SD GOVERNOR NOEM VETOS BILL CLASSIFYING CENTRAL BANK DIGITAL CURRENCY ...
This week, as you know, I've been blogging about the growing movement in the USSA which, for want of a better description, we'll simply describe as the "pushback movement." This movement is really part of a growing global phenomenon of revolt against globaloneyism and its lack of any unifying culture except greed, graft, and grift, the three Gr's that made the Bai Den Jo family one of the most successful oriental gangs in history. At the top of this list of pushback this week you can include the governor of my home state, Kristi Noem, who just vetoed a bill from the South Dakota legislature that would have recognized central bank digital currency - we'll call them "fedgimmicks" for convenience and ease-of-use's sake - but not other crypto-currencies:
In her veto message to the legislature, Governor Noem stated:
Policymakers at the Federal Reserve have considered the adoption of a digital dollar over the last several years. Noem said in a veto letter to the South Dakota House of Representatives that the legislation “opens the door to the risk that the federal government could more easily adopt a CBDC, which then may become the only viable digital currency.”
“At this moment in time, such a government-backed electronic currency has not yet been created,” Noem told lawmakers. “More importantly, South Dakota should not open the door to a potential future overreach by the federal government.”
The bill would have defined money as a “medium of exchange that is currently authorized or adopted by a domestic or foreign government.” Lawmakers passed the measure 49-17 in the House of Representatives and 24-9 in the Senate, both of which are margins that would allow for the overturn of the veto in the two chambers.
Noem added that cryptocurrencies, which are decentralized digital assets that can be transferred between virtual wallets, would not be considered money under the legislation. She asserted that the bill therefore “needlessly” limited freedoms and placed citizens at a “business disadvantage” by discouraging development within the nascent sector.
It seems clear from Governor Noem's message that she regards any attempt to create a central bank digital currency, i.e., fedgimmicks, as a power grab and a serious blow against financial freedom.
She is, of course, entirely correct in that evaluation.
But what her message missed was the opportunity to point out that fedgimmicks are not really currency at all, even though one may call them that, any more than the quackcines are really vaccines, even though lots of people call them that; Fedgimmicks are nothing but corporate coupons and means of total control. Nothing more, nothing less.
I suspect, watching the states increasingly pushing back, that we're in the midst of some much deeper conflict(see today's tidbit from Tom Luongo, and his suggestions that we're in a currency war between the Fedgimmick and the WEF over Central Bank Digital Currencies). I suspect that as the whole scheme behind central bank digital currencies becomes increasingly clear, its chances for becoming an actual currency are dwindling rapidly. Who trusts them? I don't. Who trusts the fedgimmick in Swampington. I don't, and fewer and fewer people do... Mr. Putin rightfully thinks that fedgimmick is "not agreement capable," and as long as the deep state mechanism is in place that put the current alleged president in position as puppet in chief, no one will trust it.
Thus what states like South Dakota need to do is have a viable alternative, like a bullion depository if they are to have a trustworthy means to trade among themselves and with foreign entities. Then the steps need to be taken to set and maintain standards of assay purity, of the ability to exchange notes of deposit for goods and services, and then the all- essential indgredient: convertability of such notes of deposit into actual specie. That last step will be a crucial signal, for convertability implies the regulation of the fractional reserve of bullion required. And please note, folks, that it is this factor which thus far has not entered into the discussion at all. I am suggesting that it is about to, and that if it begins to be talked about in those states, then that is the necessary next step on the way towards actual bullion-backed currency emerging.
Thus far, we've been watching merely the establishment of the most basic of these steps. It's when states start establishing standards of assay purity, and issuing those certificates of deposit as bearer demand notes, that things will get very interesting. I suspect, now, that we're not very far from that, given the state of Montana's recent willingness to consider compact-of-the-states arrangements.
What we seem to be watching, in other words, is a squeeze play on the fedgimmick, so this is about to get very, very interesting...
See you on the flip side...
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.