Why war is so profitable for a few, but costly for the many

[Ryan Rudolph]

Much of this analysis is not grounded in absolute certainty, but I want to explore and speculate on the possible intricacies of American corruption. Let us assume that the Federal Reserve (central bank), the military industrial complex (weapons companies), the major media outlets, and the major oil companies are all owned by the an elite group of powerful business men, and let us assume that these men also have quite a bit of influence and control over the CIA, the FBI, and the top tier politicians.

So right away, the major incentive I see is that it gives these men many financial reasons to influence the US government to start unnecessary wars. And so I want to now generate a profit trail –

Money Trail: The Federal Reserve lends money for the US military to buy weapons to go to war, so the bank is making money off the interest of their loans to sell weapons to another extension of themselves because they also own the weapons companies, who profit from the sale. So the American military goes to war, and invades another country as a means to secure their oil reserves. And then the oil companies come in, and devise exploitative contracts with the rookie governments there to develop much of their oil for a very low price. So they make money there as well.

So billions or even trillions of dollars is being made through the central bank, the weapons companies and the oil companies who are all owned by the same small group of elites. And the media outlets are used to place deluded commentators such as the Bill Oreillys, the Sean Hannitys and the Glenn Becks to provide their noble views as why it is so imperative that the American people support the wars in the middle-east. However, who gets stuck with the bill to pay for all the defense loans to go to war in the first place? The middle-class taxpayer. And not only are they stuck with a trillion dollar defense bill, but their standard of living also suffers as a result of the inflation caused by the excessive government spending.

Ron Paul has some pretty decent solutions. For one: competing currencies would reduce the power of the Federal Reserve, and the invention of clean green energies would remove the incentive for elites to invade other countries as a means to secure oil reserves. And the Internet is slowly removing the power of the media, which can be observed in Ron Paul’s campaign, so it is quite imperative that net neutrality laws remain in affect.

In the US, the congress can also try to pass a bill to prevent any top tier politician from owning significant shares of stock in war related companies. And anti-trust laws could be implemented to force the major defense companies to divide, and sell off half their company to another owner, and then when there is an authentic threat to a country, then the competing defense companies could bid for the contracts, instead a small group of elites always getting the contracts.

So for a capitalist free-market to function properly, monopolies and power houses in every industry need to be removed from the economy, unless the CEOS and owners have a strong moral compass, but this usually doesn't occur in industries such as weapons, oil and banking, so checks and balances need to be established at this stage of the species evolution.

[Cory Duchesne]

Money Trail: The Federal Reserve lends money for the US military to buy weapons to go to war, so the bank is making money off the interest of their loans to sell weapons to another extension of themselves because they also own the weapons companies, who profit from the sale.

The tax payers are the roots from which the military stems.

Or, another analogy:

The elite seem to be treating the military as a cash crop to be grown and harvested - and the sea of tax payers is the soil.

Farm the same soil repeatedly and you strip all the life out of it.

And then, like a parasite, move on to the next plot to exploit and degrade.

[sear]

Why war is so profitable for a few, but costly for the many

Lemme guess.
Might it have something to do with killing lots of humans?

To closely paraphrase Rush Limbaugh:
- the purpose of the U.S. military is to kill persons and bust up stuff -

The estimates I've heard are that only about 10% of the aid money we're sending to Afghanistan is actually benefiting the Afghanis.
The rest of it is paying for security details, etc. (which mainly benefits the U.S.).

And though illiteracy is rampant in Afghanistan, they're smart enough to know it.

[Leyla Shen]

Aussie, Aussie, Aussie--Oi! Oi! Oi!

Where do your tax $ go, and why?

Food, glorious food

The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO)

[Ryan Rudolph]

Cory,

The elite seem to be treating the military as a cash crop to be grown and harvested - and the sea of tax payers is the soil.

Farm the same soil repeatedly and you strip all the life out of it.

And then, like a parasite, move on to the next plot to exploit and degrade.

Yes, and recessions have usually always followed from many of the US wars, (Vietnam and the cold war are examples) and the middle-classes had to work their asses off to combat the inflation (less spending power of their dollar) by working overtime and all the rest of it. And what is clever about the elites is that historically they have never destroyed the host completely, as they allow new presidents to come in to bring the troops home, but they have already made much of their profits by that time, and so they wait until the middle-class works their balls off to bring the economy back to normal, and then they’ll pull the same stunt over again.

A wise parasite doesn’t kill the host, it just takes it too the brink of collapse and then stops, allowing it to heal and recover, so that it can have another huge feast later on.

Although, if the elites have dreams of controlling other countries, they may want to destroy the American currency totally to force Canada and Mexico to come to the rescue to merge with the US to form the American Union, and then Canada’s and Mexico’s currency would also be controlled by the Federal Reserve, which is very dangerous.

And all attempts to solve the problem haven't worked so far because the elites control the congress so it is impossible to pass bills to limit their power and influence. For instance: Ron Paul has been trying to introduce competing currencies or get back to the gold standard for over 30 years, but he has been totally marginalized and demonized.

[Cory Duchesne]

A wise parasite doesn’t kill the host, it just takes it too the brink of collapse and then stops, allowing it to heal and recover, so that it can have another huge feast later on.

Although, if the elites have dreams of controlling other countries, they may want to destroy the American currency totally to force Canada and Mexico to come to the rescue to merge with the US to form the American Union, and then Canada’s and Mexico’s currency would also be controlled by the Federal Reserve, which is very dangerous.

Why would the Federal Reserve continue to have any influence? If the American currency collapsed, wouldn't the American people latch onto the Canadian economic model? Why would Canada want to incorporate the federal reserve into it's system, given how evidently useless it is?

[Tomas]

.

These so-called "elites" have been trolling the earth before the United States was around or even thought about...

You can't fight city hall ... put up or shut up.


......


You know, Ryan, Canada has had a Federal Reserve since 1913. Try a little research here and start in your own front yard :-)

Good luck, you'll need it :-/


See below website...

..........


Canada's Federal Income Tax is unconstitutional

The constitution gives the Federal Government the right to issue its own currency

Thirst For Justice

http://www.prolognet.qc.ca/clyde/tax.htm



.

[daybrown]

Hominid evolution suggests alpha and beta males. The alphas put their bodies on the line defending the tribal resource base, or trying to expand it. The betas manage what they have, but also sire the nurturant daughters who grow up to be effective mothers, while the daughters of the alphas are bitches who often abuse and abandon the young.

Its the betas, both male and female, who do the case management and adopt the orphans. The successful gene pool has the right balance of alphas and betas. Successful alphas conquer territory and kidnap females for their harems. You cant ever have too much pussy. Course, the territory now is defined by documents, and while the expansion and concentraion of wealth does result in more access to call girls, the struggle for dominance itself has overshadowed the original purpose, which is also twarted by women using birth control while performing sexual services.

Moreover, the warrior class can no longer control the means of communication or the ability of increasing numbers of talented betas to move to wherever the cost of management is lower. Women are also vastly more aware of the instinctive, and impulsive, violence of alphas, Betas are realizing the cost of alpha male management, among which are threads like this. The usual alpha method of threats and intimidation dont work so well any more.

One the factors accellerating this is women moving up in power structures replacing alpha males. In many cases, its an alpha female, but- she dont need a harem, much less blowjobs in the office. She has much of the same drive to dominate she inherited from her father, but is content with that, and dont need a luxurious lifestyle with expensive status symbols to get laid, so she offers a lower cost of management. And one of the things promoting women are reports of alpha male abuse like this.

The trick is to replace the needlessly aggressive and expensive alpha male management without having the whole system collapse. It was not designed to be run by women, and a large part of it certainly will be dismantled. Nevertheless, there are other warrior classes, like the Jihadim, that pose threats that need to be dealt with forcefully.

[sear]

day,
That's an interesting analysis.
I don't agree with it, but at least it was thoughtful.

"The successful gene pool has the right balance of alphas and betas." day

True, but misleading.
I don't think it's a matter of genetics.
Even the flukiest of attrition can affect a population.
But there's always* a pecking order; whether by literal pecking among chickens; or by superior earning, social, or sexual power among humans.

My understanding is merely that the alpha male and the alpha female are the ones that out-compete their potential rivals. But the tenure of the alpha position is tenuous.
There are often numerous betas competing for alpha. Genes may influence it. But even among identical twins, there's usually only one alpha.

Right now I suspect Eli Manning is the alpha, and Payton the newly reduced beta (former alpha).
It's just the way things work.

* I use the word "always" illadvisedly here. The studies I've read on it indicate there's a pecking order in barnyard chicken flocks. However, those studies were completed and published before the huge factory chicken industry operations were put in place.
Whether it's possible to maintain simple chicken social standards of social rank in a population of virtually identical chickens that may number 10,000 in a single huge building; perhaps it's not quite that simple.

[Ryan Rudolph]

Cory,

Why would the Federal Reserve continue to have any influence? If the American currency collapsed, wouldn't the American people latch onto the Canadian economic model? Why would Canada want to incorporate the federal reserve into it's system, given how evidently useless it is?

The Major problem is that the American people aren't in a position to have a say in any of the big decisions though, the US business elites make all those decisions because they own everything that matters. And therefore the business elites can intentionally bankrupt the American currency, while most Americans are too dumb and docile to understand what is going on. Most Americans believe the cause of the recession is the housing crisis, but the housing crisis is only one of many affects of the activities of the federal reserve/imperial expansion. If you ask most people on the streets what the difference is between the American economic model and the Canadian economic model, not many people would be able to come up with a well thought out answer.

Even if the American economy went through a collapse, the business elites still control everything, and it wouldn’t be all that difficult to persuade the Canadian government and the Mexican government to give total control of the money supply over to their cronies at the US Federal Reserve, especially if Americans were in a tough spot and their plight was affecting the Canadian economy too, so people might jump on the NAU band wagon out of fear of a worse recession in Canada.

They have already taken steps in secret for the North American Union without debate from the people of Canada, the US or Mexico. Here are some videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T74VA3xU ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hiPrsc9 ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxzs46Nx ... re=related

Tomas,

You know, Ryan, Canada has had a Federal Reserve since 1917. Try a little research here and start in your own front yard :-)

Good luck, you'll need it :-/

Thanks for the information, I know the Canadian monetary policy also has its degree of corruption and tyranny, but I will have to research it further, and comment later on what I've learned.

[Carl G]

Hominid evolution records the Ralpha and Beater gangs. The Ralphas put their bodies on the couch unless defending the tribal resource base, aka clubhouse, and tended to have doe-eyed compliant girlfriends who munched corn chips. The Beaters controlled their own neighborhood more aggressively and chose females who were mean and potty-mouthed.

The beaters case the joint when there's a house to break into. Their last successful job was at a rich guy's named Gene. Ralphas and Beaters together in Gene's pool, what a par-tay. Trading each others' girlfriends -- I'm jealous about all the pussy, seriously. And the wine flowing. Did I mention the pussy? God I just can't get over the fact that some women will actually have sex with us guys. Doesn't matter if we sometimes have to pay them, but imagine it, have sex with us gross hairy guys. I love studying any part of history that includes harems and that shit.

Okay, now we get serious. Warrior class -- bully beefy guys defending the tribe -- rawrrr me warrior, want woman. If I am Beater I take what I want. If I am Ralpha, a bit softer from sittin' on the couch, I have to use my sly fox wits, maybe show her a little farming, hey baby look, I can support you...See, the Beaters' don't really have the advantage, he doesn't always bring home the kill, and I'm lookin' good with my plot of land here and my buried truck trailers...

And now the babes are taking over the jobs, she's becoming Ralpha or Beater herself, she doesn't need him she can pick or choose her poison, her slave , her new automobile and new slavery. She wears the pants now which is fine, I like the role reversal, especially in the bedroom. I'm low cost management, I'm a luxurious pig with a ring in his nose, I'm decent livestock willing to work for boners. I want to take out the trash, to be her trash, to wallow in the worship, to be one of the less sharp tools the shed.

[Cory Duchesne]

Cory,

Why would the Federal Reserve continue to have any influence? If the American currency collapsed, wouldn't the American people latch onto the Canadian economic model? Why would Canada want to incorporate the federal reserve into it's system, given how evidently useless it is?

The Major problem is that the American people aren't in a position to have a say in any of the big decisions

Yeah, but what about Canadians? Is our government going to witness the American currency crash, and then proceed to adopt their economic model? Is our government that dumb and docile?

the business elites can intentionally bankrupt the American currency, while most Americans are too dumb and docile to understand what is going on.

Right, which is why the currency might collapse. But are Canadians going to comply with the world elites.

Even if the American economy went through a collapse, the business elites still control everything, and it wouldn’t be all that difficult to persuade the Canadian government and the Mexican government to give total control of the money supply over to their cronies at the US Federal Reserve, especially if Americans were in a tough spot and their plight was affecting the Canadian economy too, so people might jump on the NAU band wagon out of fear of a worse recession in Canada.

It just seems a bit absurd to have the present American economic strategy adopted shortly after it fails.

[Ryan Rudolph]

Cory,

It just seems a bit absurd to have the present American economic strategy adopted shortly after it fails.

Canada doesn’t have to adopt the entire American economic strategy to make the critical mistake; it only has to adopt the same monetary policy, meaning give control to the world elites to print the money under the same unified banking system – a unified currency similar to the EURO. Most people don’t understand that those who control the money supply have a huge power over the working class. Basically, what I’m suggesting is that Canada can keep its socialist liberal style of governance, but still be victim to inflation and recessions if they hand over control of the currency to the world elites.

Most politicians and common people have no idea what monetary policy is all about; even those debating Ron Paul in America neglected to question his assertions because they didn’t understand the relationships he was presenting them with. It’s easier for everyone to assume that he is a loon.

Btw, as one of those videos suggest, the Canadian prime minister has already started signing the initial agreements for a North American Union, and a common unified currency is part of their plan, but perhaps if the American economy falls before then, it could cause the politicians to change their minds, if they weren’t already bought off.

It just seems a bit absurd to have the present American economic strategy adopted shortly after it fails.

You have to remember that only the wealthiest Canadians are able to become prime minister, and therefore our present prime minister is probably affiliated with the world elites somehow. And remember how the Iraq war was sold to the American people with lies and fear propaganda.

Well, if our current prime minister is in with the elites, the same thing could happen – he could give a speech telling the Canadian public that the only way to save our economy and divert a recession is to merge with the weakening US economy as a means to salvage their currency by unifying with it. It’s just a theory I have, and it could be wrong. But nevertheless, the world elites are in fact planning to somehow convince Canada to give over complete control of the money supply.

Actually, our past and present prime ministers have already participated in dishonest monetary practices on a smaller scale, so who knows what they are capable of, Here is a quote I found on the net –

“How Crooked Are They?”
“Paul Martin, the Liberal Leader, had yet another sweetheart deal with the banks. Instead of “borrowing” money from the Bank of Canada at effectively no cost principle and interest, he borrows it from the chartered banks at the going interest rate. Presumably Stephen Harper is continuing the practice. Both cause equal inflation. Why would he blow billions of the taxpayers’ money so needlessly? Just look at the favours the banks do Martin at election time to repay his generosity with your money.”

However, the consequences of our prime minister’s dishonest deeds do not have the same local economic impact or global economic impact because there is no influencing imperial war machine in Canada.

here is a chart breaking down military spending for each country, and one of these countries is not like the others - one appears to have a much larger erection than all the other boys on the playground...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kielbryant ... 137096110/

[daybrown]

day,
That's an interesting analysis.
I don't agree with it, but at least it was thoughtful.

"The successful gene pool has the right balance of alphas and betas." day

True, but misleading.
I don't think it's a matter of genetics.
Even the flukiest of attrition can affect a population.
But there's always* a pecking order; whether by literal pecking among chickens; or by superior earning, social, or sexual power among humans.

My understanding is merely that the alpha male and the alpha female are the ones that out-compete their potential rivals. But the tenure of the alpha position is tenuous.
There are often numerous betas competing for alpha. Genes may influence it. But even among identical twins, there's usually only one alpha.

There are a myriad other elements, in utero and child development exposure to contaminants, dietary deficit, traumatic events, and even methyl tags on the DNA. But statistically, from the standpoint of a culture, the ratio of alphas to betas varies. As the former is higher, so is the rate of violence, the degree of mysogeny, and the failure to adapt other modes because of the stronger sense of identity.

There are lotsa primate and hominid studies that show the powerful effect on behavior of hormones like adrenalin, seratonin, and dopamine. The alphas have higher levels of the former, lower of the latter. Course this can be moderated with education, but the data suggests its usually too little, too late. Who is going to provide the kids for the double blind studies? In any event, the hormone level is genetically driven, carried mostly on the Y chromosome.

There's some evidence that kids with more active lifestyles dont have nearly the psychosomatic problems. this might have something to do with why the small hill town schools in my neck of Ozark woods, which have so many kids from family farms, have a remarkably low level of autism, ADD, ADHD, and such remarkably high academic performance.

DNA shows that native Europeans evolved in villages of 150-300 over the course of the last 10,000 years. Africans in tribes of 75-150. The former has existed in substantial numbers in cities over the course of the last dozen generations, and therefore- those who survived before social safety nets left progeny who do better in cities.

Recent archaeological work with magnetometers has found large timber frame urban areas, like Tripolye on the Dneiper, that date from the mid 5th or even 6th mil BCE with populations of 20,000. And they descended from Anatolian cities going back to the 9th, which had populations of 2,000-5,000. China also has urban life of similar antiquity, and both now have descendants that cope with it a lot better than gene pools which were only exposed to it in recent times. Cities have had a Darwinian effect, altho tickling out just what that is, is moot.

If you look at the work of archeologist M. Gimbutas, you can see that Europe had very advanced and powerful matriarchic cultures for millennia in the pre-Christian era. Women also had herbal birth control. So, "fertility rites" were not for the sake of fertility, but to motivate men who got to attend to go along with the feminist agenda. Even in the middle ages, there are letters to the bishop about brother stud muffin who was 'bewitched'. And now that the harvest is over, the witches sent him back to the monestery.

The witches were in a position to prevent pregnancy, but then to choose the sperm donors they wanted, and thus breed men the same way they bred other livestock. They didnt have a lotta use for aggressive alpha males, so the general rate of violence in Europe has always been later. The graves of the yeoman farmers show only 5% of the signs of voilent trauma on the bones as seen in tropical hunter graveyards.

Jared Diamond reported that 25% of the New Guinea Highlander men died in battle when the white man showed up. Even during WWII, on both sides, the death rate in battle was 2-3%. The Nazis were infamous for using boys of 15 at the end of war. Boys of ten are now fighting in Africa. They dont think anything of it. And if you look more carefully into it, you find out that the Nazi officers took the boys out of the ranks and tried to stash them in low risk areas, meeting the demands of Hitler officially, but ignoring him in private.

Alphas are far more willing to sacrifice sons cause they know that if they can win a harem, there'll be lots more where those came from. Women have to push each boy out of their own cunts, and dont take that same attitude. So- for women, the cost of war is too high.

[Tomas]

.

El Salvador's American-made Terrorism Act in Corporate Play

"Because we were struggling against the privatization of water. Now we have to struggle against the anti-terrorism law." - Vindente Vasquez

The language in both countries' anti-terrorism legislation has been crafted so that constitutionally protected dissent can, with a corporate nod, be prosecuted as acts of terrorism and result in draconian sentences.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0802/S00103.htm

.

[Alex Jacob]

The Pentagon System, by Noam Chomsky