Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Banking Systems  (Read 21130 times)

SeanAU

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2871
    • View Profile
    • Meta-Crisis
  • Liked: 118
  • Likes Given: 27
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #300 on: November 03, 2023, 03:43:35 AM »
It's wealth, constantly seeking more wealth, to better seek still more wealth. Building wealth off of destruction. That's what's consuming the world. And is driving humans crazy at the same time.

interstitial

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2900
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 574
  • Likes Given: 96
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #301 on: November 03, 2023, 05:07:16 AM »

The construction market in China has been slowing down for about a year but recently with missed payments from major players it has been slowing even faster.


US population is growing about 0.5% per year. Not fast growth but growth. Which means the cities need to grow about the same amount. The reality is some cities and regions grow more than others and a few actually decline. Right now a US city with declining population means something is wrong. If efforts are not made to correct the problems the declining population struggles to pay for existing infrastructure. Wealthier residents move out and the poorest stay put. It can be a death spiral.
Around 1950 the population for Detroit was 1.8 million it has continued to decline since. The population has declined to 632 thousand in 2022. Seventy years from the peek that decline may finally be slowing.

vox_mundi

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 10249
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3520
  • Likes Given: 756
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #302 on: November 23, 2023, 04:12:06 PM »
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― anonymous

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

morganism

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1785
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 220
  • Likes Given: 129
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #303 on: January 08, 2024, 10:17:56 PM »
Payroll providers, Power, Respect

(...)
We recently covered the long shadow that checks cast on modern financial practice. The most important genre of check historically was the paycheck, settling an employer’s liability to their employee for services rendered. Most paychecks (and direct deposits, and earned wage access vehicles, and similar) are not sent directly by employers, but instead go through a payroll provider. Payroll providers are the original financial technology company, and were some of the first scaled adopters of computers generally.

You have almost certainly depended on payroll at some point in your life and probably never thought much of it. And it is fascinating! Let’s discuss a bit of history, a bit of politics, a bit of financial technology, and a heavy, heavy dash of extremely boring schlep in service of larger societal goals.

Why does payroll exist, anyway?

Payroll, as an institution, exists to support the deputization of (mostly private) employers as tax collectors by the state.

In the United States, prior to the Civil War, almost all federal spending was funded by tariffs on alcohol or tobacco. The war was extremely intense and expensive, and the winners mostly chose to fund it by instituting a temporary income tax, at a flat rate of 3% of income above a relatively generous threshold. This might or might not have been legal, strictly speaking, much like the contemporaneous suspension of habeas corpus, but needs must when the future of the nation is on the line. (A note to non-American readers: you can Google this if you want to get into fascinating minutiae of U.S. history, but take note that a disturbing percentage of authors who are extremely invested in Abraham Lincoln’s supposedly tyrannical behavior on taxation are using that to distract the reader from the institution of slavery.)

The actual collection of this tax was from taxpayers directly. The combination of the tax being new, tax incidence being a relatively small portion of the population, and taxpayers being mostly on their own recognizance lead to a fairly large “tax gap”, which is the wedge between taxes theoretically owed to the government (per the law) and those actually reported by taxpayers.

America re-instituted the income tax in the early 1900s (via a constitutional amendment, this time) as a result of that most cherished of American traditions: widespread populist revolt over tax rates. Specifically, tariffs on imported goods hit the pocketbook of the emerging middle class the worst. The middle class exercised (and exercises) substantial political heft in America, and directed its representatives to move more of the tax burden to the wealthy. The term of art for this in tax policy is “progressive” taxation (where one’s effective tax rate goes up with income and/or wealth); any tax on consumption (including tariffs) will almost definitionally be regressive (the opposite), because the wealthy consume less of their income and/or wealth than other social classes.

(much more)

https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/payroll-providers-power-respect/

johnm33

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 780
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 130
  • Likes Given: 127
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #304 on: January 09, 2024, 10:31:55 AM »
What they wont mention is that tax is only necessary to control inflation in the US, and it's not so different in it's numerous vassal states the bulk of taxes go towards paying interest on money borrowed, which the government could have created out of thin air like the banks they borrowed from did, buying special needs 'parade' weapons or buying votes from jo public.
A simple transaction tax of @ .05% on all transactions would pay down the US debt in a couple of years, hft algos would either pay a significant % or cease trading.
Goverments could simply print the 'money' they need, pay for infrastructure projects, defence spending and expenses chinese style and levy tax's only as a means of 'monitoring' the public.

interstitial

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2900
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 574
  • Likes Given: 96
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #305 on: January 09, 2024, 11:09:15 PM »
An observant person would note that the US was about to pay of the national debt during the Clinton administration but as the began to be a possibility the financial community freaked out and claimed the sky would fall if the US stopped offering bonds. As is always the case in the US when money talks both parties quickly and quietly did what they were told and increased spending. The debt is too big and I do not believe it is necessary but the right only mentions it when the left is in power. When the right is in power they overspend too. Case in point most of the roughly 6 trillion in debt added in recent years as covid stimulation the right is complaining about was added while Trump was in office. The democrats added 2 trillion but somehow we are supposed to believe most of the debt was added by the left. Too be clear both parties spend too much but do not be fooled into thinking that one party is worse than the other. 

El Cid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2518
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 925
  • Likes Given: 227
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #306 on: January 10, 2024, 12:54:07 PM »
"What they wont mention is that tax is only necessary to control inflation in the US, and it's not so different in it's numerous vassal states the bulk of taxes go towards paying interest on money borrowed"

That is factually false. Most states nowadays take in 40-50% of GDP and pay 2-4% of GDP on interest, so usually less than 1/10th of state income goes towards interest payments.

"which the government could have created out of thin air like the banks"

Yes they could, that is called monetary financing and is highly inflationary, see eg. Venezuela or Argentine where they do it. Sorry, MMT (Modern Monetary Theory) is a pipedream.


"An observant person would note that the US was about to pay of the national debt during the Clinton administration but as the began to be a possibility the financial community freaked out and claimed the sky would fall if the US stopped offering bonds"

In reality what happened was that there was a huge surplus of government income from the very long boom of the late 90s which caused the government debt to fall (not in nominal terms but only in relation to GDP), see charts. Ignorant people who do not know about the business cycle (many of them rosy eyed economists at the government level) thought the golden years would last forever and extrapolated the huge tax intake ad infinitum. Of course the business cycle was still alive and once there was a downturn state spending increased automatically and incomes fell. They always do in a recession, but some hoped that there would be no more recessions...

Democracies cannot avoid increasing government debt due to constant pressure from voters. I don't know where it leads but it's a fact. Unless they have an exceptional boom (70s) or unexpected boom (end90s) the trend is up up and away in almost all countries.

LeftyLarry

  • NewMembers
  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 260
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 30
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #307 on: January 11, 2024, 12:00:27 AM »
"What they wont mention is that tax is only necessary to control inflation in the US, and it's not so different in it's numerous vassal states the bulk of taxes go towards paying interest on money borrowed"

That is factually false. Most states nowadays take in 40-50% of GDP and pay 2-4% of GDP on interest, so usually less than 1/10th of state income goes towards interest payments.

"which the government could have created out of thin air like the banks"

Yes they could, that is called monetary financing and is highly inflationary, see eg. Venezuela or Argentine where they do it. Sorry, MMT (Modern Monetary Theory) is a pipedream.


"An observant person would note that the US was about to pay of the national debt during the Clinton administration but as the began to be a possibility the financial community freaked out and claimed the sky would fall if the US stopped offering bonds"

In reality what happened was that there was a huge surplus of government income from the very long boom of the late 90s which caused the government debt to fall (not in nominal terms but only in relation to GDP), see charts. Ignorant people who do not know about the business cycle (many of them rosy eyed economists at the government level) thought the golden years would last forever and extrapolated the huge tax intake ad infinitum. Of course the business cycle was still alive and once there was a downturn state spending increased automatically and incomes fell. They always do in a recession, but some hoped that there would be no more recessions...

Democracies cannot avoid increasing government debt due to constant pressure from voters. I don't know where it leads but it's a fact. Unless they have an exceptional boom (70s) or unexpected boom (end90s) the trend is up up and away in almost all countries.
Where it leads is to bankruptcy whic is the Leftist goal in the end .
Wipe out the people who have the money, because in many case they are the wrong people and then when nobody has anything worth fighting for, install worldwide Leftist dictatorships which is what socialism is doomed to become .

The Walrus

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2881
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 150
  • Likes Given: 489
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #308 on: January 11, 2024, 12:00:40 AM »
Debt in the U.S. is comparable to other European countries.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/722971/g20-public-debt-to-gdp-ratio/

interstitial

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2900
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 574
  • Likes Given: 96
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #309 on: January 11, 2024, 12:54:19 AM »
My explanation that they were going to pay of the deficit was the way I remembered it but not accurate. In 1999 and 2000 the US government spent less than they took in. Financial powers were complaining that the country was not deficit spending.


https://www.polidiotic.com/by-the-numbers/us-federal-deficit-by-year/

El Cid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2518
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 925
  • Likes Given: 227
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #310 on: January 11, 2024, 07:24:55 AM »
I do remember that even the CBO projected a major reduction of government debt and I found that even then laughable and totally unrealistic. But true, some worried what instruments would be used by banks and others if there were no gov't bonds.


johnm33

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 780
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 130
  • Likes Given: 127
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #311 on: January 11, 2024, 11:24:55 AM »
snip.
Where it leads is to bankruptcy whic is the Leftist goal in the end .
Wipe out the people who have the money, because in many case they are the wrong people and then when nobody has anything worth fighting for, install worldwide Leftist dictatorships which is what socialism is doomed to become .
It doesn't appear to be leading that way in China where they're closest to operating money creation as a public utility. It's making a lot of people very rich and lifting millions out of poverty.
Widespread bankruptcy seems instead to be the endgame of western bankers to facilitate an endgame where, in a phase transition, people totally dependent on the .0001% who own everything quietly accept slavery [heavily disguised], much like when the Roman oligarchs wiped out their natural economy and people begged to become slaves[of the right 'master] to avoid starvation. Someone with a better gift of language could easily frame the WEFs 'you will own nothing and be happy' as just such a transition.

SeanAU

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2871
    • View Profile
    • Meta-Crisis
  • Liked: 118
  • Likes Given: 27
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #312 on: January 11, 2024, 11:49:35 AM »
Quote
Wipe out the people who have the money, because in many case(s) they are the wrong people and then when nobody has anything worth fighting for, install worldwide Leftist dictatorships  ...





A contemporary Chinese saying goes:
‘In 1949, socialism saved China. In the twenty-first century, China will save socialism’.

    Achievements and Challenges for Chinese Socialism
    A Socialist or Developmental Wave in the Global South?
    China has managed to break free from the vicious ‘development of underdevelopment’ cycle that has ensnared the Third World. Decades after gaining their independence from Western colonialism, this cycle continues to define the experience of peripheral countries within the capitalist system. Owing to its tremendous economic success, an increasing number of countries in the Global South view China as both a successful example to follow (taking into account their local specificities) and a potential partner in their pursuit of development-oriented strategies. In turn, China is increasingly developing such partnerships.

    In October 2022, the report of the twentieth National Congress of the CPC included a resounding Marxist critique of the Western model of modernisation, as being based on colonisation, plunder, slavery, and predatory exploitation of the natural resources and peoples in the Global South. This model not only served as the foundation for the industrialisation processes in Europe and the United States, but also their economic, political, and military domination over the rest of the world, producing a system of imperialism. In response, China formulated its own distinct path of modernisation, characterised by principles of shared prosperity among a massive population, material and ethical-cultural progress, harmony between humans and nature, and peaceful development.

    see more:
    https://dongshengnews.org/en/whzh-vol1-no4/
It's wealth, constantly seeking more wealth, to better seek still more wealth. Building wealth off of destruction. That's what's consuming the world. And is driving humans crazy at the same time.

zenith

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2659
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 123
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #313 on: January 11, 2024, 10:56:32 PM »
White House Throws Support Behind Seizing Frozen Russian Assets
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/white-house-throws-support-behind-seizing-frozen-russian-assets-1.2020405

"President Joe Biden’s administration is backing legislation that would let it seize some of $300 billion in frozen Russian assets to help pay for reconstruction of Ukraine, a shift as the White House seeks to rally support in Congress to further fund the war against Vladimir Putin’s forces.

The administration welcomes “in principle” a bill that would allow it to confiscate the funds, according to a November memo from the National Security Council to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

“The bill would provide the authority needed for the executive branch to seize Russian sovereign assets for the benefit of Ukraine,” the NSC said in the memo, one of three such communications seen by Bloomberg News.

... Global Response

“At the end of the day, the rest of the world is going to make a judgment about whether this is a legitimate use of US governmental authority,” said Benn Steil, the director of international economics at the Council on Foreign Relations. “Overwhelmingly it’s going to be rejected by countries who represent a majority of the world’s population. Including countries we are trying to move closer to in many areas.”

Administration officials, including Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, have said in the past that current US law doesn’t allow seizure of the sovereign assets, which were frozen after Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine. While the White House wasn’t seeking such authority from Congress as recently as this summer, its position began to shift as it became clear that Republicans were hesitant to approve more taxpayer funds for Kyiv, according to a person familiar with the situation.

... According to the memos viewed by Bloomberg, the White House was initially ambivalent about inserting a G-7 approval requirement but has since emphasized the need to move in concert with allies.

Such a requirement “would make it more likely that Europe (where the vast majority of assets are located) will be willing to take this step, given their concerns that taking this action in the Russia context could increase the likelihood that we seize assets in other cases where the legal and policy justification is less strong,” the NSC said in one of its memos.

“It also reduces the risk that this step undermines faith in the United States as a destination for foreign investment,” it said.

With only about $4 billion to $5 billion of Russia’s assets in the US, it wouldn’t make sense for the US to act in isolation and risk sparking a flight from the dollar over a symbolic amount of money, according to a congressional aide with knowledge of the debate over the provisions.

The International Monetary Fund on Thursday said it’s monitoring the situation, and would assess the impact of any seizure or windfall taxes on the global monetary system and individual member countries.

“Any assessment that we would make would depend, of course, on the precise details of any actions that are taken,” IMF spokeswoman Julie Kozack said in a briefing."
Where is reality? Can you show it to me? - Heinz von Foerster

SeanAU

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2871
    • View Profile
    • Meta-Crisis
  • Liked: 118
  • Likes Given: 27
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #314 on: January 12, 2024, 12:26:35 AM »
White House Throws Support Behind Seizing Frozen Russian Assets


Interesting what the crazies get up to from one day to the next.

Putin and Russia, along with Xi and China, BRICS and the RoW are weak as piss pushovers.

They won't do anything while being raped and pillaged by the outlaw US Empire of Lies.
It's wealth, constantly seeking more wealth, to better seek still more wealth. Building wealth off of destruction. That's what's consuming the world. And is driving humans crazy at the same time.

Rodius

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2179
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 651
  • Likes Given: 46
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #315 on: January 12, 2024, 12:53:04 AM »
White House Throws Support Behind Seizing Frozen Russian Assets
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/white-house-throws-support-behind-seizing-frozen-russian-assets-1.2020405

This is a question in the form of my unclear understanding of this, please correct me where I am wrong.

Russia has assets held in the US in the form of, at a guess, USD.

The US seized said assets as punishment for the Ukraine situation.

And now, the US is discussing taking said assets to use in the rebuilding of Ukraine.

If I am sort of correct, it would be a very terrible move on the part of the US. So, I figure I am wrong in my thinking so I need correcting.

zenith

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2659
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 123
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #316 on: January 12, 2024, 03:09:36 AM »
it sounds like the vast majority of the russian assets are in europe (mostly london and cyprus?), with only small amounts in the us.

the pretext for seizing them is to rebuild ukraine (blackrock, etc.) but it will be some sort of con if history is a guide.

the article is quite straightforward, except where it gets idealistically kinky. it would rewrite us law and have wide ranging implications around the globe. it's weaponizing the us dominated international banking order, countries will flee even more than they are. who's next? it's essentially piracy.
Where is reality? Can you show it to me? - Heinz von Foerster

Rodius

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2179
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 651
  • Likes Given: 46
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #317 on: January 12, 2024, 04:37:02 AM »
it sounds like the vast majority of the russian assets are in europe (mostly london and cyprus?), with only small amounts in the us.

the pretext for seizing them is to rebuild ukraine (blackrock, etc.) but it will be some sort of con if history is a guide.

the article is quite straightforward, except where it gets idealistically kinky. it would rewrite us law and have wide ranging implications around the globe. it's weaponizing the us dominated international banking order, countries will flee even more than they are. who's next? it's essentially piracy.

I will read the article.
It seems like my assessment is mostly correct.

And yeah, if the US goes ahead and takes the assets, it would be very bad for the US.

It would do wonders for BRICS, though.

SteveMDFP

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2519
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 594
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #318 on: January 12, 2024, 03:24:14 PM »
White House Throws Support Behind Seizing Frozen Russian Assets
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/white-house-throws-support-behind-seizing-frozen-russian-assets-1.2020405

This is a question in the form of my unclear understanding of this, please correct me where I am wrong.

Russia has assets held in the US in the form of, at a guess, USD.

The US seized said assets as punishment for the Ukraine situation.

And now, the US is discussing taking said assets to use in the rebuilding of Ukraine.

If I am sort of correct, it would be a very terrible move on the part of the US. So, I figure I am wrong in my thinking so I need correcting.

The only correction I'd suggest to the above is that Russian assets in central banks have not (yet) been seized by anyone.  Rather, they've been frozen, no transactions involving these funds can take place.  These Russian assets are still owned by Russia.

There are two huge problems with the proposal.  First, if the Executive Branch is given the authority to actually seize assets held by the central bank, then few nations will want to ever hold a significant amount of assets there.  Such a shift in international finances would be very bad for the US economy.

Second, seizing assets should be a judicial ruling, not an executive branch authority.  There should be a very, very high bar in statute for allowing a judge to rule another sovereign nation's assets be seized.  This proposal puts an almost dictatorial power into the hands of whoever is the sitting President. 

SeanAU

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2871
    • View Profile
    • Meta-Crisis
  • Liked: 118
  • Likes Given: 27
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #319 on: January 12, 2024, 04:07:08 PM »
Freezing the funds is in fact illegal. It's white collar piracy.

The US empire of lies has been dictatorial and acting like a pirate for decades. All US sanctions are illegal. All who follow them and apply sanctions are acting illegally.

This notion that it has legal jurisdiction anywhere there are funds denominated in USD affords the US sovereignty over anyone and everyone is illegal as well .. and literally insane.

But might makes right. No one has the balls to stop them. Everyone's rights are owned by the USA State, and those that own it.
It's wealth, constantly seeking more wealth, to better seek still more wealth. Building wealth off of destruction. That's what's consuming the world. And is driving humans crazy at the same time.

The Walrus

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2881
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 150
  • Likes Given: 489
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #320 on: January 12, 2024, 05:42:41 PM »
Since the 1979 revolution, billions in Iranian assets have been frozen around he world.  Some of these assets have been used in negotiations with Iran, while much is still frozen.  The money has not be seized.

Rodius

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2179
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 651
  • Likes Given: 46
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #321 on: January 12, 2024, 11:36:20 PM »
I understood the difference between frozen assets and stolen assets.

I wasn't a fan of the ability for the US to freeze assets but that is part of the power the US holds having the dominant currency.

My assumption is this talk is more about testing the waters for such actions in the global community.
It just seems incredibly stupid for the US to actually take the assets that they wont do it.

IF they take the assets, it will be very bad though... surely they know that?

The Walrus

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2881
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 150
  • Likes Given: 489
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #322 on: January 13, 2024, 01:16:06 AM »
Freezing the funds is in fact illegal. It's white collar piracy.

The US empire of lies has been dictatorial and acting like a pirate for decades. All US sanctions are illegal. All who follow them and apply sanctions are acting illegally.

This notion that it has legal jurisdiction anywhere there are funds denominated in USD affords the US sovereignty over anyone and everyone is illegal as well .. and literally insane.

But might makes right. No one has the balls to stop them. Everyone's rights are owned by the USA State, and those that own it.

Freezing assets is not strictly a U.S. action.  Many countries through the world have done this.

SeanAU

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2871
    • View Profile
    • Meta-Crisis
  • Liked: 118
  • Likes Given: 27
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #323 on: January 14, 2024, 11:17:56 PM »
This is much bigger issue than merely "banking systems" but seeing it's already here, why not.

February 24, 2024, is likely to be quite a momentous day. Aside from marking the second anniversary of the current military conflict between Russia and Ukraine, all indications suggest the Group of Seven (G7) countries—a cohort that formally includes Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK, and the US, but has morphed into the de facto decision-making body of the collective West—will use the symbolism of this tragic milestone as covering fire to complete the seizure of some $300 billion worth of Russian reserve assets.

The suggested move comes amid growing reluctance in both the US and Europe to continue directly funding Ukraine. With the military situation on the ground turning more desperate by the day, a marketing campaign for this highly controversial proposal is underway. An excerpt from a recent guest editorial in the Financial Times sets the tone with the rather direct title, “Seizing Russian assets is the right thing to do”

Quote
“Western nations were reported last month to have been actively exploring the move as political resistance in the US and elsewhere grows to increasing direct financial support to Ukraine in its fight against invading Russia.

Seizing the assets has raised worries about the consequences for the financial system, namely that some countries such as China might come to fear that reserves held in euros or dollars were no longer safe. But they shouldn’t. If countries don’t illegally invade other countries, their money is quite safe.

The EU and the US should take Russia’s frozen assets and give them to Ukraine. It is the right thing to do and there are historical precedents for both confiscating foreign assets during a time of war and allocating war reparations claims after.”
https://www.ft.com/content/b2446a0d-de0a-4cc0-a600-87dc1643f844

Backing for the move is far from unanimous, especially among European countries. With Putin having dumped most of his US treasuries long ago, the vast majority of relevant assets are situated within the EU banking system where many are loath to set such a profound and potentially dangerous precedent. There is also the pesky question of what Russia would do in retaliation, something the G7 seems destined to perpetually underestimate. Here is Reuters framing the view from Moscow:

Quote
“Russian officials have repeatedly warned that the state confiscation of assets goes against all the principles of free markets.

‘Let's see what they decide,’ one senior Russian official told Reuters on condition of anonymity. ‘The protection of private property is a sacred cow that has been feeding them for many centuries.’

Some Russian officials have suggested that if Russian assets are confiscated then foreign investors' assets stuck in special so-called type "C" accounts in Russia could face the same fate. Some foreign assets were effectively locked in the C accounts. It is not clear exactly how much money is in these accounts but Russian officials have said it is comparable to the $300 billion of Russian reserves frozen.”
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/what-where-are-russias-300-billion-reserves-frozen-west-2023-12-28/

Should the G7 move forward, it will certainly be observed by the rest of the world. The resulting interpretations could add fuel to a series of recent shifts that have brought renewed focus to gold’s place in the financial system. Over the coming months, changes in geopolitics and market structure may finally resolve longstanding laments about Gold.

How this might impact the global banking systems is yet to be decided. But it appears that dysfunction, chaos, instability and the unknown is on the menu for 2024. To what degree this could then trigger major domino effects in the current unfolding planetary Meta-Crisis much sooner than otherwise may have been the case is something we will need to wait and see.
It's wealth, constantly seeking more wealth, to better seek still more wealth. Building wealth off of destruction. That's what's consuming the world. And is driving humans crazy at the same time.

SeanAU

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2871
    • View Profile
    • Meta-Crisis
  • Liked: 118
  • Likes Given: 27
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #324 on: January 18, 2024, 05:14:04 AM »
In the rear vision mirror

30 March 2023 – The International Court of Justice rules that the United States violated its Treaty of Amity with Iran when it allowed its domestic courts to freeze assets held by Iranian companies
It's wealth, constantly seeking more wealth, to better seek still more wealth. Building wealth off of destruction. That's what's consuming the world. And is driving humans crazy at the same time.

morganism

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1785
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 220
  • Likes Given: 129
Re: Banking Systems
« Reply #325 on: March 18, 2024, 09:25:26 PM »
The Luddite's Guide to Defending Cash (Part 1)

Why cash is a cutting-edge technology for maintaining a balance of monetary power

Are you someone who is concerned about cashless society, but who finds yourself treated like a Neanderthal when you tell this to your friends? Are you worried that you’ll be labelled as a conspiracy theorist if you raise the alarm about all the data and power being transferred to the ‘cashless’ digital payments industry? Do you shy away from expressing your misgivings about the full digitization of money, out of fear of appearing like an anti-progress ‘luddite’?

If you answer Yes to any of these questions, this piece is for you. You have a right to be concerned about cashless society, and you don’t have to come across like a crackpot when making the argument for cash. In fact, you can come across as very reasonable. I know this, because I spend a significant part of my life defending cash in very mainstream circles, and I often leave people who were totally OK about cashless society feeling a lot less sure. For example, I recently debated the issue at the Brussels Economic Forum. Before the debate, the audience (which consisted of hundreds of policy wonks, economists and EU officials) was polled, with 42% being keen on a totally cashless society. By the end, that number had fallen to 27%.

Not only can you come across as reasonable when arguing for cash, but you can also come across as a lot more innovative and imaginative than the average mainstream pundit. We’re often led to believe that digital tech is ‘cutting edge’, but digital hype has been with us for over 30 years now, and is getting ever more boring and conventional. It’s far more interesting to be ahead of the curve, which means widening your imagination beyond digital fetishism.
(more)

https://www.asomo.co/p/the-luddites-guide-to-defending-physical-cash