Cash is not a crime.
Yet we have a government in power that is pushing that very agenda – to limit cash transactions.
There is legalisation before parliament to prohibit cash transactions over $10,000 to people with an Australian Business Number (ABN).
That is, if you run a business you can’t receive a cash payment for goods and services over that amount.
Any payment above 10 grand needs to come from a bank or other type of financial institution.
The government says this is crack down on the ‘black economy’…
That it will be good for us.
So the nasty criminals can’t dodge their obligations.
And that anyone against it is a conspiracy theorist.
The problem is, it is effectively banning cash…
Mainstream doing the government’s dirty work
It’s not us, it’s you.
That’s the rhetoric I’ve been reading in the mainstream rags for the past couple of years.
The attitude is that you just need to get on board with the concept, and move on.
Few writers behind this topic seem to be questioning the necessity of the proposal.
And worse still, they are actively demonising anyone who does.
Chanting and taunting those that dare to stand up against the government.
Take this from the Australian Financial Review yesterday:
‘The power of conspiracies is that it is impossible to prove they don’t exist. The latest out-there theory gathering traction in political life – a plot to favour big banks through restrictions on cash – is being propelled along by senators.
‘On Thursday, a capacity audience enthusiastically listened as an economist of the outer fringe of public life, John Adams, was given a parliamentary platform to attack the government’s plan to limit commercial cash transactions to under $10,000, a recommendation of an underground-economy taskforce headed by the late KPMG executive Michael Andrew.’1
Long time readers of The Daily Reckoning Australia know I’m not into conspiracy theories.
I’m a contrarian by nature and know how to look past bullshit peddled by the press.
Same goes for John Adams.
I know John Adams quite well. We’re in regular contact. He was the first person I interviewed for my latest service Rock Stock Insider. He’s a rogue economist that is critical of how modern economics stems from neoclassical theories.
Rather, he’s keenly aware of the government’s slow infringement on your civil liberties. He makes noise and uses hyperbole to make his point, which makes him an easy target for a take down piece (there’s been a couple on this subject).
Nonetheless, he is one of the few at the front lines that with the ability to call out this proposed legislation in parliament.
Yet that doesn’t stop the emotional lounge used by writers to imply that only the people on the ‘outer’ fringes of society are pushing back on this cash ban.
Using this style of writing is a way to re-enforce that you, as a sensible person, wouldn’t fall for silly fringe thinking…
No, of course we would laugh at the absurdity of these outsiders and move on…
Except the mainstream aren’t doing anything other than working hard to deliver the government’s agenda to you.
In the process, they are losing their ability to question this absurd scheme.
And because of their lack of objectivity, they are making themselves even less trustworthy in the process.
The government argues that this will help them tackle the $50 billion ‘black economy’ — roughly 3% of our gross domestic product. And then the media does the rest.2
Except no one is bothering to point out how little impact it will have.
Crooks and thieves are smarter than we give them credit for. They’ll simply find other ways around the cash ban.
Reining in cash — even if it only applies to businesses — will have absolutely no impact tax evasion and money laundering.
To compound all of this, the task force that came up with the cash ban proposal idea has said openly that the $10,000 limit will need to be lowered to be ‘effective’.
The slow process of digitisation
Forcing you into a digital financial system takes time.
The idea of banning cash is a long slow burn.
The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) made noise as far back as 2016 about removing ‘large’ notes from circulation in a bid to reduce crime.
The thing is, the large notes they were referring to weren’t $100 notes — turns out most of us have them stuffed under a mattress.
No, the RBA says that criminals prefer a $50 note.
Now, I don’t know about you, but with two kids and a dog the size of a small pony, $50 doesn’t go far at my place.
I don’t consider $50 to be a large note at all.
However, this goes some way to showing you the mentality of whom we have in power.
The language used to demonise things makes it easier to believe their agenda.
And yes it is an agenda, not a conspiracy theory.
You do not eliminate crime by removing cash.
Crime has been around for as long as people have.
Thousands of years of naughty criminal deeds existed before paper money.
The thing is, if you here the same thing over and over…
Do you see the thread here?
The government spends all this time telling you that cash is useless, and that it only benefits criminals.
Hear that long enough and you start to believe them.
Coercion from the top
What happened here is that government propaganda has filtered through to the press.
Our government no longer needs to repeat the message because the puppets in the media are doing it for them.
In a terrifyingly short amount of time, people have accepted the doctrine that cash equals danger.
Meaning, many of us buy the lie that large amounts of cash are dangerous…letting the government herd us further into the digital financial system.
Be wary when you read headlines of how they are treating the people fighting against this.
They are using very particular tactics to make you doubt them.
There’s so few people pushing back on this insidious legalisation, that we need those willing to fight this.
| Until next time, |
 |
| Shae Russell, PS: Exclusive interview from The Daily Reckoning Australia: ‘The New Case for Gold: An interview with bestselling author and Wall Street insider, Jim Rickards’. Click here to learn more. |
Comments