India Outlawing Cash Altogether in 75 Cities


PTI

Modi launches 75 cashless townships across 12 states

Nagpur, Apr 14 (PTI) Prime Minister Narendra Modi today launched 75 cashless/less-cash townships, with an overwhelming 56 of them being in Gujarat.

The towns span across 12 states contributing to around 1.5 lakh cashless transactions per day and around 5.5 crore transactions a year.

Some of the prominent townships include those of state- owned Oil and Natural Gas Corp (ONGC), NTPC, SAIL and BHEL, as also those of cooperative firms like IFFCO and KRIBHCO.

Townships of private firms Reliance Industries, Adani, Essar and Welspun as also paramilitary forces BSF and CRPF also figure in the list.

Essar in a statement said two of its townships in Gujarat at Hazira (near Surat) and Vadinar (near Jamnagar) were today recognised as among townships pan-India that are less cash townships.

“The initiative was launched by NITI (National Institution for Transforming India) Aayog that declared Essar townships as ‘Cashless Role Model Township, which inspires other corporates to follow,” the statement said.

The townships were selected on the basis of a third-party assessment by Price Waterhouse Coopers (PWC).

To qualify as a less-cash townships, the conditions included the township must have completed deployment of a payment acceptance infrastructure, and all the families residing there would have to covered under training programmes. Also, more than 80 per cent of the total number of transactions must have been done through digital modes of payments during the review period.

“Of the two Essar townships, the Hazira township, also known as Nand Niketan, is India’s first private sector township to go cashless with the help of The Mobile Wallet (TMW), a Mumbai-based financial technology company,” the statement said


ArmstrongEconomics

The Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced on Friday the 14th, that 75 cities will be designated cashless/less-cash townships, with an overwhelming 56 of them being in Gujarat. Modi is determined to bring India into the 21st century. He is being cheered behind the curtain and every government is keenly watching the results. The townships were actually selected on the basis of a recommendation by none other than Price Waterhouse Coopers (PWC) furthering the G20 agenda to stamp out tax evasion worldwide.

We should be paying close attention to this effort for it is really a global effort to desperately try to support a complete collapse in the world monetary system that is on the horizon.

..

Want to understand the Deep State? Here is your Deep, Deep State


Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote, four years before birthing the TC in 1973, with his godfather, David Rockefeller: “[The] nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force. International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation state.”

Jon Rappoport's Blog

Want to understand Deep State? Here is your Deep, Deep State

By Jon Rappoport

Men behind the curtain?

Men who control the government and its policies from the outside?

Men who have immunity from prosecution?

Men who tell presidents what to do?

Men who can hide in plain sight? Men who don’t need to be elected to public office? Men who can laugh at their critics and call them conspiracy theorists and purveyors of fake news? Men who can determine financial and banking policy? Men who can set up corporate tribunals that nullify national courts? Men who can set virtually any national policy agenda they want to?

If an honest press existed, all this would be out in the open by now.

If, as many people are now saying, the CIA and NSA and neocons are the unelected Deep State, then the people I’m talking about would be the Deep…

View original post 1,466 more words

23 Ways Big Government Is Hurting the Poor


-ditto- Malaysia❗️

FEE

Advocates for big government often equate expanding government with concern for the poor. But reality speaks to the contrary: Expanding government often has very harmful effects on the poor.

This reality is precisely what is addressed in a forthcoming special report from The Heritage Foundation, “Big Government Policies That Hurt the Poor and How to Address Them.”

Rather than looking at welfare policy—a usual focus of analysts when discussing policies that impact the poor—the report focuses on economic policy, including regulation.

The authors identify 23 policies and provide concrete solutions that would allow those struggling financially to have more opportunities and a higher standard of living. As indicated in the report, these policies are just the tip of the iceberg.

The authors found three recurring themes that marked the policies they identified:

1. Cronyism

A significant number of the policies are classic examples of cronyism. It’s quite illuminating how government policies supposedly designed to protect allegedly vulnerable workers or consumers wind up, in reality, helping dominant producers or politically favored special interests.

2. Disproportionate Impact on the Poor Through Artificially High Prices

Many of the policies identified drive up consumer prices, such as for food and energy. This disproportionately hurts the poor because a greater share of their incomes go to meeting basic needs, as compared to households at higher income levels (see the chart below).

3. Obstacles to Opportunity

There are numerous policies that create artificial and unnecessary obstacles for the poor when it comes to obtaining jobs or starting businesses that could lift them out of poverty.

Here are four of the harmful policies detailed in the report:

1. Occupational Licensing

Laws that require official occupational licensing cost millions of jobs nationwide and raise consumer expenses by as much as $203 billion per year. These policies are often just a barrier to entry to help existing individuals in the specific field by limiting competition.

2. Federal Sugar Program

The federal government tries to limit the supply of sugar that is sold in the United States. As a result, the price of American sugar is consistently higher than world prices, sometimes even doubling world prices.

This big government policy may benefit the small number of sugar growers and harvesters in America, but it does so at the expense of sugar-using industries and consumers.

Recent studies have found that the program costs consumers as much as $3.7 billion a year. The program has a disproportionate impact on the poor because a greater share of their income goes to food purchases compared to than for individuals at higher income levels.

3. Energy Efficiency Regulations for Appliances

The Department of Energy regulates a long list of consumer and commercial appliances, including products like refrigerators, air conditioners, furnaces, televisions, shower heads, ovens, toilets, and light bulbs.

These regulations prioritize efficiency over other preferences that customers and businesses might have—such as safety, size, durability, and cost. Customers and businesses might have such preferences even at the loss of some reduced efficiency.

While there are a number of problems with the government mandating energy conservation (such as cronyism and dubious environmental benefits), appliance efficiency regulations are likely to have a bigger negative impact on middle-income and low-income families, and likely to provide more benefits to upper-income families.

4. Ride-Sharing Regulations

For years, states and municipalities have attempted to heavily regulate, and at times ban, ride-sharing companies like Uber and Lyft in an effort to prop up their principal competitors—the traditional taxicab companies.

Government policies that attempt to preserve this system against competition from ride-sharing firms, or which impose costly and burdensome regulations on said firms, do so at the expense of both consumers and drivers, with a particular impact on the poor.

As the report illustrates, government regulation and unwarranted intervention are often the primary barriers to progress for those who are poor. Just getting government out of the way could make a huge difference.

The Big 23

Here is the report’s full list of 23 big government policies currently harming poor Americans:

  1. Climate Change Regulations
  2. Energy Efficiency Regulations for Appliances
  3. Fuel Efficiency Mandates and Tier 3 Gas Regulations
  4. Ozone
  5. Renewable Fuel Standard
  6. Tennessee Valley Authority
  7. Federal Sugar Program
  8. Fruit and Vegetable Marketing Orders
  9. S. Department of Agriculture’s Catfish Inspection Program
  10. Soda Taxes
  11. International Monetary Fund Bailouts
  12. Import Restraints on Food and Clothing
  13. Jones Act
  14. High Minimum Wages
  15. Occupational Licensure
  16. Economic Development Takings
  17. Home-Sharing Regulations
  18. Rent Control
  19. Smart Growth
  20. Payday Lender Rules From the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
  21. Daycare Regulations
  22. Ride-Sharing Regulations
  23. State-Sanctioned Lottery Monopolies

The Bottom Line

All levels of government—local, state, and federal—need to look honestly at how they are contributing to the poverty problem. Then, they can become part of the solution.

Reprinted from the Daily Signal.

..

Bank of England Rigging #LIBOR – Gold Market Too?


GoldCore

  • Bank of England implicated in LIBOR scandal by BBC
  • “We’ve had some very serious pressure from the UK government and the Bank of England about pushing our Libors lower.”
  • “This goes much much higher than me” -UBS’ Tom Hayes
  • Libor distraction as all markets are manipulated today
  • Central bank’s “rigging” bond markets and likely gold
  • Risks of bank ‘holidays’, capital controls and of course bail-ins remains

The LIBOR scandal reemerged yesterday as the BBC’s Panorama uncovered a secret recording implicating the Bank of England in the interest rate manipulation saga.

According to the BBC the central bank pressured commercial banks during the 2008 financial crisis to lower their settings for LIBOR.

In a telephone recording, aired last night in the UK, a senior Barclays manager, Mark Dearlove, can be heard instructing Libor submitter Peter Johnson, to lower his rates.

Mr Johnson: “So I’ll push them below a realistic level of where I think I can get money?”

Mr Dearlove: “The fact of the matter is we’ve got the Bank of England, all sorts of people involved in the whole thing… I am as reluctant as you are… these guys have just turned around and said just do it.”

The Barclays submitter, Peter Johnson, who is featured in the phone call was jailed in 2016 after pleading guilty to accepting requests to manipulate LIBOR.

Previous assurances from the Bank of England that they were not involved in LIBOR fixing have now come under question again.

It has long been rumoured that the LIBOR fixing went higher than the banks and individuals that were originally implicated.

In 2012, a 2008 telephone note came to light which recorded a phone call between Paul Tucker, executive at the Bank of England at the time and Barclays’ boss Bob Diamond.

The note refers to what is apparently LIBOR not needing to be ‘so high’ as instructed.

The telephone note was taken on the same day that the Panorama aired phone call between Johnson and Dearlove, took place.

Despite the published telephone note, Bob Diamond told the Treasury Select Committee in 2012 that he had only recently became aware of the manipulations.

Chickens coming home to roost

Last week there were also new revelations in a newly published book by David Enrich, ‘The Spider Network’ in which Tom Hayes of UBS tells Enrich “This goes much much higher than me and a lot of what I know…”

Tom Hayes’ bosses were happy to accept his LIBOR fixing in exchange for higher commissions until the CFTC investigation came along. They promptly threw him under a bus and he rightly ended up in prison. However there was little implication for seniors at UBS and of course, the Bank of England.

It is amazing how many times junior employees seem to take the rap by themselves – as if there has been no instruction or oversight from their managers. In the banking world, the lone ‘rogue trader’ is a very common little beast indeed.

Hayes has repeatedly claimed that the real culprits are not the executors of the rigging but those higher up the chain who had instructions to do so.

As a result very little was done at the BOE following the fallout to LIBOR. Some staff quietly left their jobs but there were no charges brought against BOE employees.

By manipulating LIBOR, bankers (and seemingly central bankers) pushed up the cost of borrowing for ordinary people. LIBOR was not regulated in either the UK, US or anywhere else. This appears to be an almost line of defence for the Bank of England who only have to provide information on a voluntary basis to the Serious Fraud Office, as part of a new investigation.

Conclusion: Is LIBOR just a distraction?

Whoever was responsible for LIBOR, no-one is debating the fact that what went on was highly illegal and yet another example of financial institutions manipulating a market at the expense of investors and the public.

LIBOR should not have come as the surprise that it did. It took place in an environment that almost encouraged such behaviour. As we wrote back in 2012 ( LIBOR Manipulation Leads To Questions Regarding Gold Manipulation )

“A lack of transparency, a lack of enforcement of law and a compliant media which failed to ask the hard questions and do basic investigative journalism led to the price fixing continuing and the manipulation continuing unchecked on such a wide scale for so long.”

However, more scandals continue today. Not only have we had LIBOR but we see gold and silver manipulation, foreign exchange rate rigging, the London Whale scandal and money laundering assistance from big banks. Just to name a few.

There are others that are carried out in full public view and with the complete sanction of the press, regulators and the uninformed general public.

Today we have record low interest-rates (of which some are actually negative) as instructed by the Bank of England and other banks and governments around the world. This, combined with quantitative easing and other money creation policies, has prompted major stock market inflation.

In countries such as the UK we see the full-effect of low-interest rates and high levels of real inflation trickle down to the public in the form of house prices which are beyond affordable for the average earner, pushing them into further debt and a lifetime of mortgage repayments.

There are also property bubble in many major cities around the world and global debt levels continue to surge to astronomical levels sowing the seeds of the next financial crisis.

Central bank’s actual policies are to attempt to “rig” bond markets in order to keep bond prices high and interest rates low. This is seen in QE and how record low interest rates is supporting and arguably “rigging” or at least artificially boosting the stock market and the even more interest rate sensitive property market.

Given this policy to intervene in markets such as LIBOR and interest rate markets, is it not very likely that central banks may have been attempting to rig the gold market in recent years as alleged by the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee (GATA)?

Banks have already been found guilty of rigging gold and silver and there is much evidence. However, the question is whether the central banks are using banks as proxies to push gold and silver prices lower.

The quotation from Eddie George of the BOE above strongly suggests this was the case and likely remains the case.

Artificially suppressing the prices of markets can work in the short term but in the long term it rarely works as the powerful forces of global supply and demand tend to overcome even the most determined interventions of central planners.

What does all this mean for those of us who are just trying to protect our wealth and own the financial insurance of gold and silver?

It underlines the continuing fragility and risks in the banking and the financial system where there is little transparency and little accountability.

It underlines the importance of fading out short term noise in markets in the form of frequent inexplicable concentrated selling of gold and silver futures prices. Market interventions that push prices lower in the short term despite no negative market news or deteriorating fundamentals.

It underlines the importance of not having all your wealth in the banking system where it may be subject to negative interest rates, bank ‘holidays’, capital controls and of course bail-ins.

..

Cliff High – Fed Will Crash & Fed Is the Market


Greg Hunter

TWO TRIBES

TwoTribes2

Internet Data mining expert Clif High’s latest report says, ““The emotions at the moment are projecting a crash of the ability of the state to function. . . . We have the projection that there is going to be some sort of big government crash. It concerns funding, interruption or something. . . . We have something akin to a definition change relative to bonds. . . . One way to think about this is there is going to be a human collective or re-understanding, or new understanding, about the whole bond market as we go forward in August, September and October. This is going to cause huge disruptions for governments, which basically depends on the bonds as its source of funds. I don’t know what that definition is going to mean, but the way the language is presenting itself, it’s very much like the same language that appeared in newspapers ahead of the Bretton Woods conference. . . . At that time, a bunch of countries got together around WWII and talked about how to deal with gold, money and the dollar after the war was over. . . . We have that same kind of language now relative to the bonds. . . .This redefinition is going to cause real problems relative to governments. If I had to guess, I don’t think we will have a stock market crash, but a government crash or Fed crash or bank crash. I don’t think a stock market crash will be meaningful because by the time it crashes, nobody will care because before we get there, the Fed will crash. The Fed is the market.”

..