So, this is about the same level of slang as IBM. In about the middle of the vid you can see that their initial goal was to bring a stream of cash into every business.
But that is the wrong idea.
If you are starving you don't rob a bank, but a supermarket. If you are homeless, you search the supermarket trash instead of go bagging and will have way more food then you could get by cash from bagging.
Businesses are in no need of cash, but a market to buy and sell products.
So what happened there.
This is the Central Bank One Currency Control idea of regulating and giving order to an untile there complex system of business interactions.
Without a by force enforced rule of having to use one specific currency within a market, the market would see plenty of different exhanges. Some would pay based on a contract receiving in return of a Good other Goods over a period of time, some would exchange in one offs by using Gold, Silver, or a defined load of any Good. Forigne currencies backed by forigne banks would be an option, too.
A markets purpose is to get buyer and seller together. That includes having a transaction. This ultimately means that having every market operator have access to one cash stream is in no way part of a market need. It is need for regulating a market, but thereby limiting that markets payment capabilities which will exclude entities from the market and thereby defeat the markets very purpose.
Some can't meet.
Being more flexible and not limited to one exchange form, supporting that flexibility, will do the opposite and fulfill the markets core reason.
I can't proof that some White Squaws and Chiefs had that on mind to begin with, after having learned some rudimentary English, but everybody says markets are overregulated, just without understanding where anymore...
Using monopoly and oligopoly positions for market manipulating transaction is no overregulation at fucking all and grammatically incorrectly phrased.
You meet me in a strang time of my life. Pixie.
#cyberpunkcoltoure
#noblessoblige
