Good thread.. I always heard that the true beef with N. Korea, Valenzuela, and a couple of other countries is that they refuse to join the world banking system
That’s why there’s military bases all over the world. But they want you to think it’s to protect our freedom or to stop those evil socialists. Like why would anybody in their right mind give a fukk what type of government another country chooses?Good thread.. I always heard that the true beef with N. Korea, Valenzuela, and a couple of other countries is that they refuse to join the world banking system
First off, no, that's not the claim you initially made.
Second off, those earlier recessions WERE often caused by poor banking practices. Just taking the Wikipedia list, here are the recessions that mention banking issues or speculation as part of the cause:
1785
1789
1796
1815
1825
1828
1833
1836
1839
1847
1857
1865
1869
1873
1890
1893
1907
That's 17 recessions in the first 125 years of this country that had something to do with poor banking practices or financial speculation. Let me quote from some of them:
The idea that banking failures weren't an issue before the Fed is just ridiculous. They were a constant issue. Economic growth has been far, far more stable since World War II than at any previous time in our history. The main issue of financial cycles and debt crises is inherent to capitalism and we need to address it by going after the very notion of a credit-on-interest system, not by chasing after arcane conspiracy theories.
Breh, your goalposts are constantly shifting, and with all that talking you still haven't given a single piece of data that supports your claims.You’re still missing the entire point because you’re trying to be a contrarian just for the sake of it. I can break this down in so many ways but I’ll just give a few and this will be my last response.
You’re own words say “here are the recessions that “mention” poor banking practices” not even “caused by.” Then, you’re listing dates that I already pointed out that your Wikipedia source even stated that they have no financial data to back up these claims. Some of the examples aren’t even actual nationwide recessions such as
“The Cleveland Trust Company Index declined 19.7% during 1847 and 1848. It is associated with a financial crisis in Great Britain.”
This is a perfect example of your posting in this thread. This is a index fund that declined almost 20% in a year. It’s an index fund that had a bad year. So what? Was the Cleveland trust bank bailed out by the tax payer? Did a central bank print a billion dollars in response causing massive inflation? Then, the icing on the cake is “associated with a financial crisis in Great Britain” so the recession (if you want to call it that) wasn’t even caused by the actual bank or even a bank in America for that matter.
That one example alone has no context whatsoever to what is actually being discussed. It’s just data that came up first in your google search that you copied and pasted... from Wikipedia. But all that’s neither here nor there...
The main point you’re missing is bolded and I’ll even quote: “The idea that banking failures weren't an issue before the Fed is just ridiculous.”
I never made that claim. In fact that’s the opposite of what I said. Periods of expansion and contraction are normal. Recessions are normal. Bank failures and recessions are GOOD when a bank has poor banking practices and get to greedy. It’s a warning and example to other banks should they follow suit. The problem is when you essentially form a banking cartel it allow banks to get “to big to fail” and if one bank does fail it causes ripples in the entire financial system. It’s moral hazard. They have no reason to not be greedy because the risk for insolvency is virtually zero. Then, these to big to fail banks get bailed out by the taxpayer. In your Wikipedia “source” how many of the so called recessions (that are actually recessions) caused by banks followed with a bailout?
Maybe it’s my fault for not being specific enough but the claim I made was to be taken into context of the thread as it was by everyone else. My original post was about the increase in recessions in America caused by poor banking practices after the creation of the federal reserve because they know they’re to big to fail and the resulting bailouts and inflation that inevitably follows. Not recessions caused by some random bank in Europe, not a recession caused by a reduction in agriculture production, not a recession caused by war, etc etc.
If you want to have a debate make sure you stay in context of what the other person is actually trying to convey and not your opinion of what they’re trying to convey
Ya the US does the fighting while the rest of Europe can focus on their infrastructure and free college cause they don’t have to war up so hard
we don’t fund art programs but Sweden can.. that’s why those swedish songwriting cacs dominate our music industry.. can’t profit in a socialized country but you can use that socialized, nurtured education to dominate in American industries because your education was nurtured, institutionalized at every level compared to defunded American shyt
Not only the Presidents. Look up J.P. Morgan, Astor family, Rothschild, Joe Kennedy - you haven’t even read or seen the half. Real sinister. The extent they go to in order to manufacture economic “crises” . This is the same U.S. government that fights a war on drugs while also contributes to and profits from drug trafficking.
Money doesn’t rule the world, the power to control credit and manipulate debt does.
They ain’t slick breh. Notice how the whole period after the decline of the Roman Empire where the Moors ran Europe is called the Dark Ages. Then there was a Renaissance when they finally got them up outta there followed a period of En”lighten”ment. Basically when they began to white wash everything. Everything is there if you read between the lines
The Dutch too. The Moors were all up in there. They were prolly more brutal than the Spanish and PortugueseI have a theory that's why the Spaniards and Portuguese have a reputation of being the most brutal slave masters in the "New World." It was envy from being conquered by the Moors for so long. They never got over that and took it out on Black folks.
They called the natives over here moors as well for a minuteI have a theory that's why the Spaniards and Portuguese have a reputation of being the most brutal slave masters in the "New World." It was envy from being conquered by the Moors for so long. They never got over that and took it out on Black folks.
If only more people knew this.Is this a true quote from the wife of one of them Rothchilds
"If my sons did not want wars, there would be none." Gutle Schnaper
I’m a brehetteThat's a whole 'notha thread in itself, breh. The last guy who exposed this got murked.
Banks borrow from other banks. Capitalism. They want the average citizen to repay their debt when banks are indebted themselves. The Long Con continues.In a country like the United States you never truly "own" anything when you think about it. Unlike other countries, our government makes sure you "owe" them for any kind of asset(s) that you have. For example, you'll never own a house or car in this country as long as you pay taxes and if you don't pay taxes, they can take your sh_t.
Even the money you earn, isn't truly yours when they can garnish it for owing a debt.