Any article beneath that headline should be short. Just one word in fact: no. The problem is that I keep reading articles here in the Daily Sceptic making the case for the opposite. Take this for example:
If and when there is a catastrophic failure, you will not only then be yourself robust to the consequences; you will also be able to clean up in the aftermath (assuming the result is not complete financial, and societal, collapse, in which case we’re all screwed anyway).
Remember, we are talking here about small change. Well, a digital equivalent of small change, but the means of settling small value transactions denominated in pounds. So, pound notes and penny coins. Complete financial and societal collapse. You see coins are not just coins, as another Daily Sceptic article alerted us to:
Coins have always been more than lumps of precious metals; they are also a means of propaganda and control.
These days the metals are not so precious, but that is beside the point. The author goes on:
The means of control change over time but the insatiable desire for total control remains constant.
Total control and complete societal collapse, this is getting serious. This is the kind of stuff I hear from the founder of Extinction Rebellion, Roger Hallam. It is not small change that worries him but a trace gas in the atmosphere. Apparently, if it is not reduced it will “destroy the weather” (no, me neither) and “thus our ability to grow food” leading to “the collapse of our society”. Bingo! I knew I had heard that somewhere.
How can I be so sure that we are not in the last desperate months before being overrun by hungry hordes short of change? For the same reason that I was sure Matt Hancock was never going to suppress COVID-19 with an NHS Covid App. No matter how powerful the politician, how rich the globalist, how strongly felt the ideology, some aspects of the real world just do not work the way these people think they do. Money and banking systems being a case in point. Take the concern that I read in the Daily Sceptic only this week:
We have never been in the position in which we now find ourselves, where centralised control over all transactions taking place in the economy is so tantalisingly within reach of central banks.
I am not concerned about this for the simple reason that it cannot happen. There is no way to centralise control over all transactions taking place in the economy because they do not pass through any central system, organisation or network from which anyone could control them. They all have a value measured in pounds sterling but that does not mean they can be controlled by the Bank of England, any more than the Oxford English Dictionary, or at any rate its publisher, can control what is written in the Daily Sceptic. To put it another way, if Klaus Schwab wanted to put an end to free speech he could try buying Oxford University Press, but it would not put him in control of how English is used, other than at OUP perhaps.
How about the technology risks? Cyber-attack, power outages, Government IT projects going wrong. One commentor on this site pointed out that his broadband was down for five days, just think if that happened to money. I know the public sector has a talent for screwing up tech projects, but not even the Bank of England would put critical national infrastructure on a domestic broadband line. And why is this never a criticism levelled at Bitcoin? We never hear the question: “What if the blockchain went down?” Bitcoin must run on some special libertarian technology not available to governments. The same goes for cyber-attacks. Crypto both suffers from and is the enabler of huge financial fraud. Start with ransomware and if you can stomach it, move on to the dark web, but crime is only ever mentioned in sceptical circles when it comes to systems that might one day handle the digital equivalent of small change. Visa, Mastercard and the entire global banking system have managed to limp along for decades, constantly pried, poked and cyber-attacked, but on the whole not an extinction level worry for the public.
And so, finally, to the programmable currency thing. This is the ultimate bogeyman for sceptics. Again, from the Daily Sceptic:
If programmable CBDCs are introduced, your own digital financial footprint will be used to control you.
No, it won’t. Why? Because we have had it for over 50 years, and it has not shown anything like these controlling tendencies. Every commenter on this site uses ‘programmable currency’ to pay to comment on this site. Are they controlled by their digital footprint? The humble recurring credit card payment, the direct debit and the standing order are all examples of programmable currency. Terrifying, aren’t they? The point is that you cannot make an unattended, recurring, remote payment with physical cash. But if cash was digital, that would be a possibility. How much, to whom and how often would constitute the ‘programme’. Not much of a programme I admit, but enough to have sceptics diving behind the sofa. Could the Government ‘programme’ a digital currency? Do you see many Government-originated direct debits in your bank account? Why bother when they can tax at source?
Cash is fighting for survival on many fronts, read all about it in my articles here and here. Do politicians and globalists think it is old-fashioned, crime-ridden and would be better off minimised and phased out? Certainly. Do they care about the de-banked, elderly, disadvantaged and cash-in-hand economy? Only if pressed. Can they legislate or abuse existing laws and take advantage of circumstances such as Covid to further their pipe dreams? It is in their very nature. But they cannot magically turn everything denominated in pounds, or any currency, into something they control. It is not physically possible. No matter how much they might want it, every Western banking system cannot be suddenly changed to block transactions they don’t like. It is not technically possible.
Modernising the currency so that it can be used online and as a kind of minimal, free banking service is not an attempt to usurp society. Offering a digital alternative alongside notes and coins for settling small transactions, which is relevant to about 5% of all transactions, is not a tool of oppression, at least not one any self-respecting oppressor would bother with. Small change is not to be feared and neither are digital currencies.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Keep all cash no matter how small, its just a slippery slope to getting rid of physical cash altogether if one denomination is allowed to lapse!
There is no genuinely good reasons for getting rid of cash!
Agreed, did you or anyone you know ask for cash to be removed? Is anyone you know unhappy with the mix of credit cards, cash and bank transfers?. No me either the only ones who have the problems are the politicians who have ran the country into debt, and who are sunk deep in identity politics, they cannot control and mould society to their particular set of ideologies unless they can control us through our money.
When I shop in Sainsburys, nearly always paying cash, the automatic tills are obviously programmed to give you your change in the smallest possible denominations. ie, if I am owed 20p change, I won’t get a 20p coin, I’ll get 5p, 2p and 1p coins.
And that’s fine. They get them back next time I go there or I go into other shops in the town and use them there. They’re helping my policy of keeping cash ….. even the coppers!
The government could launch an anonymous digital currency- why aren’t they?
That tells you all you need to know.
They don’t need to. Anonymous digital cash already exists.
The only reason to launch a CBDC is precisely to programme it and trace it.
Literally the only reason.
We’ve had a system of government for longer which “did not show anything like these controlling tendencies“, then it was 2020 and that suddenly changed.
On the contrary: this started with Bliar, if not before. New Labour introduced the Institutionalised Lie (TM) with the diversity/equality agenda. Tyranny is all about forcing people to live by lies.
Cash doesn’t make money for the banks. A £10 note will always be a tenner for whoever has it and banks can’t get a rake off from the retailers (and obviusly ultimately us) the way they do from card transactions. Just think how long it takes for a £10 digital transaction before its worth disappears at 0.2% – 0.3%.
That said, the Banks want it but the RPTB want CBDC far more and for sinister control reasons.
If you can’t see the dangers in that then you’re a f****** idiot and deserve all you get.
But don’t drag us down with you, you compliant idiots.
Goodbye any semblance of freedom if the bastards win.
At the very least, the existing card terminals charge the retailer a fee for using them. So they make money with every transaction ….. unlike cash.
Some smaller retailers out here in the sticks are now asking customers to pay with cash if they can, so their charges are reduced.
Image the sums which will be creamed off every transaction if cash is outlawed.
They seem to like their prossies and coke and so I expect that there will always be a means of exchange that is universal and untraceable. I do like cash. The pleasure of having a wad in your pocket far outweighs the ducious convenience of a debit card with a healthy balance. Not that long a ago a man could’ve gone a roving with a pocket full of gold sovereigns. Can you imagine the satisfaction of having them in your pocket and fondling them. Orwell talked about the beauty of Britain and how reassuring it was that the coins were bigger and more substantial than coins from other countries. Look at how squalid a five pence piece looks these days.
A reasonable assessment,, but on the other side of the coin, there is a tendency to rely on things that do not work just when we need them, so there are times when physical cash is king. Just occasionally, you can’t pay by card when there is a system failure somewhere in the network from the retailer’s place e.g. Anyway, I don’t want the bank to know which pubs I went to on whatever day etc, so at some places I prefer to pay cash.
We already have a digital alternative to cash. Loads of them actually. Visa, Mastercard, Google Pay, Apple Pay. Etc etc. Etc.
From a consumer’s perspective, all the benefits of a CDBC already exist in the currently available options.
CBDCs are different only in what happens behind the scenes.
That is why they are dangerous. They aren’t for us, they are for them. They enhance the control of the issuer not of the end user.
I hate to go ad hominem but the fact that the objections to CDBCs are presented to this writer repeatedly a d yet he insists on trying to tell us there is nothing to fear leads me to conclude he is a complete f**King moron.
Sorry, but sometimes it’s true and pertinent to point it out.
Agreed. And s/he is apparently clueless about the only Blockchain technology which actually works and is already being used the world over for very good things: BSV.
PS AUTHOR: BSV Blockchain is the only thing which CBDCs could properly exist on. Nothing else has the correct design. BTC Blockchain is corrupted and stolen already by TRPTB, since August 2018. Get in touch if you wish.
If one downvotes, it is customary to elaborate.
Not elaborating means they are not confident in their opinion or argument.
They can’t
It just means they don’t like the message being given, or possibly the messenger.
They have no argument, or they’d make it.
I think its good that the Sceptics has different perspectives on these things, we may not agree but thats what is so good and healthy about a free society, and its that which Governments are trying to shut down. We are all on this site because we are critical thinkers who question, and are curious, but at the end of the day we each of us hopefully take each view and information away, mentally digest it and come to our own view.
The writers piece has not made me any less suspicious of digital currency and the motives behind it, but its interesting to read a different point of view.
In a real collapse there will obviously come a point where cash becomes worthless. But bear in mind that their will be an intervening period before the total breakdown of the world credit system when promissory notes will be the best thing we have. And if you have your money in a savings account, the interest isn’t usually very good. I don’t see any downside to keeping a sizeable quantity of physical cash at home other than the obious risks. That intermittent period between destabilisation and collapse could be vital in terms of deciding who survives and who doesn’t.
I usually have enough cash at home to deal with the odd snag with failed or stolen cards etc for a couple of weeks or so. Years ago it was the norm to carry a certain amount of cash on the odd international business trip. E.g. back in 2007 I went to Karachi for a few days and carried quite a few $US in notes.
There are still some traders who like cash in hand, no paperwork etc for the odd minor job as well.
Same here. I started a “resilience” strategy under the Covid Tyranny. In addition to an independent method of heating, lighting, cooking (as well as a very well-stocked larder) I also have a decent amount of cash hidden in the house.
Make sure those notes are not expired.
Yes. I know how to suck eggs as well.
wink
If this anonymous writer reads these comments in his next article – which undoubtedly there will be one, because for some reason he gets a regular slot on here to argue for CBDCs – perhaps he could answer the following question.
What will a CBDC allow him to do that he cannot do now? Because he can pretty much have a cashless life if he wants to right now.
Indeed, CBDC is redundant at best, and a totalitarian’s dream come true at worst. Thus, no good reason to have one.
The ONLY possible benefit to the masses from a CBDC is that it is “frictionless”, that is, it can be processed some milliseconds faster than cashless transactions now. Big whoop. The pace of life is already way too fast as it is, and a little friction is really not a bad thing on balance.
It’s not about the benefit to him personally though, is it.
In the cashless world, how do you help the homeless person in need of a meal, or a train fare, or whatever? Or will CBDCs sweep away the problems of untidy people like that?
Digital ID linked with UBI.
And have you not seen the beggars with portable card machines yet?
That’s easy. The council will have force-purchased your house to accommodate the homeless. You will get to rent a room or two in it.
It worked for a while. We turned our daily interractions into transaction and commodities. In the mifdde of the 19th century this demonic force asserted its rule over our realm. We have to see it in that perspective becuase this spirit is many levels higher than humanity. And it has only been the last few decades that we have truly soured. This is the time when it is laid bare. For all of us. Never be critical or impatient about those who seem to be taking longer. I guarantee you that they will get there because there is simply no other way.
I am sure the author knows it is not the voluntary reduction in use that bothers some people, including me. It is the risk the politicians will gleefully withdraw money and then exploit our dependence on digital savings snd payments to control us.
Recent actions by HMG, actions in Canada and proposals in Germany all point to extreme authoritarian attitudes and a willingness to use bureaucratic means to suppress their critics.
Face slapping stuff.
“Remember, we are talking here about small change. Well, a digital equivalent of small change, but the means of settling small value transactions denominated in pounds. So, pound notes and penny coins. Complete financial and societal collapse. “
The original author you mock is probably saying that financial collapse is the trigger for this kind of financial reset. This is a result of hyperinflation which leads to the destruction of a currency. It’s fairly obvious to ostensibly people paying attention that”They” know this and the digital pound is a way of transitioning to a new currency base once the old one eviscerates the value of our pounds (and coinage).
The thing is “We” know “They” know this and “They” are starting to notice that “We” know. Hence the latest WEF meeting on trust and ways to further restrict information (sorry misinformation) from spreading between the plebs.
Why didn’t you get the memo?
Nice try with the erroneous comparison with climate alarmism, by the way.
“There is no way to centralise control over all transactions taking place in the economy because they do not pass through any central system, organisation or network from which anyone could control them. “
Not now, no, and that’s the whole point. What do you think we are concerned about? The present system? That system is about to collapse, and what do you think comes next?
“, if Klaus Schwab wanted to put an end to free speech he could try buying Oxford University Press, but it would not put him in control of how English is used, other than at OUP perhaps.”
Perhaps the author did not notice but during the scamdemic, the dictionary definitions were changed (Miriam Webster) comes to mind for “vaccine” indeed changes were made for what constituted a “pandemic”. These were mirrored from issued changes on the WHO website which, in turn was directed by big Pharma who fund the WHO through Gates organisations in order to convince much of the population (that appear to have been born yesterday), that vaccines don’t need to stop disease, just reduce symptoms. You know, so they could jab us all with their vile junk.
Similarly, if one wants to see how Orwellian control of the digital medium has become establishment controlled, one need not go any further than Wikipedia an absolute travesty of political bias.
So no actually even his/her example is naive. Digitised formats are open to control by centralising forces in a way that physical formats are far more free.
“broadband was down for five days, just think if that happened to money. I know the public sector has a talent for screwing up tech projects, but not even the Bank of England would put critical national infrastructure on a domestic broadband line.”
WTF are you talking about? We already run digital payment systems and so does the BoE. I can’t keep up with the straw men in this paragraph:
“And why is this never a criticism levelled at Bitcoin? We never hear the question: “What if the blockchain went down?” Bitcoin must run on some special libertarian technology not available to governments.”
I hear this critique all the time. And yes the whole point about bitcoin is it’s on a distributed ledger on many multiple databases, that is what “mining bitcoin “ means.
And I’m frankly not a big fan but in that point the tech is pretty durable. On the point of privacy however, bitcoin is far trickier if you buy it using your ID as so many do.
“Crypto both suffers from and is the enabler of huge financial fraud. Start with ransomware and if you can stomach it, move on to the dark web, but crime is only ever mentioned in sceptical circles when it comes to systems that might one day handle the digital equivalent of small change. Visa, Mastercard and the entire global banking system have managed to limp along for decades, constantly pried, poked and cyber-attacked, but on the whole not an extinction level worry for the public.”
I’m going to assume you wrote this late at night after a couple of vinos because you contradict yourself in the same paragraph. You think financial fraud only exists on crypto?
And yes most skeptics don’t talk about its use in crime because the biggest criminals on the planet occupy positions at central banks and Parliaments. Unless of course you think it’s legit to spend money you don’t have, print it endlessly have the CBs back you and watch all your hard earned money dump into nothing. I’ll let some guys selling coke go if I could get 2 bankers and a politician (and Albert Bourla) go to jail for all they have done.
By the way, you don’t think the tech exists to sift through everyone’s electronic transactions once they are linked to a digital ID and linked to peoples social profiles?
Have you heard about this AI thing?
Still they could f it up. Fingers crossed. In the mean time I’ll keep silver in the safe.
Terrific post.
It appears that government only thinks in terms of centralised systems. The other day there was a serious pile up on a smart motorway because, apparently, the whole national system for managing them went down.
Any idiot would have assumed that “one smart motorway = 1 control centre.” That way there’s some degree of local knowledge, and most importantly independence of other motorways with their control centres.
But they just can’t resist national or multi-natural networks, and if that’s so for stretches of road, how much more when they want to stop homeless people in Cardiff laundering cash in Monte Carlo?
Just look how easily Trudeau took over Canadian bank accounts – and my contribution to the Convoy – leaving people destitute except for any real cash they had.
So this couldn’t possibly happen here in Blighty? Yeah, right!
Has the Government ever introduced an IT system that’s been fit for purpose and/or hasn’t gone over time and budgets by a significant factor along with serious functionality issues? (Horizon).
Answers on a postage stamp….
I’m sure the Chinese don’t believe they can be controlled either.
Like every population living under tyranny, they thought they were free…until it was too late, that is.
Five years ago, how many people expressed concerned about the growing movement towards centralization? Virtually no one except a few anarchists. Now it is becoming ingrained as an instinct to oppose it For obvious reasons of course. I am very encouraged by this tendency. It isn’t brain surgery but there is nothing left at the centre that might please anybody. You can’t just hollow out the system and expect continuing adherence,.
At he beginning of this month my internet went down for 5 days. Just at the time I needed to pay my cc bill. Fortunately, I have kept all my financial accounts in paper form, despite frequent request to go paperless, so i was able to take the bill to my local bank and pay over the counter. We need to keep cash, cheques and high St banks
A local bank? How quaint!
The real issue is one of trust, Governments are no longer trusted they ruined that when they all fell in lockstep as Tyrants in the Covid years, as such the various unelected organisations that worked with them on the pandemic policies and those that controlled and advised. They were drunk on power, their lack of humanity and their desire to dominate became all too obvious, I include 99.9% of politicians in this as I could count on the fingers of one hand those who objected, and there were none to my knowledge who resigned.
I agree with the Author that through sheer incompetence the Governments and the Bank of England will not be able to control every transaction, they won’t think that outages, attacks etc are a serious threat, you see they are arrogant, they believe themselves infalliable, and what they cannot achieve through technology they will achieve through tyranny and violence, as we all were witness too in the Covid years.
They will introduce a digital currency, they will use menaces if they have to to get all to use it, and if there are problems rather like their attitude to the Post masters, and to the Covid spike injections injured they will ignore the affected, blame them and if necessary imprison them. That is what will happen. The ability to introduce a new technology properly is way down the list of importance, the priority is to control and thats why they will force it.
He’s a funny one that anonymous IT reporter. Its quite simple, don’t create these features in the new tools if they are not going to be used. The fact they are features will mean that, at some point and for some people, they will be used.
“Every commentator on this site uses ‘programmable currency’ to pay to comment on this site. Are they controlled by their digital footprint?”
——-
Potentially.
GCHQ monitors communications in the UK (and probably elsewhere). If the police suspect a crime (including “hate crimes”) they have the right to seize your computer.
It isn’t about what they are doing now, though. It’s about the power that a CBDC will give them. And, potentially, it’s total control – we had an example of the potential tyranny in Canada when Trudeau (illegally) blocked the bank accounts of people peacefully and legally protesting at the Covid Tyranny and Jab Mandate.
Keep and use cash.
Agreed – comment re the DS PayPal cancellation posted separately.
American “intelligence services” monitor us whether we are suspected of a crime or not, and then share it with the other Five Eyes countries. So they can each bypass their own country’s restrictions on monitoring their own citizens.
It’s going to cost a lot to equip all “Big Issue” sellers with electronic kit. We help at tea stalls where a pound is asked for for a cup of tea. Who’s going to pay and arrange for electronic readers? It won’t be worth it.
Anyone who doesn’t will go out of business. Remember 2020? No-one but the chains will survive.
What is meant by “small change” though? —–Is it the 40 pence tip we let the taxi driver have? Is it the fiver we give the window cleaner or the tenner we leave on the table in a restaurant? Is it the 40 quid we give Mr Smith across the road for fixing our fence? Maybe it is also the 60 quid we give the electrician who fixes the lights in our garage. ——If we don’t have “small change” none of these transactions can occur unless the window cleaner and Mr Smith down the road carries a card reader with them. Then ofcourse every single transaction that ever occurs will be monitored. It will be monitored so that government can get every single penny of tax they think they are entitled to (as if taxation was not already a form of extortion), and then we can also be monitored for our ESG (Environmental and Social Governance Score) so that authorities can decide if what we spend is in line with their pretend to save the planet politics, and their equality, race gender and diversity nonsense. ———–So it is not so simple as it sounds. Making it sound like the “small change” is just an inconvenience we can all really do without is a trojan horse.
They will use ‘for your safety’ and sheeple will lap it up
Wow, quite some lack of understanding in this article!
The key misunderstanding is in this quote:
“There is no way to centralise control over all transactions taking place in the economy because they do not pass through any central system, organisation or network”
That is in fact the point of CBDC’s – to have a system where all transactions do indeed pass through a central system.
The author seems to have confused digital money, which we already have, with “digital currencies” based on block chain technology. The authorities have deliberately blurred the distinction to head off opposition, but they are in fact completely different concepts.
Our current digital money is created by the banking system, is not under central control, and information about it is diffused across the institutions that make up the banking system. Money in a CBDC would be created by the government, would be under central control, and information about it would be centrally stored in a government run database.
Doesn’t the author remember that PayPal suspended the Daily Sceptic’s account due to political disagreement? Surely there is no clearer example of the power digital currency providers possess, which will be much easier to execute under a CBDC.
And TURDeau did the same in Canada with those who supported the Truckers Convoys a couple of years ago. Oh, and was Farage also held to ransom with threats of being ‘debanked’ because of his political stance?
So, technological failures and cyber attacks feature highly on the Government’s National Risk Register and ‘they’ still want all of our money ‘digital’. Given how the Government ‘managed’ the last major risk that impacted, they can jog right on…