 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Anyone,
For your consideration, in the hope of improving the accuracy of perception, awareness, understanding, knowledge, power, control, ability, capacity, I offer that link which helps me lead into an angle of view that can be improved.
I have yet to read the article. Here is the title:
Libya All About Oil, Or Central Banking?
I've heard Lindsey Williams say that it is all about control. I can assert that those who seek control, or power, over other people, are apt to discover the benefits, to them, of employing the power they have in the work of making power scarce. Failure to make power scarce will inevitably result in a change in the power ratio. The legal criminals, elites, globalist, whatever, if their power is greater by this much today and the power of their targeted victims is less by this much today, what happens to the ratio if there is much more power up for grabs tomorrow?
Example:
The total Power supply is 100. They have control of 99. Their victims have control of 1. The ratio is 99 to 1.
Consider adding a reverence of time to that hypothetical situation, say 100 years time, and now you have a historical context from which to measure a sudden change in the total power supply.
Suppose, for example, that 100 years before the discovery of oil, the total power supply was controlled by a few people and their ratio of control was maintained at 99 to 1, where, before oil, the powerful group had control of 99% of the power, and their targeted victims had control over 1% of the power, ongoing for 100 years, and then suddenly a new power source began to flow through the social structure whereby the total power supply was, before oil, a total amount of power at 100, the powerful controlling 99%, and the victims controlling 1% of that total amount of power, before oil, and then suddenly the total power supply increases dramatically, power flows everywhere, many victims become more powerful. What happens to the ratio of power between the few very powerful and the many victims?
Suppose that oil power increased total power by adding one more zero. Suddenly there is now 1000 power units up for grabs. The powerful people who had a ratio of 99 to 1 over their victims must then gain control over 891 units of new power just to keep their ratio of 99 to 1. They must control 990 total units and allow 10 units to fall into the control of their victims.
What happens if the sudden increase in total power becomes a flood of many new sources of power where a majority of the population can easily gain control over large quantities of power? What happens to the ratio?
That is a lead in to something I hope, beyond expectation, that someone in here can shed some light on what I am going to offer, as food for thought.
Despite every effort, by the legal money monopoly power, the same power that must gain exclusive control over all legal money on the planet Earth, or face the force of competition, and fail to eliminate all competition, and they must then be subject to defeat in the face of higher quality money, at lower costs, despite every effort to gain exclusive control over the one legal money monopoly power, the legal monopoly money power fails. What happens?
Which competitor brings down the one legal money monopoly power? Which competitors bring down the one legal money monopoly power, and in doing this, the force of competition begins to force money suppliers to either produce higher quality money, at lower costs, or go out of business for failing in the work of satisfying the consumers of money?
Among the many competitors is one competitor that manages to remain well hidden, off the mainstream news networks, and even off most of the alternate news networks, and that competitor is called Islamic Banking.
I am going to read the link at the top of the page and then select a quote from it, and then return to this effort, this effort that hopes, beyond expectation. to gain the power of a more accurate perception, by way of reasoned discussion (which appears to be against the law).
Most countries don't have oil, but new technologies are being developed that could make non-oil-producing nations energy-independent, particularly if infrastructure costs are halved by borrowing from the nation's own publicly owned bank. Energy independence would free governments from the web of the international bankers, and of the need to shift production from domestic to foreign markets to service the loans.
Well, there it is, and I am not alone in this thinking.
The interesting part, for those who are interested, is the method by which credit prices are determined.
Which method works best, for whom, for which group?
If a person (who has recorded a very long history of paying back every cent borrowed) is being charged 79.9% interest, for borrowing money, then that method of determining that charge for credit can be known, because it exists, if it exists. What is that method?
Islamic Banking, since it exists, also uses a method by which the price for credit is determined. What is that method?
Which method is more competitive? Which method offers the highest quality credit, at the lowest price, and why, and why would one method resort to deceit and violence as a method of competing in money markets?
This is a very controversial subject since it is on the thin blue line between socialism and capitalism. This area that is in between socialism and capitalism has been mined, booby trapped, and it is full of smoke and mirrors, please take care if you enter this zone.