From: Tim Philp <bplib@wat.hookup.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 02:19:06 +0800
To: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Subject: Re: E-cash and Interest
In-Reply-To: <m0ta43a-00090DC@pacifier.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.91.960110123705.26842B-100000@nic.wat.hookup.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Jim:
	In some respects, it might actually be better. I recall attending 
an investment talk where the guru said that a dollar tax avoided was 
better than a dollar earned because it was less work! <g>

===================================
For PGP Public Key, Send E-mail to:
pgp-public-keys@swissnet.ai.mit.edu
In Subject line type:
GET PHILP
===================================



On Wed, 10 Jan 1996, jim bell wrote:

> At 08:20 AM 1/10/96 -0500, you wrote:
> >
> >I think that you have hit the nail on the head. Money could still 'earn' 
> >interest until it is spent. The 'bank' still has the 'real' money. In 
> >fact, it is an improvement over cash, in that you could still earn 
> >interest on the money on your hard drive.
> >Thanks for the clarification.
> 
> I think there is another way of looking at the ecash/interest situation:
> >From upside down, so to speak.  If the USE of Ecash avoids (legally or
> illegally) income or sales taxes, that constitutes an "interest," in an odd
> sort of way.  Not "real" interest, of course, but the next best thing.
> 
>