We Were Warned: Freedom To Chains - Paul Harvey

[postman]

I agree with keeping an eye on Virginia. The red flag issue has enough intensity to get people to mobilize. Here in my state of NY, a red flag seizure was about to take place against an army veteran in Putnam County for possessing a 30 round magazine. He sent out a message on social media and there were roughly 50-60 armed people on their way to defend him. The situation had a peaceful resolution, but the fact that people started to rally/organize was interesting to see.


R.I.P. Paul Harvey. I had the pleasure of listening to him live everyday for a few years before he died. He never ceased to inspire.

The Putnam thing was really strange. News reports were released during the event concluding that it was over, and that the suspect hadn't been charged with anything, at the same time as the guy was posting on instagram. 6 hours later the police releases some info about how the suspect is in custody and a long list of charges. Some people who were supposedly at the scene at the time of it taking place took video of the location and there was absolutely nothing going on. Supposedly some supporters that showed up were detained but I've heard nothing of them since. The whole thing almost seemed like some kind of exercise, maybe a readiness test.

 

[postman]

Florida 'Red Flag' Judge Ordered 2,654 to Give Up Guns | The Crime Report

Maryland’s ‘Red Flag’ Law Turns Deadly: Officer Kills Man Who Refused To Turn In Gun

Virginia Sheriff Vows to Fight Red Flag Laws, Deputize and Arm Thousands of Citizens

Trump backs 'red flag' gun laws. What do they actually do? - CNNPolitics



ICYMI: Rubio: It's Time to Act on my Red Flag Bill

Israel accused of planting mysterious spy devices near the White House

Trump the Clueless: Israel is Not Spying on Me - Global Research

Whoops, one of the links were broken but I fixed it now.

 

[thomas00]

Electing Bernie Sanders is not going to magically make politicians wholesome people who are only there to serve.

Might stop some medical bankruptcies...


But yeah, the political system will block his entire agenda if he was elected (probably won't be) so I guess things could become fairly ugly

but at least we don't have Killary in office. I shudder to think what she would have done.

People thought they'd get something different than Hillary with Trump. But they haven't.

The differences between them were minor. She would have let the corporations write laws like Trump has, picked on poor people, privatized whatever wasn't bolted down. Presidents don't really have much say over foreign policy, I think. Maybe some a bit more hawkish than others but that's a cosmetic difference.

The only difference is she had a track record people could castigate her over. Trump didn't at that stage. He does now.

 

[postman]

Might stop some medical bankruptcies...


But yeah, the political system will block his entire agenda if he was elected (probably won't be) so I guess things could become fairly ugly



People thought they'd get something different than Hillary with Trump. But they haven't.

The differences between them were minor. She would have let the corporations write laws like Trump has, picked on poor people, privatized whatever wasn't bolted down. Presidents don't really have much say over foreign policy, I think. Maybe some a bit more hawkish than others but that's a cosmetic difference.

The only difference is she had a track record people could castigate her over. Trump didn't at that stage. He does now.

Legally speaking as the commander in chief the President has the power to end any and all wars with a single order. Trump hasn't been very good, but at least he hasn't been completely hawkish with Russia and Iran and started WW3. At least not yet. You have to give him that at least.

I doubt Bernie would be different from anyone else. He's the one who gutted the Audit the Fed bill, at the very last moment, a total betrayal. The head of financial and monetary power in the USA.
It was disgusting the way he came out and supported Hillary in 2016 as well.

 

[NathanK]

Paul Harvey was the best

 

[yerrag]

Legally speaking as the commander in chief the President has the power to end any and all wars with a single order. Trump hasn't been very good, but at least he hasn't been completely hawkish with Russia and Iran and started WW3. At least not yet. You have to give him that at least.

I doubt Bernie would be different from anyone else. He's the one who gutted the Audit the Fed bill, at the very last moment, a total betrayal. The head of financial and monetary power in the USA.
It was disgusting the way he came out and supported Hillary in 2016 as well.

Bernie Sanders isn't your friend. He loves MMT (modern monetary theory) as it would enable him to finance his socialist pipe dreams the way it financed Argentina by its socialist former presidents. Certainly, MMT requires the cooperation of the biggest pyramid scheme tricksters in the planet - the Federal Reserve. Why audit a partner to his scheme to embezzle?

 

[postman]

Bernie Sanders isn't your friend. He loves MMT (modern monetary theory) as it would enable him to finance his socialist pipe dreams the way it financed Argentina by its socialist former presidents. Certainly, MMT requires the cooperation of the biggest pyramid scheme tricksters in the planet - the Federal Reserve. Why audit a partner to his scheme to embezzle?

What so bad about MMT? I can't imagine of any other system being worse than the current one. It wouldn't require THE Fed, but it would require a central bank. A central bank owned by the government and ran with transparenty is a whole other beast than the privately owned Fed that has almost no oversight or audit. I don't think Bernie would oppose a full audit of the fed because he supports MMT, if anything that's a reason to audit the fed.

 

[yerrag]

What so bad about MMT? I can't imagine of any other system being worse than the current one. It wouldn't require THE Fed, but it would require a central bank. A central bank owned by the government and ran with transparenty is a whole other beast than the privately owned Fed that has almost no oversight or audit. I don't think Bernie would oppose a full audit of the fed because he supports MMT, if anything that's a reason to audit the fed.

Isn't the MMT about printing loads of money that's not backed by anything of physical value to finance government spending to support its programs? Doubling down on the failing idea of Keynesian budget deficit spending?

 

[burtlancast]

A central bank ran by the government would change absolutely nothing, since the government is owned by private interests too.

It's the same people in control, but with different hats.

A solution to the banking crisis would be a return to the gold standard and abolition of paper (fiat) money, but that's a fat chance since those in power will do everything to block it.

 

[postman]

Isn't the MMT about printing loads of money that's not backed by anything of physical value to finance government spending to support its programs? Doubling down on the failing idea of Keynesian budget deficit spending?

That's how it works right now, except a private bank is doing it and lending it to the government at interest. They're also printing and lending money to membership banks, without oversight. MMT wouldn't be doubling it down, it would be reigning it in, and putting the same machine to be used in the interest of the people instead of a secretive banking cartel.

I could see why you would want money bakced with silver instead or whatever, but that comes with its own problems too.

 

[thomas00]

Trump hasn't been very good, but at least he hasn't been completely hawkish with Russia and Iran and started WW3.

His rhetoric around Russia sounded nice, at least when he was a candidate. The US military build up has continued in Eastern Europe though. These things are always bigger than a single President.

And he did threaten to go at it with Iran.

I don't think anybody gets to say no to empire when they are in the drivers seat. Which is more like a passengers seat really.

 

[postman]

A central bank ran by the government would change absolutely nothing, since the government is owned by private interests too.

It's the same people in control, but with different hats.

A solution to the banking crisis would be a return to the gold standard and abolition of paper (fiat) money, but that's a fat chance since those in power will do everything to block it.

Ever heard of the London Gold Fix? These rich families who own the majority of the gold in the world run a cartel, completley openly, setting the price of gold every day.

From wikipedia:

The London Gold Fixing (or Gold Fix)[1] is the setting of the price of gold that takes place via a dedicated conference line. It was formerly held on the premises of Nathan Mayer Rothschild & Sons by the members of The London Gold Market Fixing Ltd.

The benchmark is determined twice each business day of the London bullion market (the exceptions to this being Christmas Eve and New Year's Eve when there is only one fixing in the morning). It is designed to fix a price for settling contracts between members of the London bullion market, but the gold fixing informally provides a recognized rate that is used as a benchmark for pricing the majority of gold products and derivatives throughout the world's markets. The gold fix is conducted in the United States dollar (USD), the Pound sterling (GBP), and the Euro (EUR) daily at 10:30AM and 3PM, London time.

The current participants in the fixing are Barclays, the Bank of China, Bank of Communications, Goldman Sachs, HSBC Bank USA, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, Société Générale, Standard Chartered, ScotiaMocatta (Scotiabank), the Toronto-Dominion Bank, and UBS.[2]

Basing a currency on such an asset that is so controlled and manipulated and in the hands of the very same people who run the current financial system sounds like a horrible idea. I'm not saying that asset-backed money is a bad idea but gold-backed money specifically seems like a terrible idea when you consider what people owns most of the gold, and thus can control the price and create whatever kind of boom and bust cycles as they please.

 

[yerrag]

That's how it works right now, except a private bank is doing it and lending it to the government at interest. They're also printing and lending money to membership banks, without oversight. MMT wouldn't be doubling it down, it would be reigning it in, and putting the same machine to be used in the interest of the people instead of a secretive banking cartel.

I could see why you would want money bakced with silver instead or whatever, but that comes with its own problems too.

@burtlancast got ahead of your answer.

 

[postman]

His rhetoric around Russia sounded nice, at least when he was a candidate. The US military build up has continued in Eastern Europe though. These things are always bigger than a single President.

And he did threaten to go at it with Iran.

I don't think anybody gets to say no to empire when they are in the drivers seat. Which is more like a passengers seat really.

I think building up in Eastern Europe is a good thing, and not contradictory to having good relationship with Russia. Hillary literally said she would declare a no-fly zone over Syria if elected, meaning she would shot down Russian planes if they invaded "her" airspace. Trump did threaten war with Iran and his whole neocon jew cabinet wanted him to pull the trigger, but he didn't, and hopefully he wont do it in the future either.

The president of the United States have a lot of power. Sure, maybe they would try to kill him and his whole family if he tried anything funny, but legally he has the authority to do all kinds fo things. This idea that "the president can't do it it's out of his power", to me that just sounds like a bunch of cope by Obamaheads and Trumptards who haven't studied how the system is set up, and are trying to look for an excuse why these presidents didn't deliver.

 

[yerrag]

Ever heard of the London Gold Fix? These rich families who own the majority of the gold in the world run a cartel, completley openly, setting the price of gold every day.

From wikipedia:



Basing a currency on such an asset that is so controlled and manipulated and in the hands of the very same people who run the current financial system sounds like a horrible idea. I'm not saying that asset-backed money is a bad idea but gold-backed money specifically seems like a terrible idea when you consider what people owns most of the gold, and thus can control the price and create whatever kind of boom and bust cycles as they please.

[/QUOTE]
Anything can be gamed and manipulated. It's not an excuse to use something else that can even be more manipulated. The fiat currency system is worse, and you prefer it? Despite you knowing it is so much more manipulated? It is mickey mouse money.

 

[burtlancast]

As if the political system 150 years ago wasn't as corrupted as the one today.

The only difference is the corruption wasn't as apparent because the world was still in expansion and work still available to anyone. The reason things are so bad today is directly tied to the yesterday political corruption Mr Evers is lauding to the skies.

He's selling nostalgia and empty air, and no solution whatsoever.

 

[postman]

Anything can be gamed and manipulated. It's not an excuse to use something else that can even be more manipulated. The fiat currency system is worse, and you prefer it? Despite you knowing it is so much more manipulated? It is mickey mouse money.

Fiat is not inherently bad, it depends on who controls that fiat. Going to a gold backed system would change nothing as the same people who are in control today would still be in control.

 

[burtlancast]

Ever heard of the London Gold Fix? These rich families who own the majority of the gold in the world run a cartel, completley openly, setting the price of gold every day.

From wikipedia:



Basing a currency on such an asset that is so controlled and manipulated and in the hands of the very same people who run the current financial system sounds like a horrible idea. I'm not saying that asset-backed money is a bad idea but gold-backed money specifically seems like a terrible idea when you consider what people owns most of the gold, and thus can control the price and create whatever kind of boom and bust cycles as they please.

Gold can be mined anytime one wishes. One can certainly hoard it, but there's plenty of gold in the possession of private hands. It can never be totally controlled.

This is not a real problem, and laws can easily be adopted to prevent manipulation by hoarding.

 

[burtlancast]

Fiat is not inherently bad, it depends on who controls that fiat.

It's like saying communism isn't inherently bad, it just depends on who's at the head of the party.

When will people learn ?

 

[yerrag]

Fiat is not inherently bad, it depends on who controls that fiat. Going to a gold backed system would change nothing as the same people who are in control today would still be in control.

What is so inherently good about it?