Overflight, 152

“An extraordinary problem with money parasitism is that arguably, laws against "money laundering" could conceivably be construed as parasitism enforcement mechanisms. So increasingly draconian measures to track all privately circulating currency are installed … «Big brother wants to look in your bank account». …
Some innovators are proposing and erecting new money systems that are locally−oriented and community−based. That is certainly a strong possibility, but again they may be illegal by invasive state laws that require reporting both gifts and barter transactions and subjecting both to taxation.
A parasitical money system fundamentally has three major requirements that are arguably now already fully installed worldwide: (a) any money must be exclusively in the form of the state−authorized currency, (b) all economic transactions are subject to taxation, and (c) loss of government control over the central bank.
Ultimately, the issue largely comes down to whether individuals have the right to make economic transactions between themselves free of state surveillance or interference. U.S. and international laws and legal administration currently do not appear to support such a right. Coincidentally this is precisely the same question surrounding the legitimacy of any taxation. Again, the issue is closely related to the circumstances surrounding the founding of the U.S. and «no taxation without representation.»
In any case, a new realization of fractional reserve banking as a kind of fractional integrity or vitality system must enter the mass consciousness, along with the full understanding that the modern economic and political systems based on it are therefore deeply and intrinsically flawed – to borrow the informal yet highly descriptive phrase, rotten at the core.