Russia Writes Off 90 Percent of North Korea Debt

[Everythingg]

What do you not understand about Japan's policies at the time being strikingly similar to China's? This has been discussed ad nauseam by economists in recent years. The nominal size of the two country's economies is wholly irrelevant to anything.

Instead of repeating "economists say this and that" why dont you bring some that are saying these things? Or share the policies they share.

Oh and yea it means nothing that Japan was propped up the US and China was not when comparing their positions as a world power.

About the interest point, you're just being thick. I clearly explained to you that they rebate the interest charged on treasuries. If they rebate the interest to the government, then it is clearly advantageous for us for the Fed to finance our debt over outside investors, who would have to be compensated with full interest payments. Read this for a more thorough analysis: PublicEye.org - The Website of Political Research Associates It seems to me that no one actually knows what the Federal Reserve does in reality and yet they continue to parrot nonsense conspiracy theories.

How much in rebates do they give in relation to the amount they take in?

Spoiler

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/11/b...eturns-77-billion-in-profits-to-treasury.html

Despite having an excess of 2.5 trillion (and more) they give off 77 billion. And here you are defending them Anyway you put it, its ridiculous to trust in a PRIVATE INSTITUTION to print money for a country. Check out the Thomas Jefferson quote for that. That should under the country's control. Heres something to take in as well from that link:

"Notwithstanding its conservative investment portfolio, the central bank remains highly profitable because of its unique business model. Rather than paying for funding, it simply creates the money that it needs at no cost. The return on its investments, as a result, almost all flows directly to the bottom line."

Yea. Nothing wrong with that at all

Spoiler

If the American people ever allow the banks to control the
issuance of their currency, first by inflation, and then by
deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around
them will deprive the people of all property, until their
children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers
conquered. The issuing power of money should be taken from
banks and restored to Congress and the people to whom it
belongs. I sincerely believe the banking institutions having
the issuing power of money, are more dangerous to liberty than
standing armies."

I agree with him.

Its a good thing that no one really cares what you're weary about then, isn't it?

Just as no one cares that you made this statement. See where we get when we just waste words?

Russia is desperately trying to maintain what influence they have in the region. If they push into eastern Ukraine, they gain nothing in value compared to a couple years ago. They already had control of Ukraine. Now, they might still control it, but have to deal with the headache of occupying a land full of hostile Ukrainians. I fail to see how this is evidence of any Russian strength, as they are on the brink of losing one of their only allies left and have successfully pissed off all of Eastern Europe. The end is encircling Russia and expanding American influence in the region.

Russia went into Ukraine and has remained there despite NATO's warnings. I dont think they're stressing them at the moment. Me saying I dont think it will stop at Ukraine was my simply my perception. We'll see who's right about it. And they have China as an ally so I dont know what you mean by "on the brink of losing their only ally" The same China that beefs with Japan who the US backs.Which is why I pointed out that those situations I mentioned earlier are connected because of alliances. If this Ukraine situation escalates it can drag more countries into the fray. Coupled with tensions already high in Syria and Israel, it could have some devastating consequences on the world.

Funny how you didnt touch foreign nations inhibiting a country's growth thru the "economy". You know like the situations of Venezuela, Congo, Ethiopia, Libya, Syria (well you get the idea).. The world's economy is a farce that people need to stop supporting as it enriches the few at the expense of the many.

Nuclear war benefits absolutely no one. Elite building bunkers huh

 

[Futuristic Eskimo]

Instead of repeating "economists say this and that" why dont you bring some that are saying these things? Or share the policies they share.

Oh and yea it means nothing that Japan was propped up the US and China was not when comparing they're positions as a world power.





How much in rebates do they give in relation to the amount they take in?

Spoiler

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/11/b...eturns-77-billion-in-profits-to-treasury.html

Spoiler

Despite having an excess of 2.5 billion they give off 77. And here you are defending them Anyway you put it, its ridiculous to trust ina PRIVATE INSTITUTION to print money for a country. Check out the Thomas Jefferson quote for that. That should under the country's control. Heres something to take in as well:

"Notwithstanding its conservative investment portfolio, the central bank remains highly profitable because of its unique business model. Rather than paying for funding, it simply creates the money that it needs at no cost. The return on its investments, as a result, almost all flows directly to the bottom line."

Yea. Nothing wrong with that at all

Spoiler

If the American people ever allow the banks to control the
issuance of their currency, first by inflation, and then by
deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around
them will deprive the people of all property, until their
children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers
conquered. The issuing power of money should be taken from
banks and restored to Congress and the people to whom it
belongs. I sincerely believe the banking institutions having
the issuing power of money, are more dangerous to liberty than
standing armies."

I agree with him.



Just as no one cares that you made this statement. See where we get when we just waste words?



Russia went into Ukraine despite the US and has remained there despite NATO's warnings. I dont think they're stressing them at the moment. And I dont think it will stop at Ukraine was my point in the beginning. We'll see who's right about it. And they have China as an ally so I dont know what you mean by "on the brink of losing their only ally". Funny how you didnt touch foreign nations inhibiting a country's growth thru the "economy". You know like the situations of Venezuela, Congo, Ethiopia, Libya, Syria (well you get the idea)..

[/QUOTE]
For the last time, I never compared Japan and China's position on the global stage. You keep making this up like it supports your point. If you want to read about it economists' views on the similarities, you can search for it at your own leisure. My responsibility here isnt to educate you.

I already told you what percentage of their profits that they rebate and its in the very link I sent you as well. If you actually read it, this wouldnt be an issue. The rest is distributed in dividends, which are fixed payments, to the member banks who in turn capitalize the system. The world has evolved greatly since Thomas Jefferson has been around, so his quotes on banking policy are irrelevant. No one cares if you agree with him because a full-reserve system is outdated and would create a situation of extremely poor liquidity resulting in the destruction of our economy. Also, while its member banks are privately held, the FMOC, who control Fed policy, is appointed by the government. It is not a fully private institutional, like you are implying. "Despite having an excess of 2.5 billion they give off 77." I dont even know what this sentence means. Every central bank in the world creates money through this mechanism. Given the fact that you know so little about how this works that you are resorting to googling new york times articles to find anything to support your beliefs, perhaps you should take a step back before making any kind of judgements. The internet might be providing a platform for you to showcase your ignorance, but its not legitimizing your positions.

Russia is going to invade Eastern Europe is your position? For what purpose? If they weren't stressing NATO, they wouldn't have been forced to fall all the way back from their peak of power during the cold war. I wouldn't necessarily call China their ally. They might do business together, but they have strained historical relations. China wouldn't fukk up their money by riding with Russia against the west. The foregone conclusion was that Russia would protect its Black Sea fleet in Crimea by taking it militarily. There was no possible outcome where this wouldn't happen, so, again, this isn't a win for Russia. Dudes trying so hard on here to be contrarians that they're riding for Russia of all countries

"Funny how you didnt touch foreign nations inhibiting a country's growth thru the "economy"."

This sentence is incomprehensible so dont expect me to respond.

 

[Everythingg]

For the last time, I never compared Japan and China's position on the global stage. You keep making this up like it supports your point. If you want to read about it economists' views on the similarities, you can search for it at your own leisure. My responsibility here isnt to educate you.

You havent brought any policies that they share while at the same time saying economists agree with you. Whats the point of reiterating the same point up to three times or only to refrain from bringing what they're saying? What am I making up? That China is in a position globally that Japan never was? Or is it that Japan rose because of being propped up by the US? You said the growths were comparable and yet China didnt have the US propping it up as Japan did which is a LARGE reason why they grew. But go ahead and refrain from bring those "economists" that are saying what you are.

I already told you what percentage of their profits that they rebate and its in the very link I sent you as well. If you actually read it, this wouldnt be an issue. The rest is distributed in dividends, which are fixed payments, to the member banks who in turn capitalize the system. The world has evolved greatly since Thomas Jefferson has been around, so his quotes on banking policy are irrelevant. No one cares if you agree with him because a full-reserve system is outdated and would create a situation of extremely poor liquidity resulting in the destruction of our economy. Also, while its member banks are privately held, the FMOC, who control Fed policy, is appointed by the government. It is not a fully private institutional, like you are implying. "Despite having an excess of 2.5 billion they give off 77." I dont even know what this sentence means. Every central bank in the world creates money through this mechanism. Given the fact that you know so little about how this works that you are resorting to googling new york times articles to find anything to support your beliefs, perhaps you should take a step back before making any kind of judgements. The internet might be providing a platform for you to showcase your ignorance, but its not legitimizing your positions.

Well one your link is outdated. By about 14 years. Two, its source is the board of governors. If we're trying to find if they're corrupt or not, I dont think thats who we're supposed to ask. Three, you didnt address the link. The link clearly states that they made an more than 2.5 trillion but they only gave of 77 billion. Mind edumacating me on that young sir? So what we have here is you can google a "mythbuster" link but I cant google something that supports my position right? Without mentioning that you reiterated economists saying what you are (not that that means much) and havent brought anything to the table concerning that? And yea I can admit that I am ignorant because I do not know everything. Can you? Or are you claiming you know everything and you're not ignorant of anything? Hop off that high horse youngblood...

Russia is going to invade Eastern Europe is your position? For what purpose? If they weren't stressing NATO, they wouldn't have been forced to fall all the way back from their peak of power during the cold war. I wouldn't necessarily call China their ally. They might do business together, but they have strained historical relations. China wouldn't fukk up their money by riding with Russia against the west. The foregone conclusion was that Russia would protect its Black Sea fleet in Crimea by taking it militarily. There was no possible outcome where this wouldn't happen, so, again, this isn't a win for Russia. Dudes trying so hard on here to be contrarians that they're riding for Russia of all countries

Ukraine seems to think that Russia is trying to restore the Soviet Union. You're talking about the cold war as if that has bearing on what they're trying to do TODAY? Doesnt seem honest my friend.

And China is a ally to Russia. If I remember correctly they have something of the sort of a NATO agreement between each other with some other country or countries as well.

They may not WANT to do something, but they can get dragged into war. Just as the US (allegedly) didnt want to go to war in WW2 but got dragged into it.

"Funny how you didnt touch foreign nations inhibiting a country's growth thru the "economy"."

This sentence is incomprehensible so dont expect me to respond.

OF course. You seem to think theres nothing wrong with a private bank controlling the issue of currency in country. And for you to imply that the gov't voting the board members somehow clears out the thought of private interest being an issue?


What we do have instances of is foreign nations poking their noses in other countries businesses when they get out of line. Those countries I named are instances you can look up if you dont believe me. That shows you that its not some "free economy" where nations are allowed to grow as it happens. But that certain nations patrol other nations. And when these other nations do not act as they're "supposed" to, they're held back.

 

[Futuristic Eskimo]

You havent brought any policies that they share while at the same time saying economists agree with you. Whats the point of reiterating the same point up to three times or only to refrain from bringing what they're saying? What am I making up? That China is in a position globally that Japan never was? Or is it that Japan rose because of being propped up by the US? You said the growths were comparable and yet China didnt have the US propping it up as Japan did which is a LARGE reason why they grew. But go ahead and refrain from bring those "economists" that are saying what you are.



Well one your link is outdated. By about 14 years. Two, its source is the board of governors. If we're trying to find if they're corrupt or not, I dont think thats who we're supposed to ask. Three, you didnt address the link. The link clearly states that they made an more than 2.5 trillion but they only gave of 77 billion. Mind edumacating me on that young sir? So what we have here is you can google a "mythbuster" link but I cant google something that supports my position right? Without mentioning that you reiterated economists saying what you are (not that that means much) and havent brought anything to the table concerning that? And yea I can admit that I am ignorant because I do not know everything. Can you? Or are you claiming you know everything and you're not ignorant of anything? Hop off that high horse youngblood...


Ukraine seems to think that Russia is trying to restore the Soviet Union. You're talking about the cold war as if that has bearing on what they're trying to do TODAY? Doesnt seem honest my friend.

And China is a ally to Russia. If I remember correctly they have something of the sort of a NATO agreement between each other with some other country or countries as well.

They may not WANT to do something, but they can get dragged into war. Just as the US (allegedly) didnt want to go to war in WW2 but got dragged into it.


OF course. You seem to think theres nothing wrong with a private bank controlling the issue of currency in country. And for you to imply that the gov't voting the board members somehow clears out the thought of private interest being an issue?


What we do have instances of is foreign nations poking their noses in other countries businesses when they get out of line. Those countries I named are instances you can look up if you dont believe me. That shows you that its not some "free economy" where nations are allowed to grow as it happens. But that certain nations patrol other nations. And when these other nations do not act as they're "supposed" to, they're held back.

I stopped reading after the first paragraph. I specifically mentioned their credit-driven growth model in an earlier post. If you don't know what this means and youre unwilling to learn about it on your own, then I am really wasting my time here. Keep pounding away at your keyboard like theres anything with substance coming out

Edit: I actually read part of another paragraph while scrolling back up and the idiocy jumped out at me. Their bond portfolio was worth over $2 trillion. That is not how much profit they generated. This is so basic.

 

[Everythingg]

I stopped reading after the first paragraph. I specifically mentioned their credit-driven growth model in an earlier post. If you don't know what this means and youre unwilling to learn about it on your own, then I am really wasting my time here. Keep pounding away at your keyboard like theres anything with substance coming out

Mentioning a "Credit based economy" isnt showing anything friend. You can do better right? I mean you said economists said this and that at least three times. Why didnt you bring their word if you wanted to appeal to authority by using the phrase "economists say this" in different ways?

Perfect smilie for ya to use. Go back to sleep. The FED and the rest of the institutions that have been put in place to keep those in power with the power, will wake you up one day the hard way since you didnt want it the easy way

Edit: I actually read part of another paragraph while scrolling back up and the idiocy jumped out at me. Their bond portfolio was worth over $2 trillion. That is not how much profit they generated. This is so basic.

Same thing friend. From that same link:

"Notwithstanding its conservative investment portfolio, the central bank remains highly profitable because of its unique business model. Rather than paying for funding, it simply creates the money that it needs at no cost. The return on its investments, as a result, almost all flows directly to the bottom line."

So that bond portfolio is a straight up profit. Thats in the following paragraph of what "jumped at" you. But continue defending the FED when they could care less about your existence. You'll see in the long run that it wasnt in your or my best interest. By then it will be