posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 06:23 AM
Not that I like the current paradigm and don't want to see it come to an end, but I have to wonder...
... what exactly do people think/hope is going to happen if the banking system were to crash? My understanding of economics as a layperson may be very
limited, so by all means, enlighten me if I'm missing something (I probably am.) But it seems to me that the banking system crashing would trigger a
depression, see a lot of big banks, financial firms, and other business go under, followed by a lot of smaller businesses going under, and cause a lot
of long term suffering for many, many, many normal human beings like you and I. In an extremely protracted worst case scenario, nations might not
hesitate to enter into armed conflicts to preserve and expand their resources in such a circumstance, either.
It also seems to me that those with the most
power, who we never see publicly as the banks play their mass wealth movement shell games... those
who have always had the real power and influence, in every paradigm throughout history... could easily reshuffle the deck so that they benefit from
this chaos and control where the chips land in the end, resulting in them retaining whatever power and wealth remain once the dust settles into a new
I understand and to an extent can even relate to the logic of, "Well, it's better than persisting with things the way they are." But is it really? If
innumerable people suffer, the world takes a huge plunge, wars potentially result, and those who have power now still have power after this change?
Don't get me wrong. I don't have a better solution. But I have to wonder if we shouldn't be more patient and prudent, and wait for one that doesn't
inflict more harm than healing? I mean, it isn't as if somehow goodwill and intentions will magically reshape the world into a less corrupt, more
harmonious order after such a fall, right?
Just my two cents. Peace.
edit on 11/6/2011 by AceWombat04 because: Typo