16 Feb 2021 3:07 pm
Can you prove anything you wrote?peepee » 16 Feb 2021, 3:50 pm » wrote: ↑ ...AGAIN, in an honest system some will rise as leaders by consent/affirmation... they may acquire 10 or even 100 times more than average...not **** thousands of times more like it is in this stinking rigged system for which you apparently apologize...
...as to 'idiots' some people are smart about some things but virtually nobody understands 'the money'...not in any honest way... btw, 5th graders are capable of understanding 'it' [the fraudulent nature of the system]...it is THE all-time champion 'suppressed story'...word...
...it's obvious that you do not even know of a person who gets 'it' or you would at least slap me with a meager stinking copy and paste of someone you think 'gets it'...[you haven't ....ever]...
Let's start with this:
"In an honest system some will rise as leaders by consent/affirmation... they may acquire 10 or even 100 times more than average...not **** thousands of times more"
Show me an "honest system," and where this "honest system" exists (or has existed).
And then there's this:
"it's obvious that you do not even know of a person who gets 'it'"
Actually I quoted you Ricky Tavy, when you asked me this question. You seem to have a short-term memory...
Anyway, Ricky Tavy thinks the current system of money creation is fine. You are in denial.
Please do not ask me to dig up that post again after I went through the trouble because I showed you a case where
1) the person in question clearly understands how banks "create" money
2) the person thinks the status quo is perfectly OK (in fact, you even noted that in your angry reply to him - you accused him of supporting the "stinking, rotten bankster cabal")
Once again, you are in denial. You refuse to accept that
1) Most people are too stupid to "get it" (The proof is that you have thousands of posts on LiberalForum.net and nobody, other than those who already knew what you were talking about, was persuaded)
2) Even if they do "get it," and yet they disagree with your conclusions (like Ricky Tavy), you will pretend that person doesn't exist or circle back to your claim that if only...if ONLY, they were just a bit more 'educated,' they would agree with you.
You cannot envision stupid people (who are all around) and you cannot envision people who understand what you are saying but disagree with your conclusion. The inevitable conclusion is an endless cycle of frustration and further denial.