Can you dispute that narrow statement?
I don’t assume heinous activities on the part on anyone without evidence. To do so shows low character.
The notion that keeping non-white countries down is counterproductive economically, is only true for those countries, not great Wealth. Keeping costs down in disenfranchised nations enables the systematic aqusition of all global resources…
I don’t know what you mean by “Great Wealth”. What I can say is that ownership of natural resources has become decreasingly important post Industrial Revolution to anyone, and in particular in the post WW2 period, where cross world shipping is fast and efficient, in part by air, and even more since the information age. Since access is ubiquitous, the value is placed on productive capacity.
Ergo, what matters is who you can sell finished product to. And the faster standards of living rise in developing nations, the more customers you have for your productive capacity. iPhones, for example, sell at the same price in China (adjusted for currency) as they do here. Apple would love to be able to sell to the 80% of the country that doesn’t earn that much money in a year.
That’s so cute.. I didn’t say print money, now did I? I said create money, by loaning it into existence at a sustainable rate, where non-white countries will not have their currencies honored if they do the same. “there’s no reason to do this other than to keep non-white people down.”
I apologize for my habit of using “print” and “create” as synonyms. The point remains that such a dilution of value would be inflationary to even the US, so there are upper limits to the creation of money. We saw this in the late 70’s, when the money supply ballooned, and the result being double digit inflation in the US.
There is no reason to question the ability of any sovereign government to service a sustainably priced debt, just like there is no reason to question the ability of a sovereign individual to service the loan on her home, when the home is worth the value owed, the rate is sustainable, and the payment can be assured with income.
Which is why global banks make loans to developing nations, based on their productive capacity.
Here, after accepting as fact that non-white countries can, and do, have their currencies arbitrarily devalued, you gloat
Nonsense. I listed six currencies which are tradeable. Two of those nations are non-white. And missing from the list are all the currencies of the non Euro European countries, such as the Swedish and Danish Kronor.
You have provided no evidence of racist economic behavior.