Can /pol/ debunk this argument? Trump agrees with this video. I'm just wondering because /pol/ seems to be full of fiscal conservatives that seem to think the cure to the national debt is cutting niggers welfare. Well can you argue against this video? We will see
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlgW0mChpDQ
>>76884998
Welfare in itself is a tiny sum compared to overall spending.
The problem is the benefits for being a single mother with multiple children. This promotes a degenerate environment.
>>76885208
Except this video debunks that because even if it costs a shit ton of money the government can just print more money.
>>76885381
>>76885381
> printing more money solves a country's budget deficit
no? it just creates inflation
>>76885590
That's not true at all. Inflation will only happen if you continually print more every year exponentially like
1990: 1 billion
1991: 2 billion
1992: 4 billion
>>76884998
>Can /pol/ debunk this argument?
what argument.
>the US dollars are not backed by gold
>they're worth only as much as the paper they're printed on
technically the growth of the economy is taken into consideration, for example if the banksters assume there's going to be 1,000,000 extra chocolate bars created, they print enough money into circulation so that the people can buy it. among other finance voodoo.
imo being backed by gold doesn't magically make the economy better. when the new world was discovered, europeans got a surplus of gold, which naturally just brings it's price down. the same will happen once we start mining space, there will be an influx of minerals, we can't just back our money by gold or silver, and pretend like its price will remain a constant.
the real issue here is that the "federal" "reserve" is p much the one to make the US dollars, but they are a private group of banks, when they make dollars they lend it to the US government, with interest. the problem here is the government, and therefor the people, are constantly enslaved to pay off that debt.
it's been a p long fight for the bankers to set up their institution in the US of A. they are clearly criminals.
>the cure to the national debt is cutting niggers welfare
pic related
>>76885807
>print 1,000,000 $
>give it to niggers
>niggers spend that money on watermelons
>there are less watermelons
>price of watermelons goes up
>>76886777
>Encourages watermelon producers to produce more
>They produce more
>More wealth.
>>76886578
This argument can be debunked. If you have no left the thread message back I can supply evidence that the Central Banking conspiracy is a giant hoax.
>>76884998
Cutting social services to niggers and spics isn't just about saving money, its mostly about cutting social services to niggers and spics. ie. people shouldn't be forced to pay for stuff that harms them, and they harm us and society.
>>76887018
proofs
>>76886957
why would i work harder if you're just going to give me free money
>>76887046
That's a good argument, but the argument is expands the debt isn't really one.
>>76887254
>why would i work harder if you're just going to give me free money
Because you want that money so you have to work to produce watermelon for the nigs
>proofs
Ok. The National Debt has gone up over every President, even the ones who supposdly were anti-central banking. Conspiracy theorists claim Linoln and JFK printed their own money instead of borrow, but under both Presidents the debt went up. Same with Iran and Russia. They supposedly don't have Rothschild Central banks, but the national debt goes up in those countries. Either the Rothschild bankers have held every nation for the last 400 years or the National Debt is over-hyped BS
>>76887476
>but under both Presidents the debt went up
the problem here is not the debt going up, but who is the debt to, and who has the power to print money. in one case you have private banks that decide when to print money, and you have private banks being paid via interest.
and in the other, you have government deciding when to print money into circulation, and the money government uses to finance it's projects, the debt, is interest free.
>Same with Iran and Russia
i'm just talking about the USA. and i'm not saying it's just rothschilds
>Because you want that money so you have to work to produce watermelon for the nigs
if there are more people consuming, there will be less to consume. that money i would make as a producer would seem less and less, as more and more people stop producing, and instead for the free shit. not to mention you'd be paying niggers to have more kids, and then not educate them, meanwhile forcing working communities to accept gay couples, and all that.
you get what you pay for, if you're investing in niggers that's what you'll get.
>>76888506
>the problem here is not the debt going up, but who is the debt to, and who has the power to print money. in one case you have private banks that decide when to print money, and you have private banks being paid via interest.
and in the other, you have government deciding when to print money into circulation, and the money government uses to finance it's projects, the debt, is interest free.
If the government is the one printing money then why did the debt go up? Wouldn't it either stay the same or even go down considering new money is being added to the system that is NOT borrowed from any bank?
>i'm just talking about the USA. and i'm not saying it's just rothschilds
Ok well I'm saying it's clearly not a corrupt system benefitting the establishment because even countries that aren't controlled by the establishment have the exact same system.
>if there are more people consuming, there will be less to consume. that money i would make as a producer would seem less and less, as more and more people stop producing, and instead for the free shit. not to mention you'd be paying niggers to have more kids, and then not educate them, meanwhile forcing working communities to accept gay couples, and all that.
The money would not seem less and less because if growth rises with money expansion there will be no inflation
Also I'm not talking about giving nigs free money, I'm saying it doesn't add to the debt.
