2020 US elections. What's the status of pindostan and their 2nd civil war?

elconquistador wrote:

calripson wrote:The American elite families that arose out of the industrial revolution and the building of railroads, steel, coal, and oil in the late 1800s were quite analogous in their time to the oligarchs of 1990s Russia. The Carnegies, Morgans, Rockefellers et al owed their success to their access to London based capital (America had very undeveloped and primitive capital markets at the time). Whoever had the deepest pockets won the race and they were forever indebted to their London banking buddies. It is no surprise that over a century later their foundations and their interests still align with those interests. That is the root of what people refer to as "Globalists" or a "New World Order".

At the root of what people consider the 'NWO' is the central banking system

The concept of a private central bank, owned by banking dynasties, that has governments by the balls through huge sums of debt.

A central bank that literally owns the money printers and decides on monetary policy (and in 2021 every other policy under the sun)

Let's just call the 'European' bankers by name for the sake of clarity. The Lehmanns, the Goldmann Sachs, the Kuhn-Loebs, the Rockefellers, the Lazards, the Warburgs, the Israel Moses Seifs..

.. and last but not least the Rothschilds.

kvs wrote:Fractional reserve banking requires interest as an anti-inflationary spring pulling the money back into the place where
it was created, the banks.   The value of fractional reserve banking is that the macroeconomic injection of money
can happen "naturally" through a market driven mechanism instead of a government printing press.  

At the macroeconomic scale there is no conservation of money.   The money supply must increase as the economy
grows.  This fact is completely missed by all the idiotic comparisons of the national level economy to mom and pop
corner stores which are purely microeconomic constructs.   Yeah, a corner store cannot grow its money in the bank
because it is not operating on the same principles as the macroeconomy.   If the money supply was fixed there would
be perpetual deflationary pressure and money would not be efficiently injected where it is needed.   Entities holding
large amounts of it would have to get some sort of incentive to spend most of their holdings.   But such entities
would have no reason to act like banks and could store large amounts of money where it never circulates.

Having banks lend money supplies it where it is needed.   For example, in short term operations of companies.
Companies cannot afford to wait for savings to accumulate to retool or spend money to respond to market
pressures.   Their routine borrowing is not part of the fake debt economics practiced by governments who
stimulate GDP by playing national debt accumulation games.   Without banks everything would require
accumulation of some finite supply of money units (gold, silver, fiat, chunks of salt, whatever).  Any physical
growth of the economy would drive competition for this relatively diminishing pool of currency.  That would actually
be a much worse regime than having to pay interest.

There is an argument to be made for interest rates as a cost of money in terms of resource allocation in microeconomics. (Not saying it is 100% correct or that alternatives do not exist). In any case, there is no reason for a cartel of private central banks. This was supposed to be a government function. In terms of the real world, what matters is the physical economy which is driven by human creativity - technology and innovation.

kvs wrote:It is quite a culture shock for Afrikaners to move to Russia.   Protestants of Dutch descent moving from a tropical/arid country
to an Orthodox country with long and harsh winters.    For some reason Protestants get triggered when they see Russian priests
wear extravagant Byzantine style robes.   I think they have formed a reactionary mindset based on their fight against Catholicism.
The Orthodox Church never sold indulgences.   Orthodox lavishness is traditionally not a sign of corruption but of devotion.
But I am not going to claim that today the fetish for being chauffeured in Maybachs is not the same as in Catholic Poland.

thegopnik wrote:I guess this is correct.

Remember Jeffrey Epstein owned these two paintings.

Remember Jeffrey Epstein owned these two men.


https://twitter.com/KirbySommers/status/1269566596718174213