Agustin Carstens is the general manager of the secretive Bank for International Settlements, sometimes called the central banks central bank. It is situated in Switzerland and is almost a state within a state – a bit like The Vatican.
Carstens has been on about a CBDC for years and here he is saying that the Central Banks will have “absolute control” of the currency (what he really means is you and me).
it now looks like a trackable digital currency is on the way for all of us. All central banks are now experimenting with this, and it looks like the Fed. is going to introduce one sooner rather than later:
I like the idea. I have nothing to hide. My cash comes from ATM withdrawals not by theft or selling drugs or whatever. So, I think this will “even the playing field” between those that earn their money and pay their taxes and those that don’t and skirt the system. I’m all for it!
I volunteer with SCORE.org - I help small businesses grow and prosper. I’m always in amazement when folks who run “cash businesses” don’t do proper accounting and instead take their salary from the drawer, pay bills from the drawer, etc. and never file tax returns.
This happens more frequently than you might think. They don’t contribute to society as far as I’m concerned and should be called out. I don’t do that, but I’d love to. Maybe this will help that situation.
Now y’all can come out and shoot at me.
'38Packard
I have a hard time with the doom and gloom arguments that Steve Forbes is spewing. To me is sounded like nothing but fear mongering. As '38 mentions, the current system is all too easy to cheat, and that isn’t good. (which makes me wonder if the VAT system isn’t superior in terms of being cost effective to collect and very difficult to avoid? because our current tax system is neither of those)
I use almost zero cash these days and its been that way for years for me. If the US Gov’t wanted to, they could probably figure out how much I have and how I’m spending and investing it already.
Hmm. You might change your tune if there comes a day when some corrupt politician decides that SCORE is a subversive organization and its volunteers should be rounded up. Or some other organization you’re part of.
Hard to predict what the future might bring, but total surveillance means that you can be held accountable for anything. Is that really desirable in your view?
Thanks for your response, but I think it’s quite cliche. You obviously hide behind a hidden profile, so I get where you’re coming from - I guess.
You forgot to bold the other half of my response - I have nothing to hide.
I guess if I had something to hide, I’d be concerned with government’s abuse of that enormous power. But I’m not - because I’ve got nothing to hide.
Do you actually think that the government does not currently absolutely know how many accounts I have, what their balances are, what my credit score is, etc? Of course they know, I have to report most of that information annually when I file my tax returns. And it needs to match exactly what my banks and other financial institutions where I have accounts at report to the government. And what does not get reported, the government (local, state and federal) can each file a petition(?) with a judge to have that information released to them.
So all of these governmental agencies can look at my stuff today. It makes no difference to me wrt the digital financial footprint that I leave whether the government goes to a digital economy or not. As a matter of fact, I think it would be a PLUS for me - especially if Quicken also has download capabilities to my “government information” such as my town’s assessment of my property, my tax bill, my water bill, etc.
I can’t see how going to a digital economy will be a bad thing - especially because I have nothing to hide.
I’d appreciate if you would share with us the reasons why you think that moving to a digital economy will further enable or facilitate governmental power corruption. Because I don’t see it.
Well score.org is a resource partner of the Small Business Administration so if that happens we’re all in BIG trouble.
I’m not sure what you mean by “total surveillance”. I think we’re talking about a digital economy in this thread. I’ve explained that my financial digital footprint is already pretty complete and can be accessed by government agencies today.
I also volunteer as a voting member of a local town Economic Development Commission and I am very aware of “Open Meeting Laws” and ethics responsibilities for which I am accountable. I am also sufficiently insured via my Umbrella policy that while accountable, I am also protected in the event that the “fit hits the shan”.
While I might be OK with exposing my financial life, I’m not a fan of someone sitting across the street with binoculars looking in my windows while I take a shower. There’s a difference.
And yet our Constitution gives your the option of retaining your privacy, even if “you have nothing to hide.”
You do not have to speak to the police “even if you have nothing to hide.” You can request a lawyer. You do not have to turn over your finances, absent a warrant granted with cause , “even if you have nothing to hide.” You don’t have to let the gendarmes into your house (again, absent warrant for cause) even if…
The framers of the Constitution dealt with a government (in that case a Monarch, but plenty of ‘elected officials’ in other countries have gone the same route) who were far more casual about citizens’ privacy, and occasionally didn’t bother with niceties and went straight for the rubber truncheon - or worse.
“I have nothing to hide” ignores the broad sweep of human history. It’s not an argument, it’s a vanity declaration and it’s not in the slightest reassuring.
I’m with you on this issue. The Government has had a really complete financial picture of me my entire working life, the same goes for virtually everybody I know.
And we have seen how the “elite” are allowed to hide income and evade taxes, heck the recent release of the taxes of a former president make me sick to my stomach. People like us can’t claim a $100 charitable deduction without documentation, while the former guy, and probably many others just like him, seem to be able to dream up $1,000,000s in deductions, no proof needed.
Somewhere else in the thread somebody mentioned a VAT, at 1st glance that seems like it’d be more transparent and fair than this rigged system we currently have.
38Packard: Yes, there already is a lot of data, but now we would be talking about getting rid of cash and the government/secret service being able to track everyone’s spending with one click. What it was spent on, where and when. I’m sure many opposition leaders or critical journalists in many countries don’t think that would be a good idea. And I don’t think even the US is 100% immune from authoritarianism.
Then you must not have a problem with the IRS employing 470 new agents and auditing our Tax Returns every year to make sure we are not “Hiding” anything?
Actually, on one hand, I’d prefer that they not do that, on another, I’m OK with it.
As a former IT guy, I’d prefer that they not hire more people auditors but instead, automate more and more of the tax reporting process. Once it’s all digital, it should be easier, more accurate, and require less people - and cost less, too!
OTOH, in the absence of the above, I’m OK with a reasonable cost (investment?) in a more thorough auditing function, even if it is 470 people, to enforce the tax code and generate more legal tax revenue.
I do not know how soon a digital currency will occur. If done correctly it is cheaper than printing money perhaps?
If your money is in a bank it is a digital currency. Effectively just is.
Hiring a cleaning person for your home wont be a cash deal. That sort of thing goes out the window. If you were working for cash you should want a digital currency. You can get benefits in several ways. Meaning you can demand more in pay.
There is an underground economy we need to bring above ground.
But that is what people are afraid of. If they find more tax cheats than more people will have to pay more taxes. I am very conservative on how I calculate my taxes because I do not want to be audited. But if the ROIC on an IRS agent is even 10 percent it would be well worth hiring as many as possible.
For those who think “can’t happen here”, recall the case of Yusuf, aka Cat Stevens. He was on an airliner, over the middle of the Atlantic, when the US government decided, without any show of evidence, or legal due process, that a charity that Yusuf donated to “supported terrorism”, and banned him from the US. The airliner had to land in Maine, and boot him off, before it could continue to it’s destination. Yusuf was detained by DHS, and sent back to the UK the next day.
For more fun and enlightenment, try watching “Fahrenheit 9/11”, which, among other cases, talks about a small group of anti-war activists, US citizens all, who were put under surveillance by the FBI, for being against the war in Iraq.
Remember my commenting that I have obtained, not only a certified birth certificate for myself, but also for both of my parents, in case someone decides that only people who can prove they were not born as “anchor babies” have full rights of citizenship?
I’m a little surprised that no one seems to find it disturbing that a Mexican, working for a secretive bank in Switzerland, wants to know what you spend you cash on. What could possibly go wrong:
Freeland, who is also the finance minister, said the RCMP and other law enforcement agencies have been gathering intelligence on convoy protesters and their supporters and sharing that information with financial institutions to restrict access to cash and cryptocurrency.
Stalin and Hitler would have been in favour of a traceable digital currency.
As for me I use cash wherever possible and have a nice collection of assets outside of the banking system - fancy trusting governments and banks like this
Isn’t cash an instrument of the government? How do you know they are not tracking your cash? You should probably be paying with gold and carrying gold or silver around.
