99%? Who wants to be a part of the 100%?

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

Then STOP voting for demcracy, which most all the founders were against and start voting to restore the republic.... It would be the best way to piss republicans off

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

Bull.
Conservatives are just serious about about the changes that need to be made.
Change the laws and you'll change the influences that Wall Street has on DC.

But all are cowards and spineless weasels in DC. So do your marches. Sing your chants.

Want real change?

Get people of integrity into office.

Ron Paul seems honest with good intentions. I may not agree with some of his libertarian ideas but he trumps everyone else by a mile. Dennis Kucinoch from the democrats is ok and believe it or not donald rumsfeld from the bush jr administration.

One person cannot implement change no matter how forthcoming. Even if jesus were to make his second appearance I think corporate america would not change its way unless the 300 million population wakes up to reality.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07
It starts with one person.
Then two.
Then three.

Just beacause a journey is long, is no reason to avoid it. We may not see the destination, but we can prepare future generations who can.

Good thread.

It's about time those who think they are awake, but still asleep at the wheel wake up.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

It starts with one person.
Then two.
Then three.

Just beacause a journey is long, is no reason to avoid it. We may not see the destination, but we can prepare future generations who can.

We don't need no stinkin journey. We need a revolution to get rid of the useless eaters. We all know who they are don't we?.......

That's what the TPM wants with all their scapegoating talk and hatred of the progressive "hippies"

reply to post by whaaa
I want a journey. I want change. But lasting change not as a result of one side telling another side that they lost. Revolutions are good. But one needs to take into account the "replacement" for what was beinjg protested in the first place.

reply to post by whaaa


What we need is ufo disclosure and public central banking. Then de-incorporate the government and tell the rockefellers and rothschilds to #-off. It takes a real man to do that and the last two men by the name of JFK and Abraham Lincoln died as martyrs.

Neither the democrats nor the republicans can accomplish this!

I think I pointed this out early in the thread. Someone else offered the same.


A Picture of Let the Peasants Eat Cake--The 1%,

See they don't want to be part of your 100%

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by whaaa

 

I want a journey. I want change. But lasting change not as a result of one side telling another side that they lost. Revolutions are good. But one needs to take into account the "replacement" for what was beinjg protested in the first place.

Then perhaps stop all the name calling and divisive rhetoric mainly coming from the Right wing pundits like Rush, Savage, Coulter, Levin, Beck, et al... demonizing and marginalizing entire groups of people. I call it the "people like you" syndrome. There can be no change or peace until common goals are realized. I just don't see that happening and I use ATS as an example. I have been a member a long time and the hatred being expressed here is the worst I've ever seen it.

God help us!

reply to post by whaaa
And the left is innocent of rhetoric?

Common goals are a good thing.

What would they be?

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by whaaa

 

And the left is innocent of rhetoric?

Common goals are a good thing.

What would they be?

I don't know....I'll let "people like you" figure it out...............

reply to post by whaaa


Now that's too fuuny!! I have been called more atrocious names by the left than Carter has liver pills, even told my kind deserves to die....... I'm not even a Rep

Originally posted by Cinaed
reply to post by whaaa

 

Now that's too fuuny!! I have been called more atrocious names by the left than Carter has liver pills, even told my kind deserves to die....... I'm not even a Rep

I had a u2u from a conservative that said he would shove my keyboard so far up my *** that I would **** semicolons. I thought that was pretty clever even from a right winger....


So what is "your kind"?? I'm a "people like you" and damn proud of it!!

reply to post by whaaa


I call myself a conservative librtarian just to piss off the Reps

I have mostly libertarian views but on the more conservative end of libertarianism....

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by Cinaed

 

reply to post by ThreeThreeThree

 

You both missed the point. It isn't about being able to leave it is about having a choice within the US. If it doesn't exist then you are being forced.

I'm not even saying that it is a bad thing but many complain that socialism/communism is being forced on them. My point is that the whole thing is being forced on them.

It's not personal.

well, i'm late to the party and have only caught up to here so please forgive me if this has already been beat to death, dragged around the block and left on the corner to rot ...

when you say "the whole thing is being forced on them", i would also disagree.

the Constitution does not establish any rights, it protects and guarantees them.
personally, i cannot comprehend anyone desiring less than that minimal guarantee

and, as for its construct, it was not forced upon anyone. it was deeply and intensely negotiated for months with representatives of many persons / states / beliefs, before a final draft was produced. those representatives were chosen by the people they represented
(not quite what happens today)

and yes, the civil war was fought over states' rights, however, that doesn't discredit the Constitution.
by the time the civil war began, the original Constitution had already been challenged, modified and usurped ... it was already beginning to reflect the "mode of the day" rather the model of a nation.

Restore the Constitution ... End the Federal Reserve and let nature resolve the details.

reply to post by Honor93


Agreed.

While we're at it reserve requirements for banks under penalty of law not to exceed leverage ratio of 10:1. Loans made only to those who qualify and at LEAST a 20% loan to value down payment ratio. No bank should EVER be allowed to loan to someone who can't afford it.

Secondly and most importantly we need a separation of investment banking and commercial banking like what Glass Steagall did before the Fed, Clinton, and congress repealed the act. An act that for it's few flaws, protected the banking institutions and consumers from the type of chicanery we saw the result of in 2008 for nearly 70 years. No bank should ever be able to "securitize" the mortgage of a homeowner and then gamble with it on unregulated market exchanges away from the eyes of law enforcement. They should not be allowed to gamble with depositor money either.

It is exactly these things that caused the environment we found ourselves in 2008. And to this day none of it has changed. Not even Dodd/Frank fixed these problems. Instead, the government rewarded it with a bailout.

And as I said many times, handcuffs.

Originally posted by mastahunta

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by beezzer

 

If you believe OWS is fully supported by the democrats then your fooling yourself. The democrats are almost as conservative as the republicans. By conservative I mean looking out for BIG BUSINESS! And yes I support unions and am proud of it.

To be specific, I'd say fully supported by the progressive branch of the DNC. Van Jones being one of their "leaders".

Do you honestly believe that this progressive administration will change ANY laws that'll inhibit Wall Street?
Cough* Goldman Sachs*cough
Cough* GE *cough

This administration needs the voter base even more than it needs its funding...

edit on 9-10-2011 by mastahunta because: (no reason given)

well ok then, let's End the Federal Reserve and see how well that works, eh?

either way, after Solyndra and the Fast & Furious scandals, this administration is sunk even with a preserver handy ... and i am also of the opinion that anyone voting for this administration should have their brain checked for severe malfunction.

doesn't really matter though, neither Obama, his lapdogs or Congress have the kahunas to do what needs to be done or we wouldn't be where we are, today.

Originally posted by Honor93
and, as for its construct, it was not forced upon anyone. it was deeply and intensely negotiated for months with representatives of many persons / states / beliefs, before a final draft was produced. those representatives were chosen by the people they represented (not quite what happens today)

I'm not sure how true this is but I have read that Jefferson believed that the constitution should be rewritten every 19 years. I think it was so that every generation actually had a say. You say it wasn't forced upon anybody but I agree with Jefferson, it was forced on every generation after the generation of '76.

As for the civil war I was just pointing out that at least from that moment on the constitution has been forced upon the citizens of the confederate states.

Some have said that you could leave. I find it funny because americans abroad still have to pay income tax even if that income is earned in another country. Also, a couple of days I saw a thread about a new law that would make it illegal for american citizens to discuss or plan activities about things that are illegal in the US while standing on foreign soil. Even when you leave they are on you.

U.S. Drug Policy Would Be Imposed Globally By New House Bill

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by Honor93

 

Agreed.

While we're at it reserve requirements for banks under penalty of law not to exceed leverage ratio of 10:1. Loans made only to those who qualify and at LEAST a 20% loan to value down payment ratio. No bank should EVER be allowed to loan to someone who can't afford it.

Secondly and most importantly we need a separation of investment banking and commercial banking like what Glass Steagall did before the Fed, Clinton, and congress repealed the act. An act that for it's few flaws, protected the banking institutions and consumers from the type of chicanery we saw the result of in 2008 for nearly 70 years. No bank should ever be able to "securitize" the mortgage of a homeowner and then gamble with it on unregulated market exchanges away from the eyes of law enforcement. They should not be allowed to gamble with depositor money either.

It is exactly these things that caused the environment we found ourselves in 2008. And to this day none of it has changed. Not even Dodd/Frank fixed these problems. Instead, the government rewarded it with a bailout.

And as I said many times, handcuffs.

edit on 9-10-2011 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

thanks for your contributions and for agreeing but i really have to ask you something ...

you "claim" to have knowledge about the banking industry, yet, you avoid, at all costs, even mentioning the Beast known as the Fed ... why??

the banking industry doesn't exist without them and the current govt doesn't function without them either ... why would you want to modify the system the Beast provides??
re-instituting Glass-Steagal is as pointless as doing nothing.
Eliminate the Fed, period.

i don't even find banks necessary since the gold standard has been dissipated ... what is their function, exactly?
(yes, i know what we're brought up to believe but that's not the answer)

ppl will say, i want to start a businesss ... gotta go to the bank
i want to buy a house ... gotta go to the bank
we're starting a family ... gotta go to the bank
we're burying a family member ... gotta go to the bank
just returned to employment? ... gotta go to the bank
need groceries, car repairs, home improvement, education ... gotta go to the bank
WHEN will it END ???

i'm over ppl saying we need them ... No, we don't.
and, as for homes, Habitat for Humanity seems to be doing just fine and they are providing homes, not loans.

changing how they do business does NOT solve the problem.
forcibly trimming their balance sheet (profits) does NOT solve the problem.
protesting, picketing, and then paying your bills online does NOT solve the problem.
surely it is not just us *old farts* who see the whole picture, is it ????

reply to post by Honor93


I guess saying I agree with the notion of abolishing the Fed isn't enough?

And to take further steps to reign in predatory and irresponsible banking practices?

I'm not getting your angle here.

Are you accusing me of something?