How about newspapers.

Holy hell. We're going to look no different than Venezuala... or 1930's Germany... in the next few years...

I have been expecting that for a while now. Newspapers are hurting, and they are the first to point it out. I can easily see gov run newspapers (officially anyways) in the near future. Then they shutdown or restrict the internet access. Most people can't figure out how to reset their routers, so an actual shutdown would leave most helpless. Then they turn to a fully controlled source of information. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/scared.gif" alt="" />

Sounds like Net Neutrality is getting going as well (since we gave Obama power in the [censored] stilumus package...).

Welcome to Red China.

Having a "truly" nationalized central bank would be the best thing that could ever happen to this country.

It's the private banking interests that are the problem here. Not the government. It appears to be the government, because the banking interests have figured out how to take over the government and use the government as a tool for their own special interests.

As far as newspapers, the idea is not that they be government owned, but that they receive tax breaks if they agree to become a 501c non-profit.

The problem I see with that is that non-profits are not allowed to have political opinions or be politically active, so clearly this puts any newspaper under the thumb of the government, who could then threaten to take way their tax exempt status and impose a tax burden that would destroy them, if the government percieves the paper to be political or unfair in anyway.

Very scary.

Personally, I think that any private entity should be allowed to fail. That includes newspapers, car companies and especially banks and financial institutions.

But instead, the burden of failure has been transfer to the tax payer and that was done at the behest of the bankers who hold all of the debt. Should all of these entities fail, it would be the bankers who lost in the end. Which is exactly as it should be.

But instead, the bill will be paid by all of us and our children for generations to come.

...The problem I see with that is that non-profits are not allowed to have political opinions or be politically active, so clearly this puts any newspaper under the thumb of the government, who could then threaten to take way their tax exempt status and impose a tax burden that would destroy them, if the government percieves the paper to be political or unfair in anyway....

This should also apply to churches. Remember a little heavy-handed contributing done by a certain church this past year? <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/evil.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/evil.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/evil.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/evil.gif" alt="" />
Tax 'em if they want to play. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/butwiggle.gif" alt="" />

>>*Step one is to control financials, step two is to control manufacturing, step three is to control what is said, thought follows along right behind, typically in one generation at most.

Freedoms are not just taken away, this is far to difficult to do, rather over time acceptance of the loss becomes the norm.

Independent business is the most difficult to control because they often are....well...independent.

The way to control them is use the financials to restrict their..finances.

Huge conspiracy? Maybe. More likely a different idea of what America should be like, and headed that way one step at a time.

A couple of interesting things this old man noticed in the last few days makes the point.

One of the token Naysayers was on Fox, defending ACORN. His comment about the "50 million" or so in funding they receive being "tiny" and "Just a pittance" made me see the mindset changes.

"50 MILLION?" A "tiny pittance?" K..Where is that $5 slot machine, anyway, time to go have some fun.

Then I read the report where the FDIC might be borrowing $100 billion or so.....from the banks? NOT the treasury, the treasury already has a problem since they are printing and borrowing their own money anyway which is the REAL issue, not the "public perception" as stated.

The banks that we just bailed out by loaning/buying them? (pick one). The same financials that instantly went right back to high leverage high risk financial instruments...again?

K.

Let's see now. Left hand is broke, loan left hand money from right hand, now left hand is flush but right hand is broke, so......

Yea.

That will work.

Oh well, I am just one person. I did try to see if I could think in terms of that "pittance" $50 million, found out I couldn't.

Then I see "leaders" talking about BILLIONS, and now....TRILLIONS???

Hey, is there such a thing as a "Jillion?"

I am old enough to remember the GOOD world. My father had two Cows, the neighbor had two Horses. Dad needed a Horse, the neighbor needed a Cow.

They swapped, shook hands.

I do know one thing. I like having a government that takes care of things they should be taking care of, and otherwise leaves us alone.

Now I find myself...watching them constantly. All of them, even local.

Which means to me that our current government? We don't need most of it at ALL.....*EB

I would argue the papers are already 'nationalized'.

One part of me wants all these machinations to come to fruition - the sooner this ogre cabal can engorge to its heart's content the sooner it will die. If it doesn't die it will come back in some other form, through some other loophole...we seem to be fast forwarding through this corporatism - which may be a good thing.

We need to reboot before we get the Blue Screen of Death.

The whole point of 501c "is" control. And that includes Churches too. There have been times when Churches lost their 501c status when being too politically active, but it's a hot button issue that the government is weary of addressing. Especially minority churches for obvious reason.

One thing we have to remember is that "income" taxes, which the 501c is designed to exempt, never existed in the time of our founders. In fact, it was only established in the early 20th century as a way to fund the debt that the new Federal Reserve was supporting. And the actual tax was minimal. It didn't become the significant tax that it is today until the middle 20th century.

So in reality, we shouldn't even need 501c tax exempt status, because we shouldn't have an income tax and Churches and any other organization OR individual should be able to say any damn thing they want.

We may not agree with them, but the whole purpose of our Constitution is to protect speech we don't agree with, so that our own speech is also protected.

One reason we feel threatened by organizations like the before mentioned Church is because our own organizations, Churches or groups feel like we have remain muzzled to maintain that tax exempt status. If taxes were not an issue, we could all speak out and this country would operate as our founders intended.

Instead, the power to control speech by organizations rests in the hands of those who control how taxes are imposed and collected and that's the very people who we are suppose to be protected from...the government.

Banks can and will repay and shake off the government ownership.

Can't say the same from Big Auto. Great investment Uncle Sam, who let this guy manage the 'fund'.