More on the Belgium Treasury Purchase

Some people just won’t be happy with the truth without a confession from the perp, but in this case the motive is easy to see and the evidence can pieced together with confidence.

Paul Craig Roberts and Dave Kranzler

In response to our account of the mysterious large rise in Belgium’s Treasury purchases , it was suggested that the transaction would show up on the Fed’s balance sheet. However, the Fed is under no obligation to show the transaction.

The $141.2 billion in Treasuries purchased into the Belgium account represents 3.2% of the total current size of the Fed’s balance sheet. The Fed is a private corporation and is therefore not beholden to GAAP accounting standards. However even with GAAP standards applied, a corporation does not have to itemize and disclose the details of any event that represents less than 5% of its assets. In other words, the Fed can easily bury a 3% transaction in its financial statements.

You can read the rest of the analysis here:   More On The Belgium Treasury “Purchase”

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.   – Winston Churchill

8 thoughts on “More on the Belgium Treasury Purchase

  1. FED sitting as top dog atop the whole ponzified financial system is doing what all the other lesser dogs are doing…squeezing the last drop of blood out of the turnip before the evil clown circus pulls up their tent stakes in the middle of the night soon, and disappear.

    timely article this guy on mangy futures…profits going to zero:

    As the chart above shows, managed futures are experiencing the first capital outflow in its history. This is due to performance that has been nothing short of miserable. The chart below is the rolling annualized ROR for the BTOP 50, a standard benchmark within the managed futures industry.

  2. “Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill millions of men, and you are a conqueror. Kill them all, and you are a god.” Jean Rostand.
    Steal one dollar, you are a thief. Steal a million dollars, you are a corporate genius. Steal it all, you are either a central banker or the Fed.

    1. Thanks for the link. The IMF SDR narrative as the replacement of the dollar is being planted by the Dept of Defense and Jim Rickards is the front-man. That author only has his facts half-correct. I have it from a very good source that Rickards is intentionally pimping the IMF SDR has the dollar replacement because “the Pentagon knows the dollar is going to collapse and they need the SDR to be the replacement because – with the dollar being the majority of the SDR composition – it enables the U.S. to continue kicking the can down the road.” Trust me, that comes from someone who knows.

      It’s the Fed and maybe the ECB who are colluding to buy the Treasuries that Russia and China are dumping. See the latest TIC report. The proof is in the numbers.

      All that author offers is conspiracy theory drivel.

  3. “The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point wher the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and charis out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater”

    Frank Zappa

  4. Debt hawk Kenneth Rogoff says eliminating dollar bills might lower inflation and boost taxes, as long as it doesn’t tank the economy.

    FORTUNE — Kenneth Rogoff thinks we would be better off with bitcoin, or something like that, probably.

    Now Rogoff wants to take away all our money. He’s out with a new paper this week, published on the National Bureau of Economic Research’s website, arguing that the economy would be better off without coins, dollars, and other physical forms of money. Bitcoin for all, I guess, or some national version of it.

    Technology buffs have been trying to get rid of paper currency for a while. Fortune wrote a cover story on the topic about a year ago.

    Rogoff’s main point has to do with the Federal Reserve and recovering from recessions. To stimulate the economy, the U.S. central bank has cut interest rates all the way to zero, because it was a bad recession and there was a financial crisis and interest rates weren’t all that low to start with. The Fed is also buying bonds, which has driven some people a little bit crazy, but let’s put that aside for now. At best, these stimulus programs have helped the economy a bit, but not as much as many people would like.

    The problem is, with interest rates already at zero, they can’t go any lower. Or can they?

    Rogoff argues that, if we only had virtual currency, interest rates could dip below zero. Negative interest rates seem fun, until you consider the consequences.

    Yes, with negative interest rates, banks pay you to take out a loan.

    mark to fantasy tour de force….and the peons last cent will always be monitored.

  5. rickards says it’s up to 5 years away still.

    but he directly contradicts himself, since it has been 5+ years just over since the 2008 GFC liquidity crisis, so that time would be anytime now.

    Meanwhile, the Fed has printed $4 trillion during the last six years. “So, they’ve got no more drive power,” Rickards contended. Liquidity crises arise every five years, he said. “So what’s going to happen when the next liquidity crisis comes?”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.