Michael Moore - Capitalism Is Evil?

[actinanass]

The mass media are the popular TV (NBC/CBS/ABC), print (Newsweek/Wall Street Journal/Washington Post), radio, and websites (Yahoo!/Google/Myspace).

Let me get this straight, you believe today's mass media has power because it is independent and disobeys government orders?

I'll just say that is a naive vision.

I'm saying that if something was as big as a 9-11 conspiracy, it would have been covered more than watergate. Lets be honest here, do you actually think that the mass media would actually vouch for GEORGE BUSH? Really, for George Bush? We aren't talking about a popular president like Reagan, or even Clinton *in which they focus in on his scandals*, but we are talking about GEORGE FUCKING BUSH?

I understand that you do not trust the media, government, hell even your mama, but lets put common sense forward. If 9-11 was an inside job, with the amount of leaks in the Bush Administration, do you actually think it wouldn't have been leaked out by now? Not to mention, if that was the case, the left would of destroyed Bush in 2004. Hell, if that conspiracy was true, I wouldn't have voted for Bush.

I have a theory for people like you, and many others on this board. I call it the bitter Ex girlfriend syndrome. Ever had that ex that thought you was cheating every time you would not answer the phone, leave the house, be on the internet, go out with some friends, ect? Then, when you break up with her, and find someone else, she swears that you were fucking with your current girlfriend while you were in the relationship with her? You're the ex that thought Bush did everything in the book, yet, had no evidence. Oh yea, you probably had someone tell you *in an intelligent way* that he did this/that. However, you go on the belief that Bush did everything in the book, and that everyone is vouching for him. In reality, you actually have nothing but rhetoric. A sign of true insecurity....

 

[thoughtone]

I'm saying that if something was as big as a 9-11 conspiracy, it would have been covered more than watergate. Lets be honest here, do you actually think that the mass media would actually vouch for GEORGE BUSH? Really, for George Bush? We aren't talking about a popular president like Reagan, or even Clinton *in which they focus in on his scandals*, but we are talking about GEORGE FUCKING BUSH?

I understand that you do not trust the media, government, hell even your mama, but lets put common sense forward. If 9-11 was an inside job, with the amount of leaks in the Bush Administration, do you actually think it wouldn't have been leaked out by now? Not to mention, if that was the case, the left would of destroyed Bush in 2004. Hell, if that conspiracy was true, I wouldn't have voted for Bush.

I have a theory for people like you, and many others on this board. I call it the bitter Ex girlfriend syndrome. Ever had that ex that thought you was cheating every time you would not answer the phone, leave the house, be on the internet, go out with some friends, ect? Then, when you break up with her, and find someone else, she swears that you were fucking with your current girlfriend while you were in the relationship with her? You're the ex that thought Bush did everything in the book, yet, had no evidence. Oh yea, you probably had someone tell you *in an intelligent way* that he did this/that. However, you go on the belief that Bush did everything in the book, and that everyone is vouching for him. In reality, you actually have nothing but rhetoric. A sign of true insecurity....

Boo, hoo, hoo! Poor GW!

 

[Cock Head Jones]

Any links to the movie yet?

 

[oolong tea]

I'm saying that if something was as big as a 9-11 conspiracy, it would have been covered more than watergate. Lets be honest here, do you actually think that the mass media would actually vouch for GEORGE BUSH? Really, for George Bush? We aren't talking about a popular president like Reagan, or even Clinton *in which they focus in on his scandals*, but we are talking about GEORGE FUCKING BUSH?

Look, if you really believe WASN'T an inside job, you're possibly one of those folks that believes that the government wouldn't bring harm upon its own.

Yes, we're talking GEORGE BUSH. Same Bush that stole the seat against Gore. The same Bush that hesitated to search for Osama Bin Laden two months after the 9/11 "attacks".

The same Bush who inadvertently landed Noreaga in jail but the former Panamanian president threatened his daddy to leak disturbing pics of his son to the press. Ended up killing thousands in his search for Manuel for charges unknown. Next, had France wish to try him after fulfilling his sentence in Miami. Similar tactics to seizing Hussein.

What's insulting about 9/11, is that with a bit of COMMON SENSE, you can understand that it was a cover up. Simple facts: There are four types of fires; combustible, flammable, electrical, and chemical. Any fire that continues to burn for days long AFTER its fuel is extinguished is bound to be a chemical fire. Second, there's no ordinary fire in the world that can melt steel. If there were, the steel hulls used in making ships for AIRCRAFT CARRIERS holding jet fuel would have crumpled in 10 seconds flat after a fire also.

I understand that you do not trust the media, government, hell even your mama, but lets put common sense forward. If 9-11 was an inside job, with the amount of leaks in the Bush Administration, do you actually think it wouldn't have been leaked out by now?

Do you honestly think that big business doesn't have the media in check? They bought the media as they bought the politicians. Architects and engineers lost their jobs over speaking their minds about 9/11, not to mention the fire fighters that heard explosions to support the facts. Answer me this, why hasn't Bldg. 7 been discussed in the media? Do you know about Building 7?


You have common sense; what's that look like to you?

Insecurity is what the government wants you to feel. Why would security be the driving force for the Patriot Act? Stop using buzzwords that you have no understanding of, simply because its popular i.e. bi-polar, paparazzi, insecurity.

 

[thoughtone]

Any links to the movie yet?

They have added a special feature on this site call SEARCH!

 

[QueEx]

L O L

 

[Lamarr]

What's insulting about 9/11, is that with a bit of COMMON SENSE, you can understand that it was a cover up. Simple facts: There are four types of fires; combustible, flammable, electrical, and chemical. Any fire that continues to burn for days long AFTER its fuel is extinguished is bound to be a chemical fire. Second, there's no ordinary fire in the world that can melt steel. If there were, the steel hulls used in making ships for AIRCRAFT CARRIERS holding jet fuel would have crumpled in 10 seconds flat after a fire also.

preach! ! ! ! ! !

Do you honestly think that big business doesn't have the media in check? They bought the media as they bought the politicians. Architects and engineers lost their jobs over speaking their minds about 9/11, not to mention the fire fighters that heard explosions to support the facts. Answer me this, why hasn't Bldg. 7 been discussed in the media? Do you know about Building 7?

A lot of these cats don't know what what WTC 7 was and if they did, they sure don't understand the significance.

 

[thoughtone]

preach! ! ! ! ! !



A lot of these cats don't know what what WTC 7 was and if they did, they sure don't understand the significance.

The 9/11 conspiracy is a diversion. As we speak, the so called "G20" is deciding how to carve up the world for the multination corporations and top 1% of the economic population. You need to focus on that!

 

[Lamarr]

The 9/11 conspiracy is a diversion. As we speak, the so called "G20" is deciding how to carve up the world for the multination corporations and top 1% of the economic population. You need to focus on that!

It seems that is what Obama is pushing for, just like the 1st George Bush told us in 1991

 

[nittie]

Nothing personal just trying to make a point.

"Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.” -Eleanor Roosevelt

US income gap widens as poor take hit in recession
WASHINGTON – The recession has hit middle-income and poor families hardest, widening the economic gap between the richest and poorest Americans as rippling job layoffs ravaged household budgets.

The wealthiest 10 percent of Americans — those making more than $138,000 each year — earned 11.4 times the roughly $12,000 made by those living near or below the poverty line in 2008, according to newly released census figures. That ratio was an increase from 11.2 in 2007 and the previous high of 11.22 in 2003.

Household income declined across all groups, but at sharper percentage levels for middle-income and poor Americans. Median income fell last year from $52,163 to $50,303, wiping out a decade's worth of gains to hit the lowest level since 1997.

Poverty jumped sharply to 13.2 percent, an 11-year high.

"No one should be surprised at the increased disparity," said Richard Freeman, an economist at Harvard University. "Unemployment hurts normal workers who do not have the golden parachutes the folks at the top have."

This is capitialism at its finest. The media is downplaying the increasing wealth gap. Elites are dehumanizing the poor and working class and basically the poor and working class are just talking and conforming while their life is being taken from them.

It's time to start talking about ideas, like starting a new web based economy before the politicians allow google, msn and their cronies to monopolize it.

People should look at whats happening to the net, pay message boards, hate filled blogs, celeb scandal sites, ads everywhere and be very scared because it is prolly the last hope for the little guy.

 

[thoughtone]

It seems that is what Obama is pushing for, just like the 1st George Bush told us in 1991

How so?

And this thread as veered off topic. Moore speaks the truth!

 

[Lamarr]

How so?

just listen 2 the words. I would type em out but I'm just lazy today but this shit been planned for yrs. I got some links to the Council on Foreign Relations sites talkin about how the US would have to "cede some of its sovereignty" in order to move forward in the 21st century. Once I read through their website, it changed my whole outlook on everything. CFR is a Rockefellor "think tank". The UN sits on Rockefellor land.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7a9Syi12RJo&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7a9Syi12RJo&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>


"For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will.

If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." - David Rockefellor

 

[thoughtone]

just listen 2 the words. I would type em out but I'm just lazy today but this shit been planned for yrs. I got some links to the Council on Foreign Relations sites talkin about how the US would have to "cede some of its sovereignty" in order to move forward in the 21st century. Once I read through their website, it changed my whole outlook on everything. CFR is a Rockefellor "think tank". The UN sits on Rockefellor land.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7a9Syi12RJo&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7a9Syi12RJo&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>


"For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will.

If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." - David Rockefellor

"It seems that is what Obama is pushing for..."

You still haven't shown how Obama is pushing for this.

 

[Lamarr]

"It seems that is what Obama is pushing for..."

You still haven't shown how Obama is pushing for this.

with all due respect, What do you think he was doing at the G-20?

you do know world leaders are pushing for a new reserve currency to replace the dollar, correct?

 

[Cruise]

with all due respect, What do you think he was doing at the G-20?

you do know world leaders are pushing for a new reserve currency to replace the dollar, correct?

I suppose the Rockefeller/Morgan credit DOLLAR period is ending its world status.

However, as long as the Rockefeller bank (Goldman Sachs) still exists, it shows the dollar still has tremendous pull in global economics.

It's funny, we think a dollar is our money, when it is really the property and creation of a system of private corporations (the banks).

The G-20 is a corporate meeting to decide which corporation gets to make the new world economic trade tool.

Gotta love it!

 

[Lamarr]

I suppose the Rockefeller/Morgan credit DOLLAR period is ending its world status.

However, as long as the Rockefeller bank (Goldman Sachs) still exists, it shows the dollar still has tremendous pull in global economics.

It's funny, we think a dollar is our money, when it is really the property and creation of a system of private corporations (the banks).

well, as long as they accept my fiat, paper money for gold & silver, i'm cool.

The G-20 is a corporate meeting to decide which corporation gets to make the new world economic trade tool.

Gotta love it!

well, its coming to an end that for sure & I see them positioning the IMF as "the worlds Federal Reserve". If we can reach enough people maybe something righteous could come out of the upcoming "dollar crisis"

 

[Cruise]

well, as long as they accept my fiat, paper money for gold & silver, i'm cool.

As long as we use their fiat paper, the banks are happy, too!

Why doesn't each city float its own paper, on its own credit, based on community trust.

a St. Louis NOTE (the brewie),
a Cleveland NOTE (the erie),
a Miami NOTE (the fruity ),
a Seattle NOTE (the hoodie)
etc.

Why do we all use NOTES/PAPER that only come from New York City (the dollar)?

There is no law saying we must use BANK PAPER, so why can't we create our own PAPER and use that, at least some of the time?

To answer my own question, we are the biggest threat to ourselves, not the banks. We choose to use NYC BANK PAPER and to forego all other forms of currency and trade.

Ron Paul and Michael Moore should be pointing the finger at us for allowing this ridiculous scam to continue for so long.

Either they are not courageous enough to do that, or they don't believe we are courageous enough to listen or maybe they're both in the pockets of the bank cartel.

well, its coming to an end that for sure & I see them positioning the IMF as "the worlds Federal Reserve". If we can reach enough people maybe something righteous could come out of the upcoming "dollar crisis"

Too many people love that paper! It's hard as hell to break its spell.

 

[Lamarr]

Why doesn't each city float its own paper, on its own credit, based on community trust.

a St. Louis NOTE (the brewie),
a Cleveland NOTE (the erie),
a Miami NOTE (the fruity ),
a Seattle NOTE (the hoodie)
etc.

competing currencies is an option! But our society would have major problems adapting

Why do we all use NOTES/PAPER that only come from New York City (the dollar)?

The last cat that tried to introduce a competing currency was JFK.

Ron Paul and Michael Moore should be pointing the finger at us for allowing this ridiculous scam to continue for so long.

Either they are not courageous enough to do that, or they don't believe we are courageous enough to listen or maybe they're both in the pockets of the bank cartel.

Michael Moore doesn't have a clue about banking. Ron talks about this quite a bit, he's just too passive & nice. Of people who have had the "spotlight" in the last decade, Who has spoken out more than Ron? Jesse, Mfume, Biden, Who? This is a quote of his from the floor of the House:

Indeed, any power a government arrogates to itself, it is loathe to give back to the people. Just as we have gone from a constitutionally-instituted national defense consisting of a limited army and navy bolstered by militias and letters of marque and reprisal, we have moved from a system of competing currencies to a government-instituted banking cartel that monopolizes the issuance of currency. In order to introduce a system of competing currencies, there are three steps that must be taken to produce a legal climate favorable to competition.

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2008/cr021308h.htm

Too many people love that paper! It's hard as hell to break its spell.

Perhaps, those Chinese students that laughed at Geithner will help break that spell.

 

[oolong tea]

This is what I don't understand. If a corporation owes plenty to its shareholders, does that mean an undeveloped nation, say Bolivia, can claim a corporation provided its citizens invest ?

For instance, let's say Nestle wanted to build a plant in Ivory Coast. Now, assuming each share is worth 20.00. The locals all agree to donate 20 and 1,000,000 shares are purchased under one entity. Wouldn't that give the Ivorians the majority say of how they (Nestle) practice business in that country or other countries?

 

[nittie]

Perhaps, those Chinese students that laughed at Geithner will help break that spell.

Doing business with Chinese and other foriegn businesses is the answer because it would break global corporations grip on consumers. There are plenty of small businesses and startups around the world who would love American support.

It would just be a matter of finding trustworthy companies and then exercising free will. Like buying because it's profitable to the consumer and not following media generated trends. Jeans are jeans, sneakers are sneakers if enuff people stop buying brands corporations would have to listen, adapt and maybe spread the wealth.

 

[thoughtone]

with all due respect, What do you think he was doing at the G-20?

you do know world leaders are pushing for a new reserve currency to replace the dollar, correct?

You tell me, what did HE say at the G20?

Saddam Hussein wanted to replace the dollar as the reserve currency way back in 1990. What do you think got him bombed? After all we trained his engineers in nuclear weapons technology.

No comment eh?

 

[Cruise]

competing currencies is an option! But our society would have major problems adapting



The last cat that tried to introduce a competing currency was JFK.

Society could adapt very easily and quickly to new currencies, the way it adapts to new websites.

Though the public won't accept alternatives while the government/Fed maintains its monopoly.

And, you know my opinion on JFK. Government money is not competition.

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2008/cr021308h.htm

I didn't know he already said this. But, I'll go one step further.

Ron Paul seems to think the competing currencies of colonial America to the pre-Civil War were somehow a panacea of economic stability.

While those periods had more stability than today, they were still highly inflationary, and unstable economically. You can still have HUGE inflationary periods WITH gold and silver. Followed by deflation. Those swings are no joke.

There was never a period on this continent where there was true currency competition, because the States or Federal government always prevented it (taxes, legal tender, state chartered banks, National banks, etc.).

Merchants and politicians LOVE paper. Farmers/Agriculture HATE it. For a long time, this was the great battle in the United States, culminating in the Civil War.

Since you can't get rid of paper (despite what Ron Paul thinks), you may as well give everyone the power to print.

Personally, I believe it is the profit motive (capitalism) that makes merchants/corporations so fixated on paper currency.

Paper currency is like cheating. Once one cheats, everyone has to cheat. So, to keep everyone honest, you give everyone the power to cheat.

 

[Lamarr]

While those periods had more stability than today, they were still highly inflationary, and unstable economically. You can still have HUGE inflationary periods WITH gold and silver. Followed by deflation. Those swings are no joke.

I'd have to take your word on this, I can't refute the statement but allow me to pose a question: Were those periods you bring up, inflationary in terms of gold & silver or in terms of the paper currency they were using at the time? I say that because last summer when oil spiked to $147 / barrel, the price, if measured in gold / silver remained steady but if measured in dollars, prices spiked. if that makes any sense

Merchants and politicians LOVE paper. Farmers/Agriculture HATE it. For a long time, this was the great battle in the United States, culminating in the Civil War.

I agree, Politicians love paper money because they're not faced with the limitations of a commodities-based currency. So they can print, print, print. Which is ridiculous because if we can just print our money, no one would have to work

Paper currency is like cheating. Once one cheats, everyone has to cheat. So, to keep everyone honest, you give everyone the power to cheat.

true, its counterfeit. I welcome honest dialog because maybe the kids coming up after us can benefit in some way. But you know what, if that dollar ever stops workin, the way people are accustomed, we really have an oppurtunity if we have an informed public.

 

[Cruise]

I'd have to take your word on this, I can't refute the statement but allow me to pose a question: Were those periods you bring up, inflationary in terms of gold & silver or in terms of the paper currency they were using at the time? I say that because last summer when oil spiked to $147 / barrel, the price, if measured in gold / silver remained steady but if measured in dollars, prices spiked. if that makes any sense

Actually, currency (paper notes) was not in wide use until Abraham Lincoln arrived with his "greenbacks" in 1861.

People relied on gold and silver coins. In fact, the most widely circulating coin was the silver pieces of eight, from Mexico, until about 1857.

However, large purchases were rarely carried out in gold and silver (buying a business, inventory, selling land, cattle, livestock). They were done through bank transfers and bookkeeping entries.

When a large business, government, or sometimes a very wealthy individual, made a trade, it would be conducted through financial instruments and registered as book entries. No cash changed hands. This is where the inflation started. It didn't matter that all transactions were denominated in gold and silver.

Reserve banking and pyramiding loans which facilitate government debt and commerical financing lead to boom/bust cycles and periods of inflation/deflation. The form of money is made irrelevant under this scheme (e.g. gold, silver, platinum, etc.)

Ron Paul's solution to this is free banking. Of course, my attitude is banking is what led to this mess in the first place.

My solution is not necessarily to abandon paper, nor gold/silver, but to destroy banks and let money be decided in the marketplace by everyone (like a website).

I agree, Politicians love paper money because they're not faced with the limitations of a commodities-based currency. So they can print, print, print. Which is ridiculous because if we can just print our money, no one would have to work



true, its counterfeit. I welcome honest dialog because maybe the kids coming up after us can benefit in some way. But you know what, if that dollar ever stops workin, the way people are accustomed, we really have an oppurtunity if we have an informed public.

I don't have much hope for the kids nor the public.

Ignorance is too easy and requires no work. There are so many more interesting distractions to occupy your time (new stuff house/car/TV/whatever, sports, movies, XBox, phone, etc.).

However, it is becoming clearer, that our ignorance has been used to rob us our entire lives with our willing support.

 

[nittie]

Capitalism is great when there is competition between business and consumer. Then the exchange is kept on something of a level playing field. It falters when people become lazy and dropout. Thats when special interest groups buy their way to the top. The only advantage business has is they are not afraid of power or change. Add that to the fact they are organized and focused and it's gameova for consumers. What it boils down to is mental attitude, no one has a monopoly, patent or copyright on attitude. Its time for people to come up with ideas and get in the game again. The internet is the perfect way to do it.

 

[Cruise]

The only advantage business has is they are not afraid of power or change.

This makes no sense.

The whole point of having banks, lobbyists, intellectual property is because businesses/merchants HATE and DESPISE change, like all bureaucracies.

 

[nittie]

This makes no sense.

The whole point of having banks, lobbyists, intellectual property is because businesses/merchants HATE and DESPISE change, like all bureaucracies.

Thats not true. One of main points of capitialism is 'change is constant', and you have to adapt, not saying they don't want to control the pace of change but they know its got to happen. Going from gold to paper, derivatives, different investment vehicles, globalism, represent change. Now if they can sell the public on conservatism while they adapt then it gives them a huge advantage but if people fall for the bull its their fault, according to business anyway.

 

[Cruise]

Thats not true. One of main points of capitialism is 'change is constant', and you have to adapt, not saying they don't want to control the pace of change but they know its got to happen. Going from gold to paper, derivatives, different investment vehicles, globalism, represent change. Now if they can sell the public on conservatism while they adapt then it gives them a huge advantage but if people fall for the bull its their fault, according to business anyway.

Capitalism is about fighting change. It sees change as a threat to profit and manifests as exploiting people, material, and land.

When the Europeans, took their capitalism to different cultures (Africa, Asia, America), they didn't say let's adapt to your cultures and engage in mutually beneficial trade and share knowledge.

Rather, with their corporations, banks, and FREE TRADE, they enslaved, stole, and destroyed to enforce their values/culture on everyone else to maximize profit.

Big Business never wants to adapt. Rather, it tries to force everyone to adapt to them.

It's why new technologies almost never come from existing big business.

Rather, globalism, central banking, paper currency, copyrights/patents, stock markets are the antithesis of change and human advancement.

They are control mechanisms used by BIG BUSINESS to force everyone to do things their way.

 

[nittie]

Capitalism is about fighting change. It sees change as a threat to profit and manifests as exploiting people, material, and land.

When the Europeans, took their capitalism to different cultures (Africa, Asia, America), they didn't say let's adapt to your cultures and engage in mutually beneficial trade and share knowledge.

Rather, with their corporations, banks, and FREE TRADE, they enslaved, stole, and destroyed to enforce their values/culture on everyone else to maximize profit.

Big Business never wants to adapt. Rather, it tries to force everyone to adapt to them.

It's why new technologies almost never come from existing big business.

Rather, globalism, central banking, paper currency, copyrights/patents, stock markets are the antithesis of change and human advancement.

They are control mechanisms used by BIG BUSINESS to force everyone to do things their way.

Change is inevitable. There is no getting around it. So one has to adapt or die. Yes change is a threat to business. Yes people want to slow the rate of change as much as possible. But its going to happen. Yes Big Business has builtin control mechanisms. It is all about having things their way but the question is why do they have so much power and how can a fair and equitable trade be accomplished. That cannot happen unless people push back. That means manipulating circumstances the way business does. Time, matter, money are just elements they can be molded. Capitalism was a reaction to the Monarchy. Someone had to concieve the system. John Locke, Bacon, the Founding Fathers, to a certain extent, created the system it didn't create itself. Thats what I mean by no one has a monopoly on attitude or ideas we can create a economic system like they did. The thought of that terrifies the elites but its not going to create itself.

 

[Cruise]

Change is inevitable. There is no getting around it. So one has to adapt or die. Yes change is a threat to business. Yes people want to slow the rate of change as much as possible. But its going to happen. Yes Big Business has builtin control mechanisms. It is all about having things their way but the question is why do they have so much power and how can a fair and equitable trade be accomplished. That cannot happen unless people push back. That means manipulating circumstances the way business does. Time, matter, money are just elements they can be molded. Capitalism was a reaction to the Monarchy. Someone had to concieve the system. John Locke, Bacon, the Founding Fathers, to a certain extent, created the system it didn't create itself. Thats what I mean by no one has a monopoly on attitude or ideas we can create a economic system like they did. The thought of that terrifies the elites but its not going to create itself.

After considering your post, I'm reaching the conclusion that whites invented capitalism to reflect their general contempt for the Earth and its people.

Very few things have had as destructive effect as capitalism and its worship of profit.

As long as people choose to worship (debt) at the altar (dollar) of the capitalist shrine (banks), nothing will change any time soon.

This economic model/system will collapse, but I think it will be thrust on people rather than any conscious/willing decision.

 

[Lamarr]

Ron Paul's solution to this is free banking. Of course, my attitude is banking is what led to this mess in the first place.

My solution is not necessarily to abandon paper, nor gold/silver, but to destroy banks and let money be decided in the marketplace by everyone (like a website).

Maybe I don't understand what you're saying because it's been documented, at least since 1988, that Ron speaks out against the Fed and even it's very existence (He just wrote a book "End the Fed"). There are many causes for what we're experiencing today, and yes, fractional reserve banking deserves most of the blame.

The solutions are somewhere in your statement above but one thing is for sure, discipline must be imposed on any system if they wish for it to last. And we already know lawmakers are too fixated on the privileges "paper" money brings.

 

[Cruise]

Maybe I don't understand what you're saying because it's been documented, at least since 1988, that Ron speaks out against the Fed and even it's very existence (He just wrote a book "End the Fed"). There are many causes for what we're experiencing today, and yes, fractional reserve banking deserves most of the blame.

I often confuse libertarian with the so-called Austrian school of economics.

However, Ron Paul repeatedly writes about Austrian Economics.

Their belief is that central banking is a failure and the best way for banking to work is with free banking. This differs from the free banking period that existed in the United States in the 19th century, which simply meant state governments were free to authorize as many banks as they wanted WITHOUT federal government interference.

Austrian free banking says banking is a business like any other. If a bank cannot meet the withdrawal demands of its depositors, it must be closed & liquidated immediately, because it is insolvent. This is unlike American banking, with bank holidays, bank notes, and bank bailouts.

Personally, I think all banks are hell on mankind.

Credit should ONLY come from producers, such as manufacturers, workers, and farmers, not banks or governments. However, the allure of pooling credit in the form of debt is too great for whites to resist.

 

[nittie]

I think a good question to ask ourselves since we spend alot of time here is "How do we start a bank for BGOL regulars"?

That might sound crazy but thats how things happen, by asking questions. The Black Church is a good place to look for ideas.

In almost every Black community there is a congregation of about 50 regular members paying for a multimillion dollar church and they still have money for extras like revivals, dinners, buying the Rev a new Caddy every year. How do they do it and would that system work elsewhere. Change starts at home.

 

[Cruise]

I think a good question to ask ourselves since we spend alot of time here is "How do we start a bank for BGOL regulars"?

The very basis for any form of trade is trust. Is there enough trust to engage in trade or do people feel the white boy's dollar is all they need?

I've thought about a trade network (I hate banks). My findings so far...

there must be personal accountability, so it can't be a corporation (maybe a trust???)

there cannot be sales and purchases, only loans & investments (to get around the tax issue)

there cannot be any connection to the dollar (to get around banking laws & pricing issues)

it must be based on production, not promises (unlike paper currency)

That might sound crazy but thats how things happen, by asking questions. The Black Church is a good place to look for ideas.

In almost every Black community there is a congregation of about 50 regular members paying for a multimillion dollar church and they still have money for extras like revivals, dinners, buying the Rev a new Caddy every year. How do they do it and would that system work elsewhere. Change starts at home.

I don't know if the Church is a good place or not. Personally, it seems better to avoid the Preachers & Reverends, if possible. They have shown a preponderance toward excessive consumption, flashy lifestyles, and ostentatious spending.

These are the very characteristics you want to avoid in an improved financial system.

But, as you see, the capital is available for our communities to become independent, economically. We just choose to use the white boy's system.

They have us convinced that we need whitey to survive.

 

[nittie]

Originally Posted by Cruise
The very basis for any form of trade is trust. Is there enough trust to engage in trade or do people feel the white boy's dollar is all they need?

I've thought about a trade network (I hate banks). My findings so far...

there must be personal accountability, so it can't be a corporation (maybe a trust???)

there cannot be sales and purchases, only loans & investments (to get around the tax issue)

there cannot be any connection to the dollar (to get around banking laws & pricing issues)

it must be based on production, not promises (unlike paper currency)

Trade is based on trust but is trade whats needed its more about empowerment, so trust would be taken out of the equasion thru contracts and different agreements.

If the goal is empowerment it opens more doors, gives people more options. One scenario could be trade based on production. There could also be investments, sales and purchases under a corporate system, as long as there is strict accountability.

Originally Posted by Cruise
I don't know if the Church is a good place or not. Personally, it seems better to avoid the Preachers & Reverends, if possible. They have shown a preponderance toward excessive consumption, flashy lifestyles, and ostentatious spending.

These are the very characteristics you want to avoid in an improved financial system.

But, as you see, the capital is available for our communities to become independent, economically. We just choose to use the white boy's system.

They have us convinced that we need whitey to survive

The Black Church might be the only organization that survived against capitalism. It outlived socialism, communism and imperalism. We've seen govts crumble but the Black Church is still standing, it amazing when you think about it. Preachers & Reverends aren't necessary but the principles and values of the Black church would be worth emulating along with the way a small group like a congregation can have so much power and influence in a given commuinty.

The main point was to get some ideas and opinions flowing. Get some feedback started and see how many differents ideas are out there about leveling the field.