The USA stole $300 billion of Russia's money that was in banks controlled by the USA. Is it foolish for the USA to steal money from other countries?

[Adaeva]

For 75 years, since Bretton Woods, the US dollar has been the world's reserve currency. Countries used the dollar because it could be trusted. That has given the USA an "Exorbitant Privilege." A privilege that has been worth far than the $300 billion they stole from Russia. However, by stealing Russia's money and weaponizing the dollar, the USA has served notice to the world that the dollar can no longer be trusted.

As a result, the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) along with some other countries are working to develop a new reserve currency. https://www.silkroadbriefing.com/news/2022/10/04/brics-working-to-develop-a-new-reserve-currency/

[Anonymous]

I'm not sure it makes any difference, you may as well take the money I guess.

No one has any respect for the US, it is depised even by its closest allies even.

All it has really is fear.

We all know that you would turn on anyone in a heartbeat in an infantile rage over nothing and burn the world before admiting fault.

There is a minority of Americans who are as family to many in the world, it is for them only that anyone gives any kind of fuck about the States.

Where you aren't hated you are a joke.

BRICS has been a long time coming, I don't know if this has accelerated anything or not, maybe it did but it's not like you give anyone any choice.

We are all fucked because of you, we are all just waiting for you to burn the world or turn us into paperclips so I think its unlikely that anyone gives a fuck about money.

[lightbulb27]

Yea it's unwise to give up reserve currency by destroying it's credibility. But it always happens in history, why would this time be different?

What holds it together is those big military weapons to implement power.

I can only guess AI and robots will be the differentiator in future, and intelligence/IT ability.

God help us...

[abc3643]

What is your source of this because you did not write this yourself?

"For 75 years, since Bretton Woods, the US dollar has been the world's reserve currency. Countries used the dollar because it could be trusted. That has given the USA an "Exorbitant Privilege." A privilege that has been worth far than the $300 billion they stole from Russia. However, by stealing Russia's money and weaponizing the dollar, the USA has served notice to the world that the dollar can no longer be trusted."

[Adaeva]

www.npr.org/.../75-years-ago-the-u-s-dollar-became-the-worlds-currency-will-that-last

www.telesurenglish.net/.../...v-20220502-0018.html

[abc3643]

Neither of those has this exact quote which you most certainly did not write.

"For 75 years, since Bretton Woods, the US dollar has been the world's reserve currency. Countries used the dollar because it could be trusted. That has given the USA an "Exorbitant Privilege." A privilege that has been worth far than the $300 billion they stole from Russia. However, by stealing Russia's money and weaponizing the dollar, the USA has served notice to the world that the dollar can no longer be trusted."

What is the source of the exact quote?

[abc3643]

I am going to have one big long post spread out over several posts...
===================================
We've reached a teachable moment...

Young lady, I want to be clear that I am not debating the subject matter regarding the "Global Currency Reset" nor am I even answering your original question.

What I am interested in where you are getting your sources of information and teaching you about the idea of "due diligence".

Now that you are growing up and will have to make adult decisions, you will need to protect yourself - not with a gun, but with your mind. And that means having some skepticism and to think as logically and clearly as you can and be a sure as you can of the facts before you make your decisions or act. Due diligence helps with that.

A good definition for due diligence is given by Investopedia:
www.investopedia.com/terms/d/duediligence.asp

"Due diligence is an investigation, audit, or review performed to confirm facts or details of a matter under consideration."

Now, something you need to understand is that there are reputable sources and disreputable sources. Some have considerable bias and others don't. "Citing authorities" in an argument (like you are doing in this question) can be dangerous if your authorities have a hidden agenda because then their information (or disinformation) becomes propaganda. Just as bad, it can make you look like a fool.

So, bottom line, when getting information from a source, it is best to do some "due diligence" and investigate the nature of that source of information. Check out your sources of information before you quote them or use them in your decision making process.

[abc3643]

OK, so, now, let's examine the 3 source articles that you cited and do some due diligence. Since these are articles, it is fair to consider them from a journalistic perspective and check for any "media bias" and see if they've been fact-checked. To do that, we are going to get some help from a fact/bias checker - in this case, a good one: Media Bias / Fact Check which I will say is MB/FC.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/

The 3 articles you've cited are from 3 different sources, in alphabetical order.
NPR
Silk Road Briefing
TeleSUR

==========
NPR is National Public Radio which everyone knows.
https://www.npr.org/

Most people consider NPR to be a decent news source although some might consider it biased. What does MB/FC have to say about NPR:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/npr/
"Overall, we rate NPR (National Public Radio) Left-Center Biased based on story selection that leans slightly left and High for factual reporting due to thorough sourcing and accurate news reporting."

OK, so even MB/FC says NPR has a "liberal bias" as conservatives like to say. But, more importantly, NPR gets a "High" for factual reporting. In other words, while their opinions may be biased, they report facts accurately - they can be a trusted source for news.

- - - - - -
Bottom line for us: They can be trusted as a news source.

[abc3643]

==========
Now, lets take a look at Silk Road Briefing.
https://www.silkroadbriefing.com/

Well, I've never heard of that. Let's go to MB/FC... They have NOTHING. So, whatever Silk Road Briefing is, it's not a journalistic source for news and facts. That's a yellow flag meaning "proceed with caution". That doesn't mean that their data or fact reporting is crap, but we need to proceed cautiously and learn more about them...

I look at the top of their website and I see "Silk Road Briefing" and then in small letters "From Dezan Shira and Associates". Hmmmmm... Well, that's definitely not a news source; sounds like a law firm or an investment firm or a financial firm... And, lo-and-behold, that's exactly what they say they are:
https://www.dezshira.com/
"Dezan Shira & Associates is a pan-Asia, multi-disciplinary professional services firm, providing market entry, legal, accounting, tax, HR, technology and operational advisory to international investors."

OK, well that doesn't mean that what they report is crap especially since investors rely on them, but... who knows? Anyway, that's what they say they are. What does the Internet say?
https://www.google.com/search?q=denzen+shira

Well, there's not too much to start - all the early hits are really info Dezan Shira puts out there about themselves, but here's an interesting tidbit... One of the hits is "China Briefing".
https://www.china-briefing.com/

I got to that website. At the top on the right, I see "Other Briefings". What do I see? A plethora of them including Silk Road Briefing. I go to the bottom of the page. "China Briefing" is just another product from Dezan Shira.

OK, now we ask "Who exactly are these people?" and, just as important, "Where are they headquartered?"
Why is that important? Because, we can't assume that a "company" like Dezan Shira is a real bona fide corporation in the capitalist world. So, let's find out where Dezan Shira is headquartered...

(more)

[abc3643]

Per Crunchbase:
www.crunchbase.com/.../dezan-shira-associates
"Dezan Shira & Associates is located in Shenzhen, Guangdong, China."

OK, that tells me a lot. They are a Chinese firm. China is a totalitarian society with not many freedoms. This means that Dezan Shira COULD be an extension of the Chinese government. Furthermore, if we look at their locations, they are all in Asia - including Russia. They have "liasons" for Western countries, but no offices.

At this point, we have to consider that Dezan Shira may be propaganda source more than any form of objective journalistic news source. Again, that doesn't mean that what they write isn't true, but whatever they do write, it doesn't have journalistic integrity and is likely biased propaganda to manipulate people's emotions to what Dezen Shira (and, China, really) want those people's emotions to be.

- - - - - -
Bottom line for us: Silk Road Briefing is, at best, a questionable source and likely maybe a propaganda source filled with some bias.

[abc3643]

==========

The final source you cited was teleSUR.
https://www.telesurenglish.net/

Who do they say they are?
"
teleSUR has always been breaking the news on big events, not only in Latin America but around the world. For the last nine years we have been covering important news and information, reporting the truth internationally.

OUR MISSION
teleSUR is a Latin American multimedia platform oriented to lead and promote the unification of the peoples of the SOUTH*.

We are a space and a voice for the construction of a new communications order.

OUR VISION
Being a multimedia public service platform with global coverage and that produces and disseminates information from the SOUTH* for a broad base of loyal users, with a people at the center of their view.

(*) SOUTH Geopolitical concept that promotes the struggle of peoples for peace, self-determination, respect for Human Rights and Social Justice."

OK, that's a lot, but they are basically saying "We have bias because we are advocating for a position."

So, that's a big yellow flag too.

And where are they from?
Venezuela

(more)

[abc3643]

What does MB/FC say about teleSUR?
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/telesur/

"Overall, we rate TeleSUR Left Biased and Questionable based on a lack of transparency, poor sourcing, the promotion of pro-government propaganda and proven false claims."

"Questionable" - what exactly does MB/FC say about that:
"QUESTIONABLE SOURCE
A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for the purpose of profit or influence. Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact checked on a per article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source."

Wow. What else does MB/FC say about teleSUR?

"History

Founded in 2005, La Nueva Televisora del Sur (teleSUR, English: The New Television Station of the South) is a multi-state funded, pan–Latin American terrestrial and satellite television network sponsored by the governments of Venezuela, Cuba, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Uruguay, and Bolivia that is headquartered in Caracas, Venezuela. TeleSUR has been accused of being a propaganda tool for Hugo Chavez and his successors.

(more)

[abc3643]

Read our profile on Venezuela media and government.

Funded by / Ownership

TeleSUR lacks transparency as they do not explain ownership, however, they are primarily funded through the governments of Venezuela, Cuba, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Uruguay, and Bolivia. Revenue is derived through advertising.

Analysis / Bias

In review, TeleSur reports Latin American and world news with minimally loaded wording such as this Venezuela Election Update: PSUV Coalition Wins 67% of the Vote. Many stories promote Socialist government propaganda as well as very strong anti-American sentiments such as this Two Sides of the Same Coin: VenezolanosConBiden and MAGAzuela. Like most stories evaluated this one is completely unsourced. In general, they promote propaganda and poorly source their information."

- - - - - -
Bottom line for us: Worthless source of information.

[abc3643]

=============
OK, that's the end of the teachable moment for the most part, but what you originally quoted in this question is such highly inflammatory language that it obviously does not come from a true journalistic news media entity. And you didn't write it for a variety of reasons. So, I need you - WE need you - to be transparent and tell us the source of your original quote.

Once I know that, THEN I can analyze the source including getting context for the quote. Then, I would think about what I learned and THEN answer your original question.

[Adaeva]

There is no exact quote. I do have the ability to think and to reason. My statement came from reading those two sources and making the reasonable assumption that, if the world has been using the dollar as the world's primary currency for 75 years, countries and people would have to have trust in the dollar. That is similar to people trusting in banks because they believe their money is safe and they can withdraw it. If banks didn't return the money people deposited, there would little or no trust in banks.

Therefore, it occurred to me that if the USA can and does steal money deposited into a system under their control, there will be less trust in the dollar and US treasuries. I read that China has $1 trillion dollars in US treasuries. China would buy US treasuries because I read that US treasuries are the safest investment and the USA has never defaulted on US treasuries. If China and other holders of US treasuries believe, the USA might default, they would sell them as quick as they could and that would be bad for the USA.

Perhaps, the USA could refuse to redeem the US treasuries that China has. However, we have $20 trillion economy and I believe the loss of trust and the resulting long-term damage to the US economy and reputation would exceed the $1 trillion dollars.

In addition to listening to my parents and other adults, I get information from a number of sources such as mainstream news, Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell, and Mises Institute. I don't have time to read all the articles so I pick and choose.

[abc3643]

So, libertarians (who are often objectivists).

Good luck with that.

“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."

[Kung Fu Monkey -- Ephemera, blog post, March 19, 2009]
― John Rogers

[Adaeva]

@abc3643 After giving it more thought, it occurs to me that rather than attempting to determine how reliable a source is, it is more important to determine if what I posted is true. That is:
1. Was there Bretton Woods and has the US dollar has been the world's reserve currency for 75 years?
2. Whether the term used is seized, frozen, or stolen, did the USA take $300 billion of Russia's assets and will other countries take notice of that fact?
3. Are the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) working to develop a new reserve or alternate currency to the US dollar?

If the answer to those 3 questions is "Yes," does the source matter?

[abc3643]

I do not believe the answer to Question 2 is true.
The onus is on your to provide evidence of the veracity of that statement.

Honey, you are attempting to operate in the adult world... Good! I am happy to see that!
But, be prepared as if you are in court. Whenever you say something, you need to back it up with evidence just as you would in court trying to influence a juror to support your side when it is time for a verdict.

[Adaeva]

There is an overwhelming amount of evidence. Of course they won't call it stealing but even the Department of Justice admits to stealing the $300 billion. www.cnbc.com/.../...f-russian-oligarch-assets.html

[abc3643]

How is it stealing?

Stealing implies taking something without permission and making it your own.
The Federal Government has stolen nothing. Freezing assets is not stealing; it means freezing assets.

The UN gives a pretty good definition of what asset freezing means per this document on freezing Al Qaeda's assets:
www.un.org/.../eot_assets_freeze_-_english.pdf

In particular:
=========
Definition of the term “freeze”

9. Freeze of funds and other financial assets and economic resources includes preventing their use, alteration, movement, transfer or access, unless allowed under the specific exemption procedures under resolution 2161 (2014).

10. Freeze of economic resources also includes preventing their use to obtain funds, goods, or services in any way, including, but not limited to, by selling, hiring or mortgaging them.

11. The term “freeze” does not mean confiscation or transfer of ownership. Whatever
person or State body is responsible for regulating frozen assets should make reasonable efforts to do so in a manner that does not result in their undue deterioration, provided that this does not conflict with the overall intention behind the freezing action - to deny listed individuals, groups, undertakings and entities the financial means to support terrorism.

=========
Did you see that?
"The term 'freeze' does not mean confiscation or transfer of ownership."

That's not stealing.

(more)

[abc3643]

============
This is why I wanted to teach you about due diligence and being smart about what comes out of your mouth or what you write or, frankly, any decision or action that you make or do.

There's an old adage that goes something like this:
"Better to be silent and be suspected of being a fool than it is to open your mouth and remove all doubts about it."

And, of course:
"Children are better seen, not heard."

You are doing a wonderful job being passionate and researching, but don't become an echo machine of propaganda and ideology. Do your research with REPUTABLE sources who aren't pushing an agenda.

[abc3643]

I am going to request to follow you.
You are a very interesting young lady and remind me of another young lady, I think about your age from Arkansas, who also was smart and passionate about stuff like this.

[Adaeva]

In your own words, "Stealing implies taking something without permission..." The US government didn't have Russia's permission. When the US government steals, they never call it stealing. The strongest term I can think of that they might use is seize. In this case they use the terms freeze or
immobilized, but the effect is the same because Russia is not going to grovel, beg, and agree to any and all outrageous terms to get their money back.

More evidence that it is stealing, the European Commission on laid out legal options for the confiscation of Russian state and private assets to be used for funding Ukraine’s reconstruction.

“We have blocked €300 billion of the Russian Central Bank reserves, and we have frozen €19 billion of Russian oligarchs’ money,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in a statement.

The ultimate goal is to use those Russian assets confiscated by the member states to support the reconstruction of Ukraine and compensate the country for the damages caused by the Russian invasion.

“We will work on an international agreement with our partners to make this possible. And together, we can find legal ways to get to it,” von der Leyen added.

In other cases, when the government steals, they call it a tax. I asked my great-grandfather who was born prior to WWII if the government ever had his permission to tax his money. He answer was "No" and he arrived long before either of us. The US government even has the gall to call it voluntary, but they put people if jail if they don't pay.

Taxes is not the subject of my question, but it appears to be related to definition of stealing. Also, I am not claiming there shouldn't be taxes and to my knowledge, the only tax I pay is sales tax, but I never gave my permission other than the fact that I cannot make purchases unless I pay sales tax.

[abc3643]

The US government doesn't need Russia's permission to freeze its assets. Neither doesn't any other government which also has frozen Russian assets.

Did the Russians ask for permission from Ukraine when they invaded the Crimea in 2014 or Ukraine in 2022? After all, didn't the Russians "steal land" from the Ukrainians when they did that?

You don't ask criminals or enemies permission to thwart their activities. That's why freezing assets is not stealing and why getting arrested by the police is not being kidnapped by the police.

Young lady, you have a lot of growing up to do still.
You are passionate and reasonably intelligent, but please stop exhibiting foolishness.

[RavVid]

The US has frozen Russian reserves. This not the same as appropiated/stolen. None the less the problem you are raising is real.

The Ruble is highly manipulated at the moment for obvious reasons. if you look at South Africa, the currencies of Australia and Canada are each traded at 6x more volume. Even China's currency is traded at a little more volume than Australia's.

In the immortal words of the classic Australian movie The Castle. "Tell'em they're dreaming".

Brics currencies don't trade enough.

[call_me_scar]

Not in this particular instance as it was to stop a asshole from invading a smaller weaker one now is the u. s kinda a hypocrite for this yes, absolutely but I'm always in favor of less fighting

[call_me_scar]

Country* not one

[Adaeva]

Would you knowing put your money in a bank that freezes accounts because they bank doesn't approve of how some people spend their money or because they disapprove of their activities?

[Adaeva]

In any event, the question was "Is is foolish for the USA to steal money resulting in other countries not trusting the dollar." Based on your reply, you believe that is not foolish.

[call_me_scar]

Bank accounts can already be frozen if u are suspected of doing notorious acts, so that's kind of a moot question

[BoopBoopBeep]

Feel free to not use our banks if you don't want your money frozen in them.

[Adaeva]

Is that not what is happening by more and more countries? If they have other opinions, people prefer not to do business with criminals and thieves and the U. S. government are criminals.

[BoopBoopBeep]

No that's not what's happening by more and more countries because they still like having access to the ease of American banking. That's why we have the ability to keep freezing more and more accounts every month.

I've lived in enough other countries to know there are just as many criminals in those governments, too.

[Adaeva]

Most countries are criminals and China controls people in China. However, China is far more honest than the U. S. because being honest is good business. Our government leaders are too stupid to know that. Regardless, it is not easy to change a system that has been operational for close to eighty years. However, it is changing, maybe slowly over the next twenty years or maybe suddenly, I don't know. Living in other countries does not imply, you have insight into how that country operates in money matters.

[BoopBoopBeep]

Let's just say as part of my job I am intimately familiar with international and transnational methods of financing various enterprises through traditional and non-traditional means.

The government of China is honest? How long did you work with them?

[Adaeva]

Three times I purchased inexpensive items from China and they were honest. You just don't want to admit the truth so you argue by asking such nonsense questions.

[BoopBoopBeep]

Wait, your opinion on the honesty of the government is based on the fact that three times you purchased inexpensive items from China? You're trolling, right?

[Adaeva]

I'm done with you. You have no valid argument so you keep trying to change the subject to things that are not relevant.

[BoopBoopBeep]

Do your parents know you're online? Go to bed child.

[exitseven]

I was good with President Trump making China take a haircut on the trade deficit with China as a down payment on all the damage they caused letting Covid loose on the world.

[jshm2]

The USA stole a lot more from Iraq and Libya, kiddo.

[Anonymous]

It was foolish as it only strengthened Russia's currency.

[robocop666]

This will cause countries to move away from the USA empire.

[KrakenAttackin]

It's foolish that we send so much to Ukraine.

[Jennz6]

Good idea