Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : How Quickly Can Obama Totally Destroy the US? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Qualified Opinion who wrote (11752)	7/11/2014 7:33:19 PM
From: joseffy	Respond to of 16547

Keep the EPA's Hands off Your Wages .......................................................................................... Freedom Works ^ \| July 11 2014 \| Logan Albright The Environmental Protection Agency, apparently not content with the obscene amount of power it already possesses, has announced a new rule that further distances itself from the traditional checks and balances in government. The rule would give the agency the power to garnish the wages of private citizens, without a court order, if it is deemed that a violation of the EPA’s Byzantine environmental regulations has taken place. It’s the same power the IRS has when dealing with tax evasion, with the key difference that environmental regulations are not laws passed by Congress, and most people have no idea what these rules actually comprise. After imposing a fine for a violation, which can total hundreds of thousands of dollars per day, the EPA claims the right to unilaterally seize up to 15% of a person’s wages without any due process of law. Until now, people have been able to contest rule violations in court before having to submit to fines. The new rule will place the burden of proof on the accused, who is punished as if guilty until he can demonstrate otherwise. There has always been a concerning lack of accountability in regulatory agencies. Now, the EPA wants to circumvent the courts and just do whatever it wants. It has assumed the role, not only of lawmaker, but of law enforcement as well. It is wrong for one agency, run by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats, to both make the rules, determine punishments, and carry out those punishments without any check from the other branches of government. Several Republican senators, including David Vitter (R-LA), have penned a letter opposing the rule asking that it be withdrawn, and citing the case of a woman who was fined $37,500 per day because rain water running across her property had come in contact with dust, feathers, and manure. These type of fines do not just affect big corporations, but individual farmers who lack the resources to comply with such outrageous demands. You can read the full text of the rule here. The period for public comment is open until August 1st, and the EPA has indicated that, with enough public opposition, they may reconsider the rule. We need every American to push back against these intrusive regulations that allow government bureaucrats to take your money without court approval. Do your part to stop the EPA’s regulatory overreach now. Click the button below to leave a comment and tell regulators that you won’t submit to having your wages garnished without a court order. We have until August 1st to stop this unjust power grab.

To: Qualified Opinion who wrote (11752)	7/11/2014 7:35:15 PM
From: joseffy	Respond to of 16547

Ex-teller admits stealing $2M from Illinois bank Fox 2 St. Louis ^ \| 7-11-2014 A central Illinois woman has pleaded guilty to embezzling nearly $2 million from the bank where she worked as head teller. Sixty-two-year-old Nancy J. Huskins of Lincoln pleaded guilty Thursday to one count of bank embezzlement in federal court in Springfield. Huskins worked at the State Bank of Lincoln from 1996 until November of last year. According to a news release from the U.S. Attorney’s Office, she concealed the theft by manipulating audits. Huskins faces up to 30 years in prison and could be ordered to pay full restitution. (Excerpt) Read more at fox2now.com ...