"I'm forced to use banks because the government won't protect me from criminals if I shove cash under my mattresses." Oh please.
The irony of your ill-informed statement is that if you want to put your money in places where it can't be loaned out to others without your consent, where you should really put it is a brokerage - at least, one in the US, where there are regulations ensuring your funds can't be loaned without your consent, and your assets are protected by SIPC insurance.
They do have your consent - thats how banks work and you agree that when you deposit money in one. It seems that you are unhappy about having to consent? But, what I'm confused about is what you are upset - your money in a bank is FDIC insured, so, unless you have account that exceed the limits of that insurance, you have no risk from you bank going insolvent. So, what's the problem?
Just rent a deposit box at the bank and put your cash there. They won’t touch it. Just like having it under your mattress but probably safer from criminals.
Would a so-called cbdc work? Get a bank account at the Fed that only gives you overnight rates (i.e. low but still higher than banks!), and only risk is sovereign risk.
Akin to the narrow banks proposals of a few years ago
You'd be surprised. Lots of evidence and some writings on banks in the Babylonian times, with similar concepts dating back well over 2500 years. Obviously much has changed. Oddly, SBF seems to have perpetuated an early form of fraud, "confidence men"
I'm forced to use banks because the government won't protect me from criminals if I shove cash under my mattresses.
The banks don't offer an "opt-out" option when you register. Real consent means you offer "yes" and "no" and the other party says yes.
It's effectively forced upon me.