Fetterman introduces bipartisan ban on going cashless

Maybe you pay the extra 10 cents a gallon when you buy gas for the CARD price.

Maybe you like paying a tax to the bank.

I like paying the CASH price and paying less money.

I dont like paying more for less.

Maybe you want banks selling your data to data brokerages and giving that data to the government every time you shop but I like to keep that information private.

Maybe you dont value your privacy but I do.

Privacy is a freedom that I enjoy and its the governments job to protect that freedom from tyrants that are trying to take it away.
You and whomever you engage in trade with should be allowed to agree on the terms of the sale, including what currency you use.

If someone doesn't accept your terms regarding their sale to you of something that is their property up until that sale takes place, that's not being a tyrant taking away your freedom. They have the right not to sell you their stuff.

On the other hand, if somebody like the government intervenes in that scenario, using threats of violence to force that other party to accept money they don't want to accept, then they are being a tyrant taking away that person's freedom.
 
You and whomever you engage in trade with should be allowed to agree on the terms of the sale, including what currency you use.

If someone doesn't accept your terms regarding their sale to you of something that is their property up until that sale takes place, that's not being a tyrant taking away your freedom. They have the right not to sell you their stuff.
No actually if you want to use another currency you can just leave the country and go use it.

You want to use rubles? Go back to Russia.
 
No actually if you want to use another currency you can just leave the country and go use it.

You want to use rubles? Go back to Russia.
I get that you think that. Just understand that in this scenario, you and the government that imposes your wishes on others by violent means are the one being the tyrant.

But also, I fail to understand your reasoning. So you wish to engage in trade with someone using the Federal Reserve Notes, and that person is not willing to accept that currency. So your response is to expel them from the country to a place where they won't be forced to use that currency. But how then will this help you to do the very thing you wanted to do in the first place, which was to engage in trade with them using Federal Reserve Notes? They're now living in another country, and you still can't buy stuff from them using the currency that you want to use and they don't. You could have just let them stay in America and enter voluntary agreements with others to make exchanges both parties agreed on, while you did the same with other parties who wanted to use the currency of your choice.
 
Last edited:
I get that you think that. Just understand that in this scenario, you and the government that imposes your wishes on others by violent means are the one being the tyrant.
You are the one that wants to impose slavery and the use of counterfeit and fake monopoly money.

That kind of shit happened in Ukraine's eastern regions and now the Russians are committing national suicide and genocide.
 
You are the one that wants to impose slavery and the use of counterfeit and fake monopoly money.

That kind of shit happened in Ukraine's eastern regions and now the Russians are committing national suicide and genocide.
This is some wild truthspeak you're using here.
 
.

I certainly do NOT support a cashless society but…

I’m confused here. Are we now supposed to support the fedgov dictating the terms of private contracts/transactions?

Freedom?

We don't support it from a libertarian perspective.

But we know what's coming: a ban on cash.

Government tyranny that opposes future government tyranny?
 
It's not, it's mere observation.

trump-obama-clintons-fauci-told-them-jail.jpg



republicans-democrats-comparison-war-spending-spies-epstein-checks-rinos.jpg
 
Back
Top