Fiat currency

[Jerry_Atrick]

10 hours ago, facthunter said:

The Orange U Tan will Bugger it UP of Course. He's been Bankrupt at Least 2 times. Nev

Keep counting..

 

At least 6 times.

 

 

[nomadpete]

Weell. Not that anyone would ever do this.... but hypothetically if they did....

 

If I was powerful and wanted to tank the dollar and get rich off it, here is exactly what I would do.I would hire a Treasury Secretary who already made $3.5 billion crashing another country's currency. I would put my guy in charge of the agency that approves bank charters. I would install a crypto czar with $200M in crypto holdings and give him an ethics waiver so nobody could challenge it.Then I would sign an executive order banning the government from ever creating a digital dollar so there was no competition.Then I would have my family launch their own private digital dollar. My family takes 75% of net profits. I would grow it to $4.6 billion in circulation and route a $2 billion Abu Dhabi sovereign fund deal through it to prove it works.Then I would get Congress to pass a law requiring every stablecoin in the country to hold short-term Treasury bills. Now every dollar of my digital currency is a forced buyer of government debt. Brookings projects $2.3 trillion in captive demand by 2030.Then I would have my OCC guy grant my family's company a federal bank charter. Now I can issue my digital dollar with federal authority.Then I would have my Treasury Secretary weaken the actual dollar. Bond buybacks that suppress yields but tank the currency. Build a $950 billion war chest for more. Let the debt hit $40 trillion. Dollar index drops to 99. Gold goes to highest point ever.Then I would kill the Corporate Transparency Act and delete the FinCEN beneficial ownership database. That was the one law that required every shell company in America to report who actually owns it. Without it, nobody can trace who is buying my stablecoin, who is routing money through it, or where the profits land.Then I would let the loop run. Weaker dollar drives demand for "stable" digital alternatives. The law I passed forces those alternatives to buy T-bills. That funds the government's debt. My family takes profit on every transaction. Foreign central banks walking away from Treasuries get replaced by legally mandated stablecoin reserves my family controls.Then I would use sanctions to start cutting countries off from the dollar system entirely. And when those countries need a new way to transact in dollars, the only federally chartered private digital dollar in existence is mine. They can buy it through shell companies nobody can trace because I deleted the ownership database.I just built a toll booth on the global financial system. I take a cut every time someone uses the dollar. And I made it so nobody can see who is paying.And every single step I just described has already happened.So what does that mean for you and I?The reason the United States can borrow at low rates and keep your mortgage and your car payment and your import prices stable is because foreign central banks hold trillions in dollar reserves. That system has always been public. The benefit went to everyone. Lower borrowing costs, cheaper goods , and the single biggest economic advantage any country has ever had.What I just described is the privatization of that function. The entity buying the debt is no longer a central bank acting in the public interest. It is a private company taking 75% of net profits for one family. The reserve function used to generate a public benefit. Now it generates a private fee.Your purchasing power shrinks every time the dollar weakens. Your 401k buys less in real terms. Everything you import costs more. And every time the dollar drops, demand for the private digital alternative goes up. The one the president's family owns. The one that by law must buy government debt.You absorb the cost of a weakening dollar. His family collects the profit. That is the trade.The enforcement mechanism to stop a sitting president from doing this? There isn't one. Former White House ethics lawyer Richard Painter says it would be a violation for literally any other federal employee, but not the president.Nobody voted for this. No one was asked. There was no debate. There is no enforcement mechanism. There is no one investigating it. The Senate tried and it was blocked.This is the largest conflict of interest in American history happening in broad daylight while everyone argues about something else.So what do you do? Share this. Make it impossible to ignore. Send it to your representative, your senator, every journalist you follow. We make them answer for it. Because the only thing protecting this scheme right now is the fact that not enough people understand it yet.

 

But that would never happen, would it?

[Jerry_Atrick]

Although largely correct, my understanding of stablecoin is that it has to be backed by a liquid asset to derive its value. In other words, we would treat it as a derivative financial instrument when pricing it. I am not sure how the inversion of the dollar value would send the stablecoin up in value. It effectively becomes a proxy for directly buying US Treasuries in this case. There is no mandate for a stable coin to buy anything.. but on issuing more of the currency the stablecoin can do one of two things.. not buy any, which will dilute the value of the already issued coin as well as that of the newly issued coin, or top up their reserves of whatever is backing the stablecoin - in this case US Treasuries. These holding represent hedges against the loss of value of the coin against the currency they are stabilised against. Importantly, they don't have to buy up new US Treasuries (or whatever currency they are stabilised against), and they don't have to buy the debt - they can hold cash reserves - though that is far more expensive. 

 

I am nto sure about the retail market, but any intitutional interest in a properly hedged stablecoin as a result of a decrease in the demand of the asset backing it would not lead to an increase in demand.. In fact, it would go the other way. In the above case, if they saw the dollar dropping, they would probably take short positions in that coin (note, assuming this is not speculative) because even if it took a while for the hype of the retail investors in the coin to wear down, the coin would drop to its actual value... Also, for the coin to remain a stablecoin, as it dfoes not have cash as a hedge, it would likely have to buy more US Treasuries to maintain its stable status, and that could squeeze its finances and eventually cause it to break from the claim of stablecoin, which would then kill demand and value as it becomes another meme coin after that, or go into massive debt to hold its value. If the dollar stayed long term depressed, either way, the coin will eventually go with it from a retail investor perspective. 

 

10 hours ago, nomadpete said:

Nobody voted for this.

That is my favourite. Errr.. Yes they did.. They knew tariffs were coming, and from his first stint in office, they knew he was going to be a lying, corrupt con artist. The fact this bit was not in his policy did not mean he wasn't going to try to use the presidency to disproportionately enrich himself corruptly. It could have been any myriad of ways to do it.. And yes, you just had to listen to his policy speeches (rallies) and realise he was all about tanking the US economy through increased debt and tariffs, and being a dictator. It seems that people are really no smarter than any other animal - you offer them a morsel of bait with a giant hook in it, they will not see the hook and just take the bait, hook, line, and sinker (in fact, some animals seem smarter as when they see the hook, they nibble at the bait but not take the hook).  And then they will start thrashing about trying to get off the hook as they are drawn to the usually inevitable conclusion.

 

In the aftermath of the initial policy implementations, it was educating to see how many people who voted for Chump say they didn't vote for the policies he implemented - the very same policies he was very clear about implementing before the election... Teachers voted for slashes to the education budget, government workers voted for DOGE, undocumented immigrant families voted for ICE.. those on SNAP having it withdrawn, and the list goes on. It was absolutely mind boggling when they would turn up on youtube and MSM and say they didn't vote for that... What they thought for some reason is it wouldn't happen to them.. when it was clear it would. And the funny thing was they often said they would still vote for him... 

 

They are getting exactly what they voted for. 

Edited 3 hours ago by Jerry_Atrick

[Jerry_Atrick]

BTW, if you really want to stop the rent takers of the economy, start using cash for as many purchases as possible. Every card transaction - and I do mean every one - results with some going to one of two payments companies in the US. Even our dear eftpos has to pay a fee. 

Edited 3 hours ago by Jerry_Atrick