New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
Sign up
Let me briefly explain how inflation occurs (and correct me if I am wrong):

As a person, you are bound to your budget. If you can't afford a new car, you don't buy a car. That's not how governments work - somehow they can afford everything and can go "over budget" (for you it means wallet is empty).

Here's the jewish central banking trick:

Imagine there is 10000 money in the world. The government gathers 800 in taxes for its spending, which however is 1000. So in order to cover that it needs 200 more.

So the central bank comes in and "lends" 200 to the government. Quotation marks because it's never meant to be paid back. The government now has 800 + 200 and covers all its expenses this year.

But the 200 have been created out of nowhere, so now there is 10200 money in the world. It means the purchasing power of the 10000 previously is equal to the new 10200, so it made money ~2% less worth (10000/10200 ~= 98%). There is also a time and space based ripple effect, so those closest to the government and central banks benefit first.

These 2% is what we consider inflation. There is a lot of blabla about how productivity (GDP) increases continually to compensate that, but that doesn't matter. It's not enough, so things will continually get more expensive.

Repeat this process ad infinitum, start from where central banking was established (1913 I think). This occurs continually, so that debt accrues, plus compound interest.

IF the money wouldn't be printed, it would mean the government would literally lack the money to do its spending - it would run out of money, it would have to CARE about its budget. So either it would force higher taxes (which people do not like) or decrease its spending (which people do like). This way, thanks to the jewish central banking system, it doesn't even have to keep itself to the limitation of math and reality.

The trick is that governments can do whatever the fuck they want and there is no failure-condition. Socialists go overboard in spending? Well, it's covered. You want to reduce spending? Why so stingy? Do you now care about the well-being of your people?!

So who cares about corruption, who cares about fiscal incompetence, who cares about idiotic politics, who cares about welfare for niggers and subhuman invaders? Nothing matters, the central bank compensates all of it and dampens the consequences years into the future. But the damage is dealt, and even if it is distributed, it's still there. It makes life for everybody worse.

And it promotes destructive policies that SHOULD hurt immediately, but given this dampening effect, it doesn't hurt that bad. It distorts reality.

This is what the goyim governments get from the deal with the central banking jews, so it's great for politicians and the government itself.
You must log in or sign up to comment
7 comments:
BlueDrache on scored.co
1 month ago 5 points (+0 / -0 / +5Score on mirror )
Lending at interest is usery. There is a reason it is condemned in the Koran and Holy Bible.
WeedleTLiar on scored.co
1 month ago 3 points (+0 / -0 / +3Score on mirror ) 1 child
>blabla about how productivity (GDP) increases continually

This is especially bad because, if you don't expressely account for it, the inflation *itself* makes GDP go up. In yout example, the economy is now worth $200 more: success!

Also, you mention that the borrowed money isn't meant to be paid back but forgot to add that the debt accrued, that's never paid back, generates interest payments in perpetuity to...someone.
PurestEvil on scored.co
1 month ago 2 points (+0 / -0 / +2Score on mirror )
Ah yes, right. So this special "debt" accrues continually. So in this example, these 200 get +~5 annually on top of being accrued +200 each year? Plus compound interest.

By now that debt is some humongous number that is so huge that no amount of servitude to the kikes could ever repay it.
ScallionPancake on scored.co
1 month ago 1 point (+0 / -0 / +1Score on mirror )
Great explanation. Thanks
SnakePlisken1776 on scored.co
1 month ago 1 point (+0 / -0 / +1Score on mirror )
In capitalism deflation is built in, so they have to overcome that with money printing just to reach 0% inflation. Also something I haven’t heard talked about much, we ditched fractional reserve banking a couple years ago. Now they aren’t required to have any reserve whatsoever. This is why they have moved us away from cash, and banks sometimes question why you need it or limit your withdrawals.
TiredDad on scored.co
1 month ago 1 point (+0 / -0 / +1Score on mirror ) 1 child
There are a lot more to it on top of what you have said. For example:

Government bond: government issues bonds to collect shekels and later buy them back with interests. Now government does not do business, where does it get the money to pay the interest? Money printing.

Bank loan: you have $1000, you use $1000, that means $1000 are circulated in the market. However, if you put $1000 into the bank, then the bank loans that $1000 to another person, you still have access to your $1000, but so is the other. Suddenly there are $2000 circulating in the market, without any additional labor value put in. Which, again, leads to money printing to cover the case where both of you want to withdraw $1000 out

If you really think about it, there's absolutely no reason to ever print money. The value of money is adjusted automatically to the value of total labor in the market.
PurestEvil on scored.co
1 month ago 0 points (+0 / -0 )
> There are a lot more to it on top of what you have said.

I know, and it's kind of the point to make it overly complicated as to reduce the amount of people who understand it, so that they can claim that one is too uneducated to understand how it works, as if that's a good shield to justify the entire process' existence.

Just as jurisprudence shouldn't be overall complicated either that you are in a hopeless position without a lawyer, even as a lawyer (sometimes).

> The value of money is adjusted automatically to the value of total labor in the market.

Exactly. If anything, I can imagine creating additional currency into the circulation solely to adjust for population count, which would be a linear process. Especially when the currency has an inherent value (silver/gold coins) it would make sense. An alternative is to go deeper and create a "cent" version of that currency, subdividing it into smaller versions of itself.

As of right now it is coupled with eternal "growth" of GDP while *somehow* things get continually more expensive.
Toast message