Quote:October 20, 2025 / Joseph P. Farrell

By now if you have not figured out that I am dead set against crypto-currencies (which I've nicknamed klepto-currencies), and central bank "digital 'currencies'", and the whole scam that was such an early part of the klepto-currency narrative (that they were "unhackable", were a way around the central banking monopolies on money creation, that they were guarantees of privacy and (the best one of them all) were "completely secure", then either you haven't been paying very close attention, or you're new here.

So when the following article popped into my email inbox, I was virtually certain it would be one of this week's blogs. But first, a word about the article itself. As most regular readers know, the blogs on this website are "community driven", i.e., I blog about articles that you, the readership of this site, send me. I sort through them every weekend, and try to decide if there are any discernible patterns or themes in the articles that people share, or if there is a particularly important story, and usually I blog about those. I also usually thank the individual for the article publicly by mentioning their initials in the blog. I this case, I have to thank this individual anonymously, because the individual has requested I not even use the initials to do so.

As for the story itself, it's in that "particularly important" category, and it has my high octane speculation motor running in overdrive. Here's the story:

PayPal’s crypto partner mints a whopping $300 trillion worth of stablecoins in ‘technical error’

Note this story very carefully:

Quote:Paxos, the blockchain partner of PayPal, mistakenly minted $300 trillion worth of the online payment giant’s stablecoin on Wednesday in what the company called a “technical error.” 

Market watchers had spotted the enormous injection of the PayPal PYUSD stablecoin on Etherscan — a block explorer and analytics platform for the Ethereum blockchain.
Paxos had mistakenly minted the stablecoins as part of an internal transfer, before it “immediately identified the error and burned the excess PYUSD,” the company said in a social media statement.
...
Transactions on Etherscan showed that the mistake had been fixed after about 20 minutes. 

PYUSD is advertised as a dollar-pegged stablecoin that is fully backed by U.S. dollar deposits, U.S. treasuries and similar cash equivalents. Therefore, PayPal says the tokens are always redeemable for U.S. dollars on a 1:1 basis. 
...

There aren’t enough dollars in global circulation to back $300 trillion PYUSD, which would theoretically require more than double the world’s estimated total GDP. (All italicized emphasis added)

So note the following: (1) $300,000,000,000,000.00 of "stablecoins" were "minted" by Paxos, a fact that would seem to give entirely new meanings to the definitions not only of "minting" but of "stable" and "stability"; (2) the amount of "stability" thus "minted" was approximately double the gross domestic product of the entire planet (thereby giving new potential meaning to the "derivatives crisis"); (3) the error was caught and fixed in a "mere" twenty minutes.

Woopsee.... sorry about that!... just a little accounting glitch... We fixed it! All better now! Go home, relax, have a beer, nothing to see here. Nothing to worry about!

Now, as one might imagine, I have all sorts of high octane speculations bouncing around in my tangled gray noodle about this one. Firstly, we're told very little about how this trifling error of a mere three hundred trillion dollars was made. Why, it's but a flyspeck in the pile of crud that the derivatives crisis involves. That said, and just for kicks and giggles, I'd like to assume that the mistake was made by some artificial intelligence-driven trading algorithm. In that case, that trifling error would seem to suggest all sorts of security problems with the system. So let's extend the high octane speculation a bit further. We're told in the article that all this "stability" was "mistakenly minted" as "part of an internal transfer," which is a nice, euphemistic way of saying that none of this "stability" spilled over into the "outside world" and became part of the stream of transactions.  So that, dear reader, is precisely the high octane speculation that I'd like to indulge and pursue. Let's assume that all this unhackable and completely secure "stability" spilled out into the outside world, that it became a part of the stream of transactions, that trades and deals we made on its basis, indeed, that some of these trades and deals were made on commodities or equities or securities markets by algorithmic trading programs at lightning speed, becoming parts of further trades and deals, which became parts of yet further transactions, and so on and so on.  One can imagine the cascading effect an injection of that amount of capital into the system would have... and then...

...the mistake is discovered.... What then? Is everything rolled back? If so, then why bother with the algorithmic trading platforms, and indeed, the whole blockchain and digital currency to begin with? The rollback costs time, and in this world, time is money. And if not, how does the instability and extreme volatility injected into the system create any trust among the people using it... and on and on we could go with such questions.

See you on the... oh, wait, one more thing. Is it just me, or did anyone else notice that the figure of three hundred trillion dollars is exactly the same figure that Dr. Tatiana Koryagina mentioned was available to the global cabal that was plotting terrorist acts on American soil in her Pravda article of July 2001, just a few months before 9/11...

...nah... it's just a coincidence...

See you on the flip side...