Within the framework as it is now, it could be a nice present, despite maybe the chances of it being grandstanding and image-building to draw people away from Trump.
On the other hand, what of it if they introduce a CDBC? As Nigeria has shown, it may not be to the central governments advantage, and then they play the only card they have left: force and they bring guns.
But whatever the issue, for smart people, like with the plandemic, it is inconceivable to take this CBDC.
Yet, there is a fast difference between the US and Nigeria. The infusion of government into private lives of people, which is more extensive in the US than in Nigeria. So, people on foodstamps, and other .gov grants may be forced to take it, lest they forfeit the support.
I am sure this will lead to challenges, of course. I find it interesting they would first try it in Nigeria, with an abysmal adoption level. This way they can tweak introductions elsewhere.
It is also quite clear .gov will abuse any loophole to enforce this CBDC. For instance, farmer protests accompanied by their tractors, are a thorn in the side of the lefty animal protectors (PvdD), who would gladly break and enter into Farmers-houses and barns. They even promote it loudly. Yet, when it comes to protests, under the guise of evading dangerous situations, they want to outlaw tractors during demonstrations.
Ridiculous, but nevertheless, it is a small token of what they want. So, they could tinker around the traffic laws in order to make it difficult to use a tractor duding demonstrations.
Government shouldn’t have the authority to ban currencies it doesn’t like. Likewise, government shouldn’t force me to use a currency that I don’t want.
As per the constitution, Congress has the power to regulate coin. That's it. They failed so far.
Now the fed, on the wings of an EO, or rather the EO covering the FED moves, tries to establish a CBDC, a central bank digital currency at the expense of all other forms of currency, including private coins/token. It also covers the connection of your identifiable data to that coin. It would also put a lot of power in the hands of the banking industry in term of what you can buy or sell with that currency (think guns, ammo, etc).
It is of interest to note how this debate is raging elsewhere, for instance in The Netherlands. Under pressure of the Nederlandsche Bank, the dutch Central Bank, banks like ING, ABN-AMRO, Volksbank (regio bank + SNS) and Rabo-bank were said to be put under "pressure" to enhance the Anti-Money Laundering and anti-terrorism financing by pooling their resources in checking every transaction above 100-€. It also means that in transgression of the law "protecting" personal data, this data is now shared within the banking industry. It is also a transgression against monopolies.
The banks on their part point towards the Nederlandsche Central Bank, who is then pointing to the ECB, who is pointing to the council of finance Ministers of the European Union. This Council consists of all Finance Ministers of the Member States of the European Union. And of course the Finance Ministers, are the ones overseeing the local Central Banks. This makes the square round, does it not?
Meanwhile, while everybody is pointing at everybody and nobody takes responsibility and steps up to the plate, the train moves at high speed.
On the backend, all data is already tied together. The data of the banks, the data of the bailif, the data of the public prosecutor, police, municipalities, Fiscus, healthcare, etc, it is one big data collection scheme. The moment this was achieved some 4 years ago, the EU came up with the plan of a European Identity Card. The Covid scamdemic only exacerbated the issue because all of a sudden more people woke up to the prospect of a digital prison.
Of course, the moment it is deployed a currency crisis will occur, the same as with Covid, to push the population into adopting the apparent safety of a CBDC.
Do you think the US is free from this pervasive influence?
When looking at the States, the question is whether or not States have the right to ban a CDBD?
It smells of a debate raging in the past where the question was of the Federal Government had the right to establish a bank, while States were perfectly within the bounds of their power to have a central bank. Of course, this debate was put to rest in the supreme court. And yes, by a long and winding opinion it was thought to be perfectly constitutional.
So, what is the constitutionality of CBDC?
Can a State prohibit the deployment of a CBDC?
From this point of view, I would posit that a CBDC is unconstitutional as only gold and silver is constitutional money.
States are bound to settle debts in gold and silver.
A CBDC also transgresses against the 1st, 2nd, 4th, amendment to the Constitution.
This leads me to view a prohibition of a CBDC by the State as perfectly logical and lawful.
Despite this view, I am also very conscious about what these kind of debates have on the consciousness of people. It mold and programs us to think digital solutions are in any way shape of form helpful to maintain freedom.
I think it does exactly the opposite. At least within the confines of the current landscape. Maybe, at a later date under different circumstances as part of a private contract.
Then there are private currencies like BTC, ETH, Monero, and others. The list is almost endless. In essence, there is also the URA, based on a number of hours per person. In effect, anyone could create their own currency, and based on their reputation, gain or lose value against others.
And indeed, I have no qualms to agree with you, governments have no business in restricting access or use of private coins. Except maybe gold and silver, to check whether those coins in circulation do adhere to the required standards.
So if a silver or gold coin is to be of a certain make and model, as defined by Congress, then that is the way it is. And rightly so, they wold prosecute scammers.
Exactly. Hence, it would be a good thing to prevent the fed from scamming everybody.
The thing is: once you use a non-fiat currency, like private crypto, it cannot be used as a determiner to impose jurisdiction. See: Rome-II.
It would be good for government to prevent us from being scammed by the FED? What else do we need government to protect us from?
Within the framework as it is now, it could be a nice present, despite maybe the chances of it being grandstanding and image-building to draw people away from Trump.
On the other hand, what of it if they introduce a CDBC? As Nigeria has shown, it may not be to the central governments advantage, and then they play the only card they have left: force and they bring guns.
But whatever the issue, for smart people, like with the plandemic, it is inconceivable to take this CBDC.
Yet, there is a fast difference between the US and Nigeria. The infusion of government into private lives of people, which is more extensive in the US than in Nigeria. So, people on foodstamps, and other .gov grants may be forced to take it, lest they forfeit the support.
I am sure this will lead to challenges, of course. I find it interesting they would first try it in Nigeria, with an abysmal adoption level. This way they can tweak introductions elsewhere.
It is also quite clear .gov will abuse any loophole to enforce this CBDC. For instance, farmer protests accompanied by their tractors, are a thorn in the side of the lefty animal protectors (PvdD), who would gladly break and enter into Farmers-houses and barns. They even promote it loudly. Yet, when it comes to protests, under the guise of evading dangerous situations, they want to outlaw tractors during demonstrations.
Ridiculous, but nevertheless, it is a small token of what they want. So, they could tinker around the traffic laws in order to make it difficult to use a tractor duding demonstrations.
Government shouldn’t have the authority to ban currencies it doesn’t like. Likewise, government shouldn’t force me to use a currency that I don’t want.
I would agree.
I feel though that we are discussing two things.
As per the constitution, Congress has the power to regulate coin. That's it. They failed so far.
Now the fed, on the wings of an EO, or rather the EO covering the FED moves, tries to establish a CBDC, a central bank digital currency at the expense of all other forms of currency, including private coins/token. It also covers the connection of your identifiable data to that coin. It would also put a lot of power in the hands of the banking industry in term of what you can buy or sell with that currency (think guns, ammo, etc).
It is of interest to note how this debate is raging elsewhere, for instance in The Netherlands. Under pressure of the Nederlandsche Bank, the dutch Central Bank, banks like ING, ABN-AMRO, Volksbank (regio bank + SNS) and Rabo-bank were said to be put under "pressure" to enhance the Anti-Money Laundering and anti-terrorism financing by pooling their resources in checking every transaction above 100-€. It also means that in transgression of the law "protecting" personal data, this data is now shared within the banking industry. It is also a transgression against monopolies.
The banks on their part point towards the Nederlandsche Central Bank, who is then pointing to the ECB, who is pointing to the council of finance Ministers of the European Union. This Council consists of all Finance Ministers of the Member States of the European Union. And of course the Finance Ministers, are the ones overseeing the local Central Banks. This makes the square round, does it not?
Meanwhile, while everybody is pointing at everybody and nobody takes responsibility and steps up to the plate, the train moves at high speed.
On the backend, all data is already tied together. The data of the banks, the data of the bailif, the data of the public prosecutor, police, municipalities, Fiscus, healthcare, etc, it is one big data collection scheme. The moment this was achieved some 4 years ago, the EU came up with the plan of a European Identity Card. The Covid scamdemic only exacerbated the issue because all of a sudden more people woke up to the prospect of a digital prison.
Of course, the moment it is deployed a currency crisis will occur, the same as with Covid, to push the population into adopting the apparent safety of a CBDC.
Do you think the US is free from this pervasive influence?
When looking at the States, the question is whether or not States have the right to ban a CDBD?
It smells of a debate raging in the past where the question was of the Federal Government had the right to establish a bank, while States were perfectly within the bounds of their power to have a central bank. Of course, this debate was put to rest in the supreme court. And yes, by a long and winding opinion it was thought to be perfectly constitutional.
So, what is the constitutionality of CBDC? Can a State prohibit the deployment of a CBDC?
From this point of view, I would posit that a CBDC is unconstitutional as only gold and silver is constitutional money. States are bound to settle debts in gold and silver. A CBDC also transgresses against the 1st, 2nd, 4th, amendment to the Constitution.
This leads me to view a prohibition of a CBDC by the State as perfectly logical and lawful.
Despite this view, I am also very conscious about what these kind of debates have on the consciousness of people. It mold and programs us to think digital solutions are in any way shape of form helpful to maintain freedom.
I think it does exactly the opposite. At least within the confines of the current landscape. Maybe, at a later date under different circumstances as part of a private contract.
Then there are private currencies like BTC, ETH, Monero, and others. The list is almost endless. In essence, there is also the URA, based on a number of hours per person. In effect, anyone could create their own currency, and based on their reputation, gain or lose value against others.
And indeed, I have no qualms to agree with you, governments have no business in restricting access or use of private coins. Except maybe gold and silver, to check whether those coins in circulation do adhere to the required standards.
So if a silver or gold coin is to be of a certain make and model, as defined by Congress, then that is the way it is. And rightly so, they wold prosecute scammers.
I don't want to use fiat federal reserve notes as they hold no value, are backed by nothing, and only represent debt. Ban all federal reserve notes!
Should I get my way the way you think you should get yours?