This is a very delicate subject, and the answer is not half as easy as most observers believe.

Two main schools of thought:

A) Elite 90-100 per cent in control- deliberately engineered economic collapse to bankrupt governments and give power to globalist institutions. Generally believed by the aware underground.

B) Accidentally brought about by incompetent governments.
Generally believed by the majority of mainstream news readers.

* * *

The real answer is somewhere between the two. I think it's 80 per cent A with elements of B. At the moment I think teh gubberments started the whole thing but are not completely in control of where it's going and how it's playing out.

Points to consider:

1) Western governments, especially US and UK, going to the Arabs and Chinese, asking for loans.

2) China's huge foreign currency reserves, and the fact that it's been buying stakes in some European banks.

3) The fundamental difference between the western debt based economy and the eastern savings based one. China and Russia have no debt at all IIRC.

* * *

Any thoughts?





[edit on 24-1-2009 by HiAliens]

I tend to agree with you, in that the elites are mostly in control of the economic collapse, but that there are some levels of chaos in the system.

For those that know what is happening, that this is a debt crisis, and that the debt was made up, it becomes clear that it's an easy crisis to solve, as all you have to do is sort out what is bogus debt and what is legitimate debt, and then you come back to a softer crisis, which is the general injustice of a debt based money system. But this is not as bad as the debt load increase caused by interbank lending. Solve the interbank lending and the world economy will clear up, giving people time to address the core problem, which is the money as debt model, an elitist construct.

Nutter,
I've seen that document, yes. It's interesting, but I'd like to see how the strategies there work on a global scale, with many opposing factions.

2ndly, no group has ever been completely in control of what's going on. The elite are very powerful, yes, but not totally. I was trying to analyse the grey area between very and totally, the wildcards that they are not in charge of.

Secondly, I am talking about the *global* economic system. There are many players, with opposing viewpoints. It's not a simple case of 100 dudes getting together and saying "O.K. we pull the plug in 09." and that's the end of that. There are other countries that don't want this to happen. All sorts of groups pulling for power.

But I agree in general, they're mostly in control.

Do you have any other economic warfare docs?

Zeph,
Hi. Always like to read your posts. I agree with what you've written. How would you go about solving this problem, if you were head of the treasury department?

Also, neither of you have really mentioned the three factors I talked about in my original post. Any thoughts on them?

[edit on 24-1-2009 by HiAliens]

This won't be solved within the system. This will only be solved with culture, when the majority of people say enough and throw the elites off the pedestal. And I'm not talking violence even, just people knowing which side their bread is really buttered and taking control of their own lives instead of idolizing the wealthy. They are not worth it.

The way I see it things will naturally tend to get better if people learn to be less selfish. Systems will fit this reality over time. It is more important to protect the institution of family and family values than it is to worry about the really big stuff, which imo is a ripple up effect from a core set of problems, based on a selfish culture severed from moral values and the sheepness of the group mind.

All that said, taking over the central banks and making money investment based instead of debt based would be the way to go on the financial side. But I don't see it happening without the ideas being changed first. And this may happen shortly, I sense we are at a tipping point, especially for those of you in the US.

So, for a start, how about people shut off the TV?

I agree 100 per cent. Ideas are primary, they create systems, not the other way round. Any change will probably be a ripple up effect caused by some sort of collapse. Being less selfish would change things drastically. Selfishness is a cause *and* an effect of the current system. Many other-wise kind-hearted people are forced into a dog eat dog mentality in the scramble for survival.

*

"taking over the central banks and making money investment based instead of debt based would be the way to go on the financial side."

my main question is how could the above be accomplished, bill by bill, legislatively? Assuming, hypothetically, that Ron Paul's ideas seeped into the White house, what would the actual legislation and bills passed look like? What would be repealed/abolished?

I know its unlikely but I wonder if anyone has any ideas what the process would be.

[edit on 24-1-2009 by HiAliens]