Global Currency Reset (SDR's and the New Bretton Woods; by JC Collins)

[Cidersomerset]

Former US Budget Office president warns economy is nearing final stage of collapse

new Sunday 15th March 2015 at 07:58 By David Icke





‘The one-time director of the Office of Management and Budget under former
President Ronald Reagan has a dire warning for the world’s citizens: The global
economy has entered “the crack-up phase” that may lead to the evaporation of
much of the West’s wealth.

According to David Stockman, who is also a former businessman and GOP
representative from Michigan, the mismanagement of the global economy by the
world’s richest nations is about to reach its zenith and will be preceded, he
believes, by four events.’

Read more: Former US Budget Office president warns economy is nearing final stage of collapse

http://www.naturalnews.com/048994_ec...fice_debt.html

[ThePythonicCow]

The Financial Times of London is reporting that "Europeans defy US to join China-led development bank.":

France, Germany and Italy have all agreed to follow Britain’s lead and join a China-led international development bank, according to European officials, delivering a blow to US efforts to keep leading western countries out of the new institution.

You'll have to sign in to read any more of that article (I didn't), so here is a free site covering this report:

• Dollar Dies With A Whimper As Europeans "Defy" America And Back China-Led Bank (All News Pipeline)

Aha - The Guardian is covering the story as well: Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank: France, Germany and Italy said to join:

Gap widens between US and allies on new China-led lending body, with Britain among other countries already taking part in AIIB and Australia considering it.

A senior US diplomat said it was up to individual countries to decide on joining a new China-led lending body, as media reports said France, Germany and Italy have agreed to follow Britain’s lead and join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB).

A growing number of close allies were ignoring Washington’s pressure to stay out of the institution, the Financial Times reported, in a setback for US foreign policy.

In China the state-owned Xinhua news agency said South Korea, Switzerland and Luxembourg were also considering joining.

The Financial Times, quoting European officials, said the decision by the four countries to become members of the AIIB was a blow for Washington, which has questioned if the new bank will have high standards of governance and environmental and social safeguards.

The transition to a Chinese led (but with London still in a lead role) new world monetary system, replacing the US Dollar based world reserve currency, continues.

[Hervé]

In that same vein:

America's European "Allies" Desert Obama, Join China-led Infrastructure Bank

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 03/17/2015 11:27 -0400

It appears the sea of de-dollarization has reached the shores of Europe. With Australia and UK having already moved in the direction of joining the China-led AIIB, The FT reports that France, Germany, and Italy have now all agreed to join the development bank as 'pivot to Asia' appears to be Plan B for Europe. As Greg Sheridan previously noted, "the saga of the China Bank is almost a textbook case of the failure of Obama’s foreign policy," but as The FT concludes, the European decisions represent a significant setback for the Obama administration, which has argued that western countries could have more influence over the workings of the new bank if they stayed together on the outside. As Forbes notes, this leaves Obama with 3 uncomfortable options...

As The FT reports,

France, Germany and Italy have all agreed to follow Britain’s lead and join a China-led international development bank, according to European officials, delivering a blow to US efforts to keep leading western countries out of the new institution.

The decision by the three European governments comes after Britain announced last week that it would join the $50bn Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, a potential rival to the Washington-based World Bank.

...

The European decisions represent a significant setback for the Obama administration, which has argued that western countries could have more influence over the workings of the new bank if they stayed together on the outside and pushed for higher lending standards.

The AIIB, which was formally launched by Chinese President Xi Jinping last year, is one element of a broader Chinese push to create new financial and economic institutions that will increase its international influence. It has become a central issue in the growing contest between China and the US over who will define the economic and trade rules in Asia over the coming decades.

This follows Australia and UK...

Australia, a key US ally in the Asia-Pacific region which had come under pressure from Washington to stay out of the new bank, has also said that it will now rethink that position.

When Britain announced its decision to join the AIIB last week, the Obama administration told the Financial Times that it was part of a broader trend of “constant accommodation” by London of China. British officials were relatively restrained in their criticism of China over its handling of pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong last year.

Britain tried to gain “first mover advantage” last week by signing up to the fledgling Chinese-led bank before other G7 members.

Britain hopes to establish itself as the number one destination for Chinese investment and UK officials were unrepentant.

* * *
Which, as Forbes explains, leaves Obama with three options...

1) Continue to press its allies not to join the AIIB until governance procedures for the bank are assured;

2) Join the AIIB itself; or

3) Drop the issue.

Option one is clearly a losing proposition. There is no sense expending further political capital trying to persuade regional and other actors not to join the bank. It is a small-potato issue that is making the United States look weak at a time when U.S. influence in the region is otherwise quite strong.

Option two, which I—along with virtually every other China analyst outside the U.S. government—supported back in October is that the United States join the AIIB. There are several reasons why this is a good idea. It would allow the United States a seat inside the tent where it could be both a positive force for best governance practices and an internal critic if things go awry. It also would likely help ensure that U.S. companies have fair access to the bidding opportunities that will arise from the AIIB’s investment financing. Joining now will be hard to accomplish in a face-saving manner, but the United States could begin by publicly recognizing the need for the financing capabilities in Asia that the AIIB can provide and by moving quickly to work with Australia, South Korea, and Japan to work out common principles of accession.

Option three is for the United States to back away from the AIIB, release other countries from any pressure they might feel from the United States not to join, and let the AIIB rise or fall on its own merits. Chinese-led resource and infrastructure investment has encountered significant difficulty in a number of countries, including Zambia, Myanmar, Vietnam, Brazil, and Sri Lanka, among others. If the AIIB does not do a better job than China’s own development banks, it will be a stain not only on Beijing but also on all the other countries that are participating. If it does operate at the same standard as the World Bank and Asian Development Bank, then it will be a welcome addition to the world of development financing. The United States does not have to be in every regional organization in the Asia Pacific; it is not in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, for example, and it is only an observer in the Conference on Interactions and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia. It can sit out the AIIB or assume observer status as well.

Washington’s priority should be on advancing U.S. ideals and institutions through the pivot or rebalance rather than blocking Chinese initiatives unless absolutely necessary. (Let’s not confuse China’s effort to develop the AIIB with its push to implement an Air Defense Identification Zone, for example.) Opposition to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank has become a millstone around Washington’s neck. It is time to remove it one way or another.

* * *
De-dollarization continues... As Simon Black recently concluded, now we can see words are turning into action...

[The Allies] might be too polite to tell the US straight up– “Look, you have $18.1 trillion in official debt, you have $42 trillion in unfunded liabilities, and you’re kind of a dick. I’m dumping you.”

So instead they’re going with the “it’s not you, it’s me” approach.

But to anyone paying attention, it’s pretty obvious where this trend is going.

It won’t be long before other western nations jump on the anti-dollar bandwagon with action and not just words.

* * *
Bottom line: this isn’t theory or conjecture anymore. Every shred of objective evidence suggests that the dollar’s dominance is coming to an end.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Paul (here)
The Financial Times of London is reporting that "Europeans defy US to join China-led development bank.":

France, Germany and Italy have all agreed to follow Britain’s lead and join a China-led international development bank, according to European officials, delivering a blow to US efforts to keep leading western countries out of the new institution.

One of my favorite sites, The Daily Bell, has an excellent analysis of this event. It's easy to read, perceptive, detailed, and (in my view) gets the big picture of what's going on quite well.

I am going to quote the entire article, Real Reason for the Asian Investment Bank – and Western Participation, wishing only that I had said as much, half as well:

===============

Published by The Daily Bell - March 18 2015

Defying U.S., European allies say they'll join China-led bank ... Germany, France and Italy said on Tuesday they would join a new China-led Asian investment bank after close ally Britain defied U.S. pressure to become a founder member of a venture seen in Washington as a rival to the World Bank. – Reuters

Dominant Social Theme: Asia will show the West how to run an investment bank.

Free-Market Analysis: High finance and international politics are subtle affairs. On its surface, the effort to create an Asian-oriented "world bank" is straightforward. But beneath the surface, currents swirl.

The putative reason for such a bank is that the current World Bank is often exploitative and takes advantage of countries in trouble. A second reason is that the advantages of a World Bank will now accrue to Asian members. Their influence and monetary power will expand accordingly.

But the third reason is the most interesting of all. A little more from the article, first:

The concerted move to participate in Beijing's flagship economic outreach project was a diplomatic blow to the United States, reflecting European eagerness to partner with China's fast-growing economy, the world's second largest.

It comes amid prickly trade negotiations between Brussels and Washington, and at a time when EU and Asian governments are frustrated that the U.S. Congress has held up a reform of voting rights in the International Monetary Fund due to give China and other emerging powers more say in global economic governance.

German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble made the announcement at a joint news conference with visiting Chinese Vice Premier Ma Kai, at which no questions were allowed. He said Germany, Europe's biggest economy and a major trade partner of Beijing, would be a founding member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.

The lure of lending to countries that need money is considerable. Control a monetary war chest to influence the world or at least a region that can gain from such resources.

In the US, the World Bank is accompanied by the International Monetary Fund. They operate as a kind of tag team, as we have often observed. The World Bank lends money with some assurance it will be squandered. The IMF comes in later to provide the "austerity" necessary to assure repayment and often garners privatized assets from the prostrate country for its members.

We spoke to John Perkins on this mechanism some years ago in an interview entitled, "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man and the Unsustainability of Modern Capitalism." Of course, Perkins's book, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, details his experiences in advising The World Bank, IMF and other Western facilities on their activities.

Perkins went on to write several scathing exposes about how these bodies operate.

Here is some of what Perkins told us:

The World Bank is a tool of economic hit men, there is no question about it. It's the tool of big corporations, the IMF and most of what we call intelligence agencies of the United States, CIA and NSA. Essentially the job of all these organizations is to help what used to be just US businesses – now we call them multi-nationals – get themselves established around the world in positions where they can exploit the world's resources, natural resources and human resources.

... One of my jobs as an economic hit man was to identify countries that had resources like oil and arrange huge loans for those countries from the World Bank and sister organizations. But the money would never go to the actual country; instead it would go to our own corporations to build infrastructure projects in that country like power plants and industrial parks; things that would benefit a few very wealthy families.

So then the people of the country would be left holding this huge debt that they couldn't repay. We would come back and say, "well, since you can't repay your debt, you have to restructure your loan."

That's when the IMF comes in. So the World Bank makes the original loan and IMF shows up and says, "We'll help you restructure your loan, but in order to do that you have to meet certain conditionalities. You have to sell your oil or whatever the coveted resource is at a cheap price, to the oil companies without restrictions." Or they would suggest the country sell electric utilities, water and sewage, maybe even your schools and jails to private multi-national corporations. Or maybe allow military bases to be built; these sorts of things.

This is the model that China – and Asia – presumably want to overtake. The idea is that a bank led by China will be less obviously exploitative and will actually lend money that will find its way to projects rather than to Swiss bank accounts.

Obviously, there is an awareness of the deficiencies of the World Bank. A joint statement assured the world that new bank operations would "follow ... the best standards and practices in terms of governance, safeguards, debt and procurement policies."

Of course, being cynical about such things, we don't think for a minute that this new bank will operate much differently than the World Bank. Maybe for a while it will be "kinder and gentler," but why should one believe that the Chinese ultimately will operate their bank more altruistically than the West?

The real reason for an Asian world bank seems to us to have to do more with building a bipolar world that will eventually provide leverage for a truly international financial system.

Right now the creation of this new bank is being positioned as stemming from disenchantment with Washington. But over time it will be seen that China – Asia and perhaps Russia, too – are creating an entirely separate financial infrastructure.

Yet it is not one – despite current reports – intent on shutting out Western interests. The West, for instance, is now a big part of the initial creation of the Asian bank. In fact, the City of London itself, perhaps the most powerful Western financial player, is also significantly involved.

If the plan is to build and then merge a bipolar system, it certainly makes sense that the West would have significant interests in the new facility as well as the old one. The merger is presumably a ways off, but preparations are being made ...

We began by pointing out that international finance and power politics practiced in the 21st century can be subtle, indeed. The outward guise of a new financial system is being written about, but the underlying realities are not yet being covered.

Conclusion

Eventually, that may change.


Published by The Daily Bell - www.thedailybell.com - All Rights Reserved.

===============

So, in short, it seems that we're (well, they're) building a bipolar monetary/financial/... world, anticipating that it will fail catastrophically, justifying their "solution."

[gripreaper]

Let me see if I got this one straight Paul. The other large economies want more control in the raping and pillaging of natural and human resources, so that the balance of global imperialistic plunder and debt servitude can be more equitably distributed to the oligarchs in these countries and create a counter dialectic for synthesizing the total control of all of the planet under a new system of digital finance and surveillance which better controls these resources?

On another note, Russia was made a member of SWIFT.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Paul (here)
The Financial Times of London is reporting that "Europeans defy US to join China-led development bank.":

France, Germany and Italy have all agreed to follow Britain’s lead and join a China-led international development bank, according to European officials, delivering a blow to US efforts to keep leading western countries out of the new institution.

More ... Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and now the IMF itself are "making friends with" the new Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB).

From the BBC:

International Monetary Fund chief Christine Lagarde has said the IMF would be "delighted" to co-operate with the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB).

The AIIB has more than 30 members and is envisaged as a development bank similar to the World Bank.

From The Guardian:

Braving US disapproval and joining the UK, New Zealand, Germany and France, Australia is widely expected to announce it will invest in the bank

Australia is on the brink of joining the Chinese-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), with the national security committee of cabinet reportedly giving the government the all clear to invest.

From Business Insider:

Japan signaled cautious approval of the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) on Friday and said for the first time that, if conditions were met, it could join the institution that the United States has warned against.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by gripreaper (here)
Let me see if I got this one straight Paul. The other large economies want more control in the raping and pillaging of natural and human resources, so that the balance of global imperialistic plunder and debt servitude can be more equitably distributed to the oligarchs in these countries and create a counter dialectic for synthesizing the total control of all of the planet under a new system of digital finance and surveillance which better controls these resources?

Yes (though, if you considering applying for a position in the Press Relations department of any of these distinguished institutions, I wouldn't recommend phrasing it quite like that.)

Posted by gripreaper (here)
On another note, Russia was made a member of SWIFT.

No. Russia has been a member of Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) since 1989 (the time of the fall of the USSR.) What Russia got just now, instead of being kicked out as the US wanted, is a seat on the 25-member board of directors of SWIFT

[ThePythonicCow]

Well, I'll be darned. South Korea was not the next holdout to take a more positive interest in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). South Korea and the US had been the last two major countries to be turning a cold shoulder toward the AIIB. The US just "blinked".

From Washington Blinks: Will Seek Partnership With China-Led Development Bank (Zerohedge):

============

Don’t look now, but Washington just blinked. As we’ve documented exhaustively over the past week, pressure has been building steadily for the US to strike some manner of conciliatory tone towards China with regard to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, a China-led institution aimed at rivaling the US/Japan-backed ADB. Britain’s decision to join China in its new endeavor has prompted a number of Western nations to throw their support behind the bank ahead of the March 31 deadline for membership application. Because the AIIB effectively represents the beginning of the end for US hegemony, the White House has demeaned the effort from its inception questioning the ability of non-G-7 nations to create an institution that can be trusted to operation in accordance with the proper “standards.” Now, with 35 nations set to join as founders, it appears Washington may be set to concede defeat. Here’s more, via WSJ:

The Obama administration, facing defiance by allies that have signed up to support a new Chinese-led infrastructure fund, is proposing the bank work in a partnership with Washington-backed development institutions such as the World Bank.

The collaborative approach is designed to steer the new bank toward economic aims of the world’s leading economies and away from becoming an instrument of Beijing’s foreign policy. The bank’s potential to promote new alliances and sidestep existing institutions has been one of the Obama administration’s chief concerns as key allies including the U.K., Germany and France lined up in recent days to become founding members of the new Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.

The Obama administration wants to use existing development banks to co-finance projects with Beijing’s new organization. Indirect support would help the U.S. address another long-standing goal: ensuring the new institution’s standards are designed to prevent unhealthy debt buildups, human-rights abuses and environmental risks. U.S. support could also pave the way for American companies to bid on the new bank’s projects.

“The U.S. would welcome new multilateral institutions that strengthen the international financial architecture,” said Nathan Sheets, U.S. Treasury Under Secretary for International Affairs. “Co-financing projects with existing institutions like the World Bank or the Asian Development Bank will help ensure that high quality, time-tested standards are maintained.”

============

There is more at the above link.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Paul (here)
Well, I'll be darned. South Korea was not the next holdout to take a more positive interest in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). South Korea and the US had been the last two major countries to be turning a cold shoulder toward the AIIB. The US just "blinked".

JC Collins (the one in this thread's title) brings up a good point in his coverage of this announcement, in his first Update to his article The Coming Western Tribunals:

The recent announcement by the Obama administration in regards to the AIIB does not mean America is suddenly joining that institution. It would still require congressional approval, and considering the US Congress has refused to pass the 2010 IMF Reforms, which the Obama administration also supports, strongly suggests that any AIIB membership will also be refused.

Just because Obama's administration announces something doesn't mean that Congress will go along, or that it will happen.

[Calz]

Posted by Paul (here)

Just because Obama's administration announces something doesn't mean that Congress will go along, or that it will happen.

Devil's advocate here ... what if ... the application was ***turned down***???


Has not happened to date ... but food for thought ... of the nonsensical desert variety obviously ...


Wouldn't that be a hoot???

[TrumanCash]

IMO, everything seems to be lined up for the ultimate global currency reset--a cashless, digital currency. A good article at The Economic Collapse website.

TLC

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by TrumanCash (here)
IMO, everything seems to be lined up for the ultimate global currency reset--a cashless, digital currency. A good article at The Economic Collapse website.

Indeed.

The idea that we peons might conduct business out of sight of their surveillance is not something they want to perpetuate.

[3(C)+me]

This guy states the crash of the dollar is going to happen this year and a gold standard will be re-established.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=RVr1xIqsiDo

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by cccme (here)
This guy states the crash of the dollar is going to happen this year and a gold standard will be re-established.

The end of the US Dollar's reign as the world's reserve currency may well happen this year. JC Collins, after whom this thread is named, posted an excellent article a couple of days ago, When Will China End the Dollar Peg, spelling out the sequence of events that he anticipates, over the rest of this year 2015, as the world's monetary system transitions to national currencies, with exchange rates set by the BIS, and with major international debt and trade agreements denominated in SDR's, and with such up and coming institutions as the BRICS Development Bank, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the China International Payment System, the Shanghai Gold Exchange, and the ASEAN Economic Community playing major roles. This does not mean the US Dollar will crash entirely, but I anticipate it means that the US Dollar will lose some value in trade.

But I doubt that it means that the new monetary system will be based entirely on a gold standard. Rather the new monetary system will continue, in my expectation, to be fundamentally a debt-money system, with Banksters controlling the issuance and relative values of various currencies. The relative value of the US Military/Intelligence complex in controlling the value of the US Dollar will decline, and the resources (exports, oil and gas, and precious metals) of nations will be used as part of what determines the relative value of currencies, denominated in the common unit of accounting, SDR's.

This is not a classic gold or silver standard. I will not be able to take my silver coin to the grocery store in a year and get a loaf of bread for it. The clerk will still look at me funny if I try that.

===

Bix Weir is one of many who, in my opinion, are being distracted by a story from what's really going on. "There are eight million stories in the naked city." That is one of them.

[ThePythonicCow]

As Joseph P. Farrell explained once again, yesterday, in the fine article GLOBAL DEBT NOW TWICE THE SIZE OF THE GLOBAL ECONOMY… WHAT DOES IT MEAN?, he (along with Catherine Austin Fitts) have been of the view that the primary reason that the visible world financial system is so overwhelmed with debt is that wealth has been being sucked out for a hidden system of finance, funding such things as a secret space program, amortizing immense future stores of resources (such as minerals mined from the asteroids and other planets) and energy (once the immense and hidden progress of science over the last century is leveraged in public).

I would claim that we don't know this. Debt is the result of using today what you have not yet earned. It is "fly now, pay later." It is pulling spending forward. It is anticipating future income and enjoying the potential increase in prosperity that that income will fund, before it is earned. Monetary systems based on issuing new money in exchange for debt are perhaps the grandest tool of enslavement ever visited upon humanity.

But there might or might not actually be such future income that could service that debt. Many young adult college graduates in the US are learning this the hard way; they went into great debt to pay for an education that would gain them a higher paying job, and that job did not materialize.

Wealth - actual, useable goods, services, infrastructure, technology and skills - is not the same as money. Debt based money is not a marker for actual future wealth; rather it is marker for extracting rent and taxes on future income streams, and for the future ownership of whatever property, resources, and labor might have been offered as security for that debt.

Money can be lent into existence, and spent on ephemeral pleasures, the service of previous debt (which includes rent and taxes), and the purchase of perishable goods, leaving only the debt, as a lien on one's future property, possessions, resources and labor. The "wealth" did not necessarily go somewhere, to be found later, other than, perhaps, as another tool for the enslavement of humanity.

There is, in my view, a profound confusion in the view of Farrell and Fitts on this topic. There might not be any "there" there, other than the enslavement of our descendents. Each generation must earn its own liberty and provide its own labor. The stories of some vast hoard of gold that could be distributed to every human being, making us all wealthy, are similarly false. No pile of bonds, mortgages, securities, derivatives, gold, silver or diamonds, no new form of energy, no new supply minerals mined by inter-planetary robots, ensures the prosperity or even the liberty of our children.

[ThePythonicCow]

Something I was just reading in Jim Willie's monthly subscription HatTrick newsletter reminded me, once again, that this next round of financial/monetary/economic crises will not begin in the US, but in the emerging markets (EM).

We are not seeing a flooding of the world with dollars thanks to quantitative easing (QE).

That's what it's "advertised" as, by many in the alternative media, but that's not what has been happening these last few years, since the 2008 financial crisis.

What's happening is that the primary source of generating new money that is in circulation, which is lending it into circulation (aka "debt money") has been breaking down ... failing. Lending is slowing down because there are no longer sufficient plausible excuses to lend. We hit bottom with the NINJA (no income, no job, no assets) home mortgages of the earlier 2000's.

What all that QE is doing is monetizing existing bad debt ... essentially building a giant carpet of dollars, under which to sweep the bad debt, but not to lend new money into circulation.

Those nations most dependent on cash flow, expanding economies, higher prices, and more debt, just to make their payments on existing debt, will be the first to fail.

The weak will fail first. Greece, as the weakest of the Euro nations, is one example. Japan, once the rising sun in the east, has been digging a debt hole for two decades now. While it is more of a decaying economy than an emerging economy, it too risks being one of the earlier nations to collapse fiscally.

We are in a deflationary spiral, not an inflationary spiral. Dollars are increasingly in short supply, because lending them into existence is happening much less.

• That's why the Baltic Index is way down (index of economic shipping activity over the oceans).
• That's at least one of the essential reasons that the price of Petro is way down, as oil exporting nations desperate for the continued cash flow continue to pump more oil for use by nations with collapsing economic activity.
• That's why energy usage in many nations is down substantially.
• That's why oil fracking companies in the US are going bankrupt (they borrowed money on the expectation of over $100/barrel oil, and can't make payments with oil under $50/barrel.)
• That's why mineral mining companies are going bankrupt, and pushing out as much as they can, desperate to continue to meet loan payments (thus further driving down the prices of copper, silver, and other metals, both precious and industrial.)
• That's why more debt burdened retail chains in the US are going bankrupt and closing stores.

Those nations, corporations, banks, and individuals who cannot meet debt payments on a reduced cash flow are becoming the first to fail.

The chaining together of all the major Western Banks, each entangled with the other in the massive derivative market, will force most of them to all fail almost at once, once a sufficient amount of defaults and bankruptcies bring down any one of them.

[ThePythonicCow]

The ultimate control mechanism: SDR's.

I was reading JC Collins' latest piece SDR Fundamentals, and asking myself what it meant for a particular national currency, such as the Chinese Renminbi (Yuan) or for gold, to be potentially included in the SDR's "basket of currencies."

My ongoing hunch has been that JC Collins is both more accurate than most in anticipating what will unfold over the next year or two in the world's monetary system, and is also a bit of an apologist for some of the key players in this system. In short, he's likely right in much of what he says, but likely not saying some key things.

I think I see what he's not saying ... that's of fundamental importance.

A key aspect of monetary systems is who controls the changing value of money over time. The Banksters have a long standing "tradition" of shifting back and forth between "easy money" and "austerity", which enables them to build their wealth and control, while stealing it from the rest of us. Debt is easier to pay off if money is "easy"; defaults, foreclosures and repossession of property are more likely when money is "scarce." Successful (profitable) savings and investing are easier if one knows or controls future monetary policy.

This harvesting of wealth and control by the Banksters has been going on for at least centuries, if not millenia. First they inject massive amounts of new money, with easy lending for stocks, bonds, houses, education, capital equipment, cars, whatever ... and then they tighten the money supply, causing a crash or depression, and handing vast wealth to themselves, for pennies on the dollar.

In short, it's pump and dump ... of money itself. It's a nice job if you can get it (helps if your father was in the business too.)

Long term contracts and trade agreements, as well as long term debt and investments are written in some unit of money - say US Dollars, Yuan, Euros, British Pounds, Yen, or SDRs. The key point of control of monetary systems is the control over the relative value of these currencies, between each other and against real goods and services. Nations, corporations and individuals have been driven into bankruptcy and austerity, their wealth confiscated by their most senior lender, many times ... many many times ... when they could no longer service their debt payments, which were denominated in some currency someone else controlled.

The new monetary system we are facing will have "Swiss gnomes" (whoever controls the Banksters that control SDR's) dictating the relative value of SDR's to all national currencies. No nation, not even the US or China, will have the "exorbitant privilege" of routinely issuing major debt in denominations of its own currency.

The "Swiss gnomes" will be able to destroy any nation by deciding that that nation's currency has lost some value relative to SDR's, which will make it more difficult for that nation to service its SDR-denominated debt. So long as the debtor nation has some reserves of whatever national currencies or precious metals are included in the SDR currency basket, then that debtor can use those reserves, at whatever SDR value the Swiss gnomes assign that currency or metal, to service debt. But the value in SDR's of those reserves is not within that nation's control.

We are entering a new variant of the same old system ... the real future value of SDR denominated debt, investments and contracts held in the present will be controlled by the "Swiss gnomes" who manipulate the exchange rates between SDR's and the major currencies and metals in the SDR currency basket.

The "Swiss gnomes" remain in the cat bird seat (the seat of control), but instead of having to work through some dominant nation's monetary system (such as through Venice, Portugal, Spain, Holland, France, the UK or the US), will now have their own catbird seat, from which they control the value of all the major national currencies, relative to the SDR units in terms of which major debt, investment and trade agreements are denominated.

So ... what does it mean to a particular currency whether or not it is included in the SDR basket of currencies?

Whether or not any particular national currency (such as the Canadian dollar (CAD) or the Swiss franc (CHF)) or a precious metal (gold) is included within the future SDR currency basket will perhaps determine who, or at least how, the relative value of that particular currency or metal is controlled, whether by the Forex and precious metal exchanges, or by the "Swiss gnomes" who set the value of each currency or metal in that basket, relative to SDR's. So, being in that basket might make a currency or metal more "stable" or less subject to currency manipulators such as George Soros. But manipulated it will still be ... just by different parties, or different means.

It's (another) good day to be a "Swiss gnome."

[Ron Mauer Sr]

Posted by Paul (here)
It's (another) good day to be a "Swiss gnome."

I feel that there are higher levels of control, more powerful than the the "Swiss gnomes" (Swiss bankers). But my opinion has roots in other threads.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Ron Mauer Sr (here)
I feel that there are higher levels of control, more powerful than the the "Swiss gnomes" (Swiss bankers). But my opinion has roots in other threads.

I entirely agree ... and I intended my phrase "Swiss gnomes" to be sufficiently vague and suggestive si as to leave the reader pondering, for a brief moment, who or what those higher levels might be.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Paul (here)
We are entering a new variant of the same old system ... the real future value of SDR denominated debt, investments and contracts held in the present will be controlled by the "Swiss gnomes" who manipulate the exchange rates between SDR's and the major currencies and metals in the SDR currency basket.

Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild is famously claimed to have said "Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws." (Detail: The quote is first claimed in the 1935 book "Money Creators," by Gertrude M. Coogan, without attribution or earlier reference.)

We might not see the New World Order One World Government that so many in the alternative media (including myself on some days) have been warning of for several decades.

All that matters, at this time, in the next year or two, to those ultimately controlling the monetary system on this planet, is that they get to control the relative valuation of various national currencies, in units of SDR's, and that major contracts, agreements, and loans are increasingly written in denominations of SDR's.

That one detail gives those bastards (whom I misleadingly called "Swiss gnomes" above) the key to our earthly kingdom.

Just as when the Federal Reserve came into being in the US in 1913, it might be a couple of decades before we witness the full potential of control over the affairs of nations and corporations through this means of controlling our civilization's monetary system.

"Give me control of the world's money, and I care not who makes it laws."

Such control is rapidly being realized, as both the primary reserve and lending institutions of both "sides", the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) on one side, and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) on the other side, fully agree to denominate their holdings and lendings in SDR's.