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 dakota1s2
reply to post by inforeal
The "tea party" is exactly democratic.
They are just a bunch of average people,
mostly middle america group who see this country headed in the wrong direction. They voted, democratically, to change that direction.
What about all of the groups that support your leftist agenda. Example Media Matters, anything to do with George Soros and all of his groups that throw money, rallying the troups trying to change our country.
Why is it when you lefties don't agree with people it always comes to name bashing and whinning about being un-american.
What's really bad for our country is the ignorant who blindly follow the mind mindset of Soros, Obama, Reid and Pelosi
What's really bad for our country is the ignorant who blindly follow the mind mindset of Soros, Obama, Reid and Pelosi At least those of us who "blindly follow" that group know what the hell their policies and stances amount to. You clearly haven't the first goddamned clue what you were getting into.
Originally posted by NuroSlam
Originally posted by Sunlionspirit
it's called DIRECT DEMOCRACY on each level of society with possibility to dismiss/relieve the choosen politicians immediatly when not doing what they were voted for in office ....
Read about ERNEST MANDEL, RIP, he was one of the most intelligent actual economists, Belgian professor, he has LOTS of writings about neo-capitalism and neo-liberalism !!! Very very interesting stuff !
just for info : www.amazon.com...
These problems would not exist if it were not for the corporations paying for the violence and fear of government control.
Direct Democracy is the most evil forms of governance ever thought of. 2 men and 1 woman vote on having sex, guess who loses?edit on 31-7-2011 by NuroSlam because: (no reason given)
Here is the scenario:
These 85 or so congress people voted in office in 2010 by Tea party support are not remotely the majority of the American people, yet they are using their newly acquired power to threaten the American system of government with default if they don’t get there way. In this scenario it is the debt ceiling that they are using to do their blackmail.
Originally posted by Bramble Iceshimmer
The biggest problem with America is the so called middle class who for the last forty years or so though they could be players at the big boys table. They started flipping houses and drove that market beyond reasonable and lined up to give banks and corporations their money to invest in stock market. The nineties hit and everyone was going to get rich on the dot com craze and while a few a the top of the pyramid made boatloads of money a lot lost their shirt. Even today there are ads and infomercials for some get rich scheme to separate you from your money.
A lot with dollar signs in their eyes dreaming of vacations, fast cars and big houses throwing away any savings, their future and now needing social programs intended for the elderly, poor and disabled.
Now the Democrats want to raise taxes and spend more and more. As some have pointed out the previous congresses and administrations have put the car in the ditch. The current administration is gunning the accelerator hoping something will change if they try once more. Instead they are digging the wheels in and the frame is sitting on the ground. I think the best analogy for the tea party is they want to cut our loses, bury the car and walk.edit on 7/31/2011 by Bramble Iceshimmer because: (no reason given)
They were voted in by a majority of the voting populace and they never abused the system like the Republicans are doing now. That’s the point of my OP.
They NEVER threatened to destabilize the economic system if they didn’t get their way.
....75% of the Mexican population lived in poverty in 2001 compared to 49% in 1981, before Mexico underwent reforms to pave the way for NAFTA.... Corn is the primary crop in Mexico, but post-NAFTA farmers received 70% less for their harvests because [of] U.S. corn imports...
..NAFTA created only 700,000 manufacturing jobs in Mexico - far too few to absorb the 2 million displaced
farmers and the 130,000 jobs lost in domestic manufacturing...
With no employment prospects and worsening living conditions, many farmers believe their only option to earn a living is to attempt the perilous crossing into the United States.
Corporate Rights over People and the Environment
One of the most controversial aspects of NAFTA is found in Chapter 11 - its investor rights chapter. Under Chapter 11, foreign investors who believe their profits are being harmed by environmental or public health regulations can sue governments for cash damages within a secretive trade tribunal system. This occurred when Mexico was sued by the U.S. Metalclad Corporation, a waste-disposal company. Metalclad accused the Mexican government of violating Chapter 11 of NAFTA when the state of San Luis Potosi refused permission to re-open a waste disposal facility. The State Governor ordered the site closed down after a geological audit showed the facility would
contaminate the local water supply.... SIERRA CLUB
SEC. 404. COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS.
Nothing in this Act (or an amendment made by this Act) shall be construed in a manner inconsistent with the agreement establishing the World Trade Organization or any other treaty or international agreement to which the United States is a party.
www.fda.gov...
www.cfsan.fda.gov...
The harmonization of laws, regulations and standards between and among trading partners requires intense, complex, time-consuming negotiations by CFSAN officials. Harmonization must simultaneously facilitate international trade and promote mutual understanding, while protecting national interests and establish a basis to resolve food issues on sound scientific evidence in an objective atmosphere. Failure to reach a consistent, harmonized set of laws, regulations and standards within the freetrade agreements and the World Trade Organization Agreements can result in considerable economic repercussions....
...Two Harvard Business School professors were involved early on - John Davis and Ray Goldberg. They teamed with Russian economist, Wassily Leontief, got Rockefeller and Ford Foundation funding, and initiated a four-decade revolution to dominate the food industry. It was based on "vertical integration" of the kind Congress outlawed when giant conglomerates or trusts like Standard Oil used them to monopolize entire sectors of key industries and crush competition. www.smirkingchimp.com...
...Then, in spring 2008, prices just as mysteriously fell back to their previous level. Jean Ziegler, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, calls it “a silent mass murder”, entirely due to “man-made actions.” Through the 1990s, Goldman Sachs and others lobbied hard and the regulations [controlling agricultural futures contracts] were abolished. Suddenly, these contracts were turned into “derivatives” that could be bought and sold among traders who had nothing to do with agriculture. A market in “food speculation” was born. The speculators drove the price through the roof....” www.independent.co.uk...
...Today three companies, Archer Daniels Midland, Cargill, and Bunge control the world’s grain trade. Chemical giant Monsanto controls three-fifths of seed production. Unsurprisingly, in the last quarter of 2007, even as the world food crisis was breaking, Archer Daniels Midland’s profits jumped 20%, Monsanto 45%, and Cargill 60%. Recent speculation with food commodities has created another dangerous “boom.” After buying up grains and grain futures, traders are hoarding, withholding stocks and further inflating prices....” www.globalissues.org...
Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
reply to post by citizen6511
The teaparty as the brownshirts? Are you serious? Please do some real research on the Wiemar Republic and the brownshirts before making such a crazy claim.
They were voted in by a majority of the voting populace and they never abused the system like the Republicans are doing now. That’s the point of my OP.
They NEVER threatened to destabilize the economic system if they didn’t get their way.
..because the CDSs were unregulated—and this is because of a specific law back in the year 2000 called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act,
...So you could sell as much CDS protection as you wanted, but you didn’t have to actually post any capital when you did it....
...a lot of these contracts, these CDS contracts, are like gambling, in the sense that—normally when you buy an insurance policy, you’re buying a policy on a house that you actually own. With these CDS contracts, you could actually bet on somebody else’s mortgage.... www.democracynow.org...
Before Tony Blair became British Prime Minister in May 1997, he was Chairman of the Fabian Society...
...the Rhodes Scholarship Program at Oxford to indoctrinate promising young graduates for the purpose, and also establish a secret society for leading business and banking leaders around the world who would work for the City to bring in their Socialist world government.
Rothschild appointed Lord Alfred Milner to implement the plan.
At first the society was called Milner's Kindergarten, then in 1909 it came to be called The RoundTable.
It was to work closely with the London School of Economics founded in 1894 by Fabian Socialist leader Sidney Webb (Lord Passfield).
Today former Rhodes Scholars (such as Bill Clinton), Fabian Business Round Table members, and graduates from the London School of Economics (the primary Fabian Socialist training school in the world) dominate the global banking, business and political systems in every country...
The British Fabian Society plan to takeover the world by the City of London financial community was first published in a book entitled "All These Things" by a New Zealand author and journalist, A. N. Field....
The"peasants" would still be allowed to own their own clothes, and small assets like furniture, cars and boats etc., but the main assets of each country would be owned by their multi-national corporations and banks. www.halisa-eu.net...
[v]The McFadden Act of 1927 or Amendment to the National Banking Laws and the Federal Reserve Act (P.L. 69-639, 44 STAT. 1224): Prohibited interstate banking.
[Clinton's Law: Negating above:]
Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 (P.L. 103-328, 108 STAT. 2338).
Permits bank holding companies to acquire banks in any state one year Beginning June 1, 1997, allows interstate mergers.
The Glass-Steagall Act or Banking Act of 1933 (P.L. 73-66, 48 STAT. 162): Separated commercial banking from investment banking, establishing them as separate lines of commerce.
Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (P.L. 84-511, 70 STAT. 133): Prohibited bank holding companies headquartered in one state from acquiring a bank in another state.
[Clinton's Law: Negating both of the above laws:]
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (P.L. 106-102, 113 STAT 1338)
(pdf version from Government Printing Office.)
Repeals last vestiges of the Glass Steagall Act of 1933. Modifies portions of the Bank Holding Company Act to allow affiliations between banks and insurance underwriters. Law creates a new financial holding company authorized to engage in: underwriting and selling insurance and securities, conducting both commercial and merchant banking, investing in and developing real estate and other "complimentary activities."
Allows national banks to underwrite municipal bonds.
Amends the Community Reinvestment Act to require that financial holding companies can not be formed before their insured depository institutions receive and maintain a satisfactory CRA rating.
Makes significant changes in the operation of the Federal Home Loan Bank System, easing membership requirements and loosening restrictions on the use of FHLB funds.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (P.L. 102-242, 105 STAT. 2236).
Also known as FDICIA. FDICIA greatly increased the powers and authority of the FDIC. Major provisions recapitalized the Bank Insurance Fund and allowed the FDIC to strengthen the fund by borrowing from the Treasury.
The act mandated a least-cost resolution method and prompt resolution approach to problem and failing banks and ordered the creation of a risk-based deposit insurance assessment scheme. Brokered deposits and the solicitation of deposits were restricted, as were the non-bank activities of insured state banks. FDICIA created new supervisory and regulatory examination standards and put forth new capital requirements for banks. It also expanded prohibitions against insider activities and created new Truth in Savings provisions.
[TRANSLATION: Allowed big banks to gobble up smaller banks more easily.]
Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-550, 106 STAT. 3672).
RTC Completion Act (P.L. 103-204, 107 STAT. 2369):
implement provisions designed to improve the agency's record in providing business opportunities to minorities and women.. Expands the existing affordable housing programs of the RTC and the FDIC by broadening the potential affordable housing stock of the two agencies.
Increases the statute of limitations on RTC civil lawsuits. In cases in which the statute of limitations has expired, claims can be revived for fraud and intentional misconduct resulting in unjust enrichment or substantial loss to the thrift.
Important Banking Legislation
Originally posted by inforeal
reply to post by crimvelvet
The problem with your post is that in the cases you raise it wasn’t democrats that did these things IT WAS THE US GOVERNMENT—democrats and republicans!
You need to understand that republican and democratic governments in the US have ALWAYS oppressed third world countries. That is one of the only things the democrats and GOP agree on.
Clinton, the democrat starved the Iraqi children with sanctions; Bush did and would do the same thing, in-fact his war ended up doing worst.
So your attempt to say ONLY democratic administrations did harm to other countries is ridiculous.
So your attempt to say ONLY democratic administrations did harm to other countries is ridiculous.
..With World War II, America saw its agricultural system intentionally subjected to political policies that radically transformed it...
This transformation was the result of organized plans developed by a group of highly powerful -- though unelected -- financial and industrial executives who wanted to drastically change agricultural practices in the US to better serve their collective corporate financial agenda. This group, called the Committee for Economic Development, was officially established in 1942 as a sister organization to the Council on Foreign Relations...
Some of the report's authors would go on to work in government to implement CED's policy recommendations....
CED members were influential in business, government, and agricultural colleges, and their outlook shaped both governmental policies and what farmers were taught....
The current level of economic concentration we see today is the result of careful strategic planning.
www.opednews.com...