The Reserve Bank will now issue formal projections of the future expected Official Cash Rate

The Reserve Bank will now issue formal projections of the future expected Official Cash Rate

By David Hargreaves

One of the more quaint 'guessing games' in the New Zealand economic landscape is coming to an end.

The Reserve Bank says from now on it will be giving an explicit forecast of what it in future expects the Official Cash Rate to be.

Up till now our central bank has in its Monetary Policy Statements issued estimates of where it sees the 90-day bank bill rates being in the future. But these estimates are of course based on what the RBNZ sees as the likely future level of the OCR, which the central bank itself sets.

All that's happened in the past is that bank economists and the like look at the projections of the 90-day rates and subtract around say 10-15 basis points to arrive at what the RBNZ is hinting the future OCR will be.

But no more. From next month's MPS all the cards will be on the table.

In an advisory informing of the change today, the RBNZ has issued the below graph, taken from the August MPS, which has had the official OCR projection added in.

It appears to indicate two things: One, that a drop of the OCR to a historic low of 1.75% on November 10 appears virtually 'locked in' and that two, the RBNZ appears to be forecasting a future level of about 1.6%.

In reality there will be no such thing as an OCR of 1.6%, so, the projection (which will be updated next month), shows that as of August the RBNZ was having a bob each way as to whether it saw the low point of interest rates in this cycle at 1.75% or at 1.5%.

More recent indications, courtesy of the strong performance of the New Zealand economy and some fledgling signs of emerging inflation, would suggest that come the November projections the RBNZ may well be signalling the new low of 1.75% as the bottom.

In explaining its new policy today the RBNZ said that historically the 90-day bank bill rate has provided a good gauge for the stance of monetary policy because it typically moves in a consistent manner with the OCR.

"Variations in the past have generally been temporary and experienced during periods of financial stress. More recently, regulatory changes in global financial markets have also been altering the relationship between the 90-day bank bill and OCR, complicating the Bank’s communication of the monetary policy outlook," the RBNZ said .

"The Bank views publishing a projection for the OCR as a more transparent way of presenting the expected policy actions needed to achieve its inflation target. It has no bearing on the way that the Bank conducts monetary policy. The publication of OCR projections as opposed to 90-day bank bill rate projections also brings the Bank into line with the practice of other central banks that publish expected policy paths."

The RBNZ said that as with previous 90-day rate forecasts, projections for the OCR are conditional on the central bank’s assessment of current economic conditions and assumptions about the future evolution of the New Zealand economy. 

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

58 Comments

Comment Filter

Highlight new comments in the last hr(s).

"The Bank views publishing a projection for the OCR as a more transparent way of presenting the expected policy actions needed to achieve its inflation target.

Can anybody point to an evidence based correlation of lower interest rates (OCR) leading to rising CPI inflation?

In fact lower rates are a reflection of tight monetary conditions.

Thus, the decline of interest rates to zero corresponds with a monetary imbalance in favor of deflation, if at least an abundance of deflationary pressures. This is something that Milton Friedman also talked about, particularly in 1998 with regard to Japan. He called it the interest rate fallacy, meaning that low nominal interest rates signify "tight" money conditions, or what would be consistent with significant deflationary pressure. It is and remains a fallacy because economists like those at every central bank around the world have decided instead that low rates are only "stimulus."

To correct this view, Friedman pointed out the basic, non-trivial distinction between a liquidity effect and an income effect. Low rates can be stimulative in the short run (the liquidity effect), but over the long run their persistence means something far different. A yield curve is supposed to be upward sloping given the core time value of money and investing. That arises from opportunity cost, meaning the more plentiful the opportunities the greater the time value and the steeper the curve (the income effect). Yield and/or money curves (the eurodollar curve and even the history of the OIS curve) that collapse and remain that way unambiguously demonstrate that "stimulus" deserves only the quotation marks.

Policies that continue to be categorized in that fashion while the interest rate fallacy remains are devoted to the economy that "ought to be", not the economy that is. The danger comes as Keynes warned, in repeating mistakes rather than learning from them. Read more

Is not the main issue Stephen that ALL these central banks are still using calculators and predictions based on the same flawed math they used 'prior' to 2008 GFC?( which none predicted) . In fact more specifically, from 2001-2008

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/

In the 1970s and 80s New Zealand CPI averaged of over 11 percent. Following CPI targetting in 1989 the 1990s inflation averaged around 2.4 percent and 2.7 percent in the 2000s (http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/monetary-policy/inflation).

Seems to be working as intended (despite the current Governor ignoring his mandate).

Alternatively the lower inflation could be due to something entirely different; adding a couple of billion low wage factory workers to the global total or curtailing the power of the unions or increased mechanisation/robotics or free trade or the addition of large numbers of woman to the western workforce would do the trick.
The inflationary effects of a thirty year credit boom supernova have been well disguised while the Central Bank Apparatchiks think they're geniuses.

Do you not think Keynesian economic theory has been discredited already. It hasn't worked for Japan. I would have thought the Austrian school would be more appropriate to quote. I think we are past the point of accepting main stream economic theory are we not. How long do you think the central banks of the world can maintain their stimulus forcing the world into negative interest rates. Never been seen before in monetary history. Interest rates cannot be allowed to rise as the western economies cannot survive it and yet neither can we keep printing money. This cannot end well. Economic theories are just that, theories.

To all politicians, it is just coincidence that the economy starts to malfunction just as the asset bubbles show up because Bernanke, as Greenspan, who has the most to lose by admitting what really happened, says so. Read more

Do you not think Keynesian economic theory has been discredited already. It hasn't worked for Japan. I would have thought the Austrian school would be more appropriate to quote. I think we are past the point of accepting main stream economic theory are we not. How long do you think the central banks of the world can maintain their stimulus forcing the world into negative interest rates. Never been seen before in monetary history. Interest rates cannot be allowed to rise as the western economies cannot survive it and yet neither can we keep printing money. This cannot end well. I believe traditional economic theory is soon to be sorely tested.

Keynesian stimulus efforts simply have not been large enough, this can be proven by looking at the stimulus packages from economies like Japan, Europe and the United States. Those countries all eased but didn't see much inflation, thus it is clear the packages deployed were not large enough. Consider the USA, it eased to the tune of ~4 trillion and got almost nothing, so why not ease by something like 36 trillion! Now i know your thinking hey, that will be hyper inflation?!?! To that i say an easy fix is to simply give the 36 Trillion to the rich, the job creators. They already spend everything they need to, so the full 36 trillion will dump in to assets powering the wealth effect!

No. The reality is that the printed money effectively all ends up in the rich's hands (via asset appreciation) but this does basically NOTHING for consumption ... so commodity prices go nowhere.
There is only so much milk Bill Gates can drink.

I think the point you're missing (or assuming) is that there are a whole lot of opportunities out there to create new "wealth" if only people had access to more fiat money. When the reverse is true - there is plenty of $$ and no more resources to plunder or consumers to laden with new debt.
We are hitting an energy wall, which is the basis of everything.

"I think the point you're missing (or assuming) is that there are a whole lot of opportunities out there to create new "wealth" if only people had access to more fiat money."
That is the whole idea of interest rate tools. The problem is they are corrupted when unproductive asset roi is greater than productive asset roi. There is currently a huge potential in NZ to increase productivity through cheap borrowing, but the allure of short term gain is too great.

There is no evidence to suggest we are hitting an 'energy wall'.
We would be seeing forward prices soar if this were the case.

"There is currently a huge potential in NZ to increase productivity through cheap borrowing, but the allure of short term gain is too great"

Such as?..... I think you're dreaming.
Energy price is collapsing because demand is collapsing.
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/7853 - have a look down figures 5 and 6 if you want evidence a wall is coming. In theory prices should skyrocket, but the economy cant afford that to happen.

NZ productivity is relatively low. My point being that with prudent investment we could raise this.
This results in a real wealth gain.

"Energy price is collapsing because demand is collapsing."
Doesn't that prove my point?
We don't see forward prices increasing, so there is no intertemporal crisis. i.e. we are not expecting to hit an 'energy wall'.
It is not that demand for energy is collapsing, it is that diversification is occurring in production methods.

"In theory prices should skyrocket, but the economy cant afford that to happen."
So then, where is the efficient allocation?
It doesn't really make sense..

Nymad. The world has relied on debt rather than productivity gain for the last 30 years - but kidded ourselves growth was mainly due to productivity. Why? Because it is way way harder to actually do. Voters and politicians let the banks chose the easy debt option for us. In NZ's case we plateaued once we hit fertilizer load, land conversion, fishing, water limits etc.
The energy wall works in reverse to logic because energy is the economy ... as energy gets more expensive to harness, it delivers less "fat" into the system for the economy to function, which means the economy can afford less energy (unless we outstrip this diminishing return with productivity increases - which we havent being doing). The effect is to drastically lower viable reserves of energy. A death spiral.

So where is the efficient allocation? Really? Surely you dont still believe in efficient and free markets?
The whole purpose of QE and stimulus is to try and skew this problem to try and keep energy up to the machine (and it has worked temporarily ...). But dont count on it lasting for long.

Saw this nice summary of the failure of economic theory ...

"Economics is a failure to appreciate what economic activity really is. Energy and resource depletion.
Or in other words, a dissipative structure."

Which 'assets' do you refer to?
Because if they aren't productive assets, there will be no wealth effect...

I agree, if we could rely on all that money to go to productive enterprise investment we would be sorted. If it all goes into pumping up speculative assets though, there will be no net effect.

Where is the fun in that decision ?

Central banks, truly what is the point, Poloz of the Canadian central bank , following a speech last week that hinted at more monetary stimulus, backtracked in a speech this morning suggesting it may not be necessary given recent fiscal stimulus , only to turn around one hour later to clarify what he had said in the speech did not mean actually what he said. With a currency nicknamed the loonie (which has zigzagged on every word) , one seriously has to question where is the mental imbalance .

The more currency created the less each unit is worth so it is true you do have inflation in those things that people need. A huge currency dump or helicopter money as it is now being called theoretically should increase the velocity of money by increased spending but it hasn't up to now. More of the same is likely with the very low or negative interest rates that result encouraging or forcing people to hold on to their money and not spend. An aging population of savers is poorer so they don't spend but save or pay down debt. This is not inflationary but deflationary. Psychology is a tricky thing that economic models don't always allow for or even get right. On top of that we have the demographics of the developed west where baby boomers are retiring and naturally spending less. The world has never been here before with these levels of debt. I don't see how you can cure a debt problem with more debt. It doesn't make sense. Someone going to lose 'the money' at some stage and it will be those with financial assets. We should be aiming to be those holding the 'collateral' and not the financial assets which will at some stage be lost. The federal reserve 'saved' the system last time by printing 20-30 trillion and bailing out banks and some companies globally but has only put off a crash that will be bigger. How many people know that two Australian banks were bailed out in last crisis with investors and regulators not told and CEO's saying Aussie Banks were different. The financial systems is built on confidence so we can't have people truely informed can we.

"I don't see how you can cure a debt problem with more debt."

Quite. It isnt a money supply problem, its a demand problem. They cant actually get enough people to actually take on more new debt ... in order to keep commodity prices up at viable levels. Huge problem.

Helicopter money might actually get some spending through the system but the reality is its really an admission that the system has officially become a Ponzi only.

One other commentator noted over the weekend , the steady increase in Auckland property for sale. Another surge noted this morning on Trade me, yet we apparently have a housing shortage. Absolutely another OCR cut

It's a good time to sell with the high prices. Not so much on the buying side. It's interesting as with my immediate friends no one is interested in buying at the moment (with reference to residential only).

An OCR cut may drive prices higher but the housing bubble is showing signs of running low on steam. FHBs aren't likely to take up the slack as most have fallen behind on saving for a deposit as prices have gone up. RBNZ is not all powerful.

However that said there's still a lot of new mortgage debt being added each month so I don't think the slow down is as dramatic as what it might seem.

I can't quite tell what you are trying to say with this comment...

We don't have a housing shortage because more properties are coming up for sale?
You do know that is the most rhetoric based comment you could possibly make, right?

Up there with "climate change isn't real because it snowed the other day".

Nymad , your comment is rhetorical not mine . I simply stated a fact , what you garnered from my comment is of your own interpretation.

The poorest of facts; anecdotal 'facts' and trademe 'facts'.

You should have preluded it with "ya know, just the other day I was talking to..."

Ny Mad, I have sufficient mental capacity to store the number of Auckland and its component listings in my cortex, and on their retrieval the number appears to be increasing , I believe this to be a fact. Most housing experts on this site have made the claim that a shortage of listings correlates to a housing shortage. If listings rise from 6000 to 8000 as they have, to 10000 or indeed 12000 is there still a housing shortage

Are you able to systematically deseasonalise those numbers in that big brain of yours? Because that would be rather important..

Correlation vs causation, my friend. Elementary econometrics.
The amount of ice cream sold probably correlates to the number of listings on property trademe, too. Does that mean that if we all band together and eat more, there will be no shortage of houses?

Jokes aside, you completely misunderstand what people here are referring to when they say "housing shortage". They don't mean the number of houses listed in your head or on trademe. They refer to the rate at which the aggregate housing supply changes, relative to the growth of the population.
It doesn't matter how many houses are listed on trademe if the aggregate supply isn't changing and we have non negative demand growth.
We also don't see a cooling of the asking prices relative to the number of listings, do we? This supports such a notion along with the arguments presented on interest numerous times regarding the current elasticity dynamics of the market.

Ny MAD, I am unsure of Cowpats brain size. I completely understand what a large number of people refer to as being a 'housing shortage' , I assume this specifically relates to Auckland. From 2006 -13 the housing shortage was indeed propagated by many , only to find that Aucklands actual population only grew at half of the previously assumed rate, suddenly the very same people became very quiet as it was shown Auckland was not in such a 'shortage.'In terms of non negative demand growth , I assume this relates to either the purchase of existing homes or new build , this demand growth that you speak of is significantly lower than for the majority of the previous decade , and indeed if listings continuously rise on any of the multiple real estate listing sites that may correlate to weakening demand seasonally or otherwise. As listings have risen median prices actually have not risen since July in Auckland , actually they have fallen which is contrary to your pejorative statement that there has been no cooling. Ireland , and I know we are different also had a perceived housing shortage, prices fell , and listings rose. By the way how many homes or the amount of aggregate housing does Auckland need for its current population, just out of curiosity

This is just jibberish...Structure your points.
Just a few rebuttals..

"Aucklands actual population only grew at half of the previously assumed rate"
"this demand growth that you speak of is significantly lower than for the majority of the previous decade"
In the last year Auckland has had its highest growth rate in over a decade. So you are saying that at ~3% p.a. this is only 50% of what was anticipated? If it is, you are saying that the population would double every ~10 years..

"...and indeed if listings continuously rise on any of the multiple real estate listing sites that may correlate to weakening demand seasonally or otherwise."
Don't confuse supply and demand side dynamics.
You are arguing that listings are reflective of supply side, so don't then go and argue them as an indicator of weakening demand.

"As listings have risen median prices actually have not risen since July in Auckland"
This might help you.
http://www.interest.co.nz/charts/real-estate/median-price-reinz
And if you look closer, during the warmer months when we have seasonally more listings, prices haven't fallen either... What a revelation...

Ireland, huh.
Ireland's market didn't fall because of an increase in supply. It decreased because of a decrease in demand.

The occupancy rate?
I don't know it exactly, but you can easily look it up yourself. I think in Auckland it is around 3.

Nymad, from your comments I appreciate that you are knee deep in debt, investment properties by any chance? Your failure to reply specifically to my points suggests you have become blinkered . You state that Irelands housing market fell due to a decrease in demand. There is currently a decrease in demand in Auckland, (and it is Spring). I did not ask what Auckland's occupancy rate is , simply how many houses Auckland requires for its current population. Out of curiosity why use 3.0 as the benchmark to determine how many homes Auckland is either short of or indeed in excess of.

I give up.
You can't argue with Dunning-Kruger.

Not worth replying to him Cowpat. He's a troll mate. Just argues for the sake of arguing.

Why do u say that justice..??
I think Nymad makes some good points and ask some good questions..??
I alway read what he has to say....

Probably due to examples like the narcissistic comment below Roelof.

I wouldn't argue if you guys didn't offer an endless supply of lackluster comments and logic..

I haven't detected any increase in listings in the suburbs I am interested in.

ham n eggs

I'm interested to know how you see this all playing out.

Mike Maloney and other 'money' historians and analysts are of the view we will have deflation and then huge inflation as the central banks respond by printing trillions.

How do you see that playing out with the collapse of the reserve currency which we are seeing with the dumping since Jan 2015 of USA treasuries and increasing trade/transactions outside of the USA dollar.

Mike Maloney. Well then, lets burn all the fiat currency now.

It pains me every time a commentator quotes a self styled messiah as an 'expert' on economic theory or application.
Surely you can find a more credible monetarist to reiterate your perspective?

Real Money - personally i cant see any nice way out. Basically we will see collapse, triage, collapse, triage, collapse. because
1. No amount of financial manipulation can deliver abundant resources or cheap energy
2. No amount of financial manipulation can RE-deliver abundant resources or cheap fossil fuels energy that we've already used
3. We have progressed technologically up a ladder while removing the rungs under us. There is no nice windback solution. Risk is systemic across borders - All supply chains, rely on JIT, high capacity usage, specific expertise and have very limited backup options eg NZ's electricity infrastructure is reliant on german made replacement parts etc etc
4. NO voting/striking/leadership change can make our collective "America" great again...
5. We are already swimming in unpayable debt
6. Helicopter money and Govt spend-ups on pointless infrastructure appear the last can kicking options to delay the inevitable

Can you deny that these events are playing out. The rise of the Eurasion Trade Zone, Asian Development bank, currency wars, debasement of currencies, the fall of the American empire (or hedgemony), global QE, gold as the best investment since 2001 (USA dollars) etc.
Was it Mark Twain that said history doesn't repeat but it rhymes.
Give it another 10 years when we have a new monetary system and judge for yourself whether it was a chaotic transition or not and if your were prepared.

Just too much conspiracy for me to take seriously. I'm all Trumped out. Bring on November 9 (10 in NZ). Yes, there are plenty of issues around the price of money being too cheap, some asset prices being too high, mismeasurement of GDP and productivity, inequality, etc. etc.. But gold will never be the answer to any of this.

I can't deny the events that are playing out.
Whether they will fulfill a Mike Maloney prophecy, I am dubious.

I like your pun of 'hedgemony', although it definitely was not intended.
I have one of my own (intended). I doubt a Mark Twain quote is fathomable in this context.

There is never any one solution but it certainly will be a part of the answer. 5000 years of history can't simply be dismissed because it doesn't fit your view of economics.

You need to ask yourself why is China quietly amassing gold as is Russia, India and others including even the central banks. Gold does well in a negative interest rate environment which won't change as Western economies cannot handle real (market) rates. Currencies globally are being debased with QE and currency wars where they are being devalued against each other. Where is the stored value in currency. Gold is after all a global currency with history on its side. I could go on but people need to do their own research. The world and particularly the financial world is changing rapidly where an open and enquiring mind is required too see it.

I can see blockchain technology being the future. But not gold. The current hoarders of gold want the anonymity, because they like underworld transactions. India excluded, because of the cultural affinity, the rest know they are risking failed-state status, so corrupt leaders want to be able to spirit something of value away when it all turns to custard around them. But their only customers will be other equally shady types. It will be a circle of despots who are the only people to value gold.

Basing a payment system on its usefulness for the corrupt is a very dodgy rationale. You need to hold real doomster views to justify that.

Transactions between parties that don't know each other need trust. Which is why the blockchain will take over, and probably quite quickly. CBA is doing a trade with it this week, a world's first.

History is useless as a basis of a payments model for a future world - unless of course you are betting of a collapse - and even then its very doubtful gold will be considered any differently to any other commodity. Many other commodities would prove much more useful.

I take it David you are not a subsriber to the theory as per "The Big Reset"? http://www.thebigresetblog.com/index.php/the-book/

history is a great guide in showing us what people value in a time of crisis...
When there is a loss in confidence in fiat money and govts. , gold does take on the qualities of money...
I don't think that will ever change...
Most of the time , though, gold is just a really nice looking dead weight.... in my view

So...how come Germany and other nations cant' seem to get back their physical gold deposits when asked( demanded in fact) for from the US?

Someone thinks it still holds value. Including many international central banks. They are not giving that 'dead weight' away anytime soon it would appear

yeah... thats right... its an expensive dead weight.. why would anyone give it away..??

Maybe central Bankers have less faith in fiat money than we do..??
This is what W Buffett thinks.:

Today the world’s gold stock is about 170,000 metric tons. If all of this gold were melded together, its...value would be about $9.6 trillion. Call this cube pile A.

Let’s create a pile B costing an equal amount. For that, we could buy all U.S. cropland...plus 16 ExxonMobils...After these purchases, we would have about $1 trillion left over…”

“A century from now the 400 million acres of farmland will have produced staggering amounts of corn, wheat, cotton, and other crops...ExxonMobil (s) will probably have delivered trillions of dollar in dividends to its owners and will also hold assets worth many more trillions...The 170,000 tons of gold will be unchanged in size and still incapable of producing anything. You can fondle the cube, but it will not respond.”

Circular conspiracy theory. Only 'true' if you read and believe zerohedge or other conspiracy blogs.

But http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-06-23/german-gold-stays-in-new-york-in-rebuff-to-euro-doubters  (of course, Bloomberg could just be part of this grand conspiracy ... )

Hardly a conspiracy theory at all.

Did they ask for it back? yes
Did they get it all back? NO

"33 months later and Buba, as the Federal Bank of Germany is often called, is not very far down this road. Paris still holds 308 tonnes, the 439 tonnes of bullion held by the Bank of England is staying put and the Fed is still sitting on 1,451 tonnes or 43% of the total."

All these "despot" countries wanting their gold back eh, Germany ........Austria, the Dutch central bank secretly buying 120 tonnes...crazy conspiracy stuff.
Niether of those two blogs I read or subscribe too. ;-)

"The current hoarders of gold want the anonymity, because they like underworld transactions."

So...are central banks included in that warped view on hoarding gold then? Jezz

Is Bitcoin being used by just non despots?

https://techcrunch.com/2016/02/03/lets-be-honest-about-the-problems-with...

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11734917

The assets we have are thankfully in Australia, plus the Taxpayers will be delighted, only 80 passengers went along for the ride...in our countries finest, with our countries finest.

It could have been worse, at least the Indian Continent will not have to put em up for so long. Aussies will get the largess and we will get the Bill.

Or were we paying for that double or quits ...as usual.??

Whichever way, the problem is compounded.....wonder if we paid for Travel Insurance...too??.

I do hate to be negative about our Dear Leader, but surely a Free Trade deal, means we win, not lose money, on all his exploits.

Wasting money is not making money, no matter which way the dollar is sliced, apportioned and distributed.

Especially when the Taxpayer is taken for a free ride, for key figures with our money to burn.

Buy the way, cannot one first class ticket, be enough for our dear leader.

Cannot he speak for himself. Or does he have an entourage of 80 to spin the deal for him and keep him company, whilst he glad hands his way around the Indian Continent.

Are we not in enough debt yet, might I ask.?

Will these expenses be tax deductible....or a burden for years to come.??

I am beginning to wonder...Just asking?...cos I fear I know just who is gonna pay and who is gonna be jetting around at our expense.

..pretty unreasonable Herald commentary. Any plane can have a system warning error. Credit to the piilot for not overidiing it due to pressure. Expect a some sort of trade annoucement... why else is he going with such an entourage of press?

That is a very bizarre Herald commentary. I don't think many men would be overly surprised that a plane can break down let alone get enraged about it.

Watch out you don't trigger this radical with the presumption of "men"...

Block chain technology is being pursued by the banks as they move us to a cashless society. This is of course being pushed to negate money laundering, criminality, cash jobs by tradies who aren't paying tax etc. As the globe moves to negative interest rates, cash must be removed from the system to prevent a run on the banks. I mean who would give out money expecting less back. People will and are increasingly keeping money out of the bank and hoarding it. This is why the 500 Euro note is no longer put in circulation and we have bankers talk about doing away with the USA 100 and NZ 100 notes.

Blockchain technology is being pursued because the finance industry thinks it may be cheaper to implement and operate than current systems.

As for cash, well this is driven by governments, who do not like the idea of unregulated (whoops, I mean untaxed) commerce. A non-cash financial landscape also makes it easier to push the cost of any future system failures onto the depositor.

Once again, the risk is being moved away from those who create it.

It sucks. Imagine only having as much money as the government says you have. But as a plus, you can keep it for as long as they say you can.