The Banking Elites Are Preparing to Introduction of a Single “World Currency”

 

The idea the world would be better served with a single “World Currency” has been growing and looms as a real possibility in the near future. Many people see this as a major part of the “endgame” or something that will constitute a needed reset to a global economy and financial system that has gone off track. Throughout history, before an economic collapse, the masses and society tend to believe things are financially stable. Only after the economy goes over the edge of an abyss and is in free-fall does reality set in. It is not by accident that blinders have been placed upon us but it is the result of distractions being thrown in our path by those wishing to hold onto their power over us. It is wise to remember that when things do become critical, those in power will not be kind to us but that we will be thrown under the bus without a thought.

Over the last one hundred years, equity markets have been a primary tool used by the public to measure the economy. In some ways, the stock markets have become a kind of switch the elites can push at any given time to energize the masses distracting them from the dangers lurking in their economic future. When markets rise despite warnings from negative fiscal indicators, the masses become optimistic. During every upswing of stocks the elites claim they see the “green shoots” of prosperity, however, these shoots seem to always turn brown and die. We have been leaping from one recession to another even though central banks claim they now hold the key to generating true and honest growth. The truth is the current stock market bolstered by easy money and stock buybacks is a poor reflection of the real economy and what is happening in many areas across a broad swath of the world.

History indicates that establishment economists trained and educated in the ivory towers of academia are perhaps the most useless of all analysts and perpetually wrong. Only independent analysts have ever been able to predict anything of value when it comes to our economic future and that is because they have the advantage of not being blinded by the propaganda and brainwashed by lies flowing from those in control. Time and time again it has been proven the appearance of prosperity means nothing if the fundamentals do not support the optimism. A bullish stock market, a high dollar index, and low unemployment mean nothing and are unsustainable if generated by false methods and fiat money.We have seen time and time again throughout history that fundamentals matter. 

The markets cannot hide from true price discovery forever.The stock market with its boom and bust cycles has proven to be a false indicator of what is really unfolding.Manipulation by the central banks has rendered this indicator of economic health useless. The problem we face is the horrible options in fiat money, massive debt, and the growth of international businesses have all come together in an explosive way. The banking elites are positioning themselves to avoid blame for this disaster while the rest of us are being sold on the most elaborate recovery con-game ever conceived and perpetuated by those with the most to gain.

Those in charge of our financial machinery have indicated to the public their desire for more power. This means creating a truly globalcentralized economic system and a highly controlled world currency framework dominated by a select cult of banking oligarchs. This would, in effect makes the rest of the human race their slaves.

Over the years, many articles have  referred to a 1988 write-up in the financial magazine ‘The Economist’ titled “Get ready for a world currency by 2018.” It outlined the framework for a global currency system administered by the International Monetary Fund. This new system was and is floated on the premise that only by erasing all national economic sovereignty can true stability be obtained. It requires governments to borrow from the world central banking authority, rather than printing currency to finance their infrastructure programs.

This dovetails with efforts to create such a system under the total control of the IMF which should raise the concern of every American. We are hearing more warnings and witnessing a push to destabilize the dollar as the reserve currency by China and several other countries. It is also occurring as Orwellian governments float the idea of going cashless as a way to gain further control over our lives.

For years the IMF has been openly discussing the ascension of the SDR to replace the dollar as the world reserve currency. Many developing nations that are deep in debt are already asking for help from the IMF due to volatility across the world and the BRICS are pushing hard to remove the dollar as the world reserve. This makes it a question of when such a currency reset will occur and in its wake bury the majority of the middle-class and poor throughout America. There is no way around it, the elites are positioned and merely waiting for a geopolitical disaster or catastrophe so overwhelming that when the time arrives they can portray themselves as our saviors during the chaos.

The demise of the dollar harkens back to when President Nixon severed its tie to gold. First, it’s crucial to understand that at the very core of our global economy is a financial system dominated by the U.S. dollar which has been deemed the reserve currency.  The USD is unique in that it grants the U.S. the privilege of having a national currency which at the same time serves as the global reserve currency. This was solidified toward the end of World War II with the Bretton Woods agreement, which was accepted because the U.S. agreed to offer sovereign nations holding dollars a right to exchange these dollars for gold at a fixed price, however, with Nixon’s action in 1971, the USD became a fiat currency backed by nothing, the supply of which can be arbitrarily altered and manipulated by a group of unelected bureaucrats in charge of the Federal Reserve. This money system represents the most powerful tool on the planet.

The new world order and globalization pushed by many world leaders and the rich elite that tout “larger, more cooperative governments under one financial unit will benefit us all” feeds into the world currency scenario. Many Americans are oblivious to the fact we gain a great deal by our status of the dollar being the reserve currency by which all others tend to be measured. This means we have a great deal to lose if it is dethroned and stand to suffer the most if the dollar declines in value. Those who will be crucified are the middle-class Americans whose wealth islocked into or are holding long-term USD bonds thinking they are a safe investment.

Currently, a huge mismatch exists between the useof the dollar in the global financial system and the U.S. share of the world economy.This is whyChina, Russia, and several other countries that are acutely aware of this have been taking major steps to transition to a more multi-polar currency world. This is also why we should prepare and expect that in coming yearsthe world will adopt a completely different global financial system from the one chaotically birthed in the 1970s and when this occurs the USD will lose its total dominance on the world stage, resulting in major implications for America. While many people see this coming, several opinions exist as to how it will unfold and while we engage in speculation, nobody really knows what the world financial system will look like ten or twenty years down the road.

Few of us who continue to cherish freedom can get excited about transitioning away from the USD and being placed under the thumb of the IMF or an oppressive nation-state currency controlled by a country like China.That is why many of us think the dollar will be ripped from us during a time of crisis when Americans are open to accepting any solution offered to them as a way to ease their woes. While people point to cryptocurrencies as an option we should remember politics plays a massive role in how this all unfolds. To Americans, the fate of dollar-dominated assets and their value when the dust finally settles should be a huge concern but most Americans fail to grasp the implications. 

It is my contention the transition to a world currency will take a far greater toll on paper assets than tangible goods. While recognizing the flaws of the dollar and our current system I have come to believe the other fiat currencies such as the euro and yen hold even less merit. This includes cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin. Regardless, in the end, we should expect to be told and not given an option as to what is coming. If events unfold in the way those promoting a one-world currency have planned it will be a dagger in the heart of freedom.

Here is  the detailed explanation from a user's : One world currency in the next years: how would it impact global finance? 

 Assuming the whole world starts sharing a common currency whilst maintaining all existing border controls and barriers to trade and the movement of goods, capital and labour, there would be some fairly disastrous effects.

(TL;DR: most countries would exist in a state of disequilibrium, with very high unemployment in some and very high inflation in others, due to asymmetric economic shocks. Exporting firms would find it cheaper to obtain finance and international trade would increase significantly. Most nations would end up finding a World Currency very painful, and the only way to conceivably even slightly make it work is with a World Federation, i.e.: abolishing the idea of sovereign nations).

First, defining what a single currency entails: it means that all countries would give-up control of their money supply and interest rates (i.e.: monetary policy) to a hypothetical World Central Bank. This is NOT the same as the World Bank, which gives loans for development projects in countries - the World Central Bank instead would control the global money supply and interest rates for this new currency.

Secondly, some definitions: monetary policy is control the money supply and interest rates, and is managed by the central bank. Fiscal policy is control of government finances, and includes things like tax rates, government spending etc. The exchange rate is the value of the currency against other outside currencies - in a common global monetary union, take that to be the nominal value of the currency.

Now, it's important to understand the idea of an "Optimum Currency Area (OCA)", that is, a cluster/region of countries that can form a currency union without significant negative economic effects.

There are various theories for what constitutes an OCA, but the most famous is the one developed by Canadian economist Robert Mundell, who won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics for his work on OCAs and monetary union in 1999. Mundell theorised that currency unions need to have a high level of labour and capital mobility to work successfully. Say country A and country B share a currency (enter a currency union). Now, an asymmetric shock (which is an economic shock that impacts different countries in different ways) hits A negatively, causing a contraction of aggregate demand (AD) in country A. If it had its own currency, its exchange rate would depreciate against the rest of the world to restore competitiveness, reducing the price of exports and increasing the quantity of exports sold. This will allow AD to start increasing again and equilibrium will be restored. In a currency union, the exchange rate will depreciate slightly, but not all the way, as country B has not had a contraction of demand. This means both countries will now exist in a macroeconomic disequilibrium: A's exchange rate is overvalued, hurting competitiveness and causing unemployment, and B's exchange rate is undervalued, increasing exports and causing inflationary pressure. To restore equilibrium, labour and capital needs to be able to move from A into B - hence, an Optimum Currency Area needs a high level of labour and capital mobility across borders.

The incredibly highly integrated Eurozone, which has open borders and a common factor markets, already suffers from insufficient labour mobility across borders for a number of reasons, including differences in pension schemes, language barriers, differences in qualification acceptance etc. So the world does not in any capacity have sufficient mobility of labour and capital across borders: there are way too many barriers to the movement of factors of production. A world-currency implemented under anything close to the status-quo idea of independent nation states and borders would result in most countries being in a permanent state of disequilibrium, with high unemployment in some places and high inflation in others.

The world as a whole is also far too vulnerable to asymmetric shocks for it to be an OCA. Commodity-exporting countries in particular struggle to join OCAs as shocks to commodity markets are often far sharper than shocks that hit other industries.

In addition, countries would lose the ability to use monetary policy to correct economic shocks, that is, raising interest rates in times of high inflation and lowering them in times of high unemployment and low inflation. They would be forced to use fiscal policy to correct shocks, but different countries have different approaches to fiscal policy and without some sort of fiscal-policy rules and fiscal transfers implemented by the World Authority overseeing this, there would likely be many cases of countries' fiscal responses negatively impacting other nations who are in different stages of their economic cycle; the global interest rate for some countries would end up too high and for others, too low. There is also the issue that many countries would become more vulnerable to sovereign default as they would have foregone control of interest rates and the money supply. This would likely result in a series of Greek-like disasters in countries with severe downturns, particularly in countries with poor fiscal discipline.

The case of the Eurozone shows its almost impossible to make a successful currency union without fiscal union and transfers, which effectively means to make a currency union work it needs to be federal entity with a common government.

Finally, Ronald McKinnon and the McKinnon Criterion tells us that in order to minimise the likelihood of asymmetric shocks, countries that enter a currency union should/must have a high level of trade amongst each other. This is not true for the whole world, and likely will not be for the forseeable future purely down to distances (the Gravity Model of trade tells us the value of trade between two nations is inversely proportional to the distance between them).

Now, common currency areas DO see increases in trade as common currencies reduce the cost of exporting and importing. It also reduces the uncertainty export-industry firms face in what their foreign revenues will be, which without a currency union, would fluctuate depending on the exchange rate. This increases investors' and banks' confidence in these firms, reducing their cost of obtaining finance and increasing production, thereby increasing exports. When this occurs in all currency union members, you get a surge in trade. Some economists therefore theorise that the creation of OCA is endogenous to STARTING a currency-union, in that a common currency facilitates more trade which brings the union closer to an OCA.

It also can make firms more efficient. As an example, pre-Eurozone, it was common for unions to negotiate high wages, which firms would accept, expecting the government to devalue the exchange rate to reduce the price of exports and make up for the lost competitiveness. Workers in different countries were effectively competing against each other; the introduction of a common currency, the Euro, removed this mechanism, making wage-setting more economically sensible and firms more competitive, reducing prices.

Overall, in the status-quo, a world currency union would result in the vast majority of countries being in a state of economic disequilibrium. For it to even slightly work, you would need a common world government with fiscal rules at the very least, and a world federation at best - and even then, much of the world would remain in disequilibrium as asymmetric shocks can never be totally removed.

Now, if you propose a global currency union AND the removal of all barriers to the movement of goods, capital and labour (i.e.: an open border world), with a common government, that gets more interesting but is beyond the scope of what I can answer at the moment.