Reply With Quote
Anyone catch this?
compare:
from 07-08, 40% of the world's wealth was retracted.
vs.
during the great depression: 33% of the currency was retracted.
The point: these depression events are engineered.
The guy cited ABA publications saying that if they were going to retain control and keep silver from slipping in, which the bankers had no control over, they were going to have to control the press and brainwash voters.
Which they used to defeat Bryan the Lion.
Anyone catch this?
compare:
from 07-08, 40% of the world's wealth was retracted.
vs.
during the great depression: 33% of the currency was retracted.
The point: these depression events are engineered.
Was it engineered, or enough people with money saw the writing on the wall, pulling out their money and putting it in safer investments?
I merely inverted your burden of proof. You said that liberals are more likely to commit crime because (you believe) that more liberals are in jail. As I pointed out, that is a non-sequitur, as obviously you can't assume that whites commit more crimes before there are more whites in jail.
Then you'll understand why I'm skeptical of your memory. You are a big skeptic yourself, aren't you? Don't you often say you want the facts?
Without proof, why should I believe you?
Why do you think that "voting liberal" has more to do with crime than lower living standards, hm?
I agree that it culture and wealth play much bigger roles than race. I was merely using an analogy. But your assertion that "being liberal" means one is more likely to commit crimes should probably be backed up by some sort of facts.
The film is well-worth watching.
Bottom line: Why have the currency in the hands of private banking interests, when the currency can be controlled by an actually federal agaency, hopefully to suit the needs of our nation rather than promote increased consumer leveraging for long periods of time and then come in and suck up assetts like a vacuum.
we are not talking about capital. we are talking about wealth...currency in circulation. That is what the film claims anyway.
Starts around 46:00 mark of the video.
Last edited by Parker2112; 10-13-2010 at 04:11 PM.
Heres the cite: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE52966Z20090310
Here is another:
Milton Friedman: The Federal Reserve definitely caused the Great Depression by contracting the amount of money in circulation by one-third from 1929 to 1933
- National Public Radio interview (Jan 1996)
Oh, I see...
You mean wealth on paper, not backed by anything tangible. Well you know what... That's why bubbles burst.
How could I spell it out for you any more than I have, WC? Its not the backing, its the control. By fluctuating the amount of currency, you can engineer recessions, AND bubbles.
But gold std actually allows MORE control of currency by the elite class.
Go-Go Cosmic Cowboy and his keen economic savvy!!!
OK, call me dense in this area.
Please explain how someone just makes wealth disappear.
Under the law, currency can be extrated from circulation. Im sure they just take money from banks and decommission it, or destroy it.
Ever wonder why we stopped seeing the old money at some point, and every bill had a big head on it? Same concept.
If you mean by pulling out money/wealth that doesn't really exist, then I agree. Like I said, on paper...
And how does this affect anyone who has real money already?
You already know what happens when a market seizes up due to lack of liquidity. You know what affect that has. economic recession or depression.
@Parker2112:
Is it your contention that the Panic of 2008 was the result of currency manipulation?
The film says that.
I havent been able to verify the global currency retraction they reference for 07-08...and I did briefly look.
So you're just throwing on the wall again. Thought so. See ya later.
A viable market exists just fine without liquidity. When business relies on borrowing, then there is something wrong.
OK I understand...
If I want you to believe me, I have to make a YouTube video.
OK.
From a single point of your choosing, you dismiss the whole thing? How very astute. bye now.
You admittedly know about economics.
I think the larger point is: when know-it-all types are confronted with major information which challenges the paradigm they fervently cling to, they may get scared and dismiss the whole thing rather than admit potential fallibility.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions