There is a push to do this coming from banking elites, governments, etc. Basically to stop the circulation of cash, and to go to a strictly electronic based system. Would you be in favor of this, and what would your reasons be for it, or against it?
So should we go cashless?
- Thread starter HawktimusPrime
- Start date
Oh, the government would LOVE that. You can't bury digital money in the backyard, and EVERY transaction will leave a digital trail.
This. My biggest fear would be that every book I bought, every movie I saw, every trip I took, would be compressed into a digital history that could be bough, sold or stolen to be used against me by businesses, parties and governments. I guess what I'm saying is that I fear for my privacy.
We already have gone gold less and silver less and have notes worth not the paper they are printed upon
It would also give the banks a percentage of every transaction made in user fees. How do I give my daughter allowance or money from the tooth ferry?
Hey baby the tooth fairy put some money in my account and now I'm going to transfer it into your account. Those Easter Eggs have IOUs from the Easter Bunny in them!
Hey baby the tooth fairy put some money in my account and now I'm going to transfer it into your account. Those Easter Eggs have IOUs from the Easter Bunny in them!
Oh, you believe in the Tooth Fairy, huh? Well maybe we should take that into account when you apply for a car loan...and I wonder what the insurance company would think of that? Maybe the DHS would have questions about you parenting too.
Only if they legalize drugs, fireworks, prostitution and anything else fun I may ever want to do. But in reality I'm personally nearly cashless now. I've had the same dollar bills in my wallet since labor day.
Would give One World Government types the opportunity to control your abilities to buy least you have a 3 digit security number on your digital card...
They could try it, but a new currency or system would rise up. Maybe gold, maybe the return of bartering that can't be taxed efficiently.
I forget to mention. I would also allow everyone to carry a sidearm so in the event someone tried to rob you, you could blow their head off. Side benefit is you'd be surprised how polite society becomes when everyone has a gun and knows how to use it. Safer and friendlier. That's the world I promise all my subjects . . . I mean voters.
Then give a nice handcrafted piece of furniture to your Mexican house servants.
Of course if a dummy like you had a sidearm that's the first thing a thief would grab, then he'd stick it up your ass and fire. He'd probably smile politely while doing it.
Just finished torturing your children or your pets before sharing your psycho personality?
And you wonder why I make fun of your economic judgement.
Wonderment? Is that what you're calling the difference between wealth and income now?
The Evil Nudgemaster Supports the Banishment of $100 Bills
Richard Thaler along with Cass Sunstein wrote a book called, Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness. It's a manual on how the government should manipulate the masses. I discussed this bizarre best seller, here and here. It's a very dangerous book.
Given Thaler's overall bent to manipulate the masses through "nudges," it is no surprise that he would come out in favor of Larry Summers call to ban the $100 bill. It's all about transferring power and control to government.
-RW
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2016/02/the-evil-nudgemaster-supports.html
Richard Thaler along with Cass Sunstein wrote a book called, Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness. It's a manual on how the government should manipulate the masses. I discussed this bizarre best seller, here and here. It's a very dangerous book.
Given Thaler's overall bent to manipulate the masses through "nudges," it is no surprise that he would come out in favor of Larry Summers call to ban the $100 bill. It's all about transferring power and control to government.
-RW
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2016/02/the-evil-nudgemaster-supports.html
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 2016
Lawrence H. Summers, the Charles W. Eliot university professor at Harvard, formerUSTreasury Secretary and former director of the National Economic Council, in a column at The Washington Post tiled, It’s time to kill the $100 bill, is calling for the banishment from circulation of the US $100 bill.
He writes:
Harvard's Mossavar Rahmani Center for Business and Government, which I am privileged to direct, has just issued an important paper by senior fellow Peter Sands and a group of student collaborators. The paper makes a compelling case for stopping the issuance of high denomination notes like the 500 euro note and $100 bill or even withdrawing them from circulation.The evil statist paints it as somehow a fight to protect ordinary citizens:
[A] global agreement to stop issuing high denomination notes would also show that the global financial groupings can stand up against “big money” and for the interests of ordinary citizens.Make no mistake about it, this is about making it difficult for individuals to conduct large size transactions in cash. It is part of the war on cash by governments so that all transaction can be tracked by governments.
-RW
Also see: They Are Taking the War On Cash to the Kids: Cashless Monopoly
Lawrence H. Summers, the Charles W. Eliot university professor at Harvard, formerUSTreasury Secretary and former director of the National Economic Council, in a column at The Washington Post tiled, It’s time to kill the $100 bill, is calling for the banishment from circulation of the US $100 bill.
He writes:
Harvard's Mossavar Rahmani Center for Business and Government, which I am privileged to direct, has just issued an important paper by senior fellow Peter Sands and a group of student collaborators. The paper makes a compelling case for stopping the issuance of high denomination notes like the 500 euro note and $100 bill or even withdrawing them from circulation.The evil statist paints it as somehow a fight to protect ordinary citizens:
[A] global agreement to stop issuing high denomination notes would also show that the global financial groupings can stand up against “big money” and for the interests of ordinary citizens.Make no mistake about it, this is about making it difficult for individuals to conduct large size transactions in cash. It is part of the war on cash by governments so that all transaction can be tracked by governments.
-RW
Also see: They Are Taking the War On Cash to the Kids: Cashless Monopoly
In short the elimination of cash, would be the elimination of your control of your own money. The banks would have sole possession of it, and in that case they would have control over you.
For all those that said nay, good for you. For those that said yes,...you should really think this through.
As the ever informative Nat Algren has shown, this is a very real proposal, and there are in fact deviants that want this to happen.
For all those that said nay, good for you. For those that said yes,...you should really think this through.
As the ever informative Nat Algren has shown, this is a very real proposal, and there are in fact deviants that want this to happen.
If cash is available, people can hoard it. If cash is banned, governments can go negative interest rate and gradually take your money away from you. Some 490 million people in this world live in a country where rates are negative (from memory, Denmark, Sweden, Switzerland, and now Japan).
A scary point as well. There isn't much we can do to stop them from doing this if you look at how things have been going as of late. There was a very large voice against ACA for example, and yet that didn't stop it from happening. Most of Americans want us out of the Middle East, and again, that isn't happening.
These are the times of the shadow tyranny in this country.
So how does a digital dollar compare to a digital Euro, to an English pound? Does digital currency get traded if there is nothing tangible that it represents?
Mike Gleason: Furthering the point there, let’s talk about the war on cash for a moment. We have negative interest rates coming into the picture, as you just mentioned, with our own Fed telling U.S. banks to start thinking about how they would handle negative rates. Meanwhile, we’re seeing people who want to deal in cash, withdraw their cash, even deposit cash, getting hassled in various ways. Why do you personally think that cash and cash holders are increasingly disfavored by the financial establishment?
Marc Faber: Well, it’s clear to me. If you look at the world over the last 100 years, you have a group of people that want to have more and more control over you and me. They want to know where you are, what you do, what you’re looking at. Basically, we’re moving into an Orwellian society where they can check everything. And cash will still be one of the means where you could go somewhere and buy something and nobody would really know about it. Now they want to abolish it. Of course, if you have negative interest rates, you want to essentially prevent people from hoarding bank notes in their safes at no cost. So you want to deprive them of that privilege, of that freedom, so you introduce a cashless society. In my opinion, it will not work, and let me explain to you why.
Let’s say you and I live in a small town of a thousand people and suddenly the government says, “No more cash.” Say, I’m the baker and you’re the butcher, and a friend of ours is the pharmacist. We can then barter among each other and effect the balances every month or every 3 months and so forth. Then, some kind of paper money comes back up. These are vouchers. So the war on cash would have the exact opposite effect. You will have a voucher system in every small city, and even in big cities, some smart people will develop the voucher system. So instead of having just one currency, paper currency, you’ll have hundreds of paper currencies. Number two; if they want to really launch a cashless society, they would have to take your gold away. That, in some countries, will simply not fly. In other countries, a cashless society is simply not practical because 80% of the population doesn’t have a bank account and doesn’t have cash to start with. So in my view, this cashless business is going to fail very badly.
The argument is, of course, “Oh, we want to move into a cashless society because we want to prevent criminality.” This is all nonsense. They want to move into cashless society so they can control you.
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/02/no_author/evil-insane/
Marc Faber: Well, it’s clear to me. If you look at the world over the last 100 years, you have a group of people that want to have more and more control over you and me. They want to know where you are, what you do, what you’re looking at. Basically, we’re moving into an Orwellian society where they can check everything. And cash will still be one of the means where you could go somewhere and buy something and nobody would really know about it. Now they want to abolish it. Of course, if you have negative interest rates, you want to essentially prevent people from hoarding bank notes in their safes at no cost. So you want to deprive them of that privilege, of that freedom, so you introduce a cashless society. In my opinion, it will not work, and let me explain to you why.
Let’s say you and I live in a small town of a thousand people and suddenly the government says, “No more cash.” Say, I’m the baker and you’re the butcher, and a friend of ours is the pharmacist. We can then barter among each other and effect the balances every month or every 3 months and so forth. Then, some kind of paper money comes back up. These are vouchers. So the war on cash would have the exact opposite effect. You will have a voucher system in every small city, and even in big cities, some smart people will develop the voucher system. So instead of having just one currency, paper currency, you’ll have hundreds of paper currencies. Number two; if they want to really launch a cashless society, they would have to take your gold away. That, in some countries, will simply not fly. In other countries, a cashless society is simply not practical because 80% of the population doesn’t have a bank account and doesn’t have cash to start with. So in my view, this cashless business is going to fail very badly.
The argument is, of course, “Oh, we want to move into a cashless society because we want to prevent criminality.” This is all nonsense. They want to move into cashless society so they can control you.
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/02/no_author/evil-insane/
