PROFITING FROM THE PUSH TO DENATIONALIZE
CURRENCIES AND DECONSTRUCT NATIONS
by DeepCaster LLC
June 6, 2007
In the Summer, 2006, Deepcaster was among the first to warn of a Massive Financial and Geopolitical Scheme to dissolve the Sovereignty of the United States, Mexico, and Canada into one Regional Unit called the North American Union (NAU) (“Massive Financial-Geopolitical Scheme Not Reported by Media,” Deepcaster, August 11, 2006).
Today, nearly one year later, this North American Union project (otherwise known as the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP)) has been widely exposed. Indeed, there is a Resolution pending in the United States Congress that would halt its implementation (H.ConRes40, Goode R-VA).
Yet implementation of the NAU Project continues notwithstanding. Land has been purchased in Texas for a Transnational “Mexico” to “Canada” Transportation Corridor (four football fields wide) and development of a Mexican Port Project in Kansas City (the so-called Smart Port) proceeds.
Moreover, both the House and Senate versions of the pending Illegal Alien Amnesty Bills contain provisions which would speed implementation of the North American Union - - including potential U.S. taxpayer funding for beefing up border security at “Mexico’s” southern border; that is, at the southern border of the prospective North American Union (see below).
A key financial component of this National Deconstruction Plan is the eventual adoption of a North American Regional Currency, the “Amero,” as the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) consultant Robert Pastor named it. This of course would entail the final destruction of the U.S. Dollar, the demise of which has already begun - - or should we say, is being managed*. The annual increase in M3 (a figure no longer issued by the U.S. Federal Reserve) has recently been calculated to be in excess of 12%(!) by shadowstats.com!
*[For more information on the apparent intervention in key markets by The Cartel of Central Bankers see Deepcaster’s October 2006 Letter entitled “The Mega Manipulations - - Juiced Numbers IV: How the Government Gets the Statistics It Wants, Markets Get Manipulated, Citizens Get Deluded and Worse” and the substantial evidence for intervention in the Gold and Silver Markets collected by the Gold AntiTrust Committee at www.gata.org
. Remarkably, Deepcaster’s (and GATA’s) reports are based almost solely on publicly available evidence.]
Where the economy is growing at a much slower rate, a 12% annual increase in the supply of money is “money inflation” and leads inevitably to hyperinflation of prices. That is, destruction of the currency.
Yes, the U.S. Dollar’s demise is already underway. Though very recently it has given the appearance of some buoyancy as a result of apparently bottoming just above 80 on the USDX, it has nonetheless been in a sustained downtrend for some years now. Of course, this downtrend can NOT make the foreign government holders of over one trillion dollars of U.S. Treasury Securities feel much comfort as the actual value of their portfolios of U.S. paper has continued to diminish.
Deepcaster has addressed the issue of the demise of the U.S. dollar on other occasions. But the consequences of the demise are so significant that one must ask the question about the possible alternatives to the U.S. Dollar and the implications of each.
There are two major alternatives to the U.S. Dollar (and other similarly weakening fiat currencies). One is re-linking the (presently fiat) currencies to gold and silver, an approach that Deepcaster has long favored as fundamentally sound. The other alternative (doubtless favored by The Cartel of Central Bankers and certain other Pooh-Bahs of international finance) is to dissolve major national “fiat” currencies and create regional or multi-national currencies, such as the Amero.
Thus the battle lines are drawn for the Great Currency War of the next few years: Gold and Silver-based currencies versus the Amero and other Fiat Currencies.
Were the destruction of national currencies (e.g. the U.S. Dollar) and the Deconstruction of Nations (e.g. the current North American Union Push) not a Very Serious Project of powerful organizations and persons, and were it not already underway, the notion of denationalizing currency - - and specifically the dissolving of the U.S. and Canadian dollars and the Mexican peso into the Amero - -perhaps would be dismissed as only a matter of a curious academic interest.
But the North American Union Plan about which Deepcaster warned in its August 11, 2006 Alert is proceeding apace. It not only involves dissolving the sovereignty of Mexico, Canada and the United States into one governmental entity known as the North American Union with a single currency, the Amero.
It also involves the politically revolutionary dissolution of borders between the aforementioned nations - - thus allowing the “free flow of persons and goods” which the SPP agreement calls for.
This convergence of monetary and political policies goes far to explain the enthusiasm of the Bush Administration and Open Borders Members of Congress for the Illegal Alien Amnesty Bills now pending in Congress. After all it was Presidents Bush, Fox and Martin who launched the SPP/NAU Project via their Agreement in March, 2006 in Waco, Texas. It would also explain why the Illegal Alien Amnesty Bills discussed below contain NAU Implementation Provisions.
Thus it is also not surprising that serious proposals for adoption of Regional Currencies are being floated. Since the dollar is already in an increasingly tenuous position, and since the forces pushing to create open borders (the Bush Administration’s Alien Amnesty Bill would de facto dissolve the United States’ borders) may prevail, we must take proposals for denationalizing currencies very seriously.
Thus, given that the push for National Deconstruction and the end of National Currencies is in progress, essential questions are: Will the Push succeed? How should an investor deploy assets to protect himself from this Push as well as, hopefully, to profit from it?
Even so, to fully address these questions it is important to understand more thoroughly what the proponents of denationalizing currency and amnesty for illegal aliens are actually pushing.
A recent article issuing from the very fount of The Globalist International Financial Community has made answering these questions easier for us. Indeed, some would say that the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) magazine is a major mouthpiece of international finance and the international Central Bankers Cartel. Judge for yourself.
This article laying out the Monetary Denationalization Game Plan entitled “The End of National Currency” (in the May/June 2007 issue of “Foreign Affairs” the magazine of the CFR) was written by Mr. Benn Steil, Director of International Economics at the CFR.
Its basic pitch is “globalization and monetary nationalism are a dangerous combination, a cause of financial crisis and geopolitical tension. The world needs to abandon unwanted currencies, replacing them with dollars, euros, and multinational currencies as yet unborn.”
Steil does confess that ending monetary nationalism would result in a significant diminishing of economic sovereignty (and, Deepcaster would add, a diminishing national sovereignty and key individual rights). Thus it is important to examine Steil’s key theses: “Governments must let go of the fatal notion that nationhood requires them to make and control the money used in their territory.” National currencies and global markets simply “do not mix…In order to globalize safely, countries should abandon monetary nationalism and abolish unwanted currencies which are the source of today’s instability.” In conclusion he states “since economic development outside the process of globalization is no longer possible, countries should abandon monetary nationalism.”
Any reasonable critical examination will show all these theses to be false. And they are false because (inter alia) their underlying premises are wrong. For example, globalization and monetary nationalism are a dangerous combination in part because fiat national currencies increase the likelihood of financial crisis and geopolitical tension.
Indeed (and in large part because they are not linked to the precious monetary metals gold and silver) fiat currencies are manipulable and thus can be, and ARE, used as a type of (very destabilizing) “weapon” to gain an edge in the export markets. For example, China’s pegged currency continues to create a tension between it and the United States. And Japan is notorious for its currency manipulations, its interventions in the ForEx markets, and its absurd .5% interest rate, which, incidentally, makes the potentially destabilizing “carry trade” possible.
That is, it is not monetary nationalism per se that is the cause of financial and monetary instability. Rather, one cause is the fact that the fiat currencies which monetary nationalism employs are merely fiat, that is, they are not tied to any tangible assets such as gold or silver. Thus it is the (mere paper) fiat currencies themselves that are one basic cause of the “instabilities.”
Steil’s claim that economic development outside the process of globalization is “no longer possible” is so preposterous as to be almost unworthy of a response. One need only consider successful recent micro-loan programs (for which a Bangladeshi, Vanderbilt University-trained entrepreneur received a Nobel Prize) or the prosperity of the United States in the 1950s in which the United States’ largest market by far was, well, the United States. The Alternative Model of a relative national self-reliance plus “fair trade” (e.g. the United States in the 1950s) has considerable benefits.
But one’s conclusion about globalization partly depends on perspective. International finance and some Manufacturers have benefited from globalization, but certainly workers whose jobs are outsourced and lost and whose wages are depressed are not similarly helped. American workers will never be able to compete with Chinese workers who are making $2 a day. And given that the American consumer is 60% of the U.S. economy, one can see the impact of globalization on the middle class in the United States - - it is disappearing, both statistically and as a matter of fact.
Supporters of Monetary Nationalism have cogent counter arguments. One of them, Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz, asserts that crises of monetary instability should be blamed on international institutions such as the IMF. “Dictatorships of international finance” (as he calls them)….”Countries are effectively told if they don’t follow certain conditions, the capital markets or the IMF will refuse to lend them money. They are basically forced to give up some of their sovereignty.”
Stiglitz is quite right of course. Unfortunately he does not expound upon other consequences of giving up some economic sovereignty. Giving up economic sovereignty also entails giving up aspects of national and personal sovereignty that one might like to keep. In the United States the right of Habeas Corpus (i.e. the right to be brought before a judge if accused of a crime, and not just arrested and held incognito indefinitely) is central. Or it was until the Bush Administration pushed legislation that impaired it.
Another example is Free Political Speech, which although under threat in the United States now, is still ostensibly guaranteed by the First Amendment. With regional or global institutions such important national guarantees have been and are being lost. The European Union has recently imposed German and Canadian-like speech restrictions on all members of The Union. And in the United States bills are periodically introduced which would criminalize certain political speech.
Moreover, as American investors and workers have learned, the greatest beneficiaries of globalization are not individual investors and workers. The beneficiaries are International Financial Institutions and global conglomerates. And shall we include The Cartel of Central Bankers?
To not too greatly oversimplify, the loss of national monies would result not only in a diminution of economic sovereignty but also in a diminution of political sovereignty and a diminishment of individual and investor freedom, with the consequent increased subservience to “global” (as opposed to national and inter-national) institutions.
It is thus not surprising that the publisher of Mr. Steil’s article, the CFR, is also the source of Robert Pastor’s plan pushing the SPP/NAU.
It is thus also not surprising that the same Bush Administration which entered into the SPP/NAU agreement in March, 2006 is also pushing an Illegal Alien Amnesty Bill which contains provisions which would facilitate creation of the NAU.
Thus it is important to consider the Illegal Alien Amnesty Bills that are the subject of much debate in the House and Senate now. The pending Senate Bill (S1348) actually cites the SPP Agreement that is the blueprint for building a European-style merger of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. Specifically, the Senate Bill states “it is the sense of Congress that the United States and Mexico should accelerate the implementation of the Partnership for Prosperity…” Similar language fast-tracking implementation of the NAU is contained in the House Bill.
Of importance are the following provisions (and select impacts of those provisions) that are contained in versions of the House and/or Senate bills most of which would de facto aid in dissolving the United States’ borders.
Legalization of an estimated 25 million plus illegal aliens who were in the U.S. before January, 2007. The Investment Banking House Bear Stearns estimated nearly 3 years ago that there were 18-20 million illegal aliens in the United States at that time. Therefore, the 25 million plus is a reasonable adjusted estimate. It is clear that the Census Bureau number of 12 million is a “political number.”
The families of illegal aliens would also be allowed to come to the U.S. permanently and all could be put on a path to eventual citizenship
Up to 400,000 new workers would be admitted annually and they and their families would be put on a path to permanent residency.
Social Security benefits would be available to legalized illegals.
A new visa program would allow a doubling of employment-based visas allowing up to 290,000 visa holders to be admitted to permanent residence every year.
In-state tuition at colleges would be mandated for illegals but not for American citizens, applying from out-of-state.
Likely provision of U.S. taxpayer funding to protect Mexico’s southern border (i.e. the southern border of the North American Union).
Consider a May, 2007 study by Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation which concluded that every low-skilled household in the U.S. costs taxpayers $22,449 more in tax-payer-funded social services than that household pays in taxes. Most illegal immigrants are low skilled.
The downstream net costs to American taxpayers would likely exceed $2 trillion (again from The Heritage Foundation study)
The Amnesty would also waive many criminal provisions - - for example, an alien who falsely claims citizenship would be eligible for Amnesty even though illegal entry is a crime.
Background checks - - a criminal alien or gang member could apply for a “Z” visa without thorough background checks and receive probationary status and a residence card even if the background check is not complete.
If an alien is in removal proceedings or being detained at the time of enactment of the Bill, then that alien could still apply for Amnesty. Those applying for Amnesty could not be detained or deported while their application was being processed - - essentially giving them immunity from justice.
Terrorists and criminals could successfully apply for Amnesty. There is no prohibition that prevents the Homeland Security Secretary from waiving the grounds of ineligibility for those who have an outstanding administrative final order of removal, deportation or exclusion. Currently there are more than 600,000 such alien absconders in the U.S., who have defied orders to leave.
Taxes: Illegal aliens would be required to provide the IRS information about tax payments only when applying for legal permanent residence status. Thus they could skirt the local, state, and federal tax laws because it is not a requirement to prove one has paid outstanding liabilities to get “Z” visa status under the Senate Bill.
The Bill could add 100 million immigrants to the U.S. population in a mere 20 years (the version which was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee in the last Session of Congress would have done just that).
Clearly, passage of such an Illegal Alien Amnesty Bill would be a de facto step toward dissolving the United States’ borders and thus toward realizing the North American Union. We reiterate that the cornerstone of the NAU (SPP) Agreement is the “free movement of persons and goods.”
The bottom line of the push for de-nationalized currencies and the deconstruction of nations is that it benefits global institutions and global businesses to the detriment of most nations, intra-national businesses and their inhabitants, including most individual investors. Adoption of a Regional Fiat Currency such as the Amero whose value (purchasing power) is determined by a Central Bank Cartel, would likely spell a reduction in economic as well as political and individual freedom.
Protecting and Profiting from The Push
To protect and potentially profit from the Monetary Denationalization and National Deconstruction Push one must examine one’s own mind set. If, for example, one prefers individual economic freedom, habeas corpus and free political speech then one must work to preserve nations which embody such a system and values. That is, for example, one must think in terms of nations and inter-national trade, rather than global trade. One must support “fair trade” rather than “free trade.” By approaching trade as inter-national rather than global can one begin to fight the threat of denationalized currencies and deconstructed nations.
One must advocate gold and silver-linked national currencies, and the national integrity of those nations one hopes will adopt them.
To protect against fiat currencies in general, including fiat regional currencies such as the Euro and the Amero, one needs to adopt the general investment approach outlined in Deepcaster’s recent Letters and Alerts.
The Push for De-nationalized Currencies and Deconstruction of Nations is real and ongoing.
Failure to address the issues it raises dramatically increases the risks of suffering a variety of losses.
© 2007 DEEPCASTER LLC All rights reserved.
Email | Website