For one, unlike cash, the issuing entity can program CBDC to expire on a specific date unless utilized. Another horror use case is that they could track and limit how many hamburgers or pizzas you eat daily, weekly, monthly or yearly!
He merely suggested a small fee though. 5.1% per year and only on cash, not some CDBC with privacy concerns. If you keep your money on savings accounts you wouldn't pay anything. If the economy is growing you would get paid interest. If the economy is declining you might pay negative interest.
This is different from a coupon that expires instantly. That is a terrible idea. Don't do this.
Also, the idea of demurrage currencies is to replace the devaluation via inflation with a nominal fee so it is possible that in countries with high inflation rates, the new currency would end up losing less value over time simply because it maintains price stability easily.
Edit: btw. His theory is dated in the sense that Keynes and Dieter Suhr have an updated interpretation. With a hint of Fisher Black you are going to get one of the most interesting economic theories that can explain most of the suffering in the world based on very few assumptions. The money and land reform policy proposals still remain relevant today.
Why would the government program money to expire? Would the money not become effectively worthless the closer to the expiration date? Why would a business accept transactions from people with money that’s about to expire would that then mean they would be giving away goods and services for free potentially?
In theory you spending it would reset the expiration date.
If you know your money will expire you will spend it, thus stimulating the economy. We also can’t have the dirty proles save their way to a higher social class.
Where are these theories of how a hypothetical future CBDC come from? Is there an official announcement from the Federal Reserve about how they would like it to work? A committee hearing in Congress where this is discussed?
The theories come from concerned critics mostly. As far as I know there has been no discussion as to how the government might influence the functionality of a CBDC.
I don't get it. The government could just ban the things it doesn't want instead.
Also, nothing stops people from buying the goods in question by using a payment service provider/bank that provides a layer on top of the CDBC and automatically circulates the money for you behind the scenes to avoid the expiry.
“You could have a potentially […] darker world where the government decides that units of central bank money can be used to purchase some things, but not other things that it deems less desirable like say ammunition, or drugs, or pornography, or something of the sort“
Eswar Prasad, WEF Annual Meeting of the New Champions, June 2023
There are easy ways to get around this. This isn't actually practical to implement. You could just buy and sell stocks within a second.
> We also can’t have the dirty proles save their way to a higher social class.
I don't know what you mean by this. Rich people spend their money at a slower rate than poor people so the rich would be disproportionately impacted by this. Someone living paycheck to paycheck isn't going to have much money that can expire to begin with.
The government could issue money that can be tied to a specific purpose (allowed to be spent with specific merchants or establishments) and have a time limit. Think of the COVID-19 assistance that was given to people. If — instead of just transferring normal money into people’s accounts that allowed people to do whatever they wanted with it whenever they wanted and wherever they wanted - the government could force recipients to spend it across certain things and not others, and gave a deadline to move the money around, would that be something that’s in the best interests of the receiver? By expiring money or by applying negative interest rates, the government can offload its burden on to the people who hold and have to use this money.
If you are assuming how a hypothetical future currency will work then we could easily assume exactly the opposite and the money would be destroyed by a set date to maintain some stable rate of deflation. Do you have evidence that a time to live for a currency is being considered by the Federal Reserve and US government?
That’s fair enough. Ostensibly the government of any country should be accountable to the people but history shows that cannot be counted on.
As convenient as Apple Pay is, I would not vote for a cashless system. I am just confused that very specific ideas of how this hypothetical system is going to work and am not sure where these come from or why it has to work the way people say and not in a more accountable less abusive manner. Expiring money seems patently absurd so why a central bank would consider it seems so outlandish to me at least.
> Expiring money seems patently absurd so why a central bank would consider it seems so outlandish to me at least.
Some countries, like Costa Rica, do this with cash, but with a much longer timeframe. Every 10 years or so they launch new banknote designs, and the old ones are gradually removed from circulation, until can only be exchanged at the banks and eventually lose their value by becoming "demonetized".
