The Live Feed

We need your help,
you can signup with:



Why Not Public Banking?

As an alternative to the Corporate Banksters, the idea of Public Banks has bloomed as an idea that can, along with the OWS upwelling for financial fairness, radically change the way the financial system works in America. It would return control of the Banks back to the people whom it‘s supposed to serve. This type of Banking has already been used in North Dakota successfully for almost a hundred years.

Author Ellen Brown writes about it on the ‘Public Banking Blog’ which can be found at

http://publicbanking.wordpress.com/  

There is a also great discussion of it in the video documentary “The Secret of Oz (by Mr. Bill Still)”. This can be found on Youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qIhDdST27g

Here follows a description of what public banks are, and are not, from “publicbankinginstitute.org”.

Public Banks are ...

• Viable solutions to the present economic crises in US states.
• Potentially available to any-sized government or community
able to meet the requirements for setting up a bank.
• Owned by the people of a state or community.
• Economically sustainable, because they operate transparently according to applicable banking regulations
• Able to offset pressures for tax increases with returned credit income to
the community.
• Ready sources of affordable credit for local governments, eliminating the need for large “rainy day” funds.
• Required to promote the public interest, as defined in their
charters.
• Constitutional, as ruled by the U.S. Supreme Court

... and are not

• Operated by politicians; rather, they are run by professional
bankers.
• Boondoggles for bank executives; rather, their employees are
salaried public servants (paid by the state, with a transparent pay structure) who would likely not earn bonuses, commissions or fees for generating loans.
• Speculative ventures that maximize profits in the short term, without regard to the long-term interests of the public.

These ideas are worthy of consideration.

 

5 reactions Share

Scaring Americans Off Corporations: Imagine "People Are Corporations"

(Watch This First)

One of the reasons I think Stephen Colbert is so brilliant is because he (and his writing staff to be sure) have an incredible way of repackaging conservative talking points in such a way as to rip the cover off to show how ugly their intent is underneath. Now he's done the same thing to our political process and, in that process has put into words a profound concept that's at the root of some American's willful ignorance regarding not just the way, but the reason corporate interests use their money and influence to strip our democracy bare.

Colbert uses one of the ultimate spinmiester in American politics today, Frank Luntz, to show the methodology behind taking reprehensible ideas that are against the best interest of the vast majority of Americans and making Americans want to vote for it. Early on as Luntz asks about the idea that "Corporations Are People" he got a nasty earful about the utter corruption that corporations represent in a lot of people's minds. But eventually, he whittled away at the negative to expose whatever guise he could sell it on.

Luntz gave a report on what he came up with and I'm not sure if Colbert recognized how profound the last idea was, but I couldn't miss it. It's not Corporations are people.... it's "People Are Corporations".

Think about that for a second. People.... are Corporations. I guess people would try to explore that idea further by asking "What is a corporation?". Thing is, that's the wrong question. The real question is "What is the Purpose of a corporation?" The idea that those same people who basically told Luntz earlier that corporations were corrupt and greedy told him you could still sell the idea of protecting the interests of corporations to the American people, not by saying that Corporations Are People, but that People are the same as Corporations.

No matter the answer we as people come up with we all know that at some point we've dedicated some time in our lives to trying to find a purpose behind it. So, if we're corporations, the question is what is the purpose of our Corporate Lives?

Well, Corporations exist for one reason, but only have one "Purpose". They exist in order to shield members from liability, but their Purpose is only one thing... Make money. That's it. That is their legal obligation, to make as much money as possible, always. And again, if "People Are Corporations" that's the purpose of your life. A single minded devotion to you and what benefits you regardless of the consequences it has on others.

In other words... Why put rules and constraints on corporations? You're a corporation, remember? One day, if you work really hard... it'll be your turn. And then won't you feel dumb if you put in place all these silly rules you now have to play by?

More than that, their seeming acceptance of this obvious repackaging of the old "Pull yourself up by your bootstraps" mentality of just plowing ahead and everything will work out may have been even more chillingly effective because of the way people like to see themselves. They see themselves as "Good" people.

When you ask most people about themselves they'll usually admit they have plenty of flaws, but believe they are "A good person". If most people are "good" and people are corporations doesn't that mean that most corporations are mostly good? Now if you're like me you can probably come up with 20 examples off the top of your head about how Corporations are not good. Not just not good, but down right Immoral.

And there's the trap.

When you have so many that so obviously follow the logic that the purpose (or at least a major one) of life is to get all you can for you and yours and you call that Immoral you may automatically run into people's defenses because they're "Good people". That desire is natural. People are Corporations. Commie.

That's why I think the argument has to change to stop trying to paint Corporations as Immoral, an idea that automatically puts people in this country on the defensive, and start calling them something that should be a helluva lot more scary. Corporations aren't immoral, they are AMORAL.

Now's a good time for a definition. What is Amoral?

Amoral- adjective

1. not involving questions of right or wrong; without moral quality; neither moral nor immoral.

2. having NO MORAL STANDARDS, RESTRAINTS, OR PRINCIPLES; unaware of or indifferent to questions of right or wrong: a completely amoral person.

It is not that they are Immoral, it is that questions of morality DO NOT CONCERN THEM. It is literally not part of their purpose to worry about such things. Again, their purpose is to make money. Always. There are no Standards for, Restraints on or Principles regarding how they do that. Not unless we as citizens/human beings require them to adhere to standards, place restraints and adopt principles. (Aka, Regulations). We as human beings have our own basic, universal social mores. They don't.

But the argument should be even more compelling. Just take the logic out to it's final degree, something Colbert is brilliant at... Imagine it. A nation of people who do not concern themselves with standards or principles and do not feel the need to restrain themselves in the way they get whatever is they're after. In other words... imagine a nation full of sociopaths.

Oh, too harsh?

Sociopath- noun Psychiatry

a person, as a psychopathic personality, whose behavior is antisocial and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.

We as people tend to instinctively have a very general sense of moral responsibility and social conscience. I mean pretty much everywhere we pass laws about how you can't kill, maim, murder, rape, etc., ect. each other. Why? In addition to the basic idea that human life is worth something there also is a general fear of repercussion. A base level instinct that says if you're free to do that to anyone else then someone else is free to do it to you. That's why we kinda agree on the whole, you're not allowed to crush others to get something from them, whatever that might be.

I wonder how little most human beings would trust some dude arguing for the right for people to kill, maim, murder, rape, etc., etc. each other to get what you want? Who thinks, yeah, I like that guy. He seems highly intelligent and altogether stable?

My guess? Not many.

Now, ask people if they think it would be a better country if we just decided to give every individual free reign to do whatever they want to pursue whatever purpose it is they have to make money. Ask them if they see potential for danger there. Then ask them why they feel any safer with legally empowered, wholly made up "people" in their society doing the same thing.

You do understand that when you hear corporations, generally through their privately owned political puppets, argue against having to obey regulations... they are essentially arguing I want free reign to do whatever I see fit to get what I want.

Oh, fun fact... you know what another word for Regulation is in the thesaurus? RULE. Regulation is another word for Rule. Look it up.

So, back to my point... If most people don't trust each other to roll like that... don't trust another actual human being to roll like that, would they really trust a "Person" that never passed through a womb, grew up with and learned to live with other human beings, but simply exists because a piece of paper says so?

My guess? I doubt it.

I'm not sure how many images of houses with white picket fences, steaming hot apple pies and cute puppies playing with even cuter babies it took flashing into our brains nonstop via whatever media device you spend way too much time in front of to dumb us down to the point that we actually started to believe that nonsense about corporations caring about us, but we'd better snap out of it. Quick.

Perhaps it's a sad commentary, but I base the validity of this strategy on a study I just saw recently that indicated there is very little trust amongst socioeconomic groups in societies where there is high income and wealth inequality. Since America has that in spades now I'm guessing the thought of every individual having the right to do what corporations do... the thought that "People Are Corporations" should be just creepy enough to provide the proper Snap into reality.

3 reactions Share

Help Wolfpac Connecticut

Please help get the word out for Wolf PAC Connecticut!

Follow us on twitter.com/WolfPACConn  and Wolf PAC Connecticut on facebook!  We need to get the word out  :)

3 reactions Share

Wolf-PAC Week One Update!

2 reactions Share

Support Lam, Vote Lam

If any of you have ever been in a leadership position, then you what Im about to say to be true,

I have nothing against Cenk or anyone in TYT, but after the site came up, i havnt really seen much else being done by TYT, Im guessing maybe they though we the people would handle the rest, or maybe they just need more time to gather their thoughts and present the next step to us, either way some type of leadership will eventually emerge, and for one I think i already see the perfect person to nominate to head the majority and to represent the majority to do the talks with TYT and get the constitutional convention accomplished.

Of course this person is Lam, I hope you all agree and will give your support to this person who is taking the initiative and working very diligently to the amendment completed.

That is all

SGT Pilar

1 reaction Share

rlthorn

A third party is the only way and the only persons I can come up capable to lead such a party on a Pres./V.P. slate is Eliot Spitzer(D) and Shelia Bair(R). Both have taken on the powers that be and won. Bair looked Geithner in the eye and told not just no, but hell no, when Geithner wanted to take toxic bank assets and sell them to the FDIC. OK, it can be Bair and Spitzer. I don't care and I imagine they don't either. Give these guys 4 yrs and they will turn over some rocks that Obama/Holder won't acknowledge exist.

2 reactions Share

WolfPacWA

I just started a WolfPac facebook page for Washington State.  http://www.facebook.com/pages/WolfPacWA/158835130878631?sk=wall

1 reaction Share

Help In VA

A representative from Goldmann Sachs will be at Radford University on November 3rd to give a lecture on hostile takeovers and investment banking.  I am working with different organizations on campus, as well as the Occupy RoanokeVA movement, to demonstrate in response. It would be great to see the TYT army out there showing its support in what ever way they can. I have been a loyal follower for years now, and as a college student it is time for all of us in my generation to join the stand against corporations and their outrageous control of our government.

Forever Rebellious - Benjamin "Sweets" Brightman

2 reactions Share

Hey Guys, My first post - it's a rough draft let me know what you think.

To all my brothers on the front line of the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement, I completely support this movement!  Now, if you guys allow me I would like to throw my hat in the ring and tell you why I’m mad.

 

The OWS has been represented as a group of hippies and misfits who hate corporations and individuals who make large sums of money.  The Main Street Media (MSM) blasts this message over and over again trying to define us in this way.  Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and Glen Beck have all said everything negative about us without even ever giving us a chance to articulate in any meaningful way.  They will never interview a guy like me, William Black, Dave Stockman, or any other legitimate person who can articulate what our grievances are.  They find the people in the movement that fit their definition of what we are and it’s a complete misrepresentation of a movement that’s in over 80 countries as I write this.

 

I’m writing this in hopes of bringing my understanding of this movement and sharing what I know is the truth.  I love a free market. I love free capitalism.  Rich people are not my enemy.  I love trading futures, selling calls and purchasing leaps on occasion.   We live in a great country.  So you ask what can I be so mad at?

 

I’m mad because we don’t have a free market.  We have financial institutions that are able to operate under a completely different set of rules than the rest of us must play by.  I’m mad because the MSM never gives us the platform to rationally discuss what is currently going on.  Also, the fact is, the 99% have no representation in our government.

 

Let me give you an example:  The Bank of America, last week, got a backstop of 53 trillion dollars and our government representatives let them do this without our input or our consent.  Don’t you think this is kind of an important topic?  Yet the MSM never even talked about it at all.  Just think, 53 TRILLION.  Don’t you think the Tea Party would talk about this massive confiscation from the 99% who’ll end up paying it and yet all we hear is crickets?  Instead they did talk about Romney hiring illegal aliens, and Rick Perry’s looking for Obama’s birth certificate.  So you can see what their priorities are compared to the 99%’ers. 

 

So just think with the tax payers going in hock for 53 trillion that could pay for Obama Care for the next 100 years.  It would also pay for the Iraqi war for another 50 years.  See what I’m talking about, and the MSM and our politicians completely ignore all this.  Even though these are the issues that are bringing our country into bankruptcy.  This is the reason for the Occupy Wall Street movement. 

 

Let me go back, so we can go forward.  In George Washington’s farewell speech and it is just as relevant today than it was then; he warned the representatives of his time not to put their personal interest above those of a free nation.  If they did that, it would be the thing that would destroy the very country that they represented.  Wow, he hit the nail on the head because this is exactly what is taking place today.

 

Also, you might remember this speech by Abraham Lincoln.  We don’t have to worry about some transatlantic giant coming to smash us with a blow.  In his estimation, destruction was not going to come from abroad but would spring out from within us.  He knew this country was vulnerable to big corporate America and if possible they would fleece everyone else in the process.

 

Don’t forget the great Thomas Jefferson saying the banks were more dangerous than standing armies.  The banks in their current form today is exactly what Thomas Jefferson was referring to.

 

It’s obvious our forefathers all saw the same thing and warned us about the things that are happening right now.  That is why we are mad!

 

You can easily see in today’s society that one percent is using the same methods that they used against the Colonists in the late 1700’s.  England had just concluded a war and they needed money badly.  So who do they go to, they went to the colonists and they started taxing them even though the colonists had no representation in England’s Parliament.    Sound familiar?  The similarities don’t stop there.  England also had their own Bank of America but back then it was called the British East India Company.  The Parliament decided they didn’t want that company to lose money so they decided to tax the Colonies again.  But Paul Revere and his friends said I don’t think so.  I’m not paying that stupid tax to finance some big company back in England.  So he went to a square inNew York City and joined the Occupy Brothers.  No, not really, but the colonists did come up with their own idea.  So some of the Occupy Brothers dressed up like Indians and dumped all that British East India Company tea in the ocean at low tide.  So you now know where the Occupy Movement came from.

 

Here are some ideas of what I think needs to happen:

 

  1. We need real Campaign Reform!  We want representation right now!  Both sides are bought by lobbyists from the financial institutions and we the taxpayer pays for all of it.  Without representation.
  2. Audit the Fed Now!  We already know they gave 15 trillion to other banks around the world.  What collateral did they give us?  Who gave the Fed permission to give this money away in the middle of a recession?
  3. No more Corporate Welfare!
    1. Close the Fed Discount Window.
    2. Mark their assets to market value.
    3. Any mortgage backed security that was sold to a retirement fund and rated AAA has to be paid back in full with interest.
    4. No more carrying trades.
    5. If the bank wants to trade market futures then they must put more capital in reserve.  (Just like an individual has to if they trade futures.)

 

Right now, if the banks were a person they would be on Food Stamps.  But because of guys like Tim Geitner, Larry Summers, or Judd Gregg these institutions can completely rob us taxpayers and even if they fail they get rewarded for it.  Really, just make them comply like every one of us 99%’ers have to.  If one of the 99%’ers makes a mistake he gets fired, not rewarded.  Come on representatives make it fair!

 

If any of the 99%’ers got to operate under the same rules as the banks they would be billionaires too.

 

Change is Here!  We are the 99%!

 

Pocamp

3 reactions Share

The TYT WolfPAC Forum is Online

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Click to go to the TYT WolfPAC Forum

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I sent the folks at TYT the following email:

"Hi there.

I would just like to suggest a more advanced forum for the wolfpac website. With the current one, it's difficult to keep track of people's ideas and suggestions and hard to reply to people. Sometimes, responses to a certain post go unread.

For a movement like ours, a quality forum for ideas and discussion amongst the members is as vital as food and water. I am not alone in being dissatisfied with the current forum which fails to provide the features the community needs. I would recommend vBulletin if money is not a problem. Otherwise, Proboards would work just fine. Please consider my suggestion and act with all deliberate speed. If you do not have the resources or time to create and maintain such a forum, I will create the forum myself.

Thank you for reading.

Your loyal fan,

Lam"

When I wrote this, I intended to wait for a response, but I realized that was not necessary.  I've gone ahead and created a functional forum for discussion.  If PAC leadership creates an official one, we will move the content from this user-created one to theirs.  Until then, I say we use this one. 

So far there is only a board for general/whatever discussion.  I will build up the structure of the forum to suit our needs very soon.  Go ahead and register and hang tight.

12 reactions Share

← Previous  1  2    6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next →

Our Pack

Activity

signed Petition
signed home_dev
signed home_dev
signed home_dev
signed home_dev
signed Petition

View All