Jump to content

Liberals flood Canada with hundreds of thousands of colonists/settlers as part of ramping up Neo-colonization plans.


G Huxley

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, cougar said:

The only mistake you make is your assumption that the carbon tax is designed to fight climate change.

It is not.  

It is dust in your eyes, like the COVID mask you wear which is supposed to protect you.  By itself, it will not protect you.

A carbon tax will be only successful when it stops the economy and people start dying in mass - something we could achieve by simply starting a war.

No matter what price we pay, the damage done to the environment will always be greater.   Why ? Because you need to destroy the environment to pay the tax.

Why does the carbon tax exist if it is not to counter the effects of carbon emission? 

"A carbon tax will be only successful when it stops the economy and people start dying in mass - something we could achieve by simply starting a war."- that sounds quite unethical, so we can agree that the carbon tax should not exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"No matter what price we pay, the damage done to the environment will always be greater.   Why ? Because you need to destroy the environment to pay the tax. "

Such is the nature of sin taxes in general.  It is much like the concept of paying for indulgences. 

That said I prefer a carbon tax to no carbon tax, although I would much prefer carbon caps and not just talking about them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I have a $33,000.00 solar system that generates $1200.00 a year at a heavily subsidized rate.  Trying to supply our energy needs with wind and solar is like trying to put out a fire with a squirt gun, unless everyone is mandated through building codes to have solar squirt guns.  Even then I’m doubtful. "

Depends the type of solar you use.  Spain uses concentrated solar which is much more efficient.

At any rate.  Lowering the population is a must to reduce energy consumption.

"You’re right, the planet is going to fry.  In a few billion years the sun will supernova and engulf Earth.  Hide in your basement. "

We are already frying right now.  Just look at the heat dome.

"Americans don’t pay carbon taxes.  Those are for sucker Canadians.  Think of the subjects in the Roman provinces enjoying fewer freedoms than Roman citizens.  That’s us.  "

Americans have 5 years less of life expectancy than Canadians.  I'll take the carbon taxes and 5 extra years of life any day.  If you'd prefer the trade off you could always live in America.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, G Huxley said:

Again lower the population

Completely agree with you, as I am sure 90% of Canadian would agree too.

So why are we welcoming new record numbers of immigrants and this doesn't seem to have an end in sight?

(I know the answer; what I don't know is how we turn things around to stop the flow; let alone "lower the population") - Cougar

I've actually found from experience that only about 25% of Canadians at best are in agreement with our position, which is pretty sad.  Even 25% I think is a stretch.  My first inclination is to put the number at around 10%.

"So why are we welcoming new record numbers of immigrants and this doesn't seem to have an end in sight?"

Because as you know economic growth is hardwired into our political model and I haven't seen a single elected politician willing to and/or having the guts to challenge that.

 

"what I don't know is how we turn things around to stop the flow; let alone "lower the population""

Provided that the politicians did have the principle and the guts to do the right thing.  All it takes to lower the population is to drastically curtail the immigration numbers.

Stop economic expansion?  Raise interest rates, eliminate inflation. 

It's actually pretty simple if there was the political willpower there.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Winston said:

Why does the carbon tax exist if it is not to counter the effects of carbon emission?

😃

What would the carbon tax do to you?  Are you going to reduce your driving as a result of it, or you will try to earn more money to fix this new hole in your wallet?  I imagine it will be the second thing, because if people were conscientious  they will not need a carbon tax in order to change their habits.

So you start working more to make more money, which coincidentally will increase the damage to our planet and raise the carbon emissions even higher.  It is not the money that fixes things, it is the reduction on activities that would make a difference.

But you should have known that, because the government could have simply increased your income tax, achieving the same result - reduced buying power for you and more money for them, going into the same general fund.

But they like to make the distinction and create a brand new tax, calling it "carbon" tax, just so they can try to fool us that they are doing it with the environment in mind.

Are we not seeing a pattern here?

We had "forestry management" , "fisheries management",  "natural resources management" - all kinds of ministries and departments and "science" and conferences on "sustainability".  

They have all been fixing things scientifically for now a couple of generations.

And the fixing continues in exactly the same direction.

One needs to be very naive to take political speech at face value.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, G Huxley said:

I've actually found from experience that only about 25% of Canadians at best are in agreement with our position, which is pretty sad.  Even 25% I think is a stretch.  My first inclination is to put the number at around 10%.

You mean 90% are pro-immigration and population increase and 10% are against?

This makes absolutely no sense considering what immigration does to the general population - pressure on jobs, frozen wages, housing affordability  let alone cultural background related reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carbon tax would make more sense to me if they actually took the money generated from it and put into specific things to lower carbon emissions e.g. into renewable energy etc.,  Instead they mail a lot of it back as cheques to buy votes.

"You mean 90% are pro-immigration and population increase and 10% are against? "

Yeah.

"This makes absolutely no sense considering what immigration does to the general population - pressure on jobs, frozen wages, housing affordability  let alone cultural background related reasons. "

Of course, but the general populace has been so brainwashed to believe the opposite that they can't even imagine a lowering population.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, G Huxley said:

Completely agree with you, as I am sure 90% of Canadian would agree too.

So why are we welcoming new record numbers of immigrants and this doesn't seem to have an end in sight?

(I know the answer; what I don't know is how we turn things around to stop the flow; let alone "lower the population") - Cougar

I've actually found from experience that only about 25% of Canadians at best are in agreement with our position, which is pretty sad.  Even 25% I think is a stretch.  My first inclination is to put the number at around 10%.

"So why are we welcoming new record numbers of immigrants and this doesn't seem to have an end in sight?"

Because as you know economic growth is hardwired into our political model and I haven't seen a single elected politician willing to and/or having the guts to challenge that.

 

"what I don't know is how we turn things around to stop the flow; let alone "lower the population""

Provided that the politicians did have the principle and the guts to do the right thing.  All it takes to lower the population is to drastically curtail the immigration numbers.

Stop economic expansion?  Raise interest rates, eliminate inflation. 

It's actually pretty simple if there was the political willpower there.

 

 

 

Raising interest rates will literally bankrupt thousands of people, because their mortgages and other debts are so enormous.  We’ll have low interest rates or higher interest rates and a massive recession.  The central banks actually will have to raise rates slightly and gradually because at some point people and government’s overspending will need to be reigned in.  At least if there’s a recession when interest rates are higher you can lower them.  If we get a recession when interest rates are low, all governments can do is print money and buy debt, otherwise known as quantitative easing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

 We’ll have low interest rates or higher interest rates and a massive recession.

Record high inflation in combination with record low interest does not work for the bank.

Everyone who has any saved money is losing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/17/2021 at 12:36 AM, G Huxley said:

"We could grow our population a bit beyond the current number, slowly, if we can do it in the right ways. " - Zeitgeist

And yet the question remains why would you even want to do that?

The answer usually follows, because we are dependent on it for our economic model.

Well that logic is circular. Ultimately it points to one direction: if our economic model is dependent on constant growth, then our economic model is crucially flawed, because endless economic growth is utterly unsustainable in a finite world and is utter contempt for nature itself and all the species and complex evolved webs of life within it.

If you want to increase the population slightly, then where does it stop? Even if you are increasing the population slightly (which again begs the question why increase population at all) over enough time even that increase will become utterly massive. So why not stop the increase now and stop kicking the can down the road?
 

Part of the problem was created because Canadians in general are Socialists and expect government to provide for them from cradle to grave.  Canada has an aging population and the number of seniors is growing rapidly.  This means government must provide Old Age Security and CPP at an increasing rate.  As more people retire, there are fewer taxpayers to pay for all these social programs including pensions for the old people.  Since Canadians are reproducing fewer children, that leaves only one choice.  Immigration.  More and more immigrants will be required to start paying taxes so that Socialist Canada can continue to pay for all it's social programs and pensions for the old people.  Canadians have got themselves into this by demanding more and more social programs from government.  They continue to demand more.  There is no end to it.  Somebody has to pay for it.  Who else if not the immigrants?

Canadians will also gradually lose their freedoms because that is necessary to maintain and expand a Socialist state.  Freedom and Socialism cannot co-exist.  It simply will not work.  Socialism requires control of everyone so the system will in theory function without breaks or diversions from building the Socialist utopia.  So fundamental freedoms cannot exist forever within a Socialist utopia.  Orwell wrote about this in his famous book "1984".  In order for the Socialist system to grow and entrench itself, it is necessary to have everyone walk, work, speak, think and live in lock step so the state's objective of a utopia can be achieved.  

There are plenty of examples of freedom being eroded.  The very existence of Human Rights Tribunals where people can be punished with heavy fines for exercising their freedom of speech if it offends someone is prime example.

 

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Part of the problem was created because Canadians in general are Socialists and expect government to provide for them from cradle to grave.  Canada has an aging population and the number of seniors is growing rapidly.  This means government must provide Old Age Security and CPP at an increasing rate.  As more people retire, there are fewer taxpayers to pay for all these social programs including pensions for the old people.  Since Canadians are reproducing fewer children, that leaves only one choice.  Immigration.  More and more immigrants will be required to start paying taxes so that Socialist Canada can continue to pay for all it's social programs and pensions for the old people.  Canadians have got themselves into this by demanding more and more social programs from government.  They continue to demand more.  There is no end to it.  Somebody has to pay for it.  Who else if not the immigrants?

Canadians will also gradually lose their freedoms because that is necessary to maintain and expand a Socialist state.  Freedom and Socialism cannot co-exist.  It simply will not work.  Socialism requires control of everyone so the system will in theory function without breaks or diversions from building the Socialist utopia.  So fundamental freedoms cannot exist forever within a Socialist utopia.  Orwell wrote about this in his famous book "1984".  In order for the Socialist system to grow and entrench itself, it is necessary to have everyone walk, work, speak, think and live in lock step so the state's objective of a utopia can be achieved.  

There are plenty of examples of freedom being eroded.  The very existence of Human Rights Tribunals where people can be punished with heavy fines for exercising their freedom of speech if it offends someone is prime example.

 

You’re right.  There’s a difference between having a reasonable social safety net in case of a sudden injury or job loss and handing over our decision making and thinking to the state, which is well underway in Canada.  We’re letting government decide when we should be allowed to see people, whether we can travel, what we should think about identity, what we deserve to own, how much we should earn, and even when, how, and where we should die.  Just follow the script and let the committee decide..  You don’t have to think.  In fact you don’t have to work or worry about health.  The state will tell you what to put in your body and when.  Just disobey to see the consequences to your employment, reputation, and remaining freedoms.

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, G Huxley said:

1. Carbon tax would make more sense to me if they actually took the money generated from it and put into specific things to lower carbon emissions e.g. into renewable energy etc., 

 

2. Of course, but the general populace has been so brainwashed to believe the opposite that they can't even imagine a lowering population.
 

1. No, don't believe it will work either.  You have conservation organizations taking donations to improve habitat.  The problem is by the time they "improve" 10 square meters of habitat, you have 10,000 square meters of habitat destroyed.

 

2. Population is brainwashed, but maybe not to this extent.  I have never seen a referendum on the immigration strategy.  The numbers you have may well be total misinformation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Raising interest rates will literally bankrupt thousands of people, because their mortgages and other debts are so enormous. 

They shouldn't have taken on so much debt then.

"We’ll have low interest rates or higher interest rates and a massive recession."

A recession would incidentally decrease economic growth, which is the actual goal.  However a recession or a serious recession could be avoided by an actual wealth tax. 

Inflation is a wealth tax as well (a hidden one), but the problem with inflation is it hits workers just as hard if not much more than it hits the wealthy, as worker's meager savings and wages continuously depreciate.  An actual overt wealth tax avoids that problem as it would only affect people hoarding wealth, rather than workers and small business owners just trying to save money to buy a home, vehicle, education for their kids, for a retirement etc.

"The central banks actually will have to raise rates slightly and gradually because at some point people and government’s overspending will need to be reigned in."

Indeed.

 "At least if there’s a recession when interest rates are higher you can lower them.  If we get a recession when interest rates are low, all governments can do is print money and buy debt, otherwise known as quantitative easing."

aka exactly what is happening now.  So we should be increasing interest rates instead of keeping them absurdly low.

Edited by G Huxley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, cougar said:

1. No, don't believe it will work either.  You have conservation organizations taking donations to improve habitat.  The problem is by the time they "improve" 10 square meters of habitat, you have 10,000 square meters of habitat destroyed.

 

2. Population is brainwashed, but maybe not to this extent.  I have never seen a referendum on the immigration strategy.  The numbers you have may well be total misinformation.

 

1.  We're talking about two different things.  Agreed on what you are saying, but what I'm suggesting is take that money and use it to invest in a renewable energy grid.

2. I don't have any official numbers.  Those are simply my estimates based on personal experience, e.g. discussions I have had with the general populace.  A considerable portion of the populace will say they are for population decrease, but when you delve deeper asking the right questions it turns out they actually support population growth through their support of mass migration, which is actually the only thing driving it in Canada.  Their reasons often differ for mass migration.  The modern left will generally play the humanitarian pity card or claim that they are helping to advance suffering peoples, while the corporate right will claim that we need mass migration for economic growth.  Both are two sides of the same coin advancing the same anti-environmental anthropocentric agenda.

There is a reason we have never seen a referendum on immigration strategy and that is because it is the government against its own populace as Plato warned about tyranny in The Republic.  The last thing they want is the populace actually questioning their Neo-colonization business strategy to keep the locals down and in line. 

 

Edited by G Huxley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, blackbird said:

Part of the problem was created because Canadians in general are Socialists and expect government to provide for them from cradle to grave.  Canada has an aging population and the number of seniors is growing rapidly.  This means government must provide Old Age Security and CPP at an increasing rate.  As more people retire, there are fewer taxpayers to pay for all these social programs including pensions for the old people.  Since Canadians are reproducing fewer children, that leaves only one choice.  Immigration.  More and more immigrants will be required to start paying taxes so that Socialist Canada can continue to pay for all it's social programs and pensions for the old people.  Canadians have got themselves into this by demanding more and more social programs from government.  They continue to demand more.  There is no end to it.  Somebody has to pay for it.  Who else if not the immigrants?

 

 

This was already discussed in this thread.  The whole pension scheme is a ponzi scheme.  Depending on immigrants to pay our debts (which never actually happens and the debt just increases more as immigration itself is very costly and heavily subsidized) is frankly sick. Canadians are too lazy and self absorbed to become self sufficient so they expect others from other countries to come here and wipe our behinds for us so to speak.  Pathetic.

All it actually amounts to is subsidizing corporations with a cheap labour pool undercutting local labour and they couldn't care less if that actually increases the public debt load as long as they are raking in the millions.  If they trick the populace into thinking that will actually decrease their debt load, they can laugh all the way to their banks. 

My solution?  Get rid of inflation, so that working people can save actual money that retains its value instead of ponzi money in the form of weak government pensions which people and/or their employers are forced to pay into.

"Canadians will also gradually lose their freedoms because that is necessary to maintain and expand a Socialist state.  Freedom and Socialism cannot co-exist.  It simply will not work.  Socialism requires control of everyone so the system will in theory function without breaks or diversions from building the Socialist utopia.  So fundamental freedoms cannot exist forever within a Socialist utopia.  Orwell wrote about this in his famous book "1984".  In order for the Socialist system to grow and entrench itself, it is necessary to have everyone walk, work, speak, think and live in lock step so the state's objective of a utopia can be achieved." 

Capitalism does essentially the same.  You either march lockstep with the advance of capitalism or you starve in the street.  Capitalism and socialism are not separate entities and they are not opposites.  There is a reason that Marx saw capitalism as a revolutionary stage that led to socialism.

"There are plenty of examples of freedom being eroded.  The very existence of Human Rights Tribunals where people can be punished with heavy fines for exercising their freedom of speech if it offends someone is prime example."

Agreed. 

Edited by G Huxley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, G Huxley said:

 

There is a reason we have never seen a referendum on immigration strategy and that is because it is the government against its own populace as Plato warned about tyranny in The Republic.  The last thing they want is the populace actually questioning their Neo-colonization business strategy to keep the locals down and in line. 

 

Yep, this is the reason.  Now they only have to figure out how to continue this growth after all resources have been depleted and the productivity of the land has been destroyed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, G Huxley said:

This was already discussed in this thread.  The whole pension scheme is a ponzi scheme.  Depending on immigrants to pay our debts (which never actually happens and the debt just increases more as immigration itself is very costly and heavily subsidized) is frankly sick. Canadians are too lazy and self absorbed to become self sufficient so they expect others from other countries to come here and wipe our behinds for us so to speak.  Pathetic.

All it actually amounts to is subsidizing corporations with a cheap labour pool undercutting local labour and they couldn't care less if that actually increases the public debt load as long as they are raking in the millions.  If they trick the populace into thinking that will actually decrease their debt load, they can laugh all the way to their banks. 

My solution?  Get rid of inflation, so that working people can save actual money that retains its value instead of ponzi money in the form of weak government pensions which people and/or their employers are forced to pay into.

"Canadians will also gradually lose their freedoms because that is necessary to maintain and expand a Socialist state.  Freedom and Socialism cannot co-exist.  It simply will not work.  Socialism requires control of everyone so the system will in theory function without breaks or diversions from building the Socialist utopia.  So fundamental freedoms cannot exist forever within a Socialist utopia.  Orwell wrote about this in his famous book "1984".  In order for the Socialist system to grow and entrench itself, it is necessary to have everyone walk, work, speak, think and live in lock step so the state's objective of a utopia can be achieved." 

Capitalism does essentially the same.  You either march lockstep with the advance of capitalism or you starve in the street.  Capitalism and socialism are not separate entities and they are not opposites.  There is a reason that Marx saw capitalism as a revolutionary stage that led to socialism.

"There are plenty of examples of freedom being eroded.  The very existence of Human Rights Tribunals where people can be punished with heavy fines for exercising their freedom of speech if it offends someone is prime example."

Agreed. 

I would agree with a lot of what you say.  But I don't think Capitalism is the same as Socialism in the sense of personal freedom.  Socialism deprives citizens of their freedom.  Socialism steals from those that have something to give to everyone else or provide social programs for everyone.  Capitalism does not steal from everyone.  Capitalism is a free system in the sense everyone is free to start or run their own business with little government interference.  Everyone is free to work or not work if they prefer.  But there is an incentive to work in Capitalism because if you work you get paid and if you don't work, you don't get paid.  You will have to live on whatever the social services system gives you or depend on charitable organizations to feed you and provide shelter if that is even possible.  But Capitalism provides an incentive for those with some money to invest in it to develop industries and make a profit.  In Socialism there is no incentive for investors because government controls everything and reject the profit motive.  In Capitalism, people with expertise make decisions about what is profitable to invest in.  In Socialism government bureaucrats decide which industries should exist under government control and how everything should be run. 

In the USSR, that is how things were run and there were tremendous shortage of essential products and supplies.  I heard of a telephone system in one of their satellite countries where it was very hard to get parts for the telephone system because anything ordered had to go through a huge bureaucracy under central control.  That is why the system became antiquated and far behind the western world.  They likely had dial phones and antiquated equipment in their telephone exchanges while the west had advanced electronic exchanges and touch-tone phones.  It would have been the same problems in every industry in the USSR, including hospitals and medical technology.  They would have been years, if not decades, behind the west.

China changed to a certain degree in the 1980s with a new leader of the CCP.  They decided to allow private corporations in China and abroad, but under the ultimate control of the CCP.  Personal freedoms do not exist, but corporations were permitted because they created wealth for the country and the government.  So it became a sort of hybrid system of Capitalism-Communism.

Edited by blackbird
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, G Huxley said:

This was already discussed in this thread.  The whole pension scheme is a ponzi scheme.

I don't really see where the pension plan is a ponzi scheme.  Vast amounts of taxpayer money is invested to earn a return.  That has nothing to do with corruption.  The pensions, OAS and CPP, must be paid out to the pensioners and the more pensioners, the more money must be collected by incomes taxes.  As the population ages, it costs the pension system more money and more working people must be brought into the system to pay for it.  Hence, we have immigration. But the government had better be sure the immigrants they bring in are going to be working and paying income taxes.  Otherwise it will be a drain on the system and just add more people who will collect pensions.  There is also the medical system which takes a huge portion of government revenue to run.  That too is now being stressed to the limit.

Edited by blackbird
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, blackbird said:

I don't think Capitalism is the same as Socialism in the sense of personal freedom.  Socialism deprives citizens of their freedom.  Socialism steals from those that have something to give to everyone else or provide social programs for everyone.  Capitalism does not steal from everyone.  Capitalism is a free system in the sense everyone is free to start or run their own business with little government interference. Everyone is free to work or not to work if they prefer. But there is an incentive to work in Capitalism because if you work you get paid and if you don't work, you don't get paid.  You will have to live on whatever the social services system gives you or depend on charitable organizations to feed you and provide shelter if that is even possible.  But Capitalism provides an incentive for those with some money to invest in it to develop industries and make a profit.  In Socialism there is no incentive for investors because government controls everything and reject the profit motive.  In Capitalism, people with expertise make decisions about what is profitable to invest in.  In Socialism government bureaucrats decide which industries should exist under government control and how everything should be run. 

The income tax deducted on the rising scale is a dis-incentive to work long and hard. Many enthusiastic energetic working people eventually have a wtf moment. 

Corporate/personal rates are punitive in Canada.

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Canadian government oppresses her own citizens with punitive taxes and restrictions.  We get clobbered when we travel by having to pay hundreds for PCR tests to get back into our own country.  We pay massive income and property taxes so buddy can block railroad lines with his activist loser friends and take meth while on pogey. We pay money out to people who already have more benefits and freebies than taxpayers.  We’re masked while fully vaccinated and aren’t allowed to gather with family and friends — even at Christmas.  Immigrants are sticking to their own cultural groups. Sad slavish populous and totalitarian semi-communist government.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, blackbird said:

I don't really see where the pension plan is a ponzi scheme.  Vast amounts of taxpayer money is invested to earn a return.

Then don't come crying to me that we need massive hoards of migrants in order to sustain it.

"That has nothing to do with corruption.  The pensions, OAS and CPP, must be paid out to the pensioners and the more pensioners, the more money must be collected by incomes taxes.  As the population ages, it costs the pension system more money and more working people must be brought into the system to pay for it.  Hence, we have immigration."

Hence the ponzi scheme. 

"But the government had better be sure the immigrants they bring in are going to be working and paying income taxes.  Otherwise it will be a drain on the system and just add more people who will collect pensions.  There is also the medical system which takes a huge portion of government revenue to run.  That too is now being stressed to the limit."

Not just that you only need to live here 10 years to get the pension and medical benefits.  So show up at 55 and cash in at 65 as 'family reunification' is often used for.

The ponzi scheme never works, because it assumes that the vast hoards are just going to do what you want them to do, when in fact for the most part it is greed that drives them here and they don't care that you expect them to pay your debts for you.  In fact they are quite happy for you to pay them in the form of thousands of dollars in Childcare Benefits etc. etc.  Hence no matter how many migrants we bring in the debt spirals even further and faster into the abyss.

And what do we get for the failed ponzi scheme?  Over population and the massive problems that brings including unaffordable housing for the vast majority of actual Canadians.

Edited by G Huxley
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, G Huxley said:

The ponzi scheme never works, because it assumes that the vast hoards are just going to do what you want them to do, when in fact for the most part it is greed that drives them here and they don't care that you expect them to pay your debts for you.

Ponzi schemes fail, when they can no longer recruit new players, the number of which usually grows exponentially.

Since we have an overpopulated world and producing new human units seems to be of little issue, our ponzi scheme will fail when we run out of space or resources, or when we change climate to the point of conditions becoming unlivable.

I am quite interested to see how this will play out, with the banking system failing in particular.  Imagine the day, when your diamonds, platinum or gold become worthless, together with that Picaso picture.  Just because people are in a survival mode and there is no food and no production, no clean water, no clean air.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...