• Expropriation Is Back - Is Christine Lagarde The Most Dangerous Woman In The World ? | Zero Hedge
    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-07-03/expropriation-back-christine-lagarde-most-dangerous-woman-world

    I have gone on record that the most dangerous organization is the now French led IMF with Christine Lagarde at the helm, which has presented a concept report that debt cuts for over-indebted states are uncompromising and are to be performed more effectively in the future by defaulting on retirement accounts held in life insurance, mutual funds and other types of pension schemes, or arbitrarily extending debt perpetually so you cannot redeem. Yes you read correctly, The new IMF paper is described in great detail exactly how to now allow the private sector, which has invested in government bonds, to be expropriated to pay for the national debts of the socialist governments.

    I have been warning that there is an idea that has been running around behind the curtain that the national debt of the USA could be settled by usurping all pension funds in the country. Here is a remarkable blueprint that throws all previous considerations concerning the purchase of government bonds over the cliff. The IMF working paper from December 2013 states boldly:

    “The distinction between external debt and domestic debt can be quite important. Domestic debt issued in domestic currency typically offers a far wider range of partial default options than does foreign currency–denominated external debt. Financial repression has already been mentioned; governments can stuff debt into local pension funds and insurance companies, forcing them through regulation to accept far lower rates of return than they might otherwise demand.”

    id/Page 8 (IMF-Sovereign-Debt-Crisis)

    Already in October 2013, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), suggested the Euro Crisis should be handled by raising taxes. The IMF lobbied for a property tax in Europe that should be imposed where there are no such taxes. The IMF has advocated for a general “debt tax” in the amount of 10 percent for each household in the Eurozone, which also has only modest savings.

    People are blind. They think this is authorization to go get the rich. They are going after everyone for the “rich” are tiny players in the game. People do not want to hear that. They want to think the rich can pay the bills for everyone else. That is not practical and even Julius Caesar recognized that they may be a small group, but they are the engine of the economy that creates jobs. It would have been popular for him to wipe out all the rich who he was against. But in the end, he had to solve the debt crisis by simply retroactively attribute all interest to capital in order to solve the debt crisis that led to the first civil war.

    There is no discussion whatsoever of reforming the system. They are merely planning to default on savers expropriating their savings, but continue to borrow forever. Nobody is even bothering to look at the structure that simply cannot work.

    The money people have saved the IMF maintains should be used for debt service by sheer force. To reduce the enormous national debt, they maintain that government has the right to directly usurp the savings of citizens. Whether saving money, securities or real estate, about ten percent could be expropriated. This is the IMF view.

    Because the government debt of the euro countries has increased a total of well over 90 percent of gross domestic product, they suggest that the people should sacrifice their savings for the benefit of the state. Socialism is no longer to help the poor against the rich, but to help the government against the people. The definition has changed.

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

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

    Possible remedy. The preliminary ideas in this paper would introduce greater flexibility into the 2002 framework by providing the Fund with a broader range of potential policy responses in the context of sovereign debt distress, while addressing the concerns that motivated the 2002 framework. Specifically, in circumstances where a member has lost market access and debt is considered sustainable, but not with high probability, the Fund would be able to provide exceptional access on the basis of a debt operation that involves an extension of maturities (normally without any reduction of principal or interest). Such a “reprofiling” operation, coupled with the implementation of a credible adjustment program, would be designed to improve the prospect of securing sustainability and regaining market access, without having to meet the criterion of restoring debt sustainability with high probability...........

    >>>

    I have gone on record that the most dangerous organization is the now French led IMF with Christine Lagarde at the helm, which has presented a concept report that debt cuts for over-indebted states are uncompromising and are to be performed more effectively in the future by defaulting on retirement accounts held in life insurance, mutual funds and other types of pension schemes, or arbitrarily extending debt perpetually so you cannot redeem

    <<<

    #IMF
    #Expropriation Is Back
    #Christine_Lagarde

    • Comme si « l’expropriation » était le pire péril planétaire, c’est amusant...
      Comme si perdre son « pactole » bancaire était une expropriation. L’argent est un concept volatile, il peut partir en fumée, pas besoin du FMI pour ça. Le problème il est plutôt du système financier, qui a laissé gonfler la dette des Etats pour mieux les croquer, peu importe les petits épargnants.

      Et au moins tout cela a le mérite de nous faire revenir aux fondamentaux... C’est un peu une invention du capitalisme cette idée de stocker la richesse sous forme de capitaux. Mais les lois de la physique nous rappellent que tout ce qui se stocke n’est jamais inerte : cela subit une érosion plus ou moins rapide. De deux choses l’une :

      – Soit on est dans le capitalisme libéral et par conséquent il n’existe pas d’épargnants, il existe juste des investisseurs - des détenteurs de capitaux (même modestes) - qui font « travailler » leur argent (à leur place) et peuvent donc le perdre (surtout s’ils le confient à une banque endettée, ou vivent dans un Etat trop faible pour lever de l’impôt). Si c’est ça, le monde c’est la jungle, Lagarde a raison et arrêtons de #chouiner

      – Soit on réinvente une société plus solidaire dans laquelle on peut épargner/emprunter, c’est à dire prévoir des phases où l’on dépense moins ce que l’on gagne et inversement, selon les périodes de la vie, et en s’appuyant sur le collectif pour réguler. Mais dans ce second cas il faudra vite rétablir un élément essentiel, la confiance dans le collectif, et se débarrasser de tous les phénomènes parasites : le concept de taux d’intérêt et en particulier la rémunération abusive du risque (entretenue par l’insécurité économique... exacerbée par la concurrence... encensée par le libéralisme) et la spéculation (prônée par le libéralisme qui persiste à croire que l’économie est une activité ludique où tout le monde gagne à la fin..).

      Dans le second cas donc, il faut sortir du libéral-capitalisme...