The Cashless Society and Family Control

I thought of this after reading page 21 of the book Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars which is freely available on the net.

In a cash based society economists face a problem with what is called the household industry. The consumer preferences of any household in a cash based society is very difficult to predict let alone measure without accurate data. Using information that can be gained from the universal product code and 100% traceability of spending that the cashless society provides, the spending history of each and every household in every country can be known to the nearest dollar.

Think about the degree of precision and extent of data analysis the cashless society will afford the PTSNB (Powers That Should Not Be) not just in terms of the information they can gain about a family such as their family culture but also in terms of the potential for regulating that families life.

Think also about the potential for preventing families which constitute the masses, from building up savings and slowly acquiring some level of wealth which in turn will give them some degree of economic choices and options.

The concept of shock testing enables economic engineers to experiment on and measure the effects of sudden and sharp adjustments to the price of particular household inputs such as motor fuel, bread, milk, groceries, energy, school fees, rates etc. This enables the direct and indirect effects to measured and known with a great deal of precision.

By turning various nobs (such as prices, taxes or inflation) up or down, the PTSNB are able to regulate and control household wealth accumulation (savings) and keep the masses right where they want them.

For more info read page 20 and 21 of the book Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars.

There's still a minute problem. There's always going to be housing to worry about.

In an anarchist society there's obviously food to worry about.

And in a socialist society, there's got to be enough freedom for people to choose what they want to do if we want to avoid the potential of a massive society's revolt. The only feasible end all government option I see happening is a completely agriculturally based build your own house surrounding the massive farm one.

Then, of course, there's going to be population to worry about. So someone's gotta take a census.

Oh, you mean credit cards by cashless? Well okay.

a reply to: Azureblue

The only cashless society I will ever tolerate is a society which requires no currency what so ever in order to operate, a society which does not require or possess financial, material, or notional wealth of any sort. Until the worth of a human being and their right to move through the world freely and with a full belly, with shelter, and with heat, light and data, is guaranteed by the simple act of their being alive to experience it, I will not accept a cashless society.

Until there is no economy what so ever, there should always be cash. Until we move past the petty concerns of materialism, and toward common goals like the unification of the people of this world, the need for humanity to spread amongst the stars to prevent its being wiped out in the event of an asteroid strike or similar, we will always need a transportable and physical currency, not just electronic currency.

a reply to: Azureblue

Thats the problem with one world currencies, they can levy fines and sanctions on whole countries, not just families.

In the EU we see what austerity has done to Nations under one Euro Dollar. Here , we will regulate the value of your money for we issue it. Oh, you can't afford to pay, then we'll loan you some more and you can forever pay the interest. Oh, you can't pay, we'll take your home and your stuff.

Then you can work for us, forever, for free…

The end result

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Azureblue

Until the worth of a human being and their right to move through the world freely and with a full belly, with shelter, and with heat, light and data, is guaranteed by the simple act of their being alive to experience it, I will not accept a cashless society.

Sorry if I'm nit-picking.... but who's going to keep the lights on and the data flowing. Most electricians I know show up to work because they are going to get paid.

a reply to: eluryh22

Did you know, that the vast majority of individuals earn money by way of the least of their talents? I know a web designer and networks infrastructure consultant whose greatest talent is costume making. I know a book keeper whose true skill is also costume related. I know accountants who are fantastic welders, electricians who are far better woodworkers, bank managers who play guitar better than they ever manage money, and so on and so forth.

The number of people who are free to make the most of their talents, rather than taking jobs they hate for pay packets which demean them and say nothing of their true talents is far greater, than the number of people who make money doing what they were literally born to do, what every fibre of their being demands they spend time and love and effort doing.

If you said to any of those people "I will provide you with the tools, the time, and the living necessary to sustain you in comfort, if you will devote yourself to the thing you are best at, the thing you love" then they would chew your arm off to take that opportunity.

Society would have to be a very different beast, to allow for such freedom and nourishment of the people, but unless a cashless society is also a currency free society, where money does not exist, where a persons ability to eat is guaranteed by their will to do what they are best at, and do it to the very highest standard they can, this could never come to pass. We would all be better off if it did.

a reply to: TrueBrit

So what is your response when you will not tolerate it?

Plastic makes money for the banks and interchange for every cent spent. It's just high tech greed. Anything else that can be learned and exploited is a bonus.

a reply to: southbeach

Well, it would render any response utterly moot, if I uttered it on the internet.

You will forgive me then, if I fail to provide that information.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Any attempt to create a cashless society here in the UK would just create a barter type system, I imagine that silver and gold, services, and tradeable goods would be bartered and thus avoid taxation and traceability.

I think that would be a damn fine thing to happen so maybe a cashless society would be a good thing.

a reply to: TrueBrit

So Unicorns are real and there really is a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow?

Just because you enjoy doing something does not mean society as a whole values that talent. You still have to earn a living. In fact, my secretary is an actual costume maker. She does after hours for small theater companies. It simply does not pay the bills, so she has to work for me.

All of the advancements we enjoy as a society are done because there is an economy and somebody gets rich off that innovation. I know it is hard to accept, but greed is what drives most innovation that makes all are lives easier.

I

originally posted by: Edumakated
a reply to: TrueBrit

So Unicorns are real and there really is a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow?

Just because you enjoy doing something does not mean society as a whole values that talent. You still have to earn a living. In fact, my secretary is an actual costume maker. She does after hours for small theater companies. It simply does not pay the bills, so she has to work for me.

All of the advancements we enjoy as a society are done because there is an economy and somebody gets rich off that innovation. I know it is hard to accept, but greed is what drives most innovation that makes all are lives easier.

I

How is life made easier if we all have to have jobs that we hate in order to survive?

I am not quite sure I agree with your statement in that regard.

a reply to: Edumakated

I did not say that it was realistic right now. Humanity is not in a position intellectually, or politically, to transit into such a position at the current time.

It may be that in time, that particular situation will change.

originally posted by: nonspecific

originally posted by: Edumakated
a reply to: TrueBrit

So Unicorns are real and there really is a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow?

Just because you enjoy doing something does not mean society as a whole values that talent. You still have to earn a living. In fact, my secretary is an actual costume maker. She does after hours for small theater companies. It simply does not pay the bills, so she has to work for me.

All of the advancements we enjoy as a society are done because there is an economy and somebody gets rich off that innovation. I know it is hard to accept, but greed is what drives most innovation that makes all are lives easier.

I

How is life made easier if we all have to have jobs that we hate in order to survive?

I am not quite sure I agree with your statement in that regard.

Having a job you like is not guaranteed. Very few people are that lucky. In terms of life being easier, I was referring to advancements / innovations that mean you don't have to toil in a field for 12-15 hours a day just to put some food on the table, or go out and chop trees to build your own home, or use a horse and buggy for transportation, etc. All the technological and innovation advancements that make even the poorest among us live like kings compared to people even two generations ago.

Work isn't necessarily supposed to be fun.

Yeah, I guess in some fantasy future, it would be nice if there was no need for money, food was plentiful, and everyone lived like kings, but that utopia doesn't exist and will never exist.

a reply to: Edumakated

Agreed A eutopia is not in the near future but I would question your assumption that those who have a job they enjoy are "lucky" I would put it down to determination rather than luck.

As you say not many people work 12 hours in a field but many people work in high stress or labour intensive jobs for 60 hours a week plus and barely scrape by so I am not sure we have come all that far yet.

a reply to: TrueBrit

That's kind of amusing, I have noticed that those who are considered the most successful at their pigeon-hole jobs are usually the most useless at most other things but hobbies.

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". The "owners of capital" have, at this point, 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. We are approaching a day when they will simply make it law that you have to buy goods, 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 these accounts will be use-it or lose-it). Also, since you won't own things like the new "digital cars" being developed or the current "digital media" being rented on Hulu, Netflix, etc., means in the future, you could be billed for "damage to the vehicle or product" from the "real owners of that vehicle or product" at any time.

Regular People 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 that regular people will face 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. I can guarantee that the IRS or some other agency will have some way to calculate the amount "you should have purchased" (sounds a little like a college FASFA aid forms in reverse doesn't it?). People will also have to pay a monthly fee to keep their digital money in the bank and there won't be any alternative way to store it, without paying the monthly fee. It is an instant, predictable, revenue generator for public companies, that the stock market will then feed off.

Bartering used as a circumvention method has been suggested before, but the IRS already has a plan and system in place to deal with it somewhat. They will tax bartering by an estimate, the same way they do for restaurant servers receiving tips. There will likely be HUGE penalties for barter and I will bet EVERYONE will automatically be assumed to have "bartered" some amount over the year at tax time (perhaps an estimated $500 in barter per year, that is taxed whether the person in question did any actual bartering or not). The most likely outcome though, is that one day, bartering will simply be deemed an illegal activity, I don't recall it being a named constitutional right anywhere.

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

Here is an example, remember when cell phones were actually fun?

I do, the phone was a huge and needed to be carried in a bag, BUT my boss NEVER called me on it, after what was considered typical work hours and certainly never to ask me to do more work, while I was at home. Compare that to today, when a cell phone in your pocket can spontaneously generate more work to be done outside of the office, simply because someone higher up than you had a random thought at midnight.

When my parents were in school in the 1950's and 60's they were told: no one would have to work in the future, that everything would be done by robots and they would, in turn, have increased free time used for creating, making art, learning and helping others...

Robotics, self driving cars, digital currency, the Singularity, Cell Regeneration and Artificial Intelligence are essentially the same lie, told to our parents, rehashed for a 21st century audience. I think its funny when regular people get excited about future tech like the Singularity, AI, Robotics, Self-Driving Cars, etc. Do people really think when these thing finally become real, functioning, working designs, applicable to industry, that we, the "peons", will somehow ALL get a Data from Start Trek or a C-3PO from Star Wars, to help us at home, at the job site or in the office, etc?

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, regular people, ESPECIALLY MILLENNIALS, 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 regular people can save themselves, NOW, is to abandon tech, physically impede tech research and stop buying/supporting companies making this AI/singularity tech. I personally at this point are willing to live with 1980's +/- era tech, if it means, I am more free and can continue to earn money to live off.

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

The black market will always live on.

Not to mention, no amount of mined data will ever perfectly model a consumer. There will always be those random choices that cannot be modeled or predicted.

originally posted by: ketsuko
The black market will always live on.

Not to mention, no amount of mined data will ever perfectly model a consumer. There will always be those random choices that cannot be modeled or predicted.

The "Owners of Capital" know about this possibility and in turn, they will institute "penalties" to encourage the non-compliant to conform, increasing the accuracy of the gathered data in the process.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Azureblue

Thats the problem with one world currencies, they can levy fines and sanctions on whole countries, not just families.

In the EU we see what austerity has done to Nations under one Euro Dollar. Here , we will regulate the value of your money for we issue it. Oh, you can't afford to pay, then we'll loan you some more and you can forever pay the interest. Oh, you can't pay, we'll take your home and your stuff.

Then you can work for us, forever, for free…

The end result

I Think your right there mate. I reckon thats their plan for all of us. I dont think they ever want anyone to climb out of their box