Political & Elections

the U.S. has the most progressive income tax system among industrialized nations

http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/27134.html

"The reason we're in the mess we're in is benevolent largesse on the part of the government with other people's money. "

I fought very hard against GWB's policy of unfunded wars, underfunded Medicare D, subsidy to the wealthy in the form of less taxation,  corporate welfare and laizze-faire . 

It's tragically ironic that OWS attacks the exact wrong thing.

The reason we're in the mess we're in is benevolent largesse on the part of the government with other people's money.

But who does OWS go after? The other people.

And what do they want? More government largesse.

The "reality" of OWS is completely upside down.



-- Edited by winchester on Monday 24th of October 2011 06:04:16 AM

"The concerns of government are about people who want to keep themselves free from starvation, keep a roof over their heads, lead decent lives, have proper educational standards; the concern of government is the protection of the life and the liberty of the individual against elements in the community that seek to enrich and advance themselves at the expense of their fellow citizens."

There's a villain in there, true,  but what about the rest of it? We're floating those who don't give a crap about anything that smells of societal mores and wouldn't value an education if God himself bestowed it in a burning bush.

I know you see it that way jazzy, but seriously, you’re not seeing the whole picture.

The liberal fixation on protecting the individual, the weak, tends to not recognize the big picture of society as a whole.

Conservatism includes protection of the individual, but it realizes it’s not enough to look after only the individual persons within society, the society as a whole must be kept healthy too. Metaphorically speaking, a healthy hive is a prerequisite for healthy bees. Conservatism looks after the bees AND the hive, liberalism tends to look after only the bees, and it often does so at the expense of the hive, which in the long run hurts the bees.

Imagine you have a son, and you give him an allowance, via a credit card, and you give him a limit, and he overspends that limit, would your response be to raise the limit? You are, after all, rich, compared to him. You can afford it. And he is doing “good” with the money. So what’s the problem? Don’t be greedy. Don’t be cold hearted. Pay your fair share. Increase his limit.

If you raise his limit (because, after all, he’s doing “good” with your money) you will only encourage his irresponsibility; his bad behavior. Is that what you want to do? Will that serve either of you? Would that be “fair”? To either of you?

And further, what would you be teaching him, not only about himself but about you? What message would you be sending him, and backing up through your actions, about his role in the relationship between the two of you, and yours? How would that affect his psyche? How would that affect his behaviors, his attitudes, about himself and about you? What would that say about his “purpose” in life, and yours? Would that message be a good thing or a bad thing? Would it encourage, or discourage, his bad behavior?

Your son is Congress and the President. You are the American people, all of them, as a whole, not just some of them. An attack on one of us, weak or strong, is an attack on all of us. What are you going to do? Are you going to raise the government's limit and let them take more of your money, and thus continue to encourage their bad behavior, are you going to say enough is enough?

The message that comes from the answers to these questions is the big picture that liberalism, with its fixastion on caring for the individual, does not see.

Talk of rising taxes as a way out of the financial crisis looks at the exact wrong side of the coin. The problem is not that the government doesn’t take enough of our money, the problem is that they think they can. They see the American people as one great bottomless ATM. There’s nothing to stop them from spending everything they want on whatever they want.

If we don’t break that cycle things will never get better, they’ll only keep getting worse.

The Tea Party is saying “Enough!” They’re trying to break the cycle.

The OWSers are saying “More!” Rasing taxes on ANYONE continues the cycle, but because of their fixation on caring for the individual they can't see this. They're shoothing themselves, and America, in the foot.


-- Edited by winchester on Sunday 23rd of October 2011 04:02:04 PM

-- Edited by winchester on Sunday 23rd of October 2011 04:05:36 PM

longprime wrote:

---

Everybody is upset over the same thing- The Lack of Opportunity, whether its perceived as being contrained by Government or by the of It. 

---

 should read:

-or by the lack of It

And there we have it. The ultimate liberal argument. When it is proved that you have no valid argument, resort to:

"Don't bother me with the truth, I've already made up my mind."

And anything that does not agree with my agenda is "distorted," or "twisted."

Why not throw in "extremist" and "racist" while you're at it?






-- Edited by winchester on Sunday 23rd of October 2011 01:08:25 PM

Everybody is upset over the same thing- The Lack of Opportunity, whether its perceived as being contrained by Government or by the of It. 

Talk of whether stimulus “works,” or creates jobs, and talk of using the coercive power of government to force “the rich” to pay their “fair share” (sic), and much of the rest of the liberal and OWS agenda, rests upon the assumption that it is the government’s role to exert centralized control over the economic, and practially all other, interests of the people. 

Once that assumption has been made and accepted, such talk is little more than nibbling about the edges of, and incremental progress toward, the much larger and more insidious movement of collectivism, or central planning. 

No it's not.    Opinion doesn't make it so.

When Reagan raised taxes and Bush expanded Medicare, there was no massive hand-wringing that the nation was slipping inexorably into communistic central planning and collectivism ......it's telling that the waves of best sellers decrying said slide occur whenever there's a Democratic president in power.

We had four terms of liberal/progressive rule under FDR, who instituted sweeping changes that conservatives opposed, from Social Security to banking regulations......and yet, communistic central planning and collectivism remains at bay, existing in the U.S. only in the fevered imaginations of the far right.  

Conservatives may have hated him, but the American people kept returning FDR to office --- the people do get to vote for the government they want.   Because presidents are not mere academics or columnists or philosophers.   They actually have to deal with real people suffering in the face of economic calamity.  

I think FDR said it well:  "The concerns of government are about people who want to keep themselves free from starvation, keep a roof over their heads, lead decent lives, have proper educational standards; the concern of government is the protection of the life and the liberty of the individual against elements in the community that seek to enrich and advance themselves at the expense of their fellow citizens."

 FDR had plenty of vocerifous opposition from big business, banks, and conservatives when he ran for re-election in 1936.   He had a pithy answer for it too.

"Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate....they are unanimous in their hate for me.  And I welcome their hatred."

-- Edited by jazzy on Saturday 22nd of October 2011 01:56:55 PM

-- Edited by jazzy on Saturday 22nd of October 2011 01:58:45 PM

From the NY Times:

"...Where they differ is in where they place the blame. While Occupy forces find fault in the banks and super-rich, the Tea Party movement blames the government for the economic calamity brought on by the mortgage crisis, and sees the wealthy as job creators who will lift the country out of its economic malaise. To them, the solution is less regulation of banks, not more. "

Yes the wealthy are the job creators and should not have their taxes raised.  The evidence supports this - look at how many more jobs were created under GW with reduced taxes vs under Clinton.  The bankers and investment houses had no roles in the events of 2008 because they didn't bundle toxic mortgages, cdo's etc, it was the government that did this.  Also the government shorted Lehman Brothers out of existence - that nasty government!  We really should get rid of the government, not regulate the banks and instead of saving the banks with TARP should have let them all fail as in true capitalism.  If we had done all this then we would not have had to discuss any of this anymore.

 

Talk of whether stimulus “works,” or creates jobs, and talk of using the coercive power of government to force “the rich” to pay their “fair share” (sic), and much of the rest of the liberal and OWS agenda, rests upon the assumption that it is the government’s role to exert centralized control over the economic, and practially all other, interests of the people. Once that assumption has been made and accepted, such talk is little more than nibbling about the edges of, and incremental progress toward, the much larger and more insidious movement of collectivism, or central planning.

It is the assumption itself that must be rejected, because history shows that systems based on it, in the end, become everything they were originally intended to prevent.

To many who have watched the transition from socialism to fascism at close quarters the connection between the two systems has become increasingly obvious, but in the democracies the majority of people still believe that socialism and freedom can be combined. They do not realize that democratic socialism, the great utopia of the last few generations, is not only unachievable but that to strive for it produces something utterly different – the very destruction of freedom itself. As has been aptly said: “What has always made the state a hell on earth has been precisely that man has tried to make it his heaven.”- F. A. Hayek

It is the politics of the left which is based on this assumption, and it is conservatism which rejects it.

There is remarkably little difference between Communists and Fascists, except for rhetoric, and there is far more in common between Fascists and even the moderate left than between either of them and traditional conservatives in the American sense. A closer look makes this clear.
…
For example, among the items on the agendas of the Fascists in Italy and/or Nazis in Germany were (1) government control of wages and hours of work, (2) higher taxes on the wealthy, (3) government-set limits on profits, (4) government care for the elderly, (5) a decreased emphasis on the role of religion and the family in personal or social decisions, and (6) government taking on the role of changing the nature of people, usually beginning in early childhood. This last and most audacious project has been part of the ideology of the left – both democratic and totalitarian, since at least the eighteenth century, when Condorcet and Godwin advocated it, and it has been advocated by innumerable intellectuals since then, as well as being put into practice in various countries, under names ranging from “re-education” to “values clarification.”

These are of course things opposed by most people who call themselves “conservatives” in the United States, and they are things much more congenial to the general approach of people who are called “liberals” in the American political context. - Thomas Sowell


It follows that the various ideologies which have arisen since the concluding years of the eighteenth century – Jacobinism, socialism, communism, syndicalism, fascism, Naziism, and others – all are opposed by conservatism, which is founded upon the concept that politics is the art of the possible, and the concept that the old and tried is preferable to the new and untried. In the aphorism of J. Stuart Hughes, “Conservatism is the negation of ideology.”- Russell Kirk


-- Edited by winchester on Saturday 22nd of October 2011 01:04:15 PM

I haven't had my coffee yet either, so I'm pretty much unable to focus.

But, here is what the protests may turn into. Those who stay for days, weeks, months at a time (if it lasts that long) are those who have nothing else to do. And they are being provided free food, and a place to hang out. It's becoming a homeless haven in my town. You don't go to a protest for very long if you actually have responsibilities, such as children to take care of or a job. My guess is, this will end up being nothing more than a group of loungers looking for hand outs, and a couple of hard core leftists. It may have had a few good ideas and valid protests in the beginning, but those who keep hanging around, squattiing on private property....have nothing else going on.

Human nature is the same at every level of society.

No matter which demographic you choose - whether it is rich or poor, young or old, white or black, you name it – you’re going to find the exact same bell curve of intelligence, ambition, and greed.

People at every level of society take advantage of anything and everything they have available to them to do the best they think they can for themselves.

Not only is human nature the same everywhere, it is the same every time. It is as true today as it was fifty years ago, or a hundred, or a thousand.

Human nature, or any part of it, like greed for example, cannot be “fixed.” It is as constant as gravity.

Therefore, to blame any single trait of human nature, like greed, or any single industry, like "Wall Street," for the difficult situation we find ourselves in is short sighted, small minded, naïveté. It's like trying stop gravity from working on any single type of object.

So, what can be done?

Well, there are two approaches.

1) Try to fix human nature and force it to be something it can never be, or
2) Accept human nature as it is, and account for it

The first approach is called liberalism. It is the approach of central planning, and the Pollyanna notion of the homogenization and equalization of the human race.

The second is called conservatism. It is the approach of checking power against power, and greed against greed, so that no single person or group of people can ever have enough power to run roughshod over another.

The OWSers, the 99ers, subscribe to approach number one. They are central planners. But there’s a problem. Throughout all of human history central planning has always failed, and has often resulted in disaster (for example, see Fascist Italy, Communist China and Russia, and Nazi Germany, and the “liberal” French Revolution.)

Here’s why:

Many socialists have the tragic illusion that by depriving private individuals of the power they possess in an individualist system, and transferring this power to society, they thereby extinguish power. What they overlook is that, by concentrating power so that it can be used in the service of a single plan, it is not merely transformed, but infinitely heightened. By uniting in the hands of some single body power formerly exercised independently by many, an amount of power is created infinitely greater than any that existed before, so much more far-reaching as almost to be a different kind.

It is entirely fallacious to argue that the great power exercised by a central planning board would be “no greater than the power collectively exercised by private boards of directors.” There is, in a competitive society, nobody who can exercise even a fraction of the power which a socialist planning board would possess. To decentralize power is to reduce the absolute amount of power, and the competitive system is the only system designed to minimize the power exercised by man over man. Who can seriously doubt the power which a millionaire, who may be my employer, has over me is very much less than that which the smallest bureaucrat possess who wields he coercive power of the state and on whose discretion it depends how I am allowed to live and work?

The OWSers are not allowed microphones so they communicate by repeating a chant down the line. One person speaks a short sentence, the crowd in the immediate area repeats the sentence, and the surrounding croud repeats it again.

I wonder how they'd respond to the truth?


Person: The one percent.
Crowd: THE ONE PERCENT.

Person: Makes twenty percent.
Crowd: MAKES TWENTY PERCENT

Person: Of all the money.
Crowd: OF ALL THE MONEY.

Person: The one percent.
Crowd: THE ONE PERCENT.

Person: Pays forty percent.
Crowd: PAYS FORTY PERCENT

Person: Of all the taxes.
Crowd: OF ALL THE TAXES.

Person: The one percent.
Crowd: THE ONE PERCENT

Person: Pays TWICE their fair share.
Crowd: Pays twice their fare share.

Person: But that's not enough.
Crowd: but that's not enough?

Person: We Want More!
Crowd: we want more?

Don't be coy....what are the real reasons people are knocking each other to the ground in the context of the Wall Street behavior everyone is complaining about?

"If you have a greater amount of education under your belt, you are probably not suffering much in this economy, unless you live in certain areas or are in a hard hit profession. People of all income levels had their 401K's suffer, but the vast majority of those who kept it in and kept contributing are doing well. If you sold at the bottom in a panic, you suffered."

First - not all people had the same educational opportunities as others.  Secondly, the market was artificially inflated through QE1 and QE2 exactly as Bernanke said he wanted.  Also the wealthy have other investment opportunities not available to everybody - hedge funds, certain types of MLP's etc for example.  Thirdly, what percentage of the rich pay 35% on their taxes - nobody I know including me does.

 

^^Sounds like a good old fashioned 1960's commune to me Soccerguy.  And we have this lovely gem:

http://www.mercurynews.com/bay-area-news/ci_19139574

Answer these questions from your own memory or knowledge or understanding, no research allowed:

What percentage of the total adjusted gross income earned in this country is earned by the one percent?

What percentage of the total tax revenue collected by the government comes from the one percent?

What SHOULD each of those numbers be?

"??How'd you figure that one out? I haven't seen my stimulus check. I haven't seen my taxes go down. Are you perhaps including the favorite companies in favored industries that were on the Democrats (and some Republicans) stimulus wish list?"

 

You mustn't be in the top 1% - I've seen my income go up, my investments go up exactly as what the stimulus was suppose to do and by stimulus I'm including tarp, qe1 and qe2 which should also be considered stimulus.  Let me ask you, who's doing better the last 3 years, the middle class and the poor or the rich?  Whos reaped the benefits of the stock market going up 81% since March 2009, the rich or the poor??  Why are the earnings of the S&P at an all time high?  Who's unemployed, the rich or the middle class worker ?  Look at the statistics of who has been layed off and it certainly isn't the top 1%.

"Stimulus is redistribution of wealth - to the top."

??How'd you figure that one out? I haven't seen my stimulus check. I haven't seen my taxes go down. Are you perhaps including the favorite companies in favored industries that were on the Democrats (and some Republicans) stimulus wish list?

Stimulus is redistribution of wealth - to the top.

By that logic, any government spending is essentially redistribution of wealth.....

How much waste and fraud and administrative cost gets siphoned out of the economy  hiring private contractors to supply troops and build infrastructure in Iraq and Afghanistan?

The current system of taxation favors the wealthiest Americans, many of whom, pay fewer taxes to the United States Treasury than citizens who earn much less and pay a much higher percentage of income in taxes to the United States Treasury. We, like Warren Buffet, find this income tax disparity to be fundamentally unjust.

These people are delusional; totally disconnected from reality.

Oh, what the heck...here it is!! Quite the impressive people's "working group" that put this thing together!

 

WHEREAS THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION PROVIDES:

 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

 

BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

 

WE, THE NINETY-NINE PERCENT OF THE PEOPLE of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in order to form a more perfect Union, by, for and of the PEOPLE, shall elect and convene a NATIONAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY beginning on July 4, 2012 in the City Of Philadelphia.

 

 

I. Election of Delegates:

 

The People, consisting of all United States citizens who have reached the age of 18, regardless of party affiliation and voter registration status, shall elect Two Delegates, one male and one female, by direct vote, from each of the existing 435 Congressional Districts to represent the People at the NATIONAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY in Philadelphia. Said Assembly shall convene on July 4, 2012 in the city of Philadelphia.  

 

The office of Delegate shall be open to all United States citizens who have reached the age of 18. Election Committees, elected by local General Assemblies from all over the United States, shall coordinate with the 99 Percent Declaration Working Group (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the99declaration/) to organize, coordinate and fund this national election by direct democratic voting. The Election Committees shall operate like the original Committees of Correspondence did before the first American Revolution. 

 

II. Meeting of the National General Assembly and Deliberation:

 

At the NATIONAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY, the 870 Delegates shall set forth, consider and vote upon a PETITION OF GRIEVANCES to be submitted to all members of Congress, The Supreme Court and President and each of the political candidates running in the nationwide Congressional and Presidential election in November 2012.  The Delegates of the National General Assembly shall vote upon and implement their own agenda, propagate their own rules and elect or appoint committee members as the Delegates see fit to accomplish their goal of presenting a PETITION OF GRIEVANCES from the 99% of Americans before the 2012 elections.

 

III. Proposed Petition for the Redress of Grievances:

 

The PETITION OF GRIEVANCES shall be non-partisan and address the critical issues now confronting the People of the United States. The Delegates shall deliberate and vote upon proposals for the PETITION OF GRIEVANCES in consultation with the People as the delegates to the first two Continental Congresses did. Below is a suggested list of grievances respectfully submitted by the OWS Working Group on the 99% Declaration. The final version of the PETITION OF GRIEVANCES voted upon by the Delegates of the National General Assembly MAY or MAY NOT include the following suggested issues: 

 

 

1. Implementing an immediate ban on all private contributions of money and gifts, to all politicians in federal office, from Individuals, Corporations, Political Action Committees, Super Political Action Committees, Lobbyists, Unions and all other private sources of money to be replaced by the fair and equal public financing of all federal political campaigns. We categorically REJECT the concept that money is equal to free speech because if that were so, then only the wealthiest would have a voice. These actions must be taken because it has become clear that politicians in the United States cannot regulate themselves and have become the exclusive representatives of corporations, unions and the very wealthy who spend vast sums of money on political campaigns to influence the candidates’ decisions and ensure their reelection year after year.

 

 

2. The immediate reversal, even if it requires a Constitutional Amendment, of the outrageous and anti-democratic holding in the "Citizens United" case by the Supreme Court, which equates the payment of money by corporations, wealthy individuals and unions to politicians with free speech. We, the People, demand that institutional bribery and corruption not be deemed protected speech.

 

 

3. Prohibiting all federal public officials and their immediate family members, whether elected or appointed, from EVER being employed by any corporation they regulate while in office and/or holding any stock or shares in any corporation they regulate while in office until a full 5 years after their term is completed.  

 

 

4. A complete lifetime ban on accepting all gifts, services, money, directly or indirectly, to any elected or appointed federal officials or their immediate family members, from any person, corporation, union or other entity that the public official was charged to regulate while in office.

 

 

5.  A complete reformation of the United States Tax Code to require ALL citizens to pay a fair share of a progressive, graduated income tax by eliminating loopholes, unfair tax breaks, exemptions and deductions, subsidies (e.g. oil, gas and farm) and ending all other methods of evading taxes. The current system of taxation favors the wealthiest Americans, many of whom, pay fewer taxes to the United States Treasury than citizens who earn much less and pay a much higher percentage of income in taxes to the United States Treasury. We, like Warren Buffet, find this income tax disparity to be fundamentally unjust.

 

 

6. Medicare for all American citizens or another single-payer healthcare system, adjusted by a means test (i.e. citizens who can afford it may opt-out and pay their own health insurance or opt-in and pay a means tested premium). The Medicaid program, fraught with corruption and fraud, will be eliminated except for the purpose of providing emergency room care to indigent non-citizens who will not be covered by the single-payer program.

 

 

7. New comprehensive regulations to give the Environmental Protection Agency expanded powers to shut down corporations, businesses or any entities that intentionally or recklessly damage the environment and/or criminally prosecute individuals who intentionally damage the environment. We also demand the immediate adoption of the most recent international protocols, including the "Washington Declaration" to cap carbon emissions and implement new and existing programs to transition away from fossil fuels to reusable or carbon neutral sources of power.

 

 

8. Adoption of an immediate plan to reduce the national debt to a sustainable percentage of GDP by 2020. Reduction of the national debt to be achieved by BOTH a cut in spending to corporations engaged in perpetual war for profit, the "healthcare" industry, the pharmaceutical industry and all other sectors that use the federal budget as their income stream AND a truly progressive income tax code that does not allow the wealthy and corporations to evade taxes through excessive deductions, subsidies and loopholes. We agree that spending cuts are necessary but those cuts must be made to facilitate what is best for the People of the United States of America, not multinational and domestic corporations. 

 

 

9. Passage of a comprehensive job and job-training act like the American Jobs Act to employ our citizens in jobs that are available with specialized training and by putting People to work now by repairing America's crumbling infrastructure. We also recommend the establishment of an online international job exchange to match employers with skilled workers or employers willing to train workers in 21st century skills.

 

 

10. Student loan debt relief. Our young People and students are more than $830 billion in debt from education loans alone. Payment and interest on these debts should be deferred for periods of unemployment and the principal on these loans reduced using a corporate tax surcharge.

 

 

11. Immediate passage of the Dream Act and comprehensive immigration and border security reform including offering visas, lawful permanent resident status and citizenship to the world’s brightest People to stay and work in our industries and schools after they obtain their education and training in the United States.

 

 

12. Recalling all military personnel at all non-essential bases and refocusing national defense goals to address threats posed by the geopolitics of the 21st century, including terrorism and limiting the large scale deployment of military forces to instances where Congressional approval has been granted to counter the Military Industrial Complex's goal of perpetual war for profit.

 

 

13. Mandating new educational goals to train the American public to perform jobs in a 21st Century economy, particularly in the areas of technology and green energy, taking into consideration the redundancy caused by technology and the inexpensive cost of labor in China, India and other countries and paying our teachers a competitive salary commensurate with the salaries of employees in the private sector with similar skills. 

 

 

14. Subject to the elimination of corporate tax loopholes and exploited exemptions and deductions stated above, offering tax incentives to businesses to remain in the United States and hire its citizens rather than outsource jobs and reconstruct the manufacturing capacity of the United States.  In conjunction with a new jobs act, reinstitution of the Works Progress Administration and Civilian Conservation Corps or a similar emergency governmental agency tasked with creating new public works projects to provide jobs to the 46 million People living in poverty, the 9.1% unemployed and 10% underemployed.

 

 

15. Implementing of immediate legislation to encourage China and our other trading partners to end currency manipulation and reduce the trade deficit.

 

 

16.  Immediate reenactment of the Glass-Steagall Act and increased regulation of Wall Street and the financial industry by the SEC, FINRA and the other financial regulators, and the commencement of a Justice Department criminal investigations into the Securities and Banking industries practices that led to the collapse of markets, $700 billion bail-out, and financial firm failures in 2007-2008.

 

 

17. Adoption of a plan similar to President Clinton’s proposal to end the mortgage crisis and instead of the Federal Reserve continuing to lower interest rates for loans to banks who are refusing to loan to small businesses and consumers, the Federal Reserve shall buy all underwater or foreclosed mortgages and refinance these debts at 1% or less to be managed by the newly established Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (and foreclosure task force described below) because 1% or less is the interest rate the Federal Reserve loans to the banks directly who hoard the cash rather than loan it to the People and small businesses.

 

 

18. An immediate one year freeze on all foreclosures to be reviewed by an independent foreclosure task force appointed by Congress and the Executive Branch to (in conjunction with the  Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ) determine, on a case by case basis, whether foreclosure proceedings should continue based on the circumstances of each homeowner and propriety of the financial institution's conduct.

 

 

19. Subject to the above ban on all private money and gifts in politics, to enact additional campaign finance reform requiring free air time and public campaign finances to all candidates who obtain sufficient petition signatures and/or votes to participate in the primaries and/or electoral process, to shorten the campaign season and to allow voting on weekends and holidays.

 

 

20. An immediate withdrawal of all troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and a substantial increase in the amount of funding needed for veteran job placement and the treatment of the physical and emotional injuries sustained by veterans in these wars. Our veterans are committing suicide at an unprecedented rate and we must help now.

 

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that IF the PETITION OF GRIEVANCES approved by the 870 Delegates of the NATIONAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY in consultation with the PEOPLE, is not acted upon by Congress, the President, and Supreme Court, to the satisfaction of the Delegates of the NATIONAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY, said Delegates shall organize a THIRD, COMPLETELY NON-PARTISAN, INDEPENDENT POLITICAL PARTY to run candidates for every available Congressional seat in the mid-term election of 2014 and again in 2016 until all vestiges of the existing corrupt corporatocracy have been removed by the ballot box.

 

 

 

                                              

-- Edited by hope on Wednesday 19th of October 2011 11:02:33 PM