"Tea Party GOP Drives US Towards Catastrophic Default, World Panic"

I think what people forget is that Congress is run by a bunch of children. The only difference is that children would probably do a better job.

Why does faith matter in a globalised world?
Tony Blair speaking at the launch of the Faith Foundation

" You cannot understand the modern world unless you understand the importance of religious faith. Faith motivates, galvanises, organises and integrates millions upon millions of people."

Faith and Globalisation Initiative
...What roles have faith traditions and communities had, what roles do they currently have, and what roles will they have in the future in shaping these ongoing globalising processes? In short, how does it matter for our global future that we intelligently understand the relationship between faith and globalisation?

Originally posted by haarvik
Well, quite frankly, they will get what they want. Why? Because the American populace is way to complacent and too busy fighting over stupid crap like welfare, SS and healthcare

Agree. With a caveat...the pressure to change must come from OUTSIDE politics....

Contracts are designed to protect parties and serve as a guideline as to the nature of the agreement

First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Daly (1969)

Defendant Jerome Daly opposed the bank's foreclosure on his $14,000 home mortgage loan on the ground that there was no consideration for the loan. "Consideration" ("the thing exchanged") is an essential element of a contract. Daly, an attorney representing himself, argued that the bank had put up no real money for his loan....

To everyone's surprise, Morgan admitted that the bank routinely created money "out of thin air" for its loans, and that this was standard banking practice. "It sounds like fraud to me," intoned Presiding Justice Martin Mahoney amid nods from the jurors. In his court memorandum, Justice Mahoney stated:

Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, . . . did create the entire $14,000.00 in money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note.

The court rejected the bank's claim for foreclosure, and the defendant kept his house.

This decision, which is legally sound, has the effect of declaring all private mortgages on real and personal property, and all U.S. and State bonds held by the Federal Reserve, National and State banks to be null and void. This amounts to an emancipation of this Nation from personal, national and state debt purportedly owed to this banking system. Every American owes it to himself . . . to study this decision very carefully . . . for upon it hangs the question of freedom or slavery.

[THE REASON WHY IT DID NOT END THERE]

Justice Mahoney, who was not dependent on campaign financing or hamstrung by precedent, went so far as to threaten to prosecute and expose the bank. He died less than six months after the trial, in a mysterious accident that appeared to involve poisoning.4 Since that time, a number of defendants have attempted to avoid loan defaults using the defense Daly raised; but they have met with only limited success. As one judge said off the record:

If I let you do that – you and everyone else – it would bring the whole system down. . . . I cannot let you go behind the bar of the bank. . . . We are not going behind that curtain!

The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.

This is a variant expression of a sentiment which is often attributed to Tocqueville or Alexander Fraser Tytler, but the earliest known occurrence is as an unsourced attribution to Tytler in "This is the Hard Core of Freedom" by Elmer T. Peterson in The Daily Oklahoman (9 December 1951):

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy."

Variant: The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money.

And now, for some real history and what people thought of the great democratic experiment:

Originally posted by haarvik
reply to post by smallpeeps

 

I agree. But again you can't get people to band together because they are too busy fighting over how to distribute the wealth than they are about making sure that this great nation is here for our children and grandchildren. We make too much money, and pay too much in taxes, for this nation to be in debt like it is. It is ridiculous.

Originally posted by crimvelvet
reply to post by Janky Red

 

Contracts are designed to protect parties and serve as a guideline as to the nature of the agreement

Contracts in which banks provide NO "Consideration" - the thing exchanged, have ALREADY been found to be FRAUD in a court of law in the USA.

(97% of the US money supply is bank loans!)
*****US Banks Operating Without Reserve Requirements***** |

First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Daly (1969)

Defendant Jerome Daly opposed the bank's foreclosure on his $14,000 home mortgage loan on the ground that there was no consideration for the loan. "Consideration" ("the thing exchanged") is an essential element of a contract. Daly, an attorney representing himself, argued that the bank had put up no real money for his loan....

To everyone's surprise, Morgan admitted that the bank routinely created money "out of thin air" for its loans, and that this was standard banking practice. "It sounds like fraud to me," intoned Presiding Justice Martin Mahoney amid nods from the jurors. In his court memorandum, Justice Mahoney stated:

Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, . . . did create the entire $14,000.00 in money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note.

The court rejected the bank's claim for foreclosure, and the defendant kept his house.

This decision, which is legally sound, has the effect of declaring all private mortgages on real and personal property, and all U.S. and State bonds held by the Federal Reserve, National and State banks to be null and void. This amounts to an emancipation of this Nation from personal, national and state debt purportedly owed to this banking system. Every American owes it to himself . . . to study this decision very carefully . . . for upon it hangs the question of freedom or slavery.

[THE REASON WHY IT DID NOT END THERE]

Justice Mahoney, who was not dependent on campaign financing or hamstrung by precedent, went so far as to threaten to prosecute and expose the bank. He died less than six months after the trial, in a mysterious accident that appeared to involve poisoning.4 Since that time, a number of defendants have attempted to avoid loan defaults using the defense Daly raised; but they have met with only limited success. As one judge said off the record:

If I let you do that – you and everyone else – it would bring the whole system down. . . . I cannot let you go behind the bar of the bank. . . . We are not going behind that curtain!