The real issue here is a human rights issue. It is wonderful to hear politicians and the UN speak of our wonderful human rights, but clearly that does not exte

The real issue here is a human rights issue. It is wonderful to hear politicians and the UN speak of our wonderful human rights, but clearly that does not extend to our ability to trade our skills, good and services in a legal manner, in our common currencies. Now how is that for our much vaunted human rights? Is anyone going to propose a constitutional amendment that makes banking a human right not subject to the whims and caprices of anonymous secretive unaccountable govt and banking officials? Of course we could trade in cash, at the risk of having some "law enforcement" officials seizing our cash and asking us to prove we acquired it legally, subject to time wasting and expensive legal process which usually costs more than the amount seized. Habeas corpus doesn't apply to the cash which is why the court cases read State of New York vs $28,777 rather than State of New York vs John Doe. In the EU some countries have placed limits on the size of payments which can be made in cash. As for the US one has to wonder why the $10000 deposit notification limit which was made in 1970 has not been adjusted to account for inflation, which according to Google it is about $79,000 in 2023. Those officials must have been ecstatic at the introduction of computers which makes tracking such transactions so easy. Anyone to campaign for the adjustment of the $10000 figure to account for inflation? We want to party!! Think of how it would improve the liquidity of banks. So much money would come flowing in in full knowledge that it wouldn'tbe subject to needless checks from nosy make busy bank and IRS officials.