ALTRAV,
Yes, the Nazi propaganda is so much more memorable than the truth!
But it is the latter you should be asking after.

The Rothschilds became very rich by being good at what they do.

Aidan,you have to be more descriptive and impart more information, than merely suggesting they 'became rich at being good at what they did'.
As I have researched them for some years, when the opportunity arose, I found that you are right.
They were good at scheming, cheating, lying, stealing and even murder.
Mass murder, to such proportions that would have them on the gallows should they have been outed, but for their wealth and control over people.
They are not astute businessmen they are opportunistic, evil scum, and history will out them.
But as is typical in life today, people refuse to believe that their are bad people out there, because they don't know how to manage them.
And so it is that it is easier to deny something by calling it a conspiracy by some jealous or otherwise emotionally misdirected people, than to imagine for just one moment that there might be some truth in what is said.

ALTRAV,
Your years of looking at conspiracy theory websites hardly counts as research!

They were merchant bankers, and made their fortune by beer very good at it.

For example, after they'd informed the British government that Napoleon had been defeated, they correctly predicted the way the market was heading and bought up huge amounts of British government bonds and sold them two years later for a 40% profit.

Aidan, I'm sorry but you are welcome to take from history, what YOU see.
I prefer to broaden my terms of reference and take in ALL comments and reports historically or otherwise.
As for your take on the reference to the British Parliament.
I think you are being too kind.
As I have found, the true story is that because the Rothschilds had financed 'both' the British and the French war effort, (that in itself speaks of an evil mindset) they had to know how the war was going, so they had 'inside information' that they could exploit.
They had observers with carrier pidgeons reporting back to them constantly.
As it became obvious that the British were winning, and because RC was looked upon as the one to watch for financial guidance, he set about the rumour that the British had lost.
In doing so causing exactly what he intended.
The financial collapse of the country.
Then when news came of the British victory he sold his ill-gotten gains back at an enormous profit.
To this day they still hold sway in the 'City of London'.
So Aidan, if you think this is the actions of an 'astute' businessman, I think not.
Far from it.
It is well documented and realised many years ago that this is the actions of a devious and aggressive predator.
My research is no different nor less relevant than yours.
I am disappointed that you have taken the moral high ground in that your information is the truth and mine is conspiracy theories.
What you have demonstrated is that you have a pre-conceived stance on this family and it's disgusting irrelevance to humankind and the irrelevance and contempt they hold towards us, for the sole purpose and betterment of themselves financially.

The mere mention of banks is enough to crinkle the noses
and furrow the brows of many people. The thought of these
fat cats conjures up an image of corporate types with cash
swinging in their hands. They're often portrayed as greedy,
money grubbers who puppeteer the system, siphoning money
off the public with interest rates and the like.

Some people view them as the cause of many, if not all,
financial disasters. A few bad apples seemed to have spoiled
the reputations of the rest of the bunch. Scandal has almost
certainly become expected of these institutions.

To learn where it all began? Reading books on the Rothschild
Dynasty would be a good place to start. The more one learns
about a subject - the fairer one's perspective should become.
The key lies in getting all the facts - and only then making
judgements.

Reading books are too time consuming and contain too much irrelevant information.
I am a 'doing' kind of guy.
My preferred option has in fact been to listen to reviews and comments from those who have read any material I am interested in.
This way, I find that I do not have a personal opinion, but over time, a picture forms as to the subject matter.
I prefer things in precis form.
It is quicker, cleaner and just plain more efficient.
And so it is that my information is garnered in this fashion.
Not all, but over time I have found it to be the better option because with time the spurious information is set aside in favour of the 'meat'.
Eventually I begin to form an opinion, which I cannot prove as I do not care to prove anything.
The information I have learned only answers to me and nobody else.
The 'buck' stops here.
It is important for people to understand that, just because I can't quote links, (heck I don't even know how to do one) doesn't mean my information is flawed.
One thing I learned many years ago, (possibly why I went off reading) was that for every book written promoting something, there were ten written against it.
This was and still is the practice today.
So when I hear 'global warming', no they got that wrong, so then I hear, climate change.
Well again it appears that there are people out there who believe that this idea is also wrong.
I am not a mind reader and neither is anyone else, not on this planet anyway, so no-one, yes no-one is in a position to tell anyone what will or won't happen, especially when it has to do with something as immense and complex as the Earth.
And that includes scientists.
All they specialise in are theories!
Some times they get it right.
But how many times have they got it wrong.
More wrong than right is my guess.