It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by vehemes terra eternus
Hey Walter, sorry to hear those scumbags are pulling at your wings. Your video and your story are simply incredible.
Peace
Originally posted by BennyHill
Here is my biggest problem with this video, I refuse to buy into anything that comes from someone who looks like John Wayne Gacy. My gut tells me there is a bit of truth, but not much more.
Originally posted by Quest
Go take some accounting courses and you'll see there is no conspiracy here. Those funds cover long-term liabilities like state pensions, lotteries, medical programs, and other things.
For example if the state has 10,000 workers who are set to go about 20 years between retirement and death, and (for simplicity) they each get $30,000 a year then the state needs AT LEAST six BILLION in funds to cover them. This doesn't even include things like money for lotteries or other long-term programs.
Then consider that the states are behind the games. At some point they started this program and the first people to retire immediately gobbled up everyone's initial pay in.
If you release the funds to stem taxes then you have shortfalls a few years down the line.
Social security has the problem that the trillions of dollars it has won't cover the long-term. The abilities of the states to stay above water because of investing in the markets is one reason the Republicans wanted to privatize.
The only way someone will see a conspiracy in these PUBLIC and HEAVILY USED AND REVIEWED documents is if they have virtually no understanding of accounting.
Again: CAFR's show yearly fiscal statements with funds but funds cover all liabilities, not just those of that fiscal year.
The most simple way to put this is that those funds are owed back to the people and are and will be paid back to the people. This is why you don't see pension liabilities on the expense for 2010 on the CAFR2008.
Originally posted by mmiichael
Originally posted by Quest
Go take some accounting courses and you'll see there is no conspiracy here. Those funds cover long-term liabilities like state pensions, lotteries, medical programs, and other things.
For example if the state has 10,000 workers who are set to go about 20 years between retirement and death, and (for simplicity) they each get $30,000 a year then the state needs AT LEAST six BILLION in funds to cover them. This doesn't even include things like money for lotteries or other long-term programs.
Then consider that the states are behind the games. At some point they started this program and the first people to retire immediately gobbled up everyone's initial pay in.
If you release the funds to stem taxes then you have shortfalls a few years down the line.
Social security has the problem that the trillions of dollars it has won't cover the long-term. The abilities of the states to stay above water because of investing in the markets is one reason the Republicans wanted to privatize.
The only way someone will see a conspiracy in these PUBLIC and HEAVILY USED AND REVIEWED documents is if they have virtually no understanding of accounting.
Again: CAFR's show yearly fiscal statements with funds but funds cover all liabilities, not just those of that fiscal year.
The most simple way to put this is that those funds are owed back to the people and are and will be paid back to the people. This is why you don't see pension liabilities on the expense for 2010 on the CAFR2008.
Thanks.
This was posted Feb 27th, and I lost in the rush to scream blue murder uncovering the biggest conspiracy scam ever.
Interesting to see the dynamics.
Big question is how down are their investments now.
Mike F
Originally posted by Averysmallfoxx
Originally posted by mmiichael
Originally posted by Quest
... Those funds cover long-term liabilities like state pensions, lotteries, medical programs, and other things.
... CAFR's show yearly fiscal statements with funds but funds cover all liabilities, not just those of that fiscal year.
The most simple way to put this is that those funds are owed back to the people and are and will be paid back to the people. This is why you don't see pension liabilities on the expense for 2010 on the CAFR2008.
This was posted Feb 27th, and I lost in the rush to scream blue murder uncovering the biggest conspiracy scam ever.
Interesting to see the dynamics.
Big question is how down are their investments now.
MMichael just so you know if you read a bit after he posted this you will see that he did NOT at the time he explained this watch the movie, He had read what one gentleman on here summarised the movie to suggest and while no offense is meant to be directed torward the gentleman whom summarized, it wasn't very detail oriented and the thing about this scenario is all the details matter.
Originally posted by Rollinster
reply to post by liveandlearn
Yeah, it is obvious yet look how acceptable it is to all of us.
They don't even have to try and hide what they are doing anymore. Simply package it in a 10,000 page bill and no one will bother reviewing it.
We are so conditioned....
Originally posted by mmiichael
So how many are in on it and on the take?
I know the conspiratorial mind gravitates to cigar smoking fat guys in suits around a board room table chortling as they think up news way to bilk the common man.
But I expect it's thousands of nondescript accountants, working towards modest pensions, who know where the money is allocated and why?
Mike F
"The few who understand the system, will either be 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, the great body
of the people mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous
advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens
without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system
is inimical to their interests."
Quote by:
John Sherman
Protege of the Rothschild banking family
Date: June 25, 1863
Source: in a letter sent to New York bankers, Morton, and Gould, in support of the then proposed National Banking Act.
They don't even have to try and hide what they are doing anymore.