Nailed it!

@TheInterlooper

Well okay, it's not capitalism itself that requires debt to exist, but rather the BANKS which are a component of the capitalist economy that need it to survive.

Printing money NOT based on gold only creates a house of cards that will fall, as the monetary system is no longer based on anything valuable. Call in the debts (based on fractional reserves), and the economy collapses. That's the trouble with any fiat based system - it's only as good as the government that backs it. Just a big chess game. So again... we all know who is really in control.

@TheInterlooper - You make me chuckle. I do believe you just proved my original point in your last sentence. Anyway, to differentiate cronyism from capitalism is no different than separating greed from ambition. (The slight difference between the two is infered)
I'm a critic and a cynic; I don't have answers. It all stinks.

Just one last thought: the more we base our economy on the perceived value of our money, the more susceptible we become to failure by any slight anomalous occurrence. I point you to the Canadian stock market being devastated by the collapse of Nortel. Look it up. It affected the NASDAQ hugely. All fake money. But with real repercussions cuz of commitments to pension funds.

Damn you for keeping me awake.

I agree that fractional reserve banking is the problem. Maybe I am optimistic but I believe cronyism can be quelled in a capitalist society.

Such a society would - by necessity - require checks and balances. Cuz we know what happens when there's no rules.

I have no faith in human nature, and I would like proof why you should.

@Fanburger - there used to be when it wasn't fiat based, and backed by a commodity.

@TheInterlooper - while you're at it (writing new rules for the post-revolution democracy), banks should be non-profit utility companies. And - take a look at what happened in... where was it... Greenland? Norway? They re-wrote their constitution, jailed their bankers, and are debt-free. I wouldn't even call it a bloodless coup - they just voted everyone out and started from scratch.

@Hominid, it was iceland, & good for them!
[huffingtonpost.com]

@walklightly - Thanks babe. (Sorry, on my third glass of wine...)

@Fanburger - Then apparently your wisdom and expertise is wasted on us. Shame.

LOL! @Hominid

@Hominid I think it was Iceland, ground zero for the start of the financial implosion back in 07.

Sorry, just wanted to state I agree with your comment!@Jackolope74

hahaha

well revolution is simply overthrowing the established system. re our politicians, I don't advocate anything more violent than giving them all atomic wedgies.

@VictoriaNotes That's because they didn't give them wedgies. No, I don't call that a revolution, the system remained. I see it just as another example of the system failing.

very interesting to read your response, one of my crew and myself were at odds with the rest, saying we would feel a bit safer if trump got in, because at least everybody would be watching and criticizing him, we trusted neither.

It begins to look like your concept is working. Lets hope we get it right before fascism sets in.

The only salvation to having Trump in office is that Mueller is hot on his heels. I also wanted Bernie. I could never have ticked a box for Trump.

@RobAnybody

I am disheartened that it is needed.

You do realize that the people with the guns who live widely spread in the rural areas where the food grows are going to beat the people who are tightly gathered into cities where they can be killed in great numbers by bombs and have their supply lines cut.

I think we desperately need another civil war. But the way the deck is stacked the stupid and unethical bad guys would easily win.

You're right @MarqG - though I doubt it will ever get to that. I'm hoping the current insanity will subside. Although - it's mostly an insanity fed to us by the media that want to sell newspapers. We're living in the (statistically) safest time in history. Look it up.

@MarqG I had a similar conversation with another user about that.

I asked: "When put on paper, how can a 'militia' truly stack up against the U.S. military."
He made a good point: "An armed militia is a deterrent."

Although, it didn't directly answer my question, I accepted it as true because I believe it as true. The U.S. government will not be stupid enough to literally march their defense forces against its citizens.

But, to ask my question again: how do YOU think a well armed and regulated militia would stack-up against the U.S. military - in regards to manpower, armaments, technology, logistics, etc.

@SamKerry You do realize that the Commander In Chief of the military you speak of is on the side of the militia don't you?

Also have you heard about the "Oath Keepers"? That's a group of military and police who sign an oath not to violate the Constitution. One of the things they say they will not do is seal up cities making them into prison camps. Which tells me that they are thinking about such things. That it is a realistic strategy but one that they currently oppose. So what happens when they change their minds about using that strategy?

I don't think Anything is beneath them. These are people who hit bottom in 2008 and just keep digging, And I wouldn't look for the HRC supporting corporate Democrats to be much of a deterrent either.

@MarqG I could have misunderstood you. I apologise if I did and if my comments don't make sense which you can attribute to that misunderstanding

1: If "the Commander In Chief of the military you speak of is on the side of the militia", why is it that you feel the need for a militia? If you already have the state "on your side", what exactly would a militia be for in regards to "...A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State..."?

Also, I didn't speak of the President. I spoke of the U.S. government. But that's a different discussion. For this discussion, I'll give you that point.

2: And who are these "...stupid and unethical bad guys..." who have their "decks stacked against you" that they would win easily?

3: As for Hedges...
I didn't want to watch the full hour of the video. I only watched about the first 7 minutes. And you posting it suggest that you may have misunderstood what he meant by "empire", who he means by the "elite", and which "side" he is actually on

This really should be a different discussion but...now's better than any time. Here is Hedge's view of the current White House administration:

"...This is an ethics-free administration. There's not even a pretense of ethical rules, so you have what's going to become a naked kleptocracy… they're going to loot the country. But they're also inept, which is a very bad combination. And as that ineptitude becomes more pronounced and more understood, they are going to have to become more ideologically rigid. It's going to look like a Christianized fascism. It's going to be the fusion of the American flag with the Christian cross,"

@SamKerry Yup you're misreading me. I don't feel a need for a militia. I feel a need for a revolution. But I fear we're more likely to get a civil war. Like Hedges I think this nation is going to sink into fascism. What is needed is what every other industrialized nation has to some degree - socialism.That's why they have affordable health care and we have wage slavery.

The 2A is outdated. It was designed to compensate for not having a standing army. We have a standing Army. We also have the National Guard which is the state militia. If you really want to understand the 2A you need to read the Militia Acts of 1792 [en.wikipedia.org] which were written by the same Congress that wrote the 2A.

The stupid and unethical bad guys are the idiot conservatives who own the vast majority of the guns. The good guys are the unarmed liberals. Not NEOliberals like the Clintons and Obama. I'm talking about the Bernie Sanders supporters. We were robbed of our rightful nomination. And that might have been America's last hope to avoid an economic melt down. It was FDR who built the middle class in this country. But it may already be too late. Americans are too fucking stupid at this point. So stupid in fact that they (Trump supporters and even HRC supporters) actually believe billionaires are deeply concerned about their well being.

You ought to watch Hedges. He lays out a well reasoned argument for exactly how this country is going to melt down over the next 20 years. I would think that information would be worth an hour of your time.

@MarqG Shit! I certainly misunderstood your post. I thought you were celebrating Trump being on your side. Hahaha! Sorry, about that.

And, yeah, I'm a Hedges fan. I like his stance against the corporate elites and the systems that they support. He doesn't only have credibility from his experiences as a journalist both domestic and international, but also he backs up his views with action - peaceful action. I remember him stating that he as anti-violence and believes that the strongest form of action an individual can make is through activism. I have seen bits and pieces of his Sanctuary talk but not all of that 1hr. I'll put i on the background.

Again, sorry for mistaking the message behind your comments.

@SamKerry That's cool. But did you really think a Trump supporter posted that Chris Hedges video?

@MarqG I was very surprised. Now I know why.

I think we are on the same page. I always say when I am dictator, we will fix that. When I am elected I will contact you.

@dalefvictor I like to think I'd lead a hostile takeover but it'd probably more be like a passive aggressive takeover

wow, thank you, I just learned something I never knew, I never studied history at all, I was always under the impression that the USA was a democracy. Your comment made me look into it. But then in Oz we are not a true democracy either, we elect the clowns, and they do what they like. Lets be honest, technology is well past the point where we could have citizens decide on matters every day and have far fewer politicians.

@Rugglesby Correct. We are a republic. Democracy does not work. It's one step away from anarchy. That's the irony of America. We idealize Jeffersonian Democracy to the point we really believe in it.

hmmm

King Jigme Singye Wangchuck of Bhutan
Cincinatus was a 2 time Roman dictator, both times giving the powers up after the situation was resolved. Once in 458 B.C. and the other in 439 B.C.
Ataturk, Deng Xiaoping, Lee Kwan Yew accepted pretty universally as benevolent and autocratic
afraid Noah did the unicorns in.

@Rugglesby 4 to 0...benevolent dictators vs. unicorns. I will stick with democracy.

I can only look at the world from the outside, and believe 1/2 of what I read in the press.
So the USA is set in its ways, China, Russia, North Korea, Syria and all in theirs. If they all continue, one day there will be more international conflict, and eventually some will be forced to change. I have no answer, I hate being a flea on a dog about to get into a fight.

Water will hit first.

yes I agree it would need to be bloodless. But I would love the people in my country to totally dump all of our current politicians and political parties or have a government where neither of our major parties had any power.

Anything that happens in the US has to be peaceful. If not everyone has a gun, there will be a lot of death, not necessarily guaranteeing the right people win.

no no no no please no

@Rugglesby it's OK mate, it was just a joke.

@Whathappensnow I know, as is Barnaby. But just the thought.

We should continue the campaign to make the response to "Ow ya goin" always be "Better than Barnaby". In time it could overtake Buckley in the vernacular.

@Rugglesby barnaby had hot chick but girls explode.I wonder if his ex played with stray cocks

@RobAnybody sounds pretty awesome to me, I am going to try it.

I hope that with increased use of technology we may one day get closer to a real democracy. What we have does NOT work. I am sick of fighting trying to get our "elected" officials to do the right thing.

I did consider that as well, we could be shooting ourselves in the foot by restricting a great politician, but the odds are it would be more beneficial overall. I cannot remember any politician in Oz that I would favour staying longer. We don't throw out Governments here, each party is the same as the other, we have a duopoly.

Agreed, need to make it known we are not happy.