H.R. 2847 already passed, full effect on July 1, 2014, savings unprotected!


Recommended Posts

Fairly concise discussion of the implications of this bill such as being considered guilty until proven innocent.

<<<"The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) is having a negative impact on the U.S. economy, U.S. financial markets, American businesses operating abroad and American citizens who work and reside overseas.

American Citizens Abroad (ACA) is working hard to educate the legislature and decision makers to inform them of the many dangers of FATCA. Recently legislators and the media have come out in strong opposition to FATCA, some advocate for repeal, others for revisions of the regulations. All our unanimous that FATCA as currently drafted is bad for America and Americans.">>>

http://americansabroad.org/issues/fatca/fatca-bad-america-why-it-should-be-repealed/

<<<"FATCA was initially introduced to target those who evade paying U.S. taxes by hiding assets in undisclosed foreign bank accounts. With such a noble goal, and with the strong backing of the Administration, Congress quickly drafted the FATCA legislation and quietly slipped it into the HIRE (Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment) bill signed into law by President Obama in March 2010. Most members of Congress are unaware of the unintended negative consequences this legislation will have when fully implemented in 2014.">>>

I spoke with a business woman who told me that she fully expects that before the election in 2016, the president will declare martial law, since things will be so bad as a result of the various intrusions into the economy by the government, e.g. Obamacare and the unsustainable national debt.

The election will not be held and guess who will declare himself President for life?

She believes he wants to take this country down despite his claims to the contrary.

gg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I spoke with a business woman who told me that she fully expects that before the election in 2016, the president will declare martial law, since things will be so bad as a result of the various intrusions into the economy by the government, e.g. Obamacare and the unsustainable national debt.

The election will not be held and guess who will declare himself President for life?

She believes he wants to take this country down despite his claims to the contrary.

gg

Ask her if she's willing to bet money on it. Whatever she bets, I'll bet at 9:1 odds against her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brant and I will hold the money.

Minimum bet should be $500.00 so you needed to get your $4,500.00 up fast kid...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I knew I shouldn't have added that to my post. As usual no comments yet on the H.R. 2847 nonsense. Given the extent of the national debt the Feds are salivating over the money everyone is trying to protect or save either in their IRAs or in overseas accounts.

I hear rumors that the president has in mind a plan to mandate everyone with an IRA must hold ten percent in long term U.S. Treasury Bonds yielding next to nothing.

HUD is also engaging in a plan to mandate that what are now Republican suburbs must accept lower income housing.

The noose is tightening.

Given my advancing age and health problems I don't know if I will be alive to witness the 2016 election.

Adam, Do I understand you correctly that you think there is a chance that BHO will do what my friend suggests is likely? And what will become of those of us who object? Is that what the guillotines are for?

gg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given my advancing age and health problems I don't know if I will be alive to witness the 2016 election.

Gulch,

I certainly hope you are.

I know I'm not the only person here who likes you and wants to see you around for a long long time.

Given the growing libertarian spirit I see penetrating the mainstream, I'm pretty sure there is going to be some major course-correcting after that election.

They can still screw it up, but I'm an optimist. Lots of people on our side woke up to the fact that the secret is in the storytelling, so they are making a crapload of movies, writing fictions books, doing TV shows, etc., with a liberty agenda.

For instance, I just read about the recent Captain America: The Winter Soldier. If it is as they say, this movie is about as anti-big government as you could wish. And it's killing it at the box-office.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adam, Do I understand you correctly that you think there is a chance that BHO will do what my friend suggests is likely? And what will become of those of us who object? Is that what the guillotines are for?

gg

I know that there are individuals in the administration who are capable of carrying out that plan.

There are dedicated statists on both sides of the aisle and the parties who a) will profit from such a unilateral action; b) intellectually believe that this is the path that society should take; and c) fear freedom at an organic level.

However, as Michael just pointed out above, there is an "instinctive" revulsion that is growing in the populace to reverse course.

I am confidant, just not as optimistic as he is, that we can turn this Juggernaut around.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with declaring martial law is the military and likely law enforcement will not comply--nor will hardly anyone else.

The military is absolutely subservient to civilian rule. When the President declares martial law--and he won't--he's declaring he's no longer a civilian but only part of the military giving up his actual power and a bunch of four stars will tell him, "Welcome to our world. We have no power over the government."

The Secret Service might protect him in the formal sense required, but the telephones might go dead, so to say. The elections will be held anyway--note they are not national but state elections of an electorate. As soon as the new POTUS is sworn in the SS will protect him too.

--Brant

have a nice day; the comedy isn't going to happen; it can't; even a MacAuthur couldn't pull it off (and rule as he did in Japan)--Zero never wore a uniform much less one with 5 stars or was General of the Armies, the highest active rank ever (Black Jack Pershing)

civilians can follow illegal orders which is going on right now as Zero declaims this and that legality shall be suspended or modified respecting Zerocare, but the members of the military have a different perspective and know following illegalities respecting what they do could very well subject them, if only at a later date, to trial and imprisonment under the UCOMJ if not straight out Federal prosecution under the next regime--one general trying to follow Zero's orders will find himself arrested by the general next to him or one above or one below and it will happen so fast it could be like it didn't happen until the smoke and dust die down assuming any noticeable disturbance at all

martial law requires military law and there ain't no such thing that carries itself substantively out of the barracks: there would have to be a response to a disaster--no guns used or deployed--or to ad hoc enforce a ruling of the Supreme Court as was done in Little Rock in the mid 1950s

if a President really understood the military in expert detail he might over time and piece by piece bend it to his will respecting martial law, but Zero is simply too incompetent to be that man even if he had the time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brant and I will hold the money.

Minimum bet should be $500.00 so you needed to get your $4,500.00 up fast kid...

I'll hold the money!

--Brant

going to Vegas!

(American Greed)

See, I knew that Galt Gulch concept had a flaw or two...

I did not even explain the "vig*" that we would keep from one side or the other which is ten percent [10%]!

$450.00 and $50.00 respectively.

*vig·or·ish

/'vigəriSH/
noun
informal
noun: vigorish
1. an excessive rate of interest on a loan, typically one from an illegal moneylender.
2. the percentage deducted from a gambler's winnings by the organizers of a game.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fairly concise discussion of the implications of this bill such as being considered guilty until proven innocent.

<<<"The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) is having a negative impact on the U.S. economy, U.S. financial markets, American businesses operating abroad and American citizens who work and reside overseas.

American Citizens Abroad (ACA) is working hard to educate the legislature and decision makers to inform them of the many dangers of FATCA. Recently legislators and the media have come out in strong opposition to FATCA, some advocate for repeal, others for revisions of the regulations. All our unanimous that FATCA as currently drafted is bad for America and Americans.">>>

http://americansabroad.org/issues/fatca/fatca-bad-america-why-it-should-be-repealed/

<<<"FATCA was initially introduced to target those who evade paying U.S. taxes by hiding assets in undisclosed foreign bank accounts. With such a noble goal, and with the strong backing of the Administration, Congress quickly drafted the FATCA legislation and quietly slipped it into the HIRE (Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment) bill signed into law by President Obama in March 2010. Most members of Congress are unaware of the unintended negative consequences this legislation will have when fully implemented in 2014.">>>

I spoke with a business woman who told me that she fully expects that before the election in 2016, the president will declare martial law, since things will be so bad as a result of the various intrusions into the economy by the government, e.g. Obamacare and the unsustainable national debt.

The election will not be held and guess who will declare himself President for life?

She believes he wants to take this country down despite his claims to the contrary.

gg

If 2016 passes and there is no martial law declared will you admit publicly that you are a crackpot?

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that there are individuals in the administration who are capable of carrying out that plan.

There are dedicated statists on both sides of the aisle and the parties who a) will profit from such a unilateral action; b) intellectually believe that this is the path that society should take; and c) fear freedom at an organic level.

However, as Michael just pointed out above, there is an "instinctive" revulsion that is growing in the populace to reverse course.

I am confidant, just not as optimistic as he is, that we can turn this Juggernaut around.

A...

This is impossible for one very important reason. The new dictator cannot make a credible promise to all of his generals that he won't have them executed once he seizes control. After the coup, not all of the generals will be needed to maintain control, so it would make sense to remove some (or even most) of them in order to concentrate the prizes only to the really necessary ones.

Then there's also the problem of legitimacy that Brant points out. But that's really only a problem after the coup fails, so I don't think it's the main reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that there are individuals in the administration who are capable of carrying out that plan.

There are dedicated statists on both sides of the aisle and the parties who a) will profit from such a unilateral action; b) intellectually believe that this is the path that society should take; and c) fear freedom at an organic level.

However, as Michael just pointed out above, there is an "instinctive" revulsion that is growing in the populace to reverse course.

I am confidant, just not as optimistic as he is, that we can turn this Juggernaut around.

A...

This is impossible for one very important reason. The new dictator cannot make a credible promise to all of his generals that he won't have them executed once he seizes control. After the coup, not all of the generals will be needed to maintain control, so it would make sense to remove some (or even most) of them in order to concentrate the prizes only to the really necessary ones.

Then there's also the problem of legitimacy that Brant points out. But that's really only a problem after the coup fails, so I don't think it's the main reason.

Coups work in Africa and South America. They can't work in Mexico, Canada or most of Europe. Etc. The last place in the world they could work is here. However, we haven't been talking about a coup, but a President illegally continuing in power. All coups are de facto. The President continuing in power would have to be de jure and there ain't no de jure or cultural-political force to support him. No de facto., no support. The statists who made him President want another, fresher, more effective puppet to replace him; he's out-lived his usefulness to the enemedia and even the Chicago political mafia mob machine.

--Brant

don't worry about the soon to be x-President, worry about Clinton

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coups work in Africa and South America. They can't work in Mexico, Canada or most of Europe. Etc. The last place in the world they could work is here. However, we haven't been talking about a coup, but a President illegally continuing in power. All coups are de facto. The President continuing in power would have to be de jure and there ain't no de jure or cultural-political force to support him.

--Brant

don't worry about the soon to be x-President, worry about Clinton

Ummm... I'm pretty sure that that is a coup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummm... I'm pretty sure that that is a coup.

Mark Levin has stated explicitely that we are in a "post-Constituional" era.

Additionally, the "regime," as he calls the marxist administration of O'biwan, is conducting a "bloodless coup" as we sit here today.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark Levin has stated explicitely that we are in a "post-Constituional" era.

Additionally, the "regime," as he calls the marxist administration of O'biwan, is conducting a "bloodless coup" as we sit here today.

A...

It's not technically a coup if the process by which the administration gains additional powers is seen as legitimate.

PS: Calling Obama things like "O'biwan" and the like just makes you sound uneducated and vaguely racist. Also, the Obama administration has nothing to do with actual marxism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the military, I imagine you all are aware of The Oathkeepers which is primarily composed of active military who advocate for the Constitution and the oath within it.

They have a list of "orders" which they deem to be unconstitutional and which they will not carry out.

Like shooting civilians.

gg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark Levin has stated explicitely that we are in a "post-Constituional" era.

Additionally, the "regime," as he calls the marxist administration of O'biwan, is conducting a "bloodless coup" as we sit here today.

A...

It's not technically a coup if the process by which the administration gains additional powers is seen as legitimate.

PS: Calling Obama things like "O'biwan" and the like just makes you sound uneducated and vaguely racist. Also, the Obama administration has nothing to do with actual marxism.

He's only having fun. Calling him a "nitwit" would put Adam into the category you are addressing x-racist except why is "O'biwan" racist? Didn't that come out of Star Wars? O Biwan Kenobi was a wise and powerful Jedi knight. Sounds like applying that to Zero is sarcasm.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's only having fun. Calling him a "nitwit" would put Adam into the category you are addressing x-racist except why is "O'biwan" racist? Didn't that come out of Star Wars? O Biwan Kenobi was a wise and powerful Jedi knight. Sounds like applying that to Zero is sarcasm.

--Brant

No-Fun-Allowed_l.1.jpg

"O'biwan" does come from Star Wars which makes even less sense when you consider his role in that story. The reason it's racist is because it's pretty much the same thing as this:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is all very amusing but given that the country is on the verge of a devastating financial collapse because of the extreme, unsustainable level of debt, it is not possible for me find anything laughable.

The only reason the collapse hasn't happened as yet is because the Fed has held the interest rate close to zero. Once the interest rates start to move up it will not be possible to avoid default because the debt service will be more than can be raised.

No one will loan us money and only 1% of our taxpayers are responsible for 40% of the revenue.

Is it conceivable that a chunk of them will find a way to move to anyplace where they can keep the money they earn?

I don't hear any of the potential nominees mention this looming debt crisis or their plan to resolve it yet.

This other stuff is just a distraction.

Yellen is lowering the Fed purchase of Treasury Bonds for now. But that will cause the stock market to correct and with rising interest rates she will rev up the printing presses again. A few ups and downs and then the hyperinflationary depression, riots in the streets, roaming starving hoards overwhelming local police and martial law to follow.

Just a matter of time.

I am an optimist but also a realist and this is what is happening.

gg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

O Biwan Kenobi was a wise and powerful Jedi knight. Sounds like applying that to Zero is sarcasm.

sarcasm.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There won't be any public debt collapse because the Fed will just print all the money it needs to pay that debt. As for private debt default, most goes back to the banks and the Fed will just run more money into the banks. The caveat is student loan default, not to the issuer of the debt, but to whom owes it for it's non-dischargeable in bankruptcy. The debt burden keeps young people from starting families and probably from obtaining good employment if they aren't making payments--or, a huge future drag on the economy. A country's trick is to have its public debt in its own currency. The possible resultant price inflation is both problematic apropos the more general status of the economy and outside the possibility of a debt collapse and the consequences of that. Now if the US government had a trillon dollars worth of Japanese government bond obligations (they gave us dollars for a promise to pay back in yen at a future date) and a yen for yen to get out of them and the Japanese sent gunboats to the west coast to collect the debt--that could cause a war. There is no such difficult obligation for everything is in dollars. Here's your $100,000,000,000 back, chump. Thanks for the loan. Want a do a trillion next? 30 years for 4%?

When is actual price inflation apt to appear? When the governemnt can no longer sell its bonds without running up interest rates. Even then it will simply monetize its debt and directly flood the country with funny money to pay its bills and the citizenry looses faith in its value getting rid of it faster and faster--velocity. With fewer goods and services available in a contracting economy this velocity drives up the price of goods and services there being less of those relative to the money to buy them as everybody rushes to get rid of increasingly worthless paper. Right now velocity is rather poor.

--Brant

don't cry for me Argentina; Argentina won't cry for you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...is conducting a "bloodless coup" as we sit here today.....

It's not technically a coup if the process by which the administration gains additional powers is seen as legitimate.

Apparently all three (3) of us appear to be wrong.

Britanica defines coup/coup d'etat as:

coup d’étatcoup d’état, also called Coup, the sudden, violent overthrow of an existing government by a small group. The chief prerequisite for a coup is control of all or part of the armed forces, the police, and other military elements. Unlike a revolution, which is usually achieved by large numbers of people working for basic social, economic, and political change, a coup is a change in power from the top that merely results in the abrupt replacement of leading government personnel. A coup rarely alters a nation’s fundamental social and economic policies, nor does it significantly redistribute power among competing political groups. Among the earliest modern coups were those in which Napoleon overthrew the Directory on Nov. 9, 1799 (18 Brumaire), and in which Louis Napoleon dissolved the assembly of France’s Second Republic in 1851. Coups were a regular occurrence in various Latin American nations in the 19th and 20th centuries and in Africa after the countries there gained independence in the 1960s.

Yet Wikipedia appears to not need to incorporate violence into the definition:

Types

The political scientist Samuel P. Huntington identifies three classes of coup d'état:

A coup d'état is typed according to the military rank of the lead usurper.

  • The veto coup d'état and the guardian coup d'état are affected by the army's commanding officers.
  • The breakthrough coup d'état is effected by junior officers (colonels or lower rank) or non-commissioned officers (sergeants). When junior officers or enlisted men so seize power, the coup d'état is a mutiny with grave implications for the organizational and professional integrity of the military.
  • In a bloodless coup d'état, the threat of violence suffices to depose the incumbent. In 1889, Brazil became a republic via bloodless coup; in 1999, Pervez Musharraf assumed power in Pakistan via a bloodless coup; and, in 2006, Sonthi Boonyaratglin assumed power in Thailand as the leader of the Council for Democratic Reform under Constitutional Monarchy.

The self-coup denotes an incumbent government – aided and abetted by the military – assuming extra-constitutional powers. A historical example is President, then Emperor, Louis Napoléon Bonaparte. Modern examples include Alberto Fujimori, in Peru, who, although elected, temporarily suspended the legislature and the judiciary in 1992, becoming an authoritarian ruler, and King Gyanendra's assumption of "emergency powers" in Nepal. Another form of self-coup is when a government, having been defeated in an election, refuses to step down.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to know more about the guillotines!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is all very amusing but given that the country is on the verge of a devastating financial collapse because of the extreme, unsustainable level of debt, it is not possible for me find anything laughable.

The only reason the collapse hasn't happened as yet is because the Fed has held the interest rate close to zero. Once the interest rates start to move up it will not be possible to avoid default because the debt service will be more than can be raised.

Higher interest rates will only be applied to new debt and new debt raised to roll over old debt. The Fed will just print more money to pay the higher interest. There will be no default as such. The US could double its public debt and only match what Japan owes today as a percentage of GDP.

--Brant

it ain't rosy, but we aren't talking about the real bad stuff yet

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now