This isn't a direct reply, but you made a pretty open ended post, so I'm putting this here.

The idea that it's money that holds influence rather than jews is not an either-or proposition. Jews are both highly ethnocentric, and they have an unusual amount of money. Most of the money, as far as I can tell.

I think the best way to understand this is that fiat money is jewish. In a "Render Unto Caesar" way, it's all their money. Banking of the central type is a prerequisite for fiat money. And, in the US and Europe, that has been controlled by jews since the invention of banking as we know it. It's a system that they setup, and so to say that they have a lot of 0's in their account is kind of like saying Satoshi Namamoto has a lot of Bitcoin. IOW, Duh.

A tangentially related point is that the fiat money-central banking system has money trickle up via inflation and interest. The money is made form nothing, and then it is lent out a series of times at higher interest rates with someone (usually, basically a bank) profiting each time. The profit is in proportion to the amount of money they are able to lend, as distinct from the amount of money they have. In a simple example (simple for this kind of finance), the bank lends the money that came from nowhere to the big corpo for capital expenditures. The bank also pays interest to the Feds. The important part is: the corpo pays interest on the loan greater than the Fed's vig, thus adding money for the bank despite the fact that the original source for the loan money was "nobody." The Fed also ends up with some interest here, which I suppose is just more money that they created. The money creation is inflation, and then you can see from above that the direction the money moves due to interest is "up."

This isn't a direct reply, but you made a pretty open ended post, so I'm putting this here.

The idea that it's money that holds influence rather than jews is not an either-or proposition. Jews are both highly ethnocentric, and they have an unusual amount of money. Most of the money, as far as I can tell.

I think the best way to understand this is that fiat money is jewish. In a "Render Unto Caesar" way, it's all their money. Banking of the central type is a prerequisite for fiat money. And, in the US and Europe, that has been controlled by jews since the invention of banking as we know it. It's a system that they setup, and so to say that they have a lot of 0's in their account is kind of like saying Satoshi Namamoto has a lot of Bitcoin. IOW, Duh.

A tangentially related point is that the fiat money-central banking system has money trickle up via inflation and interest. The money is made form nothing, and then it is lent out a series of times at higher interest rates with someone (usually, basically a bank) profiting each time. The profit is in proportion to the amount of money they are able to lend, as distinct from the amount of money they have. In a simple example (simple for this kind of finance), the bank lends the money that came from nowhere to the big corpo for capital expenditures. The bank also pays interest to the Feds. The important part is: the corpo pays interest on the loan greater than the Fed's vig, thus adding money for the bank despite the fact that the original source for the loan money was "nobody." The Fed also ends up with some interest here, which appears to be another sort of money from nothing. That's inflation, and then you can see from above that the direction the money moves due to interest is "up."

This isn't a direct reply, but you made a pretty open ended post, so I'm putting this here.

The idea that it's money that holds influence rather than jews is not an either-or proposition. Jews are both highly ethnocentric, and they have an unusual amount of money. Most of the money, as far as I can tell.

I think the best way to understand this is that fiat money is jewish. In a "Render Unto Caesar" way, it's all their money. Banking of the central type is a prerequisite for fiat money. And, in the US and Europe, that has been controlled by jews since the invention of banking as we know it. It's a system that they setup, and so to say that they have a lot of 0's in their account is kind of like saying Satoshi Namamoto has a lot of Bitcoin. IOW, Duh.

A tangentially related point is that the fiat money-central banking system has money trickle up via inflation and interest. The money is made form nothing, and then it is lent out a series of times at higher interest rates with someone (usually, basically a bank) profiting each time. The profit is in proportion to the amount of money they are able to lend, as distinct from the amount of money they have. In a simple example (simple for this kind of finance), the bank lends the money that came from nowhere to the big corpo for capital expenditures. The bank also pays interest to the Feds. The important part is: the corpo pays interest on the loan greater than the Fed's vig, thus adding money for the bank despite the fact that the original source for the loan money was "nobody." That's inflation, and then you can see from above that the direction the money moves due to interest is "up."

This isn't a direct reply, but you made a pretty open ended post, so I'm putting this here.

The idea that it's money that holds influence rather than jews is not an either-or proposition. Jews are both highly ethnocentric, and they have an unusual amount of money. Most of the money, as far as I can tell.

I think the best way to understand this is that fiat money is jewish. In a "Render Unto Caesar" way, it's all their money. Banking of the central type is a prerequisite for fiat money. And, in the US and Europe, that has been controlled by jews since the invention of banking as we know it. It's a system that they setup, and so to say that they have a lot of 0's in their account is kind of like saying Satoshi Namamoto has a lot of Bitcoin. IOW, Duh.

A tangentially related point is that the fiat money-central banking system has money trickle up via inflation and interest. The money is made form nothing, and then it is lent out a series of times at higher interest rates with someone (usually, basically a bank) profiting each time. The profit is in proportion to the amount of money they are able to lend, as distinct from the amount of money they have. In a simple example (simple for this kind of finance), the bank lends the money that came from nowhere to the big corpo for capital expenditures. The corpo pays interest on the loan, thus adding money for the bank despite the fact that the original source for the loan money was "nobody." That's inflation, and then you can see from above that the direction the money moves due to interest is "up."

This isn't a direct reply, but you made a pretty open ended post, so I'm putting this here.

The idea that it's money that holds influence rather than jews is not an either-or proposition. Jews are both highly ethnocentric, and they have an unusual amount of money. Most of the money, as far as I can tell.

I think the best way to understand this is that fiat money is jewish. In a "Render Unto Caesar" way, it's all their money. Banking of the central type is a prerequisite for fiat money. And, in the US and Europe, that has been controlled by jews since the invention of banking as we know it. It's a system that they setup, and so to say that they have a lot of 0's in their account is kind of like saying Satoshi Namamoto has a lot of Bitcoin. IOW, Duh.

A tangentially related point is that the fiat money-central banking system has money trickle up via inflation and interest. The money is added at the top as part of the balance sheet of a big bank, however the movement of the broad movement of the money is due to interest. In a simple example (simple for this kind of finance), that bank would lend the money to a big corpo for capital expenditures. The corpo pays interest on the loan, thus making money for the bank despite the fact that the loan amount was never deducted from any "treasury" held by the bank. The original source is, of course, that it was just made up by the govenment/board of governors.

This isn't a direct reply, but you made a pretty open ended post, so I'm putting this here.

The idea that it's money that holds influence rather than jews is not an either-or proposition. Jews are both highly ethnocentric, and they have an unusual amount of money. Most of the money, as far as I can tell.

I think the best way to understand this is that fiat money is jewish. In a "Render Unto Caesar" way, it's all their money. Banking of the central type is a prerequisite for fiat money. And, in the US and Europe, that has been controlled by jews since the invention of banking as we know it. It's a system that they setup, and so to say that they have a lot of 0's in their account is kind of like saying Satoshi Namamoto has a lot of Bitcoin. IOW, Duh.

The way central banking and fiat money are setup, the money trickles up. The people who have money collect more of it via interest, while regular people generate value, but their bank accounts mostly churn. There were big pools of jewish wealth in the initial state, and those only grew in relative size because that's how the system works. It's somewhat tricky to explain why this works, so if anyone cares I can.