That's the status quo. A handful of entrenched banks consume all the data and share with state officials when asked (and increasingly advertisers). In return, every 10 years or so, there is a big bank bailout. If they get in trouble trillions in newly created dollars are used to buy assets the banks hold on their balance sheet to avoid a panic.

Yes, and that middle ground is the public blockchain. The transactions are visible but the identities of the endpoints are not. That leaves discovery of those identities up to the investigatory bodies following due process, whether through forensic blockchain or other methods. The blockchain is public but anonymous.

Unfortunately this is a problem of electronic money. Physical money is hard to track in small quantities, but as the quantities get larger it becomes more obvious and harder to hide the suitcases full of cash. (Or, in the Iraq invasion, C130s full of cash: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/feb/08/usa.iraq1 )

Electronic money of whatever form is equally trackable regardless of the value of the transaction. That forces a world where either you can drop country-destabilising quantities of money anywhere without any law enforcement or every microtransaction ends up in the security services database.

Anonymous billions are all fun and games until the second plane hits the tower.

> Anonymous billions are all fun and games until the second plane hits the tower.

What? security services can only spy on money, but just can’t do their main job of preventing attacks by humans?

Maybe we should hire a competent replacement for that job then.