The UN Attempting to Stick the US with the World’s Debt, page 1

Why is the GOP the only party leading the charge to preserve US sovereignty? This should be something everyone in US can agree on but I don’t see much talk about this. Obama and his ilk are hard at work trying to empty the pockets of US citizens and redistribute the wealth overseas!

The United Nations is continuing its assault on American wealth and sovereignty. Unbelievably, various proposals are in the works to tax American citizens and send the money to poorer countries.

The threat has become so serious that delegates to the Republican National Convention have adopted a proposal rejecting United Nations efforts to tax Americans. Now, preserving American freedom and keeping our tax dollars here at home will become an official part of the GOP platform.

President Obama and extreme liberals in Congress are supportive of these various U.N. efforts, of course, and that is a big reason why the GOP is finding it necessary to come out against any and all efforts at global wealth redistribution.

Among the proposals in the works by the UN are:

• TAX THE RICH: The U.N. World Economic and Social Survey wants to levy a 1% tax on billionaires worldwide.

• TRANSACTIONS TAX: The U.N. has proposed a tax of .005 percent on financial transactions, also known as the Robin Hood Tax, because it will take money from rich nations and send it to poorer ones.

• CLIMATE TAX: U.N. official Ottmar Edenhofer told an international panel that climate change policy was “a way to redistribute wealth globally,” and President Obama is on board with introducing a tax that would bypass Congressional approval and force anyone who travels to pay a climate tax.

• SOCIAL TAX: The U.N. Commission on Social Development met earlier this year and discussed a global “social protection floor” that would be funded by a new world tax.

• INTERNET TAX: In December, the International Telecommunication Union will meet to debate a global Internet tax.

• REPLACE THE DOLLAR: The U.N. wants its International Monetary Fund to manage a global monetary system and replace the U.S. dollar in international trade.

• SUSTAINABILITY TAX: Communities are beginning to rally against the U.N.’s Agenda 21, which the RNC documents call a “comprehensive plan of extreme environmentalism, social engineering, and global political control.” Agenda 21 would force taxes and regulations upon Americans in the name of sustainable development that would affect the kind of cars we drive, the property we own, the type of travel choices we can make and even how many children we can have.

• GUN TAX: The U.N. has been working for many years on a Small Arms Treaty that would allow them to tax, regulate and control our firearms, weaken America, and destroy our Second Amendment rights.

link

Why should US be forced to send money overseas when we already have a mountain of debt here at home?

What say you? Does any of this seem like a good idea or a path to US prosperity?? To me it seems like an orchestrated attempt to defraud the American people.

It is UN Policy Brief #38 and it is only 2 pages long, you should read it.

It's obviously in the early stages (a recommendation at the moment) but it's certainly interesting.

According to the Survey, realistic estimates of a tiny CTT put the revenue yield of a tax of one half of a basis point on all trading in four major currencies (the dollar, euro, yen and sterling) at $40 billion per year. A tax on a wider range of financial transactions, such as equity trades, bonds and derivatives, could raise more resources. It is estimated that the proposed European FTT will raise approximately $75 billion annually. The participation of the United States and other countries would obviously increase the revenue potential, but, to date, the United States has not been supportive of any form of FTT. Nonetheless, even when limited to Europe, as shown in the figure, an FTT and CTT have the potential to make a significant contribution to global financing needs, with estimated annual revenues nearly as large as existing annual flows of traditional ODA, even though — with the indicated scope — it would be insufficient to make up for the delivery gap between existing ODA and the agreed upon United Nations target (of 0.7 per cent of donor country national income). An FTT and CTT should therefore be viewed as additional to exisiting ODA, and not as substitutes for it.

The document itself actually seems to suggest that the US won't be participating, but this is certainly worth watching.

Here is the UN Policy Brief #38 and the UN Summary as well.

I can not find any information as to what countries would support the CTT proposal.

In particular, a CTT, which taxes international transactions, is by its nature a tax on financial market internationalization. In addition to countries appropriating a portion of taxes on domestic financial market transactions to international development, the international community should look to the implementation of a CTT to be allocated exclusively towards development and global needs, such as combating climate change.

reply to post by seabag

---

Interesting presentation of the proposals but no flag nor star for you, just because of the way you present the information is asinine. It starts by a misleading title, only one of the proposals can be said to focus on the US, and it is because the dollar is the present reserve currency.

I do not understand the anti-UN sentiment from the US, the UN is mainly a tool to extend US policies to the world. I understand that there is a distinction between the US citizen will and what his government does, but you should blame you government not an appendix of it...

reply to post by Elton

---

Thanks for pointing that out. I read that after posting in your other post as well.

Call the nuke strike off for now. Although I don`t think Obama stands a chance at doing the right thing here. The best thing is it`s taking money from the wealthy and that just won`t happen.

reply to post by timetothink

---

Anyone who thinks the UN is working to spread the principles of the US around the world is deluded.

I don't think that you are labeling the right ones deluded. I can only see anyone not understanding international policies and how international law is created and have at least a passing knowledge on the activities of the UN to claim that it is has not in most instances been working toward the Anglo-American goals, the fact is that the US is the only surviving super power the UN is meaningless and powerless without the support of the US, in fact the US is the only one that can vehemently and publicly state that it will go against UN decisions, you need not look further than the rhetoric before the first and second Iraq "wars".

Consider also how national votes are mostly a commodity, that only major powers can play at, from wale hunting to military actions it is all upon to corruption. Remember the WMD reports from the UN or how the Anglo-Americans spied on delegations votes/positions. You can also look on the injustice about Israel and Palestine, even to recent US tantrums about attempts by smaller nations to address it at the UN.

I think that the delusion is on those that still think that the UN is an independent and just organ. What about the scheme of oil for food and other corruptions spearheaded by the US, like the arms trade and support to the terrorist groups during the Yugoslavia disintegration. Delusion, yea right...

reply to post by Sodium

---

Well to be fair the US was the major player in enforcing the financial system on the world.

This is true but the US didn’t take risks for other nations nor should US be responsible for the debts of others.

When you think about it, it doesn't really matter if the US gets more debt because they already have a totally un-payable amount.

The US can dig its way out IMO as long as this debt is compounded.

If your ship is going to sink you may as well try and save other peoples while your at it.

Why?? I don’t agree with this logic.

That being said when the US inevitably sinks all countries will be dragged down too so you are damned if you do and damned if you don't.

The difference is the US can recover on its own.

reply to post by Panic2k11

---

the UN is meaningless and powerless without the support of the US,

Agreed….and many think the US should pull out of the UN. Why does the US continue to prop this defunct organization up??

in fact the US is the only one that can vehemently and publicly state that it will go against UN decisions, you need not look further than the rhetoric before the first and second Iraq "wars".

Just because the US is the strongest member of the UN doesn’t mean the UN doesn’t want to expand its control and influence over the US; as a matter of fact, that reality makes the US the prime target of the UN power grabbers!

reply to post by seabag

---

People miss a bit about the function of the UN the function of the UN is not as a government body but a legislative organ that helps to establish international law and manage international relations it has very few powers over policies inside a nation unless they contradict accepted international law.

One could argue that international law is skewed towards established powers and 3rd world nations and new nations are mere puppets. I agree with that view. Like colonialism and now cultural imperialism international law serves primarily to protect the interests of the richer nations (if we look for instance to intellectual property the historical evolution of nations dooms many to be unfairly exploited by more technological advanced nations).

I applauded when Brazil started to produce anti-AIDS medicine without license or how India is awakening to how the game is fixed, even in Europe (the people, not the government) are stoically resisting the idiocy of patenting crops.

reply to post by samkent

---

This whole thing is a non event.
The UN is a paper tiger. They cannot force anything. Think Syria.

I said the UN is “attempting” to stick US with the world’s debt. They could succeed because we surely have a lot of STUPID globalist politicians in the US that would vote for this garbage (for one - Hillary likely would). Do you want proof this could happen? Bush signed Agenda 21 back in 1992.

It’s alarming that one quick executive order or vote could open the door to this type of thing.

reply to post by seabag

---

This is true but the US didn’t take risks for other nations nor should US be responsible for the debts of others.

Well it certainly pushes people to do stuff like spend billions going to war for example. But the point of this corrupt system is you don't need to take risks for them because you know that they will do it themselves.

The US can dig its way out IMO as long as this debt is compounded.

How exactly? What industry are you expecting to save you when its all going to China?

The difference is the US can recover on its own.

How long have you spent researching the financial system and how it works?

How US Dollar Collapsed - Inside Job
  Posted 2 days ago with 65 member flags

Bank loses all of family’s possessions after wrongfully foreclosing on home
  Posted 2 days ago with 25 member flags

United States Will Become A Third World Country Overnight. Real Unemployment 22%
  Posted 1 days ago with 24 member flags

Debt Free at Last!
  Posted 2 days ago with 20 member flags

Get Your Money Out of Morgan Stanley—Fast!
  Posted 15 days ago with 13 member flags

What Would You Do if Your Child Said They Wanted To Join the Armed Forces?
  Posted 12 days ago with 12 member flags

This Is Why We Are In This Mess!!
  Posted 15 days ago with 10 member flags

Everyone Is Ignoring A Sign Of US Economic Decline We Haven\'t Seen In 60 Years !
  Posted 12 days ago with 9 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: