Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is an “Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery”

**Carol** Sun Aug 02, 2015 8:00 pm

Carol: Admin; Posts : 32886
Join date : 2010-04-07
Location : Hawaii

Post n°1

Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is an “Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery”

Carol Sun Aug 02, 2015 8:00 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDsPWmioSHg
Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is an “Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery”

Thom Hartmann talks with President Jimmy Carter, 39th President of the United States (1977 to 1981) / Humanitarian / Awarded Nobel Peace Prize in 2002 / Author of many books, including his latest, A Full Life...Reflections at Ninety, Website: http://books.simonandschuster.com
July 30 2015

Former president Jimmy Carter said Tuesday on the nationally syndicated radio show the Thom Hartmann Program that the United States is now an “oligarchy” in which “unlimited political bribery” has created “a complete subversion of our political system as a payoff to major contributors.” Both Democrats and Republicans, Carter said, “look upon this unlimited money as a great benefit to themselves.”

Carter was responding to a question from Hartmann about recent Supreme Court decisions on campaign financing like Citizens United.

Transcript:

HARTMANN: Our Supreme Court has now said, “unlimited money in politics.” It seems like a violation of principles of democracy. … Your thoughts on that?

CARTER: It violates the essence of what made America a great country in its political system. Now it’s just an oligarchy, with unlimited political bribery being the essence of getting the nominations for president or to elect the president. And the same thing applies to governors and U.S. senators and congress members. So now we’ve just seen a complete subversion of our political system as a payoff to major contributors, who want and expect and sometimes get favors for themselves after the election’s over. … The incumbents, Democrats and Republicans, look upon this unlimited money as a great benefit to themselves. Somebody’s who’s already in Congress has a lot more to sell to an avid contributor than somebody who’s just a challenger.

Last edited by Carol on Sun Aug 02, 2015 8:05 pm; edited 1 time in total

_________________
What is life?
It is the flash of a firefly in the night, the breath of a buffalo in the wintertime. It is the little shadow which runs across the grass and loses itself in the sunset.
With deepest respect ~ Aloha & Mahalo, Carol

**Carol** Sun Aug 02, 2015 8:04 pm

Carol

Carol: Admin; Posts : 32886
Join date : 2010-04-07
Location : Hawaii

Post n°2

Re: Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is an “Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery”

Carol Sun Aug 02, 2015 8:04 pm

Awaken slaves! – How The Private Central Bank Ponzi Scheme Trapped And Destroyed America

By Michael Rivero

Once upon a time, in 1913, a corrupt Congress and a corrupt President transferred the money creation authority vested in the government by the Constitution to a private central bank. It was going to be called the Third Bank of the United States. Such a fundamental change to the nation’s economy should have required a Constitutional Amendment. But earlier that same year, there had been a huge fight to ratify another Amendment, the 16th Amendment authorizing the income tax, and there is good reason to suspect that the 16th Amendment actually failed ratification even though the payers of that income tax were told otherwise.

“I think if you were to go back and and try to find and review the ratification of the 16th amendment, which was the internal revenue, the income tax, I think if you went back and examined that carefully, you would find that a sufficient number of states never ratified that amendment.” – U.S. District Court Judge James C. Fox, Sullivan Vs. United States, 2003.

Getting yet another Amendment ratified against such opposition, or worse, having to cheat one through, would be extremely difficult.

Then there was a problem with the proposed name, “Third Bank of the United States”, as it reminded people of the predations of the First and Second Bank of the United States.

“Gentlemen! I too have been a close observer of the doings of the Bank of the United States. I have had men watching you for a long time, and am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I have determined to rout you out, and by the Eternal, (bringing his fist down on the table) I will rout you out!” — Andrew Jackson, shortly before ending the charter of the Second Bank of the United States. From the original minutes of the Philadelphia committee of citizens sent to meet with President Jackson (February 1834), according to Andrew Jackson and the Bank of the United States (1928) by Stan V. Henkels

Shortly after President Jackson (the only American President to actually pay off the National Debt) ended the Second Bank of the United States, there was an attempted assassination.

But I digress.

Faced with the possibility that a new Amendment to transfer money creation from the US Government to a privately owned bank might fail and fail badly, and with the name “Third Bank of the United States” already leading to opposition to the plan, the plotters did an end run around the Constitution, passing the Federal Reserve act over Christmas vacation when the members of Congress opposed to the bill would be away. The name of the new bank was then changed to “The Federal Reserve.” But, it is a private bank, no more “Federal” than Federal Express. From that moment on all currency would enter circulation as a loan at interest.

“I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is now controlled by its system of credit.We are no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.” — Woodrow Wilson 1919

Ironically enough, this was the very system of banking the American Revolution was fought to free us from.

“The refusal of King George 3rd to allow the colonies to operate an honest money system, which freed the ordinary man from the clutches of the money manipulators, was probably the prime cause of the revolution.” — Benjamin Franklin, Founding Father

Starting in 1913, public schools stopped teaching about King George’s Currency Act, which ordered the American colonies to conduct business only using bank notes borrowed at interest from the Bank of England, and since then American students are taught that the revolution was about Tea Parties and Stamp Acts, lest the more clever students wonder how we ended up back in the same banking system that led to the first revolution.

The Founding Fathers understood how dangerous such banking systems are, and I will try to teach you here what the public schools are forbidden to let you know. The Federal Reserve system is a deliberate trap, to enslave a population to unpayable debt in order to control and exploit them, and here is how it works.

Read more at Source: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fedponzi.php#axzz3hhjsMjC2

_________________
What is life?
It is the flash of a firefly in the night, the breath of a buffalo in the wintertime. It is the little shadow which runs across the grass and loses itself in the sunset.
With deepest respect ~ Aloha & Mahalo, Carol

**Carol** Wed Aug 05, 2015 4:09 pm

Carol

Carol: Admin; Posts : 32886
Join date : 2010-04-07
Location : Hawaii

Post n°3

Re: Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is an “Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery”

Carol Wed Aug 05, 2015 4:09 pm

ANALYSIS OF RECENT IMF REPORT ON SDR ADJUSTMENTS
http://philosophyofmetrics.com/analysis-of-recent-imf-report-on-sdr-adjustments-freepom/
By JC Collins

NOTE: Authorization is given to re-post this material so it reaches the widest possible audience. Please just link back to the POM site and give credit for the work. There is much confusion and misleading information being presented regarding the changes to the monetary framework. The more this process is understood the more people can prepare and financially plan.

With yesterday’s announcement from the IMF that a recommendation has been made to delay the effective date of the new SDR basket, which would include the Chinese renminbi, by 9 months, it becomes important that we take this opportunity to review the facts which have been presented here on POM over the last 19 months, and bring a sense of understanding to the issue.

The first thing to extract from the IMF statement yesterday is that the recommendation was not to exclude the RMB, but only delay it. Sites, such as Zero Hedge, have been quick to put out articles with titles stating that the IMF has delayed the addition of the RMB. This is misleading as the recommendation was based on the effective date of the new basket, as opposed to the vote on included the Chinese currency.

The reason for delaying by 9 months was given as follows:

SDR users and members have indicated that January 1 is not ideal for the inception of a new basket. Most markets are closed on January 1st and trading is relatively thin in the days before and after the New Year. This complicates portfolio rebalancing operations necessary to adjust to the new baskets weights every five years.”

Sounds reasonable and logical from a functional perspective. The statement continues:

“The possibility of a new currency included in the basket has also generated a higher-than-usual level of uncertainty for SDR users. Moreover, SDR users have underlined that should a new currency be added to the SDR basket, more lead time than usual would be required to adjust to the new composition. Many have indicated that a lead time of six to nine months would be desirable in such a case.”

Without specifying which “SDR users” have expressed this “higher-than-usual level of uncertainty” the statement goes on to suggest a “lead time” of six to nine months before the new basket composition becomes effective.

The SDR composition on December 30, 1998 included, along with the dollar, yen, and pound, the Deutsche mark and French franc. On January 4, 1999, five days later, the mark and franc were replaced with two separate valuations of the euro, based on each of the previous currencies from Germany and France.

This basket composition remained in effect for only two years instead of the usual five, when on January 2, 2001, one day after New Year’s, the composition changed again, when both valuations of the euro (the mark and franc valuations) were merged into a single valuation.

One can research all previous adjustments to SDR basket compositions and realize that they always take place within a few days of the New Year, whether currencies were added, subtracted, or merged together in one valuation.

So why the concern over the timeline of adding the Chinese yuan?

“In light of these issues, staff proposes to extend the current basket until September 30, 2016. The extension would not in any way prejudge the outcome of the review or whether the RMB should be included in the basket. Rather, it would address concerns expressed previously by SDR users about introducing a new basket on the first trading date of the New Year. Early guidance on the current basket’s duration would also help reduce uncertainty for SDR users and facilitate continued smooth SDR-related operations, while also allowing adequate time to make necessary changes to any contractual agreements, including to the PRGT and the Fund’s invested resources. If Directors agree with the proposed extension, a separate decision would be circulated after the informal Board meeting for lapse-of-time approval.”

It is made very clear in this portion of the statement that the delay is not a function of deciding whether the renminbi should be added, but rather on the timing of the implementation of the new basket after the renminbi has been added. The inclusion of the RMB has not been delayed as some article titles have suggested. It is likely to proceed as planned on the voting component.

In fact, in order for the “allowing of adequate time to make necessary changes to any contractual agreements” to be effective, it will have to be made clear by early January that the RMB will be added to the SDR. This will give the required nine months as suggested by the recommendation report.

The reference again to “SDR user” concern about introducing a new basket composition on the first trading day after the New Year is somewhat muted when contrasted against the history of SDR adjustments taking place always on the first trading day after the New Year.

The “continued smooth SDR operations” do not specify in detail the reasons why a delay would benefit those operations. It does mention giving adequate time to make necessary changes to any contractual agreements, which would include the PRGT.

For those who don’t know, the PRGT is the Poverty Reduction and Growth Trust program which was established in 2009. The program was designed to lend to members a total of SDR 700 million, which would come from the profits of gold sales. The amounts would be distributed based on the member’s quota amounts.

The idea was that members would use the PRGT funds to subsidize additional lending to low-income countries.

From the IMF:

“As of April 15, 2015, 143 countries representing 94.25 percent of the proposed distribution had pledged to use their portion of the distribution to subsidize lending to low-income countries, which may currently borrow at zero interest from the Poverty Reduction and Growth Trust (PRGT), the IMF’s concessional lending vehicle.”

This area is loaded with research potential when we consider the large amount of gold imports into China, the announcement of lower-than-expected gold reserves by the Chinese last month, and the building momentum to have the RMB added into the SDR.

I have previously stated that China could be planning to place a large amount of gold on deposit with the IMF for a new allocation of SDR, and to subsidize, or underwrite, the exchange of USD held in its foreign reserve account with SDR. This exchange would take place through a substitution account, and was thoroughly covered in the post Will China Transfer American Debt to the IMF.

The diversification of foreign reserves, or the reduction of USD in foreign reserve accounts, is an important step in the multilateral transition which is taking place. The balance of payments deficits can only be corrected by unwinding dollar accumulation and replacing those reserves with an alternative supra-sovereign reserve asset, such as the SDR.

Reserve currency diversification has in fact been taking place since the onset of the euro in early 2001. This diversification has been increasing and will continue to increase proportionately when the Chinese renminbi is included in the SDR basket composition and given official reserve status. The diversification at this point will become more advanced and disruptive to USD interests.

This likely has a lot to do with the pressure American interests are placing on the IMF to delay the implementation, or effective date, of the new SDR basket until September of 2016. This would give the US another year to fund its deficits and avoid the harsh reductions in entitlements and exchange rate which will be required. This unfortunately puts macroeconomic pressures on every other country in the world.

The only way to avoid such disruptive outcomes is to shift away from using the USD as the primary reserve asset used in global trade. The USD held in the foreign exchange accounts of countries around the world can be deposited in the substitution account with the International Monetary Fund in exchange for claims denominated in SDR.

One of the obstacles for the use of substitution accounts is that the United States would be responsible for maintaining the value of the SDR denominated claims which were exchanged for USD which now sits in the substitution account.

China, the largest holder of USD denominated assets, is unable to diversify without causing a depreciation of those assets. It has been suggested by China that a substitution account be used to facilitate the diversification of its reserve account while maintaining the value of the assets held in that account. This predominately helps China diversify its foreign reserve holdings but leaves the IMF exposed to the costs associated with a depreciation of those USD denominated assets.

Continuing to use China as our example, even though all countries holding USD will use the substitution account, when the PBoC exchanges its dollar denominated reserves for a new allocation of SDR, China will in fact become long SDR.

As such, the IMF will be short SDR and long USD. Which means the substitution account’s solvency is at risk when the dollar depreciates. It is possible that contractual agreements can be arranged to separate the external USD held in reserve accounts, and subsequently in substitution accounts, from the internal domestic dollar, but I have yet to see any evidence to support such a process. Though my initial analysis figured such a separation, the depreciation of a domestic USD while the valuation of the international USD remained locked within a substitution account, seems to be less likely considering the level of resistance which the United States is orchestrating against monetary reform.

So who should compensate the IMF for these portfolio losses?

Most, including China, feel the United States should cover the losses in the substitution accounts when the dollar finally depreciates. Unfortunately, the US refuses to carry this risk and certain loss. Which tells us something, and provides confirmation, about the future trend of the dollar.

The need for a supra-sovereign multilateral fiscal authority at the global level becomes apparent when we fully understand the need to underwrite the SDR substitution account. Some sort of contractual agreement has to be in place to ensure that losses on exchanged USD reserves are distributed amongst members based on quota amounts and reserve substitutions.

Previously the IMF and the emerging economies, such as China and India, have been unwilling to use gold reserves, or holdings, to support the substitution accounts. Based on the transfer of gold which has taken place between the West and China, there is a growing probability that gold will in fact be used to subsidize and underwrite the substitution of USD denominated reserves with SDR.

Perhaps we will see a percentage of gold placed on deposit with the IMF from China, while another percentage is deposited within the accounts of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and BRICS New Development Bank, so both new multilateral institutions can act as underwriters for the substitution accounts.

The transfer of gold to China could be one possible way in which the US has indirectly underwritten the substitution account, without taking on the full accountability of dollar depreciation worldwide when it finally occurs.

Consider that it was the traditional list of American allies which quickly signed up as founding members of the China lead AIIB. All of these countries have a large percentage of their foreign reserves denominated in USD.

With the American refusal to implement, or pass, any legislation supporting the reform of the international monetary system, it is being forced upon other countries and institutions to make alternative plans and implement strategies which can diversify foreign reserves and build towards a new multilateral exchange regime which will work towards balancing the balance of payments and correcting other inherent deficits and deficiencies.

Transferring the financial liability of depreciating dollar reserves to the IMF will mean the Fund has to manage low returns on those assets, as well as deal with exchange rate changes. The fact that there was no agreement on risk sharing back during the negotiations which took place throughout the years 1979 and 1980, only enforces the need for a centralized fiscal power to ensure financial stability.

The USD cannot continue as the primary reserve currency based on the deficiencies as defined in the Triffin Paradox. The rise of any domestic currency, such as the Chinese renminbi, to act as a replacement to the USD, will only continue, and possible extrapolate those deficiencies. The world needs a supra-sovereign multilateral asset like the SDR in order to avoid further systemic imbalances.

Currently SDR can only be created through allocation and not substitution. After the financial crisis a new allocation of SDR was agreed upon by all member countries. But this is only a temporary solution and response to the deflationary crisis which began in 2008.

It is important to remember that this crisis is in fact a USD crisis, and can only be corrected by exchanging USD denominated reserves through the substitution account.

Any additional allocations of SDR can be supported by IMF member quota increases. New SDR can also be created through substitution, as explained, and this could be considered a down payment on future quota increases. This is why the substitution account methods will likely be the path which both China and the IMF take in the coming months in response to the continued delays by the US on the 2010 Quota and Governance Reforms.

To think that the 2010 reforms and the delay in implementing the new SDR basket are not connected would be foolish on our part. And I seriously doubt that anyone would even suggest that. Regardless, the US has pushed China and the IMF, along with traditional US allies, together on the path which will unfold in the coming months.

Denominating global reserves in SDR will stabilize exchange rates by reducing demand for other domestic currencies, including the USD. This demand for USD is what allows and accounts for American deficit spending, which will be debated this September, as well as next September. Next September is the timeframe the IMF report is suggesting to allow for changes to contractual agreements and other planning around the SDR, which will be required to support the addition of the RMB to the SDR basket.

Do not think for one moment that the decision on the RMB and SDR is being delayed. The fact that preparations are being discussed for its addition should be a clear indicator that big changes are coming. – JC

Don’t forget that the new IMF deadline on the 2010 reforms is set for September 15th of this year. Read here.

Paul:
Here's my smooth jazz station.
http://sg.pandora.com/wf/click?upn=MBt-2BZOsK1q8G3PeYUymlCDsDYOIP-2BgMtwJQuao5UH7VqY9mk8RReODHUvkHllYAPWlTw3V-2F-2BCsb2kAgYayI6qTWRM0c2tUIj-2F8waLrQmCZg-3D_E-2BLiGYwTuaRyw929OHNX89jNUvWG7TTNxtF5Wm-2FLsevLP2ShFokQ0-2BpBGzuEpLV9MVfMPRkwmdvP6Ovh8gWTOUKmGF3YJJcBZSoXxb5rG9FALyzOY6j3sUkdqWOLpub-2BDyQ9eqyaxqUNFfLSQqIQYflCOYAI1B7Z3Pmy6BDZRlodyvZuaOLKIEhEPJnHA-2BNbJSVdbZTNDhzZQJKVrmORdNIeHyso4kwM42MULe7-2BoSQ8pXmTC1glCX9yC9pK3Ggu

http://gcaptain.com/costa-concordia-dismantling-update-demolition-beginning-on-upper-decks/

_________________
What is life?
It is the flash of a firefly in the night, the breath of a buffalo in the wintertime. It is the little shadow which runs across the grass and loses itself in the sunset.
With deepest respect ~ Aloha & Mahalo, Carol

orthodoxymoron Wed Aug 05, 2015 5:10 pm

orthodoxymoron

orthodoxymoron: Posts : 13633
Join date : 2010-09-28
Location : The Matrix

Post n°4

Re: Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is an “Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery”

orthodoxymoron Wed Aug 05, 2015 5:10 pm

I don't know what I was thinking when I posted
this madness, but I'm going to leave it as I try
to leave this forum, and perhaps this planet.

Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is an “Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery” MARIA-DOYLE-KENNEDY-as-Aleksa-FROG-STONE-as-Aunt-Nino-and-Greeghan

Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is an “Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery” MARIA-DOYLE-KENNEDY-as-Aleksa-FROG-STONE-as-Aunt-Nino-and-Greeghan

Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is an “Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery” Jupiter_Ascending_28

"Orthodoxymoron Escaped Again, Your Majesty!!!"
Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is an “Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery” Babyd_zps9bebb29e

"Failure Shall NOT Be Tolerated!!!"
"Find Orthodoxymoron NOW!!!"
"The Innocent Shall Suffer!!!"
Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is an “Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery” Draconian%20baby

Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is an “Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery” Draconian%20baby

tMoA

Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is an “Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery”

Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is an “Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery”

Re: Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is an “Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery”

Re: Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is an “Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery”

Re: Jimmy Carter: The U.S. Is an “Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery”

Similar topics

Similar topics

Search Query

Display results as : Posts Topics
Advanced Search