Analysis of Central Banking Policies

The central bankers met in Jackson Hole in two thou-- as I said,

summer of two thousand nineteen, and they reviewed a plan from the

BlackRock Investment Institute prepared by a group of

retired central bankers called the Going Direct Reset.

Now, we know that the central banking system,

every eighty to a hundred and twenty

years, um, does a reset, and often that reset

is when you evolve the currency or you move the currency to a,

a different currency. So, um, we know this happens every,

you know, at some point, you sort of flush the system.

And so I assumed when that happened that we were, uh, going into a

new reset. The Going Direct Reset, Going Direct

refers to a radical change in policy.

Traditionally, when, uh, a central bank like the Federal Reserve

added money to the system, it would add it by investing in the re--

or, or putting money into the reserve track,

and then the banks would use that

reserve track to then put money in the system.

Going Direct was the Fed essentially injecting enormous amounts

of money directly without going through the reserve track, but,

but buying, um, among other things, securities from the,

um, the non-depository institutions.

And what happened starting that September after the Going

Direct meeting, um, the Federal Reserve, uh,

with interventions in the market in September, but then with the

announcement of the pandemic, injected extraordinary

amounts of money into the system. Normally, um,

and, and different estimates are that was five trillion or six trillion dollars

invested or injected directly. Normally, any injection

like that would have extraordinary inflationary impact.

And in fact, um, there was one, uh, one

former, uh, undersecretary of the Treasury who,

speaking with Swiss investors, uh, said, you know,

"Enormous inflation is baked into the cake.

We just won't feel it right away." And the reason we won't feel it right

away, as it turns out, was the pandemic,

um, many of the pandemic, uh,

uh,

uh, sort of actions of locking people down

or calling certain businesses, um, not,

uh, not essential and, uh, leaving other businesses open

and some not essential, uh, created an enormous

deflationary offset. If you look at what happened in the United

States, um, we basically shut down Main Street, lots

of small businesses, left the publicly traded companies open,

and shifted enormous market shares out of the small businesses

into the big businesses that thus radically

consol-consolidating enormous amounts of economic

activity. So you inject five trillion, um,

essentially grossly oversimplified into Wall Street,

and you shut down Main Street, and then, um, Wall

Street has money to go shopping, and Main Street is in an economic squeeze.

There-- The last estimates I saw estimated

that thirty-five percent of the small

businesses in America were shut down.

Um, and, and in some places, I think San Francisco was as much as

forty-nine percent. So it was very, very successful at

consolidating economic activity into the big

players. One estimate was we, in the United States,

we created five hundred,

or maybe it's worldwide, we created five hundred new billionaires.

So, so as I said, um, looking at this from the viewpoint

of what was happening financially around the world, it was pretty

clear to me that much of the pandemic,

um, was,

uh, essentially designed to implement the

reset

and using health policy as an excuse.