Expropriation - Is Christine Lagarde The Most Dangerous Woman In The World?

"Is Christine Lagarde The Most Dangerous Woman In The World?" Of that I'm unsure but it's quite possible she is in the top few.

I've watched all day to see if anyone would post this but nothing, so here it is. Looks like Christine Lagarde and the IMF have some new ideas on how to stave off the meltdown of bankrupt countries within the EU. It's quite simple really, they plan to steal any amount of money needed from savers and investors in order to maintain the status quo of power elites and bureaucracies within their domain.

This article on ZeroHedge covers a range of underhanded manipulations by the IMF. Read it if you will but I'm now focusing on the current plan of the IMF to maintain their power and that of their lackeys over the well being of the people they dominate.

Expropriation Is Back - Is Christine Lagarde The Most Dangerous Woman In The World?

In January 2014, the Bundesbank joined the IMF project focusing on a “wealth tax”. In its monthly report they had announced: “In the exceptional situation of an imminent state bankruptcy a one-time capital levy could but cheaper cut than the then still relevant options” if higher taxes or drastic limitations of government spending did not meet or could not be implemented.

In the latest June 2014 working paper of the IMF, they have set forth yet another scheme – extending maturity. So you bought a 2 year note? Well, the IMF possible solution would be to simply extend the maturity. Your 2 year note now become 20 year bond. They do not default, you just can never redeem.

The "wealth tax" is old news as far as these parasites are concerned. The manipulation of bond maturity dates to the detriment of investors is a whole new scheme of theft. Quite innovative but totally evil.

The huge national debts could be reduced also according to the IMF by just expropriating all private pension funds.

Well, maybe not just taking it outright. How about telling you all the 2, 5, 10 year bonds in your retirement account are now redeemable in 20, 50 or 100 years instead? I think you get the picture, you purchased government bonds and they are no longer effectively redeemable. Pretty slick.

For folks in the US who may feel this will not impact them I suggest they think again. I submit any country in the grips of collapse will use any means available to secure their survival. Even at the costs of it's citizens.

Wondering who will take over the mantle of Treasury bond buyer now that the Fed is stepping away? Curious of the government's next steps towards repression and control of wealth? Wait no longer. As the AP reports, President Obama will unveil a new retirement savings plan tonight that allows first-time savers to buy US Treasury bonds tax-deferred for retirement.
Obama Unveils Treasury IRAs, Planning For A Post-Monetization World

All I can suggest is run for the hills people. Do not trust government bonds regardless of the continent which you reside. Good luck folks, we're going to need it.

a reply to: Bassago

u mean this woman?

a reply to: BobAthome

Yep, that's the one.

This women and her organization are a moral hazard to most of the world.

Its never good news when her name is mentioned lately . The biggest cash cow they have to grab is us baby boomers .You say extend it out a few years but with their -% interest rates they wont want to wait that long .I really cant complain as if I am shocked or anything . Seen it coming when I was a boy .Never made sense then ,this whole money for nothing thing . Like my brother wanting to borrow my 67 camero and promising me he would drive it like granny ..yea sure you will :>) a reply to: Bassago

a reply to: the2ofusr1

The biggest cash cow they have to grab is us baby boomers .You say extend it out a few years but with their -% interest rates they wont want to wait that long

Yes you are quite right. Still there is some hope, people do not have to take part in these government bond schemes and savings plans that pay negative interest rates. I mean come on who in their right mind will put money into savings accounts with a negative interest rate? Better to stuff their mattress with cash than pay out to the banks.

originally posted by: BobAthome
a reply to: Bassago

u mean this woman?

That's a woman?

Peace

a reply to: jude11
Yeah and ruthless as a pit viper. This women is willing to crush entire countries to achieve her goals regardless of the damage to ordinary citizens. If you doubt that talk to the people of Cyprus who are still suffering the banking "haircuts" and capitol controls.

In an interview with The Guardian in May 2012, Lagarde was asked about crisis-stricken Greece and replied:

"Do you know what? As far as Athens is concerned, I also think about all those people who are trying to escape tax all the time. All these people in Greece who are trying to escape tax."

Even more than she thinks about all those now struggling to survive without jobs or public services?
"I think of them equally. And I think they should also help themselves collectively."

How?
"By all paying their tax. Yeah."

It sounds as if she's essentially saying to the Greeks and others in Europe, you've had a nice time and now it's payback time.
"That's right." She nods calmly. "Yeah."
Source

As I said, this women is a planetary moral harzard.

a reply to: Bassago

I submit any country in the grips of collapse will use any means available to secure their survival. Even at the costs of it's citizens.

Don't forget that citizens are also the country. With so many nations all 'borrowed out' from the recession and banking collapse, they'll have to get the money from somewhere...or sink.

The US and it's foremost allies (UK, Australia, New Zealand) have a combined debt of 18 and a half trillion (+/- few billion) with deficits predicted to continue for years.

If another recession occurs, or national economic crisis, most western countries would face extortionate lending rates. Who could knock someone like China asking for parts of US infrastructure as securities for borrowing? That'd be good Capitalism and righteous. Dominating foreign markets is a great business model for those doing the dominating.

One alternative would be to go dipping into the savings and investments of the wealthy citizens. It wouldn't be just about a 'wealth tax' by 'parasites,' it'd be one of the few ways to maintain armed forces, national security and economic infrastructure. The IMF plan won't please the wealthy, but what if it encourages the instigators of the last collapse to take fewer chances and stop it happening again?? Wouldn't that be better for the lazy poor and the hard-working rich?

a reply to: jude11

I just thought David Bowie had too much plastic surgery and changed his name.

a reply to: Kandinsky
I enjoyed reading what you said up till I got to "The lazy poor and the hard-working rich" because you seem to infer that everyone who is poor is lazy and all rich are hard-working - what about those who inherit wealth and do diddysquat
because of it. What about the poor men and women who work 12 and a half-hour-shifts in the hospital wards like one of my son works in - all that time, mostly on his feet and bending over patients. He does that job because he has a good heart and feels it makes a different - but the wage keeps him poor.

Your assessment of what is needed to keep us all safe in our beds and 'civilised' is very important and these things need to be maintained but much of our infrastructure, an example our prisons have never had the investment they should have and are crumbling. Most of this lack of investment is down to the feathering the nests of the wealthy by their investments abroad and the. The foreign aid is given mostly to promote corporate interests in poor countries that have resources the wealthy of here and the USA etc can exploit

I always thought it was a very bad idea to loan the sums of money countries from countries with China's might can take what it thinks its owed easily with military might. It wouldn 't loose a great deal because if the recipient countries can't buy Chinese goods, the pressure goes up all round and something has to blow.

The wealth tax probably could be avoided for people under a certain level of savings provided the very wealthy in the UK from the Crown down were penalised by it as well. I do think that if this is not going to be the case - and we have all seen the misery of the Greek public - an action like this will provoke civil war in many EU countries including the UK. We are at a tipping point with public confidence in the government and our institutions. There is a scandal Keith Vax is trying to sit on which could well cause a major uproar here and, if I can ever learn to download the article I want I will certainly be putting it up (but that's another subject).

Our media here is very controlled by what the government thinks we should know for their 'good'. We are not always aware of how many other EU countries, are protesting about the cuts imposed on us, which don't affect the really wealthy at all, so many are ignorant of the public unrest and many older people who don't social network are totally ignorant about the real situation in the EU.

Imagine what would happen if, for instance, a major European (or any other country) voted and tossed out the main political parties. Then, the new incoming government took back the issuing of national currency, debt free, from the central banks and called all outstanding debt, as a result of huge borrowing by previous administrations, as null and void. I imagine it wouldn't take long for that state to be labeled a pariah state and in need of an invasion to restore "democracy" once more. Alternatively, it might just start a domino effect among other states. Sure would be nice!

After all, it's the bankers who have engineered this mess we all find ourselves in, and who continue in their criminal pursuit of ever larger profits, at the expense of the rest of us and, of course, the influence that debt allows them to have. Take it all away and what are they going to do if their enforcers (our bought and paid for leaders) are suddenly deposed?

I can dream!

a reply to: Kandinsky

We saw the "one time wealth tax" used in Cyprus not long ago and IMO it was a devastating attack on the people. Most of the evil Russian billionaires had moved their money anyway. Still they still suffer under capital controls and that was supposedly a one time action.

I believe extending maturity on government bonds is infinitely worse as it's the theft that keeps on taking. Possibly for decades to come, effects pretty much everyone with a pension or investments and the only ones who will escape it are those who get the heads up before hand *cough 1%'ers cough*.

While it is a state responsibility to care for the elderly, then nationalizing the pension is pretty much a no brainer.

Expropriation of savings and other funds is a much more sensitive issue with a lot of considerations of who, how much and what restitution may apply. If a nation is approaching a critical meltdown then pressure of sever action will be high. Government debt in many nations is a serious issue that needs fixing. As a citizen, if the situation was either lose my savings or lose my economy I would rather lose my savings.

Sure it would be a lot better to lose this debt, the issues with bonds is one part of this and needs some resolution. In the long term I would like see the use of bonds in the creation of money retired as a person backed currency is introduced. Bonds are like loans and used in that context have their purposes.