[–] AdelaisNjall 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Socialism and a Mixed-Race population what would you expect?

[–] 1Iron_Curtain [S] 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Yes, socialism that goes back to Peron, but was Peron was somewhat savvier and was able to retain the system. People were more frugal back then and tended to encourage their populations to work harder. Laziness and massive state debts caused by frivolous state spending projects damns a lot of Latin America.

Argentina was also supposed to be an important venue for our own capital flow/export economy during the Argentina Junta. Argentina instead got too caught up in their own Imperialistic games, with their attempt to seize the Falkland Islands and almost went to war with Chile at the same time(Pinochet held it off).

On paper, you would think Argentina would be doing better than a place than Brazil, but the fact is that unionism is far too strong in Argentina, there is not really much corporate innovation, but there is a big corporate sector, lots of capital flow, and a pretty healthy agricultural sector(this was probably badly damaged by one of the classic Latin American Land Reform(other word for land redistribution of very wealthy land owners to poor squat farmers; yes, that is right, Latin America has been experiencing economic and racial caste genocide for some time; probably in some countries starting only more recently and at latest the 50s).

The question is why Uruguay and even Brazil even better off than Argentina economically(Uruguay is socialist and Brazil is to a certain extent too).

Obviously, they have a potent and pure white(larger recent immigrant class) that powers their economies. Chile is one of those few instances where a nation has been predominantly Mestizo and has been an economic success on the world stage. That is testament to Augusto Pinochet surrounding himself with brilliant members of the Chicago School of Economics and because Pinochet took the approach of favoring the rich over the poor unlike in other parts of Latin America. Chile's upper crust is very European though(some claim 90%).

[–] Cooking_with_Alf 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

A fiat based central banking system is engineered to collapse. The blueprint is fraud. I don't think the banksters thought they would have a working system for longer than a decade or so. It almost collapsed entirely in 1933, but the Dems were on to something, borrow MORE!!! They offered up more human collateral in the form of Social Security, which was a new tax earmarked to infuse budgetary spending. So every time the debt gets so out of hand, the bar gets raised and more taxes get levied as credit to borrow more. It will eventually snowball and rapidly crash down, but that's attributed to inflation, which is subjective.

[–] 1Iron_Curtain [S] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Its generally bad, because it holds the base core of the economy to the government, but some have seen it as a necessarily evil and even an overwhelmingly necessary thing. The central banking system should just not have any connection with the people producing the cash flow and setting interest rates(Federal Reserve). Ensuring that the Central Banking system remains in the power of regional and state leaders also would help.

Andrew Jackson's turn against the Central Bank had a point, but was more destructive than constructive. Who is going to hold the population and corporations accountable when it comes to taxes? Who is going to lend credit to booming businesses and ensure they maximize their growth but to not to such an extent where they become a monopoly, who is going to hold the government accountable for overspending(not the Federal Reserve).

Its open to abuses, which is why only Congress should have wielded influence over it and not the Senate or Executive powers. Also, the central banks need to be accountable to a conglomerate of private banks that have some influence over them and which are they are dependent on for their fiscal actions and policies. Its all about decentralization and not just overthrowing a system, because it is badly abused.

Yeah, I do agree that the emphasis on creating those security nets become excuses for reckless spending and don't encourage people to save(because the government already is doing it for you). In the aggregate the population loses out when they are taxed to supply for others. Its something that major corporations should be willing to pay out, if its allowed to exist at all.

A lot of people just can get on social security without having done much too which creates problem. Its welfare for older people. That is the thing about current debt and the general securities issue, if the government can spend enough into their own security nests they can feel they can create a backup for the dollar and ensure long-term success in general, but in reality they are just undermining the value of the dollar by just allowing all that spending on frivolous and economically non-beneficial programs just sit in some dead end. Its one of the ways China is going to corner our currency market.

The Federal Reserve essentially tries to cover for these guys and also usually the end result is the government tries to offset it by expanding and bloating corporatism, getting other foreign countries to invest in their economy/depending more on imports, and of course invest in precious and inelastic commodities, like oil.

Its no coincidence that a lot of the major Pork Stimulus programs happened during Bush's tenure. It goes after the symptoms, but does not take care of the core of the problem and actually feeds into it in a way, but then the general excuse of that is well we live in a globalist world, so the security net and value of the dollar will hold with our connection to foreign economies, when in fact it makes us more vulnerable to devaluation of things like the dollar.

Debt is huge at creating this issue and creating the systems that encourage worse taxes. The taxes we have now are going to be nowhere as bad as they will be in the future given the trends we have seen and if a liberal got into power we could probably be experiencing some massive issues on the Stock Exchange.

[–] Cooking_with_Alf 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Firstly, Congress is the only entity allowed to coin money in this country. That means we the people create wealth, whatever that may be. It's gone from land, to silver, to gold, to private entities waving a magic wand. It was agreed that private banks could not be trusted to create wealth, because banks have a tendency to create wealth for themselves and defraud their customers.

There was a major banking crisis in Europe just before the American revolution, and it happened because banks were creating more credit than they had actually money for. The founders came up with a great idea that the people should decide what works for them and gave that power to Congress. Congress then got caught up in war debts and needed private banks, but the first national charter only allowed for increased deficit spending, and it was vastly unpopular in the US, so Congress let that charter die.

Then second central banking charter came up, once again, to pay for war debts. This was also unpopular because of runaway deficit spending and corruption in government and finance. That's where our boy Andrew Jackson steps up and kills the banks.

The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 came out of left field. It was brokered in secret and ramrodded through Congress and penned by Woodrow Wilson with a knife to his throat. He later apologized in his Presidential exit speech for selling us out to the banks. Once again, runaway spending, a major war, and a great depression, one that this stupid banking system was supposed to help prevent.

Even with all the constant wars, over spending, and more and more taxes, nobody credible in the media or government office, save Ron Paul, talks about killing that corrupt cesspool you feel we need to reign in just a tad.

The Federal Reserve does NOT have a good track record. It only took 20 years since its inception to nearly tank the United States. The only thing keeping our currency system afloat right now is the petro-dollar. It's why we are so eager to fight wars and force people to use our banking systems and take our dollars for goods. The moment the world loses faith in the dollar, is the moment America fights world war 3 to make everyone keep it.

In essence, central banking is corrupt, and is the root of almost all major military conflicts for the last 300 years. Fuck the economy, I'd rather not see my kids march off and die for banks. We can't even audit the Fed, so kill it.

[–] goatboy 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Only if you accept that the debt is real. The debt was created on paper. It exists only on paper. The debt holder has no more claim to that debt than you or I except she is a better con woman than you or me.

If we kill her, and claim that debt paid by her life, then the national or global debt is paid.

If she has successfully neutralized our NBC deterrent, which seems to be the case with Uranium1 and the Trump distraction and she attempts to sacrifice us to call in the debt, then global pandemic creation capabilities are delivered to all people everywhere, to kill all people everywhere and she will die in the ensuing extinction event. The crux of a debt based system is a system that is capable and willing of killing every man, woman, and child on Earth in order to target the debt holders. Up to now, conditions did not exist that would allow for such an extinction event of the species to target the debt holders, but now such conditions do exist.

She is a parasite and needs a host. The host of the human population is about to go extinct in order to target HER.

[–] 1Iron_Curtain [S] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

That was all pretty well said. Debt almost becomes a form of "junk information" too and is sort of like black matter. Once you hit a certain point and you dump enough "securities" into the system it becomes hard to tell and based off what I just said and having China buy up your debt you essentially have a situation where debt becomes irrelevant as long as you can keep the stimulus packages getting injected into the middle and having the population consume more and more.

Its a ravenous cycle that you can push to the dark end, but it ends up finding its way in when you start killing off certain parts of your economy and allow other countries, like China, to dump their economy on yours or start buying up your capital enterprises. They know they can keep things going as long as the value of the dollar remains high, but if there is a situation where you get a massive spike in interest rates on certain things of a variable price range, yet inelastic value(real estate, cars, and the food market taken in the aggregate and only in a certain context) heightened taxes on corporations and individuals, and most importantly depending on foreign investment(dead capital that just gets thrown out by some third-world leadership) and foreign imports(maximizing profits for foreign countries, like China) you will see the dollar devaluing eventually.

This is sort of what the Bernie, Ocasio-Cortez, and Moore crowd push for without realizing it. They are so big about their conspiracies that Wall Street makes money off money, that they can't look at the federal government, and then they will start bearing(no pun intended) on corporations and taxing them to death which would be the death knell of the host in some ways. They will just restructure the economy around "spreading the wealth" around to the public and essentially nothing will be gotten out of it and that is essentially we start to turn down the road of something like a Venezuela.

The only thing saving them is technologies and a corporatism that has worked down to the small-scale level or essentially holds a "shared-monopoly" over things(the fast food Restaurant chains and malls). They believe maximizing consumer spending along will keep the economy going, but they will have to become more dependent on foreign goods and corporations, and when everyone realizes they do not have the purchasing power to consume its when things are reversed and we end up collapsing big time, especially with maximizing the income tax and start driving up inflation by lifting the ceiling on minimum wages.

Its pretty much economics 101 and these people like to violate it for the sake of some utopian ideologically based vision. You also have people who have blood money attached to killing off certain people that would get in the way of holding back the dam from breaking with the massive accumulation of debt, like what is happening with Assad in Syria who is standing up against the oil conglomerates who would like nothing better than to develop oil in the Golan Heights and Kurdish regions of Syria. Its sort of not the point, because I think the whole petrodollar is essentially a non-sequitur and ends up being a fatalistic fall back. We know we are doomed, but at least its better to be the economic fiefs of the Saudis and now the Israelis.

Argentina could last longer because even they depend on other countries, they keep their own businesses and corporations nationalized and don't let foreign figures yield an exorbitant amount of capital gain to foreign countries, because the speculative aspect of the market puts Argentina at sort of a more peripheral level of importance in the global economy and the expectations for the Argentinian market are as not big, and finally they probably get certain fixed lower rates on certain goods, such as certain types of food and certain types of cars being shipped into their economy(I don't know about this one, but would figure it is the case and it does not mean de-diversify your economy, but it shows the fraud that is the global economy and free trade). This does not mean the government can't spend the living day lights out of things or people are not taxed high in proportion to their income, but generally speaking they can still make it by and keep a small minority of people fat and happy.

I suppose considering your logic and the content that you presented in your post it would make sense that the best way to really relieve the debt in the future America is to start killing off certain parts of the population through starvation, some sort of asymmetrical targeting of certain peoples, or some biological agent being injected into certain parts of the population.

They would probably go after the people who have the least debt and most money to spend since it would allow them to justify and sit on their debt(something they would prefer to do, because for instance, using an analogy, why do you want to be around morally healthy people who delegitimize your lifestyle).

I think at an extreme level we could see this happen against corporations(the first will probably be the corporations, ironically enough) and people in Wall Street, and then these will be consolidated by the government.