Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The American system, resting on the twin pillars of freedom and capitalism, is the most productive organizing prinicpal ever dscovered in all of human history. The poorest among us live better than the kings of 300 years ago.
The advances in living standards that we have made from say, 1970 to 2010 or 1930 to 1970 or 1890 to 1930 paint a picture of unimaginable progress.
The keys to this progress have been that in America, people are more free to unlock the highest fraction of their own potential than anywhere else on Earth. And capitalism, in its pure form, embodies an ehtical system in which every transaction produces two winners and no losers. You want the groceries more than you want the money in your pocket; the grocer prefers the money to the goods. At the checkout counter, you both win. The grocer competes against all other grocers, knowing he must deliver maximum value per dollar to win your business. You are free to vote with your wallet as you see fit.
Here are the real threats to the system and to our prosperity:
There is necessarily a disparity in outcomes as the work ethic, native abilities, and devotion to improving one's value to the rest of society vary among individuals. Pressure to equalize outcomes results in drag on the potential returns on self-improvement as net producers are taxed to support net consumers. Although our poor are in better shape than 90% of all people who have ever been born, envy of those who create fabulous wealth is always an issue.
The political system has bastardized capitalism by selling favors to narrow interests. The owners of NASCAR racetracks and the importers of rum and the distillers of ethanol have been able to carve out privileged positions in our tax code, at the expense of all others.
A further political problem is the club of regulation used to extort money from net producers for political purposes--and to enshrine entrenched interests at the expense of creative newcomers.
The health of the system requires that each person has the ability to maximize their own potential. Our failed public schools, the tragedy of the cities, is a huge threat.
If we understood these truths, we all would seek radical reform of education, a complete levelling of the playing field with regard to the tax code, a proper, limited role for regulation, and a renewed sense of the foundation of American exceptionalism.
Although we will not reach the ideal, I am optimistic. We will stumble through; the strengths of the system and the ingenuity of the people should not be underestimated.
I must disagree with that conclusion.
We've lived under a "State of Emergency" and fraudulent "voluntary" socialism since the 1930s.
We will not "stumble through" in ignorance of law.
The magnitude of thievery and slavery imposed via these "expedient" laws is astounding.
The Socialist / Usurer alliance "rules" America, and takes a hefty "skim", making enumerated Americans "part-time" slaves. Part time or full time, it's still slavery and theft by government.
Do not believe me - go read their OWN WORDS.
Perhaps this parable will help explain the nature and destiny of American government:
Quote:
In the mythical kingdom of Yew Ess Aye, where everyone was a king without subjects, it was noted that weak individuals were liable to be attacked by marauders.
This intolerable situation was remedied by a solemn alliance between the kings of the land. They pledged to come to the aid of their neighbors, whose person or property was under attack.
This turned out to be unworkable and unprofitable. Each king was involved with his own business, chores and tasks. He didn't have the time necessary for rushing to the aid of his neighbors. Worse, by leaving his own domain unguarded, he might suffer loss of his own prosperity or injury to his own family and chattels.
The solution - hire "protection".
A subset of kings offered their services, for a fee, and offered their terms and guarantees for good behavior.
This seemed to be a reasonable solution. The Protectors offered to "help" secure (*not guarantee) the rights of the protected parties. Among those rights were life, liberty and absolute ownership. They pledged to submit (surrender sovereignty) to the limitations of the compact, wherein it was explicitly stated that the people's rights and powers (i.e., private property rights) were not to be violated without either securing a superior right or by consent of the protected.
The kings gave passive consent (sufferance) to the compact, and those who set up business as "Protection, Inc." began to construct their guidelines and processes for "helping".
Unfortunately, over time, the "Protectors" lured the kings to "join up" for access to "benefits" of membership. Slowly but surely, the original mind set of servant protectors for the sovereign people was modified into the sovereign protectors of the subject people.
Suddenly, it was asserted that "membership" was a right, not a privilege. And that any restraint on the delegated powers of the "Protection" was not to be tolerated. In fact, all fiscal and moral responsibility was excised from the collective operation of the system. The Collective was superior to the individual. The majority could and did take away the property and liberty of the minority. The needs of the many superseded the rights of the individual.
The descendants of kings, ignorant of their heritage, stood mute, in terror, as their once peaceful and bountiful land was beset by marauders, pirates, plunderers, parasites, and usurers. Their land, labor and lives were forfeit to the "new" kings, who ruled by fraudulent consent.
One could not oppose the "new" kings of the Collective State, for it had carefully concocted a complex set of rules that prevented any meaningful correction. There was no punishment for the wicked. There was no refuge for the oppressed.
Thus ended the noble experiment in "self government" by sovereigns.
You're disagreeing that the government of these United States of America is a Democratic Republic?
I know the law, I know how we got to where we are today. Social programs, as I said before, stabilize the country in order for business to grow. You still hear it today "the President has to create a stable environment for business." No one wants to start a business in a country where criminals are robbing places to try and feed their families. The more people are pacified, the easier it is to start and run a successful business. This is the whole principal behind social security, medicare, food stamps, etc.
Thats not socialism, its social programs to ensure capitalism.
1. A Republican form of government is not the people who decide what goes on.
The United States has a Democratic Republic form of government. If we were completely Democratic, then yes, the people would decide the issues and rule themselves. If we were a Republic, then officials of the people would decide issues for us. In our system, we elect the officials that make the decisions for us.
2. The United States was changed into a socialist democracy.
We aren't socialist, and the members of the "greatest generation" decided that some government assistance for the poorest Americans was good for business. This kept crime rates low, and made for a better climate for business. We could go back to where people lived in dank, dark slums like they did in NYC and other parts of the country when we had no social programs, or we can continue with the path that kept us the greatest super power on the planet for years.
3. The United States has slowly changed into a theocratic fascist government, that only serves the military industrial complex.
Since people were "fat dumb and happy" from the social programs, it allowed government entities who were backed by companies making money from endless military expansion to increase the debt to increase the corporations and individuals personal wealth. Eisenhower warned against this, so don't call him a socialist or a liberal. We have a military that costs at least 4 times what the rest of the world spends on their military combined, and at least half of the world are our allies, and that means we really spend about 8 times what the rest of the world that aren't our allies spend. We spend 8 times what China does alone, our only possible real advisory. Yet we continue going deeper and deeper into debt to continue the military expansion, continue growing those companies that make money from it, while we argue about money that really amounts to nothing of our budget. Facism is defined as authoritative government that is closely tied to the industrial base of the country. Thats what we have today, and most of the country is to stupid to realize that the arguments of food stamps, socialism, and other things are simply straw men problems. Liberals are left fighting for things that shouldn't be fought over, which allows them no time to focus on the real problems, and conservatives have been tricked into believing that the social programs that amount to nothing of the deficit (those that people don't like anyway) are really the problem. Conservatives support medicare and social security, which make up most of what are called "entitlements", and argue over food stamps and welfare which make up nothing of the deficit.
The OP should really take some time to analyze the budget, and compare what we spend on things to the rest of the world. You've been tricked, along with most everyone else. I don't like big government, I like tax cuts. I think we could get by on far less than what we spend now, but I get labeled a liberal by some because I know that the fish that needs frying, is the ones that no one talks about.
Republics are individual based.
Democracies are collective based.
Republics, an individual has the same voice as the collective.
in a Democracy, the collective have more voice than any individual.
Republics are individual based.
Democracies are collective based.
Republics, an individual has the same voice as the collective.
in a Democracy, the collective have more voice than any individual.
Democratic Republic is defined as a country where free and fair elections are held in a democratic way, to elect a representative body to rule the land, with no monarch.
[] USA was unique because of its republican form of government (people were sovereigns)
[] USA was infiltrated and slowly transformed into a democracy
[] USA was further infiltrated and transformed into a socialist democracy, via consent, obtained by fraud (via FICA)
[] USA was bankrupted by usurers, reorganized to prosecute the bankruptcy against the people
[] USA has been "ruled" by the usurer / collectivist alliance for generations
[] USA is about to enter a terminal collapse, due in part to an impossible to repay public debt, an interest burden that is ever rising, the drain of deficit spending, widespread rebellion against the imminent increase in tax burdens, restrictions on liberty, and unWar costs.
[] The aftermath, if nothing changes, will be the People's Democratic Socialist Republic of America, absent that "pesky" U.S. Constitution.
Senate Report 93-549
War and Emergency Powers Acts
"A majority of the people of the United States have lived all of their lives under emergency rule. For 40 years (1933-1973), freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by states of national emergency."
Most Americans have lived their entire lives under EMERGENCY RULES that abridge FREEDOMS guaranteed by the USCON... (Yes, they TOOK AWAY our FREEDOMS, and have the arrogance to invade Asian nations to "preserve Freedom"!).
Frankly, I have no expectation that the indoctrinated millions will suddenly get "religion" and study law. Nor will they suddenly realize that socialism is their worst enemy - or should I reserve "worst" for usury?
The recipient class will fight to the bitter end to retain their benefits, regardless of the dread consequences to the nation.
The donor class will be slowly ground down, and collapse under the load.
Even the "rich" will be sorely pressed, for they won't fare any better regardless of their accumulation of money tokens.
In short, we're going to face a protracted period of chaos, rioting, shortages, deprivation, and suffering.
Failure to plan is planning to fail.
So the "Wise Ants" will accumulate a store of supplies to ride out the worst of the crisis.
Hopefully, the survivors will not make the mistake of surrendering their birthright of sovereignty, freedom and independence, for the lies of collectivists and usurers. But I wouldn't rely on wisdom winning the day.
It's going to be bad, folks. And it will get worse.
OR
Things might actually be improved, socialism abolished, the burdens on the productive removed, and the rewards to the non-productive ended. The Federal government might be scaled back by 93%, as would taxes. The national debt would be abolished, on the grounds of fraud. No recipient of public funds could vote for at least two years (beggars can't be choosers). Limited liability would be abolished (no more immunity for corporations, or investors). No contract for usury shall be enforced in any court.
All partisan politicking and government meddling would be removed from the private sector.
Instead of "making money", folks will build prosperity - the old fashioned way: produce, trade, and enjoy surplus usable goods and services. Productive people and businesses create private money with which to purchase that which they make, and are no longer trapped by "money madness" nor need access to "credit" from the usurer.
To save on energy and increase arable land, suburban sprawl would end. People would settle in more concentrated high population density developments, and have access to energy efficient, frugal electric traction rail mass transit.
With unfettered productivity, America rebounds, building ever greater prosperity.
Frankly, I don't see America averting catastrophe, so I'd not expect recovery any time soon. I am a cynical pragmatist.
But I had to make the effort to get this "out there".
It's now up to you to survive, thrive or die.
The United States is no longer a democracy or a republic. It's a plutocracy, the wealthiest people and corporations now set government policies and provide money to politicians to implement those policies. It's gotten so obvious that now rich people themselves are running for office instead of employing politicians.
Originally Posted by marcopolo
The American system, resting on the twin pillars of freedom and capitalism, is the most productive organizing prinicpal ever dscovered in all of human history. The poorest among us live better than the kings of 300 years ago.
The advances in living standards that we have made from say, 1970 to 2010 or 1930 to 1970 or 1890 to 1930 paint a picture of unimaginable progress.
The keys to this progress have been that in America, people are more free to unlock the highest fraction of their own potential than anywhere else on Earth. And capitalism, in its pure form, embodies an ehtical system in which every transaction produces two winners and no losers. You want the groceries more than you want the money in your pocket; the grocer prefers the money to the goods. At the checkout counter, you both win. The grocer competes against all other grocers, knowing he must deliver maximum value per dollar to win your business. You are free to vote with your wallet as you see fit.
Here are the real threats to the system and to our prosperity:
There is necessarily a disparity in outcomes as the work ethic, native abilities, and devotion to improving one's value to the rest of society vary among individuals. Pressure to equalize outcomes results in drag on the potential returns on self-improvement as net producers are taxed to support net consumers. Although our poor are in better shape than 90% of all people who have ever been born, envy of those who create fabulous wealth is always an issue.
The political system has bastardized capitalism by selling favors to narrow interests. The owners of NASCAR racetracks and the importers of rum and the distillers of ethanol have been able to carve out privileged positions in our tax code, at the expense of all others.
A further political problem is the club of regulation used to extort money from net producers for political purposes--and to enshrine entrenched interests at the expense of creative newcomers.
The health of the system requires that each person has the ability to maximize their own potential. Our failed public schools, the tragedy of the cities, is a huge threat.
If we understood these truths, we all would seek radical reform of education, a complete levelling of the playing field with regard to the tax code, a proper, limited role for regulation, and a renewed sense of the foundation of American exceptionalism.
Although we will not reach the ideal, I am optimistic. We will stumble through; the strengths of the system and the ingenuity of the people should not be underestimated.
Your take on capitalism is a bastardization and not even true. in short, it's hypocritical. your post is misleading and deceiving. a lot of what you've stated has nothing to do with capitalism. perhaps you should get an education before sounding off so arrogantly and a know it all.
this is actually a case of the haves protecting their interests of gain first. that is essentially pure capitalism.
what many people don't understand is that capitalism and the idea of a democracy are a bit contradictory. they can work, more or less, if coupled with other policies that offset the rapacious nature of capitalism.
You're disagreeing that the government of these United States of America is a Democratic Republic?
I know the law...
Read Art.4, Sec.4, USCON.
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion;....
[United States Constitution, Article 4, Section 4]
It's a common mistake to assume "republic" = "republican form".
REPUBLIC - A commonwealth; That form of government in which the administration of affairs is open to all the citizens. In another sense, it signifies the state, independent of its form of government.
Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P. 1302
A republic is not synonymous with a republican form of government.
The People's Republic of China is a republic but not a republican form.
GOVERNMENT (Republican Form of Government)- One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people,... directly... - - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P. 695
DEMOCRACY - That form of government in which the sovereign power resides in and is exercised by the whole body of free citizens directly or indirectly through a system of representation, as distinguished from monarchy, aristocracy, or oligarchy."
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P. 432
The key distinguishing feature between a republican and democratic form is sovereignty.
In the republican form, the PEOPLE individually are sovereign and directly exercise that power.
In the democratic form, the "whole body of citizens" indirectly exercise it via representation. But in truth, democratic majorities override the individual, so no individual is sovereign.
Still need more proof?
In America, however, the case is widely different. Our government is founded upon compact. Sovereignty was, and is, in the people.
[ Glass vs The Sloop Betsey, 3 Dall 6 (1794)]
"It will be admitted on all hands that with the exception of the powers granted to the states and the federal government, through the Constitutions, the people of the several states are unconditionally sovereign within their respective states."
Ohio L. Ins. & T. Co. v. Debolt, 16 How. 416, 14 L.Ed. 997
And citizens are NOT sovereigns.
"... the term 'citizen,' in the United States, is analogous to the term "subject" in the common law; the change of phrase has resulted from the change in government. ... he who before was a "subject of the King" is now a citizen of the State."
State v. Manuel, 20 N.C. 144 (1838)
SUBJECT - One that owes allegiance to a sovereign and is governed by his laws.
...Men in free governments are subjects as well as citizens; as citizens they enjoy rights and franchises; as subjects they are bound to obey the laws. The term is little used, in this sense, in countries enjoying a republican form of government.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1425
Feel free to ask "your" public servant how and when American people (who were endowed with the birthright to be sovereign) became subject U.S. citizens at birth? But do not be surprised when they do not answer.
Democratic Republic is defined as a country where free and fair elections are held in a democratic way, to elect a representative body to rule the land, with no monarch.
This is what the United States has.
No, this is what it has become, thanks to 77 years of "emergency" rule.
It took a lot of reading to uncover the facts (in plain sight, no less).
But you have to realize the core concept is SOVEREIGNTY.
SOVEREIGN - "...Having undisputed right to make decisions and act accordingly".
New Webster's Dictionary And Thesaurus, p. 950.
SOVEREIGN - A person, body or state in which independent and supreme authority is vested...
Black's Law Dictionary Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1395.
SOVEREIGNTY - ...By "Sovereignty", in its largest sense is meant supreme, absolute, uncontrollable power, the absolute right to govern.
Black's Law Dictionary Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1396.
WHERE can an individual exercise independent and supreme authority, if, according to the "republican form of government" the people are sovereign?
PRIVATE PROPERTY.
Only upon your private property, absolutely owned, can you exercise supreme, absolute power. Everywhere else, one needs permission of the landlord.
Since 1935, Americans have surrendered their birthright to absolutely own, via enrollment into FICA.
That is how the "servant government" became our masters.
By consent.
And the propaganda ministry has successfully reprogrammed millions to "BELIEVE" the biggest lie ever - and forget that our forefathers gave us a "republican form of government".
By the way, there is only one nation on this planet, whose government ADMITS that the people are sovereign.
the truth?
...what many people don't understand is that capitalism and the idea of a democracy are a bit contradictory.
Capitalism = private ownership
Democracy = not an American form of government
What you don't understand about America is due to pervasive reprogramming by the world's greatest propaganda ministry.
As posted previously, the "republican form" is not a democratic form. It is where the people are individually sovereign, and SERVED by government.
The government is not the rulers of the people, as in a democracy.
However, those who volunteer to serve, drop in status (become subjects), and are obligated to perform civic duties.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
