Rothschild Controlled Media Outlet — ‘Get Ready for a World Currency by 2018’

| |

Top Tier Gear USA

Money concept

The Economist magazine published an article almost thirty years ago discussing the prospect of a world currency that should be expected around the year 2018. The 1988 article foreshadows a methodical movement towards a centralized world currency that we have, in many ways, seen play out over the past few decades.

One must also keep in mind that the controlling interest of The Economist is held by the powerful Rothschild family, who regard themselves as the “custodians of The Economist magazine’s legacy.” In essence, the magazine operates as a quasi-propaganda arm for the Rothschild banking empire and related businesses and, is in many ways, meant to prime the pump of public opinion for the globalist agenda to be implemented.

The excerpt below appeared in the print magazine on January 9, 1988, in Vol. 306, pp 9-10.

Ready for the Phoenix

THIRTY years from now, Americans, Japanese, Europeans, and people in many other rich countries, and some relatively poor ones will probably be paying for their shopping with the same currency. Prices will be quoted not in dollars, yen or D-marks but in, let’s say, the phoenix. The phoenix will be favoured by companies and shoppers because it will be more convenient than today’s national currencies, which by then will seem a quaint cause of much disruption to economic life in the last twentieth century.

At the beginning of 1988 this appears an outlandish prediction. Proposals for eventual monetary union proliferated five and ten years ago, but they hardly envisaged the setbacks of 1987. The governments of the big economies tried to move an inch or two towards a more managed system of exchange rates – a logical preliminary, it might seem, to radical monetary reform. For lack of co-operation in their underlying economic policies they bungled it horribly, and provoked the rise in interest rates that brought on the stock market crash of October. These events have chastened exchange-rate reformers. The market crash taught them that the pretence of policy co-operation can be worse than nothing, and that until real co-operation is feasible (i.e., until governments surrender some economic sovereignty) further attempts to peg currencies will flounder.

The New World Economy

The biggest change in the world economy since the early 1970’s is that flows of money have replaced trade in goods as the force that drives exchange rates. as a result of the relentless integration of the world’s financial markets, differences in national economic policies can disturb interest rates (or expectations of future interest rates) only slightly, yet still call forth huge transfers of financial assets from one country to another. These transfers swamp the flow of trade revenues in their effect on the demand and supply for different currencies, and hence in their effect on exchange rates. As telecommunications technology continues to advance, these transactions will be cheaper and faster still. With unco-ordinated economic policies, currencies can get only more volatile.

In all these ways national economic boundaries are slowly dissolving. As the trend continues, the appeal of a currency union across at least the main industrial countries will seem irresistible to everybody except foreign-exchange traders and governments. In the phoenix zone, economic adjustment to shifts in relative prices would happen smoothly and automatically, rather as it does today between different regions within large economies (a brief on pages 74-75 explains how.) The absence of all currency risk would spur trade, investment and employment.

The phoenix zone would impose tight constraints on national governments. There would be no such thing, for instance, as a national monetary policy. The world phoenix supply would be fixed by a new central bank, descended perhaps from the IMF. The world inflation rate – and hence, within narrow margins, each national inflation rate- would be in its charge. Each country could use taxes and public spending to offset temporary falls in demand, but it would have to borrow rather than print money to finance its budget deficit. With no recourse to the inflation tax, governments and their creditors would be forced to judge their borrowing and lending plans more carefully than they do today. This means a big loss of economic sovereignty, but the trends that make the phoenix so appealing are taking that sovereignty away in any case. Even in a world of more-or-less floating exchange rates, individual governments have seen their policy independence checked by an unfriendly outside world.

As the next century approaches, the natural forces that are pushing the world towards economic integration will offer governments a broad choice. They can go with the flow, or they can build barricades. Preparing the way for the phoenix will mean fewer pretended agreements on policy and more real ones. It will mean allowing and then actively promoting the private-sector use of an international money alongside existing national monies. That would let people vote with their wallets for the eventual move to full currency union. The phoenix would probably start as a cocktail of national currencies, just as the Special Drawing Right is today. In time, though, its value against national currencies would cease to matter, because people would choose it for its convenience and the stability of its purchasing power.

The alternative – to preserve policymaking autonomy- would involve a new proliferation of truly draconian controls on trade and capital flows. This course offers governments a splendid time. They could manage exchange-rate movements, deploy monetary and fiscal policy without inhibition, and tackle the resulting bursts of inflation with prices and incomes polices. It is a growth-crippling prospect. Pencil in the phoenix for around 2018, and welcome it when it comes.

Only ten years later, in 1998, The Economist was once again engaging the public in an effort to forward the globalist agenda, with an article entitled “One world, one money.”

Very much in line with the 1988 piece, the publication attempts to explain why a much more centralized and controlled system would be beneficial to the global economy, while wholly ignoring the fact that such a centralized global currency would be a massive coup for the international banking cartel, and the Rothschild banking empire’s financial bottom line.

Additionally, it must be noted that the creation of a global currency would give an inordinate amount of geopolitical capital to unelected international bankers, and subsequently take power away from the citizens of each nation and their respective governmental representatives.

Does anyone really want international bankers to have such a vast amount of political power on top of the massive financial influence and sway they already hold in the halls of power?People want more say in their own lives, not having policy dictated to them by international banksters and bureaucrats.

Control over a nation’s money supply is, for all intents and purposes, the lifeblood of a state’s sovereignty – without this independence, the state only exists in name but is subservient to supranational powers whose interests lie outside of domestic and national political/economic concerns.

“Give me control of a nation’s money supply, and I care not who makes its laws,” said Mayer Amschel Rothschild, founder of the Rothschild banking dynasty.

Although the Rothschild family now generally keep a very low public profile, they still have significant business operations across a wide spectrum of sectors. While you may not find any one particular Rothschild on the Forbes’ most rich list, the family is estimated to control $1 trillion dollars in assets across the globe, thus having a strong voice across the geopolitical spectrum that many perceive as a hidden hand manipulating events silently from behind a veil of secrecy and silence.

Are you starting to get the picture?

If so, please share this important information about the push for a one world currency and the agenda driving it!

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).


Contributed by Jay Syrmopoulos of thefreethoughtproject.com.

The Free Thought Project is dedicated to holding those who claim authority over our lives accountable.

Wake The Flock Up! Please Share With Sheeple Far & Wide:
  • Workstillbroke

    It looks like we are building a wall. lol

  • elbustaroyjetspeekerson

    Yo, Rothies: Get ready for an extended tour of TOWN SQUARE MEATHOOKS, up close and PERSONAL, motherfuckers.

  • Roy Hobs

    “Rothschild” is better than most nebulous terms like ‘globalists’ or ‘bankers’ etc., etc. But let’s speak clearly………..we have a Jewish Problem.

    The Jewish Problem is a historical problem and has been referred to in the past as the “Jewish Question”.

    Not until we can bring back the “Jewish Question” back into public discourse. as in the days of Henry Ford and Charles Lindbergh, will we ever be released from our bonds of slavery.

    • renee ciccioni

      The Rothschild are not Jewish ,their real name was never Rothschild, obviously their plan to defame the Jewish people has worked.

      • Roy Hobs

        Renee……………..please research the discussion/debate, “Jesus was not a Jew”.
        The Rothschilds have no relation to the 12 Tribes of Israel….that is true. The word “Jew” is not synonymous with Israel.
        The Rothschilds are counterfeit Israelites. They are Scripturally “Edomite/Caananites”. Rev 2:9.

        • renee ciccioni

          Yeah I agree their linage goes as far back as Babylon who continued the Canaanite religion of Baal/which means lord , yes the Jesus Christ character came from Constantine who combined the druidic God Hesus with the eastern Savior got Krishna which is Sanskrit for Christ , in the event referred to as the council of nicea the Hebrew Messiah is named Yahshua after the Father of all life Yahweh . The title of God belongs to the adversaries spoken of in Scripture.

      • g.johnon

        and rothschild is not even a jewish name. it is simply german for “red shield”.

        • renee ciccioni

          Your right it’s not but so many people who dislike those that practice the Jewish faith claim it is , actually they are Zionist which have nothing to do with being Jewish.

          • g.johnon

            yes indeed, they are the very same subhumans who would come out and bring a picnic basket to watch “heretics” being being burned alive during the spanish inquisition. always finding someone to hate so they do not have to admit to themselves that they are their own problem.
            zionism has nothing to do with jewish people, but everything to do with israel, where the zionist narrative tells us that the temple of solomon lies on the exact same spot as the rock from which muhammed launched himself to heaven. (pretty freaky coincidence in my humble opinion.) a narrative designed to stir up conflict in the middle east; and oh how well it has worked.

          • renee ciccioni

            Your right they lied in order to harm the Muslims because Scripture places the temple mount next to the dome of the rock called the Golden gate and Scripture says to not harm them but the Zionist that rule over everyone in that part of the world like the Christians that rule us on n the West want war.

          • THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH YOU DON’ FA

            Zionism wouldn’t and can not exist without Judaism, and Judaism can not and would not exist without zionism. True, they are not true jews, they’re impostors claimiing to be jews. These cretins… spawn of Satan need to go and meet their maker as stated in the book of John.

            All I can say after all the wars, slavery, misery, and chaos these khazars have caused is that there is a worldwide shortage of lampshades and soap.

    • g.johnon

      jews did not creat israel, zionist socialists did, “the zionist question” would be more apropos, but peeps like you can’t seem to rustle up the required discernment.

      • Roy Hobs

        Charles Lindbergh, Henry Ford and Father Charles Coughlin……………..peeps?
        So all the pogroms to expel “Jews” out of various countries and nations………..they all got it wrong huh? Should have removed the “Zionists” and not the Jews. Ok, ok, ok……………not all Jews. Just the guilty ones. Is that better?
        Google — “Jesus was not a Jew”. Jew is not synonymous with Israelite.
        Revelation 2:9;3:9. Those who say they are Judahites, but are not.

        • g.johnon

          yes, yes, yes, yes, no. jesus was not a jew because he never actually existied.
          you seem to be point/counterpointing yourself all the way down the road roy. being afflicted with low life biases can lead to confusion. or perhaps conflicted would be more accurate.

          • Roy Hobs

            Been down this road before with you ((( g.johnon ))). See ya.

          • g.johnon

            and you ran away like a coward then too.

          • ReverendDraco✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ ᵃᶜᶜᵒᵘᶰᵗ

            Poor (((Roy Hobs))) just can’t seem to handle the heat.

          • Roy Hobs

            So let me get you straight Draco, because I thought you and I were on the same page regarding the Jew.

            We do NOT have a Jewish Problem according to you? You agree with g.johnon that we should call it a “Zionist Problem” and not a Jewish Problem?

            Was Henry Ford wrong to name his book, “The International Jew”?

          • Roy Hobs

            I run from FOOLS.
            Proverbs 14:7 Go from the presence of a foolish man, when thou perceivest not in him the lips of knowledge.

  • Mike

    screw you and your one world currency.

  • Bas

    Thinking. Marx, rope, capital, and Russia revolution. Having, and living the good life of plenty, money depended on nothing, except power. This explain hatred, of ones possession it, for named country. French revolution, read it, explain money without power. Stupidity is family of holding power.

    • elbustaroyjetspeekerson

      Um, you’re not from around here, are you?

      • g.johnon

        although he is somewhat lacking in lucidity, he does make a good point. he sounds more like a product of “no child left behind” than he does a foreigner. so in that regard, pretty amazing he can think at all.

  • Frank

    This is a BS story.
    Just look at the FAILING EU and the Euro. Nations that joined the EU surrendered their sovereignty and drank the Kool-Aid, and now they’re all starting to re-think the idea. The UK, as most of us know, pulled out of the EU – in the face of unrelenting criticism, and immediately regained status as a sovereign nation and is now, once again, able to act in their own best interests. Member nations of the EU were/are cowed to submit to the “collective good” of other, lesser-capable nations. Equality (Mediocrity) among the member states was the goal, and it proved to weaken, not strengthen, the individual member nations and the organization as a whole.

    The imposition of a “World Currency” is a Globalist’s wet dream, as it is yet another means of controlling and subjugating the population. As history reminds us, when individuals seek to avoid becoming enslaved, they find the means to conduct themselves and their business outside of government-imposed rules. Over the years the methods and Mediums of Exchange have changed numerous times, and this time it will be no different. “Necessity is the mother of invention,” and when the current way of doing something becomes too burdensome, another way is found.

    • g.johnon

      pretty darn good post frank. but there is a “current way” of doing business that has been with us for well over a century (in the usa) that never ever changes. that is the involvement by international bankster cartels in what should be sovereign national economies. until that situation is resolved in no uncertain terms, no other solutions will ever stand a chance.

    • SP_88

      I don’t want to correct you if it is I who misunderstood what you said. So basically, my question is, when you say that the story is BS, are you talking about the article (on the DS) or the article that the DS is referring to (in the Economist)?
      Because I believe that the DS article is saying that the Economist article predicted we would have a global currency by 2018. The DS article is not saying we will have a global currency by 2018, as far as I can tell.

      • Frank

        The general premise of my “BS” call was a) the flawed prediction by the Economist that there would be a One-World currency and b) that the DS would post writing that is such an obvious effort to re-awaken conspiracy- and fear-promoting opinion articles. Isn’t the whole (stated) theme of The DS to enlighten and inform readers and de-bunk misinformation, not to exacerbate or perpetuate conspiracy-based or flawed speculations? The Economist article, written in 1988, was pre-EU, but the Globalist, Collectivist agenda was floating around but not as apparent to the wider audience that it is now. The DS article is digging up this subject primarily, I believe, to keep the scare on and keep the “Rothschild currency domination” conspiracy alive. The floundering and structural failings of the EU/Eurozone and the Euro currency is proof enough that, even on a limited scale with relatively similar and geographically contiguous countries, the concept is faulty – due to the unpredictability of human behaviors. The whole idea of having a global currency given the geographic, cultural, and economic diversity of the 195 recognized countries of the world is truly a Globalist’s fantasy. Submission to a global central ruling body, similar to the EU, is submission and surrender of independence and sovereignty, something many people will not abide by.

        • SP_88

          Thank you. That certainly clears it up for me. I absolutely agree. A regional currency (the EU) couldn’t even stay together, how the hell will a global currency work? It can’t.
          Whenever you tie together the currencies of different countries, the law of averages always brings everyone into a state of mediocrity. They focused on the few weaker countries that were strengthened by the Euro, but they never talk about all the rest of the countries that were weakened by it. And I don’t think they cared about strengthening anyone, they were only interested in tying them all together so they could enrich themselves from the ensuing debt. The whole thing was a scam from the get go.
          And doing it on a global scale will be an even bigger scam. The people do not want this. Wherever there is a central bank, there is massive debt. And wherever there is massive debt, there are parasitic aristocrats getting extremely wealthy from collecting these debts. It’s completely unnecessary.
          If currency was backed by gold or silver or some other valuable asset, these people wouldn’t be able to manipulate it, or use it to get rich by creating debt with it.
          When our currency ‘is’ debt, we are losing wealth simply by holding it. And many people cannot even do that.
          One of the things I fear is a cashless society. When TPTB are able to track every penny we earn, save, spend or invest, they will have way too much control over our lives. And if not for things like Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, we would really be screwed. Without cash, there are so many things that we would have to change about how we barter with each other, especially if it’s under the table.
          And I was worried that going to a cashless society would bring us much closer to a global currency. Because at that point we are just dealing with data on a computer. And if all the world’s money is nothing but data on a computer, it seems like it would be easier to simply make the switch to a global currency.
          I certainly agree that it’s a horrible idea, but that’s never stopped them before.
          But like you said, every country would have to give up their sovereignty to get in on it. And I don’t think they would. Especially since the UK got out of the EU, and there is talk of other countries following their example.
          I believe that if more countries start leaving the EU, the pipedream of a global currency will be that much further away.
          The EU was a massive failure. Doing it on a global scale would be an epic disaster.
          I certainly hope that other European countries come to their senses and leave the EU as well, and hopefully this idea of globalization can be relegated to the dustbin of history where it belongs.

  • dav1bg

    “I care not what a country’s government is or who is in power, all I care about is controlling the money. For if I control the money “I” control the country” Warburg quote. The Federal Reserve bank is a private bank owned by Warburg. Want economic freedom? Dump the Fed. And reinstate the Glass Steigal banking reform of 1933, which protected us from depression for 60+ years, until the banks spend $304 million (that they admit to) lobbying to get rid of it. Now they put your money in the stock market instead of in real property, through mortgages (which have been at the lowest rate since the last great depression). What is the stockmarket? A gambling casino. If the roughly $100 trillion it now holds were put to use in our economy how much difference would we see? Our $17 trillion national debt evaporates, money for industry, CEO salaries would drop from nonsensical levels, etc. But my IRA? IRA’s account for a fraction of a percentage of the stockmarket, just a few members own the rest. Kind of like multilevel marketing, the guys (families) who got in on the ground floor are the ones who make the money. Anyway, when all of our savings sits in the Stockmarket instead of being put back to work in the form of mortgages, or business loans, the stockmarket will fly but the economy will continue to shrink. Every house payment is pulled out of the economy and put in the stockmarket instead of recycled into new mortagages. The slow sink. Glass Stegal then the Fed.

    • g.johnon

      mortgages won’t work anymore dav. the real estate market is currently overvalued by more than on thousand percent. there is no more vialble room for growth and the only way realty can keep being an investment commodity for very much longer is for the banks to get back to the “creative mortgage” practices that got us into the last bubble. we are already in the next bubble because we refused to learn anything at all from the last.
      the only investment opportunities that should be legal are investments in productivity. period! all other forms only lead to more aggressive inflation, which is the most crippling form of taxation known to man.
      the basic rule of real estate investment is that in order for the investor to make money on a property he/she needs to find someone dumb enough to pay ten times what the given property is worth and strap them to a mortgage that is going to keep them suffering for 20-30 years. it is a heiness and filthy criminal enterprise with a strong lobby that keeps it from being declared a crime officially.
      same is, basically true for the stock market. over value rules the day there too.

  • NonYo Business

    American’s are not going to support this because they will see it for what it is. Fool money and empty promises. Slavery to come.

  • endofwatchersbegan1/28/2011

    A much better idea is to EXECUTE these Rothschild/Jesuit satanist pedophile Bankers, and FREE ourselves.

  • TrevorD

    “take power away from the citizens of each nation and their respective governmental representatives.”
    A major part of the Rothchild/Zionists/Globalist very well planned NWO ready and waiting for our pleasure. For many years we had been warned. So what now?

    • g.johnon

      ummm, when is the last time anyone on the planet has had a “government representative”?

      • TrevorD

        We know they do not work for us, they work for their masters

    • TrevorD

      “The goyim are a flock of sheep, and we are their wolves. And you know what happens when the wolves get hold of the flock?”
      Tyranny in Place.
      The evidence is everywhere.
      Globalism is their “Super State.”
      But it is forbidden to mention the Protocols of Zion in polite company.
      Courtesy of `thetruthseeker.com`

  • g.johnon

    as long as banksters run the show, the economy will continue to be a clusterfuck.

  • Just Me

    The Rothschilds are English!

  • Just Me

    Jesus was Jewish and from the house of David, his real name is Jehovah. However his earthly name was Emmanuel which is interpreted to be Jesus. His Father in Heaven (also our father in heaven) his name is Elohim. Most of the Jewish people have been made scape goats by the likes of George Soros and cronies. The bankers and the Jesuits (most Globalists are Jesuits) run the world and are the real Globalists.

    ,

    • Roy Hobs

      Study the subject/topic — “Jesus was not a Jew”.
      Just google it. ‘Jew’ is not synonymous with Israelite.
      Present day Jews are Edomite/Caananites as per Revelelation 2:9;3:9.
      Peace.

  • tonye

    And how’s that Euro working, huh?