[Moderated] World Conservation Bank/Rothschild Banking Family Net Worth?

therival58 · 15th December 2011, 12:38 PM

Some guy a conspiracy theorist named George Hunt made all of these wild and crazy claims about attending the UNCED earth summit conference in 1992 and said that the house of Rothschild worked to establish a bank called the "World Conservation Bank."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Conservation_Bank

The wikipedia source is dubious at best. The first source is George Hunt talking to a bunch of people saying how he attended the conference and how it was just a bunch of elites using the environment as an excuse to just takeover the world.

(he has a recording of some banker who was supposedly there calling the people of the world "cannon fodder")

The 2nd referenced source is just for a proposal of the World Conservation bank, but the entry reads as the bank having actually been created. Doing a search I have not come across such bank.

on this forum it was suggested that it was the "Bank privee Edmond de Rothschild" but I have not been able to connect that bank with any environmental activity.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...servation-Bank

Has anyone found different?

The Central Scrutinizer · 15th December 2011, 01:12 PM

I have no idea. But generally (99.9%) when someone attributes something to Rothschild, it's just Jewish world occupation conspiracy nonsense.

kevsta · 15th December 2011, 02:12 PM

You do know the Rothschilds are very real and lots of the stories of the past are true, don't you? the mere mention of their name does not make someone a conspiracy theorist.

whether they would like a world government is debatable, but that they are immensely rich and powerful is not.

The Central Scrutinizer · 15th December 2011, 02:35 PM

Originally Posted by kevsta

the mere mention of their name does not make someone a conspiracy theorist.

99.9% of the time it does. Especially if their name is mentioned on an Internet forum. That has already been established.

Humes fork · 15th December 2011, 02:37 PM

Originally Posted by kevsta

whether they would like a world government is debatable, but that they are immensely rich and powerful is not.

Even if they want a world government, they wouldn't necessarily get one. And if they want one, so what? Bertrand Russell and Isaac Asimov also wanted a world government.

And why assume that they have identical political views? In my immediate family, political views differ.

Humes fork · 15th December 2011, 02:40 PM

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

I have no idea. But generally (99.9%) when someone attributes something to Rothschild, it's just Jewish world occupation conspiracy nonsense.

Agreed. Btw who is the babe in your pic?

The Central Scrutinizer · 15th December 2011, 02:43 PM

Originally Posted by Humes fork

Agreed. Btw who is the babe in your pic?

Meredith Kercher. I'm trying to remember her. Or something.

kevsta · 15th December 2011, 02:49 PM

I don't dispute any of the above.

I emailed them a couple of years ago and advised them to sort their amateurish spelling mistake out on their website.

as yet they haven't. (about as efficient as your average government)

Humes fork · 15th December 2011, 03:37 PM

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

Meredith Kercher. I'm trying to remember her. Or something.

Oh she's dead! Had no idea...

The Central Scrutinizer · 15th December 2011, 04:45 PM

Originally Posted by Humes fork

Oh she's dead! Had no idea...

You must be new around here.

therival58 · 16th December 2011, 01:32 AM

Originally Posted by kevsta

whether they would like a world government is debatable, but that they are immensely rich and powerful is not.

how much wealth do you think the family owns as a collective? Some CT's claim its in the hundreds of trillions....

http://www.rense.com/general79/tril.htm

http://tobefree.wordpress.com/2010/0...-gold%E2%80%A6

The Rothschilds 500 TRILLION DOLLARS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym4TTmOJ4I8

Top rated comment

Quote:

300 years of saving money & gold, have corrupt their soul, children of Satan.

Check this out from the helpful folks at wikianswers:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_the_rot...ank_of_England

Quote:

QIs the rothschild dynasty worth over 500 trillion and do they own all the central banks of the world like the fed bank of England?

AYes. That's true.
$500 trillion is an extremely conservative estimate. Its based on an assumption of only an 8% return on their holdings since 1931, when some speculate the return is near 100% per annum.

Humes fork · 16th December 2011, 01:55 AM

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

You must be new around here.

Well you can see my join date (or month).

Puppycow · 16th December 2011, 02:32 AM

Originally Posted by therival58

how much wealth do you think the family owns as a collective? Some CT's claim its in the hundreds of trillions....

http://www.rense.com/general79/tril.htm

http://tobefree.wordpress.com/2010/0...-gold%E2%80%A6

The Rothschilds 500 TRILLION DOLLARS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym4TTmOJ4I8

Top rated comment

Check this out from the helpful folks at wikianswers:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_the_rot...ank_of_England

Ridiculous.

Sceptic-PK · 16th December 2011, 02:36 AM

So the Rothschilds control more than the entire world's GDP several times over? Well, I'm sure they worked hard for it.

The Don · 16th December 2011, 03:00 AM

Well you've convinced me, a YouTube video (and top rated comment) and Wikianswers response certainly represent incontrovertible evidence.

I wonder how they get that 100% year on year when the global economy is growing at 5%. I wonder how they manage to hide all the wealth, by now they should own everything (including my underwear).

therival58 · 16th December 2011, 03:25 AM

Originally Posted by The Don

Well you've convinced me, a YouTube video (and top rated comment) and Wikianswers response certainly represent incontrovertible evidence.

Well it certainly represents something, but evidence was not my intention.

It was more a response to Kevsta's comment about how wealthy the rothschild's are. I offered an extreme figure from the CT community (and some woo comments to boot) to spark discussion.

Tippit · 18th December 2011, 08:35 AM

Originally Posted by therival58

Well it certainly represents something, but evidence was not my intention.

It was more a response to Kevsta's comment about how wealthy the rothschild's are. I offered an extreme figure from the CT community (and some woo comments to boot) to spark discussion.

If you start with established net worth figures from historical Rothschild biographies, and discount those to the present using reasonable rates, the Rothschilds are conceivably worth hundreds of billions, if not trillions. This is simple math, even accounting for the law of large numbers. To dispute these estimates would require questioning some fundamental assumptions about what they've done over the past century and a half. Are they fading quietly into the philanthropic world of financial has-beens, or have they been working actively for decades to disguise their potentially massive power and influence? One can't challenge power that is mostly anonymous, maybe that's their goal.

It's easier I think, however, to show that claims to the world's wealthiest man are dubious, to say the least. The media recently made claims to Hosni Mubarak of Egypt's net worth, throwing around figures of $70 to $80 billion dollars. If a tin-pot dictator from Egypt is allegedly worth this vast sum of money, why should I believe Forbes' account that Carlos Slim is the world's richest man? Forbes only counts what is owned, not necessarily what is controlled. It was JD Rockefeller who once said "I want to own nothing, and control everything." This is for good reason.

therival58 · 18th December 2011, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by Tippit

If you start with established net worth figures from historical Rothschild biographies, and discount those to the present using reasonable rates, the Rothschilds are conceivably worth hundreds of billions, if not trillions. This is simple math, even accounting for the law of large numbers. To dispute these estimates would require questioning some fundamental assumptions about what they've done over the past century and a half. Are they fading quietly into the philanthropic world of financial has-beens, or have they been working actively for decades to disguise their potentially massive power and influence? One can't challenge power that is mostly anonymous, maybe that's their goal.

It's easier I think, however, to show that claims to the world's wealthiest man are dubious, to say the least. The media recently made claims to Hosni Mubarak of Egypt's net worth, throwing around figures of $70 to $80 billion dollars. If a tin-pot dictator from Egypt is allegedly worth this vast sum of money, why should I believe Forbes' account that Carlos Slim is the world's richest man? Forbes only counts what is owned, not necessarily what is controlled. It was JD Rockefeller who once said "I want to own nothing, and control everything." This is for good reason.

ah, now this is interesting. It's a shame you cannot modify thread titles, as I would rename this thread "Rothschild's Net Worth".

geni · 18th December 2011, 03:55 PM

Originally Posted by therival58

Has anyone found different?

Claims make no sense. Third would countries are unlikely to give you land for buying their debt. After all they don't really gain anything if people do. Heck you can buy third world debt youself if you want. Its openly traded. Fairly high risk though.

therival58 · 18th December 2011, 08:53 PM

Hey Tippit have you read any of the volumes on the Rothschilds done by Niall Ferguson?

Puppycow · 19th December 2011, 12:24 AM

Originally Posted by Tippit

To dispute these estimates would require questioning some fundamental assumptions about what they've done over the past century and a half.

See my signature.

I have no problem questioning anyone's "fundamental assumptions" when no evidence is provided therefor. A lot of "fundamental assumptions" turn out to be unfounded.

ETA: People who inherit wealth like people who win the lottery tend not to grow that wealth very much, but rather to spend it down and disperse it among multiple heirs. That's my "fundamental assumption."

The Central Scrutinizer · 19th December 2011, 06:48 AM

I heard the Rothschild banking Jews have more money than the US, Canada, China and Europe combined!!! That's what I heard.

Tippit · 19th December 2011, 02:51 PM

Originally Posted by therival58

Hey Tippit have you read any of the volumes on the Rothschilds done by Niall Ferguson?

I haven't read any books specifically about the Rothschilds, although the biography by Morton contains information on their net worth in the 19th century.

Tippit · 19th December 2011, 02:53 PM

Originally Posted by Puppycow

See my signature.

I have no problem questioning anyone's "fundamental assumptions" when no evidence is provided therefor. A lot of "fundamental assumptions" turn out to be unfounded.

ETA: People who inherit wealth like people who win the lottery tend not to grow that wealth very much, but rather to spend it down and disperse it among multiple heirs. That's my "fundamental assumption."

There's lots of evidence, it's been presented in other threads. I'm not going to repost it here for your benefit. Given that we already have historical evidence that the Rothschilds have been extremely wealthy, the onus is on you to prove that they are no longer extremely wealthy. The fact that they have more or less disappeared from the public eye is irrelevant.

commandlinegamer · 19th December 2011, 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by Tippit

There's lots of evidence, it's been presented in other threads. I'm not going to repost it here for your benefit. Given that we already have historical evidence that the Rothschilds have been extremely wealthy, the onus is on you to prove that they are no longer extremely wealthy. The fact that they have more or less disappeared from the public eye is irrelevant.

Wealthy, or not, I'd like to see definitive proof of their shape-shifting abilities. And no, pics alone won't cut it.

Humes fork · 19th December 2011, 03:30 PM

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

I heard the Rothschild banking Jews have more money than the US, Canada, China and Europe combined!!! That's what I heard.

And we don't demand extraordinary evidence for the extraordinary claims you hear.

therival58 · 19th December 2011, 03:58 PM

well I found something here on the historic new york times, "HOW THE ROTHSCHILD FORTUNE OF $2,000,000,000 WAS MADE"

Published: January 26, 1913.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...D9405B838DF1D3

http://www.scribd.com/doc/39557107/H...rtune-Was-Made

kevsta · 19th December 2011, 09:02 PM

given that they were funding governments across Europe as far back as the Napoleonic wars and shortly afterwards owned a good amount of the UK, and companies like Rio Tinto, DeBeers, Royal Dutch Shell, that they were an integral part of the LBMA from inception, I think it's safe to assume they are, as a family still pretty rich

Humes fork · 20th December 2011, 03:19 AM

Originally Posted by therival58

well I found something here on the historic new york times, "HOW THE ROTHSCHILD FORTUNE OF $2,000,000,000 WAS MADE"

Published: January 26, 1913.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...D9405B838DF1D3

http://www.scribd.com/doc/39557107/H...rtune-Was-Made

Two billion isn't that much money, at least not for rich people. Two billion is less than the net worths of Bill Gates, Larry Page, Mark Zuckerberg and others. Nowhere near the GDPs of industrialized nations.

Sceptic-PK · 20th December 2011, 04:05 AM

While I obviously think the Rothschild conspiracies are ridiculous, $2B was a fair chunk in 1913.

Aepervius · 20th December 2011, 05:19 AM

Originally Posted by Humes fork

Agreed. Btw who is the babe in your pic?

Who is yours ?

therival58 · 20th December 2011, 08:44 AM

Originally Posted by Humes fork

Two billion isn't that much money, at least not for rich people. Two billion is less than the net worths of Bill Gates, Larry Page, Mark Zuckerberg and others. Nowhere near the GDPs of industrialized nations.

But surely it must have been a considerable sum back in the 1900s, especially if adjusted for today's inflation.

Humes fork · 20th December 2011, 10:22 AM

Originally Posted by therival58

But surely it must have been a considerable sum back in the 1900s, especially if adjusted for today's inflation.

Sure, but no conspiracy theory is necessary to explain their wealth.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

kevsta · 20th December 2011, 10:55 AM

Originally Posted by Humes fork

Sure, but no conspiracy theory is necessary to explain their wealth.

no, for sure, funding both sides of wars and owning central banks has always been a winner.

Sceptic-PK · 20th December 2011, 02:07 PM

They don’t own any central banks you fool. Central banks are government agencies. I’ve explained this simple fact to you previously, sheesh.

kevsta · 20th December 2011, 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by Sceptic-PK

They don’t own any central banks you fool. Central banks are government agencies. I’ve explained this simple fact to you previously, sheesh.

haha check your history amigo, they certainly used to, they might not have been called CBs back then, but they were all the same.

good video here on this, a historical study, not at all CT, just factual.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

I think its based on Niall Fergusons work actually, not sure, havent seen / read that

Sceptic-PK · 20th December 2011, 02:30 PM

As I have explained to you previously kevsta, I am not interested in watching your youtube clips. Suffice it to say that the Rothschilds never owned a single central bank. Central banks are not “the same” as commercial banks, claiming otherwise is ridiculous.

kevsta · 20th December 2011, 02:49 PM

Originally Posted by Sceptic-PK

As I have explained to you previously kevsta, I am not interested in watching your youtube clips. Suffice it to say that the Rothschilds never owned a single central bank. Central banks are not “the same” as commercial banks, claiming otherwise is ridiculous.

you are being pedantic, they financed entire countries through their monarchies or governments.

and again, the video wasn't for you, it was for any others who might actually be interested in the subject.

so not a "central bank" by today's (and your) definition, but the same thing.

edit - maybe you should take the wording up with wiki too

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_M_Rot...21st_centuries

Quote:

20th and 21st centuries
The First World War marked a change of fortune and emphasis for Rothschild. After the War, the Rothschild banks began a steady transition towards advisory work and finance raising for commercial concerns, including the London Underground. In 1938, the Austrian Rothschilds’ interests were seized by the Nazis, bringing to an end more than a century at the heart of Central European banking.

central European, European central, all the same thing

Sceptic-PK · 20th December 2011, 03:25 PM

So we agree then. The Rothschilds bought lots of government bonds but didn’t own a central bank.

kevsta · 20th December 2011, 04:09 PM

Originally Posted by Sceptic-PK

So we agree then. The Rothschilds bought lots of government bonds but didn’t own a central bank.

if you add "but through their organization performed various functions of modern day central banks and worked as directors at a couple of early style central banks too.."

then yes, we agree. is that a first?

15th December 2011, 12:38 PM	#1
therival58 Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 324	World Conservation Bank/Rothschild Banking Family Net Worth? Some guy a conspiracy theorist named George Hunt made all of these wild and crazy claims about attending the UNCED earth summit conference in 1992 and said that the house of Rothschild worked to establish a bank called the "World Conservation Bank." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Conservation_Bank The wikipedia source is dubious at best. The first source is George Hunt talking to a bunch of people saying how he attended the conference and how it was just a bunch of elites using the environment as an excuse to just takeover the world. (he has a recording of some banker who was supposedly there calling the people of the world "cannon fodder") The 2nd referenced source is just for a proposal of the World Conservation bank, but the entry reads as the bank having actually been created. Doing a search I have not come across such bank. on this forum it was suggested that it was the "Bank privee Edmond de Rothschild" but I have not been able to connect that bank with any environmental activity. http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...servation-Bank Has anyone found different?

15th December 2011, 01:12 PM	#2
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,277	I have no idea. But generally (99.9%) when someone attributes something to Rothschild, it's just Jewish world occupation conspiracy nonsense.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

15th December 2011, 02:12 PM	#3
kevsta RBL CHeck Failed Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: in the shadows Posts: 2,453	You do know the Rothschilds are very real and lots of the stories of the past are true, don't you? the mere mention of their name does not make someone a conspiracy theorist. whether they would like a world government is debatable, but that they are immensely rich and powerful is not.
	__________________ "The world will soon wake up to the reality that everyone is broke and can collect nothing from the bankrupt, who are owed unlimited amounts by the insolvent, who are attempting to make late payments on a bank holiday in the wrong country, with an unacceptable currency, against defaulted collateral, of which nobody is sure who holds title." - Anonymous

15th December 2011, 02:35 PM	#4
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,277	Originally Posted by kevsta the mere mention of their name does not make someone a conspiracy theorist. 99.9% of the time it does. Especially if their name is mentioned on an Internet forum. That has already been established.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

15th December 2011, 02:37 PM	#5
Humes fork Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Sweden Posts: 2,357	Originally Posted by kevsta whether they would like a world government is debatable, but that they are immensely rich and powerful is not. Even if they want a world government, they wouldn't necessarily get one. And if they want one, so what? Bertrand Russell and Isaac Asimov also wanted a world government. And why assume that they have identical political views? In my immediate family, political views differ.
	__________________ "Faith is the surrender of the mind; it’s the surrender of reason, it’s the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals. It’s our need to believe, and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated." - Christopher Hitchens

15th December 2011, 02:40 PM	#6
Humes fork Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Sweden Posts: 2,357	Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer I have no idea. But generally (99.9%) when someone attributes something to Rothschild, it's just Jewish world occupation conspiracy nonsense. Agreed. Btw who is the babe in your pic?
	__________________ "Faith is the surrender of the mind; it’s the surrender of reason, it’s the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals. It’s our need to believe, and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated." - Christopher Hitchens

15th December 2011, 02:43 PM	#7
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,277	Originally Posted by Humes fork Agreed. Btw who is the babe in your pic? Meredith Kercher. I'm trying to remember her. Or something.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

15th December 2011, 02:49 PM	#8
kevsta RBL CHeck Failed Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: in the shadows Posts: 2,453	I don't dispute any of the above. I emailed them a couple of years ago and advised them to sort their amateurish spelling mistake out on their website. as yet they haven't. (about as efficient as your average government)
	__________________ "The world will soon wake up to the reality that everyone is broke and can collect nothing from the bankrupt, who are owed unlimited amounts by the insolvent, who are attempting to make late payments on a bank holiday in the wrong country, with an unacceptable currency, against defaulted collateral, of which nobody is sure who holds title." - Anonymous Last edited by kevsta; 15th December 2011 at 02:50 PM.

15th December 2011, 03:37 PM	#9
Humes fork Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Sweden Posts: 2,357	Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer Meredith Kercher. I'm trying to remember her. Or something. Oh she's dead! Had no idea...
	__________________ "Faith is the surrender of the mind; it’s the surrender of reason, it’s the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals. It’s our need to believe, and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated." - Christopher Hitchens

15th December 2011, 04:45 PM	#10
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,277	Originally Posted by Humes fork Oh she's dead! Had no idea... You must be new around here.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

16th December 2011, 01:32 AM	#11
therival58 Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 324	Originally Posted by kevsta whether they would like a world government is debatable, but that they are immensely rich and powerful is not. how much wealth do you think the family owns as a collective? Some CT's claim its in the hundreds of trillions.... http://www.rense.com/general79/tril.htm http://tobefree.wordpress.com/2010/0...-gold%E2%80%A6 The Rothschilds 500 TRILLION DOLLARS http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym4TTmOJ4I8 Top rated comment Quote: 300 years of saving money & gold, have corrupt their soul, children of Satan. Check this out from the helpful folks at wikianswers: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_the_rot...ank_of_England Quote: QIs the rothschild dynasty worth over 500 trillion and do they own all the central banks of the world like the fed bank of England? AYes. That's true. $500 trillion is an extremely conservative estimate. Its based on an assumption of only an 8% return on their holdings since 1931, when some speculate the return is near 100% per annum.
	Last edited by therival58; 16th December 2011 at 01:39 AM.

16th December 2011, 01:55 AM	#12
Humes fork Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Sweden Posts: 2,357	Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer You must be new around here. Well you can see my join date (or month).
	__________________ "Faith is the surrender of the mind; it’s the surrender of reason, it’s the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals. It’s our need to believe, and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated." - Christopher Hitchens

16th December 2011, 02:32 AM	#13
Puppycow Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Japan Posts: 15,775	Originally Posted by therival58 how much wealth do you think the family owns as a collective? Some CT's claim its in the hundreds of trillions.... http://www.rense.com/general79/tril.htm http://tobefree.wordpress.com/2010/0...-gold%E2%80%A6 The Rothschilds 500 TRILLION DOLLARS http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym4TTmOJ4I8 Top rated comment Check this out from the helpful folks at wikianswers: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_the_rot...ank_of_England Ridiculous.
	__________________ “Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them. With Major Major it had been all three.” ― Joseph Heller, Catch-22

16th December 2011, 02:36 AM	#14
Sceptic-PK Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 2,403	So the Rothschilds control more than the entire world's GDP several times over? Well, I'm sure they worked hard for it.

16th December 2011, 03:00 AM	#15
The Don Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Cymru Posts: 8,255	Well you've convinced me, a YouTube video (and top rated comment) and Wikianswers response certainly represent incontrovertible evidence. I wonder how they get that 100% year on year when the global economy is growing at 5%. I wonder how they manage to hide all the wealth, by now they should own everything (including my underwear).

16th December 2011, 03:25 AM	#16
therival58 Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 324	Originally Posted by The Don Well you've convinced me, a YouTube video (and top rated comment) and Wikianswers response certainly represent incontrovertible evidence. Well it certainly represents something, but evidence was not my intention. It was more a response to Kevsta's comment about how wealthy the rothschild's are. I offered an extreme figure from the CT community (and some woo comments to boot) to spark discussion.
	Last edited by therival58; 16th December 2011 at 03:28 AM.

18th December 2011, 08:35 AM	#17
Tippit Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 1,982	Originally Posted by therival58 Well it certainly represents something, but evidence was not my intention. It was more a response to Kevsta's comment about how wealthy the rothschild's are. I offered an extreme figure from the CT community (and some woo comments to boot) to spark discussion. If you start with established net worth figures from historical Rothschild biographies, and discount those to the present using reasonable rates, the Rothschilds are conceivably worth hundreds of billions, if not trillions. This is simple math, even accounting for the law of large numbers. To dispute these estimates would require questioning some fundamental assumptions about what they've done over the past century and a half. Are they fading quietly into the philanthropic world of financial has-beens, or have they been working actively for decades to disguise their potentially massive power and influence? One can't challenge power that is mostly anonymous, maybe that's their goal. It's easier I think, however, to show that claims to the world's wealthiest man are dubious, to say the least. The media recently made claims to Hosni Mubarak of Egypt's net worth, throwing around figures of $70 to $80 billion dollars. If a tin-pot dictator from Egypt is allegedly worth this vast sum of money, why should I believe Forbes' account that Carlos Slim is the world's richest man? Forbes only counts what is owned, not necessarily what is controlled. It was JD Rockefeller who once said "I want to own nothing, and control everything." This is for good reason.
Tippit Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 1,982	__________________ "This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard." - Alan Greenspan 1966

18th December 2011, 03:45 PM	#18
therival58 Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 324	Originally Posted by Tippit If you start with established net worth figures from historical Rothschild biographies, and discount those to the present using reasonable rates, the Rothschilds are conceivably worth hundreds of billions, if not trillions. This is simple math, even accounting for the law of large numbers. To dispute these estimates would require questioning some fundamental assumptions about what they've done over the past century and a half. Are they fading quietly into the philanthropic world of financial has-beens, or have they been working actively for decades to disguise their potentially massive power and influence? One can't challenge power that is mostly anonymous, maybe that's their goal. It's easier I think, however, to show that claims to the world's wealthiest man are dubious, to say the least. The media recently made claims to Hosni Mubarak of Egypt's net worth, throwing around figures of $70 to $80 billion dollars. If a tin-pot dictator from Egypt is allegedly worth this vast sum of money, why should I believe Forbes' account that Carlos Slim is the world's richest man? Forbes only counts what is owned, not necessarily what is controlled. It was JD Rockefeller who once said "I want to own nothing, and control everything." This is for good reason. ah, now this is interesting. It's a shame you cannot modify thread titles, as I would rename this thread "Rothschild's Net Worth".

18th December 2011, 03:55 PM	#19
geni Anti-homeopathy illuminati member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: UK Posts: 26,573	Originally Posted by therival58 Has anyone found different? Claims make no sense. Third would countries are unlikely to give you land for buying their debt. After all they don't really gain anything if people do. Heck you can buy third world debt youself if you want. Its openly traded. Fairly high risk though.

18th December 2011, 08:53 PM	#20
therival58 Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 324	Hey Tippit have you read any of the volumes on the Rothschilds done by Niall Ferguson?

19th December 2011, 12:24 AM	#21
Puppycow Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Japan Posts: 15,775	Originally Posted by Tippit To dispute these estimates would require questioning some fundamental assumptions about what they've done over the past century and a half. See my signature. I have no problem questioning anyone's "fundamental assumptions" when no evidence is provided therefor. A lot of "fundamental assumptions" turn out to be unfounded. ETA: People who inherit wealth like people who win the lottery tend not to grow that wealth very much, but rather to spend it down and disperse it among multiple heirs. That's my "fundamental assumption."
	__________________ “Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them. With Major Major it had been all three.” ― Joseph Heller, Catch-22 Last edited by Puppycow; 19th December 2011 at 12:32 AM.

19th December 2011, 06:48 AM	#22
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,277	I heard the Rothschild banking Jews have more money than the US, Canada, China and Europe combined!!! That's what I heard.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

19th December 2011, 02:51 PM	#23
Tippit Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 1,982	Originally Posted by therival58 Hey Tippit have you read any of the volumes on the Rothschilds done by Niall Ferguson? I haven't read any books specifically about the Rothschilds, although the biography by Morton contains information on their net worth in the 19th century.
Tippit Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 1,982	__________________ "This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard." - Alan Greenspan 1966

19th December 2011, 02:53 PM	#24
Tippit Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 1,982	Originally Posted by Puppycow See my signature. I have no problem questioning anyone's "fundamental assumptions" when no evidence is provided therefor. A lot of "fundamental assumptions" turn out to be unfounded. ETA: People who inherit wealth like people who win the lottery tend not to grow that wealth very much, but rather to spend it down and disperse it among multiple heirs. That's my "fundamental assumption." There's lots of evidence, it's been presented in other threads. I'm not going to repost it here for your benefit. Given that we already have historical evidence that the Rothschilds have been extremely wealthy, the onus is on you to prove that they are no longer extremely wealthy. The fact that they have more or less disappeared from the public eye is irrelevant.
Tippit Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 1,982	__________________ "This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard." - Alan Greenspan 1966

19th December 2011, 02:57 PM	#25
commandlinegamer Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Mazes of Menace Posts: 5,903	Originally Posted by Tippit There's lots of evidence, it's been presented in other threads. I'm not going to repost it here for your benefit. Given that we already have historical evidence that the Rothschilds have been extremely wealthy, the onus is on you to prove that they are no longer extremely wealthy. The fact that they have more or less disappeared from the public eye is irrelevant. Wealthy, or not, I'd like to see definitive proof of their shape-shifting abilities. And no, pics alone won't cut it.
	__________________ He bade me take any rug in the house.

19th December 2011, 03:30 PM	#26
Humes fork Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Sweden Posts: 2,357	Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer I heard the Rothschild banking Jews have more money than the US, Canada, China and Europe combined!!! That's what I heard. And we don't demand extraordinary evidence for the extraordinary claims you hear.
	__________________ "Faith is the surrender of the mind; it’s the surrender of reason, it’s the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals. It’s our need to believe, and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated." - Christopher Hitchens Last edited by Humes fork; 19th December 2011 at 03:37 PM.

19th December 2011, 03:58 PM	#27
therival58 Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 324	well I found something here on the historic new york times, "HOW THE ROTHSCHILD FORTUNE OF $2,000,000,000 WAS MADE" Published: January 26, 1913. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...D9405B838DF1D3 http://www.scribd.com/doc/39557107/H...rtune-Was-Made
	Last edited by therival58; 19th December 2011 at 04:01 PM.

19th December 2011, 09:02 PM	#28
kevsta RBL CHeck Failed Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: in the shadows Posts: 2,453	given that they were funding governments across Europe as far back as the Napoleonic wars and shortly afterwards owned a good amount of the UK, and companies like Rio Tinto, DeBeers, Royal Dutch Shell, that they were an integral part of the LBMA from inception, I think it's safe to assume they are, as a family still pretty rich
	__________________ "The world will soon wake up to the reality that everyone is broke and can collect nothing from the bankrupt, who are owed unlimited amounts by the insolvent, who are attempting to make late payments on a bank holiday in the wrong country, with an unacceptable currency, against defaulted collateral, of which nobody is sure who holds title." - Anonymous

20th December 2011, 03:19 AM	#29
Humes fork Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Sweden Posts: 2,357	Originally Posted by therival58 well I found something here on the historic new york times, "HOW THE ROTHSCHILD FORTUNE OF $2,000,000,000 WAS MADE" Published: January 26, 1913. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...D9405B838DF1D3 http://www.scribd.com/doc/39557107/H...rtune-Was-Made Two billion isn't that much money, at least not for rich people. Two billion is less than the net worths of Bill Gates, Larry Page, Mark Zuckerberg and others. Nowhere near the GDPs of industrialized nations.
	__________________ "Faith is the surrender of the mind; it’s the surrender of reason, it’s the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals. It’s our need to believe, and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated." - Christopher Hitchens

20th December 2011, 04:05 AM	#30
Sceptic-PK Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 2,403	While I obviously think the Rothschild conspiracies are ridiculous, $2B was a fair chunk in 1913.

20th December 2011, 05:19 AM	#31
Aepervius Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Bierland. I mean , germany. Posts: 7,759	Originally Posted by Humes fork Agreed. Btw who is the babe in your pic? Who is yours ?
	__________________ Omnes Blessant Ultima necat "I want, and this is my last and most dear wish, I want that the last of the king be strangled with the guts of the last priest" (Jean Meslier / 1664-1729 / Testament) A very early french atheist, a catholic priest in life.

20th December 2011, 08:44 AM	#32
therival58 Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 324	Originally Posted by Humes fork Two billion isn't that much money, at least not for rich people. Two billion is less than the net worths of Bill Gates, Larry Page, Mark Zuckerberg and others. Nowhere near the GDPs of industrialized nations. But surely it must have been a considerable sum back in the 1900s, especially if adjusted for today's inflation.
	Last edited by therival58; 20th December 2011 at 08:52 AM.

20th December 2011, 10:55 AM	#34
kevsta RBL CHeck Failed Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: in the shadows Posts: 2,453	Originally Posted by Humes fork Sure, but no conspiracy theory is necessary to explain their wealth. no, for sure, funding both sides of wars and owning central banks has always been a winner.
	__________________ "The world will soon wake up to the reality that everyone is broke and can collect nothing from the bankrupt, who are owed unlimited amounts by the insolvent, who are attempting to make late payments on a bank holiday in the wrong country, with an unacceptable currency, against defaulted collateral, of which nobody is sure who holds title." - Anonymous

20th December 2011, 02:07 PM	#35
Sceptic-PK Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 2,403	They don’t own any central banks you fool. Central banks are government agencies. I’ve explained this simple fact to you previously, sheesh.

20th December 2011, 02:30 PM	#37
Sceptic-PK Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 2,403	As I have explained to you previously kevsta, I am not interested in watching your youtube clips. Suffice it to say that the Rothschilds never owned a single central bank. Central banks are not “the same” as commercial banks, claiming otherwise is ridiculous.