9 ms·

> Wait until you hear about cash. I'm always bothered by this arguement because most of the same people in government who want to see a crackdown on Bitcoin al

> Wait until you hear about cash. I'm always bothered by this arguement because most of the same people in government who want to see a crackdown on Bitcoin also seem to want cash to be eliminated. I've been asked to do consulting on one of these digital cash replacement projects. The requirements included all the stuff you'd expect, like strict ID requirements for every account, and the ability to freeze funds at will. But they also wanted things like the contents of receipts getting uploaded to government servers, to allow real-time tracking of not only who was paying who, but what the funds were supposed to be for. My contact wouldn't tell me what government it was supposed to be for. But they did admit it was a dictatorship. Obviously, this would have been a very effective tool for cracking down on dissent. Frankly, I kinda suspect what was really going on was the company that reached out to me was pulling a scam on that dictatorship and had no real plan to actually deliver a working product. But it's still a good example of the panopticon that authoritarians want to replace cash with.

spurdoman77 6y ago
Central bankers are often pro-cash but anti-bitcoin. They dont want competition.
- xxxxxxx12 6y ago
  > They dont want competition Which is another way of saying they want absolute control, which in this case is the absurd charade where "inflation" measures that they claim represent life on the ground exclude the essentials like education, healthcare, and housing.
  - devmunchies 6y ago
    I liked the take from the Mayor of Miami (from a podcast about cryptocurrency): "they [governments] will have to borrow money like everybody else borrows money, they can't just print their own money. They have to borrow money at an interest rate. And if governments don't behave fiscally then they are going to have to borrow at worse and worse rates. They can't just invent their own interest rates and currency, which manipulates how markets work... We in the city of miami, we're forced to balance our budget, we actually have a surplus, about $150 million in surplus and we have some of the lowest tax rates in the history of the city."
    - xxxxxxx12 6y ago
      There is a (seemingly growing) number of people that openly say that the budget doesn't matter. You just print and spend. Fortunately this incentivizes finding ways to circumvent that regime and point out how absurd it is.
      - devmunchies 6y ago
        Yes, and that the only point of taxes is to reduce inflation, since the govt doesn't need taxes anyway since it can print money. Taxes don't even cover the cost of govt expenditures so it makes sense.
        arcticbull 6y ago
        Broadly speaking the tools of monetary policy available to reduce inflation are: (1) Increasing reserve rates for lending. This causes the circulating supply of currency to go down. (2) Increasing interest rates for lending. This reduces the demand for borrowing, which is largely fractional reserve. This also causes the circulating supply of currency to go down. (3) The Fed unwinding its balance sheet by selling bonds. They collect the cash and remove it from circulation. They can increase the circulating supply by buying bonds. Taxation doesn't change inflation, to the best of my knowledge, as before and after taxation the same amount of money exists in the circulating supply. Taxation is fiscal policy. The government doesn't print money per se, the government can borrow money by selling bonds. This just reallocates the existing money supply. The overwhelming majority of US government debt is held domestically by US persons. This doesn't change the money supply either, unless the Fed steps in.
        reducesuffering 6y ago
        > "Taxation doesn't change inflation, to the best of my knowledge, as before and after taxation the same amount of money exists in the circulating supply. Taxation is fiscal policy." Fiscal policy affects inflation. You're thinking of inflation as "the money supply / total of all $", but that's only one definition or part of inflation. Generally, you would also describe inflation as the price of things you buy going up or down (CPI). Say you ratchet up the effective tax rate to 90%. Everyone's going to have a whole lot less money to buy extra things. Some things with fixed raw input cost still wouldn't budge much. However now that people's monthly incomes have gone from $5000 -> $1000, you're going to see houses, education, Pelotons, and other extra income sinks, have their prices fall precipitously.
dgrin91 6y ago
> most of the same people in government who want to see a crackdown on Bitcoin also seem to want cash to be eliminated Can you provide a source for that? First I've heard of such an argument from government officials
- jerf 6y ago
  It hasn't necessarily been out front-and-center in the mainstream media, but it's definitely something getting talked about in mainstream financial circles routinely. Here's a bit of a partisan source from a quick google search, but it's got a lot of links and citations you can follow up on and I believe it is basically correct in its facts, even if you disagree with the conclusions drawn from them: https://www.newswars.com/cashless-society-democrats-propose-digital-dollar-run-by-the-fed/ https://www.newswars.com/cashless-society-democrats-propose-... It's up to the "trial balloon floated in Congress" point. The trial balloon has so far always been shot down, but it's really only a matter of time. If the government could just push a button and have access to literally every single transaction that occurs, they would certainly do it. They wouldn't even blink. Also, I want to say, I'm just linking one example. You can follow up with search terms similar to the ones used in that article, and probably find even more mainstream sources discussing it. It's a topic in the air in financial circles. Edit: Bit more searching, here you go with something much more mainstream, Forbes: https://www.forbes.com/sites/advisor/2020/10/22/the-pandemic-is-fast-forwarding-us-to-a-cashless-society-and-making-life-harder-for-the-unbanked/?sh=2c7a5f7e7f1f https://www.forbes.com/sites/advisor/2020/10/22/the-pandemic... And again, my main point here is that it is a topic of conversation, not making any particular claims about where we are currently.
- iso8859-1 6y ago
  Here is one prominent Bitcoin opponent arguing that people shouldn't have the right to exchange money in private: https://twitter.com/smdiehl/status/1381152231836254211 https://twitter.com/smdiehl/status/1381152231836254211
- zo1 6y ago
  If I was a politician and in charge, I'd ban both in a heartbeat. Even though banning "cash" would be practically impossible, because people would then just replace it with barter, or favors or bottle caps. But if it were to come to that, I'd replace it with some sort of digital currency that is "private" but accessible to the government within rules and reason of course.
knorker 6y ago
It's a ridiculous comparison, though. E.g. try to regularly move billions in cash and see how long it'll take before you're busted for not reporting that you're doing that. A billion bucks weighs a fucktonne. I'm pro cash, anti cryptocurrency, because the comparison is absolutely ridiculous there's no contradiction.
- nightski 6y ago
  The commissioner of the SEC doesn't find it all that ridiculous. She just commented on it yesterday actually. [1] https://youtu.be/KfvMX8sJEy4?t=525 https://youtu.be/KfvMX8sJEy4?t=525
  - knorker 6y ago
    I don't see her disagreeing with what I said.
    - nightski 6y ago
      She noted that in general you target the criminal activity itself, not the currency used to fund it. But then she further noted that cash was just as big of a problem for them and harder for them to deal with. She said that crypto had the advantage that it at least left a trail, unlike cash. No one said criminal activity is easy. But it's not fair for you to conclude that therefore it's ridiculous because using cash is hard.
      - knorker 6y ago
        So she says cash is different, and agrees with me?
- talaketu 6y ago
  Cash payment limit of $10000AUD is proposed in Australia. $10000AUD weighs fuckall. https://treasury.gov.au/policy-topics/economy/black-economy/cash-rules-2019 https://treasury.gov.au/policy-topics/economy/black-economy/...

spurdoman77 6y ago

Central bankers are often pro-cash but anti-bitcoin. They dont want competition.

xxxxxxx12 6y ago
> They dont want competition Which is another way of saying they want absolute control, which in this case is the absurd charade where "inflation" measures that they claim represent life on the ground exclude the essentials like education, healthcare, and housing.
- devmunchies 6y ago
  I liked the take from the Mayor of Miami (from a podcast about cryptocurrency): "they [governments] will have to borrow money like everybody else borrows money, they can't just print their own money. They have to borrow money at an interest rate. And if governments don't behave fiscally then they are going to have to borrow at worse and worse rates. They can't just invent their own interest rates and currency, which manipulates how markets work... We in the city of miami, we're forced to balance our budget, we actually have a surplus, about $150 million in surplus and we have some of the lowest tax rates in the history of the city."
  - xxxxxxx12 6y ago
    There is a (seemingly growing) number of people that openly say that the budget doesn't matter. You just print and spend. Fortunately this incentivizes finding ways to circumvent that regime and point out how absurd it is.
    - devmunchies 6y ago
      Yes, and that the only point of taxes is to reduce inflation, since the govt doesn't need taxes anyway since it can print money. Taxes don't even cover the cost of govt expenditures so it makes sense.
      - arcticbull 6y ago
        Broadly speaking the tools of monetary policy available to reduce inflation are: (1) Increasing reserve rates for lending. This causes the circulating supply of currency to go down. (2) Increasing interest rates for lending. This reduces the demand for borrowing, which is largely fractional reserve. This also causes the circulating supply of currency to go down. (3) The Fed unwinding its balance sheet by selling bonds. They collect the cash and remove it from circulation. They can increase the circulating supply by buying bonds. Taxation doesn't change inflation, to the best of my knowledge, as before and after taxation the same amount of money exists in the circulating supply. Taxation is fiscal policy. The government doesn't print money per se, the government can borrow money by selling bonds. This just reallocates the existing money supply. The overwhelming majority of US government debt is held domestically by US persons. This doesn't change the money supply either, unless the Fed steps in.
        reducesuffering 6y ago
        > "Taxation doesn't change inflation, to the best of my knowledge, as before and after taxation the same amount of money exists in the circulating supply. Taxation is fiscal policy." Fiscal policy affects inflation. You're thinking of inflation as "the money supply / total of all $", but that's only one definition or part of inflation. Generally, you would also describe inflation as the price of things you buy going up or down (CPI). Say you ratchet up the effective tax rate to 90%. Everyone's going to have a whole lot less money to buy extra things. Some things with fixed raw input cost still wouldn't budge much. However now that people's monthly incomes have gone from $5000 -> $1000, you're going to see houses, education, Pelotons, and other extra income sinks, have their prices fall precipitously.

dgrin91 6y ago

> most of the same people in government who want to see a crackdown on Bitcoin also seem to want cash to be eliminated Can you provide a source for that? First I've heard of such an argument from government officials

jerf 6y ago
It hasn't necessarily been out front-and-center in the mainstream media, but it's definitely something getting talked about in mainstream financial circles routinely. Here's a bit of a partisan source from a quick google search, but it's got a lot of links and citations you can follow up on and I believe it is basically correct in its facts, even if you disagree with the conclusions drawn from them: https://www.newswars.com/cashless-society-democrats-propose-digital-dollar-run-by-the-fed/ https://www.newswars.com/cashless-society-democrats-propose-... It's up to the "trial balloon floated in Congress" point. The trial balloon has so far always been shot down, but it's really only a matter of time. If the government could just push a button and have access to literally every single transaction that occurs, they would certainly do it. They wouldn't even blink. Also, I want to say, I'm just linking one example. You can follow up with search terms similar to the ones used in that article, and probably find even more mainstream sources discussing it. It's a topic in the air in financial circles. Edit: Bit more searching, here you go with something much more mainstream, Forbes: https://www.forbes.com/sites/advisor/2020/10/22/the-pandemic-is-fast-forwarding-us-to-a-cashless-society-and-making-life-harder-for-the-unbanked/?sh=2c7a5f7e7f1f https://www.forbes.com/sites/advisor/2020/10/22/the-pandemic... And again, my main point here is that it is a topic of conversation, not making any particular claims about where we are currently.
iso8859-1 6y ago
Here is one prominent Bitcoin opponent arguing that people shouldn't have the right to exchange money in private: https://twitter.com/smdiehl/status/1381152231836254211 https://twitter.com/smdiehl/status/1381152231836254211
zo1 6y ago
If I was a politician and in charge, I'd ban both in a heartbeat. Even though banning "cash" would be practically impossible, because people would then just replace it with barter, or favors or bottle caps. But if it were to come to that, I'd replace it with some sort of digital currency that is "private" but accessible to the government within rules and reason of course.

knorker 6y ago

It's a ridiculous comparison, though. E.g. try to regularly move billions in cash and see how long it'll take before you're busted for not reporting that you're doing that. A billion bucks weighs a fucktonne. I'm pro cash, anti cryptocurrency, because the comparison is absolutely ridiculous there's no contradiction.

nightski 6y ago
The commissioner of the SEC doesn't find it all that ridiculous. She just commented on it yesterday actually. [1] https://youtu.be/KfvMX8sJEy4?t=525 https://youtu.be/KfvMX8sJEy4?t=525
- knorker 6y ago
  I don't see her disagreeing with what I said.
  - nightski 6y ago
    She noted that in general you target the criminal activity itself, not the currency used to fund it. But then she further noted that cash was just as big of a problem for them and harder for them to deal with. She said that crypto had the advantage that it at least left a trail, unlike cash. No one said criminal activity is easy. But it's not fair for you to conclude that therefore it's ridiculous because using cash is hard.
    - knorker 6y ago
      So she says cash is different, and agrees with me?
talaketu 6y ago
Cash payment limit of $10000AUD is proposed in Australia. $10000AUD weighs fuckall. https://treasury.gov.au/policy-topics/economy/black-economy/cash-rules-2019 https://treasury.gov.au/policy-topics/economy/black-economy/...