Primary sources Raising Our Voices A True Narrative of the Rise, Progresse, and Cessation of the Late Rebellion in Virginia, Most Humbly and Impartially Reported by His Majestyes Commissioners Appointed to Enquire into the Affaires of the Said Colony (1677) Proclamation of the New Hampshire Legislature on the Mast Tree Riot (1734) Letter Written by William Shirley to the Lords of Trade about the Knowles Riot (1747) Thomas Hutchinson Recounts the Reaction to the Stamp Act in Boston (1765) Samuel Drowne's Testimony on the Boston Massacre (1770) George Hewes Recalls the Boston Tea Party (1834) Joseph Clarke's Letter about the Rebellion in Springfield (1774) New York Mechanics Declaration of Independence (1776) Common Sense by Thomas Paine (1776) A Narrative of Some of the Adventures, Dangers and Sufferings of a Revolutionary Soldier by Joseph Plumb Martin (1830) Letter to George Washington by Henry Knox (1786) Letter to Jefferson by Benjamin Banneker (1791) An Eyewitness Account of the Flour Riot in New York (1837)
The Mechanics of Fractional Reserve Banking (1/6) The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the people versus the banks. — Lord Acton Ryan published Frackin’ Reserve!, a fractional reserve banking simulator (desktop version here, web version here), with the promise to follow-up with another article explaining it. Part 1 explains the basic mechanics of fractional reserve banking in very simple terms with examples. Part 2 answers “What is Money?” Part 3 illustrates how and why fractional reserve banking is fraudulent. Part 4 shows how the system can fall apart, and two attacks that the banksters can use to steal wealth from people. Part 5 examines usury and compound interest as forms of invisible slavery. Part 6 is a quick summary with links to other resources. Each part builds on the previous, so it is strongly recommended to read through in order. The 3 Factors in Fractional Reserve Banking So the basic mathematics of the system are extremely simple. But it doesn’t stop there. Sources :
Nine Myths About Socialism in the United States Glenn Beck and other far right multi-millionaires are claiming that the US is hot on the path towards socialism. Part of their claim is that the US is much more generous and supportive of our working and poor people than other countries. People may wish it was so, but it is not. As Senator Patrick Moynihan used to say "Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. The fact is that the US is not really all that generous to our working and poor people compared to other countries. Consider the US in comparison to the rest of the 30 countries that join the US in making up the OECD -- the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. When you look at how the US compares to these 30 countries, the hot air myths about the US government going all out towards socialism sort of disappear into thin air. Myth #1. There is a class war going on all right. Myth #2. Infant mortality in the US is 4th worst among OECD countries -- better only than Mexico, Turkey and the Slovak Republic. Myth #3.
Law, War, and the History of Time Mary L. Dudziak, University of Southern California Law School Abstract Assumptions about time are an aspect of the basic architecture of our thinking about law and war. The paper turns to World War II, which is thought of as a traditional war, with clear temporal limits. The difficulty in confining World War II in time is an illustration of a broader feature of the twentieth century: wartimes bleed into each other, and it is hard to find peace on the twentieth century American timeline. The paper is part of a larger project that places war at the center of 20th century U.S. law and politics, rather than viewing war as something that had an episodic impact. Suggested Citation Mary L. Footnote.com - The place for original historical documents onlin UH - Digital History
INSANE Graphic Shows How Ludicrously Complicated Social Media Marketing Is Now Malpractice: Savings Reconsidered | FactCheck.org Summary In 2004 we accused President Bush of using "dubious statistics" to support his claim that limiting malpractice awards to injured patients could save the economy between $60 billion and $108 billion per year. Ever since, we’ve said most independent research indicated little if any savings from limiting malpractice liability, and just a few weeks ago we quoted the Congressional Budget Office as saying that only negligible savings could be expected. Now CBO has revised its opinion, based on new evidence. Citing recent studies, including two new economic papers published only last month, CBO concludes that limiting malpractice liability would reduce total national health care spending by about one-half of 1 percent, or about $11 billion this year. That would save taxpayers about $41 billion over the next decade in lower Medicare, Medicaid and other federal spending for health care. Analysis Rep. But CBO continued to study the question. Tax and Save Health Effects? –by Brooks Jackson