I don’t mean to be rude by harranging my half-dozen readers or so every day with constant doom and gloom but fact is we are going through the most radical period of change since the turn of the 20th Century, which makes a whole lot of sense since we are now at the turn of the 21st Century.
Even the Economist is now on board saying that for starters, the modern world has to seriously rethink the role that debt plays in our economy. (see Repent At Leisure) While the Economist doesn’t say so explicitily, if debt is to be reconsidered then so does the entire operation of the monetary system. How do we want money to behave as a store of value? In a world where labour is more and more mechanized and intellectual property is increasingly debased through digitization, where is the value that is supposed to be stored in money supposed to come from? Is Andy Warhol’s 15 minutes of fame all there is left for people to aspire to?
Life in 10 years from now is likely to be very different from what we’ve gotten used to since the easy going days of the 90s and Naughties.
Please read the post below by Damon Vrabel reposted from www.zerohedge.com. He makes a very important point about “sovereing debt”, namely that relative to countries…there is no such thing.. It’s all smoke and mirrors perpetuated by the International Mega-Banking Cartel (and the uber millionaires (the international global elites worth $30 million or more who own %30 of the entire planet’s wealth) whose interests they defend) enabling the illusion that us small people have some control over our state of affairs through our “sovereign” governments.
But please…. let Damon convince you himself:
Sovereign Debt: The Death of Nations vs. the Wealth of Nations
The gap between the truth vs. the lies that pass for truth in the media has never been so wide. But living a lie is very destructive, so it’s important to cross this gap. Today I want to clear up one of the most important lies reinforced by the media–the idea that we have sovereign countries.
No doubt most of you have heard of the sovereign debt crisis that so many countries are facing. We hear endless economists, reporters, and billionaire hedge fund raiders talk about it. But the phrase they use is fictitious. It is a fabrication of the Ivy League, Wall Street, and erudite periodicals like the Financial Times of London. Sovereign debt is an impossibility. It cannot exist.
It seems ridiculous to point this out, but sovereign debt implies sovereignty. Right? Well, if countries are sovereign, then how could they be required to be in debt to private banking institutions? How could they be so easily attacked by the likes of George Soros, JP Morgan Chase, and Goldman Sachs? Why would they be subjugated to the whims of auctions and traders?
A true sovereign is in debt to nobody and is not traded in the public markets. For example, how would George Soros attack, say, the British royal family? It’s not possible. They are sovereign. Their stock isn’t traded on the NYSE. He can’t orchestrate a naked short sell strategy to destroy their credit and force them to restructure their assets. But he can do that to most of the other 6.7 billion people of the world by designing attack strategies against the companies they work for and the governments they depend on.
The fact is that most countries are not sovereign (the few that are are being attacked by CIA/MI6/Mossad or the military). Instead they are administrative districts or customers of the global banking establishment whose power has grown steadily over time based on the math of the bond market, currently ruled by the US dollar, and the expansionary nature of fractional lending. Their cult of economists from places like Harvard, Chicago, and the London School have steadily eroded national sovereignty by forcing debt-based, floating currencies on countries. So let’s start being honest and stop describing their debt instruments as sovereign.
We long ago lost the free market envisioned by Adam Smith in the “Wealth of Nations.” Such a world would require sovereign currencies, i.e. currencies that are well-regulated rather than floating, and an asset rather than an interest-bearing debt. Only then could there be a “wealth of nations.” But now we have nothing but the “debt of nations.” The exponential math of debt by definition meant that countries would only lose their wealth over time and become increasingly indebted to the global central banking network.
So thanks to debt-based, free-floating currencies, the “wealth of nations” transitioned to the “debt of nations” which is now transitioning to the “death of nations.” The new world economic order with one currency, one banking system, one government, and one integrated corporate empire is on the horizon. Perhaps that’s a good thing, but if it were, why would the establishment concoct oxymorons like “sovereign debt” instead of telling the truth? That’s my only goal here–I think people can be trusted with the truth. Lies harm not only the population hearing them, but also the powerful people telling them.
Those powers have the best salesmen in the world, so why don’t they just sell the population on the truth? Apparently they don’t think you’d like it. Well now you have it. And it’s coming unless countries follow Iceland’s lead and recover their sovereignty. The choice is ours.