Entry Submitted by J at 10:05 AM EST on November 13, 2016
Your kindness and thoroughness is evident in answering important questions posed by thoughtful and attentive DC readers. Many thanks to you Veritas.
Whether this is knowable at this point or not, my question is the following:
Does the bank keep the balance of the sovereign rate value, Zim for example, if we choose anything less? Similarly, if a claw back does occur, does the bank we enter into a contract with keep those funds? Do we in that case get our currencies back?
What underlies these questions for me is who is behind the evaluation of we the currency holders? Is it the Chinese Elders, in that, would the maximal value of redeemed currencies go back to the source if a clawback, or if a base rate with no NDA is chosen? Or, do the currencies get exchanged by the bank for a higher, maximal rate (e.g., 32k Zim) and the bank profits further?
My hope is that funds are not left with banks to just gobble-up if not utilized maximally by we the currency holders, and that they are either not used just for bank profit at all, and/or stay with the benevolent source, back in the pot for humanity per se.
I am assuming that there are exacting regulatory plans in place for these scenarios I describe, because it seems so counterintuitive and egregious to allow banks that degree of power, and opportunistic control.
No fear here. My question is based in my want for the best possible stewardship of these funds designated for humanity, as it relates to my responsibilities as a currency holder.
I hope my question is not redundant. I read almost everything everyday on DC and have not seen this question explored.
Thank You very much in advance,