The criminal element hates a one world governance; that makes me for it. You?

PostmodernProphet said:
I could live with a one world government so long as no lib'ruls were allowed in that government.......
Click to expand...

That is up to your people.

A world bank does not create it's own mandate. It administers what the world has created it to do.

Your people, regardless of country or political persuasion, will recognize that a world bank is basically a data bank, not a cash is here bank.

It's purpose is to take the financial advantage away from the criminal side.

You may not need the cash, but ask anyone with kids.

They are bleeding their cash into criminal pockets too.

Regards
DL
 
Gnostic Christian said:
That is up to your people.

A world bank does not create it's own mandate. It administers what the world has created it to do.

Your people, regardless of country or political persuasion, will recognize that a world bank is basically a data bank, not a cash is here bank.

It's purpose is to take the financial advantage away from the criminal side.

You may not need the cash, but ask anyone with kids.

They are bleeding their cash into criminal pockets too.

Regards
DL
Click to expand...

3sxvbv.jpg
 
Gnostic Christian said:
That is up to your people.

A world bank does not create it's own mandate. It administers what the world has created it to do.

Your people, regardless of country or political persuasion, will recognize that a world bank is basically a data bank, not a cash is here bank.

It's purpose is to take the financial advantage away from the criminal side.

You may not need the cash, but ask anyone with kids.

They are bleeding their cash into criminal pockets too.

Regards
DL
Click to expand...

cool.....my people aren't stupid like your people....
 
Gnostic Christian said:
The criminal element hates a one world governance; that makes me for it. What do you think?

Given my old criminal mind and delinquent attitude; I know that if I was my old self, I would hate the notion of a one world government.

Such a bank would prevent me from talking advantage of the white economy.

Fair taxation makes my criminal wallet lose twofold. I lose my gain and now must pay fair.

Given my reform and apotheosis, I feel it is my duty to tell all my fellow white economy taxpayers, we all pay taxes, and it is foolish not to have a fair system.

Leaving unfair advantage to the black market does not seem like a good idea.

I think I would vote for a One World Government, just to get the One World Bank.

If your government preaches against a One World Government, they are voting with the criminals who hate the idea.

Economically speaking; given that single source banking governance is easy, --- I think that moving a huge economic advantage from the black market to our white market, --- is a good idea. I estimate that we all get a 30% raise in pay.

I am bought off. You?

Regards.
DL
Click to expand...

If one government ran the world, and had no opposition to its rule, it controlled the police, the military (assuming one is still necessary), and all levers of government it would:

Be totalitarian.
Be rapacious. It could tax away everyone's wealth great and small. Taxation would be onerous and omnipresent.
Be omnipotent. It would quickly control all production and the world economy
Be unaccountable. Who could stand up to it and point out its evils without disappearing, being imprisoned, etc?
Make black markets as common as house flies. A barter economy would become the norm for the average peasant in this situation.
Crime would rise commensurately with the degree of viciousness the government took

I'd estimate that 85 to 90% of the world's population would be poor to destitute while the other 10 to 15% were those that were in control and being used to exert that control.

Only the most oblivious fool could believe that giving unlimited power to a select group of people over the entire planet could possibly be a good idea.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
If one government ran the world, and had no opposition to its rule, it controlled the police, the military (assuming one is still necessary), and all levers of government it would:

Be totalitarian.
Be rapacious. It could tax away everyone's wealth great and small. Taxation would be onerous and omnipresent.
Be omnipotent. It would quickly control all production and the world economy
Be unaccountable. Who could stand up to it and point out its evils without disappearing, being imprisoned, etc?
Make black markets as common as house flies. A barter economy would become the norm for the average peasant in this situation.
Crime would rise commensurately with the degree of viciousness the government took

I'd estimate that 85 to 90% of the world's population would be poor to destitute while the other 10 to 15% were those that were in control and being used to exert that control.

Only the most oblivious fool could believe that giving unlimited power to a select group of people over the entire planet could possibly be a good idea.
Click to expand...

Apologies for a late response.

I share your views.

I am promoting a world bank that would be too large to fail and would return lots of profits from screwing up criminals, and not so much a world government.

I don't care about who controls you or I, as long as we have our governments covering our wealth. The wealth that is now giving you and I better dividends. Economy of scale does that plus we stabilize the worlds economies.

Think demographically.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
If one government ran the world, and had no opposition to its rule, it controlled the police, the military (assuming one is still necessary), and all levers of government it would:

Be totalitarian.
Be rapacious. It could tax away everyone's wealth great and small. Taxation would be onerous and omnipresent.
Be omnipotent. It would quickly control all production and the world economy
Be unaccountable. Who could stand up to it and point out its evils without disappearing, being imprisoned, etc?
Make black markets as common as house flies. A barter economy would become the norm for the average peasant in this situation.
Crime would rise commensurately with the degree of viciousness the government took

I'd estimate that 85 to 90% of the world's population would be poor to destitute while the other 10 to 15% were those that were in control and being used to exert that control.

Only the most oblivious fool could believe that giving unlimited power to a select group of people over the entire planet could possibly be a good idea.
Click to expand...

would central bankers do this also if they had total control?
 
Gnostic Christian said:
Apologies for a late response.

I share your views.

I am promoting a world bank that would be too large to fail and would return lots of profits from screwing up criminals, and not so much a world government.

I don't care about who controls you or I, as long as we have our governments covering our wealth. The wealth that is now giving you and I better dividends. Economy of scale does that plus we stabilize the worlds economies.

Think demographically.
Click to expand...

you're what we call an internationalist fascist.
 
Having many nations without rules is like states' rights. It is a race to the bottom. There is always someplace that will make a terrible deal if they get a tiny slice of the profit. The head of GE said he wished he could put all his plants on barges and move them to where he got the best deal. He did not care about workers or the environment. There should be international rules regulating corporations. There should be a minimum tax rate that corporations have to pay. There should be global laws on pollution and worker safety.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top