4 ms·

Or borrow and keep a stack of $100 bills under your mattress to be used to pay back a smaller sum at the end of the term?

15155 11y ago
That's why cash must be (gradually) banned, among other reasons. See Germany, Norway.
- dav-ycombinator 11y ago
  No need to ban cash for arbitrarily negative rates to work. Simply introduce an exchange rate between physical currency and deposits. Simply introduce an exchange rate between the dollar and it's physical representation. Barriers are largely people's lack of understanding of how this works and how huge the benefits would be for society.
  - CyberDildonics 11y ago
    > how huge the benefits would be for society Maybe if you think government and society are the same thing.
  - dav-ycombinator 11y ago
    > Maybe if you think government and society are the same thing. No, I just think that neutral monetary policy which leads to full employment (defined as natural employment under given tax/regulatory regime) is good for society. Also good for govt's ability to manage budget, but that's secondary.
- jsprogrammer 11y ago
  I don't see how that would fly in the US. Off the top, it would seem to violate at least the 1st and 4th amendments to the US Constitution.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    I'd like to see an argument for that.
    - jsprogrammer 11y ago
      Argument for what? Someone would need to propose a specific law. A law that says 'you may only contract with [insert privileged electronic currency here]" or something similar. If the enforcement is through confiscation of other currencies it will likely violate 4th amendment protections on personal effects. If certain contracts are banned (instead of, or in addition to, confiscation) it would violate speech protections. Exchanging money (in any form) is speech, as are your contractual dealings.
      - dragonwriter 11y ago
        > Argument for what? An argument as to how restricting the use of cash (or eliminating the use of cash entirely) inherently conflicts with the first or fourth amendments. > A law that says 'you may only contract with [insert privileged electronic currency here]" or something similar. The usual method would be more like "All damages, including -- but not limited to -- those for breach of contracts specifying payment in some other currency, shall be awarded and assessed in [privileged currency] as of the date the debt became due and payable." > If the enforcement is through confiscation of other currencies it will likely violate 4th amendment protections on personal effects. That's a creative argument, but, no, Fourth Amendment search and seizure protections do not prohibit confiscation of contraband. > If certain contracts are banned (instead of, or in addition to, confiscation) it would violate speech protections. Contracts that are contrary to public policy -- such as those whose fulfillment requires an act prohibited by law -- are generally void for that reason; this is a well-settled principal of law and is not contrary to the First Amendment. The idea that the First Amendment means any contract obligation, without restriction, is immune from prohibition is, well, silly in the extreme.
  - klodolph 11y ago
    Read article I section 8.
- AnimalMuppet 11y ago
  But if you ban cash, you for the same reason also have to ban gold (even jewelry), collectible coins, non-perishable food, and anything else that can be bought and stored as a store of value. Good luck with all that.
  - jaycroft 11y ago
    Can one buy futures on Honey Buns? http://gawker.com/5729214/honey-buns-are-the-new-prison-currency http://gawker.com/5729214/honey-buns-are-the-new-prison-curr...
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
nascentmind 11y ago
Keeping cash under mattress is risky. Why not buy gold(or precious metals)? Movement and hiding it is way easier than $100 bills and transport too is easier. Just wear it as jewellery.

15155 11y ago

That's why cash must be (gradually) banned, among other reasons. See Germany, Norway.

dav-ycombinator 11y ago
No need to ban cash for arbitrarily negative rates to work. Simply introduce an exchange rate between physical currency and deposits. Simply introduce an exchange rate between the dollar and it's physical representation. Barriers are largely people's lack of understanding of how this works and how huge the benefits would be for society.
- CyberDildonics 11y ago
  > how huge the benefits would be for society Maybe if you think government and society are the same thing.
- dav-ycombinator 11y ago
  > Maybe if you think government and society are the same thing. No, I just think that neutral monetary policy which leads to full employment (defined as natural employment under given tax/regulatory regime) is good for society. Also good for govt's ability to manage budget, but that's secondary.
jsprogrammer 11y ago
I don't see how that would fly in the US. Off the top, it would seem to violate at least the 1st and 4th amendments to the US Constitution.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  I'd like to see an argument for that.
  - jsprogrammer 11y ago
    Argument for what? Someone would need to propose a specific law. A law that says 'you may only contract with [insert privileged electronic currency here]" or something similar. If the enforcement is through confiscation of other currencies it will likely violate 4th amendment protections on personal effects. If certain contracts are banned (instead of, or in addition to, confiscation) it would violate speech protections. Exchanging money (in any form) is speech, as are your contractual dealings.
    - dragonwriter 11y ago
      > Argument for what? An argument as to how restricting the use of cash (or eliminating the use of cash entirely) inherently conflicts with the first or fourth amendments. > A law that says 'you may only contract with [insert privileged electronic currency here]" or something similar. The usual method would be more like "All damages, including -- but not limited to -- those for breach of contracts specifying payment in some other currency, shall be awarded and assessed in [privileged currency] as of the date the debt became due and payable." > If the enforcement is through confiscation of other currencies it will likely violate 4th amendment protections on personal effects. That's a creative argument, but, no, Fourth Amendment search and seizure protections do not prohibit confiscation of contraband. > If certain contracts are banned (instead of, or in addition to, confiscation) it would violate speech protections. Contracts that are contrary to public policy -- such as those whose fulfillment requires an act prohibited by law -- are generally void for that reason; this is a well-settled principal of law and is not contrary to the First Amendment. The idea that the First Amendment means any contract obligation, without restriction, is immune from prohibition is, well, silly in the extreme.
- klodolph 11y ago
  Read article I section 8.
AnimalMuppet 11y ago
But if you ban cash, you for the same reason also have to ban gold (even jewelry), collectible coins, non-perishable food, and anything else that can be bought and stored as a store of value. Good luck with all that.
- jaycroft 11y ago
  Can one buy futures on Honey Buns? http://gawker.com/5729214/honey-buns-are-the-new-prison-currency http://gawker.com/5729214/honey-buns-are-the-new-prison-curr...
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

nascentmind 11y ago

Keeping cash under mattress is risky. Why not buy gold(or precious metals)? Movement and hiding it is way easier than $100 bills and transport too is easier. Just wear it as jewellery.