laments a person sleeping on a sidewalk while another has luxury is talking about anything other than communism. Particularly when you offer no reasonable solutions, and only attack what you believe is capitalism.

First, let's be clear here. Capitalism does not exist in the United States, and arguably never did. Contrary to your grossly simplistic assertion that capitalism is a "pyramid scheme", capitalism is an economic system that requires a free and unregulated marketplace, massive competition, and a currency backed by wealth that all can agree upon its value. Not one of those three tenets exist in today's U.S. economy, and arguably no where else in the world.

Capitalism is an open system as opposed to the demonstrably closed economic systems of today. All closed systems tend towards entropy. Useless energy, which comes much closer to your "pyramid scheme" analogy, but that comes from a closed system not an open system. In capitalism anyone can play. In the closed system of today you have to pay to play. You are expected to obtain a license, and before you can have that license you are sent to the IRS to obtain a federal tax ID number, even before you've made a single dime in profit! The priest class lawyer set sit on their perches like vultures just waiting for their prey, and will waste no time at all in advising you to incorporate, even if your just a one man operation. That priest class lawyer will tell you all about the "benefits" you get from incorporating, but will never ever explain to you that by incorporating you are waiving your natural and unalienable rights to do business and are instead asking the state permission to do so.

More and more this is the path people take when going into business for themselves, and this is not capitalism it is corporatism. The irony, and what makes people like you such useful idiots, is that corporatists hate capitalism more than the useful idiots do, because where the useful idiots actually stand to gain something from capitalism, the corporatists do not. They hate a free and unregulated market because such a thing encourages and massive competition, and what the corporatist hates even more than a free and unregulated market is massive competition. As John D. Rockefeller once said; "competition is a sin."




You could clear Americas debt over night by passing a law to take a one off payment in proportion to each tax payers total assets.


"Taxpayer" is a statutorily defined term:

26 U.S.C. 7701


(14) Taxpayer The term “taxpayer” means any person subject to any internal revenue tax.


26 U.S.C. 1313


(b) Taxpayer Notwithstanding section 7701 (a)(14), the term “taxpayer” means any person subject to a tax under the applicable revenue law.


Your tax liability is none of my business and conversely my tax liability is none of yours. This absurd proclivity to refer to people in general as "taxpayers" is not a capitalist ideal, I assure you that.




Say 5%, so the richest would pay the majority of the debt whilst the poor would pay nothing if they had no assets.


Who's talking about communism here, you ask? Why you are! Plunder is plunder, and legal plunder is still plunder!




There is only so much resource in the world and when resources are accumilated on the scale of what the Rockerfellas and Rothchilds of this world have then somebody else is always going to have to go without.


Scarcity is a tyrants tool, and here you are advocating scarcity. Hmmmmmm




I am not saying have a state that distributes wealth socially


Oh yes you are, and just - in fact - did!

You are entitled to your opinions, but opinions that don't add up lose their value quickly. If you don't even understand simple math, why should we trust you on economic theory?



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 



With all due respect your post screams out to me the "as long as I'm ok" mentality that got your sorry nation here in the first instance. And due to your closed mind you can't see past your own ideology and anything that doesn't fit into your idiology must be called communisim.

If my want to know my own personal political views well it leans to the right, I believe that we should be low taxed and be rewarded for hard work.

Question is, it can be taken to the extreme, one group of people can get very rich whilst working no harder than another person that does not get rich. People should be rewarded for their efforts not their opportunities.

Personally if individuals were not allowed to ammas assets past say $1 billion then any dime they earn aftewr that will have to go to someone else. Whilst $1 billion is an aweful lot of money of which you could do what you liked with it, it seems senseless to accumilate more money for 1 individual because ultimately what does it bring them? Nothing more other than power to corrupt governments.

This ideology would still drive people to work hard and well, but at the same time it would give more people opportunity to have a larger share of the spoils.

You comparing wealth to plunder sort of sums up your attitude, however human nature is savaged by greed. So instead of making the changes we need to make to make the world a better place, we will keep on making the same mistakes over and over again.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 11:47 PM
link   
Nope. Nope. Bad move. It is like walking away from a bad fight. I thought America the nation and its citizens are tougher than that! Bankruptcy! Hmmf! Surely, the debt could be settled in some way, some how.
edit on 2011-6-30 by pikypiky because: To correct for "proper" grammar and spelling.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 11:53 PM
link   
Um...am I looking at it wrong or did he say this to be sarcastic? I mean, he does say what he feels and means what he says BUT I sense a bit of air of sarcasm here.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 





With all due respect your post screams out to me the "as long as I'm ok" mentality that got your sorry nation here in the first instance. And due to your closed mind you can't see past your own ideology and anything that doesn't fit into your idiology must be called communisim.


Perhaps that is because you are so busy hearing imaginary screams you can't be bothered to listen to any reasoned response.

Ironically you call the guy advocating an open system closed minded. How Orwellian of you. Orwell, in his seminal book 1984 was not using capitalism as a model to describe the dystopian society he presented.




If my want to know my own personal political views well it leans to the right, I believe that we should be low taxed and be rewarded for hard work.


No, I do not want to know your personal political views. That said, the guy advocating income tax in perpetuity claiming to lean right politically is beyond amusing, it is just sad.




Question is, it can be taken to the extreme, one group of people can get very rich whilst working no harder than another person that does not get rich. People should be rewarded for their efforts not their opportunities.


Look, there is nothing wrong with hard work, especially if this hard work gives one personal satisfaction, but selling hard work as a way to wealth is not just a lie, it is a suppressive lie. It is the tyrants lie. The wealthy do not get wealthy by hard work alone. If you are not making money while you sleep, you aren't getting anywhere near wealth. If this doesn't bother you, and all you want is to work hard, and at the end of the day relax with you and yours and go to sleep soundly, that is okay too! Of course, capitalism facilitates both ways. The economic system you have failed to suggest, I have no doubt doesn't.




Personally if individuals were not allowed to ammas assets past say $1 billion then any dime they earn aftewr that will have to go to someone else. Whilst $1 billion is an aweful lot of money of which you could do what you liked with it, it seems senseless to accumilate more money for 1 individual because ultimately what does it bring them? Nothing more other than power to corrupt governments.


Again, in capitalism there is no such thing as "allowing". People just do what they have the right to do. The moment you begin discussing what is "allowable" any hopes of coming off as compassionate and benign fly right out the window. You have no authority, just as anyone else does not, to decide which rights are "allowable". Further, it is rude and unseemly to concern yourself with how much other people make. It is, quite simply, just none of your business. Mind your own business and make the wealth you want to make and leave others alone to do the same.




This ideology would still drive people to work hard and well, but at the same time it would give more people opportunity to have a larger share of the spoils.


What ideology? The communism you're not talking about? It matters not what form of economic system is in play. Some people will succeed no matter what the rules. Of course, when the game is rigged so only a few can win - as in communism, socialism, or corporatism, only a few will succeed while the rest are required to engage in that hard work you seem so intent on shoving down peoples throat.

Is it so impossible for you to believe that a person can contribute immeasurable wealth to the world without breaking his, or her back to do it? If a person lies about relaxing for weeks on end before conceiving of an idea that supplies a specific demand is this evil in your estimation, and would you hold the ditch digger as more important?




You comparing wealth to plunder sort of sums up your attitude


It was only a matter of time before you fell back on fallacy. I did not, of course, compare wealth to plunder, I compared the taxation of wealth in order to pay for social programs that are best facilitated by private charity as plunder. If taxation is used for anything other than the protection of people's rights then it is assuredly being used to plunder.




however human nature is savaged by greed


Not only do you know nothing about economy, you clearly know nothing about human nature. Human nature is not savaged by greed, greed is a part of human nature. No legislative act is going to rehabilitate that human nature. No force of tyranny will smite it, and only a fool would buy that you are above greed.




So instead of making the changes we need to make to make the world a better place


Dear Lord, do you even stop to think about what you write? How is it, do you imagine, that making the world "a better place" isn't making changes? Sigh.




we will keep on making the same mistakes over and over again.


To err is human, but what do you know about human nature?



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by pikypiky
Nope. Nope. Bad move. It is like walking away from a bad fight. I thought America the nation and its citizens are tougher than that! Bankruptcy! Hmmf! Surely, the debt could be settled in some way, some how.
edit on 2011-6-30 by pikypiky because: To correct for "proper" grammar and spelling.


The problem is...

Citizens didnt do anything here, except be victims of large scale, century+ long brainwashing... Our founding fathers knew banks were evil, and would take everything... Just look back at ben franklin and thomas jefferson quotes... Somehow we all bought into this nonsense that paper is worth something, and is needed to survive...



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


I'm not even going to respond to you, you are a closed book and believe it is possible to run a system of take as much as you can regardless of the concequences. The world is a shrinking place and food/water and energy resources are becoming short. The human race will need to learn to co-operate if us plebs are to survive. Of course the rich can buy their way through, who gives a stuff about the rest, Right?



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 12:25 AM
link   
He is right and we have been bankrupt since 1933 that is why they stole the gold and gave us phoney paper instead. Doe a search on HJR 192. We have been operating in bankruptcy ever since. THERE IS NO DEBT it is fake. We do not owe a dime. Close the federal reserve and send them all to China and let them punish them for thier ponzi scheme.

To bad the American people are so damn ignorant or they would have voted in hundreds of Dr Pauls and we could end this ponzi scheme along with the wars and been off of oil along time ago...



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 12:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by michael1983l
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


I'm not even going to respond to you, you are a closed book and believe it is possible to run a system of take as much as you can regardless of the concequences. The world is a shrinking place and food/water and energy resources are becoming short. The human race will need to learn to co-operate if us plebs are to survive. Of course the rich can buy their way through, who gives a stuff about the rest, Right?


Without a hint of irony, you declare me a "closed book" and then declare the world a "shrinking place". It doesn't take a genius to see the irony in that. The world may or may not be shrinking, however it must be presumed that what you mean by this is that the human population is growing exponentially. However, as that population grows, the universe continues to expand. An open minded person would understand what that means. A "closed book" would ignore this and maintain arguments about "shrinking" worlds.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Originally posted by michael1983l
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


I'm not even going to respond to you, you are a closed book and believe it is possible to run a system of take as much as you can regardless of the concequences. The world is a shrinking place and food/water and energy resources are becoming short. The human race will need to learn to co-operate if us plebs are to survive. Of course the rich can buy their way through, who gives a stuff about the rest, Right?


Without a hint of irony, you declare me a "closed book" and then declare the world a "shrinking place". It doesn't take a genius to see the irony in that. The world may or may not be shrinking, however it must be presumed that what you mean by this is that the human population is growing exponentially. However, as that population grows, the universe continues to expand. An open minded person would understand what that means. A "closed book" would ignore this and maintain arguments about "shrinking" worlds.



What drugs are you on or is there just a loss in translation here? The term shrinking World refers to the increasing population and mass migrations of people and cultures. America is ok now, they have enough food and water for most, not so much so if you live in New Orleans but who cares, its their own fault they have no money or infrastructure. Who'd have thought that a great nation such as the USA would allow one of its major Cites to reach 3rd world standard?

At the moment it does not matter how much the Universe is expanding, because the human race is running the course of extinsion before it has the chance to truely explore it.

I am not sure if you have this term in the USA but I can't help but get the feel that you are a bit of an "I'm alright Jack". Well when the US economy implodes over the next decade and god forbid your personal situation takes a turn for the worse, I wonder if your attitude may well change?



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 12:44 AM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 





What drugs are you on or is there just a loss in translation here? The term shrinking World refers to the increasing population and mass migrations of people and cultures.


The term "shrinking world" linguistically speaking should mean what it is saying, and people should say what they mean. What drugs are you on that you think you can be so sloppy with your language and then get pissy about it when others take you to task for your sloppy syllogisms? I presumed, because you forced me to, on your behalf what you just explained above and it is in my post. You can pretend I didn't do this, but again, what drugs are you on?




America is ok now, they have enough food and water for most, not so much so if you live in New Orleans but who cares, its their own fault they have no money or infrastructure.


America is no where near "okay" right now, and its sputtering dying economy is on the verge of collapse, and if you would at least take a day or two to sober up you might come to realize this.

Go ahead, reply and insist that you were only being sarcastic and it is the flaw of your readers, not your lack of facility for language that created this problem.




Who'd have thought that a great nation such as the USA would allow one of its major Cites to reach 3rd world standard?


There you go again with this "allow" stuff.




At the moment it does not matter how much the Universe is expanding, because the human race is running the course of extinsion before it has the chance to truely explore it.


Your histrionics notwithstanding, humanity may, or may not be facing extinction, but grammar and spelling are dead, that seems certain.




I am not sure if you have this term in the USA but I can't help but get the feel that you are a bit of an "I'm alright Jack".


You've all ready made this point, and both times now it only demonstrates how little feelings contribute to critical thought. Try that for a time, critical thought, and see where that gets you. You may feel better.




Well when the US economy implodes over the next decade and god forbid your personal situation takes a turn for the worse, I wonder if your attitude may well change?


There are members in this site who know me well and are fully aware of my economic situation at the moment, and I have no doubt that if they were to read your thoughtlessness they would think you foolish. Of course, one can't expect to eschew critical thought and be seen as wise.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 02:29 AM
link   
Brilliant and I absolutely that the Fed must die. Still keep up the debt obligations to other nations, but the Fed has been an evil leech from day one that is sucking the nation dry. Just who has the right to create the money, the nation or a private corporation?

Kill the fed, kill the fed, kill the fed... and it may just save the nation. Go Ron



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 02:34 AM
link   
reply to post by michael1983l
 





Well when the US economy implodes over the next decade and god forbid your personal situation takes a turn for the worse, I wonder if your attitude may well change?


And where do you live friend? I got news for you where ever it is it is not just the USA that will implode.. Your country will will follow suite soon enough.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 05:00 AM
link   
How about declaring bankruptcy state by state. That way it won't be such a harsh downfall plus you will have time to pay the debt.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 07:19 AM
link   
ok then heres a question...

what other option do we have?

Oh let me guess, continue down the same road of insanity?

Yup seems like thats what everyone wants to do...
Come on peoplee, get real, realize what the situation is, we are constantly trying to buy time and raise this debt ceiling...now WTF are we doing to SOLVE the problem?

This is by definiition, insanity. This conclusion is inevitable and all Paul is saying is lets quit trying to by time and bite the bullet already. We have no other choice at this point.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join