A great summary of their dastardly plan. The creation of money by central goverment ( and through other avenues) has brought us to the brink of financial collapse, not the ‘little people’. However, the history of government IT systems is bad, very bad. If they even manage to launch this it only takes some kind of glitch, power outages or whatever and confidence is gone, no confidence and people will start looking of other stores of value and ways of exchanging goods and labour. Your suggestion to diversify your stores of value is an excellent one. Getting a little patch of land and learning to grow your cabbages isn’t a bad idea either 🙂
I can foresee a return to stashes of cash 'under the bed',as in days of yore.
My immediate sense as an increasingly pessimistic heretic, is that this will inevitably lead to an spread of the black economy -with consequent falls in tax receipts-and might well provide increased opportunities for the various bad actors now at large : terrorists and other fanatics.
Finally, why is it, that the control addicted Nomenklatura now presiding over what is left of our society, cannot bring itself to operate the border controls so urgently needed?
Public anger grows yet now we are 'encouraged' to joing the brave new world of CBDC and sign up to the looming WHO treaty,without asking troublesome questions.
Serfdom awaits, all dolled up in managerial doublespeak.
The main danger of the cashless economy - CDBCs and digital currencies are just part of this - is that they require an internet connection to work. And that in turn, of course, requires electricity. If (when) the eco morons cause the electricity system to become intermittent the whole cashless thing falls to the ground in a heap.
I expect the BoE does take a dim view of the public. Dealing with them is what retail banks are for. What they mainly worry about is criminality. They are right to because the average currency fraudster is smarter than most career civil servants tasked with figuring all this out. They know that which is why they give up and call in the consultants, who are no smarter either but agree to take on some risk in return for fees, thereby spreading future blame c.f. Fujitsu.
The main reason the Bank of England want a CBDC is that it would give them direct control of the money supply. Currently they can only change the central interest rate (which has a weak relationship with interest rates in the economy), and hope that will change the quantity of money created by commercial banks.
Most money today is not central bank money, but money created by banks issuing loans.
Cryptocurrencies, including bitcoin, are more like gold than they are like what we currently think of as money. A CBDC would be like gold, with the Bank of England controlling every gold mine.
A CBDC would, as you suggest, eventually threaten commercial bank money. In fact its purpose would be to replace commercial bank money. Cash is irrelevant. It is on its way out anyway and being replaced by commercial bank money.
It suits the Bank of England to talk about cash all the time, and pretend a CBDC would be designed to replace cash, to distract us from the real issue. The real issue being: do we want to end the creation of money by free market transactions between commercial banks and private individuals, and replace it with creation of money by the State?
In passing, note the difference between bitcoin and a CBDC. Bitcoin is not legal tender. In other words, people can refuse to accept bitcoin. People would not be able to refuse to accept a CBDC in settlement of debt (or invoices).
It is also worth noting that the IMF is developing an international CBDC platform "to allow interoperability between national CDBCs".
Thus the Bank of England's proposed CBDC should be seen as part of a global network of interlinked digital currencies. Ironically the Bank's concerns about sovereignty should truly be attached to CBDCs, not to current money. CBDCs are being pushed by the global technocratic elite, not just by the British State.
I think the word functionality appeared in the software development. A software may have an overriding function but when designing it, there are many components of it and each of them came to be described as a functionality.
The profound irony is the BoE is the main source instability in the economy because it sets the price of money through the base rate. No committee of ‘experts’ can ever get this rate ‘right’ and this is the source of the boom and bust cycle. The MPC is the archetype of central planning and anyone who blames Britain’s woes on capitalism merely shows their ignorance. In the 19th century the US grew from insignificance to the world’s second largest economy without a central bank; the Fed was set up in 1913. As with so many areas in life, the best outcome for Britain would be for government to leave the people alone. As David so clearly elucidates, in justification of itself, the Princely state will drive us to dystopia and so we will get CBDC.
I find that the most convenient way to analyze a new plan from the state is to imagine what will happen to that segment of the population most hated by the zeitgeist; say, white male Nazis who beat kittens and hate women. And eat meat, the cads.
What will the state do when one of those terrible people goes to the market with digital currency in hand? When the state has all its excuses ready at hand, how well will they be able to resist their centrist moralizing impulses?
Rest assured, that if it will be done to the most hated, it will also eventually be done to the less hated. And that means YOU. It is a mathematical certainty.
I see Trump committed to never allow "the tyranny" of a CBDC in the US at his campaign rally yesterday in New Hampshire. He was asked to say that by Vivek Ramaswamy in return for his endorsement.
Here is a favourite of mine; perhaps 'functionality was born here, along with 'societal'-what became of social?- and my bêtes noir-'impactful', 'impact on' -what became of significant, severe and affect?
Something else that occurs to me. How do you pay a bribe with a CBDC and not have it immediately spotted and reported to the fuzz. I'm sure there will be ways but a bunch of bureaucrats and politicians are going to regret pushing for CBDCs if they can't do it easily
Regarding ownership and the ledger, are there any comparisons to be drawn with other ledgers such as UK Land Registry, Companies House, DVLA or issuance of birth and death certificates?
A great summary of their dastardly plan. The creation of money by central goverment ( and through other avenues) has brought us to the brink of financial collapse, not the ‘little people’. However, the history of government IT systems is bad, very bad. If they even manage to launch this it only takes some kind of glitch, power outages or whatever and confidence is gone, no confidence and people will start looking of other stores of value and ways of exchanging goods and labour. Your suggestion to diversify your stores of value is an excellent one. Getting a little patch of land and learning to grow your cabbages isn’t a bad idea either 🙂
And post "Horizon" what could possibly go wrong with a government IT system?
I can foresee a return to stashes of cash 'under the bed',as in days of yore.
My immediate sense as an increasingly pessimistic heretic, is that this will inevitably lead to an spread of the black economy -with consequent falls in tax receipts-and might well provide increased opportunities for the various bad actors now at large : terrorists and other fanatics.
Finally, why is it, that the control addicted Nomenklatura now presiding over what is left of our society, cannot bring itself to operate the border controls so urgently needed?
Public anger grows yet now we are 'encouraged' to joing the brave new world of CBDC and sign up to the looming WHO treaty,without asking troublesome questions.
Serfdom awaits, all dolled up in managerial doublespeak.
The main danger of the cashless economy - CDBCs and digital currencies are just part of this - is that they require an internet connection to work. And that in turn, of course, requires electricity. If (when) the eco morons cause the electricity system to become intermittent the whole cashless thing falls to the ground in a heap.
I expect the BoE does take a dim view of the public. Dealing with them is what retail banks are for. What they mainly worry about is criminality. They are right to because the average currency fraudster is smarter than most career civil servants tasked with figuring all this out. They know that which is why they give up and call in the consultants, who are no smarter either but agree to take on some risk in return for fees, thereby spreading future blame c.f. Fujitsu.
The main reason the Bank of England want a CBDC is that it would give them direct control of the money supply. Currently they can only change the central interest rate (which has a weak relationship with interest rates in the economy), and hope that will change the quantity of money created by commercial banks.
Most money today is not central bank money, but money created by banks issuing loans.
Cryptocurrencies, including bitcoin, are more like gold than they are like what we currently think of as money. A CBDC would be like gold, with the Bank of England controlling every gold mine.
A CBDC would, as you suggest, eventually threaten commercial bank money. In fact its purpose would be to replace commercial bank money. Cash is irrelevant. It is on its way out anyway and being replaced by commercial bank money.
It suits the Bank of England to talk about cash all the time, and pretend a CBDC would be designed to replace cash, to distract us from the real issue. The real issue being: do we want to end the creation of money by free market transactions between commercial banks and private individuals, and replace it with creation of money by the State?
In passing, note the difference between bitcoin and a CBDC. Bitcoin is not legal tender. In other words, people can refuse to accept bitcoin. People would not be able to refuse to accept a CBDC in settlement of debt (or invoices).
It is also worth noting that the IMF is developing an international CBDC platform "to allow interoperability between national CDBCs".
https://www.reuters.com/markets/imf-working-global-central-bank-digital-currency-platform-2023-06-19/
Thus the Bank of England's proposed CBDC should be seen as part of a global network of interlinked digital currencies. Ironically the Bank's concerns about sovereignty should truly be attached to CBDCs, not to current money. CBDCs are being pushed by the global technocratic elite, not just by the British State.
I think the word functionality appeared in the software development. A software may have an overriding function but when designing it, there are many components of it and each of them came to be described as a functionality.
The profound irony is the BoE is the main source instability in the economy because it sets the price of money through the base rate. No committee of ‘experts’ can ever get this rate ‘right’ and this is the source of the boom and bust cycle. The MPC is the archetype of central planning and anyone who blames Britain’s woes on capitalism merely shows their ignorance. In the 19th century the US grew from insignificance to the world’s second largest economy without a central bank; the Fed was set up in 1913. As with so many areas in life, the best outcome for Britain would be for government to leave the people alone. As David so clearly elucidates, in justification of itself, the Princely state will drive us to dystopia and so we will get CBDC.
I find that the most convenient way to analyze a new plan from the state is to imagine what will happen to that segment of the population most hated by the zeitgeist; say, white male Nazis who beat kittens and hate women. And eat meat, the cads.
What will the state do when one of those terrible people goes to the market with digital currency in hand? When the state has all its excuses ready at hand, how well will they be able to resist their centrist moralizing impulses?
Rest assured, that if it will be done to the most hated, it will also eventually be done to the less hated. And that means YOU. It is a mathematical certainty.
I see Trump committed to never allow "the tyranny" of a CBDC in the US at his campaign rally yesterday in New Hampshire. He was asked to say that by Vivek Ramaswamy in return for his endorsement.
https://www.bullshitgenerator.com/crypto-bullshit-generator/
Here is a favourite of mine; perhaps 'functionality was born here, along with 'societal'-what became of social?- and my bêtes noir-'impactful', 'impact on' -what became of significant, severe and affect?
Something else that occurs to me. How do you pay a bribe with a CBDC and not have it immediately spotted and reported to the fuzz. I'm sure there will be ways but a bunch of bureaucrats and politicians are going to regret pushing for CBDCs if they can't do it easily
Regarding ownership and the ledger, are there any comparisons to be drawn with other ledgers such as UK Land Registry, Companies House, DVLA or issuance of birth and death certificates?