A PERFECT NIGHTMARE: CRYPTOKLEPTO
Regular readers here will be accustomed to my occasional rants and warnings about crypto-currencies. And those who are familiar with those rants will understand that I'm not an investment advisor, much less a "policy maker" (thank God!). I'm a hack from South Dakota who likes to indulge in high octane speculation. And today I want to do double duty and give not one, but two, high octane speculations about three very seemingly unrelated articles, shared by Ms. K.M., Mr G.L.R., and Mr. E.G. (who also kindly shared his own speculations in his email, which I will attempt to outline because they impact on my own). In addition to that, Catherine Austin Fitts also shared a story from the Bank of International Smugglers... er... I mean... the Bank of International Settlements, that is also germane to my high octane speculations. So with all those caveats on the record, let's dive into the first article:
Oregon Bill Would Create Banking Alternative for Cannabis Industry, Bypass Federal Reserve
Now let's cite a few paragraphs then summarize what the implications are:
A bill filed in the Oregon House would establish limited state-chartered banks to serve the cannabis industry. Final passage of this legislation would remove a major federal roadblock in front of the developing industry in the state and further nullify federal prohibition in practice.
Rep. Pam Marsh (D) and Rep. Ken Helm (D) introduced House Bill 3169 (HB3169) on Feb. 28. The legislation would create a self-contained, state chartered banking system for the cannabis industry in Oregon.
Because marijuana remains illegal under federal law, cannabis businesses in states that have legalized marijuana remain effectively locked out of the banking system. If a federally chartered or insured financial institution touches marijuana money, it takes on significant legal risk. The federal government insures or charters virtually every bank in the U.S. As a result, cannabis businesses have been forced to transact almost exclusively in cash. Passage of HB3169 would bypass the federal banking system and create a limited banking alternative for the marijuana industry in Oregon.
HB3619 would authorize banking institutions and credit unions to organize as limited charter cannabis financial institutions. Cannabis businesses would be able to deposit funds in these institutions and write “special purpose checks” for the following:
(a) To pay fees or taxes to a public body;
(b) To pay rent on property that is leased by, or on behalf of, a cannabis business;
(c) To pay a vendor that is physically located in Oregon for goods or services associated with a cannabis business; and
(d) To purchase bonds issued by a public body.
...
Oregon is among a growing number of states simply ignoring federal prohibition, and nullifying it in practice.
So what do we have? (1) A growing number of states that are fed up with the ever-growing unmanageable marsh monster in Swampington, D.C.; and by the same token (2) a growing popular distaste for far-off bureaucrats making decisions as representatives of corporations and banksters about how local people with live, run their lives, and govern themselves; (3) a determination to create local or regional means of financial transaction, with media of exchange actually backed by something (in this case, marijuana). When Ms. K.M. sent along this email, she indicated that her suspicion was that this was but the camel's nose in the door.
If one looks at this list, I suspect she's right, for almost anything could be used to create such banks, from marijuana to gold - think of Texas' state bullion depository - to food or, to borrow a page from the Nazis for a moment, Feder's "labor treasury certificates," which represented a kind of "state surplus" medium of exchange. In other words, Oregon's move is of a piece with Texas' bullion depository in a sense, and part of wider moves by several states in the United States that have passed "constitutional money" resolutions. These moves all occur, let it be noted, in the same time frame that several countries are trying to repatriate their physical gold reserves, a trend that was kicked off by Germany a few years ago, and which list has grown to include Australia, Austria, the Netherlands, and of course, Venezuela.
Meanwhile, of course, the globalist banksters are not idle, and have been noticing the growing trend of dissatisfaction with their grand scheme of creating a global centralized government with billionaire busybodies telling everyone else how big their toilet bowls can be, how many vaccines their children must have, how many showers per week they can take, and most importantly, has been throwing up road blocks to those countries trying to repatriate their gold. Recall the difficulty Germany encountered for a while trying to do so. Venezuela was simply told "you can't have your gold because we don't like you," no doubt because Venezuela was not Germany and could not make as big of a fuss.
Which leads to the second article shared by Mr. E.G.:
Gold - Preparing For The Next Move
Now, again, I'm not an investment advisor, nor are my speculations to be construed as such. I only share my own personal reactions to what appears to be emerging, which brings us to Mr. E.G.'s speculations which are quite similar to my own. The crucial crux interpretum of this second article appears to be this:
The finances of any government whose unbacked currency is the national pricing medium are central to determining future general price levels. Just taking the US dollar for example, the government’s debt to GDP ratio is over 100% (in 1929 it was less than 40%). At the peak of the cycle, the government should have a revenue surplus reflecting underlying full employment and the peak of tax revenues. In 1929, the surplus was 0.7% of estimated GDP; today it is a deficit of 5.5% of GDP. In 1929, the government had minimal legislated welfare commitments, the net present value of which was therefore trivial. The deficits that arose in the 1930s were due to falling tax revenues and voluntary government schemes enacted by Presidents Hoover and Roosevelt. Today, the present value of future welfare commitments is staggering, and estimates for the US alone range up to $220 trillion, before adjusting for future currency debasement.
Other countries are in a potentially worse position, particularly in Europe. A global economic slump on any scale, let alone that approaching the 1930s depression, will have a drastic impact on all national finances. Tax revenues will collapse while welfare obligations escalate. Some governments are more exposed than others, but the US, UK, Japan and EU governments will see their finances spin out of control. Furthermore, their ability to cut spending is limited to that not mandated by law. Even assuming responsible stewardship by politicians, the expansion of budget deficits can only be financed through monetary inflation.
That is the debt trap, and it has already sprung shut on minimal interest rates. For a temporary solution, governments can only turn to central banks to fund runaway government deficits by inflationary means. The inflation of money and credit is the central banker’s cure-all for everything. Inflation is not only used to finance governments but to provide the commercial banks with the wherewithal to stimulate an economy. An acceleration of monetary inflation is therefore guaranteed by a global economic slowdown, so the purchasing power of fiat currencies will take another lurch downwards as the dilution is absorbed. That is the message we must take on board when debating physical gold, which is the only form of money free of all liabilities.
Gold can only give an approximation of the loss of purchasing power in a fiat currency during a slump, because gold’s own purchasing power will be rising at the same time. Between 1930 and 1933 the wholesale price index in America fell 31.6% and consumer prices by 17.8%. These price changes reflected the increasing purchasing power of gold, because of its fixed convertibility with the dollar at that time.
When Mr. E.G., shared his speculations on what all this meant, he proposed the following: that there were discernible signs that central banks were moving toward the creation of a crypto-currency world, or a cashless society, with the crypto-currencies or some type of digital currency backed by (1) gold, and (2) collateralized space assets. This, in essence, was my own speculation at the 2014 Secret Space Program Conference in San Mateo, Nuttyfornia. There I proposed that space assets had been collateralized from a very early period in the post-World War Two era as a component of a secret system of finance. More importantly, recent stories seem to indicate this may have been the case, as a few years ago we were treated to stories about certain asteroids having astronomical resources that were valued in the quadrillions of dollars, handy things to have floating around when the toxic derivatives on the books are calculated to be in the quadrillions of dollars. Additionally, he pointed out that some governments have already committed to becoming cashless within a few years, for the simple reason that it gives them - and their controlling central banks - the ability to tax in real time.
I suspect - strongly - that Mr. E.G.'s and my own speculations about the collateralization and backing of digital currencies are, indeed, the "game plan" of the banksters who, sensing the rising tide of revolt against their plans for centralization and telling everyone else how they can and should live, are speeding up the process as fast as they can. With that in mind, consider this article shared by Catherine Austin Fitts about digital and crypto-currencies from the BIS (the Bank of Institutionalized Swag...er... Bank of International Smugglers... er... Bank of International Settlements... it is difficult to keep all these players sorted out):
There's so much in this speech to give one pause that to do a thorough job of reviewing it would require several blogs. But there are a few paragraphs that jumped out(Note, in the article, CBDC stands for "central bank digital currencies"):
Banks play an important role as provider of financial services to citizens and businesses. Imagine that the Central Bank of Ireland and the ECB were to offer deposit accounts to everyone and then issue debit cards and mobile phone apps for you to make payments with. In such a scenario, the central bank would be taking on the customer-facing business lines. Presumably, the central bank would need to recruit new staff to handle this line of business and to handle customer enquiries (sic). Now, I can tell you that central bank staff are very good, and they would be capable of taking on customer-facing tasks. But that is not the main issue.
Safety could be an important reason to deposit money in the central bank. In times of uncertainty, more customers would prefer to have deposit accounts at central banks, and fewer at commercial banks. A shift of funds from commercial banks to the central bank could be gradual at first. But the trickle could turn into a flood.
If bank deposits shift to the central bank, lending would need to shift as well. So, in addition to the deposit business, the central bank would be taking on the lending business. The central bank would need to meet business owners, interview them about why they need a loan, and decide on how much each should receive.
We can ask ourselves whether this is the kind of financial system that we would like to have as the ultimate set-up. I grant that this thought experiment may have gone too far. For instance, the central bank could make do without a lending operation if it sends customer deposits to the commercial banks by opening central bank accounts at commercial banks. In effect, the central bank would be lending to the commercial banks so that they could lend on to the customers.
In his speech, Mr. Carstens points out that the above scenario is a "thought experiment", and throughout the rest of the speech he simply points out that cashless payments are a growing trend in certain countries (notably China). The implication is that "it's a technological inevitability," and of course, he gives the usual caveats that central bankers are extraordinarily cautious people and don't want to leap into a course of action without knowing the full consequences.
But the consequences are spelled out in his speech: central banks simply take over all the functions of ordinary banks, including direct deposits, lending, and clearing functions for individual and corporate customers. With the BIS sitting on top of it all, of course. Notably, there is not much said about accountability in such a system, so the question needs to be baldly and nakedly stated: should we trust such a system, given what we've seen from Mr. Globaloney lately?
I don't. Given my "druthers," I'd much rather trust Texas' bullion depository, or Oregon's "cannabis certificates" than the Tower of Basel. And that brings us to the final article. At the beginning of his speech, Mr. Carstens points out that there is much discussion about the "digital" component of "central bank digital currencies." However, he quickly (and deftly) shifts the discussion to the "central bank" component as if it were another implied inevitability. In doing so, he avoids the real issue: cyber systems are simply not secure, and as such have no integrity and make it much easier for looting, fraud, and outright theft to occur, and in a central banking pyramid, that means the banksters themselves will be the primary looters, frauders, and thieves. Consider this final article shared by Mr. G.L.R:
Study Finds That Overwhelming Majority Of Bitcoin Trading Volume Is Faked
And what's true of Bitcoin is true for all cryptocurrencies, without exception. What's of concern here is the same problem I've raised elsewhere, and in different contexts: crypto-currency works for those who have the ability to create large computer systems and algorithms to execute trades, and do so with the most efficient speeds. Accordingly, market activity is not reflective of genuine human trading activity. In other words, take the same criticism of equities, commodities, securities and currency markets, and now apply it to crypto-currencies. Ultimately, the trend is toward ever greater centralization, because this is what the technology requires and demands to function profitably. And none of it - none of it - is secure. Add to this the fact that one must trust these banks to tell us the truth about how much gold, or space assets, is really backing those blips on the screen. And the more centralized, the more remote from your neighborhood, and its economic realities, they will be.
So, as far as I can see, this is a recipe for a perfect nightmare for pretty much everyone, except, of course, the banksters.
What this means is, I suspect, that one will see increasing local and regional pushback from states, provinces, and localities and more abandonment of the globalist agenda.
See you on the flip side...
35 Comments
Help the Community Grow
Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.
Do a search for Gold Stable Coin Project in Chinese and some interesting news items pull up.
Issue a variety of stable coins, IBM wants to build a global payment network
http://www.528btc.com/blocknews/47923.html
Gold Stabilization Coin Project GGE Receives US$15 Million Strategic Investment from Greater China International Group
https://www.bishijie.com/kuaixun_247916
I guess after ” https://deep-throat-ipo.blogspot.com/2018/10/when-will-xi-click-sell-button.html ” this digitized gold will be shoved down out throats.
Just a few days now to see whether “Basel III”, which basically “re-monetizes” gold, comes into force or is postponed again. But however that goes, no amount of oligarch hype will convince billions of Asians (and others) that gold is not a store of value.
isn’t north dakota the only state who’s state bank survived? how did that happen? how did it not get shut down, usurped nor co-opted? how well is it working now?
imagine if all that wheat and corn and soy production got converted to hemp and financed through an established uncorrupted state bank. imagine the consequences on all levels in all directions.
btw, anyone keeping tabs on the latest doctor deaths? got me wondering how bobby kennedy jr and mike papantonio are still alive?
Princess Leia to Governor Tarkin: “The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.”
Princess Oregona to Governor BIS: “The more you tighten your grip, the more banking systems will slip through your fingers.”
It will be interesting to see when/where/how the US Corp will respond to the growing local & regional banking systems. While they remain small and inconsequential, they may be permitted. As soon as it becomes a contest for Power, look for some ‘excuse’ be floated to intervene. As I have said before, the one thing the banksters will not tolerate is a challenge to their Financial Power…
On central banksters and cryptocurrency, just feel the following:
“Three Rings for the Elven-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.”
Sweden has been this for several years now. It started out slowly…. but now, you cannot ride a tram without a digital card. You cannot but minutes for your cell phone without a digital card. .. & it goes on & on. Consequently, the banks & the govt. & social services know exactly what you are spending, when you spend, etc. There is no privacy … Swedes are conditioned to having their funds taken out to pay bills. Everything is tracked but of course they tell their public it is safer this way when in actuality it is all about control.
Despite my enormous respect for Dr. Farrell (I think I’m on my 21st JPF book), I disagree with him on the issue of cryptocurruncies.
Let us consider for a moment centralized payment systems like banks, PayPal, and Patreon. These organizations have the power to cut off customers’ access, and have, as in the issue of the particular Oregon businesses in the above blog, Alex Jones, Wikileaks, and so on. Whether you are for against these people or organizations, it seems that by cutting off their fininancial means greatly impedes their rights to participate in a civil society. In America that would include all the correpsonding Constitutional rights such as freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Simply by not liking you (as with the case of Venezuela above) or by disagreeing with social or political postions (as with Alex Jones and Wikileaks), a CENTRALIZED payment or banking platform can cut anyone off they please.
Now consider cryptocurrencies, let’s take Bitcoin because it is the one most people are familiar with. There is no Bitcoin Incorporated, no CEO, no board members, no “Mr. Bitcoin.” In short, there is no governing body to cut anyone off if they don’t like you. It restores financial liberty to the financial system. With great effort, it is possible to connect certain Bitcoin wallets with certain users and track their use, but the system cannot be shut down or controlled by a central authority.
Many of these controversial organizations and people have already switched to cryptos for their fundraising, or to sumplement. Parties like Wikileaks, Gab.ai, Jordan Peterson, and Alex Jones have all switched because the tyrants at centralized payment systems have cut them off simply because they don’t like them. They cannot be cutoff from the blockchain.
Try as they might, the Chinese STILL cannot stop Bitcoin trading, and as a 15-year veteran of China, and a cryptocurrency user, I can speak with some authority on this. And China is one of the most hostile jurisdictions to cryptocurrency. In fact, a Chinese court recently ruled that cryptocurrencies are legitimate assets to hold, regardless of whether it’s legal to trade them or not, and we all know how subject to the official Party line courts in China are.
While many users here may disagree, Bitcoin and other cryptos are part of the pushback, and specifically the DECENTRALIZED pushback Dr. Farrell mentions in today’s HOS. It puts the power of money back in the hands of the people, has no debt associated with it, and allows people to compete with central banks by creating their own currency out of thin air. The chief difference between cryptocurrencies and fiat currency is that nobody *makes* you use it. The value of any particular currency is detemined by those who use it (or not). Hence the anti-Christ argument doesn’t hold either, because there is no compulsion.
We don’t even know who to “blame,” or at least to hold responsible, for their creation, and yet the system works. Many of you will say that that anonymity of their creator is one good reason to be suspicious, and you’d be right. But who should be fearful as a result of that suspicion? Those seeking to regain financial freedom and independence? Or The Powers that Be who have an itch they can’t scratch?
Perhaps that is still to be worked out. I would aver that the panicked reaction of governments worldwide to cryptocurrencies is an indication that neither they nor their deep state puppetmasters are the responsible parties. I would also aver that the US’s fairly moderate reaction is a glint of hope that the United States of America stands a chance of retaining its status as a beacon of light at the end of the dank, dark tunnel we are traveling through.
China is the 2nd to last country in the world I would want to see dominating the global economy, and anyone who despises and fears the dystopian future we analyze daily on this website should feel the same. The only worse place on earth for governance than China is probably North Korea, but unlike China, they eschew the economic development that would ever make them a serious threat.
Cheers!
Interesting. Ur saying that even if bitcoin is a more covert attempt at control of our funds by an invisible parasite that it’s still an improvement over current systems? Weren’t similar arguments made for open source computing to protect from hackers?
Zendogbreath, nice to meet you here, newbie that I am to the website. I’ve just reread my post thinking maybe it wasn’t clear, but it seems clear to me. Guess people come at things from different angles and different starting points. So let me respond to your question below:
No. Quite the opposite. I’m saying the finances/funds can NOT be controlled. That’s why it works.
If you look at the code and use cryptocurrencies yourself, you would soon realized it is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what any central authority, public, private, deep state, or hidden super secret would want in a currency or monetary system, because they would have no control over it. Therefore, I DO NOT think that it is a “covert” effort to control our finances, I think it is a rebellion against that. And yes, it’s better than anything currently being offered.
Because the creator remains unkown, I have to stay open to the possibility it’s “covert parasites” and pay deference to other Gizers, who are largely opposed to or very suspicious of cryptocurrencies. If they increased their knowledgebase, they probably wouldn’t be.
Think about it: Why would any cental authority/organization want a kind of money around that could a) be used by anyone any time for anything, b) be created by people by themselves out of thin air without any government/authority intervention, c) be completely unctrollable, d) lock that same authority out of controlling anybody’s use of funds, and e) provide no profit, interest, or debt for that same authority to capitalize on.
The electronic payment systems and cashless societies that are being proposed by financial organizations and governments all over the world have nothing. to do. with cryptocurrencies. I’ll say that again: Nothing to do with cryptocurrencies. They are based on the local fiat. That is all.
You may want to wait until absolutely 100% of every shred of evidence is in, and that is your and anyone else’s perogative.
I might suggest signing up for a course on cryptocurrency, blockchain, and/or Bitcoin over at Udemy.com. You can sometimes pick up a course for 10 bucks or so when they have a special, and become a fully credentialled blockchain developer and cryptocurrency expert by the end of the course.
10 bucks is probably less than your favorite JPF book, and you’ll get a marketable skill.
As per my usual perspective – what could go wrong with this system? Couple more detailed questions to answer first. Blockchain provides a permanent record right? Who is that record available to? It does seem a system opposed to the old parasitic system. If no one has centralized control over it, who exercises the most control over it? When in the past few hundred years of tech change has opposition to old systems not been at some point converted into controlled opposition? What platforms r cryptos operated on? Who controls those platforms? Who controls the grid those platforms operate on? Ask venezuala these questions too. What are the chances that the same lovely folk who gifted us with InQTel, darpanet, dontbeevilgoogle, defacedbook, bezoswerld, and the land of searches with only one right answer, are the same folk gifting us with cryptos?
Good questions, all. And yes, you have a right to be, and cause to be suspicious.
But let me see if I can synthesize the answers to a single question:
The cryptocurrencies, in particular the mined ones, are almost a perfect analog of the Topological Metaphor fecundity version.
The Giordano Bruno monetary system, if you will.
How’s that?
Crytomoney goes hand and hand with crypto stores better known as e-commerce. Shopping online our overlords’ new plan to keep us enslaved to them.
Cryptocurrency can be used for e-commerce. It can also be used anonymously at point-of-sale. I’ve done it.
Even e-commerce though can be sent up so that it is only indirectly connected to you through cryptocurrency, in perfectly legal ways. With an anonymous Bitcoin (Litecoin, Dash, etc) wallet, you can buy from merchants online and have the shipment sent to a dropbox or forwarding service.
Centralized, fiat-based payment systems don’t allow for that because they are always linked to a credit card or bank account.
I’m not trying to convert GDS users into crypto-currency users. That would make me a Yahwehist. But it does help to have a full depth of understanding of the issue before deciding what you want to do with them.
Another advantage of cryptocurrencies is that they are not controlled by government. KAF and JPF have analyzed and put forth a couple of very sound money systems at least, that are debt free and not based on precious metals. The one drawback I see in them is that in the end they are controlled by gubmit, and gubmit is always corruptible, and always, eventually, will be corrupted.
Which may remind folks here of Handel’s Messiah, Part III: “The trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
For this corruptible must put on incorruption and this mortal must put on immortality.”
Which is, afterall, a treatise in Christic alchemy!
When the Tea Party in my neck of woods was untainted by Replubli-thuggery, was interparty in its configuration and before it was converted into 501-C3s, I hung around with many of its founders to discuss various constitutional and organization concerns. One of them once had a discussion with our Senators, now retired, and during one of their conversations he heard something astounding. Our representative had visited one of the Federal Reserve banks and was given the opportunity to “order” a sizeable amount of currency for release into the general economy for use. I asked my friend, “You mean he didn’t realize what he had done?” He replied, “No. He was proud of the fact that he had a chance to participate in the financial market stimulus mechanism to help the economy at a time when recession was rampant in our state.” How was this miracle achieved? They sat him down at a keyboard, had him enter a certain amount of money that was authorized for release and submit it. Once authorized the monies were transferred to the bank’s ledgers and the money was off and running. That conversation occurred about 10 years ago. My point is, so much of this is already was already automated that the facsimile of money was hardly needed then. At a macroscopic level the digital money in the existing system far outweighs the amount of cash on hand to sustain it. The primary impediment to a full-blown system may be privacy and security issues–and they have not been able to formulate the legal code to drive those sufficiently and safely due to Congressional resistance left over from the 2008 Bailout fiasco. For all we know the hidden financial system is already digital–but backed by tangible hard “assets” in real estate, mineral rights, individualized stock certificates issued with birth records, hidden technologies and space assets. What’s left in the public system is now only a “shell currency” to be finally digitized at the next “crisis” of opportunity. My financial arthritis tells me it tis the season for a major flare-up!
I don’t doubt that at all… thanks for sharing OrigensChild
Moving towards a digital
Corporate Fascist Banktatorship event horizon?
The existing financial system is renewed annually now since 2015. The old banking system has not been replaced–possibly because of the knee-capping of the public system completed in 2008. So, yes, I agree with your thinking on this one. I’m not sure why Trump was selected to be POTUS, but since the USA, Inc is nearing bankruptcy you may need someone with that experience to guide that corporation through the process…
That was my first thought when he assumed Presidency. His expertise in BK speaks volumes.
But, his real forte, is in screwing the banksters.
Now that’s my kind of guy.
Still, I too wonder, if BK’s already in the script?
Is there’s a revaluation of gold coming 3/29?
Did The United States Corporation ever emerge from the bankruptcy of 09Mar33? Don’t think so.
https://anticorruptionsociety.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/the-great-american-adventure-complete-work-by-judge-dale.pdf
Despite my enormous respect for Dr. Farrell (I think I’m on my 21st JPF book), I disagree with him on the issue of cryptocurruncies.
Let us consider for a moment centralized payment systems like banks, PayPal, and Patreon. These organizations have the power to cut off customers’ access, and have, as in the issue of cannabis businesses, Alex Jones, Wikileaks, and so on. Whether you are for against these people or organizations, it seems that by cutting off their fininancial means greatly impedes their rights to participate in a civil society. In America that woould include all the correpsonding Constitutional rights such as freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Simply by not liking you (as with the case of Venezuela above) or by disagreeing with social or political postions (as with Alex Jones and Wikileaks), a CENTRALIZED payment or banking platform can cut anyone off they please.
Now consider cryptocurrencies, let’s take Bitcoin because it is the one most people are familiar with. There is no Bitcoin Incorporated, no CEO, no board members, no “Mr. Bitcoin.” In short, there is no governing body to cut anyone off if they don’t like you. It restores financial liberty to the financial system. With great effort, it is possible to connect certain Bitcoin wallets with certain users and track their use, but the system cannot be shut down or controlled by a central authority.
Try as they might, the Chinese STILL cannot stop Bitcoin trading, and as a 15-year veteran of China, and a cryptocurrency user, i can speak with some authority on this. And China is one of the most hostile jurisdictions to cryptocurrency. In fact, a Chinese court recently ruled that cryptocurrencies are legitimate assets to hold, regardless of whether it’s legal to trade them or not, and we all know how subject to the official Party line courts in China are.
While many users here may disagree, Bitcoin and other cryptos are part of the pushback, and specifically the DECENTRALIZED pushback Dr. Farrell mentions in today’s HOS. We don’t even know who to “blame,” or at least to hold responsible, for their creation, and yet the system works. Many of you will say that anonymity of their creator is one good reason to be suspicious, and you’d be right. But who should be fearful as a result of that suspicion? Those seeking to regain financial freedom and independence? Or The Powers that Be who have an itch they can’t scratch?
Perhaps that is still to be worked out. I would aver that the panicked reaction of governments worldwide to cryptocurrencies is an indication that neither they nor their deep state puppetmasters are the responsible parties. I would also aver that the US’s fairly moderate reaction is a glint of hope that the United States of America stands a chance of retaining its status as a beacon of light at the end of the dank, dark tunnel we are traveling through.
China is the 2nd to last country in the world I would want to see dominating the global economy, and anyone who despises and fears the dystopian future we analyze daily on this website should feel the same. The only worse place on earth for governance than China is probably North Korea, but unlike China, they eschew the economic development that would ever make them a serious threat.
Oh, and I should add that many controversial personalities and organizations have switched to cryptocurrencies for their funding, or at least supplemented their funding options with them: Gab.ai, Good ole AJ, Jordan Peterson, and Wikileaks to name a few. Why? Because no central authority can intervene with that payment system.
I think the BIS is finally starting to smell the coffee, and wants a way to cash in on the beans…..That’s what we should really be concerned about.
When you can create ‘money’ (digital numbers) at the press of a button, why does it need to be backed by anything? As far as I’m concerned they’ll just create more and more ‘money’ until the chosen few in charge of the banking systems own everything of any value. And best of all, they’ll have done no hard toi for any of it other than implementing the greatest scam of all time – making the people on the outer circle pay interest on digital numbers that were never worth anything in the first place. Whola!
Apologies for the typos… it should read “they’ll have achieved it with no hard toil themselves”
Typos are the new normal with AI monitors.
But to the spirit of your point..
. (comment interruptedThere REALLY IS something wrong with this site’s comment mod, I.e.., Several attempts to type just ONE line. )
As we used to say in the old days in the Marines, the high ground ((objective) is usually taken by the “firstus with the mostus.”
Note to Bot. Yes! It really should be mostus, and NOT most us. Please allow us biological entities our few (albeit dwindling) pleasures.
Allen S
Loved it!
Central banks do not issue currency; they issue essentially IOU’s. In my mind the debt is the central banks, although they would like you to believe it’s you or your governments debt. This could all be brought to an end if those governments participating in this Ponzi scheme demanded they repay the debt which they issued. It would also put an end to Mr. Globalony and his nonsense.
The idea behind it all is total world domination through debt; to eventually foreclose on the entire earth.
Yep
Debt slaves are their game.
Note to modders. . I did not mean to press the “report” key. Sorry. My bad..
Re: “Debt slaves”… Right. Thus the latest and greatest scam: Student loans. Debt till death. Right up there with (cough, cough) health care.
Wouldn’t’t be so bad if something useful was taught, like Manual Arts, or useful trades, with encouragement to seek further … with assistance as needed.
That’s the down & dirty truth about “their” financial system: it manufactures debt slaves
on an industrialized scale.[as well as unfairness]
Their bought & sold medias brainwash the masses into believing they’re free; when, in reality they’re chump slaves. And, the real irony is they want us chumps to fight & die for their system. How ironic, to slave away your youth & energies to serve an inhuman master$.
My as well be serving a moderation bot!
According to internet rumours, a currently “hidden” instrument called the Gold Trade Note is already in use, perhaps in cases like trade between China and Iran. As the reserve status of the dollar declines, this use may come into the open.
Here is a real “nugget”: the Sovereign Gold Bond issued by the Reserve Bank of India.
https://nseindia.com/products/content/equities/sgbs/sgbs.htm
Back to the future?
That’s not what was rumoured. What Rikards said on SGT Report is that India China Russia and Iran (and maybe others) are quietly trading with Gold Drawing Rights that require 5% down in metal with 100% settlement in metal at 90 days. An expansion of this would kill fiat central banks,
SQUARE POINT THEATER 34
Stupidified watching
herbal money tree greenbacks
go up in pipe smoke.