Analogs or digital

Undoubtedly the war between Russia and Ukraine is presenting new ways of facing armed war conflicts without the use of “weapons”, at least bombs or bullets.The response of the Western world has been to exclude Russia from the systems of processing capitalist assets.Any paradox, because capitalism has adopted typical rigist, extreme mechanisms, such as affecting the interests, no longer of a nation, but of all its citizens, rich, athletes, artists, whatever Russian oringen and has not manifested itself fehaciently against Putin's actions is considered an enemy and this justifies embarking, confiscating or deleting from Western systems.These actions that produce “collateral damages” can even affect the same Ukrainian victims if they kept their savings in banks or stocks of Russian companies, in fact millions of people around the world do activities related to this part of the world.The international financial system will try to take advantage of the legal discrectionality that offers war to advance on other enemies, those who look at the business models of the traditional economy.Interestingly, one of the points that mentions the agreement that the Argentine Republic is negotiating with the International Monetary Fund, within the section “Fortising financial resilience”, points out:" To better safeguard financial stability, we are taking measures with the aim of i) discourage the use of cryptocurrencies Looking at it prevention money laundering, informality and disintermediation; ii) provide more support for the current process of digitizing payments for improve the efficiency and costs of payment systems and cash management; and Protection of financial consumers”.In the wording of the paragraph, we can identify errors and bad intentions.

1. ... prevent money laundering. The US dollar is the most used currency for washing money. Daily we find out how over the years financial institutions are involved in money laundering maneuvers, or even as traffickers and corrupt carry bags, bags or containers full of green notes. The crypto world is electronic and therefore treatable. Every operation between portfolios links named holders of an account. To operate in any exchange or open an electronic wallet must be met with KYC (know your customer) processes that control over hundreds of identity and background databases. The best way to prevent money laundering is to end the physical currency, mainly those that higher purchasing power accumulate by paper (dollars, euros, pounds), Scanning payments is the first step to prevent this crime.
2. ... prevent informality. As with money laundering, informality uses physical money to process your transactions. Any electronic payment made for informal operations can be perfectly verified and thus reveal the tips of the movement.
3. ... prevent disintermediation, this point is really crazy. The current payment processing system has been accumulating intermediaries permanently. Banks, payment card issuers, processors, device renters, payment service providers, payment catwalks, etc. add transaction charges through goods and services, inflating the world economy, spreading suppliers and consumers. Nothing better than anything else, taking intermediates is lowering costs and returning to the most efficient model.
4. ... provide support to current systems... This point is a true sincericide, as the parties evidence the true intentions to discourage the use of cryptographic processing systems, which is simply protect an old, expensive and excluding system. A model that from the beginning only increased the costs for users and delayed the settlements of the cash balances.
5. ... Financial consumer protection. Over the years, risk investors have suffered total losses, keeping traditional products in their accounts, without going further, only a few years ago the structured instruments on mortgage portfolios bankrupt some larger banks and investment administrators in the world. Previously, the bubbles of the companies doccom or some raw materials dragged with the savings and investments of millions of people, many of whom were literally on the street. Each can invest, spend or give your money as you like. If we lack at least this freedom, then tell us where to lodge our savings and ready. Saying where not to invest is like saying where to do it. We all have the right to choose, at least this. On the other hand, if someone who receives funds commits a crime, there are legal mechanisms to address potential claims.