Search? Click Here
Join the BUGS Team! Post on the internet along with us to fight White Genocide!

The National Debt is NOT a Special Problem

Posted by Bob on July 24th, 2010 under Coaching Session


The national debt is not a debt. It is a rented commodity.

For the time it faced the crushing debts accumulated during the revolution, the United States has always been in debt. The only exception to this rule is so surprising it is excitedly discussed by people who run across it.

The biggest way for the United States Government to take money from the South and give it to New England was by tariffs. Tariffs allowed New England to sell industrial goods to Southerners at a much higher price than they could have bought them abroad.

It was also true that tariffs brought money in to the United States Treasury. During the Jackson Administration the Tariff of Abominations was passed. It was total robbery from the South by New England to such an extent that Southern “Leaders” actually objected to it.

What is not mentioned is that a BY-PRODUCT of this robbery was a flow of money into the Treasury. For a couple of years, unique in our history, there was no national debt.

This is not 1834. We no longer misbelieve that animals have no territory or property or class system, although every single ideology today takes that assumption as its basic

The national debt is no longer a promise of “real money.”

We all know what a bankrupt man means when he says, “My signature is worthless.” It means we expect a person in ordinary circumstances to have a signature, a mere scratch of the pen, which is worth money. You pay for something with goods, money or a signature.

The national debt is similar to the tariff example. From 1789 on the Great Southern Leaders allowed the federal government to be financed almost entirely out of their own DIRECT taxes, tariffs actually paid, and at the same time they let New England rob them by charging higher prices for its untaxed goods.

By the time the South became a conquered province in 1865, New Englanders quite reasonably thought that was the natural way of things.

Since 1939 the United States has made it clear that it has the right to defend Europe while Europe has little military, to give foreign aid, to impose democracy on anybody it feels like, and to have some lawyers in robes tell every branch of government what it can do.

It is a little late for the country to realize that the government has taken the powers the Greatest Generation was too weak to deny them.

And no one would ask the Greatest Generation to pay for its own war, its own decision, much less for its own benefits.

So the national debt is not a debt, and it is not a separate issue.

By the way, until very recently most of our debt was the result of World War II. Each good year until the late 80s the deficit was about ten percent of the budget, and the interest on the national debt was abut ten percent of the budgets.

Interest rates on the national debt were higher than ten percent in the Carter Administration’s inflation, but on the average a dollar debt in 1940 is ten to twenty dollars now. Selling that debt anew each year or two also drives other interest rates up.

No one has mentioned this, because no one has noticed it.

The problem is not “the debt.” The problem is that the vote is either bought, that is, the owners, the chiefs, of the non-white tribes are bought off, and the white voters are cowards.

Even respectable conservatives are allowed to shout Zowee at the sheer numbers of the so-called national debt. But the problem is special only in that respectables are allowed to talk about it.

Share it now. Like it while you're at it.
  1. #1 by H.Avenger on 07/24/2010 - 11:34 am

    “The national debt is no longer a promise of “real money.” “

    I consider this an interesting subject matter. The above entry goes into many things that are currently hotly debated subject matters. And in BUGS tradition we try to point out the obvious.

    The big debate going on between the “the New England elite” and the rest of the world is in regards to Private Central Banks. Private Central Banks have something in common with regular old private banks. Private banks can only loan the Principal. They have no way to pay down the Interest. They can write it off or negotiate a settlement. But they are primarily in the business of Loaning Money.

    Now a Private Central Bank can only loan money into circulation. They do not issue a true currency. A Public Central Bank can issue a true currency against the goods & services and productive capacity of the people. Public Central Banks issues a currency that is debt free. Whereas a Private Central Bank can only loan money into circulation. There is a difference between “loaning money” and “issuing a currency”. That is kind of common sense.

    The Federal Reserve is the largest private central bank the world has ever seen. Back in the 1950’s it was run quite well and no one cared. Now everyone in the world bitches non stop about the Federal Reserve. And they have their reasons. All the commodities on earth are priced in dollars. This is quite an advantage for anyone to have. And that is one of the reasons the US Dollar has reserve status (the fact that the USA has the largest European population on Earth also plays a role :-).

    The Chinese have themselves a Public Central Bank. They issue a true currency and it is debt free. They bypass the private central bankers…….ALMOST. The Chinese have had to tie themselves to the dollar. And until commodities are priced in another currency (besides the dollar). They will continue to have to do so.

    Now along came the Russians. The Russians have something going for them. They are WHITE. The Russians actually knew how to creatively operate. The Russians have some of the largest natural resource deposits on earth. And the Russians knew what to do with them. They got oil and natural gas etc etc. OH and they got GERMANY next door. In the USA, we got a Petro Dollar with no Petro. Which means we got to deal with Jews and Arabs and the Middle East mess.

    Now why wouldn’t the New England Elites work with the Russians and do solid oil deals with them? After all, the Russians were willing to put in tunnels connecting Siberia to Alaska. This is all because our dear New England Elites were too busy listening to brilliant NeoCons. The Neocons and other Jewish groups have a habit of telling the New Englanders WHY they must be in the middle East…..OIL (and little ole israel). But there is another story here. THERE HAS BEEN NO COMPETION SAYING ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY.

    Now the Neocons and their London colleagues always go out their way to not only sabotage Russia via their Oligarchs. They go out their way to keep the US and Russia separate. Again, the point to understand is that this is not a conspiracy. The Necons have NO COMPETION.

    Basically, the New England Elite have to have someone Irish or German (anyone who can actually think WHITE will do :-) hold their hands and show them another way. Yes, they are that stupid.

    Now were am I going in this long comment. Bob, nearly has a PHD in Economics. I can barely add and subtract. So I am just trying to stimulate discussion. The above subject matter has everything to do with our race.

    Harvard Business School never teaches how the Chinese developed their economic model with a Public Central Bank. They copied Nazi Germany. Saying Hitler had a problem with Private Central Bankers is kind of an understatement. You know like Stormfronters have issues with Jews. That much is known about the Fuhrer. But Where did Hitler get his idea to kick out the Private Central Bankers?

    Hitler and his German Advisers were reading a little book by a man with the last name Fader. In this book, Mr Fader lays out the banking in the American Colonies before the American Revolution. American Colonies issued their own currencies. In other words, Americans were not beholden to Private Central Bankers in London. The American Colonies were going gangbusters. Hitler mimicked this and went around the Private Central Bankers by issuing their own currency and the results are well known. Germany came to Full employment and the German Debt disappeared. This is considered a miracle in Economics. Pure Magic! But no one talks about WHERE the Fuhrer got his brilliant idea. You will never read anything about any of this at Harvard……or anywhere else in New England.

    Oh and you will never read anyone comparing and contrasting a certain set of Elites declaring war on Germany and um…..things like Taxation without Representation and the economic crackdown that led to the American Revolution. All this is supposed to be just “conspiracy talk”. lol

  2. #2 by Dave on 07/24/2010 - 11:59 am

    The public succumbs to the dominion of portfolio substitutes that are used solely to hold wealth. That is a polite way of saying that the public is enslaved by them by being taxed or otherwise ripped off to support their value.

    But our political goal should be to seize them and use them for racial purposes.

    Tea Party, Libertarian, and “Austrian school” mewing tip toes around our racial cause.

    We are going to continue being robbed until we get the Religion of Political Correctness off our backs, which means we have to get to segregated society.

    Accordingly, we need to focus racially. That is our task. Issues of government finance will resolve themselves naturally.

  3. #3 by BGLass on 07/24/2010 - 6:55 pm

    “The national debt is not a debt. It is a rented commodity.” A lot to chew on. Raised in U.S., under Marxist-Freudianism, it’s hard to think outside the box of the labor theory of value.

    So “debt” is a trade on the labor of individuals in the country. Like, now we will work a half year to pay “taxes” we are charged, when we combine property, sales, income, inheritance, business taxes, etc… Before, we worked only three months of the year for the “taxes” for which we were charged, and so on. This number of hours we work to pay varies.

    (With “taxes” merely being, at times, say, a negotiated percentage that employer “detracts” on paper in accordance with its negotiation with the government or whoever else. When “taxes” are negotiated up or down, the business keeps another amount from the employee on paper and so on.

    So, it’s just feudal. The game is between “taxes”/tariffs in the realm of business warfare/ price fixing (who can get the best tax deal putting which people in the position of the old Southerners mentioned, who are paying more for goods they had to buy from New England) and then the Banks and Treasury who want their cut of whatever is generated, too, and negotiate with business.

    It seemed the Treasury was the main deal and the others a byproduct—but really, all these factions are in ongoing negotiation of how to divvy up whatever comes in via, ultimately, at bottom, people producing and selling at the product level, (products being anything including ideas, and so on).

    Technically, the “treasury” could be seen as a public chest of goods, but it does not function that way, but more as a money-holding entity in its own right. So the treasury, the banks, then the businesses and more have to divvy up whatever “value” there is (raw materials, labor, products, sales, usable ideas, sold ideas, sold information, and so on).

    I figured the signature, in a sense, was the promise that whatever the masses, the public, the workers could be forced to make or sell— would go wherever it goes after all these negotiations (between treasury officials and bankers and government officials and business people and so on)

    The signature is the assumption that all publics are slaves and whatever they may do can be negotiated as belonging to others right off the top—as theirs to negotiate, divide and use. (As long as people allow it.) It’s the bet they won’t step outside the system and just not pay or play.

    So debt is always wealth transfer. People are indebted although they did not borrow themselves, nor receive anything they can point to or understand, and the debt is how a faction can trade on the the potential work, idea creation, or whatever, that they could possibly do in the future, and banks and various officials are players.

    Currency, backed by something else or not, is always needed. And an interest-free, not profiting, entity can do that. But private entities have, seemingly through various economic plays, made a place at the table for siphoning off what they wish.

  4. #4 by Simmons on 07/25/2010 - 9:09 am

    Public/Private, here is a history question for Bob. I have in my mini-safe from my father in law a 2$ “Treasury Note” with Jefferson’s pic and all the other scribbles to make it look nice, so why was that produced in comparison to the Federal Reserve Notes?

Comments are closed.