321–327 of 327 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really hate this idea that everyone needs to just constantly be spending. It's useful but there is nothing wrong with having a slow stable fincal conscious ecconomy.
And I really hate the moralizing as if the national economy needs to be run like a household budget.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> According to that same article, the reason for retiring the note was because the people who benefited the most from its existence are criminals, who need to do their business in cash -- the fewer notes, the easier for them. This is what they want the citizens to believe.
In 2016 India did the infamous demonetization claiming that the ₹500 notes were used in hoarding black money and funding terrorism. It ended up massively shocking the unorganised economy, and the nation is still recovering from it. The main reasons the government stated while doing it are still going on. The entire exercise didn't solve any problems.
However, I think that when a member of the general public makes sweeping statements like "the entire exercise didn't solve any problems" it's only flaunting prejudices. If you work at a job related to infrastructure, the details would be incredibly boring to the public, and certainly aren't shared. But you could see something was double or half the year before, and it would mean infinitely more than a million people parroting what everyone always says because they always think the same thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, that takes way too much time. If you check using a UV light you’ll notice most simple forgeries but I guess most people just don’t expect small bills to be forged.
Does it? Every time somebody pays in cash in a store here they run each bill through a machine that, I'm pretty sure, checks the authenticity of the bill.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What good is the EU if its wealthier members are unwilling to subsidize the poorer ones? Germans want the benefits of federation without the drawbacks.
While EU does subsidize poor EU countries but we must question what's the impact of that subsidizing. 1. EU is single market 2. Germany micraclously had strong currency at the time EU was created, so Germany businesses bought everything in cheaper EU countries and winners became bigger winners engulfing all small players across whole EU 3. EU taxes winners of the game and sends some money to improve the quality of li…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do they need paper money anyway? Is there something more legitimate about a piece of paper with many 0s on it vs redundant electronic storage of record?
They don’t need the pile of cash, and are free to burn it if they want and just write down in an excel sheet: “today we burned 2 billion euros”, now the question is if you’re willing to have your salary paid out in a digital recognition that you now own a part of that burnt cash, because you feel comfortable that others would allow you to pay using those IOU’s of no longer existing cash. If not, then the current syst…
I guess it seems...funny to me that the one level of abstraction (paper money representing the power to exchange goods and services) is so much more preferred to the other (digital representation of that power). Already now, most of my money is represented as a digital recognition that I own part of a pile of cash that I will never actually take physically.
This problem has probably been exacerbated by the fact the the $500 euro note has not been issued since 27 April 2019[1]. I wonder if making storing euros in cash 2.5 times harder (500 versus 200 euro notes) was part of the reason the 500 euro was retired. [Edit] The legal storing of cash. The stated reason was the criminal use of cash. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/500_euro_note
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>that do nothing for no one I'm not sure you understand these assets if you think they do nothing. If you want to rent an apartment then someone has to build and own it first. If you want to borrow money for your business then someone has to save money and put it aside so it becomes available to you. Your comparison to scrooge mcduck doesn't make sense because you're assuming that the money will never be used. If you…
>If the stock market crashes the same year you wanted to buy your car the you will need to obtain liquidity by borrowing money from a bank (remember those stupid scrooge mcducks swimming in their pile of gold? now you're begging them to give you money) Are banks not able to in effect create money in todays system?