The Grand Scam

CryptoQ Fed 1280
 
Q: What does The federal reserve, crypto-currency, and q-anon, all have in common?
 
A: They are all conspiracy theories, or not, depending on what you believe.
 
Imagine playing monopoly with a lizard who has unlimited money for himself and he uses that money to buy everything on the board before you ever even get a chance to roll the dice. Them’s the rules, he says. Pay up. You work hard and start a business, but then you find out he’s franchised your competition and everybody is investing in your failure, so you do. You apply for a job with the corporation but they’re not hiring, you. So you seek public assistance and start drinking and get angry. Eventually, your family breaks up and you end up living in your car until it breaks down. And then you find yourself looking around for a good place to pitch your tent, for the night. Just then, a wave of dirty rain water from a mud puddle gets splashed up into your face and you watch a luxurious sports tank speed away. The corporate lizard laughs as he rolls his overpriced auto investment down the road, checking the current scam-coin price and speculating that there is a conspiracy being perpetrated against him, by you and your government of socialist wannabees.
 
Welcome to the grand scam. Wall Street vs. Main Street.
 
Truth is not a prerequisite when practicing the ideology of supremacy. Belief is truth enough, for some, no matter how wrong they are. It’s been a political strategy to ignore social remedy for a long time.
 
In the beginning the value of money was determined by gold weight. It wasn’t perfect but the value of currency was stable. Most people worked for their money and put it in the bank. And then the bankers “invested” that money to profit themselves. They made fortunes but the bank deposits just “disappeared”, they said, causing an economic depression.
 
The government printed up a bunch of money to cover the missing deposits and the bankers got to keep their ill-gotten gains. The scam became a business model, based on inflation and extraction, which has been practiced ever since.
 
(The establishment profits on inflation by devaluing the currency and increasing inequality. The money is worth less but they have a lot more of it, comparatively, so it’s a profitable strategy, for them.)
 
The scammers got rich. Depositors got paid back with public debt.
 
Then in 1971, they say, the scam was unsustainable and we had to cut loose of the gold standard. Our fiat currency was born and debts were then paid, and prosperity was made, by over-leveraging the full faith and credit of future taxpayers and the belief that “growth” would be able to perpetually pick up the tab for “our” excessive prosperity. It was a lucrative plan for many, for a long time. The extaction scam was normalized and continues to this day.
 
Growth versus Extraction
 
Inequality and Inflation predictably continue to increase, along with the massive spending and debt. Instead of taxing the corporations making fortunes from the public debt, the government borrows from them, and pays them back by borrowing more, and by raising prices, devaluing money, and increasing inequality, and of course, by counterfieting, which causes inflation.
 
Pyramid schemes can work well for a long time until those at the top get too greedy and that’s what’s happened here. The failure of the scam was inevitable. The problem is the scam is vulnerable now, to correction by democratic regulations. Those who manage the scam need a more secure method of extraction moving forward, if the scam is to survive.
 
Scam? What scam?
 
What can we do to franchise the economy further for more corporate profits? How do we launder trillions of extracted and dark money dollars without oversight? And how do we completely abandon the public and their hyper-inflated and quickly crumbling currency? And most importantly, how do we prove that their “socialist” policies are to blame for this entire mess, and not us? Is what they’ve been thinking.
 
Introducing Crypto, the privatized currency market.
 
The king lizard compares crypto-currency to gold. As if random computer calculations are the equivalent to precious metals. The lizard is out to lunch. A ten martini gold plated luxury lunch paid for with the fiat profits extracted from future taxpayers, I would suspect. He’s totally disconnected from reality while pretending this massive financial conspiracy is normal. The chairman is a master of the lizard language. He doesn’t lie but he never tells the truth, that matters.
 
Allowing for a private currency based on nothing is a mockery of everything that has ever been ethical. It is an unconstitutional threat to the root of our security and should be outlawed immediately.
 
The so-called crypto-currency gets its value by defying the law. It’s not a currency at all. It is a wannabe currency. Every dime invested in crypto-currency scams should be confiscated by authorities, imho, and profitable investors should be targeted for audits.
 
Privatized currency is illegal here. So don’t call it a currency. It’s an investment scam with no underlying value.
 
Some people have too much money.
 
Of course the headline is satirical but if the fed started buying crypto-currency nobody would even bat an eye of counterpoint concern. Everybody would jump in and make a ton of money, ultimately extracted from taxpayers, who will remain oblivious to the scam.
 
Bad bets will be retroactively insured by taxpayers, as usual.
 
Cyrpto-currencies are an indictment of both our financial system and justice system. It shows there is no limit now to the shameless and blatant scamming that is allowed by the lack of oversight and legal restraint. I don’t see the problem, they say.
 
Those in justice are invested in the scam. Their conflict of interest is self-evident and so are their results. Our current economy is proof enough that our democracy needs an upgrade, asap, to recognize that money is representation and to apportion representatives accordingly.
 
Constitutional scholars are also heavily invested in the scam. Maybe not Crypto yet, but they depend on the ongoing scams for income, legal or not. They think it’s fine. They consider it normal, because it is, for now, right or wrong.
 
The crypto-strategy for profits is a marketing buzz. Let’s all get excited about making money in our pyramid scheme and see how far we can take it. See how long we can milk it with our strategical exuberance. The price will rise as promoted by corporate media celebrities and heavily invested news pundits.
 
Reality check.
 
Crypto is a scam. It’s the destination of the grand scam. Even though it’s not a currency, yet, it is quickly being accepted as payment at notable corporate retailers. The validity of the scam is being created by the establishment. Not because it’s needed but because it transcends main street, for investor profits.
 
Our money can be transacted digitally already. There’s no good purpose for a publicly sanctioned scam, even as a betting mechanism.
 
When the dollar fails, Crypto will be there to fulfill the transaction. Crypto is a Wall Street currency, not a Main Street currency. At least not yet.
 
Embracing an alternative currency is betraying the American dollar and by extension, America. If anything defines the United States it is its currency. To contract monetary authority to the Fed is outrageous in the first place, imo. But to allow them to create a privatized alternative to our legally sanctioned currency, so we can “invest” in it, is just wrong.
 
Crypto-currency is not a currency at all.
 
Maybe if we can get enough people to use our private currency, we can abandon the dollar completely, is what they want. We don’t need your stinking money, we have our own, is what they’re thinking.
 
I’ll be back to revise and extend this when I can. For now, I’ll leave this information below, I have extracted from the bitcoin currency market page. It says the investment has no underlying value, while trying to convince you that it does. And notice how they discount the dollar as being a fiat currency, as if the public’s money is as fraudulent as their own.
 
Update Dec 2021
 
At the same time Crypto is becoming more normalized and integrated into our economy, it is becoming more obvious how fraudulent the scam is. They’ll all say We told you so, and wash their hands of it. That how this “system” “works”. It reflects the intention of those who control the system design, legislating and adjudicating the scam to protect and defend their self-interests.
 
I was motivated, this Christmas eve, for a quick addendum here, after reading the linked article by Robert McCauley. Despite omitting the dark money-laundering functionality of the scam, this is the most honest analysis I’ve seen yet, explaining the mechanics of the legalized crime of the crypto scam.
 
 
————–
 
About Bitcoin
Bitcoin is a cryptocurrency invented in 2008 by an unknown person or group of people using the name Satoshi Nakamoto. The currency began use in 2009 when its implementation was released as open-source software. Bitcoin is a decentralized digital currency, without a central bank or single administrator, that can be sent from user to user on the peer-to-peer bitcoin network without the need for intermediaries. Transactions are verified by network nodes through cryptography and recorded in a public distributed ledger called a blockchain. Bitcoins are created as a reward for a process known as mining. They can be exchanged for other currencies, products, and services, but the real-world value of the coins is extremely volatile. Research produced by the University of Cambridge estimated that in 2017, there were 2.9 to 5.8 million unique users using a cryptocurrency wallet, most of them using bitcoin. Users choose to participate in the digital currency for a number of reasons: ideologies such as commitment to anarchism, decentralization and libertarianism, convenience, using the currency as an investment and pseudonymity of transactions. Wikipedia
 
About United States DollarThe United States dollar is the official currency of the United States and its territories per the Coinage Act of 1792. One dollar is divided into 100 cents, or into 1000 mills for accounting and taxation purposes. The Coinage Act of 1792 created a decimal currency by creating the dime, nickel, and penny coins, as well as the dollar, half dollar, and quarter dollar coins, all of which are still minted in 2021. Several forms of paper money were introduced by Congress over the years, the latest of which being the Federal Reserve Note that was authorized by the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. While all existing U.S. currency remains legal tender, issuance of the previous form of the currency was discontinued in January 1971. As a result, paper money that is in current circulation consists primarily of Federal Reserve Notes that are denominated in U.S. dollars. Since the convertibility of paper U.S. currency into any precious metal was suspended in 1971, the U.S. dollar is de facto fiat money. Wikipedia
 

Senate Rules

An objection is more powerful than a vote, apparently, in the senate.

Truth seeking is a time consuming endeavor when the truth is being hidden, institutionally, by almost everyone. That’s why I was happy to stumble across this Jimmy Dore video, where he points out Senator Bernie could have objected to the Trump agenda then, just as Senator Manchin, democrat, is objecting to the Biden agenda now.

Jimmy makes a good point but it needs further clarification.

One objection from a democratic senator against Trump would have changed the majority from 51 to 60, effectively defeating anything he wanted to do, and did, like his big tax cuts, his great wall, and his conservative court. His entire agenda could have been defeated by one senator objecting, but none did.

Trump confirmed three Supreme Court justices without objection. Any democratic senator could have forced a 60 vote threshold for those judicial confirmations but none did. All of the democrats voted against all of the nominees but none of them objected, apparently, so they were all confirmed. It’s a perfect example of self-sabotage by the democrats to serve the conservative agenda, by not reciprocating with the rules.

Everybody is blaming rule 22 and the need to close debate with a sixty vote threshold. It’s all because of an accidental rule change by Aaron Burr, they say, in 1806 and blah blah blah. That’s all a distraction.

I’ve been enjoying all of the misguided opinions about the filibuster and possibly shared a few of my own. It’s all a distraction from the main point, which is a supermajority of one is an intentional senate rule that violates the constitution. It’s absurd and illegal and it’s true.

Senate rule 8.1 is the problem in need of correction.

I knew one senator could object to anything from proceeding but I got distracted down a rabbit-hole of professional deception. I found myself wasting my time chasing down establishment disinformation to counterpoint. As seen in the three previous filibuster posts.

So I took another look at the senate rules and sure enough, one senator can object to consideration of just about anything, using rule eight.

RULE VIII
ORDER OF BUSINESS
.. bills and resolutions that are not objected to shall be taken up in their order, ..

Like most legalese, the language is up for interpretation and loopholes could be found to get around it. Alternative interpretations could allow bills to be debated and brought to a vote where majority rule prevails.

The rule could be interpreted to allow the chair to bring up the bill “later in the order” and declare that it proceeds directly to a majority vote, for instance. It’s all about interpretation.

But alas, the senate democrats don’t even have unity within their own caucus. Even though they have enough democratic senators they still don’t have a majority, which has been a Democratic Party problem for a long time. Despite preaching unity they are rarely united themselves, on much of anything.

The Democratic Party seem to always be just a few votes shy of victory, for the public. If the republicans can’t beat ‘um outright, then enough democrats will step forward to facilitate democratic failure.

If the republicans win a victory the public loses. If the democrats win a victory for the public, it’s because the republicans won as well.

Republicans don’t like voters.

The For the People voting rights will be a perfect example of intentional failure by democrats. If the Bill included a new computer server and a tech savvy staff in every congressional district, to facilitate electoral reform, it could be called infrastructure.

They can pass it with a majority vote, so says the parliamentarian, lol.

The democrats won’t likely include a citizen network into the infrastructure bill to revolutionize our democracy, that’s a bet. They will keep voting rights separate to ensure it fails, by rule. Just in case infrastructure passes, they’ll know meaningful voting rights won’t.

The states are all pushing voter suppression, they say.

The Democratic Party is full of double agents ready to conspire with republicans against the public, democracy, and the common good.

The filibuster is a perfect example of establishment collusion against the public. That includes both parties and virtually every organization that dispenses information. They all rationalize that the vauguely defined filibuster is a valid legal tactic despite characterizing it as derived from a legislative accident that ultimately violates constitutional intent.

The establishment says the filibuster supermajority is caused by the need to close debate. That is not true. The truth is senate rule 8.1 allows for an objection to proceed to the debate. That senate rule violates the majority rule intention of the constitution. If a senate rule obstructs constitutional intention, it’s illegal.

Senate Rule 8.1 needs to be rewritten for constitutional compliance:

RULE VIII
ORDER OF BUSINESS
.. bills and resolutions shall be taken up in their order, ..

And with that one rule change it would take 60 votes to obstruct, instead of 60 votes to proceed. A supermajority would be necessary to sustain an objection to proceeding, as the constitution intends.

So, it turns out the problem is not the senate filibuster after all.

It is Rule #8.1 that needs to be revised to make the senate procedure constitutionally compliant. Then, maybe it would be more difficult for the senate to obstruct policy that benefits the public.