Tuesday, April 3, 2012

From Prophecy News

A Cashless Society May Be Closer Than Most People Would Ever Dare To Imagine




Most people think of a cashless society as something that is way off in the distant future. Unfortunately, that is simply not the case. The truth is that a cashless society is much closer than most people would ever dare to imagine. To a large degree, the transition to a cashless society is being done voluntarily.

Today, only 7 percent of all transactions in the United States are done with cash, and most of those transactions involve very small amounts of money. Just think about it for a moment. Where do you still use cash these days? If you buy a burger or if you purchase something at a flea market you will still use cash, but for any mid-size or large transaction the vast majority of people out there will use another form of payment.

Our financial system is dramatically changing, and cash is rapidly becoming a thing of the past. We live in a digital world, and national governments and big banks are both encouraging the move away from paper currency and coins. But what would a cashless society mean for our future? Are there any dangers to such a system?

Those are very important questions, but most of the time both sides of the issue are not presented in a balanced way in the mainstream media. Instead, most mainstream news articles tend to trash cash and talk about how wonderful digital currency is.

For example, a recent CBS News article declared that soon we may not need "that raggedy dollar bill" any longer and that the "greenback may soon be a goner"....

It's what the wallet was invented for, to carry cash. After all, there was a time when we needed cash everywhere we went, from filling stations to pay phones. Even the tooth fairy dealt only in cash.

But money isn't just physical anymore. It's not only the pennies in your piggy bank, or that raggedy dollar bill.

Money is also digital - it's zeros and ones stored in a computer, prompting some economists to predict the old-fashioned greenback may soon be a goner.

"There will be a time - I don't know when, I can't give you a date - when physical money is just going to cease to exist," said economist Robert Reich.

So will we see a completely cashless society in the near future?

Of course not. It would be wildly unpopular for the governments of the world to force such a system upon us all at once.

Instead, the big banks and the governments of the industrialized world are doing all they can to get us to voluntarily transition to such a system. Once 98 or 99 percent of all transactions do not involve cash, eliminating the remaining 1 or 2 percent will only seem natural.

The big banks want a cashless society because it is much more profitable for them.

The big banks earn billions of dollars in fees from debit cards and they make absolutely enormous profits from credit cards.

But when people use cash the big banks do not earn anything.

So obviously the big banks and the big credit card companies are big cheerleaders for a cashless society.

Most governments around the world are eager to transition to a cashless society as well for the following reasons....

-Cash is expensive to print, inspect, move, store and guard.

-Counterfeiting is always going to be a problem as long as paper currency exists.

-Cash if favored by criminals because it does not leave a paper trail. Eliminating cash would make it much more difficult for drug dealers, prostitutes and other criminals to do business.

-Most of all, a cashless society would give governments more control. Governments would be able to track virtually all transactions and would also be able to monitor tax compliance much more closely.

When you understand the factors listed above, it becomes easier to understand why the use of cash is increasingly becoming demonized. Governments around the world are increasingly viewing the use of cash in a negative light. In fact, according to the U.S. government paying with cash in some circumstances is now considered to be "suspicious activity" that needs to be reported to the authorities.

This disdain of cash has also grown very strong in the financial community. The following is from a recent Slate article....

David Birch, a director at Consult Hyperion, a firm specializing in electronic payments, says a shift to digital currency would cut out these hidden costs. In Birch’s ideal world, paying with cash would be viewed like drunk driving—something we do with decreasing frequency as more and more people understand the negative social consequences.

“We’re trying to use industrial age money to support commerce in a post-industrial age. It just doesn’t work,” he says. “Sooner or later, the tectonic plates shift and then, very quickly, you’ll find yourself in this new environment where if you ask somebody to pay you in cash, you’ll just assume that they’re a prostitute or a Somali pirate.”

Do you see what is happening?

Simply using cash is enough to get you branded as a potential criminal these days.

Many people are going to be scared away from using cash simply because of the stigma that is becoming attached to it.

This is a trend that is not just happening in the United States. In fact, many other countries are further down the road toward a cashless society than we are.

Up in Canada, they are looking for ways to even eliminate coins so that people can use alternate forms of payment for all of their transactions....

The Royal Canadian Mint is also looking to the future with the MintChip, a new product that could become a digital replacement for coins.

In Sweden, only about 3 percent of all transactions still involve cash. The following comes from a recent Washington Post article....

In most Swedish cities, public buses don’t accept cash; tickets are prepaid or purchased with a cell phone text message. A small but growing number of businesses only take cards, and some bank offices — which make money on electronic transactions — have stopped handling cash altogether.

“There are towns where it isn’t at all possible anymore to enter a bank and use cash,” complains Curt Persson, chairman of Sweden’s National Pensioners’ Organization.

In Italy, all very large cash transactions have been banned. Previously, the limit for using cash in a transaction had been reduced to the equivalent of just a few thousand dollars. But back in December, Prime Minister Mario Monti proposed a new limit of approximately $1,300 for cash transactions.

And that is how many governments will transition to a cashless society. They will set a ceiling and then they will keep lowering it and lowering it.

But is a cashless society really secure?

Of course not.

Bank accounts can be hacked into. Credit cards and debit cards can be stolen. Identity theft all over the world is absolutely soaring.

So companies all over the planet are working feverishly to make all of these cashless systems much more secure.

In the future, it is inevitable that national governments and big financial institutions will want to have all of us transition over to using biometric identity systems in order to combat crime in the financial system.

Many of these biometric identity systems are becoming quite advanced.

For example, just check out what IBM has been developing. The following is from a recent IBM press release....

You will no longer need to create, track or remember multiple passwords for various log-ins. Imagine you will be able to walk up to an ATM machine to securely withdraw money by simply speaking your name or looking into a tiny sensor that can recognize the unique patterns in the retina of your eye. Or by doing the same, you can check your account balance on your mobile phone or tablet.

Each person has a unique biological identity and behind all that is data. Biometric data – facial definitions, retinal scans and voice files – will be composited through software to build your DNA unique online password.

Referred to as multi-factor biometrics, smarter systems will be able to use this information in real-time to make sure whenever someone is attempting to access your information, it matches your unique biometric profile and the attempt is authorized.
Are you ready for that?

It is coming.

In the future, if you do not surrender your biometric identity information, you may be locked out of the entire financial system.

Another method that can be used to make financial identification more secure is to use implantable RFID microchips.

Yes, there is a lot of resistance to this idea, but the fact is that the use of RFID chips in animals and in humans is rapidly spreading.

Some U.S. cities have already made it mandatory to implant microchips into all cats and all dogs so that they can be tracked.

All over the United States, employees are being required to carry badges that contain RFID chips, and in some instances employers are actually requiring employees to have RFID chips injected into their bodies.

Increasingly, RFID chips are being implanted in the upper arm of patients that have Alzheimer's disease. The idea is that this helps health care providers track Alzheimer's patients that get lost.

In some countries, microchips are now actually being embedded into school uniforms to make sure that students don't skip school.

Can you see where all of this is headed?

Some companies are even developing RFID technologies that do not require an injection.

One company called Somark has developed chipless RFID ink that is applied directly to the skin of an animal or a human. These "RFID tattoos" are applied in about 10 seconds using micro-needles and a reusable applicator, and they can be read by an RFID reader from up to four feet away.

Would you get an "RFID tattoo" if the government or your bank asked you to?

Some people out there are actually quite excited about these new technologies.

For example, a columnist named Don Tennant wrote an article entitled "Chip Me – Please!" in which he expressed his unbridled enthusiasm for an implantable microchip which would contain all of his medical information....

"All I can say is I’d be the first person in line for an implant."

But are there real dangers to going to a system that is entirely digital?

For example, what if a devastating EMP attack wiped out our electrical grid and most of our computers from coast to coast?

How would we continue to function?

Sadly, most people don't think about things like that.

Our world is changing more rapidly than ever before, and we should be mindful of where these changes are taking us.

Just because our technology is advancing does not mean that our world is becoming a better place.

There are millions of Americans that want absolutely nothing to do with biometric identity systems or RFID implants.

But the mainstream media continues to declare that nothing can stop the changes that are coming. A recent CBS News article made the following statement....

"Most agree a cashless society is not only inevitable, for most of us, it's already here."

Yes, a cashless society is coming.

Are you ready for it?

Monday, April 2, 2012

From Patriot Post

Brief · April 2, 2012

The Foundation


"In Europe, charters of liberty have been granted by power. America has set the example ... of charters of power granted by liberty. This revolution in the practice of the world, may, with an honest praise, be pronounced the most triumphant epoch of its history, and the most consoling presage of its happiness." --James Madison

Opinion in Brief


The Constitution of the Left

"Finding herself with a bit of time on her hands, Justice Ginsburg swung by Cairo last month to help out the lads from the Muslim Brotherhood building the new Egypt: 'I would not look to the United States Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012,' she advised them. Instead, she recommended the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the European Convention on Human Rights. That's why the fate of the republic will come down to a 5-4 vote. Because four-ninths of the constitutional court think the American constitutional order is as déclassé as a 2006 BlackBerry. ... [I]f the establishment wants to invent a new 'right' -- i.e., yet another intrusion by government -- it goes ahead and does so. If it happens to conflict with this year's constitution, they rewrite it. The United States is the only Western nation in which our rulers invoke the Constitution for the purpose of overriding it -- or, at any rate, torturing its language beyond repair. Thus, in [the] debate on whether Obamacare is merely the latest harmless evolution of the interstate-commerce clause, the most learned and highly remunerated jurists in the land chewed over the matter of whether a person, simply by virtue of being born, was participating in a 'market.' Had George III shown up at the Constitutional Convention to advance that argument with a straight face, the framers would have tossed aside the quill feathers and reached for their muskets." --columnist Mark Steyn

Share your thoughts on the importance of the Constitution.

Essential Liberty


"Liberal commentators were shocked this past week when in three days of oral argument in the lawsuits challenging Obamacare, five Supreme Court justices -- a majority -- asked questions strongly suggesting they think the legislation is unconstitutional. ... [T]he justices are not the only federal officials who take an oath to uphold the Constitution. So do the president and vice president, Cabinet members and other appointees, and every member of Congress. ... That means that every federal official has an obligation to act in line with the Constitution as he or she understands it. And that doesn't necessarily mean obeying Supreme Court decisions. ... Clearly the two parties are divided on the constitutionality of the Obamacare mandate. Polls have shown large majorities of voters think the provision is unconstitutional, though one can wonder whether many have given the matter much thought. But they're certainly giving it more thought after this week and will likely give it more when the decision comes down. Voters can reasonably ask candidates for Congress their views on this and other constitutional issues and call on them to vote against measures they consider beyond Congress' constitutional powers." --political analyst Michael Barone


Government


"'I place economy among the first and most important virtues, and public debt as the greatest of dangers to be feared,' Thomas Jefferson once wrote. 'To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt.' ... Remember the clash on Capitol Hill last year over raising the debt ceiling? It may have seemed like a huge battle at the time, but it was merely a holding action -- a rear-guard maneuver to buy a little time. Because which direction has federal spending gone since then? Up, of course, soaring toward new record levels and endangering our economic future. ... [M]any lawmakers seem content to make meaningless trims, not serious cuts. They act as if we can allow Social Security and Medicare spending to continue growing -- and growing -- on autopilot. They seriously think we can slash defense spending, yet continue fielding a world-class military. ... No, you and I aren't paying enough, that's the problem -- or so we're told. As if past tax hikes haven't proved, time and again, that government will quickly consume any additional funds, and then some. ... 'We must make our choice between economy and liberty or profusion and servitude,' Jefferson writes. 'If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretense of caring for them, they will be happy.' Lawmakers should heed the words of our third president -- and have the courage to steer us off the path of financial misery." --Heritage Foundation president Ed Fuelner

The Gipper


"This is the real task before us: to reassert our commitment as a nation to a law higher than our own, to renew our spiritual strength. Only by building a wall of such spiritual resolve can we, as a free people, hope to protect our own heritage and make it someday the birthright of all men." --Ronald Reagan

Re: The Left


"Once again [last] week, the president was out on the campaign trail bashing and oil and gas companies. And he continued to spread major falsehoods about this industry, which I guess is the polite way to put it. Obama is obsessed with oil and gas. He is a prisoner of the left-wing environmental groups. And really, he's extending his leftist class-warfare attack from rich people to successful oil and gas producers. What seems to have Obama especially steamed is the fact that the conventional-energy companies are profitable. Especially the five largest. So he wants to tax them. He then wants to redistribute their income to his favorite green-energy firms. Sound familiar? I don't know which is more important to the president -- the fact that he hates fossil fuel or the fact that he hates success. ... But President Obama is too busy spewing falsehoods to support his ideological agenda than to take account of the facts. And while he's at it, one of the greatest, pro-growth revolutions ever is taking place right under his nose. It's the oil and gas shale miracle, which if left unfettered will turn America and Canada into an energy-independent New Middle East inside of 10 years. ... Obama should quit the demagoguery, stop bashing oil and gas, stop taxing success and let our ingenious, creative, free-enterprise private economy spur America to a new generation of prosperity." --economist Larry Kudlow

Political Futures


"Obama is telling the Russians not to worry, that once past 'my last election' and no longer subject to any electoral accountability, he'll show 'more flexibility' on missile defense. It's yet another accommodation to advance his cherished Russia 'reset' policy. Why? Hasn't reset been failure enough? Let's do the accounting. In addition to canceling the Polish/Czech missile defense system, Obama gave the Russians accession to the World Trade Organization, a START treaty that they need and we don't ... and a scandalously blind eye to their violations of human rights and dismantling of democracy. Obama even gave Putin a congratulatory call for winning his phony election. In return? Russia consistently watered down or obstructed sanctions on Iran, completed Iran's nuclear reactor at Bushehr, provides to this day Bashar al-Assad with huge arms shipments used to massacre his own people..., conducted a virulently anti-American presidential campaign on behalf of Putin, pressured Eastern Europe and threatened Georgia. On which of 'all these issues' -- Syria, Iran, Eastern Europe, Georgia, human rights -- is Obama ready to offer Putin yet more flexibility as soon as he gets past his last election? Where else will he show U.S. adversaries more flexibility?" --columnist Charles Krauthammer

Insight


"It is a dangerous concept that men of the armed forces must owe their primary allegiance to these temporary occupants of The White House, instead of to the country and the Constitution to which they have sworn to defend." --General Douglas MacArthur (1880 - 1964)

Faith & Family


"Abortion is a feminist sacrament. The movie 'October Baby' just debuted on 390 screens and registered in eighth place [last] weekend, with an estimated $1.7 million gross. ... Naturally, the critics just couldn't judge this movie by artistic standards. It had to be savaged because it is so politically incorrect. New York Times film critic Jeannette Catsoulis bared her ideological fangs at this improbable movie: 'Not even a dewy heroine and a youth-friendly vibe can disguise the essential ugliness at its core: like the bloodied placards brandished by demonstrators outside women's health clinics, the film communicates in the language of guilt and fear.' Ouch. A celebration of life is 'essential ugliness.' ... Notice how the Times couldn't focus on the movie without imagining the horror of conservative state legislators reducing a 'woman's dominion' over the termination of unborn children, no matter how advanced the pregnancy. ... But if you do consider abortion a crime -- against God -- isn't that the kind of compassionate message Hollywood preaches regularly? Such is the militancy of this issue in Hollywood." --columnist L. Brent Bozell

Culture


"The former Charleston, S.C., black chief of police, Reuben Greenberg, said the problem facing black America is not racial profiling. He said, 'The greatest problem in the black community is the tolerance for high levels of criminality.' Former Los Angeles black police Chief Bernard Parks, defending racial profiling, said: 'It's not the fault of the police when they stop minority males or put them in jail. It's the fault of the minority males for committing the crime. In my mind, it is not a great revelation that if officers are looking for criminal activity, they're going to look at the kind of people who are listed on crime reports.' Are former police Chiefs Greenberg and Parks racist? According to the Uniform Crime Report for 2009, among people 18 or younger, blacks were charged with 58 percent of murder and non-negligent manslaughter, 67 percent of robberies, 42 percent of aggravated assaults and 43 percent of auto thefts. As for murder, more than 90 percent of the time, their victims were black. These statistics, showing a strong interconnection among race, youth and crime, are a far better explanation for racial profiling and suspicion than simple racism." --economist Walter E. Williams


Reader Comments


"I just wanted to say thank you Mark Alexander for such a well-written essay, Race-Bait Political Hustlers. I think you are absolutely right. I knew the minute Al Sharpton showed up this entire incident would be completely blown out of proportion with race rhetoric. He does know how to ignite a fire. I think there are a lot of similarities between him and our current POTUS. I will sure be glad when people quit falling for the act that both of these men put on so well." --J Tatum

"Trayvon Martin's shooting will not affect Obama's campaign. The issues are the economy, federal budget, and ObamaCare. By November this story will be forgotten and something else will be the media's focus. This story knocked Sandra Fluke off the talk shows and the front page." --Chris

"If our country is to be salvaged from the wreckage reeked upon it by Obama, this atrocity of a health care law will be struck down. If the conservative justices stay true to their beliefs, that the U.S. Constitution is the law of the land, ObamaCare will be nullified." --Jill

"Whether or not the Supreme Court 'kills' ObamaCare, Republicans had better get off their rumps and get very serious about constructing a viable and fiscally responsible health care program or we will still have BHO for another four years!" --Dick

"We will eventually have some form of socialized medicine, ObamaCare or not. The general public -- which includes the lamestream media -- likes 'free stuff' and they have no clue that 'free stuff' is not free. And when it is made 'free' its quality and availability will suffer -- and so will we." --Grant

The Last Word


"[I]t sure would be intellectually honest if more people started framing their arguments in the terms, 'I don't like freedom on this issue and here is why...' You pretty much never see that. I mean, gun control is an anti-freedom stance, but they never argue it that way. I think maybe that's why they don't understand how unpopular their stance is. The same thing with the health care debate. The mandate is an anti-freedom stance, but they try to say they're for more freedom by ending worries about health care, which is BS. One thing is freedom and one thing isn't; it's not debatable. Putting a gun to someone's head and saying,'You must buy health insurance!' isn't freedom and no one should pretend it is. It's okay to take an anti-freedom stance, you just should frame it [in] terms of why you think your ideas are better than liberty. And that will probably also help you understand why so many people don't like your views, as the left always seems to get caught off guard by that." --humorist Frank J. Fleming

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!
Nate Jackson for The Patriot Post Editorial Team



CLICK HERE FOR

Patriot Headline Report

For News That Matters Most -- Around the Clock
We value your time. As a service to you, our editorial team evaluates hundreds of reputable news sources each day for headlines that are relevant to Essential Liberty – the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and the promotion of free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values. We post links to the most notable news 24 hours a day. Skip the Drudgery of wading through celebrity reports and other non-news. –Mark Alexander, Executive Editor

CLICK HERE FOR

The Right Opinion

The Web's
Best Columnists
Our editorial team has evaluated and selected these nationally syndicated columnists who write about subjects that are relevant to our mission – the advancement of Liberty. While we don't agree with every position taken, we find these authors best reflect good Right Thinking. We post these essays – without advertising or frills – by 0800 ET each day. –Mark Alexander, Executive Editor


(Please pray for our Armed Forces standing in harm's way around the world, and for their families -- especially families of those fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who granted their lives in defense