>>> We know they don't have full reserves because we know 30% of them were seized. [1]

You suspect they don't have full reserves because you know 30% of them were seized. Presuming "full reserves" means 1:1 backing (what else could it mean, here?), your statement assumes they had exactly 1:1 reserves before the seizure. If they had more than that, your assumption could end up false.

So sure, you suspect. From what I've read in this thread, I tend to agree. But I fail to see how you know.

Better call it economics. Not like there's difference, but economics is better for PR.

No, there's a big difference lol, the economy is managed and administered at the will of the people to benefit the people. This fraud is being administered by a shady cabal in the BVI with offices in Hong Kong to the benefit of themselves.