Neil Oliver – YouTube May 10, 2023
—
To help support this channel & get extra, exclusive content every week sign up to ‘Neil Oliver’ on Patreon.com https://www.patreon.com/neiloliver
—
—
—
—
To help support this channel & get extra, exclusive content every week sign up to ‘Neil Oliver’ on Patreon.com https://www.patreon.com/neiloliver
Briliant just love this guy
its so hard to get the truth just now
we must respect and honour those who bring it to us
Thankyou neil
We’ve always had bail-ins, they just didn’t call them that. After the Crash of 1929 the banks that went under took their customers’ deposits with them. That’s a bail-in by today’s description.
If these digital currencies come in then other markets and credit practises will naturally evolve. If the money can be given a date where it’s cancelled then we’ll see a kind of reverse loan man. Instead of borrowing money and paying it back later, we’ll buy him goods before the money is cancelled, and he will pay back to us desired goods over time, keeping some credit back for himself as the interest which pays for his efforts. If I want to give him £100 before it’s cancelled tomorrow, he can tell me the goods he wants me to buy – which are the goods other people who have deposited with him have asked for. A kind of lend-lease, where you spend the money first (or lose it!) and get goods back later over time. He doesn’t have to buy any goods himself, he just takes them from customers to pay back other customers.
People will always find ways to make money. They can be honest people who may be criminalised by the law not the dealing, but where there’s a demand and a buyer there’s always room for a middle man.
If they cancel money after a time then hoarding will be made illegal. That’s why a reverse loan man (a deposit man or depo man) can work. If I give him £100 of goods he asks for, his take from the deal can be a variable interest on the goods I get back. If I ask for a small amount over more weeks, he might charge 20%, so I get £10 of goods over eight weeks. If I want more back sooner he might charge 30%, and I get £20 of goods for three weeks and £10 for the fourth week. He then takes the risks for the hoarding, and if he gets arrested (it’ll be a snitch society), I’d have lost the £100 anyway and I may still get some of it back.
Once the morons bought into the idea of constantly possessing/needing some portable mini-computer (pornophone) then the progression to total digital dystopian slavery or ‘techno-Communism’ is simply a question of time…
Politically Correct Speech was the grave they buried the First Amendment in.
https://www.9news.com/article/news/verify/money-verify/fednow-does-not-create-us-central-bank-digital-dollar-2023-fact-check/536-59448fd0-4edd-463b-8ac9-53e30b66aa2b
The dollar is already “digital”. When you pay for your Starbucks Crappacino with your credit card, you transferred digits from your bank account to the Jew caffiene pushers.
Your debit card is already digital.
FedNever coin will be an epic fail.
I think Neil Oliver is more of a force for good than bad. It’s good that he is leveraging his fame to reach out to those who may be impressed by a celebrity rather than seek out more intellectual discourse. Although that he has 195K subscribers while this site has far deeper content and commentary. It is sad that celebrity even among the disaffected seems to be an important selling point. To what extent Oliver needs an extra income based on Patreon beyond that of payments — royalties? — from current BBC programming is a moot point.
The point that we already have digital cash is well made, but so is Oliver’s contention that the CBDC is a real time mechanism rather than part of an end of the day clearing. His explanation of private fiat is good enough, but I’m sure that some non-celebrity on another channel with a handful of views and subscribers might explain it better.
The blockchain is a useful technology that is synonymous with Bitcoin and other crypto currencies but not all blockchain application are cryptos. He was suggesting crypto as an alternative to current forms of money
Oliver mentioned that current fiat is a ponzi scheme. Bitcoin definitely is a ponzi scheme because it is not universally accepted as money. Bitcoin like tulip bulbs certainly have value.
I’ve just finished reading “Blockchain Basics” by Daniel Drescher. I thoroughly recommend it. He describes himself as an agnostic wrt the technology.
Aside from the Bitcoin bubbles, there are reasons to doubt the workability of a distributed blockchain. The idealised blockchain would have every user being a “node” within the system. This requires computer resources not available to many, so straight away distribution becomes less; it becomes more centralised by degrees. It is a wonderful ideal, perhaps like a commune where everyone is equal, save in practice human society naturally throws up leaders and followers.
The central bank versus the blockchain throws up the statist versus anarchist discussion viewed from a monetary angle. I maintain that while we have corrupt forms of central governance and a period of stable clearing with an anarchist interval isn’t so much to be desired as unavoidable, human nature has shown that human beings naturally delegate. That corruption is seemingly universal doesn’t gainsay that we who are cynical often overlook the benefits of even corrupt statist administration – and I think this is the basis for say a republic with a recognised constitution.
***
I’m not too sure that TPTB will be successful in replacing cash with CBDCs. And I would like to know whether there would be a one to one replacement with physical cash that is created by the treasury with seignorage for the “people” or one to one with 95% of the money supply created as private fiat.
The growth of card payments and phone payments might be judged as analogous to the growth of methods of transport. People still work short distances whether for need or pleasure. Short of a direct implant it is difficult to see how cash can be entirely eliminated.
Money itself has generally always been recognised as material; bank deposits being proxies – “less liquid” as they say. Philosophically, money without being able to manifest itself as “liquid” might be as impossible as taking a train from your house to the corner shop or flying to the bathroom….