About a year ago, the IMF published a creepy paper offering governments suggestions on how to move toward a cashless society even in the face of strong public opposition. It hasn't been in the news a whole lot lately, but the war on cash undoubtedly continues.
Governments and central bankers claim moving toward a cashless society will help prevent crime and will boost convenience for the average citizen. But the real motivation behind the war on cash is control over you. We got a first-hand look at what happens when governments restrict access to cash when India plunged into a cash crisis after the Indian government enacted a policy of demonetization in November 2016.
Andy Haldane serves as chief economist and the Executive Director of Monetary Analysis and Statistics at the Bank of England. He proposed the elimination of cash during a speech in the fall of 2015. Durham University professor of finance and economics Kevin Dowd has written a paper titled Killing the Cash Cow: Why Andy Haldane Is Wrong About Demonetization. Dowd wrote an article published by the Mises Wire outlining his arguments. It provides a fantastically detailed overview of the war on cash and why it threatens "widespread economic damage."
Last week, Pres. Donald Trump nominated Marvin Goodfriend to fill a vacancy on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. When we reported the news, we called him "another swamp creature" - a member of the Washington D.C./Wall Street clan Trump promised to drain away.
We're not alone in our thinking. In an article on the Mises Wire, Tho Bishop called Goodfriend's nomination "a dangerous act of outright betrayal to Trump’s core constituency of working-class voters."
It's true Goodfriend's views on monetary policy don't fit in with the current Fed status quo. But that's not a good thing. Goodfriend isn’t a fan of the conventional radical policy of quantitative easing. He’s actually a proponent of an even more radical policy.
Following is Bishop's analysis in its entirety.
The SchiffGold Friday Gold Wrap podcast combines a succinct summary of the week’s precious metals news coupled with thoughtful analysis. You can subscribe to the podcast on iTunes.
Pres. Donald Trump has nominated another swamp creature to sit on the Federal Reserve board of governors.
Marvin Goodfriend does not come from the ranks of politicians. He's an academic - an economics professor at Carnegie Mellon University. But he's perfectly suited for the role of central planner. He fits right in with the other central bankers running what investment guru Jim Grant once called “the Ph.D. standard” monetary system, as opposed to the gold standard.
Australia is moving toward regulating cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum under new anti-money laundering legislation.
According to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), Parliament will vote on the measure this week. If it passes, it will place Bitcoin and other cryptos under the auspices of Australia's financial regulatory agency.
Indians are facing a major shortage of cash, with as many as 90% of ATMs in some regions of the country running completely out of currency. The cash crisis stems from a policy of demonetization the Indian government launched over five months ago.
On Nov. 8, the Indian government declared that 1,000 and 500 rupee notes would no longer be valid. They gave the public just four hours notice. The 1,000 and 500 rupee notes made up 86 % of the currency in circulation in the country. With a single pronouncement, the Indian government made virtually all of the cash in India valueless.
There’s been another shot fired in the “war on cash.” Recently, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) published a working paper offering governments suggestions on how to move toward a cashless society even in the face of strong public opposition.
Over the last several years, we’ve seen a steady push to eliminate, or at least limit, the use of cash around the world. In May of 2016, the European Central bank announced it will stop producing and issuing 500-euro notes by the end of 2018. Not long before the EU announcement, a former Obama economic adviser/ex-Treasury secretary floated the idea of eliminating the $100 bill in the US.
This article was written by Dickson Buchanan, SchiffGold Precious Metals Specialist. Any views expressed are his own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Peter Schiff or SchiffGold.
Many Americans are concerned about their privacy today. And rightly so. The NSA and governmental authorities maintain their policies are ultimately for the safety and security of the American people. We will leave that debate in the capable hands of others, but where is this same concern when it comes to money? Have central governments given us a safe, secure, and stable money in the dollar system lead by the Federal Reserve? In this article we will compare the dollar to gold and even throw in the most popular cryptocurrency Bitcoin (BTC) to spice things up a bit.
First, let's define what we mean by security.
Will the Fed raise rates? Will it hold steady? What will the next move mean for gold?
Investor and creator of Things that Make You Go Hmmm Grant Williams doesn’t really care. He’s going to buy gold regardless. In fact, during an interview at the Mauldin Strategic Investment Conference, Williams said he doesn’t really pay attention to the price of the yellow metal:
I think what the Fed does could have short-term impact, but I don’t buy gold around it. I don’t buy gold at $1,100 because I think it’s going to $1,200, I buy it for what it does, not what the price is, the price is the last consideration for me.”
Williams went on to say as the economic picture comes into sharper focus, people will realize that “gold is the answer.”
Williams said investors should focus on owning physical gold, not paper promises:
This article was submitted by JD Bauman, SchiffGold Precious Metals Specialist. Any views expressed are his own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Peter Schiff or SchiffGold.
One of the common questions we hear from gold buyers is, “Is it possible that the government might come after my gold and confiscate it?”
In a time when the governments are waging a war on cash, it’s not hard for people to imagine that a war on gold is next.
There is some precedence for this, after all. On April 5, 1933, Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Executive Order 6102 “[forbade] the Hoarding of gold coin, gold bullion, and gold certificates within the continental United States.” Americans who owned gold were told to deliver their gold to the bank and in exchange receive paper dollars of equivalent value, $20.67 per ounce at the time.
To be very clear though, contrary to common belief, the government did not conduct a widespread seizure of gold, nor did it go door-to-door nor systematically raid safety deposit boxes. While a $10,000 fine and ten year prison sentence threatened the masses into obedience, only a handful of sting operations were conducted against a few offenders to serve as an example.
This article was written by Dickson Buchanan, SchiffGold Precious Metals Specialist. Any views expressed are his own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Peter Schiff or SchiffGold.
Many Americans are concerned about their privacy today. And rightly so. The NSA and governmental authorities maintain their policies are ultimately for the safety and security of the American people. We will leave that debate in the capable hands of others, but where is this same concern when it comes to money? Have central governments given us a safe, secure, and stable money in the dollar system lead by the Federal Reserve? In this article we will compare the dollar to gold and even throw in the most popular cryptocurrency Bitcoin (BTC) to spice things up a bit.
First, let's define what we mean by security.
To be very clear though, contrary to common belief, the government did not conduct a widespread seizure of gold, nor did it go door-to-door nor systematically raid safety deposit boxes. While a $10,000 fine and ten year prison sentence threatened the masses into obedience, only a handful of sting operations were conducted against a few offenders to serve as an example.
