How many people own their place of residence and how many people rent?

If you're American, you are celebrating 4th of July! Any one here live in America and have plans?

Anyone here have a favorite beverage they like to consume? For me, I love coconut water. Keeps me hydrated!

Today, I believe so many people including students are still making so many mistakes with money and it's because they are not taught well how to best manage money in school. It's why some are still in debt years after they are out from school and all having worked for years.

What are the biggest mistakes young people make with money?

Have you bought gold, silver, stocks, bonds, crypto, etc? Post it here!

Paramount Skydance Chairman and CEO David Ellison is exploring a potential California exit as the studio battles a multistate challenge to its $111 billion acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery.

Politico reported late Wednesday that the studio is seeking roughly 400,000 square feet of office space in Nashville, signaling that its relocation is in the works. We have reported in the last few days and last month of Paramount's plan to exit the left-wing state (read here & here). 

The studio could move at least some operations to the Tennessee capital within two to three years, according to the report. No relocation has been announced, but the search raises the risk that California could lose a major Hollywood studio headquarters. Such a loss would deepen concerns about the state's ability to retain businesses as its entertainment industry struggles and the exodus of businesses and residents shows no signs of stopping.

Starting in October, Paramount will owe roughly $7 million for each day the transaction remains incomplete, according to the report. That amounts to approximately $210 million over 30 days.

The Paramount-Warner Bros. deal faces an antitrust lawsuit from 12 states, including California, despite approval from the US Justice Department in June and regulators in more than 60 countries and jurisdictions. The trial is scheduled for March, with settlement talks in San Francisco next month.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who is leading the lawsuit, has called Paramount's relocation threat nothing more than "blackmail."

For Hollywood, the potential studio loss extends beyond another corporate exit; the exodus includes Chevron, Tesla, SpaceX, Oracle, Charles Schwab, and many others.

Tennessee has actively courted the studio. Nashville also has an existing Ellison family connection: Oracle, co-founded by Larry Ellison, announced plans to move its headquarters there in 2024. Larry Ellison is also financially backing his son David's Warner Bros. deal.

"I tried to warn you. LA is getting absolutely decimated by the insane communist wackos running California. Bob Bonta's jihad against Paramount is a death blow. What a corrupt piece of shit," Spencer Pratt wrote on X.

I've always enjoyed supporting local businesses whenever I can but competing with multinational bigger companies isn't easy. Honestly I think the playing field simply too uneven for them to enjoy success on a big scale.

Do you think small businesses can still grow and succeed?

They Will Turn Your Money Off! Incoming Stablecoins More Dangerous Than CBDCs - Fitts

Daniela Cambone: Hi everyone, welcome back to the Dingella Camboni Show. Well, look, most people who leave Wall Street and Washington either cash out or go out quietly, but Catherine Austin Fitz did neither. She's an investment banker and former US assistant secretary of housing and federal housing commissioner. She spent years in court with the Justice Department after she started asking where the money actually went. Guess what? She won. Then she started publishing what she found. She talks about missing trillions digital money that can just be switched off and facilities most of us have never seen on a map.

Today she's here and we're not going to treat her like a curiosity. We're going to treat her like someone who used to sit in the rooms where the numbers get written. Uh it's a tremendous honor to welcome to the show Katherine Austin Fitz. Katherine,

Catherine Austin Fitts: thank you.

Daniela Cambone: So good to to have you on.

Catherine Austin Fitts: It's great to be on.

Daniela Cambone: You're remind Did Did you ever see the Hamilton show when it was on Broadway?

Catherine Austin Fitts: Of course. Multiple times.

Daniela Cambone: You're reminding me of that song, I want to be in the room where it happens. The room you you Well, I like having people on the show that are in the room where it happens. And uh that's why I was dying to get you on because you've sat on both sides of the table as an investment banker and as a United States Assistant Secretary of Housing and Federal Housing Commissioner. I mean, hello. [laughter]

When did you I mean, you know, you have these incredibly highowered positions, but then you were looking, you know, through the numbers and you realized the official numbers at Real Flows no longer matched. I mean, uh, walk us through that moment. It's the first time you're on the show. I mean, when did that light bulb moment happen for you where you're like, "No, something's seriously wrong here."

Catherine Austin Fitts: So I saw tremendous corruption when I was in the administration and that's why I had to leave because I was being ordered to break the law and I wouldn't. So I had to I had to go.

But I discovered the internet and so I decided to start a company that could use the power of new technology to help democratize basically equity investment and and liquidity. So um you know we were making software tools. One was IPO in a box where small business could form a venture pool and literally with radio dots make their perspectives.

Anyway, so so we had this whole vision of democratizing sort of equity the equity markets and um and what happened was I ran right smack into the fact that the mortgage bubble was growing. We had a contract to be lead financial adviser to the Federal Housing Administration and um and what was happening was there were real shenanigans going on with mortgage fraud as you know and certainly which came out during the financial crisis and we tried to essentially wind it down and stop the corruption inside.

And so we were targeted by the Department of Justice basically to get us out to, you know, to fire us. But also we had done so much in terms of building databases and softwares to map out how the money worked that it was exposing the fraud. And so there was a great effort to steal all of our software and databases and basically keep it under court control for many years and to shut us up.

And you know, there's a great line. I don't know if you've ever seen the movie Gladiator. It's one of my favorite movies and there's a great line where they say to the gladiator before they can kill you they have to kill your name and I had a very good reputation before the litigation started and there was tremendous effort to destroy my name and I realized oh they just can't afford for me to have credibility when it comes to you know the talking about the mortgage fraud.

And it was funny because I tried to warn people about the mortgage bubble and what was happening long before the you know all the way into the financial crisis. And what was amazing was how many people wouldn't listen because I had been discredited and yet you know and when the of course when the bubble popped then it turned out I was right and and there you were.

But it was terrible because you're trying to warn everybody about something that could bankrupt them and and yet they can't hear you and it's it's a terrifying experience.

Daniela Cambone: We'll get right back to the interview, but this is an important moment to ask yourself [music] when the next crisis hits, will you be properly positioned or wish you prepared earlier?

I've spent over two decades reporting on global economic shifts and what's [music] happening now is unprecedented. In moments like this, timely decisions are critical. That's why we've put together [music] the private wealth playbook. It's a free guide showing you how to use Gold and Silver strategically for protection, [music] privacy, and long-term performance.

Click below or visit dannyreport.com to download it now so you can move forward with clarity and confidence. [music]

Now, back to the show. I mean, there's so many questions I have for you, but I find it so commendable the fact that, you know, here you are in this highpowered position, Catherine. I mean, few people would walk away from that, but you couldn't stand it.

Catherine Austin Fitts: So, I had a chance to go back in. You know, repeatedly I would get offers to go back in. But here's the thing. There is a line between civilization and the absence of civilization.

And the interesting thing about me is if you look at the training I had, I really had tremendous training both on Wall Street and in the financial world, you know that if a financial coup starts that they're going to destroy the country. And so you can't go along because you're talking about something that is going to destroy everything that gave you and I and our families the blessings that we enjoy. You you can't you can't destroy, you know, you can't be part of that.

And it was very interesting because when I left the Bush administration, I came out and I said to the people I started the company with, I said, "Look, these guys are going to use the technology to destroy us all. We need a plan B."

And so the the goal of Hamilton Securities was let's create something that can build so much bottomup wealth that these guys don't have to destroy everything. We can find a way, you know, to get the government and the country on a financially sound basis and move forward.

So my idea was not to fight with them. My idea was to provide a pathway that could work for them and everybody. So, you know, with globalization, a way that the middle class could succeed despite globalization.

And what I didn't understand was they were so dependent on criminal cash flows that they couldn't permit that to happen. And I just didn't understand it at that point.

And the litigation was the process by which I learned about the covert side of the house and understood what the issues were in terms of creating a new model because essentially we knew the existing model would have to change. we'd have to do a reset and we're in the middle of a reset.

And my vision was let's create lots of bottomup wealth with new technology. Their vision is let's use new technology to get complete top- down control. And because they're thinking conservatively and risk managers and I'm thinking who would want to live in that world? It's psychopathic.

So um you know so so there were two different visions and I have an online book after the litigation was over I wrote an online book to explain you know the difference between the two visions and what had happened and the sort of the dirty tricks and and the targeting and it was really funny.

I've tried to publish it in hard copy three times and the first two it was sabotaged badly and the third time they threatened if I did it to kill somebody in my family.

Daniela Cambone: So I said oh my lord were you getting an anonymous note? What what the how did the how did that director get

Catherine Austin Fitts: I got three phone calls each with a message but if you put them together that was the message so it's done very it's done very tactically so if I try and you know talk about it in a court of law I won't win

Daniela Cambone: but it is it a voice

Catherine Austin Fitts: no it's three people you know you have three different conversations but they each give you a piece it's like a code and when you put the three pieces together you get the message right so so um anyway so I didn't know if they were serious or not, but I didn't want to test it.

So, I've just left the book online. It's Dylan Reed andco uh.com and it's it's called Dylan Reed in the aristocracy of stock profits. And it's all there. It's all it's not it's not suppressed. They just want it in a hard copy.

Daniela Cambone: Not not to not to not to digress, but um when we talk about, you know, threats and people trying to stop this, you know, stop the exposure of the fraud. Um do you believe it's happening at the government level or is this, you know, talk of deep state stuff? like what what level are we talking about here that we're trying to listen?

Catherine Austin Fitts: You have sort of a permanent government of the intelligence agencies and the enforcement agencies um that's veryworked and and they have both private and public capacity and then you have the political representation which tends not to be the deepest part.

Um and and but you also have tremendous private interests and we've seen much more um privatization of the intelligence and enforcement capacity into you know in into literally corporations that have teams of intelligence agencies working for them.

Daniela Cambone: Okay. I'm I'm going to circle back on exposing the fraud, but let's get into the nitty-gritty here because you talk about $21 trillion that can't be accounted for, right? you know, walk us through that in in plain language of how something I mean, we're not talking about a couple of bucks here, right? How does something that large disappear without the public noticing, Catherine?

Catherine Austin Fitts: So the federal government has never obeyed the or or a new round of laws were passed in the Bush administration in 1991 and then 9293 to institute uh financial disclosure uh for the federal government and a process began in 1996 whereby the federal government announced it wasn't going to obey the law.

So the federal government since 1996 has never once obeyed the laws related to financial disclosure. They are required to have audited financial statements and to publish the audited financial statements and they have never done that. They have refused to do that.

Now you and I both know if a company refused to do that the stock exchange would shut them down. Their bankers wouldn't make their transactions. They wouldn't be able to raise capital in the markets. Right.

Daniela Cambone: Right. Of course.

Catherine Austin Fitts: Right. Okay. But the federal government can keep on borrowing and the federal government bank accounts which are run by the New York Fed and its members as agents for the New York Fed keep running its bank accounts and keep borrowing money in the Treasury market. Right?

So, so you've got a financial entity that doesn't have to obey the financial management laws or provide, you know, proper financial disclosure, which means anything's possible because if I can issue securities without putting it on my balance sheet and I can do, you know, sort of non-disclosed transactions and my banks will do it, of course, anything's possible.

Okay, so here's what happened. In 1995, there was an effort to get the financial uh system and the federal credit on a sound basis, particularly with respect to the baby boomer retirement obligations. The effort failed. It turned out to be a three-w weekek very bitter shutdown of the government.

And that period was later described to me by the president largest pension fund in the country saying, "You don't understand. They've given up on the country. They're moving all the money out starting in the fall."

And what happens the right after that the um the Fed and the New York Fed bought shares in the Bank of International Settlements and then proceeded um starting at the beginning of uh well it was October 1st 1997 large amounts of money started going missing from the federal government.

So it's called undocumentable adjustments and and the Fed the federal government had to publish supposedly financial statements. What they would do every year is publish, we're not going to produce audited financial statements and we have this much in undocumentable adjustments.

Now, what the coverup artists will tell you is, oh, well, those could just be accounting entries. But the reality is if if the department of the army has six times more undocumentable adjustments than they have budget, something is very wrong.

If your church had an annual budget of $500,000, but it was missing $6 million in a year and they said, "Don't worry, it's just accounting transactions," you would force them to produce audited financial statements. Right.

Daniela Cambone: Right. Of course.

Catherine Austin Fitts: Right. So, so what happened was from uh 1998 fiscal year to 2001, uh $4.4 trillion went missing from the federal government. And we all have heard about it because the the day before 911, Donald Rumsfeld got up and said, "There's 2.3 trillion missing from the Pentagon." Remember that? Okay, that was the missing money.

And in fact, on 911, many of the buildings that blew up had records on either the securities, the Treasury market, or the accounting. Um, you know, if you look at the office at the, uh, at the Pentagon was said to be the office where the O and I was doing an investigation on the missing money.

Anyway, so, so, um, after 9/11, people stopped worrying about the missing money. I kept talking about it, but it was not a hot topic coming into the financial crisis.

And then with the financial crisis, people started to realize the extent of the fraud. And um, and not only did you have money going missing from the federal government, but then you added 29 trillion of bailouts. And so people knew something was very wrong.

And and if you look at the size of the bailouts, it was more than three times all the single family mortgages in the country.

Daniela Cambone: So So wow.

Catherine Austin Fitts: So whatever was going on, it wasn't just mortgage fraud. Okay. So So money kept going missing.

And then finally in 2015, in the last year of Obama, um there was an announcement that there were 6.5 trillion missing from the Pentagon, which was the biggest annual number yet.

And I started, you know, I kept talking about it on the radio because at that point I had up to 12 trillion dollars of missing money. And a professor from MSU heard me and uh called me and he heard me on the radio and said, "She has to be wrong."

So he went to the Pentagon and looked at their financial statements and realized, "Oh, I was right." So the money was going missing from the Pentagon and HUD where I had used to work and I knew the financial operation at HUD, you know, inside and out.

Anyway, so so Skidmore called Dr. Skimmore called me and he said, "Can I help?" And I said, "Yeah, let's get your students and do a complete survey of all these years at at DoD and HUD."

We did and he got the number. I had it up to 12 trillion. He found another um he found another 9 trillion so we got it up to 21 trillion and that was at the end of 2015.

So there was tremendous pressure at that point with this kind of attention to get the Pentagon and HUD to produce audited financial statements.

Well, what happened next? You're going to love this, was a little known policy. Remember Kavanaaugh hearings, the Supreme Court hearings with all the sex?

Daniela Cambone: Oh, yeah.

Catherine Austin Fitts: Yeah. Oh, yeah. Okay. Very distracting, very attention getting.

While that was happening, and you will appreciate this, the Congress and the executive branch working together, Democrats and Republic, passed a little known policy called Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board Statement 56, which basically said, I have a big article up about it if you're interested, but it basically said that the federal government by a secret process and a secret group of people could take a secret amount of the financial statement out of the financial statements and keep it secret and not only do it for the 24 covered agencies but for 150 plus governmental entities.

And wait get this with the national security laws and the classification uh classified laws they can then add the big banks and contractors who do business with the federal government.

Now what you will understand because of your background and the show that you do that means the vast majority of the issuers in the US bond market and the large cap stock market

Daniela Cambone: have secret books

Catherine Austin Fitts: right secret books. So I used to plow through the financials of the US government and HUD and DoD and from that time on I stopped looking because who knows what it means? You don't know. It's like that it's make believe.

Daniela Cambone: Well, I I I Well, I'm wondering, well, who's who's lining their who lined their pockets the most?

Catherine Austin Fitts: So, uh, so, so there are a couple things going on. The first thing is you you've grown since the 47 and 49 act, you've grown something called the black budget, which is a secret or covert part of the economy. And it's grown and grown and grown. That's number one.

And it's, you know, it's there's so much that's secret and and as it's grown, it's benefited a huge number of people. Like a lot of the technology in Silicon Valley, I believe, based on understanding the black budget was transferred, you know, was financed by the ta taxpayers, but transferred to these corporations.

So, they're real issues as to, you know, who should really own what. But, um, so this part of the secret part of the economy has grown and grown and grown.

But then in 1995, I think what happened was they gave up on the current structure of the government and they literally decided to engineer a coup.

And the way you do that is you you keep the existing system going, but you transfer as many assets as possible into a new system and then you bring up the new system and then you slowly, you know, dissolve the existing system.

And and the way I would describe that is in the existing system the bankers run monetary policy and fiscal policy. In the new system the bankers want to run both monetary and fiscal policy. So they want control of the fiscal side of the house and they want to keep a lot of the economy secret.

Daniela Cambone: and and and and that's where we are today Katherine.

Right. And I don't I don't want to forget this question because um you spoke of these distractions and that's how they were able to do it like psychops if that's another word you want whenever they're selling like the Kavanaaugh hearings I'm like what are they really doing right what what's the what what do you think is the equivalent in today's environment okay of a news that we're being fed that's the Kavanaaugh moment

Catherine Austin Fitts: there there are two things that we need to know first of all the game with energy And if you go to Celier, we have something called the energy timeline and trade bottlenecks. You can look at it and it will describe everything.

The the energy gain going on in the planet is co 2.0. It's a way of dramatically shifting market share out of the little guys into the big guys and centralizing power. And it's part of the US moving from a an open trade model globally to a closed trade model. And it it revolves around controlling energy.

So, so you know, COVID 1.0 was health. Now we're doing energy. Yeah. Okay. And it it's all about, you know, who controls what and so, uh, take a look at that energy timeline. I think that's the important one important thing to understand.

The second important thing to understand is we are watching the organi the legal organization and preparation of the largest bubble-blowing machine we have ever seen in the financial markets with the implementation of programmable money and digital tokens.

And if you look at what they're planning to do, you know, people who say the bubble's about to collapse, the bubble's about to collapse. And the bubble right now is ridiculous.

But if you look at the bubble machinery they are building and they are planning on launching at the beginning of next year. I don't know if it'll work because this is the most outrageous bubble plan I have ever seen in my life.

And I have seen a lot of bubbles. I've seen a lot of bubbles. But and if this succeeds, if this succeeds, you are going to see a tsunami of you're going to see explosive bubbles all over the planet.

And and here's what I'm going to describe it. I'm going to give you a brief overview and then we can dive in. Okay?

Daniela Cambone: And that was nervous laughter, by the way, on my part. Okay?

Catherine Austin Fitts: So So retail is leaving the Treasury market, right? And and so we see Norway saying they're going to sell government sovereign bonds including treasuries blah blah blah. So so institution is selling.

If you look at what the Treasury plans to do with stable coins, they plan to market stable coins into retail all over the planet in a way that will bring in they think by the end of the decade three to four trillion dollars into the treasury market.

Now, that's not a lot of treasury market, but you're talking about drawing retail in in a way that you create crypto accounts. It's crypto rails and you can pump out enormous leverage to all four billion customers, right?

So, if you remember, you're probably too young to remember the way that the Germans unified Germany after the wall came down in '89. They just offered a sweet premium for the tender and for the for the East Germans and the East Germans overnight got like a stock tenders for another company.

The West Germany tendered for the Eastern Germans through the currency and boom, they unified overnight.

The US is planning on marketing dollars through crypto rails all over the planet to anybody they can reach on Google Pay, Apple Pay, mobile payment phones. And my suspicion is they're going to be exceptionally generous with leverage.

Think of this as the pallets of cash that went out to Iraq, except this time it's going out on the crypto rails.

Now, hold that thought for a second. They are working to build digital tokens for stocks and bonds. Coinbase has said, you know, and some of the other crypto firms, we're going to offer the big cap US stocks with 20 times margin on digital tokens.

So imagine four billion people and and Armstrong has said we can we can bring four billion new people into the US stock markets.

So imagine you're offering 20 time margin on the crypto rails. You bring in four billion people to the US stock and bond market.

Mark Andre about a month ago tweeted out, you know, uh our current stock market is 68% of the global stock market. Unless something goes horribly wrong, you know, within a reasonable period of time, we're going to be 90%.

That's what he means. He means we're going to go out and try and get people all over the world into our channel.

Daniela Cambone: Okay. So, two two points I find. Okay. Let's talk. A lot of your thesis is centered around digital central bank digital currencies. Um,

Catherine Austin Fitts: no stable coins through stable coins. stable coins and digital tokens.

Daniela Cambone: I feel uh and tell me if you agree with me or not. At one point, you know, and the ECB has spoken, you know, Christine Lagarde has spoken about uh moving to moving the euro to digital currency.

And in the US, we were speaking about it heavily at one point, I would say, under the Biden administration. And all of a sudden, it really uh kind of went away magically. people stop talking about it, right?

But you see it coming as soon as possibly next year, Katherine.

Catherine Austin Fitts: So, no, it's here. It's here. So, you know,

Daniela Cambone: but the use of it, the use of it.

Catherine Austin Fitts: Yeah. So, so let's talk about So, so programmable money that is used to control us is the problem. And it doesn't matter whether it comes in the form of a CBDC or it comes in the form of a stable coin or it comes in the form of a Visa credit card that can be used in the same way.

We don't really care. We just don't want to be controlled, right?

So, so there are a couple problems with the CBDC. One is a CBDC requires authorizing legislation for Congress and in this kind of environment, you're not going to get it. That's number one.

But number two, uh, if you can do programmable money through stable coins, which are privately issued, the problem with the CBDC is the Fed is a creature of Congress and if they do something that Congress doesn't like, Congress can pull the rug out from under them, shut them down, require disclosure, and under the law, they have public policy obligations.

If if instead rather than going through the central bank, I go through private stable coins.

Daniela Cambone: Yes.

Catherine Austin Fitts: where they are mandated to do whatever Treasury tells them to do in terms of applying the central controls and the rules. Then I have the same as Twitter censorship.

I have government control, but I have private issuers that can say, "Well, I'm not subject to p public policy obligations. I'm not subject to FOIA. I'm not subject to any of these rules."

And you've got something which is far more dangerous because then the people who control them can griff to their hearts content and skim and do a whole lot of stuff that would be much harder to do with central bank digital currency.

So the stable coin plan has turned out to be far more dangerous. I mean I hate CBDC but the stable coins are far more dangerous than CBDC.

Daniela Cambone: Um if I could put you in a room alone with Scott uh Bessant, right? No microphones, no cameras, nothing. What's the one thing you'd want to tell him?

Catherine Austin Fitts: Well, I'd want to ask him questions.

Daniela Cambone: Ask him. What would you want to ask him?

Catherine Austin Fitts: I would say, if you're planning on marketing$4 trillion dollars of stable coins to the world, why did you brag about being able to seize the wallets of a billion dollars, a billion dollars worth of wallets of Iranian wallets?

Why why would you market that way? What's what was that about? That's what I would ask him.

And then I'd ask him why he illegally gave Musk all the data from IRS and the payment systems.

Daniela Cambone: Interesting. Interesting.

Catherine Austin Fitts: I'm pretty sure I know why he did, but you know, I'd still ask him.

Daniela Cambone: I I want to I always want to give my audience tools, right? They walk away from this like let's say if we have a family of four watching, they have $8,000 in savings, let's say a mortgage.

What do you think? What would you tell them is the single most useful thing they could do this month?

Catherine Austin Fitts: Here's what they must do. They What's important is not what the price of your asset is. What's important is that it's your asset and it doesn't have a leash and somebody can take it away, right?

So when you think about portfolio strategy and managing your assets, you want to focus on what are the assets that are very hard. You you don't want to make it easy for people to take your stuff, right?

The first thing you need to do that the kind of auto I call it the automatic third lock which is what they're trying to put into place with respect to our currency or our digital assets what you want to do is you want to keep the system from going all digital.

Okay. So if there's one thing you want to do you want to preserve cash and you want to preserve analog systems. you know, whether you're trading, you know, gold coins or you're doing barter or you're using cash, right? Whatever your systems are, that's number one.

Number two, we have a book at Ceri called Coming Clean. It's free. You can come in and you can download it and it's full of uh it's like a buffet of all the things you can do to get the bad guys out of your head, out of your home, out of your heart, out of your wallet, out of your life.

And you want to build as much personal resiliency in terms of food, in terms of health, in terms of who you depend on, who you associate, where you bank, etc., etc. to give yourself as much personal resiliency as possible.

So, I'll get I'll tell you a funny story.

During the litigation before it started, I had gifted, you know, I was on Wall Street. I had a great career. I loved making money, made a ton of money. And whenever anybody in my family was in trouble or needed help, I would just help them. It's like that's what you have money for, to help your friends, right?

So, so when the litigation started, I they tried to cut off all my credit, all my, you know, completely control me and cut off my resources, cut off my income.

And my family got together and and I had an uncle who bought some of my farmland from me. He was wealthy. And so they targeted him and showed up at his door in the middle of the night with a subpoena and tried to scare him into not helping me.

And so the family had a a big pow-wow by phone. Yeah.

And everybody said, "Well, we're going to drop her because otherwise they're going to target us."

And Michael said, "I'm not going to drop her because she always helped us. If we were in trouble, she helped us. And now if she's in trouble, I'm going to help her."

Well, it turned out that I had I didn't even know how much I'd gifted her loan, but I had gifted her loan 250,000 to family and friends. And over the next 11 years, 200 they either paid back or gifted back exactly 250,000.

I didn't realize it until we won the litigation. I got the money in and I said, "Okay, I'm going to pay everybody back that helped."

And I did the numbers and I realized I had loaned or gifted 250,000 and then for 11 years that money had been repaid or gifted back and if it wasn't for that money I wouldn't have made it. I would have been dead. There was no way I would have made it without that money.

So when the money came in I had had a 401k that I'd had to bust and pay half the money in taxes and fees and it was 500,000. I had to pay 225,000 of taxes and fees to get it.

And um and my CPA said, "Let's fund up the 401k."

And I said, "No, I'm going to take that 500,000 and I'm going to bonus it out on the people bank because that is the only bank I trust. That is the only bank when the you know what hits the you know what that that they can't shut off."

And so one of the things I learned as an investment advisor, we're trained to put all of our money in the brokerage account and not help our kids or our grandkids or our family.

Wrong. You want to identify the people in your life that you can trust and you want to support and back them and that's what gives us resiliency.

So I just have to say this because I was telling you how much I love the Italian people. You can't do to the Italian people what you can do to the Americans because the Italians they support and and finance their families internally.

They have much more resilience because you can't bust those family ties. Right. And that's why Right. Right. They they know how to play the game. They've lived through up and down empires. They know.

Daniela Cambone: Oh, hell yes.

Catherine Austin Fitts: And that's what Americans have to learn. Americans have to learn, you know, we're in a war and we need to circle up with each other and and find the people we can trust and build resiliency together.

Daniela Cambone: And because so true, right? If you look at the things we need, food, health, you know, finance, all these things, what you need are people you can trust in the health area, people you can trust in the food area.

You're talking about building that community. And it's so true that the Italian people, you know, I I I witness it and I'll have a funny story I'll tell I'll tell you one day.

Um, but because we can't stop this programmable money train, Katherine. So, you talk about

Catherine Austin Fitts: I I'm an optimist. So I think we can for two reasons. One is it is possible to put up guard rails legislatively within states to do so.

It is also possible to keep the financial system from going all digital. If we can keep enough analog alive that they can't go all digital, we create options.

But the third reason, and this is a longer term reason, if you look at what they're trying to do in terms of central control, I absolutely believe it will fail because the notion that you can use digital technology to control the entire universe is absurd.

And and I just think their model is going to fail. So, but I don't

Daniela Cambone: I think that's the only thing we can bank on.

Catherine Austin Fitts: Right. Right.

Daniela Cambone: Because you're proof. You're proof. You're someone who went into government hoping to make a difference, you know, with with good intentions, and those people get cut out. The moment you start exposing fraud or, hey, something's fishy over here, you're out.

Catherine Austin Fitts: Well, but here's the thing.

Daniela Cambone: So, how am I supposed to have any faith in the system?

Catherine Austin Fitts: Well, I I don't have faith in in the existing institutions. With rare exception, I do have faith in people, and I do have faith in what people can do if they organize in effective ways.

So, so let me give you an example. If I was to go to a data center, our third quarter wrap-up's going to be on data centers.

If I was to go to a data center protest, I would see a thousand people and if I said to them, give me a copy of your IRA and 401k. What I could prove to them is they're financing the data centers, right?

But here's the thing. If they get smart, and this is going to be in our third quarter wrap-up, how to do it. If they got smart and said, you know something, I'm going to stop financing the data centers. I'm going to stop financing the companies that are poisoning my kids.

I'm going to stop and instead I'm going to start financing companies that are productive and are making money or good companies, right?

And I shifted my money. If we shifted our bank deposits away from the banks that did the financial crisis and did the 21 trillion missing money, if we fa we stopped financing the companies that are poisoning our kids or poisoning us.

If we stopped financing the bad guys and started financing, you know, things that would provide us with the food and health and other things we need are just good companies.

There's a there's a ton of good companies in the world. If we would finance the good guys and stop financing the bad guys, there would be a revolution. There would absolutely be a revolution.

We can't vote our way out of it, but we can shift our money and that could have a profound impact.

Daniela Cambone: Um, just one final point. I know we went over time with you today, Katherine. I know you have limited time. I would I'm going to have to bring you back, but um just your point about the bubbles of all bubbles.

You've seen many um is this just your thoughts on is that what leads to this financial reset that many experts feel is inevitable or do you feel we're already in?

Catherine Austin Fitts: So, we're in the in the res the reset started in August 2019 with the going direct reset. We have a big wrap-up and and a summary on Cileria on the going direct reset.

So the central bankers met in Jackson Hole in August of 2019, reviewed a plan prepared by a group of central bankers through the Black Rockck Investment Institute called the going direct reset and co one point you know co the pandemic was sort of a first big piece because they injected five to six trillion into the economy and then they shut down the small business and farms.

Yeah. to create the offsetting deflation and that meant you know Wall Street I'm grossly oversimplifying could take the six trillion and go buy all the assets the people had been shut down and were in a corner. So it was a way of consolidating control upstairs.

Right now we're in what I call CO 2.0 with the energy game, but it's it's a you know it's a it's a long-term fundamental re-engineering.

I have a wrap-up that I published in 2018 called um uh the state of our currencies and it's about the end of currencies and what they were going to do with the digital control grid and I described the resets historically so I knew a reset was coming and then when you know when it started in 2019 I was like okay here it is.

But this is an old game because every hundred every 80 to 120 years the central banks do a reset and every time they go into a reset they try you know um assert control of capital of labor and travel and then centralize uh you know capital and and and do a reset.

The thing about this reset though is this is the end of currencies if they get a complete digital control grid. And so we're talking about com, you know, the end of financial liquidity available to the majority of the population which I for one am going to do everything I can to prevent.

Daniela Cambone: Katherine Austin Fitz, you are a force. You are a dynamo. And uh thank you so much for your time today. Please come back.

Catherine Austin Fitts: I definitely will. This was a pleasure. It was a pleasure to finally get to meet you in person. Well, not really in person, but

Daniela Cambone: as good as it gets. Katherine Alston Fitz, thank you so much. And thank you all for watching. And of course, uh if you have any questions, reach out to my wonderful team at ITM Trading.

We spoke so much about the importance of owning uh physical gold through through everything that's coming our way. Uh we'll see you soon.

Here's the strange thing. You and I don't own our homes. But in Missouri, gold and silver enjoy a Lloydial title now because it cannot be confiscated. That was in our bill. And the federal government, if they decide to come into Missouri and confiscate gold and silver, the state absolutely cannot help them confiscate the gold and silver. We now have actually legal tender status for gold and silver in the state of Missouri. Basically, it comes down to actually setting up an alternative transactional system. Much like the federal government likes to toy with us to get us to a cashless society.

Now, we need to actually set up infrastructure in the state for use of gold and silver as money.

Welcome back to Liberty and Finance. I am delighted to have this returning guest whom we have not had on for far too long. Patrick Holland from the Missouri Freedom Initiative joins us. Today is Friday, September 4th, 2026. Patrick, thank you for coming back on Liberty and Finance.

Don, again, thank you so much for having me back. It's been a long time and we've had an update that's been available for a while, too, that we needed to share with your audience.

Would you please tell us about the breakthrough legislation that you got passed into law in Missouri, the Constitutional Money Act?

Yep. So, the last I think we visited might have been just shy of two years ago, and we were still trying to get that across the finish line. This is a very unique bill that has since become law that happened in July of 2025. But we'll start by saying that Missouri entered the fray. We now have actually legal tender status for gold and silver in the state of Missouri. Along with that, of course, was the elimination of capital gains taxes. So there's no more state taxes on investment or anything else having to do with gold and silver. It's simply gone.

But along with that, we got many other things, and we'll go through those as we talk and everything. But one of the really exciting things—and it's something that's esoteric if we talk about this too much—and people will say, "Gosh, I don't know that." A lodidial title. Very important.

Yeah, that's when do you or do you not own your home?

That's right. And here's the strange thing: you and I don't own our homes, but in Missouri, gold and silver enjoy a loial title now because it cannot be confiscated. That was in our bill. So basically, the state can't confiscate gold and silver unless it's through due process, which was standard with everything else. And the federal government, if they decide to come into Missouri and confiscate gold and silver—much, kind of like what Roosevelt did. So we all know this. And if they try to do it, the state absolutely cannot help them confiscate the gold and silver. They can't help them.

And of course, if they do, you can zue the state, and that's actually in the bill as well. So basically, we've eliminated the taxes on gold and silver. We've made it legal tender. It's always been money, so we won't go down that road. It's always been money, always. But now it's legal tender in the state of Missouri. And also, it can't be confiscated. So basically, a loyal title, which we can't seem to get on our homes and indeed in our lives. But gold and silver enjoy that status right now in the state of Missouri.

So that was something really exciting that we got through that—and I think, for lack of a better term, for—I'm a little nervous that someone in the legislature may be watching this video when it comes out, but I don't think they understood what they were doing because they just let it through. So I would like to see another state do what Missouri did to prove whether or not this is something that they were just on board with or if it was something they simply didn't understand.

Can you walk us through the major—why this is like a grand slam home run, this bill, as far as what the major accomplishments are? Because they are multiffold. I think you just hit several of them, but help us understand the highlights because every person in every state of our country should be weted. Their appetite should be wetted to have what—the rights that the Missouri—the people of the good state of Missouri just made sure that they have going forward for themselves, their children, their—and their children after them.

Okay. Gotcha. And I'll tell you what, let me share with you a little bit of candy that we got through on the bill. And it's something that may not seem important when you first hear it, but when you understand the implications of it, it really becomes quite profound. And that is the fact that employers can in fact pay their employees now in silver and gold in compensation. That's also law in the state of Missouri. The only thing is, is the employer has to agree to it, and the employee has to agree to it, and no one can be forced.

Is there any stipulation in there about the taxable quantity assigned to that compensation, whether it's face value or market value or whatever?

Actually it would be just plain market value. So that is—it's really that simple with that. But also the only other stipulation is that if it's physical gold and silver as opposed to a UPMA deposit or some kind of electronic transfer, the responsibility remains with the employer in order to ascertain the purity of the silver and gold before it's paid out to the employee. That would be the only other stipulation.

Okay, that's a big one. Being able to pay your employees in real money, hard money, gold and silver, that will hold its value because that's been one of the—

Just like they used to, man. You see the movies that were made back in the 50s and the 40s where you're lining up for your paycheck and they were giving you like four quarters for the week and that was silver.

And that's been one of the first victims to fall in rampant degradation of the currency is the value of the working person's wages and therefore their savings as well.

Yeah, savings. But really what it was was their purchasing power. It just—it disintegrated. And of course there's a lot of subsidy—subsidizing of this through anything from food stamps to any—there's all kinds of subsidies now for employers not to actually pay a living wage. The government is the safety net for employers to actually take more profits, pay less to their—and by the way, this isn't a rich versus poor thing. I'm just saying that this was part of the system and how it evolved when we started getting away from real money.

The government had to start subsidizing the businesses by literally offering free services to people, and before then, we didn't have to do that.

So in addition to paying your employees in gold and silver in Missouri, what else did this bill—to now law—achieve?

Well, first of all, it was—it's—I would say it's groundbreaking in the way that we got a Lloyd title for gold and silver. That was a big deal. And in fact, and it's not like I'm trying to belabor the point, but I would say this to anyone who's watching this. If you have a business that vaults gold or silver, Missouri is the only state that will protect you. That's it. There's no other state that's done what we've done. So, if you vault silver and gold for a business, you might want to consider having a vault in Missouri because they can't confiscate it here.

So it—others might say, well, if you have a vault, the government knows where it is, the federal government, so they'll just go right to it. Well, technically, the government of Missouri, it's their responsibility to protect your right to own gold and silver. So basically, then we have a clash, don't we? So the—and we don't talk about that aspect of things because people start thinking, well, this is a civil war. No, it's not. It's just lay down the law in your state. Silver and gold will not be confiscated in my state. Just lay it down.

Put it on paper, get it through your legislature, and we should talk a little bit more about all the challenges we had getting that done, how long it took to get done, all because of one speaker of the house, because this bill done was popular. Everyone knew about it. It was all over the place. I mean, it was popular not only in the capital building, it was popular across the state and thousands of people were calling and emailing. There was a lot of pressure. So what the speaker of the house did was go something like this: "Good. Now I've got leverage for the things that I want to get done. I won't let this bill through unless I can get my 11 corporatist bills through. And if those go through, then we'll let the silver and gold through." So this is what happens when your bill becomes super popular in a state house or a state legislative house.

It becomes leverage.

Unintended consequences of getting involved rather than just having a sleepy sheep population that doesn't do anything and the sausage gets made in the back room of politics the way it was unhindered by the public awareness other than what you're going to tell them on the official evening news. But in this case, when you get the public actually fired up about something and actually clamoring for something, be ready. Watch out.

And that's what you're telling us is for those who are actually getting involved and getting things moving and lobbying their lawmakers in their own state and in their own counties, be aware that this can be a unintended consequence of getting involved. And you want to underscore the importance of not being thrown off your track by that.

Absolutely. In fact, actually there's heroes. There's so many heroes to the story. A lot of people might think, well, this was Pat Holland who got this done. Pat Holland might have written this and Pat Holland may have organized a lot of this, but there were thousands of people involved in getting this done. That's how popular it was. And I got to tell you a quick story because it's going to put a smile on your face because it is ironic and we like irony sometimes in the gold and silver business.

Even though it's a completely different metal, the fact is Mike Moon, who was the sponsoring senator, actually snuck this onto a banker bill as an amendment. That's how it got through. It didn't have its own time on the floor, basically as its own bill, and we were very close to the end of session, and Mike Moon saw an opportunity along with Senator Rick Bratton. So, we have another hero to talk about. And they saw an opportunity. They stuck it on the bill because they saw a bunch of things on there that everyone was going to vote yes on.

And so they didn't think the speaker, the new speaker, Jonathan Patterson, would actually stop the bill because of it, because too many people wanted it. And it sailed through that way. And so on a banker bill, no less, is how silver and gold got passed in the state of Missouri. I wish we could have the beautiful fairy tale story like they have in Arkansas where there was absolutely no grassroots support for their silver and gold bill and it sailed right through with like one no vote and like hundreds of yes votes. But it wasn't to be that way in Missouri. It was a fight.

It was a knockdown, dragged down fight from the very beginning because of the popularity and then the leverage that it was used because of its popularity.

Help us understand if that's the only reason that there was any so-called opposition was just to try to get other things in on its coattails. Help us understand what the nature of the opposition was so that people can be prepared for that in their own state as well.

Okay. The opposition that we faced mainly—and this is really stupid—was a leftright thing. So the left didn't want it because it was sponsored by the right and so they were fighting it. Do you remember, Kaiser, when I came on to your show? I may have even provided you some video snippets of it when it was on the floor in the House in 201.

We're talking the Missouri House now—was on the floor, and Pete Meredith, who was a Democrat, a senior Democrat, basically started talking about he had concerns about this bill because if gold and silver became legal tender in Missouri, he had concerns that Nazi gold would make its way to the borders of Missouri. Confederate gold would become a problem. He spoke about mega gold, whatever that is. And then he also brought up a new concept and this one was zombie apocalypse silver. Yeah. He was worried about zombie apocalypse silver.

It literally—it was like a clown show right on our house floor with the Democrats throwing up the dumbest, stupidest arguments ever against gold and silver. Literally just to burn up time. And ultimately, of course, it wasn't to be put to a vote anyway because in the Senate side, they were waiting for the Senate to put two bills on the floor that the House Speaker wanted on the Senate floor, which didn't make it to the floor because the senators were like, "We're not doing corporate garbage here. We're just not going to do it." So they let silver and gold on the floor only for the Democrats to complain about Nazi gold and then it was taken right off the floor again and it wasn't voted on.

I would have anticipated there might be some substantive push back from either traditional banking or other quarters or governments who want to be able to take advantage of the inflationary—the degradation of money supply to make it easier to pay off their debts later or something like that.

Nope, not at all. In fact, I added the inside track on that because Dirk Deon was the sponsoring representative in 2023 and he has a very close relationship with bankers in Missouri just because of his position in the House. He does the budget. And so he was talking to the bankers. They—in fact, their exact words were they were neutral—and they certainly didn't come in and fight it in any way, shape or form. Not in any hearing. I was at all the hearings. Not a single hearing did they come by and say they didn't like it or have reasons against it.

And there was no push back in any back rooms either. So the bankers were fine with—even with a loyal title. They were fine with it. So, but any rate, I wish I could tell you that there was some grand conspiracy, but there really wasn't. There was just a house speaker that was dying to get a whole bunch of legalized gambling in the state of Missouri. And that's what he was trying to get through. And he wouldn't let silver and gold go through unless they heard that on the floor of the Senate.

The other push back that we've heard in a lot of quarters is that, oh, this will be used because it's anonymous, and there—there can be misused for criminal purposes, and that therefore we can't have it. We have to—we can track and control and keep tabs on people. Any push back that came from that regard?

We did it. It was from specifically from the Democrats in the House. That's it. And that was in a hearing. They—that's exactly what they were talking about. They were worried about criminal behavior and a non-trackable money being used for criminal activity.

And how was that objection overcome?

It wasn't taken seriously by the committee—by the committee chair. No one took those concerns seriously at all.

On the topic of a loyal title, which you brought up about the nonconfiscability of gold and silver currently in Missouri: Does that only protect citizens of Missouri? Or is—or has Missouri essentially become kind of like a real money banking haven for people all over the country who want to have a safe place to store their gold and silver and maintain individual property rights of it?

That's actually a very good question and there's several ways to answer it. First off, when it comes to people who are not Missouri citizens that are in the state of Missouri, when you're inside the borders of Missouri, you're represented by the politicians that actually represent that area wherever you're at. So, if you're traveling from state to state, that's kind of a neat thing. You're actually—you could be represented by basically someone from that district you're traveling through. But when it comes to vaulting services, anyone can vault here. They don't have to be a Missouri citizen.

The gold and silver itself is what enjoys loyal title, not the business that owns the gold and silver, just the gold and silver. So basically, anyone from anywhere in the world could store gold and silver here and enjoy our non-confiscation laws here?

You mentioned the word business in that previous sentence about the business that owns the gold and silver. Does this not cover individuals or are individuals kind of considered a type of corporation and themselves? How—why do you bring up the word business all the time?

No. I brought it up just as a juosition. So the elodial title doesn't attach to a person who owns gold and silver. It simply applies to the gold and silver itself.

It's not the legal person of the owner. It's the asset itself.

Correct. Yep.

Good clarification.

So for instance, basically if you had a loidal title on your land, that means the government can't come and confiscate the land, but it doesn't mean the government can't take you out of your house and put you in jail.

In addition to those aspects of the bill, the Constitutional Money Act that has been passed into law in Missouri, other aspect you mentioned—

One more thing I forgot to mention: you can't discriminate against gold and silver. So—and this is for the state. This is a law for the state, not the people. So in other words, if it becomes normal to use gold and silver for transactions, let's say, Kaiser, you're driving through here and you're getting gas and you're going to pay for it in gold and silver. So, basically they can't discriminate at the gas station and say, "Well, since you're using gold and silver, we're going to charge you a 10% search charge." They can't do that here. You cannot discriminate. You cannot put one form of legal tender over another.

And I'm sorry I got off track there. Let me tell you something else we did. The government of Missouri will accept electronic transfers of gold and silver for payment of taxes or services. That's something else no other state's ever done before. So, we did get that done here. They don't want physical. So they've been very bold about that. We've had meetings about that during the whole process, during 3 years to get this done. They didn't want physical gold and silver, but they didn't mind necessarily electronic transfers as long as they could be easily converted into cash. So, that is specifically in there as well.

What about certain forms? Some states such as Florida have passed electronic gold and silver transactional laws or gold transactional gold laws, but they've specified restrictions such as US mint or certain forms, which really is limiting to those who have already built up assets. How permissive is Missouri about the different forms of the species of gold or silver that you hold?

I'm glad you asked that because actually we define them in our bill. And so basically, any form of gold and silver that is really formed and in function, in weight and purity—basically, that's made to be used as money—is money in the state of Missouri now. So basically, that includes everything from gold and silver coins to gold backs and to even—and the language is very specific in the bill. I was very specific that electronic gold and silver is to be treated as legal tender. We did not make electronic gold and silver legal tender in the state, but we did say it must be treated as legal tender.

So that's a very specific wording choice that I used. And although some people were a little hesitant when I said—when I was talking to them at first, when I was explaining what I was doing, they got it eventually. And it is another first. There is nothing in the constitution that says that a representation of gold and silver can be gold and silver. That's why we called it the Constitutional Money Act. Everything in our bill jives 100% with the constitution. And if we made electronic gold and silver legal tender, we would be out of bounds as far as the constitution's concerned. And this is my interpretation.

So I may talk to another person says, "That's nonsense." Basically electronic representation is really kind of the same thing, and I get it to a certain extent, but we wanted to be able to maintain the Constitutional Money Act name with our bill, so we kept it that way.

Any additional gains for the common people's constitutional rights that you see coming from this new law in Missouri?

Yes, but in a different way. Basically, it comes down to actually setting up an alternative transactional system, much like the federal government likes to toy with us. And the latest one is, of course, the Fed now program. Those of you who know about Fed Now from the Federal Reserve know that it's basically—it's more or less an infrastructure to get us to a cashless society. That's what Fed Now was really designed to do. In the case of what we did in Missouri with the Constitutional Money Act, now we need to actually set up infrastructure in the state for use of gold and silver as money.

Now that we've taken away capital gains and we've made it legal tender and we've even allowed for businesses to actually pay their employees in gold and silver, we need to start setting up the transactional system, start getting people used to it, getting them a little bit more educated, getting businesses on board with accepting gold and silver, basically for products and services. So that's kind of the next stage of the process and that's a big one. That's a—that's a big one. But one of the things that makes it really easy, I mean, some people have issues with coins. I love gold and silver coins. I absolutely love them.

And I have one of those special—I can't remember what you call it—a meology detector, something like that, where it detects the purity of the silver and the gold. And that could easily be set up at a point of sale register where you can actually verify the purity. But there's also goldbacks which are really made for transactions. And so I'm sure you're familiar with goldbacks, Dunigan.

Mhm. Yep.

Yep. So, basically, Goldbacks are starting by literally—and we're talking about the, I believe they call it the guild, the goldback guild. Businesses all around the United States are starting to accept gold backs. This is the beginning of that infrastructure. Now, it may not be the end of it, but it is certainly the beginning, and it is a start, and it is powerful, and it is actually moving and in use. So anyone could sign up that has a business—that is, sign up for free with the goldback people. Go to the guild and sign up and register your business as accepting goldbacks, and they will actually advertise your business on their website.

Not only what you're doing and what services or products you provide, but also the fact that you're accepting gold backs at your business. So, you'll start attracting probably brand new customers you never had before just cuz you are within the Goldback network.

Patrick, in addition to this bill now law in Missouri, you've been working on getting grassroots activism fermented so that you can become the leaven in the bread and you can—this can spread across farther than Missouri to the people of all the great states of the United States. Any comments from you on how you're doing that and how people who live in those states can take advantage of the work that you're doing in Missouri?

Sure. Well, first off, I did write a lot of legislation, not just for Missouri, but for other states as well. So, I collaborated with a lot of representatives and senators in other states, Nebraska, Montana, Arkansas, Mississippi. I mean, the list goes on and on—even Arizona, Minnesota, even—to try and get legislation done. But what was really lacking was any type of grassroots support. Now, Arkansas was kind of a special deal. I mean, those silver and gold bills just sail right through. It's a hot knife through butter. In Arkansas to get sound, muddy legislation done. In many states, like Missouri, it is a knockdown, drag down fight. Florida is another example.

Florida is another one of those states where it's really difficult to get something like that done, probably because it's popular and they're using it as leverage. The same thing that was happening in Missouri. So my advice to people is first off—and in fact, Dunigan, if you're good enough, please put a link at the bottom of this, in the description section, to the Missouri law that I sent you earlier. And I'll resend it to you if I need to. And basically, just take—just print that Missouri law out, and basically, you don't even need an outline anymore.

Bring it to your legislator and say, "This is what I would like to do in our state." It's really simple. It's easy. It's very easy to understand. And, basically it covers pretty much every base. The only thing that we don't have in Missouri is a state depository. And I did write a bill for that as well. That was part of SB 100. And it came down to they didn't want the expense of it. That's what they were complaining about. And so the treasurer was dead set against it and said, "We'll fight you. We'll fight you on this." Basically if you keep pushing a bill where it says the treasury has to have a depository.

Well, that's because my vision of a depository is very different from other people's. The depository for the state would be for the state only, state reserves, not for the people, not as a bank, just for the state use. And we'll let the free market come into our states, like UPMA, like Glint, like Kinesis. Let those free market aspects come into our state and serve the people's needs for silver and gold and banking and let the state have their reserves in silver and gold, totally separate from the people's. And basically, if you do that, they're less likely to start—and that's another thing, too.

Oh, actually, another really interesting point about our bill. Those who read the bill will notice there's absolutely no regulation on silver and gold. And that is by design. We didn't want the state regulating silver and gold. And when we were pushing this bill, there were a lot of Democrats that said, "I am a no vote on this, Pat." And let me tell you why. Because I have absolutely no idea how this even works. And I would say to them, I said, "Well, that's because the free market's already got this. Everything that we need to transact in silver and gold, the free market already has. We don't need the state involved." So, I'm a free market guy.

I just—so that's the way I designed the bills. And in fact, I've noticed too where, in other states where I've helped construct their bills, I had to kind of pull away from it because they would add state regulations and I was like, "No, I don't want to be a part of that anymore. I don't want to say that I had anything to do with writing that." Because they wanted regulations, the state to regulate silver and gold. If the people's money and private money come together in the form of state bank that's controlled by the treasury that holds silver and gold, believe you me, they're going to start regulating it.

And you don't want that. You want the free market to come in. You want several factions of the free market to come in to serve the people's needs because then you have choice and competition.

There's one more thing that a lot of people have been asking about, is if you own gold and silver and if you've been prudent and gathered it up over time, how do you envision that it will be actually used by the people of Missouri in—now that they've been empowered to be able to do so? How do you foresee some of the most common use cases developing?

Actually, that's a very very good question in itself. But the co—most common use cases I would see are mom and pop small businesses, period. I don't see large corporations. I don't see Walmart jumping in saying, "Yeah, we want to transact in silver gold." They'll sell gold to you, but they don't want to transact in it. So basically, that is—that ties right back to what I was talking about with the goldback guild. There's a lot of guild members right here in the state of Missouri.

These are private businesses, small mom and pop businesses that are in fact in accepting gold backs and many of them accept coins as well, gold and silver coins. So, basically, like I said, this is the very beginning of the infrastructure. Something is happening and it's with the gold back guild. Like I said, it doesn't necessarily end there, but that is a really good starting place because it's organized and it's nationwide.

Any forms of things calling themselves gold or silver or companies organizing to provide services around gold and silver that you felt were like coming out of the woodworks and it gave you a feeling that people need to be cautious and wary cuz this could open up basically a whole new kind of a free field and there could be both reputable and non-reputable players on a new field? Any thoughts from you on that of people trying to be smart about taking steps forward in this and not just stumble into a pit?

Yeah, I do. I mentioned to you I have one of those detectors myself that can actually detect a purity. As gold and silver are going up in value, basically fraudulent versions of gold and silver will be coming out. It is guaranteed is going to happen. And so basically, this is the thing: if you're worried about fraud, basically there are things you can do to protect yourselves by simply checking the purity and the weight of the gold and silver. And yes, the equipment is expensive. It's $1,000 for one of those metal dete—or I call a metal detector. I'm not sure what it's called. Sigma. Made by Sigma. Yeah. Mhm.

Yeah. There you go. So, but the gold backs themselves, basically they have anti-counterfeit printed right into them. And I think a lot of it is actually on the back side, but any rate, so these are impossible to counterfeit. I do believe they've offered $20,000 to anyone who could counterfeit a gold back and no one even came close. So with the gold backs, there's features being built in. I would hate to think that we would have to put some kind of chip in our gold and silver coins, basically to verify them or anything else like that, because people have suggested that in the past.

But yes, I do think that there is a possibility of fraud coming out for fake silver and gold. People need to be careful, and there—just learn about what you do to verify the purity of the gold, and the weight too. Not just the purity, but the weight.

And I imagine not only fake silver and gold, but what about services that might end up—your long treasured gold and silver you put into whatever, and then you never see it again? As far as there's other ways of making fraud against people than fake metals.

Sure. If you don't hold it, you don't own it. Right. So, I would once again—I—transacting in silver and gold is just like transacting in cash. If you've got $400,000 worth of cash in your house, good for you, first of all, but, secondly, that's probably not the smartest way to hold on to cash. If you got that much silver and gold, you probably want to look into vaulting services. As opposed—if especially if that's your life savings and if that's your retirement. So, I would advocate for that. But, basically most people I don't think need to do that.

I mean, you can hide gold and silver in your house, or no one would ever find it. And so, it's relatively easy to do. But with a bill like Missouri's, basically with vaulting, I think, because of the anti-confiscation that we have here, I think vaulting is going to be a thing here in Missouri. I think companies are going to want to come here and start vaulting. And I don't think it's any more expensive to vault in Missouri than it is in any other state. So but you have those added safeguards and protection. Now—

Is there any protection of personal privacy or any aspects of that in the Missouri constitutional money amendment? Some people are concerned—well, there was a number of levels of concern. Some people are concerned that—that you mentioned that if you own gold and silver, you can keep it private. You don't have to tell anybody about it. And that's—some people are concerned that that right to privacy about what you already own may be going out the window if you're expected to start giving lists just like there have been lists where you have to tell the government you have this or that or the other.

Oh, no. There's no requirement in the state of Missouri to inform the government you have anything. In fact, I have a lot of silver to be honest with you. I've been a silver buff since I was 14 years old. And I've—that was one or two years ago. And so you—but I never participated in any IRA program that I could actually use it as a tax write off because I didn't want the government to know about my silver. So I forewent the tax write off in order to keep my right to privacy. So that's what I did. But to each their own.

But there is absolutely no reason you have to inform the government in our bill or in any law in Missouri that you have any silver and gold at all. And now that you know we got rid of capital gains, doubly so.

It's capital gains at the state level. Any other taxes you've—sales tax, any other types of taxes at the state level on gold and silver?

None. It's totally taxree. The only taxes on silver and gold now are literally on the federal level, as far as Missouri's concerned.

Do you want to have a free crack at the—what you think about the concept of capital gains tax on gold and silver at all, for even at the federal level, how you feel about that?

That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. It's stupid. It's dumb. In fact, I mean, I don't want to talk about this because it was a rumor I heard about 2 years ago, but I did hear that if 15—this is a rumor I heard from the federal government. Okay, so we have to consider the source here, right? But I did hear a rumor from someone high up, someone that may be one step away from the president, that if there were 15 states that made silver and gold legal tender in their states, that Trump would ask Congress to get rid of capital gains on silver and gold.

Now, that was—that's just a rumor. I can't confirm it with anyone else. I heard it from one person, but I did hear that. But—but I do think that getting rid of capital gains on silver and gold is highly, highly important right now. And just get it done in your state. We'll worry about the federal government later. Just get rid of it because it is—it's evil and it's wrong.

If people want to support the Missouri Freedom Initiative as well as direct their lawmakers to the resources available there, where should they start?

Well, first of all, we're a very very special type of organization there. The only organization that we have technically is an email list and that's by design. We do not take donations. We do not have a membership sign up. We have nothing like that whatsoever. It's an email list that's—it's over 4,000 people in the state of Missouri that are on that email list and all of like mind and work together. And so basically that's the way we've kept it. We don't take any type of money or donations of any kind. In fact, we have a saying in the group: "Your own time, your own dime."

Is that a silver dime?

Yeah, silver dime. Yep. There you go. So it's got to be a silver dime because really the other kind isn't worth it. But so it's been—they can't bring us down. They can't bring us down. I have seen other grassroots organizations start out with the same model, and then they go, "Well, I need to make money doing this." So they start taking money and then their support evaporates very quickly because they're making money but all the supporters for that organization don't. And so they're asking them all to go up to the capital and yeah, you're getting paid to go to the capital, but I have to pay for it myself.

It's that kind of—it's squirly and it's dumb and all that fun stuff, but this is just human nature. So basically, yes, there's absolutely no money in anything that we do and they know it up at the capital. They—in fact, they regularly investigate me personally to see if I'm taking money in any way, shape or form with the Missouri Freedom Initiative donations so they can actually register me as a lobbyist. And so because the rules change on what you can do up at the capital, if you're just a regular citizen up there and not a lobbyist, you have so much freedom in the capital.

You have so much—you could do just about anything you want. When you're a lobbyist, all the rules change. And I do not want the rules to change. I want the freedom.

It's interesting. G. Edward Griffin, whom you are no doubt familiar with, who founded the Red Pill Expo and wrote The Creature from Jackal Island, a—Another Look at the Federal Reserve, talked to us about his organization, which he said is—is not leaderless, it's leaderful, meaning it's any individual and many individuals within that organization could stand up as points of coordination if the need arose. Rather than being able to do a decapitation. So I can say, we—well, we took out the honcho, and so now that organization falls apart because it's a like-minded people collaborating together.

Yep. And it's virtually the same thing. I am not a leader by any stretch of the imagination. I consider myself more of an organizer of leaders. And like I said, I would love to at some point in time shout out a thousand names of people that work their butts off to make this a reality in Missouri. And there's a ton of them. Citizens for Sound Money was helpful. Let's shout out to Isaac Gaither and his wife and his sister. Just a bunch of people that folks probably wouldn't know, but these people worked their butts off.

They believed and they helped craft and actually execute the most permissive gold and silver laws that you will see in the entire world, which we enjoy right now in the state of Missouri. No one else is even coming close. So it is. So there's a lot of leaders in our organization, is what I'm saying, and thank God for them.

Well, we're certainly grateful for you rattling the cage and saying, "Hey, we've got something we need to talk about. Let's get on and talk about it." Very grateful for your presence here with us again on Liberty and Finance. We're going to put a link to the actual law, the Missouri Revisor of Statutes official law about the Constitutional Money Act number 40801, and it will be in the description of this video, folks, if you want to check it out, if you want to get your state legislators fired up about it. You can point them to that and also to the mofree.org, the Missouri Freedom Initiative.

Any other pointers, Patrick, on people who want to get access to you and your information?

Yeah, just go to mofree.org. You can reach us through there. This is actually during the dry period because right now our legislature is not in session. We do have a veto session coming up in just over a week. And so I may go up there and do something at that time with flock cameras at data centers or something. You know how crazy I can be.

We do need you to come back and talk to us about that because that's about to get times 10 or times 100 beyond flat cameras—is this new thing about on every light pole in the country, which could be over 50 million of them, coming to a city and neighborhood near you soon. So we want to talk to you more about that soon, and—but thank you for giving us this vital update on the Constitutional Money Act being passed into law in Missouri and the fruits that are going to come from that. Patrick Holland from the Missouri Freedom Initiative. Thank you for joining us again on Liberty and Finance.

And just to show you what that can do to politicians or central bankers, do you remember the Bill Holter piece?

He said, “Who is going to finance the central banks? If they’re going to rescue the system, who is going to finance the central banks?”

Well, let me tell you what the ECB and the European Commission think about who is going to finance them.

You.

People with money in the bank are going to finance the EC Commission and the European Central Bank.

Because I’ve got a piece here. I’m going to link it.

And I’m going to ask Craig now to lift 47 seconds to 1 minute 19.

Embedded clip:

“The two most powerful leaders in Europe both just confirmed that they are coming to seize the $10 trillion sat in bank accounts in the European Union.

“I know that sounds crazy, but this clip from Ursula von der Leyen just broke the internet yesterday.

“You can see the subtitles. She said, ‘Savings are unfortunately lazy, and there is 10 trillion dollars worth of euros sat in bank accounts.’

“This clip is so insane that before I play the Christine Lagarde video I’ve got for you, I’ve gone and translated this clip from French into English for you to prove that what Ursula von der Leyen just said is real.

“Listen into this.”

Translated clip:

“Unfortunately, this saving is quite lazy indeed. 10 trillion euros of household savings continue today still in bank deposits.

“And a significant portion of European savings is invested outside our continent.

“Europe must now put it to work for the benefit of its many and diverse businesses across the entire modern economy.

“That’s the aim, uniting savings and investments.

“We’ve tabled securitization, banks and insurance investments, and market integration and supervision. They could unlock up to 470 billion euros.”

So, what the ECB is saying is that there is 10 trillion sitting in bank accounts, and it’s not doing anything.

It’s lazy.

That’s their description of your savings.

It’s lazy.

So, what they think is this money should be invested in the EU, of course. They actually say that.

Okay?

So here Lagarde is saying it should be invested in Europe. And they actually say in European businesses.

So they’re actually putting a wall up around Europe in terms of your money in your bank, in your savings account. They’re going to use it to invest within Europe, which is collapsing.

Can you see it?

Now, I would have said, “Well, that’s a rather random conversation.”

Not that politicians or central bankers have random conversations. There’s usually a big plan already behind the conversation. This is just a way of filtering it out to the public.

And then I saw another piece.

And here’s Van der Leyen talking about the same thing from the Commission.

So it’s not only the central bank, it’s now the Commission. It’s not only the bankers, it’s now the politicians saying exactly the same thing.

Embedded clip:

“More than 800 billion euros per year.

“If we want to be realistic, and if we want to deliver on our commitment under the Paris Agreement, if we want to protect ourselves from a security point of view, and if we want to move to the digital age, 15.7% of household income is actually saved.

“But where is it saved?

“It’s saved in cash. It is saved in bank deposits.

“That’s probably not the most efficient way to put your money to work.

“So I would start with that. Start with an instrument in which Europeans are reasonably comfortable investing in. Take some risk.

“The second direction I would take is make sure that money can move around. Remove the barriers. We have so much of it.

“So, in order to expand geographically where this money can be invested, we have to look at those barriers and those hurdles that we have inflicted upon ourselves.

“And the third direction that I would take as well is make sure that that money that is invested in this European instrument that can move around is actually heading in the right direction.

“And in that respect, you know, I’m not enough of an expert in venture capital and the venture capitalist approach to risks, but that’s where the money has to flow, among other things.

“We don’t have the luxury of time.”

So, we are seeing a plan that is already in place being leaked gently to the system: that the European elite are going to take the money from the banks that people have in their savings accounts and invest it in European business, which is failing badly.

Where do you go with this story?

As Bill Holter said, where do the central banks get the money from?

Well, they’re telling you.

It’s coming from bank deposits.

Now, me as a banker, if I heard this story in Europe, with the chief politician of Europe and the chief central banker of Europe both saying, “We need to activate the 10 trillion of savings that are sitting in bank deposit accounts,” I’ll take my money out.

Reuters:

Japan’s benchmark 30-year bond yield hit the 3% level for the first time since 1996 on Tuesday amid a broad-based global bond sell-off

MarketWatch:

From the UK to Japan, bond yields are jumping as US bonds tumble

Sometimes, the most obvious problems are the easiest to solve. An alcoholic has problems. His wife doesn’t understand him. His boss doesn’t like him. He needs a new car. His head aches and his friends desert him.

But his major problem: he drinks too much. This is very easy to correct. Just stop drinking. The simplicity of it makes it almost unbearable…and unthinkable.

Japan has been on a bender for 35 years. Its stock market bubble popped in 1990. Its feds have been pumping like crazy ever since, trying to get the buzz back on. They’ve inflated Japanese government debt to the largest in the world — at 250% of GDP, twice the US level — hoping to revive those glorious, intoxicating go-go years of the 1980s. That was when Japan Inc. was the envy of every business school in the world.

Back then, in the ‘80s, Japan’s industries —Mitsubishi, Toyota, Honda — dominated the financial pages. Then, after the crash, Japan continued to lead the world, but in borrowing. And now Japan has one massive hangover.

When you stop drinking your recovery begins almost immediately. But as Marc Antony said over the body of Caesar, ‘the evil that men do lives after them.’ You can stop spending, but the shadow of the past — debt — stays with you.

And Japan is not the only one living in the shade of debt. It’s been party time, worldwide, ever since Alan Greenspan revealed his ‘put option’ for the stock market. Free drinks. No closing time. Stock prices could go up all they wanted; but if they began to fall, the Fed would cut rates to catch them.

As a result, world debt is estimated at $329 trillion — or more than three times GDP. The US is right in line with more than $100 trillion in debt…or, about three times GDP. That doesn’t include the $15 trillion or so the feds are legally obligated to pay their own government retirees.

The dipsomaniac may be jolly or morose…rich or poor…smart or dumb. But until he gets that monkey off his back, he’s going to have trouble.

The US has problems too. Iran. Canada. A ‘heat dome.’ Water shortages. Hurricanes. Illegal immigrants. Obstreperousness overseas. Lawlessness at home. Mosquitoes. But the big ape on the back of the US is obvious. It’s the one neither political party wants to talk about. And no wonder; they put it there.

It’s the debt, stupid– the price of all the dumb ‘problem solving’ of the past. Who wants to remember them? Old girlfriends. Empty bottles and cigar stubs. Yesterday’s newspapers. The Gulf War of 1991…Obama’s record $1.4 trillion deficit in 2009, LA riots of 1992…Hurricane Andrew…Oklahoma City bombing…Monica Lewinsky?

All have faded from public memory…but the bills, great or small, are still unpaid. They are among the $40 trillion worth of accumulated federal debt that must be serviced every year, for ever and ever, Amen. At just 5% interest, the annual charge will soon come to $2 trillion per year, whether anyone remembers what the money was spent on or not. Federal tax receipts last year were $5.2 trillion. So, nearly half of the feds’ revenue is now headed to pay for things that were always a waste of money…and now, are largely forgotten.

Politicians don’t want to talk about it because solving the debt problem will hurt. Like cutting off a gangrenous finger without anesthetic or going ‘cold turkey’ in an asylum, neither party has the stomach for it. The voters will howl. The press will harrumph. Wall Street will quake. And, most likely, some fringy politician will take charge…and start a war to take our minds off of it.

You can ignore a debt build-up; for a long time, it will seem ‘manageable.’ But then, after a party, you end up in a ditch. Drying out (aka deflation) won’t be pleasant. People only do it because the alternative is worse.

A debt hangover is hard to shake off. Short term interest rates are lower…and closer to ‘cash.’ So, the feds moved more of their borrowing to the short end of the yield curve. This leaves them needing to ‘rollover’ their debt more frequently — even as interest rates go up. Even if they balanced the budget tomorrow, they’d still need to refinance more than $1 trillion per month.

A report from Armstrong Economics tells us that $29 trillion will be borrowed this year:

Governments and corporations are expected to borrow a record $29 trillion from global bond markets in 2026, according to the OECD. That is $4 trillion more than in 2024 and twice the amount borrowed only ten years ago. This is the Ponzi structure underlying modern government finance.

Carlo Ponzi might be proud. Practically all of the world’s post-war western governments adopted his model.

But where are we going with this? Where else, the same place it took Ponzi himself: to Hell in a handcart! Ponzi died in a charity ward in Brazil, with only $75 to his name.

And now, there is no way a society can devote half its government’s revenues to paying for the bad investments of the past…at least, not indefinitely. And the most likely ‘solution’ is the most dangerous and painful one — inflating away the debt…which is like curing the hangover with a bottle of gin before breakfast.

But we shouldn’t be too surprised if a more audacious leader — such as Jean-Luc Melenchon in France — comes along with a more radical plan. The French leftist proposes to simply renege on a portion of French debt.

And maybe that wouldn’t be such a bad idea…

Stay tuned…

https://dailyreckoning.com/its-the-debt-stupid-part-duh/

Scott Bessent warned of a “grand economic reordering” on the scale of a new Bretton Woods.

Now the pieces are snapping into place.

Bond yields are screaming: U.S. 10-years near 4.8%, Japan’s 10-year JGBs lunging toward 3%. Washington and Tokyo just ran a rare joint yen intervention after USD/JPY smashed a 40-year low near 164 and they’re still coordinating to keep FX “orderly.”

Gold has surpassed U.S. Treasuries as global reserve asset.

China is already building the alternative: 21 straight months of official gold buying, a Hong Kong vault-and-clearing network to make yuan convertible into metal, and BRICS payments rails backed by gol, designed to settle trade outside pure dollar clearing.

China also triggered the biggest gold-rush among the central banks.

In July 2026, the UK, China, Japan, South Korea and India all sold U.S. treasuries while increasing their gold holdings.

South Korea sold their Dollar Forex Reserves and started purchasing gold after 13 years.

This was exactly warned by the famous City of London banker

@LordBelgrave

at the start of year.

The City was well aware of the situation and a financial crisis will be engineered by the central banks, IMF, BIS and G-SIBs.

We’re now watching a global monetary reset happen in real time.

https://x.com/SternDrewCrypto/status/2095970159114747947/video/1

Are you for or against the issuing or credit card by the financial institutions? Personally, I don't have any business with using a credit card because I'm all in favor of using debit card always. Many people struggle to pay off their credit card debt because they spent more than they can afford to pay. It's why I don't like using credit cards.

Do you think credit card is good or bad news?

Becoming financially independent is the dream of so many people all over the world. No one wants to keep looking over their shoulders all the time because of a bill they can't pay as and at when due. It's a very difficult way to survive as a human being.

What have you been doing to ensure you become financially independent?

"Solari Builders: Understanding Money and the Economy with Prof. Richard A. Werner"

Join us on Telegram: https://t.me/solarireport

By Ricardo Oskam

At the recent gathering in Northern Italy that concluded the Solari Builders pilot course, Professor Richard A. Werner addressed two fundamental questions: What is money? And what problem does money’s existence solve?

Werner, a recurrent guest at Solari, is a German economist who, after training at the London School of Economics and Oxford, spent his formative years in Japan—as the first Shimomura Fellow at the Development Bank of Japan and then as chief economist at the Jardine Fleming investment bank in Tokyo. In the mid-1990s, he coined the term “quantitative easing,” proposing to the Bank of Japan something rather different from what central banks later carried out borrowing the same terminology. Werner’s 2003 book, Princes of the Yen, which described how Japan’s central bankers inflated and then burst a bubble to force through reform, outsold Harry Potter in Japan for six straight weeks.

Before diving into contemporary monetary theory, Werner took the Solari Builders group through one thousand years of history. With the Builders having visited a famous Italian Duomo the day before his presentation—a cathedral that was six centuries in the making—he tackled the question of how some of Europe’s most impressive cathedrals were built. Laborers contributed to structures they knew they would never see completed in their lifetimes, making the cathedrals a true testimonial to a higher culture where one honored God with every brick laid. Today, Werner notes, we would not be able to replicate those buildings at any sane cost, despite having better technology.

Since 1992, Prof. Werner has argued that banks do not pass along existing savings but create money out of thin air—the Credit Creation Theory. Werner used empirical evidence that he painstakingly gathered (rather than rely on axioms or theoretical deductions) to prove his claim to be true and disprove other theories such as the intermediation theory of banking (which claims that banks are just financial intermediaries, both individually and collectively) or the fractional reserve theory of banking (which claims that banks are individually financial intermediaries but collectively create money through fractional reserve banking).

The common thread uniting the historical examples Werner references is the creation of money as an animating force. The stone wheel money of Yap and the split tally stick made of cheap hazelwood (the grain of its split being a unique fingerprint to identify its validity) became money because people accepted them as money. His point, arriving through the back door of history, is that our own money is the same instrument, with the promise thinned out—a claim with no commodity behind it.

The tally stick was also the original accounting method: charge on one side, discharge on the other, cash recorded as it moves, checked afterwards against the counter-rolls kept in the Treasury, making it hard to lie. Double-entry accounting came later, and in Werner’s reading of it, represented not an advance in transparency but a smokescreen. Interest was illegal in Christian Europe, and the goldsmith-bankers had more than interest to hide: they were lending out gold left in their care and writing deposit certificates for gold nobody had deposited.

To truly understand the economy, we must understand what money is and how its successful use is intertwined with our governance system and a healthy culture that supports a fundamental level of trust. Will the rapid influx of newly created money in our economy facilitate borrowing for productive purposes—leading to growth without inflation—or will it further raise consumer prices and spawn asset bubbles?

Since the Fed's counterfeit money funds the Empire, it's to be expected that both the monetary system and the Empire are declining together. The powers that shouldn't be will continue to fight reality, but sound money and putting America First will materialize at some point. For the benefit of the American people (and the rest of the world that is tired of being invaded and threatened) we say the sooner it materializes, the better. Texas is getting the ball rolling with sound money. Gold and silver are now legal tender in the state.

Explore Our New Inflation Calculator

What Happened to Your Dollar? Explore Our New Inflation CalculatorThe number on a dollar bill stays the same. What it can purchase does not.A larger paycheck, a higher home price, or a growing savings balance can look like progress—but dollar amounts alone don’t tell us whether purchasing power has...

Read the full article →

Myth vs. Reality

Some of the most persistent misunderstandings about money and economics are not created by a complete lack of information. They come from explanations that are repeated so often that they begin to feel self-evident.That is why the Monetary Literacy & Mastery Foundation has introduced a new Myth...

Read the full article →

I found this great article recently.

Picture this: it’s 15th-century Florence, and the Medici family are strutting around like the coolest kids on the block. They’re not kings or popes, but they’ve got the ultimate cheat code—cash and lot's of it. The Vatican’s broke, begging for loans, and the Medici swoop in, lending like it’s a fire sale. They bankroll wars, fund Michelangelo’s paint-by-numbers, and even get to pick the next guy to wear the papal crown. Cosimo de’ Medici doesn’t need a throne—he’s the guy that the Pope owed big-time. This wasn’t just money; it’s power, influence and control, pure and simple.

Fast-forward to the 1800s, and the Rothschilds take the game global. Nathan, parked in London, finances Britain’s slugfest with Napoleon, while his brothers sprinkle cash across Europe like confetti. Legend has it he gamed the stock market after Waterloo, cashing in before the messengers even laced up their boots—cha-ching. Nathan himself put it best: “It matters not who sits on the throne.” Kings, emperors, whatever—they’re all just puppets when you own the keys to the vault. The Rothschilds didn’t wear crowns; they held the IOUs that made empires dance.

Now zoom to 2025, and meet the modern champs: BlackRock. With $10 trillion in assets—more than most countries’ GDPs—they’re not just playing; they’re rewriting the rulebook. They own stakes in everything—Apple, Tesco, your granny’s corner shop. Central banks like the Bank of England or the Fed play referee, tweaking rates and printing cash, but they’re in bed with the private banks. The UK’s £2.7 trillion debt? That’s BlackRock, JPMorgan, and pals holding the leash. When Liz Truss tried her tax-cut tantrum in 2022, they didn’t send a memo—they crashed the pound and booted her out in 49 days. She said it: the bankers called the shots. No ballot required.

Here’s the thing: governments need money, and bankers have it. Step out of line—like Truss—and the markets “fix” you. Currency tanks, borrowing costs soar, pensioners riot. Politicians get the memo quick: toe the line, or you’re toast. Voting? Cute, but useless. Pick Labour, Tory, Lib-Dem or Reform—it’s the same rigged Monopoly board. The Medici didn’t sweat the duke; Rothschilds didn’t blink at the PM; BlackRock doesn’t care about your pencil stub marking an X on a ballot paper every four years. They’ve got the cash, the markets, the power. You’re just rolling dice and playing a game of their making.

There are movements which spring up who see through the Matrix, take Occupy Wall Street—those scruffy protesters in 2011, camping out, chanting “We are the 99%!” They saw the game, called out the bankers, but couldn’t crack the code. Why? They failed to hook the public. People grumbled, sure—bank bailouts after 2008 stung—but the movement fizzled. No focus, no plan, just noise. The bankers shrugged, adjusted their cufflinks, and kept raking it in. Top 1% wealth in the US jumped from 27% in 1989 to 35% in 2023; UK billionaires doubled their stash since 2009. The house didn’t even flinch.

Now it won't surprise you but bankers love policies like mass migration—their golden goose. They pitch it like a cheesy ad: “More workers, more growth!” The IMF told the UK in 2023 to keep borders loose for GDP’s sake. Net migration hit 685,000—towns become unrecognisable seemingly overnight. For bankers, it’s a jackpot: cheap labour keeps wages down, more consumers pump profits, and property tycoons (their cronies) cash in. London rents up 30% in a decade? Boo-hoo, they’re fine. But you? GDP per person barely budges—£32k in 2008, £33k in 2023, adjusted. Wages lag behind 2008. The elite throw another swan on the fire; you’re stuck with a “Pay Rent forever” card.

Here’s the cherry on top: migration is phrased so as to divide us. While we’re bickering over bus seats or burqas, they’re laughing to the bank. Brexit was a rare “screw you” moment—people united, briefly—but the bankers pivoted. Migration just shifted gears, and the game rolled on. They lost mass migration from the EU, so opened the floodgates to Africa and India to put you back in your place. No united front, no problem. They don’t need to run everything; they nudge the levers, and we’re too distracted to notice. Your town’s a stranger, your rent’s a joke, and they’re buying another island. Rigged? You bet it is.

But hold up—there’s hope. Sun Tzu, that old war genius, said it: “Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win..” Brute force won’t cut it; we’ve got to find their weakness and win before the fighting begins.

And it’s staring us in the face: physical Silver.

Why? Banks thrive on paper—debt, stocks, digital dollars. Silver’s real, finite, and they can’t print it. Back in the day, money was silver or gold; now it’s just numbers they manipulate. If we hoard physical silver—buy coins, bars, stash it—they lose control. Supply’s tight—mining’s flat at 800 million ounces a year, while demand (tech, solar, coins) hit 1 billion in 2023. Prices are climbing—$30 an ounce now, up from $10 a decade ago.

How do we exploit it? Simple: buy it, hold it, starve their system. Every ounce you own is a brick they can’t move. If enough of us do it—millions, not dozens—their paper empire wobbles. Banks over-leverage; silver’s a hard limit. Crash their confidence, and the house crumbles. It’s not a protest; it’s a heist in reverse. Occupy failed because it shouted without a plan. This? It’s quiet, smart, and hits where it hurts. Work together, work clever, and we can flip the board so that this time, the house doesn't win.

Monopoly’s banker always wins—until the players stop playing his game. The Medici funded popes, Rothschilds gamed wars, BlackRock owns the table. Voting’s a sideshow; they’ve got 600 years of wins. But silver’s our ace. Nathan was right—thrones don’t matter when they’ve got the keys to the vault. So let’s empty their vaults, one shiny ounce at a time. Next election, vote if you want to. Just don’t bet on it changing anything.

Instead, if you want to win and beat the bankers, then bet on the #SilverSqueeze movement, who you can find simply using Google. These people are smart, united, and have identified the bankers weakness and are exploiting it to outplay the house.

Now mines a pint if you're buying, if not then share this blog to your MyFace socials and consider subscribing, it's free after all.

https://xrpmanchester.substack.com/p/the-bankers-game-from-medici-to-blackrock

Some analysts are of the opinion that cryptocurrency is going to experience major pumps before the end of the year. That has made retailers focus on accumulating some of their favourite coins. As someone who is into the markets, which coins have you been able to acquire for long-term returns?