March 27, 2018

The Fed and the Yuan

[We are pleased to announce that our book, 7 Steps to Global Economic and Spiritual Transformation, is now available online at Amazon and at Barnes and Noble.]

While the powers-that-be continue to distract the world with profiteering on war, disease, starvation, and ignorance, behind the scenes the machinations of the central bankers are intimated to us under the guise of an editorial in The New York Times.

For anyone who understands or wishes to understand how power is rooted in control over central banks and money creation, there are a number of revealing "suggestions" and comments in this message from the flagship mouthpiece of the self-described "New World Order" (a term used by both George H. W. Bush [1991] and David Rockefeller [1994]).

First, the article underscores the importance of China as a market for foreign goods, including "American aircraft and soybeans to German cars." This passage establishes the premise of the need for China to buy more things from the U.S., so that the balance of payments is, even in a small way, offset from U.S. reliance on Chinese manufactured goods. The imbalance is being exacerbated by the fact that the Chinese are no longer interested in purchasing U.S. Treasury bonds, which allow the U.S. to receive "Federal" Reserve Notes from the Anglo-Euro-American banking cartel, and pay them principal and interest for the "privilege" of doing so, as well as to purchase Chinese products. (In fact, the purchase of U.S. Treasury bonds is now being done surreptitiously and illegally by the market makers [JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, etc.] offshore, as is documented here and here.)

Then, we are told that the previous chairman of the Chinese central bank "allowed capital to start moving more freely into and out of China." It's important that the term "capital" is used here, because this indicates money that has been commodified via interest. In other words, the Chinese operate within a capitalist framework, regardless of whatever strategy they may be following.

Next, The New York Times explains to us that the Chinese central bank is not independent, like the Fed. Translation: China operates its own semi-sovereign1 central bank in its own interests, as opposed to the privately owned Fed, which is operated in the interests of a small group of sociopaths, for power, profit, propaganda, and population reduction.

We are then told that "China’s mostly state-owned banking system is burdened with bad loans to state-owned enterprises, many of which are unprofitable, burdened by the pet projects of powerful provincial leaders." The punchline: "Mr. Yi must push these banks to clean up their books."

Translation: Before China joined the WTO, the nation and its political subdivisions carried no debt. As a stipulation for joining the WTO, the capitalists made China convert to western accounting for loans, meaning that the Chinese could no longer write off bad loans (because the good ones were so productive). Thus, China's political subdivisions are now burdened with tons of unnecessary debt.

Next, the financiers warn that "... if China’s banks falter, that could set off a sharp drop in growth because China would no longer be able to rely on debt-fueled spending to keep its economy growing." In other words, capitalism relies on putting everyone into debt to spur growth, so that when the financiers collapse the system, they can seize the fruits of labor, which have been collateralized to back up the loans.

Then comes this disingenuous gem: "Mr. Yi must come up with a policy that changes the incentives for banks. As long as loans to state-owned enterprises are guaranteed by the government, banks will keep making them." Remember that the "too big to fail" banks, which own the Fed, use it to bail themselves out by purposefully selling the world toxic assets. While there is more economic jabberwocky in this carefully worded agit-prop, you get the idea: the Anglo-Euro-American banking cartel is warning the Chinese to follow their dictates, or face consequences.

While those consequences are not enumerated here, for the purposes of unmasking this "advice," we will name a few attacks to which the Chinese have already been subject: geologic weapons, weather weapons, port attacks, and stock market destabilization.

All of this comes during the run up to the petro-yuan futures market; so, first, let's summarize the aforementioned "advice" being given by the Anglo-Euro-American banking cartel, and then let us apply that to the world of the petro-yuan.

As we all know, if the banking cartel and its oil companies desired, the planet could convert to renewable energy in short order. The suppression of renewable energy is due to the cartel's need to maintain oil as the key energy source because: 1) it is more profitable to them than sustainable energy (not to mention the nearly free energy available using techniques developed by Nikola Tesla, which the U.S. government, as the banking cartel's proxy, stole from him and suppressed); 2) keeping energy prices artificially high means the cartel controls more of everyone's income; and 3) a majority of the oil sold at this time is denominated in FRNs, which supports the demand and value of the cartel's private fiat currency, thus enabling them to print more FRNs.

We are also seeing an ambitious program regarding China's conversion to renewables.

So, what are we to make of the Chinese futures market (as described in this ZeroHedge article) that "... will allow Chinese buyers to lock in oil prices and pay in local currency," which means that these futures are directly related to China's domestic demand for oil.

As the above chart from the ZeroHedge article shows, and as we see from the aggressive fracking operations of the cartel throughout the U.S., the U.S.'s demand for foreign oil is falling at the same time as China's is increasing. What do these trends hold for the future?

What we would expect to see--if China's long-term strategy is to assert it's independence from the cartel--is a leveling off and then a decrease in its domestic demand for oil, with the implementation of renewable energies and the conversion of factories and cars to electric engines. Whether this happens, or how soon it does, will be an important indicator of the power structure and the potentiality for a transfer of power in global ring leaders, from the western banks to the Chinese. (Note: It was reported in October 2018 that China has stopped buying U.S. oil.) In the U.S., a comparable renewable strategy is unlikely at this point, given the cartel's political (hacked voting), economic (privately controlled currency), and social (corporate mass and social media) hegemony.

Going back to The New York Times article at the top of this analysis, the implied threat here is that missteps by the Chinese could result in a sharp, artificial decline in U.S. demand for Chinese goods. In fact, such a strategy by the U.S. was implemented just days before the petro-yuan futures market opened: tariffs on Chinese goods.

The vigorous response by the Chinese, in adopting stiff tariffs on U.S. goods (including some of the ones mentioned in the New York Times article at the top of this analysis), indicates that China feels confident in its control of its currency and the diversity of its economy. One could also argue that China's confidence in fending off any future geologic and climatic attacks has recently risen with various Sino-Russian defense agreements. Perhaps those agreements with Russia will come into play as the cartel, via its U.S. proxy, cuts off China's access to microprocessors integral to the manufacture of cellphones and other chip-based technology.

Simultaneously, lot of noise is being made in the U.S. corporate press, about how "Trump's" tariffs will hurt U.S. domestic manufacturers and consumers, but none of the pundits falling back on this predictable argument have mentioned who controls U.S. policy--i.e., the Anglo-Euro-American banking cartel--and their lack of concern, in any way, shape, or form, for the U.S. public. The main concern of the cartel regarding all of these events is to maintain control over the world reserve currency, "Federal" Reserve Notes, which currently account for about 80% of all global transactions. And what we see in the following graph is that at the start of 2018, use of the yuan in global transactions is back down to where it was four years ago, when it began its inclusion in the basket of currencies known as Selective Drawing Rights (SDRs).

This leads to another consideration that is generally overlooked by analysts: the ability of the cartel to use its printing press (the Fed) to enter the petro-yuan futures market, and manipulate it, just as they are able to do with the petro-yuan currency, which we discussed here, on October 24, 2017.

As we noted in that previous discussion, the reality of the power struggle between the cartel and China will reveal itself as these various forces--the Fed, the Central Bank of China, U.S. tariffs, the petro-yuan futures market, the Chinese investment in and conversion to renewable energy, etc.--come to bear. The Chinese recently made it clear that they are willing to push back over this, with some tariffs of their own.

Another indicator of the stakes is the conversion to the petro-yuan by Russia and Venezuela, two major oil producers that sell to China, and the cartel's longstanding and aggressive demonization of all things Russian and Venezuelan. Perhaps more than any other actions, the ongoing attacks on these two nations indicate the seriousness of the aforementioned issues and activities (Sino-U.S. relations) to the cartel.

As China slowly but inexorably makes its way to the world's largest economy, while reducing its dependence on oil, we see that some key nations which supply China with oil (Iran, Sudan) also control their own central banks or are seeking to loosen the grip of the Anglo-Euro-American banking cartel (Russia, Venezuela). This is the root cause (attacks on national monetary sovereignty) that underpins most of our current wars, despite the false premises hawked by the corporate media.



Footnote:
1 We define semi-sovereign central banks as those which are controlled by the sovereign power (ideally, the people), but must issue bonds on which they pay principal and interest in order to receive "legal tender" currency. The Chinese were forced to do this in order to join the WTO and begin a rapid development process.

# # #



[We are pleased to announce that our book, 7 Steps to Global Economic and Spiritual Transformation, is now available online at Amazon and at Barnes and Noble.]

No comments:

Post a Comment