It is to keep the common person constantly toiling, in an attempt to keep up. They then celebrate this by pointing at the resulting growth.
I often wonder how genuinely inventive and productive people could be, if they were freed of this effort. Even if they weren’t, I suspect the mental and physical health of the population would increase.
When all you have is a hammer, all you see is nails. Central planners have lots of hammers.
Thanks Goingdeep interesting read, i always like your posts and opinions.
The only way for governments to fight back is when the great mayority of them agrees on launching a worldwide iot system, stick a crypto currency to it (plus declare every other form of payment illegal), and track all transactions globally.
A system like this (i hope) has not been built yet and for sure is not easy to build either. Plus it is not easy to get governments to mutually agree with eachother.
The big questions is, are there forces behind governments that dictate government’s course?
If that is the case, i am sure that the people who run the show, will not easily give up their power.
I hope this is not the case and sincerly hope you are right.
So growth is actually measure of a population toiling? If so, that is sick double speak. Very worrying.
The more growth a country has, the more wool over the common persons eyes?
Canada the only exception… every other country with large growth is miserable.
Well, I wouldn’t say it is that simple. However, they say inflation encourages spending, which promotes growth. This begs the question - how much growth do we need and is it always desirable? At what cost is it desirable, to both us and our environment?
The networks aren’t even standardised yet. It’s the old betamax v vhs wars again with the IoT networks. In my country the main ones battling are Lora v NB and of course there’s sigfox which is bigger in the US.
My government cant even get a national broadband network right after billions of dollars spent and years of time so I don’t think we’ll be seeing any government led control anytime soon.
But also you have to look at it from a commercial point of view. No one is going to have the government come in and try tell them what to do when they are affectivley battling competitors to get products to market. Even if government offered to pay manufacturers would be very wary because it could ruin them.
I also think governments are incompetent, but since they are governed by corporations nowadays, it really is hard to tell where things stand and what the future will look like. At the same time I really hope you are right 
Even though I had made a broad guesstimation, I don’t seem to have been too off after checking some data.
Before replying to you I went to check some census stats to see where I was standing.
My initial assumption was considering only the working-age demographics, and that there would be synchronous spending peaks based predictably by schedule (ie. at noon, lunch).
The best case to study would be India where cash is still king, even after three years of the controversial forced demonetization to implement a cashless economy.
Just considering the working age demographics in India:
Ages 15-64: 741,248,288
Ages 64-over: 61,955,950 (including this group as a group that would be resistant to cashless transactions)
Total: 803,204,238
If we assume that all of this people does at least one transaction at lunch, that is the minimum amount of transactions that would be happening more or less at the same time.
But this is only one country, at the same time zone (UTC+5:30) we have Sri Lanka:
Ages 15-65: 13,625,110
Ages 65+ : 1,602,663
Total: 15,227,773
India and Sri Lanka are in a weird time zone, it is 15 minutes ahead of Nepal (UTC+5:45), and 30 minutes from China (Xinjiang Time), Russia (Omsk Time), Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Bhutan and Bangladesh (all of them UTC+6)
Considering how close they are, it would be fair to also consider that lunch time would greatly overlap between these countries, so let’s add these people as well:
(Working age + elders)
Nepal: 16,885,164
China (Xinjiang and Tibet): 20,250,213
Russia (Omsk): 1,113,241
Kazakhstan: 12,366,257
Kyrgyzstan: 3,826,342
Bhutan: 503,394
Bangladesh: 102,905,000
That gives us a grand total of 976,281,622 people under relatively the same time zone.
Moreover, to be complete we would have to also add countries -/+ 6 hours to include those that would be having breakfast and dinner, which would be happening at the same time that these people are having lunch…
So we would be getting somewhere in the ballpark.
A conservative assumption of buying one snack at meal time would then be equivalent to about 1.5 billion transaction within half an hour to an hour, and who knows how many hundreds of millions would be overlapping at the exact same instant.
What percentage of people make a purchase at lunch? Or does everybody buy their lunch and not make it at home before leaving?
But in any case 1.5 billion transactions in the rush hour of the day means what? 15 billion transactions per day?
I was talking about this statement of 7200 billion transactions per hour every hour. Or 172,800 billion a day. A little different to 15 billion per day
The assumption is based on the bare minimum on a single activity (eating) overlapping at the same time within the hour; the rest of the world is still transacting on other activities.
The point I was trying to illustrate is that if this is the bare minimum, how on Earth are blockchains are even dreaming to become a cash replacement.
If we extend the period of transactions per day, including activities of the rest of the economy it is magnitudes higher than this.
Even if every man woman and child did 100 transactions every day that is still only 700 billion per day and is far short of your figure of 2 billion per second, since at that rate the peoples of the earth would only represent 350 seconds.
