Leave the United States if You Can

[Religious Dick]

Wendy McElroy
Leave the United States if You Can

It is time -- arguably, it is past time -- for you to get your family and your wealth safely outside the borders of the United States. America has become a police state that is moving quickly toward total surveillance and, in typical American fashion, the resulting society will almost certainly be the "the best and the biggest" tyranny in the world.

Make plans right now while opportunities still exist to secure your wealth outside of the authorities' rapacious reach because that door of opportunity may be slammed in your face in the near future. It is not merely that government at all levels is starving for the cash that's dried up from property taxes and, so, will steal and confiscate like a drunken highwayman. Many factors point to rise of the Total State, which will grind up your freedom, your future and the lives of those who resist.

I read about 12 news sources a day, from far-left to the Religious Right; month by month, there is a dramatic increase in reports of police brutality, government surveillance, crack-downs, the control of daily life down to the minutia of which oils you may cook french fries... And there seems to be precious little opposition to the arrival of totalitarianism. Perhaps the flood of oppression is too overwhelming and has caused a general paralysis; at times, that is my reaction. But, mostly, I think people are either focused on financial survival or they actually applaud the Total State. Even those who believe they believe in freedom are among the applauders because they buy the justifications being offered for the annihilation of civil liberties. For example, consider just one of the incredible and successful assaults on the due process and liberties of us all; in the name of defending women and children, the campaign against sex offenders has created a class of "untouchables" in class-free America -- people whom the government tells where to live, how to make a living, which sites they can e-visit, etc., etc. In the name of noble goals, the government has erased the idea of serving out a time in jail (which used to be called "paying your debt to society") and, instead, established the idea of indefinite sentences and 'forever' punishments.But the establishment of this caste system is just one aspect of the wild plunge into tyranny.

What should worry you the most is that everything has occurred before the economic collapse of the United States, which I believe will happen in the near future. (The timing depends somewhat on when "too many" foreign-held dollars are dumped back into America.) I expect a severe depression to unfold over the next few years. And nothing, nothing, nothing encourages the growth of State as much as people who are frightened and hungry/homeless. An entire population can turn to a leader much as children turn toward a parent...and for the same reason: to feel safe.

If an economic depression is added to the convergence of the police state with a total surveillance society, then I honestly don't know what will happen. But I do know that you don't want to be there to find out. Don't be fooled by those who say "but America has too strong a tradition of freedom for this to happen." Pre-Nazi Germans thought their culture was too sophisticated and fine to allow the triumph of barbarism. Leave.

Cross posted at WendyMcElroy.com

http://hnn.us/blogs/entries/53010.html

[Michael Tee]

Kinda overblown, IMHO.  I don't usually find myself defending the U.S.A., but fair's fair.  The U.S. has the greatest system of checks and balances ever devised by the mind of man.  When the system is tested to the limits, as it has been by the crypto-fascist tendencies (note I said tendencies, not policy) of the Bush administration, there is a reaction by the judicial and/or legislative branches that usually brings the ship of state back on course.  Way too slowly, of course, but better than never.  This kind of "get out now!  get out while you can!" solution to the problem is hysterical nonsense.

There are much better places to live than the U.S.A. in general, although IMHO it would be hard to beat such places as Miami Beach, Clearwater Beach (Florida)  or Manhattan.  I can easily understand somebody wanting to move from the U.S. to France, Italy or Greece, for example.  Even Hong Kong.  Mainly for climate, cultural or lifestyle reasons.  Or even to Canada, if you are looking for a kinder, gentler social system and pretty much the same kind of other benefits and lifestyle as you find in the U.S. plus the greatest natural beauty in the world.  But to base your move on an "escape from tyranny" motif is just pure foolishness. Hard to believe there is anyone who takes this stuff seriously.

The author seems upset at the way the system handles sex offenders.  Just to put that into perspective, the U.S. has always been willing to experiment with new solutions to old problems, has never been afraid of innovation and is still very much a work in progress.  If they're on the wrong track, they will turn back in time.  Think Prohibition, speakeasies and bathtub gin.  A federal system provides what has been called fifty little laboratories and a lot of good, solid innovation has come out of that system as well.  Naturally, you can't have innovation without some mistakes along the way.  If the author was looking for perfection, he or she won't find it anywhere else.  Sex offending has not been "solved" anywhere.

As for the coming Depression, the author, IMHO, has got that right  But the U.S. has weathered worse before.  Out of the trials of the Great Depression, the U.S. got FDR and the New Deal, which the fascists of the Republican Party still haven't been able to roll all the way back.  As far as I am concerned, any suffering caused by the coming Depression will serve as an object lesson in the perils of "conservatism" or crypto-fascism to be more accurate and will hopefully set the stage for many decades of left-wing Democratic rule where government may well return to being "for the people" and "by the people" and the average citizen will not have to regard "the government" as the enemy.

I would think, if you have LOTS of money, it's normal and healthy to worry about it, and probably at this point to off-shore a substantial portion of it, but for Mr. and Mrs. Joe Sixpack, the risks and costs of off-shoring aren't worth the effort, and the best thing you can do is shift to more conservative investments, probably cutting back on equities in favour of fixed-term securities and concentrate on life-style economies, minimizing fuel and energy costs, cutting waste in food and entertainment, etc.  Inflate the tires.

[Christians4LessGvt]

"the coming Depression"

buy gold coins!



http://www.preciousmetalsmart.com/category.sc?categoryId=7

[Michael Tee]

They're very attractive - - as collector's items, just to have and to look at.  If I were buying gold in larger quantities than a handful, I'd want to look at some other forms of the investment.  But they're nice pictures.  Thanks. 

[Amianthus]

They're very attractive - - as collector's items, just to have and to look at.  If I were buying gold in larger quantities than a handful, I'd want to look at some other forms of the investment.  But they're nice pictures.  Thanks. 

Good thing you live in Canada.

Buying large quantities of gold in the US is against the law.

[Michael Tee]

What about buying large quantities of shares in the major gold producers?

[Amianthus]

What about buying large quantities of shares in the major gold producers?

That's legal. It's just against the law to stockpile actual gold.

[Christians4LessGvt]

"Buying large quantities of gold in the US is against the law."

Define "large quantities"?

"It's just against the law to stockpile actual gold"

Source?

[Knutey]

What about buying large quantities of shares in the major gold producers?

That's legal. It's just against the law to stockpile actual gold.

I swear Ami. Everything you know either came from a cereal box or was only true in your distant fascist past:

http://www.gata.org/node/5606
Treasury claims power to seize gold and silver -- and everything else
Submitted by cpowell on Sat, 2007-10-06 17:01. Section: Daily Dispatches
1p ET Saturday, October 6, 2007

Dear Friend of GATA and Gold:

Because of recent inquiries to GATA about the possibility of an attempt by the U.S. Government to confiscate privately held gold and silver bullion and coins and shares in companies mining the precious metals, we're republishing here the correspondence between GATA and the U.S. Treasury Department on the subject in 2005.

The Treasury Department was surprisingly candid in that correspondence, asserting the U.S. Government's authority, in declared emergencies, to confiscate precious metals and to restrict ownership of mining shares -- and to confiscate and restrict every other financial asset as well. So perhaps precious metals investors shouldn't feel too paranoid.

Confiscation has never seemed to GATA to be a serious or imminent threat. While the U.S. Government in 1933 did demand the exchange of circulating government-issued coins for paper money (proceeding to devalue the paper money after the gold was surrendered), that gold then was a huge part of the country's money supply, and amid the national economic collapse at that time the government could make a plausible complaint against "hoarding." There are no such circumstances today, gold no longer being in general circulation as currency. (Yes, we're working on that.)

But of course lately the arrogance and imperiousness of the U.S. government have far exceeded even the paranoia of precous metals investors. Certainly capital controls may be imposed in the United States in the next currency crisis, and it's not far from capital controls to even more brutal interventions in the economy.

GATA's correspondence with the Treasury Department on the subject of confiscation is appended, along with the preface that appeared with the correspondence when it first was published.

CHRIS POWELL, Secretary/Treasurer
Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee Inc.

* * *

[Knutey]

"Buying large quantities of gold in the US is against the law."

Define "large quantities"?

"It's just against the law to stockpile actual gold"

Source?

Ami dont need to show you no stinkin sources until he changes the argument to something else when he is dead wrong(which is almost always)

[Amianthus]

Define "large quantities"?

I think it's currently set at $1,000 of pure gold. To own quantities larger than that requires a license. I don't know how much this is policed, but if you buy or sell that much gold, the dealer will get a photocopy of your id and send the info into the feds.

Source?

50 USC Sec. 2072

    In order to prevent hoarding, no person shall accumulate (1) in excess of the reasonable demands of business, personal, or home consumption, or (2) for the purpose of resale at prices in excess of prevailing market prices, materials which have been designated by the President as scarce materials or materials the supply of which would be threatened by such accumulation. The President shall order published in the Federal Register, and in such other manner as he may deem appropriate, every designation of materials the accumulation of which is unlawful and any withdrawal of such designation.

    In making such designations the President may prescribe such conditions with respect to the accumulation of materials in excess of the reasonable demands of business, personal, or home consumption as he deems necessary to carry out the objectives of this Act [sections 2061 to 2171 of this Appendix].

Basically, the President can periodically declare what materials cannot be hoarded and the limits of those materials.

[Amianthus]

Ami dont need to show you no stinkin sources until he changes the argument to something else when he is dead wrong(which is almost always)

Nope, sorry, that's your trick. I provide sources.

I dont have to show you no stupid link.

[Knutey]

Define "large quantities"?

I think it's currently set at $1,000 of pure gold. To own quantities larger than that requires a license. I don't know how much this is policed, but if you buy or sell that much gold, the dealer will get a photocopy of your id and send the info into the feds.

Source?

50 USC Sec. 2072

    In order to prevent hoarding, no person shall accumulate (1) in excess of the reasonable demands of business, personal, or home consumption, or (2) for the purpose of resale at prices in excess of prevailing market prices, materials which have been designated by the President as scarce materials or materials the supply of which would be threatened by such accumulation. The President shall order published in the Federal Register, and in such other manner as he may deem appropriate, every designation of materials the accumulation of which is unlawful and any withdrawal of such designation.

    In making such designations the President may prescribe such conditions with respect to the accumulation of materials in excess of the reasonable demands of business, personal, or home consumption as he deems necessary to carry out the objectives of this Act [sections 2061 to 2171 of this Appendix].

Basically, the President can periodically declare what materials cannot be hoarded and the limits of those materials.

You are going to persist in this false myth regardless of the facts and truth , arent you. You must love to be shown for the stupid, arrogant prick that you are.
$1000 you think indeed.
http://www.cmi-gold-silver.com/gold-confiscation-1933.html

Gold Confiscation

Some gold and silver dealers foster the circulation of many myths, misunderstandings, and outright lies about the purchase and sale of gold and silver. Generally, these misconceptions and falsehoods promote the notion that the government may again call in gold as it did in 1933 and that "reportable" transactions are preludes to confiscation. By cultivating such fears in investors, unscrupulous firms can sell high-priced (and often overpriced) coins with greater margins of profit.

Investors who believe these stories invariably pay too much or buy the wrong coins. After reading this Web page, no investor need be taken advantage of.

Avoiding Gold Confiscation

The most frequently used technique to promote high-priced coins is to raise the issue of confiscation. Many telemarketers tell investors that old U.S. gold coins are not "subject to confiscation," leaving the impression that modern gold bullion coins are. Consequently, many investors buy old U.S. gold coins at prices significantly higher than the value of their gold content. The idea of buying "non-confiscateable'' gold sounds like a powerful argument but wilts under scrutiny.

Many precious metals firms maintain that old U.S. gold coins, proof sets, and commemorative gold coins are "collectibles" and would not be subject to another gold recall. Some firms say that premiums of at least 15% automatically make coins collectibles. Another notion holds that coins one hundred years or older are antiques and therefore not subject to confiscation. One large firm that sells rare coins goes as far as to say:

Under current federal law, gold bullion can be confiscated by the federal government in times of national crisis. As collectibles, rare coins do not fall within the provisions permitting confiscation.

No federal law or Treasury department regulation supports these contentions.

The myth that specific types of gold coins are "not confiscateable" stems from the Executive Order that President Roosevelt issued in 1933 calling in gold. The Executive Order exempted "gold coins having a recognized special value to collectors of rare and unusual coins," but it did not define special value or collector, and certainly not collectibles. Nevertheless, telemarketers promoting old U.S. gold coins perpetuate this myth because it makes easier the selling of high-priced coins.

Just because Roosevelt exempted "gold coins having a recognized special value" does not mean that any future call-in would exempt collectibles. Roosevelt's Executive Order would have no legal binding on another gold call-in. Besides, on December 31, 1974, with Executive Order 11825, President Gerald Ford repealed the Executive Order that Roosevelt used to call in gold in 1933. This was necessary because on the same day Congress restored Americans' right to own gold. Furthermore, in 1977 Congress removed the president's authority to regulate gold transactions during a period of national emergency other than war.

Even if a law did exempt certain coins from future confiscation, the government could change that law. Sadly, the government often simply ignores laws. Dealers who say they sell "non-confiscateable" gold have no basis for making such claims.

For further discussion of this matter, assume there were another gold call-in. Would old U.S. gold coins, which make up the bulk of the "non-confiscateable" market, be exempted? Probably not because they are common coins. (The old U.S. gold coins most often promoted are the $20 Libertys and the $20 St. Gaudens, also known as Double Eagles. A $10 coin is called an Eagle, a $5 coin a Half Eagle, and a $2-1/2 coin a Quarter Eagle.)

Although Roosevelt's Executive Order required Americans to turn in their gold coins and gold bullion, foreigners continued to redeem paper dollars for gold until August 15, 1971, when President Nixon closed the gold window. From the end of World War II to 1971, our gold reserves were cut in half.

It is generally believed that all the gold coins surrendered under Roosevelt's call-in were melted or refined into .999 fine bullion bars. That was not the case. It was to the government's advantage to give the foreigners gold coins instead of bullion bars.

With the official price of gold at $35 an ounce, a foreign bank presenting $35 million paper dollars received 1,000,000 ounces if the Treasury delivered gold bullion. However, when the Treasury delivered gold coins with a face value of $35 million, it delivered only 967,500 ounces, saving 32,500 ounces. Each $20 Liberty and St. Gaudens (Double Eagles) contains .9675 ounce of gold. The smaller coins contain the same proportions. Therefore, it was to the Treasury Department's advantage to give out U.S. gold coins instead of bullion bars. Additionally, before Roosevelt's call-in, millions of old U.S. gold coins already had made their way to Europe.

So, in view of the government's policy of delivering "confiscated" gold coins to foreign governments, how can a promoter of old U.S. gold coins claim to be selling "non-confiscateable" gold when the coins he delivers may have been called in back in 1933?

Promoters of old U.S. gold coins rarely reveal the sources of their coins. They foster the idea that the coins they sell somehow survived the 1933 call-in. Probably, the coins being promoted just arrived from Europe a few weeks earlier. Several large numismatic wholesale firms have offices in Europe for finding hoards of old U.S. coins. One firm advertises "Shipments coming in from Europe daily." Another firm boasts offices in Brussels, Paris, and Zurich.

As noted above, the premise of "non-confiscateable" gold lies in Roosevelt's Executive Order that exempted "gold coins having recognized special value to collectors of rare and unusual coins." Are old U.S. gold coins "rare and unusual" today? Not hardly.

Between 1850 and 1907, U.S. mints turned out over 100 million $20 Libertys. Between 1908 and 1933, they coined some 65 million $20 St. Gaudens. Today, no one knows how many have survived, but the number is undoubtedly in the tens of millions, with the bulk of them residing in European bank vaults.

Because of all the old U.S. gold coins in Europe and because of the huge premiums they carry, old U.S. coins are dangerous investments. As gold moves higher, European banks may become sellers, causing old U.S. gold coins to fall in price while gold goes up.

Or, the European banks may decide to hold their gold but convert their high-premium old U.S. coins into bullion, thereby increasing their gold holdings. Such a move, of course, would put downward pressure on old U.S. gold coin prices. (For a further discussion about why old U.S. gold coins are overpriced, visit our page on Old U.S. Gold Coins.)

Since 1989, PCGS and NGC, the two major grading services, have "slabbed" over two million coins rated MS-60 or higher. Now, the two services are grading 200,000 to 300,000 coins a month. Millions of lower-grade coins (VF through BU) do not even warrant being submitted. Yet, they are sold as "non-confiscateable" semi-numismatic coins. Low-grade coins that have no real collector value are called semi-numismatic. VF/XF common-date Double Eagles are definitely semi-numismatic coins.

Add in the uncounted smaller denomination old gold coins ($10 Eagles, $5 Half Eagles, etc.) and the number of available old U.S. gold coins grows even bigger. There is no way the old U.S. gold coins being promoted as "non-confiscateable" have a "recognized special value to collectors of rare and unusual coins."

The concept of "non-confiscateable" gold is counterfeit. The idea lives only because dealers continue to push it for their own benefit. Investors who do not have the facts are unable to know otherwise. Readers of this Web page, however, need not be victims to the hype and promotion so prevalent in the gold coin industry.

Investors wanting to buy gold should go with the bullion coins: American Gold Eagles, Maple Leafs, or Krugerrands. These coins move dollar for dollar with the world price of gold and are easy to buy, sell, and trade. Additionally, tracking the value of these coins is easy. No "expert" has to look at them.

You are buying & reselling bullshit again, but that is what you RW assholes do , isnt it?

[Amianthus]

You are buying & reselling bullshit again, but that is what you RW assholes do , isnt it?

Actually, Nixon rescinded FDR's executive order in 1974 (Executive Order 11825), not 1971, so your source is incorrect.

Regardless, US Code says that the President can enforce limits at will, all he has to do is publish a notice in the Federal Register (source above). As I said, if you buy or sell more $1,000 of gold, you will be reported.

[Christians4LessGvt]

"US Code says that the President can enforce limits at will"

The President "can enforce limits" but that doesn't mean he/she will
do that or that it's against the law to buy or own large quantities of gold does it?

"all he has to do is publish a notice in the Federal Register (source above).
As I said, if you buy or sell more $1,000 of gold, you will be reported"

Be "reported" for what? Tax reasons? That still does not make it illegal?
You implied/stated it was illegal to own or "stockpile" large quantities of gold
but my original statement said "buy gold coins" so you are not saying it
it against the law to own large quantities of gold coins are you?