The money that you do not have.
Many clients of banks are outraged by learning about the next restrictions on banking or cash transactions in the framework of "anti-wash" and "anti-terrorist" measures. Like, " my money-what I want, then I do." It's a mistake: they don't have their own money. Not a penny.
Fresh article about anti money laundering measures banks have raised suddenly a lot of interest and heated discussion. In addition to the usual curses against the Bank "Tinkoff", many readers expressed their claims to the state, which is too free to behave with their money, and the author, not showing indignation about it. There is a clear lack of understanding by commentators of the nature of modern money and its role in the financial world.
The key thing to understand: you have not your own — that is belonging to you personally. You can not act with the available cash (paper or virtual) as you see fit. It's hard to accept, it's hard to accept, but sooner or later you'll have to admit the obvious. All the money you "own" is actually owned by the state and controlled by a small group of officials in the Central Bank and the government. This applies not only to rubles, but also to any other currency issued by any state.You receive from the state only limited rights to use its money. They give you "hold" to simplify the exchange of goods and services and ensure deferred consumption ("accumulate for old age", "postpone for the car", etc.), no more. At the same time, you do not have any real guarantees that you will be able to use the money right now or in the future. Taking into account the quality and trends of public administration in all countries, it is safe to say that in the long term any money has zero or close to it real value.In addition, there is no doubt that the further, the more restrictions there will be even on the current use of money. Pseudo-struggle with" money laundering "and" financing of terrorism " is an excellent reason to cancel the remains of anonymity of payments and transfers. The ultimate goal of the state-to fully manage the "purchasing power" of each person, and therefore his life. In today's society, no money is physically impossible to exist, not to mention the conduct of a full life.
Banks, through which money, is only nominally private organizations. The degree of their regulation by the state in all developed countries is so great that they can be considered "branches" of Central banks, working strictly within the established framework of very detailed rules. Somewhere formal regulation is a little more liberal. However, this means that the local Central Bank has an indirect or informal but no less strong influence on the banks.
Cash still gives a certain degree of freedom, but not as much as it seems: it is enough to look at the latest developments in India, where simultaneously banned the circulation of two large bills, providing a significant part of the cash turnover in the country. And the complete abolition of cash in the developed world is not far off, after which the control of States for your income and — more importantly — expenses will be absolute.
That is why it is pointless to resent the next restrictions on the "rights" of Bank customers — as meaningless as scold wolves for eating sheep. This is their natural behavior: wolves eat sheep, and officials are doing everything to turn the population into completely dependent on them workers-consumers. Another thing is that the number of wolves can be regulated, but the time to give a hand to the States, it seems, has been lost.
However, not all so hopelessly. The development of technology makes it possible to create a parallel monetary system that is not controlled by the state (and ideally — in General, no one). The current cryptocurrencies are the first step in this direction, they are not very convenient yet, but are already in demand where the state controls money the hardest: now for 98% of the global turnover of bitcoins, the "Chinese" are responsible.
Next-generation private money will be much more convenient and popular. Naturally, they are designed so as to prohibit or significantly restrict their circulation was technically extremely difficult. Private money will not win, but will eventually occupy its niche — they will be used for anonymous transactions and, perhaps, savings.
In the meantime, if you earn and spend rubles, dollars, euros, yuan and other kroner, you should clearly understand that you use other people's things, taken only on time and on terms that you do not know. And the owner of these things can do anything: limit the ways of their use, charge for use (inflation), just take them away from you if necessary. Therefore, to scold a particular Bank that pursues the policy of the Central Bank, or the Central Bank itself together with the government, is only to "let off steam" and pretend that it is fighting injustice. The real solution to the issue of public money is not there.