One world currency

Superfreak said:
wrong. They were not ever treated or recognized as separate nations Jarod.
Click to expand...

Pre Civil War the United States "are" was the way the US was referred to in news stories, etc. After the war was when the regular usage of "is" associated with the US. It was the centralization of power that caused people to view the US as one nation.
 
Damocles said:
Pre Civil War the United States "are" was the way the US was referred to in news stories, etc. After the war was when the regular usage of "is" associated with the US. It was the centralization of power that caused people to view the US as one nation.
Click to expand...

I dont belvie I have ever seen you point out that Supercandy was wrong about anything. Good point!
 
Damocles said:
Pre Civil War the United States "are" was the way the US was referred to in news stories, etc. After the war was when the regular usage of "is" associated with the US. It was the centralization of power that caused people to view the US as one nation.
Click to expand...

yes, but the United States was treated as a sovereign nation. The individual states were not. They did have their own currencies, which again, shows that multiple currencies under one federal government does not work any better than one currency with multiple federal governments.

The debt other countries accrued to the US did not get allocated by state, treaties were signed by the federal government, the Louisiana purchase was done by the Federal government. While each state certainly had more power back then, they were not treated or recognized as sovereign nations.
 
wiseones2cents said:
If the entire globe had a one world currency made interest free? Would the world be a better place to live? No more charity would be needed. No more taxes. NO more poverty. No more slavery and exploitation of the poor( A trait of capitalism).

What are your thoughts?

Does the Bible support Capitalism or Socialism?

Why is charity needed in the first place? Is it not due to greed?

The Republicans brag about all their charity. Though did not the Pharisees do the same thing?

They say the Pharisees also gave more then everyone else. They were also stealing more then everyone else. Charities are a big joke in America. They say around 30% of donations(at the most) go towards charity and the rest is all over head. It is indeed a good racket for the organizers.

Heck even the Mafia donates to charity! Though how many lives were ruined to acheive that money is well documented. As is the money donated by the wealthy from slavery.


What else does Scripture tell us about the world?

Doesn't GOD and Scripture tell us the world is ruled by satan? The system of things(Including Capitalism) Is a system of satan? Doesn't Scripture tell us satan and his demons disguise themselves as angels of light(ministers)? You cannot see the forester for the trees, but I can see. It has been given to me to see.

Why do republicans put their trust in men(men of wealth to be precise) and in wealth? Both of which are unkosher (so to speak) to GOD.

Many people think that what we are experiencing today in the workplace is "great". Where we can go from ob to job. Is it great?

That's funny! I know SOOO many people that hate their jobs and are stuck at their jobs because they cant find better. Only the guys that get payed big money to sit around in suits and the girls that are sleeping with their bosses making stupid money are the ones that are happy.

Back in the day we had job security. You would get a job and die at the job. Now you go through MANY jobs(not by choice) before you die. I prefer job security. Had I had job security? My life would have been much different today. Though destiny has brought me here and I do not plan to go down without a fight. I wil fight for my rights and the rights of every human being.

Furthermore? Jesus said that the Pharisees had CORRUPTED the Jewish way. That is why Jesus was sent. To put them back on the path. The Pharisees were prosperity preachers(for profit), many were unfaithful, corrupt, deceivers. And they had warped the scriptures and turned religion into a profit making scheme.

Also Jesus told all the rich to give their wealth to the poor and the Disciples lived in a SOCIALIST SOCIETY! Sorry people, if you believe otherwise? You have been indoctrinated by those same Pharisees.

People also talk about OT laws that support capitalism in the sense that it mentions a borrower and a lender. Though Usery was unkosher. GOD also put up with divorce even though it was not HIS way. Why? Because of the hardness of the hearts of the people.

The Bible also supported slavery. Today we know it is unkosher. You have to understand that the people of old had different sentimentalities. Therefore applying those laws and verses to today's evolved society would be unproductive. At least to the common man. The rich would still love us to be their perpetual slaves.
Click to expand...

A single currency isn't in the universe of political possibility and has numerous practical economic issues anyway.

What do you mean by "interest free currency"? Currency does not have an "interest". Our modern currency is linked to the banking system, but you'd still have lending even if that weren't the case. If you're talking about banning lending, that's just stupid.
 
Superfreak said:
They did have their own currencies, which again, shows that multiple currencies under one federal government does not work any better than one currency with multiple federal governments.
Click to expand...

Debatable. It does work on some level, sure, but that doesn't make the two options equals.
 
Damocles said:
Pre Civil War the United States "are" was the way the US was referred to in news stories, etc. After the war was when the regular usage of "is" associated with the US. It was the centralization of power that caused people to view the US as one nation.
Click to expand...

The constitution gave the federal government a lot of power that it chose not to exercise after the Federalists fell from favor. Really, there was a lot of regional resentment that kept the country more divided. The civil war was a unifying event.

The states had never been independent entities. When they were part of the UK, you didn't say the UK "are". Why, on independence from Great Britain, would a peoples with a shared culture and language choose to divide into the administrative regions the UK had arbitrarily set up beforehand rather than setting up a new country? When Australia gained independence from the UK, it didn't become 6 different countries. When India gained independence, it only divided up based on religion, it didn't divide into twenty-eight countries. And there is considerably more variation between the various Hindi subcultures than there were in the US at the time, or have ever been in the US. The subcultures that do exist in the US often aren't eve geographically isolated, and are rarely confined to a single state (the only real example would be, perhaps, the Mormons). Why would the US divide up? Why did this mythology come into existence that asserts that the states were and should have been sovereign.
 
Superfreak said:
Dear Jarod... that does not change the fact that they both sovereign nations.
Click to expand...

I suppose you could say the different is somewhat subjective. The constitution of the state of Georgia, for instance, proudly declares itself "the sovereign state of Georgia" in the preamble to its constitution. This despite the fact that there are few ways in which this claim could be considered rational. In theory, the US constitution limits federal power while giving states general powers to do as they wish, while, for instance, the Canadian parliament has total power and can abolish the provinces at a whim. In the Holy Roman Empire, you had a totally different problem, with duchies that were in all practical respects sovereign theoretically being subject to the emperor. But in practical terms, Canadian provinces actually have a lot more power than state governments, which have largely been confined to education and co-managing some federal programs.

Oftentimes, sovereignty, or the lack thereof, is little more than putting on airs. There's often a considerable difference between the de jure and de facto state of affairs. I suppose you could say that the nations in Europe have ceded some of their sovereignty. Then again, although a French withdrawal probably would cause a bit of a shitstorm, it wouldn't given the rest of europe cause to declare war, or say that a rebellion is occurring. That's not the case in the US.
 
Jarod said:
Its simply in its infantcy and is experiencing growing pains. Many of the United States once had different currency, and some different language. I agree the nationhood of the former European nations is up for debate and there are points on both sides to say if they are still seperate nations or not, but they are certantly moving closer and closer to a United States style Federalist nation. For example, much of what was Czechoslovakia (the Czeck Republic) now has almost no national government, they simply have local government and representatives in the EU.
Click to expand...

I very much doubt if the Euro can survive in its present form for much longer. It is not possible to have a currency union without fiscal union.
 
Rana said:
The poor revolt, but it is usually when they reach the point of no return.
Click to expand...

Ya they revolt and they vote in another guy for change and no change really occurs. When was the last time the poor actually revolted? Would you say we are due? The Christians are waiting fro Jesus. Lucky all the revolutionary figures in the past didn't wait for Jesus, or we would still be living in the dark ages.....If He comes, great, but I would rather take my destiny by the horns! The Jews have been waiting thousands of years for their Messiah, and have suffered many times in doing so. Now they have taken maters in their own hands. that is why most Jews are atheists.
 
wiseones2cents said:
Ya they revolt and they vote in another guy for change and no change really occurs. When was the last time the poor actually revolted? Would you say we are due? The Christians are waiting fro Jesus. Lucky all the revolutionary figures in the past didn't wait for Jesus, or we would still be living in the dark ages.....If He comes, great, but I would rather take my destiny by the horns! The Jews have been waiting thousands of years for their Messiah, and have suffered many times in doing so. Now they have taken maters in their own hands. that is why most Jews are atheists.
Click to expand...

You do know that you're nuts, don't you?
 
Smarterthan\\(())// said:
i'm saying the constitution is a legal document, therefore it should be adhered to as such. Not 'interpreted according to the times that we live in'. If people support the living constitution theory, all they are doing is giving the government a foot in the door to tyranny.
Click to expand...

Yes it is a legal document, though it is not written in stone and there are amendments. I do not think it should be interpreted according to times, though it does seem that the elites like always interpret it to their advantage. When an interpretation no longer suits them, they change the interpretation.
 
Smarterthan\\(())// said:
how do you base your currency value? how is it going to retain it's value? right now currency is based on gold, which is why you and I are not allowed to possess it. if paper currency is not based upon any real tangible item of value, it becomes worthless and inflation would run your country in to bankruptcy.
Click to expand...

It's not as much as how you base the currency value, but how you base the value of goods. How will it retain value? lol A better question is, how will it lose it?lol

Currency is based on gold now???Not according to anything I have read. It is based on nothing.
 
Jarod said:
Ultimatly one world currency and one world government (with shared federalist powers) will be a great thing. We are not ready for it yet, but as any student of history would be remiss not to admit, its the unrelenting path civilization has been blazing for over 2000 years. The advent of the United States, and the EU are the prime examples. Also consider NAFTA, CAFTA, and the Asian equivelent, the United Nations and NATO.

One day, the USA, the EU and maybe some other federations, as of yet unformed, will join in agreements leading to the next step in global government. There will still be local governments, but some shared powers and some non-shared powers will be given to the larger good.
Click to expand...

You mean, because of the great conquests of such conquerors as Alexander the Great, Rome, Attila, Genghis Khan, Napolean, and Hitler?
 
Superfreak said:
yes, they are all still separate nations Jarod. Some of them are a part of the same currency (Euro), some are not. We are witnessing firsthand how one currency with multiple political systems isn't working out too well.
Click to expand...

The one world currency I speak of will have no debt and no competing currency. Much different then the EU situation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top