4 ms·

The problem isn't about how difficult it may be to open an account. The problem is that banks become gatekeepers for the ability to exchange legal tender for go

The problem isn't about how difficult it may be to open an account. The problem is that banks become gatekeepers for the ability to exchange legal tender for goods and services. I could write an entire essay on the problems this causes if cashless business becomes wideapread. But a few highlights include: * A positive feedback loop will form due to less cash being accepted => less cash circulating => less reason for businesses to accept cash * Banks able to de-platform individuals and lock them out from access to life necessities * Governments likewise able to de-platform individuals as a neat new way to oppress dissidents and undesirables * The telco backbone of a nation becomes a one stop shop for a decapitating attack. Telco is also one of the first utilities to fail during natural disasters * Impossible to purchase goods/services without it being logged, surveilled, and used to manipulate you with individualised advertising * Once cash circulation drops below a critical point, opening or operating a business will not be possible without accepting card payments. That's your plumber, the kid who walks your dog, anyone offering any goods/services. Banks are now in control of who can receive money in addition to who can spend it. * Ditto for p2p transactions Anything that threatens the universal acceptability of legal tender should be viewed as a national security threat.

a3n 8y ago
> Anything that threatens the universal acceptability of legal tender should be viewed as a national security threat. I agree, but it depends on your point of view, I guess. Cash will itself probably be portrayed as a "threat." After all, only drug dealers and people too lazy to lift themselves up to bankable condition need cash. Right? No-cash is an example of a middleman, or system of middlemen, locking up something for themselves that was once "free." Water, especially bottled water, can be an example. Gentically modified seeds that produce sterile plants, in addition to some other benefit (Roundup-Ready) is another.
- bicubic 8y ago
  > After all, only drug dealers and people too lazy to lift themselves up to bankable condition need cash. Right? Even if we accept that line of fallacy, the sum threat of everything that could be done with illegal cash transactions is orders of magnitude smaller than the threat of a cyber attack or natural disaster disabling all exchange of money. I don't think even the staunchest anti-cash proponents could seriously advocate for building a house of cards out of our monetary system and creating a much bigger problem than what anti-cash purports to solve.
  - a3n 8y ago
    > I don't think even the staunchest anti-cash proponents could seriously advocate for building a house of cards out of our monetary system and creating a much bigger problem than what anti-cash purports to solve. I don't think anyone who could influence that decision would hesitate for an instant, if it brought them money or power in their lifetime. You really have to apply Kissinger's model of international relations (nations can be relied on to act in their own self-interest) to individual politicians and other wielders of direct power.
wastholm 8y ago
> * A positive feedback loop will form due to less cash being accepted => less cash circulating => less reason for businesses to accept cash This is already happening in Sweden: most people find card or mobile payments more convenient and therefore carry little or no cash with them; more and more shops go cashless; and the cycle continues. New coins and bills were introduced a year or two ago and I still hear people complain that they haven't learned to tell them apart yet because cash is so rarely used.
Izkata 8y ago
> The problem is that banks become gatekeepers for the ability to exchange legal tender for goods and services. Aside from banks, you generally need a debit/credit card to participate, and one of the major providers has already started this with MasterCard's ban on Robert Spencer.

a3n 8y ago

> Anything that threatens the universal acceptability of legal tender should be viewed as a national security threat. I agree, but it depends on your point of view, I guess. Cash will itself probably be portrayed as a "threat." After all, only drug dealers and people too lazy to lift themselves up to bankable condition need cash. Right? No-cash is an example of a middleman, or system of middlemen, locking up something for themselves that was once "free." Water, especially bottled water, can be an example. Gentically modified seeds that produce sterile plants, in addition to some other benefit (Roundup-Ready) is another.

bicubic 8y ago
> After all, only drug dealers and people too lazy to lift themselves up to bankable condition need cash. Right? Even if we accept that line of fallacy, the sum threat of everything that could be done with illegal cash transactions is orders of magnitude smaller than the threat of a cyber attack or natural disaster disabling all exchange of money. I don't think even the staunchest anti-cash proponents could seriously advocate for building a house of cards out of our monetary system and creating a much bigger problem than what anti-cash purports to solve.
- a3n 8y ago
  > I don't think even the staunchest anti-cash proponents could seriously advocate for building a house of cards out of our monetary system and creating a much bigger problem than what anti-cash purports to solve. I don't think anyone who could influence that decision would hesitate for an instant, if it brought them money or power in their lifetime. You really have to apply Kissinger's model of international relations (nations can be relied on to act in their own self-interest) to individual politicians and other wielders of direct power.

wastholm 8y ago

> * A positive feedback loop will form due to less cash being accepted => less cash circulating => less reason for businesses to accept cash This is already happening in Sweden: most people find card or mobile payments more convenient and therefore carry little or no cash with them; more and more shops go cashless; and the cycle continues. New coins and bills were introduced a year or two ago and I still hear people complain that they haven't learned to tell them apart yet because cash is so rarely used.

Izkata 8y ago

> The problem is that banks become gatekeepers for the ability to exchange legal tender for goods and services. Aside from banks, you generally need a debit/credit card to participate, and one of the major providers has already started this with MasterCard's ban on Robert Spencer.