7 ms·

"* money that is programmed to only be spent on certain goods or services" This is basically a rationing system, like the olden days in China and the Soviet Un

by euix 4y ago

"* money that is programmed to only be spent on certain goods or services" This is basically a rationing system, like the olden days in China and the Soviet Union, where it wasn't enough to have money, you also needed a ration coupon to buy the good. Everything was rationed not just food, but bolts of clothes, consumer goods of any type, electronics (if you were fortunate enough to be able to afford it). In this way the regime controlled scarcity and ensured loyalty and favoritism by awarding special rations and coupons for those who uphold the correct ideology and "meritorious labor". Each month your work unit issued a new ration book for the month that is based on your families' allotment of grains, cooking oil, clothing, soap, etc. If you are being a bad boy and you don't get your ration book for the month, you can't buy the goods in the state supply shop and have to go the black market. Thus pure money wasn't good enough to live well or even to survive in those systems - one needed connections and access and the authorities can cancel your access at any time. That is what a CBDC has the potential to evolve to and what worries me - a digital ration book. If all a CBDC is is digital cash, then we already have that system (Visa, e-payments, etc) and things won't change much but if a CBDC is a programmable form of money that can be disabled, inflated at will, turned off, or only allowed to buy certain goods - then there is no limit to the amount of tyranny that will be on hand. In a free country common people will not and should not accept it.

rkangel 4y ago
> If all a CBDC is is digital cash, then we already have that system (Visa, e-payments, etc) It has taken me a while today to get my head round this, but no we don't have digital cash. Visa, e-payments etc. are all claims on financial institutions (banks, payment providers etc.). Those banks then indirectly have a claim on the Central Bank currency for us. The only thing that gives private individuals a direct claim on CB currency is cash, which is increasingly less a part of society. This is the Bank of England (potentially) empowering private individuals and making us less beholden to banks.
- neilwilson 4y ago
  There’s no difference in reality. If you have money in a U.K. building society or credit union they are two steps away from the Bank. All deposit takers in the U.K. are agents of the Bank.
omnicognate 4y ago
The UK has had rationing before (in wartime, and for some time after) and didn't need a CBDC to implement it. It also already has the power to freeze assets, levy taxes, ban products, introduce license requirements, etc. Why do you think a CBDC makes the government more likely to use its powers in a manner similar to what China and the USSR were doing long before CBDCs were conceived of?
- febeling 4y ago
  Because you can push a single button and a person is in the cold. There will be no disruption for anyone else, just your one neighbor with the dangerous views can't pay rent and buy food anymore. I can't think of anything more dystopian.
  - lottin 4y ago
    Do you understand that by definition a government is able to exert violence against citizens? Surely you must find this more terrifying than the possibility that they might be able to stop someone from making payments.
    - brippalcharrid 4y ago
      They have always been able to do things like this in a targeted way to particular people at some cost as well as at some inconvenience to judges and police officers, but not efficiently, programmatically, instantaneously, at scale, and integrated with the rest of their surveillance infrastructure. This creates similar risks and incentives for politically targeted abuse and the advancement of totalitarian, technocratic forms of government masked by secrecy laws to those presented by the FISA court system.
    - febeling 4y ago
      That’s kind of distorted. Government has the monopoly on violence, true, but only to the extent as the law grants it. A prime focus of constitutional law is to set strict limits to and legal recourse against acts of government.
nivenkos 4y ago
All of Europe had severe rationing during and post-WW2. Gringos don't know how good they've had it.
- pmalynin 4y ago
  It wasn’t to the same extent I’m sure but the USA did have rationing during WW2 with ration books and all. It was organized through the Office of Price Administration.
- bobthepanda 4y ago
  Also, this kind of restricted spending is already a function of US EBT (food stamps for the poor), no digital currency needed.
notahacker 4y ago
The accounts are already electronic and can be frozen at the government's will, and the government can already set new spending rules which apply to all bank accounts whenever it wants. Commercial banks have the same purely theoretical capabilities to issue electronic accounts with time limits or spending restrictions on the money as the central bank, but the central bank has a lot less incentive to do so
einherjae 4y ago
Or, simply a gift card.
- bobthepanda 4y ago
  Not even, US EBT is already this.
com2kid 4y ago
> That is what a CBDC has the potential to evolve to and what worries me - a digital ration book. If all a CBDC is is digital cash, then we already have that system (Visa, e-payments, etc) Famously, credit cards prevented microtransactions from ever being a thing, and may have very well lead to the ad dystopia we now live in. Insisting on taking a % cut of every transaction, and not allowing small transactions to occur, has dramatically limited business models across a multitude of industries. Imagine going back to 1999, before clickbait journalism, when newspapers were incredibly well staffed with fact checkers and when long form journalists could easily spend months upon months on a single article. Now instead of forcing a race to the bottom of ads and needing to get as many eyeballs as possible, imagine if it was even possible to experiment with a 5 cent per article view microtransaction. Reddit and Twitch have both shown that users are very willing to invest in microtransaction ecosystems for large enough content platforms. Saying Visa is the same thing as digital cash is rather inaccurate!
- yurishimo 4y ago
  > Reddit and Twitch Are those examples we want to emulate in broader society though? At various points in my life, I have used both of those services extensively. I have never spent money on Reddit, despite being a registered user for 12+ years. I lurked for a year or two at least before creating an account. On Twitch, I did have a free Prime sub that I would use, but I never spent any more on the service. I'm admittedly behind on the meta now, but is it even possible to give a streamer 1 "bit"? Or is there a minimum requirement of 10 or 50 bits? When I watch streams, I see some people donate with bits, but it seems like a way to save the user from making multiple purchases in a row, rather than a new paradigm of wealth transfer. "Hey, I'm gonna buy 500 bits now and donate 50 per stream" as opposed to needing to pull out the credit card on streamlabs or paypal 5 times a week.

by euix 4y ago

rkangel 4y ago

> If all a CBDC is is digital cash, then we already have that system (Visa, e-payments, etc) It has taken me a while today to get my head round this, but no we don't have digital cash. Visa, e-payments etc. are all claims on financial institutions (banks, payment providers etc.). Those banks then indirectly have a claim on the Central Bank currency for us. The only thing that gives private individuals a direct claim on CB currency is cash, which is increasingly less a part of society. This is the Bank of England (potentially) empowering private individuals and making us less beholden to banks.

neilwilson 4y ago
There’s no difference in reality. If you have money in a U.K. building society or credit union they are two steps away from the Bank. All deposit takers in the U.K. are agents of the Bank.

omnicognate 4y ago

The UK has had rationing before (in wartime, and for some time after) and didn't need a CBDC to implement it. It also already has the power to freeze assets, levy taxes, ban products, introduce license requirements, etc. Why do you think a CBDC makes the government more likely to use its powers in a manner similar to what China and the USSR were doing long before CBDCs were conceived of?

febeling 4y ago
Because you can push a single button and a person is in the cold. There will be no disruption for anyone else, just your one neighbor with the dangerous views can't pay rent and buy food anymore. I can't think of anything more dystopian.
- lottin 4y ago
  Do you understand that by definition a government is able to exert violence against citizens? Surely you must find this more terrifying than the possibility that they might be able to stop someone from making payments.
  - brippalcharrid 4y ago
    They have always been able to do things like this in a targeted way to particular people at some cost as well as at some inconvenience to judges and police officers, but not efficiently, programmatically, instantaneously, at scale, and integrated with the rest of their surveillance infrastructure. This creates similar risks and incentives for politically targeted abuse and the advancement of totalitarian, technocratic forms of government masked by secrecy laws to those presented by the FISA court system.
  - febeling 4y ago
    That’s kind of distorted. Government has the monopoly on violence, true, but only to the extent as the law grants it. A prime focus of constitutional law is to set strict limits to and legal recourse against acts of government.

nivenkos 4y ago

All of Europe had severe rationing during and post-WW2. Gringos don't know how good they've had it.

pmalynin 4y ago
It wasn’t to the same extent I’m sure but the USA did have rationing during WW2 with ration books and all. It was organized through the Office of Price Administration.
bobthepanda 4y ago
Also, this kind of restricted spending is already a function of US EBT (food stamps for the poor), no digital currency needed.

notahacker 4y ago

The accounts are already electronic and can be frozen at the government's will, and the government can already set new spending rules which apply to all bank accounts whenever it wants. Commercial banks have the same purely theoretical capabilities to issue electronic accounts with time limits or spending restrictions on the money as the central bank, but the central bank has a lot less incentive to do so

einherjae 4y ago

Or, simply a gift card.

bobthepanda 4y ago
Not even, US EBT is already this.

com2kid 4y ago

> That is what a CBDC has the potential to evolve to and what worries me - a digital ration book. If all a CBDC is is digital cash, then we already have that system (Visa, e-payments, etc) Famously, credit cards prevented microtransactions from ever being a thing, and may have very well lead to the ad dystopia we now live in. Insisting on taking a % cut of every transaction, and not allowing small transactions to occur, has dramatically limited business models across a multitude of industries. Imagine going back to 1999, before clickbait journalism, when newspapers were incredibly well staffed with fact checkers and when long form journalists could easily spend months upon months on a single article. Now instead of forcing a race to the bottom of ads and needing to get as many eyeballs as possible, imagine if it was even possible to experiment with a 5 cent per article view microtransaction. Reddit and Twitch have both shown that users are very willing to invest in microtransaction ecosystems for large enough content platforms. Saying Visa is the same thing as digital cash is rather inaccurate!

yurishimo 4y ago
> Reddit and Twitch Are those examples we want to emulate in broader society though? At various points in my life, I have used both of those services extensively. I have never spent money on Reddit, despite being a registered user for 12+ years. I lurked for a year or two at least before creating an account. On Twitch, I did have a free Prime sub that I would use, but I never spent any more on the service. I'm admittedly behind on the meta now, but is it even possible to give a streamer 1 "bit"? Or is there a minimum requirement of 10 or 50 bits? When I watch streams, I see some people donate with bits, but it seems like a way to save the user from making multiple purchases in a row, rather than a new paradigm of wealth transfer. "Hey, I'm gonna buy 500 bits now and donate 50 per stream" as opposed to needing to pull out the credit card on streamlabs or paypal 5 times a week.