Outside of prominent
economic channels, developments from within institutions such as
International Monetary Fund and the Bank for International
Settlements (BIS) are seldom remarked upon. Instead, attention is
restricted to the latest round of political theatrics which serve to
disguise the actions and intentions of globalist planners.
Under the heading, 'The
future of money and payments', Carstens mapped out what has been a
long standing vision of globalists - namely, to acquire full
spectrum control of the international financial system through the
gradual abolition of what Bank of England governor Mark Carney has
called 'tangible assets' i.e. physical money.
Here are some links to speeches made by both Christine Lagarde and Agustin Carstens:
Central to the vision for a fully digitised global economy is the intent to reform national payment systems.
The UK uses the Real-time gross settlement (RTGS) system, which the majority of payments in Britain are facilitated through.
The Bank of England's (BOE) Victoria Cleland has emphasized on numerous occasions that the 'fundamental renewal' of the system is being carried out through choice rather than necessity.
This would indicate that RTGS works fine in its
current manifestation, but the BOE (along with the European Central
Bank) have been tasked with assuming more control over their
respective payment systems.
In February 2019, Cleland intimated that the previous intention to have finalized the RTGS reform by 2020 had been pushed back to 2025.
The year 2025 is potentially significant as we will later look at.
The 'new ways to pay' is in part a reference to services such as TransferWise, who have pioneered the introduction of borderless accounts that allow people to hold up to forty currencies at once with the ability to convert them whenever desired.
New methods of payments such as this, which grew out of the 2008 financial crisis, bypass banknotes and coins altogether. Money can only be sent, received or converted electronically, unlike at high-street banks or travel bureaus which still offer physical cash.
describe their service as showcasing 'bank-level security, minus the
It becomes apparent that two tranches of reform - to payment systems
and to how money is used - are in the process of being carried out
The BIS themselves raised the subject in their final quarterly report of 2017.
Bank for International Settlements headquarters,
When seeking to
centralize economic power further, central banks work by stealth. It
can take many years, even decades, for a plan to become reality.
Hackneyed metaphors aside, it is no secret that the only thing that preserves the current system of fiat currencies is the level of trust that you and I place in them.
But trust is not a physical construct. Rather, it is underpinned by belief.
As Carstens mentions, in an economic sense trust can be compromised by,
The bigger picture begins to emerge when Carstens declares that the debate around CBDC's is not to do with the technology involved, but,
This is an exercise in perceptual management.
He wants the focus to be on the
demise of physical assets rather than the digital transformation of
how money functions. The idea is that the decline of cash be
perceived as organic rather than premeditated.
As is often the case when powerful heads of institutions speak, the underlying agenda gradually finds its way through the flannel.
This is confirmation that if CBDC's are rolled out in the future, it
would result in the
abolition of physical money. Every penny you
possess would be held within the financial system.
Let's deal with each of those in turn.
For globalists to gain full control of the financial system, the ability of citizens to hold their money anonymously must end. The strawman arguments in favor of this happening have already been planted within the media - from illicit financing of terrorism to money laundering.
Concerted efforts are being made to encourage people to look upon those who prefer to deal in cash with suspicion.
When you narrow it down, being able to trace and track every single payment, which is currently not possible if you opt to pay with cash, is the goal here.
Therefore, eliminating the choice of using banknotes and coins
Even so, it can easily be transferred to one that offers a better rate, or can ultimately be withdrawn altogether in favor of holding the money in your hand.
With CBDC's, you would be
locked in. Positive rates would continue to pay you interest. But
what about if rates turned negative throughout the banking system?
In this scenario you would be charged for holding your money with
the bank, with no way of counteracting such measures.
Using the scenario of customers opting to put money in a digital currency of a central bank, or directly into a deposit account, Carstens said:
Gauging the speech as a whole, these eventualities are dependent on the successful implementation of CBDC's.
For that to happen, physical cash must gradually be eroded. Whilst central banks are working on concepts for a CBDC's, they do not yet appear to be in a position to introduce them.
According to Carstens,
One of the reasons for this is that,
As I have documented elsewhere, cash usage is declining year on year but remains a popular form of payment.
How long before we reach an
inflection point is unknown. What we do know is that the BIS measure
the short term plans for central banks at one to three years, with
the medium term at one to six years.
As for the BIS, in a speech Carstens gave last
month titled, 'The new role of central banks', the institution is
focused on a new BIS medium-term strategy called Innovation BIS
Clearly, they are preparing for major changes to the financial system.
Rapped up in this BIS 2025 initiative is to process all
'relevant implications of technological innovation', such as
distributed ledger technology. CBDC's would inevitably be part of
But as the geopolitical
climate becomes increasingly fractious, how many of us are