Depends on what side your on. Larry Flynt might think otherwise.

I'm staying with Obama. None of the Rep. that might run are any better. In fact there worst.

Who said I voted republican? I didn't vote for McShame or even half of the republican party. But failing to see the problems within your own party candidate because he claims to agree with your ideology is fool hearty and makes you nothing more than a brainwashed zombie. Actions speak louder than words but if you give him a pass and ignore the actions that makes you a blind shill and thus your points are invalid.

I am not a republican by any means and I call them out for being corrupt money grubbing asshats all the time. I can see all of them for what they are, professional politicians and most cannot be trusted from either party. Why is it that so many libs cannot see past their own ideology and actually be critical when it is obviously needed? Being on here is teaching me all about intellectual dishonesty.

Have you not seen what your precious leader has done while in office financially speaking regardless of what he has inherited? He is all big business, just look at his Czars, the wall street bailout 2, buying GM. Hell, G.E. C.E.O. is in charge of fair employment and trade practices yet paid no taxes? You really need to look into his financial backers and his paybacks. Obama is no better. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Most in CONgress get what they want in two years. They stick arouind because of greed.

It's what's being done that we must attack! If we don't destroy the tool, anyone and everyone can use it; which you evidenced with the fact that jews don't own, run or control everything. If we outlaw the act and process, only CRIMINALS will be violating them.

So...why don't they just buy the Holy Land back instead of constantly fighting over it?
They have the money....according to you.

SPAM!!!!

AWESOME comment, this explains soo much... Especially where the Federal Reserve is concerned.... It is also a Good thing to know who the 6 families that own the Fed are and what religion they preach. I already know that answer.... =(

Until we nationalize the banks and cancel the debts!

"Let me issue and control a Nation's money and I care not who makes its laws".
Amsel (Amschel) Bauer Mayer Rothschild­, 1838

Letter written from London by the Rothschild­s to their New York agents introducin­g their banking method into America:

"The few who can understand the system will be either so interested in its profits, or so dependent on its favours, that there will be no opposition from that class, while, on the other hand, that great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehend­ing the tremendous advantage that Capital derives from the system, will bear its burden without complaint and, perhaps, without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests.­"

We can start by pushing each of our states to follow the model that N. Dakota has had for about 90 years now. It's a state owned and run public bank.

My state is already working on setting one up and so are about a dozen other states.
Taking our personal money out of the too-big-to-fail banks is good, but when states remove Hundreds of BILLIONS....... it's even better.

N.Dakota's bank doesn't let the wall street investment bankers handle their state revenues or federal funds and they didn't get hurt in the near economic meltdown.
Other states did and the people are paying the price with cuts to programs and services.

I just read that some wall street pension fund managers charge as much as 6% to manage pension funds. Public state banks don't. I also read that WI has 67 Billion in pension funds.
That's a LOT of money going to Wall Street that could be working for the people and NOT
Wall Street.

The N.Dakota bank states that their mission is to "Serve the People".

Can't disagree with you on that. But I think a NATIONAL BANK would be a good option as well. It's one of life's necessities, and the public should their own cost saving providers of life's necessities.

Partisan fail. Thanks for playing. Idiot they all do it and the sooner you realize it the better. DO you really believe that a party cares about you just because they say so? They just want your vote and will say anything to get it.

LOL im w/YOU

DITTO!

Ahah, someone just hit the nail on the head with that comment. We used to elect the educated and compassionate people, now we just elect politicians...

I've always felt that we should have economics experts in Congress and other offices.
These guys are dime a dozen politicians and THEY are trying to fix our economic problems?
It'll never happen until we get some legislators in office that have skills in something other than
influence peddling.

Indeed. The past tense is probably more appropriate.

About your suggested monetary system; I remember it being a three tiered system and giving it some thought, but I have to admit I forgot about it, the details, and responding to you :( I suck.

Would you be willing to mail me the thread/story we were discussing that in again?

I would be willing if I knew how. You have an avatar page on current with all
the articles you've commented on. If you retraced your activity within the past
month or so, you can click the article link and reexamine the whole kaboodle.
The article had to do with the economy, money or Banksters likely as not.

I think I personally would concentrate on the commonwealth currency idea. As I had stated before, if all a metal is going to do is be brought out of the ground to back a system of money, what's the point of destroying the earth to mine something that is just going to be warehoused? To me it just seems like a complete waste of time, energy, human capital, and resources. If we need these metals for some other purpose, great…..but not just to sit around.

Most people when I ask the above question invariably point to either the constitutional mandate to “coin” money or that having a metallic system is instrumental in regulating (and limiting) the quantity. As we have agreed, it is important for money to be stable in value over time and I argued that a stable amount per person is the optimal way to achieve that.

History is ripe with several examples of where a civilization has been on a metallic standard and the population growth and metal coming out of the ground have been close enough to maintain roughly the same amount of metal per person as to be quite stable and successful. There have also been times where metal coming out of the ground increases so rapidly as to cause massive devaluation of each metal unit with the effect of rampant price inflation (the Spanish raping 16th century South America for every silver nugget it could find comes to mind). In the Spanish case, when coupled with increased mining on the European continent, it actually destroyed their economy and the wider European economy for two generations.

Of course there has also been several examples of populations increasing faster than the metal stock. When this happens, because there are less metal units per person to go around, the effects are deflationary. In our world today, it would be permanent deflation as we are long long past the time when mined metals will ever keep up with growth in population. I believe this is why in Article 1, Section 8 there is the provision to “regulate the value thereof”. If metal coins are inherently valuable, why would the founders have enumerated the need to regulate their value? Again, my belief is that they knew that metal coins were not the be all end all system of money…..or at least they could imagine a world when they wouldn’t be.

So given that, even when coupled with a commonwealth currency, if the two were a part of one system of money, when one gains value the other would have to lose value to maintain the overall stability of the system. This might take several generations, but eventually the whole system would become so lopsided as to be unstable and susceptible to manipulation. Don’t get me wrong, metal coins and bars would be great savings vehicles and should be allowed to circulate freely, but just not in any system of sovereign money.

As for your third, yet-to-be developed money system, I have literally been thinking about that for the last 24 hours. I am currently entertaining the merits of a national commonwealth currency and perhaps a local version of your proposed 3rd currency, or maybe a national system running parallel with the commonwealth currency. It is an interesting idea, but to be honest my first impression is that it is too complicated. Complicated usually equals more difficult to manage and more susceptible to manipulation……two things we should really try to avoid. I wouldn’t dismiss the idea out of hand though, it is an exciting concept and the goals you laid out for such a system are admirable, necessary (in my opinion), and just.

To date, I had always pictured those goals being handled by the one commonwealth currency. Healthcare and education specifically are not resource intense endeavors. They are labor intensive, and so the popular excuse of not having enough ‘money’ to fully fund these items is insulting to humanity on its face. With a commonwealth currency whose only mandate is to stay stable in value (quantity per person) over time, it would require creation every year to balance for population growth.

Excusing the math for the moment for simplicity’s sake, if we did have a debt-free commonwealth currency interest on the national debt would be a thing of the past. Couple that with $800billion or so in newly created money each year and spent into the economy by the issuing authority (the government) before taxes would even need to be collected to start paying for the government people would want, and we could go a long way towards funding education and healthcare for all. Taxes would still need to be collected, and the fairness (or lack thereof) in tax policy would also need to be concurrently addressed, but the overall burden to society would be greatly leveled by such policies.

The good news is that instituting a national commonwealth currency is quite easy, we’re just lacking in political will……which should come as no surprise. Bill Still and the MoneyMasters have as good an idea for how to institute the national Commonwealth currency as anyone, though Steven Keen and others have ideas on the table.

I’ll have to leave it there for the time being, it’s time to start my day. I look forward to talking with you in the future.

Respectfully yours,
Schnookums

Remember the May 5th International Day of Work Stoppage and protest!

I agree with again sibob, except for one very important point...

No more do we say next election we can get rid of, time to start becoming more vehement about resolution now. A breach of trust with your constituants should be grounds for immediate removal and a censur on ever running for political office again.

We also as people need to start boycotting the lobbying companies that hire these douches when they leave office. If Joe Blo senator looses his seat and goes to work for Brand X, Brand X should be pushed until they remove the liability from thier payrolls.

ten ups on that one!

Did you go to the link? The entire page is full of Republican donors, and there is a "blip" for some Democratic donors. This article is about "Boooo Republicans, and YAY Democrats." If is absolutely Partisan.

I am not discounting what he is saying about the Republican party, only that this is a Democratic Party cheerleader piece. When I see a page with all the donors to the Democratic party similar to the one he posted about the Republicans, then I will consider it non-partisan.

Campaign donations were somewhat lopsided to the Republicans during this last cycle, but it was reversed almost completely for 2006 and especially 2008 (which he pointed out at the time). Still, the Democrat's top 20 are listed:

http://www.hightowerlowdown.org/node/2603#democrats

Common sense will only get you negative flags..... These idiots fail to see the truth through their own bias an ideology.

Perhaps my reply was a little nuanced for everyone who voted me down. My point was not that Republicans are not bought and paid for, my point is that so are the Democrats. To think otherwise is either total and complete naivete or complete dishonesty.

Are you implying I should either pick the Republicans or Democrats or get the Eff out?