>>6405184

>>6475726

>>6491539

>>6491600

>Again, only cash or precious metals in hand will get you the new notes. You are running out of time.

You've said $1_inhand_OLD → $1_inhand_NEW via the new note distributors but warned such an exchange may take more time (compared to exchanging AG/PD/AU/PT for new notes) as the new note distributor may have to source the metals on your behalf.

Assuming one has time (?) to wait for the metal to be sourced, the old to new ratio stays $1_old : $1_new for old-cash-in-hand, no meaningful limit on the amount of old-to-new notes one can exchange, and the face value of 1oz of the four horsemen [AG ($1), PD ($25), AU ($50), PT ($100)] reflect how many new notes they are worth, why bother at all with bullion in favor of sitting on physical cash?

Yeah, it may take longer to exchange to the new notes but the bottom line appears to remain the same: it only costs $1_inhand_OLD to acquire $1_inhand_NEW.

1oz of anon's choice PT today goes for ~$889 brining the cost per new dollar to ~$8.89 meaning one is paying almost nine times more for a quicker processing/exchange time.

Maths…

$889 (cost $889_OLD) → $889_NEW

1oz PT (cost $889_OLD) → $100_NEW

https://www.jmbullion.com/2019-1-oz-american-platinum-eagle-coin/

Honest questions here:

Am I correct in understanding you are saying the convenience factor of being able to quickly acquire new notes vs. potentially waiting is worth a 9x premium today?

If the goal is to stack today to acquire the most new notes tomorrow, and setting aside the timing question, old notes seem to be the best to stack to get the new notes…(?)

>While you may craft scenarios in your head to run up the digital debt in an attempt to get "stuff" you will wish you hadn't done so when the changes occur.

Hard time seeing how this pans out - here's where I'm stumbling:

Anon exercises a $10,000 balance transfer from a credit card (or other unsecured debt vehicle) to himself under a promotion for 0% interest for 24 months and negligible processing fees. $10,000 is deposited into anon's checking account, is withdrawn in physical old-FRNs, and the old-FRNs are then held in a secure location.

>IT'S HABBENING!

>Digital forgery machine shutdown

Anon takes $10k in physical old-FRNs to new note distributor, turns it in, new note distributor either gives anon $10k in new notes or provides anon with tracking info and receipt, pending sourcing of required metals. New note distributor delivers $10k of new notes to anon at a later date once metals are sourced.

The worst case is anon now has $10k of new notes to repay $10k of unsecured debt, assuming the unsecured debt was not deflated. The upside is the unsecured debt is deflated requiring less than $10k new notes to payoff.

Any guidance you can offer to help me expand my thinking here if I'm missing something?

>>6592925

>>6592494

>banks will get a front of new bills and likely trade metals for bills first

Accepting metals will require banks to verify/process metals. Guessing this is easier for the BoAs / Wells / JPMC / etc., but exponentially harder for the smaller guys and FCUs. Certainly not impossible but also not something that can be done overnight either PLUS banks/FCUs will need time to get their shit together for this and TIME is one of the key advantages one gets by holding metals over cash-in-hand.

>By that time maybe inflation hits the old notes

For the digital side you'd declare a bank holiday, do whatever adjustments are required to translate the OLD values into the NEW values (i.e. divide all balances by 25…so if you had $100,000 in an account prior you'd then have $4,000 afterwards), do whatever other macro adjustments are needed, if any (i.e. use FDIC/NCUA to credit some/all of $96,000 face-value loss back to the account).

Everyone's digital holdings are brought into the new dollars at once and since the digital side carries the majority of the transaction volume, the majority of people can still conduct der biddness with a degree of normalcy.

…where we went one, we went all.

Anything not in the digital realm is in the real world where we've got $1,700 billion of currency in circulation.

https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12773.htm

>$1,700 billion in circulation as of January 31, 2019.

…100%

>Federal Reserve notes ($1,655.2 billion)

…97.4%

>U.S. notes ($0.2 billion)

…0.01%

>currency no longer issued ($0.2 billion)

…0.01%

>coins outstanding ($47.2 billion).

…2.7%

If it is true old notes and coins can be exchanged to new notes/coins at a 1 : 1 ratio, then ~$1,700b of metal is required to support the $1,700b of new notes/coins to be potentially exchanged with the old ones. This is in addition to whatever the metal requirement is to support the new-digital-notes-translated-at-[???]-rate-from-the-old-digital-notes PLUS whatever other macro adjustments you want to do (e.g. FDIC/NCUA payments).

Not saying $1,700b is a small number but I do think it is dwarfed by the metal required to support the digital old → new adjustment, even if such an adjustment is not done at a 1 : 1 ratio. In other words, my suspicion is circulating cash is small beans in the big picture and having old notes/coins honored at their face value is not that big a stretch.

As for inflation, if the new notes are locked to AgPdAuPt, and AgPdAuPt are locked in to avoid inflation, AND if $1_OLD → $1_NEW, the value of the old notes will shoot through the roof.

Take away I keep coming back to is stack physical currency - plus a little Pt - and keep a few 0% BT checks on hand…

>>6600555

nice trips

>How does one become based?

Financially? Hold fixed, rock solid, inflation-proof assets that can ideally generate passive income. Create a solid financial base to build on vs. the shifting baseless morass we are currently in.

Philosophically? Figure out and verify shit for yourself. Don't do something only because everyone else is doing it. In God we trust.

>Why do you need physical currency?

Physical currency can still cary out its value exchange function if the digital world is offline.

>>6532397

>One's capabilities in the present will be a reflection of your future self. Remember only the most based running the new notes.

>>4819895

>Savers to be rewarded.

If savers are to be rewarded and ones capabilities now are to be reflected in their future selves how does this reconcile with those who have diligently saved via digital FRNs - e.g. someone with $250,000 in a CD held at a FDIC or NCUA institution?

If the digital ledger is to be wiped, our saver gets wiped. Far from being rewarded.

If the digital ledger is adjusted then our saver's balance goes from $250k USD → ~$10k XUSD, but presumably with the at least the same (or more) purchasing power. Certainly not as bad as being wiped, but a stretch to call it "rewarded".

BUT if "rewarded" is tied in (somehow) to one's current financial standing, this hints at other mechanisms in play.

>A money for nothing attitude on this side will carry over to the other side. Put an end to it now or be sniffed out by the new system later and suffer the consequences.

I (think?) I get part of this but still struggle with the rest. If the goal TODAY is to stack metals to trade in for the most new XUSD notes, then why would an anon NOT consider unsecured debt as a vehicle to do so - maths below

>$900 USD unsecured = 1oz Pt

>ITZ HABBENING

> ~$25 : $1 USD → XUSD adjustment

>$900 USD → $36 XUSD

>1oz Pt → $100 XUSD

>($36 XUSD) → payoff debt

>$67 XUSD remains

…so this is what I struggle with. Why is using cheap unsecured USD debt today (and then repaid) to stack metals detrimental?

Look if shenanigans are [somehow] to be frowned upon (in a shenanigan-proof future run by only the most based people) then I get the fact it needs to be based and simple. Cash in hand? New notes at [x] rate. Metals in hand? New notes at face value. Easy. Simple.

Neither the cash-in-hand nor precious-metals-in-hand involves sourcing/funding/acquisition/whatever. It's simple: you either have your ticket or you don't.

>>6491539

>…you will have to earn your keep. No free rides only recognition for tuning into the most based frequencies.

No free rides. Only XUSD for turning in metals or old notes…or so I think? What am I missing?

>>6689719

>Not much time left to get your house in order.

On a related note central banks appear to be on a sustained gold buying spree.

>>6686593

‘In Gold We Trust’: Waning confidence in US sends world’s central banks on buying spree

Governments around the world have recently been on a “gold-buying spree.” These countries have a tactful reason for doing so, and this reason is directly tied to the anticipation of the inevitable end of US hegemony.

Central banks are among the largest purchasers of gold. So far in 2019, they have bought 145.5 tons of gold, which is more in a quarter of a year than central banks have purchased in the preceding six years. To put it bluntly, this figure represents a 68 percent increase from the year before. Last year, central banks increased their reserves by 651.5 tonnes compared to 375 tonnes in 2017. Reportedly, this is the largest net purchase of gold since 1967.

Most interesting, however, is the class of countries that we find are turning to hoarding more and more gold, many of which are deemed to be adversaries of Washington.

As always, Russia is the largest buyer of gold. In 2018, Russia’s Central Bank purchased 274.3 tons of gold. It also dumped 84 percent of its US treasury debts (we will come back to why this is important later.)

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/461207-central-banks-buy-gold-dollar/

>>6914227

>What happens to the people holding other currency?

A currency can exist as one of two options: 1. =BACKED= by a [something] or 2. =NOT= backed by a [something].

The USD is currently on the second option, the NOT backed by any real asset, this is also called a “fiat” currency.

Prior to the FED coming into existence the USD was backed by some form of precious metals - that is to say for every $1 USD, there was [ x ] ounces of [gold / silver / etc.] it could be redeemed for. In other words, the USD was =BASED= upon a fixed exchange rate to precious metals.

Currently currencies “float” against each other. 1 USD may buy .8 GPB today but .9 GPB tomorrow, based on demand. The reason they do so is there’s not a set definition of what the currency is worth (i.e. 1 USD is worth 1oz of Gold and 1 GBP is worth one pound of sterling silver).

If the XUSD were to launch tomorrow with some fixed redemption value to a previous metal, and assuming this was believed by the market, than the old “float” for the”fiat” USD would disappear and be replaced by a ratio similar to whatever the local currency would buy in terms of whatever backed the new XUSD.

For example, ~1,7m Dinars buys ~1,400 USD OR 1oz of Gold today. If the USD is reset with the XUSD and the XUSD is fixed at $25 XUSD to 1OZ of Gold, then ~1.7m Dinars would buy ~25 XUSD OR 1 OZ of gold.

>>7017722

>While this is happening on one side of China’s national ledger sheet, on the other side something completely different is happening. China reentered the gold market seven months ago, in December 2018 and has added a little less than 74 tons to their official gold holdings of approximately 1,935+ tons of gold. Please keep in mind this does not count the known 80-100 tons per annum that is flowing in from Russia. While this is not a large volume of gold in the grand scheme, this has been going on since 2016 so we are now talking about upwards of 240 – 300 additional tons. This changes their “official” gold holdings from approximately 1,935 tons to somewhere north of 2,175+. It could be as high as 2,235 or more tons of gold.

>>7060532

[ / ] Bank run rumored.

https://archive.fo/OQQRV

There is a reason James Simons' RenTec is the world's best performing hedge fund - it spots trends (even if they are glaringly obvious) well ahead of almost everyone else, and certainly long before the consensus.

That's what happened with Deutsche Bank, when as we reported two weeks ago, the quant fund pulled its cash from Deutsche Bank as a result of soaring counterparty risk, just days before the full - and to many, devastating - extent of the German lender's historic restructuring was disclosed, and would result in a bank that is radically different from what Deutsche Bank was previously (see "The Deutsche Bank As You Know It Is No More").

In any case, now that RenTec is long gone, and questions about the viability of Deutsche Bank are swirling - yes, it won't be insolvent overnight, but like the world's biggest melting ice cube, there is simply no equity value there any more - everyone else has decided to cut their counterparty risk with the bank with the €45 trillion in derivatives, and according to Bloomberg Deutsche Bank clients, mostly hedge funds, have started a "bank run" which has culminated with about $1 billion per day being pulled from the bank.

As a result of the modern version of this "bank run", where it's not depositors but counterparties that are pulling their liquid exposure from DB on fears another Lehman-style lock up could freeze their funds indefinitely, Deutsche Bank is considering how to transfer some €150 billion ($168 billion) of balances held in it prime-brokerage unit - along with technology and potentially hundreds of staff - to French banking giant BNP Paribas. (See link above for full article).

>>7248797 (pb - general research)

NEGATIVE RATES LUNACY: History Will Condemn This STUPIDITY!

https://archive.fo/x0uMG

>Google searches for coupons and discounts is also down substantially.

>Americans have been spending heavily on RVs and other pastime activities.

>The dollar is on such shaky grounds that the White House had to send Trump’s economic advisor Larry Kudlow to tell CNBC that they’ve ruled out currency intervention in order to prop up the buck.

>For the first time since 2013, not a single central bank is hiking rates

>Gold’s rally has been driven by institutions, not by your neighbor.