The stock market likely compromised/fraudulent to its core

[haidut]

Kudos to @tankasnowgod who clued me in on how exactly buying/selling stocks works in the Western world. Two entities - DTC and Cede & Co. control the whole scheme and when you "buy" or "sell" stock no actual stocks change hands unless you are selling the paper stock certificates physically, which is probably one in a million occurrence. The vast majority of stock buy/sell actions are indirect/virtual and the actual stocks and transactions are all in the names of Cede & Co, and the actual "trades" are being executed by DTC by simply changing account balances in its own systems. Well, as it usually happens, with so much power comes a great temptation to abuse it. And it seems DTC / Cede & Co could not resist that temptation and implemented the biggest "naked short" selling the world has ever seen, all on the backs of their clients.
To those who don't realize it yet, if you "own" any stock, whether personally or through a retirement account/fund, you actually own nothing unless you have the paper stock certificates in your possession! The actual "master" stock certificates for all stocks traded on the exchanges are owned by Cede & Co, which is owned by DTC, which is owned by DTCC. So, who owns DTCC? A handful of "elite" Wall Street banks. So, Wall Street very literally exists for the sole purpose of 100% illegally manipulating publicly traded companies, (even destroying them, if needed) while also ensuring that nobody (except them) really owns any stocks. Unfortunately, same goes for cash on deposit, as deposit accounts in most banks are legally under the names of "John Doe". The actual names on the accounts matching the names of the depositors are legally void/meaningless. So, the bank owns the actual deposits, not the person who deposited the money there.

Maybe @tankasnowgod can share that video with the former OverStock CEO who explains the whole thing much more clearly than I can.
@Amarsh213


View: https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/mvk5dv/a_house_of_cards_part_1/

"...TLDR: The DTC has been taken over by big money. They transitioned from a manual to a computerized ledger system in the 80s, and it played a significant role in the 1987 market crash. In 2003, several issuers with the DTC wanted to remove their securities from the DTC's deposit account because the DTC's participants were naked short selling their securities. Turns out, they were right. The DTC and it's participants have created a market-sized naked short selling scheme. All of this is made possible by the DTC's enrollee- Cede & Co."

 

[theloge]

I recently learned this as well. I read it here: Who Owns America? CEDE & DTCC • Banking, Currency & Money, Learn • RedPillReports.com.

It is explained quite well

 

[Mito]

no actual stocks change hands unless you are selling the paper stock certificates physically, which is probably one in a million occurrence.

You can request a paper certificate and the company is legally required to provide it, but like you said no one does it.

 

[Ismail]

Yes me too, someone recently mentioned the exact same thing about stock ownership (or lack thereof!).

Absolute madness!

You explained it very well @haidut, thank you.

 

[Ismail]

You can request a paper certificate and the company is legally required to provide it, but like you said no one does it.

If I'm not mistaken, it's a slightly cumbersome procedure (or so they have made it to be), I have a friend who specifically does this through a trading company in the Netherlands (if I remember correctly).

 

[tankasnowgod]

Maybe @tankasnowgod can share that video with the former OverStock CEO who explains the whole thing much more clearly than I can.

Here is the original Patrick Bryne Speech at CATO in 2014 where he goes over the system-

32nd Annual Monetary Conference: Keynote

Featuring Patrick Byrne

www.cato.org

Byrne gave an updated speech in 2016 at CATO where he covered a lot of the same material-

Cryptocurrency: The Policy Challenges of a Decentralized Revolution - Luncheon Address

Featuring Patrick Byrne

www.cato.org

 

[gaze]

the reason the whole gamestop thing occurred was because hedge funds were shorting the stock 140%....meaning that more shares were being shorted than even exist. they're literally creating shares out of thin air to short which pushes down the price of the stock, so all the hedge funds make money when gamestop goes bankrupt. of course it didn't cause reddit found out about it, and the entire situation is still super shady.

 

[haidut]

I recently learned this as well. I read it here: Who Owns America? CEDE & DTCC • Banking, Currency & Money, Learn • RedPillReports.com.

It is explained quite well

Thanks, a great summary indeed. I bet most Americans have never heard of these facts. I just asked a friend of mine (who has worked in finance in 30+ years) about this and initially he snapped at me but upon digging further into it he said "crap, it seems to be true".

 

[haidut]

the reason the whole gamestop thing occurred was because hedge funds were shorting the stock 140%....meaning that more shares were being shorted than even exist. they're literally creating shares out of thin air to short which pushes down the price of the stock, so all the hedge funds make money when gamestop goes bankrupt. of course it didn't cause reddit found out about it, and the entire situation is still super shady.

That was actually the main point of my post - not so much that stock trading is not what it seems and is literally owned by DTC/Cede, but that those companies (and their Wall Street owners) used their position of absolute power to do 100% illegal trades, which may very well have caused most/all of the financial crises since 1987.

 

[haidut]

Here is the original Patrick Bryne Speech at CATO in 2014 where he goes over the system-

32nd Annual Monetary Conference: Keynote

Featuring Patrick Byrne

www.cato.org

Byrne gave an updated speech in 2016 at CATO where he covered a lot of the same material-

Cryptocurrency: The Policy Challenges of a Decentralized Revolution - Luncheon Address

Featuring Patrick Byrne

www.cato.org

Do any of these links describe the "John Doe" issue with personal deposits? I have not been able to find definitive evidence on who owns the named deposit accounts at US banks. Though, with recent legal changes mandating "bail-ins" before bailouts are even considered for troubled banks, the money in those depositor accounts are indeed effectively owned by the banks and not the depositors.

 

[gaze]

That was actually the main point of my post - not so much that stock trading is not what it seems and is literally owned by DTC/Cede, but that those companies (and their Wall Street owners) used their position of absolute power to do 100% illegal trades, which may very well have caused most/all of the financial crises since 1987.

have you read about what happened with the archegos situation where that fund lost billions in 2 days and crashed 2 stocks over 50%? CFDs - The Dirty Little Secret Behind The Collapse Of Archegos | ZeroHedge essentially funds are buying stocks on complete leverege, and then the banks from which they are loaning from use those same stocks as collateral for money from another bank. So like 5 banks are tied together based off one fund buying stocks on leverege. In 2008, Lehman brothers and AIG were using subprime mortgage backed securities as collateral and all of sudden people realized they were junk so they went bankrupt in a day trying to pay back money. Now funds are using junk credit derivatives and these CFDs like archegos did as collateral so the stock market is teetering on potential collapse the same way it was in 2008. Rehypothecated Leverage: How Archegos Built A $100 Billion Portfolio Out Of Thin Air... And Then Blew Up | ZeroHedge

 

[haidut]

have you read about what happened with the archegos situation where that fund lost billions in 2 days and crashed 2 stocks over 50%? CFDs - The Dirty Little Secret Behind The Collapse Of Archegos | ZeroHedge essentially funds are buying stocks on complete leverege, and then the banks from which they are loaning from use those same stocks as collateral for money from another bank. So like 5 banks are tied together based off one fund buying stocks on leverege. In 2008, Lehman brothers and AIG were using subprime mortgage backed securities as collateral and all of sudden people realized they were junk so they went bankrupt in a day trying to pay back money. Now funds are using junk credit derivatives and these CFDs like archegos did as collateral so the stock market is teetering on potential collapse the same way it was in 2008. Rehypothecated Leverage: How Archegos Built A $100 Billion Portfolio Out Of Thin Air... And Then Blew Up | ZeroHedge

Yep, saw the Archegos debacle and word in DC is that the "Plunge Protection Team" loaned money to whomever (in WallStreet) needed it to avoid flash-collapse ala 2008. So, nothing has changed since 2008 except the bubble is much bigger this time and there is no defusing it...except though destruction of much of the world'd economy so the insolvent WallStreet firms can buy assets for pennies and raise their asset/debt ratio (which explains the "pandemic" perfectly)...for a few years and then the whole thing starts again.
Anyways, my bigger concern here is not even that WallStreet banks create fraudulent derivatives but that the overarching stock owner of all public traded stock (Cede & Co) as well as the clearinghouse (DTC) have been engaging in 100% illegal "naked short" selling for decades and on top of that are refusing to return stock (as per the Reddit link) to the companies who issued it and want it back. That's so illegal even a bum on the street will see it, yet SEC is all crickets about this ongoing practice that has produced 4 global financial crises so far. Basically, there is no market. It's only the "Fed" and whoever owns it, which is DTCC and its owners (unnammed/unnnamable WallStreet firms).

 

[gaze]

Yep, saw the Archegos debacle and word in DC is that the "Plunge Protection Team" loaned money to whomever (in WallStreet) needed it to avoid flash-collapse ala 2008. So, nothing has changed since 2008 except the bubble is much bigger this time and there is no defusing it...except though destruction of much of the world'd economy so the insolvent WallStreet firms can buy assets for pennies and raise their asset/debt ratio (which explains the "pandemic" perfectly)...for a few years and then the whole thing starts again.

if you get the time this book on the collapse of money in weimar germany is worth the read https://recision.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/jens-parsson-dying-of-money-24.pdf

"Side by side with the wealth were the pockets of poverty. Greater numbers of people remained on the outside of the easy money, looking in but not able to enter. The crime rate soared. Although unemployment became virtually nonexistent and many of the workers were able to keep up with the inflation through their unions,their bargaining, and their cost-of-living escalator clauses, other workers fell behind the rising cost of living in to real poverty. Salaried and white-collar workers lost ground in the same way. Even while total production rose, each individual's own efforts faltered and showed a measurable decline, and the quality of production deteriorated. Accounts of the time tell of a progressive demoralization which crept over the common people,compounded of their weariness with the breakneck pace, to no visible purpose, and their fears from watching their own precarious positions slip while others grew so conspicuously rich. Feelings of disunity and dissent were epidemic among the Germans, and nationalism among them was never weaker. Regional separatism was so strong that it came close to breaking up Germany into fragments.

Along with the paradoxical wealth and poverty, other characteristics were masked by the boom and less easy to see until after it had destroyed itself. One was the difference between mere feverish activity, which did certainly exist, and real prosperity which appeared, but only appeared, to be the same thing. There was no unemployment, but there was vast spurious employment — activity in unproductive or useless pursuits. The ratio of office and administrative workers to production workers rose out of all control. Paperwork and paper workers proliferated. Government workers abounded, and heavy restraints against layoffs and discharges kept multitudes of redundant employees ostensibly employed. The incessant labor disputes and collective bargaining consumed great amounts of time and effort. Whole industries of fringe activities, chains of middlemen, and an undergrowth of general economic hangers-on sprang up. Almost any kind of business could make money. Business failures and bankruptcies became few. The boom suspended the normal processes of natural selection by which the nonessential and ineffective otherwise would have been culled out. Practically all of this vanished after the inflation blew itself out.

Speculation alone, while adding nothing to Germany's wealth, became one of its largest activities. The fever to join in turning a quick mark infected nearly all classes, and the effort expended in simply buying and selling the paper titles to wealth was enormous. Everyone from the elevator operator up was playing the market. The volumes of turnover in securities on the Berlin Bourse became so high that the financial industry could not keep up with the paperwork, even with greatly swollen staffs of back-office employees, and the Bourse was obliged to close several days a week to work off the backlog."


sound familiar?

 

[tankasnowgod]

Do any of these links describe the "John Doe" issue with personal deposits? I have not been able to find definitive evidence on who owns the named deposit accounts at US banks. Though, with recent legal changes mandating "bail-ins" before bailouts are even considered for troubled banks, the money in those depositor accounts are indeed effectively owned by the banks and not the depositors.

Are you referring to the All Caps Strawman?

As an example, say your name is John Smith. You sent up a Trust, called the John Smith Trust, and you also have business, called the The JS Company. If you have bank accounts for the John Smith Trust and The JS Company, they technically aren't "your" accounts, even if you are a signer, as they are considered different entities or persons.

From what I understand, "personal" accounts are no different that the previous two. They don't bear the name of the man or living soul, John Smith, but instead the name of JOHN SMITH. It's not "you," but a legal fiction setup for "you" to conduct business with banks and others in the business world. Kinda like an avatar in a video game. While you can interact with a video game, you will never be "in it," or "part of it," no matter how immersive the experience.

Here is an essay about this by Moses Washington, ready by Yusef El-


View: https://www.bitchute.com/video/WEzYgbwr50Cm/


If you start looking for it, you will see the difference in a lot of places (John Smith vs. JOHN SMITH).

If you get a statement or bill from a bank or credit card company, you'll see it's addressed to JOHN SMITH, but if that same bank or credit card company is trying to persuade you to open a new account, you will see it addressed to John Smith.

 

[haidut]

Are you referring to the All Caps Strawman?

As an example, say your name is John Smith. You sent up a Trust, called the John Smith Trust, and you also have business, called the The JS Company. If you have bank accounts for the John Smith Trust and The JS Company, they technically aren't "your" accounts, even if you are a signer, as they are considered different entities or persons.

From what I understand, "personal" accounts are no different that the previous two. They don't bear the name of the man or living soul, John Smith, but instead the name of JOHN SMITH. It's not "you," but a legal fiction setup for "you" to conduct business with banks and others in the business world. Kinda like an avatar in a video game. While you can interact with a video game, you will never be "in it," or "part of it," no matter how immersive the experience.

Here is an essay about this by Moses Washington, ready by Yusef El-


View: https://www.bitchute.com/video/WEzYgbwr50Cm/


If you start looking for it, you will see the difference in a lot of places (John Smith vs. JOHN SMITH).

If you get a statement or bill from a bank or credit card company, you'll see it's addressed to JOHN SMITH, but if that same bank or credit card company is trying to persuade you to open a new account, you will see it addressed to John Smith.

Yep, that's what I was looking for, thanks.
So, basically, the banks are trying to buy themselves legal immunity (at least on paper) if they decide at some point to appropriate depositor accounts. If those people come back with a lawsuit (and the govt does not intervene to save the bank) the bank will just say "these accounts are not THEIRS to start with".

 

[HumanLife]

It’s still looking like Cryptocurrency is the future of investment more and more.

 

[PxD]

have you read about what happened with the archegos situation where that fund lost billions in 2 days and crashed 2 stocks over 50%? CFDs - The Dirty Little Secret Behind The Collapse Of Archegos | ZeroHedge essentially funds are buying stocks on complete leverege, and then the banks from which they are loaning from use those same stocks as collateral for money from another bank. So like 5 banks are tied together based off one fund buying stocks on leverege. In 2008, Lehman brothers and AIG were using subprime mortgage backed securities as collateral and all of sudden people realized they were junk so they went bankrupt in a day trying to pay back money. Now funds are using junk credit derivatives and these CFDs like archegos did as collateral so the stock market is teetering on potential collapse the same way it was in 2008. Rehypothecated Leverage: How Archegos Built A $100 Billion Portfolio Out Of Thin Air... And Then Blew Up | ZeroHedge

Mmmmm....leverage and re-hypothecation...my favorite kind of financial flimflamery. Everyone is "wealthy" until suddenly they aren't.

 

[PxD]

if you get the time this book on the collapse of money in weimar germany is worth the read https://recision.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/jens-parsson-dying-of-money-24.pdf

"Side by side with the wealth were the pockets of poverty. Greater numbers of people remained on the outside of the easy money, looking in but not able to enter. The crime rate soared. Although unemployment became virtually nonexistent and many of the workers were able to keep up with the inflation through their unions,their bargaining, and their cost-of-living escalator clauses, other workers fell behind the rising cost of living in to real poverty. Salaried and white-collar workers lost ground in the same way. Even while total production rose, each individual's own efforts faltered and showed a measurable decline, and the quality of production deteriorated. Accounts of the time tell of a progressive demoralization which crept over the common people,compounded of their weariness with the breakneck pace, to no visible purpose, and their fears from watching their own precarious positions slip while others grew so conspicuously rich. Feelings of disunity and dissent were epidemic among the Germans, and nationalism among them was never weaker. Regional separatism was so strong that it came close to breaking up Germany into fragments.

Along with the paradoxical wealth and poverty, other characteristics were masked by the boom and less easy to see until after it had destroyed itself. One was the difference between mere feverish activity, which did certainly exist, and real prosperity which appeared, but only appeared, to be the same thing. There was no unemployment, but there was vast spurious employment — activity in unproductive or useless pursuits. The ratio of office and administrative workers to production workers rose out of all control. Paperwork and paper workers proliferated. Government workers abounded, and heavy restraints against layoffs and discharges kept multitudes of redundant employees ostensibly employed. The incessant labor disputes and collective bargaining consumed great amounts of time and effort. Whole industries of fringe activities, chains of middlemen, and an undergrowth of general economic hangers-on sprang up. Almost any kind of business could make money. Business failures and bankruptcies became few. The boom suspended the normal processes of natural selection by which the nonessential and ineffective otherwise would have been culled out. Practically all of this vanished after the inflation blew itself out.

Speculation alone, while adding nothing to Germany's wealth, became one of its largest activities. The fever to join in turning a quick mark infected nearly all classes, and the effort expended in simply buying and selling the paper titles to wealth was enormous. Everyone from the elevator operator up was playing the market. The volumes of turnover in securities on the Berlin Bourse became so high that the financial industry could not keep up with the paperwork, even with greatly swollen staffs of back-office employees, and the Bourse was obliged to close several days a week to work off the backlog."


sound familiar?

I presume this is about the notoriously degenerate Weimar Republic?

Those second and third paragraphs are America in 2021. Our modern equivalents of spurious employment are the gig-economy outfits (Uber, Doordash, WeWork, etc.) and then we have our Robinhood crowd (speculation fever) as well as masses of government employees. Look at IPOs hitting the stock market the past couple of years - profitless IPOs are higher than ever.

18% of American GDP is the bloated, wasteful healthcare/sickcare.

Another 20% or so goes to food and Americans' love of eating out at restaurants, plus bread and circuses entertainment nonsense - Kaepernick/LeBron and their $100 million contracts. Another 20% is the mostly deadweight of FedGov.

I don't think much of tangible physical value is actually produced here save for MIC products, corn, and soybeans.

 

[achillea]

Yep, that's what I was looking for, thanks.
So, basically, the banks are trying to buy themselves legal immunity (at lat on paper) if they decide at some point to appropriate depositor accounts. If those people come back with a lawsuit (and the govt does not intervene to save the bank) the bank will just say "these accounts are not THEIRS to start with".

Another word is “name”. Name is “A word or set of words by which a person or thing is known, addressed, or referred to”32.

Capitis Diminutio Minima (a minimum loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. John Doe) - The lowest or least comprehensive degree of loss of status. This occurred where a man's family relations alone were changed. It happened upon the arrogation [pride] of a person who had been his own master, (sui juris,) [of his own right, not under any legal disability] or upon the emancipation of one who had been under the patria potestas. [Parental authority] It left the rights of liberty and citizenship unaltered. See Inst. 1, 16, pr.; 1, 2, 3; Dig. 4, 5, 11; Mackeld. Rom.Law, 144.​

Sui iuris, commonly also spelled sui juris, is a Latin phrase that literally means “of one’s own laws”. In civil law the phrase sui juris indicates legal competence, the capacity to manage one’s own affairs (Black's Law Dictionary, Oxford English Dictionary). It also implies someone who is capable of suing and/or being sued in a legal proceeding in their own name, without the need of an ad litem. (ATTORNEY/LAWYER)​

Thus in Roman law the caregiver or guardian of a spendthrift (prodigus) or of a person of unsound mind (furiosus), and, particularly, one who takes charge of the estate of an adolescens, i.e. of a person sui juris, above the age of a pupillus, fourteen or twelve years (boys and girls, respectively), and below the full age of twenty-five. Such persons were known as minors, i.e. minores viginti quinque annis. While the tutor, the guardian of the pupillus, was said to be appointed for the care of the person, the curator took charge of the property.



In Roman law only the "Pater Familias" - or 'head of the family' - could enter into legally binding contracts. "Filii" ("sons", although it actually meant all other male members of the extended family) women, and slaves were "Capitis diminutio" - literally "less than the head" - and were not able to do so. "Capitis Diminutio Maxima" was someone who was out of all status - they were imprisoned and stripped of citizenship. "Capitis Diminutio Minima" was basically every male other than a "Pater Familias".



The testator’s capacity is required at two periods: at the time of making the will and at the time of the testator’s death. The strict civil law also required the continuance of capacity during the interval between these dates: but the praetor disregarded any intervening incapacity (capitis diminutio minima), and, notwithstanding such an event, gave the will efficacy by granting to the heir, not the civil hereditas (which was beyond his power), but juxta-tabular possession (bonorum possessio juxta or secundum tabulas), §§ 145-147, comm., Ulpian 23, 6. Dig. 37, 11, 1, 8 Exigit praetor ut is cujus bonorum possessio datur utroque tempore jus testamenti faciendi habuerit, et quum facit testamentum et *** moritur. . . . Sed si quis utroque tempore testamenti factionem habuerit, medio tempore non habuerit, bonorum possessio secundum tabulas peti poterit.



Two other cases of incapacity were cured by the principle of postliminy and the lex Cornelia testamentaria: if a testator suffered capitis diminutio maxima by falling into the hands of the enemy, when he returned from captivity his will reacquired validity by the operation of postliminy: if he never returned his will obtained validity by the fiction that he died a moment before his capture. Dig. 28, 3, 6, 12 Quatenus tamen diximus ab hostibus capti testamentum irritum fieri, adjiciendum est postliminio reversi vires suas recipere jure postliminii, aut si ibi decedat, lege Cornelia confirmari. Dig. 49, 15, 18 In omnibus partibus juris, is, qui reversus non est ab hostibus, quasi tunc decessisse videtur, *** captus est. Ulpian, 23, 5.33



The English word “autonomous” is derived from the Ancient Greek αυτονόμος (from autos - self, and nomos - law) which corresponds to the Latin "sui iuris".



Brief summary: So Capitus diminutio Minima is your lawful Christian name that was given to you at birth with no rights abridged having the capacity to handle your own affairs in respect to all things only answerable to YHWH.

Capitis Diminutio Media​

Capitis Diminutio Media (a medium loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. John DOE) - A lessor or medium loss of status. This occurred where a man loses his rights of citizenship, but without losing his liberty. It carried away also the family rights.

Capitis Diminutio Maxima​

Capitis Diminutio Maxima (a maximum loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. JOHN DOE or DOE JOHN) - The highest or most comprehensive loss of status. This occurred when a man's condition was changed from one of freedom to one of bondage, when he became a slave. It swept away with it all rights of citizenship and all family rights.

Diminutio. Lat. In civil law. Diminution; a taking away; loss or depravation.

Capite. - Lat. By the head.



As Black's Law Dictionary explains, the full capitalization of the letters of one's natural name (Capitonym), results in a diminishing or complete loss of legal or citizenship status, wherein one actually becomes a slave or an item of inventory. The method, by which the State causes a natural man to "volunteer" himself into slavery, is through forming legal joinder, implied or stated, with the entity or legal fiction (name all CAPS, or Capitonym). Of course, most natural persons wouldn't willingly form such an unlawful but legally reductionist joinder, so trickery and obfuscation are used. The initial joinder is formed when a legal Birth Certificate is issued by the State, name in all CAPS. Of course, most natural persons wouldn’t willingly form such an unlawful but legally reductionist joinder, so trickery and obfuscation are used. The initial joinder is formed when a legal Birth Certificate is issued by the State, name in all CAPS. In fact, both the Certificate of Amistad Schooner’s manifest or those numbers or records used by legal entities or Corporations to track, account for, use and dispose of inventory. It is under the Admiralty jurisdiction Terri Schiavo’s fate was determined, and under this alien fictional jurisdiction many of today’s legal or other fictional entities such as "gay marriages" are fabricated. Commensurate with color of law, they appear to "be," but they are not. Indeed, under common law and the American Constitution, "gay marriage" is unlawful and an oxymoron (contradiction). This, no legal maneuver can change. Whereas one may have legal recourse in a Corporate or Admiralty Court, no lawful or moral remedy will be found. Administrative directives of the legal tribunal or Admiralty jurisdiction, while having the color or appearance of law, may be legal but are in fact unlawful due to the nature or status of the Court’s origin, which is predicated upon fiction. Admiralty Courts are in effect vastly inferior to the intentions and authority of those who founded the American Constitutional Republic. When searching America today, one would be hard pressed to locate an authentic Constitutional or Common law Court. This unlawful condition prevails in both Canada and the United States. A serious breech of Constitutional fidelity surfaced recently, when it was discovered Judges in Oregon were not properly sworn to uphold the Oregon Constitution and therefore were acting without Constitutional authority. The Courts and Judges in question, therefore, represent an alien power or entity.

 

[Deleted member 5487]

Kudos to @tankasnowgod who clued me in on how exactly buying/selling stocks works in the Western world. Two entities - DTC and Cede & Co. control the whole scheme and when you "buy" or "sell" stock no actual stocks change hands unless you are selling the paper stock certificates physically, which is probably one in a million occurrence. The vast majority of stock buy/sell actions are indirect/virtual and the actual stocks and transactions are all in the names of Cede & Co, and the actual "trades" are being executed by DTC by simply changing account balances in its own systems. Well, as it usually happens, with so much power comes a great temptation to abuse it. And it seems DTC / Cede & Co could not resist that temptation and implemented the biggest "naked short" selling the world has ever seen, all on the backs of their clients.
To those who don't realize it yet, if you "own" any stock, whether personally or through a retirement account/fund, you actually own nothing unless you have the paper stock certificates in your possession! The actual "master" stock certificates for all stocks traded on the exchanges are owned by Cede & Co, which is owned by DTC, which is owned by DTCC. So, who owns DTCC? A handful of "elite" Wall Street banks. So, Wall Street very literally exists for the sole purpose of 100% illegally manipulating publicly traded companies, (even destroying them, if needed) while also ensuring that nobody (except them) really owns any stocks. Unfortunately, same goes for cash on deposit, as deposit accounts in most banks are legally under the names of "John Doe". The actual names on the accounts matching the names of the depositors are legally void/meaningless. So, the bank owns the actual deposits, not the person who deposited the money there.

Maybe @tankasnowgod can share that video with the former OverStock CEO who explains the whole thing much more clearly than I can.
@Amarsh213


View: https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/mvk5dv/a_house_of_cards_part_1/

"...TLDR: The DTC has been taken over by big money. They transitioned from a manual to a computerized ledger system in the 80s, and it played a significant role in the 1987 market crash. In 2003, several issuers with the DTC wanted to remove their securities from the DTC's deposit account because the DTC's participants were naked short selling their securities. Turns out, they were right. The DTC and it's participants have created a market-sized naked short selling scheme. All of this is made possible by the DTC's enrollee- Cede & Co."

I have excited the stock market.

The Inflation factor is mainstream propaganda. Big Investment banks like GS/MS can easily manipulate the prices of good through derivatives. The FED is also purchasing TIPS to manipulate reality. The same gimmick was used by Ben Bernanke post financial Crises of 08. It's a way to get dumb money "all in" to provide liquidity for the wealthy exiting. If it's mainstream news of "higher inflation" than it's safe to bet it's not


Stock Market Bubble Mechanism:
1) The Treasury Borrows against the Tax Payer.(9 Trillion Past Year)
2) The Primary Dealer Banks Purchase the Treasury Bills.
3) The Fed Purchases Treasury Bills, from Primary Dealer Banks( Quantative Easing).
4) Fed Credits the "Banks Reserves" on the PD Banks Balance Sheets
5) Banks then Loan out credit to Speculators/Hedge Fund/Outright Buy Securities with Banks Reserves.
6) Bubble Grows

This is why they had to do 9 trillion in "Cares Act"+Covid Bailouts...etc. Bill after bill. To create a ton of treasury's for the Primary dealer banks to buy and sell to FED, to increase bank reserves.

As For the Housing Market?
1) 80% of Loans in the US are against are mortgages. The Further the Interest Rate drops, the more people can borrow to make a monthly payment. This bids up the price of house as buyers compete for purchase
2) Banks use government for eviction moratorium so the market doesn't really know how many mortgages are bust/empty house will hit the market.
3) GS/JPM/MS manipulate Lumber Prices using derivatives. This is increasing the price of building new homes to keep the existing homes value super higher and further fleece the population as more and more income goes to their land(lords).


They waded into the rubicon with the Stimulus Checks and PPP Loans, this is money printing. But as long as they don't make bank accounts at the FED for each person and they get a monthly UBI( FED liabilities turn into legal tender). We won't have Hyper-Inflationary problem. But if the FED begins using it's liabilities as legal tender. In other words, permanent Stimulus checks/UBI. Then yes run for the hills.

If you want to gamble in the casino, just use long dated calls. You cap risk off and can enjoy upside incase they go ultra parabolic and blow the bubble higher and higher.

My Main reason for exiting is Jamie Dimons Comment this week.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLnc3MmWcRY


Here's lacy Hunt. The video is scalped since it cost money to subscribe. He's the one of the best economist alive at the moment.