If one falls, then all fall ... A common argument of the random despite the obvious conspiracy theorists some of the elite against the common people is that one can never get as many people under the control of a few string-puller.
who puts forward this argument has concerned neither with history nor with politics. It will now not be whether there is a conspiracy or not, but whether there is a could give ...
If one sets in place, one can overturn the economies of entire continents, such as Europe, and provide large-area poverty. We are all, if we do not - like the nobility - of large-scale land available to us - with or without - provide money at all times with the survival of essential commodities, dependent on effective money, or currency system which is already the first point. If it is possible to exercise control over prices and the distribution of money, then that is ever half the battle.
we go again a few years into the past, than in a group of powerful financiers in England under the heading of the so-called 'free trade' was to burden by abolishing the so-called 'Corn Laws', all of Europe its economic dictates. F. William Engdahl has in his book: 'With the oil Waffee to world power' describes very vividly.
With the repeal of the Corn Laws, the British economy to a flood of cheap food has been opened from the colonies, where they were produced under slave-like conditions. The result was that
first British farmers impoverished because their income fell below the subsistence minimum, and the number of the Available to industry workers grew. The fall of food prices also drove the peasants of other countries into ruin.
second With the falling price of bread fell and the wages of British workers, because the then minimum wage and any Unterstützungenszahlungen the workers were based on the price of a loaf of white bread.
third And last but not least by reducing the cost of British products, the workers were forced in the other European states to also offer their products cheaper: "The cheap products impoverished British workers pushed the price of the emerging industry on the European continent and in the United States. They were all forced into the erbarmugslosen predatory " writes Engdahl
Does this sound familiar? Ran About 10 years ago in all the talk shows, the propaganda of a blackmail system called Hartz IV (abbreviated to H IV). Over the previous two decades . was the local workers, the share of productivity growth the economy has been denied by one of them had called for wage restraint, and depriving them of the impending reduction of weekly working hours this way we took care of a growing army of unemployed, because:
first wage levels in relation to decreased productivity, and therefore not all the goods could be sold domestically
second the increasing productivity not captured on an appropriate reduction in working hours. Was able more and more workers' will be exempt.
After the unemployment that is a lot of the workers had collected, they were taken by means of blackmail, which makes now not even in front of pregnant women wait, to
their performance more or less at no cost for the domestic offering companies to provide, so in turn their products cheaper can offer (and have, since the sinking wages so there is not enough money circulating in the system). It is considered that these vendors happy. You can initially make more profits on the backs of unemployed and have (at least in their view) no reason, with the existing system to be dissatisfied.
And finally: The low wages in combination with the high productivity now and the rest of the euro area brought under pressure because
first keep up the production for export business with the German low-cost competition can not
second and wages of the German workers are too low to provide to the amounts of exports and for imports and to buy foreign goods.
be
Meanwhile, the social groups that are adversely affected by this economic policy, incited against each other:
first The German workers against the unemployed, because they cost too much apparently, because they supposedly not want to work.
second The foreign workers from the German workers, because the (probably supposedly voluntary) to work cheap.
third The German workers against foreign workers, because to have the supposedly high wages and are not willing to tighten their belts, just as the supposedly brave Germans do supposedly voluntary.
4th The German company producing for the domestic market against the German workers, because the do not work cheap enough
5th The German workers from for the internal market manufacturing employers, because not enough are willing to pay wages
The workforce is being egged each other:
6th The temporary workers to the permanent employees because earn too much and
7th The salaried workforce against the employee because they take away with their cheap labor to work
and, and, and ....
There is a time to say, but it would not be possible to control millions of people if they wanted to. One has just the right place in a functioning system redesign and all others must act accordingly. Incorrect information you provide will not ensure that all the suspects ripped off each other.
And then no one asks:
Who really benefits from it?
Which companies?
And who holds the shares in these companies??
