David Webb’s article, “How to Survive the Great Taking,” outlines a dire prediction of a systematic scheme by central bankers to confiscate all forms of financial assets, including securities, bank deposits, and properties financed by debt.
Webb argues that this plan, which has been in the making for over 50 years, aims to centralize wealth and power among a select few individuals who manipulate legal frameworks to sever property rights.
He warns that a future financial crisis will trigger this “Great Taking,” allowing these elites to seize assets from individuals who are heavily indebted.
To mitigate the risks associated with this impending crisis, Webb advises people to become debt-free and retain ownership of unencumbered assets, as the current financial system increasingly obscures true ownership and exposes individuals to potential asset confiscation during economic downturns.
Editor’s Note: Webb’s predictions about the “Great Taking” raise significant concerns about the fragility of individual financial sovereignty in an increasingly centralized economic landscape. While his assertions may seem alarmist, they resonate with growing anxieties about government overreach and the erosion of property rights, particularly in times of crisis.
As central banks expand their influence and debt levels soar, the potential for systemic asset confiscation becomes a chilling possibility that warrants serious consideration.
“Great Taking” also underscores urgent concerns, particularly for heavily indebted nations like the Philippines, where national debt reached approximately $274 billion as of November 2024 and is projected to rise to $322 billion by 2025.1https://www.philstar.com/business/2024/07/30/2373930/national-debt-balloon-p1735-trillion-2025
This situation raises critical questions about the potential consequences of failing to meet these financial obligations.
As the country grapples with a debt-to-GDP ratio exceeding the internationally accepted threshold of 60%, the risk of default looms large, potentially leading to severe economic repercussions such as loss of sovereignty over fiscal policies and increased reliance on foreign creditors.
The political implications are profound, as a failure to manage this debt could result in austerity measures that disproportionately affect the most vulnerable populations.
Read Original Article
Read Online
Click the button below if you wish to read the article on the website where it was originally published.
Read Offline
Click the button below if you wish to read the article offline.
Resources
- 1
There was a rumor decades ago that former president Erap Estrada decided to stop getting loans from IMF/World Bank, and that resulted to him getting ousted from office. Noynoy Aquino is so diligent in paying the loans and reducing the national debt. The country was offered more loans as a result for the reason that the country is a good payer. Landbank offered loans to municipal and provincial governments. GSIS, SSS and Pag-Ibig are also offering loans. Private banks and financial cooperatives are encouraging depositors to make a loan despite of soaring interest rates. They want everybody to be indebted. LGUs nowadays are aggressive in collecting real property taxes. It seems that there is a bigger plan to put everybody into debt, to be followed by an economic rescue that will lead to seizure of assets by international bankers through our own government.