Sunday, December 23, 2012
Overdose: The Next Financial Crisis – Directed by Martin Borgs
Saturday, November 24, 2012
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
Timothy Geithner Wants No Debt Ceiling
Saturday, November 17, 2012
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
Saturday, October 20, 2012
What it All Means This Election
Remember when you enter the election booth this November, you will be voting for candidate to limit someone else's liberties while they will be voting for a candidate to limit yours. No matter what you are told to believe, there are more choices than two parties. I'll come back to this later.
********
Back during our founding fathers discussions on how to implement a Federal Government, they needed to decide on the role and power scope of that entity. Ultimately they decided on the bare minimums. The Federal Government was to be an arbiter between States using a court system, defend our borders with an Army, handle immigration, and officially enter in treaties with other sovereign countries. That's basically it, except also given the right to tax or issue debts in order to provide funds for the above mentioned. Although, the taxes were not income tax as we see nowadays, that was unconstitutional. The Federal Government used tariffs and commerce taxes.
In 1913 under the cover of Christmas break when most of Washington was out of town, the 16th Amendment to the Constitution was passes that stated:
When people think of the government nowadays and how it relates to their lives, the heirarchy looks like this:
GOVERNMENT > LAWS > PEOPLE > GOD
It's the government that makes the laws which us people have to abide by, right? Our founders thought this was a little different as interpreted:
GOD > PEOPLE > GOVERNMENT > LAWS
God made people, people made Government, and Government makes laws. Now, in this basic hierarchy, the People are above Government. People institute a Government to preserve their God-given rights, not limit them. This is evident with a court system. Without courts, a disagreement could easily be handled by two respectable gentlemen, but in the evident an impartial arbiter is needed thats where government steps in.
Also, let's say that you have a child. A certificate of live birth is filled out and GIVEN to the government for safe keeping. This means that the Government has entered into a contract with you, preserving your new child's right as a citizen so long as they choose. Ever wonder why after a few weeks the government send you a Birth Certificate, a different document, that asks you to sign and keep? They are asking you to enter into a NEW contract with them! Ever notice that when filling out the new born baby forms, there is a check box asking if you want your baby to have a social security number? Did you know this is optional?
And what about that 16th Amendment? The power of government (remember who is BELOW the people) to tax the fruit of your labor. A direct income tax proportioned to the wealth you accumulate. This is stripping a natural right, a GOD-given right from you. This is by definition, a sin against humanity, regardless of whether you believe in God.
You see, the Federal Government wasn't designed to LIMIT your freedom. It was created to preserve your freedom. But State governments are different and can create their own rules, as long as they don't violate the Bill of Rights and Natural Laws. Unfortunately, this happens all the time. But the founders knew that if the Federal government was too powerful, the people would have no where to run other than outside the country. If one State became too overbearing and infringed upon people, those people had the choice to move to another State where it might be less oppressive. If enough people left the State that was oppressive, they would go bankrupt and have to clean house to make themselves attractive again. It was free markets. It was the United STATES of America, not the United FEDERAL GOVERNMENT of America. See the difference?
But how can States be oppressive? It's up to the voters really. If you are against sugary sodas and think that "if everyone couldn't drink them it would improve lives," then you vote in someone to carry out that message. Because really, are you going to go door to door and tell people not to drink soda? No! You are going to hire a proxy to do your dirty work. See how easy it is? You don't care that the person who likes sodas can't drink them anymore, because you are doing them a personal favor!
It's just like voting in a candidate who wants to established a war veterans fund. Another person might think, "Hey! I don't want to pay for that!" But what do they know? Those war vets protected their rights as citizens! We owe it to them!
This brings me to my main point. Remember when you enter the election booth this November, you will be voting for candidate to limit someone else's liberties while they will be voting for a candidate to limit yours. No matter what you are told to believe, there are more choices than two parties.
Let's go through some main political issues:
Abortion
Any federal candidate who is asked the question "What is your stance on abortion" should immediately answer, "That does not pertain to me, that is a State issue." There is nothing in the Constitution that allows the federal government the power to determine this. But wait! Technically, its murder! Even if that was the case, its still a State issue. When a murder happens in your town, does that person go to federal court? No, that person goes to State court. A true liberty candidate will explain that its not the role of the federal government so that question shouldn't pertain to him or her. This is not provided under the Constitution.
Jobs
Presidents don't create jobs. They redistribute money. Beware, any candidate that says they can create jobs is a liar. A true liberty candidate will explain that they will allow the free markets to determine how many jobs an economy can create. There is nothing in the Constitution that says anything about job creation.
Education
The federal government was not empowered with the ability to create federal education. This is to be handled by the States. Any candidate who supports federal subsidized education is not following the Constitution. Even if the candidate supports a minor role in education on a federal level, they are in direct disagreement with the Constitution.
Taxes
A true liberty inspired candidate will offer to repeal the 16th Amendment, along with the abolishment if the Federal Reserve and Internal Revenue Service. Personal income tax is illegal and against natural law by God as stated above. Any other candidate willing to keep these functions is in direct disagreement with the Constitution and how it was originally created. Candidates although may offer consumption or tariffs as alternative taxes on a federal level.
Foreign Policy
History is repeating itself, USA is just like Rome from back in the day, and will collapse if the present course is sustained. But regardless, the Constitution didn't afford peace time Armed Services, those functions were to be carried out by States' militias. One one of our main reasons our military has such a presence worldwide is facilitating the reserve currency (the Petro-Dollar). The US secures this with smooth (ish) trade, but this is at a substantial cost.
Apart from military expansion overseas (which founding fathers didn't want), the US is to act in a non-interventionist way. This means promote trade with other countries, but stay out of other nation's affairs. The US is currently in a currency war with nearly every other country on the planet and soon will result in trade wars, and possibly actual wars after that. Any candidate looking to PUSH American values on other countries will force America into tougher times and escalate situations.
Drugs and Prostitution
The war on drugs is a failed policy and needs to be abolished. When someone tells someone else they cannot smoke weed, snort cocaine, or do whatever drug they are limiting freedom. "But it's good for them!" This goes back to my earlier point, government does not have the ability to limit freedom. People who vote other people into office to carry out their ideas via proxy are using the system and should be stopped. People have choices and are free to do them, as long as they don't harm anyone else. And if they do harm someone else, there are courts to handle those situations.
Prostitution is the same thing. Two people consenting to a sexual act has nothing to do with anyone else, as long as they aren't harming them. These are personal choices and if there are adverse effects, then those people will suffer from those choices. It's not up to you and I to decide who can do what.
Healthcare
This is a non-issue. Healthcare is not in the Constitution. It is not a right or privilege. It has nothing to do with Federal Government. If States want to take up the issue, fine. But any respectable federal candidate will tell you its not the purpose of the federal government.
Firearms
The 2nd Amendment of the Constitution. Any candidate who opposes ANY types of firearms is in direct opposition to the Constitution.
If you truly went through each point and asked yourself, "Which candidate supports what?" Then you should have come to the conclusion that both Obama and Romney are very similar. They're ideas might vary a little, but both support the same federal functions. Here is a video to back this up:
You see, when you REALLY start to think about the differences between Obama and Romney, there really aren't any. They both support FEDERAL government providing all these functions or using FEDERAL government to limit your liberty. These two candidates are not inspired by freedom, natural law, or protection of civil liberty. They are against these ideals and when you vote for them, you are using a proxy to limit other people's freedom. Both Republican and Democrats are doing it. It's just a matter of how many people will come out in support of either one. But unfortunately, in the end it won't matter because everyone loses.
No human has more power over another human. They are equal. And when you GIVE more power to someone and that person denies you or takes away something, you DESERVE the consequences. I will not vote either candidate this election because I will not vote for someone that will limit YOUR freedom. No matter if I think what you will do is wrong, I don't have the authority to decide that. You have the freedom and liberty to pursue happiness as long as it doesn't impose upon mine.
And when liberty and freedom is taken away, the people need to rise up and take back that freedom. Thomas Jefferson wrote, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." This was not a mistake. Jefferson realized that history repeats itself and no one is perfect. If the United States Government becomes a tyranny over its people, the people need to rise up with force and violently take it back. In my opinion we very well might be at that juncture, and when it happens, rest assured the Constitution will be once again the binding document of the States and no republicans or democrats will be allowed to change that.
I am voting Gary Johnson for the following reasons.
1) He is the closest candidate on all ballots that will adhere to sound money and preserve liberty.
2) He will put forth the discussion and attempt to end the federal reserve and IRS.
3) He will attempt to bring all our troops home and close hundreds of bases around the world.
4) He will attempt to take power away from the Federal government.
5) His vote will directly be counted as a protest vote against both major parties.
And if he doesn't win? Well, it was only three percent of Americans that begun the revolutionary war...
********
Back during our founding fathers discussions on how to implement a Federal Government, they needed to decide on the role and power scope of that entity. Ultimately they decided on the bare minimums. The Federal Government was to be an arbiter between States using a court system, defend our borders with an Army, handle immigration, and officially enter in treaties with other sovereign countries. That's basically it, except also given the right to tax or issue debts in order to provide funds for the above mentioned. Although, the taxes were not income tax as we see nowadays, that was unconstitutional. The Federal Government used tariffs and commerce taxes.
In 1913 under the cover of Christmas break when most of Washington was out of town, the 16th Amendment to the Constitution was passes that stated:
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on income, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.I would say that technically the United States, as a federal entity, died on this day. Let me explain...
When people think of the government nowadays and how it relates to their lives, the heirarchy looks like this:
GOVERNMENT > LAWS > PEOPLE > GOD
It's the government that makes the laws which us people have to abide by, right? Our founders thought this was a little different as interpreted:
GOD > PEOPLE > GOVERNMENT > LAWS
God made people, people made Government, and Government makes laws. Now, in this basic hierarchy, the People are above Government. People institute a Government to preserve their God-given rights, not limit them. This is evident with a court system. Without courts, a disagreement could easily be handled by two respectable gentlemen, but in the evident an impartial arbiter is needed thats where government steps in.
Also, let's say that you have a child. A certificate of live birth is filled out and GIVEN to the government for safe keeping. This means that the Government has entered into a contract with you, preserving your new child's right as a citizen so long as they choose. Ever wonder why after a few weeks the government send you a Birth Certificate, a different document, that asks you to sign and keep? They are asking you to enter into a NEW contract with them! Ever notice that when filling out the new born baby forms, there is a check box asking if you want your baby to have a social security number? Did you know this is optional?
And what about that 16th Amendment? The power of government (remember who is BELOW the people) to tax the fruit of your labor. A direct income tax proportioned to the wealth you accumulate. This is stripping a natural right, a GOD-given right from you. This is by definition, a sin against humanity, regardless of whether you believe in God.
You see, the Federal Government wasn't designed to LIMIT your freedom. It was created to preserve your freedom. But State governments are different and can create their own rules, as long as they don't violate the Bill of Rights and Natural Laws. Unfortunately, this happens all the time. But the founders knew that if the Federal government was too powerful, the people would have no where to run other than outside the country. If one State became too overbearing and infringed upon people, those people had the choice to move to another State where it might be less oppressive. If enough people left the State that was oppressive, they would go bankrupt and have to clean house to make themselves attractive again. It was free markets. It was the United STATES of America, not the United FEDERAL GOVERNMENT of America. See the difference?
But how can States be oppressive? It's up to the voters really. If you are against sugary sodas and think that "if everyone couldn't drink them it would improve lives," then you vote in someone to carry out that message. Because really, are you going to go door to door and tell people not to drink soda? No! You are going to hire a proxy to do your dirty work. See how easy it is? You don't care that the person who likes sodas can't drink them anymore, because you are doing them a personal favor!
It's just like voting in a candidate who wants to established a war veterans fund. Another person might think, "Hey! I don't want to pay for that!" But what do they know? Those war vets protected their rights as citizens! We owe it to them!
This brings me to my main point. Remember when you enter the election booth this November, you will be voting for candidate to limit someone else's liberties while they will be voting for a candidate to limit yours. No matter what you are told to believe, there are more choices than two parties.
Let's go through some main political issues:
Abortion
Any federal candidate who is asked the question "What is your stance on abortion" should immediately answer, "That does not pertain to me, that is a State issue." There is nothing in the Constitution that allows the federal government the power to determine this. But wait! Technically, its murder! Even if that was the case, its still a State issue. When a murder happens in your town, does that person go to federal court? No, that person goes to State court. A true liberty candidate will explain that its not the role of the federal government so that question shouldn't pertain to him or her. This is not provided under the Constitution.
Jobs
Presidents don't create jobs. They redistribute money. Beware, any candidate that says they can create jobs is a liar. A true liberty candidate will explain that they will allow the free markets to determine how many jobs an economy can create. There is nothing in the Constitution that says anything about job creation.
Education
The federal government was not empowered with the ability to create federal education. This is to be handled by the States. Any candidate who supports federal subsidized education is not following the Constitution. Even if the candidate supports a minor role in education on a federal level, they are in direct disagreement with the Constitution.
Taxes
A true liberty inspired candidate will offer to repeal the 16th Amendment, along with the abolishment if the Federal Reserve and Internal Revenue Service. Personal income tax is illegal and against natural law by God as stated above. Any other candidate willing to keep these functions is in direct disagreement with the Constitution and how it was originally created. Candidates although may offer consumption or tariffs as alternative taxes on a federal level.
Foreign Policy
History is repeating itself, USA is just like Rome from back in the day, and will collapse if the present course is sustained. But regardless, the Constitution didn't afford peace time Armed Services, those functions were to be carried out by States' militias. One one of our main reasons our military has such a presence worldwide is facilitating the reserve currency (the Petro-Dollar). The US secures this with smooth (ish) trade, but this is at a substantial cost.
Apart from military expansion overseas (which founding fathers didn't want), the US is to act in a non-interventionist way. This means promote trade with other countries, but stay out of other nation's affairs. The US is currently in a currency war with nearly every other country on the planet and soon will result in trade wars, and possibly actual wars after that. Any candidate looking to PUSH American values on other countries will force America into tougher times and escalate situations.
Drugs and Prostitution
The war on drugs is a failed policy and needs to be abolished. When someone tells someone else they cannot smoke weed, snort cocaine, or do whatever drug they are limiting freedom. "But it's good for them!" This goes back to my earlier point, government does not have the ability to limit freedom. People who vote other people into office to carry out their ideas via proxy are using the system and should be stopped. People have choices and are free to do them, as long as they don't harm anyone else. And if they do harm someone else, there are courts to handle those situations.
Prostitution is the same thing. Two people consenting to a sexual act has nothing to do with anyone else, as long as they aren't harming them. These are personal choices and if there are adverse effects, then those people will suffer from those choices. It's not up to you and I to decide who can do what.
Healthcare
This is a non-issue. Healthcare is not in the Constitution. It is not a right or privilege. It has nothing to do with Federal Government. If States want to take up the issue, fine. But any respectable federal candidate will tell you its not the purpose of the federal government.
Firearms
The 2nd Amendment of the Constitution. Any candidate who opposes ANY types of firearms is in direct opposition to the Constitution.
If you truly went through each point and asked yourself, "Which candidate supports what?" Then you should have come to the conclusion that both Obama and Romney are very similar. They're ideas might vary a little, but both support the same federal functions. Here is a video to back this up:
You see, when you REALLY start to think about the differences between Obama and Romney, there really aren't any. They both support FEDERAL government providing all these functions or using FEDERAL government to limit your liberty. These two candidates are not inspired by freedom, natural law, or protection of civil liberty. They are against these ideals and when you vote for them, you are using a proxy to limit other people's freedom. Both Republican and Democrats are doing it. It's just a matter of how many people will come out in support of either one. But unfortunately, in the end it won't matter because everyone loses.
No human has more power over another human. They are equal. And when you GIVE more power to someone and that person denies you or takes away something, you DESERVE the consequences. I will not vote either candidate this election because I will not vote for someone that will limit YOUR freedom. No matter if I think what you will do is wrong, I don't have the authority to decide that. You have the freedom and liberty to pursue happiness as long as it doesn't impose upon mine.
And when liberty and freedom is taken away, the people need to rise up and take back that freedom. Thomas Jefferson wrote, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." This was not a mistake. Jefferson realized that history repeats itself and no one is perfect. If the United States Government becomes a tyranny over its people, the people need to rise up with force and violently take it back. In my opinion we very well might be at that juncture, and when it happens, rest assured the Constitution will be once again the binding document of the States and no republicans or democrats will be allowed to change that.
I am voting Gary Johnson for the following reasons.
1) He is the closest candidate on all ballots that will adhere to sound money and preserve liberty.
2) He will put forth the discussion and attempt to end the federal reserve and IRS.
3) He will attempt to bring all our troops home and close hundreds of bases around the world.
4) He will attempt to take power away from the Federal government.
5) His vote will directly be counted as a protest vote against both major parties.
And if he doesn't win? Well, it was only three percent of Americans that begun the revolutionary war...
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Monday, October 1, 2012
The Greatest Truth Never Told
Check this link for beginning of the series: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekkXHnSrlwY&list=PLD31E34390C5017E8&feature=plpp
Thursday, September 27, 2012
Jim Rickards on Keiser Report
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
Monday, July 23, 2012
Government Video From 1947: Know Your Money
B&W film: Creative Commons license: Public Domain
Saturday, July 21, 2012
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
Subsidies and Free Markets - Story of Broke
Prof. Art Carden responds to "The Story of Broke" (http://bit.ly/LLStoryOfBroke), a recent video by the creators of "The Story of Stuff." In "The Story of Broke," Annie Leonard claims that the government isn't actually broke. Rather, the government just wastes resources on the wrong things like subsidies to the dinosaur economy and war. She claims that the government should change its ways, and instead, subsidize firms that will bring us the future we really want.
Monday, July 16, 2012
The Crisis of Civilization : Full Movie
The Crisis of Civilization is a remix documentary feature film investigating how global crises like ecological disaster, financial meltdown, dwindling oil reserves, terrorism and food shortages are converging symptoms of a single, failed global system.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
There's No Tomorrow
Thursday, July 5, 2012
The Creature from Jeckyll Island
Wednesday, July 4, 2012
Uroko - History of Banking
11-part series.
See this thread for more information:
http://www.tfmetalsreport.com/forum/uroko-history-banking-system-documentary/327
The Money Masters Documentary
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Mike Maloney on $20,000 Gold
Kyle Bass - Come Undone
Sunday, June 17, 2012
Blast From the Near Past: OWS'er on Fiat Money
Saturday, June 16, 2012
Obamney
Monday, June 11, 2012
Brother John F on Youtube
The American Dream Documentary
The Secret of Oz Documentary
James Rickards on Economics and National Security
Link unable to embed, click here
James Rickards talks about the currency and trade wars, and how gold will play an important role in the future. This is a must watch.
James Rickards talks about the currency and trade wars, and how gold will play an important role in the future. This is a must watch.
Truth Never Told Part 1
Nigel Farage in 2010 Regarding Eurozone
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)