Topic: [2015-11-20] Leave Bitcoin Alone. Abolish Cash Instead. (Read 784 times)
Its a matter of time until this mindless fools what we call governments realise the meaning of cryptocurrencies.And once they do they will start controlling the flow of it with all their political corruption.
Governments and banks are always wary of new things which change the established order of things. Once settled down, the hysteria surrounding the tragedy in Paris will be followed by a sober assessment of the situation and further course of action.
I think cash can easily be taken from you as we havd seen in Greece where they locked down and their own people's money, with this in mind it is a reason why cash will not be abolished the govrnments and banks need their backup fund 
bitcoin can't be controlled by them.
bitcoin can't be controlled by them. 
But I like my fiat money, it loses 90% of its value in less than 40 years, and I love my wealth being stolen by cleptocrats.
It's not fair if you let people store their wealth safely.
It's not fair if you let people store their wealth safely.
It's funny how people save their value-eroding fiat for their future retirement. It almost makes more sense to spend it on lobster now, because you are going to be eating sardines when you retire anyway. I haven't heard of the term 'cleptocrats', but it's a good one.
Cleptocrat = Kleptes (thief) + Kratos (rule) [greek term just like democracy] = A system that is based on theft
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kleptocracy
People save money now is if they need to spend some on big ticket purchase, they do not need to borrow.
Pension is an exception.
If the fiat money would not steal people's money, there would be no need for pension system.
The ONLY reason a banking system would insist on abolishing cash is so they could eventually implement negative interest rates.
With negative rates, you pay the banks to hold your money. If there's no cash, then you don't have an exit from the system to preserve your asset value. This is the true end-game, and has nothing to do with customer convenience or saving anyone time. Its all about increasing their control over you.
With negative rates, you pay the banks to hold your money. If there's no cash, then you don't have an exit from the system to preserve your asset value. This is the true end-game, and has nothing to do with customer convenience or saving anyone time. Its all about increasing their control over you.
I doubt that this move would succeed. People could always convert their assets to gold or real estate if this was fully implemented.
Plus, interest rates in the end are influenced by politics. This would be a hugely unpopular step.
Its already happening in Sweden, soon to debut in other economies where negative rates are the only alternative to paying down national debt, which will be delayed long enough to destabilize entire economies.
Let's see how fast people will freak out when they realize how easy and quick their income, pensions, savings gets eaten by NIRP.And they can do nothing against it if cash is abandoned and precious metals gets confiscated.
Let's see how they react when they pay their membership fee for a oppositional national/conservative party and suddenly police stands infront of their door 6 am in the morning.
Bye bye democracy and privacy!
Hello totalitarianism!
Greetz from Orwell!
The ONLY reason a banking system would insist on abolishing cash is so they could eventually implement negative interest rates.
With negative rates, you pay the banks to hold your money. If there's no cash, then you don't have an exit from the system to preserve your asset value. This is the true end-game, and has nothing to do with customer convenience or saving anyone time. Its all about increasing their control over you.
With negative rates, you pay the banks to hold your money. If there's no cash, then you don't have an exit from the system to preserve your asset value. This is the true end-game, and has nothing to do with customer convenience or saving anyone time. Its all about increasing their control over you.
I doubt that this move would succeed. People could always convert their assets to gold or real estate if this was fully implemented.
Plus, interest rates in the end are influenced by politics. This would be a hugely unpopular step.
Its already happening in Sweden, soon to debut in other economies where negative rates are the only alternative to paying down national debt, which will be delayed long enough to destabilize entire economies.
But I like my fiat money, it loses 90% of its value in less than 40 years, and I love my wealth being stolen by cleptocrats.
It's not fair if you let people store their wealth safely.
It's not fair if you let people store their wealth safely.
It's funny how people save their value-eroding fiat for their future retirement. It almost makes more sense to spend it on lobster now, because you are going to be eating sardines when you retire anyway. I haven't heard of the term 'cleptocrats', but it's a good one.
People save money now is if they need to spend some on big ticket purchase, they do not need to borrow.
Pension is an exception.
I doubt that cash will be abolished anytime soon, but let's give credit where credit is due. Credit cards and the associated fraud, identity theft, etc. have been at the centre of terrorist financing for years. You can remain 100% anonymous by purchasing a pre-paid credit card with cash and sending the payment to a phony business or corrupt bank anywhere in the world. This is the bank's and financial institution's responsibility to clean up this mess.
But I like my fiat money, it loses 90% of its value in less than 40 years, and I love my wealth being stolen by cleptocrats.
It's not fair if you let people store their wealth safely.
It's not fair if you let people store their wealth safely.
It's funny how people save their value-eroding fiat for their future retirement. It almost makes more sense to spend it on lobster now, because you are going to be eating sardines when you retire anyway. I haven't heard of the term 'cleptocrats', but it's a good one.
The ONLY reason a banking system would insist on abolishing cash is so they could eventually implement negative interest rates.
With negative rates, you pay the banks to hold your money. If there's no cash, then you don't have an exit from the system to preserve your asset value. This is the true end-game, and has nothing to do with customer convenience or saving anyone time. Its all about increasing their control over you.
With negative rates, you pay the banks to hold your money. If there's no cash, then you don't have an exit from the system to preserve your asset value. This is the true end-game, and has nothing to do with customer convenience or saving anyone time. Its all about increasing their control over you.
I doubt that this move would succeed. People could always convert their assets to gold or real estate if this was fully implemented.
Plus, interest rates in the end are influenced by politics. This would be a hugely unpopular step.
But I like my fiat money, it loses 90% of its value in less than 40 years, and I love my wealth being stolen by cleptocrats.
It's not fair if you let people store their wealth safely.
It's not fair if you let people store their wealth safely.
The ONLY reason a banking system would insist on abolishing cash is so they could eventually implement negative interest rates.
With negative rates, you pay the banks to hold your money. If there's no cash, then you don't have an exit from the system to preserve your asset value. This is the true end-game, and has nothing to do with customer convenience or saving anyone time. Its all about increasing their control over you.
With negative rates, you pay the banks to hold your money. If there's no cash, then you don't have an exit from the system to preserve your asset value. This is the true end-game, and has nothing to do with customer convenience or saving anyone time. Its all about increasing their control over you.
Too much cash out there. There is an estimated cash of $670 Bn circulating outside the US.
Forcing people to surrender these would create chaos.
Forcing people to surrender these would create chaos.
I personally think the authorities are fighting a losing battle and grasping at straws by trying to control the mechanism used to fund terrorism.
Banning cash and or bitcoin will not resolve these issues as the 'terrorists' will then just switch to another medium and or to a type of barter in order to get what they require. Any laws and or regulations being brought in to fight this 'terrorist funding' will in all probability just complicate the lives of the average Joe out there without having any major impact on the terrorists. Just like with all the present AML/KYC legislation where the average Joe have to jump through many hoops just to open an account or to make any kind of transaction. It just complicates the lives of many without having any real impact on the fight against terrorism.
But what do I know, its all for my protection according to those in power......
Banning cash and or bitcoin will not resolve these issues as the 'terrorists' will then just switch to another medium and or to a type of barter in order to get what they require. Any laws and or regulations being brought in to fight this 'terrorist funding' will in all probability just complicate the lives of the average Joe out there without having any major impact on the terrorists. Just like with all the present AML/KYC legislation where the average Joe have to jump through many hoops just to open an account or to make any kind of transaction. It just complicates the lives of many without having any real impact on the fight against terrorism.
But what do I know, its all for my protection according to those in power......
I would suggest abolish or reduce the use of cash in the future when the infrastructure of bitcoin is well built. At present, it is difficult to get instant confirmation of bitcoin transactions.
Actually many merchants don't require the 10 minutes' waiting for one confirmation, like coffee shops, convenient store etc.
I would suggest abolish or reduce the use of cash in the future when the infrastructure of bitcoin is well built. At present, it is difficult to get instant confirmation of bitcoin transactions.
Topic needs proper date formatting to be in the news section. Please correct.
Thanks...
Thanks...
Oops!
Sorry... first post here.
Topic needs proper date formatting to be in the news section. Please correct.
Thanks...
Thanks...
Any guesses as to how long it will take for governments to learn what cryptocurrency is and what it isn't?? Tweet the article if you agree (at least about leaving bitcoin alone).
Leave Bitcoin Alone. Abolish Cash Instead.
"The European Union has struck on a plan to crack down on the use of anonymous payments and virtual currencies so that terrorists can't use them. The problem is that terrorists aren't really using them, anyway."
"They're using good old cash, though its circulation is already severely limited in countries such as France -- the scene of the most recent Islamic State terror attacks. Instead of taking their anger out on virtual currencies, now is the time for governments to think seriously about the abolition of cash."
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-11-20/bitcoin-is-better-than-cash-for-keeping-track-of-terrorists
Leave Bitcoin Alone. Abolish Cash Instead.
"The European Union has struck on a plan to crack down on the use of anonymous payments and virtual currencies so that terrorists can't use them. The problem is that terrorists aren't really using them, anyway."
"They're using good old cash, though its circulation is already severely limited in countries such as France -- the scene of the most recent Islamic State terror attacks. Instead of taking their anger out on virtual currencies, now is the time for governments to think seriously about the abolition of cash."
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-11-20/bitcoin-is-better-than-cash-for-keeping-track-of-terrorists
Jump to: