7 ms·

Get the boot out of your mouth. If cash is legal tender, then any amount is, by default, legal. This law makes it not fully legal tender (after amount X). It

Get the boot out of your mouth. If cash is legal tender, then any amount is, by default, legal. This law makes it not fully legal tender (after amount X). It is disgusting. Stop pretending the government (any) has the “average” man’s best interest. Stop pretending they care.

alkonaut 4y ago
> Get the boot out of your mouth. If cash is legal tender, then any amount is, by default, legal. The concept of what is and isn’t “legal tender” is pretty extreme in the US compared to many other places. E.g many (most?) countries routinely takes bank notes out of circulation and make them worthless. But this isn’t so much about whether is legal tender but more about KYC laws: your €20K is no good to me as payment for a car if my bank won’t accept it in a deposit without a lot of hassle. > Stop pretending the government (any) has the “average” man’s best interest I like my government. I believe it operates with the best interest of the majority in mind. Why would they not? I elected them? It doesn’t consist of shadowy bureaucrats with hard- to-decide motives as far as I can see. They usually make laws with public support and have to answer when making impopular laws. The whole “governments are universally bad” thing is sad. Are people accepting living in democracies they experience working so poorly that they believe government has its own - or worse someone else’s - best interest in mind.
- wizeman 4y ago
  > I like my government. I believe it operates with the best interest of the majority in mind. Yeah, I used to believe that too. > Are people accepting living in democracies they experience working so poorly that they believe government has its own - or worse someone else’s - best interest in mind. Yes, unfortunately. And that's something people learn to accept because 1) most people are not aware that governments could work better, and 2) even if they know governments could work better, it's not clear to them how to achieve that, and 3) even when there are governments that already work better, it's not easy to move to another country, be it due to friends, family, lack of jobs in your expertise, language barriers, cultural barriers, different climate, strict immigration policies, etc. And even when you can move to another country, many countries still have most of the same underlying problems with government, because even when there is genuine interest in solving the problems (which is rare), their root causes are never actually solved (or at least, not effectively).
  - flandish 4y ago
    Adding: most “democracies” are not truly democratic - representative governments are, “proxy” or “hopeful” or “you promised!” democratic but not democratic. Add in the layers of “manufactured consent” and you get… this to help “fight” “terrorism.”
tgv 4y ago
That's not what legal tender means, and the expression "boot out of your mouth" is a new one to me. Perhaps you meant the more derogatory "foot out of your mouth"?
- tom_ 4y ago
  I assumed it would be to do with this: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Bootlicker https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Bootlicker - as in, you are being criticised for apparently siding with people that you should more correctly see as your oppressors. It is always possible I have misunderstood the point too.
  - flandish 4y ago
    Your understanding of the phrase as linked is exactly how I meant it.
thaumasiotes 4y ago
> If cash is legal tender, then any amount is, by default, legal. Cash being "legal tender" means that, if someone sues you and wins a judgment, you're entitled to pay the judgment in cash. It doesn't mean that anyone willing to exchange a service or item for any random service or item is also compelled to exchange their thing for cash. If they demand a live sheep, you'll give them a live sheep or do without whatever they're offering.
- flandish 4y ago
  Nobody is talking about being compelled to accept cash - we are talking about cash being used in a manner that is, arbitrarily illegal after a certain amount.
  - thaumasiotes 4y ago
    What were you saying "If cash is legal tender, then any amount is, by default, legal" meant? The only meaning of "legal tender" is that someone with a court judgment against you can be compelled to accept legal tender. It doesn't say anything about whether it's legal for you to use it in other transactions.
    - flandish 4y ago
      “ Legal tender is anything recognized by law as a means to settle a public or private debt or meet a financial obligation, including tax payments, contracts, and legal fines or damages. The national currency is legal tender in practically every country. ” https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/legal-tender.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/legal-tender.asp I’m sorry my use of the word “legal” in the context of “legally acceptable tender” triggered this response. You’ll have to forgive me: English is my first language. I will try again: The use of cash, if agreed upon by parties involved, is legal because it’s a government “backed”/“accepted” item of currency. Tendering cash in this transaction is legal. (You’re not trading a car for $value in meth or guns..) A gov is now saying, no matter how legal the use of cash is, after a certain amount it is no longer legal. This is, in my opinion and with my beliefs, an overreach and quite frankly nonsense. It is no surprise, but saddening all the same. That is all.
mfuzzey 4y ago
>Stop pretending the government (any) has the “average” man’s best interest "Average" people don't pay >10k€ in cash. So this measure won't hurt average people and may stop some money launderers / frauders so no issue with it. And actually most EU countries already have lower limits.
- flandish 4y ago
  You’re kidding, right? Average people buy cars with cash: a teen saving from first jobs for a first used car… eventually, “10k” will be where “teen” used cars land … and boom, average person. A person with a down payment on a house. …I can go on. The point is this: casting this wide a net in the name of “fighting terrorists” is absolute nonsense, and not worth what would happen to a terrorist in this net: a few extra “10k money limit” charges… compared to the literal thousands of people this will inconvenience. Anything a nation does in the name of fighting an enemy that is, in essence, a version of Lacan’s “objet petit a” - is a nation lying to its people.
  - Symbiote 4y ago
    Average Europeans use bank transfers or debit cards to make these payments.
    - nibbleshifter 4y ago
      Have you met Germans?
    - tom_ 4y ago
      It's the same in the UK, and has been for years. I'm glad there are people objecting to a limit on transactions made in physical cash, but it feels a bit ridiculous to suggest that such a limit would actually massively inconvenience people in general.

alkonaut 4y ago

> Get the boot out of your mouth. If cash is legal tender, then any amount is, by default, legal. The concept of what is and isn’t “legal tender” is pretty extreme in the US compared to many other places. E.g many (most?) countries routinely takes bank notes out of circulation and make them worthless. But this isn’t so much about whether is legal tender but more about KYC laws: your €20K is no good to me as payment for a car if my bank won’t accept it in a deposit without a lot of hassle. > Stop pretending the government (any) has the “average” man’s best interest I like my government. I believe it operates with the best interest of the majority in mind. Why would they not? I elected them? It doesn’t consist of shadowy bureaucrats with hard- to-decide motives as far as I can see. They usually make laws with public support and have to answer when making impopular laws. The whole “governments are universally bad” thing is sad. Are people accepting living in democracies they experience working so poorly that they believe government has its own - or worse someone else’s - best interest in mind.

wizeman 4y ago
> I like my government. I believe it operates with the best interest of the majority in mind. Yeah, I used to believe that too. > Are people accepting living in democracies they experience working so poorly that they believe government has its own - or worse someone else’s - best interest in mind. Yes, unfortunately. And that's something people learn to accept because 1) most people are not aware that governments could work better, and 2) even if they know governments could work better, it's not clear to them how to achieve that, and 3) even when there are governments that already work better, it's not easy to move to another country, be it due to friends, family, lack of jobs in your expertise, language barriers, cultural barriers, different climate, strict immigration policies, etc. And even when you can move to another country, many countries still have most of the same underlying problems with government, because even when there is genuine interest in solving the problems (which is rare), their root causes are never actually solved (or at least, not effectively).
- flandish 4y ago
  Adding: most “democracies” are not truly democratic - representative governments are, “proxy” or “hopeful” or “you promised!” democratic but not democratic. Add in the layers of “manufactured consent” and you get… this to help “fight” “terrorism.”

tgv 4y ago

That's not what legal tender means, and the expression "boot out of your mouth" is a new one to me. Perhaps you meant the more derogatory "foot out of your mouth"?

tom_ 4y ago
I assumed it would be to do with this: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Bootlicker https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Bootlicker - as in, you are being criticised for apparently siding with people that you should more correctly see as your oppressors. It is always possible I have misunderstood the point too.
- flandish 4y ago
  Your understanding of the phrase as linked is exactly how I meant it.

thaumasiotes 4y ago

> If cash is legal tender, then any amount is, by default, legal. Cash being "legal tender" means that, if someone sues you and wins a judgment, you're entitled to pay the judgment in cash. It doesn't mean that anyone willing to exchange a service or item for any random service or item is also compelled to exchange their thing for cash. If they demand a live sheep, you'll give them a live sheep or do without whatever they're offering.

flandish 4y ago
Nobody is talking about being compelled to accept cash - we are talking about cash being used in a manner that is, arbitrarily illegal after a certain amount.
- thaumasiotes 4y ago
  What were you saying "If cash is legal tender, then any amount is, by default, legal" meant? The only meaning of "legal tender" is that someone with a court judgment against you can be compelled to accept legal tender. It doesn't say anything about whether it's legal for you to use it in other transactions.
  - flandish 4y ago
    “ Legal tender is anything recognized by law as a means to settle a public or private debt or meet a financial obligation, including tax payments, contracts, and legal fines or damages. The national currency is legal tender in practically every country. ” https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/legal-tender.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/legal-tender.asp I’m sorry my use of the word “legal” in the context of “legally acceptable tender” triggered this response. You’ll have to forgive me: English is my first language. I will try again: The use of cash, if agreed upon by parties involved, is legal because it’s a government “backed”/“accepted” item of currency. Tendering cash in this transaction is legal. (You’re not trading a car for $value in meth or guns..) A gov is now saying, no matter how legal the use of cash is, after a certain amount it is no longer legal. This is, in my opinion and with my beliefs, an overreach and quite frankly nonsense. It is no surprise, but saddening all the same. That is all.

mfuzzey 4y ago

>Stop pretending the government (any) has the “average” man’s best interest "Average" people don't pay >10k€ in cash. So this measure won't hurt average people and may stop some money launderers / frauders so no issue with it. And actually most EU countries already have lower limits.

flandish 4y ago
You’re kidding, right? Average people buy cars with cash: a teen saving from first jobs for a first used car… eventually, “10k” will be where “teen” used cars land … and boom, average person. A person with a down payment on a house. …I can go on. The point is this: casting this wide a net in the name of “fighting terrorists” is absolute nonsense, and not worth what would happen to a terrorist in this net: a few extra “10k money limit” charges… compared to the literal thousands of people this will inconvenience. Anything a nation does in the name of fighting an enemy that is, in essence, a version of Lacan’s “objet petit a” - is a nation lying to its people.
- Symbiote 4y ago
  Average Europeans use bank transfers or debit cards to make these payments.
  - nibbleshifter 4y ago
    Have you met Germans?
  - tom_ 4y ago
    It's the same in the UK, and has been for years. I'm glad there are people objecting to a limit on transactions made in physical cash, but it feels a bit ridiculous to suggest that such a limit would actually massively inconvenience people in general.