Worst of financial crisis yet to come: IMF chief economist

I have only started to look into blockchain recently and I am still waiting to read about this technology being used maliciously.
Pretty much any technology can be used maliciously. While Blockchain or the tokenization of real world assets are not bad as such, the devil is in the details of the implementation.

It is about the Western picture of doom only. @ the end of the day who the H does the West think the West is? 3d or not.
The financial system is worldwide and tightly interconnected. All central banks (except North Korea and Iran, I think) belong to the IMF and BIS system, even the central banks of Russia and China.

I do agree that different countries will be affected to very different degrees by the worldwide finanancial system problems though. Just like the mass buying up or stealing of assets (eg. by Blackrock and Vanguard) seems to be happening mostly in the Western world.
 
I am still waiting to read about this technology being used maliciously.

Wait no longer. 🙂 Good overview of one instance here...

 

The UN Just Adopted the “Pact for the Future” Which Lays the Foundation for a New “Global Order”​

by Michael Snyder

September 24, 2024

in Curated, Opinions


Pact for the Future


(The Economic Collapse Blog)—While everyone was distracted, the global elite got exactly what they wanted. The UN adopted the “Pact for the Future” on September 22nd, and the mainstream media in the western world almost entirely ignored what was happening. Instead, the headlines urged us to just keep focusing on Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. Sadly, the vast majority of the population has never ever heard about the “Pact for the Future”, and so there was very little public debate about whether or not we should be adopting a document which lays the foundation for a new “global order”.
The text of the “Pact for the Future” is available online, but hardly anyone will ever read it and many of the most important provisions are buried toward the end of the 56 page document. Of course everyone should take the time to actually read this document, because our leaders just committed us to an extremely insidious global agenda that literally covers just about every conceivable area of human activity.


September 22nd, 2024 is a day that will go down in infamy.
Once the “Pact for the Future” was formally adopted, the following was posted on the official UN website
World leaders today adopted a Pact for the Future that includes a Global Digital Compact and a Declaration on Future Generations. This Pact is the culmination of an inclusive, years-long process to adapt international cooperation to the realities of today and the challenges of tomorrow. The most wide-ranging international agreement in many years, covering entirely new areas as well as issues on which agreement has not been possible in decades, the Pact aims above all to ensure that international institutions can deliver in the face of a world that has changed dramatically since they were created. As the Secretary-General has said, “we cannot create a future fit for our grandchildren with a system built by our grandparents.”
You would think that the “most wide-ranging international agreement in many years” would make headlines all over the planet.
But that didn’t happen.
Solar power is proving to be ineffective for the grid, but PERSONAL solar power is necessary for when the grid goes down. Grab a personal solar generator for bugging in or bugging out.
The UN press release also boldly declares that the “Pact for the Future” will “lay the foundations” for a new “global order”…
“The Pact for the Future, the Global Digital Compact, and the Declaration on Future Generations open the door to new opportunities and untapped possibilities,” said the Secretary-General during his remarks at the opening of the Summit of the Future. The President of the General Assembly noted that the Pact would “lay the foundations for a sustainable, just, and peaceful global order – for all peoples and nations.”
The Pact covers a broad range of issues including peace and security, sustainable development, climate change, digital cooperation, human rights, gender, youth and future generations, and the transformation of global governance.
I don’t want to live in a new “global order” that includes “all peoples and all nations”. I am sure that most of you feel the exact same way.
Another page on the official UN website tells us that “UN 2.0” is all about creating a “modern UN family”
Halfway through the 2030 Agenda, the world is not on track to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. It is not too late to change course, if we all rethink, refocus, and recharge. “UN 2.0” encapsulates the Secretary-General’s vision of a modern UN family, rejuvenated by a forward-thinking culture and empowered by cutting-edge skills for the twenty-first century – to turbocharge our support to people and planet.
We will strive towards this vision with a powerful fusion of innovation, data, digital, foresight and behavioural science skills and culture – a dynamic combination that we call the “Quintet of Change”. It is about evolution towards more agile, diverse, responsive, and impactful UN organizations.
That sounds so cozy, doesn’t it? Who wouldn’t want to be a part of a “family”, right?


But the truth is that the agenda that they intend to impose on all of us will not be pleasant at all.
Over the years, much has been written about how insidious the UN’s “Sustainable Development Goals” are.
Well, the UN is openly admitting that the “Pact for the Future” was specifically designed “to turbo-charge implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals”…
  • The entire Pact is designed to turbo-charge implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals.
  • The most detailed agreement ever at the United Nations on the need for reform of the international financial architecture so that it better represents and serves developing countries, including:
    • Giving developing countries a greater say in how decisions are taken at international financial institutions;
    • Mobilizing more financing from multilateral development banks to help developing countries meet their development needs;
    • Reviewing the sovereign debt architecture to ensure that developing countries can borrow sustainably to invest in their future, with the IMF, UN, G20 and other key players working together;
    • Strengthening the global financial safety net to protect the poorest in the event of financial and economic shocks, through concrete actions by the IMF and Member States;
    • and accelerating measures to address the challenge of climate change, including through delivering more finance to help countries adapt to climate change and invest in renewable energy.
  • Improving how we measure human progress, going beyond GDP to capturing human and planetary wellbeing and sustainability.
  • A commitment to consider ways to introduce a global minimum level of taxation on high-net-worth individuals.
  • On climate change, confirmation of the need to keep global temperature rise to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and to transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.
In one way or another, all forms of human activity contribute to “climate change”.
Don’t wait for beef to become more scarce. Stock up with premium freeze-dried beef cubes – no “beef crumbles” here. This America First, veteran-owned company is ready to help you eat well today and eat well tomorrow. Use promo code “veterans25” for 25% off at checkout.
And so they intend to strictly regulate all forms of human activity in order to meet their twisted goals.
The “Pact for the Future” also recognizes a “central role” for the UN and a “coordinated and multidimensional international response” whenever future “global shocks” arise
We recognize the need for a more coherent, cooperative, coordinated and multidimensional international response to complex global shocks and the central role of the United Nations in this regard. Complex global shocks are events that have severely disruptive and adverse consequences for a significant proportion of countries and the global population, and that lead to impacts across multiple sectors, requiring a multidimensional and whole-of-government, whole-of-society response.
The next time that there is a major global crisis, do you want the UN running the show and telling everyone what to do?
I tried to warn everyone about this.
Stock Market Meltdown
I have written extensively about the “Pact for the Future”, but in the end only a very small sliver of the population got fired up about it.
Now the global elite have achieved their goal, and the opposition that they encountered was barely perceptible.
Michael’s new book entitled “Why” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can subscribe to his Substack newsletter at michaeltsnyder.substack.com.
 
Sherri Tenpenny : Re The Pact of the Future
(It is on Telegram so I cannot share it)
This has gone through silently with more 'reforms' than the WHO expected when their first 'Treaty' was refused.
We will no longer be a citizen of a particular country but a GLOBAL 'citizen'.
Without a Digital/Biometric ID, Dissenting Opinions (Fact Checked by A.I.) we will be prevented from:
Driving anywhere
Flying Anywhere
Withdrawing money from any of our banks
Buy anything from anywhere
But either way we can only do, buy, drive, or withdraw the amount of money that they will 'approve' of.
Same with any remedies etc.
Their plans are to get this accepted by administrations around the world now.
 
The UN Just Adopted the “Pact for the Future” Which Lays the Foundation for a New “Global Order”
In itself, this is just a non-binding declaration of intent by the UN countries - but of course it tends to influence what is aimed for and implemented on the national level.

This "pact of the future" contains a lot of general lofty goals which can be interpreted in any number of ways. The most negative parts are the CO2-hysteria based goals, the censorship goals against "disinformation", as well as trying to centralize the control over the digital sphere ("digital ID's", total control CBDCs, etc.).
 
In itself, this is just a non-binding declaration of intent by the UN countries - but of course it tends to influence what is aimed for and implemented on the national level.

This "pact of the future" contains a lot of general lofty goals which can be interpreted in any number of ways. The most negative parts are the CO2-hysteria based goals, the censorship goals against "disinformation", as well as trying to centralize the control over the digital sphere ("digital ID's", total control CBDCs, etc.).
Timing is suspect. To me it looks like rushed document launch to prove that UN still has a reason to be considered as the top leadership forum, ahead of the BRICS Summit in Kazan at the end of the month.
Big money big business big power. They have to fight for that, and they go to straight to the political top.
 
Timing is suspect. To me it looks like rushed document launch to prove that UN still has a reason to be considered as the top leadership forum, ahead of the BRICS Summit in Kazan at the end of the month.
Big money big business big power. They have to fight for that, and they go to straight to the political top.
Yes that is quite possible! I truly hope so. And that BRICS will have far more sway over keeping our 'freedoms'. Though the 'West' is so entrenched in taking everything away asap.
I also think that further curtailments will happen after the US 'elections' (or whatever transpires or not).
 
But either way we can only do, buy, drive, or withdraw the amount of money that they will 'approve' of.

The Netherlands is already implementing some of it.
Source: MPs vote to cap cash purchases at €3,000, tighter than EU limit - DutchNews.nl

MPs vote to cap cash purchases at €3,000, tighter than EU limit​

September 25, 2024

Cash payments of more than €3,000 are to be banned after MPs voted for a stricter limit than the European Union’s planned ceiling of €10,000.

The EU proposed the limit, which also applies to cryptocurrency, earlier this year as part of a wider package of measures to crack down on money laundering and illegal drugs transactions.

Opposition parties in the Dutch parliament put forward an alternative bill that would set the maximum at €10,000, but it failed to win a majority.

Coalition parties NSC, BBB and PVV also opposed the plan, arguing it would stigmatise cash buyers and people who distrust or struggle with digital payments, but only NSC voted for the higher limit. The VVD has long supported a €3,000 limit.

VVD finance minister Eelco Heinen said a higher limit would make the Netherlands more attractive to criminals than countries such as France and Belgium, where tighter rules are already in place.

“You can get an expensive coat or watch for a few thousand euros, but if you’re laundering drug money, these are the kind of sums we need to place restrictions on,” he said.

The Dutch national bank said in April it was important to balance an accessible banking system against effective measures to fight organised crime.

“On the one hand DNB supports accessible transactions, which includes cash. But on the other hand DNB has a role to play in preventing financial economic crime,” a spokesman said.
 
Yes that is quite possible! I truly hope so. And that BRICS will have far more sway over keeping our 'freedoms'. Though the 'West' is so entrenched in taking everything away asap.
I also think that further curtailments will happen after the US 'elections' (or whatever transpires or not).
I do not think BRICS has anything to do with the individual freedoms of the citizens of each member country (from BRICS), as this aspect is considered internal affairs. One of the principles of BRICS is not to meddle in the internal affairs of another member state.

Individual freedoms (rights rather) must be upheld through public benefit organizations (not to be confused with NGOs) in each country since many elected politicians play the politically correct interests of the UN which is not exactly an independent body.

However, for the past 10 years and in specific 2020s, a plethora of educational institutions have almost completely occupied the social activism spectrum with anything critical theory could be applied to, and in specific with the critical race, critical gender, critical pedagogy, critical literacy, critical feminism, critical health, critical climate.

Critical Theory was first defined by Max Horkheimer, in 1937 (German: Kritische Theorie), in an essay "Traditional and Critical Theory", as a social theory oriented toward critiquing and changing society as a whole, in contrast to traditional theory oriented only toward understanding or explaining it.

All other following more modern phylosophers that complement the Frankfurt School which developed and sublimated critical theory into a set of theories, applied with the disturbing consequences we know today, did a great job in defining a central ideology for the ‘Pact for the Future’.

All unsuspecting observers which make the 99% of the world population do not know how their confusing and disturbing continuous reality has been modified and what it really means for their rights as individuals. Sad story but the politicians do not seem to care at all, so back to paragraph two.
 
I do not think BRICS has anything to do with the individual freedoms of the citizens of each member country (from BRICS), as this aspect is considered internal affairs. One of the principles of BRICS is not to meddle in the internal affairs of another member state.

Individual freedoms (rights rather) must be upheld through public benefit organizations (not to be confused with NGOs) in each country since many elected politicians play the politically correct interests of the UN which is not exactly an independent body.

However, for the past 10 years and in specific 2020s, a plethora of educational institutions have almost completely occupied the social activism spectrum with anything critical theory could be applied to, and in specific with the critical race, critical gender, critical pedagogy, critical literacy, critical feminism, critical health, critical climate.

Critical Theory was first defined by Max Horkheimer, in 1937 (German: Kritische Theorie), in an essay "Traditional and Critical Theory", as a social theory oriented toward critiquing and changing society as a whole, in contrast to traditional theory oriented only toward understanding or explaining it.

All other following more modern phylosophers that complement the Frankfurt School which developed and sublimated critical theory into a set of theories, applied with the disturbing consequences we know today, did a great job in defining a central ideology for the ‘Pact for the Future’.

All unsuspecting observers which make the 99% of the world population do not know how their confusing and disturbing continuous reality has been modified and what it really means for their rights as individuals. Sad story but the politicians do not seem to care at all, so back to paragraph two.
I was referring to the central ethos by Russia in the creation of BRICS. And hoped that would prevail as a general guide/maxim throughout. Yes all countries retain their autonomy. But you explanation is nearer to the truth sadly.
 
Back
Top Bottom