The birth of a new global currency, will it reside on the SAFEnetwork?


David Harrison who blogs at TradeWithDave believes that a new global monetary system is going to be implemented on a blockchain type system.

He’s not sure whether it will be the Bitcoin network itself, or if Bitcoin is a test run.

If you go the link above, you will read what Dave believes to be the synthesis of 5 years sniffing this new financial system out. It’s certainly a deep dive to understand his take on how this will be implemented on a block-chain technology…but well worth if your an ‘eyes open’ kind of person. Martin Armstrong admits that from behind the curtain, governments dream about an electronic money system, because they want everything captured for Taxes

Like it or not, there’s a real chance this system will be hosted by YOU, via the MaidSAFE vault

David Irvine himself has recognised the possibility of the blockchain becoming hosted on the SAFEnetwork as a fully distributed file. It’s interesting to ponder why SAFEnetwork was not designed with a one edged sword i.e Private. My guess is that as the internet collapse upon the SAFE footprint, we still need a public side to run business, transparent governance, reputation etc

The blockchain currently hosts irreversible transactions in the form of a currency Bitcoin (and clones) and other projects such as Etherium and Bitshares are working on other functionality hosted via the sidechain proposals…all (I presume) inherently irreversible…contracts, smart property, law, etc

Anyway you look at it, were on the edge of massive change on this planet…will that change be initially good, only to turn evil later on…tune in, turn on I guess.

So David Harrison, has put forward his thoughts on what is happening behind the scenes…does it all feel accidental to you?

You will have to dig hard, but I present here an excerpt from one of the more backgrounder articles from around 3 or 4 years ago on where this might be headed:

"Dave has written on this blog many times before about the ingenuous proposal of one Sir Mervyn King, Governor of the Bank of England. You see Mervyn has proposed the same thing that so many people believe will solve their financial problems… divorce. Mervyn has suggested that we need to divorce our currency into two halves. If you’ve been reading Dave, then you know already that money is designed to serve two distinct purposes; a) to streamline the the double coincidence required to satisfy our needs and wants, and b) as a form of wealth storage.

Mervyn’s plan is to simply separate those two functions into two entirely separate currencies. His argument is based on the fact that it is impossible for banks to engage in fractional reserve lending while simultaneously insulating themselves from a global bank run. This has gotten to be a much bigger problem now that hedge funds have a global footprint and the capability to unload massive pain upon sovereign governments in a matter of minutes. Even with a global fiat cartel centrally managed out of Basel’s BIS, the privateers are able to outrun the private central banks and capitalize on the fear of local populations no matter how quickly Ben’s helicopter drops of liquidity are deployed.

The answer to this problem is quite simple. Completely remove the fractional reserve aspects of part (a) of the currency. If you think this would be impossible, then there’s something that you don’t understand about money and rich people in particular. Rich people, as a general rule, don’t spend much money. I realize you may have been watching television, but trust Dave on this one, most wealth is in the hands of little old ladies and little ladies by and large are the penny pinchingest people on the planet. So, what’s my point.

My point is that to satisfy the first half of Mervyn’s plan for separation and final divorce won’t require much money at all. You see, the actual money that people use for groceries, cell phone bills and mortgage payments is about the same whether they are rich or poor. For argument’s sake a rich little old lady lives on about $40,000 per year while a low income family, even one that lives on some form of government support lives on about $40,000 per year. That means that for liquidity purposes, they only need about $3,500 per month and if their WSJ currency (stands for William Stanley Jevons not Wall Street Journal) is $3,500 per month then very little liquidity is needed in the part (a) portion of the Mervyn money divorce agreement to entirely eliminate the fractional lending risk. (for more on WSJ currency, click here: )

By setting up retail banks as essentially electronic transfer devices that link the direct deposit of your pay-check to the on-line bill pay of your mortgage and debit card payment of your mobile phone and groceries and carving out that portion (say the $3,500) and requiring it to be reserved at a level of 100%, rather than the historical 1%, this should be quite easy within the Basel 3 requirement of 4.5% plus 2.5% of risk adjusted assets. Keep in mind that no matter how much of a spendthrift someone may be it is difficult for even the most wasteful person to eat more than three meals a day, burn more than one tank of gas per week or watch more than one Red Box $1 video per night. Most people, rich or poor, spend about the same amount of money on life’s essentials and it is life’s essentials and people’s monthly income that is addressed by part (a) of the divorced dollars strategy.

Let’s take a look at the other side of coin when it comes to the usefulness of money – wealth storage. Whether you’re talking about the Christmas Club account at Bailey Building and Loan, your lay-away at Big K mart, your savings accounts, 401(k) or interest in Goldman Sach’s private Facebook stock exchange it takes money to make money and interest is the name of the game in part (b) of the King plan. The way the divorce settlement reads on this side of the coin is another story.

To start with the wealth building/savings account side of the coin gets some shiny gold backing. A percentage of all your part (b) money will be backed by gold. We’re not talking about $1,500 gold either. This is $5,000 gold which goes a long way towards settling our accounts with China and making those $50 buffalo gold coins a 1% backing for $5,000 gold all while avoiding the type of nagging tax issues encountered by the folks over at KITCO (for a more detailed explanation read here: ).

Not only will your new wealth building part (b) Mervyn Money have a shiny new gold backing, but it will also have government guarantees, or better yet global banking cartel guarantees. As long as you are willing to leave your money in part (b) then you will receive generous interest payments, a gold backing to help you sleep at night and the comfort of knowing that you have helped to solve the global financial market’s systemic risk. There’s only one small drawback… you can’t get to your money.

The part (b) Mervyn Money divorce not only gives you a strong guarantee it also partitions you from your money voluntarily, just like my brother voluntarily petitioned himself into what he thought was the better half of the room – the gold-filled half. What he failed to consider and what Chancellor Osborne of the Exchequer is hoping that you will also forsake is your ability to get your hands on your money at a moment’s notice. If you’ve gone to the bank lately to draw out $5,000 or more in cash then you probably already know what I am talking about. The difference once you’re divorced from your money is that it won’t just be an inconvenience waiting for your money will be a requirement.

The part (b) money will come with very strict requirements, penalties and withdrawl limitations. It is within this portion of the divorce decree that the powers that be have chosen to bury the trojans. You simply won’t be able to get to your money and why would you want to with rapidly rising gold values and a strong hazard free global banking system and for everything else there’s Mastercard. What could be better.

Add on top of this new laws that not only limit the ownership of gold to the top 1% of the population who will have already acquired it, they also treat the transacting of commerce in precious metals as an act of domestic terrorism ala Liberty Dollars (read more here: ).

So there you have it. Think of it as the Glass-Steagall II where once the partition is rebuilt between retail banking and investment banking, all of the assets and fractional leverage are on the private banker’s side of the partition while all of the risks associated with bank runs are mitigated on the public retail side of the partition. What could be better? If all this makes you want to head to your therapist for some couch time, remember what Dave says about divorces that are motivated by financial stress. If you couldn’t afford one couch when you were married, how do you plan on affording two couches once you’re divorced?