Discuss and talk about any general topic.
http://www.infowars.com/what-if-we-adop ... our-money/
Are there any countries where government is in charge of creating free money instead of banks?
Special Offer! FREE 6 Month Membership on ForeignWomen.com! Sign up here.
Find Your Foreign Sweetheart Now! Try our international Dating Sites and Overseas Romance Tours!
I suspect Cuban government prints their own money;
China , Vietnam have one party system (not much different from US btw) but I am not sure if banks run the show
Yes I've wondered about how much Rothschild/bankster ownership there is in various nations' central banks. For example, I think that when Armenia left the Soviet Union in the early 1990's, they struggled with nonconvertible currency for a while till some Rothschild-controlled entity, the World Bank I think, offered a few million dollars as startup capital for a central bank.
A few million dollars -- plus access to the world banking system, for currency conversion, bank wires, etc.
Don't know what percent ownership they received in return. Does the Armenian government own the rest, or do various Russian or Armenian oligarchs share it? Don't know.
There can't be much profit in owning a non-U.S. central bank, since they don't create fiat money the way the U.S. Fed does. Well, they do, but they are restricted by the need to maintain value against the dollar. The Fed is restricted by nothing really - only the phony limit of how much their bankster cronies want to borrow from them. ANyway, I guess there is some profit to the owners of non-U.S. central banks. But I suspect that the Rothschild fetish for controlling them all is much more about control, than about direct profit.
Re China I bet that their central bank is partly Rothschild owned. Just a hunch. Same with Vietnam and Cuba I bet.
"Well actually, she's not REALLY my daughter. But she does like to call me Daddy... at certain moments..."
An awful lot of economic problems would be solved if the US government simply gave $10,000 to every American. But don't create the money as debt, so it doesn't become part of the federal deficit and require fianance charges. What's wrong with the idea? The banksters will tell you that it would be inflationary, but I'll bet it wouldn't be. We've got an economy where tens of millions of people want to work more, and where retail is in a freefall, but nothing can go forward for lack of something called money. Something's wrong with this picture. Create the money, but don't create it as debt.
True, why not let people get paid when corporations use NASA patents we paid for, or when oil drilling occurs on public land, etc...
and stop outsourcing, all the good jobs are gone and only jobs that will be left are low paid service jobs such as cleaning, security, retail, army, etc
http://www.statisticbrain.com/outsourci ... y-country/
Total number of U.S. jobs outsourced in 2011
How come they never mention this things in debates? Coz both Republicans and Democrats are puppets of big corporations and banks
Moron Romney said it nicely
Without disputing your last sentence -- it was brought up in the second debate, and has been an issue for years, but is never addressed forthrightly. Romney offered some nonsense about making the US a more attractive place to do business, as if lowering corporate tax rates will compete with slave wages paid in China. He talked about putting pressure on China, but didn't provide the mechanism. Obama insinuated something about penalizing outsourcing directly, but didn't get too specific, IIRC. American pols communicate only in talking point platitudes, so they can never be pinned down on specifics and render less than perfect service to their corporate paymasters.
How exactly they gonna bring Apple and Nike back home when they pay worker in Asia 5-6 bucks for 12h shift whereas worker in the states for the same amount of work would be paid $200.
Bottom line is we can not compete in labor market with 3rd world countries, corporations like cheap labor, corporations are people as romney says.
We need some major changes in the world to have any chance, the way things are going we are all fckd!!
WW3 wouldnt be that bad for economy, in fact economy would blossom, many guys would lose their young lives meaning your chances of getting pink American p***y would increase dramaticly, if you survive of course or dont end up in wheelchair
so instead of happier abroad we would be banging home
Non-military, non-social-network, non-MSM jobs in manufacturing etc would give independence to engineers, owners, managers, workers with brains, skills, paychecks... Independence is bad... So keep only the things you'd want if you wanted an empire - an imperial fortress america, where anyone with a brain (IT) could only work in defense or for crown companies like microsoft et ... engineers the same... warrior type guys the same - corporate security, miitary, or starve...
Sometimes I'm slow but finally I arrive at the obvious... Outsourcing was not an accident.
To be fair, Romney actually did mention the mechanism. Tariffs. Said it twice, I think. It's just that he cringed a little as he said the word, couldn't bring himself to say it clearly. That's why you didn't notice him saying it. He muttered it, slurred it. He is muttering the word, because he knows damn well tha to actually implement significant, effective acroos-the-board tariffs is against the policy f the PTB. It's just a little policy-wonk chest-thumping.
The BRIC countries have had tariffs of 80 to 100%, 200% on some things, I believe. Not us, except on a few tough-minded little industries.
When America grew strong in the late nineteenth century we had tariffs acrooss the board of 50% I believe. Not the 3% type BS we have today. Why? well back then the robber baron families were making money off US manufacturing -- so I guess it was OK.
Tariffs are the answer.
X-boxes will cost double. But we will have jobs - and earn double.
Kind of a "Terminator"-type future. Skynet will provide for us if we serve SkyNet.
I guarantee you, there are folks in the Pentagon thinking this way. Well-meaning guys, with families.
Tariffs are the answer. Tariffs, Tenth Amendment, hand social programs to the states, hand parks to the states, eliminate income tax, "claw back" the Cartel's assets. We can be as socialist as we want, or as libertarian as we want, on a state level, and still thrive. But we have to starve this Federal Beast, and de-fang it.
Or else - as you suggest - it's going to be bad.
But I don't see what tariffs have to do with keeping American corps. from outsourcing jobs. Are the tariffs he proposes going to be on American companies manufacturing abroad, as well as foreign companies? The tariffs would have to be almost prohibitively high to offset the cheaper cost of labor abroad. I'm all for a bit of protectionism; I just don't know if it will bring back the defecting companies. And mainly what I'm hearing from Romney is more "trade agreements," which means the opposite of tariffs.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests