World Bank enslaves the world

Anything that doesn't fit anywhere else below.

Moderators: Calilasseia, DarthHelmet86, Onyx8

World Bank enslaves the world

#1  Postby Firestarter » Dec 12, 2016 3:07 pm

I started this story by investigating the effects of Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs), and the way they keep the third world enslaved. The first version was written in Dutch.
I took a lot of time to investigate the arbitration of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) of the World Bank (from a legal perspective). This gives companies the possibility to “sue” states, so they can get damaged compensated if (democratically elected) parliaments make laws, that they don’t like. This is the corner stone of modern day colonialism. I even added some historical information.

RESERVE REQUIREMENTS BANKS
American banks only have to back up investments (or loans) with a cash reserve ratio of 10%. This means with an American savings account for 10,000 dollar, the banks can invest an additional 90,000 dollar. In the European Union the reserve requirement is even lower with 1%, so European financial institutions can even invest 990,000 for 10,000 dollar. Great Britain has a 0% cash reserve ratio (so British banks can invest without limit).
On the other hand: Brazil has a reserve requirement of 45%, so with 10,000 dollar Brazilian banks can invest “only”12,222 dollar. In 1978 Turkey had a reserve requirement of 62.7%, so with 10,000 dollar it could only invest 5,949 dollar.

EXPLOITATION OF THE THIRD WORLD
The colonial forces still decide how the colonies are exploited, under the guise of international law.
A nice example is the protective measures by the European Union. With tax money the European industry is supported, so that the third world cannot compete with the EU. The EU lets the third world pay with import duties so the third world has to pay to export to the Euro zone. Here’s a description of how the EU uses protective measures against the third world: https://www.tcd.ie/iiis/policycoherence ... asures.php
As a logical result these third world "banana republics" get financial problems, so need to borrow money from the World Bank and IMF to be able to make end meet, for which in return they do exactly what they are told. So their countries can be plundered even better.
One of the best tricks are trade agreements between countries, at the discretion of the white judges. From 1959 on, BITs became ever more popular; in the early years these BITs were based on the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) of 1947. In 1995 came the next big development in BITs with the General Agreement on Tariffs in Services (GATS), for investments in services. In March 2001, the WTO would design a system to replace democracy with article VIA of General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). The GATS Disputes Panel decides if a law is “more burdensome than necessary”, in which case the WTO can simply set it aside.
From the end of the 1980s on there was some kind of explosion in BITs; no longer only between developed and developing countries, but also among and between developed countries, to exclude developing countries. Developing countries got forced to agree on BITs, because without it they couldn’t export, while foreign investors take all the money.
For the history of international treaties for investment see the story of Vandevelde from 2005: http://jilp.law.ucdavis.edu/issues/volume-12-1/van5.pdf
In the following story Anghie names exploitation of developing countries under the guise of international law "positivism": http://law.wisc.edu/gls/documents/tony_ ... ialism.pdf
As long as there are crises, the large investors earn extra money. Any idea who cause the crises?

WTO, TABD, TRIPS
Before transitory heads of state (like presidents) meet at the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Transatlantic Business Dialogue (TABD) provides them with the details of their agenda. TABD pairs influential politicians to powerful CEOs. The corporate directors give the politicians a grade on “the scorecard”. In this way big corporations rule over politrics.
One TABD proposal would reverse the $5 billion judgment against Exxon for the Exxon Valdez oil spill. TABD’s Products Liability Group that, under the guise of eliminating “non-tariff” trade barriers, takes aim at American citizens’ right to sue corporations.
The WTO’s penal system to keep the colonies in slavery is the Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). The USA unilaterally exempts itself from TRIPS, so US retailers can still import cheap drugs. The WTO requires, on penalty of sanctions, that every nation pass laws granting patents on genetically modified seeds and drugs. When Thailand tried to register traditional medicines as intellectual property, the US Trade Representative wrote that this would “hamper medical research”, so Thailand got nothing.
Goldman Sachs chaired TABD when Peter Sutherland was president of WTO, and Sutherland went to Goldman Sachs after he left WTO.

TTIP/ISDS
Here’s a short list of the consequences TTIP would have on the world economy: http://www.degrowth.de/en/2014/08/ttip- ... d-be-aware
Here a longer story about the ISDS arbitration: http://corporateeurope.org/2012/11/chap ... troduction
If the EU and the USA sign the TTIP, other areas are excluded and forced to agree on BITs, so the colonial forces can continue to plunder them. According to the following report -the economy of South America would decreases with 1.5 to 5.6% and of Africa with 1.2 to 4% as a result of TTIP: http://www.bfna.org/sites/default/files ... 202013.pdf
Based on the arbitration of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) multinationals can sue countries if they think their investments yield too little in return. The effect is that when countries take protective measures for environment, health, workers' rights or human rights, they can be sued by multinationals. If subsidies are granted or if subsidies are dropped, countries can be sued. As far as democratically elected parliaments have something to say, this is even further limited by the ISDS. It is the World Bank that decides on these disputes, in other words: by the ISDS arbitrations, the bankers (the biggest investors) become even more powerful at the expense of the taxpayer.
First the legal team of an investor looks for the most advantageous Treaty and arbitral tribunal for the claims that they were disadvantaged by a country. The ISDS disputes are judged by 3 arbitrators, of which both parties choose 1 arbitrator, who together choose the President of the arbitration tribunal. In order to give the arbitrators the leverage to judge arbitrarily, many treaties are rather vague. 69% of the arbitrators come from North America or Western Europe.
The most indicted country among ISDS is Argentina for hundreds of millions to billions, for the measures it took in 2001, the crisis in Greece was directed by the IMF and the World Bank and Greece was also indicted repeatedly. Most lawyers involved claim an hourly rate of over 500 dollars.
The next quote makes clear how independent the ISDS arbitration is, from a lawyer that bragged:
"I've got a case right now in front of [a leading international arbitrator]. Every time I go to a conference, he's there. We read each other's books. My opponent on the case ... well, he hasn't got a clue [...]. Between all the partners in our group [...] we've appeared before every single arbitrator worth knowing. Not just once, but multiple times in the past few years and we have the inside knowledge as a result of that".
To ensure that the people do not know what is going on: both the ISDS provisions and TTIP negotiations are done in secret.

THE COLONIAL WORLD BANK
It is the Board of Governors, in which all 189 countries represented, that makes the decisions in the World Bank. The catch is that these countries have a voting power based on their economic status. This means that countries that became rich by plundering the colonies now reward themselves with extra voting power.
The voting ratio depends on the matter concerned: 1) International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBPRD), 2) International Development Association (IDA), 3) International Finance Corporation (IFC) and 4) Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA). I have made a sum of the total voting power for 11 Western European countries with the USA, Canada and Australia. This shows that these 14 countries (with less than 15% of the world's population) have 56% of the voting power on whole. On MIGA these 14 countries account for a whopping 88% of the voting power. Also striking is that the English speaking USA, GB, Canada and Australia - together account for 36% of the total and 69% for MIGA.

KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS
I am of course very proud that my home country the Netherlands not only had a starring role in the slave trade, but in 2014 came first in the whole wide world in claims for the ISDS. Theoretically, a company only has to open a mailbox to use Dutch tax law and BITs.
The following advertisement of my favourite law firm De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek, shows that the Netherlands is an ideal country to evade taxes and sue countries based on the many beneficial BITs for the rich and corrupt: http://www.debrauw.com/wp-content/uploads/NEWS%20-%20PUBLICATIONS/Artikel-OGFJ-Geuze-Rebergen-.pdf
Venezuela was also indicted from the Netherlands by oil companies ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips: http://longreads.oneworld.nl/en/western ... e-of-isds/

LUXLEAKS
In the Luxembourg Leaks (LuxLeaks) financial scandal confidential information from PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) was made available in 2012 and November 2014 that showed that tax schemes for multinationals in Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Ireland were used to avoid paying taxes. The confidential documents are available on the website of ICIJ: https://www.icij.org/project/luxembourg ... s-database
The European Commission decided that the tax deduction schemes for Fiat Finance from Luxembourg and Starbucks from the Netherlands are illegal state aid (even my former employer ABN AMRO bank was involved).
Since then the whistleblowers in LuxLeaks have been accused in a trial by PwC. Antoine Deltour, Raphael Halet (both whistleblowers from PwC), Edouard Perrin (a French journalist) and The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ: coordinated the release of this information) have to defend themselves in this court case.
Unfortunately the LuxLeaks scandal didn’t get much attention from the state media. This is the best story I’ve read on this scandal: http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/3076 ... ng-charged

VENEZUELA
Venezuela, one of the largest oil exporters in the world, for many years has been a country that exports more than it imports for (which should have made this country wealthy). In Venezuelathere is both a shortage of products in the supermarkets and power cuts: http://www.infowars.com/scenes-from-the ... -for-food/
After Hugo Chávez in 1999 seized power in Venezuela he nationalized the oil industry, because it would be unfair if oil was running out of Venezuela without benefit for the population. In May 2007, he closed the door on the IMF and World Bank. In 2009, Chávez had to beg for a loan from the IMF, which obligated him to devalue the Venezuelan bolivar (causing inflation).
Chávez died in March 2013 and was probably killed by the CIA: http://www.pravdareport.com/opinion/col ... ez_eath-0/
If Chávez was murdered, he didn´t have cancer, but was poisoned and the Cuban doctors, that gave him radiation, chemotherapy and surgery no less than 4 times, were complicit to murder. Eva Golinger suspects a bodyguard of Chávez, Salazar, who after his death was granted asylum and federal protection in the USA:http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/03/14/murder-chavez-cia-and-dea-cover-their-tracks.html
In 2013NicolásMadurowas helped to the presidency. Maduro effectively hampers the industry so that it produces less and less, then sells the imported goods so cheap that these are exported (back) abroad at a profit, so hyperinflation broke out: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/featur ... 36920.html
The next masterful stroke of Maduro: selling oil and gold reserves. I would say that if Venezuela exports oil, it should be as rich as Saudi Arabia. Selling the gold (e.g. to Citibank and Goldman Sachs) means that Venezuela becomes poorer and poorer: http://money.cnn.com/2015/10/29/news/ec ... index.html
Because the underpriced products are exported to other countries, the crisis can spread across South America.

ECUADOR, PANAMA – ROLDOS AGUILER AND TORIJOS
Ecuadorian President Jaime Roldos Aguiler and Panamanian President Omar Torrijos were also murdered in 1981.
On Aguiler death it’s known that the Panamanian police reported that his plane was brought down by a bomb, near Loja, but then the national government immediately labelled it an “accident”: https://www.cuencahighlife.com/ecuador- ... on-condor/
On Torijos’ murder there’s much more. Col. Roberto Diaz Herrera on June 8, 1987 stated (he was later arrested and wrote a book) “that Noriega had conspired with Lt. Gen. Wallace Nutting, the chief of the U.S. Army’s Southern Command, based in Panama, “and with the CIA, to plant a bomb aboard the aircraft in which [Noriega's predecessor, and Diaz's cousin] General Torrijos was killed when it crashed in the mountains in 1981″: https://www.facebook.com/TheBlackFliles ... 3134646312
Herrera also implicated Col. Alberto Purcell, who reportedly was paid $250,000 by the CIA. Colonel Manuel Noriega had been involved with the CIA since the late 1950s and was closely connected to George H.W. Bush, and was suddenly called a drug lord and dictator. In 1991 Noriega tried to defend himself in court with evidence that the US government was involved in the murder of Torijos and tried to assassinate Noriega himself: http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/1991-0 ... ega-panama

DESTROYING - ECUADOR, BOLIVIA, ARGENTINA, CHILE, BRAZIL
The rest of this post is based on Greg Palast’s The Best democracy money can buy (2002): http://www.chemtrails911.com/books/The% ... ast%20.pdf
The strategy to destroy economies is something like: take money out of circulation to crash the economy, then the big bankers buy the economy pennies for dollars, while in the meantime the country has been indebted, and has to do what the World Bank tells them.
In 1983 the IMF forced Ecuador’s government to borrow $1.5 billion to take over the private debts of Ecuador’s elite. In return Ecuador had to hike prices in electricity and other necessities, and eliminate 120,000 jobs. Then in 2000, 2001 to finish Ecuador off, it was ordered to: 1) raise the price of cooking gas with 80%, 2) eliminate 26,000 jobs, 3) cut wages with 50%, 4) transfer its biggest water system to foreign operators, 5) allow British Petroleum’s ARCO to build an oil pipeline.
In Bolivia some riots broke out, when Bolivians couldn’t get drinking water. To “help” Bolivia: Samuel Soria deposited $10 million on a Citibank account in New York, that never returned to Bolivia. Water prices, could rise with 150% under the new owner, International Waters Ltd (IWL) of London.
In 2001 Argentina got ordered to cut their government budget deficit from $5.3 billion to $4.1 billion. Taking 1.2 billion dollar out of the economy already in recession, did wonders: by the end of March 2001, Argentina’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) had already dropped with 2.1% compared a year earlier. Argentina had to reduce jobs, wages, and pensions. While the IMF offered an $8 billion aid package - Argentina had to pay $27 billion a year because of their debt of $128 billion (to the likes of Citibank). The French bought the water system and raised prices up to 400%. And Argentina got threatened with sanctions by the USA to liberalise the pharmaceuticals industry.
In 1973 General Pinochet took dictatorial control of Chile, and destroyed the economy. The CIA, since October 1970, had helped Pinochet to oust president Salvador Allende. US Ambassador to Chile, Edward Malcolm Korry explained that US companies used the CIA as an international collection agency. In 1973 Chile’s unemployment rate was 4.3%; by 1983, after 10 years of free market liberalisation, unemployment was at 22%, while wages had declined by 40%. In 1970 20% of Chile’s population lived in poverty, by 1990 – when dictator Pinochet left office - this number had doubled to 40%. In 1982 and 1983, the GDP dropped with 19%, and foreign companies bought 85% of Chile’s profitable industries.
The US State Department reported: “Chile is a casebook study in sound economic management”. The respected economist Milton Friedman called this “The Miracle of Chile”.
In 1998 —the World Bank, IMF, Inter-American Development Bank and the International Bank for Settlements — offered $41.5 billion credit to Brazil. The World Bank designed a “Master Plan for Brazil” to create a “flexible public sector workforce”: reduce Salary/Benefits; Pensions; Job Stability; Employment, and increase Work Hours. After the Brazilian real dropped with 40%: British Gas bought the Sao Paolo Gas Company, while Enron and Houston Industries bought the Rio and Sao Paolo electricity companies and a pipeline.

DEREGULATING ELECRICITY
In the 1970s British professor Dr. Stephen Littlechild invented a scheme to privatise British electricity utilities. In 1990 the England-Wales Power Pool, went into business.
From Atlanta headquarters, Southern’s executives learned they could charge in “deregulated” England double the price in Georgia. In 1995, Southern bought up England’s South Western Electricity Board. The cash rolled in and American companies grabbed the majority of the British electricity sector. Although (or because) the British consumers were terribly overcharged, the IMF and World Bank required deregulation of electricity if countries wanted assistance.
The USA had a regulatory system to keep tight lids on utility monopolies’ profits, with the result that Americans had about the lowest electricity prices in the world. In 1996 California tossed out this regulatory system. The parents of Palast saw their energy bill rise with a whopping 379% in the first year of deregulation. California’s electricity watchdog claims that electricity consumers were overcharged by $6.2 billion in 2001. After PG&E bankrupted California consumers had to pay off the speculators for some $35 billion.

GREAT BRITAIN – EVEN WORSE
Palast went undercover and got in touch with LLM and told them that he represented some wealthy American clients.
Derek Draper proudly boasted that LLM had given the US investment bank Salomon Brothers, a week advance knowledge, that the cap on total spending was 2.75% instead of the expected 2.5%. Salomon made a fortune.
PowerGen PLC wanted to buy a regional electricity company in violation of anti-monopoly regulations. Draper arranged a confidential meeting between a top adviser to Chancellor Brown with the chairman of PowerGen, Ed Wallis, which secured the PowerGen merger deal.
Roger Liddle is one of the important men in government, in charge of European affairs. Liddle told Palast that “Derek knows all the right people.” Liddle had been managing director at LLM, before he put his shares into a blind trust. Any new business Liddle gets Draper goes straight into his “blind” trust.
Here are some other deals in Britain Palast found out by going undercover: 1) Rupert Murdoch’s News International got valuable amendments to union recognition bills; 2) Tesco won exemption from a car park tax worth 20 million pounds per year; 3) Enron reversed a government plan to block new gas-fired power stations.
User avatar
Firestarter
Banned Spammer
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 40

Country: Netherlands
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: World Bank enslaves the world

#2  Postby newolder » Dec 12, 2016 3:17 pm

American banks only have to back up investments (or loans) with a cash reserve ratio of 10%. This means with an American savings account for 10,000 dollar, the banks can invest an additional 90,000 dollar.

For which we should be grateful that you are not running a bank, I guess.

US savings with a reserve of 10% means banks can lend out 90 cents on each dollar.
$10k savings lets them lend $9k not $90k. :doh:
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
User avatar
newolder
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 6765
Age: 9
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Re: World Bank enslaves the world

#3  Postby crank » Dec 12, 2016 3:51 pm

The reserve requirements have become almost a joke, there are numerous games played with the way the machines can move money so rapidly, they are basically kiting their asses off to evade, ignore reserve requirements.

'Free trade' treaties aren't about 'free' trade, really, little to do with trade. I doubt you'll get many who will read much of what you've collected here, impressive as it is, too many think the US, and the West in general, involves itself in fucking over much of the developing world, they can't perceive the facts no matter how well laid out they may be. Made easier by dismissing the sources as not worth reading, and with no justification other than bogus accusations.For example, with Snowden's leaks, and others, there was copious evidence the CIA/NSA is deeply involved in corporate/financial spookdom, it's really their main focus. If you really want to see how this works, just mention the name 'Chomsky', who has discussed probably all of the issues you've raised, and sit back and watch all of the inanity that will likely follow.
“When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat.”
-George Carlin, who died 2008. Ha, now we have human centipedes running the place
User avatar
crank
RS Donator
 
Name: Sick & Tired
Posts: 10362
Age: 4
Male

Country: 2nd miasma on the left
Pitcairn (pn)
Print view this post

Re: World Bank enslaves the world

#4  Postby Scot Dutchy » Dec 12, 2016 3:57 pm

More click bait. Should be banned.
Myths in islam Women and islam Musilm opinion polls


"Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet.” — Napoleon Bonaparte
User avatar
Scot Dutchy
 
Posts: 43070
Age: 70
Male

Country: Nederland
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: World Bank enslaves the world

#5  Postby Blackadder » Dec 12, 2016 10:20 pm

newolder wrote:
American banks only have to back up investments (or loans) with a cash reserve ratio of 10%. This means with an American savings account for 10,000 dollar, the banks can invest an additional 90,000 dollar.

For which we should be grateful that you are not running a bank, I guess.

US savings with a reserve of 10% means banks can lend out 90 cents on each dollar.
$10k savings lets them lend $9k not $90k. :doh:


Just on this point, a 10% fractional reserve DOES allow the banking system to lend up to 9 times the initial savings.

Let's say a new deposit of $10k is made at a bank. That bank can lend out another $9k, i.e. the initial depoist less a 10% reserve. If this were deposited in another bank, that bank could lend $8.1k (90% of $9k). If that $8.1k is deposited at a third bank, that can then be lent on again, less the 10% reserve. Continue this cycle ad infinitum.

Theoretically therefore, for every new deposit of $X, the banking system can create $X/y of new money, where y is the fractional reserve percentage. So $10,000 initially deposited becomes $10,000/0.10 = $100,000 of new money, i.e. $90,000 of new money created out of nothing. It's known as the money multiplier and is a well known phenomenon in economics.
That credulity should be gross in proportion to the ignorance of the mind that it enslaves, is in strict consistency with the principle of human nature. - Percy Bysshe Shelley
User avatar
Blackadder
RS Donator
 
Posts: 3686
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: World Bank enslaves the world

#6  Postby newolder » Dec 12, 2016 10:25 pm

Blackadder wrote:
newolder wrote:
American banks only have to back up investments (or loans) with a cash reserve ratio of 10%. This means with an American savings account for 10,000 dollar, the banks can invest an additional 90,000 dollar.

For which we should be grateful that you are not running a bank, I guess.

US savings with a reserve of 10% means banks can lend out 90 cents on each dollar.
$10k savings lets them lend $9k not $90k. :doh:


Just on this point, a 10% fractional reserve DOES allow the banking system to lend up to 9 times the initial savings.

Let's say a new deposit of $10k is made at a bank. If this were deposited in another bank, that bank could lend $8.1k (90% of $9k). If that $8.1k is deposited at a third bank, that can then be lent on again, less the 10% reserve. Continue this cycle ad infinitum.

Theoretically therefore, for every new deposit of $X, the banking system can create $X/y of new money, where y is the fractional reserve percentage. So $10,000 initially deposited becomes $10,000/0.10 = $100,000 of new money, i.e. $90,000 of new money created out of nothing. It's known as the money multiplier and is a well known phenomenon in economics.

:thumbup: Then it's a good job I'm not running a bank then.

Found this tho'
Unfortunately, the money multiplier model of banking is completely wrong. Professor Charles Goodhart of the London School of Economics and an advisor to the Bank of England for over 30 years described this model (in 1984) as “such an incomplete way of describing the process of the determination of the stock of money that it amounts to mis-instruction.” Why is this?

More @ source

It's beyond my Economics 'O' level. :dunno:
Last edited by newolder on Dec 12, 2016 10:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
User avatar
newolder
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 6765
Age: 9
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Re: World Bank enslaves the world

#7  Postby The_Metatron » Dec 12, 2016 10:38 pm

Blackadder wrote:
newolder wrote:
American banks only have to back up investments (or loans) with a cash reserve ratio of 10%. This means with an American savings account for 10,000 dollar, the banks can invest an additional 90,000 dollar.

For which we should be grateful that you are not running a bank, I guess.

US savings with a reserve of 10% means banks can lend out 90 cents on each dollar.
$10k savings lets them lend $9k not $90k. :doh:


Just on this point, a 10% fractional reserve DOES allow the banking system to lend up to 9 times the initial savings.

Let's say a new deposit of $10k is made at a bank. That bank can lend out another $9k, i.e. the initial depoist less a 10% reserve. If this were deposited in another bank, that bank could lend $8.1k (90% of $9k). If that $8.1k is deposited at a third bank, that can then be lent on again, less the 10% reserve. Continue this cycle ad infinitum.

Theoretically therefore, for every new deposit of $X, the banking system can create $X/y of new money, where y is the fractional reserve percentage. So $10,000 initially deposited becomes $10,000/0.10 = $100,000 of new money, i.e. $90,000 of new money created out of nothing. It's known as the money multiplier and is a well known phenomenon in economics.

Republican® economics?

If it's a bad thing, I'm all for blaming republicans.
I AM Skepdickus!

Check out Hack's blog, too. He writes good.
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 20678
Age: 56
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: World Bank enslaves the world

#8  Postby Blackadder » Dec 13, 2016 12:11 am

newolder wrote:
Blackadder wrote:
newolder wrote:
American banks only have to back up investments (or loans) with a cash reserve ratio of 10%. This means with an American savings account for 10,000 dollar, the banks can invest an additional 90,000 dollar.

For which we should be grateful that you are not running a bank, I guess.

US savings with a reserve of 10% means banks can lend out 90 cents on each dollar.
$10k savings lets them lend $9k not $90k. :doh:


Just on this point, a 10% fractional reserve DOES allow the banking system to lend up to 9 times the initial savings.

Let's say a new deposit of $10k is made at a bank. If this were deposited in another bank, that bank could lend $8.1k (90% of $9k). If that $8.1k is deposited at a third bank, that can then be lent on again, less the 10% reserve. Continue this cycle ad infinitum.

Theoretically therefore, for every new deposit of $X, the banking system can create $X/y of new money, where y is the fractional reserve percentage. So $10,000 initially deposited becomes $10,000/0.10 = $100,000 of new money, i.e. $90,000 of new money created out of nothing. It's known as the money multiplier and is a well known phenomenon in economics.

:thumbup: Then it's a good job I'm not running a bank then.

Found this tho'
Unfortunately, the money multiplier model of banking is completely wrong. Professor Charles Goodhart of the London School of Economics and an advisor to the Bank of England for over 30 years described this model (in 1984) as “such an incomplete way of describing the process of the determination of the stock of money that it amounts to mis-instruction.” Why is this?

More @ source

It's beyond my Economics 'O' level. :dunno:


Which is why I italicised the word 'theoretically'. In the old days, when banks mainly took deposits and mainly made loans, this model was a useful descriptor of money creation. In today's world, banks have access to all manner of financial instruments and so are rarely reliant on depositors for more than a tiny fraction of their funding.
That credulity should be gross in proportion to the ignorance of the mind that it enslaves, is in strict consistency with the principle of human nature. - Percy Bysshe Shelley
User avatar
Blackadder
RS Donator
 
Posts: 3686
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: World Bank enslaves the world

#9  Postby Nicko » Dec 13, 2016 8:29 am

The_Metatron wrote:Republican® economics?

If it's a bad thing, I'm all for blaming republicans.


Sadly for your policy, these sort of shenanigans seem to have bipartisan support.
"Democracy is asset insurance for the rich. Stop skimping on the payments."

-- Mark Blyth
User avatar
Nicko
 
Name: Nick Williams
Posts: 8638
Age: 43
Male

Country: Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: World Bank enslaves the world

#10  Postby newolder » Dec 13, 2016 9:31 am

Blackadder wrote:
newolder wrote:
Blackadder wrote:
newolder wrote:
For which we should be grateful that you are not running a bank, I guess.

US savings with a reserve of 10% means banks can lend out 90 cents on each dollar.
$10k savings lets them lend $9k not $90k. :doh:


Just on this point, a 10% fractional reserve DOES allow the banking system to lend up to 9 times the initial savings.

Let's say a new deposit of $10k is made at a bank. If this were deposited in another bank, that bank could lend $8.1k (90% of $9k). If that $8.1k is deposited at a third bank, that can then be lent on again, less the 10% reserve. Continue this cycle ad infinitum.

Theoretically therefore, for every new deposit of $X, the banking system can create $X/y of new money, where y is the fractional reserve percentage. So $10,000 initially deposited becomes $10,000/0.10 = $100,000 of new money, i.e. $90,000 of new money created out of nothing. It's known as the money multiplier and is a well known phenomenon in economics.

:thumbup: Then it's a good job I'm not running a bank then.

Found this tho'
Unfortunately, the money multiplier model of banking is completely wrong. Professor Charles Goodhart of the London School of Economics and an advisor to the Bank of England for over 30 years described this model (in 1984) as “such an incomplete way of describing the process of the determination of the stock of money that it amounts to mis-instruction.” Why is this?

More @ source

It's beyond my Economics 'O' level. :dunno:


Which is why I italicised the word 'theoretically'. In the old days, when banks mainly took deposits and mainly made loans, this model was a useful descriptor of money creation. In today's world, banks have access to all manner of financial instruments and so are rarely reliant on depositors for more than a tiny fraction of their funding.

It's safe to conclude then, that the OP either began with "mis-instruction" or was mis-instructed in its learning process.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
User avatar
newolder
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 6765
Age: 9
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Moldova

#11  Postby Firestarter » Dec 14, 2016 4:55 pm

Unfortunately Moldova doesn’t get much attention in the state media, but it is a text book example of destroying the economy by the banksters. Moldova is one of the former countries that came into existence when the Soviet Union fell apart.

STEALING 1 BILLION DOLLAR
The story is that the Israeli-born Ilan Shor used 3 banks in Moldova to steal $1 billion; compare this to its Gross Domestic Product of less than $8 billion. The conspirators first took control of the banks and then lent themselves nearly $1 billion, collateral-free. They transferred the money out of Moldova to banks in Latvia on accounts held by U.K.-based limited partnerships (shell companies); the money then mysteriously disappeared. Shor denied any involvement in the secret takeover and looting of these banks: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... m-moldova-
Let’s see if we can understand what happened. Three Moldovian banks created $1 billion worth of “money” out of thin air, that disappeared and now the Moldavian people – the poorest country in Europe – have to repay this “money”. They claim that the “loans” moved through a “complex web of transactions and that the records of many transactions were deleted from the banks’ computers”.
This is impossible. Computers of banks are designed so that nobody can remove transactions (not even the administrators). Furthermore this is impossible without the Moldovan Central Bank helping to arrange this crime (creating $1 billion in loans in a single action?!).
Ilan Shor and Vlad Filat (prime minister from 2009 to 2013) are serving years in prison for their involvement in the theft of National Bank reserves. Vladimir Plahotniuc was/is the leader of the Democratic party of Moldova and was also accused. Plahotniuc fled the country to Geneva (Switzerland). In July, August of this year Mihail Gofman was lobbying in Washington DC: http://archive.is/yHqPo
It looks like these 3 are scapegoats for the bankers...

DESTROYING MOLDOVA BY NATIONAL BANK
According to economic expert Gheorghe Costandachi the National Bank of Moldova (NBM) is intentionally destroying the economy. There are enormous quantities of liquidity in banks, but the NBM majors the mandatory reserve rates which will effectively make loans impossible. Such a strategy is pushing the economy to a grinding halt. The problems become even greater when Moldova also has to repay the disappeared $1 billion.
After the economy crashes the rich (foreign) investors (=bankers) can buy the economy pennies for dollars, while Moldova remains poor. The NBM governor could have stopped the robbery of $1 billion, but didn’t intervene. In Ukraine, the minimum wage is $240 a month, while Moldova lives impoverished at $85 in 2012 American dollars: http://jurnal.md/en/economic/2015/6/10/ ... f-moldova/

RIOTS IN MOLDOVA
The average yearly salary in Moldova is less than $2000 per year (that’s average, so the median is even lower). There’s inflation so the bills get higher, so people got angry and riots broke out. See this picture of September 2015.
Image

Neighbouring country Romania offered Moldova a $162.5 million loan package in October 2015. After the first $65 million tranche Romania blackmailed Moldova by saying that it will not get the second tranche unless Moldova “undertakes a real fight against corruption, implements reforms targeting the justice sector and signs a draft loan agreement with the IMF”. Basically this means they have to let IMF and World Bank finish Moldova off: http://www.ibtimes.com/moldova-economic ... es-2295822
Nearly 17% of the Moldovan population live below the poverty line. In response to the $1 billion bank fraud (by the Moldavan Central bank), the EU, International Monetary Fund and World Bank have frozen their financial assistance to Moldova. According to the US Embassy in Chișinău, protests highlight the frustration experienced by many Moldovans due to lack of reforms in their country. Yeah sure... these people cannot get food on their plate and they would worry about “reforms”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015%E2%8 ... in_Moldova

CLINTON AND SOROS CONTROL THE SITUATION
The Democratic party of Moldova have contracted the Podesta group (very close to the Clintons) for lobbying services in June 2016 for 600,000 dollars (of course it isn’t suspicious that this kind of money is paid for “lobbying”): http://www.moldova.org/en/democratic-pa ... -services/
It’s none other than the Soros Foundation of Rothschild agent George Soros that is monitoring the Legal system in Moldova: http://www.soros.md/en/event/2010-12-15
That’s the same George Soros that in late 1989 arranged with the Polish Prime Minister Mieczyslaw Rakowski and the leaders of Solidarnosc to bankrupt its industrial and agricultural enterprises, using astronomical interest rates, withholding state credits, and burdening firms with unpayable debts. After the economy of Poland crashed the economy could be bough dirt cheap. An example is the steel facility Huta Warsawa that was bought for $30 million, but was worth at least $3 billion.
In late 1991 Soros arranged a similar plan with the Yeltsin circle for Russia. It was Soros who introduced Jeffery Sachs and shock therapy (draconian cuts in state spending to an economy that totally depended on the state) into Russia. Since January 2, 1992, shock therapy was introduced with chaos and hyperinflation as a result: http://balder.org/judea/George-Soros-Th ... ngdahl.php

WORLD BANK TO FINISH THE JOB
The World Bank has been “helping” Moldova since 1999 and claims impressive progress because the poverty rate was reduced from 72% in 1999 to 22% in 2010 (remember: an average year salary of less than 2000 dollar).
An estimated 18,000 pregnant women cannot buy food and need food aid packages because of the increase in food prices in the summer of 2008. The Strengthening the Effectiveness of Social Safety Nets Project is “helping” over 50,000 poor households to receive “targeted” social assistance. In a country of 3.5 million that’s a very large impoverished percentage.
Apparently much progress has been made by “the use of ICT as a tool for improved public services, greater transparency and efficiency”. An automated social assistance information system has been developed for the Ministry of Labour, Social Protection and Family to maintain records of persons requiring social services. Read what this means: Moldovans cannot buy food to eat and now the World Bank has arranged that they all have computer files (Big Brother is watching them too!).
Where 50,000 are too poor to buy food the World Bank has rehabilitated over 40 primary healthcare centres. So the health care can guarantee the amount of poor people will reduce: http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/featur ... a-20-years

In this year’s Moldovan presidential election even a former World Bank economist - Maia Sandu – has tried to get elected. But it was Igor Dodon that won with a landslide: http://www.rferl.org/a/moldovana-face-c ... 12323.html


newolder wrote:
Blackadder wrote:
newolder wrote:
Blackadder wrote:

Just on this point, a 10% fractional reserve DOES allow the banking system to lend up to 9 times the initial savings.

Let's say a new deposit of $10k is made at a bank. If this were deposited in another bank, that bank could lend $8.1k (90% of $9k). If that $8.1k is deposited at a third bank, that can then be lent on again, less the 10% reserve. Continue this cycle ad infinitum.

Theoretically therefore, for every new deposit of $X, the banking system can create $X/y of new money, where y is the fractional reserve percentage. So $10,000 initially deposited becomes $10,000/0.10 = $100,000 of new money, i.e. $90,000 of new money created out of nothing. It's known as the money multiplier and is a well known phenomenon in economics.

:thumbup: Then it's a good job I'm not running a bank then.

Found this tho'
Unfortunately, the money multiplier model of banking is completely wrong. Professor Charles Goodhart of the London School of Economics and an advisor to the Bank of England for over 30 years described this model (in 1984) as “such an incomplete way of describing the process of the determination of the stock of money that it amounts to mis-instruction.” Why is this?

More @ source

It's beyond my Economics 'O' level. :dunno:


Which is why I italicised the word 'theoretically'. In the old days, when banks mainly took deposits and mainly made loans, this model was a useful descriptor of money creation. In today's world, banks have access to all manner of financial instruments and so are rarely reliant on depositors for more than a tiny fraction of their funding.

It's safe to conclude then, that the OP either began with "mis-instruction" or was mis-instructed in its learning process.
I'm sorry but I only followed the discussion until "Just on this point, a 10% fractional reserve DOES allow the banking system to lend up to 9 times the initial savings".
There used to be a time (very long ago) that only money with an intrinsic value could be used (like silver and gold coins). Then some banker (I believe the first was the Dutch Royal family) figured out that paper "money" could be printed if it was backed by (a percentage) in gold. Since the 1970s they even abandoned the "gold standard" (JFK once tried to print silver backed dollars by the way), so now paper money is nothing more than a piece of paper that the biggest criminals of all (banksters) force us to accept and then use this "money" to rig the whole economy.
User avatar
Firestarter
Banned Spammer
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 40

Country: Netherlands
Print view this post

Re: Moldova

#12  Postby The_Metatron » Dec 18, 2016 1:17 am

Firestarter wrote:...

There used to be a time (very long ago) that only money with an intrinsic value could be used (like silver and gold coins). Then some banker (I believe the first was the Dutch Royal family) figured out that paper "money" could be printed if it was backed by (a percentage) in gold. Since the 1970s they even abandoned the "gold standard" (JFK once tried to print silver backed dollars by the way), so now paper money is nothing more than a piece of paper that the biggest criminals of all (banksters) force us to accept and then use this "money" to rig the whole economy.

The Dutch royals? I thought it was the lizard people. No, wait. The Rothschilds. No, wait. The Rotchschilds are the lizard people.
I AM Skepdickus!

Check out Hack's blog, too. He writes good.
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 20678
Age: 56
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Moldova

#13  Postby Firestarter » Dec 18, 2016 1:43 pm

The_Metatron wrote:
Firestarter wrote:...

There used to be a time (very long ago) that only money with an intrinsic value could be used (like silver and gold coins). Then some banker (I believe the first was the Dutch Royal family) figured out that paper "money" could be printed if it was backed by (a percentage) in gold. Since the 1970s they even abandoned the "gold standard" (JFK once tried to print silver backed dollars by the way), so now paper money is nothing more than a piece of paper that the biggest criminals of all (banksters) force us to accept and then use this "money" to rig the whole economy.

The Dutch royals? I thought it was the lizard people. No, wait. The Rothschilds. No, wait. The Rotchschilds are the lizard people.
The conspiracy theories of BBC-operative David Icke are a bit light on evidence. Besides the theory of reptilians/ETs that are our rulers, there are Icke-followers that believe that the moon doesn't exist.

The Chinese were in fact the first to develop paper money in the 7th century, although the first "banknotes" were only printed in 960, but only started using it on a massive scale in the 11th century.
According to the "independent" Wikipedia the first "banknotes" by a European Central bank were printed in 1661 in Sweden, but that was shortlived (only until 1668). The first European Central bank to issue banknotes permanently was the Bank of England in 1695 to finance the War against France (that's were the Rothschild crime syndicate made their first big killing). The USA only started printing banknotes in 1862: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banknote

According to the same Wikipedia in 1609 the Amsterdamsche Wisselbank was founded that issued "bank money". These were technically the evidence for a deposit, but I don't see any essential difference with "banknotes" covered by gold in a safe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amsterdam_Wisselbank
User avatar
Firestarter
Banned Spammer
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 40

Country: Netherlands
Print view this post

Re: Moldova

#14  Postby Thomas Eshuis » Dec 18, 2016 1:52 pm

Firestarter wrote:
The_Metatron wrote:
Firestarter wrote:...

There used to be a time (very long ago) that only money with an intrinsic value could be used (like silver and gold coins). Then some banker (I believe the first was the Dutch Royal family) figured out that paper "money" could be printed if it was backed by (a percentage) in gold. Since the 1970s they even abandoned the "gold standard" (JFK once tried to print silver backed dollars by the way), so now paper money is nothing more than a piece of paper that the biggest criminals of all (banksters) force us to accept and then use this "money" to rig the whole economy.

The Dutch royals? I thought it was the lizard people. No, wait. The Rothschilds. No, wait. The Rotchschilds are the lizard people.
The conspiracy theories of BBC-operative David Icke are a bit light on evidence. Besides the theory of reptilians/ETs that are our rulers, there are Icke-followers that believe that the moon doesn't exist.

The Chinese were in fact the first to develop paper money in the 7th century, although the first "banknotes" were only printed in 960, but only started using it on a massive scale in the 11th century.
According to the "independent" Wikipedia the first "banknotes" by a European Central bank were printed in 1661 in Sweden, but that was shortlived (only until 1668). The first European Central bank to issue banknotes permanently was the Bank of England in 1695 to finance the War against France (that's were the Rothschild crime syndicate made their first big killing). The USA only started printing banknotes in 1862: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banknote

According to the same Wikipedia in 1609 the Amsterdamsche Wisselbank was founded that issued "bank money". These were technically the evidence for a deposit, but I don't see any essential difference with "banknotes" covered by gold in a safe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amsterdam_Wisselbank

An essential difference is that the Templars already invented the European banking system. Long before the Amsterdamsche Wisselbank.
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 30274
Age: 30
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: World Bank enslaves the world

#15  Postby igorfrankensteen » Dec 18, 2016 7:16 pm

I can't tell if everyone already realizes this or not, so I'll mention it.

The idea of fractional reserves is not as nonsensical or as occult as many people who first hear about it first conclude. Lots of people think that banks are supposed to be allowed to "create money," at ten times the value of the "real money" that is deposited with them.

But that isn't accurate. What lenders are supposed to do, is to lend CASH, in exchange for WEALTH of equal, or (usually) greater value. If they were only allowed to give loans equal to the total amount of cash in their vaults, that would entail ignoring the value of property and labor entirely.

So they aren't supposed to "create money" at all. When they started loaning out sums in excess of the real wealth (the sub-prime loans), they WERE "creating money," not backed by anything at all. Not on existing real wealth, or on realistically expected future real wealth.
User avatar
igorfrankensteen
 
Name: michael e munson
Posts: 2114
Age: 66
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Moldova

#16  Postby tolman » Jan 01, 2017 3:17 am

The_Metatron wrote:The Dutch royals? I thought it was the lizard people. No, wait. The Rothschilds. No, wait. The Rotchschilds are the lizard people.

Apart from the Mouton-Rothschilds.

They're definitely sheeple.
I don't do sarcasm smileys, but someone as bright as you has probably figured that out already.
tolman
 
Posts: 7106

Country: UK
Print view this post

Re: World Bank enslaves the world

#17  Postby Macdoc » Jan 01, 2017 6:49 am

I can't tell if everyone already realizes this or not, so I'll mention it.

The idea of fractional reserves is not as nonsensical or as occult as many people who first hear about it first conclude. Lots of people think that banks are supposed to be allowed to "create money," at ten times the value of the "real money" that is deposited with them.

But that isn't accurate. What lenders are supposed to do, is to lend CASH, in exchange for WEALTH of equal, or (usually) greater value. If they were only allowed to give loans equal to the total amount of cash in their vaults, that would entail ignoring the value of property and labor entirely.

So they aren't supposed to "create money" at all. When they started loaning out sums in excess of the real wealth (the sub-prime loans), they WERE "creating money," not backed by anything at all. Not on existing real wealth, or on realistically expected future real wealth.


That is correct and goes a little further....as economies grow there is more money needed in the economy so by matching hard asset development ( a house for instance ) with money supply growth then it should work fine.

WHere it goes wrong are in two ways.

Said house is over-valued ..then packaged into "securities" which are then sold as Class A low risk.

Second way is when stocks are used as the hard asset ....
Bank has 1 million in capital
It can then lend 10 million against in theory 75% of the hard asset. ( and some banks capital to lending ratio is 30:1 ).

However stocks can be bought on margin ...ie 10% down.

Along come the speculators.
Take the banks $10 million which was loaned from a $1 million capital base.
Buy $100 million in speculative "assets", stocks etc.

Well a 1% downturn in the value of the 100 million in assets wipes out the banks lending base of $1 million in capital. Effectively it's a margin call.

et voila 2008 :roll:

And it's not like it's not happening again.....and of course house prices at the heart of it....again.

Rise in house values then looks like GDP growth :yuk:

IF...like the credit unions....the lending was restricted to 75% of the cost to build.....then the fractional lending notion would work.
Of the trillions of dollars daily in the economy ....99% is speculative...1% is wealth building. :nono:
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
 
Posts: 16345
Age: 72
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: World Bank enslaves the world

#18  Postby Firestarter » Jan 01, 2017 2:59 pm

Macdoc wrote:Along come the speculators.
Take the banks $10 million which was loaned from a $1 million capital base.
Buy $100 million in speculative "assets", stocks etc.

Well a 1% downturn in the value of the 100 million in assets wipes out the banks lending base of $1 million in capital. Effectively it's a margin call.

et voila 2008 :roll:
When I did an investigation on the Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton it became clear that together with Obama they should be called the 3 stooges for Goldman Sachs.
The most important name on the financial team of Donald Trump was John Paulson (of Goldman Sachs), who made over $5 billion by betting against his own clients, while participating in crashing the American mortgage markets. After making billions of dollars Goldman Sachs paid $550 million to settle fraud charges with the SEC.
This scheme bankrupted the ABN AMRO bank and Royal Bank of Scotland, and it were the Dutch and British taxpayers that paid for the losses: http://www.gregpalast.com/the-frog-who- ... ce-crisis/
User avatar
Firestarter
Banned Spammer
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 40

Country: Netherlands
Print view this post

Re: World Bank enslaves the world

#19  Postby crank » Jan 01, 2017 3:43 pm

newolder wrote:
Blackadder wrote:
newolder wrote:
American banks only have to back up investments (or loans) with a cash reserve ratio of 10%. This means with an American savings account for 10,000 dollar, the banks can invest an additional 90,000 dollar.

For which we should be grateful that you are not running a bank, I guess.

US savings with a reserve of 10% means banks can lend out 90 cents on each dollar.
$10k savings lets them lend $9k not $90k. :doh:


Just on this point, a 10% fractional reserve DOES allow the banking system to lend up to 9 times the initial savings.

Let's say a new deposit of $10k is made at a bank. If this were deposited in another bank, that bank could lend $8.1k (90% of $9k). If that $8.1k is deposited at a third bank, that can then be lent on again, less the 10% reserve. Continue this cycle ad infinitum.

Theoretically therefore, for every new deposit of $X, the banking system can create $X/y of new money, where y is the fractional reserve percentage. So $10,000 initially deposited becomes $10,000/0.10 = $100,000 of new money, i.e. $90,000 of new money created out of nothing. It's known as the money multiplier and is a well known phenomenon in economics.

:thumbup: Then it's a good job I'm not running a bank then.

Found this tho'
Unfortunately, the money multiplier model of banking is completely wrong. Professor Charles Goodhart of the London School of Economics and an advisor to the Bank of England for over 30 years described this model (in 1984) as “such an incomplete way of describing the process of the determination of the stock of money that it amounts to mis-instruction.” Why is this?

More @ source

It's beyond my Economics 'O' level. :dunno:

It's good to see someone recognizing the PositiveMoney people. They have some great educational videos, and they know what they are talking about. If you want a good refresher on how banking works, this, Misconceptions Around Banking [Banking 101] is a very good series they put out a few years ago, it exposes the levels of misunderstanding that exist among the pols, even a lot of teachers/professors in economics. It becomes clear why it's so easy for the banksters to screw the rest of us. If you're interested in economics, you need to understand what's in these videos.
“When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat.”
-George Carlin, who died 2008. Ha, now we have human centipedes running the place
User avatar
crank
RS Donator
 
Name: Sick & Tired
Posts: 10362
Age: 4
Male

Country: 2nd miasma on the left
Pitcairn (pn)
Print view this post

Re: World Bank enslaves the world

#20  Postby Handy andy » Mar 02, 2017 8:06 pm

Stupid question.

Who prints the worlds money supply? and who supplies the increasing demand for more money in the economy?

I am guessing this would be the world bank, correct?

It would be nice to print a few billion dollars you don't have and then loan it to people, who would have to pay you interest, or work for you to pay of the loan. This would be a great idea to enslave people you could print as much money as you like and buy what ever global resources you want. What have I missed? Is slavery illegal now?

Endentured labour in America went out of fashion. People claimed land from the Indians, then got people to work for them for free. The endentured labourers were eventually payed in land stolen from the Indians, if they were lucky, many died in service, some were murdered at the end of their service. What have I missed? Is slavery illegal now?

This all sounds like just a more complicated version of endentured labor or human slavery.

Andy
Handy andy
 
Name: Andy
Posts: 45

Country: World
Print view this post

Next

Return to General Debunking

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest