BRICS Gold-Backed Currency?
There's been a lot of chatter about this.
But despite an official clarification, the Russian embassy in Kenya said in a tweet, "The BRICS countries are planning to introduce a new trading currency, which will be backed by gold."
Alright so the official story is that BRICS is not working to issue a currency in a bid to compete with USD dominance, but yet the rumors fly anyway. I mean it would make sense (kind of). We all know that central banks and other institutions have been stacking gold pretty hard lately, but that the same time that can be explained simply by the market cycle and the "threat of recession".
Personally I'm not buying it.
The Biden administration full-on tried to change the common definition of what a recession even is, constantly denying that we are in one. More recently the narrative has shifted a bit. We still "aren't in a recession" but "a recession is right around the corner". It's a narrative that's being pushed so hard and fast that at this point I don't even believe it anymore. Something else is going on.
In addition to the recession narrative another big story being pushed on purpose by the propaganda machine is this idea that USD is losing dominance. We see this news EVERYWHERE, and this type of propaganda seems to be extremely effective, especially within the crypto circle. It ticks all the boxes about what we already want to hear.
Echo chamber stronk.
We already want USD to fail due to the intrinsic blatant corruption of it all, so when the liars come out and say "USD is failing" we believe them. Why would they lie? lol. Exactly what are we being buttered up for? What is the point of pushing this information to the public if it was actually true?
Certainly, it could be a variant of predictive-programming. Repeat the same narrative over and over again to justify the power-grabs coming down later. If everyone believes that USD dominance is being threatened then it's much easier to justify drastic measures that consolidate more power to the already powerful. Being alarmist about a gold-backed BRICS currency makes it easier to justify the adoption of FEDnow, which everyone seems to think is a precursor to CBDC.
Except... it's not though.
FEDnow is an account based system. The only way to use FEDnow is to be issued what is called a master-account directly from the Federal Reserve. Unsurprisingly the only way to get a master-account is to have a banking license. The FED is, after all, a central bank (IE a bank for banks). They do not service the public directly, and there's no reason to think that's going to change anytime soon.
This idea that FEDnow is going to seamlessly transition into some into some Dystopic CBDC nightmare is just flat out comical. CBDCs are wallet-based. Anyone with a wallet can use the system the same as anyone else. How are they going to magically convert an account based master-node system into a wallet-based one? Again, it's magical thinking. And also: who cares. The entire premise for all of this is that the government is going to make everything else illegal and legally force everyone to use their brand of technology, which again isn't going to happen. Literally has never and will never happen.
So a gold-backed BRICS currency eh?
I would love to see that. Let Peter Schiff do his happy dance before the entire thing crashes into the mountain. It's like these people have learned absolutely nothing from history, and history is by far my least favorite subject. If gold-backed currency is such a good idea then why did they all get phased out of existence? We're going to bring them back like it's a retro fashion trend and act like this is the future? Make it make sense.
The very concept of a gold-backed currency evokes a singular overriding message: YOU CAN'T TRUST US! Right? Because if you could trust the entity issuing the currency then it wouldn't need to be backed by gold in the first place. lol.
So where is this gold being to be stored and secured? How will that be paid for? What assurances do we have that the conversion rate will remain constant and always be available? Who's going to audit the reserves to make sure they exist? The answer to all these questions is simple: 'no'. Fail fail fail fail fail. Every metric is a fail. It's a dumb idea that only had any relevance whatsoever before the Internet existed.
But again I'd love to see this gold-backed currency become a thing because that just paves the way for a crypto-backed currency narrative. Assuming we continue on the 4-year crypto market cycle we'll get a bull run in 2025 and 2029, each with a unique narrative. I suppose at this point I wouldn't be surprised if the narrative of 2029 was the collateralization of crypto assets on a nation-state level.
It's only a matter of time before countries realize they can print assets out of thin air using Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies as collateral for the derivatives they're making. Presently it's quite obvious that the market cap of crypto is comically tiny and could never accomplish such a feat at this stage of the game... but hell with Blackrock jumping in and a full market-cycle later we might be singing a different tune. Don't forget that if Bitcoin keeps doubling every year on average that puts it at a market cap of $128T at the end of 2029, which actually is enough for nation-states to collateralize it in such a fashion. A single BTC would be worth over $6M a token, which isn't necessarily something to be celebrated. It just is what it is. Mainstream adoption what-have-you. Honestly if my net worth was only $6.5M in 2029 I'd be pretty disappointed. Seems low considering the stakes and timelines.
Bitcoin is superior.
The difficulty of transferring a billion dollars worth of gold is infinitely more complex and inefficient compared to a billion dollars worth of Bitcoin. And while were at it, let's point out that we're still measuring everything in dollars. Unit of account matters. The entire world will be irreparably changed when crypto itself becomes the unit of account. Of course Bitcoin will never accomplish such a feat, but don't try to tell a maxi that. In all likelihood Hive won't either, and that's fine. Technically we only need one.
- An audit on Bitcoin is trivial.
- Dividing Bitcoin into parts is trivial. (divisibility)
- Transferring Bitcoin is trivial. (medium of exchange)
- Bitcoin can't be counterfeit or otherwise manipulated.
- Which is exactly why these nations have refused to use it.
All I can say is that it's going to be pretty weird when the most wealthy nations in the world per capita end up being South Korea and El Salvador. On a cultural level we are about to see some pretty big shakeups. It's quite impossible to say how those developments will materialize and cascade outwardly, but it's sure to be quite the spectacle.
Conclusion
Is BRICS creating a gold-backed currency? Who cares? How is that more trustworthy than the systems we already have? It's not. Bankers have been hanged for stealing gold and printing fake money since of the concept. It's an archaic method of value storage that has absolutely no place within the digital age.
Is USD under attack? Is the "world reserve currency" threatened? Again no. You know how I know? Because the propaganda machine is shilling me the exact opposite story. They're not being subtle. Don't believe the information just because it aligns with the crypto narrative. And also don't forget that a weak dollar pumps markets, not the other way around. These speculators trying to price in events ten years from now are going to get wrecked, plain and simple. Weak hands continue to be flushed.
All that, and there simply isn’t enough gold. Nixon found that out the hard way.
Indeed the inflation of gold could never hope to match the inflation of tech and society as a whole.
Yeah, I've been reading that BS about the US dollar losing its top dog position.
Where does everyone run in times of uncertainty? The dollar.
Maybe one day they will run to !LOLZ ... hahaha.
lolztoken.com
It is slowly coming back to me.
Credit: reddit
@edicted, I sent you an $LOLZ on behalf of @captaincryptic
(5/10)
They are really pushing the "gold-backed" narrative because they really need people to believe in their new currency. Especially since no one would take their current currency (except maybe Russia)
No one trusts China to do what they say. No one trusts India or Brazil to be stable. No one trusts South Africa to continue existing.
Sooo, gold it is.
But, i bet it will not be easily convertible to gold.
So, hollow from the get go.
However, the Fed seems hell bent on making this happen
by making something, anything that is an escape look appealing.
Viva Bitcoin!
BRICS converting to gold backed is comical because that assumes people even trust the countries to buy their shit asset? America isn’t great on some things but people have used the currency for so long and there’s a lot of buying power behind it. Are people going to be jumping in line to get Brazilian currency? Absolutely not lol.
Just more fear and doom porn. It’s pathetic how incessant these assholes are. Doom doom doom fear fear fear.
I hope BRICS would introduce something new. Precious-metals backed currencies are traditional. Not surprised though. Big institutions would not change the rules when they are winning. As much as possible they would maintain the status quo but there are great people and communities out there who will make life better for the common people. !PGM
As I avoid money to the degree possible, I am not digging deep into currency rabbit holes, and would consider myself completely uninformed about current psyops.
Whew! While I am not seeking to moon on CBDCs when they are issued (lol), I am relieved to hear that FEDnow is some kind of interbank token, and won't largely impact us. While I successfully avoid a lot of money commerce, afflicting my communities would impact me no less terribly for it doing so indirectly.
I had considered that holders of SDRs would be able to issue CBDCs, and set whatever limits on them they wanted as long as they were collateralized by their SDRs. So yacht travelers availed SDRs could issue themselves and crew some that were highly fungible, or the help could get CBDCs of lesser utility, say only good for a new uniform, some goyslop, and tickets for a show in the next port, or something.
That may not be as difficult as we might assume. Back in the 80s, I considered chartering a commercial bank in Nauru, where you needed only $40k to do so, IIRC. Folks with a minimum SDR balance might be able to get such license easily, although I bet it'll be a lot more than $40k.
Because fractional reserve fraud is far more profitable. And because the US was almost certainly not holding the reserves they claimed they were when Nixon turned the dollar into toilet paper.
You do realize systems were in place to do all those things before 1974, right? They weren't perfect, as I note above, but the petrodollar allowed the US to pivot and not get called on it's BS. Had that not been an option, devaluing the US dollar would have resolved the problem.
I'd expect all hell to break loose within a year. Someone would deploy some kind of censorship to ransom BTC, because BlackRock has the depth to dig down to to make it profitable for say, the BRICS, to make it worth their while.
It is all sorts of superior, except at being able to be transacted in without someone censoring your transaction and holding it for ransom, or for miners to do so, like back in 2017 when they were charging ~25% IIRC. BTC hasn't been tested. No crypto has really faced a test of surviving censorship. Before there were online transactions, PMs had a pretty fundamental role as a collateral of choice. You needed to be able to physically take someone's gold from them to defund them.
All you have to do to defund someone using BTC as collateral is to cut their power, cut their comms, or just refuse to let them transmit encrypted data on your network they have to use to transact. Don't even need a popgun to do that. Easy peasy.
There's some boilerplate language regarding failure to enforce rights in a lot of contracts, such that just because a party hasn't enforced them yet doesn't mean they can't whenever they want to. When you're dealing with pirates, as banksters certainly are, fraud and theft are always on the table, and just because they haven't stolen everything you own yet doesn't mean they're trustworthy. Banksters have stolen everything I owned, more than once.
When BTC successfully survives such attacks, I'll have a better understanding that BTC CAN withstand censorship attacks, because I don't see that it can the way the market operates today. There are ways to counterfeit BTC. They aren't any cheaper or easier than counterfeiting toilet paper today, which makes current prices inadequate to support such an operation. If BTC pops to $1M and BlackRock is in it, that will no longer be true. BlackRock cannot risk a 51% attack, so it won't move into BTC substantially unless it can guarantee no one can 51% attack it, meaning BlackRock will be able to 51% attack everyone else. On top of that the 51% attack is not the only way to counterfeit BTC.
Think like a pirate. That's how banking works.
Thanks!