(Crazy) economy news

[Skybird]

Those contracts were agreed on on the grounds of the then-valid trading conditions, these were the ground on which Quatar signed those deals and their specific terms. The EU legislation now changes this context, it is a non-negotiated and not-agreed-to unilaterial change of the treaty context by one side to the disadvantage of the other side, specifying terms and conditions the treaty did not contain. Therefore, pacta sund servanda does not apply.

Quatar has more requests for energy deliveries than it can service. And it does not economcially depend on the EU. Thats why the EU deals with Quatar with soft gloves even in the face of Quatar-financed corruption in EU parliament, corrupted sport events, accusations of bribery, even murderings, not to mention accusations of human rights violations inside Quatar.

Quatar does not need the EU that much at all.

Quatar has more demand for its energy than it can service, from outside the EU. Germany learned this the hard way in 2022 when initially the German request to get gas was put down by the Quatari top. Just at the end of the year, half a year later, they agreed to a deal - now to their conditions (the German demand for a time limitation was no longer included) which had more almost only symbolic volume, a small quantity of what Habeck originally was asking for the summer before. And since then Quatar has alrready given prewarnings to germany that they may end the deal even earlier again, to their liking. And the Germans? Can only nod, and pray.

So, its quite clear who seats in the upper chair here. The quatari dictate the conditions, and we complied to their terms. And when they violate or end that treaty early - there is nothing we can do about that. We just cna try to find other solutions.

BTW, Biden has limited the LNG deliveries to Germany despite existing treaties from after the Russian invasion, too. Not many are aware of it, but in the government, regarding the gas situation and future supply security the lights already are back on red. They so far keep the lid on it in the state-loyal media, due to upcoming elections, but its true.

And China is just lurking and waiting for its chance to expand in the Gulf.

[Dargo]

We do not need Qatar sellers enough, and it is 5.1% of the whole import of Europe. The Biden administration is not Trump, he wants the EU buys more from the US win-win. In autumn, ONE-Dyas drilled the first well from which natural gas can be produced from field N05-A in the Dutch part of the North Sea. Soon end 2024 begin 2025, the production well will be connected to the Dutch natural gas network via the production platform (The extraction phase takes 10 to 25 years on average.). And there will be more natural gas fields in the coming years so we not need Qatar, really the North Sea is full of fields yet to be tapped. It means a 30% lower carbon footprint, it increases security of supply and provides economic benefits in the form of employment, income for the Dutch state and preservation of knowledge and infrastructure for the energy transition. So, And fetch it ourselves let Qatar sink into a gas field, we will save ourselves.

[Skybird]

Nevertheless, Quatar does not need Europe as a customer and can cancel it if it wants to. That is my only point in this conversation.

[Skybird]

The enforcement of completely digital financial systems will prove to be the most important whip with which free peoples will be forced back into servitude, servility and obedience to party and state dictatorship.

We really must hope for the great continental blackout to knock some sense into the people, the majority of whom still shrug their shoulders stupidly and simple-mindedly at the mention of this threat.

-----------------

The abolition of cash: How quickly the digital euro should take over

By Hannes Maertin,December 26, 2024

The digitalization of the financial system is progressing at an alarming rate. The introduction of a virtual euro by the ECB is already in the starting blocks. The war on cash is declared and financial freedom is at stake.

The introduction of the digital euro by the European Central Bank (ECB) could become a reality sooner than many might expect. The ECB started a preparatory phase for the digital version of the fiat currency as early as October 2023. The final introduction of a digital central bank currency (CBDC) in the euro area is expected by 2028. On the way there, the use of cash will logically be increasingly restricted - because a large part of the population should ultimately use the digital central bank money. But what is behind it, and what interests are represented by the digitization of the euro?

What are CBDCs?

CBDCs (Central Bank Digital Currencies) differ from traditional bank deposits in key ways. While CBDCs are issued and controlled directly by central banks, the management of ordinary bank money is the responsibility of commercial banks. This gives central banks more extensive control over the money supply and monetary policy measures. Technologically, CBDCs are often based on blockchain systems, while traditional bank money is based on classic banking systems.

Access to CBDCs is via special digital wallets (eWallets) or apps, in contrast to traditional bank accounts. Another crucial difference is their programmability: So-called smart contracts, self-executing digital contracts on the blockchain that automatically trigger actions, can provide CBDCs with functions such as the time-limited validity of credit balances, automatic debits or the restriction of certain transactions based on predefined criteria.

These possibilities pose the risk of massively restricting the financial freedom of the individual. The goal of CBDCS appears to be complete control over the transaction behavior of the individual citizen. This is achieved when every transaction can be tracked and the account blocked if necessary.

Cash is slowly bleeding out – acceptance is gradually dwindling

In many places, it is becoming increasingly difficult to pay with cash. Many airlines have long since completely abandoned cash. Acceptance of cash is also continuing to decline in rail transport. Deutsche Bahn is planning a pilot project from February 2025 in which cash payments in on-board catering will be restricted. On selected ICE routes, payments will only be possible digitally from February to May 2025. Although this is initially a test phase, it is quite possible that the project will be well received and that Deutsche Bahn will subsequently abolish cash payments completely. It is also quite conceivable that other companies and organizations will follow this example, as there is a clear trend in German society to move away from cash.

A recent study by the Deutsche Bundesbank shows that in 2023 only 51 percent of transactions in Germany will be carried out with cash. This continues the trend of recent years: in 2020 the share was still 58 percent, while in 2017 it was recorded at a much higher 74 percent.

This change shows a clear trend towards cashless payment methods, with debit cards and mobile payment methods in particular becoming increasingly important. Given the free choice of payment method, 44 percent of respondents would now prefer to pay cashless, an increase of 3 percentage points compared to two years ago. Only 28 percent prefer cash as a payment method.

The elimination of cash: How transactions are digitized

Is the plan to eliminate cash now entering the next phase? In many regions, ATMs are being systematically removed. The savings banks currently only operate 21,000 ATMs across the whole of Germany, a decline of almost 18 percent since 2018. The Volksbanken and Raiffeisenbanken are also recording a similar trend, with a decline in their ATMs from around 18,100 in 2018 to around 14,700 last year.

In addition, the ECB has approved a significantly lower production of coins for the 20 countries of the eurozone for 2025. Coins with a total value of around 2.1 billion euros are to be minted next year. That may sound like a lot at first, but in comparison, the volume in the current year was just under 2.4 billion euros. In 2023, coins worth 2.6 billion euros were minted. It is conceivable that coin minting will be slowly but consistently phased out to pave the way for the digitization of the financial system.

A gradual change is also taking place in banknotes: in 2016, the ECB stopped issuing 500 euro notes, officially on the grounds that it wanted to combat money laundering more effectively. At the same time, cash transactions are being increasingly restricted. This year, the EU decided on a cash limit of 10,000 euros, which will become binding in all member states. Cash payments above this amount will be illegal in the future and must be processed electronically. According to official information, this law also serves to combat money laundering, terrorist financing and tax evasion. In addition, strict documentation requirements apply to cash payments above an amount of 3,000 euros. Retailers are obliged to record buyers' data in detail to ensure traceability.

It is becoming increasingly clear that cash is being systematically pushed back. But what is really behind it? Is the fight against money laundering, terrorism and tax evasion really the main goal? Or does the progressive digitization of the financial system ultimately serve the purpose of gaining comprehensive control over citizens and their financial activities?

These disadvantages await us through the abolition of cash

Cash represents freedom. It is anonymous, untraceable and allows many people to better control their spending.

With the introduction of the virtual fiat currency, every single transaction will become transparent. In the long term, citizens of the Eurozone could be reduced to a single account at the European Central Bank (ECB) - a kind of "digital wallet" for all financial exchanges. This centralization would give the ECB extensive control and management powers, which could lead to 100% dependence on the central bank.

This scenario becomes particularly critical when one considers that the digital euro could be linked to a social rating system – similar to the Chinese Social Credit System. Financial freedoms could then be made dependent on compliant behavior.

These fears are exacerbated by the increasing digitization of private life, particularly the introduction of digital identity. From 2026, this will be available to all EU citizens and will centrally store personal data such as driving licenses, birth certificates or electronic prescriptions. The combination of digital central bank money and digital ID entails far-reaching risks: comprehensive biometric recording and complete control of every individual would be technically feasible without any problems. Measures such as freezing bank accounts, restricting access to basic everyday services, or even the complete expropriation of assets would be entirely conceivable.

How could the digital euro be adapted?

This does not only apply to the Eurozone. More than 130 central banks worldwide are working on implementing digital currencies. The global advance of CBDCs indicates that the financial autonomy of many people is under serious threat.

In some countries, virtual central bank currencies have even been introduced, such as in Nigeria, Jamaica and Panama. However, in most cases this met with great resistance from the population. After the eNaira was introduced in Nigeria in 2021 as Africa's first CBDC, the success was limited: according to estimates, only around 0.5 percent of Nigerians currently use the eNaira.

Even though cash is no longer of great importance for most citizens in Germany, the introduction of the digital euro could still be met with opposition, similar to that in Nigeria. So how could central bank money be adapted in Europe, and especially in Germany? The answer seems to lie in the welfare state.

More than 4 million people in Germany currently receive citizen's benefits. Due to demographic change, the age rate is very high. Last year there were around 22.1 million pensioners in Germany. If it were now possible to process the benefits of these groups exclusively via the digital euro, a large section of the population would already have been persuaded to accept the new system. These people are dependent on state benefits. Whether these are released in the form of digital central bank money or in some other way is something that very few people will care about.

If an unconditional basic income were to be introduced, as demanded by the Left or the Greens, which would be paid out unconditionally by the state to everyone in the form of the digital euro, the entire population would be on the hook. Whether they want it or not, it could be possible to connect every citizen to the new monetary system.

The introduction of digital central bank money and digital identity marks a turning point. Concern about the loss of financial freedom and privacy is growing. It is up to us to critically question what freedom we are prepared to give up for supposed convenience and security. The protest can be very simple: avoid restaurants and shops with signs saying "Card payment only". You should avoid companies that make denunciations. Cash is the cheapest form of payment anyway. Electronic money is subject to high fees for each individual transaction - and the prices are correspondingly higher.
https://www.tichyseinblick.de/wirtsc...-des-bargelds/

-----------------

Utmost frightening. Who is not frightened by this, must be stupid. Or terminally ill.

[Skybird]

The digitalisation of society leads to growing isolationism, loneliness, social injustice.

https://www-focus-de.translate.goog/..._x_tr_pto=wapp

https://portal-research-lu-se.transl..._x_tr_pto=wapp

In Sweden, banks play a central role in the digital infrastructure. In addition to Swish [a payment app], they have developed an electronic ID system that is required to access public services such as tax authorities and social benefits. Anyone who is not a bank customer cannot use these essential services.

Why does this not ring alarm bells at maximum volume?

[Dargo]

^Do you use the "Editor Mode"? In editor mode it paste all html code with it just saying your font colour is unreadeble again.

[Skybird]

Ah, I forgot. No, its due to paste-copy for FOCUS. I have this issue with FOCUS websites. Like NZZ websites often cannot be auto-translated by Google. Some websites somehow work outside the usual tech standard.


Corrected, should be better now. I paste-copy first into a simple txt-editor, then paste-copy from there into the post.

[Dargo]

Font colour is still black so ppl with dark theme it is hard to read. It somehow copy/past the layout code of the site.

[LEFT]
[COLOR=#000000]Why does this not ring alarm bells at maximum volume?
[/COLOR] [COLOR=#000000]
[/COLOR][/LEFT][/QUOTE]

[Skybird]

[Skybird]

Gold prices reached $3,000 an ounce for the first time in history.

[Skybird]

[https://norberthaering.de/news/spanien-bargeld/] In Spain, using ATMs is becoming a risk

May 4, 2025 | The criminalization of cash use in Europe is being taken to a new level. Spain is once again leading the way. Anyone withdrawing more than €3,000 from the bank must notify the government days in advance, otherwise they risk heavy fines. Those who withdraw less than €3,000 too often will be targeted by law enforcement. The general asset register is approaching, and our money will be locked up in the banking system.

Anyone in Spain who wants to withdraw €3,000 or more from their bank will be treated as if they were trading in weapons of war. According to a new regulation by the tax authority, the Agencia Tributaria, they must declare their intention electronically at least 24 hours in advance, and 72 hours in advance for amounts over €100,000 (Sources: English; Spanish). A purpose for the cash must be specified. Without proof of registration, the bank cannot disburse the money. Anyone who violates the regulation or circumvents it by repeatedly withdrawing smaller amounts risks a fine of at least €600 and a maximum of €150,000. It is unknown what banks and authorities consider normal and what constitutes circumvention, so even medium-sized cash withdrawals become a risk if repeated.

So far, withdrawn amounts of €3,000 or more have only been reported by the bank to the Spanish central bank, which then forwards them to the tax authorities. These reports are expected to continue.

It must be expected that this restriction on the use of cash will also find its way to Germany. This has been the case with almost all cash restrictions introduced in an EU country so far. Spain has also been a pioneer in legal limits for cash payments, continually lowering them to €1,000. It is therefore not easy to justify withdrawals of more than €3,000. Whether a lack of trust in the banking system will be accepted as a reason is unclear. Meanwhile, Germany also has a cash payment limit of €10,000, as per an EU regulation approved by the German government. A reduction was already being discussed before it was introduced.

The Spanish government's new, rigid control measures are making it increasingly difficult to access cash, making it almost impossible to legally hold significant amounts of cash without the government knowing about it, and making it impossible to get your money out of the banking system when the next financial crisis looms.

Locking up money in the event of a crisis could even be the primary function of the new regulation, in addition to further intimidating potential cash users. Banks already inform the authorities about larger cash transactions, in Spain as well as in Germany and the rest of the EU. Banks also already require that large withdrawals be notified several days in advance, under the pretext of limited cash holdings. In fact, this is based on requirements from banking supervisors, which in turn are based on requirements from the international shadow authority, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). Banks must use the advance notification period to report planned withdrawals to the authorities and give them the opportunity to object.

Banks and the government already receive a few days' notice if their customers intend to withdraw money en masse. Such a bank run threatens to disrupt the entire system because banks can only liquidate and pay out a fraction of their customers' deposits. If a bank run were imminent, the banking regulator would simply prohibit the withdrawal of cash and transfers abroad. Then the money cannot leave the banking system.

What is materially new about the Spanish regulation is that it is now a severely punished offense to withdraw money from the banking system by withdrawing, for example, €1,000 or €2,000 from an ATM every day, possibly from several banks where one is a customer. This closes one of the last loopholes that allows people to withdraw money from the banking system if they fear it might collapse.

The new Spanish regulation, if it becomes widespread, will also be an important step forward in terms of the comprehensive general asset register sought by the EU. It is particularly difficult to record the potentially large amounts of cash that someone might have in their safe or buried in their garden. Things look very different when you are legally limited to receiving more than €1,000 and cash withdrawals that exceed €3,000 at one time or within a shorter period of time must be reported with the specific purpose.

-------------------------------------

And adding to it, already three years old:



[https://norberthaering.de/bargeld-wi...land-bargeld/] Shadow power FATF demands measures against cash from the German government

October 20, 2022 | The financial industry and governments around the world are pushing back on cash. This undeclared war in an international space far removed from democracy is being coordinated by bodies such as the Financial Action Task Force on Money-Laundering (FATF). In its latest report on Germany, the FATF describes Germans' high affinity for cash as a major problem and calls for incentives to encourage citizens to use cash less.

The 39 FATF member countries regularly submit to fact-finding missions that compile and evaluate reports on their measures against money laundering and terrorist financing. The most recent report on Germany, published in August, highlights the heavy use of cash in the opening section on the initial situation. This is referenced in many places in the report, accompanied by the note that the use of cash is one of the greatest money laundering risks. This is an article of faith of the FATF. No attempt is even made to provide evidence.

The fact that nowadays, especially when large amounts are involved, it is often easier to smuggle illegal money into the legal system using forged shipping documents and the like than to smuggle suitcases full of cash across borders or carry them to the bank is neither considered nor mentioned.

The recommendations to the federal government then blatantly call for throwing the baby out with the bathwater and discouraging the entire population from using cash. The federal government is called upon to consider all available measures to reduce the risk of money laundering with cash, including (p. 51):

Cash caps for transactions;

Mandatory reporting of cash transactions;

Increased customs controls;

Incentives to encourage citizens to switch from cash to electronic forms of payment and money storage.

Peer pressure within the FATF is intense. Therefore, one must expect that the federal government will implement the recommendations contained in the report. Preferably, this will be done discreetly using tried-and-tested salami tactics. It would therefore be helpful if someone could elicit a statement from the German government regarding these recommendations and the assessment that the use of cash in Germany is a problem and should be curbed. Perhaps this could be achieved through a parliamentary inquiry or debate.

Firtz Glunk calls bodies like the FATF "shadow powers" (book title). They are international, informal bodies that derive their considerable freedom of action and power precisely from the fact that they only issue non-binding recommendations on paper. This allows them to adopt standards and recommendations without the participating government representatives needing any specific mandate for these decisions or having to account for them to a parliament.

In fact, however, the standards and recommendations are anything but non-binding. The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, which impose requirements on financially weaker countries, have recognized the FATF's recommendations as international standards. The United Nations Security Council, in Resolution 2462 on March 28, 2019, called on all countries to comply with the FATF's recommendations. The majority of governments have committed to doing so.

If the FATF identifies major deficiencies in anti-money laundering during country reviews, it can place the country in question under international scrutiny and call on all financial institutions to exercise particular caution in their dealings with financial institutions from that country. In practice, this results in many institutions withdrawing from doing business with that country for fear of the additional expense, reputational damage, or even sanctions.

So, if there were governments that would like to perfect financial surveillance of the entire population, but could not openly declare and enforce this to their people and parliaments, then the FATF route would be their first choice.

What they decide there with like-minded governments supposedly only pursues the noble goal of combating evil things like money laundering and terrorism. They do not have to take responsibility. What they decide rains down from the internationalist shadow realm as a de facto binding standard on national parliaments (or the EU Parliament), and must be implemented by them. This usually happens smoothly and without discussion.

The FATF's recommendation to reduce cash in Germany is no slip-up. The FATF's standards and recommendations are steeped in a philosophy that treats cash as one of the greatest, if not the greatest, risk for illegal activities in the financial sector.A view that seems increasingly absurd given the sheer scale of financial crime in the digital realm compared to cash.

But the FATF's anti-cash rules for banks have the effect of setting off all the alarm bells when someone enters a branch with banknotes, even if it's only 100 euros. This entails extensive inspection and documentation requirements, which the banks understandably don't want to deal with. They're already not fans of cash, but have so far responded to customers' urgent demand for cash services. But increasingly, they're accepting customer dissatisfaction due to such rules and are abandoning cash.

The fact that the FATF's rules are so anti-cash is no coincidence. The FATF is playing ball with another shadowy power, the G20 group of major economic powers. And the G20 officially cooperates with the Better Than Cash Alliance, which aims to reduce the use of cash worldwide. Key members include credit card giants Visa and Mastercard, corporate-affiliated foundations in the US IT industry, banks, and the US Agency for International Development (USAID), which is in many ways a front for the US intelligence community.

The G20 has committed the FATF and other similar standard-setters to cooperate with the anti-cash alliance and align their standards to serve the goal of global financial inclusion (into the digital financial system), a code word for eliminating cash. With the Better Than Cash Alliance at the table in developing the standards, it's hardly surprising that cash use is vilified as the biggest money laundering risk.

The lack of seriousness of the supposedly humane goal of financial inclusion becomes clear when a G20 working group, chaired by one of the world's most misogynistic governments, Saudi Arabia, develops guidelines for promoting women through financial inclusion based on a paper from the Better Than Cash Alliance.

The German government tried to conceal the fact that it is a permanent main sponsor of the Better Than Cash Alliance, but I exposed it.