Part 2- Innovative Economics: Why Central Banking Digital Currency Should Be Opposed

Please read “Innovative Economics: Why Central Banking Digital Currency Should Be Opposed” before this post to have more context.

From CoinGeek

As discussed in the previous post;

Already CBDC would give the government more power to expand, spend, and provide in unpublicized ways. At first glance, this can seem exceedingly good for almost everyone, yet it would become all too simple to invalidate the trust of the people and use easy-access ways to take money for personal greed- subverting the entire system.

The idea of a split system is not as disagreeable, a buffer between the Fed and the people would restore more liberty. As said in A CBDC Dollar Would Empower the Fed, Nor Americans, a “two-tier system” would save more privacy and personal security while still having the added benefits. With CBDC only to be used by the government and other financial institutions would give more favorable effects rather than a complete digital monetary infrastructure.

As with any new product, there is always a chance of borderline forceful actions to make CBDC more highly used. If the government were to offer $1.5 CBDC for every physical fiat $1 bill. This would generate an influx of exchange for the opportunity, though conversely this would also strain and potentially corrupt the idea. Greed debases rationality, and before being hasty, a person must think why? Why would the government push so hard? This in itself raises suspicion, and overall CBDC would give the government a gross invitation to a person's digital confidentiality, specifically a convoluted directory of a person's financials. This would give access to a person’s life and self, violating the right of personal security, an imperative right that should not be transgressed.

Technology is gaining value and prominence in societies, including the U.S., which alludes that digital currency will have to be enacted in the monetary system. However, this is not the most efficient or just way to do it. Taken from a social equity aspect, not all can afford mobile devices, how would that affect a person's stance in society? What about hacking, would the Great Depression be a recurring event if a person disabled the entire economy? There are too many variables and dissents to this idea. Though CBDC is a viable option, it’s not something that should be taken on by the United States government. Breaching personal and national security is not something that should be exchanged for ease.

From OMFIF