The global financial system is likely insolvent

blob69

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2015
Messages
362
This likely goes back to the beginning of this spiritual dark age - our yuga. That is likely many thousands of years.
The likely estimate of Kali yuga's duration is around 6000 years, as per René Guénon and Alain Daniélou, two authors that perfectly described what is going on now already a long time ago. They say there are many mistaken calculations out there about the yuga's duration. I think they are right since there was an important transition to farming, eating grains etc. around that time.

Daniélou says the final, most extreme phase of Kali yuga began around 1940. Looking at the curves below I think this is indeed the case.

https_%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages...jpeg


And obviously we must be right at the end of the yuga given the extremes we are facing now. Interesting times indeed!
 

Waynish

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2016
Messages
2,206
The likely estimate of Kali yuga's duration is around 6000 years, as per René Guénon and Alain Daniélou, two authors that perfectly described what is going on now already a long time ago. They say there are many mistaken calculations out there about the yuga's duration. I think they are right since there was an important transition to farming, eating grains etc. around that time.

Daniélou says the final, most extreme phase of Kali yuga began around 1940. Looking at the curves below I think this is indeed the case.

View attachment 32043

And obviously we must be right at the end of the yuga given the extremes we are facing now. Interesting times indeed!
Oh, things can go much lower ;) I don't take any of these so-called scholars as Yogis much less Vedic scholars. It used to be that theologians weren't intellectual masturbators, but actual practitioners who knew directly from experience. These Yugas are potentially imaginably long. (So-called) "Time" is non-linear anyway. This is the age in which to be a practitioner!
 

blob69

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2015
Messages
362
Oh, things can go much lower ;) I don't take any of these so-called scholars as Yogis much less Vedic scholars. It used to be that theologians weren't intellectual masturbators, but actual practitioners who knew directly from experience. These Yugas are potentially imaginably long. (So-called) "Time" is non-linear anyway. This is the age in which to be a practitioner!
I don't think they can go much lower for much longer, things are extreme and I don't see why much more suffering should be allowed. I say this mostly based on my intuition - the calculations by the guys I cited just confirm this.
 

sladerunner69

Member
Joined
May 24, 2013
Messages
3,307
Age
31
Location
Los Angeles
I guess I was referring to the difference in salaries between CEOs and regular workers. I think that ratio was 40-50 before the 1970s and then it took off in favor of the CEOs, to the point where in some publicly traded companies today the CEO makes more than 80% of his workers combined.

Oh yes I agree that certainly is a problem. The boards view the C-suite as worthy of investment while the employees are mere capital. I'm not sure what that means ultimately. Culture certainly has something to do with it, because in Japan the average CEO still only makes ~10 times what the average employee makes. Japan is capitalist but they have a much more coherent culture.
 

mhm

Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Messages
31
Even at the height of the 2008 crisis we never had the entire system seize up like that day in Q4 2019 when every single private financial entity on Wall Street refused to loan to any other private financial entity, even at absurd overnight rates. So, the explanation of "taxes due" is laughable in my opinion. Something much bigger happened behind the scenes, and the insolvency claim is backed up by the fact that the 4 biggest investing vehicle companies in the world (Vanguard, BlackRock, Fidelity, and StateStreet) needed repeated bailouts in order to stay afloat. To my knowledge, those 4 did not get bailed out back in 2008.

Sorry for being a bit late to comment on this, but it seems nobody (so far) made a distinction between solvency and liquidity. And when this distinction is not clear, one wonders how the present situation can even exist, let alone for so long.

Extreme situation 1: you have $1M USD in assets, $2M in debt and thus a negative equity (-$1M). As long as your cash-flow pays the bills, you can survive.

Extreme situation 2: you have $2M USD in assets, $1M in debt and thus a positive equity ($1M). But your $2M in assets is an office building, it's empty because everyone works from home and nobody wants to buy it. You can't pay your bills and could go bankrupt if nobody helps.
How is this relevant? Looking at a company's or institution's (e.g. Fed) financials really says little. One company's balance sheet may look great but if the system (e.g. tradfi) wants to kill it, that's not a problem. In a blog post the Shapeshift founder explained for example how banks would refuse to open accounts for them.


View: https://erikvoorhees.medium.com/shapeshift-is-decentralizing-639bb4c82fc8

Inversely, your balance sheet might look like crap (e.g. Tesla Motors) but the system might agree to help you, for example by financing you (Wall Street buying your equity, offering loans, federal & state credits for each vehicle sold etc.) After all since Three Mile Island it has been decided that there is Global Warming (recently renamed Climate Emergency for more flexibility), and this might be one of the future emergencies after the covid stunt. I want to arrest you? Well you're driving a polluting vehicle so I'm arresting you.

Anyway, so the point is that you can't look at how bankrupt a system is, from an accounting point of view, to determine if or when it will die. It's like saying that your neighbor's dog can't hunt so it will die soon. Not necessarily, because as long as somebody with access to food decides to feed this dog, it has a pretty good chance of living its expected lifespan.

A few more things about good things that have been written in this thread, and things that have not been mentioned yet.
@davvid_1 mentioned Richard Werner, the inventor of quantitative easing. Those interested in going down this rabbit hole will find out, by studying his work, that (among other things):

1. You're not the legal owner of the money on your bank account. The bank is. What you have is an IOU.

2. When you get a mortgage from the bank, you're basically the issuer of a security (the mortgage) backed by your property. The security is owned by the bank, so it's like you're a listed company and the bank is the shareholder. Just like a share might pay a dividend, this particular security stipulates that you will pay amortisation and interest every month to the bank. The bank can rehypothecate your mortgage if it wants to.

So to recap: if I deposit $20k in the bank and get a $80k mortgage from the bank to buy a $100k property, I'm actually giving away $20k and promising to pay the bank the monthly amount for the life of the mortgage, in exchange of the bank "printing" (of course neither paper nor ink is involved) $80k. Who wouldn't like to be the bank? Of course, technically I own the property now, so I'm the one paying the property tax and fixing the place, but the property can alway be taken away from me on a technicality, if necessary (see the movie 99 Homes if you doubt that).

Last point, as it hasn't been mentioned yet: the DTCC is the clearinghouse for almost all securities in the US and more than half of the securities in the rest of the world. It settles about 2 quadrillion (2 million billion) per year. And it works with securities owners just like a bank with the client. The DTCC holds your security and tells you it owes you this security. The Trading with the enemy Act (1917) and the Emergency Banking Relief Act (1933), the same laws that made gold confiscation possible, stipulate that should there be a national emergency, the authorities have the option to freeze or confiscate any asset. Since 1917, there have been 71 national emergencies.

But if you split the 104 years in two equal parts, 1917 to 1969 (2 world wars, one Great Depression) had five national emergencies, and 1969-2021 had 66. One could say there is inflation there too. We went from one national emergency per decade to one per semester, so we're probably bound to have several national emergencies per day eventually. So why not confiscate people's Exxon stock, if Exxon is not green enough to your taste? Or your ADRs in Chinese companies, because China is not being nice to Uyghurs. See where I'm going?

So to sum up very briefly: in a world of non-GAAP earnings, fiat money etc. don't look at fundamentals or you'll go mad. The Tesla balance sheet makes sense because the system says so. Shapeshift is not a good project because the system says so. And so on. And with such glasses it all makes immediate sense, and one understands that it can last much longer than previously thought.

Not happy with this? I see three main options: find your way to the top of the system and see if there's anything you can do to change it (good luck), live at the margin of the system ("prepping") – maybe not such a great life, but at least doing something about your situation might lower your stress – or try to create a new system while you let the old system die.

I think some people in the crypto world are trying option 3.
 

IROM

Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2020
Messages
154
And this with @haidut Also, extremely important to remember, the NACs, new asset class of all Nature: land, sea, river, trees, see this https://unlimitedhangout.com/2021/10/investigative-reports/wall-streets-takeover-of-nature-advances-with-launch-of-new-asset-class/. The Banksters will pump the real liquidity into these NACs and crypto, switch over to the new banking system shown on that BIS chart a few pages back, and then crash the old system. Elites will be Eliter and the Serfs Serfer.

The NACs or NFTs of mineral and water assets is major end goal for sure. This is part of the deindustrialization/depopulation program. I believe the Rockefeller toady Maurice Strong, of Privy Council of the Queen of England, had backed a plan for a global resources bank which accounted for all mineral, land, and water resources in the world. This was a plan everyone said was a conspiracy theory. It took much longer than planned but it is coming now.
 
OP
haidut

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
Sorry for being a bit late to comment on this, but it seems nobody (so far) made a distinction between solvency and liquidity. And when this distinction is not clear, one wonders how the present situation can even exist, let alone for so long.

Extreme situation 1: you have $1M USD in assets, $2M in debt and thus a negative equity (-$1M). As long as your cash-flow pays the bills, you can survive.

Extreme situation 2: you have $2M USD in assets, $1M in debt and thus a positive equity ($1M). But your $2M in assets is an office building, it's empty because everyone works from home and nobody wants to buy it. You can't pay your bills and could go bankrupt if nobody helps.
How is this relevant? Looking at a company's or institution's (e.g. Fed) financials really says little. One company's balance sheet may look great but if the system (e.g. tradfi) wants to kill it, that's not a problem. In a blog post the Shapeshift founder explained for example how banks would refuse to open accounts for them.


View: https://erikvoorhees.medium.com/shapeshift-is-decentralizing-639bb4c82fc8

Inversely, your balance sheet might look like crap (e.g. Tesla Motors) but the system might agree to help you, for example by financing you (Wall Street buying your equity, offering loans, federal & state credits for each vehicle sold etc.) After all since Three Mile Island it has been decided that there is Global Warming (recently renamed Climate Emergency for more flexibility), and this might be one of the future emergencies after the covid stunt. I want to arrest you? Well you're driving a polluting vehicle so I'm arresting you.

Anyway, so the point is that you can't look at how bankrupt a system is, from an accounting point of view, to determine if or when it will die. It's like saying that your neighbor's dog can't hunt so it will die soon. Not necessarily, because as long as somebody with access to food decides to feed this dog, it has a pretty good chance of living its expected lifespan.

A few more things about good things that have been written in this thread, and things that have not been mentioned yet.
@davvid_1 mentioned Richard Werner, the inventor of quantitative easing. Those interested in going down this rabbit hole will find out, by studying his work, that (among other things):

1. You're not the legal owner of the money on your bank account. The bank is. What you have is an IOU.

2. When you get a mortgage from the bank, you're basically the issuer of a security (the mortgage) backed by your property. The security is owned by the bank, so it's like you're a listed company and the bank is the shareholder. Just like a share might pay a dividend, this particular security stipulates that you will pay amortisation and interest every month to the bank. The bank can rehypothecate your mortgage if it wants to.

So to recap: if I deposit $20k in the bank and get a $80k mortgage from the bank to buy a $100k property, I'm actually giving away $20k and promising to pay the bank the monthly amount for the life of the mortgage, in exchange of the bank "printing" (of course neither paper nor ink is involved) $80k. Who wouldn't like to be the bank? Of course, technically I own the property now, so I'm the one paying the property tax and fixing the place, but the property can alway be taken away from me on a technicality, if necessary (see the movie 99 Homes if you doubt that).

Last point, as it hasn't been mentioned yet: the DTCC is the clearinghouse for almost all securities in the US and more than half of the securities in the rest of the world. It settles about 2 quadrillion (2 million billion) per year. And it works with securities owners just like a bank with the client. The DTCC holds your security and tells you it owes you this security. The Trading with the enemy Act (1917) and the Emergency Banking Relief Act (1933), the same laws that made gold confiscation possible, stipulate that should there be a national emergency, the authorities have the option to freeze or confiscate any asset. Since 1917, there have been 71 national emergencies.

But if you split the 104 years in two equal parts, 1917 to 1969 (2 world wars, one Great Depression) had five national emergencies, and 1969-2021 had 66. One could say there is inflation there too. We went from one national emergency per decade to one per semester, so we're probably bound to have several national emergencies per day eventually. So why not confiscate people's Exxon stock, if Exxon is not green enough to your taste? Or your ADRs in Chinese companies, because China is not being nice to Uyghurs. See where I'm going?

So to sum up very briefly: in a world of non-GAAP earnings, fiat money etc. don't look at fundamentals or you'll go mad. The Tesla balance sheet makes sense because the system says so. Shapeshift is not a good project because the system says so. And so on. And with such glasses it all makes immediate sense, and one understands that it can last much longer than previously thought.

Not happy with this? I see three main options: find your way to the top of the system and see if there's anything you can do to change it (good luck), live at the margin of the system ("prepping") – maybe not such a great life, but at least doing something about your situation might lower your stress – or try to create a new system while you let the old system die.

I think some people in the crypto world are trying option 3.


It is all nice and fuzzy about option 3, but I would point out the very mechanism you mentioned in regards to the other assets - national emergencies. We have been in one since March 2020. Watch how once CBDC are announced, especially if they are made initially compatible with say top cryptos (BTC, ETH, etc), how anybody who owns, trades, mines, etc unapproved crypto gets declared a major counterfeit currency purveyor and gets dealt with. Also, the idea that cryptos are safe(er) just because they are DeFi and seem to run on a platform that seemingly no single entity controls is unwarranted IMO. The Internet is an abstraction that runs on top of a physical infrastructure that is owned by the major corps and they have simply been "nice" enough to let us use it semi-freely (as in, as we see fit) so far. That is changing by the minute and once digital IDs arrive and you have to present such ID to be allowed to use the Internet, the idea of "independent" crypto on that fully controlled Internet becomes an oxymoron. Yes, black markets will probably pop up here and there, but like any black market they are not serious challengers to the official financial establishment, and can also be controlled quite well if the law is changed to brutally punish everybody involved in them. After all, what are national emergencies for, right? Ham-radio based P2P networks are just not feasible large-scale and can also be effectively outlawed if needed.
So, I don't hold out much hope that crypto will somehow spur freedom. It can contribute, but it can also be a great tool for desensitizing the public to the loss of access to physical assets while conditioning them to do their finance entirely online. Crypto is great while it is literally the Wild West of global finance and serves as an alternative to draw people pushed to the periphery by TradFi. However, like any other "outsider", once it grows to the point of threatening the establishment it gets bought out, destroyed or...becomes the (new) establishment.
The core issue to me is (over)-digitization. Fundamentally, technology is a means for absolute control over an issue/resource/asset/etc. The more we get immersed in digital technology the more we become subject to its properties of absolute control. The answer is not building yet another digital "solution" that still depends and runs on totally controlled digital network, b/c the full control we had over out (digital) assets may suddenly become the govt's full control and we have nothing. Any technology, no matter how secure, cannot be trusted with the keys to the castle if it runs on top of another technology not owned/controlled by the people using it. So, the only viable alternative to me is resisting the digitization as much as possible and relying on "analog" tools like cash, barter, PM, relationships etc for survival. That does not preclude one from also using the digital "MetaVerse" (i.e. Internet) for finance, communication, etc but I just don't see the Internet being a source of fundamental freedoms any more (if it ends up being fully controlled like the elite want it to be), and by extension any new technology that depends entirely on the Internet for delivery on its promises for freedom/benefit.
As far as the peasants (us) not owning any assets, even our cash deposits - yes, this is true and @tankasnowgod posted a good video somewhere on the forum featuring Overstock's CEO explaining this quite well to a full auditorium of econ/finance people who should have known this but were quite surprised to hear it.
As far as liquid/solvent - yes, you are right, and my post should have explained that I meant the system has now transitioned from liquid/solvent to liquid/insolvent. However, in the end I don't think it matters. Even if liquidity is still there, the money-printing trick quickly runs out of steam if there is lack of productive activity, which has been the case for (at least) the last 2+ years. If the top 4 passive investing vehicles in the world are in need of repeated (and ongoing) bailouts (considering they don't, or maybe better to say shouldn't, do any risky business activities of their own), as well as some of the biggest money market funds in the world, their problems cannot be solved by providing unlimited liquidity. IOW, when the very examples of solvency (passive investment funds, aka Grade A investment assets) and liquidity (money market funds) are under water, the printing press is not a solution, only a time-buyer. Hyperinflation quickly sets in and stops that game, and probably even collapses the entire thing as nobody believes in that (fiat) liquidity any more. So, the only question that remains is "how long before the end?" You said an insolvent scam like Tesla can run for a long time if liquidity is there. However, this is just a (albeit very large, by capitalization) single company, and I don't think the same argument can be extended to entire countries. Who will provide the liquidity to the insolvent country - i.e who is the "Wall Street" as in the case of Tesla's source of liquidity?? Back in 2008, it was China that gave a lot of money to Wall Street and contributed heavily to the bailout, but they are in deep (debt and demographic) trouble themselves this time and are not doing it again.
So, what/who is the source of liquidity, if printing has run its course (as is already the case)?
 
Last edited:
OP
haidut

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
Also, extremely important to remember, the NACs, new asset class of all Nature: land, sea, river, trees, see this https://unlimitedhangout.com/2021/10/investigative-reports/wall-streets-takeover-of-nature-advances-with-launch-of-new-asset-class/. The Banksters will pump the real liquidity into these NACs and crypto, switch over to the new banking system shown on that BIS chart a few pages back, and then crash the old system. Elites will be Eliter and the Serfs Serfer.

I wish this had wider publicity. It may bother some of the enviro-sheep into awakening as it shows that the WEF's plans for "own nothing and be happy" are nothing but (pharmacologically- and verbally-induced) delusion for the masses that is a cover for an absolute abomination of nature.
 
Last edited:

Nfinkelstein

Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2020
Messages
318
Also, extremely important to remember, the NACs, new asset class of all Nature: land, sea, river, trees, see this https://unlimitedhangout.com/2021/10/investigative-reports/wall-streets-takeover-of-nature-advances-with-launch-of-new-asset-class/.
In a global financial crisis I imagine that insolvent countries will 'partner' with institutions to vend their natural assets into these vehicles, as a way to raise cash. The countries' citizens will have even less say in their future than they do already. NAC's may be the perfect vehicle for enormous regions particularly in Africa to be absorbed by the elite and milked indefinitely. This would be much worse than when China began leasing millions of hectares of agricultural land from African governments, arguably a win-win between states or state-controlled entities. Conversely these NAC's are not controlled by any state and will/must have paramilitary forces in place to enforce their property rights. Private military forces operating independently of the state. We have already seen how fortune 500 corporations have become vehicles for implementing authoritarian policies which the government itself could never get away with. This is what libertarianism as an economic ideology was always really about, not supporting the people but rather presenting the concept that corporations should have more freedom from government control and that we would all benefit --- in reality what has happened is corporations use governments to enforce their quasi monopolies in order to stifle competition and control social dissent, doing things that governments themselves (in the West) could not get away with. It reminds me of a quote from arch globalist Brzezinski "Nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state" back in 1971.
 
OP
haidut

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
in reality what has happened is corporations use governments to enforce their quasi monopolies in order to stifle competition and control social dissent, doing things that governments themselves (in the West) could not get away with. It reminds me of a quote from arch globalist Brzezinski "Nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state" back in 1971.

I would not be surprised if the WEF (the intellectual HQ of this ideology you mentioned) in-person meeting cancellation for this year was due to security concerns. We are probably far from the only ones seeing the gathering there as a wasp's nest and understand what they have in store for us. A more radical group may have had concrete plans to do something about that gathering and the elite realized meeting in person is not safe any more. Considering they regularly mingle with each other without any masks, I highly doubt it was cancelled due to COVID-19.
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,883
Location
Manila
Playing chess, they've been winning all the rounds.

They've been killing our queen pieces. We have no queen left on the board.

Their queens have stayed unharmed, untouched.
 

mhm

Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Messages
31
It is all nice and fuzzy about option 3, but I would point out the very mechanism you mentioned in regards to the other assets - national emergencies. We have been in one since March 2020. Watch how once CBDC are announced, especially if they are made initially compatible with say top cryptos (BTC, ETH, etc), how anybody who owns, trades, mines, etc unapproved crypto gets declared a major counterfeit currency purveyor and gets dealt with. Also, the idea that cryptos are safe(er) just because they are DeFi and seem to run on a platform that seemingly no single entity controls is unwarranted IMO. The Internet is an abstraction that runs on top of a physical infrastructure that is owned by the major corps and they have simply been "nice" enough to let us use it semi-freely (as in, as we see fit) so far. That is changing by the minute and once digital IDs arrive and you have to present such ID to be allowed to use the Internet, the idea of "independent" crypto on that fully controlled Internet becomes an oxymoron. Yes, black markets will probably pop up here and there, but like any black market they are not serious challengers to the official financial establishment, and can also be controlled quite well if the law is changed to brutally punish everybody involved in them. After all, what are national emergencies for, right? Ham-radio based P2P networks are just not feasible large-scale and can also be effectively outlawed if needed.
So, I don't hold out much hope that crypto will somehow spur freedom. It can contribute, but it can also be a great tool for desensitizing the public to the loss of access to physical assets while conditioning them to do their finance entirely online. Crypto is great while it is literally the Wild West of global finance and serves as an alternative to draw people pushed to the periphery by TradFi. However, like any other "outsider", once it grows to the point of threatening the establishment it gets bought out, destroyed or...becomes the (new) establishment.
The core issue to me is (over)-digitization. Fundamentally, technology is a means for absolute control over an issue/resource/asset/etc. The more we get immersed in digital technology the more we become subject to its properties of absolute control. The answer is not building yet another digital "solution" that still depends and runs on totally controlled digital network, b/c the full control we had over out (digital) assets may suddenly become the govt's full control and we have nothing. Any technology, no matter how secure, cannot be trusted with the keys to the castle if it runs on top of another technology not owned/controlled by the people using it. So, the only viable alternative to me is resisting the digitization as much as possible and relying on "analog" tools like cash, barter, PM, relationships etc for survival. That does not preclude one from also using the digital "MetaVerse" (i.e. Internet) for finance, communication, etc but I just don't see the Internet being a source of fundamental freedoms any more (if it ends up being fully controlled like the elite want it to be), and by extension any new technology that depends entirely on the Internet for delivery on its promises for freedom/benefit.
As far as the peasants (us) not owning any assets, even our cash deposits - yes, this is true and @tankasnowgod posted a good video somewhere on the forum featuring Overstock's CEO explaining this quite well to a full auditorium of econ/finance people who should have known this but were quite surprised to hear it.
As far as liquid/solvent - yes, you are right, and my post should have explained that I meant the system has now transitioned from liquid/solvent to liquid/insolvent. However, in the end I don't think it matters. Even if liquidity is still there, the money-printing trick quickly runs out of steam if there is lack of productive activity, which has been the case for (at least) the last 2+ years. If the top 4 passive investing vehicles in the world are in need of repeated (and ongoing) bailouts (considering they don't, or maybe better to say shouldn't, do any risky business activities of their own), as well as some of the biggest money market funds in the world, their problems cannot be solved by providing unlimited liquidity. IOW, when the very examples of solvency (passive investment funds, aka Grade A investment assets) and liquidity (money market funds) are under water, the printing press is not a solution, only a time-buyer. Hyperinflation quickly sets in and stops that game, and probably even collapses the entire thing as nobody believes in that (fiat) liquidity any more. So, the only question that remains is "how long before the end?" You said an insolvent scam like Tesla can run for a long time if liquidity is there. However, this is just a (albeit very large, by capitalization) single company, and I don't think the same argument can be extended to entire countries. Who will provide the liquidity to the insolvent country - i.e who is the "Wall Street" as in the case of Tesla's source of liquidity?? Back in 2008, it was China that gave a lot of money to Wall Street and contributed heavily to the bailout, but they are in deep (debt and demographic) trouble themselves this time and are not doing it again.
So, what/who is the source of liquidity, if printing has run its course (as is already the case)?

I agree with you on all counts, except for a very small part of it, but I do think this part may matter. I think crypto has two components: one component that you could call the marketers or bullshitters, they are noise and take about 99% of the bandwidth. I'm guessing that's why you call it warm & fuzzy, I agree but it's "only" the 99%, not the 100%. The 1% left are the engineers building projects that could stand a chance.

The reason why I feel this is important is because money has been broken since the Suez Canal crisis and its monetary consequences (birth of the "eurodollar"). The system was rotten since then but survived a while until the Nixon shock. Since then it's been 100% bull**** (blabla). Zero engineering (which you could argue the Bretton Woods system had some, albeit perhaps only 1%). For those unfamiliar with this, a good recent podcast about the topic is here: https://whatismoneypodcast.com/epis...dence-game-the-snider-series-episode-6-wim106

I may add, somewhat cunningly, that consuming the life-saving products I get from Idealabs may take 1% of my time on a regular day, but has a huge effect on my health and well-being for most of the day. These compounds seem to have been engineered by someone who tirelessly works on efficient stuff in a world full (let's say at least 99%) of big Pharma and self-anointed health podcasters bull****. This forum, while perhaps not perfect nor populated by only people who get it right, is another example.

So I get the "there is little hope" part, and my message is just slightly more hopeful, maybe something like "it's not impossible but we have to focus and stick together if we want a shot at this". One example: the BitTorrent protocol. Not much, but something. The WEF and Fed and Bill Gates of the world have been unable to shut the protocol down. Why? Because it uses the same logic as Google (not being a repository, but a gateway to stuff). For those unfamiliar with the concept, a documentary about it here
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTOKXCEwo_8


Then, always going for the carotid, you correctly add the whole digital ID topic to the debate, a crucial issue for sure. I'd say 2 things about that. First, if the entities issuing passports can't print money anymore, maybe that can bring change. Second, have you noticed how governments are always more shifting to private or shady structures? They do that because they don't want to be accountable.

One current example: can anyone tell me the legal structure of the FATF (Financial Action Task Force - Wikipedia), which dictates the money laws? Nobody can. Because it's not a legal existing entity. Legally, it's a ghost. If you don't believe me, try to subpoena them. Yet they decide the money laws.

So my point is this: if the government is dissolving into either a group of corporations (the Fed is a private entity, yet it's not federal and has no reserves to speak of) or, even worse (or better, depending on your point of view), a group of unaccountable not-legally-existing entities, it's entirely possible that private/crypto digital ID efforts (let's say something like Verus - Truth and Privacy for All) become, if successful enough, forces to reckon with.

It's an uphill, narrow and long path to be sure. And, assuming there's a way, perhaps only a few or even none of us will still be there to see it happen, but what else are we going to do with our time except try to help build something that works long term?
 

Mauritio

Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2018
Messages
5,669
From an investor's standpoint wouldn't it be easy to make some cash from these NAC's and stuff like carbon credits. It's almost guaranteed to grow and succeed; not because it's good, simply because the elite is behind it and pushed it?
 

mhm

Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Messages
31
From an investor's standpoint wouldn't it be easy to make some cash from these NAC's and stuff like carbon credits. It's almost guaranteed to grow and succeed; not because it's good, simply because the elite is behind it and pushed it?

Yes it's very easy. One strategy is describe here: A Banana Worth Squeezing

TLDR: the penalty fine is €110 for not respecting CO2 quotas and the price of offsetting is €86.20, so it makes sense for the contract to gain 28% at least from this point on. I'm pretty sure leverage can be used too, although few people understand the risks of leverage beyond a 2x leverage, but that's an entire topic to itself, so let's not get into this here.
 

AlaskaJono

Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2020
Messages
940
GREAT thread fellow RayPeaters. Thanks. I am learning a lot, and learning how the financial meltdown happened and how it is going to morph (most probably) in the near future. On a positive note I recently got heard of some folks who are creating a parallel system. We each and everyone of us would do well to create/find/participate in such endevours.

@mhm == "So my point is this: if the government is dissolving into either a group of corporations (the Fed is a private entity, yet it's not federal and has no reserves to speak of) or, even worse (or better, depending on your point of view), a group of unaccountable not-legally-existing entities, it's entirely possible that private/crypto digital ID efforts (let's say something like Verus - Truth and Privacy for All) become, if successful enough, forces to reckon with."

YEAH - How can these groups/entities control Nation States around the world?!! Lockstep, UN, WHO, although the countries don't always follow the advice of WHO, but... they are all following the same script. So, WTF ? What can we do about it? (Serious Question).

Another similar situation is the Codex Alimentarius. I will get to that in a few... short while.

In a global financial crisis I imagine that insolvent countries will 'partner' with institutions to vend their natural assets into these vehicles, as a way to raise cash. The countries' citizens will have even less say in their future than they do already. NAC's may be the perfect vehicle for enormous regions particularly in Africa to be absorbed by the elite and milked indefinitely. This would be much worse than when China began leasing millions of hectares of agricultural land from African governments, arguably a win-win between states or state-controlled entities. Conversely these NAC's are not controlled by any state and will/must have paramilitary forces in place to enforce their property rights. Private military forces operating independently of the state. We have already seen how fortune 500 corporations have become vehicles for implementing authoritarian policies which the government itself could never get away with. This is what libertarianism as an economic ideology was always really about, not supporting the people but rather presenting the concept that corporations should have more freedom from government control and that we would all benefit --- in reality what has happened is corporations use governments to enforce their quasi monopolies in order to stifle competition and control social dissent, doing things that governments themselves (in the West) could not get away with. It reminds me of a quote from arch globalist Brzezinski "Nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state" back in 1971
In Australia we are already seeing the police 'enforce' Covid Rules in places, and at times the military helped out. By just being present for the most part. (Also France/Holland videos of protests etc.) Recent events in Northern Territories may have increased the presence or use of these armed forces. I do not know yet.

Big Picture: It seems like a non-elected group is already successful in getting Nation States /Politicians on board and subservient, and use assets and employees of the Nation States to fulfill the NWO plans. And have gotten individuals to police and self-police as well through effective Psy-Ops. All of it so very cost effective. And who is responsible?
 

Mauritio

Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2018
Messages
5,669
Yes it's very easy. One strategy is describe here: A Banana Worth Squeezing

TLDR: the penalty fine is €110 for not respecting CO2 quotas and the price of offsetting is €86.20, so it makes sense for the contract to gain 28% at least from this point on. I'm pretty sure leverage can be used too, although few people understand the risks of leverage beyond a 2x leverage, but that's an entire topic to itself, so let's not get into this here.
Interesting. I put about 10% of my portfolio in carbon credits/ streaming . When I researched it I noticed some of the companies are operating on a hypothesis that is very shaky. Their way of pumping C02 under ground simply might not work and have side effects on the environment. But it's not about real value in the stock markets it only matters if people think something has value/ momentum .
 
L

Lord Cola

Guest
Playing chess, they've been winning all the rounds.

They've been killing our queen pieces. We have no queen left on the board.

Their queens have stayed unharmed, untouched.
What were our queen pieces before covid?
 

mhm

Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Messages
31
YEAH - How can these groups/entities control Nation States around the world?!! Lockstep, UN, WHO, although the countries don't always follow the advice of WHO, but... they are all following the same script. So, WTF ? What can we do about it? (Serious Question).

Big Picture: It seems like a non-elected group is already successful in getting Nation States /Politicians on board and subservient, and use assets and employees of the Nation States to fulfill the NWO plans. And have gotten individuals to police and self-police as well through effective Psy-Ops. All of it so very cost effective. And who is responsible?

Again, IMO it's not about what's right or legal, it's about what works for those in control. As you notice, nobody's complaining, or better said: those complaining don't matter to them (e.g. yellow vests in France). Wanna get rid of demonstrations? Impose a lockdown. It's that simple. And if nobody complied, it would end, it's that simple.

In Santa Cruz CA there was this surfer dude David Rodriguez and his surfer friends who went surfing during the lockdown. The local police had no way to go and catch them all in the water, nor did they have the time to wait for them to get tired of surfing. So the mayor of Santa Cruz cancelled the lockdown, arguing that people were not obeying. This is the way to do it. Except the authorities ended up making David Rodriguez's life miserable, as he was identified as the leader in this movement. So you can change things locally, but then you may end up being better off moving to someplace else if you're a leader.

Other solution: do it the Satoshi Nakamoto way. When the leader is a pseudonym and nobody knows who it really is, payback becomes difficult. This is why I mentioned decentralized protocols like BitTorrent, with no leader, as a resilient potential alternative.
 

mhm

Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Messages
31
Interesting. I put about 10% of my portfolio in carbon credits/ streaming . When I researched it I noticed some of the companies are operating on a hypothesis that is very shaky. Their way of pumping C02 under ground simply might not work and have side effects on the environment. But it's not about real value in the stock markets it only matters if people think something has value/ momentum .

Agreed, the so-called solutions are mostly a joke, if not making things worse. But Al Gore became a billionaire pushing these solutions and getting a Nobel prize and such, so who cares if the solution is a joke?

Reminds me of a joke. A pants manufacturer calls a pants trader: Peter, want to buy a container with 10'000 pants? It's $1 apiece, total $10k. Sure, says Peter. Then Peter calls Joe: want to buy a container, 10'000 pants $2 apiece, total $20k? Sure, says Joe. Then Joe calls Jack: wanna buy a 10'000 pants container for $4 apiece? Sure, says Jack. A couple of days later, Jack calls Joe: I just got your pants, I can't do anything with them, those are one-legged pants. Joe says: Jack, you idiot, those pants are not for wearing, they're for trading!
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,883
Location
Manila
What were our queen pieces before covid?
They've long been eliminated in the 60s. Charles de Gaulle, JFK, RFK, MLK Jr, Malcolm X.

All assassinated.

None of the other side were assassinated. They have heirs to carry on their intergenerational plunder of the human race.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom