Interesting article in today's FT on the digital wallet as an experiment in central bank digital currency:

 

The central government in Bangkok decides

 

who gets it (not criminals, not who doesn't need it because they have already enough)

 

when it can be spent (only whithin 6 months - save and lose your money)

 

where it can be spent (only near your registered address - not in the City)

 

what can be bought (no mobiles, no cigarettes)

 

from whom you can buy (no criminals, only goverment-approved merchants)

 

People love it.

 

https://www.ft.com/content/9194ca11-7788-4a1d-a6cc-cffea18d0c9d

 

One of the comments:

The article only touches slightly on the evil that CBDCs represent.

 

It is programmable money in the full sense of that word. It means it can be programmed with arbitrary conditions and clauses, as to what it can and cannot be used for, who can use it, what the interest rate is etc.

 

It can easily perform economic ostricizm on any group deemed "undesirable" by the government.

 

Do not fall for their talking points about it being "safe", "convenient" and "good", because then one day you might actually find yourself on the wrong end of the government policy.

I fully agree with the comment..don't fall into the CBDC  digital panopticon trap as there is no way out  one in it.

The GLOBALISTS would very much like to establish a CBDC as a tool to control people. I think China already does this in some other fashion.  I don’t know much about Thailand’s Digital Wallet, though.  Probably just an easy way to distribute the 10,000 baht.

Anyway, anyone with an IPhone has a digital wallet.  You can add credit cards, debit cards, and so on.

1 hour ago, jas007 said:

Anyway, anyone with an IPhone has a digital wallet.  You can add credit cards, debit cards, and so on.

This only serves surveillance.

CBDC serves active control, steering people.

Big difference,  and this what the article,  especially the quoted comment, is all about

2 hours ago, Lorry said:

This only serves surveillance.

CBDC serves active control, steering people.

Big difference,  and this what the article,  especially the quoted comment, is all about

I understand.  I guess my point was that things seem to be moving in the direction whereby they can eventually control people.  Surveillance first, then active control. It’s not a big step. And a CBDC isn’t absolutely necessary for at least some degree of control.  Just the other day I read about credit card companies not allowing for charges for certain items, like firearms.  And look what they did in Canada to some people who supported the truckers. Didn’t they freeze bank accounts? 
 

Personally, I think people might eventually find other ways to transact business. Why put money in a bank that is going to tell you how to spend it?

 

16 minutes ago, jas007 said:

Why put money in a bank that is going to tell you how to spend it?

In many countries it's illegal to do any significant financial transaction without using a bank account,  you are not allowed to receive salaries or pensions in cash, you are not allowed to pay taxes or insurances in cash, 

it's illegal to buy anything for cash over a very low threshold  (which is lowered every couple of years)

21 hours ago, Lorry said:

It can easily perform economic ostricizm on any group deemed "undesirable" by the government.

You mean like the "We Travel Together" initiative.

That money was only available to those that would put their hand in there pocket and go somewhere.

24 minutes ago, Lorry said:

In many countries it's illegal to do any significant financial transaction without using a bank account,  you are not allowed to receive salaries or pensions in cash, you are not allowed to pay taxes or insurances in cash, 

it's illegal to buy anything for cash over a very low threshold  (which is lowered every couple of years)

 I forgot about certain restrictions that were recently imposed in the EU.  No cash transactions above a certain amount.  And people are OK with that?

 

In the US, people can use cash whenever they want. When I was a little kid, my parents sold our house because they were buying another. Anyway, from what I was told, the buyer showed up at the closing with a suitcase full of money. No problem.  Later it turned out he was a loan shark and was murdered in the backyard by someone.  I guess all that cash at the closing might not have been legitimate.

1 hour ago, jas007 said:

I forgot about certain restrictions that were recently imposed in the EU.  No cash transactions above a certain amount.  And people are OK with that?

Don't really know. 

It seems to me that Scandinavians are very happy about it, they love, trust and believe their governments. 

Germans,  Austrians,  Swiss are not happy and grumbling, but if their  government says "jump", they jump.

Southern Europeans have always been the creative types. But they more or less follow EU regulations because they live on EU subsidies. 

 

These are gross generalizations, but there really is almost no resistance against the abolition of cash.

Today's Bangkok Post has a critical opinion piece by Chartchai Parasuk about the workings of the digital money. He calls it "inferior money"

 

 

https.......post.com/opinion/opinion/2843523/digital-wallet-tokens-could-hit-scheme

18 hours ago, jas007 said:

I forgot about certain restrictions that were recently imposed in the EU.  No cash transactions above a certain amount.  And people are OK with that?

Generally I agree but that limit is 10,000 Euro's from memory and only for "commercial" transactions.

How many people are likely to want to make transactions for more than that in cash unless hiding source of funds or similar? For most people it is easier and safer to transfer direct from bank to bank.

6 minutes ago, topt said:

Generally I agree but that limit is 10,000 Euro's from memory and only for "commercial" transactions.

Every country in the EU has different limits and different rules. 

The limit is often much lower than 10,000 €. 1000 or 2000 is more typical,

that's not much more than a nice dinner party.

And no, not only commercial transactions. 

 

A typical example is buying a used car for cash from a private seller - illegal in most countries. There is generally a climate of fear and suspicion when people see banknotes exceeding 50 €.

10 years ago, I wanted to pay an AirBnB by depositing 1200 € cash in the landlord's bank account. The teller called the manager, they threatened to call the police. 

15 minutes ago, topt said:

How many people are likely to want to make transactions for more than that in cash unless hiding source of funds or similar? For most people it is easier and safer to transfer direct from bank to bank.

The usual cr@p.

The best answer is always the story of the Dutch jews.

There was a census in the 30s asking everybody his religion.  

Law-abiding Dutch all answered truthfully, they had nothing to hide.

That later saved the Nazis a lot of work.

 

If someone who has power over you wants information about you,  it's never in your interest to provide that information. 

 

1 hour ago, Lorry said:

Every country in the EU has different limits and different rules. 

The limit is often much lower than 10,000 €. 1000 or 2000 is more typical,

that's not much more than a nice dinner party.

And no, not only commercial transactions. 

 

A typical example is buying a used car for cash from a private seller - illegal in most countries. There is generally a climate of fear and suspicion when people see banknotes exceeding 50 €.

10 years ago, I wanted to pay an AirBnB by depositing 1200 € cash in the landlord's bank account. The teller called the manager, they threatened to call the police. 

The usual cr@p.

The best answer is always the story of the Dutch jews.

There was a census in the 30s asking everybody his religion.  

Law-abiding Dutch all answered truthfully, they had nothing to hide.

That later saved the Nazis a lot of work.

 

If someone who has power over you wants information about you,  it's never in your interest to provide that information. 

 

Interesting link here shows limits by country - no idea how up to date it is.

https://www.europe-consommateurs.eu/en/shopping-internet/cash-payment-limitations.html

 

Looks like France, Greece, Italy and Belgium and others on that low list you mention which surprised me. However from "scanning that I don't agree with "most countries" when buying a used car.

 

Just to be clear I am not in favour of CBDC's and very much in favour of maintaining cash as an option. Although I value my personal privacy however, I would still choose to use a bank transfer or credit card for larger amounts.

2 hours ago, topt said:

Interesting link here shows limits by country - no idea how up to date it is.

https://www.europe-consommateurs.eu/en/shopping-internet/cash-payment-limitations.html

 

Looks like France, Greece, Italy and Belgium and others on that low list you mention which surprised me. However from "scanning that I don't agree with "most countries" when buying a used car.

 

Just to be clear I am not in favour of CBDC's and very much in favour of maintaining cash as an option. Although I value my personal privacy however, I would still choose to use a bank transfer or credit card for larger amounts.

The list shows only a fraction of the restrictions,  general restrictions when purchasing something. 

There are many others,  I mentioned depositing money in a bank account. 

There are limits for withdrawing money, limits for purchases of certain goods etc etc

 

A couple of years ago, in a country which according to that list still has rather high limits,  I brought my old dental crown to a gold shop.

I got 15 €, had to bring my passport which was duely copied.

 

Newsmedia create a climate where people feel the mere possession of 4- or 5-figure sums is a criminal offence. 

Next to the headline "Guy kills wife" may be a headline "Police catches guy with 20,000 cash" - even in countries where this is not illegal at all.