Note by Me: I don't agree with some of the Jewish baiting, but its major points are accurate.
By Timothy
______________________
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=105934.400
From http://christianinfobomb.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=14058&st=0&sk=t&sd=a
BTW FDR had bad family members. When he got Polio he turned on the bankers. Check this out:
http://www.larouchepac.com/lpactv?nid=11078
And BTW as for the Gold Confiscation. He HAD TO DO IT.
The system collapsed when he took office and the dollar was about to disintigrate. People were hoarding Gold and stopped using the dollar. The entire country was on the verge of the end of days basically. If he didn't stop the Gold Hoarding the Government would have collapsed......
There are alot of BS stories about it on the internet, yea he confiscated Gold and saved the Nation from total destruction, then he used the Gold for a FIXED interest rate system which stabalized the entire world economy.
It was collapsed in 1971 by Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixon (The bretton woods system).
________
No need to correct you, you're right on about almost everything i've read here. Some of the stuff doesn't have such great sources because the internet is full of propaganda, it's very difficult to dig through it. But you've really exposed some serious connections of Dr. Von Mises and Von Hayek to the Rockefeller's and Morgans! that is crazy!....
Quote:
any possess a near-religious conviction that their beliefs are correct and that all other economic theories are pure folly.
That is exactly what the problem is. Economics is not a science to them, it's religion based on Gold Worship and Anti-Government Propaganda......
That is exactly why i call most of them cult members, because they literally call anyone who opposes their views a Marxist or a Fascist.... just childish nonsense.
-Revolt 426
_______________________________
You know Ron Paul has to know this too aswell with many people who are part of mises, are on that website etc.
I mean, it's one thing to supposedly oppose the privatly owned fed ( is that not what Austrians want, market economy, in healthcare, education, social security, then why not as Central Bank, like the Fed now is if it's sucha great idea?)......it's another to defend those robber barons for what they where/ are. It's a funny contradiction. If those robber barosn wehre sucha moral great people and capitalists, then why is it that the same school and economic streaming is attacking the privatly owned Federal Reserve wich is funded and created by exactly those names and people? Talking about falsificating history mr Thomas J. DiLorenzo!! You're going straight to bed now, no cookies tonight!! bad boy, bad boy
What is Ron Paul doing? Going up against the very funders of the economic school and Mises institute that also created and own the Fed? So what kind of opposition would that be then? >>> Me thinking really hard!! "Austrians" wake up!! I'm sure you don't wanna be conned!!
-FLying Dutch
__________________________
Organic food , good for us, but expensive. The consumer wants it, but not if they see the prices. Same with electric cars, many want it, but it's too expensive. Cause the producer want their costs of research and development earned back first. Unless there's even more reasons, cause many don't want you to eat organic food, cause they rather like to give you GMO, which is a result of the mixture of corporatism involved in politics and a vision for a kind of utopia world for them not in our interest.
Mises talking to the mouth of their "innocent" funders, it's very obvious!!
Edit: in addition:
One day producers dumped food and toothpaste on the market with bad stuff inside. People just bought them, having no clue what was inside. Back in those days there where no labels where you could read what's in it. Meanwhile producers made deceptive commercials about how clean white your teeth become when fluoride is in. Even today, generations later, now there are labels, there are commercials that say that you need fluoride, cause it's good.
Most people have no time or don't know how to find the truth out or just assume that it's true. Cause nobody would have an agenda to make them sick or dumb them down right? So when in the supermarket, people rush, they need 50, maybe 100 articles, no time to check all articles of what it all contains etc. Some do, but miss other points. See there's no producer which tells you that your IQ drops 15 points if you take fluoride or that it's very bad for your brains, bones etc.
Bottomline: producers use misleading slogans and commercials. People know partly, but not how deep it goes. The consequence of this corporatism combined with the politics of eugenics is leading to fluoride, bad stuff in vaccinations, in food, water etc etc. You are not warned! No producer is warning you on these articles for any of it!!
So who's to blame the producer or the consumer? The consumer cannot know everything when being so mislead, it's producers that are not honest about the harm of their products and deceive consumers. If people would know and really be convinced about how bad certain products are, they wouldn't even buy it!!
But Mises says, you bought it so you wanted it, so obviously also what's in it. That's not necessarily true!!
Now imagine producers so freemarket capitalism, so basicly greed, human nature running healthcare, education, social security.
what does big pharma want of you? To make sure you are healthy so that you don't need drugs or to sell drugs to you, rather a permanent usage of those? So how can you trust a vaccination producer who can reap enormous profits of hyping a disease or pandemic. Are thsoe products really what the consumer want or is he mislead to want them by telling them you really need it or else....?
So you better have goverment running healthcare, goverment without private entities involved of course!!
It's already bad enough, cause there are always bad people with different interests or bad characters, but at least if you take profits out of certain sections ofociety where it doesn't belong you can limited excessive behaviour to a controllable degree. Wich is not the case right now, cause who can battle out of control companies wich have larger incomes then most nation-states have yearly? The Rockefellers or Morgan family, just one example, involved in goverment policy or giving funding for anything or setting up institutes or infrastructure might not be a very good idea , i don't see Mises complain, rather the opposite. Is that not exactly what the problem is we're having right now? Now you can have a good family running things, I know, but you never know. The Rockefellers are openly deeply into eugenicist policies, created, funded it all, type in Margaret Sanger fro isntance you get the encyclopedia about it!! Now how can mises defend that and stating that they are good people unless you are rotten yourself?
-Flying Dutch
______________________
choice, especially for business trade as being something for all of us, but it's rather like free trtade in the perspective like the British Empire meant it to be, Maritime Law, wich is celebrated with the Statue of Liberty by French free masons . It could not be placed on land, there is Common Law, but had to be placed on an island in the Sea. It's Statue of Liberty, cause it's not about freedom for you or me, so not meant for Americans on land, but meant as freetrade, mercantimism for the British empire or for the Western obligargy ....wich in the US was raised by the British empire.
All what we see is that no label means anything, other then beign different dialects, opposing, siimingly, but also united in the very founders of these people and dialects.
See Americans on land want freedom. Liberty is associated with freedom, meanign it. The difference is that liberty is basicly maritime language. There is a reason why the Statue of Liberty a Masonic composite is not called "statue of Freedom"and stands where she stands. Remember it's located in the Empire State.but what is the empire here? The US? No! it's called the empire State, because it's the State of the empire originally, the British empire and all these families as above.They play tricks on people with exotheric and esotheric meanings of words.
That whole Austrian school is nothing but a tentacle, a dialectic that serves a certain purpose untill a synthesis is coming out of it. See, it's found by and funded by Aristocracy who have very bad idea's about freedom of you and me, so how can they do us a favour, but misleading us into false opposition. Wich was in this case Keynesian economics. ( socialistic)
But the very socialistic and Fascistic roots are foundback united if you go back to the roots of the individuals of the Austrian school.
Basicly it doesn't really matter what followers believe or if they even write books opposing eachother or competing eachother aslong everybody is busy with this game, so being inside the dialectic. I didn't expect this at all, although i know all the other things, except for the Austrian school so involved with this.
-Flying Dutch
If you use the term "Nazi"as applied how we mean it, Stalin was just as a Nazi as Hitler, yet he supposedly was left liberal, a Communism. Communism basicly is also fascism...what is the difference anyway? Socialism is just a slow cultural gradual development towards the endgoal of Communism.
Hardcore "capitalists like the Rockefellers, who funded the Nazi's and Communists, had sucha succes with business and then gaining political power, and a near monopoly and cartels, that they basicly are not different then the innerparty members of the Communist Party. Communism rules the State, but monopolists rule the State too...by taking goverment over, result is the same, fascism for the people...tyranny.
-Flying Dutch
_____________________
I've known about the Mont Pelerin Society, it's all a big ponzi scheme.
We know Austrian economics originated in the Austrian Habsburg Empire - Now we know Rockefeller and Morgan transferred it to America to create an Anti-America movement.
They succeeded. The only misconception in most of these articles is that they blame it on the "Jews" when it's not the Jews at all, it's just the British Oligarchs....... Morgan is from London, Rockefeller is a Rothschild apprentice and Rothschild is from London.
Well, it all goes back to the same families and none of them are Jewish.
some pretend they have Jewish names - But if you examine their bloodlines it's all from the Venetian Empire and Black Nobility.
So the LaRouche article really explains how these people radicalized Jewish people and made them Zionists and radicalized Muslims into the Muslim Brotherhood and made them suicide terrorists.
And their operations have been based out of the British Isles and part of the Netherlands since the 1600's , right after the Venetian Empire totally collapsed they just relocated to the British Isles. It was run by a guy named Paolo Sarpi (The Venetian Empire) and Rothschild, Lazard and the Monarchs of Europe are ALL related to Sarpi's royal families.
-Revolt 426
__________________________
Not, cause Tarpley also told to let these corrupt elitist banks go and that hole will be filled up by other banks soon after.
So no foreclosures then? So what does Ron Paul do if all these waves of poor people end up in deep poverty and hunger? Letting them die?
Those Wallstreet banks already get unliited money, so why not the people, Americans? Is the state not created to SERVE the people and not the other way around?
So why would any civilized country let her citizens die in the streets?
Ok, limited goverment, if you want that, you need to take away all profit out of healthcare, education and other branches and then see what happens to the high goverment expenditure...it stops. You get better quality healthcare, education etc, no dangerous situationswhere private companies make profits making you ill, keeping you ill or even lettinh you die because of eugenecist policies.
Ron Paul would let the market do it's work, well, we already have seen where that leads too.
Ok, he's anti Fed, alright, i'm totally in agreement.
Imagine, Ron Paul gets in, the depression is ongoing, all welfare is cut, healthcare etc etc, people start to die by the millions.
Ron Paul says, just cutting all expenditures, then the economy will recover over time. Ok, so what happens to all those people in between, between the moment all those expenditures are cut and the moment that the system is able to give a decent living, survival for every citizen? So dying or gettign ill is then the consequence of Ron's Paul "Austrian" economics.
Is that not absurd? You pay lots of taxes for everything, goverment is created to serve YOU and many of you would just die because a leader tells that we need to cut expenses and you as citizen are not part of the picture, except when the economy goes better and "free market" is able to hopefully give you a few bucks of the newly generated capital wich usually ends up in the most wealthy part of the population.
Ofcourse to agree with what i said is not Socialism. Although Socialism would be a better option for the time being then Austrian economics. At least the population of the US, because we're talking about the US now, would also get bennefits instead it all goes to banksters alone. Even if the banksters get nothing, under Ron Paul neither get it, the citizens who cannot survive to not die or are chronically ill, but are not able to afford healthcare. It's a pitty:"you have to wait for better time, and otherwise:"see you next life". If goverment should do anything, anything, it's avoiding people to die or not getting their necessary drugs/ medicines.
I mean, wouldn't you do anything, but anything to help your dear loved ones, your friends, family etc? If goverment has ANY function is the collective benefit not exactly thee? Providing healthcare and making sure we all together can keep ourselves alife and healthy? i mean, you cannot surge yourself, you need goverment here, you cannot let private companies run healthcare, it's a disaster.
I was actually spporting Ron Paul, and i agreedd about his critical comments on the Fed, banksters and more issues. But i was wondering what he would do with people who fall out of society because of poverty, i didn't see any solutions.
Untill i realised that that's exactly the problem with his stance on economics!!
Outside the police state and fascism of Communism, even within Communism the state took care of your health. So many Communistic countries had relativly good healthcare systems, despite having lower incomes then Western countries back then. Cuba had a very good healthcare system for example. Not anymore, due to economic sanctions, a different story.
My point is, any society should have the vision of basic needs for their population...nomatter what kind of system you are running.
What does it all matter if you allow people to die because they cant afford healthcare or they cannot receive welfare to stay alife if they are unemployed or handicapt etc? So what does matter then in life where people do stand up about?
So in that sense Ron Paul's economic policy, independend wether on purpose or by naivity, is leading to fascism.
Lots of eonomists believe anything they've been taught at school, they might never realize it. But i saw an omission, as far as i know, of Ron Paul tackling these issues. Imagine, maybe a good man with good intentions, but if he would become president right now, everybody happy, let's say he has the power and succeeds to abolish the Fed, everybody happy. But then..no welfare, cutting expenditure heavily, economy in great deflation and freefall
People asking:'what's happening". Ron Paul:" sorry, we need to loose wealth and correct for years to come before our economy can become better"...in a meanwhile...people dying.
See, i know that Keynesian economics don't work either, expenditures are increasing and i know it will collapse sooner or later. They would fall down under a heavier burden of debt and in a worse shape then if it would fall now, or under Ron Paul who wouldallow it to collapse.
BUT...what if you don't have to collapse? Wouldn't you want to avoid a collapse if it's maybe possible? Like freezing derivatives.
Remember, that most losses right now are due to derivatives. So if you take those out of the economy, economy can find it's way up sooner or later without a massive collapse. Cause banks would get rid of enormous future write offs and most of their losses.
You would see that you would be able to even generate some necessary money wich is now spend on pumping money into the banks and artificial pumping up of the stock exchanges, Dollar, surpressing gold etc., to then invest in infrastructure and to help the poor who are on edge.
-Flying Dutch
__________________________________
This is also not true and has nothing to do with LaRouche, he opposes Ron Paul and Keynes both economically.
It's all nonsense, dialectics at work.
Ron Paul is now openly engaging politically here in that hyping of these two camps....while it is certain that his own economic camps is the blame for this finnancial crisis.
Keynes is not about deregulation, and unbridled speculation..that RP's own school.
That was Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, von Hayek, Mises, Lawrence Summers, etc. etc...all austrians that destroyed regulations to avoid conflict of interest and unbridled speculation with the taxpayer's money or any money they could and can find.
Krugman wrote article in favor of the austrian School and against it.
So the boundaries are not as clear as Ron Paul makes of it, while his own Austrian model is really to blame!
The current bail outs are not Austrian, but on the otehr side, total austerity and a immediate collapse, no matter what consequences in combination for cuttign welfare and healthcare what RP and his camp wants is also far from a solution, between the point you do it and future recovery of the economy, you have genocide going on.
-Flying Dutch
_____________
Indeed, those big powers and some also mention Japan and Germany, need to join and re-distribute material.
As production is dropping in the Western World, while the GDP, based on financial trade is pushes higher. so the imbalance is only growing, thsi current "recovery"is a good example where the economy is pushed out of balance, if the derivative mountaon collapses in coming years, the next wave of financial and economic troubles is exceeding the current one. when this financial paper trade casino economy is then imploded, many countries, especially the UK and Us will foind out that their real physical economy is basically nothing. As real production there is a very low percentage of the total economy. so once in that position you cannot easily get out and you will be a second or third World nation.
Germany is oneifo the best of the Western world, still have soem decent physical economy, but it's also loosing.
Somebody has to finance the US, with her more than $100 trillion of total debt and liabilities, if not and the US is imploding within now or 10 years, we all go down and it will be terrible. But if somebody, all the hedge fundses, and financiers of the US are getting nervous, then it becomes dangerous.... See More
We need to roll back many of the $27 trillion ( 413 trillion are actually spend) which are approved for banks, and need a few trillion for the US economy to give it a 21th century powergrid as the US has a thiord world country power grid right now.Any sabotage and the system is flat,as the So cannot lock off sections like in other advanced countries. Many of the industries, infrastructure is pre-WWII or 100 years old.
The US has enough capacity to do something about it yet.
Secondly, you need this tobin tax on all trade in derivatives, financial products and speculation, which can be used to actually rebuilt the physical economy.
Most of the offshoring and outsourcing of jobs is due to deregulation and that and other measures became Globalization which is right now showing horrible effects for almost all nations,except for Chinaa nd India, but those will also get it later.
Luckily all those trillions as Bloomberg and others reported it are not yet landed in the financial system, because that would generate very high if not hyperinflation.
The only way out is a long term, like 50 year plan for the US, UK and several other nations, in cooperation with China, Russia and India and maybe countries as Japan, Germany and Brazil and France. Technically, the US is bankrupt, it all continues by teh grace of financiers and because those have no interest in a collapse of the US, the sage continues, but crises can occur much easier now.
-Flying Dutch
No comments:
Post a Comment