Vatican calls for "taxation measures on financial transactions"

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by wnlight (here)
Help me out here. I cannot understand why this thread is discussing the mechanics of such a diabolic method of taxation. No nation should ever agree to it.

My take is that the people living in nations are increasingly losing control of their nation's destiny, even as what seems to be "nationalism" and "populism" are on the rise.

To justify a global tax and the requisite institutions to collect and use it, we must be presented with global threats, that no nation, corporation or individual, however large they might be (think of such examples as the US, Monsanto and Soros) should be able to circumvent.

Think of such threats (whether real or staged) as

• global warming (aka climate change),
• world monetary and economic collapse,
• the end of peak cheap oil
• world wide ecological collapse,
• world wide terrorism,
• invading aliens,
• a large inter-planetary object threatening life on earth, and/or
• a “galactic superwave” (Paul LaViolette's term) threatening life on earth.

Think of all the major respected institutions, including the major nations, major corporations and media, and major churches, all putting their weight behind this.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by naste.de.lumina (here)
In order to achieve this goal, 'they' would have to be able to impose this 'fee levy' on all those who currently participate in 'transaction validations' and also on those who may come in the future.

Today, two competent geeks can successfully exchange secret information, using cryptography, with a high probability of not having the minions of the bastards in power being able to read it.

In the future, I expect that two competent geeks will continue to be able to exchange cryptocurrencies, with a high probability of not having the minions of the bastards in power being able to track it.

But as soon as an effort is made to use that secret information or that monetary value in the "larger" world, involving others in ways that can be surveilled or manipulated, then "the cat's out of the bag" and the minions of the bastards in power become (perhaps uninvited) parties to the activity.

This is much the way that the human body handles toxins. There are likely many very deadly toxins and pathogens "squirrelled" away in our bodies, in small amounts, wrapped in some inert material, out of harms way.

The substantial alternative media push for cryptocurrencies, like the earlier and ongoing push for cryptography (e.g., Google is pushing all websites, including Project Avalon) to use encrypted https, rather than plain text http), is deceptive. Such projects start out using "protection from the evil eye of our overlords" as a selling feature, but then end up providing the masses with variants of the technology that, while it may keep out ordinary crooks and humans, nevertheless has been fully compromised by our dominant overlords.

[naste.de.lumina]

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by naste.de.lumina (here)
In order to achieve this goal, 'they' would have to be able to impose this 'fee levy' on all those who currently participate in 'transaction validations' and also on those who may come in the future.

Today, two competent geeks can successfully exchange secret information, using cryptography, with a high probability of not having the minions of the bastards in power being able to read it.

In the future, I expect that two competent geeks will continue to be able to exchange cryptocurrencies, with a high probability of not having the minions of the bastards in power being able to track it.

But as soon as an effort is made to use that secret information or that monetary value in the "larger" world, involving others in ways that can be surveilled or manipulated, then "the cat's out of the bag" and the minions of the bastards in power become (perhaps uninvited) parties to the activity.

This is much the way that the human body handles toxins. There are likely many very deadly toxins and pathogens "squirrelled" away in our bodies, in small amounts, wrapped in some inert material, out of harms way.

The substantial alternative media push for cryptocurrencies, like the earlier and ongoing push for cryptography (e.g., Google is pushing all websites, including Project Avalon) to use encrypted https, rather than plain text http), is deceptive. Such projects start out using "protection from the evil eye of our overlords" as a selling feature, but then end up providing the masses with variants of the technology that, while it may keep out ordinary crooks and humans, nevertheless has been fully compromised by our dominant overlords.

I think the main objective of the Bitcoin concept is the decentralization of the financial system and transparency in transactions.

No one, country or corporation would control (manipulate) the digital currency.

If the goal is being achieved, it will be natural to expect countries at some point to try to stifle the use of this system.

China's Central Bank is Inspecting Bitcoin Operators, Bitcoin Price is Tumbling


China's Central Bank to Conduct Ongoing Bitcoin Exchange Visits


I think that if Chinese overlords currently had the ability to break bitcoin encryption, or another control form, they would not be initiating these 'inspection visits' (theoretically just to see if everything is within the 'rules') in the miners.

In my opinion, if Bitcoin does not provoke shameless attempts at retaliation by governments, it is because it is not fulfilling its main objective.

P.S.: Sorry for leaving topic 'Vatican' and taxation measures on financial transactions.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by naste.de.lumina (here)
I think the main objective of the Bitcoin concept is the decentralization of the financial system and transparency in transactions.

No one, country or corporation would control (manipulate) the digital currency.

If the goal is being achieved, it will be natural to expect countries at some point to try to stifle the use of this system.

That was the main selling point of Bitcoin, yes.

That goal is not being achieved however.

We will end up having available to us a variety of "consumer friendly" methods of transferring money, even in small amounts, individual to individual, and individual to/from business. These methods will be almost instant (seconds), and they will make use of block chain or similar technology. Financial institutions will control the keys to most of our wallets, not the average individual. This infrastructure will be essential to taxing even small financial transactions (and along with that, surveilling, manipulating and controlling them.)

All our major technologies undergo this sort of transformation that adapts it to mass surveillance and manipulation by the minions of the elite bastards: printing, coal energy, petro energy, computation (Intel has hooks deep inside their CPUs), voice communications, digitial communications, email, cryptography, cryptocurrency, social media, search engines, online shopping, ...

Nothing achieves wide spread usage that can escape this fate.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Paul (here)
To justify a global tax and the requisite institutions to collect and use it, we must be presented with global threats, that no nation, corporation or individual, however large they might be (think of such examples as the US, Monsanto and Soros) should be able to circumvent.

Think of such threats (whether real or staged) as

• global warming (aka climate change),
• world monetary and economic collapse,
• the end of peak cheap oil
• world wide ecological collapse,
• world wide terrorism,
• invading aliens,
• a large inter-planetary object threatening life on earth, and/or
• a “galactic superwave” (Paul LaViolette's term) threatening life on earth.

Another item to add to this list of global threats, requiring a globally coordinated response:

• Soros and NGO's

Listen to this latest "News and Views from the Nefarium" by Joseph P Farrell, with this thought in mind:

A wide spread revulsion to George Soros and the NGO's (non-government organizations) that he funds is being stirred up. Surely a supra-national coordinated effort will be called for, to counter Soros.

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

My speculation in this regard goes beyond Farrell's own "high octane speculation", that some sort of "international mafia war" is breaking out.

I'm suggesting that such "wars" break out when our overlords anticipate that they will find opportunities, in the conduct and resolution of such wars, to further their long standing interests.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Paul (here)
All our major technologies undergo this sort of transformation that adapts it to mass surveillance and manipulation by the minions of the elite bastards: printing, coal energy, petro energy, computation (Intel has hooks deep inside their CPUs), voice communications, digitial communications, email, cryptography, cryptocurrency, social media, search engines, online shopping, ...

Another list to be extended - add to this list gold.

Yes, gold, the mother of all money. Gold did not become the most enduring form of money until the powerful acquired dominant control over its mining. This happened, if my memory of what I've read serves me, when large mining operations in Africa, using slave labor taken from various places by the Egyptian military, became the dominant source of monetary gold in the world as was known then.

Monoplistic and technical control, using dominant military might, secret technology, and propaganda, are always and everywhere some of the most essential keys to imposing dominating survillance, manipulation and control over populations.

Crypto-currencies are at heart an alternative form of shared database update, using an oligarchy of cooperating and authorized databases rather than a single, central database. This will be yet one more technology put to use in the ongoing, never ending it seems, struggle to domesticate the human animal.

[shaberon]

I looked for any updates or fruit to emerge from this, and so far found nothing.

It seems to be a slight change in strategy, as even a 2009 massive papal document "Caritas in veritate", while being a fairly insidious tract of globalism, has not yet called for an alternative to the existing institutions. Scandals at the time had forced some audits and increased transparency of things like the Vatican Bank. As it turns out, this bank does not exactly hold the Holy See's property, it's more or less just a bank that's in the Vatican territory, with some private superintendence:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instit...ks_of_Religion

I'm keen on finding whatever new thing they decide to promote. Whatever it's called, you can be pretty sure that it will mostly be done by persuasion at the grassroots level that it's for "the greater good" accompanied by six hundred bullet points of somewhat effective rhetoric to back it up.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by shaberon (here)
I'm keen on finding whatever new thing they decide to promote.

Let us know if you think you spotted it.

[shaberon]

No clues about a new thing so far.

But you are probably right to call out the mafia infighting. Apparently the IMF had a chance to bite on this new kind of tax, and refrained: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_tax#cite_note-Page-1

Which again serves to illustrate what I take to be the rival Western power blocs:

Fabian, London School of Economics, United Nations, U. S. State Dept. (Kissinger, Rockefeller), rule by council

Jesuit, Georgetown/U. Chicago/Fordham/NYU, Medical-Pharmaceutical, U. S. Military-Industrial Complex, autocratic

In many ways, the method of propaganda is often the same, but the cui bono?--leads to different nests. So on this tax issue, the IMF says no, but Papa says yes. They will work together and put on a similar face much of the time until they get at loggerheads like this. Obviously Rockefeller is pretty big in the medical stuff as well so, there's not always clear boundaries, but on this issue we can see the different sides. Not that either one is desirable.

There also appears to be hanging, a European Central Bank (and others) discord against the Basel/BIS policies requiring increased capital vs. risk: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ften-standards

You can probably find Jesuits on both sides of that; eventually they will have their say in favor of something.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by shaberon (here)
No clues about a new thing so far.

One of my favorite places to look for interesting analysis is JC Collins at Philosophy of Metrics. He has moved his more detailed work behind a paywall. Now and then I purchase one month, for $15, and catch up on his work. Well worth it. You can get a good idea from his Free side whether or not you find his approach interesting.