Game theory applied to taking loans in fiat money system:

Q end game: get rid of the banking cabal… this is why.

1. think about N players, for example 3

2. everyone has same amount of money, competition is even

3. if none took loans (increase money supply), it would be best for society by avoiding monetary inflation.

4. if some entities take loans it will increase the money supply and thus diluting the value of fiat money of everyone else

5. now: can you convince that no player would take a loan? You might have a situation that all the players make a promise/deal that we don't take loans and grow the money supply because it is bad for society in the long run. But are you sure all players will keep the promise?

6. the advantage/opportunity: if you take a loan, you might get edge of having more resources (money) than other players. When in competition you have the edge when you have more resources, you may grow your business better than others. If you are the only one taking loan you have the biggest advantage over the others.

7. the risk: if you don't take a loan, you run the risk that someone else is taking a loan and getting more resources and an edge over you.

8. the greatest risk: if you are the only one not taking loan, everyone else will have an edge over you.

9. in game theory you don't know what others are doing and you must make up your own mind based on incomplete information that is available, and you must try to survive (possibly avoid risk and to gain advantage).

10. what would you do? Would you take loan or not? Would you trust that everyone is keeping their promise not to take loans.

11. if yes, you understand why the fiat money banking cartel is so sinister and treacherous. The dynamics of the system is such that everyone is basically forced to take loans or you are left behind everyone else (be that business or for example a house purchase).

>>385682

They might truly believe they are doing good for us (Q They are so stupid).

If they have been indoctrinated for example in the Bilderberg meetings (assuming they have global future predictions) that world will suffer water crisis and overpopulation. Then the smart elite is tasked with solving this issue.

Now LdR might be thinking giving lecture about water crisis…

>>385709

added few points:

Game theory applied to taking loans fiat money system:

1. think about N players, for example 3

2. everyone has same amount of money, competition is even

3. if none took loans (increase money supply), it would be best for society by avoiding monetary inflation.

4. if some entities take loans it will increase the money supply and thus diluting the value of fiat money of everyone else

5. now: can you convince that no player would take a loan? You might have a situation that all the players make a promise/deal that we don't take loans and grow the money supply because it is bad for society in the long run. But are you sure all players will keep the promise?

6. the advantage/opportunity: if you take a loan, you might get edge of having more resources (money) than other players. When in competition you have the edge when you have more resources, you may grow your business better than others. If you are the only one taking loan you have the biggest advantage over the others.

7. the risk: if you don't take a loan, you run the risk that someone else is taking a loan and getting more resources and an edge over you.

8. the greatest risk: if you are the only one not taking loan, everyone else will have an edge over you.

9. in game theory you don't know what others are doing and you must make up your own mind based on incomplete information that is available, and you must try to survive (possibly avoid risk and to gain advantage).

10. what would you do? Would you take loan or not? Would you trust that everyone is keeping their promise not to take loans.

11. if yes, you understand why the fiat money banking cartel is so sinister and treacherous. The dynamics of the system is such that everyone is basically forced to take loans or you are left behind everyone else (be that business or for example a house purchase).

12. result: if you take loans and profit (more than your competitors) you have benefited from the advantage you had. Is this totally without consequences?

13. if there were no consequences then we should just print money to everyone. But then it will blatantly obvious why it doesn't work: you end up with hyperinflation.

14. so what happens when some people benefit from loans (money printing)? More loans increase the money supply and dilute the VALUE of money (like dilution of a value of a stock when more than necessary number of shares are created).

15. who takes the loan benefits, and everyone else who doesn't take loans will be left with diluted value of their money. So in effect taking loans is stealing from everyone else's holding of currency. (value of salary decreases, dream of having a house will disappear etc.)

16. who gets the most loans? Big corporations (cabal owned), other richest entities/individuals.

That's why we have had calls for sound money system by a lot of intelligent people who really understand how fiat money system works. That's why people have opposed the fiat money banking system for hundreds of years.

>>385764

one of the best post ever. M-Intel confirms Q in nice way

>>385749

nice, flood could be connected with the water