Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (170165)	4/4/2021 1:16:44 AM
From: sense	1 Recommendation Recommended By pak73 Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217616

W/r to illegalisation of gold and crypto ... 'they' might just do both, and try to knee-cap both. I would like to see 'them' try, for I am guessing they shall fail and that would help ramp both, at least in friendly domains. The nature of the problem that leaves unaddressed... is what they'll do to fix "broken currencies" without an actual deleveraging. The obvious answer is a devaluation... of all currencies relative to "it"... but, relative to what ? The only obvious options for "a new fiat" right now... are the "super fiat" of SDR's. Otherwise, back to the non-fiat in a re-monetization of gold... The third alternative in bitcoin is not really an option... because "they" don't own or control it well enough to have it be useful to them... even if they can control its price through a combination of price fixing and the use of derivatives... they don't control the ability to alter the schema used to create it, or to control, alter and direct its flows... They clearly are pushing the other functions of crypto forward... the utility inherent in the more functional, new and more digital intermediaries... instead of the advantages of disintermediation... that makes them irrelevant. The core feature of fiat... is fiat... not money. The currency crisis, in the age of crypto, is thus leading to either the end of the central banks as superfluous... or to a coup led by the banks to impose the end of others exercising influence or control over money... the banks declaring themselves "owners" of everything... the new sovereigns of the world... no longer as a function of influence exercised from the shadows... So, BTC out... but the intermediaries in... giving "them" near total control over flows not just of the money itself... but of all the information tied to the money and its flows... so, through control of the new and more powerful intermediaries... giving them control over the USERS of money... not just the money. They would use the function of money and control of money... to replace and obviate governments... imposing instead a rule of, by and for the money... That means the "third alternative" is a new central bank / IMF / BIS created crypto currency... that is NOT either independent of the banks control... or able to be controlled by anyone else... including sovereigns... It seems likely they might WANT to try that... but, the fact the currency system we have is failing... is not truly an indicator of "they" having the strength required to succeed... Alternatively... nations could invoke sovereign powers to create their own crypto currencies... as China has begun to do already... only that ability to "create" the currency also not providing any greater power to impose a requirement for its use on others... The existing balances in power in relation to money might shift... but the situation is no where near ready or capable of supporting that dramatic a shift that the existing balances will be altered only because "digital"... That, and the "new" money just isn't all that good yet... So, maybe we get an attempt to cryptify existing currencies... but... how does doing that solve any of the already extant and increasingly urgent problems ? It doesn't obviously do much to help... I don't think SDR's will be accepted... don't think that will work... which doesn't mean they won't try it to see if they can make it stick... but, then, the cost of a failure would END them for sure... I think that means remonetizing gold is probably their safest option... in an attempt to hang onto power sufficient to sustain control... even when the technology means they're no longer useful or necessary... and are in fact disposable... as "control" itself is not necessarily more of a "good" than a no longer necessary evil. The worst case... is "they" have already planned it and try to spring some BS change on us a fait accompli in the wake of some (not fake but) fabricated crisis... I think doing that will create massive global instability and wars... which is not necessarily something they see as a negative... if the disruptions facilitate transitions that also enable them in preserving a hold on power and control over money... I think too few analyse the situation while considering the banks as self interested entities that are not "national" in any true sense, or even controlled by the putative sovereigns... but instead seek to control them... SDR's and crypto transitions... contain far too many uncertainties... and expanded risks... Gold backed fiat... gold backed SDR's... gold backed cryptos... obviate the need to "pick one"... so, safer ? Banks... as always... will try to grow their own stack... while avoiding risks by transferring them to others.