This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Secession Cometh to America?
There is much talk about the fragmentation of the international order. The failure of the Doha Round at the WTO, the efforts to make national firewalls are digital information, the decline cross-border movement of capital since 2008, the decline trade, the rise of anti-immigration sentiment all are part of the pessimistic picture painted by some observers.
The Scottish referendum also underscored how vulnerable the nation-state itself is to the centrifugal forces that have been unleashed. Parts of Spain want to leave. Parts of Italy and Germany have made secessionist noises. Sometimes it appears if it weren't for Brussels, Belgium might have ceased to be a country.
It turns out the US also may be subject to secessionist sentiment. This Great Graphic is the result of a survey Reuters conducted and Jim Gaines wrote about here. It was an internet-based survey that included about 9000 people. It asked a straightforward question: "Do you support or oppose the idea of your state peacefully withdrawing from the United States of America and the federal government?"
The results Gaines showed are on a regional basis. If you click here, you will be able to filter the data by state and numerous demographic categories. Gaines reports that Republicans favor their state leaving more than Democrats, the right more than the left-leaning independents, younger rather than older, lower income more than higher income and high school educated more than college educated.
In aggregate the results showed about a quarter (23.9%) of the respondents answered in the affirmative. This is greater than the support for most of the anti-EU parties in Europe, like the UKIP and AfD. Does this mean that next year, the 150th anniversary of the end of the war for Southern independence (Civil War), investors should be concerned about a new secessionist movement?
Gaines reports that follow-up conversations with some of the respondents found that the secessionist vote was more a protest vote than a genuine desire to secede. The sense of aggrievement, Gaines found, was comprehensive, bipartisan, and deeply felt, even if somewhat incoherent. It is an expression of disapproval of the direction that the country has moved, or is moving in, rather than a call for independence.
Some surveys in Europe has found, in a similar vein, that many voters of the anti-EU parties were also expressing disapproval and frustration. In Germany, most recently the AfD won representation in two German state governments on a conservative social agenda, not its anti-EU stance, which it played down, for example.
The political elites in the US and Europe have their work cut out for them. There may be an economic solution for part of the problem, but it is not just about the pace of growth and historically high level of unemployment in many countries. The issue of disparity of income and wealth means that aggregate measures of economic activity are no longer sufficient proof that more citizens have access to a better life. In many high income countries, the crisis is over the social contract, which has fallen into disrepair, and respected primarily in its breach.
»
- advertisements -
What most Americans today fail to realize is that the idea of SOVEREIGNTY has been turned upside-down. Today most Americans believe that the U.S. government is SUPERIOR to the state governments, which in turn are SUPERIOR to the people. Those people in favor of secession may not realize it, but what they are seeking is a RETURN to the ORIGINAL RELATIONSHIP among the people, the states and the U.S. government
BEFORE the Revolution, all Americans were subjects of the King of England; the King alone was the sovereign.
AFTER the Declaration of Independence was signed, the PEOPLE became the sovereigns - each man (or woman) became his own sovereign - as the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Chisholm v Georgia (below): sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereignty." sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects
Each man was an individual sovereign - no other man could tell him what to do or what not to do. The only LAW as the Common Law in which a "crime" was defined as "physical injury to another person or another person's property". And enforcement required signing affidavits under oath, the issuance of an arrest warrant by a locally-elected magistrate, then a trial by jury (12 jurors) in a true "court of record" (a Common Law court; where NO statutes apply AND the "judge" or "magistrate" acted as a supervisor of the proceedings - he could issue NO orders, fines , etc.) ONLY the jury could decide both the LAW and the FACTS in each case - and each man (the "accuser" and the "accused" ) had to present his own case to the jury. An lawyer could act as an advisor only, but could NOT speak - the accuser and accused (plus any witnesses they had) were the only people allowed to speak.
"...at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereignty." sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects...with none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the Chisholm v. Georgia (US) 2 Dall 419, 454, 1 L Ed 440, 455 @DALL 1793 pp471-472
“The people of this State, as the successors of its former sovereign, are entitled to all the rights which formerly belonged to the King by his prerogative. Through the medium of their Legislature they may exercise all the powers which previous to the Revolution could have been exercised either by the King alone, or by him in conjunction with his Parliament; subject only to those restrictions which have been imposed by the Constitution of this State or of the U.S.”
Lansing v. Smith, 21 D. 89., 4 Wendel 9 (1829) (New York)
"D." = Decennial Digest
Lansing v. Smith, 4 Wend. 9 (N.Y.) (1829), 21 Am.Dec. 89
10C Const. Law Sec. 298; 18 C Em.Dom. Sec. 3, 228;
37 C Nav.Wat. Sec. 219; Nuls Sec. 1`67; 48 C Wharves Sec. 3, 7.
NOTE: Am.Dec.=American Decision, Wend. = Wendell (N.Y.)
"There is no such thing as a power of inherent sovereignty in the government of the United States .... In this country sovereignty resides in the people, and Congress can exercise no power which they have not, by their Constitution entrusted to it: All else is withheld." -- Julliard v. Greenman, 110 U.S. 421
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The American People Are Individual Sovereigns ~~ IF they choose to be . . .
United States of America Was NEVER Intended to Be a Democracy
John-Henry Hill, M.D.
Reposted: June 18, 2014
If you do NOT know the information below, then you do NOT know the foundations of American government and law.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Source: http://johnhenryhill.wordpress.com/2014/06/18/the-american-people-are-individual-sovereigns-if-they-choose-to-be-2/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The fact is that the United States was NEVER intended to be a democracy. Rather, it was intended to be a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC, with the central (federal) government having very few and limited powers; and the States having all other powers not delegated to the central government in the Constitution. Even Alexander Hamilton, arguing in the Federalist Papers that a "Bill of Rights" was NOT needed, wrote that the Federal Government could NEVER exercise any power or authority that was not explicitly enumerated in the Constitution.
Republic: A government in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whom those powers are specially delegated. In re Duncan, 139 U.S. 449, 11 S.Ct. 573, 35 L.Ed. 219; Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162, 22 L.Ed. 627. Black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, p. 626
Democracy. That form of government in which the sovereign power resides in and is exercised by the whole body of free citizens directly, or indirectly through a system of representation, as distinguished from a monarchy, aristocracy, or oligarchy. Black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, p. 388
Of course, the federal government has greatly expanded its powers, at the expense of the States and the People. But the most fundamental principle of any written constitution is that government CANNOT do whatever it chooses! The U.S. never was intended to be, never was and is still NOT a democracy.
"The authority to judge what are the powers of the government, and what are the liberties of the people, must necessarily be vested in one or the other of the parties themselves--the government, or the people; because there is no third party to whom it can be entrusted. If the authority be vested in the government, the government is absolute, and the people have no liberties except such as the government sees fit to indulge them with.” Lysander Spooner
"The powers delegated by the Constitution to the federal government are FEW and DEFINED [explicitly stated within the Constitution]. Those which remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The powers reserved to the States will extend to all the objects which concern the lives, liberties and properties of the people." James Madison
"No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid." Alexander Hamilton
"Do not separate text [of the Constitution] from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government." James Madison
Ninth Amendment (Bill of Rights)– "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the People." (re: RIGHTS)
Tenth Amendment – "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the People." (re: POWERS; and NOT RIGHTS)
“The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy. One’s right to life, liberty and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly may NOT be submitted to vote; they depend on no elections.” Robert H. Jackson, Justice, U.S. Supreme Court
"The particular phraseology of the Constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the Constitution is void." (John Marshall, Chief Justice of U.S. Supreme Court, Marbury v. Madison)
“The several states composing the United States of America are NOT united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government; but by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a general government for the special purposes [and] delegated to that government certain definite (defined) powers and whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force. To this compact each state acceded as a state, and is an integral party, its co-states forming, as to itself, the other party. The government created by this compact was NOT made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself, since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers.” Thomas Jefferson: Delegated, Defined and Limited Powers by U.S. Constitution (in his draft of the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798)
“To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps... and their power is more dangerous as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruption of time and party, its members would become despots.” -- Thomas Jefferson - The People as the Ultimate Arbiters of All Constitutional Questions: NOT Judges
[in opposition to Marbury v Madison decision by Supreme Court]
"On every question of construction [interpretation] [of the Constitution] let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or intended against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." Thomas Jefferson
"If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an AMENDMENT in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be NO change by usurpation [“power grabs”]; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed." George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
So, What is “Sovereignty”
In old England the land was owned by the king (the sovereign), who would grant permission to select people to use this land in exchange for political, financial and military support. In modern legal terms we would say that the king possessed “allodial title” to all land and the nobles possessed “equity title” – the nobles had the “right of use” of the land, but all land was ultimately owned by the king. (In America prior to 1993 the people, as individual sovereigns, possessed “allodial title” to land they owned. Since 1993 Americans - with the exception of some parts of Texas - possess their land under “equity title” only, as their land was seized by the United States municipal corporation ) Under English law ALL land must be owned by a someone (a man or corporation); there is no such thing as un-owned land, (English law can be contrasted with some other cultures where there is no concept of private, personal land ownership, e.g., American Indians throughout the Americas, various cultures of the South Pacific prior to colonization by Europeans.) In turn these nobles (along with a very few freemen landowners or “freeholders”) rented this land to tenant farmers. If a non-landowner wished to cultivate land, he was forced to rent this land by: 1.) swearing an oath of allegiance to his landlord; 2.) agreeing to turn over rental payments to his landlord; and 3.) agreeing to the rules as set forth by his landlord. The concept of swearing an oath is extremely important in English and American law. In old England, “swearing an oath” or “pledging” was considered a contract, provided “consideration” was exchanged between the parties to the oath – such as allegiance and rent to one’s landlord in exchange the use of land and protection. Breaking that oath or contract was considered a “dishonoring” of the offended party and created a “cause of action” for the offended under commercial law, who then had the right to seek remedy in court. (One should be cognizant of the fact that all contract-commercial law is based on the system of “honor” and “dishonor”. In American courts today a man who swears an oath under penalty of perjury has created a contract between himself and the court – he has pledged to tell the truth in exchange for the legal protection of the court.) Prior to swearing allegiance, the English freeman possessed all the rights and protections of Natural Law (often called Fundamental Law) and Common Law; he was NOT subject to the rules (“private law”) of the landlord. However, having sworn an oath to the landlord, the man became a tenant and “subject” of his landlord or “lord”. In short, by contract (i.e., what we now call “commercial law”) a freeman would surrender some of his Common Law rights in exchange for the privilege of farming the lord’s land[i], thereby making himself a “subject” of the lord – that is, the tenant was waiving the exercise of his Natural rights and placing himself under the jurisdiction of the rules or “private law” of his landlord. Similarly, “sovereignty in government” is most properly interpreted as the individual man being subject to the private rules of conduct (“private contract law”) set forth by the lord or a government, but ONLY because he knowingly and freely consented to be governed by these rules, i.e., “consent of the governed”.
The English Common Law was based on custom and precedent rather than by written code or statutes. Equity Law, initially involving royal edicts, had evolved from the royal power to order or prohibit specific acts (Chancery Law) into the power to legislate “private law”: acts, codes and statutes for those who voluntarily engage via contracts in commerce. This last point must be emphasized: since all valid contracts are voluntary and require informed consent of all parties, then the contractual “private law” created by legislated statutes, acts, codes, regulations, etc. requires the voluntary consent of all parties “consent of the governed”. Just as a man was subject to a landlord only after he voluntarily consented to contract (“private law”) as a tenant, under the “consent of the governed” principle, so too is voluntary consent required from a man in order for him to be subject to (under the “jurisdiction” of ) legislated statutes, acts, codes and regulations. Therefore, it is vital to understand that “consent of the governed” originally meant the informed and voluntary consent of EACH individual man to a contract (such as a constitution, statute, act, code, ordinance, by-law, etc.) for and by a government. In addition, it is essential to understand that “consent of the governed” also meant the consent of EACH individual man to any changes in that contract for government and/or to the rules of that government, such as acts-statutes, codes, regulations and ordinances. Finally, since each man is an individual sovereign, that man may Every man in colonial America, Britain and the early United States of America understood this concept. Sadly, in today’s America most people have accepted the distorted concept of a collective “consent of the governed” – that through elections a majority (or even a plurality) of the people somehow have granted consent for ALL of the people. We see clearly that “consent of the governed” meant individual man’s consent; not some ethereal type of collective consent.
Following the Declaration of Independence and the American Revolution the people were and forever remain “individual sovereigns”. The concept of individual sovereignty stands on its own as a respected and valid concept, at least to those sufficiently educated and informed to understand it. As a king is a sovereign, so each man is an individual sovereign – and just as a sovereign king may consent to restrictions on his rights, so may each man so consent. But the king and the individual retain their sovereignty, which is not forfeited by any contracts or agreements. Therefore, a sovereign (either a King or an individual man) can withdraw his consent at any time for any reason.
"...at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereignty." sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects...with none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the Chisholm v. Georgia (US) 2 Dall 419, 454, 1 L Ed 440, 455 @DALL 1793 pp471-472
“The people of this State, as the successors of its former sovereign, are entitled to all the rights which formerly belonged to the King by his prerogative. Through the medium of their Legislature they may exercise all the powers which previous to the Revolution could have been exercised either by the King alone, or by him in conjunction with his Parliament; subject only to those restrictions which have been imposed by the Constitution of this State or of the U.S.”
Lansing v. Smith, 21 D. 89., 4 Wendel 9 (1829) (New York)
"D." = Decennial Digest
Lansing v. Smith, 4 Wend. 9 (N.Y.) (1829), 21 Am.Dec. 89
10C Const. Law Sec. 298; 18 C Em.Dom. Sec. 3, 228;
37 C Nav.Wat. Sec. 219; Nuls Sec. 1`67; 48 C Wharves Sec. 3, 7.
NOTE: Am.Dec.=American Decision, Wend. = Wendell (N.Y.)
"There is no such thing as a power of inherent sovereignty in the government of the United States .... In this country sovereignty resides in the people, and Congress can exercise no power which they have not, by their Constitution entrusted to it: All else is withheld." -- Julliard v. Greenman, 110 U.S. 421
"The very meaning of 'sovereignty' is that the decree of the sovereign makes law." American Banana Co. v. United Fruit Co., 29 S.Ct. 511, 513, 213 U.S. 347, 53 L.Ed. 826, 19 Ann.Cas. 1047.
"'Sovereignty' means that the decree of sovereign makes law, and foreign courts cannot condemn influences persuading sovereign to make the decree." Moscow Fire Ins. Co. of Moscow, Russia v. Bank of New York & Trust Co., 294 N.Y.S. 648, 662, 161 Misc. 903.
The concept of individual sovereignty [1] stands on its own as a respected and valid concept – at least to those sufficiently educated and informed to understand it. As a king is a sovereign, so each man is an individual sovereign – and just as a sovereign king may consent to restrictions on his rights, so may each man so consent. But the king and the individual retain their sovereignty, which is not forfeited by any contracts or agreements.
[1] SOVEREIGNTY (Black's Law Dictionary, Fourth Edition) “The power to do everything in a state without accountability,--to make laws, to execute and to apply them, to impose and collect taxes and levy contributions, to make war or peace, to form treaties of alliance or of commerce with foreign nations, and the like.” Story, Const. Sec 207
“Sovereignty in government is that public authority which directs or orders what is to be done by each member associated in relation to the end of the association. It is the supreme power by which any citizen is governed and is the person or body of persons in the state to whom there is politically no superior. The necessary existence of the state and that right and power which necessarily follow is "sovereignty."” Today "sovereignty in government” in its most expansive sense is meant as “supreme, absolute, uncontrollable power, the absolute right to govern. The word which by itself comes nearest to being the definition of "sovereignty" is will or volition as applied to political affairs.” City of Bisbee v. Cochise County, 52 Ariz. 1, 78 P.2d 982, 986.
RESERVATION OF SOVEREIGNTY: "[15] (b) Even if the Tribe's power to tax were derived solely from its power to exclude non-Indians from the reservation, the Tribe has the authority to impose the severance tax. Non-Indians who lawfully enter tribal lands remain subject to a tribe's power to exclude them, which power includes the lesser power to tax or place other conditions on the non-Indian's conduct or continued presence on the reservation. The Tribe's role as commercial partner with petitioners should not be confused with its role as sovereign. It is one thing to find that the Tribe has agreed to sell the right to use the land and take valuable minerals from it, and quite another to find that the Tribe has abandoned its sovereign powers simply because it has not expressly reserved them through a contract. To presume that a sovereign forever waives the right to exercise one of its powers unless it expressly reserves the right to exercise that power in a commercial agreement turns the concept of sovereignty on its head. MERRION ET AL., DBA MERRION & BAYLESS, ET AL. v. JICARILLA APACHE TRIBE ET AL. 1982.SCT.394 , 455 U.S. 130, 102 S. Ct. 894, 71 L. Ed. 2d 21, 50 U.S.L.W. 4169 pp. 144-148.
In Bond v. U.S. (2011) the Supreme Court recognized individual sovereignty when it ruled 9-0 that a criminal defendant – not just states - indicted on charges of violating a federal statute, has standing to challenge the validity of the statute on the ground that it infringes on the powers reserved to the states and/or to the people under the Tenth Amendment. Bond v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2355, 180 L. Ed. 2d 269 (2011) [2011 BL 158313]
It would have been more appropriate had the Supreme Court affirmed individual sovereignty over the federal government using the 9th Amendment, but unfortunately Bond’s attorneys made a crucial error by choosing ONLY the 10th Amendment on which to base the challenge to federal jurisdiction, thereby limiting the Court’s scope. Despite winning the appeal, Bond’s attorneys’ error was important in that it dealt only with POWERS (10th Amendment); NOT INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS (9th Amendment).
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Three points deserve emphasis here.
(1) The 9th Amendment guaranteed the natural RIGHTS possessed by the individual man (the people), whether or not listed in the Constitution or Bill of Rights (amendments 1-10). Thus, the 9th Amendment is an affirmation of individual sovereignty.
(2) The 10th Amendment guaranteed the POWERS reserved to the States or the people (as individuals) provided that:
(a) such powers had not been delegated to the federal government in the Constitution; OR
(b) such powers had not been prohibited to it by the States.
(3) While a POWER derived from a right may be delegated and the exercise of a RIGHT temporarily waived, a man, as an individual sovereign, NEVER waives or gives up possession of his natural rights.
While item (a) above – the issue of “delegated powers” - is often brought up in the courts, the issue of “powers prohibited by the States” is often ignored in terms of the powers of a single sovereign State. As the papers of the Federalists and anti-Federalists make clear, the “powers prohibited by the States” clause affirms the right of each State to prohibit the exercise of a particular power – in short, what is currently being termed in newspapers as the “state nullification of federal statutes” under the concept of each State’s sovereignty over the federal government. However, it should be remembered that each individual man forever has retained all of his natural rights and that, as an individual sovereign, his rights are NOT subject to any limitations by government. He may temporarily delegate some POWERS to a government, but as an individual sovereign with all his RIGHTS intact, a man may revoke from government those delegated POWERS at any time for any reason at his own will – the man’s wish becomes the law. Once again, “The very meaning of 'sovereignty' is that the decree of the sovereign makes law.” American Banana Co. v. United Fruit Co., 29 S.Ct. 511, 513, 213 U.S. 347, 53 L.Ed. 826, 19 Ann.Cas. 1047 and “To presume that a sovereign forever waives the right to exercise one of its powers unless it expressly reserves the right to exercise that power in a commercial agreement turns the concept of sovereignty on its head.” [Merrion et al., DBA Merrion & Bayless, et al. v. Jicarilla Apache Tribe et al. (1982) 455 U.S. 130, 102 S. Ct. 894, 71 L. Ed. 2d 21, 50 U.S.L.W. 4169 pp. 144_148]
It should be noted that in America the various States were considered individual, sovereign countries; and each State was considered was “foreign country” with respect to the other States. Similarly, when the Union called the United States of America was formed, each of the various States was considered a “foreign country” with respect to the federal government. Therefore, a federal court is considered a “foreign court” with respect to each of the various States and to the people. This concept remains valid today, as the Supreme Court has
affirmed numerous times. In Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.,240 U.S. 1 (1916), the Supreme Court ruled that Brushaber, under the law, was a "nonresident alien” of the United States corporation. Frank Brushaber made an important statement of fact which remained unchallenged at every level in the federal courts. He identified himself as a citizen of the State of New York and a resident of the Borough of Brooklyn, in the City of New York. He did not identify himself as a "citizen of the United States", as a "United States citizen" or as a "resident of the United States". He indicated that he lived and worked in New York State, outside the District of Columbia and outside any territory, possession or enclave governed by the Congress of the United States. "Enclaves" are areas within the 50 States which are expressly "ceded" to Congress by the acts of State Legislatures (e.g., military bases).
The Supreme Court ruled that Brushaber was a "nonresident" because he lived and worked outside the areas of land over which the Congress has exclusive jurisdiction. The authority to have exclusive jurisdiction over this land was granted to Congress by the authorities at Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 ("1:8:17"), and Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2 ("4:3:2"), in the U.S. Constitution – what some legal experts have called the “FEDERAL ZONE”. The Supreme Court also ruled that Brushaber was an "alien" because his statement of citizenship was taken as proof that he was not a citizen of the federal zone. He was not a "citizen of the United States" nor a "United States citizen", either through birth or naturalization, because the term "United States" in this context means only the federal zone. Therefore, he was an alien with respect to the District of Columbia and the federal enclaves, territories and possessions over which the Congress has exclusive legislative jurisdiction. This may sound strange to the casual reader, but the federal statutes do not refer to creatures from Mars: the lawyers who created the federal statutes knew precisely what they were writing, even if the average man does not.
However Frank Brushaber also made a fatal error which contributed to his ultimate downfall in the case. He identified his opposition as a corporation chartered by the State of Utah. This was incorrect. The Union Pacific Railroad Company was originally created in the year 1862 by an Act of Congress. The stated purpose of the corporation was to aid in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from the Missouri River to the Pacific Ocean (from the "Union" to the "Pacific"). This Act was passed on July 1, 1862, by the Thirty-Seventh Congress, Second Session, as recorded in the Statutes at Large, (December 5, 1859, to March 3, 1863, at Chapter CXX, page 489). At that time, Utah had not yet been admitted as a State of the Union and therefore was not considered one of the several States. Utah was still a territory, i.e., a "federal state" within the “federal zone” over which the Congress indeed had exclusive legislative jurisdiction.
Being a creation of Congress, the Union Pacific Railroad Company was found to be a "domestic" corporation under the law – that is, the Union Pacific Railroad Company was with the exclusive jurisdiction of Congress and the United States municipal corporation (the District of Columbia and the federal enclaves, territories and possessions) as per the District of Columbia Act of 1871 and subsequent related acts. This is another term which is very confusing to the casual reader. In common, everyday language, the term "domestic" is often used to mean "inside the country". For example, airports are divided into different areas for domestic and foreign flights, in order to allow Customs agents to inspect the baggage and passports of passengers arriving on flights from foreign countries. However, under federal statutes, the term "domestic" does not mean "inside the country"; it means "inside the federal zone" (the United States municipal corporation) as its own country which is an area that is much smaller than the whole country. Accordingly, a "foreign" corporation is a corporation chartered by a government that is "outside the federal zone", just as each of the 50 sovereign States is still considered a “foreign country” in relation to the United States municipal corporation (the Federal Zone). Indeed, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several occasions that each state is a “sovereign foreign nation” with respect to each of the other states and with respect to the “United States” (the U.S. government).
The federal zone consists of the enclaves, territories and possessions over which the Congress of the United States municipal corporation called the “United States.” (the District of Columbia and the federal enclaves, territories and possessions) has exclusive legislative jurisdiction. California is outside of the federal zone, for example, and corporations which are chartered in the California state are foreign corporations with respect to the federal zone called the “United States.”. Similarly, corporations chartered in France are likewise foreign corporations with respect to the federal zone called the “United States.”. It is simple, once you understand the proper legal definitions of the terms "foreign" and "domestic" in the federal statutes. To make things even more confusing, “California state” is one of the 50 sovereign States and therefore is NOT subject to the statutes legislated by Congress. However, the “State of California” is a sub-corporation of the United States municipal corporation called the “United States” and therefore falls under the jurisdiction of the federal zone and Congress’ statutes.
After the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 and District of Columbia Act of 1871 was enacted by Congress:
“It is quite clear, then, that there is a citizenship of the United States and a citizenship of a State, which are distinct from each other and which depend upon different characteristics or circumstances in the individual.” [whether or not the “United States” means the federal government as a corporate TRUST established by the Constitution and the limited territory over which it exercises exclusive sovereign authority OR as (definition #3 above) a private, foreign municipal corporation] Slaughter House Cases, 83 U.S. 36,(1873)
As discussed above, each man is an “individual sovereign” and the People, as individuals or as a group, are sovereign. The People are not subject to the jurisdiction of the federal government, even though they are born in the United States. The 14th Amendment attempts through confusing language to invert this relationship. One of the qualifications to be a “citizen of the United States” is that one is required to be born or naturalized in the United States. Another qualification is that one is required to be, "subject to the jurisdiction thereof. [of the United States]" It is not possible to be a citizen of the United States without meeting BOTH conditions: born or naturalized in the United States AND subject to the jurisdiction thereof. Thus, if you are born or naturalized, AND if you are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, then you automatically qualify as a citizen of the United States (which means the United States municipal corporation called the “United States” - including ONLY the District of Columbia and the federal enclaves, territories and possessions.
From the point of view of the federal enforcers of federal acts or statutes, the qualifications are worked in reverse. They reverse-interpret the 14th Amendment as incorrectly meaning that if you say and/or do not deny that you are a citizen of the United States, then that automatically – as an unrebutted presumption - means you are totally subject to its jurisdiction [and have been born or naturalized]. This opinion is not shared by the judicial branch. See 14 C.J.S. 426, 430 (Corpus Juris Secundum):
The particular meaning of the word "citizen" is frequently dependent on the context in which it is found[25], and the word must always be taken in the sense which best harmonizes with the subject matter in which it is used[26]. "One may be considered a citizen for some purposes and not a citizen for other purposes, as, for instance, for commercial purposes, and not for political purposes[27]. So, a person may be a citizen in the sense that as such he is entitled to the protection of his life, liberty, and property, even though he is not vested with the suffrage or other political [legislated] rights[28].
[25] Cal.--Prowd v. Gore, 2 Dist. 207 P. 490. 57 C.A. 458.
[26] Cal.--Prowd v. Gore. 2 Dist. 207 P. 490. 57 C.A. 458.
La.--Lepenser v Griffin, 83 So. 839, 146 La. 584
N.Y.--Union Hotel Co. v. Hersee, 79 N.Y. 454
[27] U.S.--The Friendschaft, N.C., 16 U.S. 14, 3 Wheat. 14, 4 L.Ed. 322
--Murray v. The Charming Betsy, 6 U.S. 64, 2 Cranch 64, 2 L.Ed. 208
Md.--Risewick v. Davis, 19 Md. 82
Mass.--Judd v. Lawrence, 1 Cush 531
R.I.--Greeough v. Tiverton Police Com'rs, 74 A 785, 30 R.I. 212
[28] Mass.--Dillaway v. Burton, 153 N.E. 13, 256 Mass. 568"
In any case, if you fail to object to the government's view of your citizenship status, then the federal government will PRESUME that you agree with their view and that you are subject to the acts-statutes of the federal government. That means you have waived your rights, and now possess only privileges as granted by the federal government. Therefore, the most practical method for a man to retain his rights as a individual sovereign is to reject the title of “citizen” and to state explicitly that one is NOT a “citizen of the United States” or a “citizen of a State”; and that one does NOT consent to federal jurisdiction and waives all benefits and privileges resulting from being a “citizen of the United States” or a “citizen of a State”. And, for goodness sake, do not claim to be a “sovereign citizen” – an obvious contradiction in terms, since one cannot possibly be a “citizen” and still retain one’s sovereignty.
John-Henry Hill, M.D.
retired physician
Web: http://JohnHenryHill.Wordpress.com
Not sure what we would gain by secession and I think we stand to lose a lot. International relations and security would be considerably worse because the Russians and EU would be dealing with a much weaker union or 4-6 fragmented states. Globalism would swamp a fragmented US. That does not even include giant corporations. If they have insinuated themselves into the control of our current federal government imagine what they would be able to do with the smaller regions. I think our best chance of righting this ship is to reform what we have and not break apart into smaller republics.
When? to be real it's not america, not the america i have in my mind..what we have is anti america..there is no america today..for proof there are no borders to define america,ask any mexican.
The answer to Big Government is to get rid of it ... the framers of the Constitution were right ... we need a strong individuals and a weak State
Everything looks okay. Not sure why Europe hasn't attacked us or raise International Court Against us... but it is probably since we provided them funding, loans, Asset Relief Program for Toxic Assets, since their wealthy were tipped off to get out of the way of the 2008 Financial Collapse, and since we sent them dollars via the FED as Relief to the Wealthy Institutions...
You have to admit: 2008 was almost a War between USA & Europe... Right? If not, then Why NOT???
Kind of a repost:
Yeah, the 2008 Global Financial Crisis just won't go away.
Just Look at this
1) Workforce Participation crashing
2) Consumption Crashing
3) Housing Still in Slumps except for Foreigners or Others working
4) Debt Rates way high, USA not quiet to the UK Level yet, India Debt, China Debt, China needs for expanding Credit is unbelievable, US needs for expanding Credit is out of sight
5) US Federal Budget is like Fascist Italy or Fascist Spain
6) US Shadow banking is apparently the Same as in Europe & London, OUT OF CONTROL
7) Modern Manufacturing seems to mostly lay in China as most UK, Spain, French, USA factories have not been upgraded or retooled for 30 years
8) Immigrants pour into USA & Europe, but don't have Skills, creating kinetic energy for Civil Unrest
9) All Politicians suck and never reveal the full picture of corruption, bribery, and Economic Malaise
10) No one person Really sees the whole Global Economic picture when taxes, subsidies, social programs, manufacturing, debt, credit, bank linkages, insurance swaps, and derivatives are included
11) How can the world Trust US Financial Markets after it caused the Global Crash
12) How can the world Trust the USA when it bails out Banks, allows them Bonuses, Gives them Free Money in ZIRP, QE & TARP... with no punishment, no loss of banking advantages, no investigations, no CEO Firings, No Fraud Found, No US Public Executive Responsibility, and No "NONE" Clean up of Financial System Regulations & Accounting.
13) US Reputation is Ruined. But we pretend we are superior. Fascist USA. But mostly Fascist Executives and Leadership and Institutions.
14) We ignore the shortages in Pensions, Social Security, MEDICAID, and University & Municipal Trust Funds... but we want new wars, more immigration (spending bill for amnesty), and we want to give more money to TBTF Banks even if we have to have Bail-Ins.
The people are great though.
Yep. Sad to say that when investing you have to consider a "secession option" now, but you do.
Trying to pay for Social Security under this scenario will not be easy...if not impossible. This would be the largest debt repudiation in human history if it happened.
Just read that the United Parcel Ssrvice will allow for localized manufacturing at their stores. "If you need a part not can can they ship it but they might even be able to make it for you."
That doesn't sound like a country that doesn't make anything to me. Indeed it sounds like the exact opposite.
You can of course wait in line at the Post Office...
King Dollar, "King Dollar was Bottoming in 2008".
If I was a conservative banker I would try to argue that you are overlooking money velocity, Real US Growth, Components of Government GDP figures, Real US Labor Participation Rate, and decline of AVG US Wages....
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M1
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M2
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/MZM
Looks like 1981 was the Money Velocity high, note manufacturing plunged 1979.
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M1V (Top was 2007 Q4 at 10.7, now down to 6.3)
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M2V (Top was 1997 Q3 at 2.2, now down to 1.5)
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/MZMV (Top was 1981 Q1 at 3.5, now down to 1.4)
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/Mult (Top was January 1987 at 3.1, now down to .7)
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/MANEMP (Employees: Manufacturing 12.1 M Persons)
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/CIVPART 62% labor participation supposedly down from 67%
**There is no doubt USA is in decline in Economic Power and Financial Condition**
**There is little debate that US is counting rent seeking behavior as GDP**
**There is no debate about whether US Industries are declining in many sectors including Hollywood, Music, Manufacturing, computer production, information processing, engineering...although I see strength in US Engineering & High Tech Manufacturing.** Plus Retail is down in shops, malls, Anchor Stores.
Plenty of weakness in USD.
***Conclude: USD Top was 1981 OR 1987.***
Unless we can find a way to reinstate the Constitution and Bill of Rights, then to hell with the Federal government.
Endless foreign wars, debasement of our currency, non-representative government that favors only the most powerful corporate interests . . . what is there to like?
Both political parties are bought and sold, they are wings on the same bird, there will be no "change you can believe in". The middle class is gone, to be replaced with debt slaves, the 21st century serfs.
All to be watched over by the biggest of brothers, the NSA. Give the police all the weapons needed to make them into the standing army once forbidden by the Constitution.
To hell with the Federal Government and Federal Reserve! I vote for seccession.
Here is where I am.
Even Liberals or Progressives have to live by, support, and understand conservative business practices. End of Story.
This begins with the US Constitution and it's amendments.
End of story.
We have had 100 year of Regulation of Commerce to Fight abuse of workers and Monopolistic or Oligopolistic Behavior. There is no shortage of history & legislation in "Financial Conflicts of Interest".
It is only since like 1970 that political trends swayed back to favor Fascism, Oligopolies & Monopolies. Fraud. And it didn't stop in one industry or in one accounting waiver. We have a huge shadow Banking system. We have a huge Lobbying System and it is mostly dominated by the Prison-Milititary-Industrial-Intelligency-Complex so much so that we go to war every 20 years and going back to World War I.
Political Spin, Media Capture, Intelligence Operations including US MSM, Propaganda, K-Street Lobby, Madison Avenue Public relations, Hollywood Productions, Political Influence of Text Books, History Books, K-12, Colleges, universities, Professors, Economists...
WTF. We are Greece. We have Debt to GDP of 100% if you only could Federal Debt. It is much worse.
Bankers took us into WW I which everyone agrees was the stupidest war in modern history. Clearly the bankers or wealthy or the Elite got us into WW I. In fact it appears that Uk had little Money & Little Military Might, but refused to make peace with Germany in WW II. Why? Because they "Outsourced" Production to the USA and got Banking from the USA. The Rothschild must have been favorable to both WW I & WW II and directed other Western Banks to join the war & to hold out as... in the end "All Debts are Honored". Well... they don't care about human cost of war it is only business and maybe England could come out on Top with Gold or Money or Assets... or so they might have promised... All Ego in England you know, Winston Churchill.
War is the biggest trick the Devil ever pulled.
Deregulation leads to misery? Many industries in the United States became regulated by the federal government in the late 19th and early 20th century. Entry to some markets was restricted to stimulate and protect the initial investment of private companies into infrastructure to provide public services, such as water, electric and communications utilities.
Transportation, Energy, Communication, Finance, Free Trade, Campaign Finance
1980 - Depository Institutions (J. Carter, followed by S&L Crisis, 5000 convictions, RTC)
1981 - Executive Order 12287, (R. Reagan, removed price controls on Petrol)
1992 - Energy Policy Act (H.W. Bush)
1994 - NAFTA, Deregulation of Trade, 3 Nations (W. Clinton)
1996 - Energy (W. Clinton, followed by ENRON Scandal)
1996 - Telecommunications Act (W. Clinton, cross ownership)
1999 - Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (Phil Gramm, W. Clinton, followed by 2008 Financial Crisis)
1999 - bombing campaign in Kosovo (W. Clinton, over 60 days)
2000 - Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 (P. Gramm, W. Clinton, derivatives)
2002 - McCain–Feingold Act (G.W. Bush, Campaign Finance, soft money unlimited)
2005 - Energy Policy Act (G.W. Bush, subsidies, excluded clean air Water acts)
2009 - 2014 Continuing Resolutions in which Congress gives up Budget Powers
2010 - Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (money is free speech for corps)
2011 - US combat in Libya (B Obama, over 60 days)
- (Laissez-faire economic policies)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deregulation#United_...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_t... (hard to pin down here)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolutio...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_Five
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resolution_Trust_Cor...
Repost;
If EU, Scandanvia, Switzerland, UK, Ireland & USA are failing due to our Socialism...
Why is it we see such tremendous wealth held by the Vatican, Royal Families, Rothschilds, Hacienda Families in Mexico & South America, and many Bankers & Private Executives??
- Wealth is Extracted from Land, Shipping, and from Labor
- Wealth People are experts on Gaming the System, and may have set up the Systems themselves (like the FED)
- Virtuous Circles reinforce the US Constitution and Equality
- Vicious Circles deprive people access to markets and Equality
- Seems like the West is in Debt and Failing due to Wealthy who "Gamed the System"
- Pitchforks come out when people can't tolerate the "Wealth Extraction" any more
The State is bigger. You can take all these rich folks and combine all their monies and it's but a drop in the bucket for funding say...the Park Service.
Repost:
I see it a little differently. PMIC, Prison-military-intelligence-Security-Complex needs funding but it comes from Federal Authorization. The employment level shows a trend line at 2.8 Million people. The Military was reduced in the 1990s under Congressional BRAC Legislation, slightly, and Clinton flattened the budget for 4 years before allowing new increases in Federal Budget for DoD. This created a lot of shouting by the DoD Lobby.
Today you see this Shouting again by PMIC Lobby. But this time is different.
The Federal Budget & DoD have Doubled and almost Tripled. This is partly due to Privatization. Today we have a huge army of PMIC Contractors. My guess is 50% of the US Economy is now Tied directly or nearly directly to the Federal Budget. They can't hire more workers with efficiencies realized from computers.
The Truth all of us go hat in hand to Bankers. We love our Finance Managers.
But in Politics you have to have an Enemy. Obama is still immature, but he is a puppet. Like him or Hate him he has supported all the wars and covert ops and funded them under hugely expensive continuing resolutions with budget increases each year and about $1 Trillion a year goes to Military, Veterans, DHS, International Programs, and Intelligence programs. He blew it on VA Medical Funding and on getting modern computer for VA Medical Centers.
But not all Military know about the Generous DoD Spending, and we have more and more contractors each year complaining they need more Juice.
All Employees: Government: Federal
2014-08: 2,717 Thousands of Persons (+ see more)
Monthly, Seasonally Adjusted, CES9091000001, Updated: 2014-09-05
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/CES9091000001
Repost:
Remember that private companies can abandon contracts for Utilities like Electricity, Hydroelectric power, Water, Sewage... The people and the local government take responsibility in the end for commodities and utilities... at great expense in times of crisis. Reverse Privatization is actually a good idea as you pay half or 1/3 the cost and you can feel okay about fixing a natural calamity or crisis. Versus if you contract out and put your County Government in huge debt to JP Morgan or Goldman Sachs... then face huge crisis. Besides Privatization always leads to tolls or fees as the contractor complain with leverage and even has insiders in government bribed to support higher fees or contract reimbursement...
Unfortunately the biggest leverage Banks have on all Nations is "Debt" and US Economy is based on Debt & War & Big Financial Cycles to create more Debt (Leverage).
---
Remember back before the FED... I'm pretty sure our economy had a US Constitution and was not based on "Debt" Slavery.
What could go Wrong in Exponential Federal Growth, to $17.7 Trillion with through Continuing Resolutions while US Congress Shirks it's Budget Powers & War Powers? Janet??
Well let' list a few:
So could be anything else:
- Political Crisis over the Federal Budget could be the cause
- International Pressure over the Fed Interest Rate, US Debt, and Federal Budget could be it
- Perception by EU OR Asia of Systemic Corruption & a Failed US Government
- Perception that US Military can no longer wage a world war or protect Seafaring Trade Routes
- Bankers may chose the time of Collapse when they see the biggest advantage and their "New Solution"
- The shift of Economic, Banking, Exchange hubs to Asia & back to Europe may create the timing for a new Currency Deal and Bankers will be pulling Capital Out of US Petro Dollar... and triggering & Marking the Collapse
How does Our Government Get away with this:
- Marketing, PR & Propaganda
- They control the Press
- They corrupted Government Statistics, GDP, Inflation, Wealth Disparities, Money Created by Banks out of thin air not measured at all, Value to the Economy NOT Measured
- They have many capital controls in place now that they don't call Capital Controls
- They are keeping US Production Down, Consumption is low, Investment is kept low, this keeps Inflation down apparently while also keeping down GDP, Real GDP that stands for Value Added to the Economy, not Rent Seeking
What is the FED Play Book, Janet? Looks like it was taken from the UK Stagnated Economy which was also manipulated through deceitful Government Statistics I'd Wager.
Janet, How can you justify in action and standing "Mute" in the Face of Exponential Federal Spending since 2002???
PMIC, Prison-military-intelligence-Security-Complex needs funding and manpower but requires Federal Authorization. The employment level shows a trend line at 2.8 Million people. The Military was reduced in the 1990s under Congressional BRAC Legislation, slightly, and Clinton flattened the budget for 4 years before allowing new increases in Federal Budget for DoD. This created a lot of shouting by the DoD Lobby.
Today you see this Shouting again by PMIC Lobby. But this time is different.
The Federal Budget & DoD have Doubled and almost Tripled. This is partly due to Privatization. Today we have a huge army of PMIC Contractors. My guess is 50% of the US Economy is now Tied directly or nearly directly to the Federal Budget. They can't hire more workers with efficiencies realized from computers.
Like him or Hate him, President Obama, has supported all the wars and covert ops and funded them under hugely expensive continuing resolutions with budget increases each year and about $1 Trillion a year goes to Military, Veterans, DHS, International Programs, and Intelligence programs. He blew it on VA Medical Funding and on getting modern computer for VA Medical Centers.
All Employees: Government: Federal
2014-08: 2,717 Thousands of Persons CES9091000001, Updated: 2014-09-05
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/CES9091000001
Federal Debt: Total Public Debt
2014:Q2: 17,632,606 Millions of Dollars GFDEBTN, Updated: 2014-09-05
Mean while as Money Supply increases, Bailouts reach historical levels, Moral Hazard Breeds immorality, Accounting Rules and Financial Standardization is a thing of the pass... as Money Velocity disappears amid Fraudulent & Criminal QE Programs... What? Janet, you don't see your immorality here?
We have become the UK with little growth & support for Jobs except in London where they break all rules of law and order and all pretense of Conservative Business Practices. All for Empire, eh? Or, Janet you just agree that we should have a very large poor class and a much less wealthy middle class to keep Inflation Down.
You don't believe in Investment any more, yet you call yourself an Economist, a populist, a woman of the people?? Where is the CAP-EX Investment in real capital in the USA, UK, in EU?
Janet, without small business growth and success we lose what little free speech & democracy we have. We become Total Social-Fascists. Small Business is in Steep Decline and so are whistleblowers in this country of World Record Scandals & Global Fraud & Complete with Fascist Spying and control.
Total US Debt
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/TCMDO ($59.398 T Exponential Growth, All Sectors; Credit Market Instruments; Liability, Level)
Foreign Owned Assets
Here is a look at Exponential Growth (2004-2008) of Foreign Owned Assets in the USA from the Department of Commerce.
http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/international/intinv/iip_glance.htm ($26 Trillion foreign compared to $22 for US) (This is very interesting as Big Banks are growing strongly, but the number of total us banks is dramatically decreasing, like someone is gaming the system, Commercial Banks in the U.S. - FRED - St. Louis Fed)
Repost:
Check page 35 of both TICData reports (2002 & 2013) for Belgium, Cayman Islands, and Luxemburg. LT US Treasuries go from $10 Billion to $366 Billion. (partly due to safe haven effect, but also due to Financial System on Steroids) Or just take a look below to refresh your memory.
Interesting of the $26 Trillion in Foreign Owned US Assets put out by BEA.GOV on IIP Data, looks like about half is accounted for in the 2013 Data Report as Equities, LT Corporate Debt, LT Agency Debt, LT Treasuries. Which leaves me to conclude foreign owned US Real Estate must be about $12-14 Trillion (page 30). But I am not an Economist or Financial guy. Maybe Europeans are also buying US Real Estate.
http://www.treasury.gov/ticdata/Publish/shl2002r.pdf
http://www.treasury.gov/ticdata/Publish/shla2013r.pdf
(http://www.treasury.gov/ticdata/Publish/mfh.txt)
http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/international/intinv/iip_glance.htm
Last Data is from April 2014.
Belgium 2002 = $10.8 B, then 2013 = $163 B, Today $366 B
Cayman Islands 2002 = $10.7 B, then 2013 = $66 B, Today ??
Canada 2002 = $8.4 B, then 2013 = $46.6 B, Today $60.5 B
China 2002 = $95 B, then 2013 = $1,272 B, Today $1263 B
Hong Kong 2002 = $37 B, then 2013 = $89 B, Today $155 B
Ireland 2002 = $6 B, then 2013 = $91 B, Today $112 B
Japan 2002 = $260 B, then 2013 = $1,023 B, Today $1210 B
Luxemburg 2002 = $20.2 B, then 2013 = $107 B, Today $141 B
Philippines 2002 = $3 B, then 2013 = $36 B, Today $34 B
Poland 2002 = $7 B, then 2013 = $31 B, Today $30 B
Russia 2002 = $3 B, then 2013 = $138 B, Today $116 B
Switzerland 2002 = $28 B, then 2013 = $157 B, Today $178 B
Taiwan 2002 = $0 B, then 2013 = $183 B, Today $175 B
United Kingdom = $45.7 B, then 2013 = $130.6 B, Today $186 B
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/ROWFDN... ($3.16 Foreign Investment USA)
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GPDI ($2.69 Private Domestic Investment)
Consumer Credit
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/HCCSDODNS $3.148 Trillion Households and Nonprofit Organizations; Consumer Credit; Liability, Level
Total Federal Debt
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GFDEBTN (Total Federal Debt $17.6 TN)
Transfer Payments
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/TRP6001A027NBEA (SNAP Payments, data no longer updated 1-1-2012)
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/W014RU1Q027NBEA (Federal government current expenditures: Current transfer payments
$554.0 Billions of Dollars, data no longer updated 2012:Q4)
Student Loans
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/FGCCSAQ027S $770 B Federal government; consumer credit, student loans; asset, Level
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M1
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M2
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/MZM
Looks like 1981 was the Money Velocity high, note manufacturing plunged 1979.
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M1V (Top was 2007 Q4 at 10.7, now down to 6.3)
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M2V (Top was 1997 Q3 at 2.2, now down to 1.5)
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/MZMV (Top was 1981 Q1 at 3.5, now down to 1.4)
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/Mult (Top was January 1987 at 3.1, now down to .7)
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/MANEMP (Employees: Manufacturing 12.1 M Persons)
---
data back to 1984 decline in number of us banks:
Commercial Banks in the U.S.
2014:Q1: 5,743 Number (down from 14,400 in 1984)
Quarterly, End of Period, Not Seasonally Adjusted, USNUM, Updated: 2014-05-21
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/USNUM
data back to decline in us businesses:
Employment Level - All industries Self-employed, unincorporated
2014-06: 9,104 Thousands of Persons (down from 10,713 in 1994)
Monthly, Seasonally Adjusted, LNS12027714, Updated: 2014-07-03
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/LNS12027714
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/LNS12027714 (self employed unincorporated)
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/LNU02048984 (self employed incorporated)
**Don't worry Janet, we are sure you have a "Golden Parachute" since you are an insider, a Diplomat, and a Chosen one.**
***Oh, Janet, This year we are watching you as the Continuing Resolutions are Criminally, Exponentially, Increased***
If we forced the Legislature to sunset the nonprofit tax status, along with the 600 billion dollars in grant money being despensed, we could regain contol of the federal gov't. Just ban federal tax dollars being used as grants and end 503 (c) organizations for tax purposes. There two items have corrupted the entire nation. Money w/ strings to serve an insidious agenda.
Be specific. Are you talking about the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance or Foreign Military Assistance/International Aid... or are you looking at specific Corporate Subsidies and tax Abatements for Big Business.
I see them all as a problem, but Domestic Assistance funds a lot of Health Research and probably social programs. I even suspect after 2005 there were DHS Subsidies that go into local businesses or government for port sercurity or things that make important infrastructure safer. I'm not a big DHS or FEMA fan and don't really think those were important... but I use those to show how complicated the issue is.
https://www.cfda.gov/
Repost:
Maybe I'll bring the Govt down on me for saying this, but there are larger issues in play:
- Integrity in Government, Original Regulation was in response to Robber-Baron Monopolies, Regulation Capture is where people with money, power & influence pay, bribe, or offer career advancement to government officials for their influence and support for documents
- Jobs are down, Wages are down, Savings are Down, Wealth of US Middle Class is down, it is a break down in the education system to have young people say that education is too expensive, Culture has broken down to equal just corporate culture as parents must work, parents just manage their kids like human resources, ... we no longer get to know our kids & don't help to see that they have normal relationships and don't look to see how they respect themselves OR Understand Themselves OR How they relate to other kids and adults and learning...
- Today marks the high point in US Middle Class Wealth and the Top for their Strength, this means this is the last chance for Revolutionary changes in Federal Government, In Simplifying Income Taxes, In simplifying Accounting, In simplifying Financial Instruments, and in ending the crazy stuff that caused the 2008 Global Financial Crisis
- The US Ideal is gone, The Vision is Gone, the basis of USA's Unique Freedom & Liberty & Equality is gone as the US Constitution is pushed aside by Presidential Signing Orders and Everything that the US Congress Does or signs
- Militarism is up, Violence is accepted, Women are now part of the Male Culture of Tough and Violent
---
- Everyone Agrees that the USA Joining World War I was a big mistake and possibly a huge PR Campaign, I agree with this... War doesn't pay off for anyone even if you claim the high ground by saying your smart bombs reduce Civilian Casualties
- facts seem to indicate that Bankers operate behind the scenes to promote war, war loans, war debts, payments to Defense Contractors of which they are investing, and today we have Contractor Logisticians, Contractor Mercenaries, Contractor Armies, and it is big Business
---
- You gotta talk about the loss of small businesses, there is even federal legislation to favor small businesses, but the system is working against the small business
- Systemic Analysis does help greatly in understanding the USA, it seems that you can't understand the media or rumors and grasp the USA's Problems... You see that the US Government is made up of many systems... and many systems can be called "Broke" as they fail for their intended purpose,... this is very important as this means we need "Federal Commission or Inspections" to bring out the facts,... after all we Tax payers are footing the bill for systems that don't work and actually support corporate Subsidies, awards to giant corporations, and... well a kind of Fascism
I would be in favor of a Constitutional Convention to sunset said compact and return to the previous constitution; The Articles of Confederation. Ten's of millions of Americans are denied representation at the federal level.
When a state such as Illinois with Chicago carrying the entire state for the electorial college....winner take all, that is a perversion of the Framer's intent.
California is another state that has passed a law twisting the electorial college vote to winner takes all (that's 40 votes). Each and every Congressional district has a vote, which was to slow down herd mentality, or a radical shift in direction.
A Presidential candidate, a successful one would have to cobble a wide and disparate electorate into a collalition in order to win. The major cities, and their constituencies now rule or lord over the rest of its citizens. This is a Republic, not a democracy.
A very healthy alternative would be to allow for the creation of more states cobbled from parts of other states. Thereby the interests of downstate Illinois could band with parts of Indiana or Iowa who share similar interests and form another state.
IMO every state should seceed. Why be dependent on the Federal government creating debt money out of thin air. If the Feds can do it then each state can do it.
"Print your own money, stick it in your own bank." Yep, simple as that.
Agenda 21 & FEMA Camps – Depopulation Plans In Americahttp://beforeitsnews.com/agenda-21/2013/09/agenda-21-fema-camps-2013-dep...
Fuck voting. If you're serious, you use sortition, just like the ancient Athenians.
FUCK THE GOVERNMENT.
Raise the Bonnie Blue Flag!
I've been working on secession for 20 years! It's time! www.leagueofthesouth.com
...and don't forget the League of the South's affiliated independence-minded web sites, Brother Mongrel:
http://freeflorida.org/
http://dixienet.org/
The percentage of secessionists in Florida would exceed the percentages in the southwest, if it weren't for all the northerners who moved here and the wetbacks who invaded & colonized, thanks to the open borders/non-enforcement/amnest policy followed by the winners of the war against southern independence.
Let's make this whole secession thing a lot easier and get Washington D.C. to secede. Fuck them.
I am going to keep pushing for the 1000-Bulldozer "March". Big Fucking D9s (I hear the IDF knows how to armor these things up) just surrounding the district of corruption and laying waste to every fucking .gov building. And of course, each one of these fine machines would be towing a kchrisc-approved, made-in-the-USA guillotine. Any rat, cockroach, or snake that tries to slither away will be handled with extreme prejudice. A guy can dream can't he?
Secession anyone?
Most of us wouldnt even bother to travel to DC and shut it down. A million surrounding the various pressure points...WH, Congress, SCOTUS, the FED, DOJ, DHS. Other nations stand up to their corrupt, jackbooted ways, but not us.
Really; "if they like their government, they can keep their government"; I certainly don't want it or need it.
WILL.....NOT.....HAPPEN
Look at what Lincoln did, suspend habeus corpus, jail political enemies....and there wasn't even QE yet.
What we really need is not seccession but a thorough watering of the tree of liberty.
Yes, Lincoln, the WORST president of the United State_, who decreed that membership in the union is no longer voluntary, even when a long train of abuses and usurpations evinces a design to reduce the states and The People under absolute despotism...and a Kenyan Usurper.
The tree of liberty isn't taking too well to the blood of brown people and the crocodile tears of tyrants....
"the crisis is over the social contract, which has fallen into disrepair, and respected primarily in its breach."
The 'crisis' is one of a Far-overreaching government apparatus gone totally 'rogue'. This is evidenced on a daily basis with no-knock raids for 'illegal' drugs, family farms, nurseries, etc., the 'spy' apparatus, the chilling effect of the IRS, etc. And yes, as other posters have pointed out, the Lincoln presidency was the turning point - unfortunately away from Founding precept and practice, towards Authoritarian/fascistic rule.
I want off the this totalitarian ride.
An American, not US subject.
If only......this is the only thing besides an armed multimillion person, inlcuding all military personnel, revolution that's going to effect any change, i.e. to yank the power away from the conspiracy that is the US government.
Guess the question of our day is: Can it be saved?
Can it be saved for the 1% you mean.
It would be "can it be rescued" for the rest of us.
Lincoln was so wrong I'd kill him myself if I could get my hands on him.
Lincoln was probably the worst president in US history. I think an old fashioned hanging would have done him justice.
Worst president in history has still got to be Wilson. WWI + Fed + Income Tax, a deadly trio.
Without Lincoln, Wilson would only be president of the North.
No Income taxes in the South, wonder how long Wilson's Fed would last next to a Gold based near tax free economy?
Yeah, I'll still stick with Lincoln, but Wilson is right there with him. Traitors, all of them.
...and Marxist/socialist Rosenfeldt was the third worst president.
You can't even include the Kenyan Usurper on the list since he ain't qualified under the constitution, now just a tattered remnant covered in elephant & jackass $#!+.
Illinois and New Jersey. Can't think of two states more fucked up
Israel.
No Obama, he oversaw the complete enslavement of the population.
I am in awe of the intelligence and foresight of the people who founded this great country. They knew what would inevitably happen as the country grew. They feared the power of a centralized government and so attempted to put as many safeguards in the Constitution as they possibly could. Yet, they failed. Or rather, we failed. We the people failed to safeguard the one document that could protect our liberty. Secession should not be necessary, because the true power of government is already vested by the Constitution in the individual states. Powers of the Federal government are limited specifically to those that are so stated. There are no implied powers. But, we willingly gave away those powers for some perceived security and so we deserve exactly what we have gotten. To quote Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Also They knew who NOT to trust ...... but somehow they didn't go far enough.
It's more like the marxists won. They infiltrated hollywood and education and the news media long before any of the corporate raiders and political reptiles enslaved us. They dumbed down schools, the reported with 'the heart', they made movies telling why america was bad.
For fucks sake...I had a 22 year old tell me that she doesn't know long division, the right way. If her parents tried to teach her the correct way, she would fail the assignments. They taught her in school that, for instance, to calculate 100 / 25, make a guess using what you know, 2 25s go into 50. Put the 2 on a side column. subtract 50 from 100, and then it goes in 2 more times. add 2 to the column, now add up the column and that is your answer. Holy shit. Serious stuff. and when the final result is less than one, for instance, say it was 116/25, you would have 16 left and 25 can't go into sixteen so the correct answer would be 4 16/25ths. I shit you not.