We could “drain the swamp”
We could “arrest the cabal”
And if we left USURY in place,
The cabal, and the swamp, would be back in business without missing a beat.
The cabal, and the swamp, were able to gain power and influence thru usury.
Usury is the charging of money, for the use of money
Usury is legally defined as charging more interest than is allowed BY LAW.
Jimmy Carter deregulated usury, because poor people needed more DEBT.
Usury has an insatiable appetite, and it always starts slow, turns a corner, and “goes asymptote”, or as they say “to the moon”
Right now we are in the vertical asymptote part of the curve, which is the part just before the big crash.
The crash will happen. That is a certainty.
But how we react to that crash, will be the legacy we leave our children
We NEED to outlaw USURY, at any rate.
All money is to be lent at 0.00% interest.
Any interest rate above 0.00% is a felony punishable by 5 years in prison.
USURY is the way that “the man” skims all of the wealth off of the working people.
ALL WEALTH is derived from LABOR.
And yet, the laborers hardly have anything!
Where does the wealth go?
The wealth is taken from the worker, in the form of income taxes on his paycheck.
Those income taxes go to pay USURY, which is the interest on the so-called “national debt”
The federal income tax was put into place around 1913, which is the same time the Federal Reserve and IRS came into existence.
They had to pass the 16th CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT in 1906 to be able to tax the US workers
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
We need to repeal the 16th amendment, or better yet, amend the amendment, to specifically FORBID the US Congress from having the power to lay or collect taxes on incomes, from whatever sources derived...
Wealth is “redistributed” from the worker, to the bank, in the form of USURY.
The worker pays interest on a mortgage, and interest on a car loan, and interest on credit cards, and interest on student loans,
The worker pays USURY when he pays property taxes on his home, if that money goes to pay interest on bonds.
The USURY of the Federal Reserve is the mechanism by which the Rothschild and Rockefeller et al took over control of the US government, and the American people.
Some of you don’t remember, but back in 2008 there was a HUGE banking crisis,
And at that time, the bankers ‘metaphorically’ held a gun to Nancy Pelosi, and the bankers demanded something like $700Billion in taxpayer money. When asked about how they came up with that number, Pelosi replied that “they needed a really big number”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_2007–2008
At that time, USURY had already run its course, and was on the verge of collapse,
The bankers frantically tried to ‘correct’, by lowering the USURY rate down lower, and lower, until it was almost at 0%
The reason the bankers kept lowering the rate, was because the internet kept talking about USURY.
So by lowering the interest rate to near 0%, the bankers were able to take USURY debate off the table, while remaining in power, playing the long game.
Recently, the Federal Reserve has been raising interest rates, because, paraphrase, they merely wanted to set interest rates to be closer to where they have traditionally been.
“Traditionally”, interest rates have been used to skim the wealth from the working people.
The Federal Reserve doubled interest rates!
And then, the Federal Reserve doubled interest rates again!
We are still paying interest on the debts incurred to fight World War 1, and World War 2, and every other conflict up to today.
https://i.redd.it/v9p3a4p3q4z31.jpg
We buy wars on credit.
“Nothing can stop what is coming”
what is coming, is a super crash.
But the people, the usurers, who are responsible for the crash, of course will want to remain in power after the crash. They have become accustomed to the lifestyle, and will do anything to maintain that lifestyle.
USURY is how they all came to power,
And ABOLISHING USURY is how they will be permanently removed from power.
End The Fed
End The IRS
Abolish Usury
Thank you for the detailed response; it's been a good conversation.
We agree on almost everything other than having ONE group write and enforce the laws -- or law [singular] as you describe. I certainly agree that your single law would be a huge improvement over what we have now:
But that would clearly allow for competing groups to function as protectors of your rights or mine; we could subscribe to one instead of another, if, say, the original began to act in a way we didn't like or raised its prices [taxes] too high or began interpreting the One Law differently than we thought proper.
It would, you know -- interpret the One Law in a way that began favoring one group over others. Power like that always brings the weasels and parasites out to "clarify" or "fortify" the law to favor themselves or their particular views, however slightly. Propaganda, money, favors, blackmail, or intimidation are inevitably involved. For that matter, it's impossible to believe that EVERY American would agree on what "direct infringement on another person's inalienable rights" really means.
For that reason, even with the One Law version of government, competition would be essential. For that to work well there would need to be legal agreements between the "governments" (really insurance & security agencies) and each agency would need to include clauses in their membership agreements specifying rules involved in dispute resolution when the other party was subscribed to a different agency. Simple stuff that the market would do naturally.
You don't see it that way, and it's clear that neither of us is willing at this time to adjust our well-thought-out and probably long-standing view. That's fine, of course. I'll keep your idea in mind, although it goes against my Tolkein-ish belief that ANY source of monopoly power -- not just in regards war but also in regards enforcing ANYTHING society-wide -- is an extreme danger that will become corrupted. But perhaps a small ember of Power is needed after all; I doubt it but I have been wrong once or twice in my life.
That's exactly how the United States was set up. The States are the competing groups. The Federal government was only designed to ensure that the states didn't violate the social contract (constitution) with their "competing" laws.
I still insist that it ONLY was able to outgrow its original design because of the lack of explicit statement of citizen sovereignty. Of course it may have happened regardless, the bankers (lead by the Rothschilds) owned enough of the world by the early 1800's that they had substantial pressure to make anything they want happen. So by hook or by crook, it probably would have happened even with citizen sovereignty being clear, though it would have been a lot more difficult. We might even still be in that battle instead of having lost it over 100 years ago. Maybe the GA would have happened sooner...
The only reason what has happened was possible was not the construction of the government, or any inherent flaws, but because of the construction of The Matrix; the purposeful overlay of competing belief systems on Reality that are the construction of the PTB.
The Matrix is designed to hide the truth by using the beliefs of the population to do the work for it. It is a self adjusting system requiring only top level control. That is how what has happened has happened. That is what the GA is all about, waking up to the Matrix.
Whatever form of government we get from here will almost certainly include explicit statements of sovereignty. A recognition of the value of the individual life (and the rights inherent in that life), the self realization of the value in our own lives, is among the most important parts of the GA. I don't think we've gotten there quite yet, but we are closing in on that realization.
That is precisely the original design of our government. The States are the competing governments, the Federal government is the agent that checks those governments, insuring they don't violate the social contract (and nothing more except to organize the common defense and set a standard for measures (like money)).
I agree with this sentiment, I just don't see a federal social contract as a monopoly. Not to say our current Federal government isn't, of course it is, but it didn't start out that way, and I have explained why it became what it did. It is a lesson learned, if we grok it.
The States were meant to be the government in almost all areas, yes, but the lack of competition for protection of rights WITHIN each state was an error -- you had a single monopolistic (by force, otherwise it won't remain a monopoly for long) that can and DID in nearly all cases become corrupted. Yes, being able to move to another State partially solved that problem but A) no one would HAVE to do that if there were competing providers of services; you could sign up with one that was less corrupt, cheaper, more in tune with your interpretation of "rights" or whatever -- or even start your own or opt out of ANY of them, although that would lock you out of much commerce -- and B) for many people, such a move would be a major hardship, financially and otherwise.
I love the way our country was set up, but I do think that having a single monopoly "government" even in the individual States is a mistake. Not nearly as bad as having one at the Federal level, but still a mistake.