The United States Inc., Est 1871: How the US Creates Monopoly Money that You Have to Pay For

Preface

"I place economy among the first and most important virtues, and public debt as the greatest of dangers. To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt." - Thomas Jefferson

The United States is at war...with itself. Martin Van Buren in 1837 said: “Should the time ever arrive when the state governments shall look to the Federal Treasury for the means of supporting themselves and maintaining their systems of education and internal policy, the character of both governments will be greatly deteriorated.”

The most powerful branch of government in the United States, isn’t the executive, legislative, or judicial branch. The most powerful branch of government in the United States is the 4th branch of government. The unelected, the unappointed, and the most dangerous. That branch is the Federal Reserve. In 1913, that day arrived with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act. It is unfathomable for a private corporation, such as the federal reserve, to have power expressly amended into the United States Constitution. In 1910, the national debt was only $2.65 billion (not trillion). Just 7 years after the enactment of the Federal Reserve Act the national debt jumped 10 fold to over $25 billion (http://www.currentusanationaldebt.com/National-Debt-By-Decade.html). A decade by decade chart shows the startling increase in the national debt:

1910: 2.653 Billion

1920: 25.95 Billion [World War I]

1930: 16.19 Billion

1940: 42.97 Billion

1950: 257.3 Billion [World War II]

1960: 286.3 Billion

1970: 370.9 Billion

1980: 907.7 Billion

1990: 3,233 Trillion

2000: 5,674 Trillion

2010: 13,562 Trillion

As one can see, the national debt has risen by leaps and bounds over the last 100 years. Gerald Ford stated “A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.” The chart below shows the massive increase in federal government expenditure per capita since the Federal Reserve Act. What this chart means is that the federal government went from having a small role in the lives of American to a fundamentally controlling influence in our lives.

What this means is we turned over control of our lives to the federal government. We allowed it to set up social programs in the form of Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, and Unemployment. In exchange, we turned a blind eye to the massive debt that those services created. As a result of these government excesses, the country went bankrupt in 1933. Unable to reveal that fact to the nation, FDR took the US off the gold standard and switched to a fiat economy system (a fiat economy is one in which the national currency is not backed by gold or silver, instead it is backed by only faith in the government). The result is the national debt has spiraled out of control ever since and now we are beyond the point of bankruptcy, we are at the point of national extinction. Thomas Jefferson stated, “I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”

Are any of you happy or do you all feel overwhelmed and burdened by out of control debt and overhead costs? The society you grew up in taught you that it is acceptable to live beyond your means because that’s what it does. That does not mean you have to continue the negative behavior you were taught to accept as a normal and practical existence.

Introduction

This book will expose the United States for what it is...a corporation in business for itself. By the end of this book you will come to understand why the US does not hold your best interest or any interest in you. You will learn what the significance of the US being a corporation and not a country means to you. You will learn when and how it came to be, who are the owners of it and how much they are making off of you every year.

This book will also address why slavery ended and how the impact of the Civil War helped to lay the groundwork for the inception of 1871. You will also learn why women gained the right to vote, as well as the advent of the income tax and the IRS.

This book will also uncover the secrets behind Jekyll Island. Who were the members. How they created the Federal Reserve. The impact and scope of the Federal Reserve, as well as who is in control of all the money. This book will also expose how social programs benefit the Federal Reserve as well as the United States, Inc.

This book will talk about the changes that need to take place such as: 1)The elimination of all social programs. 2)Why there needs to be education reform and why one should not go to college. 3)Why one should become self employed and learn and implement the concepts of self sufficiency. 4)Why there should be term limits and why your vote doesn’t count (violation of proxy voting principles). 5)Why women and minorities should form their own identity that is separate and distinct from the US European Males. 6)Why the Federal Reserve, IRS and the income tax needs to be eliminated. 7)Why the national debt needs to be rescinded. 8)Why there needs to be a constitutional amendment requiring that the national budget be balanced every year. 9)Why the two income family is less economical than the one income family. 10)How the two income family has diluted salaries and education. 11)Why women are better suited than men to be politicians and why politicians should be unpaid. 12)Why the US needs to become less oil oriented and come up with alternative energy sources. 13)How telecommuting can help wean the nation off of oil.

By the end of the book, the evidence presented will cause you to agree regardless of whether you accept that the US is a corporation and not a country that major changes need to take place before the country goes completely bankrupt and ceases to exist.

Chapter One

Introduction

“America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.” — Abraham Lincoln

Our lives are a web of lies. Everything we see, think, and feel, are all imaginary, or manipulations of reality. The conductors of perception control every aspect of our lives. We are just puppets in a larger theater of an alternative reality. Our lives were predetermined, not by God, but by man, long before we were ever born.

Every aspect of our lives was determined before our existence was ever thought of. Although there are nearly 7 billion people on this planet, those people are all controlled by a select few. They determine our language, our culture, our religion, our values, and even our thoughts. We have no control over our own lives because our ancestors gave up that control long ago.

When we are born our parents prepare us for a life of mental servitude. They teach us what is “right” and what is “wrong” based on what they were taught and what their forefathers were taught generations ago. The most successful amongst us learned long ago that one is most successful when they are met with the least resistance.

The rich and powerful learned this long ago. Their families realized that to be successful had nothing to do with brute strength and force, but rather manipulation of the masses. If the masses rise up against the oligarchies, they will surely defeat it. The oligarchies realized this and devised a system designed to keep the masses separated and enemies of one another. For you will never stand and fight together with your “enemy” which allows you to me manipulated and controlled by the oligarchy.

Although the oligarchies are weak in numbers, they are strong in unity, manipulation, and control. They count on the masses to be enemies unto themselves, and they use that natural weakness to prevent them from ever overtaking the minority forces in power.

All around the world, power is dispersed in a similar fashion. It doesn’t matter what language is spoken, what religion is practiced, or what group of people is in power; power is dispersed the same. It is dispersed in the hands of the few; the rich, and the powerful. It doesn’t matter if a person of change comes into “power” for a short time in a country, because the system will always protect the oligarchies.

The oligarchies are aware that from time to time, their system will be challenged. They know that sometimes, a charismatic person will come along and threaten what they have spent centuries keeping in place. That is why they have installed a system to withstand any threat that a charismatic leader might pose.

The oligarchies rely on the ignorance of the masses in order to manipulate and control their behavior. Centuries ago that control became threatened, that control was put into jeopardy, with the advent of the Industrial Revolution. The Industrial Revolution sought to remove the veil of ignorance that oligarchies rely on by bringing people closer together via greater communication devices.

The Industrial Revolution allowed people to travel around the world in months instead of years. It allowed people to assemble together in large cities. It also allowed large segments of the population to learn how to read and to write. Knowledge is power; and the ignorance of the masses allows them to be control. That is why during the era of slavery in the United States, slave owners were resolute in preventing slaves from learning how to read and write. By keeping them ignorant of the goings on around them they would not know that they should rise up and fight for their freedom.

As a result of the “failure” of the Industrial Revolution, totalitarian and other similar style regimes throughout the world, had to correct the “mistakes” made by the western world. They prevented their people from learning how to read and write. As time passed and it became more difficult to prevent many people from learning how to read and write, they controlled information. In many countries there is no such thing as “Freedom of Speech” and “Freedom of the Press.” Citizens in many countries are not allowed to write and speak freely about what they want. There is limited access to the internet and television. Traveling outside the country is limited or prohibited all together. Loved ones who have managed to escape the country are forever prohibited from communicating with those that remain in the country. Countries also have a stronghold on information and education.

In many countries, the concept of libraries as they exist in the United States, does not exist elsewhere. In many countries, there is no such thing as free libraries. One has to pay to use the libraries, and books cannot be taken out of libraries. The books that are available are very limited in scope, nature, and currency. Even in countries like the United States, education comes at a price.

In the United States, one is able to receive a “free” education up through 12th grade, but not beyond that point. The reason being is multi fold. Up through 12th grade, students have very little control over the information they learn. Upon graduating high school, students are able to choose majors and what schools they attend. Because of that loss of some control over information, the government does not pay for education beyond high school.

As a result, young people incur massive amounts of unsecured student loan debt. Even though all other consumer debt can be discharged in bankruptcy such as credit card debt, medical debt, mortgage debt, car debt etc., student loans cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. In fact student loans are the only consumer debt in the United States that cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. The reason being, is because the oligarchies know that knowledge is power; and they want those who receive knowledge to have to pay a very high price for it.

The oligarchies have manipulated how people believe they can receive knowledge. For most people, particularly when it comes to a “higher education,” most believe knowledge can only be acquired by being in a formal academic setting. Knowledge is made to seem devalued otherwise and not having any value in its own sake. As a result, people that obtain knowledge in the United States, receive it the vast majority of the time in a formalized academic setting.

This behavior is reinforced by people receiving degrees and a piece of paper with their names on it, symbolizing their “success.” This success is only symbolic in nature, because in the United States, attaining a college degree does not necessarily mean one will attain the job of their choice, or even a job that makes ends meet.

What people fail to realize is the same information they receive in the classroom, they can receive by learning on their own. Textbooks are not read in class, they are read on one’s own. If one has a desire to learn information for its own sake, then it can be learned without paying the tens of thousands of dollars to receive a piece of paper with one’s name on it.

Many academic textbooks are published yearly or semi annually. One can receive the same information and save upwards of a hundred dollars or more by purchasing the edition prior to the most recent edition. Unfortunately, in the United States, as it is throughout the world, education is not valued for its own sake, rather it is seen as a means to an end. If education is a means to an end, the end sought, should not be the end one should seek.

Most people view education as means of becoming gainfully employed. However, the oligarchies view education as a means of learning how to manipulate and control the masses. Unlike the average person, the rich and powerful are very well read...they have to be. Those in power are very knowledgeable, because they understand that knowledge is power. They did not necessarily gain their knowledge via a formal education, most in power don’t.

Most of the vital information one can receive for success will never come from a formalized setting. The keys to success do not exist in a textbook or in a classroom, memorizing, and regurgitating information. The keys to success comes from understanding how the world works, and how people interact with the world in which they live in. Those in power hope you spend all your time with your head buried in a textbook, because you will never have time to look up and see what is happening in the world around you.

The Industrial Revolution had an unexpected result in the West. As a result of the Industrial Revolution money and power became more dispersed. More people were acquiring financial benefits as the result of the merger of human capital in urban settings. The western oligarchies needed to reverse the tide of financial disbursement, but they knew to do so abruptly would cause a massive revolution. What they did instead is they turned a disadvantage to their advantage.

The US oligarchy saw that southerners were acquiring massive amounts of wealth as a result of the slave trade. While it was beneficial to the US oligarchy for a time, they realized that too many people were beginning to experience the benefits of wealth, and they knew that it was time for a change.

The US oligarchy began to broach the idea of ending slavery to see what type of reaction they would get. As expected the reaction was very negative. Southerners were not about to give up their free slave labor without a fight. They tried to appeal to southerners’s morale side, and convince them that slavery was morally wrong (although it had persisted in the country for more than 300 years). Again the pleas for a new found sense of morality fell on deaf ears.

Finally the US oligarchy knew that slavery must end and they were prepared to pay whatever price. The lust for free slave labor was so fervent that southerners attempted to secede from the Union. The US oligarchy unable and unwilling to allow that to happen knew the issue could only be resolved one way...war; and they knew it would be a bloody war.

What one has to understand is that oligarchies are always willing to go to war because they are never physically involved in war. Those in the oligarchy who are truly in charge, never get their hands dirty with something as barbaric as warfare. They accept the human casualty as a king accepting his pawns being taken by his enemies in a chess game. The king will only be in jeopardy if there is no one else there to fight his battles. Until then, he is never a participant, only a spectator of war.

After the ending of slavery, western oligarchies began experimenting with the concept of direct taxation. They knew it would not be greatly supported so they created a reason behind it in the form of support for war. Having seen how successful direct taxation on income was, the US oligarchy formally adopted the concept in 1913 by amending the US Constitution to allow them to do so.

The great success of direct income taxation ultimately led to women gaining the right to vote and ultimately to the advent of the two income family. Women were not given the right to vote out of benevolence. Women gained the right to vote because it was beneficial to the US oligarchy. Just like the issue of slavery, granting women the right to vote was a business decision.

For one, women were demanding the right to vote and it was creating quite a distraction. In many parts of the world prior to 1920, women already had the right to vote. Quite frankly, it was embarrassing for the US to have over 50% of its population being in a second class citizen disenfranchised status. Furthermore, the US oligarchy knew that women gaining the right to vote would ultimately mean more income taxes collected; which meant more money for the ruling class.

Gaining the right to vote was not the only goal women desired. Women wanted to also have the right to equal employment. The advent of the two income family has ultimately led to the breakdown of the American family. However, being that the US oligarchy is in business for itself, it is not relevant to it if families are destroyed in the process of it achieving its goals.

The two income family has not been beneficial to the American family in any respect. As the result of the two income family everything a family pays has a double expense. Two sets of work clothes, two sets of income taxes, two sets of transportation costs. With no one at home to take care of the children, the advent of child care services was born. While a woman might feel more like an equal as a result of having a job outside the home, in reality her employment has hurt the American family.

The reason why education is devalued in the United States, is because jobs are devalued . Jobs pay so low, and unemployment is so high because jobs had to be invented in order to appease women who demanded to work outside the home as a result of not being appreciated for what they were doing at home. The reason why so many Americans today are unemployed, under employed, and drowning in debt is because jobs do not pay enough because finite resources have to be spread to service more employees than they are designed to accommodate.

Women deserve equal rights and should be treated as the equal of men. However, should that equality come at the expense of their families? Arguably, women are more rational and better decision makers than men. Instead of women competing with men out in the workforce, would it not make more sense for them to serve in the capacity of politicians?

Politicians are over payed and under worked. They spend more time campaigning for reelection than they do actually legislating. Women would be better suited as politicians because they are willing to check their egos at the door, compromise, and work toward an amicable resolution. Women are not obsessed with war and the military the way men are, therefore they would reduce military spending.

In order to reduce the cost of government, women, moreso than men, particularly if they are not out in the field competing with men for jobs, would be willing to work in the capacity as legislators for no pay. Thus by not having to pay politicians to work, billions or dollars would be saved throughout the country by eliminating legislative pensions and salaries. Unfortunately such talk is a pipe dream and will never happen because all decisions made by the United States government, like any government is in name only. In the United States, the situation is even worse.

For many years the United States has held itself out to be the model that every other country should follow. A model based upon propaganda and smoke and mirrors. The US has held itself out to be the land of great opportunity. However, that opportunity only exists for those able and willing to be self employed and not work with someone’s foot pressed into their backs for low pay and long hours. The fact is in the United States, the good life is only something attained by the elite few. For the rest of us, we can only dream about or watch some depiction of it in the movies and/or on television.

The United States holds out the impression that everyone has an equal chance to be successful but in reality success is only reserved for the lucky few. It is usually reserved for those who inherit rather than earn success. It is that way for a reason.

Accidents exist in nature, not in the world of finances. As the next section will demonstrate, the wealth of nations is not pooled together for the benefit of society. Rather, the consolidation of financial resources is done so for the express purpose of benefitting society’s elite. The most successful way the ruling class has discovered to achieve this purpose is via the advent of the central bank.

Chapter Two

The Emergence of Central Banks

1694: The Pattern of Central Banks Emerged

“Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.” — Lord Acton

Before a central bank (The Federal l Reserve) existed in the United States, a central bank already existed in England from as far back as 1694. It completely dominated the British banking system at the time. The Rothschild family didn’t create the concept of central banking, but they perfected it best. It is estimated that the Rothschild’s family wealth goes into the trillions of dollars. Baron Nathan Mayer Rothschild boasted:

"I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man that controls Britain's money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply."

The government of King William III was in desperate need of money in 1694. William Patterson and a group of wealthy Englishmen, agreed to lend the King 1,200,000 pound sterling (approximately $6 million with an 8% annual interest rate). This loan was based on the condition that: 1)The King would grant Patterson and his cohorts a charter naming them “The Bank of England; and 2)That this new bank would have the “sole and exclusive right to issue notes to the fullest extent of its capital (sounds eerily similar to hold the Federal Reserve works in the United States).

The people of England were having a problem with transporting their gold and silver coins. The New Bank of England was only too happy to come to the rescue. The solution is aptly described by Professor Carroll Quigley in his book, Tragedy and Hope:

...for generations men had sought to avoid the one drawback of gold, its heaviness, by using pieces of paper to represent specific pieces of gold. Today we call such pieces of paper "gold certificates." Such a certificate entitled its bearer to exchange it for pieces of gold on demand, but in view of convenience of paper, only a small fraction of certificate holders ever did make such demands. It early became clear that gold need be held on hand only to the amount needed to cover the fraction of certificates likely to be presented for payment; accordingly the rest of the gold could be used for business purposes, or, what amounts to the same thing. A volume of certificates could be issued greater than the volume of gold reserved for payment....Such an excess volume of paper claims against reserves we now call bank notes. In effect, this creation of paper claims greater than the reserves available means that bankers were creating money out of nothing...

King William III granted the Bank of England the legal right to print all the money that would be used in commerce by the people and the government of England. In other words the Bank of England became the sole money source of any currency that was used in English commerce by either the people or the government. If they needed more money, they simply printed it. By 1698, the British government owed the Bank of England more than $26 million. The amount owed now quadrupled the amount that was lent in a span of just 4 years. This is the exact concept the members of the Jekyll Island Club had in mind in 1910 when they formulated the “Federal Reserve of the United States.”

1773: Central Bank Pattern Repeated

"The modern theory of the perpetuation of debt has drenched the earth with blood and crushed its inhabitants under burdens ever accumulating." - Thomas Jefferson

In 1773, a wealthy goldsmith and coin dealer named Mayer Amschel Bauer (1743-1812) convinced 12 wealthy Germans to pool their resources together for the purpose of gaining control of the German money supply and eventually the entire world. He outlined a 25 point plain to accomplish this goal.

Bauer teamed up with Adam Weishaupt who is founder of Illuminati. The Illuminati was founded in 1776. It is a secret society which aims is to orchestrate a series of world events that will eventually lead to a New World Order. Bauer later changed his name to Rothschild which means "red shield." Presently the red shield represents the official coat of arms of the city of Frankfurt, Germany. Rotschild had five sons.

Eventually each of the five sons were sent to major European cities to establish a branch of the Rothschild banking operation. The first son was Amschel. He stayed in Frankfurt and propelled Germany to financial success under Bismarck. The second son was Salomon. He went to Vienna, Austria and became a leader in the Austria-Hungary Empire. The third son was Nathan Mayer. He went to England and became head of the Bank of England. The fourth son was Carl. He went to Naples, Italy and became the most powerful man in Italy. The fifth son was James Jacob. He went to Paris, France and established France’s central bank.

By 1850, the Rothschild Family had accumulated more wealth than all the families of Europe combined. William Patterson lost control of the Bank of England soon after its formation. Nathan Rothschild was aware of Napoleon’s defeat at Waterloo before England was. He travelled to England and convinced investors that Napoleon had won the war. He tricked them into selling their securities and bonds in a panic and had his agents buy up all those securities. As a result, he was able to grow his fortune by one million pounds in a single day. This allowed him to buy control of the Bank of England for pennies on the dollar. Frederick Morton wrote in his book, The Rothschilds: "...the wealth of the Rothschilds consists of the bankruptcy of nations."

BANK OF AMERICA

Early Push For An American Central Bank

"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance."

- James Madison

The inability of the colonists to get the power to issue their own money permanently out of the hands of George III and the international bankers was the prime reason for the Revolutionary War. Ben Franklin about the booming economy of the young colonies: "That is simple. In the colonies we issue our own money. It is called Colonial Scrip. We issue it in proper proportions to the demands of trade and industry." (Colonial Scrip had no debt or interest attached.)

Having seen the success of international banks in Europe, international bankers were eager to introduce this concept to America. International bankers saw that interest-free scrip (scrips are a substitute for currency that is not legal tender) would keep America free of their influence, so by 1781 banker-backed Alexander Hamilton succeeded in starting the Bank of America. After a few years of "bank money", the prosperity of "Colonial Scrip" was gone. Benjamin Franklin said, "Conditions were so reversed that the era of prosperity had ended and a depression set in to such an extent that the streets of the Colonies were filled with the unemployed!"

America had won its political independence but its financial independence was in jeopardy. The international bankers had an agent in place and his name was Alexander Hamilton who wanted a central bank. At the founding of the nation a war was waged with whether to have a central bank in the United States. Alexander Hamilton was a strong supporter of a US Central Bank. Thomas Jefferson was vehemently opposed to the concept of one. In 1781, a central bank was formed in the United States called The Bank of North America. This bank was patterned after the Bank of England. With limited support from the colonists, the bank folded in 1790. The international bankers responded by chartering the Bank of the United States in 1791.

The bank money created by the central bank in America in 1781, is similar to the federal reserve notes used in the United States today. They both have debt and interest attached to them.. By 1790 Hamilton and his bankers had created a privately owned central bank and converted the public debt (interest-free) into interest bearing bonds, payable to the bankers. When Hamilton's bank charter expired in 1811, the international bankers started the war of 1812. By 1816, another privately owned US bank was started with $35 million in assets; only $7 million of which was owned by the United States. That bank lasted for 20 years. In 1826, the Bank of the United States’s charter was set to expire. Presidential candidate Andrew Jackson campaigned strongly against the US having a central bank. Jackson stated:: "If congress has the right under the Constitution to issue paper money, it was given them to use themselves, not to be delegated to individuals or corporations.""You are a den of vipers. I intend to wipe you out, and by the Eternal God I will rout you out...If people only understood the rank injustice of the money and banking system, there would be a revolution by morning." In 1836 the charter of the Bank of the United States did expire. However, the international bankers had other plans about how to get back in.

History shows that currency with debt and interest attached to it creates depressions. The reason being is that the amount owed becomes so high, that eventually the only amount that is being paid toward the debt is the interest, whereby the debt never goes down, it only increases. That is the exact scenario that is taking place in the United States today. The national debt is too high to make any reduction in the principle of it. Instead all payments that currently go toward the national debt are interest only payments. The Civil War began to lay the groundwork for a cycle of private borrowing by the United States that has it on the brink of a financial apocalypse today. The banking policies of the early to mid 1800s was not much better.

The Wildcat Banking Era

Prior to 1863, there was a wildcat banking system between 1816-1863. Wildcat banks were chartered under state law and were termed as such because they issued money without the proper amount of gold to back up the supply (still better than the completely fiat economy that the US operates under today, which has zero gold backing). The wildcat banking system led to the Panic of 1837.

The Panic of 1837 was caused by The Specie Circular, or Coinage Act, which was an executive order issued by President Andrew Jackson which required that payment for government land be in the form of gold and silver due to a concern that state bank notes had questionable values. As a result runaway inflation occurred, followed by a five year depression, and record high unemployment levels (sounds eerily similar to the financial market today in the US [don’t worry the banks will fail soon too and inflation will hit hard]).

As a result of the Panic of 1837, the Free Banking Era began which existed between 1837 and 1862. During this period only state chartered banks existed and they could issue bank notes against specie (gold and silver). These banks were heavily regulated in terms of reserve requirements, interest rates, loans, and deposits. There were 712 banks in total. These banks generally only lasted for 5 years. Half of them failed and a third of them went out of business because they were unable to redeem their notes.

Prior to the Panic of 1837, was the Panic of 1819. The Panic of 1819 was the result of the War of 1812, in which the government borrowed heavy sums of money which put a tremendous strain on bank reserves of gold and silver. As a result specie, or gold and silver payments, were suspended in 1814. As a result of notes not being redeemed, new banks were formed and new bank notes were issued, causing massive inflation, bankruptcies, bank failures, bank runs, and widespread unemployment.

The Panic of 1819 led to the Missouri Compromise of 1820, where slavery became a very controversial issue concerning whether slavery should be expanded into the western territories. The Missouri Compromise was ultimately ruled to be unconstitutional in the Dred Scott v. Sanford case in 1857, in which the Supreme Court ruled that Congress did not have the authority to prohibit slavery in the territories. The Court also ruled that Blacks and Mulattos did not qualify as citizens of the United States. With no constitutional restrictions on the expansion of slavery, ultimately only a civil war would stop it. The Dred Scott decision ultimately led to the Panic of 1857. The court ruling caused a struggle over areas would be slave or free, which caused a fluctuation and decline in western railroad securities. The Dred Scott decision served as a catalyst for the eventual civil war.

The Civil War

“The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office.” — H. L. Mencken

"The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credits needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers. By the adoption of these principles, the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity." - Abraham Lincoln

The oligarchy in the US wanted to end slavery because wealth had begun to be distributed amongst too many people. However, thought about a US Civil War predate to England as far back as 1809. Most people believed and fought in the Civil War based on the belief that slavery was the central reason behind it. However, the Rothschilds (who were heavy slave merchants) used the issue of slavery as "a divide and conquer strategy" which was designed to split the United States apart...and it almost worked. The Bank of England financed the North while the Paris branch of the Rothschild banking empire funded the South. In 1863, the National Banking Act was passed despite the protest by President Lincoln. This act allowed private corporations the authority to issue our money.

The National Banking Act established a system of national charters for banks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Banking_Act). It also encouraged the development of a national currency backed by US treasury securities. This act also formed the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency which is responsible for chartering, regulating, and supervising all national banks.

President Lincoln needed money to finance the Civil War, and the international bankers offered him loans at 24-36% interest. Lincoln balked at their demands because he didn't want to plunge the nation into such a huge debt. Lincoln approached Congress about passing a law to authorize the printing of US Treasury Notes. Lincoln said "We gave the people of this Republic the greatest blessing they ever had - their own paper money to pay their debts..." Lincoln printed over 400 million "Greenbacks" (debt and interest-free US printed notes) and paid the soldiers, US government employees, and bought war supplies. The international bankers didn't like it and wanted Lincoln to borrow the money from them so that the American people would owe a tremendous interest on the loan. Lincoln's solution made this seem ridiculous.

In order to fund the Civil War the government passed the Legal Tender Act of 1862. This Act mandated that paper money be issued and accepted in lieu of gold and silver. This paper money would be backed by the government’s promise to redeem them some day in the future and based on public confidence in the government (sounds like a fiat economy and a tough thing to ask the public to do in the middle of the Civil War!) This led to the Legal Tender Cases, beginning in 1870 in the case of Hepburn v. Griswold in which the Supreme Court held that paper money violated the United States Constitution. One year later the Court reversed itself and ruled that paper money was constitutional in the Knox v. Lee and Parker v. Davis cases.

Shortly after Lincoln's death, the government revoked the Greenback law which ended Lincoln's debt-free, interest-free money. A new national banking act was enacted and all money became interest bearing again.

The late Thomas A Edison explained the matter of issuing currency this way: "If our nation can issue a dollar bond (interest bearing) it can issue a dollar bill (interest-free). The element that makes the bond good makes a bill good also. The difference between the bond and the bill is that the bond lets money brokers collect twice the amount of the bond and an additional 20 percent, whereas the currency pays nobody but those who contribute directly in some useful way. It is absurd to say that our country can issue $30 million in bonds and not $30 million in currency. Both are promises to pay: But one promise fattens the usurers (interest collectors) and the other helps the people."

The Federal Reserve is owned largely by foreign banks that control our economy and Congress through the power of money and the media which they bought with profits generated by artificial debt. If we can convert US dollars that are debt and interest-free to interest bearing currency, we can change it back just as easily. Both the media and the banking system will probably claim that such a change will cause hyper- inflation. The answer however, can be found in history. Lincoln printed debt and interest-free Greenbacks (cash) to finance an entire war. With added production you can add currency without having hyper-inflation. Lincoln proved this is possible.

The IRS was created under the Revenue Act of 1862. This act was supposed to be a temporary and emergency war time tax. This Act was copied from the new British system of taxation which began to tax income directly instead of just trade and property taxes.

United States Notes, also known as Legal Tender Notes were issued and circulated directly by the US Treasury from 1862 to 1871. Which begs the question, if the US was already issuing and circulating its own national currency, then why did it eventually turn over that responsibility to a private company in the form of the Federal Reserve in 1913??? A comparison between United States Notes and Federal Reserve Notes shows that they are both fiat currency, meaning they are not backed by gold or silver. A United States Note represents a bill of credit that is inserted directly into circulation by the US Treasury interest free. A Federal Reserve Note is back by debt purchased by the Federal Reserve for the full face value of the note for 4 cents per note regardless of the face value of the note, thus generating interest that is owed to the Federal Reserve.

In case this does not make any sense, money issued and inserted directly into circulation by the United States is interest free, whereas money inserted into circulation by the Federal Reserve is not. Below chronicles how much interest has been paid over the national debt in the last 25 years, and how the debt has continued to mount since the inception of the Federal Reserve in 1913. If the Federal Reserve is the cure, I would terrified to encounter the disease.

Interest Expense Fiscal Year 2011 July $26,645,554,967.44

June $110,536,850,221.63

May $30,858,726,707.77

April $28,895,123,159.28

March $24,460,282,823.69

February $21,759,253,957.26

January $21,122,729,715.18

December $104,700,174,845.03

November $19,396,316,137.56

October $24,142,491,931.22 Fiscal Year Total $412,517,504,466.06

Available Historical Data Fiscal Year End

2010 $413,954,825,362.17

2009 $383,071,060,815.42

2008 $451,154,049,950.63

2007 $429,977,998,108.20

2006 $405,872,109,315.83

2005 $352,350,252,507.90

2004 $321,566,323,971.29

2003 $318,148,529,151.51

2002 $332,536,958,599.42

2001 $359,507,635,242.41

2000 $361,997,734,302.36

1999 $353,511,471,722.87

1998 $363,823,722,920.26

1997 $355,795,834,214.66 1996 $343,955,076,695.15

1995 $332,413,555,030.62

1994 $296,277,764,246.26

1993 $292,502,219,484.25

1992 $292,361,073,070.74

1991 $286,021,921,181.04

1990 $264,852,544,615.90

1989 $240,863,231,535.71

1988 $214,145,028,847.73 http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm

2. Date Public Debt[3] Interest Payment[4]

09/30/2010 $13,561,623,030,891.79 $413,954,825,362.17

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75 $383,071,060,815.42

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49 $451,154,049,950.63

09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48 $429,977,998,108.20

09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23 $405,872,109,315.83

09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50 $352,350,252,507.90

09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32 $321,566,323,971.29 09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62 $318,148,529,151.51

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16 $332,536,958,599.42

09/28/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06 $359,507,635,242.41

09/29/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86 $361,997,734,302.36

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43 $353,511,471,722.87

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62 $363,823,722,920.26

09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34 $355,795,834,214.66

09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73 $343,955,076,695.15

09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39 $332,413,555,030.62

09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32 $296,277,764,246.26

09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 $292,502,219,484.25

09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66 $292,361,073,070.74

09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03 $286,021,921,181.04

09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25 $264,852,544,615.90

09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32 $240,863,231,535.71

09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16 $214,145,028,847.73

09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00 $148,010,000,000.00 09/30/1986 $2,125,300,000,000.00 $221,100,000,000.00

09/30/1985 $1,823,100,000,000.00 $165,740,000,000.00

09/30/1984 $1,572,300,000,000.00 $153,800,000,000.00

09/30/1983 $1,377,200,000,000.00 $114,000,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,000,000,000.00 $100,000,000,000.00

09/30/1981 $997,900,000,000.00 $90,000,000,000.00

09/30/1980 $907,700,000,000.00 $74,800,000,000.00

09/30/1979 $826,500,000,000.00 $67,600,000,000.00

09/30/1978 $771,500,000,000.00 $42,480,000,000.00

09/30/1977 $698,800,000,000.00 $40,000,000,000.00

By decade

Date Debt

09/30/2010 $13,561,623,030,891.78

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86

09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25

12/31/1980 $930,210,000,000.00

12/31/1970 $389,158,403,690.26

12/30/1960 $290,216,815,241.68 06/30/1950 $257,357,352,351.04

06/29/1940 $42,967,531,037.68

06/30/1930 $16,185,309,831.43

07/01/1920 $25,952,456,406.16

07/01/1910 $2,652,665,838.04

07/01/1900 $2,136,961,091.67

07/01/1890 $1,552,140,204.73

07/01/1880 $2,120,415,370.63

07/01/1870 $2,480,672,427.81

07/01/1860 $64,842,287.88

07/01/1850 $63,452,773.55

01/01/1840 $3,573,343.82

01/01/1830 $48,565,406.50

01/01/1820 $91,015,566.15

01/01/1810 $53,173,217.52

01/01/1800 $82,976,294.35

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_U.S._public_debt

If you reading these numbers correctly, you will see that from 1977 onward, the United States has paid the Federal Reserve more than $9 trillion in interest payments. That means the national debt would be $9 trillion lower than what it is today. The United States Treasury Department is printing the Federal Reserve Notes just as easily as they could print United States Notes itself. This doesn’t make any sense, and it didn’t make sense to JFK, which is why he was assassinated. He wanted to protect us from an oppressive amount of debt and he was eliminated because of it. Therefore, at the time President Nixon formerly took the US off the gold standard for good and switch to a fiat economy, if the Federal Reserve Notes had been retired, and a Constitutional Amendment was passed requiring a balanced budget every year, the national debt would be no more than $400 billion today, rather than approaching $15 trillion.

There were a number of economic downturns that ultimately led to the Federal Reserve. There was the Panic of 1873, which is known as the “Long Depression;” it was known as the Great Depression prior to the 1930s. The Long Depression lasted in some parts of the world for over 20 years. Its was triggered by a drop in demand in silver and a banking and railroad disaster, dealing chiefly with the failure of the Jay Cooke bank. There was the Panic of 1884 triggered by depleted gold reserves in Europe. The Panic of 1890 was due to the insolvency of Baring Bank in London due to unsound investments in Argentina. The Panic of 1893 was due to similar issues as the Panic of 1873: railroad bubble due to overbuilding, and bank failures due to unscrupulous railroad financing. The Panic of 1896 was due to a drop in silver reserves and concern as to how that would effect the gold standard. The Panic of 1901 was due to the stock market crash of the New York Stock Exchange. The Panic of 1907 was due to the New York Stock Exchange dropping nearly 50%. Finally, there was the Panic of 1910-1911 due to the enforcement of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act which led to the breakup of the Standard Oil Company which was found by John D. Rockefeller. The prelude to all of this was the changing or creation of new federal laws and powers in 1871.

The Corporation of the United States

Thomas Jefferson said: “When all government, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the Center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.” In 1871, Thomas Jefferson’s fears became a reality. In 1871 the United States ceased to be a country and became a corporation. What that means is that the United States no longer makes decisions for your benefit or for the benefit of the people as a whole, but rather for itself.

The United States of Americas, Incorporated

"While boasting of our noble deeds were careful to conceal the ugly fact that by an iniquitous money system we have nationalized a system of oppression which, though more refined, is not less cruel than the old system of chattel slavery. — Horace Greeley

The Federal government sees itself as a democracy, whereas the original states of the Union were a Republic . This Republic is no longer recognized by the "democracy" known as the United States of America. It should be understood that "democracy" essentially is majority rule, or what some call "mob rule," and a Republic is a system of government that is focussed on the rights of each individual. The rules are such to protect the rights of the individuals, not so much the mob or the majority, but of the individuals that make up the whole. The United States of America, Incorporated is dominated and controlled by 13 powerful banking families; the Rothschilds being a dominant influence, so that the laws are passed to help curb the freedoms of the states. Most of the laws of the Federal government are essentially just corporate rules and corporate laws on the states who have become associated with the Federal government, given their allegiance or otherwise bought into the Federal government in Washington, D.C., a corporation. The government in Washington, D.C. is not set up to represent the states, but to control the states, as though they were subordinate corporations to this greater corporation. Originally, the laws passed were by consent of the states, but it has reached a point now where the Federal Reserve Bank has such power, and loans to the states or programs for the states can be financed from Washington DC, the states sell out and go along with the Federal programs in order to get Federal money. The Federal Reserve is the unofficial 4th, and most powerful branch of government in the United States. It has been a very slow and gradual take over of the states and their sovereignty and independence, so that their independence is more of a sham. Independence day is a celebration that occurs each July 4th, more out of memory than out of actual reality of the present day . There is really very little independence. Today, the states are interdependent on the federal government. Meaning that the states are dependent on the Federal government, and the Federal government has some reliance on the state for its taxes collected from the people of the various states, and in this sense there is an interdepence. They each depend on the other. Unfortunately, the founding fathers left an inadvertent loophole open that allowed the protections of the constitution to be thwarted and ultimately abandoned altogether.

The Oversight of the Founding Fathers

“The Constitution is an instrument, above all, for limiting the functions of government… Throughout history, government has proved to be the chief instrument for thwarting man’s liberty. Government represents power in the hands of some men to control and regulate the lives of other men.” — Barry Goldwater

Rothschild lawyers and representatives recognized that the oversight existed in which the Washington, D.C. government for the states had never actually been a part of the United States and therefore, they took over and created a corporation of the federal government, making it a separate nation from the United states, and from that action began to move toward a gradual take over of the various states of the union through statutes and laws which the states bought into. This began in 1871 with the advent of the District of Colombia.

District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871

"When we consider that this government is charged with the external and mutual relations only of the States; that the States themselves have principal care of our persons, our property and our reputation, constituting the great field of human concerns, we may well doubt whether our organization (the Federal Government) is not too complicated, too expensive; whether offices and officers have not been multiplied unnecessarily and sometimes injuriously to the service they were meant to promote." – Thomas Jefferson 1801

On February 21, 1871, The United States Congress passed the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871. This act formed a separate government for the District of Columbia. The Constitution gives the US Congress the power to make laws, not form new governments. The United States was financially depleted after the end of the Civil War. Desperate for money, the United States made a deal with international bankers (specifically the Rothschilds of London) to incur a debt to them. This debt came with serious stipulations. This agreement ultimately led to the formation of the Federal Reserve. I am sure that the concept of the United States being a corporation is hard to digest and makes no sense to you. But ask yourself this question: Have you ever sat back and scratched your head and wondered why the US makes so many obvious policy mistakes when there are obvious and plausible solutions available? Have you ever wondered how things got so bad so quickly? The answer is not poor decision making or bad governing, but rather careful planning designed to achieve a certain end: The betterment and perpetuation of the financial success of the Federal Reserve and the Corporation of the United States. The United States is no more a country than any business entity is a country. In fact the United States is a legal federal corporation and has been so since 1871. That’s right you are reading correctly, what I am stating is that the United States is not a country at all. It is a business corporation designed to function like a business corporation, which is designed to benefit the corporate shareholders. Meaning all decisions made by the United States, Inc. are to perpetuate the success of the business and no one or nothing else. How did all this happen you ask? In 1871, the United States passed laws to govern the District of Columbia. It was in those laws that the United States, ceased to be “The United States for America” the country, and became “The United States of America” the corporation. Under Title 28 3002 (15) (A) (B) (C) the US defines itself as a corporation. Therefore since the US ceased to be a country, the constitution ceased to be applicable, because what once existed was no more. But before we get into the ramifications of this change, let’s address the issue of why? Why would US politicians allow this to happen? For one, like most people, when a lot of words are put in front of us, we don’t read, maybe we skim them at best. That is how this and most legislation is passed in the United States. Thus, the Corporation of the United States of America was born. But who is responsible for this? After the Civil War, the United States was in financial shambles. The first step of course, was to reward Abraham Lincoln for ending slavery by assassinating him. With the country in shock and morning over his death, the US oligarchy could begin the process of financial recovery. The US sought to borrow huge sums of money from foreign investors. The United States borrowed approximately $1.8 billion dollars from foreign investors, raising the national debt from just under $65 million in 1860 to almost $2.5 billion by 1870. That is a startling amount of new debt for a country fresh off of the costliest, bloodiest battle in its history. Why else would investors lend the United States such a large sum of money unless the price was extremely high??? The US was a young country, less than 100 years old. It had just been through a 5 year civil war that ripped the country apart. Cities, infrastructure, and society as a whole was in a state of ruin. No investors were about to loan a country like that a sizeable amount of money without severe conditions. So the US oligarchy made a deal with the devil and flushed the nation and its future, down the toilet. In order to create a smoke screen, the US went through the Reconstruction Era for a decade or so while they got the new corporation fully entrenched into the New United States. After the implementation was successful, the Reconstruction Era was officially over. Almost overnight, freed slaves loss the rights they had gained and were nothing more than second class citizens begging their former slave owners for help.

The District of Colombia a Loophole

“Politics is the business of getting power and privilege without possessing merit. A politician is anyone who asks individuals to surrender part of their liberty — their power and privilege — to State, Masses, Mankind, Planet Earth, or whatever. This state, those masses, that mankind, and the planet will then be run by … politicians.” — P.J. O’Rourke

Because the US government is situated in the District of Columbia, which is not part of the United States, it is essentially, a different nation entirely. It is a Federal Nation, which rules over the District of Colombia. It technically has no real jurisdiction over the rest of the United States. Therefore, passing laws and taxing another country violates established rules of international relations. You are being taxed by a foreign country. Creating the United States with the capitol located in the District of Colombia, which was not a state, was an oversight by the Founding Fathers. This oversight benefited the Rothschilds because it allowed them to break laws of the Constitution without fear of being charged for treason. The reason being, is because the laws of the United States constitution do not apply since the actions of the Rothschilds were performed by another country with an entirely distinct constitution and laws. Because of the District of Colombia loophole, the Rothschilds can pass off their obligations their obligations and responsibilities to the Federal Reserve. It can make rules of taxation against the masses, which would otherwise be constitutionally prohibited. The Rothschilds took complete advantage of the loopholes the Founding Fathers made by creating the seat of the government in a non-state, of the District of Colombia. Once the Federal Reserve Bank was created, when the United States government needed money it would only borrow from the federal reserve banks. The Federal Reserve bank only has to go to the US Treasury Department and get money printed for just the cost of printing, and then loan the money at full face value to the United States, thus making enormous profits and putting the United States into an unimaginable amount of debt.

The Panic of 1907

In 1907, the New York Stock Exchange fell by nearly 50% (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Panic_of_1907). Many banks had lent money to corner the market on the stock of the short lived, now defunct United Copper Company. When the cornering scheme failed, lending banks suffered runs which affecting affiliated banks and trusts, and ultimately affected the Knickerbocker Trust Company which was NYC’s third largest trust. The collapse of Knickerbocker Trust caused regional banks to withdrew their reserves from New York City banks. Panic spread across the nations and other regional banks suffered the same fate. J.P. Morgan swooped in as a hero and pledged large sums of his own money and convinced other New York bankers to do the same.

Why Does the National Debt Continue to Increase

“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks...will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." -Thomas Jefferson

One of the most ungodly and fraudulent institutions ever perpetrated on the American people and the world, is the Federal Reserve System which through deceit and deception became the central bank of the United States in 1913. This abominable creation was constructed at Jekyll Island in 1910. In 1907, JP Morgan, and other US bankers created a currency panic in order to garner American support for a central bank.

1910 Meeting At Jekyll Island

Participants of the meeting at Jekyll Island included: Paul Warburg, Sen. Nelson Aldrich, Frank Vanderlip, Benjamin Strong, Henry Davidson, Charles Norton, and Abe Andrews.

Amschel Rothschild The Man Behind It All

Getting Control Of The Money Supply

"The few who understand the system, will either be so interested from it's profits or so dependant on it's favors, that there will be no opposition from that class." — Rothschild Brothers of London, 1863 In 1910 Rothschild, through his agent Paul Warburg, assembled a meeting to powerful US businessmen and politicians in order to formulation a blueprint for a central bank in the United States. The goal of the central bank, you control the credit supply and liquidity of currency, allowing them to have total control over the economy.

After 100 years of planning, the time was finally right for international bankers to capture their prize...control over the US’s monetary system. After a number of attempts to convince the American people to embrace the concept of a central bank, they knew that they needed to steer clear of that type of presentation.

In December of 1910, members of the Jekyll Island Club met in private to create the new United States monetary system. The goal of course was to create a central bank, just not overtly announce its arrival. The first step was to come up with a name that sounded governmental but had no mention of the term central in it. They settled on the name “Federal Reserve System.”

The next step was to formulate a system in which it appeared that there were a number of regional banks around the country formulating banking policy and not just one central bank. However, in reality, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, would be the Federal Reserve, with the other federal reserve banks having very ancillary roles.

The real issue would not be getting the legislation to pass through Congress. The real obstacle was having a president in office that would sign the legislation into law. The problem is they had a popular president in office in the form of Howard Taft, who would most likely win re-election if things stood as they were. Taft was on record stating he would veto any bill they came before him that appeared to create a central bank.

In order to get a democrat in office to pass the legislation, the Republican Party was going to have to be broken up. Theodore Roosevelt retired in 1908 and selected Taft to replace him as president. Taft easily won the 1908 election. However, Roosevelt was talked out of retirement and attempted to win the Republican nomination for the 1912 presidential election. After failing to win the nomination over Taft, Roosevelt formed the Progressive Party in 1912.

As result of Roosevelt’s decision the Republican Party and thus its support was fractionalized. Howard Taft only received 23% of the popular vote (he went on to become a Supreme Court Justice). Roosevelt received 27.5% of the popular vote and Woodrow Wilson received 42% of the popular vote. However, because of the workings of the Electoral College voting system, Wilson received 82% of the electoral college votes. Roosevelt received 16.5% of the electoral college votes, and Taft received only 1.5% of the electoral college votes. As a result, Wilson was easily elected to office. The Jekyll Island Club finally had their man. Author Ferdinand Lundberg stated: “"For nearly 20 years before his nomination Woodrow Wilson had moved in the shadow of Wall Street.” Now Wall Street had a representative in the White House. WHY WAS SECRECY IMPORTANT?

“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert.” — J. Robert Oppenheimer

According to Vanderlip, “If it were to be exposed publicly that our particular group had gotten together and written a banking bill, that bill would have no chance whatever of passage by Congress.” The purpose of the bill was to break the grip of what was referred to as the “money trust,” which was the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few large banks in New York on Wall Street; and it was written by the money trust. Had that fact been known from the beginning, the US would never have had a Federal Reserve System because as Vanderlip said, Congress would never have passed it. It would have been like hiring the fox to install the security system at the henhouse. This was why secrecy was so important. The goal was to create a “central bank” much like those in existence in Europe for centuries.

After the passage of the Federal Reserve Act, Congressman Charles Lindbergh stated: “This Act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth....When the President signs this Act, the invisible government by the money power, proven to exist by the Money Trust Investigation, will be legalized....The new law will create inflation whenever the trust wants inflation....From now on, depression will be scientifically created.”

Louis McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking Committee during the 1930s, said about the stock market crash of 1929: “It was not accidental; it was a carefully contrived occurrence. The international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair so that they might emerge as ruler of us all.” Since 1913, the Federal Reserve Act has been amended over 100 times, with each amendment expanding the power and reach of the Federal Reserve System to “create money out of nothing.”

The Pujo Committee Report concluded in 1913 that a community of influential financial leaders had gained control of major manufacturing, transportation, mining, telecommunications and financial markets of the United States. The report revealed that no less than eighteen different major financial corporations were under the control of a cartel led by J.P Morgan, George F. Baker and James Stillman. These three men, through the resources of seven banks and trust companies (Banker’s Trust Co., Guaranty Trust Co., Astor Trust Co., National Bank of Commerce, Liberty National Bank, Chase National Bank, Farmer’s Loan and Trust Co.), controlled an estimated $2.1 billion. The report revealed that a handful of men held manipulative control of the New York Stock Exchange and attempted to evade interstate commerce laws. Notable bankers mentioned in the report included: Paul Warburg, Jacob H. Schiff, Felix M. Warburg, Frank E. Peabody, William Rockefeller, and Benjamin Strong, Jr. The report identified over $22 billion in resources and capitalization controlled through 341 directorships held in 112 corporations by members of the empire headed by J.P. Morgan.

13 Richest Families in the World

1. Rothschild - is a European family of German Jewish origin that established European banking and finance houses from the late eighteenth century. 2. Rockefeller - Chase Manhattan Bank and JP Morgan Chase. Assets reported to be north of $100 billion. 3. Windsor - royal family of England since 1901. 4. DuPont - maintained family wealth by having first cousins marry in the 19th century. 5. Vanderbilt - 7th wealthiest family in history. 6. Krupp - 400 year old German dynasty. 7. Kellogg - 8. Goldman - multibillion dollar German family. 9. Wrigley - 11. Al Saud - trillion dollar Saudi Arabia royal family. 12. Li - 13. Cowles-Hammett -

The Money Trust

In 1913, under the Pujo Committee, it was confirmed that a money trust did exist. A money trust is designed to control the majority of the world’s finances by a few powerful individuals. The 1913 Pujo Report found that officers of J.P. Morgan sat on 112 corporations with a market capitalization of $22.5 billion. At the time the entire value of the New York Stock Exchange was estimated to be $26.5 billion. George Baker during the Pujo hearings; "We define a money trust as an established identity and community of interest between a few leaders of finance, which has been created and is held together through stock-holding, interlocking directorates, and other forms of domination over banks, trust companies, railroads, public service and industrial corporations, and which has resulted in vast and growing concentration and control of money and credits in the hands of a few men.”

THE “MANDRAKE MECHANISM” - MONEY OUT OF NOTHING:

"Neither paper currency nor deposits have value as commodities, intrinsically, a 'dollar' bill is just a piece of paper. Deposits are merely book entries." — Modern Money Mechanics Workbook, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, 1975

The passage of the Federal Reserve Act in 1913 was the beginning of the partnership between a cartel of private bankers and the US government. Cartels often go into partnership with governments because they need the force of law to enforce their cartel agreement. The “Mandrake Mechanism” named after the comic-book character of the 1940s, Mandrake the Magician, who could create something out of nothing. The government prints off US Government bonds. The bonds are bought by investors, instantly creating money out of nothing. The Arrival of 1913 and The Federal Reserve "Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws." — Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild

"This [Federal Reserve Act] establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President [Wilson} signs this bill, the invisible government of the monetary power will be legalized....the worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency bill." — Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr. , 1913

Woodrow Wilson was elected into office in 1912. He began serving as president on March 4, 1913. Before the end of the year, all hell would begin to break loose. The 16th Amendment was ratified on February 3, 1913. It gave Congress the ability to directly tax our income. Prior to this amendment, the IRS really had no power. This all changed when Wilson signed into law the Revenue Act of 1913 on October 3, 1913, which reimposed the federal income tax. Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act into office on December 23, 1913.

Ultimately, Colonel House, and Nelson Aldrich, convinced Woodrow Wilson to sign the Federal Reserve Act in 1913. This allowed Rothschild to control the monetary in the United States, along with England via the central banks of both nations. Charles August Lindbergh opposed the creation of the Federal Reserve, and wrote a book about it. President Wilson confiscated the printing plates, and had them destroyed.

The Federal Reserve was created in 1913 via the Federal Reserve Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Federal_Reserve). The Federal Reserve is an independent non government body whose decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government. Its authority to operate comes from the US Congress, that only has Congressional oversight over its activities. US taxpayers pay the Federal Reserve over $400 billion per year in interest payments for the national debt alone (no portion of the payment goes toward principle).

Contrary to popular opinion, the Federal Reserve is not a government entity. Rather, the Federal Reserve is a privately owned entity. The significance of that is the Federal Reserve is responsible for all the money that is printed in the United States. Who owns the Federal Reserve? Rothschild Bank of Berlin, Rothschild Bank of London, Warburg Bank of Hamburg, Chase Manhattan, Bank of New York, Warburg Bank of Amsterdam, Goldman, Sachs of New York, Lazard Brothers of Paris, Lehman Brothers of New York, Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy, Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York Colonel House.

All money in circulation in the United States are Federal Reserve Notes. Regardless of the face value of the note, the Federal Reserve only pays 4 cents per note, but the United States agrees to pay the Federal Reserve for the full face value of the note in the form of US Treasury Securities that it can redeem whenever it wants. In the meantime it collects interest for these securities for the full value of the note, with only a 4 cents investment. Wouldn’t all of us like to make such a small investment for such a large return. In case you are doing the math, the return rate is 25 times above the investment amount for a dollar bill, 125 times the investment amount for a 5 dollar bill, 250 times for a 10 dollar bill, 500 times for a 20 dollar bill, and 1,250 times for a 50 dollar bill. With that type of return on our investments we would all be instant overnight multi millionaires. Are you starting to get an idea of why the United States is so far in debt??? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_Note The federal income tax rate initially topped out at 6% in 1913. By 1918 the top tax rate was 72% (under the Wilson Administration). By 1942, the top tax rate was 88% and reach a high of 94% in 1944 (Both under the FDR Administration). As recently as 1980, under the Carter Administration, the top tax bracket was 70%. The chart below shows, as of 2010, the top US tax bracket is 33%. However, history shows it is likely to increase again to a significantly higher amount.

1913 - 2010 2. Historical marginal income tax rates for Married Filing Jointly at stated income levels.

Year $10,001 $20,001 $60,001 $100,001 $250,001

1913 1% 2% 3% 5% 6%

1914 1% 2% 3% 5% 6%

1916 2% 3% 5% 7% 10%

1918 16% 21% 41% 64% 72% 1920 12% 17% 37% 60% 68%

1922 10% 16% 36% 56% 58%

1924 7% 11% 27% 43% 44%

1926 6% 10% 21% 25% 25%

1928 6% 10% 21% 25% 25%

1930 6% 10% 21% 25% 25%

1932 10% 16% 36% 56% 58%

1934 11% 19% 37% 56% 58%

1936 11% 19% 39% 62% 68%

1938 11% 19% 39% 62% 68%

1940 14% 28% 51% 62% 68%

1942 38% 55% 75% 85% 88%

1944 41% 59% 81% 92% 94%

1946 38% 56% 78% 89% 91%

1948 38% 56% 78% 89% 91%

1950 38% 56% 78% 89% 91%

1952 42% 62% 80% 90% 92%

1954 38% 56% 78% 89% 91% 1956 26% 38% 62% 75% 89%

1958 26% 38% 62% 75% 89%

1960 26% 38% 62% 75% 89%

1962 26% 38% 62% 75% 89%

1964 23% 34% 56% 66% 76%

1966 - 1976 22% 32% 53% 62% 70%

1980 18% 24% 54% 59% 70%

1982 16% 22% 49% 50% 50%

1984 14% 18% 42% 45% 50%

1986 14% 18% 38% 45% 50%

1988 15% 15% 28% 28% 28%

1990 15% 15% 28% 28% 28%

1992 15% 15% 28% 28% 31%

1994 15% 15% 28% 31% 39.6%

1996 15% 15% 28% 31% 36%

1998 15% 15% 28% 28% 36%

2000 15% 15% 28% 28% 36%

2002 10% 15% 27% 27% 35% 2004 10% 15% 25% 25% 33%

2006 10% 15% 15% 25% 33%

2008 10% 15% 15% 25% 33%

2010 10% 15% 15% 25% 33%

WHERE DOES THE MONEY COME FROM?

"The increase in the assets of the Federal Reserve banks from 143 million dollars in 1913 to 45 billion dollars in 1949 went directly to the private stockholders of the [federal reserve] banks." - Eustace Mullins

"The modern Banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banks can in fact inflate, mint and unmint the modern ledger-entry currency." — MAJOR L .L. B. ANGUS

"Banks lend by creating credit. They create the means of payment out of nothing" — Ralph M. Hawtrey, Secretary of the British Treasury

When the borrower signs a promissory note, a loan is created and than loan is used by the bak or lending institution as collateral with the Federal Reserve. Thus, a fraud is committed by banks and lending institutions when they claim to have funds to loan, when those funds only came into existence via a person’s signature. These are called fiat loans, which means loans made out of thin air with no financial backing to secure them. which they can "loan" when it is your or my own signature which brings the funds into being. These type loans are designed to appear as if the funds are coming from a consolidated pool of assets that are being risked against whether you will default on the loan. However, it is the borrower that bears all the risk, that can potentially lose their house, car, or other financed possession, in the event of their default. Fractional reserve requirements and checkbook money. This process creates currency devaluation and leads to inflation. Bank can lend 90% of newly created debt currency. Also known as monetizing debt. The United States government, allows this fiat creation of money to exist because it benefits its goal of creating money out of thin air, instead of raising taxes. Then indirectly tax citizens by the national debt increasing and having to pay an increased ever growing interest payment every year. This fiat, or basically monopoly money, allows the US to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on wars such as Afghanistan and Iraq without raising taxes. Instead they just increase the national debt and divert tax receipts to Federal Reserve interest payment. Pet projects increase the national debt, not services that you are actually benefiting from. Because the government can just continue to collect money from taxpayers (its willing unbeknownst co-conspirators), it doesn’t have to demonstrate any restraint. Instead, all it needs to do is to throw a few social services your way and tell you that you are the reason the national debt is so high, because of so much it has to do for you. In reality, the national debt is so high because the Federal Reserve is like a credit card with no limit, with astronomical interest rates. The government doesn’t care how high the debt is, because they just keep collecting the money from you. Is that generosity on the American tax payers’s part, or utter stupidity? The answer is simple enough, but for appearances sake, let’s pretend there’s another choice.

Paper Money and Tyranny "Under the gold standard, a free banking system stands as the protector of an economy's stability and balanced growth." - Alan Greenspan

"The excess credit which the Fed pumped into the economy spilled over into the stock market- triggering a fantastic speculative boom." - Alan Greenspan (speaking of the 1929 Stock Market Crash)

"In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation." - Alan Greenspan

“Big government and paper money deficit spending is a scheme for the hidden confiscation of wealth”. - Alan Greenspan

The United States was not built on paper money, however the national debt it has incurred is. The Founding Fathers were aware of the dangers of paper money, which is why they strictly required it be backed by gold and silver, rather than based on faith in a government the way it exist today. So many people question the validity of God, because they cannot see him, touch him, or speak to him. However, when it comes to this concept of money, people blindly accept it in whatever form it comes. How do we know that every member of the Federal Reserve doesn’t have a printing press at home? Since all of the Federal Reserve’s records are held in secrecy, how do we know how much money is in circulation? Since all of the money it circulates can be acquired for just four cents per note, regardless of the amount of the note, how do we know there are not trillions of additional dollars circulating throughout the world? Do any of you know what the Federal Reserve spends its money on? Do any of you even know what the government spends all your money own? How do we know if many of these classified missions and files the government haw are not just covers for an international financial cartel scheme? Isn’t that basically what is happening with the Federal Reserve? What would you do if someone gave you a book of blank checks and you could get whatever you wanted with them, and just had to pay four cents for each check no matter how much the amount was? How conservative would you be about your spending habits? What if I also told you, that you make money in the form of interest payments based on the amount of new debt you generate? Seems you would have a reason to increase the debt owed as much as possible, right? Does that make you a bad person or someone taking advantage of an opportunity someone was dumb enough to put in front of you? Sounds like a case of semantics. In any event you would be a fool not to benefit from such a one sided relationship. In essence that is what has taken place with the Federal Reserve. The more debt there is, the more money it receives in the form interest payments. When does anyone turn down free money, especially when it is legally sanctioned and the government is bending over backwards to give it to you. Sounds like a really bad case of diarrhea of the spend. In other words, an uncontrollable spending addiction that has only one cure. Kill the source of the money. In this case the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is the curable disease of the United States that must be ripped right from its root, have the seeds taken out, burned, buried, dug up, and burned again just to make sure its completely dead. But here’s the problem. Everyone knows how to kill the Federal Reserve, just no one is willing to kill the Federal Reserve; you included. All of us, citizen and government alike, enjoy living beyond our means. The government does it by having a national debt rising faster than a morbidly obese person’s ballooning waistline. The average person lives beyond their means by having credit, in the form of a mortgage, car payments, credit card bills, and student loans. All of us seem to have no trouble spending the money, or what substitutes for money...credit. The problem is when it is time to pay back that credit borrowed. Many of us, like the United States, borrow more credit to pay credit that is already borrowed. In essence one pays debt with debt. One uses money one doesn’t have, in the form of new debt, to pay for money that one already owes, in the form of old debt. That’s why we all like the Federal Reserve, it makes getting new money easy. The problem is it’s not so easy. Whether it is consumer debt or government, the same person pays...you. You are either pay the debt directly in the form of debt you have personally accumulated, indirectly in the form of government debt related interest payments (i.e. income taxes), or indirectly in the form of higher interest rates and premiums because of other people’s defaults. No matter how you define, classify, or categorize it, your life is an endless cycle of paying someone else’s debt, yours included, because we all wanted to live the “good life” via the Easy Way Debt Highway. Let me ask you something buddy. How’s the good life treating you? At the end of the day all that easy street comfort living comes at a price. Many times with a government, the end of the day can be a little longer. In this case say 100 years. But when the end of the day finally comes, somebody has to pick up the tab. The end of the day for the United States is 2012. I know that most of you are dumb and blind, or just euphorically oblivious to the world around you, but you cannot escape the facts. Many of you like bunny hopping from house to house every 3 to 5 years because the one you are living in has increased in value and you’ll make a profit on it, despite the second and third mortgages you took out on it. Many of you have been used to leasing vehicles and getting a brand new one every couple of years when the lease is up. You never worry about the bill because as your salary goes up every year, so too do your credit card limits. You just keep making minimum payments. How’s that philosophy working now? Today, you find that your home has depreciated in value and you owe more than it is worth. You are so upside down on your mortgage, that you couldn’t even give it away. You’re now stuck in it; for a lot longer than 3-5 years. That cushy corporate job you’ve had for years has been eliminated, downsized, or your salary is at an elevation freeze because all annual pay increases have been suspended until further notice. Suddenly living beyond your means has caught up to you, just like the United States’s credit rating on August 5, 2011. When an entire nation’s credit has been downgraded, the nation is in trouble. A downgrade in a credit rating, whether it be an individual, or a country, is a vote of no confidence. It means that lending institutions and creditors, believe that one’s ability to pay its obligations has fallen below previous levels of sustainability. In other words, they believe that you owe more than you have the ability to pay. This is the point that the United States has reached. If you don’t understand the perilous position that puts all of us in, then just keep smoking on that pipe dream you call reality. It is for the above mentioned reasons why we are all unwilling to eliminate the Federal Reserve. Because it would mean no more easy credit. Which means we would all have to begin living within our means. All of us can have a fresh start. We could all file bankruptcy, the United States could retire the debt and begin issuing its own United States Notes. But here’s the problem: We all wish to continue living beyond our means. The problem is the national debt is like a house. In that house there are certain responsibilities like, cleaning the kitchen, the bathroom, and taking out the trash. But what happens, when no one wants to do it. They might hire a maid, but somebody has to pay her. She might take IOUs for a while until she realizes you are actually never going to pay her. Once she walks away you have to start cleaning the house yourself. The problem is you’re too damn lazy to do it. So in the end, your entire house is infested with vermin, and has been condemned because it is unfit to live in. All you had to do was be willing to clean up the mess you made. As a result of failing to do so, now you are homeless. Well I can only say one thing to you buddy: “Sorry about your damn luck!”

Money As a Moral Issue Would you trust your children or a stranger with your money? Then why trust the government? What has the government ever done to earn your trust? Has it been by creating a system in which the only way you can make ends meet is to dig yourself an inescapable debt prison? Is it by allowing the rich and big business to live like fat cats with ridiculous tax loopholes that you can never use, just so they can tax you more money? Maybe it’s because the government knows what’s best for you and it’s there to protect you? The concept of protection and money is used by another organization as well; it’s called the mob. They call it “protection money.” Basically you pay the mob so much money per month and they give you protection...from them. If you don’t pay the mob protection money then they will come in and scare away all your customers, tear your business apart, brick by brick. They may also decide to do bodily harm to you. How is any of that different from the government? You get no say in how and what the money that is collected from you is spent on. You don’t even get the ability to ask them to at least make sure the budget is balanced so you do not go further into debt. They tell you when the money is do, and if you don’t pay, the consequences are high. Failure to pay government imposed taxes, include, but are not limited to: having your bank accounts frozen, having your assets liquidated, including your home, your car, having your business shut down, being fined, and then ultimately being hauled off and thrown into jail. How exactly is any of that different from how the mob works? It’s not. Ignorance of the law is no excuse, and acceptance of their laws is mandatory, no exceptions. Sounds a lot less like a democracy and more like a dictatorship. I guess that is just more semantics. Must be nice. They get to print all the money, use it however they want, and get you to pay for. If for some reason you protest or have an issue with how they run things, well then they’ll just sick one of your fellow citizens on you and have you forcibly dragged out of your home, stripped of your clothes and dignity, forced to urinate in front of someone, have an orange jump suit thrown on you, and assigned a number. At least the mob has the decency to kill you. These sadistic bastards...I mean the United States, keeps you alive so they can torture you some more.

Money As a Political Issue Money has always been a political issue, just not a very honest issue. If big government is the problem, the solution will not be found in the Democratic or Republican party. Both parties want to spend, just each one has a different pet project to spend it on. For the Democrats, it is social programs. For the Republicans, it is the military. Both approaches have the same results: a ridiculous amount of taxes, a high annual deficits, and national debt that’s like many banks, too big too fail. No matter who runs, Democrats or Republicans, lobbyist will fund them all the same. Lobbyist are not loyal to either party, just to themselves. As long as they grease both sides of the wheel, they ensure that their agenda will be implemented. The Federal Reserve works the same way. It makes no difference which party is in power to the Federal Reserve, the need is still the same...money. No matter how big their promises, how fancy their speeches, politicians will always compromise for the money. Many people tell you that compromise is a good thing, but not when you are bending so far over you are kissing your tongue with your asshole. Compromise is what got the United States so far into debt. Politicians are so concerned about staying in office, that they don’t want to step on anyone’s toes. As a consequence, they try to please all the people all of the time instead some of the people some of the time. The problem with that philosophy is there simply are not enough resources to go around. At least not if you want to do things in a far and honest way. However, in politics, fairness and honesty are theories, that never rise to the level of implementation. In politics, no issues are so far apart, that money can’t remedy. Life kind of works the same way. In life one can be the fiercest of enemies with a person, but will work together with that individual, if the price is right. In politics, one does not see Republican or Democrat, one just sees...money. In politics, money is the only opinion that counts. Anything else that is discussed is just a rouse to make it appear that politicians really give a damn. In reality, they have to do something with their time, so they run their mouths pretending they are working toward resolutions. The best actors in the US are not in Hollywood, they are in Washington, DC. Politics is just a theatrical production, played out for people’s enjoyment, no different from any other drama, sitcom, or reality tv show.

Money as an Economic Issue In 1871, the US population was approximately 40 million people with a national debt of $2.4 billion. Forty years later in 1911, which a population of over 93 million, the US national debt was $2.7 billion. Two years later the Federal Reserve enters the picture. With the US population 3 times larger than 1911, 100 years later, one might expect the national debt to be 3 times larger or $7.1 billion. Instead the national debt is more than 5,000 times larger than it was 100 years ago. Is it now clear what happened??? The consequence of borrowed money, is that eventually someone has to pay the bill. It has taken nearly 100 years, but the United States is finally having to face the mess it created in 1913. Unemployment and inflation are just symptoms of the bigger problem, a flailing dollar as a result of a fiat economy and a national debt that is simply too big to ignore. For 40 years, the United States prevented its citizens from owning or possessing gold. The reason being, is because it did not want citizens to choose gold over paper money. More specifically, in order for a paper money scam to be successful, it requires the participation of the vast majority of people. If there are other alternatives to toilet paper with dead people’s faces on them, anyone would accept the alternative. However, when one is forced to accept paper money as the only acceptable form of barter, then those that control it have a tyrannical control on the rest of society. The chart below shows that since 1973, when the US was formerly taken off the gold standard, gold has increased from less than $100 per ounce to now nearly $2,000 per ounce. That is a direct reflection of the devaluation of the US dollar over the last 40 years. This same 40 year time frame has seen the national debt go from something that could have theoretically be paid off, that is now so large even a nuclear bomb couldn’t eliminate it. http://goldprice.org/gold-price-history.html

The politicians who allowed the Federal Reserve Act to be implemented should be dug up from their graves and shot in the head. Those that allow the Federal Reserve to continue to exist should be hunted down like the animals they are, tied to the back of a pickup truck and lynched for the abomination they allow to masquerade as ethical politics in this country.

From Jackie Patru Sweet liberty.org :

"Our Constitutional rights are under attack. While we sleep, local and state elected officials are legislating away our freedom by implementing federal legislation which does NOT apply -- Constitutionally -- to the several states. The President is acting as a king -- issuing "decrees" called Executive Orders -- which we are to believe overrides the Constitution for the United States of America, bypassing the system of checks and balances. Corrupt courts prosecute on false charges, ignoring the right to due process. To what may we attribute the impending death of our once great nation and the slave status of once free Americans? Who is to blame for her state of bankruptcy and vulnerability? We are, by our silence. Our lack of involvement is our acquiescence."

Why the Federal Reserve & The National Debt Are Illegal

“The difference between a politician and a pickpocket is that a pickpocket doesn’t always get indignant when you tell him to keep his hands to himself.” — Joseph Sobran

The privately owned Federal Reserve bank, was given authority to print Federal Reserve notes instead of the US Treasury Department printing US Treasury Notes as directed by the US Constitution. The United States Congress acted outside its constitutional authority by granting the Federal Reserve such a power. This act of treason perpetrated by the US Congress has resulted in a national debt of almost 15 trillion dollars. If everything in the United States were sold, most of the debt would still be owed. Nearly all of the debt accumulated has occurred in the last 30 years.

The US Treasury Department has the ability to void the national debt because it was accrued via unconstitutional means. Only the US Treasury Department, not a private corporation, can produce US currency. The US Congress transferring the power of the US Treasury Department to print and coin money to the Federal Reserve, would be equivalent to you being hired for a position and then have someone come in to work for you. You still receive the money, but the employer now has to pay your salary plus interest, because the employer is being forced to borrow the money from the person you designated to replace you. Most importantly, the money the person gets to pay you is from the employer. That person is simply paying the employer 4 cents per paycheck printed and the employer owes the person the full amount of the paycheck plus interest. If that sounds crazy, that’s exactly how the Federal Reserve functions. Since Congress never had the power to transfer the debt to a non government agency, there entire national debt is unconstitutional and should be rendered null and void. National Debt Not a Legal Debt

“It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong.” — Thomas Sowell

The national debt was once a rather benign issue, similar to an investor occasionally coming to your door asking if you are interested in selling your house. Then one day the investor comes to your door and doesn’t ask you anything. Instead the investor is there with a moving truck and the police. They have a contract in hand and you are forced to sign it, or you will be hauled off to jail. You see while you refused to sell to the investor, everybody else in your neighborhood did and now the investor owns the town, and the town has voted to kick you out. That is what has happened with the Federal Reserve and its relationship with the United States.

The national debt was once a relatively benign issue. Yes it was a couple of hundred billion dollars and an annoyance, but it was a manageable annoyance. Soon however, entitlement spending, inflation, and military missions consumed the nation. Very quickly the national debt doubled, and then doubled again, and has continued to double every 5 years.

What was once a seemingly benign spot on the economic landscape has now turned into a full blown systemic cancerous episode that has completely metastasized, affecting all areas of the economy. In 2000, the national debt had risen to such a level that the interest payments outpaced tax revenues causing the United States to go bankrupt for the second time in 70 years.

Instead of the money borrowed from the Federal Reserve being used as a foundation for a stable economy, it was a used as a sword to decimate the financial foundation of the entire nation. It’s like the US got amnesia and forgot how it acquired the money it used. It continued to borrow with no strategy or plan as to how to pay it back. The only thing the government knew for sure is that it was going to spend more money and had no way to pay for it.

The entity begins working, using credit to rebuild an apparent business, but forgets perhaps that it is all borrowed money, and thinks that it is doing quite well in its new thriving business, only to discover that after awhile, it owes far more than it ever imagined it would owe, so that it is even deeper in debt now than it was at the time it borrowed the money to start its new business. That is the situation the United States is operating under.

The chart below shows that the issue with the United States has nothing to do with its GDP growth or income per capita. The issue that the US has is that its spending is entirely out of control. Not a person nor a country can continue year after year to outspend its earnings and expect to remain solvent. The US is financially insolvent due to its inability, and more specifically its utter refusal to stop spending money it doesn’t have. Court Rules Federal Reserve is Privately Owned

Case Reveals Fed's Status as a Private Institution

"The regional Federal Reserve banks are not government agencies. ...but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations." — Lewis vs. United States, 680 F. 2d 1239

9th Circuit 1982

Below are excerpts from a court case establishing the Federal Reserve system's status. As you will see, the court ruled that the Federal Reserve Banks are "independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations", and there is not sufficient "federal government control over 'detailed physical performance' and 'day to day operation'" of the Federal Reserve Bank for it to be considered a federal agency:

Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (1982) The Court of Appeals, Poole, Circuit Judge, held that federal reserve banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of the Act, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations.

Affirmed.

1. United States

There are no sharp criteria for determining whether an entity is a federal agency within the meaning of the Federal Tort Claims Act, but critical factor is existence of federal government control over "detailed physical performance" and "day to day operation" of an entity. . . .

2. United States

Federal reserve banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of a Federal Tort Claims Act, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations in light of the fact that direct supervision and control of each bank is exercised by a board of directors, federal reserve banks, though heavily regulated, are locally controlled by their member banks, banks are listed neither as "wholly owned" government corporations nor as "mixed ownership" corporations; federal reserve banks receive no appropriated funds from Congress and the banks are empowered to sue and be sued in their own names. . . .

3. United States

Under the Federal Tort Claims Act, federal liability is narrowly based on traditional agency principles and does not necessarily lie when a tortfeasor simply works for an entity, like the Reserve Bank, which performs important activities for the government. . . .

4. Taxation

The Reserve Banks are deemed to be federal instrumentalities for purposes of immunity from state taxation. 5. States Taxation

Tests for determining whether an entity is federal instrumentality for purposes of protection from state or local action or taxation, is very broad: whether entity performs an important governmental function.

28 USC. Sect. 2671. The liability of the United States for the negligence of a Federal Reserve Bank employee depends, therefore, on whether the Bank is a federal agency under Sect. 2671. [1,2] There are no sharp criteria for determining whether an entity is a federal agency within the meaning of the Act, but the critical factor is the existence of federal government control over the "detailed physical performance" and "day to day operation" of that entity. . . . Other factors courts have considered include whether the entity is an independent corporation . . ., whether the government is involved in the entity's finances. . . ., and whether the mission of the entity furthers the policy of the United States, . . . Examining the organization and function of the Federal Reserve Banks, and applying the relevant factors, we conclude that the Reserve Banks are not federal instrumentalities for purpose of the FTCA, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations.

Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. The stockholding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank's nine member board of directors. The remaining three directors are appointed by the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board regulates the Reserve Banks, but direct supervision and control of each Bank is exercised by its board of directors. 12 USC. Sect. 301. The directors enact by-laws regulating the manner of conducting general Bank business, 12 USC. Sect. 341, and appoint officers to implement and supervise daily Bank activities. These activities include collecting and clearing checks, making advances to private and commercial entities, holding reserves for member banks, discounting the notes of member banks, and buying and selling securities on the open market. See 12 USC. Sub-Sect. 341-361.

Each Bank is statutorily empowered to conduct these activities without day to day direction from the federal government. Thus, for example, the interest rates on advances to member banks, individuals, partnerships, and corporations are set by each Reserve Bank and their decisions regarding the purchase and sale of securities are likewise independently made.

It is evident from the legislative history of the Federal Reserve Act that Congress did not intend to give the federal government direction over the daily operation of the Reserve Banks:

“It is proposed that the Government shall retain sufficient power over the reserve banks to enable it to exercise a direct authority when necessary to do so, but that it shall in no way attempt to carry on through its own mechanism the routine operations and banking which require detailed knowledge of local and individual credit and which determine the funds of the community in any given instance.”

In other words, the reserve-bank plan retains to the Government power over the exercise of the broader banking functions, while it leaves to individuals and privately owned institutions the actual direction of routine.

H.R. Report No. 69 Cong. 1st Sess. 18-19 (1913).

The fact that the Federal Reserve Board regulates the Reserve Banks does not make them federal agencies under the Act. In United States v. Orleans, 425 US 807, 96 S.Ct. 1971, 48 L.Ed.2d 390 (1976), the Supreme Court held that a community action agency was not a federal agency or instrumentality for purposes of the Act, even though the agency was organized under federal regulations and heavily funded by the federal government. Because the agency's day to day operation was not supervised by the federal government, but by local officials, the Court refused to extend federal tort liability for the negligence of the agency's employees. Similarly, the Federal Reserve Banks, though heavily regulated, are locally controlled by their member banks. Unlike typical federal agencies, each bank is empowered to hire and fire employees at will. Bank employees do not participate in the Civil Service Retirement System. They are covered by worker's compensation insurance, purchased by the Bank, rather than the Federal Employees Compensation Act. Employees travelling on Bank business are not subject to federal travel regulations and do not receive government employee discounts on lodging and services.

The Banks are listed neither as "wholly owned" government corporations under 31 USC. Sect. 846 nor as "mixed ownership" corporations under 31 USC. Sect. 856, a factor considered is Pearl v. United States, 230 F.2d 243 (10th Cir. 1956), which held that the Civil Air Patrol is not a federal agency under the Act. Closely resembling the status of the Federal Reserve Bank, the Civil Air Patrol is a non-profit, federally chartered corporation organized to serve the public welfare. But because Congress' control over the Civil Air Patrol is limited and the corporation is not designated as a wholly owned or mixed ownership government corporation under 31 USC. Sub-Sect. 846 and 856, the court concluded that the corporation is a non-governmental, independent entity, not covered under the Act.

Additionally, Reserve Banks, as privately owned entities, receive no appropriated funds from Congress. . . .

Finally, the Banks are empowered to sue and be sued in their own name. 12 USC. Sect. 341. They carry their own liability insurance and typically process and handle their own claims. In the past, the Banks have defended against tort claims directly, through private counsel, not government attorneys . . ., and they have never been required to settle tort claims under the administrative procedure of 28 USC. Sect. 2672. The waiver of sovereign immunity contained in the Act would therefore appear to be inapposite to the Banks who have not historically claimed or received general immunity from judicial process.

[3] The Reserve Banks have properly been held to be federal instrumentalities for some purposes. In United States v. Hollingshead, 672 F.2d 751 (9th Cir. 1982), this court held that a Federal Reserve Bank employee who was responsible for recommending expenditure of federal funds was a "public official" under the Federal Bribery Statute. That statute broadly defines public official to include any person acting "for or on behalf of the Government." . . . The test for determining status as a public official turns on whether there is "substantial federal involvement" in the defendant's activities. United States v. Hollingshead, 672 F.2d at 754. In contrast, under the FTCA, federal liability is narrowly based on traditional agency principles and does not necessarily lie when the tortfeasor simply works for an entity, like the Reserve Banks, which perform important activities for the government.

[4, 5] The Reserve Banks are deemed to be federal instrumentalities for purposes of immunity from state taxation. . . . The test for determining whether an entity is a federal instrumentality for purposes of protection from state or local action or taxation, however, is very broad: whether the entity performs an important governmental function. . . . The Reserve Banks, which further the nation's fiscal policy, clearly perform an important governmental function.

Performance of an important governmental function, however, is but a single factor and not determinative in tort claims actions. . . . State taxation has traditionally been viewed as a greater obstacle to an entity's ability to perform federal functions than exposure to judicial process; therefore tax immunity is liberally applied. . . . Federal tort liability, however, is based on traditional agency principles and thus depends upon the principal's ability to control the actions of his agent, and not simply upon whether the entity performs an important governmental function. . . .

Brinks Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 466 F.Supp. 116 (D.D.C.1979), held that a Federal Reserve Bank is a federal instrumentality for purposes of the Service Contract Act, 41 USC. Sect. 351. Citing Federal Reserve Bank of Boston and Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, the court applied the "important governmental function" test and concluded that the term "Federal Government" in the Service Contract Act must be "liberally construed to effectuate the Act's humanitarian purpose of providing minimum wage and fringe benefit protection to individuals performing contracts with the federal government." Id. 288 Mich. at 120, 284 N.W.2d 667. Such a liberal construction of the term "federal agency" for purposes of the Act is unwarranted. Unlike in Brinks, plaintiffs are not without a forum in which to seek a remedy, for they may bring an appropriate state tort claim directly against the Bank; and if successful, their prospects of recovery are bright since the institutions are both highly solvent and amply insured.

For these reasons we hold that the Reserve Banks are not federal agencies for purposes of the Federal Tort Claims Act and we affirm the judgement of the district court.

AFFIRMED.

Warnings About the Federal Reserve and Central Banks

Since the inception of the Federal Reserve, many have warned us of the dangers of the Federal Reserve, but none of us would listen. If the Federal Reserve and the concept of a central bank is so beneficial for society, then why have so many people argued against it? Below are some of those warnings.

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a monied aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power (of money) should be taken away from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs." — Thomas Jefferson

"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and it's issuance." — James Madison

"If Congress has the right to issue paper money [currency], it was given to them to be used by...[the government] and not to be delegated to individuals or corporations" — Andrew Jackson, Vetoed Bank Bill of 1836

"Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce." — James A. Garfield

"It is well that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." — Henry Ford

"These 12 corporations together cover the whole country and monopolize and use for private gain every dollar of the public currency..." — Mr. Crozier of Cincinnati, before Senate Banking and Currency Committee - 1913 "The [Federal Reserve Act] as it stands seems to me to open the way to a vast inflation of the currency... I do not like to think that any law can be passed that will make it possible to submerge the gold standard in a flood of irredeemable paper currency." — Henry Cabot Lodge Sr., 1913

"From now on, depressions will be scientifically created." — Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh Sr. , 1913

"A great industrial nation is controlled by it's system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the world--no longer a government of free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men." — President Woodrow Wilson

"The financial system has been turned over to the Federal Reserve Board. That Board as ministers the finance system by authority of a purely profiteering group. The system is Private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other people's money" -- Charles A. Lindbergh Sr., 1923

"Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits." — SIR JOSIAH STAMP, (President of the Bank of England in the 1920's, the second richest man in Britain):

"Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are the United States government's institutions. They are not government institutions. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign swindlers" — Louis T. McFadden, Chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency, June 10, 1932

"We have, in this country, one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board. This evil institution has impoverished the people of the United States and has practically bankrupted our government. It has done this through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it". — Congressman Louis T. McFadden in 1932 (Rep. Pa)

"The Federal Reserve banks are one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever seen. There is not a man within the sound of my voice who does not know that this nation is run by the International bankers.” — Congressman Louis T. McFadden in 1932 (Rep. Pa)

"The Federal Reserve bank buys government bonds without one penny..." — Congressman Wright Patman, Congressional Record, Sept 30, 1941

"As soon as Mr. Roosevelt took office, the Federal Reserve began to buy government securities at the rate of ten million dollars a week for 10 weeks, and created one hundred million dollars in new [checkbook] currency, which alleviated the critical famine of money and credit, and the factories started hiring people again." — Eustace Mullins

"The increase in the assets of the Federal Reserve banks from 143 million dollars in 1913 to 45 billion dollars in 1949 went directly to the private stockholders of the [federal reserve] banks." — Eustace Mullins

"Most Americans have no real understanding of the operation of the international money lenders. The accounts of the Federal Reserve System have never been audited. It operates outside the control of Congress and manipulates the credit of the United States" — Sen. Barry Goldwater (Rep. AR)

"I have never seen more Senators express discontent with their jobs....I think the major cause is that, deep down in our hearts, we have been accomplices in doing something terrible and unforgivable to our wonderful country. Deep down in our heart, we know that we have given our children a legacy of bankruptcy. We have defrauded our country to get ourselves elected." — John Danforth (R-Mo)

"When you or I write a check there must be sufficient funds in our account to cover the check, but when the Federal Reserve writes a check there is no bank deposit on which that check is drawn. When the Federal Reserve writes a check, it is creating money." — Putting it simply, Boston Federal Reserve Bank

"Neither paper currency nor deposits have value as commodities, intrinsically, a 'dollar' bill is just a piece of paper. Deposits are merely book entries." — Modern Money Mechanics Workbook, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, 1975

"The Federal Reserve system pays the US Treasury 020.60 per thousand notes --a little over 2 cents each-- without regard to the face value of the note. Federal Reserve Notes, incidentally, are the only type of currency now produced for circulation. They are printed exclusively by the Treasury's Bureau of Engraving and Printing, and the $20.60 per thousand price reflects the Bureau's full cost of production. Federal Reserve Notes are printed in 01, 02, 05, 10, 20, 50, and 100 dollar denominations only; notes of 500, 1000, 5000, and 10,000 denominations were last printed in 1945." —Donald J. Winn, Assistant to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve system

"We are completely dependant on the commercial banks. Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash or credit. If the banks create ample synthetic money we are prosperous; if not, we starve. We are absolutely without a permanent money system.... It is the most important subject intelligent persons can investigate and reflect upon. It is so important that our present civilization may collapse unless it becomes widely understood and the defects remedied very soon." — Robert H. Hamphill, Atlanta Federal Reserve Bank

"The regional Federal Reserve banks are not government agencies. ...but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations." — Lewis vs. United States, 680 F. 2d 1239 9th Circuit 1982

"Government spending is always a “tax” burden on the American people and is never equally or fairly distributed. The poor and low-middle income workers always suffer the most from the deceitful tax of inflation and borrowing." -Congressman Ron Paul

MEDIA BLACKS OUT THE FACTS

John Swinton, the former Chief of Staff for the New York Times, was one of New York's best loved newspapermen. Called by his peers "The Dean of his Profession", John was asked in 1953 to give a toast before the New York Press Club, and in so doing, made a monumentally important and revealing statement. He is quoted as follows: "There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar weekly salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone. The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth; to lie outright; to pervert; to vilify; to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities, and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes."

RICHARD M. COHAN, Senior Producer of CBS political news said: "We are going to impose our agenda on the coverage by dealing with issues and subjects that WE choose to deal with."

RICHARD SALANT, former President of CBS News stated: "Our job is to give people not what they want, but what we decide they ought to have."

And what is "their" agenda? What do they believe we, the American people, - THE COMMON HERD, "...ought to have?" Here is the answer:

NORMAN THOMAS - For many years the US Socialist Presidential candidate proclaimed: "The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of "liberalism" they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing what happened."

HERMAN DISMORE, foreign editor of the New York Times from 1950 to 1960: "The New York Times is deliberately pitched to the liberal (socialist) point of view."

WALTER CRONKITE: "News reporters are certainly liberal (socialists) and left of center."

BARBARA WALTERS: "The news media in general are liberals (socialists)."

The world, finally including even the balky American public, is "being rapidly educated into overcoming limited patriotism" and accepting "United Nations solutions to common global problems," said Henry Kissinger.

Bilderberg participants expressed satisfaction with progress toward world government on two fronts:

* Establishing a UN tax to not only finance new global programs, but to condition "citizens of the world" to paying tribute.

* Conditioning the public -- again, especially "those stubborn Americans" -- to accept the idea of a UN army that could, by force, impose its will on the internal affairs of any nation.

"Today, Americans would be outraged if UN forces entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow, they will be grateful," Kissinger said (of the 1992 Los Angeles riot).

Kissinger reported on a shocking speech made by UN Secretary General Butrous Ghali to the American Association of Newspaper Publishers at UN headquarters in New York in early May. The publishers' newspapers covered up the story.

The UN Security Council must have a permanent force that can be deployed anywhere in the world, instantly, to "protect the peace" and "ensure human rights" the secretary-general told the newspaper publishers.

UN TO INVADE US

This force must be allowed to intervene "at the local and community levels," the UN leader told the American publishers.

What is "especially gratifying," Kissinger said, "is that the publishers showed no reservations about the prospects of UN forces landing in the United States and imposing the UN's will."

Different Types of Taxes Sales Tax, School Tax, Liquor Tax, Luxury Tax, Excise Taxes, Property Tax, Cigarette Tax, Medicare Tax, Inventory Tax, Real Estate Tax, Well Permit Tax, Fuel Permit Tax, Inheritance Tax, Road Usage Tax, CDL license Tax, Dog License Tax, State Income Tax, Food License Tax, Vehicle Sales Tax, Gross Receipts Tax, Social Security Tax, Service Charge Tax, Fishing License Tax, Federal Income Tax, Building Permit Tax, IRS Interest Charges, Hunting License Tax, Marriage License Tax, Corporate Income Tax, Personal Property Tax, Accounts Receivable Tax, Recreational Vehicle Tax, Workers Compensation Tax, Watercraft Registration Tax, Telephone Usage Charge Tax, Telephone Federal Excise Tax, Telephone State and Local Tax, IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax), State Unemployment Tax (SUTA), Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA), Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax, Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax, Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon), Utility Taxes Vehicle License Registration Tax, Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes, Telephone Recurring and Nonrecurring Charges Tax, and Income Tax. Increase in the US Incarceration Rate

“Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law breaker, it breeds contempt for the law.” — Louis D. Brandeis

“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy.” — Ernest Benn

The business of making money is benefiting from other’s personal calamities. With the passage of the Revenue Act, Federal Reserve Act, and 16th Amendment. A new segment of potential criminals has emerged in the United States...US wage earners. Since the national debt has spiralled out of control beginning in the 1970s, there has been a dramatic increase in the incarceration rate of males in the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_rate). Since the mid 1970s, the US male incarceration rate has steadily gone up from 200 males incarcerated per 100,000 to now over 900 males incarcerated per 100,000; and the number is rising. The housing and monitoring of “criminals” in the United States is big business. The US spends nearly $50 billion annually to house and monitor its criminal population. Nearly 50% of state inmates are imprisoned because of non-violent offenses. However, in the federal system, over 90% of federal prisoners are in prison for non-violent offenses. Two thirds of those are for drug related offenses. The drug related prison population is up 1,100% since 1981. So the US cannot afford to keep drugs out of the US by shoring up its borders, but it can afford to house offenders of drug statutes. Am I the only one who thinks that doesn’t make sense? It does if you are in the business of generating income on the backs and human frailties of others.

The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy

“Every time that we try to lift a problem from our own shoulders, and shift that problem to the hands of the government, to the same extent we are sacrificing the liberties of our people.” — John F. Kennedy

On June 4, 1963, President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order No. 11110 that returned to the US government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve. At the time, $4,292,893 of this currency was put into circulation. President Kennedy's order gave the Treasury the power "to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury." This meant that for every ounce of silver in the US Treasury's vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation. As a result, more than $4 billion in United States Notes were brought into circulation in $2 and $5 denominations. $10 and $20 United States Notes were never circulated but were being printed by the Treasury Department when Kennedy was assassinated.

Upon Kennedy's assassination, this currency was withdrawn from circulation, and was never issued again. The media remained silent on how Kennedy would have eliminated the national debt and its associated interest payments, and therefore who have eliminated the Federal Reserve. President Kennedy knew that if enough United States Notes (backed by US silver) were put into circulation the demand for Federal Reserve Notes (backed by nothing) would be eliminated. Five months later JFK was assassinated. No more US Notes were issued after that. Executive Order No. 11110 is still good law. Why doesn’t any president use it?

Interest free United States Notes do not result in hyper inflation. By issuing United States Notes, interest free, we have less interest expense, and less taxes. With less taxes people spend more and buy more. This result is added production, and therefore, you can add dollars without inflation. Either Rockefeller and his people will spend your tax money into the economy or you get to spend your own money by paying less taxes. The bankers want you to think you'll have mass inflation by changing the system. This is only true if you add dollars to the economy without added production. For example, look what happened in post World War I Germany. They merely printed money without increasing production. The result was hyper inflation.

A Federal Reserve like banking system has destroyed other governments. The only thing taxes pay now is interest on the debt, and not the debt itself. Under the Federal Reserve system, when a new dollar is issued, we pay taxes to pay for the dollar as the principal (debt) plus interest on the dollar. We pay for each new dollar twice, and who gets most of the money? The bankers, who control this money. Taxpayers should only pay taxes for the paper, ink, and printing costs of new money. Why should we give bankers the right to print money on a printing press, charge them no interest on this money, and then let them exchange their "free" money for a government bond that pays them interest??

England never gave up on owning the United States. They are still silently fighting the same Revolutionary War. The Bank of England, through the Rothschilds, owns and controls the Federal Reserve. We have been robbed of our wealth. The Federal Reserve bankers have defacto ownership of the nation, our houses, cars, and business; just as Thomas Jefferson predicted.

The Great Depression

"We are completely dependant on the commercial banks. Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash or credit. If the banks create ample synthetic money we are prosperous; if not, we starve. We are absolutely without a permanent money system.... It is the most important subject intelligent persons can investigate and reflect upon. It is so important that our present civilization may collapse unless it becomes widely understood and the defects remedied very soon." — Robert H. Hamphill, Atlanta Federal Reserve Bank

The Great Depression was caused by the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve purposely restricted the money supply, which caused the US to have an inability to pay its obligations. As a result there were massive bank failures, and the stock market crashed. The goal was to create financial calamity in the US in order to lay the groundwork for the US to borrow massive sums of money from the Federal Reserve and eventually build up a national debt it would never be able to repay. Thus creation of the New Deal. When Winston Churchill visited the stock market, the day it crashed in 1929, he said: “Now I know who wields the real power (referring to the Federal Reserve).”

Since the inception of the New Deal (or the Raw Deal, depending on your perspective), the national debt has spiralled out of control. In 1930, the national debt was $16 billion. In just ten years it ballooned to $42 billion. Ten years later in 1950, it was over $240 billion. The national debt is now more than doubling every 10 years. The US has effectively spent itself into financial ruin, and the members of the Federal Reserve have become richer beyond their wildest dreams. Even if the Federal Reserve was ended today, these families would still be billionaires. They would still be the richest families in the world. While we cannot take the money back, we can at least prevent them from getting anymore.

War Inspired Debt

“The State never intentionally confronts a man’s sense, intellectual or moral, but only his body, his senses. It is not armed with superior wit or honesty, but with superior physical strength. I was not born to be forced.” — Henry David Thoreau

Since the enactment of the Federal Reserve in 1913, the US has spent over $7 trillion on various wars including: WWI, WWII, The Korean War, Vietnam War, The Gulf War, Afghanistan War, and the War in Iraq. Since 1962, the US has spent an average of about $500 billion per year on defense spending. That is a total of $20 trillion over the last 40 years.

Military Costs of Major U.S. Wars

(Updated to Include Appropriations Enacted Through June 30, 2008) Years of War Spending Peak Year of War Spending

Total Military Cost of War in Millions/Billions of Dollars War Cost % GDP in Peak Year of War Total Defense % GDP in Peak Year of War

American Revolution

Current Year $

Constant FY2008$ 1775-1783

101 million

1,825 million

NA NA

War of 1812

Current Year $

Constant FY2008$ 1812-1815

90 million

1,177 million 1813

2.2% 2.7%

Mexican War

Current Year $

Constant FY2008$ 1846-1849

71 million

1,801 million 1847

1.4% 1.9%

Civil War: Union

Current Year $

Constant FY2008$ 1861-1865

3,183 million

45,199 million 1865

11.3% 11.7% Civil War: Confederacy

Current Year $

Constant FY2008$ 1861-1865

1,000 million

15,244 million

NA NA

Spanish American War

Current Year $

Constant FY2008$ 1898-1899

283 million

6,848 million 1899

1.1% 1.5%

World War I

Current Year $

Constant FY2008$ 1917-1921

20 billion

253 billion 1919

13.6% 14.1%

World War II

Current Year $

Constant FY2008$ 1941-1945

296 billion

4,114 billion 1945

35.8% 37.5%

Korea

Current Year $

Constant FY2008$ 1950-1953 30 billion

320 billion 1952

4.2% 13.2%

Vietnam

Current Year $

Constant FY2008$ 1965-1975

111 billion

686 billion 1968

2.3% 9.5%

Persian Gulf War /a/

Current Year $

Constant FY2008$ 1990-1991

61 billion

96 billion 1991

0.3% 4.6%

Iraq /b/

Current Year $

Constant FY2008$ 2003-Present

616 billion

648 billion 2008

1.0% 4.2%

Afghanistan/GWOT /b,c/

Current Year $

Constant FY2008$ 2001-Present

159 billion

171 billion 2007

0.3% 4.0% Post-9/11 Domestic Security (Operation Noble Eagle) /b/

Current Year $

Constant FY2008$ 2001-Present

28 billion

33 billion 2003

0.1% 3.7%

Total Post-9/11--Iraq, Afghanistan/GWOT, ONE /d/

Current Year $

Constant FY2008$ 2001-Present

809 billion

859 billion 2008

1.2% 4.2%

--2--

Sources: All estimates are of the costs of military operations only and do not reflect costs of veterans benefits, interest on war-related debt, or assistance to allies. Except for costs of the American Revolution and the Civil War costs of the Confederacy, all estimates are based on U.S. government budget data. Current year dollar estimates of the costs of the War of 1812 though World War II represent the increase in Army and Navy outlays during the period of each war compared to average military spending in the previous three years. For the Civil War costs of the Confederacy, the estimate is from the Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1994. For the American Revolution, the estimate is from an unofficial financial history of the United States published in 1895. For the Korean War, the estimate represents increased expenditures of the Department of Defense during the period of the conflict compared to the projected trend from the average of three years before the war to three years after. For the Vietnam War and the Persian Gulf War, figures are Department of Defense estimates of the incremental costs of operations, meaning the costs of war-related activities over and above the regular, non-wartime costs of defense. For operations since September 11, 2001, figures reflect CRS estimates of amounts appropriated to cover war-related costs. The current year dollar estimates are converted to constant prices using estimates of changes in the consumer price index for years prior to 1940 and using Office of Management and Budget and Department of Defense estimates of defense inflation for years thereafter. The CPI estimates used here are from a data base maintained at Oregon State University. The data base periodically updates figures for new official CPI estimates of the U.S. Department of Commerce. Spending on Entitlement Programs

“Government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem.” — Ronald Reagan 1981

“Three groups spend other people’s money: children, thieves, politicians. All three need supervision.” — Dick Armey

THE TEN MEMBER BANKS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE

All owned by the Rothschilds: 1)Rothschild Bank of London, 2)Warburg Bank of Hamburg 3) Rothschild Bank of Berlin, 4)Lehman Brothers of New York, 5)Lazard Brothers of Paris, 6)Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York, 7)Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy, 8)Goldman, Sachs of New York, 9)Warburg Bank of Amsterdam, and 10)Chase Manhattan Bank of New York.

The Bankruptcy of The United States

Below is a speech delivered by former US Congress House of Representatives member James Traficant, Jr. (Ohio). The speech outlines the history the Federal Reserve has had in the United States and what the future of it holds. This was a warning to America nearly 20 years ago. It seems we didn’t listen to him.

United States , March 17, 1993 Vol. 33, page H-1303

Speaker-Rep. James Traficant, Jr. (Ohio) addressing the House:

"Mr. Speaker, we are here now in chapter 11.. Members of Congress are official trustees presiding over the greatest reorganization of any Bankrupt entity in world history, the US Government. We are setting forth hopefully, a blueprint for our future. There are some who say it is a coroner’s report that will lead to our demise.

It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 - Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.

The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments are now operating within a de facto status in name only under Emergency War Powers. With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved, the receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government for the United States. This new form of government is known as a Democracy, being an established Socialist/Communist order under a new governor for America. This act was instituted and established by transferring and/or placing the Office of the Secretary of Treasury to that of the Governor of the International Monetary Fund. Public Law 94-564, page 8, Section H.R. 13955 reads in part: "The US Secretary of Treasury receives no compensation for representing the United States?’

Gold and silver were such a powerful money during the founding of the United States of America, that the founding fathers declared that only gold or silver coins can be "money" in America. Since gold and silver coinage were heavy and inconvenient for a lot of transactions, they were stored in banks and a claim check was issued as a money substitute. People traded their coupons as money, or "currency." Currency is not money, but a money substitute. Redeemable currency must promise to pay a dollar equivalent in gold or silver money. Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs) make no such promises, and are not "money." A Federal Reserve Note is a debt obligation of the federal United States government, not "money?’ The federal United States government and the US Congress were not and have never been authorized by the Constitution for the United States of America to issue currency of any kind, but only lawful money, -gold and silver coin.

It is essential that we comprehend the distinction between real money and paper money substitute. One cannot get rich by accumulating money substitutes, one can only get deeper into debt. We the People no longer have any "money." Most Americans have not been paid any "money" for a very long time, perhaps not in their entire life. Now do you comprehend why you feel broke? Now, do you understand why you are "bankrupt," along with the rest of the country?

Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs) are unsigned checks written on a closed account. FRNs are an inflatable paper system designed to create debt through inflation (devaluation of currency). When ever there is an increase of the supply of a money substitute in the economy without a corresponding increase in the gold and silver backing, inflation occurs.

Inflation is an invisible form of taxation that irresponsible governments inflict on their citizens. The Federal Reserve Bank who controls the supply and movement of FRNs has everybody fooled. They have access to an unlimited supply of FRNs, paying only for the printing costs of what they need. FRNs are nothing more than promissory notes for US Treasury securities (T-Bills) - a promise to pay the debt to the Federal Reserve Bank.

There is a fundamental difference between "paying" and "discharging" a debt. To pay a debt, you must pay with value or substance (i.e. gold, silver, barter or a commodity). With FRNs, you can only discharge a debt. You cannot pay a debt with a debt currency system. You cannot service a debt with a currency that has no backing in value or substance. No contract in Common law is valid unless it involves an exchange of "good & valuable consideration." Unpayable debt transfers power and control to the sovereign power structure that has no interest in money, law, equity or justice because they have so much wealth already. Their lust is for power and control. Since the inception of central banking, they have controlled the fates of nations.

The Federal Reserve System is based on the Canon law and the principles of sovereignty protected in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. In fact, the international bankers used a "Canon Law Trust" as their model, adding stock and naming it a "Joint Stock Trust." The US Congress had passed a law making it illegal for any legal "person" to duplicate a "Joint Stock Trust" in 1873. The Federal Reserve Act was legislated post-facto (to 1870), although post-facto laws are strictly forbidden by the Constitution. [1:9:3]

The Federal Reserve System is a sovereign power structure separate and distinct from the federal United States government. The Federal Reserve is a maritime lender, and/or maritime insurance underwriter to the federal United States operating exclusively under Admiralty/Maritime law. The lender or underwriter bears the risks, and the Maritime law compelling specific performance in paying the interest, or premiums are the same.

Assets of the debtor can also be hypothecated (to pledge something as a security without taking possession of it.) as security by the lender or underwriter. The Federal Reserve Act stipulated that the interest on the debt was to be paid in gold. There was no stipulation in the Federal Reserve Act for ever paying the principle.

Prior to 1913, most Americans owned clear, allodial title to property, free and clear of any liens or mortgages until the Federal Reserve Act (1913) "Hypothecated" all property within the federal United States to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, -in which the Trustees (stockholders) held legal title. The US citizen (tenant, franchisee) was registered as a "beneficiary" of the trust via his/her birth certificate. In 1933, the federal United States hypothecated all of the present and future properties, assets and labor of their "subjects," the 14th Amendment US citizen, to the Federal Reserve System.

In return, the Federal Reserve System agreed to extend the federal United States corporation all the credit "money substitute" it needed. Like any other debtor, the federal United States government had to assign collateral and security to their creditors as a condition of the loan. Since the federal United States didn’t have any assets, they assigned the private property of their "economic slaves", the US citizens as collateral against the unpayable federal debt. They also pledged the un-incorporated federal territories, national parks forests, birth certificates, and nonprofit organizations, as collateral against the federal debt. All has already been transferred as payment to the international bankers.

Unwittingly, America has returned to its pre-American Revolution, feudal roots whereby all land is held by a sovereign and the common people had no rights to hold allodial title to property. Once again, We the People are the tenants and sharecroppers renting our own property from a Sovereign in the guise of the Federal Reserve Bank. We the people have exchanged one master for another. This has been going on for over eighty years without the "informed knowledge" of the American people, without a voice protesting loud enough. Now it’s easy to grasp why America is fundamentally bankrupt.

Why don’t more people own their properties outright? Why are 90% of Americans mortgaged to the hilt and have little or no assets after all debts and liabilities have been paid? Why does it feel like you are working harder and harder and getting less and less? We are reaping what has been sown, and the results of our harvest is a painful bankruptcy, and a foreclosure on American property, precious liberties, and a way of life. Few of our elected representatives in Washington, D.C. have dared to tell the truth. The federal United States is bankrupt. Our children will inherit this unpayable debt, and the tyranny to enforce paying it.

America has become completely bankrupt in world leadership, financial credit and its reputation for courage, vision and human rights. This is an undeclared economic war, bankruptcy, and economic slavery of the most corrupt order! Wake up America! Take back your Country."

United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993 Vol. 33, page H-1303 Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence

Published 1976

Chart 1 reveals the linear connection between the Rothschilds and the Bank of England, and the London banking houses which ultimately control the Federal Reserve Banks through their stockholdings of bank stock and their subsidiary firms in New York. The two principal Rothschild representatives in New York, J. P. Morgan Co., and Kuhn, Loeb & Co. were the firms which set up the Jekyll Island Conference at which the Federal Reserve Act was drafted, who directed the subsequent successful campaign to have the plan enacted into law by Congress, and who purchased the controlling amounts of stock in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in 1914. These firms had their principal officers appointed to the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and the Federal Advisory Council in 1914. In 1914 a few families (blood or business related) owning controlling stock in existing banks (such as in New York City) caused those banks to purchase controlling shares in the Federal Reserve regional banks. Examination of the charts and text in the House Banking Committee Staff Report of August, 1976 and the current stockholders list of the 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks show this same family control.

N.M. Rothschild , London - Bank of England

______

| |

| J. Henry Schroder

| Banking | Corp.

| |

Brown, Shipley - Morgan Grenfell - Lazard - |

& Company & Company Brothers |

| | | |

------| ------| | |

| | | | | |

Alex Brown - Brown Bros. - Lord Mantagu - Morgan et Cie -- Lazard ---|

& Son | Harriman Norman | Paris Bros | | | / | N.Y. |

| | | | | |

| Governor, Bank | J.P. Morgan Co -- Lazard ---|

| of England / N.Y. Morgan Freres |

| 1924-1938 / Guaranty Co. Paris |

| / Morgan Stanley Co. | /

| / | \Schroder Bank

Hamburg/Berlin

| / Drexel & Company /

| / Philadelphia /

| / /

| / Lord Airlie

| / /

| / M. M. Warburg Chmn J. Henry Schroder

| | Hamburg ------marr. Virginia F. Ryan

| | | grand-daughter of Otto

| | | Kahn of Kuhn Loeb Co.

| | |

| | |

Lehman Brothers N.Y ------Kuhn Loeb Co. N. Y.

| | ------

:

| | | |

8

| | | |

Lehman Brothers - Mont. Alabama Solomon Loeb Abraham Kuhn

Lehman Brothers - Mont. Alabama Solomon Loeb Abraham Kuhn | | __|______|______

Lehman-Stern, New Orleans Jacob Schiff/Theresa Loeb Nina Loeb/Paul Warburg

------| | |

| | Mortimer Schiff James Paul Warburg

______|______/ |

| | | | |

Mayer Lehman | Emmanuel Lehman \

| | | \

Herbert Lehman Irving Lehman \

| | | \

Arthur Lehman \ Phillip Lehman John Schiff/Edith Brevoort Baker

/ | Present Chairman Lehman Bros

/ Robert Owen Lehman Kuhn Loeb - Granddaughter of

/ | George F. Baker

| / |

| / |

| / Lehman Bros Kuhn Loeb (1980)

| / |

| / Thomas Fortune Ryan

| | |

| | |

Federal Reserve Bank Of New York |

|||||||| |

______National City Bank N. Y. |

| | |

| National Bank of Commerce N.Y ---|

| | \ | Hanover National Bank N.Y. \

| | \

| Chase National Bank N.Y. \

| |

| |

Shareholders - National City Bank - N.Y. |

------|

| /

James Stillman /

Elsie m. William Rockefeller /

Isabel m. Percy Rockefeller /

William Rockefeller Shareholders - National Bank of Commerce N. Y.

J. P. Morgan ------

M.T. Pyne Equitable Life - J.P. Morgan

Percy Pyne Mutual Life - J.P. Morgan

J.W. Sterling H.P. Davison - J. P. Morgan

NY Trust/NY Edison Mary W. Harriman

Shearman & Sterling A.D. Jiullard - North British Merc. Insurance

| Jacob Schiff

| Thomas F. Ryan

| Paul Warburg

| Levi P. Morton - Guaranty Trust - J. P. Morgan

|

|

Shareholders - First National Bank of N.Y.

------

J.P. Morgan Geoorge F. Baker

George F. Baker Jr.

Edith Brevoort Baker

US Congress - 1946-64

|

|

|

|

|

Shareholders - Hanover National Bank N.Y.

------

James Stillman

William Rockefeller

|

|

|

|

|

Shareholders - Chase National Bank N.Y.

------

George F. Baker

Chart 2

Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence

- Published 1983 The J. Henry Schroder Banking Company chart encompasses the entire history of the twentieth century, embracing as it does the program (Belgium Relief Commission) which provisioned Germany from 1915-1918 and dissuaded Germany from seeking peace in 1916; financing Hitler in 1933 so as to make a Second World War possible; backing the Presidential campaign of Herbert Hoover ; and even at the present time, having two of its major executives of its subsidiary firm, Bechtel Corporation serving as Secretary of Defense and Secretary of State in the Reagan Administration.

The head of the Bank of England since 1973, Sir Gordon Richardson, Governor of the Bank of England (controlled by the House of Rothschild) was chairman of J. Henry Schroder Wagg and Company of London from 1963-72, and director of J. Henry Schroder, New York and Schroder Banking Corporation, New York, as well as Lloyd's Bank of London, and Rolls Royce. He maintains a residence on Sutton Place in New York City, and as head of "The London Connection," can be said to be the single most influential banker in the world.

J. Henry Schroder

------

|

|

|

Baron Rudolph Von Schroder

Hamburg - 1858 - 1934

|

|

|

Baron Bruno Von Schroder

Hamburg - 1867 - 1940

F. C. Tiarks |

1874-1952 |

| |

marr. Emma Franziska | (Hamburg) Helmut B. Schroder

J. Henry Schroder 1902 |

Dir. Bank of England |

Dir. Anglo-Iranian |

Oil Company J. Henry Schroder Banking Company N.Y.

|

|

J. Henry Schroder Trust Company N.Y.

|

|

|

______|______

| |

Allen Dulles John Foster Dulles

Sullivan & Cromwell Sullivan & Cromwell

Director - CIA U. S. Secretary of State

Rockefeller Foundation

Prentiss Gray

------

Belgian Relief Comm. Lord Airlie

Chief Marine Transportation ------

US Food Administration WW I Chairman; Virginia Fortune

Manati Sugar Co. American & Ryan daughter of Otto Kahn

British Continental Corp. of Kuhn ,Loeb Co.

| |

| | M. E. Rionda |

------|

Pres. Cuba Cane Sugar Co. |

Manati Sugar Co. many other | sugar companies. ______|

| |

| |

G. A. Zabriskie |

------| Emile Francoui

Chmn US Sugar Equalization | ------

Board 1917-18; Pres Empire | Belgian Relief Comm. Kai

Biscuit Co., Columbia Baking | Ping Coal Mines, Tientsin

Co. , Southern Baking Co. | Railroad, Congo Copper, La

| Banque Nationale de Belgique

Suite 2000 42 Broadway | N. Y |

______|______|_

| | |

| | |

Edgar Richard Julius H. Barnes Herbert Hoover

------

Belgium Relief Comm Belgium Relief Comm Chmn Belgium Relief Com

Amer Relief Comm Pres Grain Corp. USFood Admin

USFood Admin USFood Admin Sec of Commerce 1924-28

1918-24, Hazeltine Corp. 1917-18, C.B Pitney Kaiping Coal Mines

| Bowes Corp, Manati Congo Copper, President

| Sugar Corp. US1928-32

| |

|

John Lowery Simpson

------

Sacramento,Calif Belgium Relief |

Comm. U. S. Food Administration Baron Kurt Von Schroder

Prentiss Gray Co. J. Henry Schroder ------

Trust, Schroder-Rockefeller, Chmn Schroder Banking Corp. J.H. Stein

Fin Comm, Bechtel International Bankhaus (Hitler's personal bank

Co. Bechtel Co. (Casper Weinberger account) served on board of all

Sec of Defense, George P. Schultz German subsidiaries of ITT . Bank

Sec of State (Reagan Admin). for International Settlements,

| SS Senior Group Leader,Himmler's

| Circle of Friends (Nazi Fund),

| Deutsche Reichsbank,president

|

|

Schroder-Rockefeller & Co. , N.Y.

------

Avery Rockefeller, J. Henry Schroder

Banking Corp., Bechtel Co., Bechtel

International Co. , Canadian Bechtel

Company. |

|

|

|

Gordon Richardson ------

Governor, Bank of England

1973-PRESENT C.B. of J. Henry Schroder N.Y.

Schroder Banking Co., New York, Lloyds Bank

Rolls Royce

Chart 3

Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence

- Published 1976

The David Rockefeller chart shows the link between the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Standard Oil of Indiana, General Motors and Allied Chemical Corporation (Eugene Meyer family) and Equitable Life (J. P. Morgan).

DAVID ROCKEFELLER

------

Chairman of the Board

Chase Manhattan Corp

|

|

______|______

Chase Manhattan Corp. |

Officer & Director Interlocks|------

------|------|

| |

Private Investment Co. for America Allied Chemicals Corp. | |

Firestone Tire & Rubber Company General Motors

| |

Orion Multinational Services Ltd. Rockefeller Family & Associates

| |

ASARCO. Inc Chrysler Corp.

| |

Southern Peru Copper Corp. Intl' Basic Economy Corp.

| |

Industrial Minerva Mexico S.A. R.H. Macy & Co.

| |

Continental Corp. Selected Risk Investments S.A.

| |

Honeywell Inc. Omega Fund, Inc.

| |

Northwest Airlines, Inc. Squibb Corporation

| |

Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. Olin Foundation

| |

Minnesota Mining & Mfg Co (3M) Mutual Benefit Life Ins. Co. of NJ

| |

American Express Co. AT & T

| |

Hewlett Packard Pacific Northwestern Bell Co.

| |

FMC Corporation BeachviLime Ltd.

| | Utah Intl' Inc. Eveleth Expansion Company

| |

Exxon Corporation Fidelity Union Bancorporation

| |

International Nickel/Canada Cypress Woods Corporation

| |

Federated Capital Corporation Intl' Minerals & Chemical Corp.

| |

Equitable Life Assurance Soc US Burlington Industries

| |

Federated Dept Stores Wachovia Corporation

| |

General Electric Jefferson Pilot Corporation

| |

Scott Paper Co. R. J. Reynolds Industries Inc.

| |

American Petroleum Institute United States Steel Corp.

| |

Richardson Merril Inc. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.

| |

May Department Stores Co. Norton-Simon Inc.

| |

Sperry Rand Corporation Stone-Webster Inc.

| |

San Salvador Development Company Standard Oil of Indiana

Chart 4 Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence

- Published 1976

This chart shows the interlocks between the Federal Reserve Bank of New York J. Henry Schroder Banking Corp., J. Henry Schroder Trust Co., Rockefeller Center, Inc., Equitable Life Assurance Society ( J.P. Morgan), and the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.

Alan Pifer, President

Carnegie Corporation

of New York

------

|

|

------

Carnegie Corporation

Trustee Interlocks ------

------|

| |

Rockefeller Center, Inc J. Henry Schroder Trust Company

| |

The Cabot Corporation Paul Revere Investors, Inc.

| |

Federal Reserve Bank of Boston Qualpeco, Inc.

|

Owens Corning Fiberglas

|

New England Telephone Co.

| Fisher Scientific Company

|

Mellon National Corporation

|

Equitable Life Assurance Society

|

Twentieth Century Fox Corporation

|

J. Henry Schroder Banking Corporation

Chart 5

Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence

- Published 1976

This chart shows the link between the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Brown Brothers Harriman,Sun Life Assurance Co. (N.M. Rothschild and Sons), and the Rockefeller Foundation.

Maurice F. Granville

Chairman of The Board

Texaco Incorporated

------

|

|

Texaco Officer & Director Interlocks ------Liggett & Myers, Inc.

------| | |

| |

L Arabian American Oil Company St John d'el Ray Mining Co. Ltd.

O | |

N Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. National Steel Corporation

D | |

O Brown Harriman & Intl' Banks Ltd. Massey-Ferguson Ltd.

N | |

American Express Mutual Life Insurance Co.

| |

N. American Express Intl' Banking Corp. Mass Mutual Income Investors Inc.

M. | |

Anaconda United Services Life Ins. Co.

R | |

O Rockefeller Foundation Fairchild Industries

T | |

H Owens-Corning Fiberglas Blount, Inc.

S | |

C National City Bank (Cleveland) William Wrigley Jr. Co

H | |

I Sun Life Assurance Co. National Blvd. Bank of Chicago

L | |

D General Reinsurance Lykes Youngstown Corporation

| |

General Electric (NBC) Inmount Corporation

** Source: Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence. Staff Report, Committee on Banking, Currency and Housing, House of Representatives, 94th Congress, 2nd Session, August 1976.

THE SOLUTION

"Most Americans have no real understanding of the operation of the international money lenders. The accounts of the Federal Reserve System have never been audited. It operates outside the control of Congress and manipulates the credit of the United States" — Sen. Barry Goldwater (Rep. AR)

The banks have publicly announced they will force us to a cashless society by 1997. Furthermore, they plan to create a one world government Twenty-four US Senators (two of them presidential candidates, Harkin & Tsongas) and 80 Representatives have signed a "Declaration of Interdependence." This Declaration, designed to make a one world government, is treason to the oath of office they took.

Under the Federal Reserve Bank Act, the bankers control our economy. The Federal Reserve controls interest rates and the amount of money in the economy. These factors determine either economic prosperity or the lack thereof. Bankers are now pushing for a one world government and a cashless society. Why cashless? No cash means no money for drugs, no theft, and the ability to collect taxes on the underground economy. Anyone who wouldn't support a cashless society must be a drug dealer, thief, or tax evader, right? What a cashless society really means is the banks can now control you. Today you fear the IRS. In a cashless society, if you disagree with the bankers' political goals, you'll find your money gone via computer error.

If you could accurately predict future interest rates, inflation and deflation, you would know when to buy or sell stocks and make a bundle of money. The Federal Reserve has secret meetings (per Congressional Record) to determine future interest rates and the amount of money to be printed. The Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) by law, stops insiders from profiting by privileged information. Congressional records prove that Federal Reserve bankers routinely hold secret meetings to profit by manipulating the stock market via interest rates and the amount of money they create. Federal Reserve bankers also profit greatly from economic disasters like the Depression. The bankers create inflation, sell their stocks before the market crashes, then buy up stocks at cheaper prices. Bankers admitted this to Congress. This violates the law, yet Congress does not act because these bankers are large political contributors.

Congress consistently defeats balanced budget amendments. In the past 30 years, Congress has raised our taxes 56 times and balanced the budget only once. We need the sound banking system our forefathers wanted us to have. History proves that banking systems like the Federal Reserve don't work. Major world powers have been destroyed over similar banking systems.

Section 7 of the Federal Reserve Act, passed December 23, 1913, states that much of the profit of the Federal Reserve should flow into the US Treasury. In 1959, new legislation allowed the Federal Reserve to transfer bonds to commercial banks at no cost to the bank. Now the Federal Reserve receives less interest income and less profit for the US Treasury because the money is diverted to other banks through an accounting entry. Congress and the IRS do not have access to the financial records of the Federal Reserve. Every year Congress introduces legislation to audit the Federal Reserve, and every year it is defeated. The Federal Reserve banking system could easily be netting 100s of billions in profit each year. Through "creative accounting" profit can easily be reclassified as expense. Within the first few years, the shareholders of the Federal Reserve received their initial investment back with no risk. All the income is tax-free, except for property tax, according to the Federal Reserve Act. When are the profits of the Federal Reserve going to start flowing into the Treasury so that average Americans are no longer burdened with excessive, unnecessary taxes? Clearly, Congress cannot or will not control the Federal Reserve. IT IS TIME TO ABOLISH IT!

3 WAYS TO ABOLISH THE Federal Reserve AND ISSUE MONEY PER THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8:

* Buy back the Federal Reserve and have the US Government collect all profits.

* Abolish the Federal Reserve by printing real US dollars as President Kennedy attempted (Executive Order 11.110, 1963).

* Request your county/state to use their Constitutional powers to abolish the Federal Reserve.

Napoleon: "When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes... Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain."

Mr. Marriner Eccles, who was Chairman of the board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System longer than any other man, testified before the Joint Economic Committee in August 1962. When Chairman Rep. Wright Patman asked whether it was not a fact that the Federal Reserve System has more power than either the Congress or the President, Eccles replied: "In the field of money and credit, yes."

Dr. Hans F. Sennholz, Chairman of the Department of Economics at Grove City (PA) College stated: "The Federal ReserveSystem facilitates the government's own inflationary financing in "periods of emergency." It makes easy the inflationary financing of budget deficits and the inflationary refunding of government loans. It stabilizes the government bond market through inflationary methods and manipulates this market to the advantage of the government. It does all this by wrecking the purchasing power of the dollar; by subtly stealing from the people of this country what it thus provides for the government, through a process exactly on par with the coin clipping of ancient kings but much less visible."

Source: Banking Act of 1935, Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Banking and Currency Committee, US Senate, 74th Congress, 1st Session, on S.1715, May 1935, pp 871-2. "The Federal ReserveSystem is in the wrong hands. No Constitutional republic can function when the government's money powers are in the hands of the financial oligarchy such as New York financiers.

By controlling Congress, the Federal Reserve has been able to control the nominating conventions of both political parties. In this way, it has been able to hand-pick the presidential nominees so that no matter which party wins, their nominee for President is under definite obligations to the Federal Reserve.

In 1975, the Rockefeller Foundation Report discussed the "Interdependence" of the countries of the world on each other. It stated we are one world and America shall become a nation-state under one government. They also say we must reach a zero state population growth. The Rockefeller Foundation stated that they have in excess of 747 million dollars to achieve this with.

Congressman John R. Rarick states that the Council on Foreign Relations CFR) is dedicated to a one world government. The media remains conspicuously quiet. The CFR wants to convert the US from a sovereign, constitutional republic into a servile member state of a one world dictatorship. On February 17, 1950, CFR member James Warburg (banker, and architect of the Federal ReserveSystem) stated before a Senate Foreign Relations Committee, "We shall have one world government whether or not you like it, by conquest or consent." Again, the media remained silent. In the April 1974 issue of the CFR journal, "Foreign Affairs", page 558, Richard Gardener states that the new world order "will be built... but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old fashioned frontal assault." Congressman McDonald, Heinz and Tower stated that this is a conspiracy. Again, the media remained silent.

THE CFR WANTS TO ABOLISH THE CONSTITUTION In a letter to Thomas Jefferson, John Adams wrote: "All the perplexities, confusions, and distresses in America arise, not from defects in the Constitution or confederation, not from want of honor or virtue, as much as from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit, and circulation".

; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by prosperity, under the same name of funding is swindling futurity on a large scale."

British bankers have stated "Those that create and issue money and credit direct the policies of government and hold in their hands the destiny of the people".

Adams, Jefferson, and Lincoln believed that banker capitalism was more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. In a republic, banks would lend money but could not create or manufacture it.

Later, Jefferson used stronger language and denounced the institution as "one of the most deadly hostilities against the principles and form of our Constitution." Some have said that Jefferson did not favor a strong central bank. What he did not favor was the delivery of our monetary system into private hands to be run for private profit.

President James A. Garfield said: "Whoever controls the money in any country is absolute master of industry [legislation] and commerce".

Without the Federal Reserve System, there can be no continuing march towards socialism, and with it there can be no free economy.

By controlling our own money, Thomas Jefferson expected that the government would incur no debt, as had occurred in the European system. European banks are like the Federal Reserve.

The Federal Reserve system is the death of our Constitution.

THE FACTS * England lost the Revolutionary War.

* England nearly destroyed the Colonies by creating fake Colonial money and hyper-inflation.

* Rothschilds who control the Bank of England (Like our Federal Reserve) said that by controlling the issue of money (printing it) you can control the government.

* The authors of the Constitution understood private banks" control over governments. The Constitution gives only Congress the right to print money.

* From the beginning of the United States to present there have been two ways to issue new currency:

The first way is to have the government print the money, debt and interest- free, and circulate it through the economy for use as a medium of exchange. There is no tax levied to pay interest on the currency in circulation because it is debt and interest-free. This is the system Lincoln used with his "greenbacks", a system Kennedy desired, and Jefferson demanded.

The second method is: The Citizens allow the bank to print $500 billion in currency (cash). The bank pays for printing costs, ink, and paper. The Citizens do not charge the bank any interest for use of the $500 billion in printed currency. The bank uses the $500 billion cash to buy a $500 billion government bond which pays the bankers interest. The bank keeps some of the bonds and sells, for a fee (10%), some of the bonds to the public. The bank can buy back the bonds from the public simply by printing more money. The bankers can create inflation and depressions by manipulating the amount of currency in circulation. The Federal Reserve operates exactly like this today. It also prints money (through the US Treasury) and uses this printed money to buy loans from other banks. This money has created our inflation. We give the bank cash interest-free, then they charge us interest on our own currency.

SPECIFIC PLAN: HOW TO GET OUT OF DEBT

US history proves that issuing debt and interest-free currency allows our economy to prosper, as long as Congress controls the amount of money created. You can add printed dollars into the economy as you add production, and there will be no inflation. With today's sophisticated computers, we can easily monitor the printing of money and inflation.

Congress needs to buy back the Federal Reserve and/or abolish it. Any government debt they own would be automatically eliminated. All remaining debt could be paid as needed with the same type of currency Kennedy issued (debt and interest-free United States Notes). United States Notes are backed by the United States. This is no different than the backing of today's Federal Reserve Notes. US citizens collect only a small fraction of the interest income on Federal Reserve Bonds and Bills. Foreigners benefit from this interest, but we pay the tax so that they collect interest on our currency. This makes sense to bankers and Congress people who receive money from bankers and foreign lobbyists.

As we pay less interest, government spending will decrease and so will taxes. Less taxes mean that people buy more goods and services and our economy expands. An expanded economy means more jobs and higher profits for businesses. More profit means increased state/Federal Reserve business taxes. Businesses continue to pay taxes while personal taxes decrease. People will have more money to spend, will buy more, and therefore pay increased state sales tax. This allows the states to balance their budgets without raising real estate taxes. As history proves, we will prosper.

For 100 years the Federal Reserve has destroyed our economy. It will take years to undo this damage. Just as Congress appoints a Postal Service, we will have Congress appoint an agency to monitor inflation as we exchange our retiring government debt for debt and interest-free United States Notes (cash). We need to break up all Central Banks created by the Federal Reserve and return to the Constitution of the United States. We have to return the power of the citizens' money back to the people.

THERE ARE SEVERAL SIMPLE WAYS TO ABOLISH THE Federal Reserve

* Inform all Americans of this report and collect signatures on the petition.

* Demand that Congress and the media support "We the People's" rights to uphold the Constitution and abolish the illegal Federal Reserve.

* Write to your local newspaper, show them this report and ask them to keep freedom of the press alive, support the Constitution and abolish the Federal Reserve. Freedom of the press should not be limited to those who own it.

* Write to CNN and other media. * Ask your State/County Representatives to use their Constitutional powers to enforce your rights under the Constitution to have the Federal Reserve abolished.

* Call in on TV and radio talk shows and discuss why the Federal Reserve should be abolished.

* Support businesses who distribute the petition and display the sign "Federal Reserve-UP". If they don't, please ask them to.

* Ask candidates if they plan to introduce legislation to abolish the Federal Reserve and uphold the Constitution which they are obligated to defend. Make candidates take a stand! Have the politician sign a contract with "We the People" enacting legislation to abolish the Federal Reserve by a certain date or the politician must resign from office. The Democratic Congress and President promised the people "no Federal Reserve" before the election. Thirteen months later, they passed the Federal Reserve.

* Display your bumper sticker to show support and inform people.

* If 5,000 people distribute 2-3 brochures daily, we can inform half a million Americans monthly. Roughly 10% of these half a million people will make copies and inform others. Our goal is to inform 70 million adult Americans. Public opinion will soon be on our side. Once 10% of the population know, the other 90% will follow.

* Pray and ask God to return us to "One nation under God."

Chapter: All Social Programs Need to be Eliminated

How Government Infiltrates/Controls Lives of Citizens- The Future of Social Programs

“People constantly speak of ‘the government’ doing this or that, as they might speak of God doing it. But the government is really nothing but a group of men, and usually they are very inferior men.” — H. L. Mencken It is a given that everyone wants to benefit, but no one wants to pay for government expenditures. However, most people are blind to being separated from their income indirectly. At least with consumption taxes wouldn’t one have a perceived choice as to when and how they are separated from their money? Could it be that direct taxation over consumption taxes were employed because consumption taxes are too fair? Doesn’t make sense; consider this.

Although corporations generate the most revenue in the United States, they pay the least amount of taxes. The bulk of taxes are paid for by individuals in the form of payroll taxes. The reason being is that the government has many tax reducible loop holes in place allowing corporations and businesses to take many deductions the average citizen cannot, for example deducting one’s overhead such as fuel cost. Shouldn’t the average citizen have the right to deduct fuel, clothing, vehicle expenses, and other related expenses directly associated with their employment? However, for some reason they do not.

Social security is another expenses that affects the average worker but has no impact on businesses and corporations. Individuals are forced to pay into a social security pool designed to supposedly pay for one’s retirement. However, when one sees that three people pay for one person on social security and there are no individual retirement accounts, it seems something is greatly array. The only reason social security exists in the first place is because employers are allowed to work their employees into the ground into their “retirement” years, but do not have to offer them a pension or any type of retirement package. The result is that the cost of retirement shifts to the employee, although the ability to plan for their retirement was taken away from them.

Typically, as is the problem with many of the US’s policies it tries to solve one problem by creating another problem. Introduce LBJ’s “Great Society.” Under LBJ’s watch the Social Security of Act of 1965 introduced Medicare and a year later in 1966, Medicaid. Under the Office of Economic Opportunity, LBJ also introduced the Head Start Program. Under the Higher Education Act of 1965, student loans became guaranteed by the Federal Reserve government. The result of all these social programs has been financial economic disaster.

These social programs are like economic time bombs. They don’t go off all at once or immediately, but when they do they leave nothing but absolute disaster in their path. Social security, medicare, and medicaid, and other government retirement programs constitute roughly 50% of government expenditures, this is also know as retirement spending. Couple that total with military expenditures and two thirds of the government’s spending, under the current system, cannot be controlled or modified because it falls under the definition of Entitlement Spending.

If that doesn’t concern you, maybe this will. The fastest growing segment of the population are the elderly (a.k.a. those over 65). If you think social security and these other social programs will be there for you when you retire, then you are tougher to convince of your future economic calamity than a $2 steak.

Have you noticed more seniors working in retail positions/ Do you ever wonder why? Because while that might be technically retired, they cannot afford to be retired. They are working not because they want to, but because they have to. Social security is not enough to pay for their expenses and the positions they worked at when they were younger did not provide them with a pension or any type of retirement package.

With seniors competing for low paying retail jobs, it makes it harder for recent high school graduates and others in various economic positions to secure those positions. Meaning, those once easy to get retail jobs with the high turnover rates are becoming much more competitive positions to attain. This is all happening in 2011. What do you think will happen when you reach retirement age? The answer: What retirement age? You’ll be lucky if you don’t drop dead on the job.

The reason why the financial outlook in the United States is so bleak, is because these social programs, such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid had a self destruct mechanism installed...it’s called overuse. With the Baby Boomers and others reaching their retirement years more and more pressure is being put on these social programs. All of these individuals are vested into these retirement and healthcare programs and expect to receive and use these services, with no expectation of any further contribution. The result is that their financial demands on these programs has now greatly outpaced the revenue being put into these programs. That has been the case since 1980 which is why the debt has skyrocketed more than 14 times what it was.

An Economic Apocalypse is nearing for the United States. Once reached the United States will most likely never recover. A country cannot keep spending without replacing the money that it is spending. The US reached a housing bubble in 2006. At first the home prices stopped increasing in value, then they began to drop. We are now 5 years in the housing crisis and there is no end in sight. The rising cost of living with no replacement income, caused people to use their houses as piggy banks. In some cases to maintain their lifestyle, in others, just to survive. If one wonders, why people engage in such a reckless practice, it’s because they learned it from the country they live in. It’s called mortgage one’s future for one more day or irresponsibility and/or survival.

The United States might continue to call itself a first world country, but it is a title in name only. With annual deficits that outpace its GDP. With Entitlement Spending that constitutes two thirds of government expenditures, and growing, with a housing market in shambles, and with no tradeable goods to offer the world; the concept of America as the Great Hope of the World is arguably a thing of the past. The United States is a country on decline and unless it makes a complete overhaul in its economic and foreign policies, the world will start saying whatever happened to the United States? The answer, it imploded on its on largess.

For those of you who might say, “well the stock market hasn’t collapsed.” That’s because Wall Street received a financial bailout otherwise it would have collapsed. Like the agriculture industry, the financial industry is now being subsidized by the United States to give its citizen and the world a stronger financial outlook of the United States than what actually exist. Without that financial bailout of Wall Street, the stock market would have crashed and this so called Great Recession would be categorized as the Second Great Depression (which it actually is), and the result would be economic panic and hysteria. It is only a matter of time until that happens.

Those on Welfare Need to be Relocated into Lower Cost Housing

in Unoccupied Homes in Less Population Dense Areas and Eventually Cycled Off of the Welfare System and Forced to Get a Job

“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.” — Thomas Jefferson

There simply is no nice way to say it. Those on welfare on an absolute burden to the country. We as a country do not have an obligation to take care of those whether they have the ability to take care of themselves or not. That liberal heart bleeding attitude is why this nation is approaching $15 trillion in debt due to entitlement spending. At some point we must have a survival of the fittest attitude.

Just because some poor person decides it is their right to pop a baby out of her vagina doesn’t mean we have to run after her like a puppy dog cleaning after her mess. She decided to have that child, now she is stuck with it, and she is the one that needs to take care of it not society. It’s kind of like feeding a stray cat. You’re not going to get rid of it if you keep putting food out for it to eat and drink. It has no reason to change what it is doing, because what it is doing is working. It is being taken care of without having to give anything back in return. The same holds true for those on welfare. The welfare recipient has no reason or desire to change what they are doing. They are being rewarded by simply producing another mouth to feed. What one considers benevolence, should instead be called senility. By taking care of the unfortunate, whether it be because of their own choosing or not, takes away from everyone. Sometimes we can all use some tough love. In the end we will learn from our mistakes, but not if someone keeps cleaning up after our messes.

Apparently taking care of their unwanted child isn’t enough. We have to pay for their housing too. Many of those people on welfare live in better living situations than those that actually have jobs. If those on welfare do not want to participate and be a part of society than they need to be excluded from society.

I do not believe in taking care of people via welfare anyway. But if society is going to do it, it needs to be as unpleasant as possible. They should only live in areas with dilapidated living conditions. They should put in homes and in areas that are basically be abandoned and forced to renovate the homes themselves.

They need to be put to work and forced to earn their keep. They should have restore these old abandoned neighborhoods to their former glory, and it shouldn’t be an option. Failure to restore the home they are living in to a predetermined standard should immediately result in having their welfare revoked. There are no free rides in life and those on welfare need to learn there are worse things than getting a job.

Unemployment Benefits Needs to be Eliminated. Instead When One Loses One’s Job, One Needs to Immediately be Found a New

Job Regardless of Pay

Losing one’s job is unfortunate, but it is not society’s problem. I do not believe in working for other people. Working for other people means that their in control...of everything. They control what time you could, when you have to be at work, for how long, when you can eat, how much you make, when you can take time off, and ultimately...whether you remained employed and continue to have the ability to generate income.

The reason why employers treat employees so poorly is because a paycheck is just another form of a handout. Do you ever get the idea that your employer feels like they are doing you a favor by allowing you to have and keep your job; it’s because they are. By and large the average person, a.k.a. the average employee is just not that special, that means they are replacement, and easily replaceable at that.

The reason why when one goes into the job market it is so hard to get a job, is because the average applicant is just not that special; or more specifically the typical job being applied for is not unique. Meaning, virtually anyone with similar skills can do it. After a new worker gets caught up with how things work in a given area, it’s like they never missed a beat. Working for someone else is like committing financial suicide.

When you work for someone else you put your entire financial well being, and your entire family’s financial well being in the hands of someone else. Does that scare you? Well it should. A company can go bankrupt, an owner might have a gambling problem and have to sell and/or liquidate the business to pay for his/her losses. Word of advise...never trust anyone. Only rely on yourself, and you will only have yourself to blame for your successes and failures in life. When you work for someone else your entire is built up on a foundation that you cannot support. A foundation that is unstable and subject to change without any warning or notice.

If you are dumb enough to decide to work for someone else then you reap what you sow. Don’t complain because you missed your son or daughter’s birthday party. Don’t be upset when you find out your wife is sleeping with your neighbor because he runs a business outside of his home and sees your family more than you do. And certainly don’t be upset when you can’t pay your bill because you incurred unrealistic overhead expenses with no rainy day fund in the event the inevitable financial calamity, that is masquerading as your life occurs.

The bottom line is, if you are dumb enough to work for somebody else, society should be there to clean up after your mess when your job suddenly disappears. News flash buddy, it was never “your” job to begin with. The same as it was never “your” house that got foreclosed upon because you owed money to somebody else. The way it was not “your” vehicle that got repossessed because you owed money to somebody else. When you live in debt up to your eyeballs, financial calamity is only a blink away...don’t blink. Eliminate Social Security

“No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth!” — Ronald Reagan

I imagine the US European male had the best of intentions when they came up with the idea of Social Security. Unfortunately, like most of their ideas, they did not think it all the way through. They did not think that hey, if a person retires at 62 and collects Social Security until they are say 85, 90, or even 100 years old, then they might end up getting more money than they put in.

They based their calculations on average life expectancies. The reality is no one actually lives to be between 76 and 81 (the average life expectancies for men and women respectively in the US). They either live shorter or longer than those expectancies based upon a host of different factors, including lifestyle and family history. The average person if they actually make it to retirement age will receive social security for many more years than what the contribution should allow.

US politicians have none this for years. That is why they increased the contribution that each person makes, raised the retirement age, and lowered the adjusted benefits. All of these changes have still not resolved the issue. People are living longer and longer every day, and retiring at earlier ages. People are staying in the workforce for shorter period of time, therefore they are making less of a contribution to the pool, while at the same time receiving a higher payment for a longer period of time than previous generations.

Ultimately what this means is economic calamity. If you keep adding people to an elevator with a certain weight capacity designed to go up to a certain floor, and add more floors and people, then eventually the elevator will collapse and there will be a free fall leaving everyone dead inside of it who got onboard.

Social Security was a poorly designed plan with no amelioration components to it. There was no system in place for it to adjust over time due to its growing needs. Because of this, there are millions of people faithfully collecting and expecting to continue to collect a check each month, while there are no actual funds to pay for it. Politicians, have no ability to say no to their constituents, because saying no means getting fired. Getting fired means no more paycheck. The result is they continue to say yes to their constituents as they watch the strings on the Social Security Elevator pop one by one, hoping it doesn’t collapse while they’re in office. Not many strings left folks.

Eliminate Welfare

"The New Colossus" is a sonnet by Emma Lazarus (1849–1887), written in 1883 and, in 1903, engraved on a bronze plaque and mounted inside the Statue of Liberty. "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" It seems US populations, a.k.a. the often conflicted US European male took this sentiment way too far.

Playing God might make one feel good and all powerful, but only God can actually do it. Welfare is another term for charity pure and simple. The fact is one is giving aid in the form of housing, food, and medical coverage to those who cannot do so. Welfare has been in place since the 1930s, beginning during the Great Depression.

Since the 1960s under LBJ’s “brilliant” “Great Society” those who were not elderly or disabled could receive this form of public assistance from the government to live on. This has gone on for nearly 50 years, for nearly two generations. It doesn’t seem that the program is helping anyone.

Instead what has happened is now generations of families are planning their futures with the assumption that the government will take care of them. With no intention of every getting a job. These people are not elderly or disabled, they are just selfish, lazy, opportunistic individuals taking advantage of a system that should have never existed in the first place.

Welfare recipients continue to produce children at a staggering rate (since they are home and have nothing better to do). Those recipients as well as their children commit crimes at a disproportionately higher rate than the rest of the population. Meaning not only are they receive government handouts, a.k.a. “free money (at least free to them not the US taxpayer)” but they are creating an additional burden on society by committing crimes, occupying the courts and prisons, and increasing the demands of already overwhelmed police force.

Welfare needs to be eliminated today. What are they going to do, stop paying taxes, stop voting, quite their jobs. News flash folks, they don’t have or do any of the above. They are dead beat burdens on society that are no different than having to call an exterminator to remove a pest problem in one’s home. They are pest they for some reason, “we” have decided to take care of...permanently.

Chapter: Term Limits Need to be Implemented at Every Level of Government

Constitutional Amendment for Terms Limit

“One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.” — Plato

A constitutional term limits needs to be passed. US politicians are in business for themselves. The only way to break up the “Good Old Boy Network” in the United States is if they are taken out of office and new blood is put in their place. Throughout the United States term limits need to be implemented at every different level of government, from small towns, to big cities, to Congress itself. There need to be ethnic and gender quotas implemented to ensure that some version of a Representative Democracy goes into effect in the US.

In order for change to happen, the same 35% of the population that has been running the country since its inception, a.k.a. US European Males cannot continue to have a totalitarian stranglehold on the nation’s politics. The reason why change doesn’t happen in the United States, is because the status quo is too beneficial to those in powers and they will fight tooth and nail to protect their interests (Not Yours) as long as they are in power.

United States politicians’s understand the Doctrine of Survival of the Fittest all too well. Every time they are up for reelection they compete as if their lives depend on it. Politicians spend less than half their time involved in legislative duties, with the rest of the time being devoted to winning reelection. Presidents may come and go every 4-8 years, but these Congressmen and Senators stay in office for decades.

The true power in Washington does not lie in the hands of the president, but rather those 435 members of Congress that remain in office year after year, election after election. It is there in which the power of government must be reduced. As long as these individuals are allowed to remain in office with a virtual stranglehold on their position due to the innate advantages that incumbents have, true change will never happen at the Federal Reserve level.

Government will always be reactionary. Real change cannot and will never start at the legislative level. In order for real change to occur it must be initiated at the grass roots level. Everyone is human. No matter who may have the best of intentions, when a politician gets into office, their primary concern soon has less to do with legislating for the betterment of the people, and instead shifts to betterment for themselves and their family.

The lack of term limits naturally forces a politician to primarily concern themselves on how to most effectively keep themselves in office. Unfortunately, as a result, their concern for others (if it ever existed) is trumped by their concerns of providing for themselves and families. A legislative person’s salaries pays very well and comes with a lot of benefits. It is unrealistic for one to expect a person to do anything that would potentially put that salary and benefits in jeopardy. Any change initiated at the government level rocks the boat (whether it is good change or not). As a result, those who attempt to effectuate change usually have the shortest lifespan as politicians.

In order for change to happen at the government level, politicians must be forced to change because the people demand it. A politician who can only have two terms in office has far less to lose than a politician who has the potential to remain in office for 10, 20, 30 years or longer. Politicians with nothing to lose are much more apt to legislate according to the will and well being of the majority rather for their own selfish ambitions.

What one also has to understand is how does one expect to be represented if no one in office represents them? Less not kid ourselves, we live in a very racist and sexist society. There is a reason why special interest groups and lobbyists are effectively represented in government; it is because they have fought and paid for that representation. Those in office often sound like they be a board member or employee for most of the top corporations and businesses in the United States. How do women and minorities expect to have their interests supported and represented in government if there is no one there to represent them? If there is no one there speaking their words, presenting their message? How do women and minorities expect to be effectively represented in government if there are essentially no one and minorities in office?

The only way for women and minorities to be represented in office; the only way for women and minorities to have their voices heard in government, is if women and minorities are elected to office. No one can represent you in life except for you. Expecting US male politicians who are in the back pockets of every special interest group and lobbyist to represent you has absolutely no basis in reality.

The reason why the Federal Reserve, the IRS, and income taxes exist in this country isn’t for the benefit of the common American, but rather for the benefit of the average Federal Reserve stockholder, US politician, and special interest group. Understand that we live in a power driven world. You have hear the saying that possession is “9/10 of the law,” well in politics, representation is 9/10 of the law.

If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear does it make a sound? Arguable, but what I can tell you is if you are a special interest group, for example, women and minorities and no one is there to represent you in office, are your concerns properly addressed and represented in government? The answer is no. This might seem like a oxymoron, but women and minorities will never have their interests represented in government as long as women and minorities are not there to represent their interest in government.

As of 2011, no woman has ever been elected to the highest office of the land. No woman has ever even been elected as vice president. Was Roe v. Wade decided by women or men in 1973? Should men have the power to make decisions about a woman’s right to choose. What right does a man have to tell a woman what to do with her body? The answer is none. However, with no right to do so, men have legislated, restricted and modified what a woman can and can’t do with her own body without ever giving women a chance to be heard on the matter.

How many times has a woman found herself wondering if her job will be safe because she becomes pregnant and has to take time off from work? What about after her time baby is born and perhaps she needs to go to doctor’s visits, school appointments, or pick her child up from daycare. Has her employer always been supportive of her or has she been made to feel she has to choose between her family and her job?

These are the types of struggles that women will continue to face as long as a male’s is the only voice heard on the issue of women and family issues. Women gained the right to vote in 1920 in the United States, and have done very little with that right. Women must take a stand and not be afraid to run for office and represent themselves in government. Women have a duty to each other, a duty to themselves, a duty to their families, and a duty to the United States (the real United States).

Let’s talk about minorities for a moment. Slavery ended in 1865. Minorities (at least the male portion) have had the right to vote in the United States since the 15th Amendment was passed in 1870. That was over 140 years ago, what has happened since. Although minorities are not properly represented in government based upon their percentage of the population, they are disproportionately represented in the criminal “justice” system.

Minorities are far more likely to go to prison for committing the same crimes as their Caucasian counterparts. They are far more likely to receive longer prison sentences, and are less likely to receive probation and/or parole. Like legislators, most prosecutors and judges are also US European males. Just like in government, how do minorities expect to receive equal treatment under the law if they are not equally represented in the law?

Minority neighborhoods have the highest crime rates and the poorest quality of schools in the country. Is that because minorities are so bad? Is that because minorities are so dumb, or don’t deserve good schools and perpetual law breakers? The answer is a universal no. Minority neighborhoods have higher crime and lower quality schools, because their concerns are no being represented in government.

Not only are minorities under represented in government, they are also under represented at the polls. The concerns of minorities do not matter to politicians because minorities by and large do not vote. How does a minority expect to be fairly treated and have their issues heard and addressed in government if they do not vote and they do not run for office. Government and politics is not about good or evil, but about power, control, and opportunity. Those in power will always have their issues addressed and always have their voices heard. Those not in power will be cast to the sidelines, never to be thought of again.

Who amongst us (besides the Federal Reserve Reserve, IRS, and politicians) are happy with the state of the economy? The answer is none of us are happy. How could any of us be content with the state of the economy when employment and underemployment are at nearly 20% (reported) and the national debt is approaching $15 trillion (reported)? We are a nation that is basically bankrupt, but not officially declared so, and no one is doing anything about it.

If the status quo works for you, then you have nothing to worry about. But if you are tired of more than 50% of your income going toward bankrupt social programs such as Social Security and Welfare. Tired of paying life sucking income, property, and capital gain taxes, then its time for you to stand up and make a change.

Don’t just get fired up after reading this book, put it on the bookshelf and forget about it. Go out there and do something about it. I understand that your time is limited, so I will not ask much of you. Buy a copy of this book for your friends and family. Pass the book around and tell others to do the same when they are done. Instead of talking about the latest celebrity fad or hairstyle, discuss things that really matter, like the state of the economy.

You have to understand that all problems in the world can be solved by resolving the world’s financial problems. For too long, money and power has remained in the hands of the few; and in case none of you realize it by now, they intend to keep it that way. There are almost 7 billion people on this planet; over 300 million live in the United States alone. Enough of us exist on this planet to make a change for the better, but none of us are going to do it out of the goodness of our own hearts.

All of us need an incentive to be better than we are. None of us is going to do something for someone else for nothing. What one receives doesn’t necessarily have to be a financial or material reward. Those rewards can be intangible such as one feeling better about oneself or closer to God because we showed someone a level of kindness. None of us will do something for someone else just for the sake of doing so; our DNA is not programmed that way. It is nothing to feel ashamed of but we must understand who we are in order to understand how we can make our world a better place both for ourselves as well as others.

The United States has already crossed the brink and entered the abyss of financial disaster. No other issue matters as much as reclaiming our financial sovereignty. Although it seems hopeless and it seems like we don’t have any time, the good news is the world is giving us time. The world still believes in us, even if we have loss belief in ourselves.

The United States can be a great nation again, but it cannot be a great nation as long as it continues to make the same financial mistakes that causes us to run annual deficits that are the same as the aggregate national debt 30 or 40 years ago.

According to the government (http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/ default/files/omb/budget/ fy2012/assets/hist.pdf), the national debt is expected to reach more than $20 trillion by the year 2016. That means a increase of $6 trillion. That means that their own best predictions have no resolution for the spiraling, completely out of control national debt. Keep in mind, if any “crisis” happens, those predictions will only become worse. The national debt continues to rise year after year, even the the GDP and tax receipts continue to increase annually.

Increase in National Debt by President

President Barack Obama

Jan. 20, 2009: $10,626,877,048,913.08

Jan. 4, 2011: $14,025,215,218,708.52

Days in Office: 715 Compounded Annual Growth Rate: 15.21%

President George W. Bush

Jan. 20, 2001: $5,727,776,738,304.64

Jan. 20, 2009: $10,626,877,048,913.08

Days in Office: 2,922

Compounded Annual Growth Rate: 8.03%

President Bill Clinton

Jan. 20, 1993: $4,188,092,107,183.60

Jan. 20, 2001: $5,727,776,738,304.64

Days in Office: 2,922

Compounded Annual Growth Rate: 3.99%

President George H.W. Bush

Jan. 20, 1989: $2,697,957, 000,000

Jan. 20, 1993: $4,188,092,107,183.60

Days in Office: 1,460

Compounded Annual Growth Rate: 11.62%

President Ronald Reagan

Jan. 20, 1981: $934,073,000,000

Jan. 20, 1989: $2,697,957, 000,000 Days in Office: 2,922

Compounded Annual Growth Rate: 14.18%

President Jimmy Carter

Jan. 20, 1977: $653, 907,000,000

Jan. 20, 1981: $934,073,000,000

Days in Office: 1,460

Compounded Annual Growth Rate: 9.32%

President Gerald Ford

Aug. 9, 1974: $481,792,000,000

Jan. 20, 1977: $653, 907,000,000

Days in Office: 895

Compounded Annual Growth Rate: 13.28%

President Richard Nixon

Jan. 20, 1969: $362,629,668,607

Aug. 9, 1974: $481,792,000,000

Days in Office: 2,026

Compounded Annual Growth Rate: 5.25%

President Lyndon B. Johnson

Nov. 22, 1963: $308,567,018,756 Jan. 20, 1969: $362,629,668,607

Days in Office: 1,885

Compounded Annual Growth Rate: 3.18%

TreasuryDirect.gov

As the amount and annual growth of the national shows. It doesn’t matter if one is a Democrat or Republican, liberal, moderate, or conservative. No one has been able to stop and/or reverse the annual increase of the national debt. Therefore, regardless of who is elected to office, the national debt will continue to grow as long as the same underlying policies are in place.

The above chart shows that the United States only has control over 19% of all spending. That means 81% of all Federal Reserve spending takes place regardless of who is in office. The systems that allow that debt cycle to function are Entitlement Spending, The Federal Reserve Reserve, The IRS, and the Income Tax.

As long as these systems are in place the national debt will continue to grow, and complete unrecoverable financial debt is an imminent reality. As long as the status quo remains in place. As long as those in office remain in office, election after election, change will never happen, and the United States will continue to spend itself into bankruptcy. None of us could continue to spend without a means to pay our bills like the US has. Time eventually catches up to all of us and the US’s day of a financial apocalypse is coming. It may already be here.http://www.Federal Reservebudget.com/ Chapter: All Forms of Debt Lead to Financial Slavery

Eliminate Credit Cards, Mortgages, and Auto Loans

“Debt is the slavery of the free.” - Publilius Syrus

“A man in debt is so far a slave.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson Various forms of debt are not the solution, they are the problem. Getting into debt is like putting a band aid over an open wound. Technically you have done something, but in reality you have done nothing to solve the problem. Debt doesn’t make problems better, it only makes problems worse. Debt forestalls the day of reckoning. As it mounts it ensures when they day of redemption come, it will truly be the worst day of one’s life.

Stop following in the footsteps of the United States and every other industrial country out there. Debt is not the same as income. Debt is not the same as money. Getting into credit card or mortgage, and car debt is no different than getting into debt with a loan shark. Sure, these debts companies are not going to come to your house and break your legs, but what they will do is much worse.

When you owe money to a loan shark they may threaten you, they may physically harm you, but what does a traditional debt company do. They will start calling you multiple a day. They will call you at home, they will call you at work, they will call you on your cell phone. They will send numerous notices in the mail. They will call friends and family members. In essence you have given them the legal right to stalk and perpetually harass you. Eventually they will take back that car, they will throw you out of your home, and they will garnish your wages. Is it really worth it???

Is it really worth it to follow the latest fade, the latest technology, music, clothes, etc.? Do you ever ask yourself why you are doing it? You can’t say because it is to enjoy life. How can you be enjoying life when you are drowning in debt and no one is there to throw you a financial life jacket? Who are you kidding, yourself or all those other people you call friends, family, and associates?

Newsflash folks, just like the person who rides your bumper and baits you into speeding isn’t going to pay that traffic ticket when you get pulled over, no one is going to pay those overhead bills for you when you have no way to pay for them. But maybe there are some of you that say, “that’s not me. I have plenty of money to pay my bills.” Then let me ask you this, do you plenty of money to pay your bills and save for retirement?

What you have to understand is when you go out and line other people’s pockets, you are lightening yours. Some of you out there may have never technically fallen behind on your bills, but like the United States national debt, your debt still grows. You are still not saving any money or enough money. Managing debt is not the same as being debt free.

Do you ever wonder why you have those extra bags and lines around your eyes, why you have trouble sleeping, why you always feel tired, and you never look refreshed? It is called stress. Most of us are under a constant bombardment of perpetual stress. We are under that stress because as we grow older we assume more and more responsibilities that we are not prepared to handle. As a result, our body has natural defense driven, negative reactions to all those outside pressures.

Your mind and body are overwhelmed by the constant pressures you are putting upon it. Many of you as you progress in your careers, see your grow income increase, but not your net disposable income. The reason being is because as one comes into more financial success, most take on more monetary obligations. Most people end up getting more credit cards, or credit cards with a higher credit limit. Many of us end up moving into larger homes with larger mortgage payments. A larger house is usually followed by a fancier car with more expensive monthly payments. We also have to get a more expensive wardrobe and attend more expensive “obligatory” social gatherings.

As a result, one’s gross income has increased, but because of poor spending control and poor financial planning one sees either no significant change in their net disposable income and/or even a decrease in their monthly net disposable income. Therefore, although one’s gross financial circumstances have improved, one still remains in the same state of perpetual stress due to an ever increasing high overhead budget. Why do we do this to ourselves?

Why do we believe that we have to live up to certain expectations? Who sets those expectations? The media sets those expectations. We are constantly exposed to commercials and other forms of advertisements numerous times a day. For example, one can watch one television show and be exposed to the same commercial more than a dozen times in a 2 hour broadcast. The media is controlled by the financial elite, who spends a great amount of time figuring out new and creative ways of how to manipulate you into separating yourself from your money.

That is why I recommend not to watch any commercials. If you are watching a live show, put the tv on mute until your show comes back on. If you are watching a non live show, record it and watch it later. Time is very valuable and watch tv eats away your time. In a 30 minute broadcast, commercials account for 8 minutes of that time, 16 minutes of an hour long broadcast, and 32 minutes of a 2 hour show.

Commercials on average last for 30 minutes. Therefore, in a 30 minute broadcast, one is exposed to 16 different commercials, 32 commercials in an hour broadcast, and 68 commercials in a 2 hour show. Companies spend millions of dollars in advertising costs trying to come up with the most novel ways to separate you from your money. Flooding your visual and audio senses with manipulative commercial images, is one of the most effective ways to do so.

When you are sitting in front of the tv, generally it is after a long day at work, or on one of your rare off days. You are relaxed and vulnerable. Your mind and body are in a state of rest. It is during these moments of sedation in which we are most susceptible to suggestive messages. Commercials are designed to pull at our emotions. They are designed to get us to laugh, to get us to cry, but not really to get us to think.

The messages in commercials are quick and subtle. They almost seem like a “friend” passing on some “useful” information to you. Most commercials today do not try to directly sell you anything. They know to do so will trigger your natural defense system when faced with overt manipulation. Instead, commercials are designed to be more covert. They are designed to be more suggestive. It makes their product seem like the product of choice for the young, the beautiful, the successful, the “important” people. They never suggest that you by their product, they just make it seem that your life is much less, complete, much less fun without it.

When watching commercials, one can’t help but to be manipulated and influenced by them. Companies have spent millions of dollars to figure out the best campaign strategies to manipulate their way into your pockets. To try to not be tempted by a commercial is to try to not be tempted when confronted by one of our most guilty pleasures, whether that be a box of chocolates, a fresh batch of baked cookies, and oven fresh cake, or the latest and newest trend. Watching commercials open us up to needless and unnecessary temptations. All of us can resist temptation for a while. However, constant and persistent exposure to temptation will weaken and eventually overcome the defense of its most formidable adversaries. That same guilty feeling you experience when you eat something you shouldn’t is the same feeling you get when you receive your latest credit card statement and wonder how the bill got that high. What did you possibly buy that was so “important”?

Wasteful spending is the symptom and high overhead debt is the disease. It is a curable disease, but one that is difficult to cure once one has contracted it. My recommendation is not to have any debts. That might sound easier said than done, but what obligation do you have to be indebted to other people? What obligation do you have to make someone rich at your expense?

Renting is the same as having a monthly mortgage payment, just without the long term obligation. Anyone who is renting I would recommend downsizing to the smallest living situation possible in order to save enough to buy a property free and clear. The problem that so many of us have is we keep trying to maximize living for today and not think about the consequences of those decisions tomorrow.

So many of us live like we are terminally diseased patients. We act like if we do not cram every bit of living into today then we are going to live life with regret. While that in some cases might be true, that philosophy should not equate to a gateway for getting oneself in debt. Many of us live by the motto, “Don’t put off for tomorrow what we can do today.” But we only apply that motto to getting ourselves deeper and deeper into debt. Generally not applying that motto to any other aspects of our lives. When we should live by the motto, “Don’t put off for tomorrow what we can do today, unless by doing it today will leave us in debt tomorrow.”

I am not suggesting that you live like a monk, but I am strongly suggesting that you live with a financial governor on your spending. Most of us have voids and emptiness in different aspects of our lives. Those voids and emptiness vary for each of us, in type, degree, and intensity. Many of us try to fill those voids and emptiness with something. Unfortunately, for many of us, we attempt to fill those voids with material possessions. Even though those material possessions never seem to solve those deficiencies, we continue to acquire more and more, as if at some point those devoid holes in our lives will be filled like a gas tank, or our stomach and our life will be complete. Unfortunately life doesn’t work that way. Just like we can’t buy love, we can’t find happiness by spending ourselves into some materialistic euphoria.

Do you ever notice how the most financially success people seem to be the most miserable? The reason being, is because like you, they bought into the notion that to be happy in life was to surround oneself with as much material possessions as humanly possible. Unlike you they can afford to take it to the extreme. They buy the largest homes, the fanciest cars, go on the most extravagant trips. They do all the things any of us have ever imagined or dreamed. Unfortunately, they find that all the money and material possessions in the world can’t fill those voids and emptiness in their lives.

Most celebrities are young with the vast majority of their lives ahead on them. They have been successful in their careers, as athletes, actors, or other forms of entertainment. Although they have been successful in their careers at a relatively early age in life, they find that they are utterly successful in life. They find they still have to put on their pants one day at a time. They still have to shower and use the bathroom just like the rest of us. They find that after you move past all their money and possessions, they are just as normal, have just many problems as the rest of us, except they have more time to directly face that normalcy.

Most celebrities have more time than the rest of us, particularly as they get older. Most of us are still actively working into our 40s, and 50s, but that is when celebrities’s career are usually beginning to grin to a halt. There they are 40 or 50 years old with the rest of their lives ahead them and with no excuse not to live it to the fullest. So what happens, they are usually miserable, they fall into despair.

Many celebrity couples soon breakup after the career of the celebrity spouse is over. The reason(s) being is that many times the celebrity spouse cannot handle that their career is over and falls into a deep depression. Other times, the couple never spent much time together when the celebrity spouse was actively working and discover that they are strangers. Happens a lot when “normal” people retire too, just at a much earlier age for a celebrity.

As a result, many celebrities find that after their careers are over they have spiraled out of control. They go through a series of relationship breakups. They find themselves in some level of substance abuse, such as drugs and alcohol. Many of them put on a tremendous amount of weight, and often times, celebrities find themselves dead well before their time due to addictive destructive behaviors.

Celebrities find out sooner than most of us, that money cannot buy you happiness. The difference is for celebrities they discover this at an early age in life. For most of us, we think that all of our problems would go away if we had a certain amount of money; as if there was some sort of magic potion hidden in the Federal Reservenotes with dead presidents on them. Unfortunately, most of discover, there is no hidden potion of happiness in money.

Unfortunately, most of us do not spend enough time discovering who we are. Instead we spend most of our time, living according to how others think we should live. As a result, most of us live some type of quasi existence in which we are not in full control of thoughts, feelings, and actions. We live a life very reminiscent of a puppet.

Puppet masters in our life take on many forms. They can be the media, coworkers, friends, and even our families. Most of use are followers and we let others infiltrate our thoughts and our heart. We stop thinking, acting, and feeling for ourselves, and allow others to carry that burden for us. The rich and powerful are only too happy to step in and intervene on your behalf.

Unlike yourself, the rich and powerful do not have others thinking on your behalf. While you are living some sort of half life, they are fully engaged individuals directly engaging in and manipulating your lives. Have you ever seen a homeless or unemployed rich person? It is an oxymoron, it doesn’t exist. While you are trying to figure out how to make ends meet from week to week, the rich and powerful are figuring out new ways to take advantage. You have to understand that the rich and powerful cannot exist with out you. You are their lifelines.

Although you don’t need the rich and powerful to survive, they absolutely need you. Money, power, and control, might be concentrated in the hands of the few, but that money and power is generated by the masses. The rich and powerful sell back to us the products that we create. We make their food, their houses, their cars, and their technology, and they put their product name on it and reap in the rewards.

Although the average person’s conditions might be better than a slave, it is not by much. Like in times of slavery, the rich and powerful control the lion’s share of the wealth; and just like those times, they participated in none of the labor and effort necessary to produce the wealth. In times of slavery, slaves had to pay their slave owners a certain amount in order to secure their freedom. Today, instead of it being the times of slavery, it is the times of debt slavery. In order to secure one’s freedom, one has to pay their creditors a certain amount in order for them to leave you alone. Just like slavery, the amount necessary to secure one’s freedom seems to constantly go up, with no end in sight.

Like in a standard abusive relationship, the rich and powerful try to convince us that we are nothing without them; that they are better than us. But in reality, they are nothing without us, we are better than them. There is more of us, therefore we are strong in number. Unlike the rich and powerful we are accustomed to hard work and getting our hands dirty. Nothing that the rich and powerful has any intrinsic value. It only has the value they convince others to place upon them and their possessions. Unlike the average person, the rich and better are better at selling their worth to others.

Let’s be honest with ourselves, there is no real value to a piece of paper or coin currency or even in some cases the gold and silver that it represents. Can one eat money? Can one eat gold or silver? Then what value does it have? Why does it have any value at all? The reason why it has value is because the rich and powerful were able to convince you it has value. They were able to convince you that you have power. They were able to convince you instead of having value in yourself and your family, you should have value in “precious” metals. That is the ultimate form of manipulation.

It is like playing a game of poker. The person you’re playing against only has 3s and 5s, but they are able to convince you that their cards are better than yours, even when you have a full house and know what cards they have. They get you to give away your cards, and then later turns the tables on you and confirms that your cards in fact have value, but now they are in control of them. That is what has happened in our lives.

The rich and powerful control the world, because they are in control of the masses’s perception of the world. The rich and powerful act as a filter, and the masses are all too eager to try on the prescription. The rich and powerful, although in control, live in a perpetual state of fear that eventually the masses will wake up and understand what is truly going on in the world around them. That is why they are constantly working on ways to manipulate us to prevent us from getting used to any deceptive type of stimuli.

The truth is, we are our own worst enemies. Throughout history, we have given the rich and powerful, power and control over us. We have allowed manipulation, charisma, and threats to substitute for strength and power. As time went on, the rich and powerful have relied on our ancestors to teach us “right and wrong.” After so many generations of submissiveness, the rich and powerful rely on the masses to keep the masses subservient.

Power and manipulation is so entrenched in our culture, that it has become an almost natural way of life. The thought of having power and control over one’s own life, seems like such a foreign thought to most that such a manifestation intellectual selection never rises to the level of average consciousness. In essence most of us live in a state of subconsciousness, as if we are under the spell of some sort of fog.

Most of us live in such a foreign state of reality, that all of our natural defenses against manipulation and control, are like our conscious, in a dormant state. Have you ever noticed how most people violently hold on to their beliefs and traditions; beliefs and tradition they most likely had no influence in creating. Most traditions and beliefs are passed on from generation to generation. The reason why most people hold on to their traditions and beliefs so passionately is because without them they would almost cease to exist. Without they would almost be empty vessels lacking any original thoughts, beliefs, or values.

Because most of us are followers, we are generally very easy to control. We are naturally submissive to power and authority which is why slavery was so effective as well concentration camps during Nazi Germany. Most of us are so willing to follow orders, that we will do so even when natural instinct and logic tell us what we are doing is wrong. In other words, the power and control that the elite have over us is so great that they are able to get us to go against our own natural instincts for survival.

All of us need to have more control over our lives. We need to be less afraid to be judged and fail, and more afraid of blindly following the masses on a perilous journey. Most of us are afraid to take chances. Most rather travel the road most traveled instead the path less taken. The rich and powerful rely on these patterns of human behavior; they design the laws that way.

For instance, the reason why most taxes are collected directly from one’s paycheck, is because most people work for someone else; i.e. a business or corporation. Businesses and corporations pay some of the lowest taxes in the United States because of the tax deductions they are allowed to enjoy. Although businesses and corporations generate far more income than the income that is generated from people’s salaries, they pay far less taxes than individuals do because individuals cannot deduct those same type of expenses from their gross income.

Ignorance is the tool of choice the rich and powerful use to primarily control the masses. An uneducated or unaware people, is a nation of masses that can do no harm to the oligarchy status quo. Oligarchies keep us preoccupied with television, commercials, technology, and jobs, in order to keep our minds on deep freeze. As long as the oligarchies do not have to compete against the masses for intellectual airspace, they will always remain in de jure and defacto control of our lives.

Chapter: Government Changes that Need to Take Place

Ways to Eliminate Poverty Require Individuals to Have to be Married and Obtain a License to Have Children

Having children should be a privilege and not a right. Raising a child is the one of the most important things a person can do in their lifetime. Why should the requirements for a person to adopt a child or to become a foster parent be so vigorous, yet anyone with physiological abilities can have one at will?

Poverty exists in the America because the cycle of poverty is allowed to continue. It is not enough for someone to want to be a parent, they must prove they deserve to be a parent. If one cannot afford to have a child, they have no right to have it, and then impose that burden on the rest of society.

The process to have a child should be rigorous. People should have to first prove that they have the financial resources to adequate and fully support a child. Then need to undergo a psychological evaluation to make sure that they are of sound mind and character. There also needs to be some sort of parental training in place to make sure that new parents have the skill set required to provide the appropriate environment to raise a child.

Minimum Wage Needs to be Raised to $10 an Hour

A minimum wage below $10 an hour is not a living wage. The reason why low income people tend to have to more than one job or need to work overtime at their existing jobs is because their primary job does not pay them enough to live on. The fact is the workforce is over saturated with too many employees. Whether it be increasing the minimum wage and reduces hours and benefits, and/or increasing the minimum wage and reducing the number of employees, real change needs to happen and it needs to happen now.

Going to school for 12 years and ending up working at McDonald’s or Burger King is not a success story. The fact is schools need to prepare students for life after school. They need to prepare them in the form of teaching them vocational skills, having classes that teach them how to be self employed, and career preparation classes. Handing someone a high school diploma after 12 years and handshake saying good luck, might as well be like handing them directions to the unemployment office, and an unemployment application to fill out.

Vocational training needs to be made a mandatory part of the school curriculum. High Schools need be required to ensure that every graduate has a job after graduation.

Companies Should Not be Allowed to Export Jobs Overseas Allowing companies to export jobs overseas is the reason why the United States has become a service oriented, rather than an industry oriented economy. In decades past, the United States was leader of industry. It was a world leader in the production of automobiles, electronic, clothes, and other consumer related items.

Over the years companies have been allowed to move their facilities to increase its bottom line and the expense of the US economy. Instead of charging less money for the goods they produce, companies continue to charge the same or money for those items, while they continue to reap in profits at a record rate.

These supposedly US companies should not be allowed to have their cake and eat it too. If these US companies want to continue to produce their goods overseas and then bring them back into the United States, then they should be charged excise and duty taxes like any foreign company import item from foreign countries.

United States manufacturers have greatly enriched the economies of foreign countries while the its nation continues to struggle to remain afloat. While its executives continue to live in luxury in the United States, US citizens struggle to find jobs, because the ones they had, in industries they used to and their families used to work in have left the United States to set up shop in other nations. Why would US politicians, a.k.a. US European Males allow this to happen?

The reality is, that US politicians are in business for themselves. Until 1991, the laws that were passed in Congress did not apply to those individuals passing those laws, a.k.a. the US European Males in power. These US politicians have allow US businesses to set up shop in overseas nations because of the financial incentives they receive for doing so. These financial incentives primarily include contributions to political war chests which allow incumbents to win elections year after year at the expense of American people.

Require Every City to Have a Mass Transit System and Require People to Use It

Too much money is wasted in cities throughout the United States to maintain the highways and roadways due to overuse. The solution is there needs to be a real emphasis on reducing traffic congestion with a nationwide implementation of an in depth mass transit system.

Everyday people travel the same way to work. Most businesses are located in key areas throughout the city. By having a mass transit system that takes people to these key locations, would greatly reduce the strain vehicles place on the roadways. Workers, who are employed in these key districts need to be required to take mass transit rather than utilizing their personal vehicle which is designed for multi occupancy and not just one person. Ways to Reduce Government Cost

Require US House of Representatives and US Senators to Work From Their Home State (telecommute). Reducing Government Cost

“When politics are used to allocate resources, the resources all end up being allocated to politics.” — P.J. O’Rourke

The cost of running the government in Washington, D.C. could be greatly reduced if Senators and Congressmen worked from their home state instead of traveling and working all the way in Washington. No only would each state save money, but not having to house its Congress people in D.C., but their Congress members would be at home more, allowing them to more directly address and understand issues at the grassroots level.

Offer Tax Incentives for Individuals Who Buy Products Online

Instead of Shopping at Brick and Mortar Stores

By encouraging individuals to shop online instead of shopping at brick and mortar stores, fuel consumption, as well as road maintenance costs will be reduced. Most of the products that are purchased at brick and mortar stores can be purchased online with the exception of perishable food items that require refrigeration and storage such as milk, butter, ice cream, and similar type items.

Not only will the government save money by reducing the cost of roadway repairs, individuals will save money on gas, allowing them to spend money elsewhere, and stores can have less employees at their brick and mortar locations saving them money. In addition, many times one can avoid paying taxes on an item if an online retailer doesn’t have a physical location in the state one lives in, like Amazon (with the exception of Washington and New York state which are its principal places of business).

Solutions/Changes that Need to Take Place "Government spending is always a “tax” burden on the American people and is never equally or fairly distributed. The poor and low-middle income workers always suffer the most from the deceitful tax of inflation and borrowing." -Congressman Ron Paul

Taxes need to be drastically reduced for the working and lower classes. It does not make sense to tax the poor. The poor and working class are barely just getting by and a loss in employment would result in an immediate negative change in their circumstances in the form of having to collect unemployment and eventually become homeless. By eliminate income taxes for the poor and working classes, they would have a better opportunity to survive in the event they are separated from their employment. This scenario is more likely for the poor and working classes since they are typically in jobs that require lower skills making them easily replaceable.

Income taxes need to be replaced with consumption and excise taxes. It is unfair for a government entity to directly take money from one’s earnings. Everyone deserves a choice in terms of how one’s money is spent and in terms of how one is ultimately separated from one’s money. Having consumption an excise taxes will give individuals a choice as to when they are separated from their money and how much will be taken from them at any given time. Excise taxes will penalize those for spending their money on more extravagant items. Public morale as it relates to the taxing of personal income would be greatly improved if their money is not allocated before they ever even receive it.

Government officials’s salaries need to be reduced. Politicians should not be getting rich by working for the government. Winning an election should not be like winning the lottery. Politicians’s primary role must be to serve, not to get paid. Politicians should be compensated for their services but their compensation should be reasonable and incentive base. Politicians should not receive any pay at all if they do not balance the budget, cut cost, and reduce the national debt. They need to be accountable for their actions and it should start with their paychecks. Politicians would do a much better job of fiscal responsibility if they knew their paychecks were contingent upon it.

Mass transit systems need to increase service. In the overwhelming vast majority of cities in the United States few have a public transportation system as expansive and sophisticated as New York City. The reality is all cities would benefit for a more elaborate public transportation system. Although gas prices have fluctuated between $2.50 and $5 over the last few years, employee salaries have remained relatively the same. The combination of underemployment, stagnant wages, increase inflation, and high gas prices, have left American workers with a significant net reduction in their take home earnings. Providing them with a public transportation system that gets them from Point A to Point B would A: Stabilize their commuter cost to and from work and B: dramatically reduce oil consumption and reduce highway and road congestion.

A Look at the US Health Care System

Health care needs to be nationalized and health insurance needs to be eliminated. Many families have lost all their life savings and/or end having to file bankruptcy because of a illness, and having no health insurance, or health insurance that does not completely cover the medical expenses. By nationalizing health care, society as a whole is protected from predatory health insurance practices which include: 1)Overcharging for health coverage, 2)Denying people medical care who they are not “ideal” candidates for a medical procedure, and 3)Refusing to cover certain individuals for various reasons.

Health insurance companies have no incentives to offer preventive health care because they are in the business of making money of the sick, and treating symptoms just enough to keep a person alive and functional, but not enough to cure them. It makes no practical business sense to them to invest resources toward curing diseases because then they would have no one to cover and would begin losing their bottom line.

By nationalizing health coverage and eliminating health insurance, the government would have an incentive to cure diseases, because it would reduce the number of sick people and “medicine” to treat them, as well as their overhead associated with servicing the health needs of a nation. Nationalized health coverage might promote an emphasis on a healthy diet and exercise, and people more physically active, rather than a society o-f medically doped up sedentary individuals.

Let’s Focus on Streamlining Laws/ Functioning Like a Republic, Not Isolated Entities

There should only be one national driver’s license. Every state has their own driver’s license. Traffic laws are similar but different in each state. There needs to be uniformity in traffic laws. When one is driving from one state to the next, there is not suddenly a list of new driving laws one is being presented with, but the local law enforcement will surely impose those regulations upon. The law states that ignorance of the law is no excuse, at a minimum that motto is convenient for those passing down judgment on others, but shouldn’t the laws, particularly as it pertains to a interstate activity like driving be uniform in nature?

There needs to be only one national medical license. As far as I know the human physiology does not change from state to state. Bodies have the same functions throughout the US, whether one lives in Florida or California, or somewhere in between. Yet for some reason, there different governing laws and bodies that vary from state to state. Really? Really? Really?

Other, than the obvious reason (money), what possible explanation is there for having to obtain a new medical license each time one begins practice in another state. Seemingly with the need to keep up on all these rules and regulations it seems everyone needs to go to law school just to underscore all the many and obscure laws. Which brings to my next point.

There should only be one national bar card. In fact one should automatically qualify to practice law after completing law school (seems Wisconsin thought of that idea first). If one is concerned about the universal standard of each law school, have a national exam that law students are required to take in order to graduate (it’s only on the first year of materials anyway). Let’s Bring the Hiring Process for Jobs/Workplace Into the 21st Century

The interview process for jobs needs to be changed. Video conference interviews need to gain in popularity. Quality jobs are in scarce supply. Throughout the country thousands of students graduate from college and beyond each year. When the student graduates he/she has not made up their mind in terms of where they are going to live and settle to; in today’s job market that really in a position to be. Video conferencing would greatly bridge that gap to both potential employers and employees in enhancing their interview process experience.

Unfortunately, it seems employers take on the role of being a potential romantic suitor than one who is interested in finding the best person for the jobs in terms of skill. A resume is relatively self explanatory, and assuming all information in the resume is accurate and true, does not require further elaboration.

However, for some reason employers are looking for more. It’s almost like they want to touch and feel (and in some cases literally) prospective employees. Wanting to weed potential problem employees who one may have a potential personality conflict is perfectly reasonable. However, there is much more to the weeding out process than that. Employers will summarily dismiss a potential candidate because how they look, whether it be a gender issue or racial one. They may also decline further evaluation of a potential candidate based upon body size, or even a candidate’s hairstyle of style of dress. What these elements have to do with whether a candidate is right for the job is questionable at best. What is not, is that every day employers continue to get away with discrimination whether it be age, gender, or racial during the interview process with almost no accountability.

The work week needs to be decreased to 36 hours and only 4 days a week. There are only 168 hours a week. Out of those 168, the average person spends 56 of those hours sleeping, leaving a balance of 112 hours. Out of those 112 hours a person is lucky if they “enjoy” 32 hours off, which represents 2 waking days, and for many not consecutive days off. That leaves a balance of the bulk of the waking hours which is 80 which is 71% of the week, with that bulk of that being devoted to employment.

The employer will tell you that only half of those 80 hours are spent at work, which may or not be technically true for some. However, must people have to commute portions of an hour each way to work, which gets that 40 hour number up to 50 hours. Additionally, that 50 hour time frame does not include, the mandatory 1 hour each day most employers force employees to take for lunch during the middle of the day, increasing the work week by 5 hours to 55 hours. The average person also spends an hour each day preparing for work which brings the grand total of a 40 hour work week to 60 hours or 75% of the 5 out of 7 days a week. Leaving the average person with only 4 hours each day to get anything else they need to get done, normally after most businesses have closed for the day.

Since the average person usually works during the week and during the day, the only way a person can get something done during the week is to either call in sick or take vacation time. This may be to perform such “luxuries” as going to the doctor or the dentist, having the cable guy come out, one may have a plumbing issue, or one may be simply burnt at and need some time to recharge.

The reality is businesses do not have to have employees working essentially all day every day. It is done with a purpose. That’s why they call the job “full time” because it occupies all of your time; leaving you with what little time you have left in the day, tired, exhausted, unmotivated, and unable to change your present circumstances.

If people had more time to themselves, they might feel more rested and be more motivated. They might take a course after work or during that “extra” day off and eventually be able to leave their crummy job for a better opportunity. However, employers’s goal is to keep their employees down and keep their proverbial foot on their throat. They don’t want their employees to feel good about themselves otherwise they will rise up and seek better opportunities. Look around at your job, morale is low, people look listless, just trying to get through the day, and it will be the same exact way the next day, and the day after that, and the day after that. An unhappy workforce, is an unmotivated workforce, and that’s what employers want. They want their employees to have enough motivation to do the tasks requested, but not be motivated enough to benefit themselves.

By reducing the workweek from 5 to 4 days a week, that would be a potential savings of 20% that Americans spend on gas each year, as well as reduction in traffic of 20% on particular days. Such savings could be significant considering the average person spends $50 a week on gas, or $2500 per year. That would be a savings of $500 per year, or $1,000 per year for a 2 income family. That means with a workforce of over 100 million people, Americans would save over $100 billion annually on gas, as well as save the cars 20% less wear and tear, miles, and oil changes. Americans cannot afford not to work less days a week.

All businesses need to be closed on Sundays. Every person deserves to have some time off. Deserves to have a day every week that they can depend on that will be theirs for themselves and to spend time with their families. The alternative is what many people experience, which is a fluctuating work week being off on different days on different weeks, making it impossible to plan anything out long term. Even retail businesses could stand to be closed one day a week, and if the work week were reduced to 4 days a week, instead of 5, they would not experience a noticeable drop off in sales because people would have time during the week to get other things done.

The Government Needs to Create Financial Incentives to Car Pool

It may seem like we do, but we don’t change jobs everyday. What that means, is that for some period of time we generally go to the same job, taking the same route to work over and over again. If we notice, we might see the same cars going in that general direction. Wouldn’t it be nice, if at least some of the time, someone else could do the driving? Even if it was just one or two days a week? Introducing car pooling.

I am sure many of you have heard about the concept of car pooling but how many of you have ever really thought about it. For many people, driving, particularly driving to and from work everyday is a very stressful, or at the very least a very mundane experience. Why do you think the vast majority of accidents happen on the road during rush hour either coming or going to work? It is because, 1)most people don’t really feel like going to work and 2)most people definitely do not feel like having to drive to work.

If you ever take the time to look around at other vehicles around you on the road, most of them are occupied by one individual. Most vehicles can comfortably hold 4 adults (two in the front and two in back). Imagine if everyone was car pooling, there would be 4 times less vehicles on the road. Not only would the drive to work be a lot less stressful because the road would be substantially less congested, but also one would save a lot of money on commuter cost.

Even if one were still paying the other drivers for gas, it will still be cheaper in the long run. The reason being, with less vehicles on the road on a daily basis, there would be less of a demand for gasoline, therefore the price would be dramatically lower. The price of items only goes up as the demand increases. A steep decline in demand would result in a step decline in prices. Also the wear and tear on one’s vehicles, including unnecessary auto repairs due to vehicle overuse would be greatly decreased.

If the government is not going to offer any alternative fuel sources of vehicle to make driving more affordable and/or shorten the workweek from 40 hours to 36 hours (4 days a week instead of 5), then it can at least make driving and going to work more bearable than it currently is by offering car pooling incentives. Such incentives should include some type of tax break for car pooling. After all the government would be saving money. As a result of less vehicles being on the roadways everyday, there would be less wear and tear on the road. Therefore, with less wear and tear on the road, there would be less repair costs. Less repair costs means the government could stop wasting money on needless roadway repairs due to outdated policies.

In the alternative, if the government is unwilling to offer car pooling incentives, people should have the common sense to due it themselves. The government should require auto manufacturers to build one occupancy car vehicles. These smaller vehicles would be more affordable because less materials to manufacturer them as well as more fuel efficient, which would drastically reduce the cost and consumption of gas.

There Needs to be Less People in the Workforce by Encouraging

Early Retirements and Promoting the Concept of One Income Families The concept of the two income family sounds good in theory, but bad in reality. For many years in this country, women were treated as second class citizens, and more specifically like property. Women had no rights in this country. They were disrespected by their fathers and eventually disrespected by their husbands. They did not have the right to vote, nor did they have the right to own property, no right to make decisions concerning their own bodies, and no right to a divorce. Women, who are the majority of the population, were given 5th class minority status. They were treated little better than a slave. Those times have changed.

Even though those times have changed, women suffer similar problems that minorities suffer in the United States. For example, women do not always receive equal pay for equal work. They also do not always get the promotions they are qualified for. In addition, they still experience sexual harassment in the workforce.

The problem is that women are fighting a losing battle. Like minorities, women are demanding to be treated as the equal of men, in essence they are demanding to be treated the same as a man. That is not a logical possibility. You cannot change someone’s perception of someone else simply by demanding that they treat someone differently than they have in the past. Those perceptions are still there, they just become less overt and more covert.

Just as a minority will never be able to change their facial features or skin complexion, a woman will never be able to change her gender or physical experience appearance...nor should she. I am not suggesting that women should go home and just clean the house and bake cookies all day, far from it. What I am suggesting is that women should remove themselves from the workforce and become self employed.

Being self employed has many positive benefits. One, a woman would never have to compete against a man for a job again. Two, with less competition for jobs, salaries would actually increase, and the competition for jobs would decrease because the workforce would be reduced in half. Three, a woman would no longer have to choice between work and home, because she would be working from home. Four, families would greatly reduce their overhead associated with two people working outside the home. Those costs include: child care services, extra vehicle repairs, fuel consumption, and clothes allowance. Additionally, there would be 50% less vehicles on the road, which would reduce roadway gridlock as well as reducing fuel consumption.

In the alternative, a man could just as easily work from home. However, if a woman does decide to work outside the home, she should work for a women only firm or company. One, it promotes women as leaders in the field of industry. Two, like government, most businesses are run by European or “White” males. Just as they have demonstrated an inability to treat “minorities” as equals, they have similarly demonstrated to treat women as equals as well. The “White Man’s” appetite for dominance and controls knows no bounds. Expecting more of them than is in their natural temperament is asking more than they are capable of doing. Those that say: “White is right,” are probably “White Males” obsessed with power and control. My recommendation is to stay as far away them as humanly possible. Like with any wild animal, when around them proceed with extreme caution...they are very dangerous. Large Businesses Need to be Encouraged to Move to Less

Population Dense Areas to Decrease Population Density

Just like there is a separation between church and state, there needs to be a separation between work and home. Businesses should not be located in or near residential areas. The reason why traffic congestion is so bad in most cities throughout the United States is because businesses are located too close to residential areas. The result is that there is almost no separation between work and home.

Whether one works from home, retired, on vacation, or someone in between, one never seems to be able to escape the goings on of the outside. From automobiles large and small, to commercial vehicles. Many see an endless array of vehicles passing by their residential dwellings on a daily basis because of the close proximity of businesses.

There needs to be a clear separation between commercial and residential areas, instead of the blurred and interchangeable line that exist today. By businesses being encouraged to move to less population dense areas, population density and/or at least the main problem...traffic gridlock will be greatly reduced.

For example, when people think of New York, one immediately thinks of NYC. The population there is over 8 million. The population per square mile is staggering dense. However, once one moves away from the city, population density dramatically decreases, and so do home prices.

One of the big reason why home prices are so expensive is because residential buildings are having to compete against commercial buildings for land space. The result is that businesses, particularly big businesses have the resources to compete for land and space. This competition dramatically drives up the cost of home prices, which greatly increases the overhead cost for many American family. The unfortunate downside is that with those increases in overhead costs, disposable income significantly decreases, which is ultimately bad for businesses.

The fact is businesses are their own worst enemies. They compete so aggressive for land and space that they drive away their customers by keeping customers’s money tied up in home expensive rather than being free to spend on business services and merchandise.

The government needs to step in and offer tax incentives to business to relocate their offices to less population, non residential areas. This would greatly reduce traffic problems in cities throughout the United States, increase disposable income, because property values would go down (which is ultimately a good thing), and decrease crime (because there is less crime in areas that are primarily residential in nature, rather than areas that are mix between residential and commercial). Fast Food Places Need to List Nutritional Information on the Food They Serve

Ignorance is bliss, but not when it comes to one’s health. Fast food chains make it a business to keep their customers in the dark about what is going into their bodies. No one would eat something bad for them if they knew with absolutely certainty that the food they were consuming was making them healthy and shortening their. It is that same type of ignorance and self denial that allows people to consume animal products.

The average person is a consumer of meat: pigs, cows, ducks, chickens, turkeys, deers, and for some even bears, monkeys, and cats, and dogs. Those last two got to you didn’t they; cats and dogs, that sounds disgusting. However, it is just as disgusting to eat those other animals to many other cultures in the world.

With the exception of fish, how many of you could actually raise an animal and then kill it. Maybe you could cut off a turkey, duck, or chickens neck. But have you ever seen how a pig or cow is killed. Do you that a bullet gets put in their brain. Could you really remove all that skin and organs from their bodies to get access to the meat you crave so much.

So many of you condemned Michael Vick, because of his dog fighting conviction. However, for some reason you do not think about how your actions perpetuate a cycle of violence and cruelty to animals by paying these farmers to raise these animals just so they can be slaughtered and served on your plates.

I am not condoning what Michael Vick did. However, I do not think there is much difference between what he did, by engaging animals in dog fighting, and what the average person does everyday by turning their backs on the cruelty to animals that happen everyday in your names just for a piece of flesh to eat. If I were going to analyze which action was worse, I would probably say the later.

The reason being, in Michael Vick’s case, most of the dogs involved in the fighting actually lived and have a chance for a normal life. However, the animals that get raised and killed to go on your plate have no chance to live; no chance to live a normal life. Their fate was sealed the second they were born. If Michael Vick deserved to lose a $130 million contract, what do each and every one of you deserve to lose. How will God judge you on Judgment Day.

You need to be aware of how your food is prepared and how it gets from its original status, whether that be animal or plant, to eventually on your plates. Fast food chains add so many addictive chemicals and additives to the food they serve in order to mass produce the food and get you hooked on it. They do not let you know what exactly is put into the food because if you became aware of the high sodium and fat content, including trans fats, and other ingredients, it might take away from your “enjoyment” of the food.

Drugs and Prostitution Need to be Decriminalized and Regulated to Decrease Quality of Life Crimes

Adults should be allowed to be just that...adults. No one needs someone passing moral judgments on one’s personal activities. If something that one participates in does not harm and/or threatened someone is and is participated in voluntarily and willing by consenting adults, then who are we to judge? Ever heard of judge not, yet ye be judged. All of us have skeletons in our closet. All of us have things about us that if others knew of they would approve or make others think differently about us.

These politicians who cast down their noses at prostitution; how many of them have had mistresses? Mistresses whose expenses they pay for and have no other form of work other than being at their beck and call. Are they not involved in some sort of pay for sexual services? How many of you have had lovers or another outside of your supposed committed relationship? Whether it be right or wrong, is it really society’s place, i.e. other human beings to tell you can and cannot do with another consenting adult?

Does the prohibition of drugs and prostitution really promote public safety and welfare? I have already spoken briefly about prostitution and I will get back to that in a moment, but let’s analyze the prohibition of drugs. If government is going to prohibit the use of drugs, why not prohibit the use of alcohol and tobacco? Doesn’t the use of tobacco greatly reduce life expectancy and create many health related problems that increase the cost of health care overall?

With the consumption of alcohol, doesn’t that cause impairment over judgment and motor skills, leading to the deterioration of families, poor job performance, declining health and life expectancy, increased medical expenses, and alcohol related car accidents and fatalities? What is the difference between alcohol and other drugs? Yes alcohol is a drug. Anything that causes impairment of one’s thoughts and motor function is a drug?

If drugs and prostitution were legalized wouldn’t quality of life crimes go down? Public safety and welfare would be increased because prostitution could be regulated allowing the government to collect taxes on those wages. Prostitutes would be required to get regular checkups to ensure they are healthy. The spread of sexually transmitted diseases would decrease. People are going to engage in these activities anyway. Prostitution is the world’s oldest profession; should it not at least be safer for the public at large?

If drugs were legal, wouldn’t they be less expensive? With drugs more affordable wouldn’t crime be reduced? One since the use of drugs would no longer be a crime, law enforcement resources would not have to be devoted to preventing its usage, the same as prostitution. Streets would be safer because pimps and drug dealers would have to find another line of work. The billions of dollars a year that are wasted trying to prevent the use of drugs and prostitution could be redirected to more worthwhile issues.

The spread of diseases that result from the use of iv drug usage would be decreased because people would be able to buy needles at their local stores, instead of getting dirty needles off the streets. In reality, with drugs being legalized, for many, than would lose their novelty. Many people use drugs as a way to thumb their nose at the system. While many will still use drugs, it would at least be safer, and most people would probably not look to progress any further than marijuana as a recreational activity, similarly to going out for drinks after work with colleagues.

One Needs to be able to Connect to the Internet Anywhere Without Cost

by Setting Up Wireless Internet Connections via Satellite Towers

Even though the internet has been around for 20 years, the cost to use remains expensive, and the availability of it continues to vary based on location. The days of the internet being a luxury are over. The internet needs to be universally available to allow people to connect to each other at the click of the mouse. It’s a lot easier and more accessible to get information from the internet than it is to get in a car and/or travel via some other means to a brick and mortar location such as a library for that same information.

The reason why the internet is not readily available at no cost is not because the technology doesn’t exist for universal availability, but because telecommunication companies continue to lobby against such an idea. The US government would rather these multi billion dollar companies continues to make ridiculous sums of money off the backs of US tax payers than to provide a service that is of paramount necessity in today’s society.

Many elderly people live in the United States unable to communicate with family members or have no family members to communicate. They are on fix incomes, many of whom could benefit from having access to the internet to provide them with information they would otherwise not have access to. Many of them no longer have the ability to drive and cannot easily travel outside their homes for information. Because of this, many elderly and the disabled find themselves left in intellectual darkness. Having access to the internet would turn the light on that ignorant abyss.

Illegal Immigration Needs to be Eliminated Illegal immigration is not a small problem. Illegal immigrants are doing more than just taking away low income jobs that supposedly Americans don’t want to work at anyway. In today’s economy many people will take any job they can get. Illegal immigrants are sucking up American resources. Like anyone else they get sick and require medical attention. Since they are illegal, they do not have any health care coverage, therefore those cost are absorbed by US taxpayers. They also have children, who under the laws of the United States are US citizens, even though their parent or parents are illegal. Those children will eventually, we they reach maturity be able to sponsor their parents for citizenship. If all of that is not enough, illegal immigration is a threat to national security.

The fact that illegal immigration exist means that individuals throughout the world have unauthorized access to the United States. The individuals who illegally access the US’s borders, do not just have to be illegals, they can be terrorists too. By having the nation’s borders unprotected, terrorists can infiltrate the country whenever they want and bring in whatever they want without the US ever knowing they arrived and what they have brought in.

The United States is so concerned with making sure the airlines are safe to travel on and that people coming into the country via customs have a legitimate reason to enter the country. However, if the goal is to come in completely undetected, there are many vulnerable places where a terrorist or a group of terrorists can enter the country and then travel anywhere they want throughout the United States.

As we speak, terrorist cells can be planted throughout the United States waiting for their next attack. Just because Osama Bin Laden is dead, doesn’t mean that terrorism died with him. It took the US 10 years to find him after 9/11. That was more than enough time with the resources he had to plant numerous terrorist cells throughout the United States. Whether they attack on the ten year anniversary on the United States or sometime in the future, another attack on the United States is inevitable.

As long as the United States continues to leave its borders unprotected and continues to go around the world sticking its nose in other countries’s business, it will always be vulnerable to another terrorist attack. With all the taxpayer money the United States spends on the military, including weapon development, overseas deployment, and various covert operations; couldn’t the US big wigs spend just a little of that money solidifying the US borders from an almost certain terrorist infiltration. Do they really think a terrorists have not researched, mapped, and strategized every inch of the US borders and know exactly how to gain entry to the country anywhere and anytime they want? If they haven’t then the real drug problem in this country must center around Washington D.C.

Homelessness Needs to be Eliminated by Forcing the

Homeless to Get a Job and Providing Low Cost Housing

(By Renovating Old Cheap Houses)

Housing Projects Need to be Torn Down Even in today’s dismal economy, the United States is still a land of great opportunity. There is no reason why there should be a single person homeless in the United States. There are millions of unoccupied in and around the United States. Many of these homes are in low income areas that could benefit from a revitalization effort. Having the homeless occupy those homes, is better than no one living in those homes at all.

Even if the only employment the homeless are able to obtain are renovating the homes they are moving into, the benefit to the economy would be significant. By having dilapidated homes renovated home values in those areas would go up. Crime in those areas as the result of break in and vandalism would decrease. People may begin moving back into those areas which would increase revenue for local businesses, which increases the tax pool as well.

The housing projects where many of the homeless and poor live and vagrant need to be torn down because they are a cesspool for breeding poverty, crime, and violence. The reason being, in places like housing projects, a sense of normalcy is created in the non normal. Being unemployed, committing crimes, and engaging in drug and violence, seem like normal activities. Therefore, things that seem normal become the abnormal there such as: going to school, getting a job, and keeping oneself out of trouble.

In essence a bizzaro world is created in which wrong is right and right is wrong. In order to end the cycle of poverty, crime, and violent, the environment that spawns its development must be eliminated. Only by eliminating poverty crime safe havens such as housing projects, will the cycle ever be broken.

Prisoners Need to be Educated While in Prison, Guaranteed Jobs Upon Release,

and Sexual Abuse in Prisons Needs to be Eliminated. Life Sentences Need to

be Changed to the Death Penalty

Tossing somebody in prison and supposedly throwing away the key might feel good, but that only works in the movies. The reality is the vast majority of prisoners are eventually released from prison. Do you ever wonder why when prisoners get out of prison they are worst than when they went in? That’s because when they are put into prisons they are treated like things, they are treated like animals. They are no longer even called by their name, they are called by their number.

They are basically just thrown into a cell and left to rot there. There are forced to work manual labor jobs for less than $1 an hour. They receive no education, and when released there is no job for them. But for some reason the courts, expect them to magically turn their lives around....how? When they are released from prison they are usually on parole or probation, not really free to do anything. Any prospective employer has to be informed about their criminal history. If they were employed in a previous field prior to prison, most likely that line of work is no longer available to them. Since they were not trained for a new position while in prison, they are basically unemployable.

This is not a temporary condition. Those with prison records are labeled “ex-cons” for life. While I am not telling you to be sympathetic for someone who went to prison, I am telling you to think about your own safety and welfare. When a ex-con is released from prison with no job skills, and no means of support, what do you think they are going to do? They are going to reoffend, they are going to commit more crimes.

The reason why the recidivism rate is so high is because ex-cons do not necessarily reoffend because they want to, they reoffend because they feel they have to. The same reasons why they offended to begin with, or even more paramount when they are released from prison. Again, I am not asking you to feel sorry or be sympathetic toward ex-cons, but in order to protect yourself and society from them, you need to understand why they offend.

Many criminals come from poor, disenfranchised families. They had to grow up, fighting, just to survive, fighting just for food on their plate. Most of them come from poor, uneducated parents and families, and are poor and uneducated themselves. They come from a cycle of poverty and criminality. While this is not an excuse to offend, it is in fact the reason why they offend.

Most people are followers, not leaders. Right or wrong, most people mimic the actions and behaviors they see around them. While for some growing up in more affluent families it might be normal to become highly educated and become successful business people. For those who come from uneducated poverty stricken families, doing whatever it takes to survive seems just as normal to them.

Unfortunately, the Criminal Justice System operates like the Criminal Injustice System, because there no justice for all, in fact there is not justice for anyone, criminal or victim. Instead of focusing or rehabilitation, the laws in place or designed to focus on retribution. The concept of paying for one’s crimes is important. There must be consequences for one’s actions, but at what point does it go too far?

If the goal is to eventually release offenders back into society, does society not have an obligation to make sure they are prepared for reintegration? If the only things these individuals ever experienced while in prison was cruelty, humiliation, left to rot in a prison cell, not learning any new skills, no counseling, and no family support, is it any wonder when released they respond and act like untamed animals? The problems lies with who is responsible for making these laws.

Like the founding on this country, laws were made by that same cold blooded segment of the population...White European Males. Although they make up only 35% of the US population, they control ever segment of the population. Their goal when dealing with non conformists, a.k.a. criminal offenders, is not to rehabilitate them, but rather to control them and punish them for their crimes. Punishment does have its place in society, but if left without any govern or control, it spirals out of control and that is what has happened in the United States. The United States has the highest incarceration rate per capita in the world. Not the highest incarceration rate for any industrialized country, but any country, no matter what it’s political ideology. That means whatever policies the United States has in place with respect to crime are a complete and utter failure. If none of this matters to you, think of this. The criminal population is one of the fastest growing populations in the United States.

Whether it be a felony or misdemeanor, once in the system, your life can become very difficult, from being able to get a job, to finding a place to live, to even traveling outside the country for vacation or otherwise. In places like England, offenders automatically have their records clear if they do not reoffend for a certain statutory period of time, like a bankruptcy falling off of one’s record. However, in the United States, once labeled an offender, one carries that stigma, like a scarlet letter for life. Who does that benefit in the long run?

Are offenders not human beings? Are their families? Are you? If these questions seem strange to you, remember, for every action this an opposite and equal reaction. Everything that happens to one person impacts someone else. Offenders have friends, family members, and children that may depend on them. Once involved in the criminal justice system, the offender, who once may have been a provider on their family, no becomes a burden on their family.

Not only are they no longer taking care of their family, but many times, particularly upon release, their friends and families must take care of them. In the likely event that many of their friends and families have turned their back on them, just like while in prison, these ex-offenders become a financial burden on society. Thus, once able bodied individuals who had an opportunity to make a positive impact on society are now just a burden on society...all in the name of...justice (a.k.a retribution).

Unfortunately, that seems to be how the US European male mind functions. They seem to engage in actions, without thinking about the long term consequences of those actions. They rather see a person continue to suffer and experience misery all the days of their lives, rather than being given an opportunity to learn from their mistakes, put the past behind them, and start over. If they want to have those type of policies in place, shouldn’t they put the offender out of their misery? For example, does it really make sense for a person convicted of murder and/or some other violent crime, to be sentenced to life in prison, with no chance of parole, instead of just death.

In essence, when a convicted murderer, serial rapists, or similar type criminal is convicted for their crimes and sentenced to life in prison, are they not being rewarded for their crimes? They have committed all of these horrible acts, and now their “punishment” is to be the burden of society for the rest of their lives. They get to live out their lives, making no financial contribution toward their own sustainability, and no contribution to society, while their victims are dead, and/or living a life imprisoned by their own memories. Would not executing these type of offenders, be a better form of justice and less financially burdensome on society? For some reason society (a.k.a. The US European Male) does not think so.

Another problem with the criminal justice system is turning a blind eye to rape in prison. Is part of the “Right of Passage” of becoming a US offender is to eventually be raped in prison? Should a person who has engaged in a nonviolent offense really be exposed to the potential and possibility of being raped in prison? Unless that nonviolent offender dies in prison, they are almost certain to one day being eventually released. If a nonviolent offender goes to prison and becomes a victim of rape while in prison, are they really going to be a better person once released?

Nonviolent and violent offenders should not share the same common space in prison. Prisons should not be a haven for new crimes. If the those in control of United States policies are unable to provide prisoners with the rehabilitation resources they need to make a successful transition back into society, perhaps offenders need to be removed from society altogether never to return. Meaning, there are many remote unoccupied places around the world that would be ideal for violent offenders.

Violent offenders should never be reintroduced back into society. If one commits crimes such as: rape, arson, murder, kidnapping, or any similar crime, they should effectively forfeit their right to remain part of society, stripped of their citizenship, and be sent off to live out their lives in some remote location, never to be seen or heard from again. Having to instead have sex offenders on national registries for the rest of their lives and on permanent probation is a waste of money and does not solve the problem. If these individuals are so dangerous that they need to be kept under permanent supervision, then they need to be permanently removed from society.

If society wants to deter criminal behavior, the penalties must be more severe. Violent offenders must be permanently removed from society, whether in the form of execution and/or permanent exile. Offenders must be given the skills they need to succeed in society upon release. Those skills should be primarily vocational in nature and place an emphasis on being self employed. If they reoffend again, they must be permanently exiled and removed from society. The schizophrenic criminal laws in place, have led to the similar results, like the disastrous tax policies and social programs that have led to a national debt in excess of $15 trillion. Wishy washy policies lead to disastrous results.

Families Need to Pay Increased Taxes if They Have More than 2

The paternalistic society created by the US European male must be reversed in the United States if this nation is to ever recover from severe economic downturn. It is not the responsibility of society to take care of every child that a woman decides to propel from her uterus. If poor women are hell bent on producing more mouths to feed with no way to support them, society should not step in to be their financial saviors.

Rather than families receiving tax breaks because they have more children, they should receive tax penalties. These children start off as children, but eventually they will be adults. Most likely they will either be adults competing with you for jobs, or adults trying to separate you from your money and possessions by force because they can from a family of have nots.

It makes a person feel good to say, “Yes I will take care of you.” until it is time for somebody to pay the bill and then everyone is looking around to see who to pass the check to. This nation is hemorrhaging money due to its paternalistic social programs. This society cannot continue to step in for every poor person and act as that parental savior simply because their families continue to make poor decisions generation after generation. These type policies are the form of Financial Schizophrenia in which on the one hand there are some policies in place that are survival of the fittest in nature, such as tax breaks and loopholes for those skilled enough to maneuver around them. Then, with no feasible way of paying for them, ill conceived social policies and programs designed to take care of those who supposedly can’t take care of themselves. How many drug addicts have you known to clean up their acts with someone always there to cleanup after them. Tough love is the only remedy for the Poor Baby Factories around the nation, a.k.a. poor women who believe it is their God given right to produce as many children as nature will allow.

Newsflash folks, nature does not equal nurture. You can go to a restaurant and order as many entries as you like, but make sure you have a means to pay for it. Freewill and freedom of choice does not necessarily mean you can do whatever you want. There are consequences, both positive and negative for one’s actions. Unfortunately, in today’s society, many of the social programs in place do not allow the poor to take responsibility for their poor decision in past, future, and present generations. Society does not have a responsibility to act as a life jacket for every poor person that decides to pass on their family seed. Some trees just shouldn’t be planted.

Every Child Needs to Learn and be Fluent in Spanish, and Other

Languages Need to be Encouraged to be Learned as Well

The United States is a nation of immigrants. The fastest growing segment of the population are those in the Latino community. Those individuals primarily speak Spanish. The world is no longer dominated by a few elite European nations. With the United States primarily being a service industry, those requiring services in the world are primarily not English speaking.

Today, there are nearly 7 billion people in the world. The United States comparably only has a small segment of that population with just over 300 million people. China and India account for nearly 2.5 billion of the world’s population. More than 4 billion people live on the continent of Asia. The fact is, by not speaking other languages, one is limiting one’s chances for future opportunities.

The United States is a country in decline. The schizophrenic fiscal policies and social programs implemented by US European males have stymied future growth in the US to the point of near implosion. There is no difference between the US continuing to print money backed by no gold or other standard and you getting a photo copying machine and printing US currency yourself. The money being printed is not worth the paper it was printed on. The paper is more valuable (it can at least be used for toilet or scrap paper).

Today’s youth and even those who have reached mid life will never be able to retire under the current system that exists in the United States. With social programs in place such as Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and other government supported retirement accounts having no renewable source of income to support them, events these programs will obsolete sooner rather than later. Even with the best predictions of yesteryear, these programs were set to be completely out of money by 2025. That is now less than 15 years away. Even amongst the oldest members of the population, the vast majority of us expect to live longer than 15 years.

Meaning, instead of there being a light at the end of the tunnel, there will just be an abyss. In order to make it through that abyss, one will have to either keep working until they drop dead, or find some other source of renewable income. That’s where foreign countries come in. Many of us will eventually be forced to move to other countries in order to live out and lives and eventually retire. The trend has already begun.

Thousands of US retirees have already begun relocating to other countries in order to afford to be able to retire. The vast majority of these settlement locations are non speaking countries. Therefore, in order for one to be able to retire in these places and have any idea what the hell is going on, they will need to speak the local language whether that be: Spanish, Portuguese, French, or other.

Unfortunately, relocating to another area just for the purposes of retirement will not be enough. Americans will begin to have to move to these locations in order to sustain themselves and their families. For instance, Canada is roughly the same size (land mass) as the United States, but has only 10% of the population. Is not a stretch to think that eventually, some smart US citizens will begin migrating to Canada for a better life including: national healthcare, an incarceration rate that is 7 times less than the US, lower national debt, and less foreign enemies. If one decides to move to Quebec, where French is the local language, one would have to pick up the language in order to survive.

Other potential relocation destinations could include China. While in the past, China was not an ideal place to relocate to, and maybe still isn’t, it does have one of the fastest growing economies in the world. Also, as one of the world’s leading producers of clothes, electronic devices, and item consumer related manufacturing items, it may be a location worth considering. If one does decide to relocate there, they better begin brushing up on Mandarin now. It’s a beast of a language to try to learn while flying there. It’s a long flight from here to China, but not that long.

Eventually, Americans will learn that you get what you pay for. If you don’t pay for things like social services, then eventually your country will run out of money and will be effectively bankrupt. Also, when you make enemies all around the world by continuing to stick your nose in other people’s business where it doesn’t belong, eventually your country becomes a target and other nations have a strong interest in seeing your country’s demise. With the inability to change the wayward an ill conceived policies of the US European male, many Americans may decide to pack their bags, and start their lives anew elsewhere (Cuba may become an interesting choice in a few years, particularly with Castro being in his 80s [no one has beaten death yet!])

Credit Cards Need to be Eliminated Credit cards are the absolute tools of the devil. Whoever invented credit cards needs to be shot. If they are already dead, they need to be dug up from the grave and shot again and then have their ashes burned, urinated, and defecated on. Few things destroy one’s family and increases one’s overhead cost with nothing in return than a credit card.

We do all understand that credit cards are not free money...right? Apparently not, because it seems just about everyone has one. Credit cards are a form of Financial Slavery. Once you become in debt to a credit card company, it is almost impossible to get free of it. Credit cards are unsecured credit, meaning there is no intrinsic value in it. It is kind of similar to the today’s US dollar.

Credit cards have no value in and of themselves, other than the credit issuer placing a limit on how much debt one, can have on it and how far an idiot, excuse me, a credit card holder will run up the card. Let me ask you something. If you didn’t have the money to pay for something today, what makes you think you are going to have the money tomorrow (like the national debt)? Seemingly come tomorrow, you will have even less than you had today, because you borrowed from what you didn’t have yesterday to pay for something supposedly tomorrow? Makes sense...I didn’t think so.

Unfortunately the average person (and the United States government) doesn’t seem to grasp this concept. When you borrow money, it is not because you are in good financial shape. No one would afford to borrow money if they could pay for what they or (in most cases) wanted, without borrowing. Why put off tomorrow what you can have today, right...wrong? Tomorrow is not guaranteed, one doesn’t know what obstacles tomorrow will bring.

Once one begins borrowing it is a cycle that will never end. I’ll tell you a little story. In 1982, my family “bought” a house for $62,000. I say bought in quotation marks because I do not believe anything is yours unless you own it free and clear. They put $50,000 down and the payments were $179 per month. Instead of paying off the property and owning it free and clear, they took only numerous mortgages on the property until the point in which they owed nearly $500k. Now they are barely holding on to the property by the skin of their teeth. What happened to the money they borrowed, it essentially got flushed down the toilet with one hair brain scheme after another.

The point is when you borrow money, you open yourself up to financial ruin. Think there is nothing worse than not having something when you really need it. Try having something you supposedly needed having no way to pay the money you borrowed to get it and now losing everything you on because of. Whether you lose everything because of bankruptcy, a fire, or a bookey or having your wages garnished into perpetuity; borrowing money takes financial control out of your hands and places it into another.

For those of you who might say, what if I get sick or someone I love gets sick. Here’s a word of advise. If you are married to the person, divorce them. If it is a friend or family member, have them transfer everything they own to a trust or someone else. Healthcare is too expensive, and in the event of illness you better find some way not to pay for it yourself because if and when you get better, you’ll wish you were dead because of the mind boggling medical expenses you owe. Home Prices Should Only Increase Due to Inflation, and

Should Not Outpace Increases in Salaries

The housing crisis happened because people decided to use their homes as piggy banks, rather than as the place that serves as a roof over their head; keeping themselves and family protected from being homeless. The reality is, the housing crisis would have never happened if people actually had to pay for their homes.

The cost of homes would never have gotten as high as it did (like health care and the national debt) if people had to pay for the home they were living in rather than making monthly payments. Stretching payments out over the course of 20, 30, or even 40 years is crazy. It has people living in a false sense of reality.

People walk around calling themselves homeowners when they don’t “own” anything. How can you call yourself a homeowner when you put 3% down on a home value at $500k with $2k a month mortgage payments? As anyone can clearly see, all it took was homes no longer going up in value because people began losing their jobs and could no longer maintain those indentured servitude level overhead costs, and people quickly came to realize they were not “homeowners” at all.

The true definition of a home owner is someone who owns that home free and clear with a fee simple absolute with no encumbrances, liens, or debt on a property of any sort. Meaning, if one suddenly lost one’s job the only thing one would be concerned with is their basic living expenses, and property taxes (Property taxes should be eliminated in favor of consumption taxes. Whether it be a person, their earnings, or something they own, nothing should every be directly tax. Either you own it or you don’t).

Today the average home price in the United States is over $200k, which is staggering considering that the average salary is 6 or 7 times less than that. What’s the difference between a renter and the average “home owner?” Answer, nothing, everything. In reality, there is no difference between the a renter and the average “home owner” except...liability.

Both the renter and home owner make monthly payments to someone who has the ability to have them removed from the dwelling they occupy should they fail to pay. However, the most the renter has to pay is the remainder of their lease, usually no more than a year. Whereas a “home owner” owes the entire mortgage they have taken on in their name. The average rent payment is less than $1,000 per month or less than $12,000 per year. A home on the other hand might have a mortgage of more than $1 million attached to it, which could be more than one make in their lifetime. Therefore, while the renter and “home owner” are both in a precarious living situation, subject to change at someone’s notice, the “home owner” stands to lose everything they own in the event of default, whereas the renter may just have to pay a higher deposit the next place they move to.

What is fascinating is that there are thousands and thousands of home throughout the United States that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars less in the same areas where idiots, I mean “home owners” are paying 10, 20, or 30 times, or more than that amount to live in the same areas. It seems Americans place a lot of value (worthless value) on location, location, location. Americans also seem to like new things. New cars, new clothes, new houses, etc.

Americans don’t seem to realize that they second they own something it is no longer “new” to anyone else. That means it is immediately devalued. That used to only apply to cars, clothes, and other consumer products. Now that same concept applies to homes. Today, homes less than 5 years home are being sold for less than half of what they originally sold for. Unfortunately people seem to have a hard time grasping this concept and don’t know how to cut their loses and start over.

Sadly, people continue to cling to their pasts like they are on life support, and fail to accept their current set of circumstances; kind of like an amputee who fails to accept that they have lost their limb. People keep clinging onto their lifestyles, with their impossible to maintain overhead costs, rather than cutting their loses and starting over.

While people are not to blame for the world that they inherited, they are to blame for how they exist and interact in that world. People must accept responsibility for their life they are living. No one can undue the past, but everyone can change their futures. It’s not a cliche. Clearly the most difficult thing one can do is to give up and start over. Not in the physical or actual sense, but in the mental sense.

The biggest obstacle that most of face, is between our ears. Our biggest problems are not what we are facing or dealing with, but rather how we face and deal with those problems. It is those decisions and series of decisions we make about our lives that impact how our lives will play out. We all have different problems and issues in our lives, but it is how we deal with those problems that will decide how bad or how stressful they will be.

Who cares what your friends, families, or neighbors will think if you file for bankruptcy, or sell your home or your car and move to a different neighborhood. Many times it seems that people are trapped in a prison that they self create. We create barriers to our growth that prevent us from moving forward. Rather than learning from our mistakes, most of us tend to dwell in those mistakes, living as a mental hostage and prisoner to them, and unable to move forward.

It takes a strong person to make the decision to cut ties with their past and start over. It is not an easy decision to make, but once made one’s life will immediately become easier. Those decisions and issues that have bogged one down for months and/or even years will suddenly be gone because they have been met with a resolution. Perhaps no the most ideal resolution, but most decisions in life have their ups and downs. The problem for most, is they become trapped in the moment, unable to make a decision. The problem continues to become worse, and eventually the decision is made for them. Usually a lot worse, than if they had made the decision themselves.

Mortgages should be eliminated. Properties should only be able to be transferred or sold, in private transactions without the use of banks or other institutions that would place the true ownership of a home in doubt due to numerous different people and entities having a stack in a particular property. Until one is in complete control of one’s finances, one will always be living in Financial Slavery. All Prisoners Need to Become Active Members of the Military All prisons should be eliminated. One of the biggest deterrents there could ever be for crime is if those convicted of crimes were required to join the military. Crime would be reduced because most people do not want to join the military. Arguably, many would prefer to go to prison, rather than deal with the structure and discipline required to be a member of the military. The US struggles to keep its military personnel at sustainable numbers. By utilizing the more than available military population, they have “willing volunteers” ready to serve.

Based on the current structure of the legal system in the United States, those convicted of crimes will have a permanent second class citizen status in the United States. Unless they relocate to another country, or die, they will basically be in a position to either reoffend, and/or be a burden on society. The only way to protect society from these very foreseeable consequences is to find and alternative resolution for them other than sticking them in a prison cell.

By them serving in the military, their criminal status can be offset. Even if the stigma of being an ex-con is attached to them, they wouldn’t also have the status of being ex military which could only help the prospects of becoming or remaining gainfully employed. Not only would they have the opportunity to stay on with the military, once their mandatory time of service is up, but they will also take with them many valuable skills upon departure. They will learn a trade, discipline, and commitment. These are not skills they would have learned had they been thrown into a prison cell.

Serving in the military is not the Club Med alternative to going to prison. It is a way for offenders to make a contribution to society rather than being a burden to society. It’s a way for them to gain valuable real life experiences, rather than new ways to offend. The new “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy should be applied toward whether one has been convicted of a crime or not. Beggars can’t be choosers, and the military can use all the additional manpower it could get.

Tax Incentives Need to be Implemented for Those Who Pass Physical Fitness Exams Promoting being physically active should not just begin and end when one is of school age. As adults, one should be given incentives to being physically fit. Not only is being physically fit beneficial to the individual, but it is also beneficial to society as a whole. Society will benefit from being more physically fit overall by being able to reduce medical costs, in the form of less money being allocated to medicines to treat “illnesses” that could have been avoided such as obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, and emphysema.

With less trips to the doctor and people living longer, healthier lives, the reliance on health insurance coverage as a “remedy” for diseases would be eliminated. Instead the remedy for illnesses would be in the form of living fitter and healthier lives. Tax incentives for passing physical exams would be offset by the drastic reduction in health care costs. This would cause health insurance providers to have to go find another line of work.

Abortions Need to be Encouraged

According to the First Amendment, in the United States, there is separation of church and state. However, seemingly that line is blurred when politicians think they have the right to decide what a woman should or shouldn’t do with her body. Abortion is a controversial issue, because it deals with the issue of the right to life, and life and death. However, abortion is an issue of morality and not legality.

Whether a woman chooses to have an abortion should be her decision and her decision alone. However, I would like to state that should a woman choose to have a child without the consent of the father, then she should not expect to be able to impose parental responsibility upon him because she decided to make a unilateral decision that affects both of them, as well as the unborn child.

The reason why abortions need to be encouraged is because it promotes the public health and safety of the nation. The typically female that would be seeking an abortion is young, unmarried, and has limited financial means. Does it really make sense to impose parental responsibility on her simply because she engaged in unprotected sense? Should she be stuck with the responsibility of raising a child for next 18 to 21 years (or longer if the child has any health issues) simply because of an unprotected sexual encounter? Does a child deserve to born to a mother that has no ability to care for it? If she does has the child, who is supposed to take care of it since she has no means of support? Her family? Society?

When people decide to impose their moral beliefs on others they must realize when they do so it comes at a price. No child she be born to a family that does not have means. Simply because one has the physiological and biological capacity to have a child, does not mean one should have a child. Engaging in unprotected sex is bad judgment, and completely misguided in and of itself. However, to compound the situation by sentencing a woman to 18-21 years to care for a child she never wanted in the first place is a sickeningly poor choice.

Unwanted children is the epicenter of crime and poverty. This is where the entire cycle begins. All across the United States, every year, thousands upon thousands of young teen, early 20s female are having children they are unable to take care of. Eventually these children grow up and repeat the same process. The females continue to have the unwanted children, and the males continue to impregnate them as well as commit crimes. Who left to clean up the mess??? Society.

Each one of you who stand up and look down your nose at someone who has an abortion and goes parading around in a picket line should be responsible for each one of those unwanted children. Because if you are not prepared to take care of these unwanted brats, then you need to shut your mouth, and an even better choice, make sure they have that abortion to you don’t have to take care of their problem over the next 30-50 years while they’re out and about making those typical low income mistakes.

Once a female finds herself pregnant, an abortion is the most responsible and cost effective thing she can do. Not only is she saving herself a lifetime of expensive bills and responsibilities, she is saving society from those same expenses and responsibilities. Rather than discouraging abortions, they should be encouraged and free to whoever needs the service. Regardless of one’s moral position on the subject, it is about survival.

The reason why such services are in place such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare, Head Start Program, Student Loans, etc. are available is to take care of the poor. While some of you might say all those programs are not the same, in reality they are. Any program in which someone receives something for nothing is one in which one was too poor to be able to do it for themselves without help.

Some might say, “Hey I worked, for social security, and I deserve medicare.” If that’s the case, then why don’t you ask for a check, for what you are really owed? Or better yet, why didn’t you save and invest your earnings when you were working all those years? The fact is the reason why anyone has to really on any of those services is because they came from a poor family. Rich people do not use those services...only the poor.

By encouraging abortions, one is curtailing the spread of poverty in the United States. Entitlement Spending has a strangle hold on United States government expenditures, and no one wants to pay the check. The US population in 1900 was only 76 million (http://www.demographia.com/db-uspop1900.htm). Today the US population is over 300 million. That is an increase in the population of over 300% in just 100 years. With the United States already struggling to stay afloat today, can you imagine if the population goes up another 300% over the next 100 years?

Many of you might be thinking, well I’ll be dead by then. You won’t be dead tomorrow, and neither will your children or grandchildren. Poverty is an epidemic that has real solutions to it. Stop feeding the problem. Let the poor fend for themselves. If you stop feeding a problem or feeding anything, eventually it will die. We can no afford to be the parents and guardians for every person that makes a bad decision, or for every person that didn’t accomplish all they wanted to in life. America is supposedly the land of the free, but not if taxpayers are imprisoned by the mistakes of the poor.

Adoptions Need to be Encouraged and Sperm Banks Need to be Eliminated We are now approaching 7 billion people on this planet. The world population was “only” 1.65 billion in 1900 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population). With a world population set to reach more than 10.5 billion by the year 2050, we are head toward population implosion...a population apocalypse.

The desire to have one’s own child is programmed into our DNA, but that doesn’t mean everyone should have one. If one is unable to have a child for whatever reason, they should not look to procure it via some artificial means. Single women should definitely not go to sperm bank to have a child and neither should a married woman. There are millions of unwanted children in the world who need homes right now. Why bring more children into the world, when the one’s already here are not being taken care of??? The answer is selfishness.

Many of is seem to caught up on enforcing our “rights” that we do not stop and think about the consequences for our actions. Have any of you ever stopped to think why you want to have a child in the first place? Do you want to have a child to experience the “joy” of raising a child, or because you want to pass on your genes to the “next generation.” If the goal is to pass on your genes to the next generation, then I have some information for you...we are all related.

Whether you are short or tall, light or dark, curly hair or straight, blue eyes, green eyes, or brown, or maybe just somewhere in between, we all come from mother earth. We are all human. We as humans have a responsibility to take care of each other and this planet during the time that we are here. Now this might seem like a contradiction to my position of survival of the fittest, but it is not.

If one has the desire to have a child, and one is going to have one anyway, it makes more sense to adopt one that is already here, rather than in essence abandoning already existing obligations just to create another one. It’s not like those pre existing obligations are going to go away. They will become an issue sooner rather than later. I am not telling you it is your obligation to take care of someone else child, far from it. What I am saying, is if you are going to have a child anyway, why not first consider one that is already here rather than selfishly choose to produce one of your own?

Subsides to Farmers Need to be Eliminated

Currently US farmers receive over $20 billion annually in subsidies which accounts for approximately 62% of their annual income (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_subsidy). Like any other business, the US farmer should be responsible for its own viability. They need to either grow crops that are profitable overseas, and/or the farming industry should become nationalized in order to reduce cost. If the farming industry seeming is not profitable on its own, then private businesses need to be removed from the equation altogether in order for it to be as cost efficient as possible. Violence Needs to be Eliminated From Television

Children learn from watching others. Children learn from what they hear and from what they see. What is being told to children in the United States is they should be ashamed of their bodies but they should embrace violence. Every day there are thousands of show filling the airways with violence. Although the images of people’s private parts are blurred out, one can readily see a decapitated head, a slashed throat, brains pouring out of a head from a bullet wound, or guts oozing from a body as a result of a stab wound. Children are taught conflict should be resolved in fisticuffs.

Many of the top rated shows on television today are crime drama shows and they depict acts of violence with frequent regularity. The excessive exposure to crime that Americans witness everyday on television desensitizes them to those acts. From their depiction on television shows, to be sensationalized in court cases and news casts, Americans are exposed to violence with frequent regularity.

Many of the adults who engage in violence, whether it be domestic violence, or otherwise, grew up as children in households in which their parents were involved in violent altercations, and/or engaged in acts of violence. By allowing children to view such an endless stream of violence on television, they become preconditioned to be violent later on in life. That makes the world we live in a very dangerous place to be.

Illegal Immigrants Need to be Deported, Not Educated, Not Given

Medical Care, Not Employed, and Not Put in Jail

One of the reasons why illegal immigration is such a large problem in the United States is there is Schizophrenia in the Law. For example, if a pregnant woman who enters into the country illegally delivers her baby on United States soil, then the baby is automatically a citizen. That is a completely irrational policy to have. Such an act should fall under the “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine.”

If a woman is in the United States illegally and gives birth to the child, the child should not automatically be granted citizenship. Since the woman was here illegally, any child she has should be a citizen from her original country of origin and not a citizen of the United States. Many illegal immigrants travel to the United States every year for the purpose of giving birth to their child in the United States. With such a schizophrenic policy, many dangerous implications can occur.

For example, what if Osama Bin Laden had impregnated a woman before he died. The woman successfully makes it into the United States and delivers his child. Under the current laws in the United States his child would be a citizen of the United States. This scenario could be applied to any of the US’s enemies, for example, Fidel Castro and Saddam Hussein. These “citizens” of the United States would have the right to travel back and forth from the US to the parents’s country, which could potentially be a significant threat to national security. However, even seemingly less ominous scenarios can have significant negative impact as well.

Whether it still holds true or not, the United States is perceived as the ‘Great Nation of Opportunity” throughout the world. Even though the Statute of Liberty is no longer accepting new immigrants, they are still making it into the country. Many nations throughout the world are desperately poor. While most citizens of other nations cannot afford to make all the way to the United States, there are still other ways for them to make it to the US, or at least a part of them.

While it might be difficult to get thousands or even hundreds of people out of a country undetected, it is very plausible to be able to procure the passage of babies from one country to another. Take for instance South and Central America. Many of the citizens in these countries are very poor. Although they do not have the financial means to make it to the United States, that doesn’t mean their children can’t.

With natural and financial resources being in short supply in many Latin America countries, citizens there may find themselves in a state of desperation. Unable to support their entire family, they may have to make a tough choice. With the promise of their child having a better life, they may allow their child to be taken from them, in hopes of reaching the United States. A scenario can play out in which migrant infant children are rounded up and taken from border to border until they eventually reach the United States.

Upon reaching the United States, the US would be unable to determine when these children arrived in the country. Therefore, with no parents or anyone else to speak to the contrary, these children would be declared US citizens. World of this short of event could potentially be heard, not only in Latin America, but throughout the world. Instead of the slave trade, a baby trafficking trade could develop in which young infant children throughout Asia, Africa, and Latin America are rounded up and illegally brought to the United States. Such a scenario could quickly increase the population by millions in a short period of time. All of these children would be wards of the state, driving the United States into further financial peril.

Illegal immigration is a serious problem, and if left unresolved, foreigners may take advantage of the US’s schizophrenic policies. Illegal immigrants need to be rounded up and immediately deported. Places like Guantanamo Bay need to be closed, and those individuals need to be immediately sent back to their countries of origins. In order to qualify for US citizenship, both parents should be at a minimum legal residents in the United States at the time the child is conceived. Based on the birth date of the child, the child had to have been conceived by two legal residents in the United States for it to be considered a citizen.

Instead of putting illegal immigrants in jail when they commit crimes, they should be immediately deported. Illegal immigrants should not receive medical attention or education. While it is inhumane to send them back to their country in physical distress, they should only be given enough medical treatment to ensure they are fit for travel and sent back to their home country. They should not be allowed and the children should not be allowed to be educated in the United States. They must be deported to their country of origin.

The United States has become the destination of choice for refugees around the country. The United States is one of the easiest countries to get into illegally. Once someone arrives illegally in this country, it is nearly impossible to get them to leave, but the US has a lax stance on the issue of illegal immigration. US politicians, i.e., US European Males, believe there are other more important issues. The fastest growing population in the United States is the Hispanic population. Do any of you know how many of them are legal and how many are not? Are they legal because they were born in this country and their parents or grandparents are illegals? Without a strict policy against illegal immigration, these individuals will just be added to the pool of “citizens” who make up “The Entitlement Spending Brigade.”

English Needs to be Declared as the National Language and Required for Everyone to Speak

Not having English declared as the national language means that the United States is a nation without a national identity. The United States was founded by immigrants, because of this, the US is apprehensive about identifying itself as one particular group. Australia was founded by criminals, does that mean the country should have no laws?

By the United States not having a national language, it makes it appear weak to the rest of the world. Most nations are steeped in a tradition of national pride and unity from the outside world. However, the United States, is the exact opposite. The US defines itself on being a melting pot; however, none of the parts mix, like oil and water.

Instead of the United States being a meting pot, in which all the parts mesh together, it is more like a fragmented pool of nuclear waste that is destroying the environment. US politicians, i.e., US European Males, are so concerned about not stepping on any groups toes, that they essentially have policies, that dance around issues like they are on pogo sticks.

Having a national language is not a slippery slope to declaring a national religion, or infringing upon the individual rights of citizens. What it means is that if you are in the United States, there should be an expectation that you have the ability to converse with its citizens. One should not call up a customer service line and hear “For English press one, for Spanish press two,” followed by a series of undiscernible words.

The United States has bent so far over to be accommodating to other languages and cultures that we are virtually licking our own assholes. How can the US expect to solve any of its major issues, such as the economy, crime, and the environment, when it can’t even decide what language to speak in. Failure to communicate is the reason for much of the world’s problem. If one doesn’t have the ability to communicate with another because they are not speaking the same language, in the same country, how do they ever expect to “get along.” Can’t we all just get along and speak one language. What you speak at home, indoors, is your own business. But outside, please for God’s sake, speak in English. None of us should have to walk around with a language translator because they left their neighborhood and everybody down the street says, “No hablo ingles, tu hablas espanol?”

Condoms and Birth Control Pills Need to be Free and Widely

Available at Places Like Libraries, Schools., and Grocery Stores

As much as we might try, young people are aware of their bodies and they are going to have sex. The concept of just say no and go with abstinence is simply not going to work. Did it work for you? By denying that young people are going to have sex is to deny the issue altogether. Whether we agree with young people having sex or not is not to issue. The issue is how to best mitigate the consequences of young people having sex.

Just because one might disagree with young people having sex does that mean they should end with an STD...or a child? Passing moral judgment on them is not going to stop them from having sex. We cannot monitor them 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. They spend more time around each other than they do with their families; at school, after school, on the weekends, school breaks, etc. Parents have jobs; those jobs do not allow them to monitor their kids on a constant basis. Even if they could, who would want to.

The reason why the spread of sexual diseases and the birth of unwanted/unplanned children is such a big problem in the United States, is because children are “taught” at an early age to simply not address their behavior, a.k.a., not take responsibility for their actions. Since they cannot discuss their sexual desires, and sexual activities with their parents, they discuss it amongst each other. They are forced to make life changing and life altering decisions without any parental guidance.

As a result, children have unprotected sex, leading to STDs and pregnancies. As adults, they continue to engage in this type of behavior because it is what they have always done. This type practice is even more prevalent in poor communities, because many times their parents had them at an early age, so it is almost a “Right of Passage” for them to have children at an early age as well.

The result, is that generations of children never reach their full potential because they are burdened with the responsibilities of adulthood at an early age. They end up dropping out of school, getting a low paying job, and for many, eventually ending up on Welfare, or some other public aid. All of these catastrophic events could have been prevented if they had been able to discuss sex in an open format with their parents.

Condoms and birth control pills should be made widely available; not for the purpose of encouraging sexual behavior, but rather to curtail the consequences that result from sexual behavior. Denying that an issue exists, never makes it go away. The only result that occurs is the issue becomes a larger and larger problem, like the national debt, or one’s growing credit card debts. Problems need to be resolved before they reach their inevitable abyss. Preferential Treatment Needs to be Given to Low Income People,

Ex-Cons and the Disabled Who Apply for Jobs

Instead of stigmatizing people because of their status, we should try to help them moved past their plight in life. Unless we are prepared to deport and/or kill every person we have a problem with, we better figure out how to co-exist with them. In the world of background checks, labeling someone an ex-con for the rest of their life is completely asinine. Should a person nearly 50 years old still be discussing a petty theft that they engaged in as a teenager 30 years later? Why are those in charged, a.k.a. “US European Males” so hell bent on once somebody is down, keeping them down? How are they ever supposed to move on? Who does that benefit?

Discriminating against a person because of a physical or mental disability seems to be the last thing a potential employer should do. If a disabled person is applying for a job, and it is a job they can easily do, shouldn’t they get the job, over someone else, who will most likely be able to find another job? If that disabled person does not become employed, aren’t they likely to be unemployed and thus a burden on society, when they could of instead have been making a contribution?

When a person with limited financial means applies for the job, isn’t there a chance they might need the job more than somebody who is in a better stable financial position? Isn’t the person of limited financial means more likely to stay with the job, because they have less options should they desire to move on? What happens to them if they do not become employed? Are they not likely to become a burden on society and have to begin receiving aid from these social programs simply because they were denied employment?

Helping other people get on their feet is not just beneficial to the person one is helping, it is helpful to the benefactor as well. The less people in financial calamity, the further your money will go. We live in an interdependent society. Meaning, everything that happens to one person has an indirect impact on the rest of society. Nothing happens in a vacuum.

When a person becomes disabled and is unable to work society has to pick up the bill. If that person had dependents, society will have to take care of them too. If a person commits a crime and is sentenced to prison, society has to pay to take care of them. If they were employed, society loses the income and taxes that person was generating. If that person had dependents society has to take care of them. When a person becomes unemployed society has to pay to help them get on their feet. When financial calamity strikes, under the current system in the United States, society has to come in and act as one’s savior and/or guardian. Since we cannot seemingly eliminate these policies and programs overnight, we can at least mitigate their arduous impact by helping those who cannot help themselves get on their feet as quickly as possible. Your money will go farther the less people have their hand out for it. Certifications and Bar Exams Need to be Eliminated

If there are to be certifications and bar exams, there should not be one for every state. The United States is either one nation, or a loosely connected union of connected countries. This all goes back to the original founding of the country and the concept of “Checks and Balances” and powers not specifically enumerated to the Federal Reserve government are reserved for the states. But does anyone else see the chaos this bifurcated system has created except for me?

In the United States, each state has its own constitution, its own driver’s licenses, its own certification and bar exams. Laws throughout the country are different for the same set of circumstances. For instance, the United States does not have a universal age of consent. Driving regulations are different from state to state. A resident in one state cannot enroll into a college or university in another state without have to pay “out of state” fees. Why are we (and by we I mean the US European Males in charge) so afraid of togetherness?

What’s wrong with actually be a unified nation that has one bar exam, one driver’s license, with its citizens being able to enroll into schools of their choice (since they are paying to go there), without incurring ridiculous high “out of state” fees? Why can we not have one constitution, with one set of laws, universal for all?

This system of checks and balances, and a separate state and national government was designed to protect us from any one branch of government from becoming too powerful. But after over 200 years, and a national suffocating in its own debt, isn’t time for some modifications? Isn’t it time we start restructuring the system that is in place, and if that doesn’t work scrap it altogether? Think of a constitution as a blueprint. If one is constructing a building based upon a blueprint and discovered that there is a flaw in the design, does one keep constructing the building anyway knowing that it is going to fail? Or does one sit down with the engineers and architects and figure out how to get the design right? Then why have we not figured out that the system we are existing under is killing us? Why have we not made modifications to our system for the betterment of society as a whole?

The problem is the same system the founders fought against over 200 years ago exists in the United States today. While there is not one family that has been in charge of the US since the inception of this country, there has been one group of people...US European Males. Throughout the history of this country they have designed and constructed laws that were most favorable to them. At one point: 1)only they could own property, 2)slaves could not be citizens, 3)they introduced slavery to the US, 4)women didn’t have the right to vote, or own property, and were considered the property of men, 5)Segregation, a.k.a. Jim Crow Laws, and 6)miscegenation laws preventing those of different “races” from becoming married.

The US European Male, with deliberation, malice and forethought has done everything they could to keep other people down and hold the powerful in their tyrannical oligarchy hands. They have not willingly allowed others to gain rights, those rights have to literally be fought for in the form of: 1)The Civil War, 2)The Civil Rights Movement, 3)The Women’s Rights Movement, 4)and the Equal Rights Movement; to name but a few. US European Males, have not been leaders of change, they have been reactionary and stood in the face of change; only acquiescing after the pressure became to great not only in their country, but around the world to ignore. Together we stand, divided we fall. The minority US European Male Oligarchy has dominated US politics since its inception. A change in the ranks of our representatives need to be change. Taxation without representation, who do the US European Males represent?

They will trick you and say they represent you because you vote for them election after election. US elections are rigged, they serve as mock elections. The reality is these politicians continue to win elections because they manipulate the system. They spend their time building their Political “War Chests (what a fitting name)” in order to take advantage of the concept of name recognition.

The reason why US European Males continue to remain in power is because they are almost always the incumbents holding more than 90% of the elected offices in the country at the local, state, and national level. Incumbents win reelection more than 90% of the time due to name recognition. After all the campaign speeches, advertisements, endorsements, commercials, emails, interviews, etc. the average US voter is so saturated by incumbent campaign propaganda that they almost forget there even someone else running in the election. Unless there are term limits, or the politician does something so egregious that they cannot talk their way out of, reelection is almost a near certainty and the election process is just a mere formality.

It is this dominance over campaign spending that prevents other parties, and/or independent candidates from ever surfacing into the election process. Democrats and Republicans have such a stranglehold on campaign contributions, that they snuff out any potential threat to the two party system. It is not about who is the best candidate for the job, but rather who can scream the loudest, and be heard doing it the most times.

Campaign contributions and political war chests need to be completely eliminated from the political equation. All candidates, regardless of political party or independent and whether they be an incumbent or challenger need to be given equal air time. They need to receive the same level of print, visual, and audio coverage. They need to engage in multiple debates, and after two terms in office, incumbents need to step down, and find another line of work (and that doesn’t mean run in another district, or for a different position). Once an incumbent serves two terms in office, at whatever level that political career needs to be over...a.k.a. cease to exist.

http://www.nyc.gov/html/om/pdf/2010/pr507-10_report.pdf Many US elections are uncontested and/or anti competitive. In 2010, 7% of US House of Representative races were uncontested, with 45% of competitive races won by a margin of greater than 30%. In 2009/2010 state legislative races, 33% of races were uncontested, with 36% of contested races won by a margin of greater than 30%. One of the reasons for un-competitive races are gerrymandered districts designed to give incumbents an extremely unfair advantage at election time.

Chapter: How the Breakdown of the American Family has Lead to Financial Instability Keeping Families Together Leads to Success

“The most dangerous man, to any government, is the man who is able to think things out for himself… Almost inevitably, he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable.” — H. L. Mencken

When I first starting writing this book in 2009, I did not realize how much this would be a process of self discovery. What I have come to realize is that the root cause of all problems in an industrialized society is the breakdown of the family. Meaning, every problem one has in life is the result of a departure from family values and family unity. A family that works and stays together, flourishes together.

http://www.tparents.org/library/unification/talks/colvin/secular.htm

From 1901 to 1970, the divorce rate increased by 700%. In 1900 there were 56,000 divorces in America; in 1992 1.2 million, a 700% increase, adjusted for population growth (Insight 6/17/96, p. 14)

From 1970 to 1992, the divorce rate increased 279%; the number of children with a divorced parent increased 352%, the cohabitation population increased 533%, which means 2.7 million unmarried households, 40% of them containing children. (Stanton, pp. 2-3)

Within six months of their marriage, 50% of newlyweds begin to doubt the marriage will last, 39% report "big fights" at least once a week and 4% had already separated for at least one night. (Philadelphia Inquirer, 1994)

"Between 1970 and 1995, . . . the percentage of married couples with children dropped by a third, but single-parent families nearly doubled." (Larry Witham, "New data on American family offer few hopeful signs," WT National Edition, March 11-17, 1996, p. 1)

In 1960, 243,000 children were living with a single parent who had never married; by 1993 this figure had risen to 6.3 million. 1.2 million children per year are born into fatherless homes. America has 1.8 million "latchkey" kids. (Seven Promises of a Promise Keeper, p. 118) 20 years ago, 17% of American children grow up without a father; today, 36% do.

In 1960, 8 million children living only with their mother; in 1995, 23 million.

Three fastest growing forms of the family in the US, 1980-95: 1. Single mother families; 2. Blended families (step-parents); 3. Divorced families (the family left over after divorce). (Stanton, p. 1)

Divorce is the leading cause of childhood depression. (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development) 75% of adolescent patients at chemical abuse centers are from single-parent families. (Center for Disease Control, Atlanta, GA) 63% of youth suicides are single-parent children. (Center for Disease Control, Atlanta, GA) 70% of teen-age pregnancies are single-parent children. ("Children in Need: Investment Strategies for the Educationally Disadvantaged" - Committee for Economic Development ) 75% of juveniles in youth correction facilities are from single-parent families. (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1988)

Children of divorce are 5 times more likely to be suspended from school; 3 times as likely to need psychological counseling; 2 times as likely to repeat a grade; are absent from school more, late to school more often; show more health problems.( . Dr. Gene Brody - Study of Competence in Children and Families; Gormely, Newburgh, NY)

America’s Schizophrenic Culture

America has developed a schizophrenic culture. On the one hand, we have attained unprecedented heights of material success and prosperity On the other hand, we have been unable to maintain a solid moral character, family stability, safe communities, and a harmonious and happy society. This contradiction is manifest in individual lives. We instill in our youth a strong desire for material success and prosperity yet we fail to teach the values that are necessary to build good character, strong families, and a harmonious society.

When I speak about family, I speak about it in a generic sense. The family one eventually has, is not necessarily the one they are born with. Many things can happen in one’s original family that so irrevocably breaks the bounds of trust and solidarity that moving forward together as a unit just simply is not possible. Sometimes the best family one can have is not the one that one is born with, but rather the one that a person creates.

The line between success and failure is a blurry one at best. Success does not happen because one necessarily comes up with some “magical” new invention or some “novel” never-before conceived business idea. Success comes from the ability to execute and repeat successful actions with perpetual consistency.

Every successful person, family and/or dynasty has one thing in common; they did not do it on their own. Much of the failure we experience in life in putting too much burden on our individual shoulders and expecting to somehow make it all happen on our own. We as humans live a life that is interdependently connected. What that means that we need others, not only to be successful, but just to survive.

None of us would have time to do anything in life if we had to do everything in life. The simple act of getting up and preparing for our day requires the involvement of other people. From waking up in the bed that we did not make, to the house that we did not build, to water we did not purify, to the food we did not grow and harvest. Every step that we take in life has required the participation of others. So why do we think we can be successful all by ourselves?

When one looks at the successful people and companies over the years such as Walmart, Bill Gates, Donald Trump, and the Rockefellers, they all have one thing in common, none of the them did it on their own. They all had help from their families. It does not necessarily take talent to be successful, but commitment to teamwork.

Is there really something special behind Walmart? They are successful because they are able to charge less money for the items they have due to the number of sales they generate which allows them to be able to make a very low profit on each item they sale and instead profit based on overall sales volume. What made them successful is not the concept, but the execution of the concept.

Is there anything really special behind KFC, Burger King, Wendy’s, or any of those other fast food chains? They have a simple product to sell (food), and they were able to sell it on a large scale because they worked together as a family.

Most of us have families or people that they can work together with. If they don’t then one at least have ideas that perhaps others might be interested in being a part of. For instance, a family, or a structure of collective individuals can be successful, just by pooling one’s resources. In today’s world going out and finding a job, can be like finding a needle in a haystack; but if one has a collective goal then success can be inevitable.

For instance, say a group of high school students decide when they graduate they are going to work together to form a business. Each member of the group decides to become trained in different fields: carpentry, plumbing, electrical, construction, cdl, landscaping, automotive, roofing, air conditioning, and computer repair. Together, they decide to create a landscaping, auto repair, home repair, computer repair, moving service company; kind of a jack of all trades type of company. Individually they would be unable to offer of all of these services, but together, they create a unit of a powerful business structure.

An example of successfully using the unity concept is when immigrants come to the United States. Although they are seemingly at a disadvantage, time after time, with no ability to speak the language, and no real prospects for employment they become successful...why??? The reason being, is that when they come to the United States, they do not come with the intention of working for somebody, they come with the intention of being self employed and having the opportunity to utilize the skills they have, whether it be vocational skills, or just the sheer number of people they have and the willingness to work together.

All across the United States, one can find a Chinese Restaurant and other ethnic restaurants. Although the people operating the restaurant speak limited English and do not know much about the culture, they end up operating a successful business because of a variety of key reasons: 1)They go into business for themselves, they do not go and work for someone else. 2)They are working in a field that is proven to yield a successful return. 3)They employ each other. 4)They help each other get their businesses off the ground.

An Example of Failed Family Unity

An example of an unsuccessful group of people in the United States is the “African American.” African Americans have lived in the United States for hundreds of years, but yet they have consistently and utterly failed to reach their full potential as a people in this country. Yes, they were slaves at one point, but they have not been slaves for almost 150 years. What has happened to the descendants of slaves since their time of emancipation?

One can understand the importance of Civil and Equal Rights. However, African Americans have to recognize, just like Asian Americans that they will never be able to fully assemble into the “White” or “European” culture that exists in the United States. For one, because of African American’s distinctive physical characteristics they do not have the ability to “blend” in with the Europeans. There are many different European ethnic groups in the United States, but after centuries of assimilation they are just simply “Americans.” They have been able to assimilate because of the similarity of their physical features. That is not a possibility for African Americans.

African Americans have wasted their time in a war that they cannot win. Instead of focusing on self realization and self actualization they have wasted their time demanding that “White America” treat them as equals. They have failed to accept that not everyone is going to like you in life. They have demanded to go to the same schools, live in the same neighborhoods, worship in the same congregations, and work together in the same professions. While their goals might seem noble, they are in reality fancifully idealistic.

No one has a right to impose themselves on others. African Americans demanded after slavery that they be accepted as equals. Instead they should have demanded to be allowed to form their own towns and cities west of the South and began forming their own identity. “White America” would have gladly allowed African Americans to go west and begin building their own identity. Instead, all the violence ensued because these two groups suddenly went from being “master” and “servant” to fellow citizens in the blink of an eye, with the stroke of a pen.

Writing something into law doesn’t suddenly change the perceptions and feelings one has for the other. That is why after 12 years of the Reconstruction Era, the idea was basically disbanded and the Jim Crow Era began, because African Americans refuses to leave the South and move west and form their own identities. Instead of having the goal of assimilation and being accepted, the African Americans should have preferred to have the goal of being respected. Had they gone west and formed their own towns and cities, nearly 150 years after the end of slavery, the topic of conversation would be over the remarkable African American Renaissance in the United States, instead of the Plight of the African American in the United States.

When one asks others for help, they are taking the power to choose out of their own hands. Throughout the United States, mainly in the South, there are many areas that are predominately African American, yet it is not the African Americans who are prospering in those areas. Rather, it is other minority groups who come in who are owning the businesses in those areas. Instead of African Americans working together in their communities, they are instead engage in “Black on Black” crime and selling drugs to their own people, which further perpetuates their downward struggle.

Government Involvement in the Unraveling of Families and Society Although illegal drugs are not primarily grown in the United States, they still manage to make it into the US, even today’s world of heightened security. How is that possible? How is it possible for drugs to continue to make it into the US and continue to primarily make it into minority communities, particularly African American and Latin American communities unless the US government allows it to happen? One has to ask oneself why has the US allowed illegal drugs to continue to penetrate US borders? The answer is simple: To perpetuate a cycle of dependence and inferiority in minority communities.

Prior to LBJ’s Great Society, the targeting of drugs as crime number one in the United States did not exist. Go to any town or city in the United States and local law enforcement know all the places where local drug activity exist. Sparking one to ask the most logical question: If they know where all the drug activity exist then why do they not simply arrest all those involved and simply stop it?

Local law enforcement will tell you that if they arrest one person, then someone will just take their place, or if they stop drug activity on one street corner, then it will just popup someplace else. That simply is not necessarily true. While it is true that initially someone may take someone else’s place and activity may resume someplace else but eventually it will stop. Why? Because at a certain point it reaches a point of diminishing return. If every time one starts up the activity at a new location it immediately gets shut down then eventually it will become too expensive in both loss of men and startup cost to continue to operate that business. Therefore, eventually drug usage would cease to be a topic of conversation in the United States and the problem would be eliminated. If the solution is so simply, then why is something not being done about it?

The reason something is not being done about it is because local law enforcement takes their orders from entities above them. For some reason, although drug usage and their related crimes, is the number one crime issue in the United States, the crackdown on drugs has not been labeled a top priority. The reason being is that this so called War on Drugs is instead a War on Minorities, particularly African and Latin Americans.

The only illegal drugs that can be grown in the United States on a large scale is marijuana. Therefore all other drugs have to be grown elsewhere and then brought into the United States. If those drugs do not make it into the United States, then they can’t be sold in the United States. With no supply of drugs, drug dealers have no product to sell, and drug users have no problem to buy. Does all this seem pretty simple to you? If it does, it is because it is. The reason why there is a drug problem in the United States, is because the United States created a drug problem in the United States.

The United States treats the drug issue the same way the insurance companies treat health issues in the United States; treat the symptoms, not the disease. Just like health insurance is big business, so is the regulation of drugs in the United States. If problems exist, money is needed to solve those problems. If there are no problems, then there is no money needed to solve them. Just like health insurance is big business, government is big business too. The money is not in the resolution of problems, the money is in the treatment and regulation of those problems. Like the health insurance’s approach to diseases, government has the same approach to crime. If the problem is solved there is nothing more to discuss, therefore it no longer requires money devoted to it. However, as long as the problem exist, money needs to be devoted to it to “solve the problem.” For example, take the United States’s approach to the oil issue. If we are so dependent on it, wouldn’t make sense to come up with alternative fuel sources to eliminate that dependency? Ten years ago, California was in the process of requiring vehicles to have lower fuel emissions. It was also requiring alternative fuel source vehicles, such as the electric car to be introduced. Auto manufacturers began building electric cars in anticipation of these new changes that were going to be implemented in California. Then suddenly, the electric car concept was scrapped. Scrapped to the point that those electric cars that were already on the road were “removed.” Why did this happens?

The reason why the electric car failed in California, is that it simply wasn’t good business...for the auto manufacturers and for...the United States. California is the largest state in the union, with more than 10% of the nation’s population living there. What happens there has a direct impact on the rest of the country. A successful introduction of the electric car there meant that it would have eventually surfaced all over the nation. That would have been great for American consumers but bad for big business.

The auto manufacturers currently have an integral relationship with oil. Oil companies and auto manufacturers are integrally linked. The introduction of alternative fuel source vehicles into the United States would mean the end of a multi billion dollar industry. Families such as the Bush family which produced two of the nation’s forty four presidents, have made its fortune on oil. Auto manufacturers would have to completely remodel their infrastructure to accommodate the production of alternative fuel source vehicles. Like government, big business does not respond well to change.

One should ask oneself, how does an industry that does not even pay taxes have such a large influence in the United States. Automotive companies routinely state that they are operating at a loss on an annual basis. If they are operating at an annual loss, then they theoretically have no profits to pay in the form of taxes. The question becomes: How do they stay in business? How do their executives continue to receive multi million dollar salaries and bonuses if they are so unsuccessful? The reason being is because they are operating with “paper losses.” On paper, they are shown to be operating at a loss, but in reality they are generating revenue. Revenue to pay workers and executives, with annual salary increases too. However, it is the construction of their financial records (that they pay so handsomely for) that allows them to state they are “losing money.” It is this philosophy that has corrupted the nation’s military objectives.

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were not an in effort of protecting America’s safety and freedom, but an effort to protect oil reserve sources. The United States is no longer a world producer of goods and services, rather it is a producer of services and propaganda. The reality is the nation’s chief export is military equipment and technology, and the country spends hundreds of billions of dollars in military expenditures in the name of “protecting the United States’s borders from the threat of terrorism.”

No one is going to attack the United States. Are they going to go after the US’s over priced products that they can get cheaper elsewhere? Are they going to go after the US’s dwindling supply of food sources? The United States got attacked on 9/11 because it can’t keep its nose out of other people’s business. Instead of spending the amount of money it does on the military, a considerable portion of those funds should be devoted to coming up with alternative fuel source vehicles and renewable energy sources. All of these issues I have discussed relate back to one issue: The breakdown of the family. With the introduction of the Industrial Revolution people left their families in the rural areas to supposedly pursue a better life; the results have been mixed at best.

When people decided to leave their families behind, this concept of the “American Dream” emerged. The “American Dream” centered around having a big house, big car, and other similar material possessions. In exchange for this “American Dream” people left their values back on the countryside.

Family Life in the US Prior to/Transition Toward the Degradation of the Family

It was in these urban cities that diseases spread rapidly such as tuberculosis. A disease like tuberculosis did not have the ability to spread at such a rapid rate in rural areas because the population was more spread out.

Before the Migration to Cities families took care of families. However, after the move to urban life, as people began to mature into their elderly years, and no longer able to work, there was no one to take care of them because they had moved away from their families and had essentially alienated themselves. Eventually, there were generations of families in similar fates. The end result was a significant segment of the population unable to fend for themselves and had to look elsewhere (a.k.a. somewhere other than their family) for help.

During the FDR administration, when the government stepped in and introduced their social programs they were only attempting to “solve” a problem that resulted from the emergence of big business. Big business only emerged and became a problem and the dominant controlling influence in the United States because people left their families and began investing their energies into something outside of themselves and their families. The result, is that they wasted their best years working for someone and/or something else with the only “accomplishment” being the emergence of the upper class on the backs of the poor and working class.

Almost overnight the United States went from a laissez faire capitalist society to a socialist society. The United States would never admit to being a socialist country and technically it would be correct. The United States is not technically a socialist country for one reason. In socialist countries, when they have expensive socialist programs in place they have a tax system in place to pay for those social programs.

In the United States although the socialist programs are in place, no one wants to pay for them. It went from passing on the burden of these social programs to the next year, then to the next election, and finally to the next generation. The result, is a growing national debt in excess of $14 trillion with no end of its increase in sight. Again, this metamorphosis occurred at a staggering rate. In 1980 the national debt was “only” $980 billion. How did the national debt gone from under $1 trillion in 1980 and more than fourteen fold higher just 30 years later? One answer...social programs and a warped, failed tax structure.

Over time, the government has found more and more ways to infiltrate itself into our lives; the resulting effect has been absolutely smothering. Beginning in WWI the government began directly taxing one’s income. After seeing how effective it was to separate directly separate one from their money it passed a constitutional amendment making it a permanent activity. Could the government not have generated the income it wanted in a less benign way by introducing consumption taxes instead?

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=3938

Two-income couples with children are saving less and incurring more debt than they did 20 years ago, according to Elizabeth Warren of Harvard Unversity and daughter Amelia Warren Tyagi. In "The Two-Income Trap," the authors stress that the emergence of two-income families since the 1960s has led to a decline in real incomes, lower savings rates and more credit card debt. Other findings include:

In 1981, savings made up 11 percent of average personal income; by the year 2000, savings declined to -1 percent; meanwhile, credit card debt has risen from 4 percent in 1981 to a whopping 12 percent of average personal income.

Some 60,000 women filed for bankruptcy in 1981, compared to a staggering 500,000 women in 2001; more than 1 out of 6 single mothers are predicted to file for bankruptcy in this decade.

Married couples with children are more than twice as likely to file for bankruptcy as couples without children.

The authors note that as more individuals compete for jobs, real wages have declined. Additionally, the income gained from a second working parent is often spent on day care, second cars, and restaurant bills. Lastly, the higher nominal incomes of two-income families drive up mortgage costs as these families bid for homes in desirable suburban neighborhoods.

Source: Allan Carlson, "Rediscovering the Family," National Review, January 26, 2004; based upon Elizabeth Warren and Amelia Warren Tyagi, "The Two-Income Trap," Basic Books, September 2, 2003.

Chapter: The Key to Financial Security is Self Employment

You will never be able to retire if you work for someone else. Before I get into that...what happened to you? Were you not young once? Did you not have dreams? Is the life you are living the one you had in mind for yourself? Waking up everyday tired, not looking forward to the day. Long week, short weekend, start the cycle over again the next week. Living from paycheck to paycheck. Commuting back and forth everyday. High overhead cost, high debt, stress, sleeping problems, maybe some depression. Why do you accept this as your life?

Working for someone is a choice and a very bad choice. When you work for someone else they make all the rules. They tell you when to get up, when to go to sleep, when to be at work, when to leave, when to eat, how much you make, and when you can spend time with your friends and family. This type of scenario can continue year round for 20, 30, even 40 years. Then what are you left with? What are you left with at 60 or 70 years old? 10, 15, 20 years if you are lucky. Does that sound like what you dreamed your life would be like? Maybe you are asking what choice do you have, that’s just how life is right...wrong!

Life is about choices. Some choices can lead you down a path of better opportunities, some lead you down a path of no opportunities. Working for someone else will never lead you to more opportunities, just less. All of us will get older, but it is how we get there that counts. Do you want to look back at your life with contentment or regret? Do you want to know you gave this life everything you had, or just got by, never really accomplishing anything?

Accomplishing something does not mean become president of the United States, or winning the Noble Peace Prize. Accomplishing something means having dreams when you were younger and making sure you fulfilled those dreams...why? Because that is what is important to you. Life isn’t worth the time it took to live it, if we live it never doing or accomplishing the things we wanted to do.

I hear so many people talking about being able to provide a better life for their family so that they’ll have more than they have. Many of these people are 20, 30, 40 years old. Hey, what happened to their life? When their life suddenly lose value? Was it the day they had kids? Some people have kids as teenagers (unfortunately). Does their life end before they’re even 20 years old? What kind of example is one demonstrating for their children if children see their parents give up on life, give up on their dreams and just work until they are old and grey for someone else? If parents are going to give children that image to go to sleep to every night, maybe they can do it with a bottle of sleeping pills next to the side of the bed so their child doesn’t wake up the next day. Because essentially, you are sentencing your child to a lifetime of servitude...a death sentence. It’s like they go from 18 to 70 overnight. Except they have a lifetime of disappointments and what ifs in the process.

We have a responsibility to ourselves and our family not to waste the lives we were given. Working for someone else is a waste of that life, year after year after year. When you work for someone else you know what the routine is going to be: Long hours, low pay, little time off, just enough money to survive on, not enough more to strive on.

For all of you who say there is nothing else you can, here’s a few reasons you might what to change that perspective. What happens if the company you worked for all those years suddenly goes bankrupt? Then there is no more pension. Now you are left with Social Security right??? Wrong. We all know that will be completely bankrupt sooner rather than later. Well maybe you made some investments in the stock market. What if it crashes? Probably not you say. It hasn’t crashed in 25 years, trust when I tell you...it’s due. What happens if the dollar suddenly loses value? Not going to happen? What version of reality do you live in? You are all familiar with credit ratings right? A credit rating is based on the amount of debt one has versus the amount of available credit one has. As one’s debt goes up and available credit goes debt, so too does one’s credit score. Does one think it works any different for a country? The United States is over $14 trillion dollars in debt. It’s credit rating recently fell for the first time...ever. The US’s own prediction is that it will exceed over $20 trillion by 2016. Do any of you know what the US’s credit limit is? Do you really think it’s $14 trillion? Do any of you think it is $20 trillion?

The US is currently making only interest payments because it cannot afford to make any payments toward principle. If it cannot afford to make any principle payments today, will a larger debt cause it to make principle payments tomorrow? Do any of you remember how the Great Depression happened? The Federal Reserverestricted the flow of money causing the US to be unable to pay its bills. If the Federal Reservedid that before, why won’t they do that again? Has it not tried everything else to spark the economy, why not just step back and let things play out? How do you think it will play out?

Let’s see, when one can’t pay their bills, usually the full amount of what they owe becomes due immediately. Collection proceedings begin, and their assets have to begin to be liquidated. What would that mean for the United States? It would mean no more subsidies for farmers and Wall Street. That means that the stock market would crash and food prices would dramatically increase. There would be massive widespread unemployment. Inflation would spiral through the roof. There would be a rapid succession of bank closings. Bank assets would be liquidated, homes would be foreclosed upon, and vehicles would be repossessed. Credit would grind completely to a halt. The government would have no money to pay its bills or to pay for any more social programs which would mean the end of: Welfare, Medicaid, Social Security, and Medicare. Pensions would cease to exist. Stock portfolios would be worthless. Instead of a Second Great Depression this would be the Great Hurricane, most likely the end of the United States the way you know it. Sounds ominous doesn’t it. Yet very realistic and very probable.

Most of you are so invested in this system that you cannot afford for it to fail. When it does, and it will, you will all have nothing. Only the few that were smart enough to plan ahead with make it out unscathed such as the Federal Reserveand Wall Street. Don’t believe any of what I said is true, why tempt fate. If there is even the smallest possibility of the scenario I presented happen, why not at least be prepared for a financial apocalypse? Do you not owe it to yourself? Do you not owe it to your family?

Working for someone puts you in a position of dependency and weakness. How badly do you think the Amish would be affected if a financial Armageddon occurs. They are not dependent upon the system like you are. They do not have street jobs, social security cards, and bank accounts. They are not dependent on public utilities like electricity and public water..why are you? Am I telling you to go and live like the Amish? No...not necessarily. What I am stating is that you can learn a lot from them about how to survive without being dependent on the government. What I am suggesting is that perhaps you might want to consider developing some survival skills in the event your all mighty government drops the ball and forgets that you even exist.

It case you haven’t realized by now, your government does not have your back. That should be evident from the laws they have in place. “Ignorance of the law is no excuse.” How is that fair? What kind of arbitrary policy is that? Who does that help? Who does that benefit? Does it benefit me or you? Certainly not.

What about an arbitrary tax system that guts your paycheck every week. Do they care that you have fallen behind on your bills, or living from paycheck to paycheck? Why is it when the government has a financial deficit it can keep “borrowing” from the Federal Reserve Reserve, but when you have financial problems you can even get more of the paycheck you earned to cover your expenses? What do you think the government is going to do for you when it can no longer keep dipping into that “unlimited” fountain of money being “supplied” by the Federal Reserve Reserve. What I am suggesting to you is you might want to get a little more (maybe a lot more) control over your finances.

You earn the money, now maybe it’s time you go out there and keep it. You need to take advantage of the system that is in place, just like businesses and corporations do. Maybe you all need to do your own reality tv shows. Start your own corporation, hire yourself and begin writing off your expenses. Everything you do would be an expense. Your home is where the business is located, it is also where the production of the show is taking place, which allows you to write off monthly payments, utilities and other living expenses. Film yourself driving to work. Now your commute and your car payments are deductible. Whatever you do, you need to recapture as much of your income as possible. It is your money, shouldn’t you be able to do what you want to with it...the government does.

By being self employed your net income goes up simply by being able to deduct your expenses. Living expenses can be greatly deducted such as food, clothing, housing, and utilities, depending on how you are running your business. Vehicle expenses can be included if the vehicle is being used for the business. That means that the amount of gross income you need to generate to replace your outside job is significantly less than what you were making. Which means that not only will you have more free time, but also more disposable income and more control of your income. Instead of the government getting its hands on your money first, you will receive 100% of your earnings, with the government only receiving a portion after you have deducted your natural expenses. Sounds a lot fairer than working for someone else. Also if you have a corporation, you can further reduce your taxable income by taking advantage of tax laws.

There are corporate taxes as well as personal income taxes. Depending on how much your business nets, it might make sense to pay yourself a separate salary. While you don’t have to pay yourself a salary, you may find that doing so causes the remaining income to fall into a lower tax bracket. You may also find it helpful to have some other people “employed” under you such as family members who were not previously working. You can pay them just below the poverty line and they would not be required to pay any money on those “earnings.” Remember, like they say, “Ignorance of the law is no excuse.”

http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2010/ted_20101022.htm

Demographics of the Self-employed In 2009, self-employment rates for older workers continued to be higher than those for younger workers. Among the unincorporated, self-employment rates ranged from 1.6 percent for those aged 16 to 19 years to 18.1 percent for those aged 65 years and older. Among the incorporated, self-employment rates ranged from 0.1 percent for those aged 16 to 19 years to 7.7 percent for those aged 65 years and older.

In 2009, unincorporated and incorporated self-employment rates were higher for men than women. Among the unincorporated, 8.3 percent of men were self-employed, compared with 5.6 percent of women. Among the incorporated, 5.4 percent of men were self-employed, compared with 2.3 percent of women.

With regard to educational attainment, in 2009 unincorporated self-employment rates were lowest for individuals with an associate’s degree (6.6 percent) and highest for those with less than a high school diploma (9.9 percent). Among the incorporated, the self-employment rate was highest (6.6 percent) for individuals with advanced degrees—about 3 times the rate for those with less than a high school diploma (2.0 percent).

http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2010/09/art2full.pdf

http://pewsocialtrends.org/2009/09/17/take-this-job-and-love-it/

Under Employment

According to the Gallup Poll, nearly 20% of all Americans are underemployed.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/147872/Unemployment-Stagnant-May.aspx http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0104719.html http://www.gallup.com/poll/125639/Gallup-Daily-Workforce.aspx Since 1920, the unemployment rate in the United States has varied between a low of 1.2% in 1944, to as high as 23.6% in 1932. In recent times the unemployment rate was as low as 4.0% in 2000 during the final year of the Clinton Administration. By the end of the Bush Administration in 2008, the unemployment rate rose to 5.8%. As of August of 2011, the unemployment rate stood at around 9.5%. I believe an argument can be made, that unemployment is as high or higher than the Great Depression, when one factors in part time employment and underemployment. As of August of 2011, 18% of the US workforce were classified as underemployed, which are either individuals who are part time employed, seeking full time employment, or those employed in positions in which their qualifications dwarf the requirements. When combining the unemployed and underemployed numbers, the true level of unemployment in the US is over 27% which is sharply above the unemployment percentage During the Great Depression.

Chapter: Saving Money is the Same as Earning Money

A Dollar Saved is a Dollar Earned

Society teaches us to covet things we do not have. We are taught that in order to think of ourselves as successful we must have fancy cars, fancy clothes, fancy houses, and our kids must go to expensive schools.

The reality is, it is this type of thought that prevents us from ever being set free. We become slaves to the system. When one seeks out a certain lifestyle there is a consequence. One become dependent on others for a high paying job to support one’s high overhead lifestyle. One ends up not spending quality time with one’s family. One ends up working long, unfulfilled hours, leaving one with little time for oneself. Little time to even enjoy all those luxury items that one’s acquired.

Living a more frugal lifestyle does not means one has to live like a pauper. Living a frugal lifestyle means one is more careful with how one spends one’s money. Instead of buying a brand new car, by one that slightly used, or better yet, buy one that is older, and acquire the skills to restore the car. One would not have to worry on relying on a mechanic, and also the car insurance would be a lot cheaper.

Instead of buying a brand new house, buy one that is a little older, maybe in an upcoming, relatively safe earlier. Learn how to fix the house oneself, so that one can build equity in the property, save money by avoiding high mortgage payments, and reduce the stress of wondering how to pay for things.

One should avoid credit cards at all costs. If one does not have the money for something, save until one does. So much money is wasted on those monthly payments. By avoiding them, that is like making extra money without having to do anything.

If one wants to go to school, find a way for someone else to pay for it. There are many programs out there that the government provides to give individuals an opportunity to go to school, particularly for need based positions. If one is not interested in those positions, or cannot find the money, just get an ordinary job.

An ordinary job might not pay much, but there are ways to maximize the money by reducing one’s overhead. Live at home until one saves enough money to buy a place in cash. Move to a low cost area so that one’s cost of living is low enough to maximize the money one is earning. Do not have kids until one can afford to do so. Anything one wants such as electronics, and other household items, consider sites like Ebay where one can acquire those items for pennies on the dollar, and in many cases still be under warranty.

Do not be afraid to buy the Sunday paper, cut out and use coupons, and buy things on sale, and in bulk. Buying things in bulk is usually a lot cheaper then buying them in small quantities. Also avoid name brand and opt for store brand items whenever possible, since they are usually a lot cheaper for roughly the same level of quality.

Best Places to Live if You Don’t Want to be Broke

The best places to live in you do not want to be broke are places where people are not. In real estate they always say, “Location, location, location.”

There is a strong correlation between high population density and high costs of living. In high population areas like New York City, Los Angeles, and Chicago, land is at a premium. In these areas, when one no longer can build new properties, the existing properties dramatically go up in value.

As the property values go up, so too does the population density and the cycle continues. What is interesting to note is that in areas in which there are high home prices, with a higher cost of living, income per capita is either the same as in lower cost of living areas or actually even lower. Therefore individuals living in high cost areas have a lower disposable income and a lower quality of life, and are struggling just to get by.

In determining the best places to live one need to look for a combination of a low unemployment rate, low home prices, low population density, and low crime. Obviously the combination of these things is very difficult to find and no place is going to be perfect, one is going to have to decide what is best for them, but one needs to focus on a low cost of living.

One is able to expand the number of areas to choose from if one is self employed and/or is skilled in a high demand market. There are many areas in this country in which there are low cost properties with relatively low crime. The problem is in these areas jobs are very hard to come by. What this means is one has to have an entrepreneurial persona in order to survive in these areas. The good news is if one is skilled at manual labor then one will generally always be able to find work. Most Americans today can’t or do not like fixing their own things, if one can fix things one will be able to earn a living.

Some of the best places to look for places to live are in the Midwest like Indiana, Ohio, Michigan. These areas tend to have low cost properties and in some of those areas low crime. Even places like New York State can be affordable once one move north of New York City and Albany. The key is to avoid the big city.

One of the most affordable big cities is Houston, but that trend is likely to change, since population grow there continues to be on the rise. The least affordable state in the continental United States is California (Alaska and Hawaii are not affordable either). Most other states in the United States usually have some areas that affordable to live in. If there is a lot of land for sale in an area chances are it is affordable to live because the population density is low.

Believe it or not one of the most affordable areas to live in, when one factors in both home prices and utilities is probably the Northwest, somewhere North of Eureka, California and somewhere south of Seattle, Washington along the coast. The weather there stays a comfortable 50- 70 degrees year round and by avoiding those extreme temperatures one saves a lot of money on heating and cooling bills.

Do I Really Need a Brand New Car or House?

The only ones that benefit from the purchase of brand new cars and homes are car manufacturers and home builders. The fact in the long run buying used always saves money.

Of course there is a concern that when one buys a used car or a used house they set themselves up for unexpected high repair bills and that is a valid concern. The key is to try to find a happy median.

I am not suggesting that one should go buy a 100 year old house or a 20 year old car (although in some cases it might not be a bad idea depending upon circumstances). One I am advocating is that one buy a home or a car that is a few years old.

One big issue for Americans is that everything has to be supersized. Supersized food, cars, and houses. Being conservative in ones habits makes a lot more sense. Instead of getting a big gas guzzling SUV, try being more environmentally friendly and get an economy vehicle. The vast majority of those that go to work do not carpool. Therefore most people who are driving large vehicles are primarily driving them as a single occupant. Economy size vehicles tend to lose their resale value very quickly. That is bad news if one is looking to sell the vehicle, but great news if one is looking to buy the vehicle. One can get a good car at a low price and save a lot of money.

If one is living in a non urban area like Houston or Dallas, TX, one will find that in places such as these one can find slightly used homes at very reasonable prices. In theses type areas new houses are always being built (at least until they run out of space). What this means is that older homes even if they are only 5-10 years old have very low, if any home appreciation. This creates a good buyer’s market and a bad seller’s market. A home that is only 5 years old is going to have a good amount of life to it with little if anything that will need to be repaired. New does not always mean better when it comes to cars and homes.

Never Buy a Brand New Home A brand new home costs too much money. Always buy a used home. One can always get a used home for a discount. The older the home the better price one can get. Be willing to put in the hard work to own a home. Owning a older home is more work, but it is yours, not the bank’s. Learn how to fix things in your home such as plumbing, electrical work and carpentry. By doing your own repairs and improvements to your home you will save a lot of money.

Never Buy a New Car. A New Car is a Complete Waste of Money

The car is completely devalued the second one drives off the lot and it continues to decrease in value. Buy a good used vehicle and avoid making car payments and having high insurance rates as a result.

The need to own something new, seems to be an American Obsession. Cars become “un new” the second they are outside. From rain, to snow, to the sun, to pollution, cars experience a lot of adverse exposure. I am not telling to go out and get a heap of junk. What I am saying is the value you find in yourself should not be determined based how new your car is and/or how miles it has on it.

A automobile should serve the purpose of getting you from Point A to Point B. If you want it to look nice fine (a paint job cost $200). If you need it to sound nice, fine too (nice set of speakers and a radio will cost $300). Keeping it clean is fine too, but remember you are not living in your vehicle, you are taking it from Point A to Point B. Treat it as an accessory to your life, not as the standard your life is based on.

Buy a repossessed vehicle or one from an auction, or one that has a salvage title. All you should care about is that the vehicle functions, not whether it had a previous owner with credit issues, or that it may have had a fender bender. Keep in mind that when you go to purchase a vehicle at a retail establishment, you are not just paying for the vehicle. You are paying for advertising costs, storage fees, and personnel. Is that what you thought you were paying for? I thought you just wanted to buy a vehicle? Buy direct, cut out the middleman, a.k.a. the retailer.

Never Buy New Electronic Equipment

With the advent of Ebay, it is very easy to buy electronic equipment in very good condition at a fraction of the cost. One should never pay full retail for a retail item. Like automobiles, electronic equipment loses it value the second you take it out the store. Keep in mind that things are always more expensive when they first come out. By the time you get it, it will still be new to you. Always Buy Items on Sale and With Coupons

Buying items on sale is a great way to stretch the dollar. Buy items in bulk and save even more. Every dollar you save is a dollar earned. Doesn’t make sense, think about it, when you go to the store and buy something on sale, and/or with coupons, and/or in bulk that is like putting that cash back in your wallet or bank account. The reason being, coupons have value. Whatever value is written on the coupon is how you do not have to spend. However much an item is discounted when it is on sale, is further savings for you and your family.

The key to saving money is not denying yourself the things you desire, but rather making sure when you get them, they cost you as little as possible. In order to maximize you dollar, and save the most money, shopping cannot be done spontaneously. You must take shopping seriously. You must plan it out decide what you want and make sure when get it you have maximized your savings.

The key is to do researched. Study how much the item is online versus, at a brick and mortar store. Many times items online are cheaper because retailers have a reduced overhead due to less employees and facilities that function like a warehouse, rather than something that has to be attractive to potential customers.

Find out how long something has been on the market. See if the price goes up or down during the year depending on holiday and other sales. Perhaps you can substitute the most recent model or edition for the older one, but have the exact same item. Find out what coupons are available both in the newspaper and online. Past and expired coupons are good indicators of how much you can save on the item. By knowing how frequently and when the coupons come out and expire, you can figure out when the next coupon will come out on the item you are interested in.

Never buy things at the last minute, always shop in advance. It is important to price compare, shop around, and buy things online. Even if prices are the same as buying in person, one can save money on gas. Usually the prices are cheaper, especially if one buys in bulk.

Do not buy name brand clothes or food. Generic items are drastically less expensive in comparison to name brand items. Price compare, and only buy name brand items when they are on sale, discounted, and drastically reduced.

Do Not Live in a Big City It is all about supply and demand. The more people in one particular area, the higher the demand for everything. Home prices are more expensive, gas prices are higher, population density is higher, commute times are longer, crime is higher, and parking is much more difficult (if not impossible). Quality of life decreases the higher the population density.

The key to being to live a smaller area is to move there for the primary purpose of living and not working there. It is true we need to generate income in order to survive in an industrialized society, but does that mean we have to subject to the local conditions of the economy in which we live?

I cannot stress how important it is to be self employed. Just like being a victim to one’s economic plight, i.e. being indebted to other people and entities, one should avoid being victim to the local economic circumstances of a region or city. One has to have skills that are a necessity to have regardless of local circumstances.

One needs trade skills such as computer repair, automotive skills, electrical, plumbing, air conditioning, and carpentry. One should also be considered being self employed in an online capacity, such as having one’s own website, or research business, online paralegal, or medical billing. If one is employed in a field that can be done exclusively by telecommuting, then the only thing a local community will over is a grocery, presuming one doesn’t grow one’s own vegetables.

Eat Out Very Rarely

Eating out is a huge waste of money. The food is usually not very good for you and cost a lot more money to buy than to make oneself. Only go out on special occasions and look for coupons and special deals. Many of the things people think they can’t do without is because they have been conditioned to believe that they need them. Eating out is key example of this.

Many of us have been conditioned to eat out on a regular basis. Whether it is because of a busy work schedule, or just too lazy cook, many of us eat out more often than we should; and it is not just about the money. Ever stop to wonder why you keep gaining 2, 3, maybe even 10 pounds are more a year...it is because of your eating habits.

Don’t ask don’t tell doesn’t just apply to the military (or at least it did), it also applies to the food that we eat when we go to a restaurant. Just like when we go to someone’s house and we do not know how the food was prepared and what ingredients were used, we also don’t know that when we go to a restaurant. We don’t know if the food was prepared in a sterile environment; for instance, whether someone has washed their hands or has a cold. We definitely do not know what ingredients were used.

Most food outside, even at supposedly higher level restaurants are mass produced and commonly contain high amounts of fat and sodium. Ever notice menus at restaurants never contain ingredients or nutritional breakdowns? It’s because restaurants don’t want you to know what you are eating. If you how bad the food was you were eating, you might consider dining elsewhere...like your home.

Outside food is also prepared with a lot of additives designed to get you hooked on to the food, similar to being hooked on drugs. Your body because used to eaten certain foods, from certain places. Essentially one develops a biological chemical dependency to certain types of food. That is why it is so difficult to go cold turkey with food. The body becomes so used to eating certain types of food, that it craves it incessantly. Those cravings can make any average person succumb to those cravings causing one to slip back into old habits, which is why diets usually always fail.

In order to reverse the cycle of negative food dependency, one has to gradually wean oneself off of addictive foods. Trying to quit cold turkey will almost certainly cause one to have a relapse and resume making negative food choices. As one begins consuming less and less of the negative food, one’s body will begin to crave it less. Eventually one can stop eating it completely and find that not only do they feel better, have more energy, and their clothes fit better, but they have more money in their pockets too.

Do Not Have a Gym Membership A gym membership is a waste of money. One can get more than an adequate workout at home without the stress and waste of time of going to a gym. The reason most people don’t workout is because of the inconvenience of working out. Let’s be honest, no one would workout if they could avoid it, and most of us come up with excuses to avoid. One of the biggest excuses is, “I can’t afford, and don’t have time to go to the gym.” Who does?

I have been working out since 1989, and I can assure you going to the gym is a stressful experience. First there is actually going, which means getting ready to go. Putting on certain clothes, maybe taking a shower (then another shower while there and/or when you come back), packing your workout bag, bringing with you some water, and a between workout meal. Did I forget to mention the time and expense of going to the gym. There are some other issues as well.

When you go to the gym, you are removed from the rest of your life, now for many of us, such distractions can be a good thing, but for a person like me who works from home it can be a nightmare. At the gym you do not get to listen to the music you want unless you have something stuck in your ears. You miss or have to delay watching certain tv shows. There is also the issue of waiting to use the equipment, and equipment that has been left with another person’s sweat on it. Oh, and did I mention the germs and the smells? What about those I call “The Hot Sexys” who walk around with their chests all pufFederal Reserve off, with every mirror being their friends. Who grunt and streak between each set and slam the weights down.

My advice workout at home. Now you might say, what if I don’t have the space? You can get a set of Iron Master dumbbells or something similar that go up to 75 lbs each. You can also get yourself a folding bench and a rowing machine or stationary bike. These couple of pieces of equipment don’t have to take up a hole room, can be stored when not in use and are cost effective. The bottom line is, don’t make excuses not to workout, just do it. Twenty or thirty minutes a day will definitely get the job done. You waste that much time anyway stopping at the fast food restaurant every night to get what you call “dinner.” Skip the fast food, have a protein shake, and get your work out. Your look better, and your body will thank you for it. Not to mention...it might help you get laid (that’s a plus isn’t it?!?)

Do Not Have a Cell Phone Cell phones make people too accessible and are way too expensive. Have a low grade dsl internet or cable connection and talk to people using magicjack and/or communicate via email. They also now have magictalk. I am not telling not to keep in touch with the outside world, what I am suggesting is that cell phones are expensive and you could probably do something better than paying than $50-$70 a month or more cell phone bill. If you need to have a phone outside in case of emergencies, get a prepaid phone with minutes that don’t expire very quickly. Remember a dollar saved is a dollar earned.

Do Not Have a Netflix or Blockbuster Membership

These days many libraries have movies including the latest releases. Also sites now like Hulu offer shows for free online. One can also get something like Hulu Plus for less than $10 a month for a wider selection of programs. It just makes sense to save money however we can rather than in this case spending $30-$50 per month on a Netflix or Blockbuster membership. It doesn’t sound like much, but you do the math. Look around this book at all the cost savings I suggest. You will be saving so much, it would be like getting a second job, except without doing all the work.

Do Not Buy Books or Cds

Popular books and cds can be gotten at the library and music can now be downloaded for free or for very low cost on the internet. Cds can also be gotten from the library as well. For instance, Amazon is now offering kindle edition of books, which are generally much cheaper than the printed version. If you are a college student and/or someone requiring a textbook, consider getting the earlier edition. It is a lot cheaper than the newer version, and there is virtually no difference in the book. So what is the difference in editions you might ask?

Many editions come out within 3 years of each other, and for classes like American Government, new editions come out annually. The only difference between the new edition and the most recent previous edition, is the copyright date, perhaps that might have also moved some chapters around, and performed spell check again...and one more thing. The older edition might be about 10 times cheaper than the new one. Why buy the new edition for $100 or more when you can get the older edition for $5 or less? Hurry, there might be an auction ending on Ebay right now, you might get it for 99 cents plus shipping. Do Not be in Such a Rush to Move Out of Your Parents’s House

Parents are usually not in a rush for you to move out as much as they are in a rush for you to stop asking them for money. Get a job, save your money, and buy your own place in cash.

The reason why the cycle of poverty and financial slavery continue is people continue to take money out of their own pockets and put it into the pockets of someone else. Whether it be rent or a mortgage, paying money to someone else is a waste of money. Whether it is rent or a mortgage, once you are separated from that money, you are separated from it permanently.

By saving your money and living in your parents’s home, you ensure that when you do finally move out it is smooth transition. No more slumming it on a friend’s couch or having a remote. You will have the opportunity to move out of your parents’s house, and live on your on free and clear without that crippling overhead cost (even if your parents still are trying to pay their house off).

Going in to debt is a problem that is spawned by poor choices. We end up going into debt and usually further into debt because we try to get outside out of one problematic financial situation by getting into another. Getting into any form of debt is never a solution to any of your problems. It just forestalls the envelope with a balloon full of acid and knives when it bursts open and rips through your flesh.

Travel Around the World for Free

If you are going to travel, take advantage of one of those 18-30 programs which allows one to work while one travels which allows one to pay for the trip and take in the culture as well.

Never settle for the status quo. If you do not believe the United States for you, don’t be afraid to travel around the world and find out what else is out there. Maybe you’ll find something better, maybe you won’t. My advice to you is to try; don’t live your life with regret. Never look back and wonder what could have been. Give everything in life your best shot, and win lose, succeed or fail, you will satisfied to know you gave it your best. A life full of regrets isn’t a life at hole; it just a wasteful existence full of shattered dreams.

Don’t Struggle, File Bankruptcy If you are way over your head or struggling to pay debts, file bankruptcy. Filing bankruptcy will ruin your credit for a few years, but your credit was already ruined to begin with. Besides, credit is just another form of dependency and one just needs to kick the habit. The things one needs such as utilities (water, electricity, etc.) will still be able to be acquired with bad credit, it will just cost one a little more in the form of a deposit. However, paying a deposit for utilities is still better than paying back those high debts.

The ultimate goal one should have when it comes to finances, is to reduce one’s overhead costs, and try to save as much as possible. We all are capable of making financial mistakes...we all make them. The key is what does one do when a mistake occurs. Sometimes a mistake is too big to be fixed. One may have extended oneself too far and has no way of pulling the reel back in. The smartest thing to do in those type of instances, is to cut ones’ loses and start anew. Filing bankruptcy offers one that opportunity. Why settle for struggling when you can have piece of mind? File bankruptcy today and put the past behind you. You’ll wake up happier tomorrow.

What if One Has Kids Already?

If one already has kids, one needs to implement as much of these ideas as possible. One should indoctrinate one’s children with these principles and make them take responsibility for their own lives. Having kids does not mean having to go broke. What it means is you need to have clear financial boundaries.

Children should learn at an early age that they cannot always get everything they want; and in life...usually one doesn’t. I would recommend limiting your child’s television and internet time. They instead should be involved in reading, going to the library, and physical activities.

Children should never have name brand clothes. One of the primary reasons is because they are constantly growing, therefore the clothes they get won’t last. Some of the clothes I have, I have had them for more than 20 years. The other reason is name brand clothes are expensive, and for their purpose (and most of us in general), off brand clothes are just as good, without making you go broke.

Parents often worry about making sure their children have everything they didn’t have. The first thing would be to make sure they start off with a positive role model. A positive role model teaches them good values. Good values include working for what you want and being disciplined in what you do. Parents also do not realize how valuable a resource children can be.

Children might not be able to do everything an adult can but they are loyal. They do not have to be quite the financial burden that parents make them out to be. If one is self employed, children can be an intricate part of your business. Children love to help, it makes them feel useful, and in reality they can be useful. If a child is taught things at an early age, say 5 years old, they can begin to grasp simple concepts. They might be a little slower to comprehend and understand, but they will get the hang of it. With supervision and guidance, children can do many of the things an adult can do, including: Answering the phone - they can work in a modified receptionist capacity. Organizing files and folders. They can also make copies, fax documents, and possibly send emails. Some of these tasks might be too much for some children, and their skill level will probably vary with age.

The good news is unlike many adults, children will usually try their best and give you 100% of what they have. Working together with your child, will allow you to build a stronger relationship with them. As your child matures, you may have an opportunity to build a better relationship, rather than one that tends to fragment over time as they develop their own interests.

What About Vacations?

It is important to plan vacations in advance. Maybe have a timeshare or home in the woods. Never pay full price, look for discounts and deals. Everyone needs some downtime from their everyday life, but that does not mean one should go broke in the process. There are many remote areas in the United States, that are away from big cities, and big industry and retailers. As a result, these type areas offer affordable places to vacation and relax.

Many of these areas offer timeshare opportunities in which a person can have the exclusive use of a property for one or more designated weeks during the year. The property is professionally maintained and offer a host of amenities. Many of these timeshares can be purchased second hand at a reduced rate from individuals or companies. The timeshare might have failed to sell as many slots as expected and/or some people might have decided to change their mind about using it and are just looking to get rid of it.

In terms of vacations, such as going on cruise lines, or Disney World, many of these type vacations can be secured significantly below the retail price. Often times companies may be running promotion in conjunction with a cruise line or family destination spot. The key is to plan a vacation well in advance, to maximize savings, and avoid any potential last minute snafues.

Work Part time by Reducing One’s Overhead By reducing one’s overhead one also has the potential to work part time giving one more time for oneself to pursue other ventures. The concept of working full time means there is essentially no time for you. The average person spends 11 hours, preparing, commuting, and being at work. With most people awake approximately 16 hours a day, that leaves a person at most, 5 hours a day to themselves. Most of us really only have 2-3 hours to themselves, particularly if one tries to take care of themselves by eating healthy meals and exercise. Additionally the typical errands one has to perform in a day eat up at least an hour on average as well. As a result, people do not have enough time to pursue other endeavors they might be interested in. Consequently, the average person is nothing more than a working drone, whose sole purpose in life appears to be working until they are no longer valuable, a.k.a. retired. Who wants to live that way.

By reducing one’s overhead costs such as housing, vehicle, fuel consumption, food, clothes, and other living expenses, a person might find that a part time job is although they need to survive. Yes, I did say survive. The mistake that most of us make is that we are looking at a job as a means to get ahead in life...that is where the mistake begins.

The only way to get ahead in life is by pursuing one’s own endeavors. As long as you are working for someone else, you will never get ahead in life, or at least, not with any life yet. Ever hear of people dropping dead soon after retirement? Ever wonder why? It is because people have driven their body so far into the ground, that by the time they retire, they discover they were running on fumes. Their bodies were function do to ritual and momentum and not because they have anything left. As a result, when they stop working, so do their bodies. Here’s something else.

When a person spends 40 or 50 years working out in the street, who are they? I mean really? You might say oh, that is so and so, their wife is blah, blah, blah, and their kids are yada, yada, yada. But what else can you say about that person, other than where they work at, and whose in their family? The average person has no true identity outside of work and family.

What one discovers when they retire, is not only are they a stranger to their family (many retired couples learn this when they begin spending more time with each other after they retire), but one is also a stranger to oneself. One spent so many years working for someone else and fitting the mole that someone else made, that they discover they have no self identity. This is why many retired people become depressed, have mid life crises, and end up getting divorce. They soon discover, once they retire, that the life they had been living all those years, was in fact not a life at all, but just a shell of an existence, packaged around mundane ritualistic activities. Self discovery is supposed to happen in one’s youth not in one’s 50s, 60s, and 70s.

Living one’s life to its fullest, does not necessarily mean making the most money you can, it means, discovering who you are and living out your life’s goals and ambitions to the best of your full potential. Don’t be afraid to fail. Don’t live life with regrets. Discover who you are. In order to do so, you need the time to do it. That does not come from spending the lion’s share of your life working for someone else. It comes from spending that time discovering who you are.

I am not telling you to be a dreamer your whole life, you’ll never accomplish anything. What I am telling you is to try doing the things you are interested in and see where they lead you. Life is about making mistakes and taking chances. If you always live life close to the vest you may never discover what was waiting for you just over the horizon. Look into Telecommute Positions. Great Way to Save Money on Gas

Telecommute positions are an excellent way to escape from the everyday grind. They do generally pay less, and you will still be working, but you will be home in your own environment, which brings a person a lot of piece of mind. Even if one decided to work “full time” at a telecommute position; their full time would be less than someone else’s.

Since the average 40 hour week is 45 hours, including lunch, which turns into 55 hours counting commute, time, a person working from home can save themselves on average 3 hours a day and 15 hours a week in work time. Since the average person work 50 weeks a year, that would be a savings of 750 hours in work time, or 18.75 hours less a week. That means that in terms of hours, the average full time telecommuter would be working similar or less total annual hours as a teacher (particularly when one factors in commute time).

A savings of 3 hours a day in work time, means a person would only be devoting 50% of their awake time to work instead of the average person who devotes 68.75% of their time to work (or 11 hours a day). By reclaiming 18.75% of your day back you will feel significantly refreshed. You will not experience the perpetual wear and tear on your body that they average person experiences from having to commute to work. By not having to be around people on a daily basis, you want have to put on that phony face and smile that is necessary to make it through the day. You will be less apt to drag out of bed in the morning. You can set your own schedule. You can have time to exercise, eat right, and work on your own projects.

In short, by telecommuting instead of commuting to work everyday, you will have something the average person doesn’t... a life. Look at the people around you everyday; they look like zombies. They generally talk in a monotone voice, have bags under their eyes, their clothes aren’t as fresh and pressed as the could be, makeup is a bit off, their teeth are a bit unkept, and they are carrying about 20 or 30 extra pounds than they should. Newsflash folks, NOBODY LIKES GETTING UP EVERYDAY GOING TO WORK AND WORKING OUTSIDE!!!

Most of think it is the work itself that we abhor. In reality it is what is generally involved in work that we find repugnant. Most of us are not inherently lazy. Most of us would be bored out of our minds if we just sat at home watching Maury and Jerry Springer everyday. The problem we have is we cannot grasp and comprehend why working has to be so difficult. Even if one has to work outside, why does it have to be all day? Can’t I get a little time to myself?

It is that dichotomy of unanswered questions that leaves people in a perpetual state of dissatisfaction. Dissatisfied with their work situation, and with life in general. As a result, those negatives feelings and emotions are transferred onto ourselves. We think less of ourselves because of the life we are living or the lack thereof. As a result, we cut part of ourselves off to protect ourselves from the unrelenting monotony that is masquerading around as our lives.

We all deserve better than the lives we are living, but few of us ever demand more. We gradually come to except a life that is less than what we imagined, and less than what we can bare. We become empty vessels, cloaked in the veil of human skin. We seem to be human on the outside; capable of being creative, imaginitive and free spirited. But inside we are trapped in a cycle of industrial slavery. Trapped in a world that we had no hand in making but that for some reason we have come to accept. Take back your life and break the chains of industrial bondage.

Always Bring Your Food With You

Never buy lunch or other meals during the ordinary course of your work day. Simply put outside food is bad for you. It is highly processed and very expensive. If you don’t know what’s going into your body then you shouldn’t eat it. All of these different diseases and illnesses that have emerged over the last 100 years are the result eating highly processed food with all sorts of unusually ingredients that one needs a rocket scientist to pronounce.

Eating food is not brain surgery, and it shouldn’t take an advanced degree in biology, physics, or chemistry to fully comprehend what’s going into one’s body. We need to stop poisoning ourselves, and stop consuming these products that companies have masquerading around as food. It’s almost as if there is a conspiracy of collusion between health insurance companies and these producers of processed food (along with having the FDA in their back pocket).

Think about, the worst the food is for you, the more the health insurance companies make. They don’t want you to get so sick that you will die (they can’t make much money off a corpse [some but not much]), but they don’t want you to be so healthy that you think you can live without their “insurance” over your health. The FDA must have an approach, that want doesn’t immediate kill you makes you stronger.

How can the FDA allow such highly processed food make it to the food aisle and call it safe for public consumption? Why would they do this unless something was in it for them? Kickbacks in the form of homes, money, sexual favors? Why are they not protecting us from these Food Producing Terrorists? Is it because they are card carrying members of the “Good Old Boy Network?” I don’t have the answers to these questions but maybe your local representative does. Wait...is the person a US European Male? Then you may be in for the run around. Maybe the answer to your question is top secret and will be kept classified until 2050. Maybe it just won’t get answered at all. So you’re going to eat that hot dog? I guess you like the meat surprise? The surprise is in the meat.

Become a Vegetarian Eating vegetables is a lot less expensive than eating meat and good for you too. Have you ever stopped to consider why you consume meat? Do not tell me that is what I have always done, and my parents, have done, and their parents, etc.? I do believe that the consumption of meat is sin against humanity and a sin against God. Before you turn away to the next section, can I ask you a question? Do you kill for your own meat? If your answer is no, then please read on.

Killing an animal for the purpose of consuming its meat or for using its skin and/or its fur is wrong. Unless you are defending yourself from the aggressive attack of another, whether it be human or animal you should not kill. Do you know how the meat you consume gets from the state of life, to a pre packaged piece of flesh? Do you know why the meat you consume is designed not to look the animal it came from? Are you prepared to kill for your food?

Do you know what would happen if you walk up to a cow and started to beat on it in attempt to kill it for a piece of flesh, so you can have a hamburger? Probably nothing. It would probably just stand there defenseless and allowed itself to be beat on, by the person that had raised it from birth. Humans raise and take care of animals for the purpose of killing them. There are many names for that if done, to humans, but to a an animal it’s just livestock...unless it’s a cute dog or cat, then it’s called animal cruelty...how hypocritical.

Maybe you have convinced yourself that animals have no feelings and feel no pain. If that is the case, then why are they anesthetized prior to surgery, or prior to medical treatment? Or maybe you have convinced yourself that they don’t care, or don’t know they are going to die. Then why do pigs squeal and scream in horror every time they are killed?

Do you know how a chicken or duck or turkey is killed? It has it’s head cut off. Okay, okay, not so bad right? What about a pig. It is dragged on the ground by its tell, removed from the rest of the pigs, and then a bullet is put in its brain. Not so good right? What about your friendly neighborhood cow? It is led on an assembly line with many other cow and one by one a machine pumps a bullet into its brain. Does any of this sound humane? But I know, you need beef to live right??? Wrong.

The consumption of animal products is not essential for human survival. The reason why you experience heart burn, indigestion, acid reflux, and other digestive related problems, is because your body is experiencing an adverse reaction to the “food” you are eating. In other words Einstein...it is allergic to meat. But hey, maybe you’ll say I experience some of these symptoms when I eat vegetables too. Did you forget about the large portion of meat that is on the plate when those vegetables are consumed?

I’m not here to judge you (or maybe I am); but what I will say, if you are going to eat meat, do yourself a favor and try killing an animal once. No you’re not going to do that, okay. Then how about this. Watch a video on how animals are killed. After you do that let me know on my blog whether you are still as eager as you were earlier to bite into your next piece of flesh. I think that’s fair don’t you? You probably don’t, but do it anyway. You do so many other things you don’t want to do.

People keep saying that ignorance is bliss, but I never seem to understand that. I say, knowledge is power. Don’t you owe it to yourself to find out how your “food” gets from the state of life to on your plate? I imagine that most of us prefer and even make it a point to be kept left in the dark about matters they find “unpleasant.”

Most of us are not confrontational (although we may think otherwise). We prefer to avoid confrontations whenever possible. Although many of us talk a big game like 40 years of the Cold War, most of us are chicken shit. We hide behind our ignorance like it is a badge of bravery; when in reality it is a cesspool of ignorance. Anyone who is afraid to know the truth, needs to ask themselves why? Why are they afraid to have their beliefs challenged? Are you afraid you might change your mind, or learn that everything you ever believed is wrong? Or maybe you are just a mean son of bitch, and don’t care about yourself or others. Whatever the case is, at least now why you are the way you are.

Lose Weight, Eat less, Allows One to Save Money on Food

Most of us use our bodies as rental vehicles. We fill them up with junk and we don’t keep them in the condition we got them in. As a result, they break down and require unnecessary repairs. Or in the case of humans, unnecessary surgeries, and medicines to correct our destructive behavior. But we are never quite as good as we used to be.

The reason why most diets fails is because they are just that diets. They convince you that you have to give up your favorite foods or certain type of foods in exchange for losing weight. While those approaches might work in the short time, in the long term they do not. Eventually the diet will be over and all the negative behaviors that cause you to gain weight in the first place will still be there because they were never addressed.

The key to permanent weight loss is not a diet, but rather self control. Rather than completely giving up foods the rest of one’s life, one needs to consume food in moderation. One needs to essentially change the relationship one has with food. Instead of eating to get full, which causes one to feel tired and sluggish, one should instead eat to be satiated and be ready to eat again in 2-3 hours.

In order to consistently maintain one’s weight, one’s body must operate with a fast metabolism. People assume, as they age their metabolism slows down, which is why they gain weight and lose muscle. While that is technically true, it is not inevitable. Moderate exercise and a conservative diet will allow a person to maintain their youthful figure. They key is to be disciplined and consistent.

One must stick to a regular workout regimen and food plan in order to get consistent results. By eating every 2-3 hours, one keeps one’s body, out of starvation mode. Therefore, instead of the body holding onto stored fat deposits, it releases them because it has been conditioned to know that it be receiving nutritional support throughout the day.

Many people, see an overweight person and assume they must eat all day. While that may be true about the morbidly obese person, it is not true for the average overweight person. The average person eats several or even one large meal a day. As a result, they have a very slow metabolism and their body remains in starvation mode throughout the day. The consequence of that is they do not efficiently burn calories and the body is programmed to store high fat deposits. That is why you see people with pockets of fat around their hips and mid sections because that is where their body is storing fat.

Based on poor eating habits, the body is unsure of when it is going to receive food again so it slows its metabolism down and stores fat, in order to protect itself from starvation. Therefore, the problem that people have with food is not necessarily what they eat, it is how often and how much of that food they eat.

Most people have a negative relationship with their body in which they fail to give it the nutritional support it needs. As a result, the body reacts contrary to how we would want, but based on our actions, how we should expect. It stores fat and doesn’t burn calories because you don’t feed it. The solution: One needs to eat more meals with fewer calories and stopped treating their bodies like a trash compactor. Eat 5-6 small meals a days, rather than 2-3 big ones and you will see positive results.

Save Money by Saving Water

Cut the water off when you are showering and brushing your teeth, allowing one to save money on water. This may sound like a small thing, but what can as much as $5-$10 or $60-$120 a year on water. With more than 100 million households in the US, savings can add up to $500 million - $1 billion annually.

Water might seem like an endless renewable source because the majority of the planet is made up of water, but in reality it is not. We must consume fresh water, water that is salt free. Supplies of fresh drinking water are much less bountiful than the non consumable salt water that the oceans are mostly made of. That is why we hear so often about water shortages, and using sprinklers to water grass sparingly.

The purification facilities to clean our water are not inexpensive either. They also require massive amounts of nonrenewable energy to purify our drinking water. Without cutting back on the amount of water we needlessly waste, there may come a point in time in which the drinking water instead could be confused for...hot chocolate (if you know what I mea!?!)

Record Tv Shows Allow s o ne to watch one’s shows in a shorter amount of time, and avoid seeing manipulative purchase inducing commercials. Commercials might seem harmless, but they are a manipulative form of communication masquerading as non biased media. Every day, advertisers spend thousands and even millions of dollars on commercials with the goal of how to most effectively separate you from your money.

Every 30 minute show has 8 minutes of commercials and every 1 hour show has 16 minutes of commercial. When you watch a 30 minute cartoon show, you may notice that each scene last exactly 11 minutes, followed by a 4 minute commercial. Commercials are designed to target you when you are your most manipulable point; sitting relaxed starring at the tv. You don’t even know you are being manipulated.

They are designed to seem playful and innocent. Not too much information that it causes you to think, but just enough information that it catches your attention, and let’s you know what product it is. The messages are almost subliminal. Commercials are designed to plant phrases and images into one’s subconscious allowing them to be tapped into when one is making future decisions such as, which toothpaste to buy, where to go to get something to eat, or where to buy one’s next car.

It is at the point when you are making a decision about something, that your subconscious mind will be activated, causing you to remember parts of the commercial even though consciously you do not know you are doing it. Companies spend millions of dollars, using marketing teams, and market surveys, and sample items, to find out the most manipulative ways to influence your buying decision making.

Commercials are pathetic yet effective attempts to sell you items you do not need in order to separate you from your money. You never see the electric, water, or gas company advertise for business because those are things that you need. Products you need do not require advertising. Items you do not need do because of the goal of separating you from your money you would otherwise keep for yourself and your family.

So the next time you see a commercial, don’t just laugh and think it is an innocent way to spend 30 seconds. Hold on to your purse or wallet, because they may figure out a way to come through the screen and take your money while they leave you in a trance like hypnotic state.

Save Money by Get A Portable A/C and Heating Unit You do not need to cool off your entire house at once. This allows one to save money on electricity. While you modern home dwellers with your HVAC units may be believe that portable a/cs and portable heating units are reserved only for the poor, you might want to think? Explain why it makes sense to cool or heat an entire house if you are only in one or two rooms at a time. Sure, if you are having company over, or having people staying in your home, it might make sense to turn on the central system. But does it make sense if you are home alone?

Many people see that heating and cooling bills soar to over $200 a month, when the cost could perhaps be less than half that by using a portable unit. One could save upwards of $100 per month or $1200 per year. That means as a whole, the US could save over $120 billion a year on heating and fueling cost. That is no small lump of change. Savings do add up. The goal in life is to work smarter, not harder. The smartest thing to do is to be as efficient as possible with how we spend our money.

Live in an Area that Charges Less Property Taxes and

Live in a State That Does Not Charge Income Taxes

Saving money on property taxes will save one money in the long run. Less taxes means more money for you. Taxes is how the government directly separates you from the money you earn. While you cannot avoid taxes entirely, there are ways to reduce them.

With the not so recent economic downturn, home prices are at all time lows. As a result, property taxes have dramatically fallen as well; in some place moreso than others. Why live in one area and pay double or triple the property taxes or more, versus living somewhere with the same size home or larger, and pay dramatically less for it and the property taxes. For many the answer may be simple: “I can’t afford to leave, because of my job;” or “I can’t sell my home because I owe more on it than it is worth.” My advice to them is self employment and a short sale. So I guess I will speak to the rest of you...is there anyone else out there???

All areas are not created equal. I urge you to research different areas throughout the United States and see how far your money will go, particularly if you are retired, retiring, self, employed, telecommuting, a student, or somewhere in between. Don’t be loyal to a given area, because the cost of living is not loyal to you. As I have stated before, ignorance is not bliss. Ignorance is a very costly condition. Not having knowledge costs you money and causes you to work a lot harder than you have to.

Depending on where you live state income taxes can cost you up to 10% of your gross income, like in California, and property taxes can cost one more than $10,000 a year. That means a family of four with a modest family income of $45,000 could be losing upwards of $15,000 a year just on property and state income taxes. No matter where you live, you can’t escape from the Federal Reserves taking their cut. That means that a family of four could see their net income reduced from $45,000 to $25,000 or even $20,000 before they spend even one red cent (scary how taxes work isn’t it). By moving to an area with lower state and property taxes, you will at least guarantee yourself of seeing more of your money, instead of seeing it being used to pay for new designer police vehicles and laptops, and to pay the salaries of law enforcement to write you citations every time you pull out of your driveway, or go one mile over the speed limit.

Buying a modular home is also another way to save on property taxes. Many times, modular home are classified as vehicles, or something with a depreciating value. While that might be bad for resale purposes, it is great for those looking for a reduced monthly overhead. Usually modular homes are cheaper than stick built properties, and many times because of zoning regulations they are in more remote areas on larger pieces of land.

Live in a Low Population Density Area

Low population density means lower auto insurance rates. Let’s face it, just about every place you live, auto insurance is mandatory (another fine scheme cooked about by lobbyists and special interest groups). Why pay more for the same no service coverage if you can be “legal” for less. Insurance rates are not all created equal. One can pay thousands of dollars a year more for auto insurance for the exact same vehicle for the exact same coverage. It is all based on population density.

I would probably tell you in places where the cost of insurance is so astronomical, you should probably be taking public transportation, but if driving is in your blood, and you can’t live without it, you better pack your bags and move someplace else, or register your car at a friend or relative’s home in a place with a lower population density.

You should never just give your money over to someone, particularly if it is not beneficial to you. Always find ways to reduce your overhead by working around scenarios that separate you from your money without anything in return. Insurance usually rises to the top of the list. Similar to extended warranties, except if you have to use the warranty, you get what you paid for. Whereas with insurance, if you use, usually it is not what you expected and your rates go up, or you might get dropped.

Look to Buy Foreclosures and Bank Owned Properties Today banks are eager to unload foreclosed properties sitting on their books. These properties are not making them any money. In many cases, they are willing to take pennies on the dollar just to get rid of these homes. It is a great time to be a buyer if you have the money to buy. These homes will eventually go back up in value. When they do, those that bought home for $10k, $20, or $30, can see those same properties sell for $50k-$100k or more. In essence, many will be able to become multi-millionaires overnight when the real estate market recovers.

People are kind of like dumb animals when it comes to spending. They tend to forget what something sold for a month before, or even a week before. Eventually it will all seem like a bad memory when credit was hard to come by and homes were as cheap or cheaper than cars. My advice to you is to cash in now.

Even if you can’t or don’t plan to buy multiple, you should secure one for yourself now. Monthly mortgage payments can range from $500-$2500 or more. By eliminating one’s monthly mortgage payment, life will become a whole lot easier. The 3 biggest expenses a person has every month are: 1)Mortgage/Rent, 2)Vehicle Expenses, and 3)Food. Eliminating one of those Big 3 will feel like you just got a big raise. Follow all of my recommendations in this book, and you may feel like you have hit the lottery.

Offer to Babysit Neighbors’s Kids. This Can Allow One to Make Money on the Side

Babysitting is a great way to make income on the side, or a great way to make your primary income. In neighborhoods throughout the US, there are children. Many of those children need supervision during the day when their parent(s) are at work. As a local babysitter in the neighborhood you can provide convenience and affordability. Many parents will gladly pay you $100 a week to watch their children. A person can easily generate $1,000 per week without ever having to leave their home. One might have to do a little more cleaning than usual, but $1,000 a week isn’t bad.

Sell Items on Ebay You No Longer Want or Use. This

Will Allow One to Make Extra Money

Many people buy items, use them a few times, and then never use them again. Or one may buy an item, use it for some time and decide they need an upgrade. Regardless, selling one’s items on Ebay is a better alternative than turning one’s house into a storage facility.

Whether it be books that you have read, and are not going to read again, or a Cd you bought and then burned to your computer or ipod, or video games, movies, computers, workout equipment, home appliances, and even vehicles; Ebay is an excellent choice if one wants to make some extra money to just sell stuff they are no longer using.

One may also find they can do a little better than making extra money. One may have friends and family who buy items and don’t use them anymore, also neighbors, and even colleagues at work. People are an excellent source to make extra money by selling items they no longer want or use.

Donate Items. This Will Equal a Tax Writeoff

If one doesn’t have time or feel like selling one’s unwanted items on Ebay, donating is the next best choice. Usually one can receive the full adjusted retail price for the item and be able to reduce one’s adjusted gross income.

Use Student Loans to Buy the Things You Need Such as a House or a Car

They have low interest rates a payments can be stretched out over 30 years. Student loans can also be deferred and in some cases completely for-given. Student loans are a “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” source of additional money. While I don’t necessarily recommend it, they are an alternative to going out and slaving away in the “real world.”

The main problem people generally make with student loans, is they use them to live on or they buy something with them that doesn’t garner a return such as clothes, cars, etc. However, by investing the student loan money in such things as houses and business ventures, one can receive enough of a monthly return on one’s investment to easily make the monthly student loans payments.

Student loans require no credit check and can be indefinitely deferred. As an undergraduate one can take out up to $8,500 a year and as a graduate student one can take out up to $20,500 a year, with an aggregate amount of $138,500 (they must calculate pre interest). One should not take student loans out if they are planning to live on them, or have no way, or no plans to pay them back. Student loans are the only consumer debt that cannot be discharged in bankruptcy, so borrow wisely.

Buy an Electric Shaver. Save Money on Shaving Blades and Shaving Cream

Many shavers, particularly the knock off versions, can be purchased for around $10. A pack of shaving blades can cost as little as $2 for a twin blade pack of 10, to as much as $10 or more for a 4 pack of four or five blade shavers. Depending on how once uses shaving blades, one can easily spend $10 a month or more on blades which can quickly add up.

One should try to you blades more than once and avoid shaving with the water on. Many times we will find we have to add more shaving creme to our hands because it rinsed off while we were shaving. Whereas if the water remains off, we can “reuse” the shaving creme we already have on our hands.

Shop at Dollar Stores. Get the Same Items for Drastically Reduced Prices

Many of the items we buy in regular retail stores can be purchased at dollar store type places for just one dollar. I have seen such items as can openers, lotion, deodorant, different types of food, books, some clothes, stationary, sun glasses, and other item. Normally these items can cost as much as 5 or ten times at a regular. Regardless of what you are looking for, it is worth a look at your local dollar store.

Buy Furniture and Appliances Used. Avoid the Retail Prices

The obsession of buying things new is a character flaw. The reason why landfills are so full of garbage and other items that people throw away is because we have no concept of recycling. We are constantly buying new things without ever attempting to recycle the old. As a result, we don’t have the space or desire to keep the old item around so we place it outside to be picked up by the trash.

The problem with that scenario is that is not the end of the process. These items make it to the landfill and are just left there to rot. No one wants the landfill in their neighborhood, but no one is looking to reduce their wasteful habits that cause landfills to fill up so quickly. Buying previously owned items is not about just saving money, it’s about saving the environment too. If that does matter...maybe this will.

One day you might put your garbage out. If you are like me you don’t follow the local news or signs posted around your neighborhood. The next day you go to collect your trash can and discover that all the trash is still there. Your initial thought is that it must be a holiday. Later you find there was no holiday, the trash simply was not picked up. The reason being the local landfill is full, and there is no where else to put the trash.

People will then have to start paying to have their trash removed and taken to other locations. Most however will probably begin burning their trash which will pollute local air quality. Burning one’s trash might eliminate small items, but what about those large items you put at the side of the road? What are you going to do with them? If you leave them outside the city will fine you? There’s no space inside for them? Don’t like this scenario...then do something about. Stop being so selfish and start thinking about the long term effects of your actions. You don’t on this planet alone...stop acting like you do!!!

Focus on Your Net Income, Not Your Gross Salary Determine the cost of living in different areas and find out how far your money will go. Many times making less money results in one saving more depending on what area one lives in.

People focus a lot on gross income, but gross income has no real value. For instance, the highest tax bracket in US history was in 1944 and 1945 when the highest bracket was 94% (http://answers.yahoo.com question/index?qid= 20090209171608AAS7Z0v). The only amount one should be concerned about is the net amount one receives, anything else is cursory at best.

Depending on where you live and where you want to relocate to, a pay decrease might end up being a pay increase. For instance, let’s say you are living someplace making $75,000 a year, state income taxes are 10% and rent is $3,000 per month. If you relocate to another area in which the rent is $600 a month and there are no state income taxes, you would only need to make about $39,000 for the same net income and housing situation. Therefore, in a place with no state income taxes and much lower rent, a $25,000 decrease in salary would increase your net income by $11,000.

Ownership is Not the Same as Making Payments

One does not own anything if one is still making payments. Plan your finances according to worst case doomsday scenarios. Can you afford your lifestyle if someone in your family gets sick or you lose your job? If your answer is no then you need to downsize your life. What if you came back home and everything was burned to the ground. Prioritize your life.

Do Not Use Your Home as a Piggy Bank

Your house is your fortress, your kingdom from the rest of the world. Do not let others get their hands on it. Keep your hands off your property’s equity. Do not trust anyone. Do not invest in other’s ideas. Stay away from those with dreams rather than goals and ways to accomplish those goals.

Back in 1982, my family acquired a property for $62,000. The down payment on the property was $50,000. Leaving a monthly payment of $179 per month over the course of 12 years. In 1990, my mother met a young man who was 9 years her junior. This man promised her the world, but never delivered on any of his promises.

In 1994, after the property was owned free and clear, my mother took out $50k on the property, with monthly payments of $750. By 2004 she had taken out a total of $370k on the property with monthly payments in excess of $2,000 a month. Where did the money go you, ask? The answer is no idea. The house was in my mother’s name, but it was my grandmother’s money (my mother’s mother) that paid for the house. Now my grandmother is more than 80 years old and still lives in the house. My mother now lives in father with that same man who convinced her to take out all that money over the course of 10 years, living in a house with a negotiated monthly payment of $900 per month. Her mother is on a fixed social security income of $700 per month. She has no ability to pay for the more than $2,000 per month note that her daughter incurred on her property.

In the 20 plus years I have known this man my mother is married to he has never made any steady money. He has been a dreamer his whole life. Because of a bad diet and no exercise he has already had 2 strokes before the age of 50. He now receives a monthly disability payment in the amount of $900. It is the only steady income he has brought to the marriage and they have been married since 1994.

My point is, you should never invest in other people’s dreams. While it is okay to be supportive of someone else’s ambitions, one should not make a financial investment into them. Because when the chips are down and it is time to recoup the spent funds, the dreamer will always just shrug their shoulders and laugh it off, and act as if it is no big deal. It is no big deal to them because they do not have to deal with the financial responsibility of their actions.

Don’t be Afraid to Fail

Failure is a part of life, being afraid to fail is being afraid to live. However, chances taken should be calculated and risks should be kept to a minimum.

All of us should dream, however dreams need to be harnessed. Sometimes we get so caught up with our dreams that we do not actually live. I have known people who I will call the big dreamers. The big dreamers are the type who are focusing on one big deal or outcome, and they focus on it to the exclusion of everything else.

The problem with focusing on one big dream or one big goal to the exclusion of everything else, is that big dream or big goal may not come to fruition. One has to consider how one is going to support oneself while that dream or goal is being developed. If one has family and one is a big dreamer one will be come a dependent on that family as well as a severe financial detriment to that family.

Dreams should never be forgotten about, but they must be kept as hobbies until they are fully developed. One needs to definitely work on one’s goals in order for them to be realized, but one has to be able to support oneself as well.

One thing one should keep in mind is not to expect a lot of friends or family support for one’s big goal or dreams. Most people are not dreamers, and if they are, chances are they gave up on their dreams a long time ago. Do not let others discourage you. Focus on your goals. In some cases it may be important to keep your progress to yourself, in order to avoid others negatively influencing you.

Nothing is ever entirely brand new. Learn from others mistakes and successes. Just like anything, in order to be successful it is going to take work and it is going to take research. The more knowledge one can acquire from other sources outside of oneself the better.

Don’t Be in Such a Rush to Grow Up?

A lot of the mistakes that are made early on in adulthood can be avoided if we just take our time. Many young people are in such a rush to get out of their parents house that they end up getting themselves in trouble.

A lot of those early adulthood mistakes particularly like racking up huge amounts of debts can be avoided if one stays at home a little while longer. Most parents are not in a rush for one to leave the house as much as they are looking forward to their child becoming self sufficient. One of the most expensive bills a person can have is keeping a roof over one’s head.

Until a young person gets out into the real world and has to start paying those bills, one has no idea how expensive things are, and more importantly how quickly things add up. Typical bills a young person has to face include: rent (maybe renter’s insurance), water and electricity (maybe gas), cable tv and internet, phone bill, groceries, laundry, gasoline, auto insurance, car payment, and household miscellaneous items. Living on one’s own is typically fairly expensive, and a lot of young people end up having to get a roommate in order to make ends meet. Also a lot of young people do not have good credit and end up having difficulty being able to secure a deposit and/or end up having to pay high deposits.

The best advise I can give a young person just starting out is to save your money. Do not go and acquire a high number of credit cards. Quite frankly I do not believe in the use of credit at all, although one should keep in mind for utility purposes such as water, gas, electricity, no credit probably will result in one paying a deposit, but one does get the deposit back after 12 months. For many, credit works as a safety blanket, my recommendation is find another blanket.

One of the biggest financial disasters one can face is if one becomes sick and has no health insurance. It seems that President Obama is working on a health plan and hopefully it works out. Like credit, I do not believe in health insurance either. Unfortunately, medical services without health insurance is so high that it turns one life into financial suicide without it. The best advise is to remain as healthy as possible, by eating healthy, exercising, getting a proper amount of sleep, and keep one’s stress levels as low as possible. Prevention is the key when it come to one’s health.

I’m Really Here Because I Want the Job, I’m Not Going

to Pick Up and Leave After Two Weeks In today’s over saturated job market, it is a employer’s market. Prospect employers can be very picky about whom they hire for positions. As a consequence to this phenomenon, many people are employed in fields in which they do not have degrees; thus the misplaced worker.

At some point, maybe even today, you may find yourself in a position in which you are applying for a job outside of your area of expertise. In many cases one qualifies for these positions, but so do a lot of other people. Employers may choose to steer clear of you because they believe you are overqualified for the position.

If you are lucky enough to secure an interview for one of these positions, and the issue of being overqualified comes up, you will need to convey to the employer, that you are applying for the job because you believe your skills and background most closely match the needs of the position.

You will have to express that all though it is true you may be qualified for other positions, the position that you are interviewing for is the one you are interested end, not some potential hypothetical job out there that might have 1,000 people applying for the position.

A prospective employer needs to believe that you are worth investing the time in to extend a job offer to you. You must instill in them a belief that you will not be leaving them high and dry soon after you start the job because some “better” position comes along. You need to express to them if you offered the job you intend to stay at the position for a long time. You may end up leaving the position soon after you start it because a better position comes along, but at least you were being paid in the process.

Is the US Right for Me?

Living in the United States ultimately may not be right for everyone. This is a whole world that exist out there, and it is not just the United States. If you have trained to work in a certain field and suddenly find the job market very saturated, thinking about taking your skills elsewhere may not be a bad idea.

Just as it true a big fish always looks bigger in a small pond, well the same holds true for education and/or areas of expertise. In the United States, job markets have become very saturated. One can no longer just pick a field and decide one is going to work in it, particularly if one has not graduated from an ivy league school.

I recommend looking abroad if one wants to truly be able to pick a field one is interested in working in. There are a lot of less developed countries in the world. Arguably there will be less opportunities for positions than in the United States, but there will also be less competition for those positions too.

Just like one shouldn’t settle on being born in a certain town and live there for the rest of one’s life, one should not settle for living in a particular country one’s entire life, if it turns out that country is not right for you.

For instance in Canada like in many western countries around the world, even Cuba, universal health coverage is offered, which is something that does not currently exist in the Unite States (maybe by the time this book is published).

Some countries place an emphasis on one being proficient in math and science, which is no longer the US’s strong suit. Japan has lifetime employment, in the US they just throw you out to the wolves and you are completely on your own. Other countries place an emphasis on working less, and having more extended periods of time off.

Other countries are more ethnically tolerated and/or do not have the racial tension history that exist in the United States. Some countries have even had women elected to the highest office in the land.

Choosing the right country to live in should be an individual choice. One should not be forced to stick with the country one is born into. One must weigh all the pros and cons and decide accordingly.

Just Say No and Walk Away

Never Get Into Debt. Do Not Get Into Debt Because Debt is a Form of Slavery.

Debt creates an obligation to something other than oneself.

Getting into debt is a form of modern day serfdom. A serf is defined as someone in the lowest class of society, subject to the will of the landowner, whose land one occupies. How would you define a person who is in debt? A person who is in debt has negative equity. A person who is in debt has less than zero.

A person who is in debt is working to get to zero, working just to be free; similar to a person who is in slavery, or serfdom. A person in debt works not to get ahead in life, but to avoid being sucked under. From high car and mortgage payments, student loan payments, taxes, insurance, and child care related expenses, a person can be working indefinitely with no end to their negative equity status in site.

Even if one is able to file bankruptcy, all of one’s problems do not magically go away. One still needs a roof over one’s head; that’s an overhead expense. If one has children, those child care related expenses still exist. Most importantly, if one has student loans, they cannot be discharged, which one is obligated to pay, or face their wages being garnished. Going into debt sucks the life blood out of your existence. Once in debt, you are no longer working with the prospects or toward retirement, you are working just to survive. Those you are indebted to control all your money. The contractual obligations you have signed and/or agreed to are boilerplate. Meaning you had no say in the terms or conditions. They are able to determine how much the payments are, what the interest rate is, and what constitutes default.

In essence you have given something or someone the legal right to harass until the debt is paid off, or until you die, whichever comes first. Don’t think you can escape the debts with death. Your heirs will be responsible for those debts long after you are gone. Therefore, debt not only destroys your life, but the lives of your family members as well.

Do Not Have Children Until One is Done Working

Everyone can retire by 40 years old. A man should not have a child until he is at least 40 years old. A man should always be married to a younger woman. A woman can work until 35 and then begin to have children.

Forty might seem like an early age to retire, but it is realistic. If one begins working at the age of 18, by the time they reach 40 years old, they would have been working at their trade for more than 20 years. If they have been smart and have incurred no debts, have no kids, and invested in their profession, they should be in a position to retire.

When I speak of retirement, what I am referring to is the ability to generate passive income. Meaning, one no longer has to be actively involved in generating the income necessary to sustain oneself. Passive income works for you, even when you are not working for it. For instance, if you are a contractor, plumber, electrician, or a mechanic, if you have been diligently working at your craft since you were 18, by the time you reach 40, your business should be at the point where it is no longer necessary for you to babysit it to keep it afloat. By 40, one should have employees who are doing most of the work for one, shifting one’s position from active co-worker, to supervisor. As a supervisor one is able to curtail the schedule in a manner best suited for them.

Once one has solidified one’s income, one can move to the next stage of development which is building oneself a family. To jump to the family development phase before solidifying one’s income is financial and familial suicide is dooming both to failure, because one will never be in a position to give either the full attention it needs. Thus, causing both to wither in neglect and die from abandonment. We don’t jump into the shower without first taking our clothes off. Why should we jump into family planning without first being prepared for the responsibility?

Own a Home, Do Not Have a Mortgage There are many homes out there for less than $50k. Everyone can have a house free and clear that is fully paid for. In cities all across the United States, homes can be procured for less than $50k; and I am not speaking about small cities. In places like Jacksonville, Atlanta, Charlotte, Houston, Dallas, Chicago, Indianapolis, and others, homes are available for considerably less than $50k; and I am not talking about shacks. I am talking about homes with nice size yards, 3 and 4 bedrooms, 2 or more bathrooms, and a garage.

These home might not be in perfect, they are older, some built in the 1980s, some as far back as the 1920s, but they are not dilapidated, they just need some TLC. The reason why they are so low in price is because they are competing against newer homes. Homes that starting out overpriced and overvalued from their inception. Homes in which people got in them for more than they could afford to pay and ended up being foreclosed upon.

As a result older homes, which were lower in value to start with, quickly depreciated. The upside of all of this is today you can get into a home free and clear, solidify your living situation, and lower your monthly overhead. Having a mortgage at this point (and to be honest any point) in time deserves the “Idiot’s Choice Award” for dumbest possible decision you can make.

Chapter: The Myth of Education: Why the Education System Needs to be Reformed

Do I Really Need to Go to College?

I am a very well educated person (Bachelor’s Master’s and Doctorate degrees). I do not say that to brag, quite the opposite. I say that because I amassed an impressive education with a lot of debt to go with it.

A Personal Reflection on the Value of a College Degree and/or The Problems Having One Can Cause

I have lived in this country for 36 years. Twenty eight out of those 36 years have been spent in school. Those years in school have earned me a high school diploma; a bachelor’s in political science, a master’s in library science, and a juris doctorate in law.

I have never had a job that has lasted even one year. The longest job I ever had was for 10 months in a electronic sales position at a retail store. Although I have applied for many jobs of a higher nature, no position has ever been offered to me. For all intense purposes I have virtually no high skilled work experience. The old saying no experience without a job and no job without experience holds true. But who is responsible for getting me that experience, who is responsible for helping me secure that job. Is it the society that charges citizens taxes to school its children? Is it the school system that charges money to local property owners to pay for school? Is it the colleges and universities that take your money and send you own your way with only a piece of paper that says that you graduated? I ask you, who is responsible? The answer is they all are.

The government has a responsibility to its citizens to ensure that we reach our maximum potential. The more successful we are the more we can contribute to society. Except the government seems less concerned with seeing to it that we reach our maximum potential and more concerned with controlling us.

For instance, my wife and I, with combined academic total of 50 years of education recently found ourselves on the wrong side of the law. A few years ago we attempted to start an online company and purchased some books from a bookclub. Faced with many years in prison, we ending up accepting a plea deal which made us lifetime felons. Neither one of us had ever been arrested, charged, or convicted of anything in our lives. Now we are convicted felons.

Would it have not made more sense for the government to see to it that we were in the best position to earn the most money in order to pay back the company we owe. Instead by making us lifetime felons, we are forever limited if not completely prohibited from making money in the fields of expertise we went to school for.

We owe more than $230,000 in student loans and more than $100,000 to this company for a total of more than $340,000. Stripped of our ability to earn a decent living, we will most likely never pay these debts back, instead the American people will be left to deal with them. With no ability to work in our fields of expertise, we will earn very little and make a negligible, at best, financial contribution to society, compared to the amount of money we could have generated before it stripped us of our rights to work. Who suffers, all of us suffer. But this is just one example of what happens everyday.

Everyday poor people are targeted by this government for the purposes of taking away their rights as citizens in this country. Convicted felons, whether one is convicted of murder or receiving items in the mail they did not pay for are forever barred from certain activities in this country.

As a convicted felon, one loses the right to vote, loses the right to posses a firearm, loses the right to be on a jury, loses the right to hold any public office, loses the right to have a professional license of any sort. Nearly every potential employer now does criminal background checks. A criminal background check is standard when deciding whether to allow someone to rent an apartment. Criminal background checks are done by some countries prior to letting one visit. In essence one is barred from ever becoming a productive citizen and almost forced to turn to a life of crime.

Instead of the government taking the position of trying to ensure that its citizens reach its maximum potential, it takes on the role of an authoritarian regime, with the goal of enforcing its laws with extreme prejudice, with zero second chances, and zero opportunities for reform and/or rehabilitation. Unlike when a person files for bankruptcy in order to have a clean start, with a bankruptcy falling off of one’s credit report after 7-10 years, criminal convictions never go away. One could have committed a petty crime at 18 years old, and at 40 or even 50 years old, that one infraction with the law is still chasing one around like a scarlet letter. With no opportunity for a fresh start what does society expect one to do.

The Goal of Government in Educating and Otherwise Taking Care of the Masses Unfortunately the goal of the government is to control the masses for the benefit of the oligarchy, for the benefit of the elite. The government has no egalitarian purpose. Everything the government does is to serve as a pacifier and nothing more. For instance the implementation of social security was not actually designed to take care of people, but rather to give one an illusion one is being taken care of. No one can leave on the meager amount one gets from social security, but yet it makes people think that the government cares about them.

The government provides one with a education up through the 12th grade, but was the expectation that one take that education and go work in subsistence jobs for less than $10 an hour. For the average person the answer would be no, but for the government the answer is yes. After all, the minimum wage is set at well below $10 an hour which is not enough to support one person let alone a family even if two people were earning money from minimum wage jobs it would not be enough to support a family. But again setting a minimum wage and providing a basic education gives one the illusion the government cares about them.

The government provides a police force supposedly to keep people safe, yet we have some of the unsafest streets for an industrial society in the world, yet the United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world. Surely one would argue that the police are designed to keep people safe. If that were true why does it not occur. Police know where all the crime areas are. They know where drug deals are happening and places where individuals are most likely to find themselves victims of crimes, yet the drug dealers remain on the street and murders, rapes, and robberies still occur. But the police give one the illusion the government cares about one.

Some may say that those that commit crimes do not deserve the right to vote or serve in elected office, but is that true for women and minorities too. In the 2000 presidential election, Al Gore was voted by the majority of the voters to be President of the United States, but instead George Bush became president...how did that happen? Could it possibly have had something to do with the controversy surrounding the state of Florida, the state which at the time George Bush’s brother was the governor of.

Student Disengagement Schools do not care if students become productive citizens once they graduate. Schools function more like a detention center rather than institutions of learning. Although times change the method of education does not. Students have become more and more disengaged with the methods of education but those methods remain.

We as Americans live in a technological society, our definition of what makes a person an adult is not clearly defined. Student disengagement has been described as “the most immediate and persistent issue facing students and educators because disengaged students lack the psychological investment necessary to master academic knowledge and skills (Pellerin 2005).”

Because of the advances in technology, people in this country live considerably longer than do most members of the human race. As a result of this fact, individuals need to stay in the workforce longer to be able to sustain themselves in their retirement years. Compound that with the fact that workers need to know more than ever before to perform their jobs sufficiently, schools have become not only a place of learning, but also a place of detainment. Our society cannot afford to have a large excess of workers in the marketplace, because such a scenario would drive unemployment up to such levels that our economy would eventually collapse. Thus, by keeping young people in school longer, older generations are allowed to stay in the workforce long enough to provide for their golden years.

Student disengagement ultimately occurs because students have no way of relating what they learn in school to what they will be doing once they are done with school. Because the demands of our economy change so rapidly, what one learns today may not be relevant in the workplace tomorrow. When I began my schooling back in 1979, I was a very engaged student. My years in school were initially very enjoyable and challenging. All that changed in fourth grade when a teacher of mine told our class that after the fifth grade, everything we learn would essentially be review. Meaning there would be nothing we learned after that time that would be entirely unique, but instead just an extension of what we had already learned. Although at that time I did not take what he said to heart, that saying was always in the back of my mind. As the years went by, I did begin to notice that what we were learning was very repetitive and mundane. By the time I entered the ninth grade, I had become a disengaged student.

A Personal Reflection on Student Disengagement

For the first three years of high school, I was basically a B student, but not a B student in every class; my grades were somewhat extreme. In History and English classes I was an A student, but in Math and Science classes I was a C student. My future was not a big concern to me at that point, so if I was not really interested in a class, I did just enough to pass and nothing else. In my senior year, my outlook completely changed when a teacher of mine actually took an interest in me. It was that interest that served as a catalyst for me. My senior year was the only time in four years of high that I ever made the honor roll. Although I still had the same feelings about school, my attitude about the results I wanted had changed.

When I went to college, initially it was a struggle; I got a D+ on my first paper. High school had not adequately prepared me for the rigors of college; but I did not give up and ultimately I graduated with honors. Even though I now consider myself a dedicated student, I am still somewhat disengaged. My problem has to do with the way material is taught in school from elementary school through graduate school. The techniques that were used and continue to be used leave me feeling disengaged. The information that I have learned does not carry over to experiences I have or expect to have in my life, thus I feel very detached from what I have learned. This feeling of disengagement has led me to want to find out if other students feel disengaged, and if so, what are the reasons why they feel the way that they do.

Student Disengagement (general information, continued) We need to understand why students become disengaged because they are our future. Without fixing the problems that have led to so many students becoming disengaged from the educational process, we will eventually have a society controlled by apathetic, unengaged, disinterested individuals, which would be very ominous for all of us.

Student disengagement is not a new phenomenon, but the percentage of students who are disengaged is increasing at an alarming rate. In the 1970s, for example, in a typical classroom, one may have found three or four disengaged students (Trout 2000). Today, nearly half of America’s school children are disengaged (Trout 2000).

There are many reasons why students become disengaged. Student disengagement is defined as “the extent to which students refrain from participating in activities offered as part of the school program” (Natriello 1982). School environment plays a significant role in this process (Bauer 2000). When students feel that their teachers really care about them then they will care also. School climate also serves as a hindrance to some students achieving success. For example, some students may have outside problems and/or responsibilities that interfere with school such as work and/or children of their own.

Some students may require some latitude in relation to school attendance and assignments being handed in at a certain designated time. If school officials are unwilling to meet the needs of these students then they may become disengaged and/or drop out of school altogether (Bauer 2000). A school environment that lacks understanding could place tremendous hardships on homeless children who may suffer from such things as poor nutrition, lack of a quiet place to study, adequate amounts of clothes and school supplies, poor living conditions, peer mischief, and the constant concern of having to relocate.

A competitive and/or antagonistic school atmosphere can also be very stifling for students who do not learn material as quickly as other students (Bauer 2000). For them, in a school environment that rewards those who trample over fellow classmates, they may become discouraged and lose whatever interest that they once had in school.

Many minority students such as African, Asian, and Hispanic Americans may become disengaged because they may not feel adequately represented in school literature. According to a recent study (Bauer 2000), minorities account for only 2% of those writing scholarly textbooks. Children of color may become further disengaged because they have to accept the material in these books as true, when at home they might be taught information that contradicts the same books that schools try to force them to accept.

Other students may become disengaged because of such factors as: teacher disengagement, or material they find uninteresting, poor teacher to student ratios, underfunded schools, and lack of parental involvement (Bauer 2000). According to a recent Clinton urban education initiative (Bauer 2000), urban school children from low socioeconomic families are at the greatest risk for becoming disengaged with the school process. The results for these students are lower test scores and graduation rates and an increase in teen pregnancy (Bauer 2000). In schools where educational funding is low, teacher quality tends to be low as well. This is because teachers who are experienced and have seniority tend to transfer to less crowded, suburban schools where they find that the schools are more up to date and crime and violence are considerably less. The result is, that these poor underfunded schools also tend to have lower quality, inexperienced teachers instructing the students.

Guidance counseling at many schools is grossly inadequate. Some students, particularly minority students, are lumped into vocational classes because counselors may deem them as not being college material (Bauer 2000). For example, many Central American refugee students are often placed into entry level math courses because an assumption is made that in their home country, advanced math courses were not taught to them (Bauer 2000). Since quite a number of these students have in fact taken higher level math courses, they become disengaged and uninterested in school because they are arbitrarily placed into non-challenging courses.

One of the results of student disengagement has been grade inflation (Bauer 2000). Professors and universities are under increasing pressure to cater to their students and treat them as customers rather than students. In colleges and universities around the country, professors try to keep their students happy in order to receive favorable reports from them at the end of the semester. These reports determine whether they receive tenure, salary increases, promotions, and the like (Trout 2000).

Adjunct professors are particularly vulnerable to scrutiny so they traditionally give students higher grades in comparison to their senior colleagues. School administrators are under pressure from those in higher authority to keep student enrollment up (Trout 2000). This trickles down to professors in the form of administrators admonishing professors for grading students too harshly or assigning them too much work. Many times when students are upset about their grades, they will go to someone above the professor’s head and their grade will be raised without the professor in question ever being consulted in regard to the matter.

Bauer’s study (2000) shows a dramatic increase in grade inflation over the last 25 years. At Harvard University in the 1970s, the average overall GPA was between a B and a B-. Today humanities majors have an average GPA of between an A- and a B+., and natural science majors have an average of between a B+ and a B; social science majors at Harvard fall somewhere in the middle of the other two majors. The University of Washington has shown a similar trend.

In 1983 at the University of Washington, 60% of the grades given were between A’s and B’s; today 70% of all grades there fall within that range. Forty-three years ago at Rutgers University A’s only made up 13% of the grades, B’s were at 29%, C’s at 34%, D’s were at 12%, and F’s made up 6% of the grade distribution. Today A’s and B’s at Rutgers University total nearly two-thirds of the total grades given. Stanford, Brown, and Oberlin Universities eliminated the F from their grading system, with Oberlin going as far as doing away with D’s as well (Bauer 2000).

The Central Institute Research Program of the Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA in 1992, reported in a survey of college freshman that 36% of them were bored with school during their final year of high school (Bauer 2000). A reported 69% of then stated that they did not complete their homework assignments on time, with 58% of them stating that they had previously been late for classes. Only 33% of those surveyed stated that improving their reading and study skills were important to them.

Students are no longer going to school with the focus of just expanding their minds, they are now more concerned with fattening their wallets (Trout 2000). A recent study (Trout 2000) found that 71.3% of all students entering college are doing so for career rather than academic purposes. For these students college is just another roadblock they must hurdle to get to their ultimate goal...money. They are not concerned with learning about things that are not related to the career field in which they will be going into. They want to reap the rewards of what an education brings without putting in the effort to get it.

There is a growing concern among many US industries that most individuals (60%) are not coming out of school with the necessary skills, particularly in the areas of math, science, communication, reasoning, and American history to be productive entry level workers (Bauer 2000). Eighty-four percent of the industries surveyed said that science literacy, which is defined as the ability to read and understand news articles that relate to science, will soon be a requirement for entry level jobs (Bauer 2000). Ths is very disturbing when at the university where Henry Bauer teaches science, average science grades have dropped by more than 50% over the last 15 years. What is more alarming is the requirements he has placed on his students have been reduced.

The above statistics are in contrast to earlier statistics I mentioned in which is was reported that grade inflation is on the rise. What this means is that in the fields of liberal arts and humanities grades are going up, but in the fields of math and science, grades are going down. This trend is supported by the fact that the US continues to fall behind many nations of the world in the areas of math and science.

In 1987, Professor Bauer began offering extra credit to his students worth up to 5% of the final grade. He began using videos in his classes in 1990, and Test Bank questions on his exams as well as curving the grades in 1991. In order to help students get better grades, he added more questions to his quizzes so each question did not count as much; yet his students’s overall performance continues to decline (Bauer 2000).

Fortunately, there are a variety of measures educators can use to combat student disengagement. In a study by Trout (2000), he contends that schools must do an about face and stop the erosion of standards. Trout says standards need to be raised at every level of academia in order for students to be motivated to strive for success. In order to accomplish this the quality of textbooks must be raised, teachers need to be better trained and possess new and innovative teaching techniques.

Students must be convinced that when one is successful academically, there is a future benefit, and when one is unsuccessful, negative consequences will arise (Trout 2000). What Trout suggests is having standardized national exams, high school and college exit exams, and exams for Federal Reserve college aid. Teachers must stress to students that hard work rather than luck or innate abilities equal academic success. Career and guidance counselors must do a better job preparing students for advanced education and beyond (Trout 2000). They must ensure that students are prepared and are committed to academic success before allowing them to move on. If they are not, suggest to them to take some time off so that they can better prepare for the rigors of higher education. Counselors must also be wary not to push college onto everyone because some students may benefit more from vocational or technical schools (Trout 2000).

In order to combat student disengagement at the college level, students need to be educated and become fully aware of the problem, its causes, and possible solutions (Trout 2000). This process can begin by having students fill out questionnaires in regard to their attitudes toward education, teaching, studying, and the academic process in general. Teachers also need to raise their own expectations of students, their grading practices, and requirements. Authoritative teaching is also important to use, which focuses on students’s long term development rather than their short term desires.

In order to help professors, school administrators should eliminate student evaluations, particularly ones which are used to decide if professors will be retained, tenured, and promoted (Trout 2000). Admission standards must also be raised to ensure that the students who enter college are prepared for the peaks and valleys of academic life. Remedial classes need to be eliminated at senior colleges and universities. Instead, students who are not yet prepared for four year schools should complete their remedial coursework at local community and two year colleges. School administrators such as the president and assistant deans should be required to teach at least one class per semester in their field of expertise, which would save universities money and keep administrators in touch with what is going on in the classrooms (Trout 2000).

Other researchers (Cook 1984) have suggested discussing controversial issues in class such as religion, sex, and nuclear weapons. Cook says by discussing issues in the classroom that are usually perceived as being private, students will become more engaged in classroom discussions and activities. These same students will also be more likely to participate in the political process rather than being disengaged and not vote.

Raffini (1988) has suggested individual goal setting for students which would allow them to have more flexibility in choosing the curriculum that they learn as well as the methods used to do so. Another approach he is in favor of is outcome based instruction and evaluation which would allow slower children to experience success in school without having to compete with faster students. There would be more emphasis on progress than actual results. Reshaping a student’s locus of control would also help them to be less apathetic (Raffini 1988). By students viewing their success or failure as being the result of their own efforts rather than by luck or chance, they may begin to take more responsibility for their educational results.

In a study by Rosensberg (1999), he examined how Positive Peer Groups (PPG) could be an effective way to get disengaged students involved with school. PPG is a leadership training program that allows disengaged students to actively participate in school related activities by working with and forming relationships with fellow students. Students who participate in the PPG program have developed independence by participating in group activities that focus on work, discipline, and responsibility. Adult supervisors encourage them to solve their own problems, make decisions, plan, and set goals. By students participating in this program they have gained a cooperative educational experience and have learned that they can be responsible and contributing members to their school and local community (Rosenberg 1999).

Why Something Needs to Be Done About Student Disengagement

Student disengagement is an issue that every community in every state must address. All students will benefit from an environment that is geared more toward learning rather than route memorization, lectures, and note taking. However, the students that will benefit the most are those from impoverished, low socioeconomic backgrounds. In order to end the pervasive cycle of poverty in this country, education must be the key.

Children who come from a poor upbringing must be taught that there is a better way out there for them. They must have the opportunity to see that there are other avenues to pursue that do not include ones that are destructive to themselves and others. The prison system is filled with people, the majority of which are not very well educated. What if before they went down the wrong path they were shown another alternative; maybe they would not be where they are today.

Education cannot and should not stifle creativity, innovative thinking, and the questioning of the status quo. Students should be able to and must constantly challenge the status quo in order for this country to move ahead. The problems of disengagement will continue at every level of life as long as people are not allowed the opportunity to change the world in which they live in. Our future is now, disengagement must end today.

It is not enough for schools to provide students with disconnected information. Students must be instead be provided with information that has real life applications to life after school.

The Truth About Student Loans….Should You Pursue that College Degree

The United States has been labeled “The Great Land of Opportunity.” That opportunity comes at a price in the form of the cost of a college education. That cost is widely paid for by student loans. Student loans are widely taken out by college age individuals between the ages of 18-25. However, student loans are the only consumer debt that cannot be discharged under US bankruptcy laws.

Student loans is a multiple billion dollar business. The ultimate beneficiary of the loans being taken out are the creditors not those that have taken out the loans. Many borrowers end up paying student loans for upwards of 30 years. That means during their prime earning years, most of their disposable income is eaten up by student loan payments.

The average student loan debt per borrower is over $24,000, which is more than 3 times higher than the average amount of credit card debt per household (http://money.cnn.com/2010/10/22/pf/college/student_loan_debt/index.htm). By the end of 2011, the aggregate student loan debt is projected to exceed more than $1 trillion (http://news.consumerreports.org/money/2011/06/us-student-loan-debt-set-to-hit-1-trillion-already- outpaced-national-credit-card-debt.html), which is greater than the aggregate amount of credit card debt for the nation as a whole.

Although the student loan debt is guaranteed to have to be repaid, the benefit of taking out the student loan is not, a.k.a a job. The overwhelming vast majority of academic programs do not offer job placement services, and those that do offer assistance, usually offer nothing more than help with resume writing. The student loan creditors are only concerned with getting paid, they do not help a borrower find a job or offer them options to lower their monthly payment.

For many borrowers, they find that the toughest challenge isn’t the four or more years it takes to complete their degree, it’s the process of finding a job. Colleges and universities today have taken on the role of a Degree Factory Meal. Their Mission Statement is usually something like: “We want to promote the academic well being and future success of our students by providing with a quality education.” When in reality it should be: “Our goal is to increase the annual revenue for our school in order to pay the increasing salaries of our tenured professors and faculty. The more students we get to enroll, the more money we will have to do so.” This position is supported by the ever increasing size of the student body on campuses throughout the United States, coupled with the lower admission standards, and ever ballooning cost of a “Higher Education.”

Schools have now tried to make borrowing student loans more attractive by using disbursement such as refunding the money via a “HigherOne” account. With this account a student is issued a debit card in their name with the full amount of the disbursement funds to spend as they see fit with zero oversight. An overzealous student can easily blow through those funds in a matter of weeks without ever stopping to think about the ultimate consequence: “What will I do when I have to start paying this money back?” Only then does the oversight begin, in the form of monthly statements showing the debt ballooning to astronomical proportions because of added interest and penalties.

The combination of high monthly student loan payments and general cost of living eventually leaves monthly borrowers with monthly overhead expenses above their monthly income. The eventual result is they take out credit cards in order to “supplement” their income. Credit cards serve to be only a band aid over a much deeper issue and they are subsequently force to file bankruptcy. However, instead of ending up with a fresh start, they end up with the credit card debt discharged, but the main unsecured debt, a.k.a. the student loans are still there post bankruptcy.

A post bankruptcy student loan borrower finds themselves with limited options. They have horrible credit, most likely for at least two years post bankruptcy. They cannot qualify for a home line and now many jobs do credit checks, so they cannot qualify for a descent job either. The eventual borrower finds themselves back on the student loan train taking out more debt to get a better job.

Eventually once the borrower has graduated from their graduate degree program, they find that not much has changed, at least not for the better. They are now armed with a graduate degree, but so are many other individuals, finding for fewer jobs than the degrees that are produced every year. What the new graduate borrower finds is that they have an advanced degree without the necessary experience to get the job and now they are overqualified for the previous positions they once applied. They are also left with even more student loans with no way to pay for them.

If this sounds like a nightmare it is because it is. The author of this book has more than $165,000 of student loan debt and his spouse has more than $100,000 of student loan. That combined monthly payments for those aggregate student loans is over $2,000 per month. That means over $25,000 per year of post tax earnings have to go toward paying student loans. The estimated payoff date is 2041. The author will be 66 years old at that time with zero money saved for retirement.

Many borrowers have found a “solution” to their loan payment problem. The law provides that if a borrower is enrolled in school on a part time basis then they do not have to pay their student loans and the student loans are deferred. That means as long as a person is enrolled in a program on at least a part time basis, which is usually 6 credit hours they can avoid paying their student loans indefinitely.

In order to be in default on one’s student loans, one has to have failed to pay them for 270 consecutive days. That means as long as one enrolls in school every 269 days for one semester they can avoid paying their student loans indefinitely. The result is that many borrowers end up becoming “lifetime students” because they cannot afford to not be in school and begin paying back the student loans. Some borrowers have found other alternatives.

For instance some borrowers may have their student loan repayment plan calculated on a income contingency basis. Which essentially the less you make the less you pay. Payments can be an almost negligible amount and after 26 years of consecutive payments the remaining student loan amount is discharged. If 26 years is too long borrowers have found another alternative.

Student loan borrowers were paying their loans back via a standard or income contingency payment plan can have their student loans discharged after 10 years of consecutive payments if they work for the government or a non profit organization. In theory, nothing would seem to keep a borrower from starting a non profit organization, pay him or herself a nominal amount per year and then after 10 years have their remaining student loan debt discharged. Ten years may still sound like a long time, but it is better than 30.

For many borrowers and potential borrowers, none of these options seem very attractive. Some may be looking to learn from the mistakes of their predecessors. Some may still seek to take out student loans knowing the full potential risks and rewards. These type of individuals may think of themselves as “The Smart Borrowers.”

The Smart Borrowers, unlike others that have come before them may take out student loans with a plan. Based on the experiences of their predecessors, they may conclude that the basic purpose behind student loans is flawed which is: One should use the loan money to seek a higher education in order to secure a better job. The reality is that time thinking is flawed because the vast majority of college graduate, particularly those with liberal arts degrees end up securing employment in a field outside of the one they studied. Often those jobs require further training because the liberal arts degree did not actually supply the graduate with skills just basic knowledge about specific information unrelated to the position they have been hired to perform.

The Smart Borrowers might decide to take out student loans with the purpose of starting their own business. They might take out the money and instead of living on the funds like many borrowers do investing the funds instead. Many college students do not work while they are in school. As a result, the student loan money they receive ends up paying for, in essence, a paid second high school experience, in which they are able to delay their entry into adulthood another four years. The Smart Borrowers might decide to instead have a full time job and perhaps go to school on a part time basis, or to have a part time job and go to school full time, but remain at home with family for that period of time or pool their resources together and live in a communal living setting.

In some cases The Smart Borrowers might be made up of family members with the joint goal of starting a family business. Each family member can go to school and attain education in a field that will benefit the family business. They might also keep in mind that every US citizen is eligible to borrow up to $138,500 ($20,500 per year as a graduate student).

Vocational Education Myths and Realities

From the ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, & Vocational Education Myths and Realities Series: Benefits of Vocational Education by Michael E. Wonacott, 2000

After a decade of decline, the 1990s have seen a resurgence of vocational education enrollments. Of 39 states surveyed in recent research, 70 percent reported an increase since 1990 (Husain 1999). Nevertheless, secondary vocational education continues to suffer from a negative image among students, parents, educators, and policymakers. This Myths and Realities examines some popular beliefs about secondary vocational education, along with some related beliefs about the labor market and about college degrees-and some facts that may or may not support those popular beliefs.

"Voc Ed Is for Dummies and Misfits!" Perhaps the most enduring belief about vocational education is that it's only for the noncollege bound, the potential dropouts, or other students with special needs (Stone 1993). And this belief is not confined to students and their parents; it is often shared by other educators and policymakers ("What Do People Think of Us?" 1997) perhaps explaining why postsecondary vocational-technical education scholarship money sometimes goes untapped (West 1996). But do the facts bear it out?

No, they don't. Almost all high school students take at least some vocational courses; 80 percent take at least one occupationally specific vocational course, and one in eight academic students actually takes more vocational courses than vocational students do. Furthermore, vocational education students enter post secondary education at about the same rate as all high school graduates (Kober and Rentner 2000; Stone 1993), and vocational students with applied academics such as math and reading in high school are just as proficient as college-prep students.

"Voc Ed Doesn't Pay Off!"

On the contrary it does. A range of studies show that vocational graduates are more likely to be employed and earn more than their nonvocational counterparts, particularly vocational graduates who worked part time during high school (Stone 1993). There is strong evidence that the generic technical skills and occupationally specific skills provided in vocational education increase worker productivity, skill transfer, job access, and job stability when vocational graduates find training- related jobs (Bishop 1995). "But a Four-Year College Degree Is the Ticket!"

A related set of beliefs about the labor market may reinforce the traditional negative image of vocational education. Assuming that technical training is inferior to academic programs (West 1996), parents want their children to go to college and get a four-year degree because it will assure them a job (Vo 1997). Indeed, there is a widespread belief among parents that a four-year college degree will guarantee their children a place in the middle class. Students themselves are often quite confident on this point; in one study, half of male and 68 percent of female high school students believed that with a four-year degree, they would have a nice, professional job by the time they were 30 years old (Gray 1997). Such beliefs are often attributed to numerous reports in the 1980s that American industry would suffer severely in the 21st century from shortages of scientists, engineers, and mathematicians (Berliner and Biddle 1996).

Among college students who graduate with a four-year degree, only two of three will find employment related to their field of study. Among college students who graduate with a professional credential (e.g., for teaching, engineering, or accounting), only one in two will find related employment. A four-year degree does not guarantee a high income. Although college graduates have higher average earnings than high school graduates, only some of the variation in earnings can be attributed to education; supply and demand are the most important factors.

The US Department of Labor's Managerial/Professional job grouping is indeed at the top of the salary ladder. But the next rung down on the ladder is Craft, Precision Metal, and Specialized Repair occupations in virtually every industry and every work environment like construction drafter, medical lab technician, manufacturing systems operator, computer repairperson, and paralegal that pay well but require specific occupational skills available in secondary and postsecondary vocational-technical programs or apprenticeship programs.

A closer look at supply and demand in the labor market uncovers another reality to contradict the belief that a four-year college degree is the ticket to success. That fact is that professional occupations make up only 20 percent of all jobs (ibid.). The numbers are startling: At the start of this decade [the 1990s], the economy was creating nine new cashier jobs for every computer programming job, and the US now has nine times as many janitors as it has lawyers, accountants, investment bankers, stockbrokers, and computer programmers combined. The biggest sector of the job market is now service, not manufacturing. (Berliner and Biddle 1996, p. 38)

Technical employment is the fastest-growing segment of the labor market.. Most technical work will not require a four-year college degree. Only 25 percent of all technical work requires a four-year or graduate degree. The fastest-growing piece of the high-skill, high-wage technical workplace is occupations that require an associate's degree. (Gray 1997, p. 26) "One million new programming jobs come open in the next nine years." That one million is only the beginning. Add many more million positions going begging for skilled welders and machinists, electricians and plumbers, healthcare workers, and repair people of all stripes, and you begin to get the picture. (Brady 1999, p. 41)

Although technologically sophisticated jobs will grow, the biggest chunk of openings will be in services and not very high-tech services at that. In the next decade, five million new jobs will be created for food workers, including kitchen help, waiters, and waitresses. Another four million will be for cashiers and retail salespeople. More than three million will be for clerks. Two million will be for helpers, packagers, and laborers. Openings for truck drivers will abound. Managerial and professional occupations will also need more workers, but their numbers pale compared with openings requiring less education.. The Labor Department projects an increase from 1996 to 2006 of less than 1 percent in the overall share of workers in occupations requiring a college degree. (Rothstein 1999, p. B-9)

"College-One Size Fits All!"

Another common belief among parents is that every child has the aptitude and interests to succeed in an academic four-year college degree program. Parents often believe that if their children get grades of B or C in the high school college-prep track, they are well prepared for college. After all, why would a college accept them if they weren't well prepared? Likewise, parents often believe that their child will, if necessary, make the crucial transition from community college to a four-year college (Gray 1997).

Of course, many high school graduates do have the interests, aptitude, and academic preparation needed for college academic courses, but statistics do not present a rosy picture across the board (ibid.): According to some estimates, only about 30 percent of high school graduates possess the aptitude and receive the academic preparation needed for success in college academic courses.

Another look at the Realities of the Current Educational System

Education needs to be free (particularly for vocational training). Vocational training is the wave of the future. Sooner or later Americans are going to realize that an academic education is not going to provide them with enough opportunities to take care of their families. An academic degree is the equivalent of having a license to become someone’s slave. Unless one has graduated from an ivy league school, an academic graduate is not in a position of power in the employment arena.

Today Americans are graduating from college and beyond at a staggering rate, yet the jobs and the quality of jobs only seem to diminish. A college education is ultimately a waste of one’s time. If knowledge is what one is seeking, then I would recommend picking up a book and reading and not wasting 4 years sitting in a classroom only to find there is no job there when one graduates.

With vocational training, a person who has completed their studies has a drastically different employment seeking experience than their academic counterparts. There is actually a demand for those with vocational training in fields like automotive, carpentry, computer repair, air conditioning, plumbing, and electrical work. Unlike an academic graduate, when a person completes vocational training they are already trained and immediately able to get to work. No one needs to show them how a car functions, or how to change a pipe.

With an academic degree one is not trained in anything, one just has good dinner cocktail knowledge and has demonstrated they can grasp some innocuous material and regurgitate it. Every new place they go and work they will have to be retrained. That is not the experience a person with vocational training has. The job they do never changes, only the place in which they do it. With an academic background everything is different every time a person changes positions.

One other major difference between vocational training and academic training is it doesn’t necessarily matter whether one becomes employed in their vocational field of choice because they can be an independent contractor and self employed. They are also able to personally benefit from their own skills, as well as the members of their family. With an academic education, financial success is solely contingent upon becoming employed by someone other than oneself. The “skills” learned in academia are not self actualizing, they require someone else to trigger them. No one in one’s family is going to benefit from a walking encyclopedia.

Student loans need to be eliminated. Student loans are an absolute scam. To give young people an opportunity to get themselves in deep debt with no way of potentially ever get out of the debt until they are in their 50s or 60s is horrible. The combination of a lack of jobs when a person graduates, coupled with the mounting debt (that continues to rise with interest), and no useable skills to benefit themselves or their families make academia a scam.

A person will never be able to provide for their family with a college degree. Sure, what they learn in school may have a purpose like using the books to keep one’s fireplace going, or doing better on Jeopardy (not “Are Smarter Than a 5th Grader?”). However, in terms of actual skills, college teaches a person nothing than can use inside their home and with their family, unlike vocational training.

In 1996, 27 percent of college freshmen dropped out-an all-time high. The best estimates are that about half of the students in four-year programs graduate within six years; the worst estimates, as low as 30 percent. Only about 12 percent of community college students are found at four-year colleges 3 years later. Another study looked at graduation rates 5 years after starting college for students of different income groups (Bracey 1999): (1) among students from families with income of $68,000 or more, 41 percent had graduated; (2) among students from families with income of between $22,000 and $68,000, 19 percent had graduated; and (3) among students from families with income of $22,000 or less, only 6 percent had graduated. Those differences across income groups were much more pronounced than differences across ethnic groups. After the same 5 years,graduation rates were 27 percent for whites, 18 percent for Hispanics, and 17 percent for blacks.

Require Colleges and Universities to Offer All Their Programs Online

With today’s technology there is no reason for colleges and universities to not give their students the option of taking a class online whenever possible. Most classes are conducted in a seminar and/or lecture format and do not require students to be physically present in order to fully participate in the process. Yes some institutions and programs are so steeped in tradition that they do not offer online classes at all.

For example, law schools that are entirely online are ineligible for accreditation under the ABA. According to the ABA, a law schools that offers all of its courses online does not meet the standard necessary for accreditation because it denies students the opportunity to fully participate in the Socratic Method process. This position simply is not true, when one considers that technology today allows students to either interact with online image and voice via web cam, and/or interact by keying in their answers using a keyboard.

Most preparation for law school classes occurs outside of the classroom including, reading and preparing case briefs, and studying for exams. In fact, particularly for more successful students, they tend to spend more time preparing the material outside of classes, than learning the material in class. The classroom generally serves as a format to allow students to ask questions and get clarification on certain topic or issues they might be unsure about.

Not only is the inaccessibility of an online education costly to the students, it is potentially costly to colleges and universities as well. Many colleges and universities could considerably increase their revenue, if they offer their programs online. Many potential students might have time to do the program but not have the specific time to meet in a classroom due to travel and time restrictions. As a result, colleges and universities lose valuable revenue that they could be receiving from online students. Perhaps if they had a stronger online presence, colleges and universities wouldn’t continue to dramatically increase its tuition rates like they do year after year.

All Schools Need to Have Job Placement Services

Let’s face it, a degree without a job is just something to wipe your ass with if you run out of toilet paper. I have personally not been to a graduation of any sort since 8th grade. A degree without a job is not worth the paper it was printed on, because anyone can go to a supply store, get a certificate of some sort and have one’s name put on it, calling themselves a graduate.

Let’s take the rose colored glasses off shall we. It is great to theoretically say that the goal of obtaining a higher education is knowledge, but who are we kidding. Schools are in business to separate young people from their money. Young people are in school to get the degree necessary to get a job. Generally speaking what happens in school is the school does successfully separate one from one’s money, but there is no job at the end of the process, only debt.

School is big business and like any big business the goal is to make money; schools do that very successfully. However, the problem is the customers, i.e. the students are not receiving what they are paying for. Yes they are receiving a degree, but any diploma mill can print you off a degree and put college or university on it. Schools have an ethical and fiduciary responsibility to ensure that their graduates have something to look forward to after their time in school and over. Receiving a monthly student loan invoice with no way to pay does not constitute something to look forward to...other than death. If colleges and universities are unable to provide job placement services then perhaps they need to start calling themselves “Institutions of Higher Dreaming” rather than “Institutions of Higher Learning” because they only thing college graduates walk away with is feeling like they have awakened from a long dream and now reality begins (a.k.a. looking through the classifieds along with the other dummies, I mean college graduates).

A Ray of Hope?

As we have seen, there is a raft of common misconceptions about vocational education, the labor market, and the four-year college degree; in particular the name "vocational education" often invokes an automatic negative response. At the same time, however, people often reveal very favorable attitudes toward many of the elements that are a traditional part of vocational education (Vo 1997):

In a nationwide survey of 1,000 people, 83 percent agreed that "schools should focus on career preparation" (p. 20). In a survey of nearly 1,400 Missouri residents, 91 percent thought schools should place "much greater emphasis on teaching knowledge and skills relevant to the job market, like computers, math, and science" (p. 22).

In a random telephone survey of 500 Oklahoma citizens, nearly all were in favor of career preparation in school. A survey of Washington residents revealed similar attitudes (Washington State Workforce Training and Education Board 1997). Almost 9 of 10 respondents agreed that high schools should provide some kind of career preparation to every student before graduation; 3 of 4 said that career education should start before high school; and a whopping 96 percent favored education for every student that provided a strong academic foundation, hands-on learning experience, and an opportunity to practice what he or she has learned in a work-based setting.

In a smaller nationwide survey ("What Do People Think of Us?" 1997), respondents split exactly 50-50 on the big question of whether or not vocational education was for high school students who didn't plan to go to college. However, respondents had overwhelmingly positive reactions to smaller, individual questions about vocational education: 76 percent said that all students would benefit from vocational education. 90 percent agreed or strongly agreed that vocational education prepared students for good-paying jobs. 92 percent agreed or strongly agreed that vocational education can lead students to go to college. Only 4 percent agreed that vocational education led to low-skill jobs. 98 percent said that internships or apprenticeships in different career fields were appropriate for high school juniors and seniors. 90 percent said that real work-based problems or career-related projects were a good way to teach subjects like math and English.

These survey results present a curious contradiction. Many people-but not all-have a negative overall image of vocational education, probably based at least in part on mistaken assumptions about how today's labor market actually works. Yet the great majority of people have a very positive reaction to the elements that are the very foundation of vocational education: a focus on career preparation; knowledge and skills that are relevant for the job market; the possibility of challenging careers, good-paying jobs, and college. Such favorable attitudes toward the foundation elements of vocational education may represent a new trend for the new millennium.

Rising Tuition Rates http://www.finaid.org/savings/tuition-inflation.phtml

A good rule of thumb is that tuition rates will increase at about twice the general inflation rate. During any 17-year period from 1958 to 2001, the average annual tuition inflation rate was between 6% and 9%, ranging from 1.2 times general inflation to 2.1 times general inflation. On average, tuition tends to increase about 8% per year. An 8% college inflation rate means that the cost of college doubles every nine years. For a baby born today, this means that college costs will be more than three times current rates when the child matriculates in college. This section of Financial Aid provides detailed information about the rate of increase of college tuition.

Summary Statistics

The following table and chart shows the geometric mean of college costs and general inflation for the period from 1958 through 1996, as well as the ten-year periods ending in 1986 and 1996. As can be seen from the table, the college inflation rate runs between one and a half to two times the general inflation rate.

Year College Inflation General Inflation Rate Ratio

1958-1996 7.24% 4.49% 1.61 1977-1986 9.85% 6.72% 1.47 1987-1996 6.68% 3.67% 1.82 1958- 2001 6.98% 4.30% 1.62 1979-2001 7.37% 3.96% 1.86 1992-2001 4.77% 2.37% 2.01 1985-2001 6.39% 3.18% 2.01 1958-2005 6.89% 4.15% 1.66 1989-2005 5.94% 2.99% 1.99

Historical Inflation Rates

The following table shows the college cost inflation rate and the general inflation rate for the years from 1958 through 1996. College cost inflation rates are based on the Digest of Education Statistics for the years 1958-1970 and the College Board figures for four-year private colleges for the years from 1971 to the present. General inflation figures are based on the annual Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Statistically, there is no correlation between college inflation rates and general inflation rates. After all, increases in college tuition rates represent a very small percentage of the CPI. Even the rule of thumb that college costs increase at twice the inflation rate is not valid. As can be seen from the table, the college cost inflation rate has run from a high of 6.5 times the general inflation rate to a low of half the general inflation rate, with an recent average of about twice the general inflation rate. In recent years the college cost inflation rate has been decreasing to 5% as colleges try to control escalating costs. (This trend may be ending because of the souring economy.)

Since the Consumer Price Index includes a "College tuition and fees" component, it is possible to use that component as an index of historical tuition inflation. It reflects consumer spending on college tuition during the calendar year and is based on the same methodology as the Consumer Price Index. The second table provides these figures. Note that these figures show an average tuition inflation rate from 1979 to 2001 of 8.0% and from 1997 to 2001 of 4.5%. An inflation rate of 8% means that a baby born today will face college costs that are 3.7 times current costs.

The average magnitude of the difference between the BLS figures and the College Board figures is 1%, and the cumulative difference from 1979 to 2001 is about a quarter of a percentage point per year. The cumulative difference from 1991 to 2001 is three quarters of a percentage point per year. The BLS figures are, on average, higher than the corresponding College Board figures.

Based on these figures, it would be reasonable to expect an average college inflation rate of 7% or 8% per year for the next ten years.

Ye College Inflation (CB) General Inflation (CPI) Rate Ratio ar

20 6.3% 07

20 5.9% 3.23% 1.83 06

20 5.94% 3.39% 1.75 05

2 0 5.97% 2.66% 2.24 04

20 5.99% 2.28% 2.63 03

20 5.80% 1.58% 3.67 02

20 5.48% 2.85% 1.92 01

20 5.25% 3.36% 1.56 00

19 4.56% 2.21% 2.06 99

19 5.24% 1.56% 3.35 98

19 5.16% 2.29% 2.25 97

19 5.05% 2.95% 1.71 96

19 5.32% 2.76% 1.93 95

19 5.44% 2.77% 1.96 94

19 5.99% 2.78% 2.15 93 19 5.79% 3.16% 1.83 92

19 7.61% 4.45% 1.71 91

19 7.83% 4.81% 1.63 90

19 8.61% 4.99% 1.73 89

19 7.89% 4.16% 1.90 88

19 7.39% 3.90% 1.89 87

19 8.02% 1.61% 4.98 86

19 8.15% 3.55% 2.30 85

19 8.03% 4.14% 1.94 84

19 9.78% 2.44% 4.00 83

19 14.35% 6.48% 2.21 82 19 13.95% 10.73% 1.30 81

19 12.00% 13.22% 0.91 80

19 9.05% 11.27% 0.80 79

19 7.37% 7.74% 0.95 78

19 8.10% 6.72% 1.21 77

19 9.27% 5.43% 1.71 76

19 7.20% 9.65% 0.75 75

19 5.93% 11.53% 0.51 74

19 3.60% 5.73% 0.63 73

19 6.07% 3.04% 2.00 72

19 8.60% 4.37% 1.97 71

19 8.32% 5.90% 1.41 70 19 9.24% 5.45% 1.70 69

19 5.03% 4.29% 1.17 68

19 3.62% 2.87% 1.26 67

19 6.04% 2.78% 2.17 66

19 5.18% 1.79% 2.89 65

19 4.61% 1.11% 4.15 64

19 6.64% 1.54% 4.31 63

19 4.89% 1.02% 4.79 62

19 5.38% 1.21% 4.45 61

19 5.00% 1.41% 3.54 60

19 5.19% 0.80% 6.49 59 19 7.81% 2.47% 3.16 58

Bureau of Labor Statistics Figures

Ye Tuition Inflation (CPI) General Inflation (CPI) Rate Ratio ar

20 6.71% 3.23% 2.08 06

20 7.46% 3.39% 2.20 05

20 9.46% 2.66% 3.55 04

20 8.40% 2.28% 3.69 03

20 6.82% 1.58% 4.32 02

20 5.09% 2.85% 1.79 01

20 4.14% 3.36% 1.23 00 19 3.98% 2.21% 1.80 99

19 4.22% 1.56% 2.71 98

19 5.11% 2.29% 2.23 97

19 5.66% 2.95% 1.92 96

19 6.00% 2.76% 2.12 95

19 6.98% 2.77% 2.73 94

19 9.37% 2.78% 3.13 93

19 10.74% 3.16% 3.57 92

99 10.17% 4.45% 2.42 1

19 8.09% 4.81% 1.50 90 19 7.93% 4.99% 1.65 89

19 7.60% 4.16% 1.84 88

19 7.56% 3.90% 2.07 87

19 8.09% 1.61% 4.35 86

19 9.10% 3.55% 2.56 85

19 10.23% 4.14% 2.37 84

19 10.41% 2.44% 3.24 83

19 13.44% 6.48% 2.18 82

19 12.43% 10.73% 1.20 81

19 9.43% 13.22% 0.70 80 19 8.01% 11.27% 0.71 79

Higher Education Price Index

The Higher Education Price Index (HEPI) is similar in concept to the Consumer Price Index (CPI), but measures inflation based on a basket of goods and services used by colleges and universities. It is calculated for each academic year (July 1 to June 30) by the Commonfund Institute. The CPI figures in the following table are June to June ratios.

Year Tuition Inflation (HEPI) Tuition Inflation (CPI)

2006-2007 3.4% 2.7% 2005-2006 5.0% 4.3% 2004-2005 3.6% 2.5% 2003-2004 4.6% 3.3% 2002- 2003 2.9% 2.1% 2001-2002 4.1% 1.1%

Education as a Business

The idea that education is, itself, a business is obvious to most. Particularly with higher education, you have students, who are the consumers of a good provided by University for the price of tuition. While many institutions like Lehigh are not-for-profit organizations, they still have to play the fundamental game of making sure that revenue covers expenses (and even look to expand the excess reserves within the endowment). While education is a business, it is a strange one for several reasons.

First, consumers pay different prices for the exact same product, with prices set primarily based on how much wealth the consumer has. In other sectors of the economy, this type of behavior would be price gauging, and illegal. Second, Universities enjoy selling a product that has a high replacement cost for the consumer. Consider a student who is unhappy with the University he or she attends. Switching to a new school involves a physical move, damage to personal relationships, and difficulties surrounding the transfer of credits from one institution to another. Quite simply, most people end up staying at the institution they start at. Third, in most cases, the end consumer of the product (education) is wholly oblivious to how his funds are spent and the quality of the product he or she receives. Of course, this is often because students are not making tuition payments themselves. Parents, scholarships, or student loans are almost exclusively utilized, with the latter being vague enough so that the student often misses the connection between his consumption of a good now and his eventual payment for that service. Additionally, a school like Lehigh that has about 10 applicants for each student who matriculates has little concern of “running out” of new students. A strong reputation insulates Lehigh from being affected by poor investments.

These dynamics always provide an interesting perspective of an institution’s spending decisions. Obviously, institutions have an interest in offering the services desired by students, but beyond that they can divert funding to whatever may serve to benefit the University’s interests, as opposed to the student’s. This incongruity is a simple byproduct of the large costs that surround transferring: most schools are able to assume that once a student arrives on campus as a freshmen, that student will be purchasing four (or more) years of tuition. So when Lehigh raises its tuition another 3% next year, it can do so safe in the knowledge that no one will transfer because of the price increase. All it has to worry about is attracting new students – the current ones don’t matter anymore.

Average College and University Professor Salaries

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/04/14/aaup

Average Salary and Percentage Increase by Rank, 2007-8

Category Average Salary 1-Year % Increase Number of Faculty

Full professor $103,521 +4.30% 113,040

Associate professor $73,275 +4.12% 94,243

Assistant professor $61,359 +4.06% 96,439

Instructor $44,382 +3.93% 22,466

Lecturer $50,215 +4.35% 21,468 Unranked full-time $56,811 +10.01% 5,319

All $76,216 +3.84 352,975

Top 10 Private Research Universities in Average Salary for Full Professor

University Average Salary

1. Rockefeller University $191,200

2. Harvard University $184,800

3. Stanford University $173,700

4. Princeton University $172,200

5. University of Chicago $170,800

6. Yale University $165,100

7. University of Pennsylvania $163,300

8. Columbia University $162,500

9. New York University $162,400 10. California Institute of Technology $162,200

Top 10 Public Research Universities in Average Salary for Full Professor

University Average Salary

1. University of Maryland at Baltimore $142,700

2. New Jersey Institute of Technology $139,500

3. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill $138,500

4. University of Michigan $137,000

5. Georgia Institute of Technology $134,700

6. University of Virginia $132,700

7. Rutgers University at Newark $130,600

8. Rutgers University at New Brunswick $130,100

9. Rutgers University at Camden $129,100

10. Cornell University (statutory units) $127,800 Top 10 Liberal Arts Colleges in Average Salary for Full Professor

College Average Salary

1. Wellesley College $139,100

2. Barnard College $132,000

3. Amherst College $131,700

4. Claremont McKenna College $129,900

5. Pomona College $129,100

6. Harvey Mudd College $128,500

7. Swarthmore College $126,500

8. Williams College $126,400

9. Middlebury College $125,800

10. Wesleyan University $124,500 Top 10 Community Colleges in Average Salary for Full Professor

Community College Average Salary

1. Westchester Community College $108,300

2. Queensborough Community College $98,300

3. Hostos Community College $97,900

4. LaGuardia Community College $94,800

5. Miami University at Hamilton $94,500

6. Union County College $94,000

7. Borough of Manhattan Community College $92,900

8. (tie) Bronx Community College $92,000

8. (tie) Kingsborough Community College $92,000

10. Tunxis Community College $85,100

Institutions at Which Average Salary for Associate Professor Is at Least $100,000 Institution Average Salary

1. Stanford University $122,200

2. California Institute of Technology $120,200

3. Babson College $110,100

4. Thomas M. Cooley Law School $108,200

5. (tie) Princeton University $107,500

5. (tie) University of Pennsylvania $107,500

7. Massachusetts Institute of Technology $106,400

8. Claremont Graduate University $106,200

9. Harvard University $106,100

10. New Jersey Institute of Technology $105,300

11. Cornell University (endowed units) $103,400

12. University of Chicago $103,300

13. Duke University $102,500 14. Northwestern University $100,500

15. Dartmouth College $100,000

Top 10 Universities in Average Salary for Assistant Professor

University Average Salary

1. California Institute of Technology $101,300

2. University of Pennsylvania $95,900

3. Harvard University $95,400

4. Stanford University $94,300

5. Massachusetts Institute of Technology $93,300

6. University of Chicago $90,700

7. Bentley College $90,500

8. Cornell University (endowed units) $89,800

9. Claremont Graduate University $88,500 10. Northwestern University $87,900

Institutions Where Average Salary for Full Professor Is $50,000 or Less

Institution Average Salary

1. Saint Paul's College $38,300

2. Union College (Kentucky) $39,200

3. Tabor College $40,400

4. Lackawanna College $41,300

5. Walla Walla University $42,200

6. Kentucky Christian University $43,300

7. Alderson-Broaddus College $44,100

8. Missouri Valley College $44,800

9. Faith Baptist Bible College and Seminary $45,200

10. Ohio Valley University $48,100

11. Rocky Mountain College of Art and Design $48,200 12. Antioch College $48,800

13. St. Andrew's Presbyterian College $49,600

14. Kansas Wesleyan University $49,700

15. Oklahoma Panhandle State University $49,800

16. Missouri State University - West Plains $50,000

Education is Not Enough

Growing up I had the mistake belief that education would be all I would ever need in life to get ahead or just to even make it. I was very wrong in that assessment. What I have now learned is that education is not only not enough, in many cases it is not necessary.

Bill Gates is the richest person in the world and he only completed two years of college. The second richest person in the world, Warren Buffet happens to have a MBA.

The key to getting ahead in this life is connections. Unfortunately without networking it makes it very difficult to get one’s foot in the door in just about anything one may do. The reality is no matter how talented one is and no matter how great one’s idea(s) might be, without having some sort of connections it makes life rather difficult.

It is important for one to start at an early age developing a list of acquaintances, the type people one can call on if they are in trouble, or the type of person to gain them access to others with connections. A person without connections is kind of like a man on a deserted island. No one will know how great you are if you do not have someone to tell.

Start by getting yourself involved with organizations, like a church, a gym, recreation club, organizations of interest to you, co-workers, fellow students, family and friends. It is important to have a diverse and expansive ecosystem because one never knows when one might have to call on a member of that circle. Extra-Curricular Activities Matter It is important for young people especially to involve themselves in extra-curricular activities. As a young person, one may not have many connections, and little to any experience, however that does not stop one from being able to gain connections via volunteer work.

Doing volunteer work is a great way to enhance one’s resume. It also provides one with the ability to make those important connections. In addition those one meets in a volunteer capacity can also be useful for references purposes in terms of gaining employment.

Volunteer work also allows one to gain experience that one otherwise might not have an opportunity to acquire, that makes one more marketable and more likely to garner employment.

I Got Duped into Education, Now What?

I became disinterested in after completing 5th grade. School became very repetitive. The material was no longer original, just a review with slight additions of the old. By 14 years old I was ready to get a GED and move on into the workforce.

I did not end up getting a GED. Instead I completed 4 years of high school and received a standard high school diploma. When I graduated high school I was only 17 years old. Most jobs required one to be 18 years old. So even though I had enough education to work, I was not old enough to be hired. Six months later when I turned 18, it was as if a generation of jobs had completely dried up.

The year was now 1993. The jobs that I had seen in the newspaper 6 months earlier were no longer there. My mother, I graduate of both college and graduate school had no connections to get me an entry level position. With no job prospects I enrolled in an online corresponding school between 1993-1994.

In 1994 I entered conventional college. Initially I enrolled with a major in accounting, then I switched to psychology; eventually I majored in political science and minored in psychology. I graduated with honors. However, like high school, there were no employers lining up at the door to higher me. Like high school, there was no emphasis placed on career counseling, for life after school.

There I was in 1997, no a college graduate, but a college graduate with a liberal arts degree and now $15,000 in debt. After spending the summer of 1997 trying to find employment and failing at every turn, eventually I got a job at a retail store selling portable electronics in the fall of 1997. I stayed with the job until the late summer of 1998. Frustrated with no career advancement I left the job and began my search once again to find a better job.

For the next 13 months I bought the newspaper, several different newspapers everyday. I applied for job after job with no success. During this 13 month period I also applied for credit cards and began to incur credit card debt to support myself while trying to find a job. Eventually I secured a job in Florida, up to that point I had lived in New York City my whole life, and I was working at a well none national bank. Being of minority status and also the only male working at the branch, I was eventually fired during the probation period, citing that I was not “Walt Disney” friendly enough.

I then returned to NYC, still living with family, and enrolled in another academic program, this time for Physical Education. I had some difficulty with a few classes, ended up leaving the program after one semester and enrolled the same year (2000) in another school this time majoring in Guidance Counseling. Half way through the program I was doing well, I had a 4.0 GPA, but by the end of 2000 there became a problem with the financial aid and the school told me I owed them nearly $5,000 for classes due to an error at the financial aid office. I was forced to withdraw from the program, but not before amassing another $20,000 in debt, bringing my student loan debt total to $35,000.

I then set my sights on returning back to Florida. I was unsure whether to focus on majoring in Education or go to law school. I was accepted into both an Master’s in Education program and a law school program in the fall of 2001. I ended up enrolling in neither program. Instead I enrolled in a start up state law school in South Florida in 2002.

The program did not go as expected. Although I felt like I understood the material, I continued to receive less than expected grades, due to always falling on the wrong side of the curve. I did eventually make my way through law school and graduated in 2005. By the time I graduated law school I was roughly $100,000 in student loan debt (my how debt accumulates fast!).

With bad credit, I knew there was a good chance I would qualify at that time to take the bar exam. I got involved in an online business (I will tell you more about that later) and continued that business until 2006.

Eventually. I ended up enrolling in a Master’s in Library Science program in South Carolina in 2007 and finished the program in 2008. My time in the program was successful, graduating with a 3.85 GPA. However, like all the previous programs I had graduated from previously, there was no job waiting for me at the end of the tunnel.

Now with the year being 2008, I had graduated college in 1997, and had not compiled a resume with any sort of work history. I was now 33 years old and the longest job I had held up to that point was for 10 months at a retail store between 1997-1998. I had an impressive academic resume, but no work history to back it up. With no connections and no work history, I found myself in employment limbo with that old cliche, “No Experience Without A Job, And No Job Without Experience.”

By 2008, I was more than $125,000 in student loan debt with zero job prospects. So like before, I enrolled in another academic program; this time a Master’s in Education. I ended up dropping out of the program in 2009, because it became clear I had selected a speciality (Social Studies) that had a low probability of resulting in a job. By the fall of 2009, with principle and interest, I was more than $150,000 in student loan debt.

After more than 25 years in school I finally realized, I got duped into education. I had been in school more on than off since 1979 and the only result was a lot of education, with a lot of debt, and no job. The old saying, “Don’t Be A Fool Stay In School,” did not work for me in any possible way.

I finally realized that I had spent my whole life pursuing things that I was interested in without realizing the consequence for my actions. It is fine to pursue intellectual pursuits, by one should not pursue at the expense of one’s financial viability.

One does not have to gain intellectual knowledge by going to school. If one is interested in a topic, nothing stops one from picking up a book and learning about it. One would be surprised how easily accessible academic books are, and how extremely inexpensive they are when one is not trying to acquire the latest edition.

The fact is education is a business. The goal of colleges and universities is to increase the number of students enrolled, to increase the cost of tuition, and to increase the salaries for its faculty and administration. Whether students end up graduating is not a primary goal. Whether students end up employed following graduation also does not rank high on their list. The fact that students end up with astronomical student loan debt is just an unfortunate byproduct in their minds.

The reality is the best occupations to pursue or the ones that society teaches one to look down upon, the ones that require the use of one’s manual labor.

I am not talking about becoming a housekeeper or janitor, by rather skilled, high paying manual labor. The type of positions I am talking about are truck drivers, carpenters, electricians, plumbers, computer technicians, mechanics, air conditioning, and the like.

These positions are in high demand. What separates one when they become qualified in these positions from those that receive a college degree are a variety of things. One, is that one does not end up with the kind of student loan debt a college graduate does. Two, when one graduates with a college degree it means that one is trainable not that one is already trained.

When one graduates from college one has learned relatively abstract concepts, with very little, if any applicability. When one graduates having gotten vocational training, one has hands on experience. When one graduates, a prospective employer knows that one is ready to work and make an immediate contribution. With a recent college graduate, an employer knows this person is not going to be field tested and must be trained in order to perform the tasks the job requires.

What if You Have Student Loans Already? If you have student loans, one can either stay in school indefinitely, or reduce one’s overhead and have them paid off in less than 10 years. Today, payments can now be made based on an income contingency scenario. Essentially it means, the less you make, the less you pay.

The student loan people cannot force you to pay with something you don’t have. If you don’t have, you don’t have it. Many people don’t seem to know that student loan payments are negotiable. It is an unsecured debt. They are happy to receive anything, relatively speaking. My advice is, if you are stressed about student loans don’t be.

In order to be deemed to have defaulted on one’s student loans, one would have to failed to pay the student loan for 270 consecutive days. That means if you make a payment on day 269, then you are technically not in default on your student loan. You can also go to school on a part time basis indefinitely. As long as you are enrolled in an accredited program for at least 6 credit hours, even in an associate degree program, your student loans will be deferred and you will not have to pay. Meaning, if you take 2 classes in the fall and spring each year, you can theoretically avoid paying the student loans forever, regardless of how much you owe. If you are really lazy, or don’t care about your credit, you can take 2 classes every 6 months, skip a semester and take 2 more again. Remember, 6 months only equals up to 180 days, and to be in default, you have to have missed 270 consecutive days of payments, which is 9 consecutive months.

Just because you were dumb enough to get stuck with student loans (like me), doesn’t mean you have to be stuck with paying them every month. While student loans are the only consumer debt that cannot be discharged in bankruptcy, it is also the only consumer debt that exist with so many loopholes to avoid paying the full or any amount of it. So doctors, lawyers, stop worrying about those large monthly student loan payments. Go back to school, some of you need to take refresher courses anyway for licensing and certification purposes. Don’t tell me you don’t have time. You literally can’t afford not to go back to school.

If One Does Have a Degree, Think About Becoming a Teacher

Becoming a teacher gives one more time off and a way to save money. Think about teaching overseas, join the Peace Corps, or become a Family Teacher, or Foster Parent. The average person works approximately 250 days a year. The average teacher works only 180 days. One cannot discount how important recovery time is for one’s peace of mind and overall physical well being.

Throughout the year, the average person simply has nothing to look forward to. The year for most, doesn’t really have an end in sight, or recovery time built in. Sure, one might get 10 sick days and two weeks off a year, and a dozen or so Federal Reserve holidays, but that’s it. Many people, in relatively higher paying positions, such as librarians for instance, do not consistently get back to back days off. Most libraries are open Saturday and/or Sunday, and a librarian usually has to be there one or both days. Therefore, although a person might technically get two days off a week, they are not consecutive, and therefore not recuperative.

A teacher never works on the weekend. They may have to take work home with them, but they can manage their time as they see fit, and many times there are ways to grade students’s work at school and not bring it all home with them. Teachers also get off for all the major holidays, as well as most of the summer, winter and spring breaks. So, while teachers may make less in some cases, then other professional paying jobs, that net numbers might show a different story.

Since a teacher works 70 days less a week than most people, they essentially work 14 weeks a year less than most people. The average person spends approximately $50 a week on gas to go to and from work. By traveling 14 weeks less a year one would be saving $700 or $1000 before taxes. Many people also have their children in daycare and after school programs. Such services and programs can cost a person at least (I am being modest) $150 a week per child. Since the average family has at least 2 children, that would be a savings of $2100 or $2730 before taxes. Also since one would be home when their children get home, they could avoid paying for after school care altogether. Most people also spend at least $10 on outside food a day, which means a person would save an additional $1000 before. Therefore, by being a teacher instead of working in another field the average person could save at least $5000 a year, and a couple could save at least $10,000 a year, without working any additional hours.

One should also keep in mind if one works in a need based area and/or teaches a subject matter in high demand such as math or science, they could receive additional stipends and salaries increases that a typical teacher does not. Also many teaching jobs offer loan forgiveness up to $19,2000 over the course of one’s teaching career. So when you run the numbers, you may discover, that teaching isn’t so bad after all.

Student Loans Need to be Eliminated and All Education Should be Free

The security of the nation’s future should not be left in the hands in private industry. The business of education should not be a business at all. All schools should be nationalized to ensure that students are actually receiving the education necessary to be successful and productive adults. Education curriculum should be standard and universal.

While the argument can be made for post secondary education to have a privatization element to it, it should not be something sponsored by the government. There are few things worst than starting off on the wrong foot. Yet that is exactly what happens to unsuspecting young people year after year in the form of getting stuck with student loans.

The government a.k.a. “The White Men in Charge” continue to allow colleges and universities graduate ill equipped to make it in the real world. Coupled with a staggering amount of student loan debt because of tuition rates that outpace inflation year after year; young people find themselves starting off in life at point that few if any would envy.

In Japan, for instance, education is tailored made to prepare young people for life after school. They are employed in companies with the expectation of remaining there for the rest of their employed years in the form of lifetime employment. In contrast, workers in the United States jump from position to position like someone that has firecrackers going off in their pants. They either lose their pensions in the process of transferring, or lose a portion thereof.

In the United States, the concept of long term planning does not seem to exist. Most decision that people and the government make seem to be short term, and not respective of long term planning or goals. It is this wayward style of thinking that is responsible for most of the financial and political problems in this country.

Instead of training the able bodied poor in fields that would make them financially solvent, money is thrown at them in the form of Welfare. Instead of investing money in research for alternative fuels for energy and vehicles, money is poured into the military to “protect” us from phantom enemies. Instead of ensuring that young people receive quality educations and are prepared for the workforce, money is poured into continuing outdated education policies, and young people are allowed to compile mountains of debt in the form of credit cards and student loans. Instead of promoting adoption and abortions, lawmakers waste them time running to Congress to try to find more ways to prevent women from resolving an already difficult issue (in the form of unwanted pregnancies).

Throughout the history of the United States, it has gone out of its way to stand in the path of positive change and progress. It continues to invest time in money into issues not worth fighting, and continues to fail to address issue that are vital to the nation’s future.

These schizophrenic policies and agendas are the result of ineffective communication at the governmental level, and the “Good Old Boy Network” continuing to work at its worst. Status quo isn’t working. Unfortunately people are too busy trying to survive to care and/or be able to do something about it.

Sex Education Must be Mandatory for Every School

Contraceptives must be given out for every school. Students should be required to wear monitor devices in order for parents to know where they are at all times. There needs to be no more latchkey kids. Every child needs to be involved in after school programs, such as sports, music, and dance.

Increase Teacher Salaries, Make Sure Every Classroom

Has a Certified, Qualified Teacher The best and the brightest generally do no become teachers. The reason being, generally speaking, teacher salaries just don’t pay enough, and are not enticing enough to attract top level teachers. As a result the standard GPA a teacher is expected to have graduated from college with is a 2.5. Couple that with the fact that states make it so difficult to become a teacher, is it any wonder that the typical teacher just doesn’t measure up? Do our nation’s children not deserve a better quality of teachers?

By increasing teacher salaries, increasing class sizes, and allowing for telecommute classrooms, schools will be able to shift its financial resources in order to be able to pay teachers significantly higher salaries, which would then cause the best and brightest to take a second look at the teaching profession. We have to make an investment in our future and it starts with our children. In order to invest in our children we must invest in securing a high qualified pool of teachers.

Do Not Waste Your Time Going to

Getting a college degree just leaves one in debt. Any customer service or retail job, or a job with a trade or skill, will pay one more than enough to save to retire, provided one lives in a low cost area and keeps one’s overhead down.

Whether one starts off in the retail or other field, all entry level positions start off with a relatively low salary. When considering going to college one has to ask oneself: How much money am I losing by having to pay for college and not have a full time job versus is I had a full time job and no college expense? Will I be able to get employed in the field I have chosen or will I have to work in another field for perhaps less pay than I expected? At what point do I hit the break even point, which is defined as: The point in which the money I lost by going to college and not having a full time job is exceeded by the extra money I generated by attaining a college degree?

Remember a college degree is not a gateway to success...at least not anymore. Every year more and more high school graduates are going to college, and not just high school graduates. Thousands of people every year who have been out in the workforce for an extended period of time go back to school in order to advance in their fields. That means when a high school graduate decides to go to college, they are not just competing against other entry level high school graduates. Upon graduation, they will face the stiff competition of those with college degrees that already have experience.

When choosing whom to higher, an employer will always choose the person with the same academic qualifications that has experience over someone with education and no experience. One may be asking oneself, how do I get a job with no experience, and how do I get experience without a job? The answer is simple. Many people that go to work for a company, begin their career in a low paying entry level position. Gradually they work their way up the ranks into higher positions. Eventually, because of their lack of education, they hit a career ceiling on future earnings. Their employers usually pay for them to go back to school and encourage them to apply for the new position once they graduate. Many of the jobs that are advertised online and in the newspapers are advertised for requirement purposes only. Meaning, a job may have to posted in order to show that the hiring process was fair and impartial (when in reality it isn’t). A certain number of candidates and applicants have to be called in for interviews. Although the position technically says no experience necessary, they are looking for someone with experience and in fact already have someone in mind. Why is an employer going to hire you for the position over someone else whom they have paid to go to school for that same position? The answer is...they are not.

The reality is many, positions one is applying for are illusory and might technically exist, but in reality do not exist, because someone else has already been preselected for the job and human resources is just going through the motion of pretending to have selected from an open pool of candidates. The bottom line is, unless your education is being paid for by your employer, and/or you have a job lined up upon graduation, you should not go to college. It will ultimately be a waste of money, and something to chalk up to experience. You have read my book now, don’t be dumb enough to go and get that experience, when I have already done it for you.

Letters of Recommendation Need to be Eliminated to Get into Academic Programs

Your credentials should speak for themselves. I do not understand why standardized tests, GPAs, and transcripts exist, if in the end one has to ask someone for a letter of recommendation. The above mentioned evaluation factors are objective in nature. A letter of recommendation is subjective in nature. It is the opinion that one has of another. Opinions are like ass holes, everyone has one.

It’s the same as applying for a job, and needing to get letters of recommendation or some similar voucher to make one’s qualifications seem more worthy. Perhaps it makes more sense when applying for a job that calls for experience, but is it really necessary for an entry level position, or for an academic program when one walks into a situation fresh faced, with no experience necessary?

We seem to live in a world today in which nobody can stand up on their own. Everyone seems to need someone else’s opinion when it comes to making a decision. Whether it to hire someone for a particular job, or what toilet paper one should get to wipe one’s ass, and even what food to eat, people seem to not be able to make any decisions on their own. We have become a society of “What Do You Think I Should Do” People. Here’s an idea: MAKE A DECISION ON YOUR OWN. Grow a set and become an adult. That’s what I think you should do.

All Children Need to Participate in Sports in Schools The United States have some of the most unhealthiest people in the world. The average American lives a very sedentary life. This lack of physical activity stems from being relatively inactive at an early age which extended into adulthood. Being physically active is important for one’s overall well being. It reduces health risks such as heart diseases, obesity, and diabetes. While having a poor diet is one of the main reasons why the average American is overweight, it is also heavily compounded by a lifestyle of virtually complete inactivity.

The most important class one can take in school is gym. The reason being, most of the health issues than one experiences later on in life is due to poor diet and no exercise. People need to be conditioned from early on in their lives to enjoy and appreciate the benefits of being physically active. The discipline and routine of conventional exercise is probably too monotonous for the average person to commit to. However, if one is participating in physical activities that they actually enjoy, then they tend not to notice that they are actually exercising.

As the population of the United States continues to grow, so does the cost of health care. With the recalcitrant health care policies in place, implemented by US European males, people have to begin become their own health care solutions. A big part of that solution is being physically active and having a body weight that appropriate for their height and body type.

Classes Need to Begin Being Taught via the Internet and All Families

Need to Have Access to a Computer and the Internet

In today’s society, the quality of education from K-12 varies from school to school, city to city and state to state. The reason being, is that resources are spread too thin. Schools receive various amounts of funds allocated per pupil and the quality of teachers varies from school to school as well. By utilizing the internet, some of the classes taught such as English, History, and Math can be taught remotely.

By teaching classes remotely, students throughout the United States will have the opportunity of receiving the same level of curriculum and the same quality of teachers. Teachers throughout the country could combine their skills in order to maximize resources and enhance the learning experience.

Not only will students receive a better quality of education, but the cost of that education would be drastically reduced. If students are only going to school on certain days and for certain classes such as gym, shop class, and driver’s ed; the cost to maintain the schools would be reduced. Money would be saved on fuel cost, drivers’s salaries, and the size of the schools could be reduced, and in many cases schools could be consolidated.

By families having access to computers and the internet at home, learning can be more interactive and there can also be an increased network of communication between students throughout the country. Students can make connections to others at a earlier point in their lives which may help them down the road as progress not only academically, but eventually in the workforce as well.

By allowing students to become comfortable interacting with others remotely, a generation of students can become a generation of workers who primarily telecommute for many services oriented positions, which are the primary white collar positions in the United States. Therefore, as the country continues to grow in size, the stress and strain on roadways and other infrastructure won’t be increased and in many instances may be reduced by switching from a primarily brick and mortar workforce to one that is a primarily telecommute workforce.

Do I Really Need to Go to College?

I am a very well educated person (Bachelor’s Master’s and Doctorate degrees). I do not say that to brag, quite the opposite. I say that because I amassed an impressive education with a lot of debt to go with it.

For the vast majority of people I do not recommend going to college. There are some exceptions. If one is going to an ivy league school like Harvard or Yale, chances are one will be able to acquire a job fairly easy when one graduates. However if one is going to a garden variety college or university one needs to be very careful.

For most colleges and universities serve to delay the inevitable. It serves to delay one’s entry into the workforce and become a full fledged adult. If one goal is to delay becoming a full fledged adult there are better ways to go about it.

If one is between 18-30 years old there are programs in place in which one can travel the world on work visas. One can go from country to country securing jobs when one gets to an area and be able to explore the world. It is a great experience that I would recommend for anyone (I am sorry I did not do it myself). The only thing going to college will accomplish is the acquisition of some relatively useless cocktail hour information and a lot of debt.

I will recommend college for some. If one’s goal is to become a teacher then in some cases I would recommend one going to college. However, one should keep in mind that the teaching profession is becoming more and more competitive. There is a demand for teachers, but it is in certain areas such as: math, science, and special education. The nursing profession is also potentially a good field to get into, but that is also becoming more competitive.

The key is one wants to enter a field that only is just getting into demand. The problem with fields that have been in demand for a while is that by the time one completes the education necessary to enter the field, the jobs have begun to dry up. Remember, college takes 4 years to complete. Four years is nearly half a decade, and a lot can happen in the job market in 4 years. For most I recommend vocational training. Most programs take 2 years or less, which gets one out in the job market quickly and immediately prepared to work. When one graduates college, one still has to be trained by the employer because one has no job experience, which makes one less marketable and thus makes it more difficult for one to acquire a job. With vocational training one is a proven commodity because one has already developed a portfolio of work to show to a prospective employer. With a college education one is just able to demonstrate knowledge of concepts with zero real life applicability.

Every child needs to learn a skill and a trade while in school. Teens need to be able to get full time jobs regardless of what age they are when they graduate high school. It needs to be mandatory for teens and college students to have part time jobs and complete internships in order to graduate. Young people need to become acclimated to working and they are not going to do so if they do not gain job experience, particularly in the field(s) they are planning to work in. If a person graduates from high school at an early age, they should not be penalized by being unable to get a job until they reach a certain age. The high school diploma should entitle them to be able to apply for jobs their education allows.

Chapter: Women Need to Form Their Own Identity Separate From Men

A Woman’s Place in Politics and Society

In the entire history of the world, no group of people has done so little with so much potential. In the entire history of the world, no group has done so little, but caused so much harm. The group I am referring to is women.

It is common knowledge that women are and have always comprised the majority of the population. Women are also responsible for existence and creation of all human life on this planet. Yet even though women are the most powerful force on this planet in number, ability, and intellect, they have failed to reach their full or even a fraction of their potential. Instead women have languished in impetus and have throughout the centuries and millenniums to dominate the world and their lives.

It is similar to a meat eater taken the position they are a non violent person. A meat eater might not technically harm or slaughter any animals themselves, but they allow to perpetuation and cycle of violence to continue to animals on their behalf. These men who have dominated, controlled, and manipulated the world, all started out as women’s infant sons.

These young boys have failed to be raised with respect for women. These young boys have failed to be raised with respect and compassion for their fellow human beings, whether those human beings be men or women. I don’t want to hear it the responsibility of men, husbands and fathers to raise their sons right. Every husband and father also started out as a woman’s infant son. Every husband and father first looked into their mother’s eyes and instinctively knew that was the person that was supposed to protect them and raise them right.

Women have utterly and completely failed at their responsibilities as parents. Women should be willing to give their lives, to sacrifice their lives to protect their children. Yet they don’t. Instead women allow their children to be raised by overbearing totalitarian men. They allow themselves to be abused. They allow they children learning to grow up with violence, hate, and prejudice in their hearts.

Yet women take no responsibility for their actions. They do not accept and understand the power that they have. Women control life and death from the very beginning. Women alone decide whether to conceive, whether to give birth, whether to nurture that child. Until that child grows up and begins to go out in the world, it is their mother that has the chance to instill core values into them.

From birth until at least 5 years old, a mother is a child’s constant companion. Men have almost nothing to do with their children before then. It is in these formative years that women have the opportunity to make the greatest impact in their sons lives. Instead they waste that time. They waste those years and allowed their sons to be empty vessels waited to be plucked up by their oppressive fathers and teach them all the vile, disgusting traits that they have picked up over the years.

If it is not enough for women to fail to properly raise their sons, women basically commit speciecide against their own kind. They raise their daughters to be completely submissive to men. Women teach their daughters no redeeming core values. They teach them to honor and respect men as if they are some kind of gods. They teach them how to cook and clean. They tell them that a woman’s place is in the home taking care of the house and the children. Women essentially raise their daughters to be slaves masquerading around in the form of human beings.

Why is it that women do not teach their daughters to be strong, powerful beings that have respect for themselves and their fellow human beings? Why do women not teach their daughters that they can do anything they want and that their futures is theirs for them to decide for themselves? Women have a responsibility to teach their daughters to be strong vessels of life. They have a responsibility to teach their daughters to be powerful protectors of the earth. They have a responsibility to teach their daughters to matriarchs and protectors of their families.

Women have a responsibility to teach their daughters not to grow up and live under the foot of a man. Women have a responsibility to teach their daughters to have enough respect for themselves that they would never allow a man to hit them or abuse them. That they would never allow a man to teach their children how to hate, how to be prejudice, how to plot evil. Women should teach their daughters that they must be willing to sacrifice their lives to save the souls of their children. They must be willing to kill abusive men that would do harm to them and their families.

Women must understand although they are a passive people, men are not. Men are bullies. Men are ruthless creatures that cannot be reasoned with. One cannot teach a man as an adult, they must be taught how to be a man as a child. Once a male has progressed into adulthood without the proper guidance and supervision, that male is lost and there can be no hope for him.

Women must stop becoming involved with these kind of men. They must stop carry on the bloodline and having children with these men. These men must be left to fend for themselves. We know what type of men I am talking about. These men are the hunters, they are the wife batters, they are the cops, the soldiers, and men with aggressive, controlling, manipulating personalities (doesn’t leave much left to choose from?!?). These type men are allowed to flourish and continue to rain down the brand of violence, manipulation, and control of the world because they always have women at their side to take care of them. Whether these men be Hitler, Stalin, Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, and others, they have always had women there to look after them and to clean up their mess. Men might be able to control and manipulate the world, but most can’t maneuver their way around a kitchen or find where they left their wallet or car keys.

The point being, even as adults, these men still need their mother, or at least a maternal figure in their lives. They still need for someone to cook for them, wash their clothes, keep their house clean, and take care of their children. In short, men will forever be dependent on women. Men cannot function, they cannot do the day to day tasks they engage in without women there to look after them. By women continuing to appease them, they allow men to carry on the way they do as destructive vessels of death.

Women must stop living their lives as victims and realize they are the most powerful force on the planet. Some say that those that control money control the world...wrong. Those that control life control the world. There is no world to control if there is no one to control. Women hold the power of life and death inside of themselves. Women must stop allowing men to devalue them and tell them how worthless they are and realize the truth. Men fear women.

Think about how the courtship process works. Men are always on their best behavior. They are always very respectful; movies, dinners, flowers, compliments...then what happens once a man has gotten a woman to succumb to his efforts...he changes. The moment a man has a woman under his spell he immediately tries to change and manipulate her. Initially the changes can be subtle such as asking her to do a few things for him, maybe spend a little more time with him and less with family and friends. Eventually the man has engulFederal Reserve a woman’s life, that she forgets what life was like before he came along.

The reason why men are so possessive and so controlling is because they fear women. No matter how big and strong a man might be, he is still that same pubescent boy remembering what it was like when he was in school where he felt so intimidated by the popular girls in school. In the male/female relationship pursuit, it is generally the male that is pursuing the female. The female has all the power. She gets to choose who she will and won’t go out with. However, once the female decides on a particular male, all her power and control is gone.

Unfortunately, females, more often than not, are all too willing to give power and control over to a male in a relationship. It is during the courtship process in which the male begins to train the female for a life of servitude and devotion to him. Often times this training is more subtle and covert, but for a naturally submissive female the training can be much more obvious and overt.

There are two types of females that are the most dangerous: Ultra Submissive Females, and Females of the Aristocracy. Ultra Submissive Females make horrible parents. They are bad role models for both males and females. They generally either come from an abusive background and/or are involved in an abusive and/or controlling relationship. These type women are huge ego boosters for the controlling male.

Ultra submissive females will raise their sons to be controlling abusive males. Their sons will grow up having no respect for women and they will ultimately look to marry someone who reminds them of their mother who was also submissive. Daughters of these women will grow up learning to fear men and be obedient toward them. They will be submissive and will grow up and raise children in a similar fashion as their mother raised them allowing this abusive cycle to continue.

Females of the Aristocracy are elitist females. They have no real roles in their families other than birthing future heirs. They are arm pieces for their husbands and nothing more. They generally are only in public marriages in which the couple really has no home life and most likely her husband has at least one if not multiple mistresses. Generally these type females do not raise their own children. They usually have a nanny and/or multiple caregivers to look after them.

Generally the caregivers that look after and raise the children of aristocracy are low educated, homely women that are incapable of being seen with any level of respect. Although the children raised by then grow to love and care for them they have virtually no respect for them. These children generally have very distant relationships with their parents and a distorted view of reality.

Males raised by these types of caregivers grow up to disrespect women and look to engage in similar controlling relationships when they get older. The females raised by these women are generally either very rebellious or end up marrying a carbon copy of their father allowing the cycle to continue.

Regardless of a woman’s socioeconomic status. Regardless of race, creed, color, or religion. Women must recognize that they alone are responsible for the present and future of this planet. Men have been allowed to unsuccessful rule this planet for thousands of years with disastrous results. It is up to the women of this world to rise up and realize their full potential. Women can no longer take a back seat to men anymore.

So often a person might pray to God and say: God, how is it You can allow Your creations to run amuck and to rule unfettered on the earth? It is the women of the world I pose this question to. How can women allow that male offspring to run amuck and to rule unfettered on the earth? Do not women not have a responsibility to ensure that what they create is safe for humans? Manufacturers of products are required to run test to ensure their products are safe for human users.

Are women not the manufacturers of children? Are women not the producers of children? Every year women produce millions upon millions of lives in this world. Should there not be a requirement that the lives they produced be safe to be around the rest of us? Yes, the right to choose whether a woman has a child or not is hers to make. However, once she decides to have that child she has a duty to herself, a family, and the human race to ensure that child grows up with some level of core values to prevent them from becoming a monster.

Could nothing have prevented the pain and misery brought down by Hitler not have been prevented? Did Stalin, Saddam Hussein, or Osama Bin Laden have to grow up to be the wretched beasts of humanity that they became? Did they not have mothers? Were they born by jackals? What about serial killers such as Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy, and Charles Manson; who takes responsibility for them?

God entrusted women alone, not men, to be the create, and continue the perpetuation of human life on this planet. Women have a sacred covenant with God to nurture and protect all human life on this planet. Throughout the centuries, women have broken that covenant with God by allowing these feral mongrels to engulf the world with their destructive and malignant control of our planet. Women must restore order and justice to planet earth by reigning in man’s dominance, savagery and control over all of us.

In the entire history of the United States a woman has never been elected either president or vice president in this country. A woman has never even ran on the main ticket of either the Democratic or Republican party to be President of the United States. Before the election of President Barack Obama, no minority had ever held the highest office of the land.

Although males of European Caucasian percent are a minority in this country representing approximately 35% of the population, they occupy 90% of the positions of elected office in this country. Although women make up more than 50% of the population in this country they hold less than 10% of the positions of elected office in this country, with minorities, whom represent more than 30% of the population, occupy less than 5% of the positions of elected office in the United States. However, no where in the US Constitution are women and minorities who make up 70% of the US population prohibited from occupying 10% of the positions of elected office, so the system that is currently in place must be fair to all...correct???

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2008/05_women_lawless_fox/05_wo men_lawless_fox.pdf

Table 1 – Women Office Holders in the United States

Office % Women

Statewide Elective Officials 24.1

State Legislators 23.5

State Governors 18.0

Members of the US House of Representatives 16.3

US Senators 16.0

Mayors of the 100 Largest Cities 10.0

Source: Center for American Women and Politics, “Women

Office Holders Fact Sheets and Summaries,” 2007

Table 2 – Worldwide Rankings of Women

in the National Legislature

Rank and Country % Women 1. Rwanda 48.8

2. Sweden 47.3

3. Finland 42.0

4. Costa Rica 38.6

5. Norway 37.9

6. Denmark 36.9

7. Netherlands 36.7

8. Cuba 36.0

Spain 36.0

10. Mozambique 34.8

11. Belgium 34.7

12. South Africa 32.8

13. Austria 32.2

New Zealand 32.2

15. Iceland 31.7

16. Germany 31.6

17. Burundi 30.5

18. Tanzania 30.4

19. Uganda 29.8

20. Switzerland 29.5

84. United States of America 16.3

International Average 17.5

Source: Inter-Parliamentary Union, “Women in National

Parliaments,” as of October 31, 2007

As of 2008, women only occupy 16.3% of elected office in the United States. The United States ranks 84th in the world in women representation. As the position becomes of higher importance such as US Senators and mayors of major cities, their representation dramatically decreases.

Table 7 – Potential Candidates Family Structures and Responsibilities

Women Men

Marital Status

Single 13 % * 5 %

Married or Living with Partner 69 * 86

Separated or Divorced 11 * 6

Parental Status

Have Children 72 * 88

Children Living at Home 37 †

41

Children Under Age 6 Living at Home 11 10

Childcare Responsibilities

Responsible for Majority of Childcare 60 * 4

Equal Division of Childcare 29 * 35

Spouse / Partner Responsible for Majority of

Childcare

5 * 60

Household Responsibilities

Responsible for Majority of Household Tasks 44 * 7

Equal Division of Labor 43 * 36

Spouse / Partner Responsible for Majority of

Household Tasks

10 * 56

Average Number of Hours Spent Weekly on Household Tasks

12.3 * 8.4

Sample Size 910 1,095

Notes: Household responsibilities figures are based on respondents who are married or living with a

partner. Childcare arrangements figures are based on respondents who have children. Significance

levels of the gender gap: * p < .05 or better; †

p < .10.

http://www.sba.gov/advocacy/850/12264

Overall Findings

The time-use patterns of self-employed women differ substantially from those of men and of women employed in wage-and-salary work. Consistent with family motivations for selecting self- employment, self-employed women spend less time than both men and women in wage-and-salary jobs on work-related activities, and more time on household activities and caring for children. The results suggest that the development of policies that enhance work-life balance, offset racial disparities in self-employment, and increase human capital through education might encourage more women to enter self-employment as a way of balancing family life and the need or desire to earn a living.

Highlights

The authors’ results offer compelling evidence that time-use patterns are different for self- employed women compared with women employed in wageand- salary jobs, and with men.

According to the study, women are about 57 percent less likely than men to enter self- employment. Entry rates are lowest among African- American and foreign-born women relative to men. Women with more advanced degrees are more likely to enter self-employment, especially in the financial industries, education and health sectors, and other service categories.

Contrary to results in previous studies, higher earning women were slightly more likely to enter self-employment than their lower earning peers.

Self-employed women work about 1.5 hours less per day in their self-employment work or about 10 fewer hours per week than self-employed men. Women work as wage-and-salary employees about 6 fewer hours per week than wage-and-salary-employed men. Self-employed women spend about 3.5 more hours in household activities per week than women employed in wage-and-salary work and 6 more hours than men.

In general, women spend more time on primary child care activities, but the effects are largest for self-employed women. Self-employed women spend about 3 additional hours per week on primary child care relative to self-employed men. Women wage and- salary workers spend about 2 more hours on primary child care than men in their employed sector.

For wage-and-salary workers, higher levels of education mean more time in primary child care, but education levels are not a significant determinant of primary care time for the self- employed. Differences between self-employed women and men are especially significant in secondary child care, where a parent is at the same location as the child but is primarily engaged in another activity (such as work or household activities). Women spend more time than men in secondary child care, with the largest effects for self-employed women (6.4 hours per week more than men).

Being married has opposite effects on the time use of self-employed women and men. Married self employed women work 4.5 hours fewer than unmarried self-employed women, whereas self-employed men who are married work almost 4 more hours per week than their unmarried counterparts.

Each additional child in the household means 2.4 fewer work hours per week for self- employed women and 1.5 fewer hours per week for women in wage-and-salary work.

http://familiesandwork.org/site/research/reports/main.html

Chapter: Minorities Need to Form Their Own Identity Separate From White Males

The victimization of minorities in the United States is a long and lengthy one particularly for African Americans. Unlike every other minority in the United States, African Americans are the only ones that came to the US, not of their own choice. African Americans were slaves; and unlike in other regions in the world, particularly in the Carribean where slavery also existed, there has been no effort to truly assimilate African Americans into US culture. Unfortunately, if status quo is maintained, assimilation of African Americans into US culture will never occur. Slavery occurred at the hands of European males. European females were not directly responsible for the introduction, continuation, and the horrors of the slave trade. In order for the remnants of slavery to be eliminated from the United States, African Americans must be integrated into US culture. The only way for African Americans to be integrated into US culture is their culture and the European cultures are blended. The only for the two cultures to blend is by eliminating the signs that divide.

African Americans will never be accepted into US culture, it simply is not possible. A blended African American does have a much better chance of being “accepted.” Athletes such as Derek Jeter and Tiger Woods have been accepted by US culture. Barack Obama became President of the United States. The three of them all have one thing in common, they are only 50% African American. Both Jeter and Obama are half Caucasian, and Woods is half Asian. A full blooded or mostly African American person makes the average American “uncomfortable.”

One can either call that uncomfortability racism or accept that many of us have a natural uneasiness with those that we find different. The stigma attached to African Americans in the United States is one that will stick with this country forever. More African came to Mexico by way of slavery than the United States, but no one ever hears about African Americans in Mexico. The reason being is because Africans and Mexicans intermixed thus eliminating the “issue” of racism.

Many Mexicans are darker in complexion because they have African ancestry in their blood. They accept this ancestry, they are not discriminated because of it. However, in the United States, more than 12% of the population is of distinctly noticeable African decent, there has been no intermixing of the blood by and large. The result of this like of intermixing is a lack of integration. African Americans will remain on the outside looking in as long as their unique physical characteristics separate them from the rest of the population. Unlike other groups, there is no “blending in” when one is majority African American, thus they stand out like a sore thumb.

Am I suggesting that African Americans mix with other races...yes absolutely. Miscegenation laws existed in the United States up until 1967, because US European males understood what race mixing would mean to the issue of racism in the United States. The issue of racism would completely disappear if the races were to intermingle. US European males, particularly the oligarchy wanted to keep the races divided for as long as possible. The reason being is, a divided country is one that doesn’t stand up and fight together in unison.

Instead a country of fractions is easier to manipulate and control than one that stands together as one. If everyone is your enemy then the true minority, the oligarchy can put one group against another, and use that strife for their own financial gain. If the races were to intermix, then there would only be one group of people and the United States would be a true melting pot, they way it was intended. A unity people would stand against their true enemies, the oligarchy invoking real change for the first time in the United States in over 200 years.

That is why African Americans are depicted so negatively in the United States. The reason why African Americans are depicted so negatively is because the oligarchy, the US ruling class has a vested interests in keeping the races divided. Women from other racial groups are far less apt to intermix with African American males if they always seem to be in some sort of trouble with the law. The reason why there are any mulattoes in the US at all, is because during the time of slavery, US European regularly raped slave women causing them to become pregnant and give birth to their children.

African Americans have a duty in to themselves, their families, their children, and their future generations to intermingle with other races. African Americans must marry outside of their race if they want racism to end in the United States. When African Americans marry outside of their race today, it is the African Americans who are usually up in arms over the event. How can African Americans expect to be treated equally in this country if they continue to act like a fringe, militia group.

African Americans have gone out of their way not to fit in with US culture? After nearly 150 years of being free from slavery, how is that working out? No Black person has ever been president or vice president. No Black person has ever been Speaker of the House or Governor of California. African Americans are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system. African Americans are the reason the United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world.

Let’s be honest, Black people refuse to act normal in the United States. The average Black person still carries on many of the same characteristics they learned when they slaves. Characteristics that were displayed to them by the Southern slave owners. Essentially the average Black person acts like a Black Redneck. Anyone who wants to learn more about the definition should read the book “Black Rednecks and White Liberals” by Thomas Sowell (it should be noted Thomas Sowell would be described by most as a African American).

Essentially the average Black person in the United States displays very unrefined characteristics, the same as the average White Redneck. Like the average White Redneck, the average Black person is prone to bouts of violence, they have their own sayings (many people have referred to how Black people speak as Ebonics), they have strange hairstyles, they dress differently from the average person. Southerners like country music, Blacks, like rap music; many of the themes of rap and country music are very similar. Southerners like wearing a lot of makeup, driving big loud cars, and speaking loudly in public. Blacks like wearing a lot of makeup, driving big loud cars, and speaking loudly in public.

In short, after nearly 150 years post slavery, African Americans have failed to strip away the stigma of their slave history, because they have failed to strip away the characteristics of their former slave masters. Many Black people still demand reparations for their time as slaves, the same as White Southerners demanded reparations for the Civil War and still driving around with their conFederal Reserveerate flags. Many Black people drive around with their windows rolled down playing loud music no matter how hot it is outside, the same as White Rednecks who drive around in a similar fashion.

After slavery ended, many White Americans were willing to let newly freed Blacks move into their neighborhoods and interact with them on a regular basis. The reason why the tide turned against Blacks and the Whites began protesting against integration of neighborhoods, is because of the complete and utter uncivilness of the Black people. Blacks had spent so many years being slaves, that once they became free, they failed to recognize how to conduct themselves as civilized, ordinary human beings. Most of them could not read and write, they had no real skills, other than being slaves, and they conducted themselves in public in a vary disconcerted matter.

Blacks seem to forget that there was a Reconstruction Era in the United States after the Civil War ended. Whites tried to extend an olive branch toward Blacks, however Black people failed to take advantage of that opportunity. Rather than adopting the values of Booker T. Washington, and look to earn the respect of White people, Blacks instead took up the approach of W.E.B. Dubois and had the misguided view that White people owed them something for their time as slaves.

Rather than Blacks being happy that slavery ended and trying to put it behind them, many of them just couldn’t let it go. Many of them wanted to be treated like equals of Whites, without having to ever earn the privilege. Just because you get hired in an entry level position to a company doesn’t mean you are going to become president of that company overnight. Blacks wanted things that they simply weren’t entitled to.

There have been numerous minority groups in the United States over the nation’s 200 plus year history. Most have not been treated well initially and they had to all accept their place, and work their way up to a higher position. For some reason, Blacks thought they were different. Blacks thought they were going to get the royal penthouse treatment because of what their people went through in the United States. Let’s face forward to the present day.

This is 2011; slavery ended in the United States nearly 150 years ago. That means that all the slave owners are dead, and their children are probably dead, maybe even their grandchildren. That also means that all the former slaves are dead too, as well as their children, and probably their grandchildren. Why are Blacks still holding onto slavery when no one alive today had anything to do with it? It is like holding onto a family grudge for centuries even though the descendants of those family have nothing to do with the original grudge.

The fact is Blacks will never be accepted in the United States as long as they hold onto their chip on their shoulder as a result of slavery. Rather than feel angry and feeling sorry for themselves, they need to suck it up and take advantage of the opportunities that exist in this country and put the past where it belongs; permanently behind them. Slavery is just as alive as Abraham Lincoln or Robert E. Lee. Last I checked those two individuals are very much dead, and so is slavery.

Black people should stop trying to be accepted by Whites, particularly by White European males and look to form their own identity. They need to stop getting in trouble with the law by selling drugs, committing burglaries, and robberies and go to school, learn a trade and take back their communities. Changes will not happen overnight, but they can happen, but not if Blacks expect Whites to give them everything.

There is a system in place with many advantageous benefits for those willing to take advantage of them. I will make the same recommendation to Blacks as I would make to any group. Cut up your credit cards, cancel your credit cards, get out of your mortgages, get out of debt completely, file bankruptcy if you need to, and make a fresh start.

Stop being a victim. Stop blaming everybody else for your own problems. Realize that your future is within your control and it is up to you to take it into your hands and make the best of it. No one is going to give you anything in this life, you have to go out there and earn it. Stop waiting for life to come to you and go out there and earn what you want. African Americans have been acting like victims in this country for too long.

If African Americans want to be treated equally and with respect in this country they are going to have to earn it. They need to stop having kids outside of wedlock. Stop having kids as preteens, teenagers, and with no means to support them. Stay in school and get a trade. Look to become self employed. Have some respect for your own communities and stop robbing, stealing from, raping, and killing, your own people, and start acting normal. Stop making their skin complexion a badge of honor or a badge of courage, and just make it a part of life. Instead having race be their lives, make it just another fact of their lives. When you stop focusing on your differences, others will start to do so too.

African Americans need to stop making their lives about other people and instead making it about themselves. They should not let other people define them, instead they should shape their own existence. As I stated earlier, if African Americans want racism to end in this country then they need to integrate and marry outside of their race. If they are unwilling to do that then I have other recommendations.

If African Americans are unwilling to integrate and unwilling to marry outside their race, then they need to separate themselves from the rest of society. The Civil War was a wound that literally ripped the United States apart. African Americans are in many ways a sad reminder of that time. They either need to move to a different part of the country, i.e. not the South or the Northeast, or they need to move out of the country altogether. It is at that point.

The largest reason for the national debt is by far, the Federal Reserve, the IRS, and military spending, and social programs. However, behind them is the African American issue. African Americans refuse to live up to their full potential by being undereducated, underemployed, and crime stricken. As a result, more limited government resource have to be used for such programs as Medicaid and Welfare, more cops have to be put on the streets in African American neighborhoods, courts are flooded with unnecessary cases wasting more tax dollars, and then they are being disproportionately housed in prisons at tax payer expense.

The African American issue is the biggest social problem in the United States...far bigger than illegal immigration. Unlike African Americans, illegal immigrants do not qualify for social security. For the most part they get low income jobs and live in close knit communities. Although there are a fair number of Latin Americans in the prison system, most of them were born in the United States.

The issue of racism has remained an issue of controversy and embarrassment for the United States since the end of the Civil War. How can a country expect to be respected around the war when its people fail to get along. The issue of racism has robbed the United States of the opportunity to live up to its motto of the American Dream. We are a nation of sects and the African Americans are the most divisive of those sects.

Although African Americans might move into our neighborhoods, how many of us would move into theirs? When we hear about a poor crime ridden neighborhood, how many of us do not first assume it is a African American neighborhood or one with a heavy African American population? Some might call that racism, the fact is those are the statistics. In the vast majority of neighborhoods around the world socioeconomic status does not determine the level of crime but rather the percentage of African Americans in the area. I have researched cities in every state in the United States. There are many areas throughout the US with high unemployment and a high level of poverty. However, in terms of crime the areas, with the highest level of crime, particularly violent crimes, such as murder, rape, and burglary, primarily occur in African American communities. What that means is one’s socioeconomic status does not define a person, rather one’s mentality defines who we are.

Although African Americans seem to be the least willing to actively work to change their socioeconomic plight, they seem to be the most willing to complain about their plight, as well as engage in acts of criminality because of their plight. In essence, many in the African American community, for lack of a better term are a bunch of cry babies. They blame everybody else for their problems except for themselves. As a result, everyone are their enemies, including each other.

Out of all the groups in the United States, African Americans are the most divided, disjointed, disconnected group of them all. What is said about that, is few groups have existed in the United States longer than the African Americans. Instead of their past history in the US uniting them, it as a division.

What is also startling is that even though African Americans do not like each other very much (as supported by crime statistics), they rarely ever marry, date, or intermingle outside their race. They are in short a bunch of angry, chip on their shoulder type of people, that are just a gluttony for punishment. They term “misery loves company” must have had African Americans around. Tried to have a conversation about any political issues with an African American and the conversation is likely to turn to a woo is me, everybody is out to get me, what has the government done lately for me type of speech.

The reality is the government does too much for all of us. We depend too much on the government and not enough on ourselves and our families. The biggest reason for the national debt (besides the exploitation being perpetrated by the Federal Reserve) is people’s inability to want to take responsibility and control for our own lives.

So many of us seem to be in a perpetual state of adolescence. We seem to want to be adults, but on the other hand, we want to be taken care of too. That type of schizophrenic approach to life, is exactly how the US government functions. On the one hand it allows people to have freedom of choice, on the other, there is direct taxation to pay for social programs and out of control government spending because people rather someone else to handle the major responsibilities in their lives. As a result the new nation of 20 something, 30 something, and 40 something year olds, are worse off now than previous generations.

Let’s face it, the older generation has not done the younger generations any favors. They have left us with an inheritance of a massive national debt, government spending that is out of control, paternalistic social programs, and a private central bank masquerading as a government agency driving us more than one trillion additional dollars into debt every year.

It is time for the younger generations to stand up for themselves. How long are we supposed to continue to bear the burden of our parents’s, grandparents’s, and great grandparents’s mistakes. Just like it is unfair for children to inherit their parents’s debts, it is equally unfair for new generations to inherit the debts of older generations mistakes.

None of us alive today had a hand in creating the financial mess we are entangled in, in the United States, so why should we live with and bear the burden of it. None of us alive today are responsible for the creation of these social programs that FDR thrusted upon us, so why should we continue to fund them.

Social programs are kind of like medicine. At some point you are supposed to get better and get off the medicine. If you can’t get off the medicine you are either too sick or he medicine does not work. We are needlessly drowning in debt because of previous generations poor decisions. If the country refuses to change its continued debt accumulation position, then the country either needs to be disbanded or we need to find someplace else to go.

None of us can think that the status quo can work. The national debt is now doubling every 5 years. We are now going into debt further and further at a rate of more than one trillion dollars a year, which is more than 3 times more than what the national debt was 50 years ago. The national debt is outpacing the GDP, and is outpacing inflation. Home prices have never been this low this long. In fact the last time home prices dropped in the United States was during the Great Depression. The only reason the country in not technically in a depression is because the Federal Reservecontinues to lend Wall Street and banks money to keep the stock market a float. Once the stock market collapses, so will the dollar.

We have bigger issues in this country than what people look like and whether someone likes are dislikes someone because of how they look or who their parents or grandparents were. We are at the point in this nation’s history where the very concept of the nation as a nation, let alone continuing as one in whatever capacity is in grave jeopardy. None of us, the United States, Inc. included, can continue to outspend its resources year after year and not expect a receipt for those expenses.

Instead of the people of the United States continuing to support and allowed old issues from yesteryear divide us, we need to join together as a nation and put an end to the institutional regime none as the Federal Reserveand the IRS, and wipe the national debt slate clean. If the politicians are not going to wipe the slate clean, you better start doing it for yourself.

You should all stop accepting Federal Reservenotes as good currency. Instead you should only accept payment in the form of gold and silver as the founding fathers intended. You should turn in all your cash for gold and silver. You should empty all of your investment accounts and use those funds to acquire gold and silver.

The reality is the stock market will crash sooner rather than later. When it does the dollar will be completely devalued (don’t say I didn’t warn you!). Those holding the gold and silver will be ok, but those holding on to pieces of paper, such as Federal Reservenotes, stocks, bonds, and treasury notes, will be holding on to fools money, not worth any more than the Mexican peso or the Russian ruble. Instead of being on the outside looking in, for once take a stance and protect your future. Don’t let the US financially crumble, with you holding the bag.

I can assure you, when, not if the US economy permanently collapses, the members of the Federal Reserve will be ok. They have planned for that day for nearly 100 years. They did not leave it up to chance. Their money is well diversified in many currencies. They have large deposits of gold, much larger than the United States (many of those deposits are in the United States). When that faithful day comes, you will wish you listened to me and protected your future. Many of you will be running to Mexico, Canada, and Brazil when the US collapses. Unfortunately many of you want make it, because your precious passport, like the US dollar will not be worth the paper it was printed on. In other words, US citizens will be barred from traveling to many of the countries throughout the world.

SUMMARY OF QUICK FACTS

* Various dates and proofs that the Bankers created panic to push Congress to pass laws favouring bankers.

* President Wilson received $85,000 bribe from bankers.

* How England, through the Bankers, controls our Congress.

* Rockefeller is connected to President Carter.

* How George Bush is directly connected to the Federal Reserve bank.

* President Hoover and President Roosevelt were international Bankers.

* President Nixon was hired by Rockefeller's law firm to become President.

* Federal Reserve owner's manual to destroy and control US citizens.

* Proof Bankers claim they control the government. * Proof the Federal Reserve knowingly created the Great Depression for their gain.

* Federal Reserve bankers are directly linked to the New World Order and the United Nations. New World Order was discussed by George Bush, Rockefeller, Adolph Hitler, and Jimmy Carter.

* The Great Seal on back of the Federal Reserve $1 bill, below pyramid, the NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM means "New World of the Ages" or --- New World Order.

* How the Banker's tax-exempt organizations fund activities to destroy America's freedom by attacking our Constitution and way of life.

* Senator Barry Goldwater warned of economic powers capable of bypassing or controlling the political powers. Bank induced depression is possible in the future to force political change.

* Rockefeller's money was used to seize control of America's teaching and training of students by rewriting history and textbooks. Rockefeller has also funded the National Education Association (NEA).

* Gary Kah, high-ranking government liaison having first-hand knowledge of the New World Order exposes the truth. Read his book and En Route To Global Occupation.

IN CLOSING

For the secret owners of the Federal Reserve to control the volume of money and become our absolute masters, they had to get the gold away from our grandparents. This was accomplished in 1933 with the threats of fines and imprisonments by their President Franklin D. Roosevelt with aide Harry Hopkins, who said... "Elect, elect, elect, tax, tax, tax, spend, spend, spend, for the people are too damned stupid to understand". By the way, Roosevelt was an international Banker. See Fool's Gold is Green by Winston Smith.

The Revolutionary War was fought and the Constitution was written to prevent other nations and private banks from issuing (printing) money and controlling our currency. In 1913, members of Congress committed treason and violated their oath of office to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic by voting in the Federal Reserve Bank.

For the New World Order to create a one world government, they must control a central bank, eliminate the Constitution, end Christian values, disarm America, and control the media. The Council on Foreign Relations has openly said they will take us over in favour of a one world government. The American people must be warned or we may lose our freedom forever. If we do not demand our rights and uphold the Constitution, the CFR and bankers will continue their march toward socialism. If we allow them to continue, they will abolish our rights and put an end to our present government.

The bankers control the media, but cannot stop patriotic Americans from using copy machines to distribute information and inform America. Once informed, people will demand an explanation why Congress allowed this fraud as the media appeared to be independent and investigative, but remained silent on this important issue. The ones who scream the loudest to keep the Federal ReserveBank probably profits the most.

HOW TO CONTROL PEOPLE

“Tyranny seldom announces itself. … In fact, a tyranny may exist without an individual tyrant. A whole government, even a democratically elected one, may be tyrannical.” — Joseph Sobran

The difference between true education and vocational training has been cleverly blurred. Here are a few tips on how smart people can control other people. If any of this rings a bell - Well, then wake up! The first principle of people control is not to let them know you are controlling them. If people knew, this knowledge would breed resentment and possibly rebellion, which would then require brute force and terror, and old fashioned, expensive and not a 100 % certain method of control.

It is easier than you think to control people indirectly, to manipulate them into thinking what you want them to think and doing what you want them to do. One basic technique is to keep them ignorant. Educated people are not as easy to manipulate. Abolishing public education or restricting access to education would be the direct approach. That would spill the beans. The indirect approach is to control the education they receive.

It's possible to be a PhD., doctor, lawyer, businessman, journalist, or an accountant, just to name a few examples, and at the same time be an uneducated person. The difference between true education and vocational training has been cleverly blurred in our time so that we have people successfully practicing their vocations while at the same time being totally ignorant of the larger issues of the world in which they live. The most obvious symptom is their absence of original thought. Ask them a question and they will end up reciting what someone else thinks or thought the answer was. People’s education consists of learning how to use the library and cite sources. That greatly simplifies things for the controller because with lots of money, university endowments, foundations, grants, and ownership of media, it is relatively easy to control who they will think of as authorities to cite in lieu of doing their own thinking.

Another technique is to keep them entertained. Roman emperors did not stage circuses and gladiator contests because they didn't have television. We have television because we don't have circuses and gladiator events. Either way, the purpose is to keep the people's minds focused on entertainment, sports, and peripheral political issues. This way you won't have to worry that they will ever figure out the real issues that allow you to control them.

Just as a truly educated person is difficult to control, so too is an economically independent person. Therefore, you want to create conditions that will produce people who work for wages, since wage earners have little control over their economic destiny. You'll also want to control the monetary, credit, and banking systems. This will allow you to inflate the currency and make it next to impossible for wage earners to accumulate capital. You can also cause periodic deflation to collapse the family businesses, family farms, and entrepreneurs, including independent community banks.

To keep trade unions under control, you just promote a scheme that allows you to shift production jobs out of the country and bring back the products as imports (it is called free trade). This way you will end up with no unions or docile unions. Another technique is to buy both political parties so that after a while people will feel that no matter whether they vote for Candidate A or Candidate B, they will get the same policies. This will create great apathy and a belief that the political process is useless for effecting real change.

Pretty soon you will have a population that feels completely helpless, and thinks the bad things happening to them are nobody in particular's fault, just a result of global forces or evolution or some other disembodied abstract concept. If necessary, you can offer scapegoats. Then you can bleed them dry without having to worry overly much that one of them will sneak into your house one night and cut your throat. If you do it right, they won't even know whose throat they are cutting.

Chapter: Conclusion

It's no coincidence that during the period following the establishment of the Federal Reserveand the elimination of the gold standard, a huge growth in the size of the Federal Reserve government and its debt occurred. Believers in big government, whether on the left or right, vociferously reject the constraints on government growth that gold demands. Liberty is virtually impossible to protect when the people allow their government to print money at will. Inevitably, the left will demand more economic interventionism, the right more militarism and empire building. Both sides, either inadvertently or deliberately, will foster corporatism. Those whose greatest interest is in liberty and self-reliance are lost in the shuffle. Though left and right have different goals and serve different special-interest groups, they are only too willing to compromise and support each other's programs.

If unchecked, the economic and political chaos that comes from currency destruction inevitably leads to tyranny- a consequence of which the Founders were well aware. For 100 years we have lived with a central bank, with the last 40 years absent of any restraint on money creation. The longer the process lasts, the faster the printing presses have to run in an effort to maintain stability. They are currently running at record rate. It was predictable and is understandable that our national debt is now expanding at a record rate.

The panicky effort of the Federal Reserve to stimulate economic growth does produce what it considers favourable economic reports. However, we find that military spending-almost all of which is overseas- is up by over 50%. This, of course, represents deficit spending financed by the Federal Reserve's printing press. This is hardly a reassuring report on the health of our economy and merely reflects the bankruptcy of current economic policy.

Real economic growth won't return until confidence in the entire system is restored. And that is impossible as long as it depends on the politicians not spending too much money and the Federal Reserve limiting its propensity to inflate our way to prosperity. Only sound money and limited government can do that.

Today's Conditions

Today's economic conditions reflect a fiat monetary system held together by many tricks and luck over the past 40 years. The world has been awash in paper money since removal of the last vestige of the gold standard by Richard Nixon when he buried the Bretton Woods agreement- the gold exchange standard- on August 15, 1971. Since then we've been on a worldwide paper dollar standard. Quite possibly we are seeing the beginning of the end of that system. If so, tough times are ahead for the United States and the world economy.

A paper monetary standard means there are no restraints on the printing press or on Federal Reserve deficits. In 1971 the national debt was $408 billion; today it stands at $15 trillion, a 3000% increase. Since that time, our dollar has lost almost 100% of its purchasing power. Common sense tells us that this process is not sustainable and something has to give. So far, no one in Washington seems interested.

Although dollar creation is ultimately the key to its value, many other factors play a part in its perceived value, such as: the strength of our economy, our political stability, our military power, the benefit of the dollar being the key reserve currency of the world, and the relative weakness of other nation's economies and their currencies. For these reasons, the dollar has enjoyed a special place in the world economy. Increases in productivity have also helped to bestow undeserved trust in our economy with consumer prices, to some degree, being held in check and fooling the people, at the urging of the Federal Reserve, that "inflation" is not a problem. Trust is an important factor in how the dollar is perceived. Sound money encourages trust, but trust can come from these other sources as well. But when this trust is lost, which always occurs with paper money, the delayed adjustments can hit with a vengeance.

Following the breakdown of the Bretton Woods agreement, the world essentially accepted the dollar as a replacement for gold, to be held in reserve upon which even more monetary expansion could occur. It was a great arrangement that up until now seemed to make everyone happy.

We own the printing press and create as many dollars as we please. These dollars are used to buy Federal Reserve debt. This allows our debt to be monetized and the spendthrift Congress, of course, finds this a delightful convenience and never complains. As the dollars circulate through our fractional reserve banking system, they expand many times over. With our excess dollars at home, our trading partners are only too happy to accept these dollars in order to sell us their products. Because our dollar is relatively strong compared to other currencies, we can buy foreign products at a discounted price. In other words, we get to create the world's reserve currency at no cost, spend it overseas, and receive manufactured goods in return. Our excess dollars go abroad and other countries-especially Japan and China- are only too happy to loan them right back to us by buying our government and GSE debt. Up until now both sides have been happy with this arrangement.

But all good things must come to an end and this arrangement is ending. The process put us into a position of being a huge debtor nation, with our current account deficit of more than $600 billion per year now exceeding 5% of our GDP. We now owe foreigners more than any other nation ever owed in all of history, over $3 trillion.

A debt of this sort always ends by the currency of the debtor nation decreasing in value. And that's what has started to happen with the dollar, although it still has a long way to go. Our free lunch cannot last. Printing money, buying foreign products, and selling foreign holders of dollars our debt ends when the foreign holders of this debt become concerned with the dollar's future value.

Once this process starts, interest rates will rise. And in recent times, despite the frenetic effort of the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates low, they are actually rising instead. The official explanation is that this is due to an economic rebound with an increase in demand for loans. Yet a decrease in demand for our debt and reluctance to hold our dollars is a more likely cause. Only time will tell whether the economy rebounds to any significant degree, but one must be aware that rising interest rates and serious price inflation can also reflect a weak dollar and a weak economy. The stagflation of the 1970s baffled many conventional economists, but not the Austrian economists. Many other countries have in the past suffered from the extremes of inflation in an inflationary depression, and we are not immune from that happening here. Our monetary and fiscal policies are actually conducive to such a scenario.

In the short run, the current system gives us a free ride, our paper buys cheap goods from overseas, and foreigners risk all by financing our extravagance. But in the long run, we will surely pay for living beyond our means. Debt will be paid for one way or another. An inflated currency always comes back to haunt those who enjoyed the "benefits" of inflation. Although this process is extremely dangerous, many economists and politicians do not see it as a currency problem and are only too willing to find a villain to attack. Surprisingly the villain is often the foreigner who foolishly takes our paper for useful goods and accommodates us by loaning the proceeds back to us. It's true that the system encourages exportation of jobs as we buy more and more foreign goods. But nobody understands the Federal Reserve role in this, so the cries go out to punish the competition with tariffs. Protectionism is a predictable consequence of paper- money inflation, just as is the impoverishment of an entire middle class. It should surprise no one that even in the boom phase of the 1990s, there were still many people who became poorer. Yet all we hear are calls for more government mischief to correct the problems with tariffs, increased welfare for the poor, increased unemployment benefits, deficit spending, and special interest tax reduction, none of which can solve the problems ingrained in a system that operates with paper money and a central bank.

If inflation were equitable and treated all classes the same, it would be less socially divisive. But while some see their incomes going up above the rate of inflation (movie stars, CEOs, stock brokers, speculators, professional athletes,) others see their incomes stagnate like lower-middle- income workers, retired people, and farmers. Likewise, the rise in the cost of living hurts the poor and middle class more than the wealthy. Because inflation treats certain groups unfairly, anger and envy are directed toward those who have benefited.

The long-term philosophic problem with this is that the central bank and the fiat monetary system are not blamed; instead free market capitalism is. This is what happened in the 1930s. The Keynesians, who grew to dominate economic thinking at the time, erroneously blamed the gold standard, balanced budgets, and capitalism instead of tax increases, tariffs, and Federal Reserve policy. This country cannot afford another attack on economic liberty similar to what followed the 1929 crash that ushered in the economic interventionism and inflationism which we have been saddled with ever since. These policies have brought us to the brink of another colossal economic downturn and we need to be prepared.

Big business and banking deserve our harsh criticism, but not because they are big or because they make a lot of money. Our criticism should come because of the special benefits they receive from a monetary system designed to assist the business class at the expense of the working class. Labor leader Samuel Gompers understood this and feared paper money and a central bank while arguing the case for gold. Since the monetary system is used to finance deficits that come from war expenditures, the military industrial complex is a strong supporter of the current monetary system.

Liberals foolishly believe that they can control the process and curtail the benefits going to corporations and banks by increasing the spending for welfare for the poor. But this never happens. Powerful financial special interests control the government spending process and throw only crumbs to the poor. The fallacy with this approach is that the advocates fail to see the harm done to the poor, with cost of living increases and job losses that are a natural consequence of monetary debasement. Therefore, even more liberal control over the spending process can never compensate for the great harm done to the economy and the poor by the Federal Reserve Reserve's effort to manage an unmanageable fiat monetary system.

Economic intervention, financed by inflation, is high-stakes government. It provides the incentive for the big money to "invest" in gaining government control. The big money comes from those who have it- corporations and banking interests. That's why literally billions of dollars are spent on elections and lobbying. The only way to restore equity is to change the primary function of government from economic planning and militarism to protecting liberty. Without money, the poor and middle class are disenfranchised since access for the most part requires money. Obviously, this is not a partisan issue since both major parties are controlled by wealthy special interests. Only the rhetoric is different.

Our current economic problems are directly related to the monetary excesses of four decades and the more recent efforts by the Federal Reserve to thwart the correction that the market is forcing upon us. Since 1998, there has been a sustained attack on corporate profits. Before that, profits and earnings were inflated and fictitious, with WorldCom and Enron being prime examples. In spite of the 13 rate cuts since 2001, economic growth has not been restored.

Paper money encourages speculation, excessive debt, and misdirected investments. The market, however, always moves in the direction of eliminating bad investments, liquidating debt, and reducing speculative excesses. What we have seen, especially since the stock market peak of early 2000, is a knock-down, drag-out battle between the Federal Reserve's effort to avoid a recession, limit the recession, and stimulate growth with its only tool, money creation, while the market demands the elimination of bad investments and excess debt. The Federal Reserve was also motivated to save the stock market from collapsing, which in some ways they have been able to do. The market, in contrast, will insist on liquidation of unsustainable debt, removal of investment mistakes made over several decades, and a dramatic revaluation of the stock market. In this go- around, the Federal Reserve has pulled out all the stops and is more determined than ever, yet the market is saying that new and healthy growth cannot occur until a major cleansing of the system occurs. Does anyone think that tariffs and interest rates of 1% will encourage the rebuilding of our steel and textile industries anytime soon? Obviously, something more is needed.

The world central bankers are concerned with the lack of response to low interest rates and they have joined in a concerted effort to rescue the world economy through a policy of protecting the dollar's role in the world economy, denying that inflation exists, and justifying unlimited expansion of the dollar money supply. To maintain confidence in the dollar, gold prices must be held in check. In the 1960s our government didn't want a vote of no confidence in the dollar, and for a couple of decades, the price of gold was artificially held at $35 per ounce. That, of course, did not last.

In recent years, there has been a coordinated effort by the world central bankers to keep the gold price in check by dumping part of their large horde of gold into the market. This has worked to a degree, but just as it could not be sustained in the 1960s, until Nixon declared the Bretton Woods agreement dead in 1971, this effort will fail as well.

The market price of gold is important because it reflects the ultimate confidence in the dollar. An artificially low price for gold contributes to false confidence and when this is lost, more chaos ensues as the market adjusts for the delay.

Monetary policy today is designed to demonetize gold and guarantee for the first time that paper can serve as an adequate substitute in the hands of wise central bankers. Trust, then, has to be transferred from gold to the politicians and bureaucrats who are in charge of our monetary system. This fails to recognize the obvious reason that market participants throughout history have always preferred to deal with real assets, real money, rather than government paper. This contest between paper and honest money is of much greater significance than many realize. We should know the outcome of this struggle within the next decade. Alan Greenspan, although once a strong advocate for the gold standard, now believes he knows what the outcome of this battle will be. Is it just wishful thinking on his part? In an answer to a question I asked before the Financial Services Committee in February 2003, Chairman Greenspan made an effort to convince me that paper money now works as well as gold: "I have been quite surprised, and I must say pleased, by the fact that central banks have been able to effectively simulate many of the characteristics of the gold standard by constraining the degree of finance in a manner which effectively brought down the general price levels." Earlier, in December 2002, Mr. Greenspan spoke before the Economic Club of New York and addressed the same subject: "The record of the past 20 years appears to underscore the observation that, although pressures for excess issuance of fiat money are chronic, a prudent monetary policy maintained over a protracted period of time can contain the forces of inflation." There are several problems with this optimistic assessment. First, efficient central bankers will never replace the invisible hand of a commodity monetary standard. Second, using government price indexes to measure the success of a managed fiat currency should not be reassuring. These indexes can be arbitrarily altered to imply a successful monetary policy. Also, price increases of consumer goods are not a litmus test for measuring the harm done by the money managers at the Federal Reserve. The development of overcapacity, excessive debt, and speculation still occur, even when prices happen to remain reasonably stable due to increases in productivity and technology. Chairman Greenspan makes his argument because he hopes he's right that sound money is no longer necessary, and also because it's an excuse to keep the inflation of the money supply going for as long as possible, hoping a miracle will restore sound growth to the economy. But that's only a dream.

We are now faced with an economy that is far from robust and may get a lot worse before rebounding. If not now, the time will soon come when the conventional wisdom of the last 100 years, since the Federal Reserve was created, will have to be challenged. If the conditions have changed and the routine of fiscal and monetary stimulation don't work, we better prepare ourselves for the aftermath of a failed dollar system, which will not be limited to the United States.

An interesting headline appeared in the New York Times on July 31, 2003, "Commodity Costs Soar, But Factories Don't Bustle." What is observed here is a sea change in attitude by investors shifting their investment funds and speculation into things of real value and out of financial areas, such as stocks and bonds. This shift shows that in spite of the most aggressive Federal Reserve policy in history in the past few years, the economy remains sluggish and interest rates are actually rising. What can the Federal Reserve do? If this trend continues, there's little they can do. Not only do I believe this trend will continue, I believe it's likely to accelerate. This policy plays havoc with our economy; reduces revenues, prompts increases in Federal Reserve spending, increases in deficits and debt occur, and interest costs rise, compounding our budgetary woes.

The set of circumstances we face today are unique and quite different from all the other recessions the Federal Reserve has had to deal with. Generally, interest rates are raised to slow the economy and dampen price inflation. At the bottom of the cycle interest rates are lowered to stimulate the economy. But this time around, the recession came in spite of huge and significant interest rate reductions by the Federal Reserve. This aggressive policy did not prevent the recession as was hoped; so far it has not produced the desired recovery. Now we're at the bottom of the cycle and interest rates not only can't be lowered, they are rising. This is a unique and dangerous combination of events. This set of circumstances can only occur with fiat money and indicates that further manipulation of the money supply and interest rates by the Federal Reserve will have little if any effect.

The odds aren't very good that the Federal Reserve will adopt a policy of not inflating the money supply because of some very painful consequences that would result. Also there would be a need to remove the pressure on the Federal Reserve to accommodate the big spenders in Congress. Since there are essentially only two groups that have any influence on spending levels, big government liberals and big government conservatives, that's not about to happen. Poverty is going to worsen due to our monetary and fiscal policies, so spending on the war on poverty will accelerate. Our obsession with policing the world, nation building, and pre-emptive war are not likely to soon go away, since both Republican and Democratic leaders endorse them. Instead, the cost of defending the American empire is going to accelerate. A country that is getting poorer cannot pay these bills with higher taxation nor can they find enough excess funds for the people to loan to the government. The only recourse is for the Federal Reserve to accommodate and monetize the Federal Reserve debt, and that, of course, is inflation.

I agree, it would be politically tough to bite the bullet and deal with our extravagance, both fiscal and monetary, but the repercussions here at home from a loss of confidence in the dollar throughout the world will not be a pretty sight to behold. I don't see any way we are going to avoid the crisis.

We do have some options to minimize the suffering. If we decided to, we could permit some alternatives to the current system of money and banking we have today. Already, we took a big step in this direction. Gold was illegal to own between 1933 and 1976. Today millions of Americans do own some gold. Gold contracts are legal, but a settlement of any dispute is always in Federal Reserve notes. This makes gold contracts of limited value.

For gold to be an alternative to Federal Reserve notes, taxes on any transactions in gold must be removed, both sales and capital gains. Holding gold should be permitted in any pension fund, just as dollars are permitted in a checking account of these funds. Repeal of all legal tender laws is a must. Sound money never requires the force of legal tender laws. Only paper money requires such laws.

These proposals, even if put in place tomorrow, would not solve all the problems we face. It would though, legalize freedom of choice in money, and many who worry about having their savings wiped out by a depreciating dollar would at least have another option. This option would ease some of the difficulties that are surely to come from runaway deficits in a weakening economy with skyrocketing inflation.

Curbing the scope of government and limiting its size to that prescribed in the Constitution is the goal that we should seek. But political reality makes this option available to us only after a national bankruptcy has occurred. We need not face that catastrophe. What we need to do is to strictly limit the power of government to meddle in our economy and our personal affairs, and stay out of the internal affairs of other nations.

Civil Disobedience, The Alternative: If You Can’t Beat Them, Join Them Generally I find that reasoning with your enemies just simply won’t work. When it comes to you and the government, you are in an unequal bargaining position. The government takes the position of do as I say not as I do. Therefore, you have to take the approach of, “If you can’t beat them, join them;” or “If you think you can do it without me, then fine, go ahead and do it.”

What I am talking about is Civil Disobedience, fighting fire with fire. The government thinks it is perfectly fine for it and the Federal Reserve to print as much worthless money as it wants, because you, the American Taxpayer, will always be there to pick up the tab. Well what if that were not true. What if you were no longer there to be for their extravagance. How then would they be able to make their interest payments to their creditors? How low would their credit rating go then? How much higher would the national debt be? How much quicker would it accelerate?

What I am talking about has nothing to do with breaking the law. There is a fundamental premise that in order to have access to things, it requires that you generate income to do it. That’s not entirely true. You now that because you have credit card bills, mortgages, and car payments; all of which are debts, not income.

You were able to acquire those debts based on your ability to pay; based on the income you had to pay for those debts. In essence, your income served as collateral for your debts, similarly as you serving as collateral for the United States’s debts. There is an assumption by the US’s creditors that you will continue to be there to pay its debt. Therefore, based on that premise, creditors continue to lend the US money. But what if you were no longer there? The US’s credit rating would fall again and its obligations would be do in full, immediately.

How can you disappear, from the financial equation? Simple, you remove yourself as a tax payer. I am not telling you not to pay taxes, or to move out of the country (might not be a bad idea though). What I am saying is to avoid having taxes to pay. Income might always be money, but money is not always income.

For the purpose of taxes, in order to have a tax obligation, one needs to have generated income. What is income, it is money you generate that you have no obligation to repay. Examples of income include: your salary, a gift or inheritance you receive, or winning the lottery. These are earnings that would trigger a tax liability. What types of money are not income: lines of credit, credit card cash advances, and loans (including student loans).

What I am suggesting is instead of going out there and earning a living in a traditional sense, you instead earn a living in a non-traditional sense. The most effective strategy is to lower your taxable income. You do so by increasing your taxable deductions (just like most corporations do). For instance, you could be working for someone else, however, instead of being an employee, you are an independent contractor. What are some of the benefits?

Some of the benefits include receiving all of you money up front, instead of having taxes already deducted from you. Some taxes can be avoid altogether. For instance the social security tax. Section 310 of the Medicare Section of the Social Security Act has a tax exempt provision for self employed individuals which allows them to be exempt from Social Security taxes. If one is a member of a religious organization that is conscientiously opposed to Social Security benefits, such as the Amish, then one can avoid paying the tax; as long as one has reasonable provisions in place for the elderly and dependent members. One would not be eligible for Social Security, Unemployment, and Welfare. Small price to pay to get back 15% of your income.

As an independent contractor one is also able to deduct work related expenses such as gas, vehicle repairs, car payments, auto insurance, car taxes and registration fees, clothes, and food. These are not the type of expenses one can deduct if one is an employee. One can also avoid having their paycheck deducted for insurance. It is not necessary to have insurance in order to receive medical treatment. A hospital cannot refuse service to an indigent person and providing identification information is unnecessary to receive service.

A self employed person has even more tax deductible options. A self employed person who works from home can deduct living expenses as well such as rent, mortgage payments, taxes, insurance, and repairs. Depending on one’s original income, one can save tens of thousands of dollars in taxes. One such also incorporate one’s home in order to receive an annual deduction for depreciation.

Another useful technique is to loan money to business. For instance, if one is self employed, it makes the most sens to incorporate. Therefore, nearly all expenses are tax deductible. One should loan as much money as possible to the business on an annual basis. The loans can be personal loans from you to do the business, or from friends, family members or similar sources. The money that the business would generate would not be realized income because of the obligation it has to repay a debt or expense it has occurred. By increasing the business expense sheet, you be reducing its overall taxable income owed.

If after deductions, loans, and expenses, one finds there is still a taxable profit, then the next step is to pay your employees. Since you work for the company you are entitled to a salary. Make sure to pay yourself below the poverty line to avoid any tax burden. If you are married, pay your spouse as well below the poverty line, and be sure to file taxes separately.

You may also decide that it is important to continue your education. You are entitled to take out an aggregate amount of $138,500 per person. All members of your family can attend school at the same time. You may find that such a strategy may increase the available money you have available to lend to your business, which would reduce its taxable income considerably. Money lent that is debt for you and debt to your business equals money owed, and therefore no income as been realized.

Such a scenario played out on a wide scale would severely cripple the United States financially and force it to have to make extreme changes to its tax laws. It may be forced to have to cut a considerable amount of government programs and agencies including the defense budget, the IRS, and social programs. Those tax loopholes that corporations enjoy may be eliminated, with consumption taxes put in its place. The US might also be forced to retire its current national debt and eliminate the Federal Reserve since it would no longer be able to live its fiscally irresponsible lifestyle.

If you are willing to fight for change, change will happen. But if you stand by and allow the status quo to continue, you, your children, your grandchildren, and every generation will be penniless, and all that will remain of the once great United States are memories (as well as worthless Federal Reserve Notes some might start using as wallpaper). End the FED, save your life (and your country too).

References

Alonso, Laura (1996). Improving Deficient Listening Skills in the Language Arts Program at the Middle School Grades. Saint Xavier University, 1996.

Bauer, Henry H. (2000). The New Generations: Students Who Don’t Study. VPI, 2000.

Berliner, D. C., and Biddle, B. J. "In Defense of Schools." Vocational Education Journal 71, no. 3 (March 1996): 36-38. (EJ 519 291)

Bishop, J. H. Expertise and Excellence. Ithaca: School of Industrial and Labor Relations at Cornell University, 1995. (ED 389 853)

Bishop, John (1988). Why High School Students Learn So Little and What Can Be Done About It. Subcommittee on Education and Health, 1988.

Bracey, G. W. "The Forgotten 42%." Phi Delta Kappan 80, no. 9 (May 1999): 711-712. (EJ 585 687)

Brady, J. T. "My Son, the Technician." Tech Directions 58, no. 7 (February 1999): 41.

Cook, Kay K. (1984). Controversial Issues: Concerns for Policy Makers. The National Institute of Education, 2000.

Dubeck, Leroy W. (1988). Science in Cinema. Teaching Science Fact Through Science Fiction Films. Teachers College Press, 1988.

Gimenez, Martha E. (1989). Silence in the Classroom: Some Thoughts About Teaching in the 1980s. Teaching Sociology Journal, 17(2), p.184-191.

Gray, K. C. "The Gatekeepers." Techniques 71, no. 9 (January 1997): 24-27. (EJ 535 321)

Hardy, Lawrence (1999). A Cold Climate. American School Board Journal, 186(3), p.31-34.

Husain, D. D. "Good News on the Horizon." Techniques 74, no. 3 (March 1999): 14-17. (EJ 580 988)

Kober, N., and Rentner, D. S. Do You Know the Good News about American Education? Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy and American Youth Policy Forum, 2000. www.aypf.org/whatsnew.htm

Kohn, Alfie (1999). Constant Frustration and Occasional Violence: The Legacy of American High Schools. American School Board Journal, 186(9) p20-24.

Kroll, Catherine W. (1990). Classroom Dialogues: Connections Amide Incongruities (New Teachers Workshop). English Journal, 79(6), p.41-46.

McGonigal, Charles (1994). Student Motivation in the Classroom. Saint Xavier University, 1994.

Natriello, Gary (1982). Organizational Evaluation System and Student Disengagement in Secondary Schools. National Institute of Education, 1982.

Natriello, Gary (1983). Evaluation Process and Student Disengagement From High School. National Institute of Education, 1983.

O’Brien, David (1997). Engaging At-Risk Students. Perspectives in Reading Research No. 12. Office of Educational Research and Improvement, 1997.

Pellerin, Lisa A (2005). Student Disengagement and the Socialization Styles of High Schools. Social Forces, 84(2) p.1159-1179.

Phelan, Patricia (1998). Adolescents’ Worlds: Negotiating Family, Peers, and School. Teachers College Press, 1998.

Raffini, James, P. (1988). Student Apathy: The Protection of Self Worth. What Research Says to the Teacher. National Education Association, 1988.

Rosenberg, Stephen L. (1999). Positive Peer Solutions: One Answer for the Rejected Student. Phi Delta Kappan, 81(1), p.114-118.

Rothstein, R. "Shortage of Skills? A High-Tech Myth" New York Times, October 27, 1999, p. B-9. nytimes.com/library/national/102799lessons-edu.html

Schlosser, Linda K. (1992). Teacher Distance and Student Disengagement: School Lives on the Margin. Journal of Teacher Education, 43(2), p.128-140.

Stone, J. "Debunking the Myths." Vocational Education Journal 68, no. 1 (January 1993): 26-27, 56. (EJ 455 319)

Thompson, Josephine T. (1991). Establishing Locus of Control Among Ninth Graders: Using Peer Mentors to Reduce Student Disengagement, Absenteeism, and Failures. Nova University, 1991.

Trout, Paul (2000). Student Anti-Intellectualism and the Dumbing Down of the University. Montana State University-Bozeman, 2000.

Vo, C. H. "Not for My Child." Techniques 71, no. 9 (January 1997): 20-23. (EJ 535 320).

Washington State Workforce Training and Education Board. Education and Workforce Issues: Public Attitudes and Awareness. Olympia, WA: WSWTEB, 1997. (ED 425 347)

West, P. "Scholarships for Voc Ed Go Untapped." Education Week 15 (April 3, 1996): 3.

"What Do People Think of Us?" Techniques 72, no. 6 (September 1997): 15. (EJ 553 296