Thread by @MagnusFlatus

1/ Allow me to share a simple spiel with my economist friends about digital currency.

I'll preface this very carefully. A lot of economists love numbers and systems, naturally. Sadly, most of the economists I met analyse things through the lense of the current system.
#economics

2/ Meaning that they will analyse things under the assumption that the underlying framework and mechanisms are the same.

That's fine 99.9% of the time and over time, specialization will do this.

Alas, we are in a time where the framework will be radically changed.

3/ Therefore I ask of you, if you want to play along, to consider things under a principalled or fundamental lense. In essence, what new rules a new framework would entail and then start juggling with these.

4/ So, it should be obvious that we are entering an era of digital currency and there is only a few competitors in the race.

I'll focus on the central banker's proposition of CBDC's since it will highlight the problem and the structural inevitabilities.

5/ A key aspect of digital currency is that you only need a personal computer, a connection and a hard-drive. If anything, cryptocurency showed this.

It can be completely decentralized. It would make sense for users to just use their own gear and stop paying bank fees.

6/ Not only theoretically, but assuming that economical participants want to minimize costs and augment benefits, digital currency should mean: The End Of Banks.

7/ So, why would banks propose CBDCs?

And how could they insert themselves in that system being that they are not fundamentally required for a dgital system to work?

8/ They can't even be a mere "transactional service", the ledgers could be automated and the transaction infrastructure is already there.

Their only option is central control over the system. There is no way around it, it's that or poofness into the vastness of nothingness.

9/ We are already seeing signs of this in the legal framework they are setting up. Seeing politicians throwing the idea that "centralized control is crucial for security reasons" (which is BS of course).

They are laying out the legal grounds.

10/ Similarly, you will see regulations about crypto pop up. It will be impossible for a nerd in a basement to write his decentralzied system and put it online.

The reason for this pertains to human nature.

11/ When put in a situation, humans will always adopt the path that affords more liberty.

So, if you are in a situation where you have 2 concurent digital systems, a healthy human left unpropagandized will always choose the most decentralized option.

12/ So past centralization, expect monopoly.

In truth, they want this system to be world wide, as a group. So you could see this as the BIS having the monopole and the various central banks having their own interoperable franchises in their own zone.

13/ If you are centralized and have the monopole, then you need to identify all the bank accounts.

Well, that's the old system. In the new system as repeatedly suggested by Klaus Schwab, the "4th industrial revolution" will be different, it will change "you", meaning your body.

14/ All the indications are that the new digital currency will use what they call the "Internet-Of-Bodies"

I'm sure you are aware of the Internet-of-things where every little gadget is linked to the net and to each other. Well, they want humans to be treated as connected devices

15/ For some, this will look outlandish but I guess you'll have to trust me on that one. The tech is there and is in fact partly deployed. I won't go into further details and I'll leave you to your research on that one if you are curious.

16/ In a digital environment where every human is individually and singularly identifiable without any option to fake or shelter their identity, the digital currency system will have the ability to identify information at the individual level instead of the account level.

16/ This is an important point since it adds a sense of fatality to the situation. You can't open another account in some tax haven or under your wife's name, etc. Every thing is inevitably linked to you.

On the receiving end, it's not a problem if you are fair and square.

18/ oups, the last 16 was 17...

The problem here is on the controlling end.

This means they have all of your info, purchase behavior and control. And there is nothing you can do about it.

Total control achieved.

19/ At this point, individuals that can not think in terms of system in a principaled way will say: well, it's the case already.

Well, yes and no. They have to buy it, there are laws, etc. It's not an immediate state-of-affairs and people could reset their stuff, etc.

20/ In fact, in their digital system, laws protecting individual economical privacy would be impossible to make because without these pre-installed features, the whole system would stop working.

Engrained and immutable is the term I guess.

21/ The rest follows. You already hear bankers say: "Well, it's easy, in the future, if there is a risk for hyper-inflation, we'll just pause the ability for people to buy stuff".

Enjoy having your 5h a week of purchasing time if you are a plebian in times of financial crisis.

22/ Obviously, they will also incorporate the carbon-tax scam, sorry it's what it is... the world needs more CO2 btw.

So you will see algorithms computing your allowances and perform automatic taxations, etc.

Then there is also the obvious targetting of dissidents.

23/ You see where this is going. The slippery slope is very slippery.

If you know human nature, you know it will end there.

But let me go further.

If you ignore currency, economies exist because of a simple human reality: Humans like to exchange stuff, they sometimes steal stuff and they often fight over stuff.

To minimize conflicts and misunderstandings, a standardization encompassing this FREE exchange of stuff came to.

25/ (shoot.. it's getting late :) the last number was 24).

All of the economical structures are there to regulate thess free exchanges where humans accumulate capital and potential for further trade.

But, since this digital system is a centralized controlling monopoly, it is not such a system.

It is not an economy.

Instead, it's "that guy" in the corner, that tells everyone what they can trade or not, under which conditions.

It is a dictat

27/ shoot, missed another

There is no accumulation of capital
There is "allowed capital"

There is no free exchanges
There is "permitted exchanges"

28/ This is getting long so I'll conclude.

In reality, if CBDC's are implemented like I foresee it

It will mean the end of Economy

Since the only thing that this framework can concretely operate is a Slave Management System

That is the danger, heed it.
Thanks for your time.

Oh, one last thing.

Since this system requires transgressing human nature, it will necessarilly have to control other human activities that have nothing to do with the economy.

Mainly because they know that humans, when enslaved, will prefer to live independently in the wild.

Anything that affords humans the ability to recreate a parallel system (albeit primitive) will be faught against

They will have to be total fascists but they don't seem to mind.

The point is that the requirement for control will bleed out in every field, It'll be hell on earth.

It's a daunting task but it's doable.

Imagine a vax that kills your immunity.
So that, in order to live, you need to get your shot tri-annually.
They only accept digital currency.

That "living, as a subscription service" scheme will keep people in the system.

Just a thought.

Algorithmically, you can detect the "non-digital-currency-participants".

If the number of transactions is abnormally low, raise the price of the vax-to-live but only for these individuals.

They will have to participate/prioritize the digital system instead of their parallel one

I hope you are understanding why they want EVERYONE vaxxed

Even if the crap they inject you does absolutely nothing against covid (in fact, it kills your immune system).

Are the dots connecting?