Connect with us

Digital cold war? United States and China vie for blockchain supremacy

Digital cold war? United States and China vie for blockchain supremacy

Published

on

As the tech standoff heats up, China launching a CBDC before the U.S. “absolutely does not guarantee global financial preeminence.”

Two nations, two visions of the financial future: "The tech cold war is here — and the US isn't winning," wrote Ripple co-founder Chris Larsen in an opinion piece for The Hill recently. According to him, China has “a once-in-a-century opportunity to wrest away American stewardship of the global financial system, including its ultimate goal of replacing the dollar with a digital yuan." Western values of openness and freedom could be lost in this new financial order.

Others have sounded similar concerns. “There is a new space race. It is the cyberspace race of building and controlling the systems and governance that will power the digital economy,” wrote Perianne Boring, president of the Chamber of Digital Commerce. While the race includes other advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence, big data and the Internet of Things, blockchain is key, as China’s president, Xi Jinping, has noted. Alex Tapscott, co-author of the book Blockchain Revolution, told Cointelegraph:

“China is on the brink of launching its own digital currency while, at least on this issue, the United States is dragging its feet. The two visions for these central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) couldn't be more different. Whereas the U.S. wants to protect the U.S. dollar as global reserve currency, China wishes to export its own economic model around the world and tighten control at home.”

Overheated rhetoric?

Is this all just hype — scaremongering to gain some local advantage? Those raising the CBDC alarm may be overlooking some recent trends, such as de-globalization. According to an Aug. 14 report from Barclays: “The impact of COVID-related measures is likely to accelerate already established trends, such as de-globalisation”; i.e., the decreasing economic interdependence and integration among countries. That, in turn, could mean the question of who dominates the planet’s reserve currency will become increasingly moot.

Lone Fønss Schrøder, CEO of blockchain solution Concordium, told Cointelegraph that the threat to Western values from a new global CBDC — i.e., a digital yuan — is exaggerated: “I don’t think that’s a problem.” There’s been a tendency since the COVID-19 crisis for businesses and consumers to look for “deliverables” closer to home, Schrøder said. Rather than a new dominant world currency, a more likely solution is the rise and expansion of local currencies in a more decentralized world.

As a non-executive director of the board at Swedish home furnishings retailer IKEA, Schrøder recently participated in a board discussion around the question: Is the present COVID-hobbled global economy the new normal, or is it just a pause in globalization? She shared with Cointelegraph:

“It’s a big tendency — this producing and buying goods close to home — particularly among the younger generation. Not only do they want to support local businesses in an economic crisis, but they don’t want to waste the globe’s energy. They don’t want to sit in Sweden eating a piece of fruit that was grown on the other side of the world.”

According to Barclays’ report, the pandemic has revealed new globalization risks, “specifically related to China’s key role in ‘just in time’ global supply chains that rely on the timely delivery of intermediary goods for production to take place.” Multinational corporations are likely to rethink how to build resilience into their supply chains; that is, “less trade with China and diversifying production centres could follow, as well as attempts to re-shore some production to domestic suppliers.”

If one takes a bird’s-eye view, above the current U.S.–China contention, the world has never been as well organized or as much at peace as the present, continued Schrøder, who also serves as non-executive chair of the board at Volvo, a Swedish car manufacturer that has been owned by China-based Zhejiang Geely Holding since 2010.

As someone who has lived in both worlds, East and West, “I believe in partnerships,” Schrøder told Cointelegraph. Volvo has built factories in China, for instance, following the same principles as those operating in Sweden. She believes that people can learn from each other, adding: “The binary situation in the U.S.” — i.e., us vs. them — “is not what we need now.”

An upset to the global monetary order?

Others view China’s CBDC ambitions with trepidation. “China’s rapid development of a central bank digital currency has the potential to upset the global monetary order,” noted the editorial board of the Financial Times recently. It represents a direct challenge to the U.S. dollar’s dominance as the global currency of choice and is intended to “bypass rival western-operated cross-border payment networks, such as Swift, which the US has used to enforce sanctions,” noted the Financial Times.

In August, Beijing announced a trial run of its digital yuan in four city hubs — Shanghai, Beijing, Guangzhou and Hong Kong — a test area with 400 million people, or about 29% of the country's population. Around the same time, the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank of Boston announced it will collaborate with researchers at Massachusetts Institute of Technology in a multiyear effort “to build and test a hypothetical digital currency oriented to central bank uses.” The U.S. effort is minuscule in comparison with the Chinese pilot — and possibly years behind.

A digital yuan may not make a difference

Digitalizing the yuan by itself won’t necessarily ensure global financial dominance though. "Digitalization doesn't address the lack of free convertibility of the yuan," Andrew Collier, managing director of Hong Kong-based financial research company Orient Capital Research, told Nikkei Asian Review, adding that China’s competition with the dollar is more of a long-term strategy. That said, according to him, “the digitalization of the currency and other settlement systems gives an advantage to its (China's) institutions, which will be significant when the currency is liberalized" — even if it won’t immediately overturn the SWIFT interbank network.

Jason Brett, founder and CEO of Value Technology Foundation — a think tank focused on blockchain technology — told Cointelegraph that China launching a CBDC before the U.S. “absolutely does not guarantee global financial preeminence. If that was the case, the Bahamas should be dominating us with its Sand Dollar for years to come. Trading partners, weapons technology, all of this matters too.” He added:

“What is more unnerving about the Chinese launching a CBDC might be ways that the technology for their digital yuan may be used to surveil other countries in all of their transactions.”

In his opinion piece for The Hill, Larsen also noted that the Chinese government is subsidizing the vast amounts of energy needed to fuel the nation’s crypto mining industry, suggesting that China effectively controls Bitcoin (BTC). If the U.S. were to lose stewardship over the world’s financial system, including cryptocurrency, all sorts of dire scenarios could emerge, in his view. A U.S. defense payment to an ally could be blocked or reversed, for instance, or “U.S. banks could have their payments restricted if they run afoul of Chinese policy goals,” said Larsen.

Something similar was suggested by technology and risk management executive Jonathan Rosenoer in a recent Cointelegraph Magazine article: “By holding authorization keys, China could freeze transactions it doesn’t like or seize digital assets by locking customers’ mobile wallets at will.”

One tech sector among many

Others suggest that any financial damage that China could do to the U.S. would be limited. Tapscott told Cointelegraph that “losing global reserve status would significantly diminish U.S. hegemony in financial markets and reduce its power globally, but it would not cripple it entirely.”

Steve Mushero, an American tech entrepreneur who founded and serves as CEO of Shanghai-based ChinaNetCloud, told Cointelegraph that a U.S.–China cold war may be shaping up on many fronts — not only tech but also trade, economics and even human rights.

If one considers the tech sector alone, however, “China does very well in digital payments, and some parts of AI like people tracking, some logistics and gaming, and some consumer stuff like TikTok, but very little else.” In the broader tech world — which encompasses dozens if not hundreds of areas including aerospace, energy, water, weather, agriculture, satellites, autonomous ships, enterprise software, cloud computing, the chip market and others — “China has few, if any, players at all,” said Mushero, adding:

“Broadly the U.S. leads nearly all technologies and generally does not care nor need anyone else; however, individual companies like Apple and some others do, and no one wants to let a big competitor grow up unfettered abroad and then come ashore as Japanese companies did with consumer electronics [in the 1980s].”

Some worry that China’s authoritarian regime has the advantage of being able to throw vast sums of money at emerging technologies like blockchain and AI, but “The Chinese way is not necessarily better,” Brett told Cointelegraph. The U.S., like other democratic countries, may be slower to act, “but once it identifies an issue, it is able to rally together to beat back totalitarian regimes, just as we did in WWII.”

There remains a risk in falling too far behind, though, and some signs are troubling, such as lower patent activity in the U.S. (the People’s Bank of China alone has filed more than 80 patents related to digital currencies, by comparison) and the Blockchain Service Network, China’s government-backed blockchain initiative that recently launched an official international website.

The future of money

Few in the crypto community, however, are likely to quarrel with Larsen’s call for a “more supportive regulatory approach to blockchain and cryptocurrencies, especially those technologies developed and used by American companies” as well as drawing attention to digital payments generally, where the U.S. has lagged. As Tapscott told Cointelegraph:

“Every thinking person must understand the stakes, battle lines and consequences of the battle for the future of money.”

After all, “AI, blockchain, and other critical technologies that will be the backbone of how the world economy runs. They will create jobs,” added Brett. “All advanced nations must make it a priority to focus on emerging technologies.”

In sum, the new U.S.–China rivalry involves more than technology; it also encompasses trading partners, economics, geopolitics, weaponry and human rights. But even within the tech sector, digital currencies and blockchain technology occupy a relatively small area.

Nevertheless, digital currencies and blockchain technology are emerging technologies that are expected to loom larger in the future, so one shouldn’t become complacent. That said, other trends like de-globalization may make the launch of the first major CBDC at scale a sideshow at best, and in any event, a digital yuan may still not have a significant global impact without convertibility, trading partners, and political and military allies.

Read More

Continue Reading

International

US Spent More Than Double What It Collected In February, As 2024 Deficit Is Second Highest Ever… And Debt Explodes

US Spent More Than Double What It Collected In February, As 2024 Deficit Is Second Highest Ever… And Debt Explodes

Earlier today, CNBC’s…

Published

on

US Spent More Than Double What It Collected In February, As 2024 Deficit Is Second Highest Ever... And Debt Explodes

Earlier today, CNBC's Brian Sullivan took a horse dose of Red Pills when, about six months after our readers, he learned that the US is issuing $1 trillion in debt every 100 days, which prompted him to rage tweet, (or rageX, not sure what the proper term is here) the following:

We’ve added 60% to national debt since 2018. Germany - a country with major economic woes - added ‘just’ 32%.   

Maybe it will never matter.   Maybe MMT is real.   Maybe we just cancel or inflate it out. Maybe career real estate borrowers or career politicians aren’t the answer.

I have no idea.  Only time will tell.   But it’s going to be fascinating to watch it play out.

He is right: it will be fascinating, and the latest budget deficit data simply confirmed that the day of reckoning will come very soon, certainly sooner than the two years that One River's Eric Peters predicted this weekend for the coming "US debt sustainability crisis."

According to the US Treasury, in February, the US collected $271 billion in various tax receipts, and spent $567 billion, more than double what it collected.

The two charts below show the divergence in US tax receipts which have flatlined (on a trailing 6M basis) since the covid pandemic in 2020 (with occasional stimmy-driven surges)...

... and spending which is about 50% higher compared to where it was in 2020.

The end result is that in February, the budget deficit rose to $296.3 billion, up 12.9% from a year prior, and the second highest February deficit on record.

And the punchline: on a cumulative basis, the budget deficit in fiscal 2024 which began on October 1, 2023 is now $828 billion, the second largest cumulative deficit through February on record, surpassed only by the peak covid year of 2021.

But wait there's more: because in a world where the US is spending more than twice what it is collecting, the endgame is clear: debt collapse, and while it won't be tomorrow, or the week after, it is coming... and it's also why the US is now selling $1 trillion in debt every 100 days just to keep operating (and absorbing all those millions of illegal immigrants who will keep voting democrat to preserve the socialist system of the US, so beloved by the Soros clan).

And it gets even worse, because we are now in the ponzi finance stage of the Minsky cycle, with total interest on the debt annualizing well above $1 trillion, and rising every day

... having already surpassed total US defense spending and soon to surpass total health spending and, finally all social security spending, the largest spending category of all, which means that US debt will now rise exponentially higher until the inevitable moment when the US dollar loses its reserve status and it all comes crashing down.

We conclude with another observation by CNBC's Brian Sullivan, who quotes an email by a DC strategist...

.. which lays out the proposed Biden budget as follows:

The budget deficit will growth another $16 TRILLION over next 10 years. Thats *with* the proposed massive tax hikes.

Without them the deficit will grow $19 trillion.

That's why you will hear the "deficit is being reduced by $3 trillion" over the decade.

No family budget or business could exist with this kind of math.

Of course, in the long run, neither can the US... and since neither party will ever cut the spending which everyone by now is so addicted to, the best anyone can do is start planning for the endgame.

Tyler Durden Tue, 03/12/2024 - 18:40

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Buried Project Veritas Recording Shows Top Pfizer Scientists Suppressed Concerns Over COVID-19 Boosters, MRNA Tech

Buried Project Veritas Recording Shows Top Pfizer Scientists Suppressed Concerns Over COVID-19 Boosters, MRNA Tech

Submitted by Liam Cosgrove

Former…

Published

on

Buried Project Veritas Recording Shows Top Pfizer Scientists Suppressed Concerns Over COVID-19 Boosters, MRNA Tech

Submitted by Liam Cosgrove

Former Project Veritas & O’Keefe Media Group operative and Pfizer formulation analyst scientist Justin Leslie revealed previously unpublished recordings showing Pfizer’s top vaccine researchers discussing major concerns surrounding COVID-19 vaccines. Leslie delivered these recordings to Veritas in late 2021, but they were never published:

Featured in Leslie’s footage is Kanwal Gill, a principal scientist at Pfizer. Gill was weary of MRNA technology given its long research history yet lack of approved commercial products. She called the vaccines “sneaky,” suggesting latent side effects could emerge in time.

Gill goes on to illustrate how the vaccine formulation process was dramatically rushed under the FDA’s Emergency Use Authorization and adds that profit incentives likely played a role:

"It’s going to affect my heart, and I’m going to die. And nobody’s talking about that."

Leslie recorded another colleague, Pfizer’s pharmaceutical formulation scientist Ramin Darvari, who raised the since-validated concern that repeat booster intake could damage the cardiovascular system:

None of these claims will be shocking to hear in 2024, but it is telling that high-level Pfizer researchers were discussing these topics in private while the company assured the public of “no serious safety concerns” upon the jab’s release:

Vaccine for Children is a Different Formulation

Leslie sent me a little-known FDA-Pfizer conference — a 7-hour Zoom meeting published in tandem with the approval of the vaccine for 5 – 11 year-olds — during which Pfizer’s vice presidents of vaccine research and development, Nicholas Warne and William Gruber, discussed a last-minute change to the vaccine’s “buffer” — from “PBS” to “Tris” — to improve its shelf life. For about 30 seconds of these 7 hours, Gruber acknowledged that the new formula was NOT the one used in clinical trials (emphasis mine):


“The studies were done using the same volume… but contained the PBS buffer. We obviously had extensive consultations with the FDA and it was determined that the clinical studies were not required because, again, the LNP and the MRNA are the same and the behavior — in terms of reactogenicity and efficacy — are expected to be the same.

According to Leslie, the tweaked “buffer” dramatically changed the temperature needed for storage: “Before they changed this last step of the formulation, the formula was to be kept at -80 degrees Celsius. After they changed the last step, we kept them at 2 to 8 degrees celsius,” Leslie told me.

The claims are backed up in the referenced video presentation:

I’m no vaccinologist but an 80-degree temperature delta — and a 5x shelf-life in a warmer climate — seems like a significant change that might warrant clinical trials before commercial release.

Despite this information technically being public, there has been virtually no media scrutiny or even coverage — and in fact, most were told the vaccine for children was the same formula but just a smaller dose — which is perhaps due to a combination of the information being buried within a 7-hour jargon-filled presentation and our media being totally dysfunctional.

Bohemian Grove?

Leslie’s 2-hour long documentary on his experience at both Pfizer and O’Keefe’s companies concludes on an interesting note: James O’Keefe attended an outing at the Bohemian Grove.

Leslie offers this photo of James’ Bohemian Grove “GATE” slip as evidence, left on his work desk atop a copy of his book, “American Muckraker”:

My thoughts on the Bohemian Grove: my good friend’s dad was its general manager for several decades. From what I have gathered through that connection, the Bohemian Grove is not some version of the Illuminati, at least not in the institutional sense.

Do powerful elites hangout there? Absolutely. Do they discuss their plans for the world while hanging out there? I’m sure it has happened. Do they have a weird ritual with a giant owl? Yep, Alex Jones showed that to the world.

My perspective is based on conversations with my friend and my belief that his father is not lying to him. I could be wrong and am open to evidence — like if boxer Ryan Garcia decides to produce evidence regarding his rape claims — and I do find it a bit strange the club would invite O’Keefe who is notorious for covertly filming, but Occam’s razor would lead me to believe the club is — as it was under my friend’s dad — run by boomer conservatives the extent of whose politics include disliking wokeness, immigration, and Biden (common subjects of O’Keefe’s work).

Therefore, I don’t find O’Keefe’s visit to the club indicative that he is some sort of Operation Mockingbird asset as Leslie tries to depict (however Mockingbird is a 100% legitimate conspiracy). I have also met James several times and even came close to joining OMG. While I disagreed with James on the significance of many of his stories — finding some to be overhyped and showy — I never doubted his conviction in them.

As for why Leslie’s story was squashed… all my sources told me it was to avoid jail time for Veritas executives.

Feel free to watch Leslie’s full documentary here and decide for yourself.

Fun fact — Justin Leslie was also the operative behind this mega-viral Project Veritas story where Pfizer’s director of R&D claimed the company was privately mutating COVID-19 behind closed doors:

Tyler Durden Tue, 03/12/2024 - 13:40

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Association of prenatal vitamins and metals with epigenetic aging at birth and in childhood

“[…] our findings support the hypothesis that the intrauterine environment, particularly essential and non-essential metals, affect epigenetic aging…

Published

on

“[…] our findings support the hypothesis that the intrauterine environment, particularly essential and non-essential metals, affect epigenetic aging biomarkers across the life course.”

Credit: 2024 Bozack et al.

“[…] our findings support the hypothesis that the intrauterine environment, particularly essential and non-essential metals, affect epigenetic aging biomarkers across the life course.”

BUFFALO, NY- March 12, 2024 – A new research paper was published in Aging (listed by MEDLINE/PubMed as “Aging (Albany NY)” and “Aging-US” by Web of Science) Volume 16, Issue 4, entitled, “Associations of prenatal one-carbon metabolism nutrients and metals with epigenetic aging biomarkers at birth and in childhood in a US cohort.”

Epigenetic gestational age acceleration (EGAA) at birth and epigenetic age acceleration (EAA) in childhood may be biomarkers of the intrauterine environment. In this new study, researchers Anne K. Bozack, Sheryl L. Rifas-Shiman, Andrea A. Baccarelli, Robert O. Wright, Diane R. Gold, Emily Oken, Marie-France Hivert, and Andres Cardenas from Stanford University School of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Columbia University, and Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai investigated the extent to which first-trimester folate, B12, 5 essential and 7 non-essential metals in maternal circulation are associated with EGAA and EAA in early life. 

“[…] we hypothesized that OCM [one-carbon metabolism] nutrients and essential metals would be positively associated with EGAA and non-essential metals would be negatively associated with EGAA. We also investigated nonlinear associations and associations with mixtures of micronutrients and metals.”

Bohlin EGAA and Horvath pan-tissue and skin and blood EAA were calculated using DNA methylation measured in cord blood (N=351) and mid-childhood blood (N=326; median age = 7.7 years) in the Project Viva pre-birth cohort. A one standard deviation increase in individual essential metals (copper, manganese, and zinc) was associated with 0.94-1.2 weeks lower Horvath EAA at birth, and patterns of exposures identified by exploratory factor analysis suggested that a common source of essential metals was associated with Horvath EAA. The researchers also observed evidence of nonlinear associations of zinc with Bohlin EGAA, magnesium and lead with Horvath EAA, and cesium with skin and blood EAA at birth. Overall, associations at birth did not persist in mid-childhood; however, arsenic was associated with greater EAA at birth and in childhood. 

“Prenatal metals, including essential metals and arsenic, are associated with epigenetic aging in early life, which might be associated with future health.”

 

Read the full paper: DOI: https://doi.org/10.18632/aging.205602 

Corresponding Author: Andres Cardenas

Corresponding Email: andres.cardenas@stanford.edu 

Keywords: epigenetic age acceleration, metals, folate, B12, prenatal exposures

Click here to sign up for free Altmetric alerts about this article.

 

About Aging:

Launched in 2009, Aging publishes papers of general interest and biological significance in all fields of aging research and age-related diseases, including cancer—and now, with a special focus on COVID-19 vulnerability as an age-dependent syndrome. Topics in Aging go beyond traditional gerontology, including, but not limited to, cellular and molecular biology, human age-related diseases, pathology in model organisms, signal transduction pathways (e.g., p53, sirtuins, and PI-3K/AKT/mTOR, among others), and approaches to modulating these signaling pathways.

Please visit our website at www.Aging-US.com​​ and connect with us:

  • Facebook
  • X, formerly Twitter
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
  • Reddit
  • Pinterest
  • Spotify, and available wherever you listen to podcasts

 

Click here to subscribe to Aging publication updates.

For media inquiries, please contact media@impactjournals.com.

 

Aging (Aging-US) Journal Office

6666 E. Quaker Str., Suite 1B

Orchard Park, NY 14127

Phone: 1-800-922-0957, option 1

###


Read More

Continue Reading

Trending