American Politics

[Tiny 12]

Your pro Repub spin that those Dems "popularized" or "promoted" the idea of minting a magic coin to pay down the massive debts that horrific Repub policies and stewardship produce is like saying people on the ground witnessing the poor souls leaping out of 100 story windows of the World Trade Center because a blazing fireball of airline fuel and shrapnel was at their backs during Bush's 9/11 Attack and commenting that they understood why they lept and would probably have done the same were "popularizing" and "promoting" the idea of leaping out of 100 story windows.

Uh. No. The terrorists who flew those planes into the World Trade Center are the ones who "popularized" and "promoted" that idea.

Same with the Repub economic terrorists who repeatedly threaten to default on their debt re the magic coin idea response.

Without Repubs repeatedly threatening to force the USA to default on the loan debts that horrific Repub economic policies and stewardship cause to be racked up more than any other factor including all the "wild coincidences" you can imagine, no Dem would ever consider Repub spiritual twin Bo Gritz' magic coin idea as a last ditch alternative to something far worse.

Thanks Tooms! I think this is a first, you agree with me!

[Tiny 12]

You are keeping it 100 my ISG Brother about the reporting requirements. And I think it is very accurate that you shared. Any one that goes off shore better know what they are doing.

But if you do not exceed 10,000 USD balance in all of your foreign accounts throughout the year you can avoid a lot of the reporting requirements just by staying below the limits. But if you earn income on those accounts then can not avoid them no matter what your balances are. But when it comes to foreign holdings, there is a really big loop hole that you can drive a truck trough. Foreign held real estate in your own name. If you do not hold it in your own name you are going to have to report it on IRS Form 8938.

Correct Subcommander. The requirement to report on 8938 only applies to financial assets, like bank accounts, brokerage accounts, and loans to your Thai sweetie to buy that special pig farm in Isaan for the two of you to retire to someday. Not referring to you here Subcommander in the last part. That's more for someone like Tooms to consider, as he lives in a place where it's illegal for foreigners to purchase land in their own names. If you loaned money to a trusted friend or set up a corporate entity to hold the land, and the total value of your foreign financial assets is greater than $50,000, then I bet you would have to file the Form 8938 and report the asset, which would be the loan or the corporation.

The corporation would open up a whole new can of worms, the dreaded Form 5471 for controlled foreign corporations. You better have a good accountant and an asset worth enough to justify paying his fees, or you'll eat up the value of what you own in accounting fees in a hurry. Actually reporting the corporation on your Form 8938 is a piece of cake, you just check a box. But the 5471, if you tried to fill it out yourself, would be an exercise in extreme masochism. One way around this would be to use a "check the box" election to treat the corporation as a disregarded entity, if you own the entire corporation, although your Thai sweetie might not go for that. Then you'd have to file a Form 8858, but that's a lot easier to do than the 5471, and the penalties if you screw it up are a lot lower. For either route, Form 5471 or 8858, you're going to need financial statements for the corporation to fill out the forms.

This is an illustration of why I hate the politicians and lawyers who are responsible for our tax code.

[Spidy]

I wanted to circle-back to your opening line and add some additional thoughts, to my previous post, as a separate, but inclusive response/post:

You Said:

I don't like the idea of children being indoctrinated by any belief system, but I really hate the idea of children being exposed to sexual freaks. ...

First, I'm sure many of us, mongers on this ISG forum, at one time or another, have been called "sexual freaks" (naturally from the women and girls we've seen and been with over the years). And I'm sure we all, still consider ourselves to be "good people" around kids. So is that really a good metric or criteria you wanna "hang your hat on" when it comes to hanging around children?

Secondly, while I acknowledge that your entitled to feel the way you do, I think your outrage, hate or dislike towards StoryBook Hour (SBH) readings, is misplaced, unfounded and simply I feel, is just overblown right-wing media hype and propaganda.

If the parents of the kids see fit to take their kids to a SBH reading hour, who are you to say otherwise? Conversely, while I may find parents who take their kids to a "Nazi" style book-ban/book-burning event/protest, very distasteful, disgusting, immoral, unethical, stupid and pathetic, I (and/or the left) will still defend their right to do so.

Thirdly, when you consider the millions of sexual abuse cases, against a trusted and venerated institution, that the right hold very dear to their identity, you begin to understand the hypocrisy, behind the right-wing's hate for SBH reading hour.

What institution is that you ask?...that would be the Church and the clergymen (and women), priests, bishops and cardinals that hide their sexual perversions under the "Cloak of the Good Book/Bible" and the "Holy Church".

It's appalling and staggering, at the amount of empirical data, papers, articles, documented and reported cases of the church's sex abuses worldwide, spanning decades, that have directly (and/or indirectly), led to the ruining of millions of lives. So forgive me if I find, the right-wing attacks on SBH readings, just a bunch of sanctimonious BS.

May I suggest, you should be more worried about your kids going to church than your kids attending a (albeit prenatally supervised) SBH reading.

The data and the enormous number of sexual abuse cases, perpetrated by the church, suggests and indicates, that parents should be more concerned about, the men dressed in black white and red robes verses the men dressed in hot-pink drag.

Fun fact for you (well perhaps not fun):

• Sexual abuse in the Church, worldwide over several decades, are estimated in the millions.

• The global scale of child sexual abuse in the Church has skyrocketed over the last three decades and still remains ingrained in the Church ethos, after some 100+ years.

• The church and their clergymen/priesthood remain the #1 sexual abusers and offenders of children, worldwide.

In closing:

Personally, I'd be more worried about my kids suffering harm, from the men in robes reading from "the good book", as opposed to, the men dressed in women's clothing reading at a SBH.

So CrowExplorer, if you truly hate the "idea of children being indoctrinated" and "the idea of children being exposed to sexual freaks", then may I also suggest you take a look in your own backyard (as it were) and direct (most or a majority of) your outrage and concerns more towards, the real indoctrination, going on be behind the closed doors of your local priesthood, diocese, and/or church.

[SubCmdr]

The WSJ wrote about this a couple of days ago. The name of the Russian cypto exchange is Garantex. Russians use it to move money in and out of the country, to avoid sanctions. One of Hamas' partners, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, received millions through Garantex.

https://www.wsj.com/finance/currenci...tions-a3648357

PM me if you don't subscribe and want the text.

Thank you for sharing the WSJ article with me. It brought joy to my heart, supporting everything I have believed about cash and crypto. Not a single mention of gold and silver. Cash and crypto is the way to go. If you live in a place where the government does not fuck with it, they cannot track it. That is behind the push for CBDCs. In my opinion everyone everywhere about the world should fight like hell against them being implemented. And if we cannot carry the day then make preparations to operate off the grid.

[GDreams]

I don't like the idea of children being indoctrinated by any belief system, but I really hate the idea of children being exposed to sexual freaks. Just. Why? Are you just trying to piss people off? "look, we're coming for your children!" It's like you want people to vote the other way.

It's definitely only the left who are pretending "trans women are real women". Everyone else knows that it's a dude wearing a dress.

The number one reason I can never get on board with the left, is that they are complete moral fascists right now. They love to create new trendy "victim groups", then chastise anyone who doesn't pay the current victim group proper homage. And outright attack anyone who dares to disagree with their moralizing.

They are also the number one enemies of free speech right now. Every leftie I know is pro-censorship. They tell me we need to "stop the spread of misinformation", and "only approved experts should be allowed to have an opinion on a given subject".

It's really too bad, I actually agree with the left on a few topics, but they're like that annoying asshole at the campground who goes around telling all the other campers what the rules are, and looks for infractions to complain to management about.

So you are anti Christion for them indoctrinating children.

The left just don't care about peoples lifestyle choices unless they try and force those choices onto you as the right like to do.

The biggest victim in the US right now is Donald Trump, crybaby extraordinaire.

The left are the defenders of free speech. The right are the champions of lies and propaganda. What is anti. Wokism if not anti free speech?

[Spidy]

I don't like the idea of children being indoctrinated by any belief system, but I really hate the idea of children being exposed to sexual freaks. Just. Why? Are you just trying to piss people off? "look, we're coming for your children!" It's like you want people to vote the other way.

Not sure what the idea is, you are trying to communicate? Are you saying, their "life style choices" will ONLY make other people vote a certain way? The Republican or right-wing way?

I miss the 90's. When you'd see these men dressed as women on Jerry Springer and everyone would have a good laugh. Nobody was pretending the emperor had clothes, we all knew it was a sex kink with these people.

It's definitely only the left who are pretending "trans women are real women". Everyone else knows that it's a dude wearing a dress.

Never did see the appeal myself. That being, taking the pis-s (or taking pleasure) from other people's differences, anguish or duress, is IMHO the "lowest hanging fruit" and the lowest form of entertainment. Anyways, I think (maybe) their target audience with was more geared towards viewers, with a grade 10 level education.

But in reality, such shows only serve to blind, weak minded viewers into passive believers of "fake indoctrination" and of course, all in the name of TV ratings. But also, to obfuscate "the real indoctrination", happening behind close doors, they don't want you talking or thinking about. More on this, later!

It's definitely only the left who are pretending "trans women are real women". Everyone else knows that it's a dude wearing a dress.

No I think you're wrong. Believe it or not, most of us the left also know its a "dude wearing a dress". However, I think (IMHO), those on the centre-left/left, will tend to empathize more with people who are different, make different "life style choices" or have different "cultural norms", than the prototypical "straight male gaze".

Put differently, the left are just more tolerant and more accepting of people who are different than themselves. I think in general, the left is amoral about the "life style choices" of others and more importantly, the left is always willing to defend their right to live said choices. Provided of course, they follow and obey just laws and they aren't harming anyone but themselves or other consenting adults.

The number one reason I can never get on board with the left, is that they are complete moral fascists right now. They love to create new trendy "victim groups", then chastise anyone who doesn't pay the current victim group proper homage. And outright attack anyone who dares to disagree with their moralizing.

They are also the number one enemies of free speech right now. Every leftie I know is pro-censorship. They tell me we need to "stop the spread of misinformation", and "only approved experts

should be allowed to have an opinion on a given subject".

While I disagree with assessment of the left here, any so called "leftie attack" would most likely only be mostly verbal in nature, with only perhaps either a verbal insult and/or bruised ego to their victims.

Compare that with an "attack" from the right, and you're more than likely left (pun intended) for dead. Possible outcomes for their "victim groups" include, AR-15'd, gunned down, stabbed, flag-poled to death, vehicular manslaughter while protesting, punched and kicked to death, beaten with blunt object...etc, get the picture?

I'll take my "verbal assault" from the left and live to fight another day verses a "beat-down" from the right and pray my healthcare premiums are paid up in full. That is of course, if I manage to survive. Is it any wonder your very own Repub congressmen and women are paying like $5K/day for security, to protect themselves against QAnon/MAGA right-wingers, just because they don't agree with the rest of their right-wing colleagues on being loyal to Trump and/or related issues?

It's really too bad, I actually agree with the left on a few topics, but they're like that annoying asshole at the campground who goes around telling all the other campers what the rules are, and looks for infractions to complain to management about.

Interesting analogy! Name one (or some) of those topics on the left that you would agree with? Cause right now it's very hard for me to find anything the Repubs (or the right) have done, that I could in good conscience agree with. But then again it's hard to find policies that have benefited most middle/working class Americans, if you've done nothing in the way of passing said policies, for the past several decades.

More to come...

[EihTooms]

Tiny wrote - Let's stick to Tooms' philosophy, that something like a pandemic, or presumably a war, is no excuse for an increase in the debt.

Where in the world did you come up with that one? Of course, Trump's Pandemic was cause to increase the debt, as was the Great Repub Depressions, Great Repub Recessions, the Great Repub Jobs Destructions, etc.

Spidy, It's pretty obvious what you meant. See the bold text below. You meant every Republican and his dog wants to mint a trillion dollar coin to pay down the debt.

So we've established that the following famous people promoted the idea of a trillion dollar coin, for the purpose of paying down the national debt or, in the case of Tlaib, two coins to pay $1,000 a month to most Americans:

Paul Krugman: Renowned Democrat economist.
Lawrence Tribe: Renowned Democrat attorney.
James Galbraith: Well known Democrat economist, where I live anyway.
Jerry Nadler: Famous Democratic Congressman.
Rashida Tlaib: Famous Democratic Congresswoman.

No, neither you, your links, we, nor anyone else have established any such thing. They responded to questions about it and made the case for it only as a silly or bad idea that isn't as silly and bad as what Repubs repeatedly propose for dealing with it; Not paying the debt they racked up and allowing USA to default.

Repub spiritual twin and running for POTUS too soon to be the far and away front runner for the Repub Party nominee Bo Gritz was the first politician and as far as I know the only one so far who promoted the magic coin idea without that economically disastrous Repub threat at his back.

Your pro Repub spin that those Dems "popularized" or "promoted" the idea of minting a magic coin to pay down the massive debts that horrific Repub policies and stewardship produce is like saying people on the ground witnessing the poor souls leaping out of 100 story windows of the World Trade Center because a blazing fireball of airline fuel and shrapnel was at their backs during Bush's 9/11 Attack and commenting that they understood why they lept and would probably have done the same were "popularizing" and "promoting" the idea of leaping out of 100 story windows.

Uh. No. The terrorists who flew those planes into the World Trade Center are the ones who "popularized" and "promoted" that idea.

Same with the Repub economic terrorists who repeatedly threaten to default on their debt re the magic coin idea response.

Without Repubs repeatedly threatening to force the USA to default on the loan debts that horrific Repub economic policies and stewardship cause to be racked up more than any other factor including all the "wild coincidences" you can imagine, no Dem would ever consider Repub spiritual twin Bo Gritz' magic coin idea as a last ditch alternative to something far worse.

[Tiny 12]

In yet another twist to the one (1) Trillion dollar coin, debt, this article (below) suggests, ex-Pres Ronald Reagan (GOP/Repub), should be the "face of the coin".

What an interesting and novel idea. Why didn't I think of that? (...kkkk!)

Why Ronald Reagan Should Be on the $1 Trillion Platinum Coin
https://ourfuture.org/20130110/why-r...platinum-coin?



I nominate Trump, as butt-end (or tails) of the coin...kkkk!

Great idea! But your article is way too subjective. We need a systematic and fair way to pick the presidents, for the trillion dollar platinum coin to pay down the debt. And Tooms has given us just what we need!

U.S. Debt by President: Dollar and Percentage.

https://www.investopedia.com/us-debt...entage-7371225

Let's stick to Tooms' philosophy, that something like a pandemic, or presumably a war, is no excuse for an increase in the debt. Do we look at the run up in the debt in dollar terms or percentage terms?

Well, if it's dollar terms, then yes, Trump's the tail! And Obama, who presided over a $7. 6 trillion increase in the debt, larger than Trump's $6. 7 trillion, is the head!

If Biden wins re-election and gets to govern again with a Democratic House and Senate then I bet he'll edge out Trump, and maybe Obama. So maybe we should wait. Tooms' link must be a little old, as it only shows a $2.5 trillion run up in the debt under Biden, but it has really been $4.2 trillion so far.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEBTN

On the other hand we could look at the percentage increase. Then Franklin Roosevelt's the head and Woodrow Wilson is the tail.

Again, please, no argument about the basis for selecting the winners. If we're not going to use a pandemic as an excuse, we darn sure shouldn't use war as an excuse. A war is often avoidable and a pandemic is not.

[Spidy]

In yet another twist to the one (1) Trillion dollar coin, debt, this article (below) suggests, ex-Pres Ronald Reagan (GOP/Repub), should be the "face of the coin".

What an interesting and novel idea. Why didn't I think of that? (...kkkk!)

Why Ronald Reagan Should Be on the $1 Trillion Platinum Coin
https://ourfuture.org/20130110/why-r...platinum-coin?

"... If the White House decides to mint the coin, the Treasury should put Reagan's picture on it. And if I were president Obama, just for fun I'd drill a hole through it, put it on a chain, and wear it around my neck at the next State of the Union."

I nominate Trump, as butt-end (or tails) of the coin...kkkk!

[Tiny 12]

Talk about hopeless! (...kkkk!) No you'd be wrong again! I never called the Repubs, the progenitor of the coin idea.

Here is what I wrote:
Tiny 12, to be clear, no where in my initial post do I say that Repubs, are the progenitor of the coin idea. I only stated they (ISG Repubs) often loved to "float" idea.

I was simply saying, I thought I had remembered that Repubs (meaning and mainly referring to the "ISG Republican pseudo economists", w/r to past forum discussions on the topic, whom), just loved to float the coin idea, as a solution to the debt problem. I seem to remember them bringing it up all the time. And then I asked, how would it work?

Tiny 12, I submit, it was you, who then []twisted and put a spin on the articles you put forth, as the Dems being the progenitor of the coin idea. And then later declared Beowulf, aka Carlos Mucha, as the one. Yes, those articles have some Dems agreeing to the idea of using "a coin" idea in one way or another, to solve a crisis (often Repub made), but NOT the progenitor of the coin idea.

EihTooms, than presented evidence, that clearly rebuts your arguments and clearly predates ALL your findings and conclusively thus far, squarely points the finger at Mr. Bo Gritz ("a closet Republican"), being the progenitor of the coin idea.

So with Mr. Gritz (the "closet Repub" wannabe) as the clear front runner to the progenitor of the coin idea, thus far, prompted me, in jest, to create more Repub folklore, "GOP Lord of the Coins". Since, after all Mr. Gritz, is really a Republican, even if he is still in the closet.

On your very own, Tiny 12, YOU were the one who jumped to the conclusion, I said, "Republicans created the trillion dollar coin idea", albeit perhaps from a Repub guilty conscience? Knowing that Repubs are most often guilty and responsible for so much nutty duress on the US economy and political health of the country?

Spidy, It's pretty obvious what you meant. See the bold text below. You meant every Republican and his dog wants to mint a trillion dollar coin to pay down the debt.

Now that was funny, but so true! And I do so enjoy a good "Fairy Tale". If (when) it fails, perhaps we can use it as a "Cautionary Tale/Fable"?

Speaking of "fairy tales", what ever happened to the one about the "One (1) Trillion dollar coin" (Repubs love to mint in their heads), that could simply payoff the federal debt?

I seem to hear this one, every time a Repub President takes office and then proceeds to astronomically run up the federal debt, on their way to yet another Repub recession, and every Repub and their dog, seems to think that this mystical coin is the answer.

Any Repub economists (or anyone really), care to explain how this would work?

So we've established that the following famous people promoted the idea of a trillion dollar coin, for the purpose of paying down the national debt or, in the case of Tlaib, two coins to pay $1,000 a month to most Americans:

Paul Krugman: Renowned Democrat economist.
Lawrence Tribe: Renowned Democrat attorney.
James Galbraith: Well known Democrat economist, where I live anyway.
Jerry Nadler: Famous Democratic Congressman.
Rashida Tlaib: Famous Democratic Congresswoman.

And two nobodies:

Bo Gritz, Populist candidate for president who received 0.14% of the popular vote.
Carlos Mucha, aka Beowulf, Democrat Attorney.

And I'm not sure exactly what Gritz proposed, as I'm not seeing any contemporaneous reporting from 1992. Presumably he did not propose a platinum coin, because that wasn't allowed in 1992, and whatever he proposed was an impossibility at the time, as legally the government couldn't mint a coin with a larger denomination than $50 until 1996.

Contrary to what you posted, "every Repub and their dog," there aren't ANY Republicans on that list.

[SubCmdr]

That works if the "combined balance of all the foreign accounts you own or have a financial interest in or signature authority over" is less than $10,000 throughout the year. If that's case there's no requirement to file the Fincen Form 114 (FBAR) with the Treasury Department.

There's another form you file with your tax return, Form 8938, that pretty much duplicates what's on the FBAR. You list your foreign accounts and maximum balances. But you don't have to file that provided you have less than $50,000 in total foreign financial assets.

And finally there's a box you have to check on your Schedule B of Form 1040 if you have a foreign account. This needs to be checked regardless of the balance in your foreign accounts. And you need to report all income from your foreign accounts on your tax return..

You are keeping it 100 my ISG Brother about the reporting requirements. And I think it is very accurate that you shared. Any one that goes off shore better know what they are doing.

But if you do not exceed 10,000 USD balance in all of your foreign accounts throughout the year you can avoid a lot of the reporting requirements just by staying below the limits. But if you earn income on those accounts then can not avoid them no matter what your balances are. But when it comes to foreign holdings, there is a really big loop hole that you can drive a truck trough. Foreign held real estate in your own name. If you do not hold it in your own name you are going to have to report it on IRS Form 8938.

[Spidy]

And I'm making a bigger deal of this than I should too. Spidy mistakenly called the trillion dollar platinum coin idea a Republican idea and it wasn't. It was a Democrat idea, to be able to bypass Republicans to increase the debt limit. You guys could have gracefully admitted the mistake but instead came up with a bizarre line of reasoning that makes Sidney Powell's theories about the 2020 election look reasonable.

Talk about hopeless! (...kkkk!) No you'd be wrong again! I never called the Repubs, the progenitor of the coin idea.

Here is what I wrote:

... Speaking of "fairy tales", what ever happened to the one about the "One (1) Trillion dollar coin" (Repubs love to mint in their heads), that could simply payoff the federal debt?

I seem to hear this one, every time a Repub President takes office and then proceeds to astronomically run up the federal debt, on their way to yet another Repub recession, and every Repub and their dog, seems to think that this mystical coin is the answer.

Any Repub economists (or anyone really), care to explain how this would work?

Tiny 12, to be clear, no where in my initial post do I say that Repubs, are the progenitor of the coin idea. I only stated they (ISG Repubs) often loved to "float" idea.

I was simply saying, I thought I had remembered that Repubs (meaning and mainly referring to the "ISG Republican pseudo economists", w/r to past forum discussions on the topic, whom), just loved to float the coin idea, as a solution to the debt problem. I seem to remember them bringing it up all the time. And then I asked, how would it work?

Tiny 12, I submit, it was you, who then twisted and put a spin on the articles you put forth, as the Dems being the progenitor of the coin idea. And then later declared Beowulf, aka Carlos Mucha, as the one. Yes, those articles have some Dems agreeing to the idea of using "a coin" idea in one way or another, to solve a crisis (often Repub made), but NOT the progenitor of the coin idea.

EihTooms, then presented evidence, that clearly rebuts your arguments and clearly predates ALL your findings and conclusively thus far, squarely points the finger at Mr. Bo Gritz ("a closet Republican"), being the progenitor of the coin idea.

So with Mr. Gritz (the "closet Repub" wannabe) as the clear front runner to the progenitor of the coin idea, thus far, prompted me, in jest, to create more Repub folklore, "GOP Lord of the Coins". Since, after all Mr. Gritz, is really a Republican, even if he is still in the closet.

On your very own, Tiny 12, YOU were the one who jumped to the conclusion, I said, "Republicans created the trillion dollar coin idea", albeit perhaps from a Repub guilty conscience? Knowing that Repubs are most often guilty and responsible for so much nutty duress on the US economy and political health of the country?

[Tiny 12]

But over in the Pattaya Reports thread there is a mother fucker who says he uses bank transfers to pay prostitutes. Nah brother. I pay cash.....Why do you pay prostitutes in cash in countries where prostitution is legal?

I agree 100%. I don't think U.S law enforcement would or could come after someone for paying a prostitute in a country where prostitution is legal, provided she's not underage or trafficked, and few or none of us would knowingly have sex with women in that category. However, I don't really know any more. You've got FOSTA, SESTA, the Mann Act and state statutes on the books, so it's hard to keep up with it all. And for anyone who has a wife or an employer who frowns upon our hobby, using cash makes even more sense.

Let me give you a hypothetical: You transfer money to your foreign bank below the allowed limits. Then you take the money out of your account in cash (USD or the foreign currency of the country where you are banking) and put it into safe keeping. Can you tell me how that is illegal or a violation of the foreign bank account reporting standards?

I am not taking issue with you my ISG brother. I am making an attempt to share information and make people think.

That works if the "combined balance of all the foreign accounts you own or have a financial interest in or signature authority over" is less than $10,000 throughout the year. If that's case there's no requirement to file the Fincen Form 114 (FBAR) with the Treasury Department.

There's another form you file with your tax return, Form 8938, that pretty much duplicates what's on the FBAR. You list your foreign accounts and maximum balances. But you don't have to file that provided you have less than $50,000 in total foreign financial assets.

And finally there's a box you have to check on your Schedule B of Form 1040 if you have a foreign account. This needs to be checked regardless of the balance in your foreign accounts. And you need to report all income from your foreign accounts on your tax return.

Foreign banks and other foreign financial institutions report certain info about their American customers accounts to the IRS under the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). I don't know the details but would assume that applies regardless of the customer's balance. There are many foreign banks and brokers that won't accept USA Clients because they don't want to jack with the reporting requirements under FATCA.

You probably know all or most of the preceding, but maybe it's worth mentioning for anyone else interested in this who happens to be reading.

[SubCmdr]

I don't understand it, but intuitively fear it too. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's kind of like the digital wallet in my post? It's the government keeping track of the money in your account, not your bank?

That is exactly it! The government will have either direct access to your CBDC account or it will be a pass through of information through the banks. GOVs have a lot of hurdles to work through because if they do it wrong they will put the banks out of business. My best guess is that they are going to attack crypto at the off ramps and by making it illegal to hold crypto directly. They probably want to make banks the official custodians of all money. GOVs fear crypto more than gold or silver. Gold and silver are hard to move. Crypto is the first medium of exchange where you can self custody and move it at the speed to light, without and intermediary. Right now there is very low adoption. That is the only reason GOVs are not really paying attention to crypto. But as more people wake up to the fiat currency scam, you are going to see crypto get a lot more attention.

That's probably wise. I don't because I'm lazy and want the frequent flyer points that come with card charges. Which admittedly may be penny wise and pound foolish.

We all have our priorities and I will never tell people how to use their money. But over in the Pattaya Reports thread there is a mother fucker who says he uses bank transfers to pay prostitutes. Nah brother. I pay cash. Even law enforcement agencies say that if you are engaged in illegal activities you should use cash. Anything else they say they can track down.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/secre...reddit-ama/amp

I don't understand or entirely trust crypto. If you just use bank accounts like I do, there's really no legal way. And no illegal way I'd feel comfortable with. I like to sleep well at night.

I understand crypto but do not entirely trust all crypto. There is BTC and everything else.

I do not engage in illegal financial activities of any type. It is legal to own crypto. You must report your activities to the IRS (if pay taxes in the USA). But if you put your crypto into a cold wallet and then store it some place, that does not require any reporting until you use it for something, sell or transfer it. Just check the box on your tax return to avoid lying on a report to the USGOV.

But the GOVs in general have a problem. They must rely on self reporting. Because if you transfer your crypto directly to someone else by operating your own full node (computer and software that costs about 300 - 400 USD) the only footprint that is left is on the blockchain of the crypto itself. Use a coin mixer and it is becomes impossible to trace. Like dropping your crypto into a black hole. The problem is for the average individual is that it takes a lot of research and knowledge to pull this all off (I have done the research and I know what I am doing). Some may think, well why would you be doing this if you are not doing something illegal? Why do you pay prostitutes in cash in countries where prostitution is legal?

The defense rests.

The penalties for failing to file the FBAR reporting foreign bank accounts are too severe -- they can take several times the maximum value in your account and put you in jail.

Let me give you a hypothetical: You transfer money to your foreign bank below the allowed limits. Then you take the money out of your account in cash (USD or the foreign currency of the country where you are banking) and put it into safe keeping. Can you tell me how that is illegal or a violation of the foreign bank account reporting standards?

I am not taking issue with you my ISG brother. I am making an attempt to share information and make people think.

[EihTooms]

Beowulf, aka Carlos Mucha, is a Democrat. He's more partisan than you are.

https://twitter.com/mucha_carlos?lang=en

Krugman popularized the idea. James K. Gabraith, another Democrat economist, and Lawrence Tribe, a Democrat attorney, did as well, but this would have never attracted attention if Krugman hadn't gotten behind it.

https://archive.nytimes.com/krugman....int-that-coin/

https://archive.nytimes.com/krugman....barous-relics/

https://archive.nytimes.com/krugman....out-the-brink/

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/paul-...coin_n_2427160

https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/stat...39546800971776

https://fortune.com/2023/05/03/paul-...-debt-ceiling/

Nobody who matters ever heard of Bo Gritz. Many a tin pot dictator in South America and Africa did what Bo Gritz proposed, only it involved printing paper instead of minting coins. Gritz's proposal wouldn't have passed muster with the courts in 1992 when he ran for president, and none of the Democrats who popularized the trillion dollar coin were influenced by the guy.

Rashida Tlaib proposed minting two trillion dollar platinum coins to pay $2000 up front and $1000 per month every month to most Americans until a year after COVID ended. Presumably that would have been $4,000 a month for a family of four even if the husband and wife were employed.

https://tlaib.house.gov/posts/common...y-from-us-mint

Gritz was a nut case. Thus you feel compelled to label him as pro Republican and label me as one of his supporters. Well, at least you're smart enough to know the idea, the trillion dollar platinum coin, is nutty.

You should have just argued that, despite the support of Krugman, Jerry Nadler, Tlaib and some other Democrats, this is a fringe idea that neither the Obama nor Biden Administrations supported. I would have agreed with you. And as to "protecting anyone else reading your unsupported suggestion," you, Spidy and I are probably the only ones reading these posts. I've given up on converting both of you. I do though still pray to the Saints of Classical Liberalism (Hayek, Friedman, von Mises and Ronald Reagan) for your immortal souls from time to time.

And I'm making a bigger deal of this than I should too. Spidy mistakenly called the trillion dollar platinum coin idea a Republican idea and it wasn't. It was a Democrat idea, to be able to bypass Republicans to increase the debt limit. You guys could have gracefully admitted the mistake but instead came up with a bizarre line of reasoning that makes Sidney Powell's theories about the 2020 election look reasonable.

But Beowolf did not come up with the idea. The Repub Party's spiritual twin Bo Gritz did.

Many people who were paying attention in 1992 knew about Bo Gritz. Even about his magic coin idea, dumb enough to only come from a Repub mindset.

I knew about him and his magic coin idea in 1992 because at that time I still had a bit of numbskull "Bothsider / Neithersider" lingering in me so I was looking for a Third Party alternative. Not as much numbskull mindset as whatever possessed me to vote for Teflon Ronnie in 1980. But some. In fact, I voted for a Third Party candidate in 1992.

That is why I knew to look up Bo Gritz as the likely originator of that magic coin idea. I remembered it coming from him. And I remember thinking then that his ideas were so stupid and in line with the way Repubs think he really ought to run more honestly as a Repub.

Today, Bo Gritz, exactly as he was in 1992, saying exactly the same things in the same way, proposing exactly those same Repub ideas would be ahead of Trump, DeSantis, Haley and the rest by at least 70 points in the Repub Party POTUS Nominee polling consensus.