sync0s
Well-Known Member
I think people need to get a mind their fucking own and stop listening to the politicians and the media. That'd be a monumental start.
Do You Support The "Occupy"Protests?
- Thread starter Tales
- Start date
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
Depends on the situation really. Right now, yes. Public opinion needs to be won. Riots don't win public opinion. If you've got public opinion on your side and even though the majority agrees with you and still government refuses reform and the cops are using violence, then depending on the specifics, violence may become necessary. Violence was necessary in Egypt, Libya, etc, but not here, not yet. They have a population that overwhelmingly agreed with them. Occupy does not. Right now it's a PR game. The more cops are shown on the news beating up people for peacefully protesting, the more support occupy gets. That's the game right now.
Always. Violence in any way will always be used against the oppressed.
Cameras are everywhere, police can beat and spray and taze people all day and it wont make news.
One protester throws a fence and makes a cop bleed and 312 million people will see it at 6 o'klock.
Sure Shot
Well-Known Member
Sunbiz1
Well-Known Member
I have asked countless people the following question, nobody has an answer yet.
How are we going to eliminate the Federal Reserve banking system without being thrown back into the stone age economically?. We cannot go back onto the gold standard b/c we never owned the gold to begin with. For this movement to work, there has to be currency of value to the world economy. And the folks showing up in city parks sure don't have it. The system was designed to break us, so eventually the masses will be broke. This movement is premature imho, things are going to have to get worse in OUR country to gain the upper-middle class support needed. Otherwise, our growing skills will come in very handy b/c we'll be needing to grow our own food and such.
How are we going to eliminate the Federal Reserve banking system without being thrown back into the stone age economically?. We cannot go back onto the gold standard b/c we never owned the gold to begin with. For this movement to work, there has to be currency of value to the world economy. And the folks showing up in city parks sure don't have it. The system was designed to break us, so eventually the masses will be broke. This movement is premature imho, things are going to have to get worse in OUR country to gain the upper-middle class support needed. Otherwise, our growing skills will come in very handy b/c we'll be needing to grow our own food and such.
beardo
Well-Known Member
Kennedy had the answer to your question pretty well figured out....
Do some research on the United States Notes he issued
mccumcumber
Well-Known Member
Talking about the silver backed notes?
Isn't silver more rare than gold? How much is one of Kennedy's notes worth? I'd imagine they're free from inflation... being on the silver standard and all. I think there ought to be some $5 and $2 notes still floating around somewhere... Just wondering, what is silver backed by?
Isn't silver more rare than gold? How much is one of Kennedy's notes worth? I'd imagine they're free from inflation... being on the silver standard and all. I think there ought to be some $5 and $2 notes still floating around somewhere... Just wondering, what is silver backed by?
Sure Shot
Well-Known Member
Good question! The answer is simple, actually.
We could just use United States Notes instead of Federal Reserve Notes!!
United States Notes vs. Federal Reserve Notes
Both United States Notes and Federal Reserve Notes are parts of the national currency of the United States, and both have been legal tender since the gold recall of 1933. Both have been used in circulation as money in the same way. However, the issuing authority for them came from different statutes.[24] United States Notes were created as fiat currency, in that the government has never categorically guaranteed to redeem them for precious metal - even though at times, such as after the specie resumption of 1879, federal officials were authorized to do so if requested. The difference between a United States Note and a Federal Reserve Note is that a United States Note represented a "bill of credit" and was inserted by the Treasury directly into circulation free of interest. Federal Reserve Notes are backed by debt purchased by the Federal Reserve, and thus generate seigniorage, or interest, for the Federal Reserve System, which serves as a lending intermediary between the Treasury and the public.
Finshaggy
Well-Known Member
Silver is itself in weight. It backs itself.
Sunbiz1
Well-Known Member
It isn't as simple as you would think. US notes(or Greenbacks as they were called originally)were backed by import taxation during the Civil war. That type of global economy hasn't existed in decades. Money always has to be backed by something of international value, back then the union government was collecting custom fees via gold payment. This movement needs the people who make six figures but are not set for life. And that isn't going to happen until the government fucks up for a few more years. Then those people will realize that their children and grandchildren aren't getting that nice inheritance they should be. And then the $$ will be available to create an alternative banking system. Meanwhile, I voted yes on the support b/c the only way to beat $$ when you don't have any is by numbers.
"Legal tender status guaranteed that creditors would have to accept the notes despite the fact that they were not backed by gold, bank deposits, or government reserves, and bore no interest. However, the First Legal Tender Act did not make the notes an unlimited legal tender as they could not be used by merchants to pay customs duties on imports and could not be used by the government to pay interest on its bonds. The Act did provide that the notes be receivable by the government for short term deposits at 5% interest, and for the purchase of 6% interest 20-year bonds at par. The rationale for these terms was that the Union government would preserve its credit-worthiness by supporting the value of its bonds by paying their interest in gold. Early in the war, customs duties were a large part of government tax revenue and by making these payable in gold, the government would generate the coin necessary to make the interest payments on the bonds. Lastly, by making the bonds available for purchase at par in United States Notes, the value of the latter would be supported as well".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Note
Keep up the good work all, but keep it safe as well!
Herman Cain: "free speech is going to tear down the greatest country in the world".
mccumcumber
Well-Known Member
Couldn't you say the same about the dollar?
Sure Shot
Well-Known Member
U.S Notes were backed by import taxes?, Great!
Tax imports then! (TARIFF) Don't want to pay that tax, buy American.
The Tea Party happened because the cheapest Tea was coming in from across the seas.
American merchants had to pay tax to the crown while The Company sold tea free of this bondage creating a market where British Tea was cheaper then any other.
Does that not correlate with what has happened to every market in the name of "Free Trade"?
Allow the full scale production of Hemp that farmer's across the Midwest US are demanding for.
Then export said hemp to the Global Market.
The Bread Basket of America would be stronger if sown with hemp.
Article from two weeks ago;
United States: More states want federal government's OK to grow hemp
beardo
Well-Known Member
Only a real one-
Look up what a dollar is
Like he said it backs itself- silver is worth it's weight in silver
beardo
Well-Known Member
United States Notes
It was in 1963 that John F. Kennedy, who was then the reigning president of the United States, made the decision to create his own money to run the country, for he knew the Federal Reserve Notes that were being used as the legal currency of the country went against the Constitution of the United States. He must have thought to himself: "Why should a rich country like the United States, a country full of all kinds of natural resources, of all kinds of human potential and know-how, become enslaved with a debt-money system ?"President Kennedy issued what they called "United States Notes", in the amount of approximately $4 billion, to be used as the legal currency of the country. This was an interest-free, debt-free money. It was issued as money was needed to finance new production, and withdrawn from circulation when this production was bought and consumed.
In the illustrations, we can compare a "Federal Reserve Note" issued from the central banks of the United States, with a "United States Note" issued by President Kennedy. They almost look alike, except one says "Federal Reserve Note" on the top while the other says "United States Note". Also, the Federal Reserve Note has a green seal while the United States Note has a red seal.
Unfortunately, President Kennedy was assassinated in November 1963. The "United States Notes" he had issued were taken out of circulation, and the Federal Reserve Notes continued to serve as the legal currency of the nation, even though the original Federal Reserve Act of 1913 could still be declared unconstitutional.
mccumcumber
Well-Known Member
Maybe Ron Paul will be a modern day Jackson and take down Maddison's central bank... I mean the Federal Reserve...
mccumcumber
Well-Known Member
I'm pretty sure that even if you take down the Federal Reserve it will come back as an even stronger entity in the future, hence my last post.
Edit: Oh and as far as your Kennedy silver backed dollars are concerned (that's what you mean by real dollars, right?) It would be very interesting to see how the economy would work using them for a year before everyone jumps on the gold standard band wagon. Sounds good in theory... but as we can tell from our previous president's blunders, what sounds good in theory isn't always good in practice.
Edit: Oh and as far as your Kennedy silver backed dollars are concerned (that's what you mean by real dollars, right?) It would be very interesting to see how the economy would work using them for a year before everyone jumps on the gold standard band wagon. Sounds good in theory... but as we can tell from our previous president's blunders, what sounds good in theory isn't always good in practice.
