Latest

Hungary Becomes First European Country To Ban Rothschild Banks

Hungary bans Rothschild banks from the country

Hungary have become the first European country to officially ban all Rothschild banks from operating in the country. 

In 2013, Hungary began the process of kicking out the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and agreed to repay the IMF bailout in full in order to rid the country of the New World Order banking cartel.

Neonnettle.com reports:

A kindly worded letter from Gyorgy Matolcsy, the head of Hungary’s CentralBank , asked Managing Director, Christine Lagarde of the International Misery Fund, as some have fondly nicknamed it, to close the office as it was not necessary to maintain it any longer.

The Prime Minister, Viktor Orban, seemed keen to ease off austerity measures and prove that the country could go it alone. It in fact issued its first bond in 2011, borrowing off the global markets.

Hungary borrowed €20 billion loan to avoid becoming insolvent during the economic crisis in 2008. But the debtee debtor relationship has not been smooth sailing.

Many criticised the Prime Minister as making an ill-advised decision in order to win an election, which was due in 2014. He also wanted to refrain from having too many foreign eyes on their economic policies, as many reforms were criticised as being undemocratic.

Paying the loan back early has meant Hungary have saved €11.7 million worth of interest expenses, but Gordan Bajnai, leader of the electoral alliance E14-PM, claimed that they had actually lost €44.86 million by March 2014 because of the early repayment as all they did was replace the loan from the International Mafia Federation (another nickname, we’re still talking about the IMF here) with a more expensive one, labelling the stunt as Propaganda .

And what made further nonsense; another loan at high interest rates was signed to finance a nuclear upgrade, which will mean not only higher repayments but also high electricity costs. But they do have economic sovereignty now.

Many have claimed that the IMF AKA ‘Imposing Misery and Famine’, are owned by the Rothschild group, the biggest banking group in the world, having their fingers in almost every central bank in the world. This means that not only do they make money off usurious interest rates at the misfortune of crumbling economies, they also literally own Governments and people of power – I mean they have considerable influence.

Escaping the banking clutches is therefore, iconic. Iceland joined Hungary in 2014 when it paid back its $400 million loan ahead of schedule after the collapse of the banking sector in 2008 and Russia, of course bowing down to no Western puppeteer, freed itself in 2005.

The return of these three countries to financial independence has been said to be the first time a European country has stood up to the international fund, since Germany did so in the 1930s. Greece is anxiously trying to make payments but missing them as we all stand on the sidelines routing for them to stick two fingers up to the ‘International M***** F******’.

  • Magdalene

    BRAVO!!!

    • socalbeachdude

      For what?

  • Slavko Vukic

    That will never happen, because prime minister of Hungary-Magyarorszag is JEW-KIKE him self !! Nothing in good HIStory came from Hungary-Magyarorszag and never will !!!

    • socalbeachdude

      Your blatant and egregious Anti-Semitism is beyond appalling.

    • nicu78

      Slavko the stupid serb is blasting off after he had too much to drink. Anything good came out of Yugoslavia you moron? Or maybe we should just ask Croatia to kick your asses again?

      • Archie1954

        Now really? That is just as unnecessary as Mr. Vukic’s comment!

  • socalbeachdude

    The Rothschild family has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with the International Monetary Fund which is headquartered in the US and supported directly by all participating countries with the US government providing about 17% of its funding.

  • socalbeachdude

    Iceland’s economy is NOT “THRIVING” at all and is a catastrophic debt wreckage and total mess economically, politically, and financially and it has never emerged from the financial crisis of 2008 at all and is now in much worse shape in 2016 as their political mess implodes.

    Iceland’s Prime Minister just resigned this year as part of the PANAMA PAPERS scandal which exposed his corruption and the country is in severe political turmoil with its economic and financial situation worse than ever.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/04/06/the-panama-papers-made-icelands-prime-minister-resign-heres-why/

    2016 – A rerun of 2009? No, we Icelanders are much angrier this time – Alda Sigmundsdóttir

    The farce played out by president and prime minister yesterday laid bare Iceland as a nation run by charlatans, whose hypocrisy the whole world can see

    http://www.theguardian.com/news/commentisfree/2016/apr/06/2009-icelanders-farce-president-prime-minister-charlatans-hyprocrisy

    No financial industry professionals are in jail at all in Iceland and all were released this year after those farce trials on trumped up charges and all that were convicted are now free citizens after that witch hunt travesty.

    As to EU membership, Iceland was NEVER OFFERED EU MEMBERSHIP AT ALL but rather submitted a membership application to the EU in 2009 which was subsequently suspended in 2013.

    Accession of Iceland to the European Union is a contentious political issue in Iceland. Iceland applied to join the European Union on 16 July 2009 and formal negotiations began on 27 July 2010. However, on 13 September 2013 the Government of Iceland dissolved its accession team and suspended its application to join the EU. On 12 March 2015, Foreign Minister of Iceland Gunnar Bragi Sveinsson stated that he had sent a letter to the EU withdrawing the application for membership, without the approval of the Althing, though the European Union stated that Iceland had not formally withdrawn the application.

    If negotiations were to resume, Iceland would face contentious issues on fisheries which could potentially derail an agreement, despite already being a member of the European Economic Area [EEA] (which excludes fishery). If an agreement were to be concluded, the accession treaty would be subject to a national referendum in Iceland and require ratification by every EU state.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accession_of_Iceland_to_the_European_Union

    • junktex

      Yeah Iceland would be in great shape if they had stayed in the tender clutches of the Rothschilds

      • socalbeachdude

        Iceland has never had anything whatsoever to do with the Rothschild family and they are a very tiny element in banking today and are primarily in wealth management with boutique private client banking operations in the US and Europe.

  • Dave Mende

    The borrower is a slave to the lender.

    • socalbeachdude

      No, the borrower is merely obligated to repay any money borrowed based on the terms and conditions and timetable that the BORROWER AGREED TO WHEN THE BORROWER BORROWED MONEY FROM THE LENDER. If you do not want to be obligated to repay any loans, then simply do not borrow any money from lenders.

      • junktex

        LMAO.You need to read more.Try “Confessions of an Economic Hitman”.There’s much more to things than your simplified disinformation.

        • socalbeachdude

          What I stated about lending and borrowing is 100% correct.

          • AngusMac

            But why should one body have access to cheap capital that it can profit on ?

          • socalbeachdude

            What “one body” are you talking about? There are over 6,000 banks in the United States and all banks globally now have access to very inexpensive funds as they pay depositors practically nothing on their deposits because interest rates are so low globally and because demand for borrowing is so low globally.

            Banks do not lend “capital” at all, but rather LEND ASSETS specifically DEPOSITORS FUNDS THEY HOLD AS ASSETS and on which they pay practically nothing for those deposits.

            The IMF is an international lending organization which is funded by its member nations and is headquartered in the US and has a European head which is currently Christine Lagarde from France.

          • AngusMac

            Nice try but have you not heard of the Fed window?

          • socalbeachdude

            The Federal Discount Rate is applicable to any borrowing by banks through the Federal Discount Window and is always 0.50% higher than the rate at which banks can borrow directly from each other. Moreover, there is a stigma attached to banks borrowing directly from the Federal Reserve through the Federal Discount window in addition to the much higher costs and that window is practically NEVER USED by banks for the reasons of both very high cost and the stigma attached.

            Just like the Federal Funds Rate at which banks can borrow from each other, any such borrowing can only be used 1) for very short term (typically overnight) LIQUIDITY PURPOSES to clear bank transactions within the Federal Reserve system and those funds may NEVER BE USED for any other purposes under any conditions and are 2) fully collateralized borrowings. The current Federal Discount Rate is 200% of the cost at which banks can borrow from each other for the very same purposes.

            The only 3 rates that the Federal Reserve is involved with setting are:

            1) Federal Discount Rate – currently 1.00%

            2) Federal Funds Rate (which it influences) – currently the range of 0.25% to 0.50%

            3) Federal Reserve IOER (Interest On Excess Reserves) – currently 0.50%

            The ONLY applicability of the Federal Funds Rate is INTERBANK BORROWING to clear nightly transaction balances which is now practically NEVER UTILIZED as the banks are awash in trillions of dollars of EXCESS RESERVES and have no need to borrow from each other.

            The IOER (Interest On Excess Reserves) interest rate does have an immediate beneficial impact for banks as it is the interest paid to banks on their excess reserves accounts inside the Federal Reserve and those accounts now have more than $2.5+ trillion sitting in them, and banks were very fortunate to see the interest they received on those DOUBLE on December 16, 2016 from 0.25% to 0.50% and are urging the Federal Reserve to get that increased again by at least 0.25% to 0.50% without any further dawdling or delay as banks need increased income to help profitability this year.

            As to interest rates on savings accounts, BANKS ARE AWASH WITH EXCESS CUSTOMER DEPOSITS AT A TIME WHEN DEMAND FOR BORROWING IS VERY LOW which is why interest on savings rates is so low and that is not likely to change much.

            There was indeed a rate increase on December 16, 2015 by the Federal Reserve, not that it matters the slightest bit of a hoot, and there will be a series of interest rate hikes in 2016 on the only 3 interest rates set by the Federal Reserve with the first being as early as July 2016.

            The only 3 interest rates set by the Federal Reserve have NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH THE INTEREST RATES ON THE US GOVERNMENT DEBT as those yields (interest rates) are all set in the $12.8 trillion a year US Treasuries market and have nothing to do with the Federal Reserve.

            Current, interest rates on consumer debt (credit cards) which now exceeds $1 trillion is the HIGHEST IN RECORDED HISTORY and runs between 12% and 25% on that UNSECURED CREDIT because it carries a high RISK OF DEFAULT.

            There are 3 components to interest rates.

            Interest rates are comprised of:

            1) real rate (typically around 3% historically)

            2) inflation adjustment (now correctly at zero)

            3) risk adjustment (now rising astronomically)

            The risk of DEFAULT is higher than ever and will continue to rise.

          • AngusMac

            I like keeping you busy …you must have no life, So why for one example are student loans not granted at the same rate as the greedy bastard bankers can get — I would much rather subsidize s student than some fat greedy scumbag ….

          • socalbeachdude

            Loan interest rates are not determined by your social notions or emotions as to what you do or do not want to support financially, but are basically broken into two key classifications that are based on RISK OF DEFAULT and the recourse available to the lender:

            1) SECURED LOANS which are secured by COLLATERAL which can be repossessed / foreclosed upon in the event of default to satisfy a large part of the underlying loan. Those types of loans are MUCH LESS RISKY and therefore have lower interest rates.

            2) UNSECURED LOANS which have no collateral which can be repossessed by the lender in the event of default and which are considered MUCH HIGHER RISK LOANS and therefore carry much higher interest rates.

            The interest rates on secured loans for housing today are as low as 3.00% and those rates are keyed off the yields (interest rates) on 10 year US Treasuries.

            The interest rates on unsecured loans such as CREDIT CARDS are the highest interest rates out there (leaving aside the issue of so-called “payday loans”) and typically carry interest rates of 12% to 24% and even higher up to around 35% when the borrower has poor to bad or very bad credit history.

            As to STUDENT LOANS, they are typically GOVERNMENT GUARANTEED TO THE LENDER and have an enormously HIGH RATE OF DEFAULT which currently is more than 12% of all of the student loans issued in the US. There is very high cost in servicing student loans for the lender and very high loan losses for the ultimate lender which in many cases is the US government and that is reflected in the rates.

            Student loans are a HORRIBLY BAD IDEA IN LENDING and have been the primary factor that has caused the cost of college and university education to soar upwards by around 1200% since the early 1970s. If students simply had to pay what they could afford which was the case up through the early 1970s then the colleges and universities could not VASTLY OVERCHARGE for tuition and the prices of tuition would fall very dramatically (up to around 90%) of where they are now.

            Student loans are among the most onerous in terms of NOT EVER BEING DISCHARGEABLE and they stick with the borrower right up to the grave. They cannot be discharged in bankruptcy court and both wages, federal tax refunds, and Social Security and other government benefits can be garnished for repayment of student loans without any consent or consideration from the borrower and this is becoming an increasingly enormously problem for borrowers on student loans who rarely look at all of the terms of student loans before taking on that debt.

            As to the very low rates on US government debt in the US Treasuries market that is determined by the more than $13 trillion a year market in US Treasuries and is based on DEMAND FROM INVESTORS BUYING US TREASURIES. Demand has NEVER BEEN HIGHER and the higher the demand the higher the prices on US Treasuries which is why US Treasury yields (interest rates) are at RECORD LOW LEVELS because PRICES ARE INVERSE TO YIELDS. That is what has driven much of the sovereign debt down to nearly 0% (or lower) yields (interest rates).

          • AngusMac

            “Student loans are a HORRIBLY BAD IDEA IN LENDING and have been the primary factor that has caused the cost of college and university education to soar upwards by around 1200% since the early 1970s. If students simply had to pay what they could afford which was the case up through the early 1970s then the colleges and universities could not VASTLY OVERCHARGE for tuition and the prices of tuition would fall very dramatically (up to around 90%) of where they are now.” ……this may be true if you include the predatory so called EDUCATIONAL institutions SUCH as devry etc…..but you fail to consider THE se;lf fulfilling phropesy angle wherein a group of people charged are higher interest rate are much more LIKELY to default AT a higher rate ……also since the 80s cheap rates for S&Ls and banks HAS had no bearing on the relative risk of said loans 🙂

          • socalbeachdude

            I completely and wholeheartedly concur with you that the is HUGE MISPRICING OF RISK in our present financial system and that has been increasing since the 1980s.

            There are 3 components to interest rates.

            Interest rates are comprised of:

            1) real rate (typically around 3% historically)

            2) inflation adjustment (now correctly at zero)

            3) risk of default (now rising astronomically)

            The risk of DEFAULT is higher than ever and will continue to rise.

            What has happened since the 1980s is the development of a VAST SHADOW BANKING SYSTEM totally outside of the much small regulated banking stem in the US. The total size of the regulated banking system administered by the Federal Reserve is only around $13 trillion, whereas the size of the shadow banking system in the US is now well over $25 trillion and includes pension funds, hedge funds, money market accounts, and the insurance industry and much of the debt in the US – even that originated within the regulated banking system – is SECURITIZED and sold into the markets which involve the shadow banking system.

            Interest rates on unsecured debt such as credit cards has NEVER BEEN HIGH IN HISTORY than it is now with hugely onerous interest rates of 12% to 35% on credit cards at a time when yields (interest rates) on US Treasuries (federal government debt) has NEVER BEEN LOWER AT ANY TIME IN HISTORY. Obviously, this has a very negative and real deleterious financial impact on the poor and middle class who are forced to borrow because they don’t have funds from income to meet their financial needs (and that includes student loans).

            The concept of RISK has been TOTALLY DISCARDED in the sovereign bond markets internationally including in US Treasuries and sovereign government debt has literally EXPLODED UPWARDS over the past 35 years to literally unbelievable levels with US government debt alone now exceeding $19.4 trillion. There is HUGE RISK OF DEFAULT in the sovereign and municipal loan markets and we are seeing that in Europe and even in the US with the territory of Puerto Rico now in default and with over $73 billion of debt which is simply not repayable as it stands.

            A number of intelligent folks like Bill Gross, Kyle Bass, Jeffrey Grundlach, and others have warned about these risks and mispricing, but the market participants have totally ignored these risks and we’re now at a point where both bond prices and stocks are at historic highs and moving higher and those two things should never be moving in the same direction in a market that properly prices risk. At some point in the not too distant future, RISK will become a much more important part of pricing of debt and the markets will see huge earthquakes from the levels at which debt is currently priced, and hopefully we will then start to see a return towards normalization, but that will come at a huge price of defaults and loss in the value of debt instruments.

            Keep in mind that prices of bond are inverse to their yields and as prices fall on bonds yields rise. As yields rise that will cause huge problems for governments, corporations, and individuals with huge amounts of debt which is constantly being refinanced on an ongoing basis and the costs to service that debt will rise astronomically from the record low levels today.

          • AngusMac

            Are you Bill Fleckenstein ? If so I did make some money from your warnings about 9 years back !!

  • yep

    excellent, now you will have the wrath of the zionist usa coming to attack you hungray, yet well done, i am proud of you

    • Amir Brooks

      Freedom arriving in 3… 2… 1…

      • socalbeachdude

        As Kris Kristofferson once wrote, “Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose.”

  • cMc_Dominator

    IMF – Ignorant Mother Fuckers.

    • socalbeachdude

      False. The International Monetary Fund has highly competent executives and staff and is a very important and well regarded global institution which is based in Washington DC.

      • cMc_Dominator

        lol, you actually uptick yourself every comment, what a retard.

        • Rachel Flanagan

          I know, it’s embarrassing, and a ‘tell’ for sure, but think it’s a bot, and not a human.
          This is why every comment is upticked. Who goes through their own comments and upticks them all. Only a straight up retard, or a bot. If he’s not a bot, his job will be given to one soon.
          Talk about poetic justice.

          • socalbeachdude

            You can be sure yours was down-arrowed!

  • Daniel Hudson

    Bull, I think it was Jackson that kicked out the “International Banking” system in the early years of the U.S.

    Problem is, after him, we let them right back in through another process…

    I don’t remember the exact details, but one of our early presidents did this…We just don’t remember it.

    • socalbeachdude

      Andrew Jackson did no such thing at all as you assert.

      The Federal Reserve did not even exist until the Federal Reserve Act was enacted into law in 1913, so obviously Andrew Jackson had nothing whatsoever to do with the Federal Reserve.

      Andrew Jackson died 68 years before the Federal Reserve Act was enacted into law in the US. After completing his second term in the White House, Jackson returned to the Hermitage, where he died on June 8, 1845, at the age of 78. The cause of death was lead poisoning caused by two bullets that had remained in his chest for several years.

      Andrew Jackson attacked banks and the banking system because it supported his political rivals and it is well known that he was a mendacious and highly vindictive person, not to mention that he was a slave owner.