Posted on 10/13/2010 12:58:24 PM PDT by Starman417
There are men of vision who rise to heights of power and fame as they strive to realize their own destiny: George Soros has a vision for the world and the United States of an open-society with open borders and a system of wealth redistrubution, he wants to achieve this vision through his disciple Barack Obama.
George bases his vision on a primary premise of a global objective, a one world government. He refers to his concept of world government as an "open-society philosophy". Of course the system requires a omnipotent god-like billionaire for it is a billionaire oligarchy system based loosely around a benevolent billionaire who is in charge of everything and knows what is best for the world. George is imminently qualified for the position, at least in his own mind, he definitely has the money and has considered himself a god for a long time; he has started implementing his plan by supporting a myriad of anti-American organizations and through his charismatic student and sycophant, Barack Obama.
One of the initial requirements for an open-society is open borders. He explains the reason for open borders in the February, 1997 "Atlantic Monthly", in an article titled "'The Capitalist Threat':
"Societies derive their cohesion from shared values . . . religion, history, and tradition. When a society does not have boundaries where are the shared values to be found? . . . the concept of the open society itself."
In the article Soros further expounds on his Social and economic theory in three main parts:
ECONOMIC STABILITYECONOMIC theory has managed to create an artificial world in which the participants' preferences and the opportunities confronting participants are independent of each other, and prices tend toward an equilibrium that brings the two forces into balance. But in financial markets prices are not merely the passive reflection of independently given demand and supply; they also play an active role in shaping those preferences and opportunities. This reflexive interaction renders financial markets inherently unstable. Laissez-faire ideology denies the instability and opposes any form of government intervention aimed at preserving stability. History has shown that financial markets do break down, causing economic depression and social unrest. The breakdowns have led to the evolution of central banking and other forms of regulation. Laissez-faire ideologues like to argue that the breakdowns were caused by faulty regulations, not by unstable markets. There is some validity in their argument, because if our understanding is inherently imperfect, regulations are bound to be defective. But their argument rings hollow, because it fails to explain why the regulations were imposed in the first place. It sidesteps the issue by using a different argument, which goes like this: since regulations are faulty, unregulated markets are perfect.
SOCIAL DARWINISM
BY taking the conditions of supply and demand as given and declaring government intervention the ultimate evil, laissez-faire ideology has effectively banished income or wealth redistribution. I can agree that all attempts at redistribution interfere with the efficiency of the market, but it does not follow that no attempt should be made. The laissez-faire argument relies on the same tacit appeal to perfection as does communism. It claims that if redistribution causes inefficiencies and distortions, the problems can be solved by eliminating redistribution -- just as the Communists claimed that the duplication involved in competition is wasteful, and therefore we should have a centrally planned economy. But perfection is unattainable. Wealth does accumulate in the hands of its owners, and if there is no mechanism for redistribution, the inequities can become intolerable. "Money is like muck, not good except it be spread." Francis Bacon was a profound economist.
(Excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net...
Too bad he didn’t swing from some rope for collaborating with the Nazi’s back in the 1940’s !
Apparently they found out he was much more useful to them as a thief and a rat.
Hard to blame the Nazis for ‘not trying hard enough.’
I am sure the decision to spare young Gyorgy was considered a good one at the time.
bflr
BTTT!
Soros is all for redistribution, as long as a large cut flows toward him.
This bastard Sorry ass needs to be arrested. waterboard the scum bucket and he will tell all about Obummer. Than Obummer can be arrested and the American people can sponge America from this dark spot of dung from its history. To many Americans were suckered in by a con artist
You'd think the mossad would've already taken care of this.
Let’s all start the redistribution of wealth, it’s a grand idea................You first george. I guess the experiment in Chicago some years ago wasn’t enough to convince george that most of us evolved through the work ethic to have what little we have and that is why we are a little reluctant to redistrubute our hard earned pitance.
When you work for something, it’s much more precious than when it’s given to you.
Soros is a sick man.
By the way the experiment I mentioned eliminated the ghetto
in Chicago and built high rise apartments as replacements.
The high rises soon came to be known as vertical slums. These units were virtualy destroyed by the inhabitans, since they didn’t work to earn them they didn’t appreciate them. It seems to me that redistributon of wealth is a program heading in the same direction.
RE: “Soros is a sick man.”
********************
...not sick enough to suit me — I can’t wait for his demise! (Oh, was that mean?)
Face looks like Ted Kennedy’s.
IMF. UN are also pushing this agenda. We give massive amounts of money to them and they are demand more.
Diminishing our military advantage is part of the plan. Hillary may be on the list to continue the agenda if Obama is no longer effective. It seems like a group of global strategists with little concern for individuals .
The Tea party is a real threat to soros and globalists and probably the best road block with help of the Internet.
Except for his own wealth, that is...
“These units were virtually destroyed by the inhabitants, since they didn’t work to earn them they didn’t appreciate them. It seems to me that redistribution of wealth is a program heading in the same direction.”
That’s a great insight. As someone who became wealthy speculating in currencies (and convicted of insider trading), it’s understandable that Soros has a hard time recognizing any connection between wealth accumulation and creativity. To Soros, Thomas Edison or Henry Ford would seem like just two more rich crooks. And the inhabitants of those ghetto high rises would appear to be no different except for a deficiency in luck or brains. So why should George see anything wrong with rebuilding the rest of the world on the Chicago Ghetto model?
Thanks Starman417.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.