[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Business/Finance See other Business/Finance Articles Title: Why there’s a war on cash; it’s about central banks consolidating power Why there’s a war on cash; it’s about central banks consolidating power Posted on February 12, 2016 by Bob Livingston cash hidden in mattress The war on cash has gone from overt to covert. Having expended all their ammo with Quantitative Easing to infinity and zero interest rate policy (ZIRP), central banks are now looking toward negative interest rates. What are negative interest rates? Right now, banks pay only slightly above 0 percent interest on savings. In reality, that’s already a negative rate of return. Real inflation (not the government’s fiction inflation) of the money supply is running north of 7 percent. So your money depreciates while in savings. You might as well hide it under the mattress. But banksters now are looking for ways to make use of cash difficult and also charge people a fee (negative interest) to deposit and hold their money. Likewise, all deposits are now subject to a “haircut” if the bank is about to go belly-up. That means banksters will skim some off the top of all deposit accounts in order to keep the “too-big-to-fails” afloat. JP Morgan Chase recently implemented new controls on cash. Want to make a cash deposit or pay a loan or credit card with cash? You must show ID. And now Citibank is preparing new policies for cash deposits. Cash deposits to an account will require the depositor to state the purpose of the deposit, provide a Social Security number, provide identification and provide a place of employment and job type. Apparently there’s begun such a huge increase in people using cash to pay off debts for other people or expand other people’s savings accounts that banksters are becoming concerned. (Excuse the sarcasm.) So why are banksters suddenly opposed to cash? There are three reasons (at least): they can’t control or track its use, to prevent people from pulling their money out of banks if negative interest rates (where people pay the bank to hold their cash) are introduced, and to consolidate their power. Of course, that is not the excuse the banksters use. They claim cash is tool of criminals. In a report for the Harvard Kennedy School for Business, Peter Sands proposes eliminating “high value currency notes” like $100 bills because, “Such notes are the preferred payment mechanism of those pursuing illicit activities, given the anonymity and lack of transaction record they offer, and the relative ease with which they can be transported and moved. By eliminating high denomination, high value notes we would make life harder for those pursuing tax evasion, financial crime, terrorist finance and corruption.” Sands would know a thing or two about “financial crime, terrorist finance and corruption,” having formerly led the international bank Standard Chartered, which forked over $340 million in settlement money to the Feds over claims that it laundered hundreds of billions of dollars for Iran and lied to regulators. Now, banksters around the world are calling for the abolition of cash. Last month, Norway’s largest bank, DNB, called for the country to stop using cash to reduce black market sales and crimes such as money laundering. “There are so many dangers and disadvantages associated with cash, we have concluded that it should be phased out,” DNB executive Trond Bentestuen said. The CEO of Deutsche Bank calls cash “terribly inefficient and expensive.” A recent Bloomberg article called cash and coins “dirty and dangerous, unwieldy and expensive, antiquated and so very analog.” Of course the excuse for the ongoing restriction of personal privacy and personal liberty is always crime. The government promotes crime and then uses the threat of crime to restrict your liberty. Government oppression under the color of law is to reduce the freedom of honest citizens. Criminals and crooks pay no attention to laws. Any child knows this. The Financial Times tells us another reason for a cashless society” [T]he introduction of a cashless society empowers central banks greatly. A cashless society, after all, not only makes things like negative interest rates possible, it transfers absolute control of the money supply to the central bank, mostly by turning it into a universal banker that competes directly with private banks for public deposits. All digital deposits become base money. And finally, economics professor and creator of QE tells us that with negative interest rates: …banks’ margins will stay low and the financial situation of the banks will stay precarious and indeed become ever more precarious… As a result banks that mainly engage in traditional banking, i.e. lending to firms for investment, have come under major pressure, while this type of ‘QE’ has produced profits for those large financial institutions engaged mainly in financial speculation and its funding. The policy of negative interest rates is thus consistent with the agenda to drive small banks out of business and consolidate banking sectors in industrialised countries, increasing concentration and control in the banking sector. It also serves to provide a (false) further justification for abolishing cash. And this fits into the Bank of England’s surprising recent discovery that the money supply is created by banks through their action of granting loans: by supporting monetary reformers, the Bank of England may further increase its own power and accelerate the drive to concentrate the banking system if bank credit creation was abolished and there was only one true bank left – the Bank of England. This would not only get us back to the old monopoly situation imposed in 1694 when the Bank of England was founded as a for-profit enterprise by private profiteers. It would also further the project to increase control over and monitoring of the population: with both cash and bank credit alternatives abolished, all transactions, money creation and allocation would be implemented by the Bank of England. Even local governments are passing laws prohibiting the use of cash for the purchase of second-hand items as a way of gaining more tax money. I have long warned Personal Liberty Digest® and Bob Livingston LetterTM readers to get their money out of banks, keep some cash on hand for emergencies, and buy gold and silver. I would also add the need to store food and water and ammo for your guns. We are in for interesting times ahead. They may not be pleasant. Poster Comment: Be prepared and get ready. There are going to be some interesting, and tough, times ahead. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||