How to end boom and bust: make cash illegal

Is this a good idea?

" Forcing everyone to spend only by electronic means from an account held at a government-run bank would give the authorities far better tools to deal with recessions and economic booms, writes Jim Leaviss "

A proposed new law in Denmark could be the first step towards an economic revolution that sees physical currencies and normal bank accounts abolished and gives governments futuristic new tools to fight the cycle of “boom and bust”...

...the move could be a key moment in the advent of “cashless societies”. And once all money exists only in bank accounts – monitored, or even directly controlled by the government – the authorities will be able to encourage us to spend more when the economy slows, or spend less when it is overheating.

No, this is not a good idea.
It is a very, very, very bad idea.

The article ends with this, "Finally, the 'black economy' will be hugely diminished, and tax evasion made all but impossible."

No, the "black economy" is not going to be diminished.
On the contrary, this will only force people into Bitcoin
and other forms of alternative currency like ZeroCoin, etc.

Your current account will no longer be held with a bank, but with the government or the central bank. Banks still exist, and still lend money, but they get their funds from the central bank, not from depositors.
Having everyone’s account at a single, central institution allows the authorities to either encourage or discourage people to spend. To boost spending, the bank imposes a negative interest rate on the money in everyone’s account – in effect, a tax on saving.

This is a New World Order wet dream fantasy.
Not going to happen. Don't worry. Be happy.

a reply to: wasaka
This was one of the first things I saw this morning and was going to post after I finished all my reading. I found it ironic that the article clearly notes "government control" of an individuals money multiple times in the article and spins it off as positive that an individual would be forced to spend or save by a central governmental system.

You are right, this is the New World Order's wet dream, however, I do think this will happen in some places, as the article notes, but I am also sure people realize the danger and stop spending money at places where in the Danish proposal

it would simply allow shops to refuse payments in cash and insist that customers use contactless debit cards or some other means of electronic payment.

and force these places out of business and send a message that they experiment backfired.

a reply to: wasaka

There is currently a "war on cash" going on, being waged by the governments and banksters because it would allow for them to further manipulate and skim off the top

This would also be followed up immediately by a VAT (Value Added Tax) on ALL transactions, including yard sales and flea markets. That would permit the leeches in DC to steal and redistribute even more of our hard earned money.

Cash is KING.

Ain't got it....can't afford it....shouldn't have it.

And why the heck should I be obliged to have a permenant record of my finances for some paper-pushers to scrutinise?

I don't spend what I don't have, I understand good value and bargains, don't have to live as a four digit number or by providing personal data to use a card.

Better still, live by "barter". Trading stuff, things and services and not even touching cash, let alone credit. This also promotes personal abilities rather than how much I can make by a check or direct transfer which is just a bunch of numbers and dots.

Cash IS King and the reason TPTB are scared of it because they have less power over those who choose to use it.

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: wasaka

There is currently a "war on cash" going on, being waged by the governments...

Actually, this is a expertly veiled attempt at killing BitCoin, for which governments are much more fearful than cash. The happy consequence in this case is that a strategy that kills BitCoin, is wrapped up as a strategy to kill cash, which really kills BitCoin more, but cash also.

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: wasaka

There is currently a "war on cash" going on, being waged by the governments...

Actually, this is a expertly veiled attempt at killing BitCoin, for which governments are much more fearful than cash. The happy consequence in this case is that a strategy that kills BitCoin, is wrapped up as a strategy to kill cash, which really kills BitCoin more, but cash also.

How does this kill Bitcoin? Please explain that to me.

This is the direction the governments of the world want things to go. They want 100% control of the buying and selling of goods and services for a variety of reasons...not the least of which is the ability to tax. We the people need to develop other means of barter that don't require cash.

Gold and silver will always be alternate means of currency. I also believe that we need to get better at trading with our neighbors and people in our community. This is the kind of fair exchange we should be moving towards not some electronic prison of financial transactions.

I don't think this is a new idea at all, the Government/Banks in Australia took away pay packets here years ago, all wages were to be paid directly into a person's bank account.

Key cards/Debit cards became the norm, the difference being you can still withdraw and trade in cash, at the moment.

I think the message is clear.

One of the big issues that came during the global financial crisis is the issue of the bailouts, when the banks are failing electronic money can be taken away and repossessed as happened in the case of the deposits in Cyprus. Physical money can’t be as easily repossessed as a result of that.

Denmark’s Central Bank Nationalbanken plans to stop printing banknotes and minting coins by the end of 2016. It claims that people increasingly prefer to use credit cards and electronic money in transactions rather than cash.

RT: The Danish Central Bank says it's stopping printing new money because demand for banknotes is falling. Is this a global trend or one peculiar to Denmark?

rt.com...

Double post

They want to stop drug trafficking, dealing, and using. I don't know how the government will do this as so much money is made by certain agencies by the drug trade. It would give them ultimate power over the citizens. I believe they would also make bartering and such illegal too. Of course regulating that would be difficult.

ETA: I heard somewhere Canada had plans to do the same?

It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, 17 so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.

Rev. 13:16-17

Pardon me for going there, but this seems awfully familiar. It's a means of control. The ultimate means of control. If they control the cash (or lack thereof), they also control you. If they take control of the only allowed medium of exchange and make it the only legal means of exchange, then they also control you.

originally posted by: ketsuko

It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, 17 so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.

Rev. 13:16-17

Pardon me for going there, but this seems awfully familiar. It's a means of control. The ultimate means of control. If they control the cash (or lack thereof), they also control you. If they take control of the only allowed medium of exchange and make it the only legal means of exchange, then they also control you.

Ha, ha...you just had to go there didn't you. But, you might well be quite correct. For one thing, forcing the serfs into a cashless economy would make it possible to move the world to one currency for all transactions, effectively replacing the Dollar as the world reserve currency.

I guess in the long run it doesn't matter anyway because in the long run....we're all dead anyway. None of us are getting out of this alive.

The argument that cash is responsible for busts is very poor. While no clear cause is defined for why busts do happen, the association that cash is responsible is very silly. To target cash to end recessions is one big, bright red herring.

With a government owned account it will make it easy for some government official to put their perception of right to the public's savings.

I've talked about this before as well and its a shot across the bow of Regular Joes. Yes...consumers will not have choices in the future because purchases will be mandatory in some way. "Click-Wrap Agreements" and a cashless society will make that transition easier for the "Owners of Capital" to force on the general populace.

Policies structured like Obamacare should have taught us ALL how these kinds of scenarios will play out. Obamacare is merely the test run of how to implement legislated purchases on a large scale. "Click-Wrap Agreements" a cashless society will only strengthen similar policies in the future.

What do I mean exactly?

Many forget that we now live in what "could" be considered a fascist country, with oligopolies running it behind the scenes. What usually results, is a situation where the "owners of capital", can and will "legislate" mandatory purchases in the future, if revenue does not match their expectations or projections (for the good of the nation of course, i.e., Too-Big-to-Fail).

So for example, if someone chooses not to buy unneeded goods or services, they will simply pay a "penalty" at tax time or some scheme involving a "negative interest rate". When the "owners of capital" run out of consumer goods that they can "strongly coerce" people to buy, in order to go to work, such as, gasoline, internet connection, car insurance, bus/subway fare, cell phones, suits/uniforms, soap, deodorant, razors, etc, one day, they will simply make it law that you have to buy them, in certain quantities before tax season (the current Healthcare dependent, Flexible Spending Account, FSA, is just the pilot program, one day we will have an FSA for ALL goods and services, and you can bet they will be use-it or lose-it). Also, since you won't own these new "digital cars" or "digital media" that means you could be billed for "damage to the vehicle or product" from the "real owners" at any time.

You will not be allowed to be frugal in the future because the "owners of capital" will take close to the same amount back, when a person tries to save money by reducing purchases, in the form of "tax penalties" or other method (cashless, digital currency,, negative interest rate, deductions from bank accounts whenever the "owners of capital" see fit). A cashless society, dominated by "click-wrap agreements" is the easiest way to structure "forced purchases" into the larger economy. Another scenario in the future is when someone chooses "not to buy" and then doesn't have the proper "proof of purchase" coupon, etc, to prove they bought these items, in the required quantities, when tax fillings come due, the IRS will have some way to calculate the amount "you should have purchased" (sounds a little like a college FASFA in reverse).

Look at solar roof panels, for example, many local governments are taxing people for installing them because they reduce dependence on local utilities, which in turn drive down privatized revenue being collected by the contract companies hired running the utilities.

I choose to not trust the intentions of corporations, AT ALL TIMES. The tech being created today is merely a tool of the "Owners of Capital" to oppress regular people. IN THE NEAR FUTURE, tech will absolutely be designed and bound to do the bidding of corporations and to enforce the will of government. It will not be independent of the real "owners of capital", by any stretch of the imagination. Currently, people falsely believe tech will save and unite them, when in reality it was designed by "corporate committee" to do just the opposite. The only way to prevent that shift, is to not buy such tech, oppose the development of said tech and discourage others from buying and using it, even if it means using force.

Note, I said OWNERS, not "creators", "purchasers" or "users".

originally posted by: wasaka
Is this a good idea?

" Forcing everyone to spend only by electronic means from an account held at a government-run bank would give the authorities far better tools to deal with recessions and economic booms, writes Jim Leaviss "


A proposed new law in Denmark could be the first step towards an economic revolution that sees physical currencies and normal bank accounts abolished and gives governments futuristic new tools to fight the cycle of “boom and bust”...

Forcing everyone to spend only by electronic means from an account held at a government-run bank which within a few short years would privitised and owned by the owners of the existing banks,

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: wasaka

There is currently a "war on cash" going on, being waged by the governments...

Actually, this is a expertly veiled attempt at killing BitCoin, for which governments are much more fearful than cash. The happy consequence in this case is that a strategy that kills BitCoin, is wrapped up as a strategy to kill cash, which really kills BitCoin more, but cash also.

Waiting on your reply to my queston: how does this hurt Bitcoin?

As you know, Bitcion is an Open-Source mathematical protocol and it
is not so easy to put a protocol back in the box. In my view, this tech
will endure in much the same way UNIX does.... it may not be mainstream
but it will never go away completely.... the banking system can ignore
it if they want to... but a small percentage for people will use it.

This underground economy called "system D" is there to stay!

The only way to kill it would be to turn off the electric power and
destroy the satellites in space that can keep it functional without
a fully functional electric grid down on Earth. If that were to happen
places like Texas and Iceland could sustain the crypto-currancy until
power is restored else where.... in that event the value of Bitcoin
would only increase! Bitcoin can't be killed... only ignored.

originally posted by: wasaka
How does this kill Bitcoin? Please explain that to me.

If the only accepted method of payment for goods, services, and investments are through a centralized exchange of digital versions of national currencies, BitCoin would be excluded in one clean fell-swoop.

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: wasaka
How does this kill Bitcoin? Please explain that to me.

If the only accepted method of payment for goods, services, and investments are through a centralized exchange of digital versions of national currencies, BitCoin would be excluded in one clean fell-swoop.

I don't see why you assume this would be the case.

Excluded doesn't mean Bitcoin ceases to function.
It only means that "system D" will thrive all the more.

The NWO's dream of a cashless society, is dead.
It is dead because of Bitcoin, and Moneta (ZeroCoin).
Excluding it only gives it power and sexy appeal.

a reply to: TonyS

First take away the experience you have from managing your own money by managing it all through a single, government entity. Those who walk the halls of power already consider any money you get to be theirs that they generously "allow" you to have. This just further consolidates that impression further making you simply a slave. After a while, it will be seen by our masters that the illusion of money will not be needed only a simple chip to track how much we work so they can disburse what it is calculated that we have earned in our labors for the state.