Menu

Civil Defense

About Civil Defense

Posts by :

CBDC Digital Currency Central Bank

CBDC Digital Currency and Control

, , , , , , , ,

What is a central bank digital currency (CBDC)?

Central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) have recently emerged as a hot topic in the financial space. Banks, Institutions, and governments are performing research and analysis on the economic and technical feasibility of introducing a new form of digital money and its impact on monetary and fiscal policy.

 

A Bank of International Settlements report states that over 80% of central banks are already researching CBDC. It begs the question: why are these institutions preoccupied with CBDCs? In this explainer, we’ll cover CBDCs, their importance in digital economies, countries exploring their use cases, and the road to mass adoption.

CBDCs explained

Cryptocurrencies, as we know them today, are extremely volatile and lack government backing — CBDCs overcome these concerns while using the same underlying distributed ledger technology of cryptocurrencies. Governments recognize CBDCs as legal tender in the issuing central bank’s jurisdiction, meaning anyone can use them for payments and every merchant must accept them.

 

In simpler terms, CBDC is short for Central Bank Digital Currency, an electronic form of central bank money that citizens can use to make digital payments and store value. A CBDC offers three main elements:

 

  • A digital currency

  • Issued by the central bank

  • Universally accessible

 

But why should a government issue a CBDC when fiat currency exists?

Why issue a CBDC?

If a country issues a CBDC, its government will consider it to be legal tender, just like fiat currencies; both CBDC and physical cash would be legally acknowledged as a form of payment and act as a claim on the central bank or government.

A central bank digital currency increases the safety and efficiency of both wholesale and retail payment systems. On the wholesale side, a central bank digital currency facilitates quick settlement of retail payments. It could improve the efficiency of making payments at the point of sale or between two parties (p2p).

No physical coins or notes are available to individuals in a digital society, and all money is exchanged in a digital format. If a country intends to become a cashless society, a digital currency with government / central bank backing is a credible alternative. The pressure for governments to adopt a CBDC is strong, as the market for private e-money is on the rise. If it becomes mainstream, beneficiaries are at a disadvantage because e-money providers aim to maximize their profits instead of the general public’s. Issuing a CBDC would give governments an edge over the competition from private e-money.

In addition to domestic transactions, the current cross-jurisdiction payments’ model depends heavily on central banks operating the real-time gross settlement (RTGS) infrastructure within which all local banks’ obligations must settle. Since time lags exist in cross-border payments, participating parties are exposed to settlement and credit risk. A CBDC is available around the clock, while privacy is taken into account to eliminate counterparty credit risk.

 

Different types of CBDCs

CBDCs are categorized into two different proposals based on the targeted users:

 

Retail Central Bank Digital Currency

Retail CBDC, based on distributed ledger technology, is traceable, anonymous, and available around the clock. It offers possibilities for interest rate applications, as well. Due to these advantages, a retail central bank digital currency focuses, in particular, on supporting the general public. Additionally, it helps lower the cost of cash printing and promotes financial inclusion.

 

Wholesale Central Bank Digital Currency

Wholesale CBDC increases payments and security settlement efficiency while resolving liquidity and counterparty risk issues. It’s a great fit for financial institutions which have reserves deposited in a central bank. With their capability to improve wholesale financial systems’ speed and security, even central banks consider wholesale central bank digital currency a favored alternative to existing systems today.

 

Countries experimenting with CBDCs

 

China: Digital Yuan

The People’s Bank of China is one of the first central banks to develop a CBDC. They deployed a special task force in 2014 to research and implement a digital Yuan. It gained traction in 2020 when China announced the testing of a CBDC prototype. The first trial of digital Yuan was held in October 2020 in the Luohu district of Shenzhen. The second pilot program took place in Suzhou City at the beginning of 2021. As per reports, the Chinese digital Yuan will impact the $27 trillion payment market in China.

 

Sweden: e-krona

In 2017, the world’s oldest bank, Swedish Riksbank, began its CBDC project called e-krona. In collaboration with Accenture PLC, a pilot took place from 2020 until February 2021, and the project was extended until February 2022. E-krona intends to offer a robust alternative in case of emergency or turmoil of private payment service providers, thereby ensuring the Swedish payment system remains stable.

 

Bahamas: Sand Dollar

In 2019, the Bahamas also began their CBDC project called “Sand Dollar” — it was fully deployed in October 2020. The project was initiated in two districts: Exuma and Abaco Islands. Each Sand Dollar constitutes an additional digital variant to the Bahamanian dollar, which is, in turn, kept at a 1:1 peg with 1 US dollar. The project delivers inclusive access to financial services and regulated payments.

 

Eastern Caribbean Area: DXCD

The monetary authority for the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States members, the Eastern Caribbean Central Bank, began their work on a CBDC project called DXCD to reach financially excluded parts of the population. Its prototype is being tested in Antigua, Barbuda, Grenada, Saint Lucia, St. Kitts, and Nevis. The main goal of DXCD is to be a retail payment system for citizens without credit cards, for merchant and e-commerce payments at low costs.

 

Marshall Islands: Sovereign

In 2018, the Republic of the Marshall Islands shared plans for launching a CBDC called Sovereign (SOV). Currently, the US dollar acts as legal tender on the island, mainly because its population is only 58,729 and the cost of cash printing exceeded its benefits. RMI plans to introduce SOV as alternative digital money as a legal tender to improve the efficiency of RMI’s current payment systems.

 

CBDC’s path to mass adoption

Decentralized blockchains today have a “user beware” attitude: all transactions are irrevocable once settled and assets cannot be recovered if the transacting party is unwilling to cooperate with legal authorities. This is not a viable option for a CBDC aiming for mass adoption.

Moreover, no existing non-banking payment system has this kind of treatment under existing laws. Nor is it possible for legal authorities to compel cooperation, since the recipient could be an unknown person from overseas not subject to abide by the laws and regulations of the CBDC’s jurisdiction. Instead, CBDC issuers should modify their state under banking, property, payment, and contract law. This is possible only with hybrid two-layer designs that address two distinct problems:

 

  1. A CBDC needs a proper management infrastructure, wherein transactions can be first verified and then modified under the jurisdiction’s law. A dispute resolution system has security, compliance, and auditing processes. With Hedera acting as a publicly verifiable log of transactions for CBDCs that live in permissioned blockchain frameworks, banks that layer customer services on top of the payment layer can trust and verify that transaction information is accurate.

  2. A CBDC also needs to report its state (account balances, transactions, etc.) to relevant regulatory bodies, which can be more than just the state of the transactions — this includes things like information on IP addresses or account IDs. This information is vital in dispute resolution for payment systems. Using Hedera as a public record, authorities could directly inspect a CBDC’s state, including the details of how users have interacted with it.

 

Closing thoughts on CBDCs

Given the considerable efforts and attention that central banks are dedicating to central bank digital currencies, they will become a reality soon. Introducing CBDCs to the world will help boost crypto adoption as people will have access to the platforms to convert cryptocurrencies into legal tenders. Moreover, it will also help in the financial inclusion of the bankless population.

CBDCs will have far-reaching implications on the future of finance, including the buying and selling of digital assets and securities. However, the question is when? This answer will rely on the foundations of a dedicated legal framework to facilitate the transparency, distribution, and issuance of a digital form of money by global governments. As regulators and central banks take concrete steps in the direction of establishing CBDCs, the world will begin to embrace digital currencies as a standard.

fednow

FedNow Surveillance

, , , , , , , ,

The U.S. Federal Reserve is set to launch its digital payments system, FedNow, in July. Described by Richmond Fed President Tom Barkin as “resilient, adaptive, and accessible,” the system aims to facilitate faster, lower-cost bill payments, money transfers, and other consumer activities.

However, as central banks globally pursue Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), concerns arise about the potential consequences for financial freedom and privacy.

The U.S. to Surveil All Private Financial Affairs

FedNow’s introduction of a CBDC could potentially pave the way for increased government surveillance of private financial affairs.

According to Robert Francis Kennedy Jr., with transactional anonymity gone, central banks would have the power to enforce dollar limits on transactions and restrict where and when money can be spent. A CBDC linked to digital ID and social credit scores could be even more dangerous.

Kennedy maintains that such a system could enable governments to freeze assets. They could even limit spending to approved vendors for those who don’t comply with specific mandates, such as vaccine requirements.

Although initially limited to interbank transactions, the launch of CBDCs raises concerns. These are related to the potential for governments to ban or seize decentralized currencies like Bitcoin, as was the case with gold in 1933.

Governments appear to seek to capitalize on crises like banking instability. For this reason, they are promoting CBDCs as safe alternatives to paper currencies and a means of protection against bank runs.

CBDC Federal Reserve Fednow

In light of these concerns, Bitcoin’s decentralized nature and censorship resistance becomes increasingly important.

As a decentralized currency, Bitcoin offers an alternative to CBDCs that can empower individuals and protect their financial privacy.

  1. Financial sovereignty: Bitcoin allows users to maintain control over their funds without relying on third parties. This independence can empower individuals to manage their finances without interference or censorship from governments or financial institutions.
  2. Privacy: While CBDCs can enable governments to track and scrutinize individual transactions, Bitcoin transactions are pseudonymous. Although not entirely anonymous, Bitcoin provides a higher degree of privacy than traditional banking systems. It allows users to safeguard their financial data from unwarranted surveillance.
  3. Borderless transactions: Bitcoin enables seamless cross-border transactions without the need for intermediaries or the constraints of foreign exchange rates. This feature can facilitate international trade, remittance transfers, and global investment opportunities, fostering greater financial inclusion and economic growth.
  4. Resistance to inflation: Bitcoin’s fixed supply of 21 million BTC and predictable issuance rate can protect users from inflationary pressures. In contrast, CBDCs, as an extension of fiat currencies, would still be subject to the monetary policies of central banks. These include inflationary measures such as quantitative easing.
  5. Security and resilience: The decentralized nature of Bitcoin’s underlying technology ensures the network’s security and resilience against cyber-attacks and system failures. This contrasts with centralized systems like CBDCs, which can be more vulnerable to hacks or technical issues.

By sidestepping centralized control and surveillance, Bitcoin could play a pivotal role in preserving financial freedom and autonomy in a future dominated by CBDCs.

BRICS Russia China World Economy Currency Trade

Changing tides in trade and currency

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

More than 13 months since the Ukraine-Russia war began and an avalanche of sanctions and restrictions hit the Vladimir Putin-led country, it seems that Russia is taking its relationship with some allies to a new level.

The ties between Russia, China, India and other BRICS nations appear poised to go a step further with the formation of a new currency. BRICS includes Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. 

According to reports quoting Russian lawmaker Alexander Babakov, the BRICS nations are in the process of creating a new medium for payments – established on a strategy that “does not defend the dollar or euro”. 

Babakov, who is the deputy Chairman of Russia’s State Duma, reportedly indicated that the new currency would be secured by gold and other commodities such as rare-earth elements. The BRICS countries are working on creating a new form of currency with a plan to present its development at the BRICS leaders’ summit this year, he said on the sidelines of the India-Russia Business Forum in New Delhi last week.

While the claim is yet to be verified by other officials from the member nations, it came just a few days before South Africa sent senior officials to Russia to discuss the “recalibration of the global order” with President Vladimir Putin‘s party. South Africa is also slated to host a BRICS summit in August this year.

The new currency could reduce the world’s dependence on the US dollar and the Euro, according to reports from the Russian state-owned news agency Sputnik. 

Last week, Russian President Putin adopted a new foreign policy that put India and China at the forefront. The announcement also came mere days after Chinese Premier Xi Jinping visited Moscow to further cement the “no limits” partnership announced last year.

Furthermore, as per a Bloomberg report earlier today, China’s yuan has replaced the US dollar as the most traded currency in Russia. The yuan surpassed the dollar in monthly trading volume in February for the first time, and the difference became more pronounced in March, according to data compiled by Bloomberg based on daily transaction reports from the Moscow Exchange.

Before the invasion, the yuan’s trading volume on the Russian market was negligible.

“Russia will continue to build up a particularly privileged strategic partnership with the Republic of India with a view to enhance and expand cooperation in all areas on a mutually beneficial basis and place special emphasis on increasing the volume of bilateral trade, strengthening investment and technological ties, and ensuring their resistance to destructive actions of unfriendly states and their alliances,” the statement said, as per the report.

It also announced its intention to prioritise and enhance its capacity and international role in groupings such as BRICS ‘to help adapt the world order to the realities of a multipolar world’.

Now, it remains to be seen whether BRICS nations verify this claim by the Russian lawmaker, and whether they bring more clarity regarding such currency being created, if any.

brics nations economy china

A new world order? BRICS nations offer alternative to West

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Predictions about the BRICS countries as the fastest growing economies haven’t quite panned out. Instead, the alliance is now offering a diplomatic forum and development financing, outside of the Western mainstream.

The acronym began as a somewhat optimistic term to describe what were the world’s fastest-growing economies at the time. But now the BRICS nations — Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa — are setting themselves up as an alternative to existing international financial and political forums.

“The founding myth of the emerging economies has faded,” confirmed Günther Maihold, deputy director of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, or SWP. “The BRICS countries are experiencing their geopolitical moment.”

Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa are trying to position themselves as representatives of the Global South, providing “an alternative model to the G7.”

The G7 is an “informal forum” of heads of state of the world’s most advanced economies, founded in 1975. Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, Japan, Canada and the US are members, as is the EU.

The acronym BRIC, which initially stood for Brazil, Russia, India and China, was coined by Jim O’Neill in 2001 when he was chief economist of the multinational investment bank, Goldman Sachs. At the time, the four countries had sustained rates of high economic growth and the BRIC label stood for economic optimism about the future of those nations. Opponents of the label said the countries were too diverse to be grouped together like this and that it was really just a Goldman Sachs marketing ploy.

But what may have started as a marketing ploy to encourage investors has grown into a platform for intergovernmental cooperation similar to the G7. In 2009, the four nations met for their first summit in Russia’s Yekaterinburg. In 2010, South Africa was invited to join the group, adding the “S” to BRICS.

 

brics world economy china

Challenging the World Bank model

In 2014, with $50 billion (around €46 billion) in seed money, the BRICS nations launched the New Development Bank as an alternative to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. In addition, they created a liquidity mechanism called the Contingent Reserve Arrangement to support members struggling with payments.

These offers were not only attractive to the BRICS nations themselves, but also to many other developing and emerging economies that had had painful experiences with the IMF’s structural adjustment programs and austerity measures. This is why many countries said they might be interested in joining the BRICS group.

The BRICS bank is open to new members. In 2021, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Uruguay and Bangladesh took up shares. However, these were much lower than the respective $10 billion investments made by the bank’s founding members.

Set to expand

South African Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor has said worldwide interest in the BRICS group was “huge.” In early March, she told television interviewers that she had 12 letters from interested countries on her desk.

“Saudi Arabia is one,” she said. “United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Algeria, and Argentina,”  as well as Mexico and Nigeria.

“Once we’ve shaped the criteria [for lending], we will then make the decision,” she said, noting that the topic would be placed on the agenda for the upcoming August summit in South Africa.

The most recent economic developments in BRICS member states have little to do with the initial myths upon which the group was founded. Of the five members, only China has achieved sustained and extensive growth since then. 

As China’s gross domestic product grew from $6 trillion in 2010 to nearly $18 trillion in 2021, the economies in Brazil, South Africa and Russia stagnated. India’s GDP grew from $1.7 trillion to $3.1 trillion, but was outpaced by China’s growth.

No sanctions against Russia

Since the start of the Russian war in Ukraine, the BRICS countries have only distanced themselves further from the so-called West. Neither India, Brazil, South Africa or China are taking part in sanctions against Russia. This has become increasingly clear with near-historic levels of trade between India and Russia, or in Brazil’s dependence on Russian fertilizer.

“Diplomatically, the war in Ukraine appears to have drawn a stark dividing line between an eastern-backed Russia and the West,” political scientist Matthew Bishop from the University of Sheffield wrote for the Economics Observatory late last year. “Consequently, some European and US policymakers worry that the BRICS may become less an economic club of rising powers seeking to influence global growth and development, and more a political one defined by their authoritarian nationalism.”

BRICS world economy Russia China
.
Astrid Prange
 
American Farming is Dead

The Plight of American Farming

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

.

It is impossible to pinpoint a single cause for the misery of American farmers since it is a complicated problem. However, some of the main causes of their challenges include increasing production costs, declining demand for specific commodities, and the expansion of large-scale agribusiness. The number of farms and farmers in the United States has decreased as a result of these factors, which have made it harder for small and mid-sized farms to compete with their bigger counterparts.

It is impossible to pinpoint a single cause for the misery of American farmers since it is a complicated problem. However, some of the main causes of their challenges include increasing production costs, declining demand for specific commodities, and the expansion of large-scale agribusiness. The number of farms and farmers in the United States has decreased as a result of these factors, which have made it harder for small and mid-sized farms to compete with their bigger counterparts.

Due to this reduction, the United States today imports a substantial amount of its food from other countries. Fruits and vegetables made up a significant portion of the nation’s $137 billion worth of food imports in 2020. This suggests that a significant amount of the food consumed frequently by Americans is imported rather than produced locally.

American Farming is Dead
American Farming is Dead

Based on the latest data available from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) for the year 2020, the top 10 countries the United States imports food products from, along with their annual dollar value of imports, are as follows:

  1. Mexico – $28.7 billion
  2. Canada – $25.3 billion
  3. China – $5.6 billion
  4. Brazil – $4.9 billion
  5. Chile – $3.1 billion
  6. Argentina – $2.8 billion
  7. Vietnam – $2.7 billion
  8. Peru – $2.5 billion
  9. India – $2.4 billion
  10. Indonesia – $2.2 billion

It is important to note that these figures only represent the value of food products that are officially recorded by the USDA and do not account for informal trade or unrecorded imports. Additionally, the types of food products imported from each country vary widely and include everything from fruits and vegetables to meat and dairy products.

The United States is currently importing a sizable portion of its food from other nations as a result of this reduction. In 2020, the nation imported food worth over $137 billion, with fruits and vegetables making up a sizable share of total imports. This implies that a large portion of the food that Americans regularly eat is not produced locally but is instead imported from other nations.

Notwithstanding these obstacles, the government has been slow to assist the growth of small and mid-sized farms and give local farming priority. Instead, it has concentrated on regulations that aid industrial agriculture and large-scale agribusiness. For instance, whereas restrictions and zoning laws frequently make it challenging for small farmers to sell their products directly to consumers, subsidies are frequently given to large-scale producers.

The government might help small and mid-sized farms flourish and give local agriculture precedence as a potential solution to this issue. This might entail taking steps like providing tax benefits to local farmers, funding research on ecologically friendly agriculture practices, and aiding the expansion of local food markets. The United States can ensure a more sustainable and resilient food supply while also promoting the economic viability of local farming communities by prioritizing local agriculture.

I’d want to wrap this up by emphasizing that the state of American farms and farmers is a complex issue that requires thought and action from decision-makers. By putting an emphasis on local farming and encouraging the expansion of small and mid-sized farms, the United States can create a more resilient and sustainable food system that benefits both consumers and farmers. Nevertheless, unless the government takes these steps, the trend toward importing food rather than producing it locally is likely to continue, putting People at risk for food safety and endangering the success of local farming communities.

American Farming is Dead
American Farming is Dead

Based on the latest data available from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) for the year 2020, the top 10 food products imported into the United States, along with their annual dollar value of imports, are as follows:

  1. Fresh fruits – $17.6 billion
  2. Fresh vegetables – $11.8 billion
  3. Wine and beer – $6.4 billion
  4. Snack foods – $5.7 billion
  5. Coffee and tea – $5.5 billion
  6. Fish and seafood – $5.4 billion
  7. Processed fruits and vegetables – $5.2 billion
  8. Chocolate and cocoa products – $4.2 billion
  9. Red meats – $3.3 billion
  10. Dairy products – $3.1 billion

It is important to note that these figures only represent the value of food products that are officially recorded by the USDA and do not account for informal trade or unrecorded imports. Additionally, the types of food products imported vary widely and include both raw materials and finished products that are sold directly to consumers.

I was going to end my life…..

Bitcoin Cryptocurrency

Half a Trillion Withdrawn

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Bitcoin (BTC) and other crypto assets have been liquidated in the last 24 hours as a powerful law enforcement agency sets its sights on Ethereum (ETH).

New data from Coinglass shows 137,969 traders were just liquidated to the tune of $429 million with the majority of traders losing bets on BTC and ETH, which saw $141 million and $110 million in liquidations respectively.

Other prominent crypto assets affected include smart contract platform Solana (SOL), Bitcoin alternative Litecoin (LTC), meme asset Dogecoin (DOGE), layer-2 scaling solution Polygon (MATIC), oracle provider Chainlink (LINK) and XRP.

Bitcoin and Ethereum are trading for $19,935 and $1,406 at time of writing, both over 6% declines during the last 24 hours.

The broad market plunge comes as the Biden Administration and New York’s Attorney General launch an assault on crypto assets and their owners.

ETH has been labeled as a security by New York Attorney General Letitia James in a lawsuitfiled with the Supreme Court of New York on Thursday, and the Biden administration is targeting Bitcoin mining in a new tax proposal, following the regulatory pressure that collapsed crypto-friendly bank Silvergate.

The macroeconomy is not helping the crypto markets either.

Equities are reeling from the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank, which was officially shut down by regulators today after reporting a $1.8 billion loss from selling mostly US government bonds.

Mainstream economists believe banks can buy government bonds as a safe way to diversify their assets, but the Fed’s sharp interest rate hikes have sent their prices in a downward spiral.

Zombie Apocolypse

A Real Zombie Apocolypse?

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A zombie apocalypse, as portrayed in popular culture, would likely be caused by some sort of outbreak or virus that turns people into zombie.

A virus like the rabies virus, which already exists, may have undergone a mutation as one potential cause. Rabies is a fatal virus that spreads through saliva and is known to make those who have it act violently. It would be simple to spread and result in widespread infection if a strain of rabies were to mutate to the point where it could be transmitted through the air.

Another possible cause could be the emergence of a new virus that is specifically designed to create zombies. This could be the result of bioweapons research gone wrong, or it could be the work of a malicious individual or group.

A parasite, such as a protozoan, which invades the human brain and changes the animal’s behavior to make it more aggressive and less reasonable, is another possible cause. Toxoplasma gondii, a parasite that may infect rats and alter their behavior by making them less frightened of cats, is one illustration of this. A zombie apocalypse might occur if a parasite like that infected people.

Additionally, a zombies apocalypse could also be caused by a bacterial infection, such as the one caused by Necrotizing fasciitis, it is a fast-moving flesh-eating bacteria, which causes severe tissue damage, this could lead to zombie-like symptoms.

A zombies apocalypse could also be caused by a neurological disorder, such as Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD), it is a rare, degenerative, fatal brain disorder, it is caused by abnormal proteins called prions. These prions cause nerve cells in the brain to die, leading to a loss of brain function. Symptoms of CJD include aggressive behavior, which could be mistaken for zombie-like symptoms.

And finally, a number of circumstances might combine to bring forth a zombie apocalypse. For instance, a parasite may propagate a virus that makes people aggressive and enhances the infection’s effects. In addition, the virus’s effects could be strengthened by a bacterium that induces tissue death, leading to even more severe symptoms resembling zombies.

Overall, a zombie apocalypse is a hypothetical scenario that could be caused by a number of different factors, including viruses, parasites, bacteria, and neurological disorders. Each of these factors alone could cause severe problems, but combined they could lead to an outbreak of zombies on a massive scale.

The COVID-19 pandemic has provided some insights into how a real-life zombie apocalypse may unfold. The way the virus spread and affected people’s behavior are similar to the way a zombie outbreak would progress.

One of the most significant lessons from the epidemic is the importance of early discovery and prompt action. After the virus was first identified in Wuhan, China, the World Health Organization (WHO) took some time to proclaim a pandemic. By the time the virus was detected, it had already spread to neighboring countries, making containment considerably more difficult. This highlights the need for rapid and decisive action in the case of a further breakout.

Another important lesson learned is the importance of international cooperation in dealing with a global threat. The virus quickly spread to every corner of the globe and it became clear that no country could deal with it alone. The way different countries responded and cooperated with each other was a big influence on how the pandemic played out, with some countries having greater success than others.

The pandemic also brought to light the necessity for health systems to be prepared and their susceptibility. Many nations were unprepared for a pandemic of this magnitude and were forced to race for supplies like hospital beds, ventilators, and personal protective equipment. This made combating the virus considerably more difficult and contributed to more fatalities. This shows how important it is to have a functioning healthcare system that is capable of handling pandemics and other emergencies.

The COVID-19 pandemic also highlighted the effects of false information and false information. The spread of false information during the pandemic, including conspiracy theories and false news, has made it more difficult to fight the infection. Due to the difficulty in getting correct information out to the public, there was misunderstanding, mistrust, and to some extent, a lack of cooperation. This demonstrates how crucial proper information is during an outbreak and how harmful disinformation can be.

Long Term Meat Storage United States Prepper

Meat Storage Long Term

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Long-term meat storage can be challenging, but with the correct methods and equipment, you can preserve your meat fresh and fit for consumption for a considerable amount of time. Here are some strategies for long-term beef storage:

  1. Freezing: This is one of the most effective ways to store meat long-term. It slows down the growth of bacteria and helps to preserve the flavor and texture of the meat. You can freeze both raw and cooked meat, but it’s important to wrap it properly to prevent freezer burn.

  2. Canning: When preparing for the zombie apocalypse, canning is an excellent technique to conserve meat for longer periods of time. Using this technique, meat is heated to a high temperature in jars, killing microorganisms and forming a vacuum seal that preserves the meat’s freshness.
  3. Dehydration: By eliminating moisture from the meat, this method of preservation reduces the growth of bacteria and enables longer-term storage of the product. Making your own jerky or other dry meat snacks is a breeze when you cure meat using a dehydrator or even the sun.
  4. Curing: Meat is preserved through the process of curing, which involves seasoning it with salt and other curing chemicals. By removing moisture, this generates an environment that is unfriendly to microorganisms. The most popular cured meats are salami, ham, and bacon.

  5. Smoking: Smoking is a method of preserving meat by exposing it to smoke, which can help to kill bacteria and add a smoky flavor to the meat. This method is best for tougher cuts of meat like pork shoulder or beef brisket.

  6. Pressure Canning: This is another great method of canning meat, It uses a pressure cooker to heat the meat to a higher temperature which kills any bacteria and creates a sealed environment for storing the meat for long term.
  7. Fermenting: Fermenting involves cultivating meat with advantageous microbes. This may enhance the meat’s flavor and aid in its preservation. Sauerkraut and kimchi are two examples of fermented meats.

  8. Brining: Similar to curing, brining involves adding salt, sugar, and spices to meat in a liquid solution, which helps to preserve it and add flavor. The process of brining can also make the meat more tender.

  9. Vacuum sealing: This is another effective way to store meat long-term by removing the air and creating an airtight environment around the meat. It keeps the meat fresh and stops it from getting freezer burns.

  10. And lastly, good old fashioned Salt curing: This method is one of the oldest ways of preserving meats, it is also one of the most effective. This method involves rubbing salt, sugar and various other spices on the meat and then let it sit for some time. This process draws out the moisture, kills bacteria and preserves the meat for a long period of time.

While each of these methods can be useful for long-term meat storage, it’s crucial to use the right one for the kind of meat you’re preserving and to handle food safely to avoid contamination. Always be ready and have some solutions available because you’ll need to be able to safeguard and preserve your meats in the event of a zombie apocalypse.

government-controlled-cryptocurrency

Government Controlled Cryptocurrency

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Building on the bitcoin model, central banks are planning to produce their own “digital currencies”. Removing any and all remaining privacy, granting total control over every transaction, even limiting what ordinary people are allowed to spend their money on.

From the moment bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies first emerged, sold as an independent and alternative medium of exchange outside the financial status quo, it was only a matter of time before the new alternative would be absorbed, modified and redeployed in service of the state.

Enter “Central Bank Digital Currencies”: the mainstream answer to bitcoin.

For those who have never heard of them, “Central Bank Digital Currencies” (CBDCs) are exactly what they sound like, digitized versions of the pound/dollar/euro etc. issued by central banks.

Like bitcoin (and other crypto), the CBDC would be entirely digital, thus furthering the ongoing war on cash. However, unlike crypto, it would not have any encryption preserving anonymity. In fact, it would be totally the reverse, potentially ending the very idea of financial privacy.

Now, you may not have heard much about the CBDC plans, lost as they are in the tangle of the ongoing “pandemic”, but the campaign is there, chugging along on the back pages for months now. There are stories about it from both Reuters and the Financial Times just today. It’s a long, slow con, but a con nonetheless.

The countries where the idea progressed the furthest are China and the UK. The Chinese Digital Yuan has been in development since 2014, and is subject to ongoing and widespread testing. The UK is nowhere near that stage yet, but Chancellor Rishi Sunak is keenly pushing forward a digital pound that the press are calling “Britcoin”.

Other countries, including New Zealand, Australia, South Africa and Malaysia, are not far behind.

The US is also researching the idea, with Jerome Powell, head of Federal Reserve, announcing the release of a detailed report on the “digital dollar” in the near future.

The proposals for how these CBDCs might work should be enough to raise red flags in even the most trusting of minds.

Most people wouldn’t like the idea of the government monitoring “all spending in real-time”, but that’s not the worst it.

By far the most dangerous idea is that any future digital currency should be “programmable”. Meaning the people issuing the money would have the power to control how it is spent.

That’s not an interpretation or a “conspiracy theory”, just listen to Agustin Carstens, head of the International Settlement Bank, speaking earlier this year:

Here’s that quote again, with some emphasis added:

…which tells you not only that they want and are seeking this power, but how they justify it to themselves. They transform other people’s money into an “expression of their liability”, and so consider it’s only right that they control it.

An article in the Telegraph, back in June, was just as candid [our emphasis]:

Digital cash could be programmed to ensure it is only spent on essentials, or goods which an employer or Government deems to be sensible.

The article goes on to quote Tom Mutton, a director at the BoE:

You could introduce programmability […] There could be some socially beneficial outcomes from that, preventing activity which is seen to be socially harmful in some way.

Governments and employers making sure the money they issue can only be used on “sensible” things, and not be used in “socially harmful” ways? It doesn’t take much imagination to see just how this system could evolve and re-shape society into a truly dystopian nightmare.

In China the process is already beginning, with a trademarked lack of subtlety. As they progress toward the release of their digital currency, they are banning all cryptocurrencies to remove competition and it’s already known the digital yuan will be programmable.

The West’s approach will probably be less direct, but no less controlling for that.

Britcoin will likely be programmed in only “special circumstances”. Starting, as the Telegraph says, with state benefits. They will be flagged to be spent only on “essentials”. (Of course, if Universal Basic Income is put in place, then it’s possible the majority of people could end up on “state benefits”.)

It’s also not hard to see programmable money feeding into the “protect the NHS narrative”, where people aren’t allowed to spend state money on sugar, cigarettes or alcohol. Or people on organ waiting lists, or diagnosed with certain conditions, have their wages and spending controlled.

By and large, however, it is the nature of British tyranny to be unofficial. So the UK government will make a big show of renouncing their own power to program the money, thereby positively contrasting themselves with China…but at the time will take no steps to prevent large companies “programming” the wages they issue.

So, while the state controls the digital yuan in China, the digital pound will be subject to corporate control and used to enforce the unspoken state-corporate partnership that defines true fascism.

It will likely start in small, predictable ways designed to “limit competition”. McDonald’s, for example, will make it impossible to spend their wages at Burger King, and vice versa. Coke and Pepsi. Starbucks and Costa. You get the idea.

We’ve witnessed the rise of cancel culture, the cultivated age of identity politics, and virtue signalling. Well, imagine how programmable currency fits into that. Companies could commit to “combatting hate”, and stop their employees from donating money to black-listed political parties, religious groups, charities or individuals.

In the age of Covid we have seen how authors/actors/singers who step out of line are subject to poisonous witch hunts, but imagine a world where companies could “renounce those who spread misinformation”, by making it impossible to spend wages they issue on art/films/music/books by outspoken critics of the government.

Maybe companies will make it so that employees who aren’t vaccinated have more limitations placed on their wages than vaccinated ones. Maybe an unvaxxed paycheck can’t be spent at cinemas or nightclubs, to “stop the spread of the virus”.

John Cunliffe, deputy director of the Bank of England, told the Telegraph:

You could think of smart contracts in which the money would be programmed to be released only if something happened.

So maybe employers will remove choice altogether, and make a negative test and/or a vaccine booster a prerequisite for unlocking your wages. That could be applied to all kinds of behaviours moving forward.

The World Economic Forum has a clear vision of the future where people “own nothing and are happy”, combine that with a prolonged war on homeownership, and you can see employers and governments issuing money which can be spent on rent, but not on a mortgage.

Now imagine the nascent “Green New Deal”. Hard limits on how much money you can spend on petrol, plastic, or meat.

Only X dollars on flights per year. Only Y pounds on beef. All for the good of the planet.

Money will turn from an expression of independence into nothing but a voucher system operated completely at the whim of corporate monoliths.

All of this would have sounded like rampant paranoia just two years ago, but would you honestly be surprised to see that suggestion in the Guardian, these days?

A programmable digital currency would have, coded into it, the ability to control our entire society. And it looks like that’s where The New Normal is heading next.

power-outage-map-texas

Texas needs some Preppers!

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

(CNN) A winter storm and lengthy cold snap have crippled power facilities in Texas and caused about 2.3 million outages as of Wednesday evening, leaving residents in the cold and dark for several days.

The lack of power to about a quarter of the state has created a widespread emergency, with families huddling in homes or cars without heat, burst water pipes, failing water systems and gasoline shortages.
Barbara Martinez said she had been burning firewood to try to heat her suburban Houston home, which had been without power from early Sunday until Tuesday.
 
“We got power for four hours and then it went off again and it stayed off for a few hours, came back for like two hours then went away,” she said Wednesday morning. “It’s currently off.”
 
The outages cover the areas served by Electric Reliability Council of Texas, or ERCOT, from the counties bordering Mexico up to those touching Oklahoma, and from Houston in the east to rural Big Bend in the west. Yet areas outside of ERCOT’s coverage zone, including the eastern border with Louisiana, the northwest panhandle and El Paso in the west, are basically unaffected.
 
Texas officials pointed the blame at the power company and called for investigations. US Rep. Marc Veasey, a Democrat who represents parts of Fort Worth and Dallas, said he’s learned from an industry executive that the power grid was just minutes from failing on Monday before state agency officials initiated emergency rolling outages.
 
“I want people to know that we were minutes away from the entire grid crashing,” he told CNN’s Ed Lavandera, criticizing ERCOT and Republican leaders for not better preparing for the freeze.
 
“They certainly could have taken some precautions that would have prevented what we’re having to deal with now,” Veasey said.
An ERCOT spokesperson did not immediately return a CNN request for comment. But earlier Wednesday, CEO Bill Magness said the issue largely was a lack of energy supply as the cold weather shuttered power facilities. ERCOT’s controlled power outages, he said, had in fact averted the system’s collapse.
 
“If we had waited, and not done outages, not reduced demand to reflect what was going on, on the overall system, we could have drifted towards a blackout,” he said. “People feel like what we’re seeing feels like a blackout, but the blackout that can occur if you don’t keep the supply and demand in balance could last months.”
 
The power issues are likely to continue, especially given that the cold temperatures will last for another day or two. Over 21 million people, or nearly 70% of Texas’s population, are currently under some sort of winter weather alert.
 
The controlled outages have created rotating power issues as ERCOT has tried to spread around the pain, pushing people to rely on warming centers or the kindness of neighbors.
 
“We have power for about 30 or 15 minutes and then we get a blackout for about five to six hours,” said Eder Lemus of San Antonio.
The pipes in his house froze, so he, his wife and three children are relying on others for water.
 
 
“As of now, we are using a neighbor’s faucet to refill a bucket of water to drain our toilets,” he told said. “When and if the lights come back on, we try to take showers and refill our drinking water gallons so that we can stay hydrated.”
 
Gov. Greg Abbott said that he has spoken with both the lieutenant governor and the state House speaker, and that an investigation of ERCOT is slated to begin next week.
 
“ERCOT is an independent private entity that, candidly, I have both investigated and prosecuted before when I was attorney general of Texas, and we’re now investigating again,” Abbott said. “I’m not suggesting any way that there’s been any criminal activity or anything like that, but it is something that needs to be looked at.”
 
Abbott said a news conference Wednesday that 6,000 megawatts have been added to the state’s grid — enough power for about 1.2 million households.
 
There will be additional onboarding coming from the South Texas Nuclear Project and additional operations will increase from coal-produced power, Abbott said.
 
These sources will add more than 2,000 megawatts to the grid and provide additional power for about 400,000 homes, according to Abbott. About 17,200 megawatts of renewable generated power remain out on Wednesday afternoon, due to “freezing of the wind, or because of lack of sun for the solar,” Abbott said.
 
The widespread outages stem from a weather disaster coupled with an unprepared infrastructure.
 
A winter weather system brought unusually frigid temperatures to much of the central US over the past few days, including in Texas, the country’s energy leader. The deep freeze caused demand for power and heating to skyrocket even as it knocked out the state’s natural gas, coal, wind and nuclear facilities, which were not ready to function in such cold weather.

Load More