What Does A Carney Do?

 I say this a lot but who am I kidding? "If you follow this blog..." I have 4 or 5 loyal followers I think. So if you are one of those people you will have probably guessed I'd eventually get to today's topic. If not, I've been on a phoniness heater for the last half dozen posts and if you ask a well-informed person to list the phoniest shit in our world they won't get too far down the list before they mention money or banks or economics. This post will include as little of their lingo as possible but that is ONE of the many ways the members of the money industry smooth talk their ways out of trouble, they have a language that can be used to confuse, obfuscate, and create ambiguity - indeed, that may be its main purpose. To give you just one example I will tell you in lay-lay-laymen's terms what "fiat currency" means. Almost all of the money you or I have used physically or electronically in our lifetimes was fiat currency. What that means is it's not backed by anything of value like gold or silver - it is pulled out of the ass of a banker or central banker and is in every way imaginable phony. They've done their best to smooth talk us into believing this "creating money from nothing" idea is fake, but it's recently been empirically proven. Richard Werner has not been debunked yet as far as I have seen.  So what that means is... ahem... One of the only things that isn't fake about banking is that a lot of what they do is fake. The percentage of fakeness is in almost direct proportion to the size of the bank and the "size" of the customers they deal with. 

Go to 7:30 in this video which is the man himself, Richard Werner explaining how he proved the theory of credit creation. First of all, don't feel bad if, like me and even John Maynard Keynes, you thought that when banks "lend" money they actually give out money they had gathered over time through customers making deposits. This is the "financial intermediation theory." Or maybe you thought they use our money to make investments and create a reserve governed by a central bank and it is out of this stock that they "lend" us money. That's called the "fractional reserve theory." Both or either of these is what banks and central banks wanted us to believe. But both are wrong. Unbelievably, or believably if you are as jaded as I, when Werner "borrowed" 200,000 Euros from this bank as part of his scientific experiment, the first thing that bank did was record a deposit of 200,000 Euros! A FAKE deposit from which they "lent" him his newly pulled-out-of-orafacial money. This is called the "credit creation theory," euphemistically speaking. It could more accurately be called the money creation theory or the arse-exit theory or even the defecation theory. But that terminology might cause alarm and people might revolt. After all, by extension this means the bank has zero responsibility to anyone to magic this money into existence. They have no onus to create any value to associate with this money. They are handing it over to YOU and saying, "This is entirely worthless, now go ahead and work, create something, or do something with this money to give it actual value - then give it back to us WITH INTEREST! If that is not revolution-causing practice, what the hell is? 

But wait, there's more! If the people DID revolt, or even just find out about this, lose confidence in banks altogether, and run to the (more likely drive to but...) bank to take out all their money - which has happened before and it's called a "bank run," 1. There would only be enough for a small number of people to get back their savings or investments and, hmmmm... who do ya reckon THOSE folks would be??? The banks would start right at the top of course repaying their top customers. 2. Even if you DID somehow manage to get your money back like if you saw the bank run before the rich (which never fucking happens cuz the rich don't bank on the same planet as the rest of us. I'll illustrate a bit later.) your money would now have lost a lot of its value anyway. And 3. To "solve" this problem, the "government" would step in. I put that word in quotation marks because no government has its own money, the government is the people. Not those rich assholes who got their money back people (who don't pay taxes), the REGULAR people. Yeah, that's who will be responsible through taxation for paying back the money the banks screwed them out of and then lost it all in the first place! And on THAT there would be interest too! Look at the "rewards" all the bankers took from the 700 billion dollar 2008 bailout. That debt to the taxpayers of just America has ballooned into the trillions - yet they're still dutifully banking. 29 trillion 15 years ago as THAT article calculated. But we've stopped calculating, or at least publishing the calculations, I guess to avoid embarrassment. 

And the very WORST part about this is the bankers know that this is what they're doing and the only way this all ends is if the public finds out. The info is out there and the banks of the world have been precariously running this scam on ordinary people for years and years in constant jeopardy, they get discovered every once in a while and the system "corrects itself" (by taxing the workers more) and for this massive crime nobody ever seems to go to jail. You can see why they get off on that! It's the wet dream of the greedy and envious: magicking money into existence with virtually no consequences.

I say they are constantly in very big trouble but they don't think so. Banks make sure they hire the most narcissistic people they can who believe they are too smart to be in trouble. Sure there is the titillation of knowing that it's possible. It helps when they are practicing auto-erotic asphyxiation in their money vaults coked up with their high-priced call girls. Maybe they add the thought of getting caught to heighten their sexual pleasure somewhat but pride assures these bankers that they are too smart for the rest of the world to realize that what they do is entirely fake. And they have been right for a surprisingly long time! 

How long, you may wonder. The US is not the only country that practices this crap and I don't even know if they invented it, but they are, and have been for some time, world leaders in it. *** A word of warning: this may be hard to take if you are American or participate in the hero worship of Alexander Hamilton or even George Washington. The power of money to corrupt is formidable and can sometimes weaken the best of us. 

PLEASE READ THIS.

This is admittedly full of bias, but this was the creation of America's very first central bank. And this happened back when there still were principled Americans like Jefferson and Adams to oppose it. Alex Hamilton, the secretary of the treasury at the time needed president Washington's approval to set up this central bank of the corrupt, by the corrupt and most decidedly for the corrupt. Ever wonder why Washington DC is called that? It's pretty far from Washington. It probably would have been in Philadelphia or somewhere in Pennsylvania if not for a little corruption on the part of even old "I cannot tell a lie" "Father of America" Washington. His land, Mount Vernon, certainly skyrocketed in value after the capitol was placed so close to it! It was called Washington DC and abutted his land in exchange for his partially reluctant support for the central bank. I guess in his old age the previously moral George Washington was more concerned with providing for his security than doing the right thing. 

But this was after the American Revolution! The nation was broke from selling out to the war effort. The money and war bonds were almost completely devalued. This was all the soldiers had and the rich contrived to fuck them out of those war bonds for pennies on the dollar. This was a "gift" or maybe it could be better described as an IPO (initial public offering) to get the confidence of the rich, who, let's face it, were ALREADY war profiteers, behind the new central bank. You could say Hamilton and what he called the "monied" class of the country threw the rest of the people of America under the BUS (Bank of the United States). The money that was used to buy up the war bonds at face value didn't exist. There was a little contributed by the rich backers of the bank and people are taught that there were other sources like the French and Dutch who just loved to see the British getting their asses kicked in a war, but the initial value of the Bank of the United States was just in confidence. They employed the credit creation theory only a few years after confederation! Where is THAT song in the popular Broadway musical "Hamilton?" I guess that doesn't make for good singin'. Lemme take a crack at this:

We fought the high class British gents who taxed our tea and raised our rents then Hamilton our paychecks fenced to give us what we'd fought against.

Through sycophance and sophistry to early aristocracy he puckered up and rose to be secretary of the treasury.

Young Hamilton is who to thank for our initial central bank which helped the bad and screwed the good like some opposite Robin Hood.

Six years we languished at the yoke of this unprincipled young bloke till one man rid us of this cur. God bless the aim of Aaron Burr! 

No? Not boppy enough? Well I gave it a 1700's ring. Maybe the retention of the British mercantile system and the oligarchy that plagued the early days of the fledgling nation made it something less than a musical place to be. 

Nowadays, more and more people are beginning to realize that banks and the central banking system really do this and there exists a recurring pattern to it that the above illustrates. Werner tells us that for the past 50 years macroeconomic policy in most "developed" (I'm using a LOT of words in quotes. That tends to happen more in direct proportion to the fakeness of what I am writing about) countries, in particular Europe, N. America, and Japan, has been dominated by the views of their central banks. These views or what Werner calls "narratives" have been consistent if not identical from central bank to central bank all over the world. 

Step 1 is the crisis. If there isn't one already like a war or a pandemic, just create one. For example, two countries could cooperate politically and economically to manufacture social rivalry and financial crash that would qualify as a crisis. Sound familiar? Anyone believing the WWE posing between Musketrump and the newly UN-elected leader of Canada, and I hasten to add former governor of the central banks of Canada and England, Mark Carney? A friend asked me recently what I thought of the new Canadian PM. A good friend. One who might be doing it to get a friendly rise out of me. It worked. My response was something like This banker who, for the most part, Canadians didn't even vote for the people who voted him in, is trying to ingratiate himself by appearing to oppose Trump and appearing to cut carbon taxes right after replacing Junior T who had to step down for doing things like enacting the Emergency Act to nose through and actually freeze people's bank accounts - a move that was legally declared unconstitutional and illegal search and seizure - but for which he'll never be imprisoned or anything like that. Think of his name: What does a carney do? They coerce you into playing their rigged games and smooth-talk you into thinking you have a chance of winning and even when it appears like you won you've really only spent 50 bucks on a 3-dollar stuffed animal. 

The crisis is just a game to these puppet masters. Carney's "game" is this trade war which is nothing more than inflation for both countries which will come with the requisite step 1 economy crash. Recession or depression is the desperate panic state or "crisis" that enables the central banks to dictate macroeconomic policies that NOOOObody wants. The soldiers didn't want to sell their war bonds at 3 or 4%, they HAD to. This is step 2: The implementation of draconian economic policy. "Belt-tightening," "Reform," "Austerity Measures," you've heard the euphemisms. With the ever-increasing success of banks and corporations, and now that we know money creation is as easy as it is, why are we constantly given these doom-and-gloom fairy tales? To put it simply, these are policies of power and control.

What, you may ask, is the policy both Trump and Carney are seeking? Well, I'm glad I asked that question. Both have spoken about it and it represents what Werner calls "dystopian, 1984-like power and control." And, in true banker fashion, they have an abbreviation for it: CBDC. Central Bank Digital Currency. Here is Werner again talking about it:

Werner and Carney went to school together at Oxford! Even THEN Werner describes himself as the rebel to Carney's obedient disciple. 

Fascinating stuff to me! I can't remember enjoying researching a blog post more than this one. Yet, I am certain none of my posts forecast more danger. As always I don't want to be the soothsayer, prognosticator, prophet, or sage. I don't want to look back on this post and say, "I told ya so." But when Werner describes the central banks realization that they are FINALLY busted for their money-creation BS, I can just see the bad acting. It's almost comical. 

Like they were waiting (a century or more) for us dimwits to finally catch them. There was only FAKE surprise. But Werner tells us there was no denial. They jumped straight to, "Yup we're guilty so we must stop this. Here's how..." and they rolled out the CBDC plan as an alternative. It's not an alternative and it won't fix what ails us. It's something they've been anxiously waiting to spring on us that will give them EVEN MORE control than their "credit creation theory" did. 

You can search the internet as well as I can and find Trump talking about it or Carney writing and talking about it. They both want it. WE don't. So what do you reckon this central banker and dick-tater will do to try and get it? It's already started. 

The irony is there are ways to stop this like in France where everybody loaded up carts with groceries in supermarkets that stopped accepting cash and just left the full carts and walked out when their cash was refused. We still have the power to stop this and even the central banking "narratives" can be used for good and HAVE been if the fake money is made real by consumers instead of given to the rich who just artificially inflate their wealth with it... But that may be best left for another post.