Most of the world’s economies, including the United States, are rapidly ramping up to digitize their currency and ultimately end “paper cash” by creating a Central Bank Digital Currency (or CBDC for short).

Part of the “Great Reset” agenda is to eliminate or reduce untraceable and untaxable cash and crypto transactions and clear the way to establish national government-controlled digital currency.

The agenda is to get a CBDC in every country, get people used to it, and then connect those digital systems into a one-world digitized payment system.

Does this sound too far-fetched? Consider that the U.S. Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors have already issued a white paper titled “Money and Payments: The U.S. Dollar in the Age of Digital Transformation” as a “first step” in exploring the creation of a CBDC.

Make no mistake, a centralized digital currency is coming. President Biden has already sounded what many consider to be the paper dollar’s death knell when he signed Executive Order 14067, which calls for the implementation of a U.S. Central Bank Digital Currency.

While that may sound benign at first, a centralized digital currency has the potential to allow the federal government to:

-Legally surveil all U.S. citizens
-Control all bank accounts and purchases
-Crush free speech and silence opposing voices by cutting off access to their digital money

As an article in Wired magazine explained, “Digital currency issued by a central bank can be used as a tool for government surveillance of citizens and control over their financial transactions.”

With this kind of control, how long will it take before the U.S. government infringes on ALL of its citizens’ rights?

But you know what the smart people are doing right now? They are taking up to 40 percent of their savings from paper assets and putting it directly into gold and silver.

The simple reason is straightforward protection. They’re giving themselves an “economic hedge” against all market down forces, whether that be inflation, stock market crashes, bank collapses, bank bail-ins (meaning $250k depositors are left holding the bag), recessions, or big government social control through digital currency.

An economic hedge of protection is your insurance policy when things go bad. Don McPherson lays it out very simply when he says, “True prevention is not waiting for bad things to happen, it’s preventing things from happening in the first place.”

You’re protecting yourself against future events.

The first step is to get this FREE action guide from Monetary Gold. It’ll explain “what to do” and “what not to do.”

And you’ll also learn about the one type of account that Forbes magazine says all wealthy people have and why you should have one too.

Monetary Gold is proud to be the official Gold Sponsor of Breitbart News. It says a lot to have that much trust in a gold company.

House Bill 900, which would set new standards for school libraries to keep sexually explicit content off bookshelves, is heading to Gov. Greg Abbott’s desk. Librarians, legal experts and some parents are concerned that the bill’s language is vague and broad enough to ensnare books that are not inappropriate.

“House Bill 900 is simply another tool that we as a state can use to do all that we can do in our communities and in our schools to address harmful sexually explicit material,” state Sen. Angela Paxton, R-McKinney, said on the Senate floor Tuesday night.

The upper chamber formally approved the bill with a 19-12 vote along party lines just before midnight Tuesday. Without any changes to the legislation, HB 900 is now on its way to the the governor. Abbott’s office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment regarding his support for the legislation.

Bill author Rep. Jared Patterson, R-Frisco, tweeted Sunday that Paxton, the Senate sponsor, assured him that the Senate version would match the House version for quick approval. HB 900 still needs final approval from the chamber before it can be sent to the governor.

If HB 900 passes into law, book vendors would have to assign ratings to books based on the presence of depictions or references to sex. A book would get a “sexually relevant” rating if the material describes or portrays sexual activity and is part of the required school curriculum. A book would get a “sexually explicit” rating if the material describing or portraying sexual behavior is “patently offensive” and not part of required curriculum.

Two rating agencies placed the United States on a negative watch over recent negotiations to amend the debt ceiling between President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

The debt ceiling, a statute established by Congress that prevents the government from spending beyond a predetermined national debt limit of $31.4 trillion, exceeded the threshold earlier this year. Republicans want to link an increase in the debt limit with spending caps, while Democrats say they prefer separate processes for debt limit negotiations and budget reforms, a debate which occurs even as the government nears default as soon as June 1.

Fitch Ratings, considered one of the three most influential credit rating agencies in the nation, said in an outlook on Wednesday that the AAA rating currently held by the U.S. could be reconsidered because of “increased political partisanship that is hindering reaching a resolution to raise or suspend the debt limit.” The firm, which nevertheless anticipates that the debt ceiling will be amended before the estimated deadline, added that persistent failures to “meaningfully tackle medium-term fiscal challenges that will lead to rising budget deficits and a growing debt burden” also have negative implications for creditworthiness.

“The absence of a medium-term fiscal framework and a complex budgeting process has contributed to the failure to reverse successive debt increases caused by economic shocks and other fiscal accommodations,” the firm added. “Political partisanship has brought about repeated debt-limit brinkmanship and led to near-default episodes that could erode confidence in the government’s repayment capacity.”

The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled 5-4 in favor of an Idaho couple who wanted to build a house near a lake in a decision that makes it more difficult for the Environmental Protection Agency to police water quality. 

Justice Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion that stated that the Clean Water Act only regulates wetlands that have a “continuous surface connection” to larger bodies of water that are regulated. The couple, Chantell and Michael Sackett, do not have such a connection on their property.

Madeleine Hubbard is an international correspondent for Just the News. Follow her on Twitter or Instagram.