4 ms·

> 10k is high enough that most people will only hit it when 1) buying a car (or other vehicle - i.e. boat) 2) purchasing a house 3) doing a renovation Okay but

> 10k is high enough that most people will only hit it when 1) buying a car (or other vehicle - i.e. boat) 2) purchasing a house 3) doing a renovation Okay but in 1970 it was 7 years of median rent, 58% of the median home value and 13 months of median salary according to the census bureau.

munk-a 5y ago
Money has definitely become inflated since that 10k figure was originally established - but I don't think it passed a significant threshold societally like, say, five dollars passed. Five dollars was enough to get a modest lunch pretty much anywhere in the 70s and is now, in the affluent parts of the country, around the expected cost for a coffee. 10k, in my mind and opinion of course, went from being "Hey, that's a lot of cash" to "Hey, that's a lot of cash". It remains an amount we (most people at least) don't trivially deal in on a day to day basis and that's where I think the cutoff for this reporting law should be. If most people are going to trigger a mandatory report then LEOs have a lot more data about transactions that are common in society which may be a privacy concern but certainly lowers the usefulness of that ledger - if these transactions are still "rare" then there is a volume of data that can be hand-sifted through to produce interesting insights. With computers and everything in theory we could probably now handle the volume of tracking the full list of every person's transactions but that would lead to normalizing refusing to report large transactions and we'd only end up seeing the transactions that are made by completely innocent people.