Rothschild has spoken few days ago. Any thoughts ? >famil

>>1272911

>having more money than the entire planets GDP
>people think this is possible

Seems like a reasonable guy.

Smug university students asking shitty questions about climate change and taxing the rich then getting btfo with logic

>>1272911
Thanks anon. I'm usually pretty ADD but I couldn't stop watching.

>>1272911
Fuck, I always thought it was Roth-schild instead of Roths-child

>>1272911

last time you posted that shit someone destroyed your
>>family that owns 500+ trillion USD

and u still come back with it?
he's not even the most interesting in that panel

>>1272911
500 trillion lol

>>1272911
The devil himself

>>1272997
Ey u never get to see Rothschild speak publicly cus they own all media even though it's the top 3 most powerful families in the world, so it might be interesting for some

Next thread make it 600 trillion

Our evil caretaker

Also Peter Brabeck is about the closest you can get to a real life James Bond villain

>tfw you will never get a private email from david rothchild regarding what to invest in

>>1272946
they've owned almost every bit of currency for over a century

these niggas so rich you can't even count how rich they are

>>1272983
such an embarrassing mistake to make at a fancy dinner party with friends.

>>1273731
you can't really invest if you already own everything kek.

>>1272983
Like homer simpson: "Barts teachers name is Krabappel? Ive been callin' her Crab apple dohh I feel like an IDIOT!"

>>1272983
but it IS Roth-schild.
even if they change it, it remains german(ish), and that's how you do it in german.
roth is old for rot (red), and Schild means sign in that context.

European Jews often had names according to the house they lived in, the first Rothschilds apparently lived in a house that had a red sign.

Therefore, Roth-schild

>>1272946
>thinks GDP is indicative of wealth

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1361145/Earth-worth-3-000-trillion-according-scientists-new-planet-valuing-formula.html

File: johnny sack 1.png (3MB, 1697x950px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1697x950px

Is that net worth? in terms of the houses and properties they own and shit?

couldn't they just donate 99% of their riches to solve cancer, aids and malaria and still be living like lander gentry?

>>1274572
We could solve cancer, HIV, etc but there's no profit in that. There is a huge profit in medicine that treats symptoms though.

>>1274572
It doesn't quite work like that for them. They own the money. What would you have them donate?

>>1274586
I bet people that rich probably have found cures for all the diesases they will ever experience and probably have set up a facility a bit like that film the island with obi wan kenobi on the motorbike where they have clones of people and use their organs to replace failing organs of the rich.

On a series note having as much cash as they is pointless to a degree like what is there to life now that you own everything?

>>1274538
Roth's child tbqhwyf

>>1274594
the first recordings of their existence are from the 16th century in Germany.
Clearly nothing to do with "child"

File: image.png (142KB, 500x566px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 500x566px

>>1274593
They haven't cured anything. They just get out at the top of the list for standard procedures.

They don't have much cash. They own the cash.

>>1274601
they are still rich as fuck. like beyond arab money and also beyond owning diamond mines money. that motherfucker went through six peoples hearts

File: wat.jpg (22KB, 380x293px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 380x293px

>mfw I realize actual human beings create these threads and believe these garbage-tier conspiracy theories
God have mercy on the feeble-minded.

>>1274601
That pic is fake and gay.

>>1274615
Honestly, the Rockefellers are not as rich as people presume them to be. The combined estimate is at like $10 billion after accounting for all the trusts. Even David, who is the head of the family, is only worth like $3 billion. Don't get me wrong, that's an insane amount of wealth, but not the trillions that people have credited them for. The legend of the Rockefellers mainly circulated in the 70s and 80s, when their dynasty was already beginning to fade. The Rockefellers had tremendous political and global influence from the 40s to the 80s but are slowly losing ground. Even Jay Rockefeller just recently retired his senate seat last year.

A hundred years ago? Yes, the Rockefellers were the richest people on earth. John D Rockefeller was said to have assets that equaled 1.5% of the US GDP which would be about $250 billion today. Now? The Rockefellers dynasty is just a legend. They still have some remaining influence and wealth, yes, but they do not control the world by any means of the imagination.

>>1274615
Let's try an example. Suppose I own all the cars in the world. I own all 1.2billion cars. Now I can't possibly drive all those cars, so I rent them out. I keep one for myself, my family and friends get some, but for the most part all 1.2b cars are rented out and in service throughout the world. Now, you need a car. You're crippled and can't walk anywhere, so you need transport. But all the cars are already rented out. What would you have me do to lessen your plight?

>>1274635
Google it.

When you own the money, how much do you need lying around? How many diamonds do you think the De Beers have sitting around their house?

>>1274655
>http://www.forbes.com/profile/rockefeller/
Sorry, bud. I know I am probably disillusioning you right now but there is literally no evidence of all this hidden wealth that you are claiming they have. The estimates take into account all of their trust funds, assets, cash, investments, etc.

>>1274655
Diamonds are a useless commodity that no rich person worth a damn should even keep around.

I'm sure they have banks full of silver and gold and all that, but man I'd be laughing my ass off if I saw a millionaire with a collection of diamonds they bought.

>>1274678
>>>1274655 #
Diamonds are a useless commodity that no rich person worth a damn should even keep around

So is cash.

>>1274565
You got my hopes up but you didn't even read the article you posted. The formula he is using is made to measure habitability, and not based off of an actual dollar value baka.

>>1274678
>I'm sure they have banks full of silver and gold and all that, but man I'd be laughing my ass off if I saw a millionaire with a collection of diamonds they bought.

What exactly makes diamonds so much more laughable than gold? Is it because they make gold coins and not diamond coins that you think diamonds can't be used as money? Jewelry can go up in value a lot faster than gold.

>>1274710
Diamonds exist in artificial scarcity. They're a near worthless commodity useful for industrial purposes but not much else. I have disposable saw blades encrusted with diamonds. It's not the diamonds which make them expensive.

>>1274705
The price of our resources is double his estimate.

>The History Channel aired a special episode about the value of our planet. They examined aspects such as diamonds, gold, lumber, water, and nearly everything on earth and came up with a price tag. From their calculation, our earth is worth $6,873,951,620,979,800, or to put it in words, nearly seven quadrillion dollars.

http://m.imdb.com/title/tt2880140/

>>1274714
Real diamonds are scarce and have to be mined. The diamonds in your saw blade are man made. Man made diamonds aren't clear and they don't cost nearly as much.

>>1274734
Man made diamonds are generally of much higher quality than naturals.

>>1274738
They're made for industrial purposes.
But not for jewelry, since they're not clear, as >>1274734 said

>>1274760
No. There are plenty of gem quality man made diamonds.

See gemesis.

>>1274734
No dude. Diamonds aren't scarce.
https://www.gemsociety.org/article/are-diamonds-really-rare/

>>1274760
The way experts tell the difference between man made diamonds and natural diamonds is, man made diamonds are too perfect. Like the difference between cultured pearls and natural pearls.

http://www.wired.com/2003/09/diamond/

>>1274538
I always thought his ancesters just had a mean shield bash.

>>1274655
Lol. You know they store huge amounts of diamonds to keep the price up, don't you?

File: 38.gif (500KB, 500x302px) Image search: [Google]

500KB, 500x302px

>believing the rothchilds control le banks theory

>>1272911

I work for Rothschild as an analyst.

It's also worth noting that Rothschild is a big name by now - there is Edmond de Rothschild & Nathan de Rothschild; both of which are impressive finance houses in their own right.

The current company, Rothschild & Co (which is really NM Rothschild & Sons), is the original bloodline of Nathan Mayer Amschel Rothschild, who is the OG dude.

The most important thing to note is that the current Rothschild & Cie isn't the original Rothschild bank - it actually was nationalized by French socialists in the 70's. David de Rothschild started it as a boutique that grew to the powerhouse it is today - of course partially due to the strong reputation of the name.

If you guys have questions, you can ask.

>>1275129

How will they dispose of most of humanity once the New World Order is in place?

How much gold and silver do I need to be considered worth allowing to live? Or will they just kill me anyway and take it?

>>1275129

what should i invest in this year