Bitcoin Forum
December 11, 2017, 07:32:31 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Death Is The Price of Imperial Money  (Read 1372 times)
Leprikon
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 310



View Profile
February 22, 2017, 06:56:43 PM
 #21

I can see the USD surviving for at least another 20 years. After the Trump era is over, we'll see how the big financial crisis was inevitable. Both EUR and USD are under a big wave coming. If EUR fails USD fails, if USD fails EUR fails.

We are going to see the end of a big fiat currency die in our lifetime, the cycle is almost over.

this can not be. The government will not allow it. Money - it is a tool to manipulate people. And if they do not become the state simply disappear
1513020751
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513020751

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513020751
Reply with quote  #2

1513020751
Report to moderator
1513020751
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513020751

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513020751
Reply with quote  #2

1513020751
Report to moderator
1513020751
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513020751

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513020751
Reply with quote  #2

1513020751
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
BobK71
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 555


View Profile
February 23, 2017, 10:49:38 PM
 #22

War is profitable for the state, war is needed for the economy. Why not fan the flame of war when you are the one directly making profits out of it?
USA realized that there is no enough places in the world where they could intervene anymore so why not keep already war torn countries burning?
I don't believe that combined forces of USA and Russia can't defeat ISIS in Syria, I don't believe that if they wanted they couldn't stop permanently some conflicts in Africa.

I understand this is a pretty popular view, but I suspect profits from war alone don't really justify the 'reputation risk' to the US for fanning the flames of war and conflict.

Again, I think the key is to understand the role of money and finance.  The US elites really have no choice: the deceptive nature of their money and debt threatens a partial or total collapse of their system (and thus the loss of most of their power.)  This threat may be small at any one time, but it grows and they can't afford to give it too much time.

This is most true at this stage, after two major bubble busts in the US itself, when confidence in their assets or in growth is no longer really there, but the elites have already issued so many assets that they really need confidence and growth to stabilize them.

War and conflict give them two benefits at once: their political and military superiority, as well as their control of the media, give them the upper hand come any conflict, so war and conflicts are good tools for putting pressure on regimes around the world to help support the dollar and related assets.  At the same time, as we know, war and conflict tend to breed very bad actors, Nazis and Japanese militarists in the past, and terrorists and ISIS in our day.  When things get really bad, the empire can finally regain their 'moral superiority' by leading the world in a crusade against the bad actors.  At the end of the great conflict, they will have so much power over all countries that they will be able to remake the financial system (i.e. increase financial repression, in effect) and blame any changes on the great conflict.  This was what happened at the end of World War II.

You notice I put 'moral' in quotes...  That is because in order for their scheme to succeed, they must secretly nurture the bad actors into a strong force.  If ordinary people suffer as a result, well, too bad.  (We know for a fact, for example, that after 9/11 many high level leaks came from the US government that served no purpose besides helping al Qaeda, such as the fact that the US was able to track bin Laden's electronic communications -- causing him to stop using them quickly.  These leaks are still not investigated.)
deisik
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1414



View Profile
February 24, 2017, 11:29:04 AM
 #23

Has anyone noticed that, recently, few US-involved wars have come to an end?  From Somalia, to Afghanistan and Iraq, and now Libya, Syria and Yemen, all have either become failed states or been embroiled in endless civil war, with much suffering for their people.

I almost didn't believe it when you said it. Had to look it up.

Somalia - https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/16/world/africa/obama-somalia-secret-war.html?_r=0

Afghanistan - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2015%E2%80%93present)

Iraq - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American-led_intervention_in_Iraq_(2014%E2%80%93present)

Lybia - http://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/iraq/u.s.-troops.htm

Syria - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American-led_intervention_in_Syria

Yemen - https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/15/us-bombed-yemen-middle-east-conflict

The real question is - should the US just sit back and watch as Dictators and Terrorist tear existing countries or peaceful people apart? If your neighbor is being attacked, do you join in the fight to help your neighbor or do you sit back and let them figure it out? What's the right move?

The road to hell is paved with good intentions

Iraq and Lybia are now close to being failed states (other countries in this list are already there). Obviously, Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi were not angels (didn't even come close), but they certainly were a lesser of evils in regard to what we see in these countries right now, i.e. an endless civil war of all against all, which is spreading to neighboring countries at that (see Syria). It seems that the US itself now recognizes that overthrowing Hussein had been a bloody mistake. I don't even speak about the contrived reason why the US attacked Iraq in 2003



Remember that?

BobK71
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 555


View Profile
February 27, 2017, 01:45:03 PM
 #24

The real question is - should the US just sit back and watch as Dictators and Terrorist tear existing countries or peaceful people apart? If your neighbor is being attacked, do you join in the fight to help your neighbor or do you sit back and let them figure it out? What's the right move?

What you state is a real moral dilemma, but fortunately we don't have to deal with it in this topic.  The reason is that helping the local people fight dictators and terrorists is never the real reason for US intervention -- it is only the advertised reason.

The Rwanda genocide lost a few hundred thousand lives, but since the country held no importance to the imperial financial and economic system, the genocide was allowed to occur.

The main point of the original post was to poke a hole in the advertisement by the imperial elites and the media, that it is all about the local people.  It is about supporting the dollar and the rest of the imperial system.
BobK71
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 555


View Profile
June 21, 2017, 12:44:07 PM
 #25

I can see the USD surviving for at least another 20 years. After the Trump era is over, we'll see how the big financial crisis was inevitable. Both EUR and USD are under a big wave coming. If EUR fails USD fails, if USD fails EUR fails.

We are going to see the end of a big fiat currency die in our lifetime, the cycle is almost over.

If I had to guess, I would guess what you say.

But the values of the 'core' currencies are never really determined by market forces.  The imperial system uses war and regime change to intimidate governments around the world to support the dollar in one way or another.  That makes for a complex system that is hard to predict.

Even small countries like Syria must be taught a lesson.  Noam Chomsky uses the term 'mafia principle' to describe the system: if a small shopkeeper refuses to pay protection money, the amount is not important, but other shopkeepers might get the idea they can defy the mafia.  In the case of Syria, the straw that broke the camel's back was only the issue of allowing a natural gas pipeline from Qatar.
jtipt
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728



View Profile
June 21, 2017, 12:59:23 PM
 #26

I can see the USD surviving for at least another 20 years. After the Trump era is over, we'll see how the big financial crisis was inevitable. Both EUR and USD are under a big wave coming. If EUR fails USD fails, if USD fails EUR fails.

We are going to see the end of a big fiat currency die in our lifetime, the cycle is almost over.
Are you sure about this, according to me for a major fiat to die, the country of the fiat has to die first. While in case of EUR its more than one country buy for USD it's the USA, and you are speculating that in the coming 80-100Yrs we will see the death of USA. Well if you asked this few years ago I would have been 100% sure that wouldn't happen, but today it very well might be possible but still the probability is very low, i mean it's the world leader(more or less) 1 bad president certainly can't cause its death.

BobK71
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 555


View Profile
June 21, 2017, 08:55:18 PM
 #27

... according to me for a major fiat to die, the country of the fiat has to die first. While in case of EUR its more than one country buy for USD it's the USA, and you are speculating that in the coming 80-100Yrs we will see the death of USA. Well if you asked this few years ago I would have been 100% sure that wouldn't happen, but today it very well might be possible but still the probability is very low, i mean it's the world leader(more or less) 1 bad president certainly can't cause its death.

Depends on what you mean by 'death.'  Currencies around the world are massively devalued all the time.  Sometimes a currency is abandoned in favor of a new one.  Virtually all fiat currencies are at least 'half dead.'  The strongest, say, the dollar and pound sterling, are worth a small fraction of their values, say, 100 years ago, both in terms of purchasing power, and in terms of gold.
Hydrogen
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630



View Profile
June 22, 2017, 02:41:02 AM
 #28

All of lockheed martins big shareholders are wallstreet investment firms and banks.

When lockheed martins F-35 costs more than $1 trillion.

Taxpayers could ask themselves if the cost is justified or whether the project is a huge wealth re-distribution scam intended to make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

 

Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!