Quote from: minor-transgression on July 23, 2017, 08:33:35 PM

Thanks BobK71, more on that below .....

It seems that my joke about the tomatoes was prescient

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-22/pippa-malmgren-talks-bitcoin-refugee-crisis-and-plunge-protection-team
"The question is whose e-money. So everybody in government circles have been
watching the Indian experience because the prime minister stepped up to the
platform in early November and basically said we are going to move all of you,
a billion people, off paper money and onto electronic money, and we are going
to do it in three months. They did it, and they did it successfully."

Well, she would say that wouldn't she?

Failure is likely defined as "tanks in the streets" though that response is
so 1989 ....

Funny I read that probably within hours of your post.

'The question is whose e-money' betrays the ultimately political nature of money.

Forms of money matter, but by far the most important thing is 'are you with us or against us.' Whether the dollar is fiat or pegged to a special blockchain, countries can choose to promote or demote the dollar (and that which 'backs' it.) Being who she is, of course Malmgren would emphasize 'successes' in geopolitics. And 'success' comes, naturally, from the future main partner of the global banking elite, India.

India's demonetization of high-value paper money (right at the time of Trump's election) is eerily analogous to how the US cut off its nose in 1873 to support the British-led international gold standard by abandoning silver (the "Theft of '73".) The economic pain was long lasting enough to drive William Jennings Bryan's 1896 presidential campaign and his famous speech about 'crucifying mankind on a cross of gold.' He lost. I suspect something similar is happening in India. The elites seek not just a big and productive country, but also a relatively docile population.

A special blockchain is possible, but I still think relatively unlikely. If the global bankers need a last-ditch safe haven, they will want to make sure it's absolutely safe, and that will be the Libertarian, totally honest Bitcoin. A special blockchain would only expose the chief weakness of crypto -- if you can create a blockchain any time, there's no guarantee today's blockchain won't be replaced by tomorrow's, when the elites owe too much debt in the old crypto. (I hope this doesn't come from an optimistic bias.)

The mid- to late-19th century was a period of geopolitical success for the British-led imperial system. It's possible the equivalent period of the American-led system has ended, with Russia and China having basically broken out of the alliance.