How is a decreasing population bad I think its worse to bring

Our government illegalized itself from printing money, so in order to finance itself, it needs to borrow money from the central bank, which charges interest on the loans.

Taxes are used to amortized those loans do we don't default against our own central bank.

A declining population means less tax revenues, which means the bankers can withhold loaning the government more money.

>>134564260
so do you want to be part of the population that decreases? golden rule much?

>>134564658

The OP doesn't understand economics. Not his fault. Schools are poor in the west.

If we don't keep our tax revenues high, we will default and the bankers will stop loaning to us. And if we try to nationalize the central bank, they will use other countries to declare war on us. It's estimated that the average German woman was raped by 50 allied men a day when they conquered Berlin.
So you want your sister, wife, daughter, and mom getting rapes by 50 foreign men daily? Then I suggest you accept immigrants

so what I'm gathering from this is: kill all bankers

>>134565256

The US can't win a war with the rest of the world.

>>134565115
>>134564548
So we should just get on our knees and suck (((global banker))) cock?
We should just let our country be ruled over by (((them)))?
Fuck that shit, America can win a war against the rest of the world, we got more aircraft carriers than the rest of them put together.

>>134564260
A declining population would be good for overpopulated countries like mine.

>>134565635

Hahaha.. keep dreaming.

It's over. (((They))) won. This shit won't end with whites fighting some bloody war. Whites will go out in a pitiful whimper as more non-whites settle in white countries.

>>134565901

No it won't. Lower tax revenues mean you can't pay back even the interest on the loans your government borrowed from your central bank.

>>134565993
Just dissolve the central bank.

>>134564260
It's not. The white populations are, once again, acting rationally. There is no need for 5 children when you're not farming the fields with your hands. Shit, even farmers today use tons of machinery and don't rely on mass labor with the exception of picking small fruit,

What we are being sold by the (((media))) is that at the same time that labor needs are decreasing exponentially, we need to import third world refuse in order to ensure we have a labor force in 20 years.

"But muh pensions" says the idiot at this point. This is a fix so simple as to be laughable. Remember, with increasing mechanization of industry, productivity will continue to increase, even as labor needs continue to decrease. So, where up to now pensions and other welfare was funded by taxing the labor (the people), in the future the pensions can be funded by taxing the means of production - essentially the increased productivity can be taxed to fund anything you want. This is a simple fix and shift, and there is nothing stopping us from implementing it tomorrow.

The choice we as a civilization have is to import third world engineers, brain surgeons and accounts, who will flood the labor market for the few labor jobs available in the future, or to tax capital at an increasing rate, and lower (((their))) returns on capital. Of course, (((their))) returns on capital cannot decrease in the slightest, which is why we are being sold the destruction of our civilization as the only way to save our civilization.

>>134565115
no country can defeat USA