PSGRNZ propose a six-year moratorium on CBDC trials. After 2030, any permission to trial or release CBDCs could only be approved after Parliament or the public vote for it.
At present currency is created using sovereign (and other) debt as the asset, central bank created notes/coin (massive seigniorage) - same asset, and fractional reserve banking - same asset. Private banking is by far the largest contributor to currency. The circuit is closed when the debt is repaid and the currency is destroyed. How to you think CBDCs will affect this circuit?
For those wanting to side-step the CBDC/Digital ID dystopian nightmare, all you will ever need is Bitcoin. If you take some time to understand what Bitcoin is, how it supersedes conventional money, and the great leap forward into self sovereignty (as opposed to nanny-state banking), you will never again be bothered by the dishonest machinations of political machinery which is on the brink of self destruction.
If you would like to see a parallel alternative which aims to supersede democracy in the same way that Bitcoin will supersede fiat currencies, take a look at www.internetofvoters.com
For those not immediately familiar with the title or the organisation that describes itself as, "Physicians and Scientists for Global Responsibility New Zealand (PSGRNZ), Charitable Trust (NZ Charities no.CC29935), the acronym PSGRNZ applies, the organisation appears to enshrine the globalist "precautionary principle," where policy-based evidence may incrementally replace evidence-based science (https://psgr.org.nz/precautionary-principle).
'Benessia A. et al. 'The Rightful Place Of Science. Science On The Verge' highlight this problem succinctly. Perhaps the real issue then is the Progressives' degradation of what might constitute considered ethics, replacing this instead with the incoherence of speculative risk?
Interesting. Isn't it a double-edged sword? Throwing the baby out with the bath water? There's long-term evidence that the multinational corporations would much prefer that the 'innovation principle' replaced the precautionary principle, which they view as a threat, and they have worked tirelessly to erode the precautionary principle. We can choose to look at evidence, - yes and vested interests can elect to apply policy-based evidence. This is how the New Zealand EPA works, as they continue to fail to review the scientific literature to assess the changing nature of knowledge regarding the toxicity of many chemicals, including risks from synergies, and bioaccumulation. Scientists do not get funded to consider such risks in New Zealand, unless they relate to climate change.
If society claims it is unscientific to address open-ended dilemmas, to come to terms with tipping points we really cannot prevent harm. We cannot assess a given problem, and address uncertainties around risk. Beautifully captured by Rittel and Webber in 1973, and discussed here: https://www.talkingrisk.nz/what-is-a-wicked-problem/
At present currency is created using sovereign (and other) debt as the asset, central bank created notes/coin (massive seigniorage) - same asset, and fractional reserve banking - same asset. Private banking is by far the largest contributor to currency. The circuit is closed when the debt is repaid and the currency is destroyed. How to you think CBDCs will affect this circuit?
For those wanting to side-step the CBDC/Digital ID dystopian nightmare, all you will ever need is Bitcoin. If you take some time to understand what Bitcoin is, how it supersedes conventional money, and the great leap forward into self sovereignty (as opposed to nanny-state banking), you will never again be bothered by the dishonest machinations of political machinery which is on the brink of self destruction.
If you would like to see a parallel alternative which aims to supersede democracy in the same way that Bitcoin will supersede fiat currencies, take a look at www.internetofvoters.com
For those not immediately familiar with the title or the organisation that describes itself as, "Physicians and Scientists for Global Responsibility New Zealand (PSGRNZ), Charitable Trust (NZ Charities no.CC29935), the acronym PSGRNZ applies, the organisation appears to enshrine the globalist "precautionary principle," where policy-based evidence may incrementally replace evidence-based science (https://psgr.org.nz/precautionary-principle).
'Benessia A. et al. 'The Rightful Place Of Science. Science On The Verge' highlight this problem succinctly. Perhaps the real issue then is the Progressives' degradation of what might constitute considered ethics, replacing this instead with the incoherence of speculative risk?
Interesting. Isn't it a double-edged sword? Throwing the baby out with the bath water? There's long-term evidence that the multinational corporations would much prefer that the 'innovation principle' replaced the precautionary principle, which they view as a threat, and they have worked tirelessly to erode the precautionary principle. We can choose to look at evidence, - yes and vested interests can elect to apply policy-based evidence. This is how the New Zealand EPA works, as they continue to fail to review the scientific literature to assess the changing nature of knowledge regarding the toxicity of many chemicals, including risks from synergies, and bioaccumulation. Scientists do not get funded to consider such risks in New Zealand, unless they relate to climate change.
If society claims it is unscientific to address open-ended dilemmas, to come to terms with tipping points we really cannot prevent harm. We cannot assess a given problem, and address uncertainties around risk. Beautifully captured by Rittel and Webber in 1973, and discussed here: https://www.talkingrisk.nz/what-is-a-wicked-problem/
There's a paper that outlines the precautionary principle and the environment, from New Zealand that I defer you to: https://openaccess.wgtn.ac.nz/articles/thesis/Application_of_the_precautionary_principle_during_consenting_processes_in_New_Zealand_Addressing_past_errors_obtaining_a_normative_fix_and_developing_a_structured_and_operationalised_approach/17018624/1