What I have noticed with left wing ideas, is that when the "research" is in place, the legislators seem to have the legislation written up and ready to go, then the media blitz begins.
It's like rolling a snowball downhill in wet snow, in that it starts out small, with deniably minor bits like this : Drug dealers, tax cheats boost $100 bill demand?
Inference?
Hundred dollar bills are the favorite of drug dealers and tax evading crooks in the underground economy.
The pushed concept:
That those who carry/use hundred dollar bills are crooks or drug dealers.
The Alinsky payoff:
People don't want to be considered drug dealers or tax cheats so they won't carry hundred dollar bills, and use plastic instead (which means they won't have much cash on hand).
The eventual target:
A more vulnerable population and...
The accepted confiscation of any stash of hundred dollar bills, or any "large" (how big is big?) stash of cash, for that matter, which would be justified in the public consensus (including Conservatives, the group which should most strenuously object) because "only drug dealers and tax cheats would have a lot of cash on hand".
The Liberal counter argument to objections would be something on the order of: "I thought you were a Conservative, how could you be for Drug Dealers and Tax Cheats profiting from their illegal activities?"
The real downside:
Any prepper, or for that matter any prudent person who realizes banks can fail, will have some cash on hand as well as some stash of silver and/or gold, just in case the normal economic system is interrupted.
Credit/Debit cards are just so much plastic if the lights go out, and cash is king. Money talks, after all, and if the dollar is suddenly worthless, silver, gold, ammo, or other items of barter might carry the day.
Not having a stash of cash, at least enough to pay a month's bills, (and double that when you consider that in stressed supply situations, prices rise quickly), leaves one very vulnerable to government relief mechanisms or the absence thereof in more ordinary, temporary emergencies (like hurricanes).
Now, add in the fact that filling up your gas tank, a couple of bags of groceries, or even a modest dinner for two in many places will eat the lion's share of a C-note, and that a wad of fifties is twice the thickness of hundreds, it appears the whole idea is to get people away from having/using cash, or being able to summarily vilify them for having " a lot" of cash, to the extent that the pop consensus is that ...
They deserved to have it confiscated because everyone knows only drug dealers and tax cheats would have that much cash around.
Once the media meme is in place, the snowball gathers momentum and grows. Televised content will contain a few emotional dramatizations via the 'entertainment media', maybe even a 'made for TV movie', a couple of well-harped and filtered news stories, some "Evil Cash.com" type websites pop up along with focus groups (seeking, ironically, for you to donate some 'evil cash' to the cause via PayPal or Credit card), and when the ball is really rolling, the Bill to confiscate "large sums of cash" goes in the hopper and is passed by public acclaim.
Mission Accomplished!
...and our liberties just took another hit.
Of course, in an economy which has unprecedented numbers of people on food stamps, for many, the once not so rare $100.00 bill seems like a lot of money--a lot more than it did when they were working, anyway, and it is surprising how fast the concept of how much is "a lot" changes with the transition from good employment to unemployment or back again--especially if you have your own business on the return leg.
While the venerable 'Benjamin' might seem like 'a lot', it buys less than ever before in terms of day-to-day supplies.
Now I have used this (currently) non-issue as an example, partly because the story linked is new, and this may be the start of yet another assault on conservatives, preppers, and ordinary Americans' liberty, but mainly to illustrate the sequence of events, the pattern, which even now is being used in order to try to gather steam against the RKBA and virtually any other aspect of the fundamental Liberty Americans had come to take for granted.
That assault on fundamental Liberty, in typical Obamite fashion, is coming from many directions simultaneously in an attempt to overwhelm resistance, but typical of the Left, it follows the same playbook.
I concur with those well-formed thoughts.
Plastic, i.e., an account, can be locked and also it’s use tracked. It’s very difficult to be a “Jesse James” style outlaw today, every time you use plastic you can be tracked. Accounts can be frozen and confiscated.
On the one hand, this brings to light why swat teams are largely unnecessary, and should be replaced by simple invitations to come to court. Let’s hear the case, and if Johnny is a drug dealer, that will come out in a proper trial, if not, he’ll be exonerated. If a person does not come to court, after years of contacts, at a certain point, IMHO, just have the trial in absentia. The big drug kingpin types could have their lives made miserable if they had no access to banking or accounts of any kind and had to run a 100% paper currency business. Little people who are mistaken for drug dealers, being good citizens, would certainly come to court to clear their name. Of course, it is a major inconvenience, but certainly better than having a swat team drop by at 5:00am and kill your family and your dog, just to find out they were at the wrong address.
On the other hand, if Johnny is not a drug dealer, not a murderer, etc., but he’s being set up by a few people that can’t stand his printing the truth or speaking the truth, etc., of course, that pursuit of him is illegitimate. A “good guy” might be on the run as well as a “bad guy”. If we find ourselves in a much degraded statist society, the “good guys” being illegitimately pursued may be a large part of society but will continue to conduct business, and paper currency will be used.
In either case, there should always be a currency that by design is not linked to any particular person, so someone can simply pay “cash” for an item, and not be traced or tracked and not suddenly find their account confiscated.
Such a currency is fundamental to freedom, and people will always develop such a currency where there is none, not so much so individuals will have a stockpile of currency, but to enable people to conduct transactions. (We would do well to remember that we earn the most by employing capital (investing in a small business), and should keep levels of cash at just what is prudent). Such a currency is a basic building block of commerce, and it is an essential element for people who have experienced catastrophe to rise from the ashes of failure. It enables us to pick ourselves up, etc., and start selling things for money and buying what we need and want, regardless of our status on anyone else’s books.
But I digress,.
As far as the coordinated efforts of the “thinkers”, media and legislators, IMHO, people would profit from thinking about what you’ve laid out.
Here’s to you, Smokin’ Joe.