Why Big Government Is Waging War Against Cash

Forbes ^ | 1 Mar, 2016 | Steve Forbes

[PUGACHEV]

"It’s also a precursor to NIRP, negative interest rates."

You are exactly right. This proposal has nothing to do with tax evasion or controlling drug money. People inclined to those activities are resourceful and would quickly find another way to escape detection. Instead, it's all about paving the way for negative interest rates as the new norm in one disguise or another. Simply, you cannot have cash and negative interest at the same time. Otherwise, who in their right mind would put their money in the bank as opposed to keeping it in mason jars.

[doldrumsforgop]

maybe we should all just go back to bartering, the way the works very well.

[DesertRhino]

“The ostensible reason is to help in the fight against terrorists, bribers, drug dealers and tax evaders by making it more inconvenient for these bad guys....”

So make like more boxed in and restrictive on me, to protect me. Poor Lt Calley was just a little too early. They have to burn the village in order to save it.

Sick.

[MarvinStinson]

If the Obama Administration really wants to deny resources to terrorists, why is it giving tens of billions of dollars back to the globe’s terrorism central, Iran?

[PMAS]

*

[Trod Upon]

Is there really any reason not to start killing them immediately should they start overtly repressing the populace in that way? Trying to think of one, but as it would essentially be an assertion of ownership over the oppressed populace, I'm not coming up with anything.

[opus1]

“elimination of currency” was on the Bilderberg agenda about 4 years ago or so.

[Cvengr]

We are unable to pay for a tank full of gasoline with such a limited currency.

[MarkL]

And by going to a cashless society, they will, by necessity, ban the private ownership of gold, silver, and any precious metals.

There will be a one-time public buy, and after that, the government will institute REALLY harsh criminal penalties against anyone trying to buy or sell the precious metals. The government won’t have to search for it, but long prison terms and huge fines will make an impression on anyone thinking about bypassing the government’s negative interest rates.

Mark

[alpo]

I’ve posted it before on similar threads, if you want to stop the drug trade, make the largest denomination the Lincoln cent.
Can you imagin some corner merchant with his low-rider cutoffs full of pennies?

This attack on large bills is a way to tax all the illegals that will be coming out of the shadows.

[Pelham]

” The real “high denomination” bills, the $500 and $1000, were removed from circulation a long time ago.”

They were used for transfers between banks. I don’t think they ever circulated among the public at large.

[SaveFerris]

Yes, I think the Tribulation and then the Great Tribulation are awfully close. As is Ezekiel 38.

[SaveFerris]

Amen

[grania]

It's a violation of privacy to get rid of cash

But most people, even those old enough to know better, are going to an almost cashless society for the convenience. For people under age 40 or so, I doubt most of them have a clue that without economic freedom and privacy there is no freedom. It doesn't seem to bother most people that all of their purchases, and thus all of their activity, are computerized.

It's already happened with income. It goes automatically into an account. So where's the logic in having to take money out of that account, instead of just transferring it?

Look at health insurance. Nobody really pays for health care anymore. It's just a crazy swirl of data from one source to another, to the point where there's no logic or control concerning cost.

I pay for everything I can cash. Everything where cash isn't possible, by check....no automatic payments of anything. Most folks think that's weird.

[grania]

re: negative interest rates

For all practical purposes, most people already have what's in effect a negative interest rate. Unless a person can maintain a pretty hefty (for many) balance, fees use up quite a bit of their money.

[alexander_busek]

It is not the governments business what we buy. Maybe how much we make so they can tax the hell out of it, but what we buy and where is none of their business.

But how else to ensure that all sales taxes are also being paid, but by monitoring all cash transactions?

(/sarcasm)

Regards,

[roadcat]

I pay for everything I can cash. Everything where cash isn't possible, by check....no automatic payments of anything. Most folks think that's weird.

Same here, not weird to me. Last week I paid for a dinner out with some friends, in the $200 to $300 range. Easily paid with $100 bills. Would be hard to carry around a bunch of $20 bills to pay for it. I don't trust someone walking away with my credit card where I can't see it. Plus I don't like my activities tracked. The other thing about cash, is that it's a good way to transfer value to your adult kids without tracking. If they need something, pay for it for them. Beats letting the government take half when you die; give it to your adult kids while alive.

[hughesm1]

$5000 & $10000 bills were typically bank to bank transfer notes however were available for public use. $500 & $1000 bills were commonly in circulation until the late 60s, when in June 1969 they were removed under the guise of curtailing “illicit” activity (i.e. drug trafficking.) [s] How well did that work out?[/s]

[deks]

In 1950, $100.00 had the same buying power as $1,002 does today

http://www.dollartimes.com/calculators/inflation.htm

[SkyPilot]

Plus I don't like my activities tracked. The other thing about cash, is that it's a good way to transfer value to your adult kids without tracking. If they need something, pay for it for them. Beats letting the government take half when you die; give it to your adult kids while alive.

Those are some of the very reasons they want to (and will) eliminate cash.