In China, free trade is produced possible. It is a system which allows traders to transact business without the government intervention like subsidies, tax and tariffs. There are many countries, like New Zealand and Australia that’s signed a totally free trade agreement with China.

Because Chinese backpacks are cheaper than a number of other domestic products, it is quite good to enter into this type of agreement with China to produce countries rich in standard of living, since buying or producing products off their own countries would are more expensive since the labor price is higher as compared to China’s labor cost.

There ended up arguments using the developed countries that start free trade in China concerning together with the people who will miss their jobs. But despite what most believes, China cannot manufacture everything with a low cost. For instance, China can produce toys with a low cost yet it’s the US who will manufacture computers at cheap prices. If the US and China enter into these kinds of agreement, then it is rather beneficial for both countries simply because could trade computers and toys.

Another argument may be the wage conflict between China and the civilized world. Take for example, in the US the typical wage of any person will be $10 every hour, playing with China, it is just $2 by the hour. But this argument will undoubtedly matter if each countries are involve in manufacturing something.

Anna Hazare’s campaign for a stronger Lokpal Bill and his 12-day battle against corruption has given the Opposition, mainly the BJP, to present themselves as a party which can replace the ruling coalition at the Centre. A STAR News-Nielsen survey conducted across 28 cities with close to 9000 respondents after Anna ended his 12-day long fast – has revealed that the BJP will garner 32 % of the votes across India if Lok Sabha polls were held in the near future, while the Congress will manage to win just 20 % of votes. According to the survey, the BJP has turned out to be the most favoured party across all regions – 40:27 in the north; 20:15 in the east, and 46:15 in the west – barring the south, where 20 % respondents still prefer the Congress, while 16 % prefer the BJP.

The numbers mentioned above is in stark contrast to the ones that came out in a similar survey conducted by STAR News-Nielsen in May 2011 – before the Anna movement gripped the country’s imagination. Barely four months ago, was the Congress leading the pack with 30 % of the vote share while BJP had only 23 %. Also, except the west, the Congress was leading in all the current Lok Sabha, Congress has 207 seats and BJP has 115 seats. Anna’s movement, and the way the UPA government handled the situation, seems to have swayed a number of people who voted for Congress during last General election – around 11 % of the respondents who voted for the Congress last time now intend to vote for the BJP, while only 5 % are switching away from the BJP. Throughout Anna Hazare’s campaign, several UPA leaders, most vocally Kapil Sibal, had said that a few thousand people supporting Anna, do not represent a country of 1.2 billion.

They even challenged his team members to prove its legitimacy in the elections. But if they were to contest elections against Team Anna members tomorrow, the politicians would be in for a surprise. In a Kiran Bedi vs Kapil Sibal contest, 74 % of respondents in the STAR News-Nielsen survey would vote for the iconic former IPS officer, while Sibal would manage just 14 %. Similarly, a contest between Arvind Kejriwal and P Chidambaram would end up in a defeat for the home minister – 58 % of the respondents claim they will vote for the RTI activist while 24 % would choose Chidambaram. Interestingly, the Anna campaign has given the country a brand new youth icon. Around 62 % of the respondents feel that Arvind Kejriwal, the most vocal member has as the new role model for young India. He has significantly higher approval ratings in north (75 %). Respondents however do not lay the blame for corruption on the doors of any particular political party – a third of respondents (75 %) believe that all parties are equally responsible for corruption. Another 49 % of the respondents believe that feels that giving or accepting bribe is in the fabric of the country and it cannot be stopped by people in India. A similar number – 46 % – believe that corruption can be stopped if people unite against it.

Our country faces numerous issues, yet so many of them could be solved with just a little foresight. Unfortunately, politicians are rewarded by getting reelected, not by offering viable long-term plans for the country. A case in point is the current status of Wall Street reforms. The largest banks have only gotten bigger since the financial crisis began – so much for addressing the “too-big-to-fail” rumblings. Plus, Wall Street quickly reestablished its propensity to pay out large bonuses to their bankers for taking speculative risks. Derivatives, which were a contributing factor in the real estate meltdown, currently stand at ten times the planet’s gross domestic product. Someone is going to get burned when those take a fall, and the taxpayer is usually the one to take the hit. Yes, there have been some small reforms. However, the bankers in Manhattan are smart enough that, when one door closes, they can always find another opening or loophole.

The old problems have most definitely not been fixed. In my own state of California, legislators just decided not to ban bribes to politicians. This was ostensibly because the state could not afford the $200,000 tab each year. The fact that paid fines would more than offset that cost seemed not to matter. Anyone with a double-digit IQ knows the real reason. Since my business is mainly real estate – I’m a mortage note buyer – I have a particular interest in how that industry is affected by government policies. Let’s see how the elected officials have done so far: The housing market needs to go through a natural market recovery, which it can do if left alone by the Feds and the states. The real estate bubble took years to build, and it will take at least that many years in which to recover to something approaching normality. If the government will stop butting in, the housing market will have a chance to catch its breath and stabilize. Community and regional banks will be more willing to lend as the volatility decreases.

For those situations where banks prefer not to tread, owner financing can pick up some of the slack. When a mortgage note (often called a real estate note) is created, a much more transparent and honest transaction occurs. The former property owner also has the flexibility to keep the mortgage note or to sell the note to a mortgage buyer. There are lots of viable solutions to the economy and housing market. The government could be part of the solution by making sure that market forces play out fairly without the big banks running roughshod over everyone else. So far, the bureaucrats have only made the problem worse, and Joe Six-pack has no clue to the long-term implications of government policies and programs. Will those few politicians who still have a brain and a heart for the country, please take control!

A recession or a slump is a shortage of money, which is created when banks refuse to supply the economy with money by tightening up on lending. To end our current slump more money must be put into circulation, which under our idiot system would be done by the banks lending more money. When banks simply refuse to lend more money we are locked into the slump and are prevented from emerging form it. The sensible solution would be for government to start printing money and spending it into circulation as a service to the community. That option is very simple, very logical but has the disadvantage of yielding no profits for the banks. Banks prosper by raking in interest on lending money they conjured out of thin air. Government seems to believe it must protect bank profits at all costs and that banks take precedence over everybody else.

It is quite acceptable for the nation’s economy to be smashed so long as the banks can continue raking in the bucks. Government long ago dropped the ball of money creation and handed that privilege over to un-elected private-profit corporations known as banks. It works like this: Let’s imagine the government is $1000 short of money and instead of just printing more and spending it, it does the “modern” thing of borrowing it from the banks. How is this borrowing done? Well, what government does is print pieces of paper with a fancy design on them. It calls these fancy pieces of paper “bonds.” �It assigns each bond a value (say, $100). �It then sells 10 of these this $100 bonds to a “financial institution” (a bank). The bank creates $1000 out of thin air (in other words, prints money) in order to buy the bonds. Later, the bonds are “redeemed,” which means the government buys them back AT INTEREST. �Essentially then, government has borrowed $1000 from the bank and repaid the loan at interest. The bank created the money it lent to government out of thin air and made a nice profit on the loan.

Okay, that’s a simplified picture but it is nevertheless the essence of what happens, stripped of its usual smoke screen of complexity and gobbledygook. It becomes obvious to anyone with an ounce of common sense that government could just as easily draw up a fancy piece of paper with “$100” on it and call it a “note” and SPEND it directly into circulation, bypassing the banks altogether. After all, if a private corporation called a BANK can create money out of nothing and spend it (by lending it to people) then why not have your elected government create it instead and SPEND it into the economy, say by grants to industry, building roads, increasing pensions or reducing taxation or whatever? In the latter case the new money is not LENT, so does not have to be repaid at interest and so does not set us up for an even greater round of borrowing a few years down the line. In this fashion the economy could be re-inflated very quickly and the money shortage eradicated without us having to grovel to the banks for the privilege of borrowing our own means of exchange from them. So why does government not do it that way? Good question. I’ll take a look at that in my next article

Earlier, during the time of dictators, there were strict restrictions on the expression of views and publication of news. People had made it a habit to live a silent life. They had no right to oppose even on injustice. Arabian women were more wretched species in the country that had no right to decide even their own future. But, sooner or later, the destiny of the dark is to disappear and give way to the lights of hopes for better tomorrow. This is exactly what taking place in Arab today. The continent is experiencing the warmth of change-rays coming from all over the world, inspiring Arabian individuals, and spreading light in their lives. Thanks to the online availability of Arab news that every Arabian can access to, and share his or her views online.

It has revolutionized the whole world today and Arab is no exception. The online Arab news is reaching to every household with the excess of internet, and to every individual holding a mobile or an i-Pod. There are several online magazines of Arab people, being published for Arab people, by Arab people. This makes them aware of the political, economical developments taking shape in and out of Arab continent, and how it is affecting their social life. This awareness then forms a view in their mind, and many like-minded people get a step ahead to exchange their views through online forums available on the Arab news portals. The easy and fast process of exchanging views inspires them very much to do it.

The process doesn’t stop here. Many online magazines and news portals also provide comments from experts in every sector, which further enhances knowledge of individuals, and corrects their understanding of the affairs, if so is required. Thus it strengthens their confidence of the topic, and encourages them to participate in such events more openly. Not only men, but Arabian women are also equally participating in such online venues and registering their pros and cons towards anything which is affecting their entity.

It is true that not all parts of the continent are using internet so profusely to bring about changes but some economies have really opened door to the foreign views by allowing free access to internet. Some extremist countries are still restricting the free use of internet and any such facility which might augment the awareness of locals and challenge the dictatorship of so called leaders. However, the wave is continuously flowing on its way and it is sure to reach every nook and corner of the continent; sooner or later though. If you are an Arabian and want to share your views towards the developments in your region, join online forums available on some of the very good Arab news portal online. You can meet several people who agree with your views and they will support your views by adding their own views to it. This will provide a common platform for you to raise voice against evils and contribute to the welfare of current and coming generations.

The unfolding currency war that currently dominates the financial press has its causes firmly rooted in US monetary policy deployed since the credit crunch and the ensuing global financial crisis according to analysts at “EurasiaTrade”. The failure of Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch, the astonishing relegation to practical insolvency and subsequent nationalization of mortgage financing giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as well as the bailouts of AIG, GM and others called for an unprecedented effort to plug the huge holes in the good ship America’s hull.

Interest rates slashed to zero, TARP (Troubled-Asset Relief Program), $1.25trn worth of quantitative easing, the Federal Reserve’s discount window, the TALF (Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility) and other attempts were made to stabilize the financial system and then rebuild the US economy. “All these bailouts and stimulus took their toll on the US dollar and, as a result, it has weakened significantly since 2007. The trouble is, because the US is the largest trading partner for several major economies around the world, it has had the effect of making their exports to the US proportionally more expensive. Seeing as those countries have an obligation to provide an environment conducive to economic growth that’s every bit as valid as America’s, they have taken steps to protect their economies”, said a “EurasiaTrade” analyst. Whilst the scale of the US efforts have been unmatched by all with the exception, perhaps, of the United Kingdom, the net effect has resulted in the currencies of America’s main trading partners to fall in concert with the US dollar but this is appears to be of less concern to US authorities than the fact that China’s currency, the renminbi or yuan, remains undervalued against the dollar despite relentless pressure from Washington.

China, they say, is intervening in the FX market to keep the yuan cheap and hurting US exports by making them more expensive to buy in China. The “EurasiaTrade” analyst explained, “Well what on earth did the Americans expect China to do? They have to protect their economy too. We don’t agree with suggestions that China played its part by simply accepting US T-Bonds and agency debt in return for cheap goods instead of calling time on America’s excessive borrowing. Your local electrical store isn’t going to tell you to stop buying LCD televisions from them using your credit card because they think you’re running the risk of becoming tapped out, are they?” “EurasiaTrade” says they expect the situation to worsen in the coming months as investors begin to lose patience with US monetary profligacy and demand higher yields for holding US debt. The US is headed for austerity whether it likes it or not; it’s just a matter of whether it goes quietly or not. After all, nobody likes a complainer.

In a column appearing in The New Media Journal on May 29, Freelance writer Paul R. Holllrah warns “Beware of the National Popular Vote.”

The National Popular Vote Plan is an interstate compact, whereby participating states agree to allocate their electoral votes to the winner of the National Popular Vote, as opposed to the candidate who secures the most votes in their state. The compact would take effect when enough states (constituting the requisite 270 electoral votes required to win the Presidential election) agree to participate. Currently eight states and the District of Columbia, constituting 132 Electoral votes, have ratified the compact.

Mr. Hollrah then asserts: “Any scheme for selecting a president and Vice President by national popular vote would clearly violate the intent of the Framers and may very well be unconstitutional.” Contrary to Hollrah’s assertion, delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were deadlocked regarding how to select the President. One proposal had the U.S. Congress select the President. Another proposal was to have the State Legislatures choosing the President. A third alternative was to conduct a direct popular vote. All proposals were rejected. Given this impasse, the conventioneers decided to delegate “plenary authority” to the states to award their electors, as reflected in Article ll, Section 1, Clause 11 of the U.S. Constitution, which states: “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors.” Accordingly, the intent of the Framers was for each state to have the autonomy to select electors in any way that it deems fit.

Moreover, the Plan is in fact constitutionally permissible. There is no provision in the U.S. Constitution mandating that the President must be selected by a particular electoral method. The winner-take-all-electoral voting system currently employed in 48 states was not in fact part of the grand design of the Founders. In 1789, the year of the first Presidential election, voters of only five states were permitted to mark ballots for Presidential electors. The other states granted the power of voting for Presidential electors to their state legislatures. The winner-take-all approach of awarding electors was a scheme devised by partisan parochial interests to maximize their political advantage. States have the Constitutional authority to change their means of awarding electors. Massachusetts has done this 11 times. In fact, Maine and Nebraska changed from winner-take-all to the Congressional Allocation method.

Mr. Hollrah incorrectly couples supporters of the National Popular Vote Plan with Electoral College abolitionists. The Plan would not “emasculate the Electoral College.” Participating states would simply alter the way they award their Electoral Votes. The Electoral College will still exist under the Plan. On the Monday following the second Wednesday in December after the Presidential election is held, electors representing each state and the District of Columbia will still cast their Presidential ballots. On January 6, the Vice President will declare the winner to a joint session of the U.S. Congress. This is the process done now, and this is what will be done after the National Popular Vote Plan has been adopted by enough states to take effect.

Finally, Mr. Hollrah asserts that the National Popular Vote “is a liberal scam.” While there are certainly liberal supporters, the Plan also enjoys the support of many contemporary conservatives. They include former Republican Presidential candidates Fred Thompson and Tom Tancredo, former U.S. Senator Jack Garn (R-UT), former Chairman of the Michigan Republican Party, Saul Anuzis, and Ray Hanes, the former Chairman of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC.)

The left does not necessarily stand to gain if the National Popular Vote Plan is actuated. With some polls showing a dead heat between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, but with Obama garnering leads in the preponderance of swing states, it is easy to envisage a scenario where Mr. Obama could win a second term without mustering the most votes.

The National Popular Vote Plan will simply “even the playing field. ” The President will be elected the same way as a Cemetery Commissioner, a Governor, or a U.S. Senator. It will obliterate the dynamic where candidates assiduously cultivate support from voters in only about 15 “showdown states” while relegating the majority of Americans to the Electoral Sidelines.

Mr. Hollrah is a resident of Oklahoma. This is a state which has been ignored by Presidential nominees since 1976, and is becoming increasingly Republican at the Presidential level. It was John McCain’s best state in 2008. Barring an electoral cataclysm, the state will not be contested for many election cycles in the future. Only under the National Popular Vote Plan will Mr. Hollrah’s vote in Tulsa, OK be as sought after as a vote in Tulsa, OH. Under the winner-take-all system, Mr. Hollrah’s vote is futile. It is a forgone conclusion that Oklahoma will award all of its electoral votes to the Republican Presidential nominee.

Data collected from the research from the nonprofit Catalyst disclosed that sixty of the Fortune 500 corporations do not possess any female directors. Out of the same group, 136 firms have no women among their top five executives. Moreover, there are 26 Fortune 500 companies which have neither a female in executive management, nor a woman board member. More than half of the United States workforce is made up of females. It is also widely recognized that they receive less than their male counterparts and the statistics are far worse for women of color. This disparity upsets women at every level of the job market. Women, who comprise almost 40% of the students attending elite business schools, find it especially difficult to rise into the ranks of senior management among the States’ largest public companies.

The companies were labeled in categories by industry following a review of the Catalyst information. Wall St press investigated their corporate websites to find out if they had any females in top management at all. While they finally managed to find somebody, they were usually in public relations, human resources, investor relations, or accounting. In the 21st Century it is incomprehensible how public companies can manage to eliminate women from such crucial positions, when Intuit Inc claims that a billion women will enter the workforce by 2020. The statistics are disgraceful and point to lingering misogyny in the board rooms and executive suites of a number of the largest companies. It is widely recognized that females make up a powerful global consumer force which has resulted in greater knowledge of mobile technologies, urban migration, increased access to education for women and a much wider use of the Internet. The study showed that with micro-credit burgeoning, combined with low market entry fees, that a ‘she-economy’ is about to evolve. There are more females in national positions than at any other time in history. The list consists of 3 queens as Head of State, 4 Governor Generals and 14 concurrent women national leaders.

This, in conjunction with the findings of the study, has led a few experts to state that we are about to enter the ‘women’s decade’. However, this is definitely not reflected in the board rooms and executive suite’s business sectors of the world. In the area of world politics, women are also still only noticed because of their lack of a major presence.}

Addressing an election rally at Jehanabad in Bihar on Wednesday, Congress General Secretary, Shri Rahul Gandhi stressed that only Congress Party truly believes in the welfare of backwards, tribals and weaker sections of the society. He revisited the promise made by Congress during the 2004 Parliamentary elections and said that he had promised that any Congress led government shall be a government of the poor, of the weaker sections, of the minorities, of the tribals. And since 2004, UPA government had undertaken many mega programmes for the upliftment of all such people who have stayed marginalized from witnessing the fruits of economic and social growth, he said. Congress belongs to the common man and Congress government is obliged for their progress and development of each and every nook and corner of the nation, he said.

He further said that since the focal point of Congress’s idelology is to work towards nation building and taking the fruits of development to each and every Indian, the party had decided to go alone with its message and dedicated work in UP and Bihar, he added. Shri Gandhi reiterated that only Congress Party genuinely thought about the poor, marginalized and weaker sections of the society. Others only provided lip service to their cause, he lamented. He said that it was truly paradoxical that in order to communicate whatever progress made by the urban parts of the country, NDA had coined the slogan  India Shining in English and not in Hindi or any regional vernacular. This showed the elitist nature of their ideology, he added. He pointed out that the Bihar government was also undertaking a media led blitzkrieg about Bihar Shining. But this too was a false propaganda, he added. He asked the people of Bihar that if Bihar was shining, why were people from Bihar on an exodus to Delhi, Punjab or Haryana in search of employment. The truth he stated was that people of Bihar were shining and not Bihar per se. People from Bihar and UP were significant contributors to the development of Delhi, Haryana, Punjab and Maharashtra, Shri Gandhi pointed out. He further added that the picture of villages in Bihar projected a completely contrary mosaic of underdevelopment and abject poverty. The central funds for developmental schemes and programmes were not reaching the Bihar villagers and were being usurped by unscrupulous elements due to rampant corruption in delivery mechanisms of these programmes, he said. Shri Gandhi pointed out that while MNREGS is a legal guarantee towards providing at least 100 days employment to all poor people in the country, in Bihar more than 75% people were provided less than only 30-35 days of employment.

He also pointed out that despite receiving highest allocation amongst all other states for Indira Awas Yojana, the true beneficiaries were not getting houses in Bihar. These houses were being allotted to such persons who were well off and could afford paying bribes to officials, he added. Congress General Secretary said that Congress wants to take the nation forward. And to achieve this goal, Congress shall continue to work tirelessly in this direction, he said. He added that Congress has started a mission for the youth, for the people of Bihar, for the whole of India. He stated that Congress wants to change Bihar for the good. He said that Congress had the right ideology for this service to the nation as it was not limited by narrow boundaries of caste or religion. Congress party was for the entire nation, he added. He said that if the country has to move forward, these narrow ideologies will have to be eradicated. He exhorted the people of Bihar to take the first concrete step in this direction and let Congress get an opportunity to establish Bihar on the path of prosperity and glory!}

Harry Reid Follower of Satan? by David Cunningham The question has been poised to me on several occasions is Harry Reid a follower of Satan, you know the Evil One , Lucifer, the Devil. Personally I never liked the mans politics but to be a follower of Satan? Let’s look at the facts. We know that Harry Reid is a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, commonly refered to as the Mormons. The name of the church alone suggest that they are Christians not Satanist. Who else are Mormons within the public eye Mitt Romney, Glenn Beck are two but there is a whole list in Congress and the Senate and House, we have Bob Bennett, Michael Crapo, Orin Hatch,Gordon Smith are in the senate in the house we have Robert Bishop, Leonard Boswell, Christopher Cannon, John Doolittle, Jeff Flake, Dean Heller, Walter Herger,James Matheson, Howard “Buck” McKeon, Michael Simpson, Thomas Udall. Why do people think Harry Reid is a follower of Satan and not all these other politicians who are members of the same church? What is it that Harry Reid is doing that is irritating the public for them to come to such a conclusion or for them to even ask the question? As I began to research this information about Harry Reid one of the things Harry Reid kept saying is most of his criticism came from other members within his church, OK, why would that be? Could it be that since they all (Mormons)have the same fundamental belief system when one member deviates from it you draw fire from the others , or could it be that Harry Reid is on a higher spiritual level than the general membership of the church and has received some kind of revelation from God to enact the kind of legislation that he has for the betterment of the population Mormon non-Mormon alike. Maybe Harry Reid really is his brothers keeper.

So to really understand Harry Reid’s thinking let’s look at his belief within his own religion. A religion in which he claims he is in good standing with. The Mormon church teaches that we are placed on this earth to make choices it is our God given right to have the freedom to choose. Even before this earth life it is taught within the Mormon church that there was a war in Heaven as you can read in King James version Revelations 12:7-9 a disagreement and two plans came forward and where presented before the body of Heaven one by Christ which entailed freedom of choice and one by Satan or the Devil which entailed no choice but forces us to live according to Satan’s law. It is taught that God our Heavenly Father choose Christ’s plan then kicked Satan and his followers out of heaven. There are some moral issues that the Mormon Church takes a very hard stand on. We will briefly review the main ones. Rules are accepted as guidelines for members to help them make their life better, but remember the Mormon church teaches free agency, that is part of their plan of Happiness “it is through our choices that brings either Happiness or Misery to our lives”. The Mormons believe in the Ten Commandments as presented by Moses, The Mormon church teaches it is a sin to have sex outside of the bounds of marriage, and the Mormon Church is pro-life.

The Mormon Church believes members should pay a tithe or 10% of your increase as stated in Malachi 3:8 In general terms this is the basis Harry Reid was taught along with millions of others. So why are so many people upset with Harry Reid? Some say they don’t agree with Harry Reid on the health care bill that leaves funding in there for abortions. Harry has said and I quote “I oppose abortion except in cases of rape,incest or when there is a threat to the life of the mother” It sounds like he is in step with his church beliefs, but out of step with his parties beliefs. Could it be that’s why Harry Reid author a bill within the health care bill that would permit taxpayer funding of abortions. Well we know from his church beliefs he Harry Reid is free to choose what he wants to legislate. Within the Mormon church a law was instituted in April 23 1834, called The United Order. “to be a united order, and an everlasting order for the benefit of my church,and for the salvation of men until I come”This United Order was to equal out the inequalities between the rich and the poor. Balance the social injustice between the haves and the have nots. Sound familiar. Sounds like redistribution of wealth to me.

God has always admonished us to take care of the poor, that’s what the United Order stands for, but some feel it is a form of socialism in fact Wikipedia says United Order is a form of Christian communism. This United Order was instituted in the Mormon church but had a short life span since the people could not stick with the program. Harry Reid are you trying to establish a United Order on the people of America? What is the difference between the United Order and Socialism? In my Webster s II 1995 dictionary it defines Socialism: ” A social system in which the producers posses political power and the means of producing and distributing goods, the theory or practice of those who support such a social system,construction of the material base for Marxist- Leninist communism under the dictatorship of proletariat. In my Black’s Law dictionary socialism is defined as “any theory or system of social organization which would abolish, entirely or in great part, the individual effort and competition on which modern society rests,and substitute for it co-operative action, would introduce a more perfect and equal distribution of products of labor,and would make land and capital, as instruments and means of production, the joint possession of the members of the community.

Blacks definition clearly states that you will loose private property rights. In a Webster’s New International Dictionary 2nd ed. dated 1951 you get this definition,”A political and economical theory of social organization based on the collective or governmental ownership and the democratic management of the essential means for the production and distribution of goods; also a policy or practice based on this theory.” This version sounds more like what is happening today verses the former “the collective” “governmental ownership” Obama talks about the collective all the time. George Bernard Shaw was a noted Fabian Socialist. Shaw stated this “Socialism reduced to its simplest legal and practical expression, means the complete discarding of the institution of private property by transforming it into public property and the division of the resultant income equally and indiscriminately among the entire population” Carl Marx and Friedrich Engels are considered the starting point in modern day regarding the socialism movement when they drafted the “Communist Manifesto” We now have many socialistic/communist groups as demonstrated by the One Nation rally on 10/10/2010. Communism is socialism but it is persused by revolutionary means, almost always by using force or terror. Socialist belief in the collective control of ownership and production, Communist the same, the difference is Socialist will try to reach that control through policy getting politicians to write laws to further their agenda sometimes laws that don’t even make sense to us but have a long term or a much bigger picture once all pieces are in place. So whether it is a Communist or a Fabian or any other style of Socialism they all have have these things in common which they advocate. According to the Mormon church the United Order is the Lords program for eliminating the inequalities among men, based on the belief that all things in and on the earth belong to the Lord and that when men hold earthly possessions they are stewards for those possessions and accountable to God. To enter into the United Order when it was being tried one had to consecrate or give all his possessions s to the Church by a “covenant and a deed” which could not “Be Broken” a covenant is a promise. So a person completely divested himself of all his property by conveying it to the church. Now this was VOLUNTARY. After divesting himself or giving all to the church the church would then give back to the consecration or he would receive a STEWARDSHIP by conveyance. This stewardship could be more or less the the original consecration, so this allowed each person to be equal according to their family and according to his circumstances, wants and needs.

This process preserved in every man the right to private ownership and management of his property. At anytime he could abandoned the property sell it or pass it on to heirs. The idea was for him to keep the property provide for his family needs and then anything he produced above his needs give to the church to help the poor until their (the poor) needs where met. The principles are very simple to understand. Let’s compare the two and see what the similarities and basic difference are. Similarities of the United Order and Socialism /Communism 1.Both deal with production and distribution of goods. 2.Both aim to promote the well-being of mankind, by leveling the economic field 3.Both in-vision the elimination of selfish motives in the private capitalist industrial system The differences between the two. The cornerstone of the United Order is a belief in God and acceptance of him as the Lord of the earth and author of the United Order. Socialism purely materialistic, and founded by the principles of man not of God. “Although not all socialist may not be atheist, none of them in theory or practice seek the Lord to establish his righteousness” quoted by Marion G. Romney Of the Council of the Twelve Apostles in 1966 of the Mormon Church which Harry Reid is a member of, so Harry do you believe in what Marion G. Romney stated? An Apostle of God as authorized from your church. The United Order is implemented by VOLUNTARY choice to give free -will because men believed in God. Thus the United Order preserves man ‘s God given agency to choose and to own property. United Order is non-political. The United Order lift the poor from poverty and at the same time humbles the rich. Socialism/Communism will take either by deed (force)or through high taxation or regulation. Socialism/communism deprives men of private property ownership. Socialism is political both in theory and practice. Socialism argues that it as a system will eliminate the evils of profit motives, those greedy rich people that got rich through our capitalistic system. Socialism/Communism empowers a few.

As quoted from John Adams our first Vice President and our second President of The United States “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Dishonesty will eventually destroy all political governments that try to abridge man’s free agency as granted from his Creator as these inspired words from Thomas Jefferson stated in our Declaration of Independence.”We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty (freedom) and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Rights are either God � given as part of a divine plan or they are politically driven a political plan and granted from government. If we believe rights are given from government than we also have to be willing to accept the fact those rights can be taken away by the same government that granted them. People are greater than government and more superior in every form. Since we get our Rights from God, people than form a government to help them preserve those rights and safeguard them.

So people will always be superior to the creature (government) they created.A Constitution was therefore designed to limit government to certain enumerated functions, and anything beyond that is tyranny The Mormon church teaches that God established the Constitution of this land by the “hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose”.and it is presupposes mans untrammeled exercise of free agency. Man is on the earth to be tested. Weather man succeeds or fails will determine how he uses his agency. Mankind’s whole future through all eternity is at stake. Eliminate a man’s agency and the whole purpose of his mortality is thwarted. “This is a blessed land( USA) were God inspired men to write the Constitution “so that man would have a place on the earth were at least there is one place that free agency is practiced. So if that is the belief of the Mormon Church that this is a blessed land and that God inspired our founding fathers to write the Constitution then anything else would have to be against the will of God.

If Harry Reid is a practicing Mormon then he would have to do everything in his power as a legislator to preserve the Constitution and principles. With that understanding, now you can see in other countries where socialism/communism is very strong but Mormons live and do what they can do under those circumstances, but in this country socialism/communism is not acceptable. In a country that was preserved to bring about freedom. Ronald Reagan said” Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream.

It must be fought for,protected, and handed on for them to do the same.” So it comes down to two points again free agency to choose as provides by our Constitution or Socialism/Communism giving up our free agency through entitlements and government programs. Is Harry Reid a follower of Satan? Harry Reid has chosen. Harry Reid knows what his Church teaches and their principles, unlike Obama who claims he never listened during church It appears Harry Reid wants to govern against the teachings of his own church and against the will of the people. So in my humble opinion Harry Reid has lost his moral compass from the basic things he was taught in his own church and has chosen to follow Satan, thus trying to enslave us American Citizens who have a birthright given to them from God the Almighty to be a free people and to choose for ourselves. Harry Reid has traded his “exaltation” for a few silver coins just as Judas’s betrayal of Jesus Christ, Harry Reid has betrayed not only his church and fellow members but the American people. For all your actions Harry Reid this makes you a dirtbag. Dirt bag Harry this is what WE THE PEOPLE are going to do on November 2, are going to ablerate the democrat party figuratively speaking at the polls. November is coming quickly. For more on Harry Reid go to