The Davos Plan For Your Cash and Bitcoin

The Davos Plan For Your Cash and Bitcoin

11635
14
SHARE

“The European Commission has quietly launched the next offensive in the war on cash…The ECB…[is also] working towards a Trojan horse blockchain network that will serve only to entrap those naive enough to trust it,” states the publication Activist Post on February 9

An acceleration in the war on cash and a shift on bitcoin occurred in the wake of the January World Economic Forum (Davos) at which the world elites planned the economic rules under which the rest of us are meant to labor.

Also read: Following the PBOC Exchange Shakeup China’s Localbitcoins Volume Surges

The Broad Framework

The Davos Plan For Your Cash and BitcoinThe war on cash is a war to eliminate physical money and drive all currency exchanges into the digital realm. For some bitcoin enthusiasts, this signals greater legitimacy and wider adoption. But for the war on cash to achieve the goals desired by states and central banks, the digital realm must be under state control and tightly monitored by authorities. Bitcoin, as a vehicle of personal freedom and independence, will be driven underground or gutted by regulation. To the extent it can, the EU will cripple its competitors – the free market and dissident individuals – even if it needs to co-opt internet access in the manner of an emerging nation.

Fortunately, the situation is chaotic, even within the EU proper. This is fortunate because decentralization – that is, the chaos of competing and independent alternatives – results in freedom and opportunity. While France and Spain go slap happy about capping cash transactions, Germany stands in strong opposition because roughly 80% of all its transactions are conducted in cash. While the European Commission talks of reigning in bitcoin to thwart terrorism and crime, average Italians flock to it as a protection against their government’s fiscal policies. Vigorous opposition exists.

Why then is there a sudden EU drive behind the cashless society and the centralization (regulation) of bitcoin?

Davos, June 2016

The Davos Plan For Your Cash and BitcoinSessions of the powerful are accompanied by public announcements which often reflect vague goals and non-binding commitments. Next to nothing is known about the private agreements that almost certainly occur between the global powerful who pitch their own interests. These specifics need to be teased out by events and policies that occur in the direct wake of Davos meetings. But two items long recognized as crucial by the Davos Men are the monetary crisis which verges on collapse, and that Fintech is the main competition to their mainstream system.

Nick Giambruno, among other influential economic forecasters, believes the June meeting had “huge historical significance” which developed behind closed doors. Giambruno, the Senior Editor of Casey Research’s International Man periodical, pointed to several indications of the historical direction, including:

• “Immediately after the conference, there was a big acceleration” toward a cashless society, beginning with the elimination of “high-denomination currency notes.” Publications such as Bloomberg and the Financial Times called for a cashless society. “A flood of articles from The New York Times, The Economist, Zero Hedge, and other publications picked up on this.”

• Only days after Davos, “the head of the Japanese central bank implemented negative interest rates for the first time ever.” He did so despite having repeatedly denied it would happen.

• Similarly, “the CEO of Deutsche Bank called for the elimination of cash. Norway’s biggest bank essentially did the same thing.”

• Academia fell in line. “Harvard put out a paper talking about the need to eliminate high-value paper currencies, like the $100 bill and the €500 note.”

The War on Cash, to which negative rates are integral, began to gallop.

Why are negative rates integral? Banks hold very little physical cash with most currency consisting of digits flowing through official computers. If people en masse demanded cash, there would be extensive bank runs and probably a collapse. If nothing but digital transfers existed, however, the runs would not occur. Moreover, banks could charge their trapped ‘customers’ a negative interest rate. That is, people would be compelled to pay a fee for maintaining an account. This would create a vicious circle. Rather than maintain $1,000 in an account that slices off $5 a month, people would have incentive to immediately spend their digital money on real goods and services with more static value.

Of course, each exchange – every penny earned, every book and head of lettuce purchased – would be seen by the state. The centralized funds could be easily taxed, frozen, confiscated, trapped within borders, and otherwise manipulated at will. The analysis of goods and services purchased could become a mainstay of social control.

But the brave new monetary world only works in the absence of viable currency and trade alternatives, such as physical cash, bitcoin, and barter. Authorities know this.

The Davos Plan For Your Cash and Bitcoin

Davos, January 2017

Consider just two events that occurred directly after the latest Davos:

• “On the 23rd January 2017, the EU Commission issued the ‘Commission Initiative Roadmap’ for 2018 regarding the step up fight against the financing of terrorism, also known as its ‘Payments Restriction Initiative’ or…the cashless society.” (EU Steps Up The Pace For Cashless Society In 2017/18).

• January 28, a Bitcoin.com headline read “Bitcoin Powerhouse Bitfury Initiates Global Blockchain Business Council (GBBC) in Davos.” The Davos announcement stated, “The GBBC is meant to be a truly global body for the Blockchain and business ecosystems.”

If the GBBC is voluntary and does not benefit from government privileges that hobble its free market competitors, then no one can object any more than they can object to cashless systems that evolve naturally within the private sector. What are the odds?

An article entitled “EU Seeks Cash Limits in Push for Orwellian ‘Cashless Society’” (Feb.7) astutely comments; “Because a ban or limits on cash transactions would, if actually enforced, lead to people using alternative means to bypass Big Brother, the EU also anticipates the need for other assaults on other means of payment that allow privacy. “ In short, an assault on bitcoin and the like.

Conclusion

The world is a diverse maze of monetary practices, policies, and needs. The reality of cash and bitcoin use will differ dramatically from place to place depending on the specific circumstances. For individuals to prosper, rather than corporations and banks, however, the increasingly difficult trick will be to avoid regulation and the many traps that states will establish, such as Trojan horse blockchain networks.

One thing that should not be tricky is the response of the bitcoin community to an expanding state presence. Regulation should not be applauded as legitimacy; it should be recognized as a death threat to the personal freedom and flexibility that bitcoin promises.

And, yet, some bitcoiners will herald the state and global usurpation in the belief that it is credibility, not nationalization. Trading freedom for credibility is like trading freedom for security; it results in neither and damages both.

What do you think about the Davos plan for your cash and bitcoins? Let us know in the comments below.


Images courtesy of Shutterstock and Pixabay.


Do you want to vote on important Bitcoin issues? Bitcoin.com has acquired Bitcoinocracy, and rebranded the project to Vote.bitcoin.com. Users simply sign a statement with a non-empty Bitcoin address and express their opinions. The project focuses on determining truth backed by monetary value and transparency.

  • concerndcitizen

    Wendy, your story is very good but you have missed two critical points. The real reason for Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and “know your customer” (KYC) isn’t to prevent drug deals or terrorists. The illicit and dangerous transactions are largely done by state actors…security agencies and families who control countries and vast wealth. The main reasons for AML / KYC are to ***control the flows of funds and value OUT of and INTO the credit system*** we use today for money. There are giant amounts of gold and even printed cash out side the system, waiting to come in and take control of the system away from the 13 families who have run it for hundreds of years. Calling it “black money” (even though it may be perfectly legal, taxes paid, etc) serves only the banking families who run the world because they are in control of rates, issuance of more credit (fake money) and so on. These banks also control the flow OUT because it could create a competitive system.

    Bitcoin is a tiny amount that has proven the value of financial freedom from debt slavery.

    • Good afternoon, concernedcitizen. Thanks for the thoughtful comment! I absolutely agree with you when you write, “The real reason for Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and “know your customer” (KYC) isn’t to prevent drug deals or terrorists.” Those are not Davos measures or ones that address cashlessness or bitcoin, however. I also agree that a major — and for some elites primary — goal of the measures I outline is to grab and/or control the money. Political and social power is as important to the elites, however, and my last article “Bitcoin, Stop Apologizing for Victimless Crime” https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-stop-apologizing-for-victimless-crime/#comments goes into detal on the intimate, inseparable relationship between victimless crime (drugs, etc.) and the existence of the total surveillance, totalitarian state.

      Even if you agree with my analysis, you might argue that both are in place in order to facilitate the ongoing money grab of the elites. And you might be correct. But I think the two goals — financial enrichment and political control — are compatible but separable and able to be addressed individually. Indeed, I think it is very valuable to address them as two pieces of a totalitarian puzzle.

      I think we are in accord. I think I am merely stressing a different aspect of the unholy aggression of the Davos Men. I’d be interested in your response.

  • Good afternoon, everyone. At least, it is afternoon in balmy Canada. I’ll be dropping by today and tomorrow to chat and answer questions. Enjoy!

    • Finally some new life to these disqus threads, thank you for your hard work Wendy!

      • You are most welcome, Ken. Don’t be a stranger.

  • Brad R

    The desire of the authorities to push negative interest rates is certainly a strong driving factor behind the war on cash. Another, which I suspect you couldn’t shoehorn into an already full column, is the desire of large banks to grab a cut of every financial transaction they possibly can. Each cash transaction is a transaction they’re not skimming 3% of, and they’re so desperate for money that they want 3% of everything …even little Johnny buying a pack of chewing gum. The interests of big banks are well represented at Davos.

    • “The interests of big banks are well represented at Davos.” That’s just one reason I cannot celebrate the establishment of the GBBC at Davos…or any other global agreement on bitcoin. At its core, bitcoin must remain decentralized to remain of value to the individual. As for the banks wanting their slice of Johnny’s candy money…AGREED in CAPS. Thanks for the post.

  • gdp

    Excellent but disturbing article, Wendy. 🙁

    I have read that, in most of the countries that have tried “Negative Interest Rates,” it has had the opposite effect of what the central bankers intended, namely, people tended to cash out their savings-accounts and then hide their cash, rather than going on the centrally-desired “spending spree.” So in effect, negative rates were provoking bank runs!

    But I rather expect that the tactic of “hiding one’s cash under a mattress” will be met by draconian gov’t cash policies such as those recently implemented in India, where individuals were given only a limited time to turn in large-denomination banknotes before they become worthless, and meanwhile access to gold and other precious metals was kept artificially restricted to prevent conversion of cash into coin or bullion. 🙁

    Again, excellent article, and thanks for the heads-up. 🙁

    • Thanks gdp. I sometimes feel like a harbinger of ill times in the midst of people going “rah rah”…and I actually *am* “rah rah” about cryptocurrencies — mostly bitcoin and ether. But the much applauded attention digital currencies is receiving from state agencies is a double-edge sword and I think the state side is the sharpest by far.

      You are correct that negative interest rates have caused bank runs and that’s exactly why the state needs to couple it with a cashless society and an attack on alternative ‘currencies’ (digital) as well as stores of wealth (precious metals). The only way to make people accept negative interest rates is to give them no alternative but to deal with banks on their (the banks’) terms. If the only legal transfers are digital, then the bank can slice off its pound of flesh with impunity. Of course, black and gray markets will flourish. Of course, barter will soar.

      BTW, I do not forgive the state and central banks for the latter. The brilliance of true currency is the liberation of people from the barter system which severely limits the productivity and wealth creation of average people. The “powers that be” wish to return the average person to feudal days when payment was in chickens and other hard goods. Either that or people will have to accept their thieving terms. I am pretty much outraged by this move and I cannot believe the average person does not see through the massive and unprecedented wealth grab. Allow me to step out of character and call the cashless advocates “thieving bastards.”

  • antesithe

    Nice article. I keep reading about attempts by different authorities to try to regulate crypto currencies and even central banks planning to use the blockchain technology for their own new ‘centralized’ digital currencies. To me it is obvious that they don’t really know what they are talking about and in one way that is good. On the other hand I fear that once they realize that there is no way for them to control this they will opt for more draconian measures like outright banning the use of crypto currencies altogether. What we are witnessing now is the start of an ugly battle between the authorities’ control freaks and us liberty aspiring citizens all over the world. What I do not understand is why they are so hell bent on destroying or subverting something that is so obviously liberating and positive. If anyone can shed some light on this I would be grateful because I honestly cannot grasp their mentality.

    • antesithe…I’ll give an explanation a shot. As a caveat, however, there are many motives and mindsets behind the wish to destroy what is good and freedom-oriented. The simplest one to explain is the profit motive. People with power can enrich themselves much faster and easier through theft and violence. This is particularly true of powerful people who do not have the character or merit necessary to produce wealth in an honest fashion. It is uncaring selfishness — rather than rational self-interest — at its naked worst. (I never liked when Rand trumpeted the word “selfishness” as a virtue.) Usually it is garbed in humanitarian or reasonable terms…partly to sell the theft to the public but as much as anything (I suspect) to let the person live with themselves. Only real sociopaths can mass damage innocent people without a need to convince themselves that something else to some degree is going on. Few people enjoy looking in the mirror and seeing themselves as “evil”, for want of a better word. They are rather like torturers during the Inquisition who convinced themselves that they were saving people’s souls. I couldn’t do it. You couldn’t do it. They could.

      I think I have a good handle on the other psychological motives because of my early passion for Ayn Rand, which has significantly waned but continues in some fundamental ways. She was brilliant in portraying the resentment and hatred (not too strong a word) some people who cannot or do not produce feel toward those who do. If productivity is a virtue — as I believe it is — then they hate the productive for their virtues. (I use the word “productivity” not in its limited financial sense but across the board to include art, true humanitarianism etc.) You see this in people who destroy for the joy of destruction (vandalism is a minor expression); they feel incapable of creating and so they destroy. Usually, as with the profiteer, they embrace a righteous motive such as being oppressed by the white male culture, the system, etc. In some cases, they are correct about the marginalization…but that’s not an excuse. Without going into my past, like many people who refuse to celebrate destruction, much of my life has been a tale of marginalization. But there are those who view that situation as their own responsibility to overcome; there are those who blame everyone else and so wish to harm everyone else. The destructive rage you see is real and it is experienced as totally justified.

      It is possible to write a book on this subject but I will stop now in the hope that the post provides some insight. Interesting subject. If you have further thoughts, I’d value them.

      • antesithe

        Wendy, you have a way with words, thanks.
        It must be terrible for them in not believing in themselves being capable of succeeding in a constructive way. At least I would be horrified to be stuck in that kind of mindset. In a centralized world of control they would win, in a decentralized world they would lose. I guess that’s why crypto currencies has gone under their radar for such a long time and why we seem to have such a large community of like minded enthusiasts who value constructive and optimistic collaboration. I never thought about it in these terms before. Thanks

  • Fritz Knese

    This is not surprising to any anarchist. Government is all about control. Only the collectivists believe that government is to “serve the people”. Frankly, next to disarming the common man eliminating cash is probably the most destructive thing that can happen to free men.

  • Eddie Fridovich

    If people are not free to do business privately anonymously they are not free .