Trust Me: Your Brain Cannot Handle This!

...the banking system is where the losses are, and it’s where the risks are. Which are then both transferred to Joe and Jane Blow, who subsequently have less to spend, which defeats the alleged central bank purpose of ‘stimulating’ the economy.
Draghi’s argument for the new (water-)bazooka measures is that without them, Europe would face ‘awful’ deflation. But it’s his very measures that create and encourage deflation. So who still knows how to count beyond 101? Good question.
But anyway, I just wanted to say that Draghi’s gone in all but physical presence. And if they keep him on for a while longer, that means that what happened today will happen again, just faster. Big risk.
No Super Mario no more.
What happened with Draghi yesterday is eerily reminiscent of the ‘glorious’ Bernanke days, when ‘poor’ Ben would make one of his weighty announcements and the effects he was looking for would fizzle out within hours. In full accordance with the law of diminishing returns, Draghi’s new and far more desperate measures lost their very meaning even within the space of barely more than half an hour. This EURUSD graph says it all:

That is ugly. That has meaning. Much more than Mario -the former Goldman Sachs executive- himself and his paymasters will be willing to acknowledge. It means the financial world is now ready to bet against Draghi. Like they bet against China...
Draghi’s done. This hole is too deep for him to climb out of.

We’re repeating the same crazy thing that nearly brought down the system back in 2008—paying people to borrow money.
The primary difference is that, this time around, the bubble is much bigger.
Back then, the subprime bubble was “only” $1.3 trillion.
Today, conservative estimates show that there’s over $7 trillion in negative rate bonds.
What could possibly go wrong?
German bank that almost failed now being paid to borrow money

Behold The Impotent ECB mr. Bean-draghi Viagra

Meanwhile...

"...wealthy financial entities, including local banks and rich individuals, all of whom have an interest in keeping the UK in the EU and preserving the status quo, are placing far larger bets, even if their number is ultimately far lower than the number of people betting on Brexit. And in yet another case of reflexivity, with the public seeing that "Remain" is winning based on bookie odds, it is shifting popular sentiment toward Remain, even as the vast majority of bets is actually for Leave.
To be sure, none of this is broken down when either the investing or general public see the bookie odds: they just note 76% chance of Leave, when in reality almost two thirds of bookie bettors are voting to Leave, despite not having nearly the financial capacity to offset the bookie line as a result of the few massive bets being placed on the other side.
Of course, the actual referendum is a democratic, and popular one, not one where the rich can influence or buy votes, and as such far more important is not the skew to the Brexit or Bremain line due to outsized bets, but the actual number of bets in any direction. As such, it would be certainly useful to the British voting public to know not just the bottom line odds, but how they got to where they are, which as Ladborkes admits, it "has received a higher volume of bets to leave the EU."
Substantially larger in fact, some 62% to 38%, which also explains the dramatic divergence between the neck and neck polling and the actual Brexit odds which see Remain winning with whopping 76% odds. Because it is those 38% supports of Remain, whose outsized bets are driving not only the reported odds, but also global market sentiment.
The real question is whether that same wealthy minority which is influencing bookie odds will also be able to manipulate the final Referendum outcome in less than 24 hours."

Read more at Zero Credibility, F.Media, Politicians, Banksters & More

Gold expert and author of “$10,000 Gold,” Nick Barisheff, says all markets are manipulated and fraudulent. Barisheff predicts, “This has been happening in all markets. When you have a manipulated market, at some point in time, you have a massive correction back to what would be the norm. It usually overshoots the norm. It’s like keeping a balloon under the water. Sooner or later, it’s going to pop. That’s what we’ve got now.”