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.


The Union Movement

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 10:27 PM
This was an idea that came to me the other night while I was getting ready to go to bed. It actually ended up keeping me up for sometime as I brainstormed the idea and it evolved more and more. I wonder if there needs to be a bigger movement. Something more than OWS. Something more than the Tea Party. Something that nobody can point to and say "that is a leftist movement" or "that is a right--wing movement". Something that is just normal people, completely fed up with EVERYTHING that the Federal government is and has done. Something that unifies nearly everyone. Something that, perhaps, brings about term-limits for politicians.

What do you guys think?
What would be needed to get this kind of movement rolling?
And is it even possible?

posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 10:37 PM
reply to post by Ketzer22

Yeah... his name is Ron Paul


posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 10:46 PM
My room mate has long preached the idea of "The peoples union" It costs one dollar a month for every member of your family. The idea being that if everyone on the planet gets in, it's six or seven billion every month flowing in. His idea is all about monetary clout! I admit, I sometimes see the validity of the argument but only if the entire population of the planet were in. Even if you took out a billion per month to administer the thing you could funnel a lot of cash to protect peoples rights and freedoms. My problem with the concept has always been getting a full house of contribution.

posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 11:17 PM
I think the problem here would be the agenda. Im going to assume from your post and the fact that you are on ATS that you are for smaller goverment, more personal freedom,and the chance to work for your own goals. ( Please forgive me if Im wrong ) I agree with you very much,but we are not representive of all the populus. There are many who believe that the goverment is the answer to all the problems. That they should be supplying all of our needs. Then there are those who would remove almost all goverment. Almost to the point of choas.

Its a hard bargin to strike. It would be a great day for this country, but I think we have moved to far from the center as a people to ever have that much agreement between us. Short of a major collapse that brings every one back together in order to survive as a country.

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 12:11 AM
Over here in Austria 1% of every paycheck goes to an institution called Arbeiterkammer (Workers Chamber) It's an obvious socialist/commie group of course: It wants business to thrive, because that is where they get their money from. Their services can be summed up as "free lawyers for employed people". With the money that's left over after that, they offer cheap education, and test products for consumer savety.
There is an often abused loophole that gets you around paying that 1%. Recently they have started serving those folks who's employer forced them into that loophole too.
It's amazing what you can do with 1%.
(Btw: unemployment in austria is 4%, and Germany is our main source of cheap labor)

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 01:41 AM
Optimus Subprime- yes, I agree with you... i voted for RP on 08' and i voted for him in 12'... however, I don't think he is going to be able to unify everyone. Or is that even possible? At what point do we say "we want our freedoms vs. we want the government to control everything?

Minkmouse- I see where you're coming from... it wouldn't be a bad idea, but like you said... it would require full participation from everyone.

David134- you are absolutely correct and I am for smaller government on all levels. I guess I forgot the fact that some people think more government is not only favorable, but necessary. I am actually sad. I do not know what to do to get the government out of my life...

Nahwal- it sounds like what is going on here with the unions. People pay into unions... which fund the democratic party... which want more control over the average citizen.. although, in the end both parties want more control from different stand points

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 11:04 AM
It's a great idea.
The only problem is that once the movement picks up some steam, those in the political world will latch on to it like a parasitic leech. It would quickly be hijacked by either party and stripped of its intention, rendering it completely useless to us. It has happened before.

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 02:43 PM
reply to post by Ketzer22

It is naive to think that EVERYONE could ever be united as one... it isn't possible. Too many people with their hand out. Too many politicians using that to their advantage.

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 02:54 PM
All it needs is a change of focus.

If in a group of 100 people we all look after number one as we have been encouraged to do then the result is one person looks after you. YOU.

If you put yourself second and everyone else first and everyone in that group does the same then everyone has 99 people looking after them including you.

Dont excuse yourself by saying no one else would do it. Just do it and even if only one other does it you have lost nothing. If two others do it you have doubled the people looking out for you.

top topics


log in