Government 'Seizure' of private pension assets : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

It is my understanding that there was law passed by the U.S. Govt. about three to five years ago which allows the government in times of crisis (the nature of the crisis was not specified) to assume control of all private pension assets. They would issue certificates for the value of those assets but would 'manage them'. I have not been able to get a copy of that legislation or confirm that it actually exists. Has anyone else read anything about this legislation and/or know how to get a copy of the legislation?

Dan Woods

-- Dan Woods (, January 05, 1998


Dan, Here is a copy/paste of the existing Executive Order. You could try starting a search here for further information. I have heard that also. >>

Order#10995 - Seizure of all communications media in the U.S. 10997 - Seizure of all electric power, fuels, and minerals, both public and private. 10998 - Seizure of all food supplies and resourses,public and private, all farms and farm equipment. 10999 - Seizure of all means of transportation,and total control over all highways, seaports,and waterways. 11000 - Seizure of all American people for federal work forces. 11001 - Seizure of all health, education,and welfare facilities both puplic and private. 11002 - Empowers the Postmaster General to register all men, women,and children in the U.S. 11003 - Seizure of all airports and aircraft. 11004 - Seizure of all housing and finance authorities,to establish forced relocation. Designates areas to be abandoned as "unsafe", establishes new locations for populations, relocates communities, builds new housing with public funds. 11005 - Seizure of all railroads, inland waterways and storage facilities, both public and private. 11051 - Provides the office of Emergency Planning, complete authorization to put the above orders into effect in times of increased international tension or economic or financial crisis. 12919 - Signed by Bill Clinton June 3, 1994. Encompasses ALL of the above orders!

-- observer (, January 06, 1998.

Dan, I'm not famliar with the details or the text of the various FEMA regulations, but I'm sure others will step in to provide some answers in that area. But keep in mind that new regulations could be imposed, even if there aren't any on the books already.

If one assumes that the government will operate in a "logical" fashion(!), then the extent of any pension-related restrictions would probably be directly correlated with the extent and severity of a Y2K crisis. Thus, if it's perceived as a "moderate" crisis, the government might simply impose a larger penalty for liquidating your IRA (i.e., greater than the current 10% penalty), or a longer waiting time before you can get your hands on your money. That would make sense if the objective was to slow down what would otherwise turn into a stampede/panic.

In terms of a semi-permanent "assumption of control," I believe that a good example was a similar action taken by the British government during World War II. At that time, of course, the government could justifably argue that the country was fighting for its survival; it would be interesting to see whether a similar argument would be made for Y2K

-- Ed Yourdon (, January 10, 1998.

Click here for Executive Order 12919 Just hit the submit button when you get there.

The order gets its authority primarily from the Defense Production Act of 1950, apparently prepared in case of nuclear war. For all you people stockpiling barter goods because you're worried the government will make gold ownership illegal again, be aware that this act allows the President to declare any resource to be strategic and illegal to hoard.

-- Dennis Peterson (, January 15, 1998.

Oops, don't hit submit, hit the link at the bottom, or click here.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, as ominous as this sounds, it may be the only way to keep people fed in a major disaster. Hopefully, like the WWII Brits, it will be temporary. I think it is most likely to be temporary, if we all take responsibility as citizens and pull together to get things running again, rather than taking to the hills.

-- Dennis Peterson (, January 15, 1998.

For those of you not fully aware of who REALLY controls our government, and what is planned for our country, may I suggest that you begin research on this topic by viewing the contents and videos offered at

-- Pam Small (, January 24, 1998.

Hm. It's an infrastructure kind of day ...

I think what most people are forgetting in all this is that governments can draw up all the resolutions they want to -- but it doesn't really matter.

I know it's hard to envision, but keep this in mind: governments operate the way they do because technology -- specifically computers -- gives them the ability to do so. If you suddenly take away their computers, governments become virtually powerless.

Think about it: could the Federal government nationalize and call in the National Guard if they can't even print the Guardsman's paychecks?

Could they adequately direct the operations of troop movements without computers? I don't mean could they do so fifty years ago -- obviously, they could. But largely, troop movements today are entirely dependant on computers. Take them away, and could a modern military function? Do the skills exist to do so "low-tech," or have they been lost?

Indeed, did "low-tech" skills ever exist for coordinating troops at a level any higher than World War I? Or the Civil War? Compare the level of troop movement at that time with today. Could one realistically coordinate World War II -- or better -- troop movements using the resources of World War I or earlier? Assuming, of course, that the skills to do so haven't been lost.

One of my assumptions is that as of 1-1-00, governments as we know them are gone. Your local town or county may continue to be relevant as may some state agencies. But governments as a whole will be gone.

What is absolutely guaranteed to happen at this point -- it's far, far too late for any government with which I'm familiar to prevent it -- is the collapse of the U.S. government and probably most of the states. They are the most succeptible organizations around. They are utterly and totally reliant on a high-tech infrastructure. Take away the infrastructure and they simply can't function.

Returning to less "high-tech" methods of governing isn't a viable option. Sure, there are some people in power now who remember how they used to do it. Bob Dole certainly remembers. But he hasn't had to for decades, and the existing infrastructure has no experience in governing "low-tech."

Governing "low-tech" also means giving up a tremendous amount of control (even assuming the skills to govern low-tech aren't lost and would have to be re-discovered). Let's face it: socialism as it is currently practiced is only possible because of computers. If you take them away, you'd need an army to maintain the same level of control. An army so huge and vast that you'd need a high-tech infrastructure just to run your army.

Let them legislate to their heart's content. American governments are already dead -- Stephen Horn knows it, I don't know why he keeps hanging around.

The axe is already starting to drop -- it's only an inch or so from the chicken's neck. No one can stop it -- it's too late! We're all watching the axe dropping. All that's left at this point is the final chop and then the chicken running around in its death throse.

It would be all fine and dany if the chicken weren't roughly eighteen feet tall and weighing a couple of tons. But then, I guess we shouldn't have grown such a big chicken in the first place.

-- "John Smith" (, April 21, 1998.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ