US Government

1. 65

   Wayne Orvisburgposted 15 years ago

   The price of gold should be determined by the free market. Gold is so "expensive" now, because the dollar is becoming worth less and less.
   
   Still maintain the gold standard, (that can't be manipulated by a president) is the way to go.

   replyreport
2. 60

   mdburksposted 15 years ago

   Here is a little artical from Histor.com on the gold pricing and several Presidents  http://www.history.com/this-day-in-hist … p;id=59256
   Read it, it is interesting.

   replyreport
3. 59

   mikelongposted 15 years ago

   This U.S. veteran realizes that change does not come with elections...but with the actions of the little people, who aren't paying too close attention most of the time...
   
   Unless we are willing to tackle the serious issues ourselves, and not continue to be dependent on lackey politicians to work "for" us, there is no opportunity for substantive change...
   
   If people in this nation, the U.S., cannot see the importance of places like the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach....
   
   If people continue to enable production jobs to run to Mexico and elsewhere unabated......
   
   and if we continue to let people like Dick Cheney shape our future national policies.......
   
   there is not much to look at....
   
   California is currently running a 20 billion dollar deficit that has to be bridged in 5 and a half months or so.....more job losses.....more home foreclosures...more lost tax revenue (and California is the financial bread basket of the nation).
   
   all the while Hawaii doesn't even have enough money to send a man to Congress (1 million dollars needed for their election fund, and they only have 5 thousand dollars available).....as in ecosystems, the health of our society can be measured in the plights of its largest and smallest members.....
   
   It does not look good....
   
   People can gripe and point fingers all they want, but at the end of the day nothing has been done...
   
   Unabated globalisation...the "race to the bottom" has to be curtailed and restrained.....and real solutions to our ongoing national debt crisis need to be put forward...

   replyreport
   1. 70

      rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      I agree and as long as we allow the very rich to determine through lobbying congress and out and out buying the favor they seek to remain in power we will all suffer.  The vote is the only power "We The People" have and that has become a contentious issue with recent elections on the national scene. 
      
      The poison or silver bullet to counter the vote for politicians is the absolute polarization of the electorate.  With constant lies, distortions and misdirection they are able to adequately divide us and manipulate the vote to serve their needs.
      
      I just wonder how long the people will sleep in this false state and wake up to the real issues and not the party fiascos we constantly become embroiled in.

      replyreport
   2. 65

      Wayne Orvisburgposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      So do you think the Federal Govt should get rid of agencies like the CIA or the Dept of Education? That's what Ron Paul proposed last election and when you hear his argument it almost makes sense.

      replyreport
4. 59

   mikelongposted 15 years ago

   I don't know exactly what the department of education or cia have to do with globalization/jobs going elsewhere (aside from the cia being used to keep "developing" nations in check)...
   
   I would definitely eliminate the "no child left behind act" and numerous other policies.....
   
   My issue is this...if there is no tax revenue to come in (as in California or Hawaii) the system fails....If California can not pay up to the Federal government it's lion share of tax revenue, then the nation suffers severely...
   
   300 billion dollars worth of goods flow into the ports of los angeles and long beach each year...at least they did....times are changing, and some of these alterations are permanent...like the loss of production jobs...they aren't coming back...
   
   The "little people" have to change what they do, from  the people/parties they vote for to the places they go to buy their things....
   
   .....and ultimately, men like Dick Cheney need to be kept as far from governance as possible.....any hint of conflict of interest needs to be investigated, and those found wanting need to get themselves a new line of work...
   
   Check out Cheney's Halliburton stock worth since 2005.....and then say "thank you America for being so gullible and naive."
   
   I voted for Bush at the time....so I know I am responsible for what has happened as well.....which is why I think I am so vocal about this...learning needs to come from mistakes, and i don't want to see the same error repeated in the future...

   replyreport
5. 65

   Wayne Orvisburgposted 15 years ago

   It had more to do with reducing expenses and the size of the federal govt.

   replyreport
6. 59

   mikelongposted 15 years ago

   Reducing the size of government isn't the issue.  In California the State and other government agencies employ more people than any other sector...
   
   The government print the money, the government dishes it out through programs and paychecks, and then the people give it back through taxes and other means....
   
   Our problem is that the money has stopped flowing back into our system.....more of it is being socked away in the funds of the elite and their corporations/foundations...
   
   Look at the bonus money handed out by bailed out banks, even up to this point.....look at the no-bid contracting, the excessive "consultant" fees and the paying off of Iraqi sheiks...
   
   Wealth has not diminished, it just flows through more constricted and fewer paths...that is the issue.
   
   Too many are clouded in the "economic/political" smokescreen to see....there are too many trees in this forest for a single one to stand out maybe...
   
   Well, we will all get what we paid for, through our action, misaction, or apathy.....such is the way of life...
   
   If we have buyers there will be sellers.......and we have no shortages of salesmen........why do the ones holding the greater pursestrings continue to hold back?
   
   I have my answer to this question..it is up to individuals to decide for themselves...
   
   on a final note (for this particular statement) when this current "slump" occurred, it was not Walmart, or major corporations that could not get short term loans to keep their inventories and employees going...these groups do not deal with this type of operational financing.....
   
   It was rather the "little guy" who took the hit.....while the "big boys" kept on pumping, using the weight of their national/international strength to ride out the storm....and gain in overall market share when the "recession" subsides....
   
   Small banks disappeared, the big got bigger...
   
   Recession? I call it the economic/political elite version of chemotherapy.....they are strong enough to survive....but the majority aren't....
   
   Thoughts?

   replyreport
   1. 70

      rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      The economic downturn was a total victory for the very big corporations in this country.  Instead of being allowed to fail they were propped up by the government to not pay for any consequences for their actions.  If they were there would have been conditions for the money we now can't account for.  To further the complete fiasco the banks bought up the smaller banks instead of making the loans they said they would to stimulate the economy.

      replyreport
7. 59

   mikelongposted 15 years ago

   and we pay the whole way, and watch as our governments are being stripped of their regulatory power....at least that is what I am seeing on the local and state levels here in California.....and we are the biggest...what will trickle down from here?

   replyreport
   1. 70

      rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      The funny thing that completes this is the latest healthcare menagerie of excuses and lies.  To think that the vote of one senator can be bought by congress so the bill would essentially be free for his constituency in front of the countries eyes.  One has to wonder if he will be given a second look in his bid to be re-elected by his constituency when they have profited from his criminal act.
      
      We the unknowing, led by the blind are just holding ourselves back when it comes to cleaning out the congress of all the slimebags that rape us.

      replyreport
8. 59

   mikelongposted 15 years ago

   I look at all the hate-emails...from the one I wrote a hub about (dealing with Muslims...with the logical tie in to the "Obama is a Muslim" paranoia running amok through much of American society), to the recent one I received about the ongoing federal court case trying to figure out if Obama is an American citizen.....there is enough anger here...
   
   If these people are not able to reach their objective, of throwing out Obama and "liberals" through the legal processes...I'm really wondering about what lengths would be gone to in order to evoke their "change"......
   
   I do not want to live in a martial law society....to a greater degree than I already am....but I am watching as foolish-selfish-hateful minds ally themselves for a fight that they believe is inevitable...which may very well be...
   
   All the while...again.....the elites will stay back, and profit from the social/economic/political pillaging that takes place...
   
   The worste part of this is the person I receive a lot of these messages from is an Armenian....born here, cushy lifestyle.....all the while not remembering what befell his own people when similar struggles and chords were played out in the Ottoman Empire....

   replyreport
9. 65

   Wayne Orvisburgposted 15 years ago

   Mikelong, so you're saying corporations are too big and the government needs to do something about it?

   replyreport
   1. 70

      rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      I think the favor bought by the corporations should be eliminated and publicly financed campaign of limited timeframes should be instituted.  This would go towards curtailing the lousy way favor is doled out in Congress.

      replyreport
10. 65

    Wayne Orvisburgposted 15 years ago

    Also, the lobbyists that work for the corps and get such high restirctions placed on certain commerce that smaller companies can't even get in the market to compete. Once again, get rid of lobbying.

    replyreport
11. 59

    mikelongposted 15 years ago

    Some are too powerful.....  that is the more important word to use...
    
    Their reach is too deep, and their influence too much...

    replyreport
    1. 70

       rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

       I really don't see how you can place much more restrictions on big business other than cutting off their access to special deals and legislation that compliments their domination in any one area.
       
       I believe the slimebags on the hill are the ones that need the reigning in because of their rotten backroom antics.  They operate in the open most of the time until the crap gets too deep.  Then the real screwing begins.

       replyreport
12. 59

    mikelongposted 15 years ago

    The no-bid contract needs to be eliminated....
    
    Pushes for increased executive power need to be curtailed...
    
    and the concept of "party" that can work to override the checks and balances set up in our national system (branches of government self-interested in competition) need to be checked...
    
    When you have a man like Cheney who worked for Nixon, and openly dispised the inquiries of Congressional investigations....who then enters the legislature and argues that the executive branch needs to be strengthened, and that congress should back off.....and then becomes vice-president behind the man who has come to symbolize abuse of executive power....30 years of on again off again public "service"..while in between he works for halliburton/kbr......
    
    Such ties should not be allowed to exist in public office.......

    replyreport
13. 65

    Wayne Orvisburgposted 15 years ago

    You can't say someone who worked for a corporation can't serve in public office just because of who they worked for. However, once again there shouldn't have been a no bid contract with Halliburton/KBR.

    replyreport
    1. 70

       rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

       This is all theory as the "slime on the hill" has got ahold of the reigns and will not relinquish them as they have worked far too many years to let it slip by now.
       
       They are all part of a corrupt system that we the people uphold every election with blinders on.  Until we are willing to look at this from an objective perspective there can be no change and the slime will paint their masterpiece of corruption and crime to our undoing. Greed has no boundaries and in this country money buys freedom.

       replyreport
14. 65

    Wayne Orvisburgposted 15 years ago

    I'll tell you guys what I did last election. It may sound ignorant, but I just voted for whoever was not the incumbant.

    replyreport
    1. 70

       rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

       I pretty much have a tendency to vote that way also.  I got it from a very humble source, a bumper sticker.  The bumper sticker read, "If you are in, you're out".
       
       But I do look at the background more closely and try to head the slime off at the pass. Sometimes you have to hold your nose when you pull the lever but it is a start I must admit.

       replyreport
    2. 0

       A Texanposted 15 years agoin reply to this

       My Congressman always votes the way I want him to, now the Senators from my State are a different story. I think researching the candidate and making an informed decision is the way to go, too bad nobody bothered doing that with the scumbag living in the White house now.

       replyreport
       1. 70

          rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

          The funny thing is the slimebag in the other party had more baggage and some lousy choices on his part that were too hard for most to swallow.

          replyreport
          1. 0

             A Texanposted 15 years agoin reply to this

             There were other choices!

             replyreport
             1. 70

                rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                I agree and isn't it unfortunate the parties offered up the crap they did for us to vote for?  The problem with letting the parties choose the candidate is that it is not for the good of the people they offer these slimebags but for the good of their parties and their benefactors.

                replyreport
15. 65

    Wayne Orvisburgposted 15 years ago

    I actually do research them, fotunately for me I live in a state that is pretty well set in their ways so I would have voted for the same person anyway. There was one good choice in the last presidential election that everyone made sound like a whack job! Mr. Ron Paul!

    replyreport
    1. 70

       rhamsonposted 15 years agoin reply to this

       I whole heartedly agree.  Ron Paul was my choice and I liked his straight forward talk and constitutional ferver.
       
       Unfortunately the media did not like him and showed it during the debates by portraying him as a crackpot.

       replyreport
16. 59

    jobisterposted 15 years ago

    In addition to the corporate meddling in Government. Politicians should not be allowed to make it a career being in government. Too often it becomes their agenda over their constituents goals.

    replyreport