Harvard economist Larry Summers says “it’s time to go after big money,” and he wants to start by banning the $100 bill. But critics say he and other globalist elites may have an ulterior motive for such a move.
The former U.S. Treasury secretary and chief economist of the World Bank recently penned an op-ed in the Washington Post calling for removing the 500 euro and $100 bills from circulation.
“He’s been writing forcefully about that for the past six months,” said Patrick Wood, an economist and expert on the Trilateral Commission, technocracy and global governance.
Summers is a member of the elitist Trilateral Commission, co-founded in 1973 by David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski, and has operated at the highest echelons of global finance.
The argument being parlayed by global elites is that high-denomination bills are often used by crime syndicates and terrorist cells.
Summers argues, “[I]n certain circles, the 500 euro note is known as the ‘Bin Laden,'” and this is why it should no longer be printed.
“A moratorium on printing new high denomination notes would make the world a better place. In terms of unilateral steps, the most important actor by far is the European Union. The €500 is almost six times as valuable as the $100,” writes Summers.
But Wood, an Arizona-based economist, says eliminating the $100 bill has little to do with fighting terrorism or crime and everything to do with continuing to chip away at the availability of cash.
“There’s a big portion of society that’s not included in the banking system. They just don’t have bank accounts. They operate on cash, and that’s a large percentage of the developing world, and even in America. A lot of people on welfare, they go around the first of every month cashing checks. They don’t have accounts, and apparently that’s something that bugs the global elite,” said Wood, author of “Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation.”
“He’s a Trilateral guy, and it really bugs them that anybody is still living outside the system,” he said.
JP Morgan Chase announced this week it would start limiting the amount of cash a non-customer can withdraw from its ATM machines to $1,000.
The Wall Street Journal reported:
“The bank run by Chairman and Chief Executive Jamie Dimon said there doesn’t appear to be fraud involved. But in part due to heightened regulatory scrutiny, banks are paying more attention to large cash transfers that could be a sign of money laundering or other types of shady activity.”
Wood said the cashless society has long been an item on the checklist of global bankers. It’s also a key element of the burgeoning global technocracy that is tightening its grip on the world.
“Technocracy” is a term more Americans should familiarize themselves with, he said. That’s because it is technocracy – not communism or fascism – that the elites envision as their data-driven lever of control over the human race.
Consumers who operate with cash do not leave behind a digital trail and are thus not as transparent in where they go and what they are doing.
The original definition of technocracy was put forth by the Technocrat magazine in 1938. While much has changed since the original technocracy movement of the 1930s, the essence of the definition remains intact, Wood said. What has changed is the level of technology at the disposal of the world bankers and government technocrats.
“How they described it back then, in 1938, was that technocracy is the science of social engineering, or the science behind the entire system of goods and services as delivered to the entire population. If that’s the mindset of technocracy, that they have to ‘leave no one behind,’ then I can see where that comes from and where it’s leading.
“One thing is certainly true: You can’t exclude someone without first giving them the opportunity to be included.”
And Summers is not the only globalist panning the $100 bill.
Peter Sands, the former head of Standard Chartered Bank and now senior fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School, published a paper stating that eliminating high-value notes that are “rarely used” would help deter tax evasion, financial crime, terrorism financing and corruption, CNBC reported.
Most of the benefits of being included in the cashless system will be on the monetary side.
“If they include that in the system, that bank account will become a point of control over you, because without it you will not be able to buy or sell,” Wood said. “So if they say you are not worthy to buy or sell in our society and there’s no other mechanism, you are going to be greatly disadvantaged.”
“The 1000 and the 500 are already toast; they’re history,” Wood said.
“If they remove the $100 bill, that’s a big blow. How many $10 or $20 bills would it take if you’ve got $10,000 in your house? It would be almost impossible; you just wouldn’t do it. So I think taking out of the $100 bill would just about kill cash.”
Summers wrote, “Such an agreement would be as significant as anything else the G7 or G20 has done in years.”