>I _already_ pay a mountain of taxes so that we > can have a government to prosecute criminals and a court system to settle > disputes, and your client should use those resources instead of expecting > the rest of us to be roped into paying for what amounts to an insurance > policy. Perhaps this is the answer - insurance. Whereby an e-gold accountholder has the choice of purchasing insurance to cover spends from his account. This ensures that e-gold's non-repudiable policy is kept intact while those who want insurance pay for it. The rest are not affected. The annual cost of bulk coverage is suprisingly very low. Recently Citibank introduced a credit card for Internet transactions with 100% protection by insurance. The cost of such insurance - no more than $1 per year! Even if e-gold is considered a bigger risk by the underwriters, the premiums would still be affordable (based on the above rate). There's an upshot to recent moves by Citibank to link bank accounts to the net and enable global internet transactions, even between those having accounts in other banks - it is like the banking empire is striking back (belatedly) at the turf of e-gold and others. Banks, despite all their inefficiencies, have a major advantage in this war - instant funding - they are already holding customers' money. One of e-gold's major advantages is the non-repudiability of transactions. Now with the insurance option, as Citibank is pushing with its internet card, aren't banks too in a position to offer non-repudiability for their net transactions? Expect fierce competition ahead. Regards, Chandra --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
