It means that our own representatives no longer represent the US citizens. We can't even govern ourselves or our own best interests. It is now a global agenda. I would, at this point, assume that is why our congress is no longer effectual in creating laws and it is being blamed on partisanship rather than the fact that in order to vote on a law effecting the US, there has to be a world conference first.
I think there is a lot of confused thinking about the issue, and I believe there are 2,000 to many rules and regulation that contradict themselves. But boy I believe this: the Federal Government cannot manage at the local level, usually not the Country Level, and not the State Level. Banks should be allowed to do as they may anywhere they want to go, but if there is a straight line process where government policy is concerned, the Federal Government should not even be involved in local level issues. New Orleans? The Feds should have stayed out of that PERIOD.So I want the Federal Government OUT of Local/State processes, and I see that as a guarantee the banks will follow suit. That brings them out of the common mans business ...unless.... there is a community effort to re-vitalize, or maintain any given areas. Gimme, gimme groups then, don't succeed without a lot of work which instantly changes them from Gimme, Gimme's to watch what you touch bub.. groups.Very profound question here.The effect of my position is to remove the international monetary groups from local positioning and put local banks in the drivers seat where the community is law abiding and capable. Remove law abiding and capable, and I believe the town will die as banks flee.. and justifiably so.
If you hand over control over your money to someone else, they would end up trying to pocket some of it. Smaller countries work better, partly because it's easier to see what their doing. We complain about how much corruption there is in the UN, and we are thinking of handing over some control over our economy to a central entity?These big Emerging countries is known for corruption and boom and bust economies. They have very little experiences with handling their own. Bankers also problably thinking of how to esploit these countries. When Russia rid itself of communism, Bush purposefully gave them bad advice destroying their country. Only oil helped Russia rebuild. What I see is greed. We want to see the good times keep coming. We want to control other countries economy so our boom times keep going. The problem is if we tie our economy too closely to others, our good times might be better, but our bad times would be worse. The problem is that all our economies is too interconnected. England is in trouble, because of their banks heavily invested in US mortgages and is dependent on high interest banking in Iceland. 2 days ago I heard warning that China's stimilus package might be a giant disaster for us. We our releasing more treasury bonds to help pay for our Banking bail out, and it is suspected CHina will sell off their holdings on treasury bonds to pay off their plans for improving their infrastrucuter. Economist do not believe the public can absorb all those treasury bonds. PS, this Chrismas, I will be watching It's a Wonderful Life, and thinking of the banking failures.