by Larry Oxenham, Publisher
Although this tab is used to emphasize ways to make money it is important to note that one of our favorite forms of commerce, cash, is now under attack by the very people responsible the worldwide economic malaise:
CENTRAL BANKERS AND THEIR ELITE PARTNERS ARE ON THE ATTACK AND CASH IS THE TARGET.
Cash is frustrating for government bureaucrats because they can’t always find it, can’t control it, it allows individuals to live apart from the government ‘eye’, and, most of all they sometimes can’t tax it.
It is their inability to tax it that raises the government ire but, for the Central Bankers and their elite partners, control is the issue.
Central Bankers are the ‘geniuses’ who have attempted to moderate the financial collapse of America and much of Europe by manipulating money. In America we have the Federal Reserve headed by Janet Yellen, who followed the father of never-ending-money-printing, Alan Greenspan, and who has continued the disastrous stimulus program that has propped up the stock market but led to a never ending non-recovery of the private sector.
The Euro-zone has Mario Draghi, Central Bank head who has led a continuous expansion of the money supply in the hope of stabilizing every country.
In Japan the government is moving to negative interest rates because years of printing money and keeping interest rates at 0 or near 0 has not worked.
More importantly for us, Central Bankers have indicated their clear desire to exercise total control of world economies through manipulation of currencies. In other words, they have used techniques they have proven will not work and now want to expand their power base so they can wield even more of their wisdom on us! And, since they already control the digital currencies there is only one target remaining: CASH!
When currency/stocks/commodities, etc., are traded online it can be tracked and controlled by these gurus; when it is in your pocket it is problematic for their power grab. And, as you might expect, a Harvard elite has now come to the surface to explain why letting him have your cash is a good idea:
The Wall Street Journal, Saturday/Sunday edition, August 27/28, 2016, published ‘The Sinister Side of Cash’ by Harvard Professor and former International Monetary Fund Chief Economist, Kenneth S. Rogoff, as an excerpt from his book, ‘The Crisis of Cash’.
The article begins with a look at the way drug cartels use $100 bills to conduct business and the difficulty government has tracking their movements. He expands to all manner of $100 bill crime including bribing politicians and then concludes that cash delivers ‘absolute anonymity; portability, liquidity and near universal acceptance.’ Horrors!
It is important here to note that anytime government wants to do something the argument must be properly framed; thus a safety feature is worth any cost if it saves just one life or a new tax is a great idea if it saves the planet or … well, you get the idea.
The truth is everybody, good and bad, loves cash.
And the Central Bankers also love cash, just not in your pocket.
In Mr. Rogoff’s world it is critical to demonize that which you want to ban so you present the case the drug dealer’s love of $100 bills as proof that cash is the root of all evil and something should be done.
He claims – no source given for this – there is $4,200 in cash circulating outside of financial institutions for every man, woman and child in the U.S., almost 80% in $100 bills. He then quickly concludes getting rid of $100 bills would keep those holding the $4,200 from evading taxes!
Mr. Rogoff, of course, adds that the IRS believes cash is at the root of much ‘tax evasion‘. (It is interesting to note here he never refers to tax avoidance, the legal method of using acceptable deductions to lower your taxes.) His premise is the money is being held by individuals primarily to evade taxes, an illegal practice. Apparently, his economics degree includes the ability to read minds ….
Although he emphasizes $100 bills he targets all denominations and tells us confiscating/banning $100 bills would allow the government to have cash available to give to people for whom a hurricane or other natural disaster has wiped out electricity and their ability to conduct lifesaving transactions with debit cards.
So, apparently, the government would ban $100 bills, we would then, I suppose, turn ours in to comply with the law, our fiscally smart government would then stow those dollars for a, literally, rainy day … How convenient. (We would remind Mr. Rogoff our government raids the highway funds, the social security funds and every other source of money available; what makes $100 bills different?)
He does make an exception for $10 bills because he said it would take too many for a drug dealer to conduct business. So at least we can have a little gas money but, alas, his reasoning is not what you expect: he says low-income individuals rely on cash so they need $10 bills, although “it wouldn’t cost much to have the government or financial institutions provide them with debit cards.” Mr. Rogoff, forgets, apparently, that the government already provides debits cards with welfare, food stamps, etc. And, of course, the debit cards could be monitored/watched by those very smart people like Mr. Rogoff to whom we can trust our well being.
He finally gets to his real ‘mission’ when he says, “… perhaps the most challenging and fundamental objection to getting rid of cash has to do with privacy – with our ability to spend anonymously. But where does one draw the line between this individual right and the government’s right to tax and regulate ….” Mr. Rogoff draws the line at the top of your pocket!
Later in the article Rogoff tells us the real thinking behind his writing, and the reason so many Americans have been up in arms against the establishment in this election season, is: “The tax and crime angle is reason enough to shed the world’s mountains of paper currency. There is, however, a very different … rationale, having to do with the ability of central banks to deal with financial crises and deep recessions? Why? … monetary policy remains much the preferred first line of defense in dealing with recessions.”
“Take cash away,” he says, “And Central Banks would be free to drive rates as deep into negative territory as they needed in a severe recession.” The theory advanced is negative interest rates means you would go out and spend your money rather than have it hibernate in a bank account, and your purchases would then stimulate the country. On the other hand, and we ask this from our less than enlightened vantage point, if you never saved it in the first place what would you be spending?
Oh, wait, I got it, let the Central Banks control everything from lending to lifestyle and utopia can’t be far around the corner.
His writing makes great sense to the power structure in Washington, D.C. that has concluded the only logical way to retain their lavish lifestyles while eliminating the barriers that allow citizens to hold them in check, is to take the money away.
Rogoff mentions such ‘happy ideas’ as limiting the total cash any one individual can save to, say, $2,000 but not paying interest on those savings. He would also have taxes/penalties assessed in one is brazen enough to withdraw a ‘large amount’ of cash from a bank at any given time. Presumably, if only $2000 is allowed in a savings account a withdrawal of $2000 would excite a penalty!
Another great reason for outlawing cash is, “Finance ministries are desperate to collect more tax revenues without raising tax rates.” Eliminate cash and you can record all transactions of all types and the evil individuals can’t avoid taxation! Yard sales, flea markets and other entities that thrive during difficult times – difficult times created by these great financial gurus – and every type of commerce falls under central control.
“It is time, at last,” Rogoff concludes, “to get rid of all those $100 bills.”
Mr. Rogoff’s concept of central planning is not new on earth; we have examples in Cuba, North Korea, Russia, Venezuela and others, true central planning that assures a great lifestyle for the Rogoff’s of the world but shortchanges you and me.
And we have had political candidates and some in Congress who openly espouse a socialized economy.
Maybe this is the reason we remain more and more dedicated to living a cash lifestyle than ever before.
After all, we like the idea of paying ourselves before the government; we like the idea of buying bargains with cash; we especially like the idea there is one small segment of our lives our glorious bureaucrats, our smarter-than-us academics like Mr. Rogoff, and politicians can’t get their hands on.
We believe we have the capacity to live honestly despite the temptations those evil $100 bills bring and can only hope Mr. Rogoff is not the harbinger of more ‘helpful’ government to come!
We don’t pretend to have the advanced degrees or ‘largess of thinking’ Mr. Rogoff has, but we do believe we are responsible enough to give our $100 bills a productive life and let them serve as perhaps the last bastion of freedom we actually enjoy.
The War on Cash is on!
Your comments encouraged.