[Valentine]

(05-03-2016 12:11 PM)captain_shane Wrote:  

Anyone who votes yes is out of their fucking mind. It will happen though because people are fucking morons who can be easily hoodwinked by the following positives:

Positives:

+ Fast easy transactions
+ Drug transactions will be much harder
+ Money laundering much harder
+ Tax evasion non existent

I'm confused, why would these be positives?

With our overlords watching I'm not going to say any more on these topics, but this is definitely not a clear cut positive.

Well maybe it is to lawmakers and SJWs, but I think many here wouldn't agree with it.

(05-03-2016 12:46 PM)PhDre Wrote:  

^MrFish, you are completely correct in that we need an anonymous, decentralised currency.

However, the problem with bitcoin is that it's a digital currency; it needs the internet to work.

What if the government decides that bitcoin is illegal and they start to take out network nodes or exchanges?

That's the beauty of cash. The government doesn't know how much you have or how much you spend.
The only real downside is that the central banks can create it as they please.

The perfect solution would be a currency that is anonymous, decentralised, offline and limited in total amount.

Cryptocurrency can be offline. You can keep digital wallets stored offline on a USB and even do exchanges offline through handing over these USB wallets.

The only danger is that it will require several layers of vetting before you exchange cryptocurrency with anyone because they could be a government agent, or just willing to snitch.

As for digital exchange servers, there are many notorious online black markets on the darknet which have lasted years.

For transfers between wallets, governments will know transactions occur, but they won't know where they are generated from. For example, the largest bitcoin transaction recorded was worth $147 million, but no-one has any clue who did it.

---

In the event of cash being banned (or made significantly less accessible) the world will move towards a bartering system with precious metals etc, or we will all use cryptocurrency.

My money is on cryptocurrency because:
- It is highly divisible, making it superb for micro-transactions
- It can be hidden - on a USB, on your computer, on an online server
- It can be backed up in multiple locations, cloud and offline

---

We've already learnt this year that the mainstream hates our movement and we quickly made our tribes underground.

Currency will go the same way, and with our community being the cutting edge of many thought movements I can see within a few years we'll all be using the darknet and cryptocurrency.

---

On another note,
What's also worrying is the steps they've already taken towards cashless societies:

Quote:

Sweden has already phased out most cash transactions.
According to Credit Suisse, 80% of all purchases in Sweden are electronic and don’t involve cash. And that figure is rising.
If the trend continues - and there is nothing to suggest it won’t - Sweden could soon be the world’s first cashless society.
Sweden’s supply of physical currency has dropped over 50% in the last six years. A couple of major Swedish banks no longer carry cash. Virtually all Swedes pay for candy bars and coffee electronically. Even homeless street vendors use mobile card readers.

Italy made cash transactions over €1,000 illegal;
Switzerland proposed banning cash payments in excess of 100,000 francs;
Russia banned cash transactions over $10,000;
Spain banned cash transactions over €2,500;
Mexico made cash payments of more than 200,000 pesos illegal;
Uruguay banned cash transactions over $5,000; and
France made cash transactions over €1,000 illegal, down from the previous limit of €3,000.

Any guesses on the next big move towards cashless?

[PhDre]

(05-03-2016 05:34 PM)Valentine Wrote:  

Cryptocurrency can be offline. You can keep digital wallets stored offline on a USB and even do exchanges offline through handing over these USB wallets.

I didn't know that. Isn't there a need for the transaction to be verified by a network node and added to the blockchain?

I see that you specified the transaction as simply exchanging USB keys with a wallet on them, but this still requires you to split you own bitcoin portfolio into different wallets every time you want to make a payment. And you will have to do this on the spot, or know in advance exactly how much you are going to spend. Doesn't seem very practical to me.

And what about bitcoin counterfeiting? How probable is it that people will be able to create fake bitcoins if you want minimum reliance on network nodes?

[PhDre]

(05-03-2016 02:50 PM)Caravaggio Wrote:  

(05-03-2016 12:46 PM)PhDre Wrote:  

…
That's the beauty of cash. The government doesn't know how much you have or how much you spend.
The only real downside is that the central banks can create it as they please.
…

private banks can create money too.

I know that they create electronic money (thus most money) out of thin air whenever they make a loan. But do they have the ability to print cash or are they limited in the amount of physical money they can withdraw by their account balance at the central bank?

[RaccoonFace]

(05-03-2016 02:50 PM)Caravaggio Wrote:  

definitely no! without cash we are totally at the mercy of our governments.


yet we are heading this way, and before anyone notices, cash is gone. The EZB will vote in the abolition of the 500€ note tomorrow. Germany and Austria want to keep it, but the majority wants to see it gone. The next will be the 200€ and then an already discussed limit of cash-purchases (e.g. in italy sums over 1000€ have to be payed electronically). The only thing which currently slows down the trend (at least in my view) are the pensioners. My grandfather doesn't even have a ec-card and there is no way he would manage to pay electronically, let alone doing transactions on the computer. But this generation will cease soon and that will too pave the way for our cashless society.

(05-03-2016 12:46 PM)PhDre Wrote:  

…
That's the beauty of cash. The government doesn't know how much you have or how much you spend.
The only real downside is that the central banks can create it as they please.
…

private banks can create money too.

Most, if not all, contemporary central banks are private, including the Federal Reserve.

This documentary is essential if you want to understand the central banking system:

[Valentine]

(05-04-2016 12:44 AM)PhDre Wrote:  

(05-03-2016 05:34 PM)Valentine Wrote:  

Cryptocurrency can be offline. You can keep digital wallets stored offline on a USB and even do exchanges offline through handing over these USB wallets.

I didn't know that. Isn't there a need for the transaction to be verified by a network node and added to the blockchain?

I mean specifically that ownership of wallets can be exchanged offline, wallet-to-wallet transfers still require being online for the blockchain.

It's a moot point anyway requiring offline capabilities since these transactions are anonymous and the network is distributed and extremely robust.

Quote:

I see that you specified the transaction as simply exchanging USB keys with a wallet on them, but this still requires you to split you own bitcoin portfolio into different wallets every time you want to make a payment. And you will have to do this on the spot, or know in advance exactly how much you are going to spend. Doesn't seem very practical to me.

You would only need to make one wallet-to-wallet transfer from yours to the other individual. And with digital wallet apps this takes seconds.

Quote:

And what about bitcoin counterfeiting? How probable is it that people will be able to create fake bitcoins if you want minimum reliance on network nodes?

Again, you seem to have misunderstood my answer on offline capabilities. Attempts to counterfeit have proved impossible.

For further reading look into the success of darknet black markets and how Bitcoin itself works to see why this is almost the perfect currency of the future (z.cash seems to have further improved on it).

[DamienCasanova]

It's coming faster than you'd expect

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-04...eu500-bill

*ECB ENDS PRODUCTION AND ISSUANCE OF €500 BANKNOTE
*ECB SAYS ISSUANCE OF EU500 NOTE TO STOP AROUND THE END OF 2018
*ECB SAYS OTHER EURO BANKNOTES WILL STAY IN PLACE
*ECB: EU500 CAN BE EXCHANGED AT CEN BANKS FOR UNLIMITED TIME

And just like that the second highest denominated European bank note in circulation (after the CHF1000 Bill) is dead...


And so now, everyone rushes into the CHF 1000 note.

So what, big deal, eliminate it. The people will still have 5, 10, 20, 50, 100 and 200 euro bills right.

As we wrote previously, the answer is not that simple at all. Recall that the €500 note is the second highest currency denomination in G10, after the CHF1,000 note. More importantly, the total value of €500 notes in circulation amounts to €306.8bn and has been rising as shown in this BofA chart:


Furthermore, as a share of the value of total euros in circulation, the €500 note is the second-highest, after the €50 note.


This is what we said in February

In other words, if overnight the €307 billion worth of €500 bills were eliminated, the notional value of the entire amount of European physical currency in circulation would decline by 30% to €700 billion!

And there you have it: while it may not be banning all European cash outright, we are confident the ECB would be delighted if one third of it was to start, while pretending to be fighting financial crime, terrorism, corruption and drug dealers.

Of course, what Europe would be truly doing is setting the scene for ever more aggressive NIRP, and by removing the highest denomination bank notes, it would make evading negative that much more difficult and costly (albeit would certainly favor gold).

... we would expect that abolishing a note that represents almost 30% of the total Euros in circulation would be negative for the currency, keeping everything else constant. The share of the €500 note in the total value of Euros in circulation has been falling since 2009 and this has coincided with a weakening Euro in real effective terms. This is not evidence of causality, but we should not ignore it.

If we are right, the Euro will weaken, primarily against the USD and the CHF. The USD is the most liquid currency and we would expect it to capture a large share of the drop in the demand for the Euro as a store of value. However, the CHF could also benefit, having the largest note denomination in G10 economies. Indeed, the CHF1000 note is already very popular, representing more than 60% of the CHF notes in circulation, unless the SNB follows the example of the ECB and also abolishes the CHF1000 note.

BofA is right, unless of course, in this global race to the bottom where every central bank tit has other central bank tats as a direct response, first the SNB "scraps" the CHF1000 bill, and then the Federal Reserve follows suit and listens to Harvard "scholar" and former Standard Chartered CEO Peter Sands who just last week said the US should ban the $100 note as it would "deter tax evasion, financial crime, terrorism and corruption."


As the Treasury chart above shows, $100 bills account for for $1.08 trillion of the $1.38 trillion total in circulation. So should the Fed react to the ECB's "scrapping" of the €500 bill, which accounts for 30% of the value of currency in circulation, then the Fed would respond in kind, by eliminating 78% of all paper currency in circulation by value.

Not a bad way to launch a global ban on paper currency ahead of a global NIRP regime, and all, of course, in the name of fighting "tax evasion, financial crime, terrorism and corruption."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Buy more physical metal and stockpile those big bills folks....something big is coming

[thoughtgypsy]

Ultimately the elimination of cash comes down to the motive of total control.

The use of cash means that transactions cannot be tracked for analysis, and private wealth can be kept safely and securely. The theft of resources (taxes) is more difficult. Cash is a form of self sufficiency from those who create the money supply and orchestrate the economy. All forms of self sufficiency must be eliminated to ensure a total reliance on a centralized state, and to remove the potential of the formation of power structures outside of the state.

Most people can reach the conclusion that elimination of cash prevents private citizens any recourse from bail-ins, or direct theft of their property. Consider what happened in Cyprus and Greece as a template for what will happen globally before GATCA is enacted. When Cyprus (an EU member) confiscated the wealth of it's citizens and residents a few years ago, they closed the banks and prevented people from withdrawing any more than a pittance of funds each week. Directly prior to this, Juncker promised that a bail in wouldn't happen. This is the same Juncker who famously said "When it becomes serious, you have to lie." You cannot trust anything these people say, and must do your own analysis.

Most people are not aware of the wider picture. It is often thought that economics is not a perfect science. I would propose that this may not be the case, and that an understanding of the science has been actively discouraged.

I have a background in electronics and circuits, which are a fascinating field of study. An understanding of the elements of the circuit allows one to calculate all aspects of the circuit with perfect mathematical precision. For instance, Kirchhoff's first law states that the current flowing in and out of a "node" must balance perfectly. In a similar manner, the flow of currency moving into and out of a transaction must balance perfectly.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. There are many possible elements in a circuit, such as resistors, capacitors, inductors, amplifiers, voltage sources, and so on. I would propose that all of the elements of an economy may be represented by analogous components. As just one example, following our analogy where current flow represents the flow of currency, a capacitor allows for the storage of charge, and can thus be represented in economic theory as the storage of wealth. By representing all elements of an economy as an electrical circuit, economics may be perfectly calculated using circuit theory.

In order to calculate the components of a circuit, one must use measurements. As time has progressed, more data regarding our assets and spending habits has been made available. Tax collection data (from both private citizens and the businesses to which their funds flow), may provide a good enough approximation of the flow of wealth in an economy with enough data points. Introduction of the Universal Product Code (UPC) and use of credit cards made even more data available, to where every single transaction that doesn't involve cash can be tracked and analyzed. With the elimination of cash, every single transaction can be tracked and analyzed.

With the collection of data regarding the flow of wealth, one may be able to analyze the economic effects of different actions and begin to understand how to control an economy. Economic activity can be encouraged through marketing and advertising, a multi-trillion dollar global industry. The science of marketing has progressed at rapid pace, and provided a big push for the insatiable collection of big data. Besides advertising, there are many other ways to control an economy. The flow of wages can be restricted by controlling the labor supply. The generation of wealth can be restricted by preventing new business formation through tighter regulation laws. The spending power of currency can be modified by expanding the money supply. It has been an open secret for some time now that everything we do online is being collected for analysis. Massive data centers have been built for this purpose.

With a massive data set, it is possible to analyze the effects of different economic actions. Models can be developed to predict these effects. Further actions can then be performed, the effects measured, and the model can then be compared against what was measured. The model can then be refined further, and with each iteration it may increasingly accurate. Even complex non linear systems can be very closely approximated using a large enough data set and an accurate model. The use of Principal Component Analysis (PCA), such as methods of Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) or Partial Least Squares Regression (PLSR) allows for the identification and isolation of all or most variables within a data set. Statistical analysis is very powerful and allows for the construction of extremely accurate models and algorithms.

Elimination of cash eliminates whatever uncertainty is left within the economic data set and allows for complete accuracy and measurement. It allows for complete control over all aspects of an economy. The ability to control whether a man can put food on his table, whether he lives or dies is an enormous power. Even Silent Weapons can be enormously dangerous. Perhaps those who are making the push to a cashless society understand this.

[Onto]

Here's an indirect assault on cash that already exists here in the US.

I was talking with a mortgage banker this week about acquiring a mortgage . He said if you have cash that's not in the bank you won't be able to just deposit it and have it be considered or used for getting a mortgage. Cash deposits into your bank, even if it's a series of smaller amounts will not be considered if it appears to be out of ordinary from your normal financial routine.

Of course money in brokerage accounts, securities, etc., are ok. Just not that big stash of cash you've been holding in your safe.

Maybe the banks are getting more desperate for cash to shore up their balance sheets.

[NovaVirtu]

(05-08-2016 08:23 AM)thoughtgypsy Wrote:  

entire post

Fascinating analysis, thoughtgypsy. In William Cooper's book Behold A Pale Horse he lays out a similar analogy between the flow of electricity and economics. The essay is called Quiet Weapons for Silent Wars.

Banning cash is bad news for all the reasons thoughtgypsy and others have laid out. However, I just don't think it would work. Black market underground currencies would form, if for no other reason than that crime syndacites would not allow themselves to be put out of bussiness that way.

Smart, enterprising people would form their own underground banks and create currency themselves.

And of course the blockchain technology will be difficult to supress.

We need to stay vigilant, but I just don't think this totalitarian vision can ever be completely acheived. The world is too complex. There's too many people (and governments who are not part of the NWO like Russia) that won't stand for it.

[debeguiled]

(05-08-2016 09:46 AM)Onto Wrote:  

Here's an indirect assault on cash that already exists here in the US.

I was talking with a mortgage banker this week about acquiring a mortgage . He said if you have cash that's not in the bank you won't be able to just deposit it and have it be considered or used for getting a mortgage. Cash deposits into your bank, even if it's a series of smaller amounts will not be considered if it appears to be out of ordinary from your normal financial routine.

They are softening us up to accept a cashless society by making cash a pain in the ass in the present.

[DamienCasanova]

How El Chapo Used Gold To Move Money Out Of The US
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2...er-of-gold

Laundering scheme used forged metal invoices, court files show
As banks beef up compliance, criminals hide money in trade

Mexican drug cartels operating in the U.S. have a problem: getting the profits home. Sometimes they try sending cash through banks, but that’s grown difficult as the government forces financial institutions to beef up anti-money-laundering efforts. So at least one international organization moved its money on a river of molten gold.

The Sinaloa cartel, once led by serial prison escapee Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman, used some of its proceeds from selling drugs in the U.S. to buy gold in pawn shops, according to ­allegations in court records. It shipped more than $98 million in gold to a Florida company that had it melted down and sold for cash. Then the cartel used fake invoices to justify sending the proceeds to a company in Mexico.

Court documents, plus interviews with people familiar with the alleged scheme, paint an unusually detailed picture of how gold can be used to hide an illicit money transfer.

“If I had a lot of money to launder, I would choose gold,” says John Cassara, a former U.S. Treasury special agent and author of books on money laundering. “There really isn’t anything else like it out there.” Once it’s melted down, the commodity’s origins are difficult to trace. It can quickly be converted to cash. Many of the companies that deal in gold aren’t held to the same compliance standards as banks.

Part of the suspected money laundering operation is laid out in documents from a federal court case in Chicago. People including alleged Sinaloa member Carlos Parra-Pedroza, who’s among those facing charges, are accused of arranging for couriers to collect drug proceeds and then buy up gold bars and scrap pieces from jewelry stores and businesses in the Chicago area.

Parra-Pedroza has pleaded not guilty, and his attorney didn’t respond to requests for comment. According to the Chicago documents, members of the group shipped the gold via FedEx to an unnamed company in Florida to be melted down for cash.

Boxes of Gold
Between 2011 and 2014, the Chicago complaint says, the company allegedly took in hundreds of boxes sent from the cartel, which used aliases such as Chicago Gold or Shopping Silver. The Florida company collected a commission of 1 percent, then forwarded the remaining money to a company in Mexico owned by Parra-Pedroza and called De Mexico British Metal, court documents allege. The records also say that falsified paperwork made it look as though De Mexico British Metal sold the gold to the unnamed Florida company, helping to make the transactions appear legitimate.

That unnamed company, say two people familiar with the matter, was Natalie Jewelry, which was the subject of a separate case in federal court in Florida. The trail that led U.S. authorities to the company began with a modest question, says one of the people who knows the case.

Lou Bock, a retired agent for the Department of Homeland Security, says U.S. Customs records posed a conundrum: “There’s just way too much gold going through Miami,” he says. He prodded his former agency to look into the uptick, which was suspicious, he believed, because virtually no jewelry is made in Miami.

In January 2014, based on Customs reports showing discrepancies between the volume and value of gold processed by the company, federal agents converged on Natalie Jewelry’s office in an industrial park just north of Miami. They seized cash and ­hundreds of kilograms of gold and silver. The agents had uncovered a tax-­evasion scheme, according to two of the sources. Natalie Jewelry’s records revealed money-­laundering links to drug rings including the Sinaloa cartel, the people say.

Guilty Pleas
Natalie Jewelry owners Jed and Natalie Ladin had set up an office for their company in Mexico City, court documents in the Florida case show. Natalie Jewelry would actually sell the gold it received to other companies, known as refineries. Refiners collect their own commission when they melt down scrap gold, then send proceeds back to the gold trader.

The Ladins pleaded guilty to conspiring to launder money on behalf of a separate Mexican drug dealer. They haven’t been charged with laundering funds for the Sinaloa cartel. Jed, who was sentenced to three years in prison, declined to be interviewed. Natalie was sentenced to time served and supervised release; she also declined an interview request, through her lawyer.

There was a bizarre incident during the Miami bust. With cars flashing blue lights and a SWAT team in front of the warehouse, a black sedan pulled up. A man got out, popped the trunk, pulled out a briefcase, and walked toward Natalie Jewelry’s door, a person who was at the scene says.

“I just need to drop off this gold and get a receipt,” the man was heard to say. “I need a receipt.” The man walked into the Natalie Jewelry office and dropped off the briefcase, which was full of gold. If he was a cartel courier, his insistence on documentation may be understandable: On surreptitious recordings, Parra-Pedroza described one courier who admitted losing money, after claiming it was seized by authorities. “I think they even cut his fingers off,” he said.
The man in Florida left with his receipt.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-06...ney-out-us
Here's how the money laundering process allegedly worked. When the Sinaloa cartel needed to get the proceeds from its drug activities in the U.S. back to Mexico, it would first go buy up gold bars and other scrap gold pieces (sometimes silver as well) from jewelry stores and other businesses in the Chicago area. Then, the gold would be put into boxes, and under the name "Chicago Gold", or on occasion "Shopping Silver", would ship the boxes via FedEx to a company near Miami called Natalie Jewelry.

Once the gold arrived at Natalie Jewelry, the second leg of the operation was set in motion. The gold would then be sold to companies referred to as refineries, who melted down the gold. The refinery would take a commission, and send the rest of the proceeds back to Natalie Jewelry.

Now came the difficult part, which was getting the cash out of the country and into Mexico. This part of the operation called for a little bit more creativity, so the cartel set up a company in Mexico called De Mexico British Metal. De Mexico British Metal would invoice Natalie Jewelry, making it appear that it had sold the gold to them. Natalie Jewelry would in turn take their commission, and send the final proceeds to De Mexico British Metal.

The invoices made the entire transaction appear legitimate, and it worked for a period of time, as the cartel was able to launder an estimated $98 million using this process. However, the Department of Homeland Security eventually caught on to the scheme. "There was just way too much gold going through Miami" said retired DHS agent Lou Bock. The fact that U.S. customs records showed a large volume of gold being processed by a company in Miami, coupled with the fact that virtually no jewelry is made in Miami, made the agency very suspicious.

In January 2014, based on Customs reports showing discrepancies between the volume and value of gold processed by Natalie Jewelry, federal agents converged on the office located in an industrial park just north of Miami. They seized cash and hundreds of kilograms of gold and silver, along with documents linking the company to the Sinaloa cartel.


Beware of this kind of story, this is exactly what they will use to justify banning physical currencies like Cash & Gold.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

There is already a popular uprising under way that wants to stop the elimination of the 500 Euro note, which others have pointed out is popular:


https://www.volkspetition.org/petitionen...t-stoppen/

It is a petition that not only wants to stop the elimination of the 500 euro note, but also cash itself being fully aware that this is their goal.

Here a short interview with Anthony Migchels, who is the best monetary reformer I know. He is currently opening an alternative currency in Europe that can be exchanged to the Euro.

Bitcoin by the way won't be banned, because it's essentially a scarcity currency meaning that it is more like gold. Also the creation is quite obscure pointing to a top-down direction. Introducing scarce usury currencies is not problematic. What we need is usury free currencies that are created for the people with sufficient turnover rate that come back to the people and are not transferred to the 0,001% where they are only accumulated, but not spent into circulation.

In the interview you will also have mentioned the future of the US, the Yuan, the Euro as well as Bitcoin. Listen well, because I agree with Anthony on that front.

Fore more info you can check out the website:
https://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/

I was leaning towards Libertarianism before I found that site. Also I researched it via other sources as well - the information within that site is massive. As an economist I can tell you that everything said on those pages is by far logical than what is told to students worldwide in macroeconomics.