What about the " minus any fees"? Are they deducted coming and going. It appears to me we would be giving the government way too much control. How efficient has the government been in running any program other than maybe social security and it is going broke while the can is being kicked down the road as usual.
Here is another one for the record... When someone with a digital wallet looses said wallet or forgets how to access the funds. What happens to the wallet. The comptroller takes possession of it JUST LIKE a delinquent safety deposit box at the bank.
I just last week had my credit card replaced. If memory serves, that was either the third or fourth time since I been carrying cards. And I’m pretty careful with my cards too…. But somehow, someway they seem to get hacked….. I can only imagine in my worst dreams the digital crooks that will come out of the closet should all financial transactions become digital.
Though I like digital currency, its done very well for me, I dont like having a wallet to store it with all the hackers on line its way to easy to get ripped off, hear stories of that all the time ;(
I think that is a very naive take. What is your alternative when the dollar goes digital? I get paid in dollars, I don't another option.
I'm still very curious how they are making an end run on the constitutiuonality of doing this.... Article 1 section 10 is pretty clear on the matter.
Some certain States think they do not have to follow Federals regulations with anything, they are special little cowboys. They are covered with "Stupid dust" and do what they want as long as others are caught rather than them. IMO, Jim no specific states, parties, or activities mentioned.
Bartering, precious metals, other crypto-currencies, etc. In any case, assuming that the government doesn't force the usage, if there is not a ready made alternative then one will be created. So long as the population has some leeway in making decisions on this front (which I expect would remain the case in the US), then a system that is unacceptable to the majority will fail due to a destabilization of society. In short, unless forced through tyranny, a broken system will be fixed to a state that is tolerable. It won't by any means be perfect, but it will be functional, efficient, non-resource intensive, and convenient. It has always been the case that, under certain conditions, legal systems have had the authority to freeze or seize bank accounts. This is an aspect of our current system that could be leveraged for some pretty overbearing and tyrannical purposes. However, we all go about our lives utilizing banks anyway because these potential abuses do not occur at a level that concerns us. Why would we expect a fully digital system to be any different?
No one eats cash either. Seems to me that they are both just mediums of exchange. One is being devalued though.
Digital currency is a bad idea for one reason, and one reason only . . . you cannot take physical possession of it and adequately protect it from taking by others. Everyone will recognize it, but there's an alternate meaning to the old proverb, "A fool and his money are soon parted", and we're all debating in the present moment whether or not to make ourselves the fools by embracing digital currency.
I share your skepticism about digital currency, but I don't find this argument especially compelling. That which can be physically possessed can be physically stolen or destroyed. I can't be at home 24/7 with my finger on a trigger, waiting for someone to try something. I don't believe "complete protection" exists, and I'm pretty sure "adequate protection" would consume more time, money, and attention than I care to afford. I can imagine changing my mind, though.
Come on ******* , Join the intelligent group of states who want to leave the union who think they can use all of the money for their purpose as everyone will go digital. Well ,until China decides to close the game. But "their" US government will surely give loads of credit and cash to themselves to use. Yea!!!!
Got to be some kind of kick back for those who sign. Someone with a lot of bitcoins or soon to have a bunch started this
Thus my use of the word adequately . . . I consciously decided not to use "completely", as that is not a defendable position.
If done correctly, digital currency has a chance of providing more security than paper. Some of this is admittedly speculation, but digital currency (including bank account money) likely exists in a database somewhere with a link to a table that connects that money directly to your account with an amount, a timestamp, last changed date, etc. If someone runs a script, or tries to mess with that database, to try and steal that money, a well designed database (again, assumption) should have logs set up, or at least history files, that show when the event happened, potentially which logged in account did it, and the date and time of the transaction. Given these logs, your money has a high chance of getting traced right back to you and returned. This is similar to why you have a chance of getting your money back when disputing fraudulent credit card transactions (I've never had a dispute denied, though I haven't had many). Paper money has tangibility, but zero traceability. If someone steals it or destroys it, it's gone forever. Even if you recorded the serial numbers for all of the bills you possessed, you would have a hard time proving that you actually owned them. So, on the bright side of digital currency, if done correctly, it could provide a fair amount of solid security. The problem is if the power goes out... Neither approach is perfect. With digital currency, banks could theoretically shut down your access. With paper money, the government could theoretically demonetize it or take away its legal tender status. Neither approach seems overwhelmingly safer than the other. Nonetheless, I think the world will go digital unless we experience a major energy crisis. Which, at this time, does seem to have a greater than 0% probability.
Actually a bunch of states would be stronger. I might use it if many other states adopted the resolution. Edit A gold backed resolution. I think that this thread took a few turns.
From my post, “ . . . adequately protect it from taking by others” is intended to include government actors. While paper money can be debased, such an action affects all users across the board, and therefore is far less likely to be employed by governments, digital currency facilitates targeting individuals with surgical precision and, absent widespread public awareness and outcry, is far more likely to be employed by the government.
FYI - The Texas legislature ended their regular session over a month ago and HB4903 (this bill) made it to the general calendar, but did not come up for a vote on the floor. Maybe it gets reintroduced in the next session. https://legiscan.com/TX/bill/HB4903/2023