Rothschild: Get Ready For One World Currency By 2018

[Hydrogen]

Rothschild: Get Ready For One World Currency By 2018

A Rothschild publication predicts that a one world currency is likely to be put in place as soon as 2018 – eroding individual nations’ sense of sovereignty.

The Rothschild-controlled Economist magazine published an article 30 years ago that highlighted the proabability of a world currency by the year 2018.

Thefreethoughtproject.com reports:

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?

http://www.anonews.co/rothschild-world-cuurency/

This cites a retro/throwback article from 1988 where the economist magazine called for a one world currency by 2018.

Still it is interesting to note that centralization has been a globalist objective for a very long time & how bankers have sought a monopoly over the money supply and currency of nation's for decades if not centuries.

[BillyBobZorton]

Rothschild: Get Ready For One World Currency By 2018

A Rothschild publication predicts that a one world currency is likely to be put in place as soon as 2018 – eroding individual nations’ sense of sovereignty.

The Rothschild-controlled Economist magazine published an article 30 years ago that highlighted the proabability of a world currency by the year 2018.

Thefreethoughtproject.com reports:

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?

http://www.anonews.co/rothschild-world-cuurency/

This cites a retro/throwback article from 1988 where the economist magazine called for a one world currency by 2018.

Still it is interesting to note that centralization has been a globalist objective for a very long time & how bankers have sought a monopoly over the money supply and currency of nation's for decades if not centuries.

So where are you getting the Rothchild-Phoenix connection from? I remember reading about The Economist thing, and I remember the mention the Phoenix but that was as far as I know just some sort of fictional piece/prediction and there was never a Rothchild connection so I want to see the evidence of Rothchild being involved in this so called 2018 global currency.

[Hydrogen]

So where are you getting the Rothchild-Phoenix connection from? I remember reading about The Economist thing, and I remember the mention the Phoenix but that was as far as I know just some sort of fictional piece/prediction and there was never a Rothchild connection so I want to see the evidence of Rothchild being involved in this so called 2018 global currency.

The connection comes from Lynn Forester De Rothschild owning a majority stake in the Economist Group which wields a controlling interest in The Economist magazine. Its mentioned in the 2nd paragraph of her wiki bio.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynn_Forester_de_Rothschild

The Economist these days is shady in that many of its feature articles are written anonymously. It could be accurate to say anonymously written pieces are becoming a signature move for globalists.

[mindrust]

Bitcoin might be the prequel of what was actually planned.

Maybe they created bitcoin just to see how we are going to react to the new currency or cashless society? I also think It is not a coincidence that bitcoin was founded in 2009, just after the RE bubble. The founder also is being anonymous aaaand,

I think CIA created bitcoin and they left the project when it was in its early stages so they can observe our future behaviors better.

[Pierre 2]

I feel like bitcoin is just start of something bigger.
Bitcoin isn't what these guys seek for. They want full control over money, above nations. bitcoin's price isn't really controllable cause its supply is fixed.

[allthingsluxury]

The elites would love nothing more than this. Competition in currencies must be maintained for all our liberties. A one world currency would be a disaster for free people.

[Love!]

If the United States has a "Shadow Government" like so many speculate, it would be the Rothschilds.

I'm saving this thread because this is all very fascinating to me, I am going to see if there are any connections between this and Bitcoin.

[Baofeng]

If the United States has a "Shadow Government" like so many speculate, it would be the Rothschilds.

I'm saving this thread because this is all very fascinating to me, I am going to see if there are any connections between this and Bitcoin.

Yes, the article look very fascinating indeed. And the author has predicted that by 2018 we would have one currency. If you look at bitcoin right now, somewhat all of us wants it to be globally mass adopted, meaning it could be used by people regardless of what country they are. So bitcoin is laying out how we can have "one world currency".

[Xavofat]

"The Free Thought Project" appears to be a clickbait site under the guise of a political site.

While I'm personally mostly in favour of globalism, so long as it preserves sovereign democratic systems along with freedom of movement and global currency systems, it's pretty clear that this is an incorrect prediction.

If there was going to be a single global currency by 2018, you'd think that halfway through 2017, we'd be at least a fair bit of the way there.

Maybe they created bitcoin just to see how we are going to react to the new currency or cashless society? I also think It is not a coincidence that bitcoin was founded in 2009, just after the RE bubble. The founder also is being anonymous aaaand,

Yeah, well I couldn't possibly imagine any other reasons why the creator of Bitcoin would want to stay anonymous.  /s

[eaLiTy]

So you really that the Illuminati is that works here to predict the existence of bitcoin and other crypto currency by 2018 way back I do think this as a really wild prediction made and nothing else.

Yeah, well I couldn't possibly imagine any other reasons why the creator of Bitcoin would want to stay anonymous.  /s

The only reason the creator of bitcoin wanted to be anonymous is simply because he wanted to have his privacy and he wanted to walk like a normal person and go along with his life like a normal human being,i respect that attitude and so should everybody.

[wxa7115]

We are almost there and, we are not close to that being true and even if it was we have bitcoin that will allow us to resist and avoid using that currency, also the plan of a single currency for the entire world is never going to work, just look at the euro and look at the failure of their union.

[prehisto]

I agree that this clearly is false prediction in this time frame, in order to achieve this ONE  controllable currency there should be massive changes in global geopolitical situation.
One should speculate that such changes could be achieved by massive wars.

On one hand I do support global currency since different currencies do make trading with goods more slower and more expensive. Small currencies are a part of collective EGO which is nationalism. No wonder there is a reason why we tend to make economical alliances and use fewer  currencies  for example EURO.

On other hand to give more power to small group of people is very wrong in many, many levels.
I hope that it wont come to that.

[prehisto]

We are almost there and, we are not close to that being true and even if it was we have bitcoin that will allow us to resist and avoid using that currency, also the plan of a single currency for the entire world is never going to work, just look at the euro and look at the failure of their union.

If you are referring to Brexit, than it is not relevant in this context . Because UK has never been part of EURO zone , they have British pounds.

[Harlot]

I read it and I still don't believe that our world we live in will have 1 global currency that will favor all the buyers and sellers. I don't believe it simply because of each countries' different view on that matter that global currency we are talking about needs to cross a lot of path in order to be successful to claim that title. From legal issues to demand and consumer acceptance all of those must need to be check to become an official global currency. And I know all of us here is looking for Bitcoin to grow and be the global currency.

[JeffBrad12]

So where are you getting the Rothchild-Phoenix connection from? I remember reading about The Economist thing, and I remember the mention the Phoenix but that was as far as I know just some sort of fictional piece/prediction and there was never a Rothchild connection so I want to see the evidence of Rothchild being involved in this so called 2018 global currency.

The connection comes from Lynn Forester De Rothschild owning a majority stake in the Economist Group which wields a controlling interest in The Economist magazine. Its mentioned in the 2nd paragraph of her wiki bio.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynn_Forester_de_Rothschild

The Economist these days is shady in that many of its feature articles are written anonymously. It could be accurate to say anonymously written pieces are becoming a signature move for globalists.

I'd like to call the rothschild as the root of the bankers in the world. I know that the rothschild owning the majority stake in the Economist group or economic global. I remember the story of the Napoleon Bonaparte that's relationship with the rothschild.

I believe with what has written by the author in the wiki's page.

But majority or all of the central banks in the world has owned by the Rothschild family.

[sunsilk]

I feel like bitcoin is just start of something bigger.
Bitcoin isn't what these guys seek for. They want full control over money, above nations. bitcoin's price isn't really controllable cause its supply is fixed.

I doubt it that they will use bitcoin for this conspiracy but it's still too early for the one world currency.

Everything has been planned, maybe something is going to blow up and they will proclaim it that it's their.

This family totally wants to rule this world.

[Tyrantt]

When I was a kid I saw a documentary called digital angel, or smthn like that, where they talked about all the bible stuff and mentioned the NWO. One government, one currency,etc.. Then when I've heard of bitcoin and read a little about it, the first thing that came to me was that documentary. Where everyone would be buying and selling via the mark (like QRcode) by just swiping it over the reader.

Not being a conspiracy theorist or anything, just pointing it out.

[BillyBobZorton]

So where are you getting the Rothchild-Phoenix connection from? I remember reading about The Economist thing, and I remember the mention the Phoenix but that was as far as I know just some sort of fictional piece/prediction and there was never a Rothchild connection so I want to see the evidence of Rothchild being involved in this so called 2018 global currency.

The connection comes from Lynn Forester De Rothschild owning a majority stake in the Economist Group which wields a controlling interest in The Economist magazine. Its mentioned in the 2nd paragraph of her wiki bio.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynn_Forester_de_Rothschild

The Economist these days is shady in that many of its feature articles are written anonymously. It could be accurate to say anonymously written pieces are becoming a signature move for globalists.

Well, that is a good catch, but it's not enough. Having a big stake on a company doesn't necessarily mean that they control every single newspaper on a daily basis and the Rothchild guy whose owns the stakes are going to be looking personally on everything every single day before releasing it, or at least, I don't imagine Lynn Forester de Rothschild reading The Economist headlines everyday before approving them for release. Or maybe they are such control freaks that actually do that... who knows..

[Hydrogen]

Well, that is a good catch, but it's not enough. Having a big stake on a company doesn't necessarily mean that they control every single newspaper on a daily basis and the Rothchild guy whose owns the stakes are going to be looking personally on everything every single day before releasing it, or at least, I don't imagine Lynn Forester de Rothschild reading The Economist headlines everyday before approving them for release. Or maybe they are such control freaks that actually do that... who knows..

There's a clip on youtube with a good example of how centralized & uniform american media is.

If you dislike links search on youtube for: "Media Brainwashing - News simply repeats the same taglines & phrases OVER and OVER".

Link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jH8dejYGa5A

There's other evidence if you want it.

[buwaytress]

Well the prediction's off by several accounts:

1. No one's going to be doing their shopping next year using only one currency.
2. Or if they did, they were already doing so online from behind their computer using... Paypal?
3. Central bank descended from the IMF? Definitely written by the elite.