Explain where I'm wrong here…

Many Americans (and others) have been induced to believe that there is such a thing as "passive investment". They turn much of their wealth over to financial institutions, and somehow, over time, the value of that wealth "magically" increases.

To be clear, these passive investors have NOT performed any work of evaluating what investment opportunities are likely to succeed or fail, or even any work of evaluating what "investment experts" are actually good at doing that sort of thing.

So… where is their "increased wealth" coming from?

So far as I can tell, they are literally turning over their wealth to the global banking cartel, which puts it to use in illegal and immoral profit-making activities, which tend to be more profitable than legal investments.

Basically, "passive investment" is simply disguised criminal investment.

The reason "index funds" do better than "expert investors" is because the wealth is being transferred directly to the top level criminals who can put it to use in the most profit-making ways, morality be damned.

Am I missing something?

>>9871521

MJ had an unusual upbringing and an unusual life, but his songs run the gamut (or close) of human emotions and he doesn't seem fake. I'm more inclined to think he got set up.

>>9871669

Epstein was no mastermind.

He was a very "smart" guy who was emotionally childish, and so manipulated via his lust for teen girls. Ultimately a bad guy, but manipulated by those more astute.

He thought he had it made, but he got played.