Funding the foe? Fox Nation explores the chilling truth that America is unwittingly f

[Gunny]

Why indeed.

Funding the foe? Fox Nation explores the chilling truth that America is unwittingly financing China's growth (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/funding-the-foe-fox-nation-explores-the-chilling-truth-that-america-is-unwittingly-financing-china-s-growth/ar-BB1oJqW5?ocid=msedgntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=9359a1fff73c42c986e5c7e9443443b5&ei=67)

[revelarts]

Why indeed.

Funding the foe? Fox Nation explores the chilling truth that America is unwittingly financing China's growth (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/funding-the-foe-fox-nation-explores-the-chilling-truth-that-america-is-unwittingly-financing-china-s-growth/ar-BB1oJqW5?ocid=msedgntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=9359a1fff73c42c986e5c7e9443443b5&ei=67)


I've been told it's NOT Globalist or Globalism.
Even though many globalist minded leaders & billionaires have long stated that they've want to promote China and replicate it's style of governance world wide.
A plan that's seems to have been cobbling together over many years.

[revelarts]

BTW, is it really new?
And maybe it's a plan or just "free market" activity ... or both?

http://cryptogon.com/?p=30288

2002 (http://archives.cnn.com/2002/BUSINESS/asia/01/09/china.loral/):
U.S. satellite maker Loral Space & Communications Ltd. has agreed to pay a $14 million fine for passing missile technology to China.
The satellite and communications company will pay the fine over seven years to the U.S. State Department, through its Space Systems/Loral Inc. subsidiary.
The subsidiary neither admitted nor denied the charges but has agreed to pay the fine. It contends the information was “mistakenly sent to the Chinese.”
The investigation started as a criminal case, after the U.S. government adjudged Space Systems/Loral might have broken export laws when it gave technical help to China, on its rockets.
Loral helped China investigate the February 1996 crash of a Chinese Long March missile that was carrying a Loral satellite.
Such a move requires government clearance. But in June that year, Loral disclosed that it had not received it.

Via: The Atlantic (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/pentagon-contractor-caught-illegally-selling-military-technology-to-china/259469/):
The Canadian arm of the aircraft engine manufacturer Pratt & Whitney closed a six-year U.S. government probe last week by admitting that it helped China produce its first modern attack helicopter, a serious violation of U.S. export laws that drew a multimillion dollar fine.
At the same time it was helping China, the company was separately earning huge fees from contracts with the Pentagon, including some in which it was building weapons meant to ensure that America can maintain decisive military superiority over China’s rising military might.


Arms Dealers Selling Weapons to ALL sides?!! Say it anit so.



Nazi Nexus: America's Corporate Connections to Hitler's Holocaust
It's a follow up and broader than his previous
IBM and the Holocaust.
In each he documents, with thick paper trails, the financial and industrial support of the various NAZI programs.

single explosive volume that details the pivotal corporate American connection to the Holocaust. The biggest names and crimes are all there. IBM and its facilitation of the identification and accelerated destruction of the Jews; General Motors and its rapid motorization of the German military enabling the conquest of Europe and the capture of Jews everywhere; Ford Motor Company for its political inspiration; the Rockefeller Foundation for its financing of deadly eugenic science and the program that sent Mengele into Auschwitz; the Carnegie Institution for its proliferation of the concept of race science, racial laws, and the very mathematical formula used to brand the Jews for progressive destruction; and others.

While his research makes clear the U.S. corporate complicity in the rise of Nazi war machine but it's covered, maybe even more forth rightly, by Anthony Sutton in Wall Street & the Rise of Hitler again well documented


...This book demonstrates how "American" multinational corporations, who entered into cartel agreements with I.G. Farben, German General Electric, and a few other firms allowed the Nazis to greatly increase the ability of Germany to wage war. Without many of the processes developed by American firms being given to the Germans, there is NO WAY that the Nazis could have fought as long as as hard as they did.

Many Wall Street firms floated the loans to the German firms, allowing them to build their cartels which would later cost Americans and their allies many billions of dollars and millions of lives. The fact that there were Americans, some of them Jews like the Warburgs, on the Board of Directors of these same cartels that formed the Nazi war machine is mentioned. Sutton asks the obvious question. Why weren't the American members of these firms brought up on war crime charges like their German colleagues? I guess the obvious answer is that their American counterparts had influence in the conquering governments.
Sutton also shows how ITT(International Telephone and Telegraph), G.E., Ford, and Standard Oil had no problem supplying both sides of the war. International financiers, of course, had no problem floating loans to both sides either. I guess that this should come as no surprise. Businessmen are motivated by profits first and patriotism second, if at all.

This book is yet another demonstration of what Carroll Quigley meant by the close-knit ramifications of international financial capitalism. For critics of foreign aid and other such pracitces, here is another example of how it can come back to haunt the citizens of the lending country, while the elites laugh their way to the bank.
Related: The Best Enemy Money Can Buy by Antony C. Sutton (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0937765015/ref=nosim/cryptogoncom-20)

then there's this other book By General Smeadly Bulter
"WAR IS A RACKET"
text (https://www.heritage-history.com/site/hclass/secret_societies/ebooks/pdf/butler_racket.pdf)
audio (https://www.heritage-history.com/site/hclass/secret_societies/ebooks/pdf/butler_racket.pdfhttps://archive.org/details/war_is_a_racket_1903_librivox)

(https://www.heritage-history.com/site/hclass/secret_societies/ebooks/pdf/butler_racket.pdfhttps://archive.org/details/war_is_a_racket_1903_librivox)

[revelarts]

War Is A Racket
CHAPTER ONE
War is a racket. It always has been.It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.
A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes. In the World War (WWI) a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War (1). That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How many of them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded or killed in battle?Out of war nations acquire additional territory, if they are victorious. They just take it. This newly acquired territory promptly is exploited by the few -- the selfsame few who wrung dollars out of blood in the war. The general public shoulders the bill.And what is this bill?This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones. Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic instability. Depression and all its attendant miseries.Back-breaking taxation for generations and generations.For a great many years, as a soldier, I had a suspicion that war was a racket; not until I retired to civil life did I fully realize it. Now that I see the international war clouds gathering, as they are today, I must face it and speak out...

Fool me once...

[fj1200]

I've been told it's NOT Globalist or Globalism.
Even though many globalist minded leaders & billionaires have long stated that they've want to promote China and replicate it's style of governance world wide.
A plan that's seems to have been cobbling together over many years.


BTW, is it really new?
And maybe it's a plan or just "free market" activity ... or both?



then there's this other book By General Smeadly Bulter
"WAR IS A RACKET"
text (https://www.heritage-history.com/site/hclass/secret_societies/ebooks/pdf/butler_racket.pdf)
audio (https://www.heritage-history.com/site/hclass/secret_societies/ebooks/pdf/butler_racket.pdfhttps://archive.org/details/war_is_a_racket_1903_librivox)

(https://www.heritage-history.com/site/hclass/secret_societies/ebooks/pdf/butler_racket.pdfhttps://archive.org/details/war_is_a_racket_1903_librivox)

I'm not entirely sure you understand the words that you use.

[revelarts]

I'm not entirely sure you understand the words that you use.
ok.

So, what's your take on the U.S gov, U.S. corporations and markets investing in China to the detriment of our economic & military safety.. for years?

And the fact that U.S. financiers and corporations have done so historically (invested in & done biz with U.S. enemies) at least since WWI.

[fj1200]

ok.

So, what's your take on the U.S gov, U.S. corporations and markets investing in China to the detriment of our economic & military safety.. for years?

And the fact that U.S. financiers and corporations have done so historically (invested in & done biz with U.S. enemies) at least since WWI.

I do not have a problem with free trade and the liberty that we have to invest in foreign companies. To the extent that all of that is legal to do so. If the government decides that it is not in the countries best interest then they have the ability to pass laws as they have done.

But I must ask if your main issue here is with globalism (free trade) or globalists (i.e. One-world government)? And I wish that we could restrict, like you apparently think we're able to, investment in foreign countries with perfect 20/20 hindsight.

[revelarts]

I do not have a problem with free trade and the liberty that we have to invest in foreign companies. To the extent that all of that is legal to do so. If the government decides that it is not in the countries best interest then they have the ability to pass laws as they have done.
But I must ask if your main issue here is with globalism (free trade) or globalists (i.e. One-world government)?.

Globalism has broad/various takes but

globalism
https://dictionary.cambridge.org
noun POLITICS, BUSINESS
the idea that events in one country cannot be separated from those in another and that economic and foreign policy should be planned in an international way.
globalism
merriam-webster.com
noun
a national policy of treating the whole world as a proper sphere for political influence
compare IMPERIALISM, INTERNATIONALISM

globalist according to cambridge is:
noun POLITICS
Someone who believes that economic and foreign policy should be planned in an international way, rather than according to what is best for one particular country

as you said
ie One-world government
In my mind Globalism does not equal "free trade".
Globalism is more of the merger/subduction of national govt(s) to large multi-national corporation and private orgs will via international laws that align with certain multi-national corporations and orgs interest.

"Free Trade" isn't really what "globalism" is about.
A major aspect of Globalism is just international crony capitalism.
So I try to put the term "Free Trade" in Quotes when i'm using it to reference what corporations and globalist SAY they are doing.



And I wish that we could restrict, like you apparently think we're able to, investment in foreign countries with perfect 20/20 hindsight


You don't need hindsight not to sell billions of the best arms to the rest of the world in general.
You don't need hindsight not to sell certain things to known adversaries, helicopter parts, arms, certain tech etc etc.
You don't need hindsight not to sell or give control to known adversaries major or important portions of your land, food, infrastructure, tech, communications, or important consumer goods.
You do need to monitor certain transactions to know if collectively there may be problem.
You don't need hindsight see known adversaries don't have your best interest at heart. And to legally create bottle necks to any economic leverage that might strengthen their positions.

[Black Diamond]

Question. What would happen to the stock market and the economy if we pulled all our business outof China. Companies sind verboten from selling products to the Chinese.

[revelarts]

Question. What would happen to the stock market and the economy if we pulled all our business out of China. Companies sind verboten from selling products to the Chinese.

The stock market would crap the bed.
If "we pulled all our business out of China" meant everything wholesale all at once.

What would war with China or WW3 do for the stock market and the economy?

[Black Diamond]

The stock market would crap the bed.
If "we pulled all our business out of China" meant everything wholesale all at once.

What would war with China or WW3 do for the stock market and the economy?

Maybe someone should cut a deal....

[fj1200]

Globalism has broad/various takes but

globalism
https://dictionary.cambridge.org
noun POLITICS, BUSINESS
the idea that events in one country cannot be separated from those in another and that economic and foreign policy should be planned in an international way.
globalism
merriam-webster.com
noun
a national policy of treating the whole world as a proper sphere for political influence
compare IMPERIALISM, INTERNATIONALISM

globalist according to cambridge is:
noun POLITICS
Someone who believes that economic and foreign policy should be planned in an international way, rather than according to what is best for one particular country

as you said
ie One-world government
In my mind Globalism does not equal "free trade".
Globalism is more of the merger/subduction of national govt(s) to large multi-national corporation and private orgs will via international laws that align with certain multi-national corporations and orgs interest.

"Free Trade" isn't really what "globalism" is about.
A major aspect of Globalism is just international crony capitalism.
So I try to put the term "Free Trade" in Quotes when i'm using it to reference what corporations and globalist SAY they are doing.




You don't need hindsight not to sell billions of the best arms to the rest of the world in general.
You don't need hindsight not to sell certain things to known adversaries, helicopter parts, arms, certain tech etc etc.
You don't need hindsight not to sell or give control to known adversaries major or important portions of your land, food, infrastructure, tech, communications, or important consumer goods.
You do need to monitor certain transactions to know if collectively there may be problem.
You don't need hindsight see known adversaries don't have your best interest at heart. And to legally create bottle necks to any economic leverage that might strengthen their positions.

I have no desire to have a semantics argument with you about globalism, it's various definitions, or your preconceived notions about free trade... or "free trade" for that matter. Focus a little bit and we may get somewhere.

[fj1200]

Question. What would happen to the stock market and the economy if we pulled all our business outof China. Companies sind verboten from selling products to the Chinese.

1929 perhaps. The problem with addressing the China question is that those who are most vocal about the China question probably don't want to stop with China; See AHZ for example.

[Black Diamond]

1929 perhaps. The problem with addressing the China question is that those who are most vocal about the China question probably don't want to stop with China; See AHZ for example.

I have a feeling I'd be working until i am 80

[revelarts]

...But I must ask if your main issue here is with globalism (free trade) or globalists (i.e. One-world government)?...


I have no desire to have a semantics argument with you about globalism, it's various definitions, or your preconceived notions about free trade... or "free trade" for that matter. Focus a little bit and we may get somewhere.

So you want me to use your definitions for any discussion here?
But you asked me about MY Main issue. I replied with MY main issues with globalism & globalists.
I think i replied to that.

[fj1200]

So you want me to use your definitions for any discussion here?
But you asked me about MY Main issue. I replied with MY main issues with globalism & globalists.
I think i replied to that.

I don't care what definition you use I just don't want to discuss all of your preconceived notions in every thread. You brought up the Nazis again; hundreds or thousands of companies did business with Germany prior to WWII; that alone doesn't make it nefarious. Firms did business with Russia prior to 1989... Firms did business with the Chicomms for decades... Firms did business with apartheid South Africa... Firms do business in the environment in which they exist. Government sets that environment. Can they swing to far in either direction? Sure but you tend to do wholesale conviction based on aforementioned preconceived notions. My base? Free trade is good. "Free trade" is not good.

[revelarts]

... You brought up the Nazis again; hundreds or thousands of companies did business with Germany prior to WWII; that alone doesn't make it nefarious.
All of my post named specific corporations. and the books that I'm not forcing or guilting anyone to read point out the details why they are nefarious.




...Firms did business with Russia prior to 1989... Firms did business with the Chicomms for decades... Firms did business with apartheid South Africa... Firms do business in the environment in which they exist. Government sets that environment. Can they swing to far in either direction? Sure but you tend to do wholesale conviction based on aforementioned preconceived notions...
So if the Government sets that environment, if it's legal, then it's not any corporations fault if they just made money suppling arms & loans to their national adversaries? It's the gov'ts fault for setting the environment too loosely?
Sorry no company HAD to work with NAZIs, Or the Soviet Union, Or Slave Traders, or Aparthied South Africa, or Planned Parenthood, or the DNC, or Drag Queen StoryHour. All corporations have a choice. They can choose morals over money ANYtime.
No one HAS TO sell weapons to or finance our adversaries.

Corporations are not dumb children who have NO CLUE who they are dealing with until the govt tells them. And they can't (honestly) just claim ignorance and "no rules against it" & wave the flag of free trade and expect everyone to give them a pass.
maybe you will, i dont know.
But I won't.





My base? Free trade is good. "Free trade" is not good.
I'd agree, in general.
When the nation set good limits. And There are no perfect solutions to those limits, they probably should be in flux.
Because even PURE Free Trade is NOT good. My base.

Also please stop claiming I promote WHOLESALE condemnation of corporations or free trade.
Why is that alway the cry?
Someone points out corrupt cops -U hate all Cops!!!-
point out corrupt clergy -U hate all Clergy!!-
point out illegal military actions -U hate all Military!! (& U weren't there p****y!)-
point out corrupt corporations -U hate ALL Free Trade!!-
There's not even any content in that kind of reply, it just assumes a negative bias and hopes the facts presented get disregarded.
Please stop, I'm just pointing out some uncomfortable realities.

Here's what I do believe, that FREE TRADE or "Free Trade" are NOT the ULTIMATE environment that business should be moving in.
Free trade sailing in an environment of good morals and service to people. & they can create that environment WITHOUT gov't help anytime.

[fj1200]

All of my post named specific corporations. and the books that I'm not forcing or guilting anyone to read point out the details why they are nefarious.

You miss the point.


So if the Government sets that environment, if it's legal, then it's not any corporations fault if they just made money suppling arms & loans to their national adversaries? It's the gov'ts fault for setting the environment too loosely?
Sorry no company HAD to work with NAZIs, Or the Soviet Union, Or Slave Traders, or Aparthied South Africa, or Planned Parenthood, or the DNC, or Drag Queen StoryHour. All corporations have a choice. They can choose morals over money ANYtime.
No one HAS TO sell weapons to or finance our adversaries.

Corporations are not dumb children who have NO CLUE who they are dealing with until the govt tells them. And they can't (honestly) just claim ignorance and "no rules against it" & wave the flag of free trade and expect everyone to give them a pass.
maybe you will, i dont know.
But I won't.

You live in a world, or present such, of 20/20 hindsight with expectations of perfect information. The Democratic National Committee? :rolleyes:


I'd agree, in general.
When the nation set good limits. And There are no perfect solutions to those limits, they probably should be in flux.
Because even PURE Free Trade is NOT good. My base.

Also please stop claiming I promote WHOLESALE condemnation of corporations or free trade.
Why is that alway the cry?
Someone points out corrupt cops -U hate all Cops!!!-
point out corrupt clergy -U hate all Clergy!!-
point out illegal military actions -U hate all Military!! (& U weren't there p****y!)-
point out corrupt corporations -U hate ALL Free Trade!!-
There's not even any content in that kind of reply, it just assumes a negative bias and hopes the facts presented get disregarded.
Please stop, I'm just pointing out some uncomfortable realities.

Here's what I do believe, that FREE TRADE or "Free Trade" are NOT the ULTIMATE environment that business should be moving in.
Free trade sailing in an environment of good morals and service to people. & they can create that environment WITHOUT gov't help anytime.

You find yourself with that based on your posting pattern especially in how every time you want to discuss something you can't help but bring up yet another laundry list of talking points. Some relevant and some not but it is not a point from which rational discussion can begin.

[revelarts]

You live in a world, or present such, of 20/20 hindsight with expectations of perfect information. The Democratic National Committee? :rolleyes:



Seems you live in a world where you think corporations should not be reigned in by any laws on trade & corporations are not responsible for their actions, before or after, they've been exposed as nefarious.
And you want perfect information of their crimes without reading or really investigating the evidence available.

And Yes "the DNC" was half Joking.

[revelarts]

Anyway,
I stand by my earlier post


BTW, is it really new?
And maybe it's a plan or just "free market" activity ... or both?

http://cryptogon.com/?p=30288

2002 (http://archives.cnn.com/2002/BUSINESS/asia/01/09/china.loral/):
U.S. satellite maker Loral Space & Communications Ltd. has agreed to pay a $14 million fine for passing missile technology to China.
The satellite and communications company will pay the fine over seven years to the U.S. State Department, through its Space Systems/Loral Inc. subsidiary.
The subsidiary neither admitted nor denied the charges but has agreed to pay the fine. It contends the information was “mistakenly sent to the Chinese.”
The investigation started as a criminal case, after the U.S. government adjudged Space Systems/Loral might have broken export laws when it gave technical help to China, on its rockets.
Loral helped China investigate the February 1996 crash of a Chinese Long March missile that was carrying a Loral satellite.
Such a move requires government clearance. But in June that year, Loral disclosed that it had not received it.

Via: The Atlantic (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/pentagon-contractor-caught-illegally-selling-military-technology-to-china/259469/):
The Canadian arm of the aircraft engine manufacturer Pratt & Whitney closed a six-year U.S. government probe last week by admitting that it helped China produce its first modern attack helicopter, a serious violation of U.S. export laws that drew a multimillion dollar fine.
At the same time it was helping China, the company was separately earning huge fees from contracts with the Pentagon, including some in which it was building weapons meant to ensure that America can maintain decisive military superiority over China’s rising military might.


Arms Dealers Selling Weapons to ALL sides?!! Say it anit so.



Nazi Nexus: America's Corporate Connections to Hitler's Holocaust
It's a follow up and broader than his previous
IBM and the Holocaust.
In each he documents, with thick paper trails, the financial and industrial support of the various NAZI programs.

single explosive volume that details the pivotal corporate American connection to the Holocaust. The biggest names and crimes are all there. IBM and its facilitation of the identification and accelerated destruction of the Jews; General Motors and its rapid motorization of the German military enabling the conquest of Europe and the capture of Jews everywhere; Ford Motor Company for its political inspiration; the Rockefeller Foundation for its financing of deadly eugenic science and the program that sent Mengele into Auschwitz; the Carnegie Institution for its proliferation of the concept of race science, racial laws, and the very mathematical formula used to brand the Jews for progressive destruction; and others.

While his research makes clear the U.S. corporate complicity in the rise of Nazi war machine but it's covered, maybe even more forth rightly, by Anthony Sutton in Wall Street & the Rise of Hitler again well documented


...This book demonstrates how "American" multinational corporations, who entered into cartel agreements with I.G. Farben, German General Electric, and a few other firms allowed the Nazis to greatly increase the ability of Germany to wage war. Without many of the processes developed by American firms being given to the Germans, there is NO WAY that the Nazis could have fought as long as as hard as they did.

Many Wall Street firms floated the loans to the German firms, allowing them to build their cartels which would later cost Americans and their allies many billions of dollars and millions of lives. The fact that there were Americans, some of them Jews like the Warburgs, on the Board of Directors of these same cartels that formed the Nazi war machine is mentioned. Sutton asks the obvious question. Why weren't the American members of these firms brought up on war crime charges like their German colleagues? I guess the obvious answer is that their American counterparts had influence in the conquering governments.
Sutton also shows how ITT(International Telephone and Telegraph), G.E., Ford, and Standard Oil had no problem supplying both sides of the war. International financiers, of course, had no problem floating loans to both sides either. I guess that this should come as no surprise. Businessmen are motivated by profits first and patriotism second, if at all.

This book is yet another demonstration of what Carroll Quigley meant by the close-knit ramifications of international financial capitalism. For critics of foreign aid and other such pracitces, here is another example of how it can come back to haunt the citizens of the lending country, while the elites laugh their way to the bank.

Related: The Best Enemy Money Can Buy by Antony C. Sutton (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0937765015/ref=nosim/cryptogoncom-20)
About US corporations Funding & Suppling the defense industry of the USSR during the cold war.


then there's this other book By General Smeadly Bulter
"WAR IS A RACKET"
text (https://www.heritage-history.com/site/hclass/secret_societies/ebooks/pdf/butler_racket.pdf)
audio (https://www.heritage-history.com/site/hclass/secret_societies/ebooks/pdf/butler_racket.pdfhttps://archive.org/details/war_is_a_racket_1903_librivox)
(https://www.heritage-history.com/site/hclass/secret_societies/ebooks/pdf/butler_racket.pdfhttps://archive.org/details/war_is_a_racket_1903_librivox)

[Gunny]

BRICS. They're working on funding themselves beyond the trade already being done in defiance of UN/US sanctions. Nothing would make expansionist bullies happier than do what you and other short-sighted folk want and pull the US out of everything and leave it all for them.

[fj1200]

Seems you live in a world where you think corporations should not be reigned in by any laws on trade & corporations are not responsible for their actions, before or after, they've been exposed as nefarious.
And you want perfect information of their crimes without reading or really investigating the evidence available.

And Yes "the DNC" was half Joking.

Absolutely nowhere has that been stated.


Anyway,
I stand by my earlier post

The problem with it is the same problem with your globalists evidence. Start with the conclusion in mind, find evidence real or imagined that supports the conclusion, hence your conclusion is correct.

[fj1200]

BRICS. They're working on funding themselves beyond the trade already being done in defiance of UN/US sanctions. Nothing would make expansionist bullies happier than do what you and other short-sighted folk want and pull the US out of everything and leave it all for them.

I'm not worried about BRICS. The BRICS share of the global economy only looks substantial because of China's share. Everyone else is small potatoes. The below includes Argentina which thanks to their recent vote of sanity is pulling out... to the extent that they were ever in.

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/charted-comparing-the-gdp-of-brics-and-the-g7-countries/

[SassyLady]

I'm not worried about BRICS. The BRICS share of the global economy only looks substantial because of China's share. Everyone else is small potatoes. The below includes Argentina which thanks to their recent vote of sanity is pulling out... to the extent that they were ever in.

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/charted-comparing-the-gdp-of-brics-and-the-g7-countries/
The growth of BRICS in the coming decade compared to the G7 warrants consideration.

[fj1200]

The growth of BRICS in the coming decade compared to the G7 warrants consideration.

Not so much. The BRICS countries are essentially countries that do not even give lip service to the fundamentals of free markets; Property rights, transparency, rule of law, etc. are anathema to most of those countries.

[Gunny]

I'm not worried about BRICS. The BRICS share of the global economy only looks substantial because of China's share. Everyone else is small potatoes. The below includes Argentina which thanks to their recent vote of sanity is pulling out... to the extent that they were ever in.

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/charted-comparing-the-gdp-of-brics-and-the-g7-countries/"Not worried about" doesn't address its existence. Like confederate money. As long as there are those willing to trade on it, there will be trade. I haven't figured out yet the thought process that these people are working on other than anti-US sentiment blocking their judgement. BRICS is underwritten by China which is underwritten by the dollar.

China needs to, and is trying to, but cannot manage to divest itself of the dollar. For all the dumb things Putin has done, one thing he managed was to decrease Russia's outside debt by a large margin. As far as the latter mindset when it comes to bookkeeping, someone in the US should pay attention and give it a shot. The US spends like my ex wife after drinking in possession of a credit card:rolleyes:

[fj1200]

"Not worried about" doesn't address its existence. Like confederate money. As long as there are those willing to trade on it, there will be trade. I haven't figured out yet the thought process that these people are working on other than anti-US sentiment blocking their judgement. BRICS is underwritten by China which is underwritten by the dollar.

China needs to, and is trying to, but cannot manage to divest itself of the dollar. For all the dumb things Putin has done, one thing he managed was to decrease Russia's outside debt by a large margin. As far as the latter mindset when it comes to bookkeeping, someone in the US should pay attention and give it a shot. The US spends like my ex wife after drinking in possession of a credit card:rolleyes:

If you're referring to the hoped for BRICS currency then that doesn't exist yet. And probably won't IMO; see other threads. Until then BRICS is just a bunch of countries slightly more free than the eastern blocs trading group of last century.