The Breakup of the United States

[Lumi]

The Breakup of the United States

​

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]by Michael S. Rozeff
[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT][/FONT]​

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]As the dissatisfactions of Americans with their national government grow, so does the likelihood of the breakup of the United States. I believe that most Americans can improve their well-being by ending the national government, that is, ending the Union. I believe that this goal should shape politics if politics is to do much good.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]I don?t think Americans are going to be the first people in the modern era to initiate a large-scale anarchy. But Americans might conceivably move back to a federal form of government something like that under the Articles of Confederation. If so, the problem is how to proceed. Many Americans feel (and are) trapped and thwarted by government power.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]I see two paths. Americans can do this either acting as individuals formed into a body politic of 300 million Americans or as 50 body politics organized by state. I think action by state has a better chance of success.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]To act as one body, Americans would have to alter their Constitution. The divisions among Americans make this highly unlikely. Even if it were pursued, the results would be highly uncertain.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]I like to think of federal programs being made optional at either the state or the personal level, but that means ending the Constitution or radically amending it. This takes me back to the other path of change: the States. This path looks more viable.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]We the People created the Constitution through state legislatures. That is a quasi-legal path to undoing the Constitution and thus breaking up the United States. This begins a process by which Americans take back their own government. I say "begins" because most states are also candidates for restructuring. Many local governments are also out of control.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]I don?t think Americans can improve their lot by participating in national politics under the current rules of the national game. I think they have to change the rules. They have to end the Union and get out from under the existing Constitution, which is now entirely controlled and interpreted by the national government.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Since there is no consensus for going back to the original Constitution and since it would have to be rewritten and renegotiated, which is a process of uncertain outcome and which is impractical anyway, this leaves one viable path: ending the Union and ending this Constitution.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Rather than thinking in terms of national politics, which at best can only produce marginal changes and which plays into the hands of the national powers-that-be, it would be far smarter to have no national or federal government at all. Although this involves significant political restructuring, We the People and the States can always retain or exercise options to form federated organizations for specific and limited purposes if we so desire.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]But by what means can Americans undo the Union?[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]A viable means is the withdrawal of consent by Vermonters or Texans or Alaskans or Arizonans or Californians or the citizens of any state to the U.S. government. People gain leverage and power against the national Leviathan by acting as citizens of their respective states. They need to act through their state legislatures, not as citizens of the United States. In the old days of whaling, the method of bringing down the whale was by several crews working together in several boats. It was not by individual whalers rowing around by themselves and confronting Leviathan on their own.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The states entered the Union. Secession once before almost ended the Union. The states are the political entities by which the Union and its burdens and injustices can be ended.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Action through one or more states is one of the few and maybe the only viable political means by which the Union can be broken up.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Contrast this with a national tax revolt, something that I believe is not a viable means of achieving a significant and lasting change in our politics. A tax revolt movement that seeks redress at the national level will not cause the U.S. to break up. That is the politics of accommodation and adjustment. It doesn?t challenge Congress itself. It doesn?t challenge the United States. It doesn?t challenge the Constitution. It leaves the power structure intact. As soon as such a movement is tossed a few crumbs, it loses its momentum. The national government divides it and conquers it. The national government lives on. It can regain its dominance over time by any number of means, such as by invoking some imaginary emergency. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]A tax revolt that works from and through the state legislatures directly undermines the Union. It directly challenges the power of Congress to tax. That?s a far stronger political platform for restructuring the United States.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Outright secession is one political measure in a spectrum of possible actions by which one or more states stand up to the U.S. government. Nullification is another. Withdrawal from the banking system is another. A separate payments system at the state level is a fourth. Refusal to obey any of hundreds of U.S. directives is a fifth. The formation of alliances among states is another.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]In fact, there are so many possible ways by which one or more states stand up to the Union that, given enough time and the right conditions, a breakup is all but assured. The same cannot be said of any movement that seeks to work change by confronting Americans as one large group with their national government.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]All that has to happen at present is a spark lit by one or more States and the Union will go up in smoke. The Empire will fall. The tinder is very dry right now. One bolt of lightning will set the U.S. ablaze.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The breakup can start small. Momentum will do the rest. There will be a bandwagon effect. The accumulated dissatisfactions with the monumental corruption, power-mongering, waste, and totalitarian nature of the United States government will seek and find channels of political relief.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The number of potential actions that can set off a chain reaction is very large. Once one or more of the States throw down the gauntlet, the downfall of the U.S. will be sparked.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]This will come through the financial markets. The value of the United States paper currency depends critically on the taxing power of the United States. Anything that undermines U.S. tax collections undermines the U.S. dollar.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]To bring down the U.S. government, all it may take is for one state to declare that its citizens need no longer pay taxes to the U.S. government. No matter what the national government does next and no matter what complex sequence of political tit for tat ensues, the uncertainty will balloon.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The financial markets will do the rest. A flight from the U.S. dollar will set in. Flight from the dollar will torpedo and sink the national government.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The Chinese and other foreign lenders will be very unhappy about their investments. So will anyone who is a creditor of the U.S. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Financial market prices at present are not factoring in even a small chance of this happening. Lenders to Uncle Sam act as if everything is hunky-dory. U.S. government bonds even look attractive to those who believe further and deeper depression is imminent.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]No break up is visible in the short run. This seems to confirm such thinking. But boiling beneath the surface is a rising stream of heated discontent. Major political change is far more likely than it may seem to superficial observation.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Greek bond prices fell very sharply when the government went into crisis. They only recovered when the rest of Euroland decided to bail out the Greek government and bondholders. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]There is no external bank or government that can or will extend credit to the U.S. to save the dollar once the perception spreads that its tax-collecting power is permanently impaired.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The Federal Reserve can?t save the dollar or the U.S. government by extending credit. The markets will see right through that. In a politically fragile situation where the tax-collecting power of the national government has sunk, the Fed is powerless to save the national government.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Once enough people in a given state gain the conviction that they will be far better off by shutting off the flow of their incomes to Washington, then they will get their legislature to stand up to Washington?s dictates. This will encourage citizens of other states who are in a similar situation.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]There does not have to be a shot heard round the world as on April 19, 1775. A Declaration of Tax Independence will take its place.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Even if such a process of one state standing up against Uncle Sam fails, even if it elicits responses from the national government that thwart immediate success, experience will be gained. The national government is bound to show its true oppressive colors in such an episode. The game changes. A game-changing event or series of events is what is needed.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The government of the United States markets itself as the nation?s defender. It advertises that it provides security nationwide for We the People. It claims that it provides military security, economic security, and social security.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]These are all false claims. More and more Americans recognize these claims as false. More and more Americans recognize that the United States government has reduced their security in all its many forms. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The United States government has succeeded in entangling Americans in an endless succession of foreign wars. It has succeeded in retarding and even reversing standards of living. It has succeeded in raising medical care costs and reducing the quality of medical care. It has perpetuated a Ponzi scheme of social security that is doomed to fail. The United States government is responsible for reducing American freedoms, for spying on Americans, for searching them, and for turning travel into a nightmare.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]More and more Americans realize that promises of security do not create security. More and more Americans realize that the United States government creates insecurity and disorder.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The United States government does not deserve the tax dollars it collects. This is the fundamental bread-and-butter reason for ending the Union. The Constitution allows massive tax collections for purposes enunciated by Washington. There is no way to stop this process, which is killing the country, except by undoing the political foundation by which it is enforced.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The stream of tax dollars flowing to Washington can be turned off by the action of one or more state legislatures who act on behalf of their citizens. When that source of financing is halted, the United States government will be well on its way to breakup. This is the great gift that we should bestow on ourselves and future Americans.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Americans will remain. America will remain. The nation will remain. The People will remain. The country will remain. The United States government is none of these things. It will go. With that burden lifted from our shoulders, we can once again make our way to better lives. We can renew a process of liberation and liberty that has been frustrated.[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]July 26, 2010[/FONT]​

[/FONT][/FONT]

 

[Chadman]

Yeah - maybe we can go back to those good 'ol Constitutional days when slaves could be legally imported to work for the rich white protestant land owners (it was important to make this one of our main constitutional entries), and clearly label them as 3/5 of a real person. Which, actually in some respects had more value that the women-folk.

I know some around here long for the good 'ol days... at least some of the tea-partiers, that is.

 

[Lumi]

It's always the same reach isn't it?

Maybe if we go back far enough Chad the slaves will have never been brought here?

Stop being ridiculous about the matter, it's easy to see that smaller states don't want that to happen where as a larger State such as CA, which is broke, due in part to funding "non-residents" do where they don't have to put up with the constant Federal meddling like AZ. Oh, we have the Fed meddling in Prop 8, which of course makes "The People" of Ca ignant. That's what happens when a majority doesn't follow the progressive playbook, huh? It doesn't matter how I voted on that Prop where no means yes and yes means no, and let me think about means you could have violent tendencies towards homosexuals. :nono: But I voted NO, which Means YES, I figured let the Gays and Lesbians be as miserable as I was in my 2 marriages.

 

[Chadman]

Without going to far in this - keeping my reach closer, I guess... if we disband our current government, what happens then? Seriously? Who will defend our country? Do you care? I mean I know you have the weapons and bunker in place to hold out during an invasion of our country - for a while, but seriously, disbanding our government? And I'M the one who is reaching? I'm the one who is being ridiculous?

"to form federated organizations for specific and limited purposes"

You mean like the KKK? Or the Black Panthers? Specific and limited purposes, determined by who, and benefiting who? And I'm being ridiculous?

That's enough for one brief ridiculous challenge to another anti-government rant, I suppose. Have at it.

For the record, if we go back far enough, NONE of us would have been brought here. And I doubt that those that were here agree with the theory that those that did come here actually "discovered" much of anything - it was already here, in existence. "We just decided to take it. Much like northern Mexico back in the day, actually.

But, who cares about any of that, when we're considering the rights of "our" people, right?

 

[Lumi]

Federal Government Working to Remove Sovereignty of States

Federal Government Working to Remove Sovereignty of States

Federal Government Working to Remove Sovereignty of States

Activist Post
July 25, 2010

It has been reported that 46 states are on the verge of bankruptcy. Since states are Constitutionally mandated to balance their budgets, and do not possess the ability to print money, they?re finding themselves in a critically weakened position to challenge the Federal Government.

In our republic, states have sovereignty to create and enforce their own laws as long as they don?t violate the U.S. Constitution. The Tenth Amendment gives states the freedom from Federal laws and regulations if they deem them to be unconstitutional.
The Tenth Amendment: which makes explicit the idea that the Federal government is limited only to the powers granted in the Constitution, is generally recognized to be a truism. States and local governments have occasionally attempted to assert exemption from various federal regulations, especially in the areas of labor and environmental controls, using the Tenth Amendment as a basis for their claim.
An oft-repeated quote, from United States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100, 124 (1941), reads as follows:

The amendment states but a truism that all is retained which has not been surrendered. There is nothing in the history of its adoption to suggest that it was more than declaratory of the relationship between the national and state governments as it had been established by the Constitution before the amendment or that its purpose was other than to allay fears that the new national government might seek to exercise powers not granted, and that the states might not be able to exercise fully their reserved powers?(Source)

Recently, it seems the Federal government is overstepping their authority and infringing on the sovereignty of states. Furthermore, given that many broke states will most certainly require a Federal bailout to maintain their basic social structures, we can assume that the Feds will use that to impose even stronger controls.
The Federal government has clearly violated California state law regarding medical marijuana by raiding state-approved legal dispensaries and grow-ops. And now, Obama and company are suing Arizona to overturn their new anti-illegal immigration law, which is essentially a reiteration of the Federal law, just with plans to actually prosecute it.
Additionally, we have seen the steady erosion of the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the use of the military for local law enforcement. Stories of active military and the National Guard helping local law enforcement on operations as routine as random traffic checkpoints and local crimes such as illegal gun and drug searches are becoming everyday news ? again a clear violation of the Tenth Amendment.
It is clear that the goal of Federal government is to centralize and consolidate control as much as possible. Liberty advocates have a growing concern that states teetering on the verge of bankruptcy will require Federal bailouts that will come with sovereignty-smashing strings attached. Based on the clear violations already exhibited by the Federal government, we can only assume that more centralized oppression is on the way.
​

 

[Chadman]

So, the gist of this new article is this:

"46 of states are on the verge of bankruptcy."
- The linked article doesn't even say that, it says that many have budget shortfalls. The first premise of this article is simply false.

The Federal government has clearly violated California state law regarding medical marijuana by raiding state-approved legal dispensaries and grow-ops.

- This seems to be a dispute between the DEA and a local sheriff's department. Like this has never happened before? This is how the government is attacking state's sovereignty? Our nation is going to break up because the DEA took out some arguable (depending on who you ask) marijuana plants, based on concerns about a larger investigation including other suspects? Seems possible to me, and unlikely to be a part of a grand government attack on sovereignty. And maybe the DEA knows more than the sheriff does in this situation? Who knows, really?

Then...

Obama is suing Arizona.
The article claims that states have sovereignty in the situation in their view, and I'd suggest that the states - or the U.S. - do not have sovereignty over being sued. They simply don't. Whether the lawsuit has merit, is appropriate, whatever, is arguable. But they are not above being sued, just like with the NEW Arizona law, the police in that state will not be above being sued, simply if a "concerned" citizen thinks they aren't checking out enough brown skinned individuals based on their own opinion. Probably worth discussing, don't you think?

And the last thing?

Cops in New York working with the Pentagon in violation of Posse Comitatus is not about marijuana and the so-called drug war. It is about searching for weapons and intimidating the American people. As the economy deteriorates the police and military will attempt to disarm the American people.

Is this OPINION arguable? Of course it is. Is it probable political posturing and bullshit? I'd guess so, but that's just me.

Add up all of the "evidence" from this, and I'd say it's another distortion of reality by another anti-government source. Again, that's just me.

 

[Duff Miver]

The world will end 12/21/12.

So why are you worried Illuminati?

 

[Chadman]

With all the crazy environmental events going on, it actually wouldn't surprise me. Seems like the earth might be prepping for some fireworks to pay tribute to the Mayans, eh?

But then it would be the earth acting against our rights as a person, and that won't be cool with some folk, either.

:0060

 

[rusty]

Federal Government Working to Remove Sovereignty of States

Activist Post
July 25, 2010

It has been reported that 46 states are on the verge of bankruptcy. Since states are Constitutionally mandated to balance their budgets, and do not possess the ability to print money, they?re finding themselves in a critically weakened position to challenge the Federal Government.

In our republic, states have sovereignty to create and enforce their own laws as long as they don?t violate the U.S. Constitution. The Tenth Amendment gives states the freedom from Federal laws and regulations if they deem them to be unconstitutional.
The Tenth Amendment: which makes explicit the idea that the Federal government is limited only to the powers granted in the Constitution, is generally recognized to be a truism. States and local governments have occasionally attempted to assert exemption from various federal regulations, especially in the areas of labor and environmental controls, using the Tenth Amendment as a basis for their claim.
An oft-repeated quote, from United States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100, 124 (1941), reads as follows:

The amendment states but a truism that all is retained which has not been surrendered. There is nothing in the history of its adoption to suggest that it was more than declaratory of the relationship between the national and state governments as it had been established by the Constitution before the amendment or that its purpose was other than to allay fears that the new national government might seek to exercise powers not granted, and that the states might not be able to exercise fully their reserved powers?(Source)

Recently, it seems the Federal government is overstepping their authority and infringing on the sovereignty of states. Furthermore, given that many broke states will most certainly require a Federal bailout to maintain their basic social structures, we can assume that the Feds will use that to impose even stronger controls.
The Federal government has clearly violated California state law regarding medical marijuana by raiding state-approved legal dispensaries and grow-ops. And now, Obama and company are suing Arizona to overturn their new anti-illegal immigration law, which is essentially a reiteration of the Federal law, just with plans to actually prosecute it.
Additionally, we have seen the steady erosion of the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the use of the military for local law enforcement. Stories of active military and the National Guard helping local law enforcement on operations as routine as random traffic checkpoints and local crimes such as illegal gun and drug searches are becoming everyday news ? again a clear violation of the Tenth Amendment.
It is clear that the goal of Federal government is to centralize and consolidate control as much as possible. Liberty advocates have a growing concern that states teetering on the verge of bankruptcy will require Federal bailouts that will come with sovereignty-smashing strings attached. Based on the clear violations already exhibited by the Federal government, we can only assume that more centralized oppression is on the way.
​

:mj07: :mj07: Thanks Illuminati I needed a good laugh:facepalm: :mj07: :mj07:

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

The Breakup of the United States​

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]by Michael S. Rozeff[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]​

[/FONT]

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]As the dissatisfactions of Americans with their national government grow, so does the likelihood of the breakup of the United States. I believe that most Americans can improve their well-being by ending the national government, that is, ending the Union. I believe that this goal should shape politics if politics is to do much good.[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]I don?t think Americans are going to be the first people in the modern era to initiate a large-scale anarchy. But Americans might conceivably move back to a federal form of government something like that under the Articles of Confederation. If so, the problem is how to proceed. Many Americans feel (and are) trapped and thwarted by government power.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]I see two paths. Americans can do this either acting as individuals formed into a body politic of 300 million Americans or as 50 body politics organized by state. I think action by state has a better chance of success.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]To act as one body, Americans would have to alter their Constitution. The divisions among Americans make this highly unlikely. Even if it were pursued, the results would be highly uncertain.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]I like to think of federal programs being made optional at either the state or the personal level, but that means ending the Constitution or radically amending it. This takes me back to the other path of change: the States. This path looks more viable.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]We the People created the Constitution through state legislatures. That is a quasi-legal path to undoing the Constitution and thus breaking up the United States. This begins a process by which Americans take back their own government. I say "begins" because most states are also candidates for restructuring. Many local governments are also out of control.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]I don?t think Americans can improve their lot by participating in national politics under the current rules of the national game. I think they have to change the rules. They have to end the Union and get out from under the existing Constitution, which is now entirely controlled and interpreted by the national government.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Since there is no consensus for going back to the original Constitution and since it would have to be rewritten and renegotiated, which is a process of uncertain outcome and which is impractical anyway, this leaves one viable path: ending the Union and ending this Constitution.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Rather than thinking in terms of national politics, which at best can only produce marginal changes and which plays into the hands of the national powers-that-be, it would be far smarter to have no national or federal government at all. Although this involves significant political restructuring, We the People and the States can always retain or exercise options to form federated organizations for specific and limited purposes if we so desire.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]But by what means can Americans undo the Union?[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]A viable means is the withdrawal of consent by Vermonters or Texans or Alaskans or Arizonans or Californians or the citizens of any state to the U.S. government. People gain leverage and power against the national Leviathan by acting as citizens of their respective states. They need to act through their state legislatures, not as citizens of the United States. In the old days of whaling, the method of bringing down the whale was by several crews working together in several boats. It was not by individual whalers rowing around by themselves and confronting Leviathan on their own.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The states entered the Union. Secession once before almost ended the Union. The states are the political entities by which the Union and its burdens and injustices can be ended.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Action through one or more states is one of the few and maybe the only viable political means by which the Union can be broken up.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Contrast this with a national tax revolt, something that I believe is not a viable means of achieving a significant and lasting change in our politics. A tax revolt movement that seeks redress at the national level will not cause the U.S. to break up. That is the politics of accommodation and adjustment. It doesn?t challenge Congress itself. It doesn?t challenge the United States. It doesn?t challenge the Constitution. It leaves the power structure intact. As soon as such a movement is tossed a few crumbs, it loses its momentum. The national government divides it and conquers it. The national government lives on. It can regain its dominance over time by any number of means, such as by invoking some imaginary emergency. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]A tax revolt that works from and through the state legislatures directly undermines the Union. It directly challenges the power of Congress to tax. That?s a far stronger political platform for restructuring the United States.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Outright secession is one political measure in a spectrum of possible actions by which one or more states stand up to the U.S. government. Nullification is another. Withdrawal from the banking system is another. A separate payments system at the state level is a fourth. Refusal to obey any of hundreds of U.S. directives is a fifth. The formation of alliances among states is another.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]In fact, there are so many possible ways by which one or more states stand up to the Union that, given enough time and the right conditions, a breakup is all but assured. The same cannot be said of any movement that seeks to work change by confronting Americans as one large group with their national government.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]All that has to happen at present is a spark lit by one or more States and the Union will go up in smoke. The Empire will fall. The tinder is very dry right now. One bolt of lightning will set the U.S. ablaze.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The breakup can start small. Momentum will do the rest. There will be a bandwagon effect. The accumulated dissatisfactions with the monumental corruption, power-mongering, waste, and totalitarian nature of the United States government will seek and find channels of political relief.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The number of potential actions that can set off a chain reaction is very large. Once one or more of the States throw down the gauntlet, the downfall of the U.S. will be sparked.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]This will come through the financial markets. The value of the United States paper currency depends critically on the taxing power of the United States. Anything that undermines U.S. tax collections undermines the U.S. dollar.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]To bring down the U.S. government, all it may take is for one state to declare that its citizens need no longer pay taxes to the U.S. government. No matter what the national government does next and no matter what complex sequence of political tit for tat ensues, the uncertainty will balloon.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The financial markets will do the rest. A flight from the U.S. dollar will set in. Flight from the dollar will torpedo and sink the national government.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The Chinese and other foreign lenders will be very unhappy about their investments. So will anyone who is a creditor of the U.S. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Financial market prices at present are not factoring in even a small chance of this happening. Lenders to Uncle Sam act as if everything is hunky-dory. U.S. government bonds even look attractive to those who believe further and deeper depression is imminent.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]No break up is visible in the short run. This seems to confirm such thinking. But boiling beneath the surface is a rising stream of heated discontent. Major political change is far more likely than it may seem to superficial observation.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Greek bond prices fell very sharply when the government went into crisis. They only recovered when the rest of Euroland decided to bail out the Greek government and bondholders. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]There is no external bank or government that can or will extend credit to the U.S. to save the dollar once the perception spreads that its tax-collecting power is permanently impaired.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The Federal Reserve can?t save the dollar or the U.S. government by extending credit. The markets will see right through that. In a politically fragile situation where the tax-collecting power of the national government has sunk, the Fed is powerless to save the national government.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Once enough people in a given state gain the conviction that they will be far better off by shutting off the flow of their incomes to Washington, then they will get their legislature to stand up to Washington?s dictates. This will encourage citizens of other states who are in a similar situation.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]There does not have to be a shot heard round the world as on April 19, 1775. A Declaration of Tax Independence will take its place.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Even if such a process of one state standing up against Uncle Sam fails, even if it elicits responses from the national government that thwart immediate success, experience will be gained. The national government is bound to show its true oppressive colors in such an episode. The game changes. A game-changing event or series of events is what is needed.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The government of the United States markets itself as the nation?s defender. It advertises that it provides security nationwide for We the People. It claims that it provides military security, economic security, and social security.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]These are all false claims. More and more Americans recognize these claims as false. More and more Americans recognize that the United States government has reduced their security in all its many forms. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The United States government has succeeded in entangling Americans in an endless succession of foreign wars. It has succeeded in retarding and even reversing standards of living. It has succeeded in raising medical care costs and reducing the quality of medical care. It has perpetuated a Ponzi scheme of social security that is doomed to fail. The United States government is responsible for reducing American freedoms, for spying on Americans, for searching them, and for turning travel into a nightmare.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]More and more Americans realize that promises of security do not create security. More and more Americans realize that the United States government creates insecurity and disorder.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The United States government does not deserve the tax dollars it collects. This is the fundamental bread-and-butter reason for ending the Union. The Constitution allows massive tax collections for purposes enunciated by Washington. There is no way to stop this process, which is killing the country, except by undoing the political foundation by which it is enforced.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The stream of tax dollars flowing to Washington can be turned off by the action of one or more state legislatures who act on behalf of their citizens. When that source of financing is halted, the United States government will be well on its way to breakup. This is the great gift that we should bestow on ourselves and future Americans.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Americans will remain. America will remain. The nation will remain. The People will remain. The country will remain. The United States government is none of these things. It will go. With that burden lifted from our shoulders, we can once again make our way to better lives. We can renew a process of liberation and liberty that has been frustrated.[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]July 26, 2010[/FONT]​

[/FONT][/FONT]

Not as far fetched as its seems and a distinct possibilty.
I'm all for it--let each live with the consequences of their convictions.

Helen Keller would have no prob visualizing the division.

We could call it the redistribution of values and everyone could surround themselves those whose views they identify with.

Would be the ultimate justice.

 

[Lumi]

:mj07: :mj07: Thanks Illuminati I needed a good laugh:facepalm: :mj07: :mj07:

Your response(s) to things you don't comprehend are getting old and stale.

Is the world going to end in 2012? I don't know, it could end today, I live my live in the now to the fullest. 2012 is too far away for me to worry about. July 29, 2010 is more of a significant date to be concerned about.

When there isn't a social program and a Government Handout you have yet to dislike, I guess I can understand :shrug: why you would be against States declaring soveriengty.

I know you are going to respond with "what to do about the Military?"

"I don't know the answer to that" That's above my pay grade.

 

[rusty]

Your response(s) to things you don't comprehend are getting old and stale.

Is the world going to end in 2012? I don't know, it could end today, I live my live in the now to the fullest. 2012 is too far away for me to worry about. July 29, 2010 is more of a significant date to be concerned about.

When there isn't a social program and a Government Handout you have yet to dislike, I guess I can understand :shrug: why you would be against States declaring soveriengty.

I know you are going to respond with "what to do about the Military?"

"I don't know the answer to that" That's above my pay grade.

Sorry.I don't mean any bad.I know some of your views are good .I get a kick out of your posts not in a bad way.

By the way me and my wife work for a living.
It hasn't been easy with a mortgage, kids, etc.

 

[Lumi]

If you want to continue to tread water, with your nose barely above the water line, tread on.

Myself, however choose not too. And have chosen not too 20+ years ago. I started buying Gold in '86 at $380.00 and ounce, more than half my pay as a PFC. One ounce every 3 months, one firearm every 6 months. I learned allot from Sr NONCOMS who had been there and done that. Money management, personal conduct, social behavior, while other troops acted like total assholes, shocking, I know. :scared As a young troopie I went to many places and had done many things, including loan shark, one who had ton's of smokes and poguey bait, of course marked up when in the field. How much do you think a pack of Marlboros or Newports went for in 86,87,88,89.... for a troops who needed smokes? $50.00 pay back in 2 weeks $60.00, every week after that it went up $10.00. It all contibuted to my purchase of more metals and peace makers :00hour

States declaring Sovereignty is a "EFFF YOU" to DC to get their shit together and quit fucking the people, all the people of the United States. And that does include the suit against AZ.

States do have the right to declare soverignty,

LEAD, FOLLOW, OR GET OUT OF THE WAY

 

[Duff Miver]

Didn't The Confederacy try something like this once? How did that work out for them?

Instead of gold you should invest in Confederate currency.

$380 invested in gold in 1986 would be worth $1180 today.

$380 invested in the Dow Jones in 1986 would be worth $2857 today plus dividends reinvested for a total of approx $3571.

How's that gold thingy working out for you?

 

[Lumi]

You were still shitting yellow in 86, now you are just plain yellow.

What have you done for the country besides collect subsides and cry about the doers?

How dare you compare me to that fuck stick, but I guess it's better than your idol Karl Marx?

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Muffy per your--

"Cut taxes but keep your government hands off my Medicare, Social Security, Farm Subsidies, School Loans, the Defense budget, free public schools and roads and parks. Don't cut the FBI, CDC, FAA, CIA or any other agency which protects me, but CUT MY TAXES!!"

Thats where seperation comes in--Those who pay taxes can manage above
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What you need to be concerned on your side of the wall is
you and your parasitic base that don't pay taxes yet collect--medicade-food stamps--housing subsidy--healthcare subsidies the 80% illigetimacy cradle to grave care--iilegal sanctuary-80% of prison population ETC
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
--as I said--to each their own--live with your convictions--and best part is you won't have to put up with all us nasty ole tax payors--farmers--military--job providing corporations etc

--and you'll be getting nothing but dust out of that ole gov tit.

 

[Duff Miver]

How dare you compare me to that fuck stick?

You are his disciple, Mr. God, guns and gold. And a proven financial (invest in gold) moron to boot. You'd have made more money investing in peanut butter futures. Your great gold investment hasn't even kept pace with inflation. LMAO !!!!!

What a dolt.

 

[Duff Miver]

Muffy per your--

"Cut taxes but keep your government hands off my Medicare, Social Security, Farm Subsidies, School Loans, the Defense budget, free public schools and roads and parks. Don't cut the FBI, CDC, FAA, CIA or any other agency which protects me, but CUT MY TAXES!!"

Thats where seperation comes in--Those who pay taxes can manage above
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What you need to be concerned on your side of the wall is
you and your parasitic base that don't pay taxes yet collect--medicade-food stamps--housing subsidy--healthcare subsidies the 80% illigetimacy cradle to grave care--iilegal sanctuary-80% of prison population ETC
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
--as I said--to each their own--live with your convictions--and best part is you won't have to put up with all us nasty ole tax payors--farmers--military--job providing corporations etc

--and you'll be getting nothing but dust out of that ole gov tit.

BWAAAHHHAAAHHAAA! You monkey-turd. I've paid more in taxes than you'll ever hope to see. BWWAAAHHHAAAAHHAAAA!

 

[Lumi]

You are his disciple, Mr. God, guns and gold. And a proven financial (invest in gold) moron to boot. You'd have made more money investing in peanut butter futures. Your great gold investment hasn't even kept pace with inflation. LMAO !!!!!

What a dolt.

Glenn Beck wasn't even on the radar in 86. Yeah I'm a dolt, keep worshipping your idols Che', or should I call you Mao?

 

[Duff Miver]

Yeah I'm a dolt

True.:mj07: