The Bail-Ins Are Coming! | QPOL Issue #37
Why Central Banks won’t co-mingle for the Great Reset.
I’ve praised Lynette Zang in a past issue of QPOL. She knows her stuff, especially in regards to being one of the only people talking about the importance of switching from LIBOR to SOFR. However, In this appearance a few things stood out to me that were both favorable and questioning.
Just by judging the title of the video, “Your Bank Can Legally Seize Your Money, 'Too Late' to Stop Hyperinflation & The Great Reset - Zang” It’s pretty clear that alternative finance and mainstream media are mesmerized by this possibility that the banks can bail-in people’s money during a financial crisis just like Cypress. I’ve covered this issue before, but it bears repeating because the public (or at least those who think they’re “paying attention” to markets), are being propagandized and brainwashed into thinking the US would do such a thing.
So needless to say, she’s way off about the bail-in stuff. That doom-porn kinda shit tells me she’s just talking her book (as she should), but she’s dead wrong it will happen in the US. That would destroy the Fed’s credibility and trust in the US financial system will be gone. Not gonna happen if the goal is to be the cleanest shirt in the dirty economic fiat laundry. Also, the banks are well-capitalized with RRP and reserves, so they don’t need to do bail-ins.
But again, she’s talking her book and is trying to sell gold. I don’t blame her. Lynette’s gotta eat. However, failing to realize the nuance and particulars of the Fed and banking system and applying them to as many aspects as possible can be dangerous and misleading. It dumbs down the collective conscious and markets. I don’t like my zeitgeist served retarded. It’s as bad as Peter Schiff blaming the Fed for everything while trying to sell you his gold (only at least Lynette is actually trying to get people to buy gold rather than Schiff’s shitty paper product).
A couple positives…
I didn’t know the bail in rule was people with *more than* $250k. Meaning if you have that much money or less in the bank (which if you’re of my skeptical Austrian persuasion, why the fuck would you??) then you’ll be fine. So basically the average Joe won’t get bailed-in… The wealthy seem to be the unsecured creditors at risk. Perhaps I’m misunderstanding the rules here, but it seems pretty clear.
The breaking of the Fed’s “forward guidance” is a huge point. Telling the markets to expect 50 bps raise in August and giving them 75 bps instead is massive. That’s basically the pre-cursor of ending the Fed Put, which is why Powell is raising rates (as I have explained ad nauseam). This is what Powell is aiming to do: make the markets lose confidence in Greenspan’s Fed Put. The markets in America are plenty robust and independent to survive a financial crisis, especially with trillions of liquidity and and independent debt index rate (SOFR) to support a new monetary policy for America.
She mentions the central banks use perception management, as in making the customer feel like their money is safe at the banks even though their money could in theory be bailed-in.
The irony is that Lynette is applying perception management in her own thesis by lumping all the Central banks together as one team, which is patently false (as we’ve discussed in QPOL before…).
Central Banks Butting Heads
It’s wrong for her to assume all the Central banks are on the same team with the same agenda, especially considering BRICS. As far as the monetary reset goes, not all the banks will willingly go into that good night. Yes, BRICS is moving away from the petrodollar, and Jerome Powell has publicly admitted there’s plenty of room for multiple reserve currencies.
However, the Davos finance regimes such as the ECB, IMF, World Bank and political outfits like the UN and NATO want an alternative path of monetary hegemony. Davos wants to consolidate all financial power in Europe by ridding the concept of commercial banking entirely and replace it with a Central bank similar to how the USSR functioned. It’s straight out of Marx. The way they would do this is via a CBDC and MMT (which is what Jerome Powell and the Commercial banks are vehemently against purely out of survival because CBDCs and the preservation and issuance of private capital via commercial banks don’t exist in the same world).
In regards to leaving LIBOR, this isn’t a coordinated play by all Central Banks. SOFR was a reaction to the fraudulent, globalist rate of LIBOR, and it is globalist powers who are the most reluctant in switching their 100s of trillions of dollars worth of contracts over to SOFR or some other form of securitized rate. It’s globalist powers like the UN and Christine Lagarde publicly begging Jerome Powell to stop raising rates and making the switch to SOFR. This is a blaringly obvious factoid that screams these elites aren’t all in the same boat, and the Davos boat will go down like the Titanic…
Powell does not share the same Great Reset agenda as Davos. He has his duel mandate to follow and American monetary policy comes first (AKA, telling Christin to shove a climate change-based monetary policy up her ass). His ability to raise rates gives him the leverage over the rest of the world because their markets are fragile since they’re still tied to LIBOR, which screams that the markets are in denial especially when looking at how the Eurodollar futures curve keeps kicking its can down the road (it signaled the Fed to pivot in June originally, and now its signaling for fall of 2023).
All this is revealing the cracks in Europe’s financial system. They want to consolidate power, but only on their watch where the Fed is the first to fall and capital flight flees America into Europe which would provide the EU with plenty of ammo and financial dominance to make the city of London (or maybe even Germany?) the financial hub of the world once again. It’s the Mackinder heartland theory, and the dirt people of the BRICS nations stand in Davos’ way. These actors are not on the same team, and as much as the globalists want to come out on top, it seems that Powell’s Fed has strategically set all the financial and monetary boobie traps necessary to come out the victor for humanity.
Yes, these things are always fluid and the future is forever in motion. However when there’s clear evidence right in front of you and you choose to ignore it or simply haven’t considered its implications to your existing thesis, you’re simply missing out and doing yourself and your audience a disservice. I’m not saying Zang is doing this, and it’s hard enough in this business to be right. As always, nuance is key.
Go #TeamFed.
Subscribe if Powell is your pal.
~ Phil Gibson