Chief Citigroup Economist Proposes Abolishing Cash to Save World Economy

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
This is a loaded question. What is stopping the federal government from doing anything? All laws are Constitutional until shown to be otherwise by the Judicial Branch. So you can ask this question, but the reality is, how likely is it that the law will withstand Constitutional scrutiny? I'm already pretty sure that Louisiana law is unconstitutional, so if that is the case, a federal version of it will be equally unconstitutional.

Here is another example from Texas:

SALES AND USE TAX BULLETIN Susan Combs, Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts June 2014 Garage Sales and Texas Sales Tax Selling Personal Items – You May Need a Texas Sales and Use Tax Permit

The issue is on their radars and they are just feeling it out at this point. Don't worry, they WILL find a way to collect a portion of these taxes eventually.

a reply to: boohoo

Well clearly the people need to stand up and vote that crap down. Two states really aren't indicative of a national trend though.

PS. I notice that both of those states are Republican states. Weren't Republicans supposed to be the ones AGAINST raising taxes or implementing frivolous taxes like this? Gotta love the hypocrisy. LOL.

No offense to you or anything, I'm not trying to assume anything about your political affiliation. Just making a statement regarding a trend between the two states you've brought forward as examples.

originally posted by: NthOther
Which presumes it's worthy of saving, but I digress...

Bloomberg Business (yikes!)

The world's central banks have a problem.

When economic conditions worsen, they react by reducing interest rates in order to stimulate the economy. But, as has happened across the world in recent years, there comes a point where those central banks run out of room to cut — they can bring interest rates to zero, but reducing them further below that is fraught with problems, the biggest of which is cash in the economy.

In a new piece, Citi's Willem Buiter looks at this problem, which is known as the effective lower bound (ELB) on nominal interest rates.

It's filled with a lot of economist jargon, but basically what the guy is saying is that for their little shell game to continue, they have to remove cash from the system or de-incentivize its use (or both).

Creating a cashless society is one goal of the world's elite-of-the-elite that we've been talking about here for quite some time, and of course received our fair share of ridicule for it.

Nonetheless, a "credentialed" top economist at one of the world's leading financial institutions is now openly proposing it (albeit not the first). He acknowledges the fact that such a policy would encounter heavy resistance, but of course dismisses such concerns outright.

Then the article, of course, suggests that there's really "nothing to see here":

Whatever the strength of the arguments, the chances of an administration taking the decision to abolish cash seem vanishingly small.

Not gonna happen, right?

Right.

Bilderberg 2015 is in a few weeks, if I'm not mistaken. Will this be an agenda Action Item?

Fundamentally, the ELB problem comes down to cash. According to Buiter, the ELB only exists at all due to the existence of cash, which is a bearer instrument that pays zero nominal rates. Why have your money on deposit at a negative rate that reduces your wealth when you can have it in cash and suffer no reduction?

Cash therefore gives people an easy and effective way of avoiding negative nominal rates.

Buiter's note suggests three ways to address this problem:

Abolish currency.

Tax currency.

Remove the fixed exchange rate between currency and central bank reserves/deposits.

Is this a preview of what's inevitably coming down the pike?

I've been saying this for years. They have every intention of removing cash from the hands of the "small" people, the serfs. That way EVERY purchase is tracked, just like our phone calls & emails & our net activities. You will have to be rich to be able to afford cash.

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
What is the point of a government if absolute control over our daily lives is controlled by a system of private banks?

A cashless system would be a gift. A few clicks of the mouse and financial crisis' can be averted. IF such a power was in the hands of trustworthy directors - might I suggest - a democratically elected government and not a bunch of sleazy, lazy, unimaginative banker clones that are holding back the advancement of our civilization.

Imagine an unlimited amount of pay cheques going out to researchers in the space industry. Unlimited pay cheques to the medical industry. No targets for "shareholders" other than do your best, do it right, and lets see what we can do.

What is the point of government when the bankers control the people?

Because the banksters behind the Fed own the politicians who write the laws (I include SCOTUS). In short, the banksters are our government. It's the banksters who own the international mega-corporations who control our energy, our food production, our medical system, our real estate, etc., etc.

A cashless society would be a gift only to the Cabal who want total control of the money and who do not want the serfs to have any privacy. For us, the serfs, it would be a nightmare.

originally posted by: boohoo

OR make People-Driven car insurance rates, so high, that no regular working-stiff can afford to pay it and in turn and are then forced to buy/finance a self-driven car, at an overall cheaper price point, per mile driven.

Correct, this kind of tech is bad for regular people, whom are not part of the true "Owners of Capital" class.

The "Owners of Capital" believe that this kind of tech, along with the manipulation of legislation and tight wage controls will give them ultimate power over ALL labor, not just the lower classes. People need to start abandoning tech, if they truly hope to have a chance at standing up against the "owners of capital". Currently, people falsely believe tech will save and unite them, when in reality it was designed by "corporate committee" to do just the opposite.

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?

Also all these digital technologies WILL have "click-wrap agreements". Remember we will be "agreeing" to use software, not "agreeing to follow the rules of the road in vehicles under our own control". Self-driving car WILL have "click-wrap agreements", waiving the right to sue, that will be automatically acknowledged by stepping into the vehicle and digitally signed wirelessly by the phone in passengers pocket. I can GUARANTEE that users/owners of Self-Driving Cars are going to be forced to waive their right a Jury Trial and will be REQUIRED to sign either "jury waivers" at the time purchase/lease or to go through forced private arbitration.

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.

"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."

Cell regeneration, the good gifts of high tech, will be reserved for the Rich.

Eventually, robotics will replace most of the workers of the world. Not any time soon, but it's coming.

Self-driving cars and AI are already here. A cashless society will be coming. It's an Orwellian nightmare coming. I'm amazed more people can't see it.

originally posted by: AuranVector

I'm amazed more people can't see it.

This is what really gets me anymore. I'm convinced that most people can't see it because they choose not to see it. They know it's there, but they don't want to look at it. "If I can't see it, it can't see me"-type thinking, nervously laughing while telling everyone it'll all be ok. It's about ego-defense for them. They've vested so much energy into perpetuating the system that by the time they figure out it's bulls#, it's too late. Now it's about saving face and keeping the accounts afloat.

However many people, of course, have simply been so successfully brainwashed that they think malevolent action on the part of their "government" (or any other trusted entity) is simply impossible. History doesn't matter. Reason doesn't matter. Current events don't matter. It's just impossible for them to be evil.

I don't know which one scares me more. In either case, it's clearly a form of mental disorder.

What do we use debit cards. this will be a hackers dream.
Credit cards are just as bad.

Anyone that get your numbers has your money.

If we had cash less in the US and if someone found a way to get every ones numbers they could get very rich very quick.

Just take one cent from everyone's account every month and you would have $3 million a month.

Or if the government took 5 cents a month they would get 15 million a month.

Who would miss 5 cents a month.

a reply to: ANNED

Oh, is another data mining this time by both the government and the private companies that will keep track of the cashless society, all that will cost money and who is going to pay? they just will deducted like everything else they will deduct from your cashless deposits.

originally posted by: NthOther

originally posted by: AuranVector

I'm amazed more people can't see it.

This is what really gets me anymore. I'm convinced that most people can't see it because they choose not to see it. They know it's there, but they don't want to look at it. "If I can't see it, it can't see me"-type thinking, nervously laughing while telling everyone it'll all be ok. It's about ego-defense for them. They've vested so much energy into perpetuating the system that by the time they figure out it's bulls#, it's too late. Now it's about saving face and keeping the accounts afloat.

However many people, of course, have simply been so successfully brainwashed that they think malevolent action on the part of their "government" (or any other trusted entity) is simply impossible. History doesn't matter. Reason doesn't matter. Current events don't matter. It's just impossible for them to be evil.

I don't know which one scares me more. In either case, it's clearly a form of mental disorder.

I agree. I've pretty much given up on warning people I know.

Well, I seem to be a few days late to the thread... oh well.

originally posted by: boohoo
Other states may not limit cash transactions, but there are many local governments that require a permit to hold a garage sale and the reporting of revenue collected to the local tax franchise board.

Because what they claim you owe, and what you owe is going to go to court, and they need to prove your claim. Lets say you hold a yard sale where most items were $5 and you fill out the paperwork. At the end of it you fill out the paperwork and write $5 in revenue. If they go after you and ask why it was so low, you can simply say people weren't buying and you wanted to get rid of the stuff so you gave it away. You sold one actual item at $5 (on the off chance and inspector showed up and bought something to prove you were selling) so you marked it down.

What it comes down to is it's completely unenforceable.

originally posted by: snowspirit
Too many things to change, like laundromats, all vending machines, purchases under $5 (these cost the store if cash isn't used).
I hardly use cash for other things these days, paycheque direct deposit, online bill paying, email transfers when my son borrows (?) money, debit card purchases for anything over $5.
My veterinarian only takes cash or VISA (I don't have a VISA), coins to purchase bulk water, and we just bought a puppy (delivery next week).
Email transfers take about a half hour or so to go through, that needs to be instant to work with strangers.

It takes all of $50... maybe $100 to convert a laundromat to debit/credit only. You put one of those addon card swipes on the coin machine (which instead gives you metal slugs that work in the machines) so that people swipe their card to get the tokens to use the machines rather than the cash or bring in their own change. It's already common practice in arcades to do this.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: NthOther

The existence of the black market makes any attempt to eliminate cash useless. If they got rid of cash, people would switch to some other arbitrary and untraceable object to use to engage in black market deals.

The black market isn't really the concern here. The concern is that if banks need to start offering negative interest rates there's no incentive to put your money in the bank when cash is an alternative. Some areas of Europe and Asia are already negative interest rates, and what generally happens is the people put their money in other countries banks. In the US we would probably include banking laws to prevent that. So what you would have is money in the bank that is worth $1 today but $0.99 tomorrow vs the $1 cash that's worth $1 today and $1 tomorrow.

The reason they're talking about this as a problem is that we're only a couple years away from the next big banking disaster at this point, if these things stick to their historical pattern and so far there has been zero recovery from the last one. There are no economic tools to make things remain solvent other than negative interest rates (which are of dubious value) and confiscating cash from depositors bank accounts.

Just how in the heck is this gonna "save" the world economy??? The majority of the people aren't putting money in their savings account mainly because they have no money to save after they pay the bills because their hours have been cut to what would be considered near part time and their wages have either been stagnated way too long or they've lost a good part of it! All that money is being diverted up to the top echelons of society where they see no need to lend it out to business ventures or invest in anything useful, not when there's so many other ways to make their fortunes in the unregulated shadier markets! Doing away with the medium of currency that we are using does nothing to fix the fundamental flaws that they've built into the system over the last close to half a century!

And the only way they can force people to buy this or that is if they force businesses to pay employees enough to have the funds to buy it, look at the obamacare mess!!! It's either pay the employees enough to buy it or spend a crapload of money finding a way for the taxpayers to buy it for them. and well having the taxpayers pay for it leads to just more needy people needing help to buy the crap that the gov't says they need even when they don't see the need themselves!

the only way that this could save the economy is that it would give a facist gov't/corporate union the power to take control of everything. and well give them the power to decide how much each person should be paid, how much they should be spending on what they need, and just what they need! The that gov't\corp union is the one that gives you your credits each month out of the gov't\corp pool of invisable money that is taxed from the companies that you work for. at least that's the future I see. but hey at least the little people aren't paying taxes anymore!!

An economist wants to abolish cash... I want to abolish economists. How about we make one BIG fire and throw all the bankers and cash in it and start again trading in cigarettes???

Something to consider in all this "cashless" talk, is that when we take cash out of the bank and keep it at home, even sometimes just as a reserve in case our card stops working or is compromised (as I have had a couple of times) then that is money not on the banks books. Sure, it is legally "MY" money, but the banks do not like me taking it out. By going cashless, they then have a much greater on the books worth, and more of our cash to play with or to bail them out.

Another thing to consider too, with the technological push and surely a natural progression, is that if we move to a cashless system of monetary credits of whatever name they choose, why would we put it in the hands of some sleazeball organization with a sordid history of theft and criminal acts?
Surely, those monetary credits could then reside in a repository under the owners control instead of that of the banks?

Just imagine the ramifications of that for a moment. Maybe I have just painted a big target on my forehead for even bringing it up!