This came from the first comment to OP linked here:

From: u/uhtred

Neil says at the end we have until march

Clif High is saying 2 months for "the big ugly

If they both say a couple months, then I am inclined to start to believe. Soon, for sure. We are in for a world of pain in Europe imminently and so much of not only the surface narratives but the deeper details have been pointing in that direction for quite a while now.

The U.S. posture towards Ukraine has screamed that the Cabal is readying its two sides to begin playing "all out war" any minute now. There won't be an end to support for Ukraine because that's not where the story is supposed to end.

This in itself is a means to an end for what some would consider to be an even larger problem, that being the global financial system's collapse. They have always used World Wars to help reset and continue the global debt slavery scheme in the past and this time will be no different. There is a reason that most of Europe remains surprisingly calm even as battles rage a mere few hundred miles west of them. Even the children know "the Yanks will pay for it."

Two moves almost guarantee an outbreak of hostility has been scheduled on the calendar: The removal of Russia from the SWIFT global monetary system - well publicized - and the U.S. Federal Reserve's decision to move from LIBOR to SOFR as the overnight rate measurement benchmark (which subsequently changes a whole BUNCH of things with respect to financial interactions) - not well publicized or understood.

For that understanding in brief I'll give you a part of a decent write up:

In terms of communication, LIBOR represented a very rich message – it communicated not only interest rate expectations, but also systemic credit and liquidity expectations. Treasury securities overnight yesterday (SOFR), or is it expected to cost over the next few months (Term SOFR) – a very minimal version of interest rate expectations.

In terms of risk, SOFR takes the systemic credit and liquidity risk that was for(merly dispersed across the entire syst marketem and concentrates it on to financial intermediary balance sheets. If banks were gas stations, it would be as if the price at the pump was tied to the consumer price index (CPI), rather than to the wholesale price of gasoline – the same amount of risk in the economy is concentrated on fewer entities.

In a SOFR-based world, a dislocation such as occurred in 2008 or 2011 or 2020 will likely have very disparate impacts on the asset and liability sides of FI balance sheets.

Entire article here. Essentially what began to happen a few years back was a narrowing of the gap between LIBOR and SOFR as concerns of U.S. public debt rose along with the balance sheet of the Fed itself. The line from the regulators is basically: It became a bit redundant to rely on the LIBOR which took into account international rates and fluctuations in other national economies when indeed those entities all look to the Fed and Treasury markets to determine their risk profiles anyway. In short they want you to hear that we'd been "overstating systemic risks" due to LIBOR.

In reality we are butting up against a major systemic threat and everyone knows it. In the past, the LIBOR had prevented the Fed from going very far up on the fed funds rate because if they did this and went too far, they'd send other markets and national economies into collapse due to their connections via the rate. This allows the Fed to be much more heavy handed by no longer accounting for the sensitivity to Europe's markets specifically. If we go further than we should and allow OUTRAGEOUS LEVELS OF RISK TO PROLIFERATE because of the financial globalization in the past, tough shit for you I guess. The U.S. and global banking created incredible sensitivities to our rates and markets worldwide, so why account for them in our discovery of overall systemic risk when all that really matters is that WE SURVIVE? We will just start looking inward to evaluate risk and take them out of the equation, since they're so incredibly dependent on our markets to continue, and because the entire concept of risk management and what constitutes acceptable levels has been perverted since 2008 anyways.

This is a really dangerous narrowing of how we evaluate risk and perhaps even more importantly it will now predict winners and losers - that's the "disparate impacts" piece.

That is not just relegated to financial institutions as the article scope covers but entire nation's economies. So if war breaks out and many smaller nations get caught up and thrown into receivership, who is the likely beneficiary of this, even if their national balance sheet is the best of a bad bunch? Hey, if you're trying to globalize and run the whole thing under one world government, I suppose there are more conspicuous ways to go about it. 😑

By the way how is the LIBOR doing?

Just because we don't use it as our yardstick anymore doesn't mean it has any less power to explain what is happening. And it certainly doesn't mean it WON'T predict what events come next. The collapse can manifest in a million ways, whether we are looking for the right or wrong indicators. In essence, this is another example of how they want to change a definition to ignore a fact. It's always a dangerous bargain doing this and no one can say whether it will work. Perception is not always reality.

This will pave the way for a wartime emergency economic state to take shape in the form of increasingly more front-facing, direct financial ownership of the world at large. For much of the world has already been turned into puppets and indentured servants in the global debt slavery scheme that's existed for centuries and the only thing left to do is sweep through one final time and complete the capture with finality. This was always the end game: debt slavery was good for a while but eventually that system would allow too much autonomy for the owner class among us."

Hopefully I've been able to explain the money part of this which they've set up to:

• increase the hegemony and control of the financial institutions and carve out winners and losers in that sector, which will in turn trickle down to the other sectors and effectively put the financiers in charge (more than already) of all businesses globally; the emergence of the mega Corp

• in turn the financial institutions will further amalgamate with what we consider to be the state and entire nationalized economies will be under direct supervision of the U.S. / power elite

• try and prevent their exposure to the world through an unintentional collapse economically.

Now one thing I would say this strongly implies is that they are not yet ready for the full transition to CBDC and have plans to engage in the implementation of that program later on.

My guess is the likely time would be in the aftermath of the coming "war" following the pattern of other major changes to our financial institutions and accepted exchange which seem to always take place around the time of large wars. It seems to be better suited to post-war implementation as a way to better integrate the places that will be left in rubble into the power structure more fully.

Hope you enjoy the read!