| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 12:54:58 PM | Hey dukky
If you really want to be honest about it, what percipitated the mortgage meltdown was the FACT that you could be get a loan with NO documentation of income, and no down payment. That is a relatively new development, and it was done in order to try to provide "affordable housing", and to increase the numbers of first time buyers. As with most times when the govt. gets their finger in the pie, it goes bad. No documentaion and no down loans were government ideas to increase the number of new buyers. If you were to follow back the people who were champions of these ideas, you might be surprised who they are............. Oh, yeah, they are currently employed.
Paul K | |
|
HO2
|
Joined: 10/11/2008
Msg: 277 | |
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 1:20:38 PM | Government is merely the pie we baked with ingredients we picked to represent us.
If we asked a blueberry if its really a blueberry and to prove it repetitively, all would be fine
The fact is we almost never hold a politicians feet to the fire for anything. | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 2:26:13 PM |
No documentaion and no down loans were government ideas to increase the number of new buyers.
It was done deliberately to fuel the boom and it was done (by Clinton I think) at the behest of the guys in the banking & financial industry (The guys at the top probably didn't mind). They knew at the time what the inevitable consequences would be, just as anyone with a lick of economic sense would have seen the setup for the eventual collapse of the housing market.
I was warning guys in the US five years ago that it was a bubble that would bite them on the a$$ in a heartbeat one day soon, but most of them didn't listen. The ones who did got out early with a tidy profit that they put into gold (on margin if they were smart) at about $450/oz. | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 2:33:47 PM | | Might makes Right. It's that simple. A "right" is only as good as the willingness and power to fight for the right. For example, if the Americans would have lost the War of Independence against England we would have no Bill of Rights. He have them because we had the power to fight for them and preserve them. | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 2:36:28 PM | Hey dukky
And just when I think you are going to say someting reasonable and we can agree...... So Clinton made the changes to the qualifications for obtaining a loan at the behest of the mortgage bankers, and the guys in the financial industry? UMMMM... NOT TRUE. Only some of the changes were made, and it was at the behest of those who wanted to implement social change...... to increase first time home ownership, to achieve "affordable housing"..... And the people I am referring to were POLITICIANS.
During that period of time, I was married to a banker, and she would come home and almost cry because she was smart enough to see the end result, but they HAD TO make those loans, or they would have had their charters pulled. I think that the final nail in the coffin was during Bush, first term, when they forced banks to make loans with no down payment........ As long as home prices were escalting, all was well. ALL of the politicians were/ARE complicit in this mess.
Paul K | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 2:38:10 PM |
He have them because we had the power to fight for them and preserve them.
The question is....Are you ready to do it again? I hope you guys are keeping your powder dry. | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 2:57:37 PM |
t was at the behest of those who wanted to implement social change...... to increase first time home ownership, to achieve "affordable housing"
That was the "official" line, yes...after all, it had to look politically motivated didn't it? Do you really think Clinton would have said "I've been told to fuel a housing boom so my bosses can drain the economy of its wealth by ripping off dumb Americans." It might not have had the same "ring" to it as the official line, which sounded a lot better to the American public.
Remember, Clinton, Bush and even Obama are only employees of the ruling elite (that you don't get to vote for). It is their job to run interference between the owners of the Fed (who really run things) and the people (who vote on whether the "good guy" or the "bad guy") puts the screws to them. | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 3:10:21 PM | Hey dukky
JUST A MINUTE..............
just a little longer...........
ALMOST GOT IT..
THERE, got it. OK, now that my tin fil hat is on, I re-read your statement of who really controls us, but you left out the illuminatti, the Rockefellas, the pope, the Masons, (or is it masonites?) and the Knights Templar. Now that I have the hat on, you make perfect sense.
Paul K
Knight Templar, Third degree.
I always wanted to be a knight. | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 3:25:21 PM | Paul there is a school of thought that the Chairman of the Federal Reserve is the most powerful man in the country. Durring the time that you are speaking of Alan Greenspan was the Guru that could do no wrong. Well, he was among those that advised that it would be a good idea to loosen lending requirements. He also advocated the removal of the Glass-Stiegal act which prevented from over leveraging. Better known as buying on margin. So, both you and Dukky are right.
Dukky is right that we don't pick the President, it is our Electors that do. The electors are picked (at least here in NC) by the state party.
The true revolution is at the ballot box, not with a weapon. Trust me know of which you advocate when you scream revolt. Elections not Revolt. | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 3:46:04 PM | Either we are truly one nation with rules that work in ALL the 50 states or we aren't.
We aren't. All powers not specified in the US Constitution for congress are reserved for "the states and to the people." The USA was setup as a federation of states. And some of us happen to like it that way. Don't expect it to change any time soon. | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 4:00:14 PM |
I always wanted to be a knight.
OK...I dub thee once...twice...thrice!......Arise Sir Paul K, Knight Templar and Scion of the Illuminati.
If you now enclose two box tops along with a money order for $99.99 (plus tax, shipping & handling), you will receive your Knight Templar sword & shield kit, along with our genuine "Illuminati Secret Plan For Global Takeover and Governance" (encrypted). If you act now, you will receive (absolutely free of charge) our "Illuminati Secret Plan for Global Takeover and Governance Secret Decoder Ring."
I don't know why you have such a hard time believing me...Do you really think the bozos in either party that keep getting elected have done one single thing in the interest of the American People? It looks to me like your country has been spiralling downhill since 1913. It took a major (and planned) war to bail you out of the last depression. What will it take this time? | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 4:08:26 PM |
Elections not Revolt.
If your choice is always gonna be between Tweedledee & Tweedledum, it won't make a tinker's damn bit of difference...the status quo will win the election and the people will continue getting screwed.
I'm a non-violent kinda guy, but I think Thomas Jefferson had it right. It is nothing less than your duty to revolt against your government if it craps on the Constitution, and it's been doing that for many years now....How long are you guys gonna stand for it? | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 4:10:13 PM | Dukky boom bust business cycles happened long before the adoption of the 16th Admendment. I just don't think that it was planned. However, I don't think that it impossible. It would just take too many people to make it happen, that's an aweful lot of malice. Do these people have no families?
BTW the Certerstians (religious order) is what was left of the knights templar. They make some good bread and wine, but def. not trying to govern the world. Just bring people closer to Jesus.
Opus Dei, is scholarly orgaiztion. Yep there Catholic too. So Paul might be onto that whole Pope thing ;). I don't think Benidect XVI has any other intentions then making sure that souls go to heaven.
Paul, you could always become a Knight of Columbus. lol.
You have to see, what the next election brings. I think there will arise another party, however, its a pain in the neck to get on a ballot. NC 9000 signatures. Anyone wanna help me?
Gadget. | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 4:16:14 PM | I'd love to help........
Where do I sign??? Like I said: Gadget for head piano player!!
Paul K
Opus makes some GREAT wines........ saddly, I only have one bottle left.............. | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 4:22:08 PM | | Well I need to find ten people first. Then I can fill out the form to run. However, I really need to see how they want the petition structured. | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 4:40:37 PM |
It would just take too many people to make it happen, that's an aweful lot of malice. Do these people have no families?
It doesn't take malice, just extraordinary greed and a false sense of superiority over the "useless eaters." In point of fact it is the families of the elite that they DO care about, but ONLY their families...everybody else is just a serf. It's a very feudalistic attitude.
If you're looking for the Catholic church's connection to the global banking system, look to the Jesuits. Unfortunately for him, one of the recent pope's wanted to see the books of the Vatican bank shortly after he was elected. I don't think he even lived to see them. I seem to remember too, that one of the Vatican Bank directors(?) committed "suicide" in around that time too. Nothing suspicious there...move along, everything's fine...
Gadge, you're studying economics, so you must see the connection between the money supply, interest rates, and the reserve; those are what determines the state of the "business cycle." It's arguable what "causes" changes in the other variables, but all three are dynamically linked...and two are directly controlled by the central banks (the money supply is only indirectly controlled by the other two). Please note who has control over these things in the US (it isn't Congress, or the senate, or the President). | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 4:46:51 PM |
Well I need to find ten people first. Then I can fill out the form to run.
Ahh...You guys blew it in the last election...You had Ron Paul running and the powers that be saw to it that he'd never get to be nominated for the Republican ticket. I think he was your last hope. There may not even be another election if Obama declares martial law, which I see as a distinct possibility in the next few years. Look for another "911" to justify it. | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 5:08:20 PM | Hey dukky
I wouldn't say that Ron Paul was "running", I would say he was jogging......... While the party where his heart lies didn't have a credible candidate, I believe that the only reason that Ron Paul changed party affiliation to republican, is to somehow gain some credibility. How'd that work?
If you were to talk to a true libertarian about their position on the military, defense, anything of that nature, and if they don't scare you away, you belong with them...........
Howdy Doody will NEVER declare marial law, much to the dismay of the foil hat crowd. What good would it do to declare martial law, especially in states like Texas, who to a great extent, are already wanting to push sucession for their state.
Paul K | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 6:14:05 PM | Gadge, you're studying economics, so you must see the connection between the money supply, interest rates, and the reserve; those are what determines the state of the "business cycle." It's arguable what "causes" changes in the other variables, but all three are dynamically linked...and two are directly controlled by the central banks (the money supply is only indirectly controlled by the other two). Please note who has control over these things in the US (it isn't Congress, or the senate, or the President).
This is another constitutional question. Is the Federal Reserve, (a quasi-private) enterprise Unconsitutional? The reserve system is closely linked to the 16th Admendent. The Consitution states that the Congress shall, have control of the money supply. No one else. Yet, you're right on supply of money, interest, ect. I think that will have to be on another thread.
Pope John Paul I, it is believed died of a massive stroke, or brain anurism. I am very fimilar with the Soceity of Jesus (Jesuits). They have taught economics, faith, other accidemics. I don't remember, the Soceity of Jesus ever getting into lending practices. Just so you know St. Loyla of Ignatuis, had been brought before the Inquistion at least twice.
And as a student I had no difficulties reading anything out of the Vaticans Secret Library. There is a great number of the books being placed into digital form, and added to the offical Vatican website.
I liked Ron Paul too, but then again I was a registered Libertarin for a while. It became an pain in the butt to stay. I also had problems with some of their postions. Eg. Drug policy, and public finance of public goods | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 7:26:44 PM | Howdy Doody will NEVER declare marial law
Why not?...He's already declared a state of emergency over the H1N1 tempest in a teapot (the pandemic of "deadly flu" that is less common and less deadly than ordinary flu).
Martial law will be probably be declared after the people start rioting in the streets over the new draconian domestic economic policies "recommended" by the IMF. Either that, or a new "911" event will be conjured up to unite the country.
(a quasi-private) enterprise
Quasi-private?...Oh yeah, the president gets to pick the head of it (from a list of candidates THEY give him)...Yeah...real "quasi"!
The reserve system is closely linked to the 16th Admendent.
...which, if I recall correctly, was never ratified by the required number of states to make it law. (How DID they manage to "paper over" that little defect anyway?)
Let's listen to the guys who railroaded the Fed through congress two days before Xmas (when most were gone home for the holidays), shall we?:
Edward Mandell House had this to say in a private meeting with President Woodrow Wilson:
“[Very] soon, every American will be required to register their biological property in a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will effect our security as a chargeback for our fiat paper currency. Every American will be forced to register or suffer being unable to work and earn a living. They will be our chattel, and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions.
Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, forever to remain economic slaves through taxation, secured by their pledges. They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two should figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debt to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges. This will inevitably reap to us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor to this fraud which we will call “Social Insurance.” Without realizing it, every American will insure us for any loss we may incur and in this manner, every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and, we will employ the high office of the President of our dummy corporation to foment this plot against America.”
Gee...sounds a lot like the system that got introduced years later by Roosevelt as a "New Deal" doesn't it? Isn't that when they introduced the SSN? In any event, that's where your money comes from...YOU...The US Treasury floats bonds on every American citizen and uses them as collateral on the loans from the Fed. Moreover, that's what your income tax is for...to pay the interest on the loans, so nearly all the income tax money goes to the Fed for their magnanimous gesture of lending you your own money (at interest). That's what the "privilege" of citizenship buys you, the obligation to pay on a national debt that would have been paid off long ago if congress had authorized the money.
Let's see what "Woody" said about it:
"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world - no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men."
— Woodrow Wilson | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 7:49:42 PM | | Riddle me this: Is the 16 Admendment legal, as well as the Federal Reserve system, because the President that signed them into law was no longer of sound mind or body following his stroke? Woodrow Wilson. Can any law signed after this period be considered valid? | |
|
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 9:39:14 PM | Riddle me this: Is the 16 Admendment legal, as well as the Federal Reserve system, because the President that signed them into law was no longer of sound mind or body following his stroke? Woodrow Wilson. Can any law signed after this period be considered valid?
Oohh...Good riddle Gadge! I wonder what the answer is? Whatever it is, I think Americans that would like their country back had better start looking for answers to "tough" questions like these.
To bring the thread back on topic, I'd like to suggest that Americans have a right to live free in their own country and not just be "human resources" and chattel for the bankers. | |
|
HO2
|
Joined: 10/11/2008
Msg: 298 | |
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/26/2009 9:49:31 PM | Well all those Rights come with responsibilities....like reading about what politicians do all day
http://www.votesmart.org/index.htm
Do you really know what your elected representatives are doing 40 hours a week,
--they work on your behalf....right ?
If you just don't care - you get what you get and should go back to sleep. | |
|
| |
| Philosophical argument of Rights
Posted: 10/27/2009 4:59:13 PM | Here's a little something that everyone should pay strict attention to, because the treaty will soon be signed if you don't get "up in arms" about it! There go your rights!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIoeiURV9eY | |
|
Home
login 
