March 25th, 2014, 9:15 pm
Good Evening, Family!
Let me begin this OPINION piece by first saying that I know there are some skeptics who don't believe we are going to see a Global Currency Reset, despite the fact that such media worthies as FOX Business News, CNBC, Bloomberg (and even the lowly CNN), along with some very outspoken economists, are increasingly talking about it and the absolute necessity of this event in order to right some serious global economic problems.
Before I express my opinion, let's talk about an event that has been front and center in the news media yesterday and today.
Senator John McCain made the statement yesterday (covered by the major news networks) that he expected the Senate to pass the aid bill to Ukraine, along with the accompanying 2010 IMF Code of Reforms as a rider.
Treasury Secretary Jack Lew has been trying repeatedly to get this bill passed by incorporating it as a rider with other bills, since the House and Senate have been reluctant to even bring the bill up for discussion.
Yesterday, and again this morning, the news erred in reporting that the bill had passed by a 78 to 17 vote. While it is true that the aid to Ukraine did pass, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid stripped the IMF Reforms from the aid bill to Ukraine.
A number of prominent Republican senators and congressmen have been in opposition to this bill, particularly since Russia's incursion into Crimea and subsequent annexation of that territory.
In order to clear away some of the smoke surrounding this bill, and why this bill is important to the Treasury, let me share a little background with you.
Let me first say that this bill is absolutely meaningless without the Global Currency Reset having been implemented, and I will shortly give you my reasons for saying that.
There has been a lot of talk about the so-called BRICS nations in financial news reporting, and their ongoing effort to bypass the IMF (AND, by the way, the USD) and create a new petro-currency to replace the petro-dollar.
(The current administration's economic policies both at home and abroad have done much to precipitate this move, in my opinion.) The BRICS nations represent five countries (hence, the BRICS acronym): Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.
I will also remind you, in conjunction with what I'm about to share, that Secretary Jack Lew spent two days in Brazil this past week meeting with the head of their Central Bank and their Minister of Finance, a visit due in part to the following.
The 2010 IMF Code of Reforms was structured in such a way as to reduce America's participation -- and near-absolute veto power -- in the IMF. On the face of it, it sounds relatively innocuous.
Consider that the IMF was formed in 1944 by the United States and its WW-II Allies as a means to begin providing financing that would help emerging nations, as well as those hurt by WW-II, rebuild and or begin to stand on their own economically in the world community. The US's participation in the IMF amounts to 17% at the moment.
The remaining nations -- 88 in all -- who participate in the IMF hold the remaining 83%. Of those 88 nations, there are some 29 with voting rights and twelve (according to my latest information) who actually contribute financially and hold the purse strings.
It takes no math genius to figure out that the US holds enormous voting power in the IMF.
The proposed Code of Reforms allows other nations a greater voice in the IMF. It reduces the control of the United States from 17% to 15%. On the face of it, that really seems minuscule, but our politicians fear that giving up that 2 percentage points will give Russia and its cohorts enough power to interfere with our objectives and the aid we might provide to other countries through our IMF contributions.
I should also point out that we (that is to say, the current administration) have not met our commitments to the IMF since 2010, preferring instead to waste our dollars with profligate spending programs that damage our nation's economy rather than help it. (In case you hadn't noticed, that's a personal opinion.)
Here's where I'm going with this piece. The IMF 2010 Code of Reforms has no teeth in it without the Global Currency Reset. It actually accomplishes little based on the current fiat currencies that abound throughout the world.
Without an asset-backed US Dollar, and all the other currencies which are due to undergo restructuring so that they have actual value, this code of reforms does little more than shuffle more funny money between the various nations.
I fully understand the reluctance of our conservative senators and congressmen to give Russia even so much as an increase of 1% in voting power or voice within the IMF.
What seems to be missing in this discussion is that the 2% drop in the US's voting power gets spread among the five BRICS nations, and in order for that to make any difference in how the IMF's funds are distributed or used, they would have to have solid agreement between many other nations in order to override the US.
In case you hadn't noticed, there aren't many nations -- especially among the WW-II Allies -- willing to agree with Brazil, Russia, India, China or South Africa when it comes to economic matters.
In the end, does it matter whether we pass the 2010 IMF Code of Reforms? I think it does. It particularly matters when you realize that we are on the verge of the greatest economic change in the history of this planet.
For the first time in history, we are looking at a future for world currencies that have true asset value. Barring the current administration's absolute collapse of the USD prior to the GCR with its insane spending and unstoppable printing of funny money, a global reset of historic proportions is in view.
When the dust settles, I believe we will see some long-standing debt obligations by this country (and others) settled once and for all and a return to some economic sanity -- at least for a few years !!!! We might actually get our country back. (OK, it's a hope anyway!)
Blessings on you. Eagle 1