Blockchain/Digital Currency as part of 'The Great Reset'

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Blockchain/Digital Currency as part of 'The Great Reset'

Postby Elvis » Wed Feb 23, 2022 6:34 pm

https://sociable.co/government-and-poli ... l-hearing/

A digital dollar doesn’t have to be a Central Bank Digital Currency; anonymity is a bedrock of freedom: Congressional hearing

‘If the digital dollar is to stand for more than surveillance, data mining & political censorship, US policymakers must be willing to articulate & defend a different set of principles’: Rohan Grey

A digital fiat currency expert testifies that it’s a mistake for Congress to only consider Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDC) when exploring digital dollars, adding that transactional anonymity is a bedrock of freedom in a democratic society.

Today, the US House Committee on Financial Services’ Task Force on Financial Technology held a hearing exploring the “Technological Infrastructure, Privacy, and Financial Inclusion Implications of Central Bank Digital Currencies.”

Expert witness Rohan Grey warned that a United States CBDC could be used for surveillance and censorship, and that it would be a mistake for Congress to ignore historical precedents when considering a digital dollar.

Grey told the congressional task force that it was limiting the full scope and potential of digital fiat currency systems by only looking at Central Bank Digital Currencies.

“Contrary to popular misconception, the Federal Reserve is not, and has never been, the only entity responsible for issuing currency or providing public payment services,” said Grey.

“Throughout American history, the [US] Mint, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, and the US Postal Service have all designed, issued, and operated various forms of public monetary technologies.

“It is thus a mistake to equate and reduce the wide spectrum of digital fiat currency architectures and arrangements to the more limited category of Central Bank Digital Currency, which refers only to those models in which central banks are the exclusive issuers and administrators,” he added.

Grey, who carries with him a host of titles including Assistant Professor of Law at Willamette University, Director of the Digital Fiat Currency Institute, and Consultant to the UN International Telecommunications Union’s Focus Group on Digital Currency, warned Congress about going down the path of surveillance, censorship, and control.

In his written testimony, Grey elaborated on the potential for political censorship and oppositional persecution, which occurs whenever public and private entities attempt to self-regulate.

“It is often asserted that as long as there are adequate privacy safeguards baked into centrally administered systems, then there is little to worry about when it comes to potential for abuse,” he wrote.

“I would strongly urge members of this Task Force not to indulge in this dangerous fiction
, which is typically paired with the personal sentiment that ‘as long as one is not doing anything wrong, one should have nothing to hide.’

“History reminds us time and time again that public actors, even those we tend to consider on the side of right and good, cannot always be relied upon to respect their own bright lines, or to self-regulate the worst excesses of their often well-intentioned desire to compromise individual rights and due process in the pursuit of swift and efficient administration of justice,” he added.

In both his written and spoken testimony, Grey asserted that a digital dollar should be complementary to physical, hard currency, and that the safest approach to data protection, privacy, and freedom should be one that mimics the Hippocratic Oath: “first, do no harm.”

“There are meaningful and important differences between a digital fiat currency regime committed to preserving the privacy and freedom-respecting features of physical currency, and one built exclusively instead around common ledger or account-based technologies in which all transactions are recorded and censorable by design,” he testified.

“The safest and most defensible approach is to adopt a Hippocratic-style principle of ‘first, do no harm.’ In the context of digital financial privacy, the best way to limit the risk of data abuses is to not collect it in the first place.”

Earlier this year, the People’s Bank of China began rolling out its own digital currency that would allow the Chinese Communist Party to further surveil, coerce, and control its citizens’ behavior as part of its larger social credit system.

During Tuesday’s hearing, Grey advised, “If the digital dollar is to stand for more than surveillance, data mining, and political censorship like China’s digital yuan or Facebook’s Diem [formally known as ‘Libra’], American policymakers must be willing to articulate and defend a different set of principles and commitments, even when doing so entails difficult choices.”

Should a digital dollar be abused by political interests, Grey warned, “It is not difficult to envisage a future in which political donations, even within the United States, become increasingly subject to censorship and monitoring by those in control over the technological means of payment.”

Furthermore, he added, “If we do not take active and committed steps to reverse our decline into information and surveillance capitalism, […] we will end up in a world in which token-money, and the freedoms and civil liberties that it affords, are functionally extinct.”

According to Grey, anonymous peer-to-peer financial transactions are a bedrock of political freedom in a democratic society, and he urged Congress not to fall for the “seductive narrative” that anonymity is what allows criminal enterprises to thrive.

“It is now common to hear claims today that if we allow anonymity in digital currency networks, we are effectively giving a green light to criminals, money launderers, and terrorists,” he testified.

“I strongly urge members of this Task Force not to be enticed by this crude, albeit seductive, narrative.”

Grey recommended that lawmakers treat digital fiat currency platforms like common utilities available to all citizens as a public good while expanding the notion of “net neutrality” to the concept of “currency neutrality.”

“It is not uncommon to hear policymakers claim that designing a digital dollar system to allow for anonymous, peer-to-peer transactions would be radical or extreme,” Grey told Congress, adding, “I profoundly disagree.”

“Transactional anonymity, like anonymity more broadly, is a public good and a core bedrock of political freedom in a democratic society.”


The expert witness went on to recommend:

“Above all, Congress should adopt a principle of currency neutrality similar to net neutrality whereby digital fiat currency platforms and technologies are treated as common utilities available to all as a public good.”



Grey's committee statement begins at 38:34; the others are probably interesting, too (I haven't heard them yet).

Virtual Hearing - Digitizing the Dollar: Investigating the Technological...
8,327 views
Streamed live on Jun 15, 2021

U.S. House Committee on Financial Services

On Tuesday, June 15, 2021, at 10:00 a.m. (ET) Task Force on Financial Technology Chairman Lynch and Ranking Member Emmer will host a virtual hearing entitled, “Digitizing the Dollar: Investigating the Technological Infrastructure, Privacy, and Financial Inclusion Implications of Central Bank Digital Currencies."

- - - - - - - -
Witnesses for this one-panel hearing will be:

• Mrs. Carmelle Cadet, Founder and CEO, EMTECH

• Mr. Jonathan Dharmapalan, Founder and CEO, eCurrency

• Mr. Rohan Grey, Assistant Professor of Law, Willamette University

• Dr. Neha Narula, Director of the Digital Currency Initiative, MIT Media Lab

• Dr. Jenny Gesley, Foreign Law Specialist, Library of Congress

Overview

Traditional electronic payment systems are electronic representations of fiat currency and require a network of financial intermediaries who maintain accurate ledgers. Since 2008, a new digital asset class that uses cryptography and distributed ledger technology (DLT) has gained prominence and value in the global economy. These digital assets, often called cryptocurrencies, usually require no centralized intermediary to buy, sell, or exchange since the ledgers are public, mathematically verified, and stored on a distributed network of computers. However, the rise of decentralized cryptocurrencies and private digital currencies has helped spur debate around the concept of a central bank digital currency (CBDC), which would be issued by a government’s central bank – such as the Federal Reserve System (Fed) – and would replicate some features of cryptocurrencies. A CBDC is generally considered a digital payment instrument that is a direct liability of a central bank, but since implementation is, by definition, left to each sovereign state, CBDC designs will inevitably vary.

In response to rapid innovation in digital assets across the globe, the Fed, the central banking system of the U.S., has shown greater involvement and interest over the past several years, as demonstrated by the launch of a multi-year collaboration between the Boston Fed and MIT to code and test a hypothetical CBDC. This hearing will explore CBDC’s potential design trade-offs of various technological infrastructures and examine consumer privacy implications and the potential for increased financial inclusion.




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5LhZ4G4s-A
“The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” ― Joan Robinson
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 7561
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blockchain/Digital Currency as part of 'The Great Reset'

Postby Elvis » Wed Feb 23, 2022 6:38 pm


H.R.8827 - Stablecoin Classification and Regulation Act of 2020116th Congress (2019-2020)

Sponsor: Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-13] (Introduced 11/30/2020)
Committees: House - Financial Services
Latest Action: House - 11/30/2020 Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services. (All Actions)
Tracker:

This bill has the status Introduced

Stablecoin Classification and Regulation Act of 2020

This bill provides for the regulation of stablecoins, a type of privately issued digital currency whose value is pegged to a currency such as the U.S. dollar. Issuers of stablecoins must be a member of the Federal Reserve System, and must seek prior approval from the Federal Reserve, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the appropriate banking agency for the offering of stablecoins. Issuers of stablecoins are subject to oversight by the appropriate banking agency, including with respect to capital adequacy, leverage, and permitted activities.

Furthermore, issuers of stablecoins must be able to redeem all outstanding stablecoins at their nominal redemption value in U.S. dollars upon demand.



116th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. R. 8827

To amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to provide for the classification and regulation of stablecoins, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
November 30, 2020

Ms. Tlaib (for herself, Mr. Lynch, and Mr. García of Illinois) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services
A BILL

To amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to provide for the classification and regulation of stablecoins, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. Short title.

This Act may be cited as the “Stablecoin Classification and Regulation Act of 2020”.

SEC. 2. Findings.

Congress finds the following:

(1) Article I, Section 8, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution provides that Congress shall have the power “to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures”.

(2) Section 2A of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 225a) provides that the mandate of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is to “promote effectively the goals of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates”.

(3) Section 21(a) of the Banking Act of 1933 (12 U.S.C. 378(a)) provides in part that:

“(a) After the expiration of one year after [June 16, 1933] it shall be unlawful …

“(2) For any person, firm, corporation, association, business trust, or other similar organization to engage, to any extent whatever with others than his or its officers, agents or employees, in the business of receiving deposits subject to check or to repayment upon presentation of a pass book, certificate of deposit, or other evidence of debt, or upon request of the depositor, unless such person, firm, corporation, association, business trust, or other similar organization (A) shall be incorporated under, and authorized to engage in such business by, the laws of the United States or of any State, Territory, or District, and subjected, by the laws of the United States, or of the State, Territory, or District wherein located, to examination and regulation, or (B) shall be permitted by the United States, any State, territory, or district to engage in such business and shall be subjected by the laws of the United States, or such State, territory, or district to examination and regulations or, (C) shall submit to periodic examination by the banking authority of the State Territory, or District where such business is carried on and shall make and publish periodic reports of its condition, exhibiting in detail its resources and liabilities, such examination and reports to be made and published at the same times and in the same manner and under the same conditions as required by the law of such State, Territory, District in the case of incorporated banking institutions engaged in such business in the same locality.”.

(4) Section 3(l) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813(l)) provides that under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, the term “deposit” means:

“(1) the unpaid balance of money or its equivalent received or held by a bank or savings association in the usual course of business and for which it has given or is obligated to give credit, either conditionally or unconditionally, to a commercial, checking, savings, time, or thrift account, or which is evidenced by its certificate of deposit, thrift certificate, investment certificate, certificate of indebtedness, or other similar name, or a check or draft drawn against a deposit account and certified by the bank or savings association, or a letter of credit or a traveler’s check on which the bank or savings association is primarily liable: Provided, That, without limiting the generality of the term money or its equivalent, any such account or instrument must be regarded as evidencing the receipt of the equivalent of money when credited or issued in exchange for checks or drafts or for a promissory note upon which the person obtaining any such credit or instrument is primarily or secondarily liable, or for a charge against a deposit account, or in settlement of checks, drafts, or other instruments forwarded to such bank or savings association for collection,

“(2) trust funds as defined in this Act received or held by such bank or savings association, whether held in the trust department or held or deposited in any other department of such bank or savings association,

“(3) money received or held by a bank or savings association, or the credit given for money or its equivalent received or held by a bank or savings association, in the usual course of business for a special or specific purpose, regardless of the legal relationship thereby established, including without being limited to, escrow funds, funds held as security for an obligation due to the bank or savings association or others (including funds held as dealers reserves) or for securities loaned by the bank or savings association, funds deposited by a debtor to meet maturing obligations, funds deposited as advance payment on subscriptions to United States Government securities, funds held for distribution or purchase of securities, funds held to meet its acceptances or letters of credit, and withheld taxes: Provided, That there shall not be included funds which are received by the bank or savings association for immediate application to the reduction of an indebtedness to the receiving bank or savings association, or under condition that the receipt thereof immediately reduces or extinguishes such an indebtedness,

“(4) outstanding draft (including advice or authorization to charge a bank’s or a savings association’s balance in another bank or savings association), cashier’s check, money order, or other officer’s check issued in the usual course of business for any purpose, including without being limited to those issued in payment for services, dividends, or purchases, and

“(5) such other obligations of a bank or savings association as the Board of Directors, after consultation with the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, shall find and prescribe by regulation to be deposit liabilities by general usage, except that the following shall not be a deposit for any of the purposes of this Act or be included as part of the total deposits or of an insured deposit:

“(A) any obligation of a depository institution which is carried on the books and records of an office of such bank or savings association located outside of any State, unless—

“(i) such obligation would be a deposit if it were carried on the books and records of the depository institution, and would be payable at, an office located in any State; and

“(ii) the contract evidencing the obligation provides by express terms, and not by implication, for payment at an office of the depository institution located in any State;

“(B) any international banking facility deposit, including an international banking facility time deposit, as such term is from time to time defined by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in regulation D or any successor regulation issued by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System; and

“(C) any liability of an insured depository institution that arises under an annuity contract, the income of which is tax deferred under section 72 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.”.

(5) Section 1(a) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1811(a)) provides that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation was established for the purpose of “insur[ing] … the deposits of all banks … which are entitled to the benefits of insurance” under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act.

SEC. 3. Regulation of stablecoins.

(a) Definitions.—Section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813) is amended—

(1) in subsection (l)—

(A) in paragraph (4), by striking “and” at the end;

(B) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (6); and

(C) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following:

“(5) stablecoins issued by such bank or savings association; and”;

(2) by adding at the end the following:

“(aa) Definitions related to stablecoins.—

“(1) STABLECOIN.—The term ‘stablecoin’ means any cryptocurrency or other privately-issued digital financial instrument that—

“(A) is directly or indirectly distributed to investors, financial institutions, or the general public;

“(B) is—

“(i) denominated in United States dollars or pegged to the United States dollar; or

“(ii) denominated in or pegged to another national or state currency; and

“(C) is issued—

“(i) with a fixed nominal redemption value;

“(ii) with the intent of establishing a reasonable expectation or belief among the general public that the instrument will retain a nominal redemption value that is so stable as to render the nominal redemption value effectively fixed; or

“(iii) in such a manner that, regardless of intent, has the effect of creating a reasonable expectation or belief among the general public that the instrument will retain a nominal redemption value that is so stable as to render the nominal redemption value effectively fixed.

“(2) NOMINAL REDEMPTION VALUE.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—With respect to a stablecoin, the term‘ nominal redemption value’ means the value at which the stablecoin can readily be converted into United States dollars, or any other national or state currency, or a functional monetary equivalent, on demand, at the time of issuance, or otherwise accepted in payment or to satisfy debts denominated in United States dollars or any other national or state currency.

“(B) TREATMENT OF INSTRUMENTS PEGGED TO THE UNITED STATES DOLLAR.—For purposes of subparagraph (A), the value at which a stablecoin that is pegged to the United States dollar or a functional monetary equivalent can readily be converted into United States dollars, on demand, at the time of issuance shall be calculated using the express or implied pegged rate for such conversion at the time of issuance.

“(C) TREATMENT OF INSTRUMENTS DENOMINATED IN OR PEGGED TO ANOTHER NATIONAL OR STATE CURRENCY.—For purposes of subparagraph (A), the value at which a stablecoin that is denominated in or pegged to another national or state currency or a functional monetary equivalent can readily be converted into United States dollars, on demand, at the time of issuance shall be calculated using the express or implied exchange rate for such conversion at the time of issuance.

“(D) FUNCTIONAL MONETARY EQUIVALENT DEFINED.—For purposes of this Act and any Act enacted after the date of enactment of this subsection, the term ‘functional monetary equivalent’ means—

“(i) deposits, as defined under section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act;

“(ii) e-money and money transmitter balances;

“(iii) other stablecoins; and

“(iv) any other financial instrument issued for the purpose of circulating as money, making payments, or satisfying debts denominated in United States dollars or any other national or state currency.”.

(b) Regulations.—The Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1811 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

“SEC. 52. Stablecoins.

“(a) Issuing stablecoins.—

“(1) LIMITATION ON WHO MAY ISSUE STABLECOINS.—It shall be unlawful for any person to issue a stablecoin other than an insured depository institution that is a member of the Federal Reserve System.

“(2) LIMITATION ON STABLECOIN-RELATED COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES.—It shall be unlawful for any person to issue a stablecoin or stablecoin-related product, to provide any stablecoin-related service, or otherwise engage in any stablecoin-related commercial activity, including activity involving stablecoins issued by other persons, without obtaining written approval in advance, and on an ongoing basis, from the appropriate Federal banking agency, the Corporation, and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

“(3) NOTICE AND APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS.—Any person issuing a stablecoin shall—

“(A) notify the appropriate Federal banking agency, the Corporation, and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System of the person’s intent to issue the stablecoin at least 6 months prior to the date of issuance;

“(B) obtain written approval from the appropriate Federal banking agency, the Corporation, and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System prior to issuing any stablecoin or stablecoin-related product, providing any stablecoin-related services, or otherwise engaging in any stablecoin-related commercial activity, including activity involving stablecoins issued by other persons; and

“(C) provide ongoing analysis to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Financial Stability Oversight Council, and the Office of Finance Research on any potential systemic impacts or monetary policy implications of the stablecoin.

“(4) MASTER ACCOUNT ACCESS.—With respect to an insured depository institution that is a member of the Federal Reserve System and that has obtained written approval described under paragraph (3)(B)—

“(A) the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System shall provide the institution with a master account at the Federal Reserve System; and

“(B) the institution shall be eligible to receive all benefits and access to services associated with such account.

“(b) Requirement To maintain fixed value.—Any issuer of a stablecoin shall take all possible actions to ensure that, at no point over the life of the stablecoin, the redemption value of the stablecoin does not drop below the nominal redemption value of the stablecoin.

“(c) Ability To redeem stablecoins.—

“(1) IN GENERAL.—Any issuer of stablecoins shall maintain the ability to immediately redeem all outstanding stablecoins at their nominal redemption value, upon demand, in United States dollars.

“(2) REQUIREMENT TO MAINTAIN COLLATERAL FOR UNINSURED STABLECOIN AMOUNTS.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—Any issuer of stablecoins shall deposit reserves with the applicable Federal reserve bank in a segregated account in an amount equal to the nominal redemption value of all outstanding stablecoins issued by the issuer, and such reserves shall serve as collateral for such stablecoins.

“(B) EXCEPTION FOR INSURED DEPOSITS.—Subparagraph (A) shall not apply with respect to the value of any outstanding stablecoins that the issuer of the stablecoins knows are insured deposits.

“(3) PENALTIES.—If the issuer of a stablecoin fails to immediately redeem an outstanding stablecoin, upon demand, in United States dollars (or if the appropriate Federal banking agency determines that the issuer does not have the ability to immediately redeem all outstanding stablecoins, upon demand, in United States dollars) the appropriate Federal banking agency shall penalize the issuer, which may include—

“(A) the revocation of deposit insurance provided under this Act;

“(B) the revocation of the issuer’s membership in the Federal Reserve System;

“(C) the revocation of the issuer’s Federal charter; and

“(D) such lesser penalty as the agency determines appropriate.

“(d) Products and services related to stablecoins.—

“(1) DISCLOSURES.—Any person offering or providing a product or service with respect to a stablecoin, regardless of whether such person is the issuer of the stablecoin, shall clearly disclosure—

“(A) whether the person is the original issuer of the stablecoin; and

“(B) if the person is the original issuer of the stablecoin, whether—

“(i) the stablecoin is being held as an insured deposit; or

“(ii) the stablecoin is fully collateralized by reserves maintained at a Federal reserve bank.

“(2) USE OF THE TERM dollar.—A person offering or providing a product or service with respect to a stablecoin may not use the term ‘dollar’ or ‘dollars’ to refer to stablecoin balances unless such reference is pre-approved by either the Comptroller of the Currency or the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

“(e) Prioritization under deposit insurance.—With respect to a depositor, for purposes of determining whether a deposit is an insured deposit, the Corporation shall first include deposits that are not stablecoins.

“(f) Oversight by Federal banking agencies.—

“(1) IN GENERAL.—The appropriate Federal banking agency shall have general regulatory authority over an insured depository institution’s business activities related to stablecoins, including all existing regulatory powers that the agency has with respect to the institution’s business activities related to other deposits

“(2) CAPITAL ADEQUACY RULES.—The Federal banking agencies shall promulgate rules and standards regarding the capital adequacy, leverage, liquidity, and permitted activities of stablecoin issuers and other persons engaged in stablecoin-related activities.

“(3) EFFECT ON OTHER RULES.—To the extent a person is subject to capital adequacy, liquidity, and other rules issued under this section, the appropriate Federal banking agency may provide exceptions or exemptions from similar rules issued pursuant to other provisions of law, if the agency determines such exceptions or exemptions are appropriate, taking into account the activities of such person.

“(g) Rule of construction.—Nothing in this section may be construed as removing any jurisdictional or regulatory authority of any Federal agency.”.

(c) Banking Act of 1933.—Section 21 of the Banking Act of 1933 (12 U.S.C. 378) is amended—

(1) in subsection (a)—

(A) in paragraph (1), by inserting after “to any extent whatever in the business of” the following: “issuing stablecoins or”; and

(B) in paragraph (2), by inserting after “officers, agents or employees, in the business of” the following: “issuing stablecoins or”;

(2) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c); and

(3) by inserting after subsection (a) the following:

“(b) For the purposes of subsection (a), the term ‘stablecoin’ has the meaning given that term under section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813).”.

(d) Rulemaking.—Not later than the end of the 3-month period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation shall issue rules to carry out this Act and the amendments made by this Act.

“The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” ― Joan Robinson
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 7561
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blockchain/Digital Currency as part of 'The Great Reset'

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Thu Feb 24, 2022 6:04 am

stickdog99 » 24 Feb 2022 05:24 wrote:
I love that they think of all of us as children that they want to keep from buying sweets.


Yes. They haven't thought how their kids will buy pingers if there is no cash? T hey won't suddenly stop.

It will never happen. Black markets won't just go away. That's a ludicrous assertion.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10616
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blockchain/Digital Currency as part of 'The Great Reset'

Postby Belligerent Savant » Thu Feb 24, 2022 9:34 am

.

The near-term concern isn't about whether or not black markets will persist. Of course there will be [behind the scene] markets that will develop and even proliferate.

The concern is how digital IDs and currency will impact the the 'law-abiding', tax-paying typical citizen. How outlawing FIAT will impact everyday people, particularly working/lower classes.

Whether or not any of this is sustainable long-term, or if implemented, success percentage (and adoption) rate over time, all remain open points of inquiry/scrutiny. As already mentioned, there is greater probability for adoption in key urban hubs. At a minimum, there'll be more aggressive pushes for this in urban settings (infrastructure's already largely laid out via vaccine passports and related measures).
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5573
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blockchain/Digital Currency as part of 'The Great Reset'

Postby Grizzly » Thu Feb 24, 2022 12:08 pm

Great Reset in Action - World Economic Forum's Communist 'Digital Identity' Scheme - Video
https://rairfoundation.com/great-reset-in-action-world-economic-forums-communist-digital-identity-scheme-video/
The WEF’s digital identity scheme is laying the foundation for a global social credit system that will give them the power to control citizens and punish those they deem “untrustworthy.”

#GreatReset #WEF #schwab #klaus #digitalidentity #identity


Image
“The more we do to you, the less you seem to believe we are doing it.”

― Joseph mengele
User avatar
Grizzly
 
Posts: 4907
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blockchain/Digital Currency as part of 'The Great Reset'

Postby Belligerent Savant » Fri Feb 25, 2022 3:08 pm

.

Don't be lulled into complacency. This is only the beginning.


A National Vaccine Pass Has Quietly Rolled Out – And Red States Are Getting On Board

While the United States government has not issued a federal digital vaccine pass, a national standard has nevertheless emerged. To date, 21 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico offer accessibility to the SMART Health Card, a verifiable digital proof of vaccination developed through the Vaccination Credential Initiative (VCI), a global coalition of public and private stakeholders including Microsoft, Salesforce, Oracle, the Mayo Clinic and other health and tech heavyweights.

And very soon, at least four more states will be rolling out access to SMART Health Cards. “We've seen a notable uptick in states that have officially launched public portals where individuals can get verifiable vaccination credentials in the form of SMART Health Cards with a QR code,” says Brian Anderson, co-founder of the VCI and chief digital health physician at MITRE.

Image

...

“And at an international level, we are continuing to see intense interest in a coordinated international approach,” says Anderson. “And that has not diminished at all. I think quite the opposite.”

To wit: Every Canadian province has now adopted SMART Health Card verification, as has Aruba, the Cayman Islands, Singapore and Japan. And in Africa, the SMART Health Card has rolled out in Kenya and Rwanda, just the first of 32 African countries in the “Smart Africa” alliance to adopt a digital-first approach to healthcare records.

...

The second argument for adopting a digital vaccine verification system is the one swaying red-state governors: Having digital access to personal health records empowers the individual.

More than a dozen states have launched their own SMART Health Card-based portals. At least seven others — including Arizona, Mississippi and West Virginia — have turned to a third-party, MyIRMobile, to issue SMART Health Cards. Minnesota has chosen Docket, another third-party option.

Most right-leaning states offering SMART Health Cards do it quietly, without any fanfare. But big red South Carolina expects to roll out a portal for SMART Health Cards by the end of March, reports Politico.

“This isn’t a passport,” South Carolina’s director of immunizations told Politico. “This is essentially a Covid card that people get at their convenience because it’s their record.”

...



"convenience". FUCK THEM.

REFUSE/RESIST.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/suzannerow ... d2d0976be6
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5573
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blockchain/Digital Currency as part of 'The Great Reset'

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Sat Feb 26, 2022 5:37 am

Belligerent Savant » 24 Feb 2022 23:34 wrote:.

The near-term concern isn't about whether or not black markets will persist. Of course there will be [behind the scene] markets that will develop and even proliferate.

The concern is how digital IDs and currency will impact the the 'law-abiding', tax-paying typical citizen. How outlawing FIAT will impact everyday people, particularly working/lower classes.

Whether or not any of this is sustainable long-term, or if implemented, success percentage (and adoption) rate over time, all remain open points of inquiry/scrutiny. As already mentioned, there is greater probability for adoption in key urban hubs. At a minimum, there'll be more aggressive pushes for this in urban settings (infrastructure's already largely laid out via vaccine passports and related measures).



In my experience working/"lower" class people have alot more to do with black market activities. And I'm specifically not talking about drugs. But cash economies of all sorts. Stolen goods, off the books work on houses and vehicles that's cheaper and tax free for the tradie involved. All sorts of shit like that. There would be people at those protests in Canada who use that economy at times.

Altho plenty of people at that protest would drive trucks and use ice/meth/speed and other stimulants. But I was specifically referring to other things which is why I excluded drugs.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10616
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blockchain/Digital Currency as part of 'The Great Reset'

Postby Belligerent Savant » Sat Feb 26, 2022 11:13 am

.

There will be -- as there is now -- participants from all classes involved in black market activity. Even those with outwardly 'clean' personas or status may have backdoor dealings going on, etc.

The key here, though, is that in order to participate in the 'front-facing' economy/world, a digital ID/social credit system will be the barrier for entry. This will create a more overt and clear mark of delineation among groups of people and/or classes.

This remains all TBD at this point, so we're left to speculate in the near-term -- there'd be unforeseen outcomes/alternatives that may develop.
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5573
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blockchain/Digital Currency as part of 'The Great Reset'

Postby Harvey » Sat Feb 26, 2022 5:07 pm

Joe Hillshoist » Sat Feb 26, 2022 10:37 am wrote:In my experience working/"lower" class people have alot more to do with black market activities.


C I A
And while we spoke of many things, fools and kings
This he said to me
"The greatest thing
You'll ever learn
Is just to love
And be loved
In return"


Eden Ahbez
User avatar
Harvey
 
Posts: 4200
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 4:49 am
Blog: View Blog (20)

Re: Blockchain/Digital Currency as part of 'The Great Reset'

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Sun Feb 27, 2022 4:01 am

Harvey » 27 Feb 2022 07:07 wrote:
Joe Hillshoist » Sat Feb 26, 2022 10:37 am wrote:In my experience working/"lower" class people have alot more to do with black market activities.


C I A


I'm sorry?
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10616
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blockchain/Digital Currency as part of 'The Great Reset'

Postby RocketMan » Sun Feb 27, 2022 5:08 am

It appears crypto equals democracy, freedom and human rights suddenly!

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/25/4point1 ... vaded.html

Ukrainian central bank suspends electronic cash transfers, bolstering the use case for crypto

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/25/4point1 ... vaded.html

$4.1 million in cryptocurrency funneled to Ukrainian military since Russia invaded
-I don't like hoodlums.
-That's just a word, Marlowe. We have that kind of world. Two wars gave it to us and we are going to keep it.
User avatar
RocketMan
 
Posts: 2813
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:02 am
Location: By the rivers dark
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blockchain/Digital Currency as part of 'The Great Reset'

Postby Harvey » Sun Feb 27, 2022 10:07 am

Joe Hillshoist » Sun Feb 27, 2022 9:01 am wrote:
Harvey » 27 Feb 2022 07:07 wrote:
Joe Hillshoist » Sat Feb 26, 2022 10:37 am wrote:In my experience working/"lower" class people have alot more to do with black market activities.


C I A


I'm sorry?


Don't be. Just pointing out the limits of your experience.
And while we spoke of many things, fools and kings
This he said to me
"The greatest thing
You'll ever learn
Is just to love
And be loved
In return"


Eden Ahbez
User avatar
Harvey
 
Posts: 4200
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 4:49 am
Blog: View Blog (20)

Re: Blockchain/Digital Currency as part of 'The Great Reset'

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Mon Feb 28, 2022 7:04 am

Ahhh. Very clever.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10616
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blockchain/Digital Currency as part of 'The Great Reset'

Postby Belligerent Savant » Fri Mar 11, 2022 10:20 am

Belligerent Savant » Sun Nov 21, 2021 7:57 pm wrote:
...

So, hypothetically:

Once an individual's "Digital ID" (vaccine status, health info, bank/digital asset info, employment status, criminal record, internet activity, etc) is stored on the blockchain, a 'smart contract' can/will be appended to that individual's ID.

So long as one keeps to their vaccine schedule, or avoids certain activities deemed to be 'domestic threats', access to your digital monetary assets will remain active. Stray from the straight line, however, and mechanisms will automatically trigger to withhold funds (no human 'broker-bureaucrat' required; the terms/code of the 'smart' contract does all the work), or otherwise prevent you from making purchases (such as public transit or meals).

These smart contracts would also be built-into other services, such as UBI. In order to qualify for UBI, you must meet certain prerequisites -- easily verified via your Digital ID profile. Failure to maintain certain policy requirements will result in withholding of UBI until the 'issues' (e.g., getting your latest booster shot) are resolved.

This becomes particularly important if CASH/FIAT is no longer a viable alternative.

...


...

https://theupheaval.substack.com/p/just ... -cbdcs?s=r

Just Say No to CBDCs

A Central Bank Digital Currency would enable a totalitarian nightmare

Image

N.S. Lyons
15 hr ago

You awake to find that today is special: it’s Stimmie Day! When you roll over and check your phone, you see a notification from your FedWallet app letting you know that another $2,000 in FedCoins has just been added directly to your account by the U.S. Federal Reserve.

To be honest, part of you would love to save that money for the long term, given that things have been getting rather uncertain and actually kind of crazy lately, what with the war and the economy and all… But you can’t, since these FedCoins are coded as usable for consumer purchases only, and will expire and vanish in seven days. So you’d better spend em while you’ve got em!

The latest PlayBox it is then. Everyone says Elden Ring 3 is the hottest VR game on the Metaverse right now, and you’ve really wanted to join in. Since you’re stubbornly old fashioned, you decide to check it out at BezosMart on the way home from work today before you get it delivered by drone to your tiny apartment.

But first you begin your day as you always do, with a quick stop at the local Starbrats’ automated, no-contact drive-through latte dispensary. Opening your FedWallet app and vaguely waving your smartphone at the machine is enough to complete the transaction. $14 in FedCoins are instantly deleted from your digital account at the Fed and recreated in Starbrats’ corporate account, well before the sweet, coffee-flavored milk beverage is deposited into your eager, grasping hands.

Your morning starts to go downhill quickly, however, when you realize that your SUV is almost out of gas. You pull the old clunker, with its antiquated combustion engine, into the nearest open station you can find – it looks pretty run-down – and roll up to the pump. A dull-eyed teenager in a facemask inserts a nozzle into your vehicle and waits for you to pre-pay. You wave your phone at the pump. Nothing happens. You try again. Your phone buzzes, and you look at it. There’s a message from the Fed: “You have already spent more than the $400 maximum weekly limit on fossil fuels specified in the FedWallet User Agreement. Your remaining account balance cannot be used to purchase non-renewable energy resources. Please make an alternative purchase. Have you considered a clean, affordable New Energy Vehicle? Thank you for doing your part to build a more just and sustainable world!”

You have in fact considered purchasing a clean, affordable New Energy Vehicle. But they still aren’t very affordable for you, what with the supply chain shortages. Despite the instant credit the Fed would add to your balance when buying an electric car – plus the permanent ten percent general subsidy you automatically receive on every purchase as a BIPOC individual thanks to the Fed’s Reparations Alternatives for Comprehensive Equity (RACE) program – the down payment on a new car would still be more than you can afford, even with your new stimmie coins.

Well, you’re not going to be able to make it to work at the warehouse on what you have in the tank. How could you be so foolish? You’re going to have no choice but to park here and blow a bunch of money on hailing one of those sleek, incredibly expensive self-driving electric cabs to take you there instead. But, as you’re about to tap the screen to do so, you notice there’s a classic fast-food joint next door. Might as well head there first to unload a little stimmie money. Nothing makes you feel better like a greasy breakfast sandwich.

Entering the establishment and sidling up to the old touchscreen kiosk, you order a McKraken with extra bacon. But when you wave your phone to pay, an error message pops up again. “You have exceeded your weekly purchase limit for complex animal protein, as stipulated in the FedWallet User Agreement. Have you considered purchasing a delicious vegan or mealworm alternative? Thank you for doing your part to build a more just and sustainable world!”

This is a sandwich too far for you during an especially hard week. “Ugh FedWallet is so fucking lame!” you post on Twatter as you idle hungrily in front of the kiosk. “Your message has been flagged for review,” says an immediate notification. “As a reminder, using ableist hate speech may impact your ESG score and future financing opportunities. Thank you for doing your part to build a more just and inclusive world!”

“Omg this is absurd, life was so much better before FedCoin, when we still had cash!” you post again to Twatter, unable to control yourself. “Your account has been locked pending national security review,” says a notification from FedWallet. “As a reminder, the proliferation of false or misleading narratives which sow discord or undermine public trust in government institutions is classified as a potential domestic terrorism offence by the Department of Homeland Security. We value your feedback.”


You jerk awake, fumbling at your phone with trembling, sweaty fingers. Oh thank God, it was all just a terrible dream! You just dozed off while reading Rod Dreher’s blog. You can still eat all the steak and bacon you want. There’s nothing to worry about…

But no, you’re actually reading Politico, and see with horror that President Biden has just released a “sweeping” executive order directing the government to immediately begin moving to comprehensively regulate cryptocurrencies while developing a digital dollar issued by the Federal Reserve. “My Administration places the highest urgency on research and development efforts into the potential design and deployment options of a United States CBDC,” he declares, in a line probably narrated in a creepy whisper.

You are wracked by foreboding amid the sudden cawing of ravens.

At least you should be, because everything about central bank digital currency (CBDC) is the stuff of totalitarian nightmare.

But let’s start with the basics: what is a CBDC?

Well, as the term implies, it’s digital money issued directly by a central bank. You might assume that you are already using “digital currency” right now, since you rarely use physical cash anymore, instead buying everything with a credit card or a digital payment app; you impulse buy something on Amazon and these do their thing – with the 1s and the 0s and whatnot – over the internet, and boom: numbers are moved between accounts.

But in truth the process of moving money from A to B is vastly more complicated than that. It involves a tangle of payment processors, banks holding federal debt, financial clearing houses, and, if your money is crossing borders, international communication and exchange systems like the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT). Since generally the actual money itself doesn’t move, each institution must take on risks to fulfill your transaction by accepting promises, sending transfers, and verifying receipt of funds, etc. So naturally many fees are collected along the way for such services.

A CBDC system would be radically simplified. A customer opens an account directly with a country’s “independent” central bank (let’s say the Federal Reserve), and the central bank issues (creates) digital money (whether denominated as dollars, or FedCoins, or whatever) in that account. This makes the money a direct liability of the Fed, rather than of a private bank. Using digital tools (like say a “FedWallet” app) the customer can initiate direct transactions between Fed accounts. The digital money is deleted in one account and recreated in another essentially instantaneously. No promises or trust is necessary; every transaction is permanently recorded on a digital cryptographic ledger in real time. Kind of like Bitcoin, but exquisitely centrally managed. The Fed retains complete oversight and control over the creation, destruction, and “movement” of money, no matter who “has” it, or where it “is.”

Or as Agustin Carstens, General Manager of the Bank of International Settlements (BIS), helpfully put it at a 2020 summit of the International Monetary Fund:
“We don’t know who’s using a $100 bill today and we don’t know who’s using a 1,000 peso bill today. The key difference with the CBDC is the central bank will have absolute control on the rules and regulations that will determine the use of that expression of central bank liability, and also we will have the technology to enforce that… and that makes a huge difference.”

Moreover, in such a centralized system there is no longer any need for middlemen like banks or credit card companies. The Fed and its magic coins handle everything. Some planning documents for CBDCs discuss still including private banks in a “public-private partnership” system. But that’s only because customers love banks so much and because banks would love to keep charging fees for handling your money as long as they can, even if in reality they are reduced to being totally redundant husks for central bank software.

Image

Among their many conveniences, CBDCs could also greatly simplify moving money across borders. Something as complex as SWIFT would no longer be needed. If you are moving digital dollars into your investment account from your office in Dubai, that would be as simple as receiving the Fed’s digital blessing. Meanwhile converting dollars into Euros, for example, would be slightly more complex, but just require a pre-existing agreement between the Fed and the European Central Bank to allow this. Of course, if either party did not want you to be able to exchange your money, you’d be out of luck.

Finally, because these digital coins are minted out of code, they are easily “programmable” to function, or not function, however or whenever the central bank wants them to – a small detail about which we’ll get into later.

But first, how did we get here, anyway? Cash has been working at least fairly well for a few thousand years. Why is it suddenly now a matter of “the highest urgency” for the United States to push for a technological revolution in money?

In truth, momentum toward the development of CBDCs has been building for years, ever since Bitcoin appeared and demonstrated that digital currencies were a thing now. Once they caught on, central bankers started doing their own research into how they could best jump on the crypto bandwagon too.

Over the last several years, one central bank after another has released reports on what that might look like. As a summary report by the BIS recently put it, “Central banks' interest in CBDC has increased as a potential means of delivering their public policy objectives,” while allowing them “to evolve in step with the wider digitalisation of people’s day-to-day lives.” Plus, “Profound, ongoing changes across finance, technology and society, as well as the ongoing Covid-19 crisis, provide additional impetus” for doing so now while there seems to be the opportunity for some kind of reset, or something.

And so eight of the largest central banks (including the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank, the Bank of England, the Bank of Japan, and the Bank of Canada, among others) have decided to form a tentative consortium, with guidance from BIS, in order to “enable interoperability and cross-border transactions between [their] domestic CBDCs” as they move forward with development.

In their public reports, these central banks all tend to cite the same reasons for why implementing a CBDC would be beneficial.

A Fed report from January, for instance, portrays a CBDC as a way to “support faster and cheaper payments,” and “offer the general public broad access to digital money that is free from credit risk.” In particular, it argues that, “Promoting financial inclusion – particularly for economically vulnerable households and communities – is a high priority for the Federal Reserve.”

Biden’s executive order also calls for the need to “Promote Equitable Access to Safe and Affordable Financial Services by affirming the critical need for safe, affordable, and accessible financial services as a U.S. national interest that must inform our approach to digital asset innovation, including disparate impact risk.”

And the ECB figures a digital Euro could not only “increase choice, competition and accessibility with regard to digital payments, supporting financial inclusion,” but also “represent an option for reducing the overall costs and ecological footprint of the monetary and payment systems.”

Image

The Bank of Canada assesses that a “CBDC could be necessary in the future to ensure a competitive digital economy,” and also “solve market failures” on social and economic issues.

“So, under what conditions would a central bank find it necessary to issue a digital currency?” the Bank asks rhetorically. Well, “the answer to the previous question is somewhat trivial: if a CBDC is expected to increase welfare, then a central bank should issue one.” Ah, so simple!

Image
Wait, what was that part about discontinuing banknotes?

That stuff sounds nice and all, but still: why the new level of urgency? After all, it wasn’t too long ago that Fed Chair Jerome Powell was going around saying that when it came to CBDCs it was “more important to get it right than to be first,” given the “potential risks” and “important trade-offs that have to be thought through carefully.”

Well, fortunately you can always count on the Americans to say the quiet part out loud.

“The United States derives significant economic and national security benefits from the central role that the United States dollar and United States financial institutions and markets play in the global financial system,” Biden’s new executive order states. Therefore, “The United States has an interest in ensuring that it remains at the forefront of responsible development and design of digital assets and the technology that underpins new forms of payments and capital flows in the international financial system.”

Or as BlackRock’s former Global Head of Sustainable Investing, and now Director of the U.S. National Economic Council, Brian Deese put it even more directly: “The approach outlined in the E.O. will reinforce U.S. leadership in the global financial system and safeguard the long-term efficacy of critical national security tools like sanctions and anti-money laundering frameworks.”

Oh, right. You see, it turns out that it’s the Chinese that have pioneered the development of a CBDC (the Digital Yuan) and even begun putting it into limited circulation and testing its cross-border functionality.

Right now the dollar’s overwhelming use by those conducting global commercial transactions means that the United States has quite a bit of leverage to strong-arm banks, or the whole SWIFT network, into not doing business with anyone we don’t want them to do business with – i.e. it can impose sanctions. But if there was some easier, faster, less-interdictable-by-Yankees alternative, something that could move money across borders and be exchanged instantaneously with zero-cost, such as a Digital Yuan, then some people around the world might be tempted to start using that instead of the dollar – in fact many might in time find they have much less use for the dollar at all. In the long-run, only the development of a similarly fast, convenient, convertible, widely used, and easily controlled digital architecture seems certain to allow the West to maintain its collective dominance over global financial flows, preventing the enemies of America and its allies from escaping the long arm of the liberal international order’s sanctions regime.

And by enemies of course I mean Russians. So really it’s hard to see who could oppose CBDCs; I mean, are you pro-Russia or something?

It’s just that, once we do our patriotic duty and implement a FedCoin to stop Putin, there are some other potential ways in which the Fed may be tempted to use the One Coin of Power here at home that may be worth considering in advance. You see, the unique “programmability” of CBDCs happens to open up a huge range of intriguing possibilities that you, and I, and maybe even the central banks, might not yet have fully thought through.

When word first arrived that the People’s Bank of China “has tested expiration dates to encourage users to spend it quickly, for times when the economy needs a jump start,” Western monetary policymakers – who struggled for years to use negative interest rates to stop people from saving – probably spat coffee-flavored milk beverage all over their monitors. But that is still pretty midwit-level creative thinking.

We could of course directly subtract taxes and fees from any account, in real time, with every transaction or paycheck, if we wished. And there would be no more tax evasion, either, since we have a complete record of every transaction made by everyone.

And say goodbye to unapproved money laundering, terrorist financing, or financial crime in general. With a CBDC, all transactions are clean and transparent transactions.

In fact, we could levy fines in real time too, as long as we’ve hooked up the Internet of Things by then – speeding and jaywalking will become the scourges of an uncivilized past!

If we are feeling more generous, there would also no longer be any need to mail out stimulus checks, since money could just be deposited directly into accounts. As could welfare or universal basic income payments – so convenient for the little people!

But why not go higher resolution than that: how about targeted microfinance grants, added straight to the accounts of those people and businesses that are extra deserving? There’s no need to wait for annual tax credits and loopholes when those are now antiquated.

A Fed-funded discount could even be applied to those businesses the people most want to help; Google and Yelp already flag which businesses are or are not black-owned or LGBTQ-friendly, presumably so people can preference their patronage, so why not assist with a little nudge here and there? Or we could go in the other direction and effectively change the price of anything based on the identity of who’s buying it.

Indeed a CBDC could make ending any kind of systemic inequities much easier, and through market friendly means. And as the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco has reminded us, after all, being “‘race-neutral’ is not enough” when it comes to monetary and fiscal policy. The central bank could really be doing more in general.

Discriminatory practices like redlining by banks would certainly be a thing of the past; unless of course we wanted to do a little bit of redlining, just to make things a bit more equitable maybe, in which case we could do it, like, super easily.

Prison abolition has proven challenging. But a CBDC could help: just geofence the location within which parolees’ money can be used and not disappear – house arrest will never have been better incentivized! This would also work great in case we wanted to keep people confined to their homes for any other reason.

Should people be incentivized to eat the foods we think it’s best for them to eat? CBDCs can do that. Trying to get people to make reductions in their carbon footprint? CBDCs can help with that too.

But why just focus on individuals? Why not provide preferential financing to companies and investors virtuously meeting environmental, social, and governance (ESG) goals? This can be finely graded based on how closely they conform to standards.

And we could help nudge consumers away from organizations and businesses that are undesirable, too. Why not collect additional fees for transactions with “risky” businesses or charities that have low ESG scores? Or slow down their transaction speed to allow for greater “verification.” Just as a nudge, of course; people would still have free choice.

In fact why not create comprehensive credit scores based on behavior and number of associational connections with dangerous, risky individuals and organizations? It’s only logical as a next step.

Though if it were ever really necessary, like if they were honking truck horns too many times in a row, the most dangerous individuals or organizations could simply have their digital assets temporarily deleted, or their accounts’ ability to transact frozen, with the push of a button, locking them out of the commercial system and greatly mitigating the threat they pose to our democracy – no use of emergency powers to compel cooperation by intermediary financial institutions required!

But that’s just a start. There’s probably no limit to the innovative possibilities, really.

True, making so many interventions could get pretty complex for even a much-enlarged Fed staff to handle, but someday maybe we could plug the whole economy into the black box of a supercomputer AI and let it manage everything for us in minute detail, using perfect surveillance of pricing data to make real-time policy adjustments. Will we be able to comprehend everything that is happening or how judgements are handed down by the algorithm? No, but who cares – do you not already enjoy TikTok? Praise the Fed Spirit, for it will be generous and all-knowing!

Sorry, I got a little carried away there by the bureaucratic thrill of thinking about every remaining mitigating barrier between the private individual and the all-seeing, all-controlling state collapsing into a warm, patriotic plasma of perfect efficiency and social harmony.

It’s just that CBDCs have the potential to be a technocratic central planner’s wet dream. And given the political make-up of the Fed, the direction that dream is likely to take seems to already be pretty firmly fixed.

Meanwhile, in the United States there happens to be no constitutional right enshrining the freedom to conduct property transactions. Which is very convenient for circumventing all those other pesky rights if their bearers happen to stand in the way of the greater good. Freedom of speech? Sure, but it’s not much good if no one can buy those rabble-rousers’ books and they can’t buy ink, let alone web hosting services. Freedom of assembly? Sure, but only if they’re prepared to walk! There’s nothing really in the way of the Fed working to “allow the trustworthy to roam everywhere under heaven, while making it hard for the discredited to take a single step.”

In fact, the implementation of a CBDC could represent the single greatest expansion of totalitarian power in human history. Never has there been any regime with such omnipotent insight into and control over its people’s every transaction as what CBDCs may soon make possible. No Xerxes, no Caligula, no Stalin, no Kim Jong Un has ever held such power. And yet this is what will soon be smuggled into use in our societies in the name of convenience, social justice, and patriotism.

Actually, now that I think about it, maybe we should just say no to CBDCs.



Excerpt from the comments:
Frank Lee ·9 hr ago

It blows my mind that the youngsters are supporting the political agenda that is committed to taking control of all institutions that provide for independent life. I cannot tell if the kids are just so brainwashed from their campus experience and media feeds that they are sleepwalking to their own misery... or if more layers of oppressive rules and control feel good to them.

The hope of the digital world was to eliminate the man from the middle of everything. Today they man is firmly in control of the digital world and working to completely dominate it. Why are the kids not resisting THIS!?

1Reply

Clever Pseudonym 8 hr ago·

I think your question answers itself: ie, smartphones, constant internet access, and social media are the greatest tools of social conditioning and mass-opinion control and formation ever invented, they have created a digital panopticon of docile anxious conformists constantly monitoring each other for social miscues or deviations from orthodoxy, all happy to report each other to the authorities for social credit and virtual virtue points.

What we are living through is the internet swallowing all of humanity (all human systems and cultures and relationships etc), and obliterating every possible barrier between public/private and virtual/real.

This is naturally more painful and confusing for those of us who lived during the glorious Olden Times; but for the "digital natives" this is the only world they've ever known so it feels only natural to live a life entirely inside the Machine.

Think of those of us over, say, 30ish as the last wild free-range humans (at least till the inevitable cataclysm), and then once we're gone, we'll be replaced by zoo animals.
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5573
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Blockchain/Digital Currency as part of 'The Great Reset'

Postby Grizzly » Sat Mar 19, 2022 4:44 pm

The WEF/NWO/Global Elites are beyond communism and fascism. They're looking to solve problems the rest of us wouldn't dare even consider problematic because we have hearts and morals.

These folks don't care that Ukraine is infested with Nazis. They don't care that BLM and Antifa are actually fascists. They don't care if you're communist or libertarian.

They only care that you're alive still -- and they mean to exterminate you.
“The more we do to you, the less you seem to believe we are doing it.”

― Joseph mengele
User avatar
Grizzly
 
Posts: 4907
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests