New World Order and One World Currency

[breno785au]

A man wins $5,000,000 dollars and ends up with $150,000 in debt? Seriously? That is not just financially irresponsible, that is just plain financially stupid

I think part of this financial stupidity as you rightfully call it is the average person (including myself) has this mindset of having only one income stream (per person) in a household and relying on things like menial payrises each year where you don't get any financially because your always trying to catch up to GDP. I think the best way to go is passive income, granted you have the time to work and generate other income sources. I'd say a lot of people would if they used time more wisely. Things like using natural gifts and talents to generate income, going into real estate etc.

One income stream is a killer financially I think and I'm working on ways to broaden that myself.

 

[oldman]

While I have no definitive proof, I believe many of the most powerful people in government (in ALL parties) are members of the Illuminati, while most people deny that group even exists!

.Perhaps there is a scripture to back you up.

[h=1]Ephesians 6:12King James Version (KJV)[/h][FONT=&quot]12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

Perhaps the 'spiritual wickedness' are some of those in power - humans. The other 3 appear to be spiritual entities. The humans may or may not realize that they are being used by dark forces.[/FONT]

 

[Alertandawake]

From a financial point of view, it does make you wonder if the future of mankind is to be forever in debt to those who control the finances of the world? The push for elimination of physical money, at the same time, the push for more traceable methods of payments. The big question is, how can a "global currency" be introduced to the world? Does existing currencies have to be made worthless? Does everyone start from scratch again with a 0 balance?

 

[PennEd]

I think part of this financial stupidity as you rightfully call it is the average person (including myself) has this mindset of having only one income stream (per person) in a household and relying on things like menial payrises each year where you don't get any financially because your always trying to catch up to GDP. I think the best way to go is passive income, granted you have the time to work and generate other income sources. I'd say a lot of people would if they used time more wisely. Things like using natural gifts and talents to generate income, going into real estate etc.

One income stream is a killer financially I think and I'm working on ways to broaden that myself.

What is "passive income"? Gosh, I hope i'm not smelling the stench of socialism with that remark!

 

[breno785au]

What is "passive income"? Gosh, I hope i'm not smelling the stench of socialism with that remark!

Google it. Passive income is an income stream where you put work into something and it perpetually creates income with no extra work required. An ultimate example of this is writing a song and then continually getting paid royalties for it. That is passive income, publishing a novel is passive income, a successful YouTube video is passive income etc. etc.

Yourself not knowing what passive income is an example of what I meant

 

[tourist]

Has anyone on this forum ever studied the U.S. Constitution? Specifically, I am talking about Article 1, Section 10, Clause 1, "No state shall ... make ANY THING but gold or silver COIN a tender in payment of debt.

The United States is a collection of states, so that clause applies to ALL states!

No states can issue their own form of currency. The federal government is not a state but governs the states and it can do anything it wants in regards to forms of monetary exchange.

 

[tourist]

I think part of this financial stupidity as you rightfully call it is the average person (including myself) has this mindset of having only one income stream (per person) in a household and relying on things like menial payrises each year where you don't get any financially because your always trying to catch up to GDP. I think the best way to go is passive income, granted you have the time to work and generate other income sources. I'd say a lot of people would if they used time more wisely. Things like using natural gifts and talents to generate income, going into real estate etc.

One income stream is a killer financially I think and I'm working on ways to broaden that myself.

The concept you have stated was covered in a book years ago called Rich Dad, Poor Dad. The Poor Dad relied on solely on his paycheck. The Rich Dad, in addition to any wages also had a revenue stream called portfolio income that include some of the examples you listed. You raised a very interesting point and one that I myself have been giving considerable thought as of late.

 

[tourist]

Yes, indeed, and guess what political party took the United States OFF the "gold standard!" Do you know who FDR was?

I believe that the president who took the United States off the gold standard was Nixon and not FDR. The gold standard was based on an arbitrary set price of gold that had no intrinsic value relative to what is was actually worth. The true value of a dollar is in the eyes of the beholder that is based on what is considered the good faith and standing of the United States in paying off its debts in a timely basis. As that faith is eroded the value of the dollar is lessened and inflation occurs in the price of goods and services. Eventually the entire economic system will collapse with the results being war, chaos and misery.

 

[oldman]

From a financial point of view, it does make you wonder if the future of mankind is to be forever in debt to those who control the finances of the world? The push for elimination of physical money, at the same time, the push for more traceable methods of payments. The big question is, how can a "global currency" be introduced to the world? Does existing currencies have to be made worthless? Does everyone start from scratch again with a 0 balance?

.And then there's this. Looks like no physical cash used, just some sort of credit balance in some sort of account.

. Wisconsin Company to Implant Microchips in Employees | KSTP.com

 

[breno785au]

The concept you have stated was covered in a book years ago called Rich Dad, Poor Dad. The Poor Dad relied on solely on his paycheck. The Rich Dad, in addition to any wages also had a revenue stream called portfolio income that include some of the examples you listed. You raised a very interesting point and one that I myself have been giving considerable thought as of late.

Yes, that is the book that exposed my financial ignorance lol

I take no credit for what I said above.

 

[Huckleberry]

Looking at matters from a financial point of view (as we both know, one can buy with money/assets they own, or one can buy on credit), I wonder, can a "Global Currency", especially in the world of digital money, could such a system make a person always in debt? Imagine a system of commerce where people who are buying, are always buying on credit, and never able to pay off the debt incurred?

Nothing can "make a person in debt" except
spending money they haven't earned yet.
Debt is, by definition, borrowed money.
No borrow, no debt.
Nobody is forced to borrow money.
People borrow because they lack discipline.

 

[Inquistor]

You must not have studied it well either.

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

The purpose of that section is to restrict states from engaging in activity that is reserved to congress in section 8, or engaging in activity that this nation shall not in whole.

I made no error in my post. Did you see the three dots after "no state shall ...?" in my original post? It meant there were other words following the three dots which were not relevant to the point I was making in my post! And the "purpose for that section" was ALSO irrelevant, because the words became "the letter of the law!"

 

[Huckleberry]

Money is an illusion.
It does not exist as most percieve it, as it has no
intrinsic value because it is backed by nothing.

Monetary systems are necessary so we can trade goods and services,
and they work themselves out nicely when not manipulated by greed.
If it weren't for money, you'd be at the mercy of finding someone
who has what you want and is willing to trade for what you have.
E.g., you have wine and want bread, but the only guy you
can find with bread doesn't want wine, he wants cheese.
With a monetary system, you trade for currency in whatever form,
and he goes and gets his cheese from a guy who wants meat.

 

[Huckleberry]

It is when someone makes something of value, that didn't exist before.

Liberals can't fathom being productive.

 

[MichaelOwen]

Liberals can't fathom being productive.

Nope, their value is taking from the hard working and giving to the lazy unmotivated

 

[Adstar]

One thing I do appreciate about the Muslim traditions, is that it is illegal to charge interest on money. It is the most ungodly thing we have in the Western world, among all the good we have too.

But it would be nice to have such a law. Money is a transaction. It is not something you make money from within itself! How to get rid of debt? Make it illegal to create debt.

If you want something you got to save for it.
If you want something, and you need to borrow the money, you have to be trusted.

Debt is a way of taking people's stuff if they can't pay. Real estate = physical money. Bank money is monopoly money until it turns into real estate.

It makes sense as to how absurd interest is, and how it's all part of a lie, and a bubble, a pyramid scheme that only implodes when it reaches critical mass.

To simplify it; Say I'm a bank, on the planet Mars which has only just been colonised with 10 people. They have £0 to their name, but all want to buy something off the next person who is charging £100. The bank says they will lend £100 but you have to pay back £150.

They all borrow £1000 but have to pay back £1500 in total. Of course the truth is, they could have said, well, your product is £100 lets just swap. That is a transaction (so is cryptocurrency). But in this case together they owe £500 which they don't have. So the bank says give me your stuff. So they are back to £0, but also not their stuff. So they make more stuff to sell to the next person, the bank gets richer, the people are left with pretty much the same, except they have to work harder. This is the nature of capitalism.

The bubble bursts when the rich get too rich and the poor get too poor. But usually the outcome is war. Inevitable war.

However the good news is, that maybe AI already sort things in a way that people couldn't before (we are in a technological age). Maybe that is why the looming bubble of this time hasn't burst. If you can keep people just about poor but not too poor, then you don't have a problem. But the rich still get richer, but proportionally the poor still get poorer but only in comparison, rather than in comparison to poor.

The greediest and most ruthless tactic of capitalism, is to have people believe that there is simply not enough money for everyone. We are living in that time.

Maybe it is better than war, but taking down capitalism, and interest would be even better.

What you describe is not capitalism.. It is a world wide bankster scam.. It is not capitalism..

 

[Gracie_14]

you might enjoy this novel:

View attachment 177069

im totally reading this! for sure!

 

[Dai3234]

Yes, indeed, and guess what political party took the United States OFF the "gold standard!" Do you know who FDR was?

You also don't need a driving license for personal use, only commercial. But try that in court & they'll still probably jail you.

 

[Inquistor]

I believe that the president who took the United States off the gold standard was Nixon and not FDR. The gold standard was based on an arbitrary set price of gold that had no intrinsic value relative to what is was actually worth. The true value of a dollar is in the eyes of the beholder that is based on what is considered the good faith and standing of the United States in paying off its debts in a timely basis. As that faith is eroded the value of the dollar is lessened and inflation occurs in the price of goods and services. Eventually the entire economic system will collapse with the results being war, chaos and misery.

President FDR (a democrat) created the "Federal Reserve System," from which "Federal Reserve Notes" were launched. That was the START of removing the "gold standard" from U.S. currency!

 

[Dai3234]

President FDR (a democrat) created the "Federal Reserve System," from which "Federal Reserve Notes" were launched. That was the START of removing the "gold standard" from U.S. currency!

Gold would not work as a standard anymore anyway. There are too many people who use it for nearly all decent technology. There's not much gold in the world & silver, though more widely available, is used even more than gold for technology.

That's probably why people use Monopoly money.