411–420 of 915 posts
This is obviously the first part of a major push to force us to use Central Bank Digital Currencies. Now that they are banning cash, we will be controlled like never before. This is the beginning of the end of freedom.
Let's be honest for a second. There are very few instances where a person would ever 'need' to pay for something over €10k in physical cash?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Horrible take. 10k is a pittance. Small business owners, farmers, people buying and selling vehicles, etc. It’s not a large amount of money. If you go down to the apple store and buy a couple well specced computers the bill is going to be over 10k.
Americans aren't used banking systems that work.
And the problem with good governments (and fair elections and other properties of decent democracies) is that they can accidentally let bad actors in (populism is one helluva drug for the masses), and bad actors may attempt to undermine the institutions, turning democracies into kleptocracies and dictatorships if they succeed.
Then all those safeguards in the name of all that's good become perfect tools for abuse in the name of all the control over whoever dares to oppose the established order.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I mean is that for that sort of money, it would be somewhat strange to "want" to pay in cash. You wouldn't walk 200 miles on foot to go meet a friend when you had a car on the driveaway?
> You wouldn't walk 200 miles on foot to go meet a friend when you had a car on the driveaway? Perfect example. I wouldn't do that, no, but I wouldn't want it to be illegal.
As such it is important for organisations such as the EU to try to re-assert their control over private interests to prevent the loss of control that has occurred over recent decades from making democratically run organisations completely impotent in the long run.
This narrative has not a great deal to do with the linked article and everything to do with the discussion on here. A discussion that seems to completely ignore these changes that have happened to our societies in recent decades while holding an irresponsible view that financial regulation is tyranny and that taxation is theft. It is _critical_ to our democratic values that our institutions that are accountable to the people, are able to control private interests that grow too large and are able to raise tax receipts from those that wish to try and hide. That includes the black market.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I very much doubt there are money people that walk into an apple store with 10k in their back pocket to pay for some computers. Same with farmers. How many farmers living in this modern age are walking around with 10k in their back pockets? In the vast majority of cases, I would argue that people just use their bank account for such large payments these days.
> I would argue that people just use their bank account for such large payments these days. Yup, and now they are _forced_ to. Its a single point of failure. One which the government conveniently has control over. I'm surprised the HN crowd isn't grasping this more clearly. Backups are important.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep,thugs will use crypto, but EU can force their will on people wallets easier.
Thugs use cash, not cryptos. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/only-0-15-total-crypto-174206... The share of illicit activities for cash is around ~5%, 33x more than cryptos.
Even though it has a facade of protection, this isn't about protection against criminals; it's about control and being able to track citizens.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You wouldn't walk 200 miles on foot to go meet a friend when you had a car on the driveaway? Perfect example. I wouldn't do that, no, but I wouldn't want it to be illegal.
True but would you want it to be illegal if the vast majority people that did walk 200 miles on foot instead of driving, did it because they were doing it to get away with committing a crime?
It's the same reason I want a right to privacy; you could argue that most people who want to hide something from the state want it because they're doing something illegal, but I still find it valuable that I can do things without being tracked. It's the same as the right to go outside without any form of ID; most people who aren't up to anything illegal could make sure to always bring valid ID at all times, but I value the freedom to not be forced by the state to bring something. It's the same reason I would oppose a law that you must wear a GPS tracking device on you at all times; most people do it willingly with their phone and watch these days, and the only people the law would really affect would be criminals, but I value the freedom to go somewhere without being tracked.
I currently make all payments electronically, but I value the freedom to be able to transfer money without leaving traces of the transaction, even though I don't currently exercise that freedom. Because the state doesn't have any business micro-managing individuals' behaviour like that.
This is also the same country implementing laws to curb dissent and deviation from the narrative which is generally indicative as to where the EU is going. Imagine being worse than the UK.
Case in point: https://english.radio.cz/fifty-persons-charged-endorsing-rus...
Opinion is now illegal.
There are many many more examples where the Czechs are an embarrassment to the western society they so desperately want to be part of.
Edit: sweet summer children downvoters
Earlier quoted context omitted.
True but would you want it to be illegal if the vast majority people that did walk 200 miles on foot instead of driving, did it because they were doing it to get away with committing a crime?
So make the criminal act at the end of the journey illegal, not the act of walking 200 miles on foot. This feels like the question of Blackstone’s ratio: “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.” I’m not an absolutist about these things, but I take Blackstone’s side of this (very difficult) question.