Military Review

Banks rule the world. And who rules the banks?

19



Today it is no longer necessary to prove that the notorious US hegemony is based on the monopoly of the Federal Reserve printing press (FRS). It is also more or less clear that the shareholders of the Fed are banks of world caliber. They include not only US banks (Wall Street banks), but also European banks in Europe (banks of the City of London and some countries of continental Europe).

During the global financial crisis 2007-2009. The Fed, acting without publicity, distributed to various banks loans (almost interest-free) in excess of 16 trillion. dollars. The owners of money handed out loans to themselves, that is, to those banks, which are the main shareholders of the Federal Reserve. At the beginning of this decade, under heavy pressure from the US Congress, a partial audit of the Fed was conducted, and in the summer of 2011, its results were made public. The list of loan recipients is a list of the main shareholders of the Fed. Here they are (in parentheses are the amount of received Fed loans in billions of dollars): Citigroup (2500); Morgan Staley (2004); Merril Lynch (1949); Bank of America (1344); Barclays PLC (868); Bear Sterns (853); Goldman Sachs (814); Royal Bank of Scotland (541); JP Morgan (391); Deutsche Bank (354); Credit Swiss (262); UBS (287); Leman Brothers (183); Bank of Scotland (181); BNP Paribas (175). It is noteworthy that a number of recipients of FRS loans are not American but foreign banks: British (Barclays PLC, Royal Bank of Scotland, Bank of Scotland); Swiss (Credit Swiss, UBS); German Deutsche Bank; French BNP Paribas. These banks have received from the Federal Reserve about 2,5 trillion dollars. We will not be mistaken if we assume that these are foreign shareholders of the Fed.

However, if the composition of the main shareholders of the Fed is more or less clear, then this cannot be said of the shareholders of those banks that, in fact, own the Fed's printing press. Who are the shareholders of the Federal Reserve shareholders?

First of all, consider the leading US banks. Today, the core of the US banking system is represented by six banks. The Big Six includes Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, Citigroup. They occupy the first lines of American banking ratings on such indicators as the amount of capital, controlled assets, attracted deposits, capitalization, profit. If banks are ranked by assets, then JP Morgan Chase comes first (2.075 billion dollars at the end of 2014). In terms of capitalization, Wells Fargo ranks first ($ 261,7 billion in the fall of 2014). By the way, according to this indicator, Wells Fargo came out on top not only in America, but also in the world (although it ranks fourth in US assets, and in the world it is not even among the top twenty).

On the official websites of these banks there is some information about the shareholders. The bulk of the capital of the “big hair” of American banks is in the hands of the so-called institutional shareholders - various financial companies. Among them there are banks, that is, there is a cross-participation in capital.

The number of institutional investors at the beginning of 2015 in individual banks was as follows: Bank of America - 1410; JP Morgan Chase - 1795; Morgan Stanley - 826; Goldman Sachs - 1018; Wells Fargo - 1729; Citigroup - 1247. In each of these banks, a group of large investors (shareholders) is quite clearly distinguished. These are the investors (shareholders) who have more than 1 percent of capital each. Such shareholders are, as a rule, from 10 to 20. It is striking that in all banks in the group of large investors appear the same companies and organizations. In tab. 1 give a list of such the largest institutional investors (shareholders).

Table. 1.

The largest institutional shareholders of US banks and their share in the share capital of individual banks (%, December 31 2014)

Leading institutional shareholders

Major US banks

Bank of America

JP Morgan

Citigroup

Wells Fargo



Goldman Sachs

Morgan Stanley



Vanguard group

5,13

5,46

5,02

5,22

4,91

3,87

State Street Corporation

4,55

4,71

4,61

4,23

5,60

7,50

FMR (Fidelity)

3,67

3,48

2,85

3,14

-

2,44

BlackRock

2,63

2,75

2,64

2,46

2,59

2,05

Northern Trust

1,24

1,53

1,37

1,35

1,29

-

JP Morgan Chase

1,71

-

1,56

1,99

-

2,96

Source: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=GS+Major+Holders

In addition to the institutional investors indicated in the table, the lists of shareholders of leading American banks include the following organizations: Capital World Investors, Massachusetts Financial Services, Price (T. Rowe) Associates Inc., Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc., Berkshire Hathaway Inc., Dodge & Cox Inc., Invesco Ltd., Franklin Resources, Inc., Bank of New York Mellon Corporation and some others. I name only those that appear as shareholders in at least two of the six leading US banks.

The institutional shareholders that appear in the financial statements of leading American banks are various financial companies and banks. Separate accounting records are kept for such shareholders as individuals and mutual funds. In a whole number of Wall Street banks, a significant proportion of shares belongs to the employees of these banks. Of course, these are not ordinary employees, but leading managers (however, ordinary bank employees may have some symbolic number of shares). As for mutual funds (1), many of them are under the influence of all the same institutional shareholders, which are named above.

As an example, a list of the largest shareholders of the American bank Goldman Sachs, belonging to the category of mutual funds (table 2).

Table. 2.

Goldman Sachs largest mutual fund shareholders (as of 31 December 2014 of the year)

Mutual fund name

Equity share

Dodge & Cox Stock Fund

1.73

Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund

1.61

SPDR Dow Jones Industrial Average ETF

1.03

Vanguard 500 Index Fund

1.02

Vanguard Institutional Index Fund-Institutional Index Fund

0.96

SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust

0.94

Growth Fund Of America Inc

0.91

MFS Series Trust I-MFS Value Fund

0.83

Select Sector SPDR Fund-Financial

0.57

Fundamental Investors Inc

0.56

Source: finance.yahoo.com

At least three of the funds listed in the 2 table are under the influence of the Vanguard Group financial corporation. This is the Vanguard 500 Index Fund, the Vanguard Institutional Index Fund. The share of Vanguard Group in the share capital of Goldman Sachs is 4,90%. And three mutual funds, which are in the system of this financial holding, give an additional 3,59%. Thus, in fact, the positions of the Vanguard Group in the Goldman Sachs bank are determined not by 4,90%, but by 8,49%.

Banks rule the world. And who rules the banks?


In a number of Wall Street banks there is a category of individual shareholders - individuals. As a rule, these are top managers of a given bank, both acting and retired. We give a certificate of individual shareholders of the bank Goldman Sachs (tab. 3).

Table. 3.

Goldman Sachs largest individual shareholders (as of 27 February 2015 of the year)

Shareholders

Number of shares

BLANKFEIN LLOYD C

1,893,354

WEINBERG JOHN S

1,020,051

SCHWARTZ MARK

976,761

PALM GREGORY K

908,494

VINIAR DAVID A

751,558

Source: finance.yahoo.com

In the aggregate listed in the table. 3 five individuals own more than 5,5 million shares of Goldman Sachs, which represents approximately 1,3% of the total share capital of the bank. This is as much as a share in an institutional shareholder like the Northern Trust. Who are these people? Goldman Sachs top managers. Lloyd Blankfein, for example, is Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of Goldman Sachs from 31 May 2006. John Weinberg - Vice-President of Goldman Sachs from the same time, simultaneously a member of the management committee and co-chairman of the investment banking unit (he left his last post in December 2014 of the year). Three other individual shareholders are also classified as Goldman Sachs top managers, all of whom are active employees of the bank.

Is a few percent equity interest in order to effectively manage a bank? There should be at least three points.

Firstly, there are no very large shareholders in the leading US banks for a long time. Formally, these banks do not have a single shareholder whose share would be higher than 10%. The total number of institutional shareholders (investors) in US banks ranges from one thousand. It turns out that on average an institutional shareholder accounts for approximately 0,1 percent of capital. In fact, it is less, because besides them there are mutual funds (taken into account separately), as well as many thousands of individuals. In a number of banks, employees own shares. In the case of Goldman Sachs, in the hands of individuals is about 7% share capital. Finally, part of the shares are in free circulation on the stock market. Taking into account the dispersion of the share capital among tens of thousands of holders of securities, the ownership of even 1 by the percentage of the shares of Wall Street Bank is a very powerful position.

Secondly, the same owner can be behind several (or many) formally independent shareholders - the ultimate beneficiary. For example, the owners of the financial holding Vanguard Group participate in the capital of the bank Goldman Sachs and directly, and through mutual funds, which are in the sphere of influence of the specified holding. Most likely, the share of Vanguard Group in the capital of Goldman Sachs is not 4,90% (the share of the parent company) and not 8,49% (the share with the three controlled mutual funds), but more. It is impossible to dismiss from the accounts and shareholders - individuals, whose share is much higher than their share in the share capital, since these are top managers appointed to senior positions by those who are called "ultimate beneficiaries".

Thirdly, there are such shareholders whose influence on the bank’s policy exceeds their share in the share capital because they own so-called voting shares. At the same time, other shareholders own so-called preferred shares. The latter give their owners the privilege of receiving a fixed dividend, but at the same time deprive their owner of the right to vote at shareholders' meetings. Let's say a shareholder may have a stake in the bank's capital equal to 5%, but his share in the total number of votes may be 10, 20 or even 50%. And the privilege of a decisive vote for Wall Street banks can be much more important than the privilege of obtaining a guaranteed income.

Let's return to tab. 1 in the first part of the article. It shows that in almost all US banks, the main shareholders are financial holdings. At the same time, if the names of the leading banks of Wall Street are known to everyone today, then the names of financial holdings owning large blocks of shares of these banks speak of something only to a very narrow circle of financiers. But we are talking about those who ultimately control the US banking system and the Federal Reserve System. For example, recently the Franklin Templeton Investments investment fund was quite often mentioned, which bought up debt securities of Ukraine on 7-8 billion dollars and actively participates in the economic strangulation of this country. Meanwhile, this fund is a subsidiary of the financial holding company Franklin Resources Inc., which is a shareholder of Citigroup (share 1,24%) and Morgan Stanley (1,40%).

Financial holdings such as Vanguard Group, State Street Corporation, FMR (Fidelity), Black Rock, Northern Trust, Capital World Investors, Massachusetts Financial Services, Price (T. Rowe) Associates Inc., Dodge & Cox Inc .; Invesco Ltd., Franklin Resources, Inc., AXA, Capital Group Companies, Pacific Investment Management Co. (PIMCO) and several others do not just participate in the capital of American banks, but also own mainly voting shares. It is these financial companies that exercise real control over the US banking system.

Some analysts believe that the equity core of Wall Street banks is only four financial companies. Other companies-shareholders either do not belong to the category of key shareholders, or directly or through a chain of intermediaries are controlled by the same “big four”. In tab. 4 provides a summary of the major shareholders of leading US banks.

Table. 4.

Leading institutional shareholders of major US banks

Name of the company - shareholder

Controlled assets, valuation (trillion. Dollars; in brackets - the date of valuation)

The number of employees

Vanguard group

3,00 (Autumn 2014)

12.000

State Street Corporation

2,35 (middle of 2013)

29.500

FMR (Fidelity)

4,90 (April 2014)

41.000

BlackRock

4,57 (end of 2013)

11.400

Estimates of the value of assets held by financial companies that are shareholders of major US banks are fairly conditional and are periodically reviewed. In some cases, the estimates include only the own assets of the companies, in other cases they also include the assets transferred to companies in trust management. In any case, the value of the assets they control is impressive. In the autumn of 2013, the list of world banks ranked by assets ranked first in the Chinese Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) with 3,1 trillion assets. dollars Maximum assets in the US banking system at that time had Bank of America (2,1 trillion dollars). It was followed by such American banks as Citigroup (1,9 trillion. Dollars) and Wells Fargo (1,5 trillion. Dollars).

It is noteworthy that trillion-dollar assets financial holdings of the "big four" turn when using a fairly modest number of employees. With total assets of approximately 15 trillion. dollars, the staff of the "big four" does not reach 100 thousand people. For comparison: the number of employees only in Citigroup Bank is about 250 thousand people, in Wells Fargo - 280 thousand people. Compared to the “big four” financial holdings, Wall Street banks look like workhorses.

In terms of controlled assets, the Big Four financial companies are in a heavier weight category than the US Big-6 banks. The Big Four financial holdings extend their tentacles not only to the US banking system, but also to companies in other sectors of the US and foreign economies. Here you can recall the study of specialists of the Swiss Institute of Technology (Zurich), whose goal was to identify the governing core of the global economic and financial system. In 2011, the Swiss were ranked as the core of global finance by 1218 companies and banks as of the beginning of the financial crisis (2007 year). Inside this conglomerate, an even denser core of 147 companies was discovered. According to the authors of the study, this small core controlled 40% of all corporate assets in the world. Kernel companies were ranked by Swiss researchers. Let's reproduce the first ten of this rating:

1. Barclays plc

2. Capital Group Companies Inc

3. FMR Corporation

4. AXA

5. State Street Corporation

6. JP Morgan Chase & Co

7. Legal & General Group plc

8. Vanguard Group Inc

9. UBS AG

10. Merrill Lynch & Co Inc.

An important fact: all 10 lines of the Swiss list are occupied by organizations of the financial sector. Four of them are banks, the names of which are on everyone's lips (one of them - Merrill Lynch - no longer exists). Of particular note is the American bank JP Morgan Chase & Co. It is not just a bank, but a bank holding company participating in the capital of many other American banks. As you can see from the table. 1, JP Morgan Chase has a stake in all other Big Six banks with the exception of Goldman Sachs. There is another notable bank in the US banking world, which is not formally included in the "big six", but which invisibly controls some of the banks of the "big six". We are talking about The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation. The specified bank held shares in Citigroup (1,24% stake), JP Morgan Chase (1,48%), Bank of America (1,25%).

But the six lines of the Swiss list belong to financial companies, rarely appearing in the open press. These are financial holdings that specialize in acquiring shares of companies in various sectors of the economy throughout the world. Many of them establish various investment, including mutual funds, manage clients' assets on the basis of trust agreements, etc. In this list we see three financial companies from the “big four”, shown in Table. 4: Vanguard Group Inc, FMR Corporation (Fidelity) and State Street Corporation. These financial holdings, as well as the Black Rock company (which has greatly strengthened its position since 2007), form the core of the US banking system.

It is noteworthy that the “big four” is very well represented in the JP Morgan Chase banking holding: Vanguard Group - 5,46%; State Street Corporation - 4,71%; FMR Corporation (Fidelity) - 3,48%; Black Rock - 2,75%. Another of the above-mentioned bank holdings - The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation - is controlled by three financial companies of the “big four”: Vanguard Group - 5,15%; State Street Corporation - 4,72%; FMR Corporation (Fidelity) Black Rock - 2,62%.

After we have identified the governing core of the US banking system, consisting of a small number of financial holdings, a number of new questions arise. Who are the owners and final beneficiaries of these financial holdings? How far does the influence of these financial holdings extend in industry and geography? Is it possible to assert that the approach to explaining what is happening in the field of global finance based on the concept of the “struggle of the Rothschilds and Rockefellers clans” is outdated?

However, this is a topic for another conversation.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.fondsk.ru/news/2015/05/12/banki-pravjat-mirom-a-kto-pravit-bankami-i-33300.html
19 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. EvgNik
    EvgNik 14 May 2015 15: 00 New
    +7
    I realized that I didn’t understand anything. No economic education, unfortunately. Only one thing is clear - with the economy in the world it’s very bad.
    1. tronin.maxim
      tronin.maxim 14 May 2015 15: 29 New
      +7
      And who rules the banks?
      WORLD GROWTHERS!
      1. Eugene-Eugene
        Eugene-Eugene 14 May 2015 16: 33 New
        +7
        Soviet political scientists have long established the ultimate beneficiaries of the world economy: these are the cores, the backbone of famous families (Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Morgan, and others). They also own voting shares. The minor branches of families are only entitled to income (hence the so-called "preferred shares"). For example, the Rockefellers are behind Exxon (including Sakhalin oil) - the successor to StandardOil. It is enough to type "monopolies" on book sites (for example: http://mirknig.com) and please do a lot of research. Moreover, in the normal scientific style, without any applications for the "Faint revelation" as the author of the article. So long before the "world conspiracy theory" (which Katasonov is also developing), this topic was disclosed. And no one banged anyone for this, so no Katasonov is a weak analyst and certainly not a potential victim. Today this topic is poorly developed for the reason that grants and Lenin's prizes are not given for it, and that's all.
        1. Talgat
          Talgat 14 May 2015 19: 26 New
          +3
          That the families of bankers rule the world is no longer a secret - and the lists start with the Goldman Saxons Rockefellers the Rothschilds Solomon and similar surnames and end

          It is said that the world's rulers specifically promote the spread of various "conspiracy theories" so that the ugly truth is lost in their multitude.

          Here on the site someone posted a joke (I apologize to the author - someone forgot - I can not refer)
          "... Two cows are talking. One another:
          - Listen, I have a suspicion that these, on two legs, feed us to steal our milk, and then kill and eat us.
          The second answers:
          - Yes, you tie up with your theory of conspiracy - all the flock is laughing at you already.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. sovetskyturist
            sovetskyturist 14 May 2015 22: 10 New
            +1
            And whoever manages the money-lenders, the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers probably lost the wings to the biggest guys, as in the pretype Kolomoisky and Poroshenko lost the halyui of the aforementioned gentlemen. And the Vatican will probably be cooler, there is not only money but also power over the souls plus all the libraries cleared up the Pan-Inquisition
            1. Luzhichanin
              Luzhichanin 15 May 2015 11: 06 New
              +1
              finally, a sensible article was posted on VO, bothered ...

              on this site:
              http://pravosudija.net/profile/tatyana-volkova
              This is a topic that has been chewing for years in detail and what’s most interesting ... and you yourself read and think.
        2. Intensive
          Intensive 14 May 2015 20: 12 New
          +2
          Where did you see the claim for Greatness? The author cited figures, compared, gave his assessment. There are no claims to "Greatness" in the text.
    2. svetoruss
      svetoruss 14 May 2015 19: 19 New
      +2
      The US Fed rules the world, the names of the founders of the Fed are on the Internet, otherwise they will be accused of later on anti-Semitism and belief in conspiracy theory ....
    3. digo
      digo 15 May 2015 00: 13 New
      +1
      ... It’s also tense with economic education, and about bankers - at the level of a joke:
      The son asks the father-banker:
      - Dad, here you are at the bank, first you take other people's money, and then you return them as much. You don’t leave anything to yourself, but you live richly. I don’t understand where you got a lot of money from?
      Papa Banker:
      - Well, son, bring lard from the refrigerator.
      The son brought. Father held in his hands and ordered to carry back. Then he said:
      - In the refrigerator, how much fat was so much left. Correctly?
      - Yes!
      - Ah ... FINGERS are FAT !!!
  2. Metallurgist
    Metallurgist 14 May 2015 15: 00 New
    11
    Yes, the article is just super!
    To stir up, even in that stream of open information, what belongs to whom ...
    Author, I'm starting to fear for your life. After all, they say that money loves silence, and big money loves great silence.
    Thanks again for the titanic work!
  3. fomkin
    fomkin 14 May 2015 15: 05 New
    +6
    Wow, how many numbers. One feels that the author has studied the system well. I just read about Glazyev, Kasatonov, Delyagin. You can add here 4 series "World Evil". Who is interested - "Red Line".
  4. Asadullah
    Asadullah 14 May 2015 15: 16 New
    14
    It is noteworthy that a number of Fed loan recipients are not American, but foreign banks


    The answer to this note is quite simple, the US financial forces quite tightly regulate the amount of money in the state, and private property there is far from a sacred cow, but the excess money must go abroad and be destroyed accordingly. So, for example, the bank should seem to consist of equity capital, where and which tractor plant and Vasya Grachkin from the water pump are the shareholders who bought the bank's shares. But the fact is that second-tier banks and smaller ones, entirely consist of borrowed capital, where the share of equity does not reach even two percent. The last link is the moneylenders' offices or, in other words, quick loan shops. Excess money disappears precisely in the pockets of unlucky citizens and in the accounts of bankrupt firms. That is, the external debt of the United States (and what kind of external debt is it, if everyone ultimately owes it to the Fed?) Is annihilated mainly by citizens of other countries and unsuccessful enterprises.

    Many expect the collapse of the US dollar, spellbound by following the numbers on the Wallstreet counter, in fact, there can be no collapse, because the US dollar system is not pyramidal, but parallelepipedal. It’s like a vacant lot, forced by empty boxes, the collapse is caused by one row of boxes, because it is not connected with the subsequent ones. From this, the only way to deal with the green is to switch to a multi-currency reserve system, when competitors of the reserve currency appear, limited by assets of some equivalent, for example, the work-energy ratio.
    1. Cube123
      Cube123 14 May 2015 15: 43 New
      +4
      I put you a plus, although I do not quite agree. In addition to the scheme described by you, there is also a bunch of streams. Type of money for the Central Bank, operating according to the scheme of Carrence Board. There is direct money that goes to pay for the material assets received. There is money annihilated in the form of escheat. There is confiscated money of the drug mafia. There is a depreciation of the dollar as a result of inflation (since the cancellation of gold collateral in the early 70s, the dollar depreciated 40-50 times). There are fines of foreign banks in the tens of billions. There is finally a pyramid depicted on the dollar.

      But the collapse of the dollar is possible, because the whole scheme is based on an unequal exchange of products of the printing press or noughts on the computer keyboard for real material values. If there is no such exchange, the scheme becomes unnecessary. And the second reason for the possible collapse is the limb of planet Earth. The capacity of the dollar market is finite, and the pyramid, which can no longer expand, is clearly falling. The only question is a soft or hard fall scenario.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  5. M72
    M72 14 May 2015 15: 17 New
    +1
    Who are the owners and ultimate beneficiaries of these financial holdings?

    I understand the truth can not be found. As soon as the owners themselves are not confused by what and through what they own.
  6. fomkin
    fomkin 14 May 2015 15: 23 New
    +2
    I AM APPLICATION FOR MY POST, WHERE I ADVISE TO WATCH THE DOCUMENTARY FILM. You should read "World Cabal". My friend's sclerosis.
  7. Asadullah
    Asadullah 14 May 2015 15: 51 New
    +3
    Quote: Cube123
    I put you a plus, although I do not quite agree. In addition to the scheme described by you, there is a bunch of streams. Type of money for the Central Bank, operating according to the scheme of Carrence Board. There is direct money that goes to pay for the material assets received. There is money annihilated in the form of escheat. There is confiscated money of the drug mafia. There is finally a pyramid depicted on the dollar.

    But the collapse of the dollar is possible, because the whole scheme is based on an unequal exchange of products of the printing press or noughts on the computer keyboard for real material values. If there is no such exchange, the scheme becomes unnecessary. And the second reason for the possible collapse is the limb of planet Earth. The capacity of the dollar market is finite, and the pyramid, which can no longer expand, is clearly falling. The only question is a soft or hard fall scenario.


    There is such a thing, but what do you think they are doing in the USA with a confiscated mass of money? Allowed for social projects, for charity, for transgender surgery? For example, the last case of confiscation of the Mexican drug mafia box office, which is about one hundred million. Destroyed. Special machine. Doesn't it seem like an unjustified luxury? Sure, if money means anything to you. Do they mean to the person who draws them? One thing means to him that this process would go on forever, and the excess of his art would be destroyed without decreasing demand. Sincerely.
    1. Cube123
      Cube123 14 May 2015 16: 12 New
      +2
      There are two dollars. For internal and external use. In the states, these two streams are clearly separated. For example, he himself saw when my hundred-dollar pieces brought from Russia were put in a separate pile in a store. It appears to be determined by the series number. I think that they also went to the shredder. The main thing is that this scheme does not allow an excess of money inside the country, which helps to keep domestic inflation low. But for the external market - there is an almost unlimited (or rather limited by the size of the planet) field. Just consider this separation in your analysis. wink
    2. The comment was deleted.
  8. Asadullah
    Asadullah 14 May 2015 15: 55 New
    +1
    Quote: M72
    Who are the owners and ultimate beneficiaries of these financial holdings?

    I understand the truth can not be found. As soon as the owners themselves are not confused what and through what they own.



    When power is in your hands, money is just an instrument of this very power. And it’s not so important to know how much you have, if in fact everything is yours. The most important thing is to monitor the processes that may lead to the loss of this same power. Monitor and regulate, if possible manage.
  9. ydjin
    ydjin 14 May 2015 15: 59 New
    0
    Vague doubts tormented me for a long time! I am sure 2 financial clans threw a noose around the world! It's time to get serious!
    1. Boris55
      Boris55 14 May 2015 16: 11 New
      +1
      Quote: ydjin
      I am sure that 2 financial clans have put a stranglehold on the whole world! It's time to get serious!

      "All that we see is only one appearance.
      Far from the surface of the sea to the bottom.
      Consider inconsequential manifest in the world,
      For the secret essence of things is not visible. "
      O. Khayyam.


      (22 erafants are one of the surviving heirs of the previous civilization "Atlantis").
      1. Noncombatant
        Noncombatant 14 May 2015 17: 34 New
        +4
        is a Jew driving a Jew and a Jew? Ehhhh ... if only it were that simple. They do not decide everything. And the most interesting thing is that we, all of us, ordinary people, play by their rules every day, thereby twisting the noose around our necks even more. I read Efremov's "The Andromeda Nebula" and "The Hour of the Bull", and so, until humanity goes through a cycle of cataclysmic tests, during which it will be put on the abyss of death, it is unlikely that it realizes all the perniciousness of its socio-ethical norms in force now, in our time. Everyone needs to give up overconsumption, put absolutely different values ​​at the forefront, while clearly believing that your neighbor has exactly the same set. Until this happens, clans will change clans. So, most likely, everyone will have to go through the hellish heat of wars and catastrophes of various kinds, which we can already observe. There will be two results. Either humanity will destroy itself and leave this planet, or it will come to the origins of a completely different world order, which will have an objective right to life. So far, if you look globally, we are all just crap and destroy, there are very few creative principles in the total aggregate and they do not have a single vector of development.
        In general, drink mineral water and wash your hands before eating. crying
    2. Metallurgist
      Metallurgist 14 May 2015 16: 12 New
      +2
      Well, sorted out, for example. Found these two, maybe more of the clan, and then what?
      What to do with them?
      1. Cube123
        Cube123 14 May 2015 16: 21 New
        +4
        The problem is that this is the foundation on which the world is built. Therefore, you need to destroy it very carefully and understanding what you are doing. Otherwise, inadvertently, you can fill up the whole building.
        1. Boris55
          Boris55 14 May 2015 16: 28 New
          0
          Quote: Metallurg
          Well, sorted out, for example. Found these two, maybe more of the clan, and then what? What to do with them?

          To contrast their slave concept with their own, fair concept, which Russia has is the Concept of Public Security (BER). The struggle between the concepts is already underway. Master a fair concept and join the fight for a just society on planet Earth.
          Petrov K. P. - "Secrets of Mankind Management": https://yadi.sk/d/TNnbybHOg3xV2
        2. Metallurgist
          Metallurgist 14 May 2015 16: 54 New
          +1
          So you then offer a redivision of the world.
          Those. Do I understand correctly, a revolution on a global scale?
          Or quietly strangle these clans?
          What will it lead to?
          If they have World Money.
          Here, perhaps, it is necessary to struggle with what to change, or even better, remove the dollar, introduce another currency as the world currency. Bankrupt them. Again the inheritance war.
          No, my knowledge is clearly not enough here. I just have no idea what to do if these "masters of the world" are found.
          1. Boris55
            Boris55 14 May 2015 17: 09 New
            +1
            Quote: Metallurg
            So you then offer a redivision of the world.

            If you are contacting me.
            I'm not suggesting, but KOB. Not a redivision of the world, in the sense of changing borders and arranging specific principalities, but building a just society for all people on earth without borders, without armies and rulers. Read the book by Efremov "The Hour of the Bull".



            All revolutions bring a lot of troubles to ordinary citizens, and only a handful of bastards benefit from this.
            Money is only one of the means for enslaving peoples for the sake of unlimited domination over them.
            1. Talgat
              Talgat 14 May 2015 19: 35 New
              +2
              Quote: Metallurg
              So you then offer a redivision of the world.
              Those. Do I understand correctly, a revolution on a global scale?

              Quote: Boris55
              Not a redistribution of the world, in the sense of changing borders and arranging specific principalities, but building a just society for all people on earth without borders, without armies and rulers.



              All these are great ideas, but first of all, I think we need to free ourselves from financial slavery and stop paying tribute to the United States and the Fed (and liberate the whole world ?? - I don’t know - it seems to me that others who want to - then they will start to join us). As if "not to fat" - after the collapse it is necessary at least to get up on his feet - not until the "world revolution"

              Our President Nursultan Abishevich Nazarbayev spoke very well on this score at the SCO summits (both about printing dollars and extracting unilateral benefits and about "lending") - and by the way, both China and the Russian Federation and the rest of the BRICS (by starting direct actions against the unfair systems) - well, about "obeyed" of course a joke - it is clear that his speech was either agreed or just kind of "ripened on the sidelines"
      2. The comment was deleted.
  10. Uncle Joe
    Uncle Joe 14 May 2015 16: 42 New
    -1
    Today it is no longer necessary to prove that the notorious US hegemony is based on the monopoly of the printing press of the Federal Reserve System
    The author claims it is unclear what is based on, after which he goes to the shareholders.

    Tolley is telling the truth to Tolley gossip about the issuance of 16 trillion loans, but a link to the source of this information, the Congress resolution on the audit and its results does not give.

    He speaks of the banks, the main shareholders, but does not mention the common share of each of the shareholders and references to parts of US law that speak of the possibility of the influence of shareholders on the Fed’s policy.

    He makes a frankly stupid statement about the owners of the printing press of the FEDERAL (that is, state) backup system.


    In general, solid assumptions based on assumptions

    To whom the topic is interesting, look here (simply, briefly and with links) - http://master-vict.livejournal.com/4168.html
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Talgat
      Talgat 14 May 2015 22: 48 New
      +1
      Quote: Uncle Joe
      He makes a frankly stupid statement about the owners of the printing press of the FEDERAL (that is, state) backup system.


      But federally only in words is called federal - but actually belongs to private individuals - this is the same list of families starting with Solomon and Goldman, etc.

      Many say that we are all supposedly in dollar slavery to the United States, not quite so - we are slavery to the families of the Fed owners - like the whole world after 2 world and the destruction of the USSR. Even if we were assigned a not so terrible share as 5 to the unhappy billions in Africa China India Brazil Asia - we can be lucky - they gave us oil to sell and kept a decent price - but slavery is still slavery - even if it is fed and rarely beaten
      1. Uncle Joe
        Uncle Joe 15 May 2015 01: 09 New
        -1
        Quote: Talgat
        But federally only in words is called federal - but in fact it belongs to private individuals
        But Nazarbayev is only in words elected president, and in fact is the appointee of slugs from Alpha Centauri.
        Will we justify our opinion based on facts, laws and logic, or will we BELIEVE whoever wants to?

        Many say that we are all supposedly in dollar slavery in the United States, not quite so - we are in slavery with the families of the Fed owners - like the whole world after World War 2 and the destruction of the USSR
        You are enslaved to imports — goods that your country does not produce, but which it needs and which your country is willing to sell for the most prosperous (20% of the world production of high-quality high-tech products), at the moment, the world's currency.

        we can say lucky - we were given to sell oil
        What prevents them from selling oil, but using it domestically for the production of goods that now have to be purchased? - think about it.
  11. vik14025
    vik14025 14 May 2015 16: 49 New
    +1
    Good analytical work. Bravo to the Author. I would just like to note that money in itself is only a means of achieving goals. But these goals are far from humanism.
  12. Strezhevchanin
    Strezhevchanin 14 May 2015 17: 43 New
    0
    To take and prohibit the loan interest on a global scale and what these poor people will do, it’s going to have to work, so they will do Ukraine all over the world, because instead of caviar, you’ll have to butter butter and goddamn soy paste, and that’s it tin !!!
    1. Boris55
      Boris55 14 May 2015 17: 48 New
      0
      Quote: Strezhevchanin
      To take and prohibit loan interest on a global scale and what will all these poor people do?

      Managing people is not only through money.
      Type in a search engine: "Priorities for managing humanity."

      1. Strezhevchanin
        Strezhevchanin 14 May 2015 18: 31 New
        0
        Borya! Sincerely, I chewed this system a long time ago and spat it out, it's already an open secret, but it's worth posting, suddenly someone hasn’t tasted this system yet !!!
  13. Denis Skiff M2.0
    Denis Skiff M2.0 14 May 2015 17: 45 New
    0
    Banks rule the world. And who rules the banks?
    angels. from ol
  14. Wolverine
    Wolverine 14 May 2015 18: 11 New
    -1
    We scold the Inquisition, and it was only she who planted money-lenders on a fire, and it’s a pity, it turns out that normal guys were.
  15. kombin23
    kombin23 14 May 2015 18: 13 New
    0
    Do not hide your money in banks and corners ...
    1. Noncombatant
      Noncombatant 14 May 2015 18: 17 New
      0
      Yeah .. who are not request
      1. Boris55
        Boris55 14 May 2015 19: 38 New
        +1
        Quote: noncombant
        Yeah .. who are not request

        At first, the money was copper, silver and gold, then - paper ... and now we only have tokens in someone else's computer. Guess from three times - when it was easier to control us:
        - when did we have coins from precious metals?
        - when did we have paper money?
        - when are they on our "plastic" (zeroes in someone else's computer)?
        laughing
        1. Noncombatant
          Noncombatant 14 May 2015 19: 44 New
          +3
          The easiest way to control us will be when this notorious plastic is made in the form of a microchip, with which everyone will be stamped like cattle. It contains all the information about the "cattle", the amount of his money, certificates of crimes, debts, and so on.
  16. umka_
    umka_ 14 May 2015 19: 54 New
    +1
    It is necessary to drive bankers with a broom, a working man is the hozin of life, not a parasite.
  17. aviator1913
    aviator1913 15 May 2015 10: 52 New
    -1
    Everybody yells about management and the like. Everyone wants to sweep away the old system, build a new one, etc. But what will happen in the end? Kill all the rich and give the poor their property? - We tried, in the end civil war, hunger, death, and then all over again. It's like jumping off the ground and saying "I'm flying," but in the end you still land and find yourself on your native land. Power and money will always be with the rich, the only way out is to create social elevators so that a person endowed with certain talents can advance. Develop business, without mafia and corruption, be a talented politician and develop society.
    Right now, exclamations will begin about the fact that they will not give monopolies, etc., but people are trying to achieve, brands, corporations are being created, in the USA, in Europe, in Russia. We also have many competent businessmen and inventors, of course there are not as many as we would like, but they exist, and our task is to allow talented people to advance, and not to dream of destroying all billionaires and sharing their property among the poor. Create uniform rules of the game that are fair and help business develop taxes, develop infrastructure to the extent that it is necessary, build it where it is needed, and not build in order to build it.

    That is the goal, and the eternal struggle with corporations and the like only divert forces to really worthwhile things.