The Validity Of The Public Debt Of The United States Shall Not Be Questioned

page: 1
4

log in

join

posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 12:25 PM
link   
Amendment 14 Section 4

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.

The validity of the public debt of the United States shall not be questioned.



val·id (vld)
adj.
1. Well grounded; just: a valid objection.
2. Producing the desired results; efficacious: valid methods.
3. Having legal force; effective or binding: a valid title.
4. Logic
a. Containing premises from which the conclusion may logically be derived: a valid argument.
b. Correctly inferred or deduced from a premise: a valid conclusion.
5. Archaic Of sound health; robust.


Section 4 of the 14th amendment says including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection and rebellion. So, it is not saying that the debt will not be questioned only when it is the result of putting down rebellions, BUT, the validity of the debt will not be questioned including those instances that it is incurred to put down rebellions.

If someone did not have nefarious aims, and was being completely honest, why would they say that the validity of the public debt cannot be questioned? Could it be, perhaps, because the debt is not valid?

The only reason you would tell someone they are not allowed to question anything is because you have something to hide. If the debt was valid, then questioning said validity would do no harm.

And what would someone have to gain from putting the Union into debt?

Discuss.




posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 12:39 PM
link   
There is a difference between public debt, and government induced debt.

The public didn't vote to go to Iraq, in fact, we protested it.

We didn't vote to go to Afghanistan, in fact, we protested it.

None of the trillions of dollars in MIC spending is public debt.

It's just debt that is being Passed On to the public...

HUGE DIFFERENCE.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by YouAreLiedTo
 



There is a difference between public debt, and government induced debt.


It's just debt that is being Passed On to the public...


I think that is the heart of the problem.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by YouAreLiedTo
 


But, whatever it is, why are we not allowed to question it's validity?
edit on 1-2-2013 by LewsTherinThelamon because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by YouAreLiedTo
 


Sad but naive. Any debt the gov't takes on IS the public debt. They take on the debt on our behalf. The fact that we had no direct say in the matter is moot because we 'elected' them to 'repesent us'. What a scam, huh? We are living in the age of privatized profits and socialized debts.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by LewsTherinThelamon
reply to post by YouAreLiedTo
 


But, whatever it is, why are we not allowed to question it's validity?
edit on 1-2-2013 by LewsTherinThelamon because: (no reason given)


Because you vote for people who are supposed to repres . . .

never mind

Because that's just the way it is . . . like a three year old waiting for dinner, you rarely if ever get any say about what's put on the table before you.

Just hold your nose and mange, baby . . . mange!!!!!!



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   
I bet the bankers dreaming up the Fed Reserve chuckled over that item as they laid out their plans.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by jtma508
reply to post by YouAreLiedTo
 


Sad but naive. Any debt the gov't takes on IS the public debt. They take on the debt on our behalf. The fact that we had no direct say in the matter is moot because we 'elected' them to 'repesent us'. What a scam, huh? We are living in the age of privatized profits and socialized debts.


Naive?

We literally took to the streets by the tens of thousands to protest these wars and absurd spending.

We aren't being represented, that is the problem.

When they are deliberately ignoring the public opinion, it no longer becomes the publics' debt.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 12:57 PM
link   
I like that train of thought. If they say we are not allowed to question something, maybe we should be questioning it. I didn't rack up all the national debt although I cannot say I did not get some benefit from government projects. Everyone gets a benefit from government spending whether they realize it or not. The government funded many big projects throughout the years, the waterlines and sewers, the electric lines and the roads and bridges also.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 01:06 PM
link   
Here is the thing that really gets me.

The Federal Reserve is supposed to be an extension of the federal government.

If that is true, and as a member of the body politic of the Federal government--how is it possible that the Federal government can be in debt to itself when it borrows money from itself?

You cannot "borrow" from what is already yours. You cannot be in debt to yourself.

Which is why I believe that the Federal Reserve is a private bank, and that the Federal Reserve Note is the property of said private bank.

And, to top it off, we are not allowed to question the validity of the debt.

Works out well if you're running the world's most intricate ponzi scheme.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by YouAreLiedTo
 


Yea it is. Let's say you have a credit card. You decide to get your girlfriend a card on your account. She hits shoes-r-us and loses her mind. Guess who is stuck with the bill? It's not right. It's not fair and on principal I don't disagree with you. But the fact is the gov't can do anything they wanty and we're on-the-hook for it.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by rickymouse
 



The government funded many big projects throughout the years, the waterlines and sewers, the electric lines and the roads and bridges also.


I thought those were supposed to be what our taxes pay for?



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by LewsTherinThelamon
Here is the thing that really gets me.

The Federal Reserve is supposed to be an extension of the federal government.

If that is true, and as a member of the body politic of the Federal government--how is it possible that the Federal government can be in debt to itself when it borrows money from itself?

You cannot "borrow" from what is already yours. You cannot be in debt to yourself.

Which is why I believe that the Federal Reserve is a private bank, and that the Federal Reserve Note is the property of said private bank.

And, to top it off, we are not allowed to question the validity of the debt.

Works out well if you're running the world's most intricate ponzi scheme.


The Federal Reserve is and always has been a privately owned corporation. The "name" has confused many-many people for many-many years.

It is a gigantic sham... The Fed buys the nations debt for a return in interest...the fed prints our money and loans it to the individual banks and sends the bill to the Government (the people) which is added to our debt...the people in turn go to the bank and "borrow" money with interest (money that they are already paying for with their taxes...the national debt).

And the Fed pockets all the interest from the Gov, the banks and the people and laughs at what a bunch of morons and fools people are...

What a great scam!
edit on 2/1/2013 by Jeremiah65 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by LewsTherinThelamon
 


The problem comes when communities apply for funding for projects that don't need to be done, just to get money for the local contractors to try to boost the economy of the area. Some projects are necessary while others aren't. Low income people apply for funding to get their bathroom fixed and the inspector comes in and gets bids for new siding and windows on the house along with a lot of other things to bring the house up to code. There isn't enough money left to fix the bathroom up because all the money is spent on things they don't really need. The bathroom just needs a new tub and plumbing and the toilet doesn't flush right. I'm not making this up, I went to look at this job and the people declined the work because their aluminum siding was in good shape and their windows were adequate. They would have had to pay back half of the cost for things they didn't need or want. These programs are flawed. If someone needs a roof, just do the roof.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by LewsTherinThelamon
 


i think the original premiss was that for people to say "who is the government to say we owe anything"

i think now its terms ( knowing how corrupt they really have become)

i think the terms means " you cannot question the " numbered value" of debt ie whether its 10 mill or 72 trillion but knowing that they are manipulating the very markets they are supposed to regulate.

how can we really trust the numbers we are seeing as "actual" debt?



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 02:17 PM
link   



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by LewsTherinThelamon
 

I think there is a case for dismissing debt incurred by our representatives who have acted outside of constitutionally acceptable behavior or against the best interests of their constituents.

This thread explores a related topic:
State Nullification - Peacefully Restoring Our Constitutional Republic





top topics
 
4

log in

join