The War On Cash: Australia Leads The New Age Of Economic Totalitarianism
The reason I moved the Solution Conference forward was due to the fact that all my sources behind the curtain were screaming from the four corners of the world that the new age of Economic Totalitarianism is upon us all. Australia will be the first to introduce a compulsory tax on savings. This is the ultimate Marxist state for now anyone with spare cash is the enemy of the Conservative Tony Abbott government. What I laid out at the Solution Conference is the ONLY way out of this nightmare. It is time for people to start spreading the word and get behind changing the game plan while we still have a game in play. We have to stop this confiscation of all wealth and the continual borrowing and taxation. This will lead to the total destruction of Western culture for we are plagued by power hungry insane politicians who cannot see past their nose.
The new compulsory control is already provided for in the 2015 Australian budget. So that everyone who has any savings must pay taxes on on their savings. The measure is expected to serve as a global test balloon for Europe and North America will watch the outcome in Australia. If there will be no massive resistance of Australian savers, the rest of the world should expect this outright confiscation very rapidly.
Tony Abbot has proven to be a real Marxist. He is taking the Australian people into the economic abyss from which only war and bloodshed can emerge. This is really Atlas Shrugged in high gear. The Abbot Government will introduce its draft budget for 2015 tax on savings and it will to announce this measure before the formal decision on the budget.
Prime Minister Tony Abbott said that it was now all about to relieve families and small businesses. For this, the new tax is to be used. The problem is clear. There will be no reduction in taxes for these people, it will only be more money in the pocket of corrupt and seriously deranged politicians who are destroying the western civilization in the blink of an eye.
Abbott also said there would be some hard decisions in the new budget because this was inevitable. For the banks, the government’s plans are anything but good news. Abbott’s anti-capitalism view will put him up there with Lenin no doubt when history is allowed to be written honestly perhaps in a hundred years or some. This decision of a tax on savings would seriously harm the government and if there are any smart Australians, it should now be a race to get the hell out of the banks. The banks should see a massive withdraw. Take your money and buy tangible assets even gold, but you just cannot store it in a bank. Movable assets will be the key and buying equities in the USA may be the only real game in town to protect money.
It is hard to fathom how Australian banks will attract or hold on to deposits in this new Abbott-style of Economic Totalitarianism. The opposition is of course outraged by the decision of the Abbott Conservative government. This is not a labour government demonstrating what I have said – economically there is no difference between left and right – just hand them the money.
The introduction of this tax on money in Australia led by Tony Abbott is the trial balloon for the global economy. The IMF’s Christine Lagarde has led the battle to impose French socialism/communism upon the entire world. I have warned that she is the most dangerous woman on the planet. Do not forget that it was the French elite who sold the idea of communism to Marx – not the other way around. Now the French elite have control of the IMF and they have persuaded all other global financial institutions to also require such a compulsory levy for several years because they see it as the only way to resolve the debt crisis – just confiscate the people’s money. In the wake of the G20 discussions such measures are usually prepared and coordinated. The public knows about it only when there are hardly any ways to prevent the action and mainstream press sell the people down the river cheering it all the way.
You better wake up before the coffin is nailed shut.
Here are some things that worry me about the onrushing “cashless
society”: It leaves out the poor and desperate, those who need just a
bit of money, for food, drinks, or drugs. I am thinking of the
repellent beggars of San Francisco who make foreign tourists not want to
come back here after being cursed, spat at,& sometimes even roughed up.
“You got some spare change I can have?” What, the tourist is supposed
to say?
“Yes, I will give you $2 by way of PayPal!” How can the beggar support
(financially) a smartphone? (Yes, I know, they all can. They make a
good full bourgeois living by their begging.) But because they are
irresponsible brainless outcasts, they will not be able to cope with
the now required tax forms of the cashless society… They can’t renounce
citizenship like us rich folks & you PT have already done…
Oh, yes, I know that various charities (think: Glide Memorial Church)
maintain soup kitchens that serve up three meals a day at no charge to
the less fortunate citizens. But somehow the disordered characters who
live on the streets never seem to find their way there; they are begging
for cash for other projects anyway.
And what about the under-the-table workers? Dads escaping child
support, tax cheats, illegals of every kind…..and of course the huge
criminal element. Form 1040 for you, buddy, from now on!
Yes, I can think of many categories of society that will be
inconvenienced, or even distressed, by the cash-free society. It would
not bother me. My current cell phone is fairly inert and is only good
for making phone calls, but it’s about time I got an upgrade anyway. It
would not hurt me personally to use the phone to pay for a coffee or
something. And because of the work I do, tax avoidance is pretty
impossible anyway.
BUT: The bad guys, when they feel stress, don’t they always find a way
to lay off their stress on their current victims? Example: Improved
car locking mechanisms, years ago, made breaking into cars nearly
impossible. Did this fact lead to a large downturn in stolen cars? Oh
no, it led to a big upturn in carjackings. If the bad guys couldn’t
make an easy entry into the nice new expensive car using a Slim Jim,
then they attacked the car drivers with guns and took the cars anyway.
And when it comes to the illicit drugs, well, we all know the somebody
who used to write that “the market will be served!”
The crime situation here (in San Jose) seems to be getting worse. The
police feel that they are underpaid, and city hall declares that there
is no more money for hiring more cops or raising the pay for the cops,
and somehow it has worked out that there is no more interest in
investigating property crimes. Also, answering burglar alarm calls has
become a non-priority for the police, who used to be absolutely
excellent about all these things.
My next-door neighbor had a break-in about half a year ago. I asked
him, did the burglars get anything of value? He replied regretfully,
“Only all the good jewelry we took fifty years to get.” After that, he
got a burglar alarm. I hear that home burglaries are way, way up all
over Silicon Valley (i.e., Santa Clara county) and that the police
explain this by saying that there is this huge methamphetamine factory
here and all these crooks (both amateur and professional) are doing
crimes to get money to pay for the meth that they love so much.
A society that functions without any cash, what a concept! Will it put
an end to people getting hung up on meth (and other drugs), and cut
down on all these burglaries? I would think that the thugs will be
thinking up other ways to obtain their drugs, possibly more harmful to
the general populace. They will not be cutting down their drug intake;
I am afraid the crimes will become more confrontational, more
destructive, more threatening.
When I was in medical training I was told about the supposed “west coast
escape route.” This was described as the probable path of society’s
outcasts, the criminal, the maladjusted, the out-and-out crazy people.
I was told that these types, when things got too hot for them where they
were living, tended to drift first to Texas, then gradually westward to
southern California, a few always settling into some town along the way.
Those who were crazier, more violent, more unrelentingly criminal,
might pause someplace here and there but things would heat up around
them and they would find it necessary to move on again. They tended to
sweep up northward in California, on north into Oregon and Washington,
and many of them ended up in Alaska, which seemed to be the end of the
line for this alleged route of escape. I don’t know about the truth of
this tale; Google certainly shows nothing about it. I think it’s creepy
but possibly true, because people need a safety valve or a place to run
to. If you block off a safety valve, you may be increasing the chances
that the system will explode.
Until recently, San Jose had the largest homeless encampment in the
United States and it was called “the Jungle.” Police chased the people
out but, of course, they soon resettled nearby. I read that there are
an estimated 7,000 homeless people in San Jose. The average rent for a
2-bedroom apartment is $2800 per month in San Jose; in San Francisco
it’s closer to $4300. Where is the safety valve? People can live hours
away for cheaper rent, stack dozens of people into a small house, or
just go off the grid, I guess.
Bottom line, a cash-free society might be a good thing; I am not wise
enough to know about this. But I am thinking it might turn out to be a
lot more rocky when put into effect in the U.S. compared with some
other, more peaceful (and already more bureaucratic) countries.
Just wondering,
your pal
BH
Thanks for your thoughtful input on “the cashless society” I
am sure that small change for beggars & to pay for $15 booze pints &
lids of dope will stay with us & be allowed.
What you are doing (above) is exploring just a few of the “unintended
consequences” that always accompany changes of this sort.
Few people, if any in the 1920s, projected the move of most creative
people to Europe & the rise in the USA of organized crime and greeter
booze consumption as the result of prohibition. Oddly enough, the
do-gooders didn’t care. All the wars on drugs, poverty, etc. etc. always
has these often unintended consequences.
Reducing things some do gooders do not favor — like use of stimulants
or prostitution with methods that don’t work obviously means trying
something new- not more of the same.
I think your predictions and many others you didn’t think of will be
the result: Just more and newer problems.
The Answer?
My PT religion is the answer for me. What do you think?
” Get your ass & assets out of the way of laws & stuff you don’t like?”