Another important step in taking control of our lives, the end of cash. I mean, they'd love to, and they'd do anything for it.
I remember when the idea became public, people were skeptical, especially since digital technology was not as intertwined with our lives as it is today. We couldn't see how it would be possible. But our bigwigs started gently and, as usual, mentioned the costs of production, of recycling used notes and coins and, above all, of course, the fight against fraud and trafficking.
It's the same principle as with terrorism: some guy managed to get on a plane with soles full of explosives? Millions of morons (including me) are forced to take off their shoes when they want to get on a plane. Drug dealers and arms dealers are depositing large sums of illegal money in exotic accounts? Millions of Europeans can no longer buy a product with cash if it exceeds 1000 euros.
It's a little more complex than that (see here), but it's a joke: the narcos and others have long since stopped carrying suitcases in Geneva or Costa Rica. The money is reinventing itself by jumping from account to account in a matter of seconds, and that's it! Meanwhile, all your purchases over 1000 euros are traced since you are obliged to use a means of payment other than cash. The only way to avoid this is not to have a bank account, and therefore no checkbook or credit card. And how do we know that the bar won't be lowered in the future? To 500 euros, for example?
And while we're on the subject, let's talk about the 500 euros note. Still in circulation but no longer produced since the beginning of 2019. Here again, one of the reasons given is that it facilitates fraud and is often found in shady deals. So we tell ourselves that, in any case, we had no intention of walking around with 500 euros notes in our pockets, that it was a German obsession (those Germans are stupid, eh LOL), and that most of us have never even seen one in real life. So...
Yes, but... It's part of the same logic as capping cash payments: we're stepping up controls under the pretext of making life difficult for tax evaders. Ha ha ha! What a joke! Those guys have every means of “legally evading tax”, while you...
In fact, it combines with the subject of previous post (and the following) for each day, to tighten the ties around the average citizen, not only in France, not only in Europe, but all over the world. To the point where they find themselves constrained by forced spending, capped amounts, various taxes, and without an easily identifiable interlocutor, given that, at the same time, responsibilities are diluted to the maximum.
Citizens, even those who are moderately wealthy, not wealthy enough or downright poor, must become PROFITABLE! Profitable in that they participate, whether they like it or not, whether they have the means or not, in the running of the unbridled consumption and production society. Whether he likes it or not, he will participate in it, unless he wants to retire to a hamlet in the depths of Creuse or Ariège (french not so populated areas). And even then...
Unilateralism and what'sthepointofitism?
When it becomes too much for them and they invade the roundabouts, a big debate is organized to keep them busy for a while and justify chasing them away from their places of protest “Manu militari” 🙂. For good measure, the government announces spending that was mostly already in this year's budget, and when things calm down a bit, they sweep everything under the rug until next time. And I'm not even talking about the Citizens' Climate Convention, which had paid off, with numerous propositions. But in the end, none of them were deemed worthy of being implemented.
The result is a dangerous combination: increased control over everyone except the one or two percent super-rich that the government doesn't want to alienate, a false concern for the aspirations of the people who supposedly “have sovereignty”, then a decision from above to abandon these same people, and weariness/resignation from below.
Meanwhile, through a rather dubious sleight of hand, the far right has adorned itself with all the attributes of the France that protects, listens to and pampers the voter in the right way. The right wing believes it is in opposition when it actually has power. The left, meanwhile, has lost its way somewhere between wokeness, the deconstruction of man, the justification of the unjustifiable, spineless environmentalism and... disgraceful opportunism. On this last point, Panot's photo of her shamelessly facing Simone Veil during the constitutionalization of the right to abortion makes me want to cry. But I digress...
Let's get back to the point: if cash disappears tomorrow, not only will all your expenses and all fund movements be traceable, but you could also be cut off from your funds at any moment. Oh, it won't even take a big bad guy to do it, nothing overtly Machiavellian. It will be enough, as is already the case, for you to reach zero in your account or to exceed your authorized overdraft and it will be done automatically, ghostly. No one will be responsible, except you. Yes, but, big difference, there will be no more cash hidden in a sugar bowl, no bailout, because it wouldn't help anyway, since no shopkeeper would want it anymore. Yippee!
Not to mention everything that can be gained from a marketing point of a view from your purchases which previously went unnoticed (bakery, greengrocer, newspapers, cigarettes, etc.).
So, on your marks, get set, for the disappearance of cash... Ready? Steady?
Wesh Bro!
P.S. A reader also points out that, I quote: “The exclusive use of dematerialized payment inevitably leads to a shift towards consumption because purchases only represent an amount devoid of an overall view of one's finances.”
Nothing but good, eh?
P.S.2. Another reader pointed out to me that the Covid period was a “revelation” for the banks. They saw, and experienced, the scale of the goldmine that online payments and the associated fees represented, when they were widespread. This made the banks even more active on the issue of eradicating cash.
