reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker says, “You are going to see a crack in the bond market. Okay? It is going to happen. And I tell this to my regulators, some of whom are in this room, I'm telling you what's gonna happen, and you're gonna panic. I'm not gonna panic. We'll be fine. We'll probably make more money, and then some of my friends will tell me that we're that we cause we like crises because it's good for JPMorgan Chase.”

The discussion frames the current global confrontation as driven less by ideology or democracy and more by an economic battle centered on financial control. The speakers argue that the British establishment is panicking not about territory or missiles, but because a Quietly released Washington document signals the end of London’s ability to siphon money from the American economy. This document, the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) 2025 annual report, is said to prioritize economic stability and household income over protecting the financial system that underpins “the casino,” and it is described as revolutionary in shifting policy away from saving “financial parasites” toward supporting the real economy. Key points include: - The premise that London fears a shift in U.S. policy that places people and economic growth first, not globalist or imperial financial interests. The two documents released within a week—the FSOC 2025 report and the administration’s national security strategy—are said to reassert that American principles will govern, not imperial ones. - Susan Kokinda argues that this shift exposes a strategic clash: London’s fear is the end of its economic model’s dominance, not a conventional military threat. - The war in Ukraine is recast as a theater where Trump’s administration is pushing a new economic and geopolitical strategy. Trump’s team is said to be telling Zelensky to negotiate on territory or risk losing security guarantees, signaling a move away from a rigid transatlantic alliance toward recognizing Russia’s interests and seeking peace. - Britain, according to the analysis, is openly pushing for continued conflict. A Sky News interview with a British general is cited as evidence that the UK is preparing its population for war rather than advocating peace. - Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service is presented as corroborating that the UK is undermining Trump’s peace efforts and pressuring the EU to seize Russian assets to fund Ukraine and derail a U.S.-led settlement. - The FSOC reform is tied to a broader reshaping of the U.S. economy, with the participation of influential figures such as Lord Peter Mandelson and Larry Summers in shaping post-2008 financial policy (Dodd-Frank) and its alleged pivot toward protecting American households rather than financial centers. - The administration’s domestic focus targets four alleged cartels that are viewed as pillars of the imperial financialized system: beef cartels, big pharma and insurance, housing, and narco trafficking. The claim is that these sectors drain resources from the public and fuel the financial system’s dominance. - Beef, pharma, housing, and drugs are presented as extraction and control mechanisms of the British system, with reforms aimed at breaking these up described as both economic and strategic blows to the empire. - The narrator contends that stopping these economic mechanisms can prevent wars sustained by financial interests, and that Trump’s policies are reviving American manufacturing, builders, and producers. Supporting details highlight instances where political figures frame policy as protecting working Americans—food security, healthcare affordability, and housing stability—while linking these goals to a broader strategy against international financial power structures. The overarching claim is that the real war behind the shooting war is economic, and the British system cannot survive a successful American pivot toward prioritizing people and real economy over financial elites. The update closes by urging readers to understand the economic war behind geopolitical conflict and to engage with Promethean Action for more analysis.

The transcript presents a sweeping critique of the modern monetary system, arguing that money is created not by governments but by private banks through debt, with consequences that affect the entire world. The speakers outline a long historical arc in which banking interests, central banks, and debt-based money have steadily gained power, eroded public sovereignty, and produced recurring crises, while the general population bears the costs. Key claims and points - The root problem: The money supply is created by the community of money users through borrowing from commercial banks. The bulk of money creation originates with banks, which decide when and how much money to produce, leading to an out-of-control system. Governments borrow money from banks, which effectively enslaves the broader economy. - Concept of the debt-money system: The money system is described as a global Ponzi scheme, in which new money comes into existence as debt with interest. Because interest must be paid, the system requires ever more debt to be sustained, and people and nations are drawn into a cycle that benefits banks at the expense of the public. - Historical pattern of private control: The narrative traces a long history in which private banking families (notably the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, and Morgans) and allied financiers manipulated governments to borrow and to reward speculative advantage. It alleges that private central banks and debt-based money systems sought to consolidate power in private hands, sometimes by fomenting or exploiting crises. - Tally sticks and early monetary control: In medieval England, tally sticks were used as money and as a way to keep money power out of bankers’ hands. Their suppression by bankers in 1834 is described as a revenge of a debt-free money system that had empowered the public for centuries. - Goldsmiths, fractional reserve lending, and counterfeiting: The text explains fractional reserve lending as a historic means by which goldsmiths expanded the money supply beyond real reserves, enabling them to profit from interest and to influence economies; this practice is labeled a form of counterfeiting and a source of systemic instability. - The rise of central banking and central control: The transformation from debt-free or government-issuing money to privately controlled central banks is traced from the Bank of England (1694) to the U.S. National Banking Act (1863) and the creation of the Federal Reserve System (1913). The Aldrich Plan, the Jekyll Island meeting (1910–1912), and the public relations campaign to popularize a central banking system are described as pivotal steps toward centralized control over the money supply. - Lincoln’s greenbacks and the political fight over money: The narrative emphasizes Abraham Lincoln’s issuance of greenbacks during the Civil War as debt-free money created by the government. It claims bankers reacted defensively (Hazard Circular) and moved to undermine greenbacks through bonds and later the National Banking Act, which made private banks central to the money supply. Lincoln’s assassination is linked to the broader battle over monetary policy. - Civil War, the rise of debt, and depressions: The text links episodes such as the Panic of 1837, the Coinage Act of 1873, and the Panic of 1893 to deliberate contractions or manipulations of money supply by banking interests. It argues these episodes were engineered to force or normalize debt-based monetary arrangements and central banking. - The 20th century and the Federal Reserve: The Great Depression is attributed to deliberate contraction of the money supply by the Federal Reserve. The text argues that the Fed, a privately owned central bank, has operated to protect the banking sector at the public’s expense, with the 2008 financial crisis cited as confirmation of this dynamic. - Political economy and influence: The narrative contends that politics and academia have been co-opted by moneyed interests. It asserts that large campaign contributions from banks shape policy, and that many economists are funded or controlled by the Reserve and major banks, limiting critical debate about monetary reform. It also claims media and public discourse are constrained by debt relationships and corporate power. - Proposed reforms and principles: Across speakers, a consensus emerges around three core reforms: - Forbid government borrowing as a mechanism for money creation; return to debt-free, government-created money that serves the public interest. - Put money creation under public control, not private banks, with national or local sovereign authority issuing debt-free currency. - End fractional reserve lending and ensure robust competition among banks so that money is created in the public interest and channeled into productive real-economy lending rather than financial speculation. - Practical implementation ideas offered by some speakers: - Government to issue debt-free sovereign currency directly; private banks would compete to lend government-approved money to the public. - Eliminate consolidated currencies (e.g., the euro) in favor of national sovereignty over money creation. - Use monetary policy to match money supply with real productive activity, controlling inflation by adjusting the money supply through public channels rather than debt-based credit expansion. - Repeal or reform existing central banking structures to reestablish a Bank of the United States owned by the people rather than by private banks. - Promote transparency, reduce the influence of special interests in academia and media, and educate the public about money creation. - Enduring critique and warning: If the status quo persists, the system is said to threaten Western civilization and global freedom, with potential for continued debt-serfdom and systemic collapse if debt-based money and private central banks remain in control. - Concluding perspective: The speakers urge decisive reform, emphasizing that the truth about money creation is accessible to the public and that collective political will can restore monetary systems to serve the people. They conclude with a call to remember Margaret Mead’s idea that a small group can change the world, and exhort listeners to pursue debt-free monetary reform as a path to greater production, independence, and freedom.

Banks are attempting to change rules to avoid collapse, particularly in relation to derivatives. Derivatives are risky bets in the stock market that caused the 2008 financial crisis. Despite promises of regulation, banks continue to engage in unregulated and unreported derivative trading. A new proposed rule aims to allow big banks to avoid margin calls during periods of market volatility, essentially giving them a free pass on risky bets. The recent example of Archegos and Credit Suisse highlights the dangers of counterparty risk in the derivative market. This rule change suggests that banks are anticipating increased market volatility. Overall, politicians and regulators are aligned with the interests of banks, and the global monetary system is highly leveraged.

BlackRock is a risky company focused on making money, selling high-risk bonds without investors fully understanding the risks. The speaker warns of a looming economic crisis, likening it to past financial collapses. They criticize the actions of CEOs and politicians, predicting a repeat of the 2008 financial crisis if lessons from history are not heeded.

The speaker believes that a collapse in the financial system is imminent due to low interest rates and hidden insolvencies. The financial markets are being propped up by a hidden hand injecting money and institutions buying protection in the derivatives market. However, this support can be withdrawn at any time. The timing indicators include the bank resolution authority's plan for a solvent wind down of globally important banks by the end of 2022. Trilateral exercises involving the US, Britain, and the EU have been conducted for several years to ensure the smooth transfer of collateral during bank wind downs. These exercises involve high-ranking officials from various entities, highlighting the seriousness of the situation.

Speaker 0: So who are the people that actually get to be inflation? Well, they're the ones that are climbing up the network. They're the compromised ones. Why? What do they get? They get 0% money. The most corrupt money in the world is quantitative easing. Right? You essentially get the banks to buy the government's debt, and then central banks, put it on their balance sheet. So this is just pure corruption. This is below interest money. What about the banks? They get to create it for free. You know, they actually get to create it. They get a thousand decks on you you're paying 10%. They get they get to lever that up a 100 times. They get a thousand percent. And remember, this is all a debt based Ponzi scheme. The money to pay the interest doesn't exist, so you gotta find another person to take on the debt. You're either if you have a positive money in your in your bank balance, it's because somebody else is in debt. The money doesn't exist unless somebody else is in debt, and the money to pay the interest doesn't exist. So we create this economic environment where your money is continually being debased, and then you need to speculate in order to beat inflation. Now if you do a bit of speculation and you just invest some of your money in stocks, what happens? You're suddenly like, I don't know what stock to buy. I'm I'm not a professional trader. So there's a company out there, BlackRock, that will just buy all the stocks for me, and I just can give them a £100 a month or something. And, now I don't need to figure out what stock to buy. Okay. So now BlackRock is taking everyone's investment money that can't be bothered to figure out what stock through ETFs and index ones. Then they're taking everyone's pension. Then they're taking everyone's insurance contributions because you're trying to hedge some of the risk. And then when you get your house, you have to have insurance. And so where did BlackRock and all the asset managers in this financial industrial complex get all the money? It's your money. You paid for it. So then what do they do? Well, the banks create all of these. They they create new money every time they issue a mortgage. And then they say, do you know what? I don't even wanna take the risk of these mortgages anymore. What if can I just package it up and give it to someone else? So Larry Fink says, yeah. I've got all this money. All these people are putting these pension money in. Why don't we create something called a mortgage backed security? Let's package up all of these mortgages. Just put them into one product. And then what I can do is we can slap a credit rating on it. And if everyone complies, then they get this credit rating. Credit rating is not it's about compliance with the network. So now you've got all the banks are creating the money, and then they create these mortgage backed securities that allows them to control effectively all the real estate and transfer it. But who do they sell it to? They sell it to you. And so they created the money. They created the mortgage backed security, and then they sold it to your pension. So you paid for the very system for them to get the 0% money in the first place, and they're charging a fee for it. And what else do they get? They get a board seat on every company.

Professor Michael Hudson and Glenn discuss how the war against Iran is reshaping the global economy and international order. Hudson contends this is World War III in the sense that energy, fertilizer, and oil exports are fundamental to the world economy, and the conflict targets these choke points. He notes a recent US stock market rally of about a thousand points, driven by hopes of reversibility, while insisting the war’s effects extend far beyond Iran and are irreversible. He asserts the US is waging a war to maintain control over the world oil economy by preventing any sovereignty that could export oil outside US influence. This includes sanctions on Iran and Russia, and earlier sanctions on Venezuela, with the aim of ensuring oil proceeds flow to US-controlled channels. He argues the US sought to control the Strait of Hormuz to decide who gets Gulf oil, but Trump’s advisers warned that attempting to seize Hormuz would leave troops as “sitting ducks,” yet the underlying goal remains “grab the oil.” He claims Iran’s objective is to guarantee security by removing all US bases in the Middle East and by relief of sanctions imposed by US allies; without that, Iran claims the world will not return to the previous order. Hudson emphasizes that the war disrupts key supply chains: oil, fertilizer, helium, sulfur, and related inputs. Although Iran allows oil exports via Hormuz for payments, it does not permit fertilizer exports, impacting the upcoming planting season. He forecasts the world entering the most serious depression since the 1930s due to these interruptions and the consequent financial ripples. On the financial system, Hudson explains that since the 2008 crisis, the US pursued zero or near-zero interest rates to rescue banks, enabling asset price inflation in real estate, stocks, and bonds. He describes a shift where non-bank lenders and private equity could borrow cheaply and buy up assets, creating a debt-led, Ponzi-like dynamic that depended on continued access to credit and rising asset prices. As long as rates stayed low, this system could keep rolling; now, with 10-year treasuries around 4.5 percent and 30-year mortgages above 5 percent, the cost of rolling over debt intensifies. The war-induced disruptions to energy and inputs threaten defaults and a feedback loop of debt collapse, catalyzing a depression. Regarding the broader international system, Hudson argues Europe is following sanctions on Russia at great economic cost, with Germany already experiencing GDP declines after energy sanctions in 2022. Europe’s shift away from Russian energy, the Ukraine-Hungary/gas dynamics, and the broader energy choke points threaten the cohesion of NATO and the EU. He predicts Europe may suffer consumer price increases and living standard cuts as deficits expand to subsidize heating and energy, leading to a reordering of alliances and economic blocs. He characterizes Asia–Russia–China as increasingly separate from Western systems, with a shift toward Asia as the growth center and Europe/US lagging. He asserts the West’s operational vocabulary frames the conflict as a clash of civilizations, but the underlying dynamic is a clash of classes, where the US seeks to subordinate others through energy and trade controls. Hudson argues the current trajectory signals not simply a decline but an abrupt systemic change: the end of the postwar Western-led order. He calls for rethinking international institutions and law, including a new framework to replace a discredited United Nations and to organize economic and military arrangements that protect sovereignty outside US-dominated systems. He highlights the need for energy and food self-sufficiency to resist weaponized foreign trade and to avoid being drawn into US-imposed economic chaos. In closing, Hudson points to Britain’s looming non-viability under deindustrialization and limited energy resources, illustrating how advanced economies may struggle to adapt to a new multipolar order.

Peter Schiff and the hosts discuss how surging gold and silver prices relate to potential banking instability and a broader dollar crisis. Key points: - Silver production is about 800,000,000 ounces per year, while bank shorts on silver are claimed at 4,400,000,000 ounces according to some reports. The implication is that if silver continues to rise, the biggest banks in America could face severe coverage challenges for their short positions. The discussion notes that many banks are “barely covering their asses to stay afloat.” - Gold and silver price levels are highlighted: gold at about $4,600 per ounce after a bounce, and silver at about $92 per ounce. Peter Schiff, introduced as a silver and gold expert and economist, has authored The Real Crash, How to Save Yourself and Your Country, and America’s Coming Bankruptcy. The host mentions the book. - Peter Schiff’s perspective on timing and crisis: he says the 2013 book predicted the current situation and that gold and silver have risen significantly—gold up, silver up substantially. He believes the price moves signal a major warning of a financial or economic crisis, comparing it to the subprime warning before the 2008 crisis. He asserts this time the warning concerns the U.S. government sovereign credit and a potential dollar crisis and U.S. Treasury crisis, possibly unfolding next year. - Connection to global debt and the dollar: Schiff explains that much debt is sustainable because the U.S. dollar serves as the global reserve currency, enabling continued spending. He notes foreign central banks buying gold instead of U.S. Treasuries, moving out of dollars into gold, and cites U.S. intervention in oil-rich Venezuela as part of broader moves to keep oil prices down. He argues that the dollar’s reserve status is eroding, and a meaningful decline in the dollar relative to other currencies could soon impact consumer prices and interest rates, leading to higher costs for Americans. - Impact on the average person: Schiff asserts that the reserve currency status has long supported a standard of living that relies on importing goods paid for with dollars created “out of thin air.” As the dollar collapses and the world shifts away from the dollar, the dollars earned and saved by ordinary people will buy less, with price spikes across goods and services. He suggests a future scenario where prices rise dramatically while wages do not keep pace, giving an example of a hamburger potentially rising from $15 to $30 or $50, and services versus goods diverging in price movement. - Preparation and investment stance: Schiff emphasizes that gold and silver have performed well since the turn of the century, outperforming the Dow in real terms. He argues for moving wealth into real money rather than paper assets and notes, in general terms, opportunities in mining stocks as a hedge, including juniors and mid-tier producers. He references the broader strategy of diversifying out of U.S. stocks, bonds, and dollars to protect wealth during what he describes as a coming real crisis; he stresses focusing on real assets rather than relying on the dollar. - Final remarks: Schiff reiterates that the crisis is coming and that some Americans should consider protecting wealth through precious metals and mining opportunities, while the hosts acknowledge the outlook and thank him for the insights.

David Webb, a former hedge fund manager, discusses his insights into the financial markets and the current state of the global economy. He explains how the creation of money by central banks has outpaced real economic growth, leading to a breakdown in the transmission mechanism of money into the economy. Webb believes that this breakdown in the velocity of money is the underlying reason for many geopolitical issues. He also discusses the need for public banking and the importance of eliminating debt and investing in tangible assets. Webb's book, "The Great Taking," explores these topics in more detail.

Epstein recalls his path from Wall Street trader to philanthropist funding cutting-edge science, and in parallel, his views on money, complexity, and the limits of understanding complex systems. - Santa Fe Institute and complexity: Epstein describes founding Santa Fe Institute as part of an effort to study complexity mathematically. He explains that, in the late 1980s–early 1990s, he funded the institute after Los Alamos and other physics centers were losing scientists. The aim was to see if “these areas of strange things can be described by some form of mathematics.” Langdon, Murray Gell-Mann, and Chris Langdon are mentioned in connection with Santa Fe and related complex-systems work, including artificial life and biosphere studies. Epstein stresses that the goal was to develop tools to understand complex systems rather than to force them into traditional machine-like models. - Transition from prestige to numbers: Epstein explains how the world shifted from valuing reputation to valuing calculable metrics. He notes that by the mid-1970s on Wall Street, “the most important parts of business were really now going to calculations.” He contrasts reputational measures (like being Rockefeller) with the need to understand the financial underpinnings of institutions through numbers, not just status. - Trilateral Commission and Rockefeller board: Epstein recounts being invited to join the Rockefeller board due to financial expertise as the university expanded, and his interactions with figures like David Rockefeller. He describes the trilateral commission—comprising leaders from North America, Europe, and Asia—asking him to join when he was in his early 30s. He even recounts jokingly listing “Jeffrey Epstein, comma, just a good kid” on the application, a detail he raises to illustrate how financial insight was valued in these elite circles. - Money, assets, and liabilities: Epstein emphasizes a recurring theme: leaders often misunderstand money and its mechanics. He distinguishes how individuals perceive assets and debt (feeling wealthier when assets rise vs. debt) from how banks’ assets are defined (what they are owed by others). He explains fractional reserve banking simply: with one dollar held, a bank can lend out nine, highlighting how this system relies on confidence and liquidity rather than physical cash on hand. - Inflation, central banking, and complexity: He connects inflation to fractional reserve concepts and describes how the banking system has to be understood as a network of interdependent pieces. He argues that most world leaders lack deep financial literacy, and even bankers can be unaware of systemic dynamics. He uses examples of the Liquidity and the blood-flow analogy to explain why liquidity is vital to prevent system collapse. He notes that the “central banks” live with the fear of runs on the bank, not only inflation. - The 2008 crisis and personal circumstances: Epstein recounts being in jail in West Palm Beach in 2008 during the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy and the Bear Stearns episode. He describes solitary confinement, a brown jumpsuit marked “trustee” (spelled incorrectly), Almond Joy bars, and two phones for collecting calls. He describes making collect calls to Bear Stearns’ Jimmy Cayne and to a JPMorgan contact about Bear Stearns and the broader crisis. He recounts learning about Lehman’s collapse from these conversations and witnessing the “greatest financial crisis in world history” unfold from prison. - The systemic nature of crisis and derivatives: The interview touches the debate over causes of the crisis, with Epstein arguing that derivatives were not the fundamental cause; rather, “these are system collapses.” He explains that the crisis involved a complex set of interactions—subprime lending, guarantees by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, accounting rule changes, and debt instruments—that collectively stressed the financial system. He notes that government actions often altered incentives, such as guaranteeing subprime loans, which shifted risk to the banking system. - Subprime lending and moral hazard: Epstein discusses how politicians, particularly Bill Clinton, promoted home ownership as a political weapon to gain votes, encouraging banks to lend to subprime borrowers with federal guarantees. He describes the accounting changes that required banks to mark down asset values differently under stress tests, further stressing confidence in the system. He suggests that the combination of policy incentives and financial instruments created conditions ripe for a systemic crisis, though he cautions against single-cause explanations. - On understanding and predictability: A recurring thread is the gap between mathematical models and real-world outcomes. Epstein emphasizes that even the world’s smartest people cannot predict complex systems with precision. He discusses the notion of “measurement” in science, arguing that “measure” is often used loosely in finance and markets. He argues that complexity makes full understanding difficult or impossible, comparing it to the limitations of Newtonian physics when faced with quantum-scale phenomena and other unexplainables. - Newton, Leibniz, and the evolution of science: The conversation travels back to foundational figures—Newton, Leibniz, and their roles in calculus and physics. Epstein presents Newton as enabling precise predictions in the physical world through laws describing motion, gravity, and planetary dynamics, while recognizing that later theories (quantum mechanics, chaos, complexity) reveal limits to complete predictability. He notes that Newton bridged geometry and physics, and that later scientists separated mathematics from philosophy, which contributed to rifts in understanding. - The soul, life, and science: The dialogue turns philosophical, with Epstein discussing the soul, life, and consciousness as phenomena difficult to quantify. He references thinkers like Schrodinger and Leibniz, and he suggests that life and consciousness may resist straightforward mathematical descriptions. He argues that a new science may need to incorporate intuition and non-mechanical ways of knowing, acknowledging that while mathematics can describe much of the physical world, aspects like life and the soul resist easy quantification. - Funding, ethics, and money’s sources: The discussion ends with questions about the ethics of funding scientific research and the sources of Epstein’s wealth. He defends his philanthropy, arguing that money can fund important work (like eradicating polio) regardless of its source, while acknowledging that people may have concerns about where money comes from. He asserts that his funding priorities include exploring unexplainable phenomena with mathematical or computational approaches while recognizing the limitations of those methods. - Closing reflections: The exchange often returns to the tension between measurement, predictability, and intuition. Epstein emphasizes the ongoing search for tools to understand complex systems, recognizing that the most meaningful questions may lie beyond current mathematical reach and may require new frameworks, interdisciplinary collaboration, and openness to non-traditional ways of knowing.