Silver Update: Bank Runs!

bankrunBrotherJohnF discusses the impending bank run looming when Cyprus’ banks are finally re-opened, and the Pandora’s Box that has been opened as a result of the ECB’s botched Cypriot/ Russian oligarch bank heist in his latest Silver Update:
Bank Runs!

 

2013 Silver Eagles As Low As $2.59 Over Spot at SDBullion!

 

SD Bullion

 

Comments

  1. Let the bank runs begin. It is about time club med take back their countries from the technocrats and bankers.

    Cypriot Govt MP Mario Mavrides tells #newsnight if a deal with the Troika can’t be found or Cyprus can’t raise 6bn, they’ll leave the Euro— BBC Newsnight (@BBCNewsnight) March 19, 2013

    Cypriot Govt MP Mario Mavrides on finding extra funds: “We have some ideas … we were thinking of nationalising pensions.” #newsnight— BBC Newsnight (@BBCNewsnight) March 19, 2013

    Mavrides: “If we can’t find a solution shortly we’ll start printing Cypriot pounds and leave the euro.” #newsnight— BBC Newsnight (@BBCNewsnight) March 19, 2013

  2. Why do I get the feeling that as PM’s price decline further and further the headlines and articles try to paint an optimistic reality for bullion investors? Bank runs, collapse at our doorstep, banks out of metals, etc.  It feels more like pumping sales of PM’s by scare tactics. 
    The system may be drifting slowly towards collapse, but not tomorrow. Keep stacking wisely on dips, not out of panic. Ah yeah, and it is also OK to sell some physical when price rises since until confirmed otherwise, we are still in a downtrend.

    • I agree. There is a bit of desperation in the air when every little uptick becomes a screaming headline. Especially at this site when everyday it’s a waterfall or a vertical rise.

  3. Bank Runs will be the result. As B J F said, the banksters know this and usually do everything to avoid the run. So why are they now creating a run. The only answer I can think of is they are ready to pull the plug and burn it all down soon. More and more people really seem to be ready to listen about what is going on. I hope they didn’t wait to long.

  4. Just my opinion. We are going to see what happens too the metals when Bernanke speaks tomorrow at the FOMC. Jim Sinclair is also speaking tomorrow in New York. Max Keiser and Stacey Hubert are also in New York City. We shall see what is on the horizon tomorrow.  
    Max Keiser stated that April will be when the economic collapse occurs. So we shall see what happens.

    • Many things are like clouds.  They can be on the horizon but that does not mean they will come our way.  The long-term trend is pretty clear, though, as far as the case for PMs and for economic disaster are concerned. We can’t know the timing of future events but the trends indicate considerable problems.  
       
      The advice above about stacking the dips and general prep are spot on and will help any of us do better than we would have done without them.  For me, the choice is pretty simple.  Do I want to hold my wealth in FRNs that I KNOW will inflate away to not much at all and MAY die completely someday or do I want to hold gold and silver that have been MONEY for 5,000 years?  
       
      One thing that is not stressed enough, IMHO, is that prepping is not an all or nothing venture.  Neither is stacking.  Some will say that they are but it is entirely possible that history will disprove those contentions.  One of the great lessons in life is “moderation in all things”.  Being immoderate, also known as being extreme, may work out or it may not.  It is an all or nothing bet. Hedging ones’ bets is usually a good idea because the future often unfolds in unexpected ways.
       
      The bottom line in all this seems to be that being as independent as possible is good because we do not know whether or not we can continue to depend on what we’ve had in the past.  Having multiple plans for dealing with many of the potential problems out there is a good thing.  Having one super plan that does a fantastic job IF just the right scenario occurs probably won’t be.  Play the odds and bend them in your favor whenever possible.
       

  5.  
    My filing into Pennsylvania Supreme Court was finally accomplished yesterday, so I have a little time to devote to this arena (although I have still more legal grassfires to deal with).

    Since I’ve explained it dozens of times; among the regular readers of this forum, I don’t imagine I need to remind anyone that I deduce the banknote scheme to be systemically doomed by inescapable fundamental design. It’s such a stupid get, that I hold it in as high a degree of scorn and vilification as to intensely desire its completely universal eradication (Deposit Certificates and genuine Real Bills excluded).

    By my reconstruction of it, credit-currency inflation is a function (not of mere greed, but) of compounding interest on the circulating float. ‘Float’ of exactly what? Not only the physical stamps, but their gargantuan digital counterparts in bookform as well. This is what triggered my comment here.

    BrotherJohn broached the immense numerical disparity between those two forms of the banknote in his video, which set me to revisit my wonder (shared with many others), why the banks are so obviously triggering broad ‘bank runs’, seeming on its face, to work against their goals? Well, now it appears to me; to get the tax-backed PAPER form to ‘substantiate’ their quickly evaporating digital ghosts.

    If I understand the ‘process’ correctly, the banks are left free to create all the digital banknote credits they please … it’s their exclusive intellectual property, after all … but, the stamp forms are only brought into existence by governments (that’s THEIR reserved bailiwick)! In the recent past we’ve been watching many governments increasingly refuse to print up more stamps in reasonable fear of the inevitable price effect that must follow by the Laws of Economics.

    What I believe most politicians (and certainly the vast majority of their constituents) never come to grips with, is the elemental scheme of the banknote system as SELF-inflationary. Their reticence to create sufficient amounts of stamps, on pace with the inherent imperative of the complex compounding of interest, is ignorantly intended as a ‘discipline’ on the bankers to slow down ‘creation’ of their digital currency; not having a clue that it’s the invisible force of complex compounding interest, impelling … necessity … to permit funding of the interest with commensurate new physical currency. No new stamps (Labor, ultimately) to fund interest, equals imminent systemic implosion. That’s why a few luminaries had said that if people understood this ‘money’ system, they’d revolt by the following day.

    So, there’s the answer to the quandary in light of ‘banknote scheme mechanics’ … the banks are ratcheting up the political ‘hurt’ for failure to ‘play the game’ of ‘substantiating’ digital interest growth with new Plantation Scrip in excess of its OWN interest demand … in turn to substantiate a proportional amount of the banks’ digital credits. THAT viewpoint is NOT self-defeating for the banks … at all.

    In order to counteract these digital interest imperatives internally, banks have had very limited capacity to temporarily ameliorate fluctuations by ‘selling’ shares and bonds in their operations, then ‘crashing’ those shares and bonds later, but only to so much an extent. The exponentiality of the math makes ever greater interest burden offsets by physical ‘cash’ (again, Labor, ultimately), that governments MUST succumb, accept the price consequence and … tax, tax. tax!

    The private ‘benefits’ politicians accrue from perpetuation of the banknote scheme makes them violently recoil from the only permanent resolution to this ‘monetary slavery’ available to them, because the social result reduces their functionality back to a more purely administrative level, but it must be faced headlong or everyone is thrown into utter chaos.

    Banknotes MUST be re-converted back to a physical form, relative to the depreciation they’ve experienced since their initial distribution. I’ve also said a few times here, that in the American case, that means every FRN has to be exchanged for a copper coin of (now) about six or seven grams. The whole episode between 1913 and the present can be erased and the rational inter-relationships between the cornucopia of goods in the full matrix can then naturally re-align to supply-demand realities.

    Even more desirable, would be abandonment of the ancient governmental commandeering of the monetary sphere through minting proprietary ‘units’ defined by anything more than basic weight and fineness. In that way, all appropriate metals will immediately acquire monetary status and inter-change seamlessly and … of paramount importance … rapidly.
     

    • @PatFields   Glad you’re back to posting.  It’s been awhile.  I thought perhaps you had been relocated to a FEMA camp for a bit of re-indoctrination.  

    • @UglyDog
      Not yet. I think with the gaggle of Law Suits I”m planning and the subject matter of them, I may just make that NEXT year’s ‘vacation’.
       

    • Heh, I would have thought that Pat had taken up residence at Gitmo.  Very glad to see that this is not the case.  Well, not yet anyway!

  6. Let’s see.  OBR system?  Bank A needs a bail-in  Chaching and 2% of your money vaporizes.  Bank B needs a bail-in  Chaching–another 5% is vaporized.  
    Kind of like the South Park episode.  Aaaaaand it’s gone.
    If there is a reasonable chance; let’s say 15-20%, that capital controls will be implemented in the US:  This speaks to capital controls in excess of the annoying reporting requirements of $5-10,000 in cash transactions or offshoring cash (just another means to put FIAT in bankers hands), then you have a problem.
     If you take into account that our Federal government is decidedly left leaning;  very Progressive, taking pages from the largest banks play books, banks which have been given free reign to take your funds, gamble with them and not be held accountable, then you have a problem.
     If you take into account that the FBI is being given the green light to probe and poke into your bank accounts without a warrant for good reason or no reason at all, then you have a problem.
    If the rule of law is eroding daily throughout the world as supra-national corporatist bankers exert increasing power to dictate policy to sovereign governments that include demands of confiscation of private citizens deposits, then you have a problem.
    If you take all these manner of controls and coercive mechanisms that extend beyond and through national borders, we have a world spanning fascist enterprise of interconnected financial elites who think they are above the law. They’ve made it clear the gloves have come off. They will use any and all means to extract the wealth from the ordinary people.  This makes me very uncomfortable in having anything amount of FIAT in a bank other than that needed to conduct short term daily business.  
    The risk is simply too great that my funds or those of anyone else could be taken for no reason than a politician says there is a need to ‘help’ someone or some enterprise completely unrelated to me and be told I have no power to stop them except by exiting the banking system, removing myself from harm’s way.  It’s better to be 1 month, even 1 day early, than 10 minutes late.

    • “If you take all these manner of controls and coercive mechanisms that extend beyond and through national borders, we have a world spanning fascist enterprise of interconnected financial elites who think they are above the law.”
       
      Well, AG, they think that because they ARE above the law in the same way that a carpenter is above wood cabinets or a plumber above repaired pipes.  They are above the law because their paid minions make the laws in the ways they are told to make them.  
       
      As proof of my contention, I offer the case of one Jon Corzine.  Jon is not a bad-man bank robber, like Jesse James.  No, he probably doesn’t even own a gun.  But he does own a pen and since it is mightier than the sword (and presumably the gun as well) he was able to accomplish a magic trick worthy of the world’s great magicians… the complete disappearance of $1,600,000,000.  Not only that but Jon will tell you that the trick was so elegant and so perfectly done that even he does not know where the money went.   Apparently, Eric “Fast and Furious” Holder agrees and has declined to prosecute Jon for anything, including utter malfeasance and violation of the fiduciary duty required of him as the CEO of a publicly traded company by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.  Yes, it is good to be king but it can be just about as good to be one of the king’s best buddies.  In any case, Jon does not need to worry about anything as trivial as “the law” that would send any of us to jail for a VERY long time for doing 1/10,000th of what Jon has done. Jon is now free to “pursue other interests”. Perhaps he will start a bank somewhere?

    • @Ed_B
      “Jon Corzine … does own a pen and … he was able to accomplish … disappearance of $1,600,000,000″
       
      Given the fact that all ‘money’, worldwide, is merely book-entry credit-digits … that ‘disappearance’ is no more mystifying or magical than turning over one’s pencil and erasing the number. In Corzine’s case … then again turning over his pencil and writing that same number in another book (in the modern computerized ‘cut and paste’ sense, of course).
       
      Speaking of the ‘Just-us’ Department … Government (integrated from the White House to the local School Boards) has concocted a plethora of ‘traverses’ used to devise ‘reasonable presumption’ that folks are in one way or another intimately ‘connected’ to government, so they can prosecute them under Administrative Process (in plain language … Star Chamber Kangaroo Courts). In this jurisprudence, the ‘Parties’ have only whatever ’civil rights and obligations’ allowed and conditioned by government statute.
       
      The wonderful thing I’ve discovered about Common Law Process of ‘Right and Remedy’, is that it’s internationally superior Law to administrative process internal to limited jurisdiction municipalities! It’s a completely external system originally designed for the use of Monarchs as a practical CONTROL MECHANISM for those inferior jurisdictions. Since each American has inherited the Royal Persona of the country’s Monarch, if carried out properly, any American has the internationally recognized Naturally Inherited Right to correct government’s ‘mistakes’ and prosecute its Torts and Trespasses!
       
      Imagine if everyone fully understood the extensive ramifications of THAT. Not a single criminal politician, banker or monopoly industrialist would be ‘immune’ to any Tom, Dick or Harriet, ‘calling them to account’ in ordinary Common Law Courts of Record and subjected to a Trial By Jury (NOT  Administrative ‘Jury Trial’).

    • Pat… after reading your reply, I have no doubt whatever that you are correct.  But all that mind-numbing legal stuff brings to mind a line from, I believe, King Lear… something about, “First, let’s kill all the lawyers!”.  If that was seen as a viable solution to social or political problems in the 1600s, I see no reason why it would not work today.  :-D
       
      My preference for government is the village council of elders.  It worked well and was about as local as one could get.  The further from the everyday citizen the law gets, the screwier it gets.  This likely occurs because there are too many over-paid and under-worked people on their payroll.  With all that time on their hands, they are bound to cause trouble.  Gram always said that, “Idle hands are the devil’s workshop”.  She made sure that we never had a problem with that.  ;-)
       
      I took note of the fact that county sheriffs and town marshals are the only elected police officers we have in this country.  It is not a coincidence that these people tend to support the God-given / Constitutional rights of the citizens while those who are appointed by boot-licking politicians very often do not.  This lesson is not lost on me and I hope that many others see it for what it is as well.  Maybe we need to elect ALL law officers who run their particular departments?  That would very likely make them a lot more responsive to the citizens’ interests and rights. 
       

    • @Ed_B
      “My preference for government is the village council of elders. It worked well and was about as local as one could get. The further from the everyday citizen the law gets, the screwier it gets.”
       
      I’m with you 1000%. That’s the thrust behind the re-emerging Citizen Grand Jury movement. Of course, if you do some research, you’ll find it peppered with a few goof-ball ’revenge oriented’ cells and ‘free-money’ dreamers, but the more seriously motivated, pragmetic majority of its proponents are on the vanguard of a game-changing reversion back to direct Power in The People again. You might also look into that avenue for involvement. I’d say the ‘Michigan Free State’ group is among the most level-headed example to start with

  7. Speaking of Grand Juries and juries in general, I am often amazed that so many courts do not advise jury members that they not only stand in judgement of the case at hand but also of the law pertaining to the case as well.  If a person has committed a crime of some sort but the law that defines the action as being criminal is invalid, then no crime has been committed and the defendant must be acquitted.
     
    Another point that I find baffling is when a judge “directs” a jury to deliver a specific verdict.  If the judge is going to direct a verdict, why not just have a bench trial instead of a jury trial?  This must be difficult for any juror or jurors who have already decided the issue in their own minds, only to be told, ‘no, you’re wrong, do it this way instead’.
     
    Of course, a great deal of the law is confusing at best, which is no doubt done on purpose for the same reasons as the old guilds had their secrets to maintain their grip on their areas of expertise… and the income derived therefrom.
     

  8. @Ed_B
     
    A jury under Civil Law is in the role of an advisory body. Only under Common Law is the Jury’s role, that of plenary judgment taking cognizance of both law (statute really) and fact of the case.. Another aspect of Civil Law is that its premise generally holds an accused as guilty until proven innocent. So, innocence having not been PROVED in a judge’s opinion, he MAY ‘instruct’ a jury to ‘decide’ a guilty ‘finding’ (and overturn a recalcitrant jury). The nefarious standard of lawyers, is to file ALL cases, State AND federal, in Civil Law jurisdiction, leaving the impression (which I fell for too, over an embarrassingly long time) that it was the paramount form of jurisprudence. It’s the proverbial ‘Big Lie’ in Law! At Common Law, the role is reversed! The Magistrate is administrator of keeping the Record of the proceedings whereas the Jury fulfils the role of Judge. That leaves the Plaintiff (you or I) in the role of ‘the King’s Prosecuter’, expositor of the ‘King’s Law’.
     
    From Matthew Hale’s ‘History of Common Law of England’ (1713)
    “The Common Law, and the Judges of the Courts of Common Law, have the Exposition of such Statutes or Acts of Parliament as concern either the Extent of the Jurisdiction of those Courts (whether Ecclesiastical, Maritime or Military) or the Matters depending before them; and therefore, if those Courts either refuse to allow these Acts of Parliament, or expound them in any other Sense than is truly and properly the Exposition of them, the King’s Great Courts of the Common Law (who next under the King and his Parliament have the Exposition of those Laws) may prohibit and controul them.”
     
    In the American perspective, The People are the ‘Kings and Queens’ of the Realm, and their ‘Parliaments’ are the Juries of THEIR Court of Common Law. Any one American acting ex relatione as equally inhered in the ‘Royal Prerogative’, has power to correct agencies inferior to the ‘Crown’, by ‘Signa Superioritatis’ (superior significance).

    • “A jury under Civil Law is in the role of an advisory body. Only under Common Law is the Jury’s role, that of plenary judgment taking cognizance of both law (statute really) and fact of the case.”
       
      That sounds as if justice lives in the Common Law court while legal shenanigans live in the Civil court.  In fact, it sounds as if there is very little that is civil about Civil Law courts.
       
      “Another aspect of Civil Law is that its premise generally holds an accused as guilty until proven innocent.”
       
      That sounds a lot like the courts held in most dictatorships.  To be charged, whether with or without cause, is to be assumed to be guilty unless strong evidence can be presented to the contrary.
       
      “The nefarious standard of lawyers, is to file ALL cases, State AND federal, in Civil Law jurisdiction, leaving the impression (which I fell for too, over an embarrassingly long time) that it was the paramount form of jurisprudence. It’s the proverbial ‘Big Lie’ in Law!”

       
      It certainly seems like it.  How is it decided whether a civil court is used vs. a common law court?
       
      “Any one American acting ex relatione as equally inhered in the ‘Royal Prerogative’, has power to correct agencies inferior to the ‘Crown’, by ‘Signa Superioritatis’ (superior significance).”
       
      Something tells me that this is VASTLY underutilized.  The Gov and its minions certainly present themselves as if they are superior to just about everyone and most especially the citizens.

    • @Ed_B
       
      “How is it decided whether a civil court is used vs. a common law court?”
       
      It’s the decision of the Plaintiff (or their under-handed attorneys who ALWAYS file Civil) into what jurisdiction and Process to initiate the case. A cool tactic for self-litigators is, if sumonsed as a Defendent (victim) under Civil Law, one files Counter-Claim under Common Law, Whereby, in the role of Counter-Plaintiff, one then wagers HIS Law (being superior Common Law) against the Counter-Defendant, on the fact that the Counter-Defendant never had non-fraudulently contrived authority (ultra vires) to bring their original case … and … if appropriate, to demand Remedy for Trespass on the Case, or other outright Tort, in monetary restitution … FROM THE INDIVIDUAL TRANSGRESSERS in their PRIVATE PERSONS! If sufficient to make a strong enough case, that can include judges and lawyers in addtion to agency goons!

    • Interesting info, Pat.  I am amazed at what you come up with in such matters!  Truly amazing stuff for sure.  Thanks for keeping us updated on the business of defending liberty in the courts.  Please also keep us up to speed on the cases you file.

  9. Oh! So a bank run will soon happen everywhere? That’s not a big issue for most of us because we have almost nothing inside our bank account! Lesson of the week: Never keep all of your savings inside bank accounts!

Speak Your Mind