Happy Atheist Forum

bail out the banks, in essence semi nationalising them. bail out the car industry. in fact bail out any multi national thats fed on free market capitalism and use tax payers money as a bulwark to stop the collapse. what next? america gets a european health service? now that is pie in the sky. has it occured to anyone else that bush is the most socialist president since f.d.r.

Bush has enacted socialism in the form of welfare for the obscenely wealthy.  I think a "socialist" health care system would be great.  In other countries the system works - sure people bitch about it but is it better to die without medical care?  We already pay as high a percentages of taxes as Europeans do.  They just call the taxes all sorts of different things here so they can pretend they don't count as taxes.  

Just look at your next paycheck, adding up all of the stuff taken out of your check - and count the bits taken for health insurance, too.  It will equal a a big percentage of your wages.  Now imagine that instead of using that money to pay a bunch of bureaucrats to find ways to avoid using that tax money on the citizens (such as the Social Security Administration whose apparent job is to figure out how to deny disabled people benefits long enough so most die before collecting the money they paid in) the taxes were used on useful things such as providing health care for sick people and education for children and for developing clean power sources.  Oh, and the money you currently pay into insurance is paying people to find ways to deny covering your medical care should you become ill.

Ironic that the Repubs tried to paint Obama with the Socialist label in order to smear him, yet...

Kylyssa, you have no idea how wasteful the nationa health service in england is. I used to think that healthcare to all, free at the point of need, was great. i then found out that the nhs budget has balooned to 110 billion pounds a year under labour, a 3 fold increase in 10 years.  can tell you from perosnal experience that the standard of healthcare is still shockingly low in many instances.

Social provision of healthcare is profligacy manifest.

I would also contest that you pay as much tax as we do, at least in this country. We may see similar deductions to our pay packet, but due to the massive inflation of stealth taxes, a pound over here will probably buy less than a dollar over in the states, this was true even before the pounds slip against the dollar. To give you an idea, petrol costs a pound a litre over here at the minute, or $6.59456088 a gallon, almost all of the increase in price is due to tax. even trying to import goods from the states ( when that was a good idea ) Brown stings you for around 25% normally.

Quote from: "spartacus"bail out the banks, in essence semi nationalising them. bail out the car industry. in fact bail out any multi national thats fed on free market capitalism and use tax payers money as a bulwark to stop the collapse. what next? america gets a european health service? now that is pie in the sky. has it occured to anyone else that bush is the most socialist president since f.d.r. :D

The government has no control of the money spent.  We should be asking ourselves, "WTF?".  Saying there was a buttload of money spent is the understatement of the millennium.   Under fear we were coerced into throwing money at the situation.  Fear is a powerful weapon of many (if not all) governments.

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/Content/Article.aspx?rsrcid=41183

QuoteWhere Did the Bailout Money Go? Banks Can’t, or Won’t, Say
Monday, December 22, 2008
By Matt Apuzzo, Associated Press


Elizabeth Warren chairs an oversight committee set up by Congress to oversee the bailout. The Associated Press interviewed her in Washington on Thursday, Dec. 18, 2008. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)
Washington (AP) - It's something any bank would demand to know before handing out a loan: Where's the money going? But after receiving billions in aid from U.S. taxpayers, the nation's largest banks say they can't track exactly how they're spending the money or they simply refuse to discuss it.
 
"We've lent some of it. We've not lent some of it. We've not given any accounting of, 'Here's how we're doing it,'" said Thomas Kelly, a spokesman for JPMorgan Chase, which received $25 billion in emergency bailout money. "We have not disclosed that to the public. We're declining to."
 
The Associated Press contacted 21 banks that received at least $1 billion in government money and asked four questions: How much has been spent? What was it spent on? How much is being held in savings, and what's the plan for the rest?
 
None of the banks provided specific answers.
 
"We're not providing dollar-in, dollar-out tracking," said Barry Koling, a spokesman for Atlanta, Ga.-based SunTrust Banks Inc., which got $3.5 billion in taxpayer dollars.
 
Some banks said they simply didn't know where the money was going.
 
"We manage our capital in its aggregate," said Regions Financial Corp. spokesman Tim Deighton, who said the Birmingham, Ala.-based company is not tracking how it is spending the $3.5 billion it received as part of the financial bailout.
 
The answers highlight the secrecy surrounding the Troubled Assets Relief Program, which earmarked $700 billion -- about the size of the Netherlands' economy -- to help rescue the financial industry. The Treasury Department has been using the money to buy stock in U.S. banks, hoping that the sudden inflow of cash will get banks to start lending money.
 
There has been no accounting of how banks spend that money. Lawmakers summoned bank executives to Capitol Hill last month and implored them to lend the money -- not to hoard it or spend it on corporate bonuses, junkets or to buy other banks. But there is no process in place to make sure that's happening and there are no consequences for banks who don't comply.
 
"It is entirely appropriate for the American people to know how their taxpayer dollars are being spent in private industry," said Elizabeth Warren, the top congressional watchdog overseeing the financial bailout.
 
But, at least for now, there's no way for taxpayers to find that out...

I guess I think universal health care would be a good idea because people here become homeless because of disabilities because they can't afford health care and can't actually get the SSDI they paid in all their lives.  Many Americans are one major illness away from homelessness.  When you compare people dying from lack of medical care or losing their homes and jobs due to illness with other issues the other issues start to feel less important.

I'm one of those people who is disabled yet cannot collect disability.  I don't have the sniffles or a head cold, I have lupus, a brain tumor, uncontrolled seizures, dangerously high fevers with delirium, random loss of consciousness, and fibromyalgia.  I haven't seen a doctor in about a year as that's when my savings ran out.  My condition has not improved and I cannot get medication for my seizures.  While I make a small amount from my writing I survive only due to the kindness of friends.  I'm one of those little unimportant people dying in the richest country in the world.  I paid my taxes, I paid in my social security but I'm a discard as are uncounted thousands of Americans.  

The money that could be buying my seizure medication and doctor visits and making me well enough to get back to work and be a productive member of society was used to buy guns and bombs and tanks to kill 63-year-old grannies and pre-teens in Iraq.  I'm a little pissed about it.

This here makes me Glad I'm in Scotland. I hope Socilized Healthcare comes to you soon.

While I certainly empathise with your situation, social healthcare is not a system whereby it is expensive, but infallible. there are still many, many people who the system refuses to help. Despite the insane bugets, corners are still being cut where they matter, in the number of beds and nurses. Private companies are hired to clean wards now, the result being outbreaks across the whole country of MRSA and other superbugs. many peple now fear going into hospital, incase they go in for a minor or routine procedure, and get infected with a fatal, incurable illness.

The budget cutting has reached such levels, whereby every illness is now judged on how bady it effects your quality of life, and lilley how many years you will live with or without treatment. If you fall outside that particular hospitals cost per year of life budget, they will refuse to treat you.

My own, personal preference would be for a sytem like france, where the wealthy and poor are both treated, yet the healthcare is not administered by the state, and is therefor much more efficent.

i`m sure that each nation will have it`s horror stories about their own health services, whether social or private. it would be more interesting to look at the cost effectiveness of healthcare in each nation. in the u.k. it averages out that £1,500 is spent on each person and the n.h.s. has a 95% approval rating amongst the u.k.  also i`m fairly sure that the amounts quoted by` ssy` are actually the annual cost of the u.k.`s welfare system of which the n.h.s. is a part

Bail-out's aren't socialism, they're just a government reinforcement of the capitalist system.

QuoteWhat distinguishes all forms of social ownership from capitalist ownership is that the latter involves shareholders whose money employs waged labour and entitles them to a share of the wealth created not by themselves but by the workforce. This money, which is inseparable from the market relationships â€" employment of labor and the sale of its product â€" in which it is invested, is capital.

http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article ... view/7668/ (http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/7668/)

For many in the US, capitalism is a religion; infallible, almighty, and unquestionable. I can't imagine the US moving to less capitalist solutions until things get a lot worse than they are now. It's a shame, too, because I know a lot of people with preexisting medical conditions that have to pay an arm and a leg just for basic medical insurance, if they can even get it.

I am pretty certain we will see some kind of national health care system in the U.S. very soon. I miss the good old days of paying cash, when a broken arm cost $75 to fix.  :(

Quote from: "McQ"What I find interesting about this topic, and it may be an appropriate thing to split off, is that we have come to the point (especially in the U.S.) where we expect flawless, or nearly flawless medical care. And we expect it without waiting. And we expect it to be free, or damn nearly so.

I don't see where you see that.  We expect American health care to be completely incompetent, at least those of us who have used it.  My mother died of thyroid disease - thyroid disease which can be treated by a single pill a day.  For ten years the TSH test was run on her yearly physical showing abnormal levels from the first and clinical hypothyroidism by the second.  Predictably enough her hair fell out, her heart enlarged, and her central nervous system started shutting down.  For years it was obvious she was sick and her doctors (paid for with cash from loans because she was too sick to get insurance and too young to qualify for medicare) supposedly worked to diagnose her problem.  They didn't diagnose what should have been diagnosed nine years before until she was in her terminal coma.  My father is still paying off her hospital bills five years after her death.  All of them would have been avoided by a GP actually reading the blood test results he ordered for his patient.  A pill a day costing less than $8 per month and she'd be alive.  During one of her surgeries (I think when they put in the shunt) she was also given a staph infection which required them to remove several of her ribs and graft tissue.  But this isn't all.

I have thyroid disease as well.  I self-diagnosed it using internet checklists prior to my mom's death.  I repeatedly told my doctor I wanted a thyroid test.  It took me losing all my hair, losing the hearing in one ear and slipping into a semi-comatose state to get the doctor to order a $26 blood test.  I even had Blue Cross Blue Shield - however, the various co-pays for the treatment required for the damage caused by my untreated thyroid disease were still a bitch and amounted to several thousand dollars.  Again, all of which could have been avoided by a doctor listening to a patient and ordering a simple blood test.

I also had a knee surgery prior to this wherein a stray surgical sponge was left inside my knee leading to an infection.

When I slipped and fell getting knocked out two years ago I went to the ER afterward as I've had head injuries before making any additional head trauma more dangerous. (Wow, did I just feel the need to justify why I went to the ER for a head injury?)  They ran a few tests and released me (still vomiting and disoriented), telling me I had a minor concussion and a sprained thumb and wrist and, oh, here, have a prescription for some Vicodin.  I got worse over the next few days, both my hand and my concussion symptoms.  Turns out I had a major concussion and a broken wrist and thumb.  Funny thing is that the doctor that diagnosed these issues did so from films from the same hand x-rays and brain scans the ER doctor had looked at.

Oh, and did I mention that from these brain scans they found a tumor in my brain?  Or that they never bothered to mention it to me?  I discovered I had a brain tumor only because I applied for SSDI and got curious about what was in the big envelope of medical records.  Between the head injury and applying for SSDI I had all sorts of neurological symptoms - you'd think they might mention something about a brain tumor in that time, wouldn't you?

My sister was sent home from an ER to miscarry when she was 6 months pregnant after being required to fill out a form that certified she hadn't inserted anything into her uterus to end her pregnancy.  Several hours later she was back in the ER, bleeding out.  She survived but just barely.  

I could go on and on... no one expects competent care in the US.  I'll have to look them up but several studies indicated that at least thirty percent of all medical diagnoses in America are incorrect, often with dire consequences.

One of the worst things that can happen to america is a socialized healthcare system.

Sadly, stupid people don't realize that the current situation can be solved by doing three things:

1)allow healthcare plans to be bought under a voucher system, and allow them to be transferrable from company to company.

2)Allow healthcare plan recipients to only purchase health insurance according to their particular risks.(for example, someone who doesn't have anything to do with cigarrette smoking might not want to by lung insurance.)

3)break up big pharma into smaller companies that automatically recieve funding to develop cure drugs. This enables competition and keeps the prices for drugs down. Also, get rid of drug patents.

Thes three things would instantly reduce the cost of healthcare by at least 70% Why? Most people who have taken an economics course and passed could see why. Unfortunately, america is filled with stupid people who are taken in by the democrats who use nice phrases like "help the poor" and "the rich need to pay their fare share." These same people voted for obama. and I should know. I used to be one of them.

*note* I realize this could be insulting to people who might think I am refferring to them. First of all, there's nothing in the bill of rights that says people have the right to not be insulted. However, if you can answer these questions, then rest assured I am not talking about you:

1) How does the minimum wage, and rise thereof affect the american economy?

2)Why did america get off the silver standard?

3)What would be the effects of privatization of the american school system?

4) Who or what major groups are opposed to the privatization of the american school system and WHY?

5)Precisely how much does your vote count when determining the next u.s. president, as opposed to your vote when determining a local offical?

Quote from: "Kylyssa"

Quote from: "McQ"What I find interesting about this topic, and it may be an appropriate thing to split off, is that we have come to the point (especially in the U.S.) where we expect flawless, or nearly flawless medical care. And we expect it without waiting. And we expect it to be free, or damn nearly so.

I don't see where you see that.  We expect American health care to be completely incompetent, at least those of us who have used it.  My mother died of thyroid disease - thyroid disease which can be treated by a single pill a day.  For ten years the TSH test was run on her yearly physical showing abnormal levels from the first and clinical hypothyroidism by the second.  Predictably enough her hair fell out, her heart enlarged, and her central nervous system started shutting down.  For years it was obvious she was sick and her doctors (paid for with cash from loans because she was too sick to get insurance and too young to qualify for medicare) supposedly worked to diagnose her problem.  They didn't diagnose what should have been diagnosed nine years before until she was in her terminal coma.  My father is still paying off her hospital bills five years after her death.  All of them would have been avoided by a GP actually reading the blood test results he ordered for his patient.  A pill a day costing less than $8 per month and she'd be alive.  During one of her surgeries (I think when they put in the shunt) she was also given a staph infection which required them to remove several of her ribs and graft tissue.  But this isn't all.

I have thyroid disease as well.  I self-diagnosed it using internet checklists prior to my mom's death.  I repeatedly told my doctor I wanted a thyroid test.  It took me losing all my hair, losing the hearing in one ear and slipping into a semi-comatose state to get the doctor to order a $26 blood test.  I even had Blue Cross Blue Shield - however, the various co-pays for the treatment required for the damage caused by my untreated thyroid disease were still a bitch and amounted to several thousand dollars.  Again, all of which could have been avoided by a doctor listening to a patient and ordering a simple blood test.

I also had a knee surgery prior to this wherein a stray surgical sponge was left inside my knee leading to an infection.

When I slipped and fell getting knocked out two years ago I went to the ER afterward as I've had head injuries before making any additional head trauma more dangerous. (Wow, did I just feel the need to justify why I went to the ER for a head injury?)  They ran a few tests and released me (still vomiting and disoriented), telling me I had a minor concussion and a sprained thumb and wrist and, oh, here, have a prescription for some Vicodin.  I got worse over the next few days, both my hand and my concussion symptoms.  Turns out I had a major concussion and a broken wrist and thumb.  Funny thing is that the doctor that diagnosed these issues did so from films from the same hand x-rays and brain scans the ER doctor had looked at.

Oh, and did I mention that from these brain scans they found a tumor in my brain?  Or that they never bothered to mention it to me?  I discovered I had a brain tumor only because I applied for SSDI and got curious about what was in the big envelope of medical records.  Between the head injury and applying for SSDI I had all sorts of neurological symptoms - you'd think they might mention something about a brain tumor in that time, wouldn't you?

My sister was sent home from an ER to miscarry when she was 6 months pregnant after being required to fill out a form that certified she hadn't inserted anything into her uterus to end her pregnancy.  Several hours later she was back in the ER, bleeding out.  She survived but just barely.  

I could go on and on... no one expects competent care in the US.  I'll have to look them up but several studies indicated that at least thirty percent of all medical diagnoses in America are incorrect, often with dire consequences.

Kylissa please read my post in its entirety and you'll see that I did say that, "There are so many people who legitimately need and can benefit from simple, free treatment to improve the quality of their lives.". I'm very sorry about the way your mother was treated (or mistreated and misdiagnosed), but that is part of my point. There are simple ways to treat a lot of things. But we do expect perfect health care. That is my bigger point. We do not tolerate mistakes or unwanted outcomes.

Everyone will die from something, whether it be accident, illness, or other means. Medicine is not ever going to be perfect because we are biological organisms, each and every one, and no one can be treated in exactly the same way. Even identical twins have certain differences that make them unique, and therefore their treatment must be individualized. Doctors are human. They miss things. It is not due to malfeasance on their part, or that they don't care about people. I would have liked very much that my father's doctors would have correctly diagnosed him with Pancreatic Cancer. But they didn't. Why? Because it was the least likely thing for him to be sick with, and they treated him as best they knew how, for six months, until they realized what is was. Too late. Dead three weeks later.

If you haven't been in their shoes, it is very easy to get upset with medical personnel. They fight a losing battle every single day. And despite your opinion that you expect incompetence, I've been in a hospital or physician's office every single working day for the past 19 years, and I can tell you with complete confidence that as a whole, in general, we expect and demand near perfection from health care professionals.  

You are angry with medicine, it seems. I'm sorry that you are. You have suffered a lot and had to deal with things most people never do. I'm not minimizing your suffering. What I don't understand is why you seem to blame the entire health care field for it though. You cannot make a wide assumption that the entire field is incompetent from a study of one person (you). And to be perfectly clear, I am not saying our medical system is perfect. I never did. In fact it is breaking down and does not work properly. But what I said was that we expect it to be perfect. We expect all doctors and nurses to be perfect...to diagnose everything correctly all the time. That is impossible.

That is all I'm trying to say. Please don't misinterpret that.

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"One of the worst things that can happen to America is a socialized health care system.

Sadly, stupid people don't realize that the current situation can be solved by doing three things:

1)allow health care plans to be bought under a voucher system, and allow them to be transferable from company to company.

Vouchers? Can you elaborate?

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"2)Allow health care plan recipients to only purchase health insurance according to their particular risks.(for example, someone who doesn't have anything to do with cigarette smoking might not want to by lung insurance.)

How many illnesses or accidents do you think are foreseeable?

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"3)break up big pharma into smaller companies that automatically recieve funding to develop cure drugs. This enables competition and keeps the prices for drugs down. Also, get rid of drug patents.

If several big pharmaceutical companies can all, simultaneously have high prices, what's to prevent that with a few more companies?

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"These three things would instantly reduce the cost of healthcare by at least 70% Why? Most people who have taken an economics course and passed could see why. Unfortunately, america is filled with stupid people who are taken in by the democrats who use nice phrases like "help the poor" and "the rich need to pay their fare share." These same people voted for obama. and I should know. I used to be one of them.

I'm going to have to ask for some evidence to support that 70% figure. So far all we might have are vouchers, and quite frankly current medical voucher systems aren't saving even a fraction of that.

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"*note* I realize this could be insulting to people who might think I am referring to them. First of all, there's nothing in the bill of rights that says people have the right to not be insulted.

There are forum rules. And the social contract probably applies, too.

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"1) How does the minimum wage, and rise thereof affect the american economy?

Regardless of what some people might say, it effectively ended slavery by proxy. No longer can people be paid ludacrisly low amounts because they can't find work elsewhere. There's a reasonable limit put on the lowest wages to ensure that people aren't taken advantage of.

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"2)Why did america get off the silver standard?

This is way too long to get into.

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"3)What would be the effects of privatization of the american school system?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism)

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"4) Who or what major groups are opposed to the privatization of the american school system and WHY?

This is also too long to get into.

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"5)Precisely how much does your vote count when determining the next u.s. president, as opposed to your vote when determining a local offical?

A lot less. California has one vote per 627,253 residents in the electoral college.

I doubt anyone on this forum would call me stupid, and I think that universal health care would do a great deal to eliminate wasteful industry and would help a great deal of people in need. 1/6 people being uninsured isn't going to be solved by minor tweaks in the system. It needs an overhaul.

/threadjack

Quote from: "McQ"If you haven't been in their shoes, it is very easy to get upset with medical personnel. They fight a losing battle every single day. And despite your opinion that you expect incompetence, I've been in a hospital or physician's office every single working day for the past 19 years, and I can tell you with complete confidence that as a whole, in general, we expect and demand near perfection from health care professionals.  

You are angry with medicine, it seems. I'm sorry that you are. You have suffered a lot and had to deal with things most people never do. I'm not minimizing your suffering. What I don't understand is why you seem to blame the entire health care field for it though. You cannot make a wide assumption that the entire field is incompetent from a study of one person (you). And to be perfectly clear, I am not saying our medical system is perfect. I never did. In fact it is breaking down and does not work properly. But what I said was that we expect it to be perfect. We expect all doctors and nurses to be perfect...to diagnose everything correctly all the time. That is impossible.

That is all I'm trying to say. Please don't misinterpret that.

No offense intended, but I'm tired of hearing how sorry everybody is.  Sorry doesn't fix anything.  I have no medical care, no money, no insurance and I get sicker and sicker with seizures closer and closer together.  I'm in chronic pain and have been for a long time.  I can't hold down a regular job, I get let go the first time I fall over and bleed on their floor or fall asleep on the job.  That and the constant, grinding pain makes it impossible to concentrate or even to give a shit what someone's flowers look like.

I expect doctors to be human and make mistakes but I also expect doctors to at least try to help.  I think I deserved to find one doctor over the course of a year who didn't decide that wait and see was the best approach.  I deserved to get better care than a suggestion to exercise more and to take Aleve.

If anyone here is in any doubt that Kylyssa and her family represent the norm for American medicine, rather than the exception, watch "Sicko." I loved it.

Kylyssa, I have seen much the same ineptitude you have. My hubby's sister had to get as sick as you did to get her hypothyroid disorder diagnosed in California. I had to go into full respiratory distress and septic shock to get pneumonia diagnosed, though the doctor who diagnosed it used the same x-ray which had been taken earlier in the day. I had come in four hours previously with all the symptoms of pneumonia and was told, "It's just your asthma." and, "You're just trying to get attention because your husband has pneumonia." I delayed going back in because of what they had said, and because when I called to tell them that it hurt to breathe or to move, they said I had just strained a muscle in my ribs. I almost died because they just couldn't seem to take me seriously until I passed out on their floor in full blown shock. In both SIL's case and in mine, we had insurance. My mother, on medicare, died of a MRSA infection she got during a heart cath. They didn't use quarantine procedures with her even once they knew she had MRSA!

Also, the USA is at the bottom of the list of developed nations for neonatal survival!ref: http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/parenting/05/08/mothers.index/

Quote from: "Willravel"

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"One of the worst things that can happen to America is a socialized health care system.

Sadly, stupid people don't realize that the current situation can be solved by doing three things:

1)allow health care plans to be bought under a voucher system, and allow them to be transferable from company to company.

Vouchers? Can you elaborate?

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"2)Allow health care plan recipients to only purchase health insurance according to their particular risks.(for example, someone who doesn't have anything to do with cigarette smoking might not want to by lung insurance.)

How many illnesses or accidents do you think are foreseeable?

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"3)break up big pharma into smaller companies that automatically recieve funding to develop cure drugs. This enables competition and keeps the prices for drugs down. Also, get rid of drug patents.

If several big pharmaceutical companies can all, simultaneously have high prices, what's to prevent that with a few more companies?

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"These three things would instantly reduce the cost of healthcare by at least 70% Why? Most people who have taken an economics course and passed could see why. Unfortunately, america is filled with stupid people who are taken in by the democrats who use nice phrases like "help the poor" and "the rich need to pay their fare share." These same people voted for obama. and I should know. I used to be one of them.

I'm going to have to ask for some evidence to support that 70% figure. So far all we might have are vouchers, and quite frankly current medical voucher systems aren't saving even a fraction of that.

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"*note* I realize this could be insulting to people who might think I am referring to them. First of all, there's nothing in the bill of rights that says people have the right to not be insulted.

There are forum rules. And the social contract probably applies, too.

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"1) How does the minimum wage, and rise thereof affect the american economy?

Regardless of what some people might say, it effectively ended slavery by proxy. No longer can people be paid ludacrisly low amounts because they can't find work elsewhere. There's a reasonable limit put on the lowest wages to ensure that people aren't taken advantage of.

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"2)Why did america get off the silver standard?

This is way too long to get into.

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"3)What would be the effects of privatization of the american school system?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism)

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"4) Who or what major groups are opposed to the privatization of the american school system and WHY?

This is also too long to get into.

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"5)Precisely how much does your vote count when determining the next u.s. president, as opposed to your vote when determining a local offical?

A lot less. California has one vote per 627,253 residents in the electoral college.

I doubt anyone on this forum would call me stupid, and I think that universal health care would do a great deal to eliminate wasteful industry and would help a great deal of people in need. 1/6 people being uninsured isn't going to be solved by minor tweaks in the system. It needs an overhaul.

/threadjack

All right. First, let me apologize for the cold and uncaring tone in the previous post, as well as for calling people who supported universal healthcare stupid. That was wrong of me and I should have known better.

As for defending my argument, let's see:
The voucher system: I believe it might work something like this. The government would use tax revenue to set up a private healthcare account for each citizen should they request it through their tax forms. Then a digital voucher would be held by the citizen, sort of like an empty netscape card. The citizen could shop for either a government run healthcare plan or a private healthcare plan. Once chosen, the digital voucher would be filled out with the proper information, and that citizen would have a healthcare plan. The voucher should have a limit of paying 70% of healthcare costs.

Some illnesses and accidents are very foreseeable. Others are not. This is where personal responsibility, as well as research undertaken by the individual comes in. It's important to keep the government out of dictating what policies we buy or don't buy, as that would keep prices down low. Besides, do you really think that the government should be called in to tell the poor little children what they need? People are capable of figuring things out for themselves.

The basic idea with big pharma is to enable competition. If they all have high prices, that implies collusion. Still, they wouldn't want people to go to other companies rather than theirs. The result would be drugs sold at their market value, instead of inflated values. It can't get much better than that. This would also reduce costs by very much.

Finally, the 70% figure: I pulled it out of my butt. My bad.  

Look, you're not an idiot, willravel, but I think history has shown that competition has trumped socialism in efficiency, production, and quality every time. Socialism doesn't work very well, because there is no incentive for people to work harder and get ahead. After all, if someone else is successful, then why not demand that they share their wealth with you? That's the basic principle. Of corse, those that get ahead won't like that one bit. So they stop making wealth. When that happens...you get the idea.

Quote from: "curiosityandthecat"Ironic that the Repubs tried to paint Obama with the Socialist label in order to smear him, yet...

Yet nothing, child. Obama and Bush are the same kind of asshole. The same shit spews from them. Obama is no better than Bush. the 4 years under him (a freedom loving candidate will rise against him in 2011 to knock him out in 2012, if there is any semblance of a god) will be simple socialism. Obama is nothing but a politician. His race is irrelevant. He will say and do whatever it takes to get votes.

A person like that is scary.

He will not have a backbone to risk some things to help us. A big hardship of true leadership is taking a gamble at times to help your people. It has helped humanity survive for so long.

I'm sorry but we had two big losers this election year. I'm glad I voted for McCain over Obama because he  at least suffered greatly for his country in the military while Obama never served a day in his short life.

Is that the end all and be all? Hardly! But Obama has done much to show me he is unworthy of serving his country as POTUS. He snubbed wounded soldiers in Germany because he couldn't bring press cameras to witness the sacrifice of our brave men and women in uniform. That disgusts me. I hear news of friends that I cared deeply dying or suffering in Iraq and Afghanistan who would be willing to die a million deaths for America. They do not get bitter and cling to their "guns and religion" to fight for the land they love.

Obama is not a bad person. He is just not fit to serve as the President. Neither is Bush. WIthout Bush Obama would not have been elected. They are just a couple of worhtless drunk frat boys who got elected due to what they are, not who they are.

I'm sorry, but I cannot drink the Obama Kool-Aid. He only has roughly half a year of Senate experience and has yet to have a real job. Why not propose a flat tax where we all pay 10 percent? No loop holes, no bullshit. YOU (that means all of us) cannot wiggle out of it.

I pay 20 percent of my paycheck to taxes. If we were to lower it to ten percent with not loopholes, we'd need to get rid of a few agencies and pork barrel spending.

Do we really need a DEA? The DEA targets Latinos and Blacks regarding a Victimless crime. You want to smoke pot/snort coke/etc. in your home? Your business. You like to shoot up a certain drug, until you do something bad to others, you are free to do as you wish. You want to spend half your day high on Herion/Weed/Hashish/Etc. it's your own body.

No offense, Kryslla, but maybe you should provide for yourself. The government is not meant to bail you out. What is your chronic pain? You can't play the whiny sympathy card because I've heard that shit already.

What is so bad about your condition. Please expand. I'd love to hear a self-pity party about this.

Go on about how bad you have it. I bet I can top it.

Here's the dilemma I face when thinking about healthcare worldwide as a whole:
I am a firm believer that human overpopulation is racing out of control, and is going to be a more noticeable problem as years go on.
The average age of humans goes up with better healthcare.
Advances in fertilization will lead to the increase in births.
We're at about 6 billion on Earth right now, where will that be in 10 years? 20 years? 100 years? Will it spiral out of control? Will we overload and overburden the only planet we know we can live on because of it?

Is better, or more accessible healthcare good for our planet?
Ethical dilemma if the answer to that question is no: Who shouldn't get it? Should it be more accessible to some, and less to others?

Until I can answer all those questions for myself, I'm not sure I can have a true opinion on it concerning everyone else. This is one problem that I'm not sure has a solution. Perhaps even a bit of a catch-22.

Quote from: "Big Mac"No offense, Kryslla, but maybe you should provide for yourself. The government is not meant to bail you out. What is your chronic pain? You can't play the whiny sympathy card because I've heard that shit already.

What is so bad about your condition. Please expand. I'd love to hear a self-pity party about this.

Go on about how bad you have it. I bet I can top it.

What is Social Security Disability Insurance for if not to provide you with your own money paid in when  you are too sick to work?

So, you have a brain tumor, too?  I'll list it off for you.

A brain tumor, 3 cm.  Causing neurological issues.
Lupus.  Because you are probably too stupid to know what lupus is here's a link. (http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/lupus/DS00115)
Fibromyalgia. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibromyalgia)  
Fevers, of unknown origin though one neurologist theorized the 3 cm mass in my brain might be the cause, frequently reaching above 105 degrees.
Seizures.
Blackouts, fainting, loss of consciousness.
Some of the neurological symptoms may be due to the skull fracture I experience years ago which left me in a coma for almost 9 days.  The repeated falls and concussions caused by seizures, etc. probably haven't helped.  A trip to the grocery store can be enough to wipe me out - I have to sit down or pass out - though the not passing out isn't even a sure thing then.

I didn't stop working due to pain, I kept working until I had so many losses of consciousness at work that I kept getting 'let go' then I lived on my savings a few months, went back to work and lost that job after my liver swelled up and I had to go to the ER in the first week.  I waited a few weeks, again living on savings, then got another job which I lost because my employer saw me taking vicodin on break - vicodin I was prescribed to allow me to work at a standing job.  She said that anyone who needed narcotics to stand all day shouldn't have a job standing all day and she said that she was sorry but that I couldn't work there.  I went through seven jobs. Apparently, employers prefer dependably conscious employees who don't need drugs to stand and don't have organs that suddenly swell up.

I even lost one job because I fell, broke my hand, and got a concussion.

By the way, I have five screws in my knee, a plate in my lower leg, and a plate in my head.  I worked six months standing in a full leg brace while waiting to get ACL and ML repair.  I'm no pussy.

I am trying to support myself on my writing because, since the last job I lost, I haven't found anywhere else willing to hire me.

I lose consciousness in at least two different ways, at least once a week, sometimes as many as twelve times.  If the loss of consciousness is a seizure, I often vomit all over afterward or lose bodily control in other ways.  I get high fevers from one to seven times a week which make me lose time and talk like I'm drunk (hmm, I actually got accused of that by a co-worker), usually right before I fall over.  I won't mention the pain in relation to a job because you don't believe in the existence of pain too severe to work.  I've worked 18 years as a florist and have won awards in my field.  I have published in a number of international print magazines.  I can operate a radio board and edit film.  I have twenty years of customer service experience and three years of college with a major in biochemistry and physics and a minor in radio and television journalism (no degree).  I have taught classes to special needs adults and conducted seminars on design.  I have eight years of management experience.  I have aqua-cultured and sold marine life including coral, starfish, detritivores, and fish.  Would you hire me?  Other than my physical issues, I will be a model employee.

Quote from: "Ihateyoumike"Here's the dilemma I face when thinking about healthcare worldwide as a whole:
I am a firm believer that human overpopulation is racing out of control, and is going to be a more noticeable problem as years go on.
The average age of humans goes up with better healthcare.
Advances in fertilization will lead to the increase in births.
We're at about 6 billion on Earth right now, where will that be in 10 years? 20 years? 100 years? Will it spiral out of control? Will we overload and overburden the only planet we know we can live on because of it?

Is better, or more accessible healthcare good for our planet?
Ethical dilemma if the answer to that question is no: Who shouldn't get it? Should it be more accessible to some, and less to others?

Until I can answer all those questions for myself, I'm not sure I can have a true opinion on it concerning everyone else. This is one problem that I'm not sure has a solution. Perhaps even a bit of a catch-22.

You are missing the part about unwanted pregnancies dropping and birthrates dropping as people become more educated.  Birthrates are higher in countries where medical care is scarce.  Look to Germany and Russia - they are having negative population growth.  People are dying later there but fewer people are having children.

You have to ask yourself if it's better to have more death and more births or if it's better to have fewer deaths and fewer births.  Personally, I'm for fewer deaths and fewer births.

Quote from: "Big Mac"Why not propose a flat tax where we all pay 10 percent? No loop holes, no bullshit. YOU (that means all of us) cannot wiggle out of it.

I pay 20 percent of my paycheck to taxes. If we were to lower it to ten percent with not loopholes, we'd need to get rid of a few agencies and pork barrel spending.

Sorry, this is a capitalist society, a flat tax of 10% is not equitable.  Flat rates are imposed for social security and Medicare, income tax is based on income level.  So, a person making $10 and hour and a person making $100 an hour should pay the same 10% of taxes?  How is that fair? I'm not saying our tax dollars are spent wisely, they are not, but certainly those making six figures have greater disposable income and those at minimum wage and below the poverty line need as much of their income as possible just to make ends meet.

Quote from: "Big Mac"Do we really need a DEA? The DEA targets Latinos and Blacks regarding a Victimless crime. You want to smoke pot/snort coke/etc. in your home? Your business. You like to shoot up a certain drug, until you do something bad to others, you are free to do as you wish. You want to spend half your day high on Herion/Weed/Hashish/Etc. it's your own body.

Yikes, so it's victimless crime?  So you wouldn't mind that your brain surgeon shot some heroin at home a few hours before you go in for surgery?  Brave man.

Quote from: "spartacus"bail out the banks, in essence semi nationalising them. bail out the car industry. in fact bail out any multi national thats fed on free market capitalism and use tax payers money as a bulwark to stop the collapse. what next? america gets a european health service? now that is pie in the sky. has it occured to anyone else that bush is the most socialist president since f.d.r.

If it is a right-wing variant (at least compared to the UK).

Kyu

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"One of the worst things that can happen to america is a socialized healthcare system.

Sadly, stupid people don't realize that the current situation can be solved by doing three things:

1)allow healthcare plans to be bought under a voucher system, and allow them to be transferrable from company to company.

2)Allow healthcare plan recipients to only purchase health insurance according to their particular risks.(for example, someone who doesn't have anything to do with cigarrette smoking might not want to by lung insurance.)

3)break up big pharma into smaller companies that automatically recieve funding to develop cure drugs. This enables competition and keeps the prices for drugs down. Also, get rid of drug patents.

Thes three things would instantly reduce the cost of healthcare by at least 70% Why? Most people who have taken an economics course and passed could see why. Unfortunately, america is filled with stupid people who are taken in by the democrats who use nice phrases like "help the poor" and "the rich need to pay their fare share." These same people voted for obama. and I should know. I used to be one of them.

*note* I realize this could be insulting to people who might think I am refferring to them. First of all, there's nothing in the bill of rights that says people have the right to not be insulted. However, if you can answer these questions, then rest assured I am not talking about you:

1) How does the minimum wage, and rise thereof affect the american economy?

2)Why did america get off the silver standard?

3)What would be the effects of privatization of the american school system?

4) Who or what major groups are opposed to the privatization of the american school system and WHY?

5)Precisely how much does your vote count when determining the next u.s. president, as opposed to your vote when determining a local offical?

Ok I am taking this from the UK point of view... perhaps I am one of the stupid people your talking about ..but no offence taken :D )
3. The effects of privatising any state/country school system will inevitably drive up the costs of a good education and therefore make sure that the less well off in any society remain poorly educated.
4. I do not know which groups speciffically are against it but it should be all parent groups  ... For the reason, "why" just read my answer to question no3 again  :brick:  ... even though you did not make it a question ... Listen my friend, I dont understand your reasoning against free care at all.

You Said : Allow healthcare plan recipients to only purchase health insurance according to their particular risks.(for example, someone who doesn't have anything to do with cigarrette smoking might not want to by lung insurance.)

So what would happen if the non smoker then developed lung cancer?

And if the governments of the world can spend trillions on armies "to protect us", bailing out the banks "to protect us" .. then c'mon ...free health care should be a cinch in order "to protect us" ... A NO BRAINER I THINK :beer: Cheers

The Federal Reserve has been the driving force in pushing us toward Socialism.  The constant printing of money without taking money out of circulation is the key to inflation.  Every generation the hard currency is debased.  The true value of the dollar has never been so low.

QuoteIf the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their Property until their Children will wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered. -Thomas Jefferson

Uh, MigMac, I think you're a sourpuss. That's the nicest thing I could think to say, and if I were Kylyssa, I would not have bothered to defend myself to you. I hope you need medicaid someday soon. Maybe you'll grow a heart.

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"All right. First, let me apologize for the cold and uncaring tone in the previous post, as well as for calling people who supported universal healthcare stupid. That was wrong of me and I should have known better.

No worries.

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"As for defending my argument, let's see:
The voucher system: I believe it might work something like this. The government would use tax revenue to set up a private healthcare account for each citizen should they request it through their tax forms. Then a digital voucher would be held by the citizen, sort of like an empty netscape card. The citizen could shop for either a government run healthcare plan or a private healthcare plan. Once chosen, the digital voucher would be filled out with the proper information, and that citizen would have a healthcare plan. The voucher should have a limit of paying 70% of healthcare costs.

This makes sense assuming your perspective on the issue is that the government wouldn't be able to run health care. Your voucher idea actually is a bit like the bailout; let the government foot some or most of the bill, but allow the market (that kinda got itself into the bind in the first place) still manage the system. To be honest, I don' see that as a pragmatic approach. If the private management has demonstrated time and again that they are incapable of managing a necessary industry effectively, the government should at least be given a chance. If neither work, it's time for revolution. :blush: [/quote]
I've been known to do that myself. 60% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

Quote from: "Wechtlein Uns"Look, you're not an idiot, willravel, but I think history has shown that competition has trumped socialism in efficiency, production, and quality every time. Socialism doesn't work very well, because there is no incentive for people to work harder and get ahead. After all, if someone else is successful, then why not demand that they share their wealth with you? That's the basic principle. Of corse, those that get ahead won't like that one bit. So they stop making wealth. When that happens...you get the idea.

There's never been a pure socialist government or society (nor a pure capitalist government or society). What I've observed is that some goods and services are better left to the market and other goods and services are left to government. I'm sure you wouldn't want a 100% privatized military. And I wouldn't want government-run telecommunications. You wouldn't want to have to pay insurance for police, firemen, or roads. I wouldn't want to pay taxes for government-run religious organizations.

Quote from: "Wraitchel"Uh, MigMac, I think you're a sourpuss. That's the nicest thing I could think to say, and if I were Kylyssa, I would not have bothered to defend myself to you. I hope you need medicaid someday soon. Maybe you'll grow a heart.

He just likes to offend people. Go back and read some of his previous posts. He's basically just an ass who likes stirring up shit (not in real life, apparently; the bravery of being out of range just brings out the douche in him).

Quote from: "DennisK"The Federal Reserve has been the driving force in pushing us toward Socialism.  The constant printing of money without taking money out of circulation is the key to inflation.  Every generation the hard currency is debased.  The true value of the dollar has never been so low.

Um, the Federal Reserve does not just print money, they buy or sell securities to change the money supply in circulation, change the reserve ratio, and/or affect the interest rate for bank borrowing.  If they printed money without the appropriate backing our dollar would have been completely worthless long ago.  Our dollar isn't changing, it's buying power is due to aggregate price level changes over time primarily due to fiscal policy rather than monetary.  If the Fed did not create change to the money supply we would be in a stagflation right now (we are pretty close to that as is) and would be in far more trouble than we are now.  The Fed is our greatest economic strength, which we learned through the Great Depression.

Quote from: "VanReal"

Quote from: "DennisK"The Federal Reserve has been the driving force in pushing us toward Socialism.  The constant printing of money without taking money out of circulation is the key to inflation.  Every generation the hard currency is debased.  The true value of the dollar has never been so low.

Um, the Federal Reserve does not just print money, they buy or sell securities to change the money supply in circulation, change the reserve ratio, and/or affect the interest rate for bank borrowing.  If they printed money without the appropriate backing our dollar would have been completely worthless long ago.  Our dollar isn't changing, it's buying power is due to aggregate price level changes over time primarily due to fiscal policy rather than monetary.  If the Fed did not create change to the money supply we would be in a stagflation right now (we are pretty close to that as is) and would be in far more trouble than we are now.  The Fed is our greatest economic strength, which we learned through the Great Depression.

If I'm not mistaken, the Federal Reserve Act was passed in 1913, decades before the Great Depression.  It was sold to President Roosevelt, Congress, and the American people to stabilize the dollar and economy.  It was supposed to prevent hard crashes like experienced in the 30's marking the beginning of the Great Depression.  Yet you think it deserves the credit for getting us out?  What it did was put U.S. currency in the hands of private elite bankers and charge us interest.  Now our dollar is virtually worthless.  We owe trillions of dollars to the elite banking establishment.  The dollar is worth pennies compared to what it was prior to the Federal Reserve.  The only thing a centralized bank produces is debt.

A brief history of the events prior to the Federal Reserve Act:
J.P. Morgan (a respected banker of his time) published rumors that a NY bank was going bankrupt causing a rush on the bank creating a domino effect on other banks.  Unaware of the fraud, Congress appointed Nelson Aldrich (who had intricate ties to the banking cartels and later married into the Rockefeller family) to investigate.  Aldrich recommended a centralized bank be established so the troubles experienced in 1907 wouldn't happen again.  The legislation was then written by bankers at a private meeting at one of J.P. Morgan's estates, not by Congress.  Prior to the formation of the federal reserve, our country never did better.  The problem (at least for the major banks) was that savings were happening all over the country and the big banks were losing business.

Quote“the refusal of King George III to allow the colonies to operate an honest money system, which freed the ordinary man from the clutches of the money manipulators was probably the prime cause of the revolution” â€"Benjamin Franklin

QuoteI believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."  -Thomas Jefferson

Quote"Most Americans have no real understanding of the operation of the international money lenders. The accounts of the Federal Reserve System have never been audited. It operates outside of the control of Congress and manipulates the credit of the United States."  -Senator Barry Goldwater

The Federal Reserve is more powerful than our government.  This was by design.  And was it coincidence that the federal income tax was enacted the same year?  We have to pay for the interest somehow, eh?

This is an informative video if anyone is interested.  The first few minutes are dated, but it gets much better.  http://video.google.com/?hl=en&tab=wv

Quote from: "DennisK"If I'm not mistaken, the Federal Reserve Act was passed in 1913, decades before the Great Depression.  It was sold to President Roosevelt, Congress, and the American people to stabilize the dollar and economy.  It was supposed to prevent hard crashes like experienced in the 30's marking the beginning of the Great Depression.

Actually it was put in place to stop person's from running on banks and bankrupting the system.  Prior to the Fed's establishment when the economy became "scary" people would run to the bank and pull out there money.  Most of those funds were not really there, they were issued as notes so the bank would bankrupt and whoever wasn't quick enough lost every penny.  It did stop that from occurring.

Quote from: "DennisK"Yet you think it deserves the credit for getting us out?  What it did was put U.S. currency in the hands of private elite bankers and charge us interest.  Now our dollar is virtually worthless.  We owe trillions of dollars to the elite banking establishment.  The dollar is worth pennies compared to what it was prior to the Federal Reserve.  The only thing a centralized bank produces is debt.

Actually at the time the prevelent economica theory was that the economy was a self-correcting entity and the Fed and the government did not play active roles in trying to correct it.  The Great Depression actually idetified the "sticky wage" and showed that the economy, while it does run in waves does not always self correct and government fiscal policies or Fed monetary policies are sometimes necessary in order to aid its repair. (The bad thing is when they both act, that leads to disaster as we are seeing now).

That's correct, most people do not understand how money is created, and they do not understand the money multiplier, bank to bank lending, and loan return.  Money is somewhat confusing because it is not capital and it instrinsically is worthless.  However, our dollar has the same value it has always had, it is the price level that has changed.  We may have been able to buy a soda and candy bar for $0.50 years ago, the $0.50 is still $0.50, it's the soda and candy bar that have changed.  You can play with the inflation calculator, it's actually interesting.  It's not the value of the dollar that is changing, it's the buying power of that dollar.

The Fed does not print money to affect the money supply.  It sells securities and/or increases the bank to bank interest rate (not interest we pay to creditors) to reduce the money supply during inflation, or it buys securities and/or reduces the interest rate to increase the money supply during recession.  Unfortunately that's not an option right now because we are in a recession and there is inflation occurring (stagflation) so the government is going to have to enact fiscal policies to get us out of this mess.  The Fed has been rendered impotent at this moment in time, if they react to much while fiscal policy is occurring we may enter a hyperinflation, at which time I am going to start my garden and chicken coop.

Seriosuly though, our money is not worthless and is not just printed and distributed without reason.  If it were we would be in the same trouble as Zimbabwe is going through having to issue trillion dollar notes for consumer spending.  Our dollar is just fine, it's the rest of the economy that needs help.

Of course, this is economics and if you've ever watched or attended a summit you will see economists on every side of the fence, dangling from the poles, and trying to slide under.  That's why it's not part of the science department in school:)

Quote from: "VanReal"Actually it was put in place to stop person's from running on banks and bankrupting the system.  Prior to the Fed's establishment when the economy became "scary" people would run to the bank and pull out there money.  Most of those funds were not really there, they were issued as notes so the bank would bankrupt and whoever wasn't quick enough lost every penny.  It did stop that from occurring.

It was sold to Congress and the President as putting an end to inflation and instability, yes.  I did not do either.  For example, between 1914-1919 the amount of money in circulation doubled.   Smaller banks took out huge loans and lent that money out.  In 1920 the Fed called in mass amounts of the money in circulation causing these banks to call in their loans causing runs on banks (similar to 1907) and mass bankruptcies, repossessions, etc..  Over 5400 competitive banks outside the Federal Reserve system collapsed creating more consolidation for the big guys.

"Under the federal reserve act, panics are scientifically created. The present panic is the first scientifically created one, worked out as we figure a mathematical equation." -Charles Lindbergh 1921

A very similar thing happened from 1921-1929.  This time it was a margin loan that was called in.  Just prior to the call, Rockefeller and some other elites quietly exited the stock market.  Then came the stock market crash known as "Black Tuesday".  This time 16,000 banks went under and were bought by elites at pennies on the dollar and whole companies as well.  And rather than increasing the money supply, the Fed decreased it sending us into the Great Depression.

"The Federal Reserve (Banks) are one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever seen. There is not a man within the sound of my voice who does not know that this Nation is run by the International Bankers."  -Louis McFadden (Conressman from Pennsylvania, 1914-1934)

"We have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks, hereinafter called the FED. They are not government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers." -Louis McFadden

After a few assassination attempts, McFadden was poisoned and died.  He was unable to proceed with any impeachment attempts of Federal Reserve board members.  Are we seeing a trend.  The Fed started out corrupt and it is corrupt to this day.

Quote from: "DennisK"

Quote from: "VanReal"Actually it was put in place to stop person's from running on banks and bankrupting the system.  Prior to the Fed's establishment when the economy became "scary" people would run to the bank and pull out there money.  Most of those funds were not really there, they were issued as notes so the bank would bankrupt and whoever wasn't quick enough lost every penny.  It did stop that from occurring.

It was sold to Congress and the President as putting an end to inflation and instability, yes.  I did not do either.  For example, between 1914-1919 the amount of money in circulation doubled.   Smaller banks took out huge loans and lent that money out.  In 1920 the Fed called in mass amounts of the money in circulation causing these banks to call in their loans causing runs on banks (similar to 1907) and mass bankruptcies, repossessions, etc..  Over 5400 competitive banks outside the Federal Reserve system collapsed creating more consolidation for the big guys.

"Under the federal reserve act, panics are scientifically created. The present panic is the first scientifically created one, worked out as we figure a mathematical equation." -Charles Lindbergh 1921

A very similar thing happened from 1921-1929.  This time it was a margin loan that was called in.  Just prior to the call, Rockefeller and some other elites quietly exited the stock market.  Then came the stock market crash known as "Black Tuesday".  This time 16,000 banks went under and were bought by elites at pennies on the dollar and whole companies as well.  And rather than increasing the money supply, the Fed decreased it sending us into the Great Depression.

"The Federal Reserve (Banks) are one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever seen. There is not a man within the sound of my voice who does not know that this Nation is run by the International Bankers."  -Louis McFadden (Conressman from Pennsylvania, 1914-1934)

"We have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks, hereinafter called the FED. They are not government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers." -Louis McFadden

After a few assassination attempts, McFadden was poisoned and died.  He was unable to proceed with any impeachment attempts of Federal Reserve board members.  Are we seeing a trend.  The Fed started out corrupt and it is corrupt to this day.

"Give me control of a nations money supply, and I care not who makes its laws" -Mayer Amschel Rothschild, founder of Rothschild banking dynasty.

Edit:  I forgot to attach this.  It is an extraordinary video which explains in laymen's terms what is going on. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7065205277695921912

Touche!  As I said, you will find people, professional and laymen, on both sides - for and against the Fed.