21–30 of 199 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps the value is the fact a central bank can't obliterate the value of the currency based on a whim, using a bunch of esoteric economic logic to justify such policies?
No, instead a small set of Chinese miners can obliterate the value instead.
The value of bitcoin was always to evade taxes and launder money, both of which are criminal enterprises, the only thing that is changing is enforcement.
But peaceful political activism is criminal to many governments. Bitcoin serves an important purpose of helping to circumvent local product/service bans.
Yes, that is likely illegal. But it's certainly not categorically wrong.
The value of bitcoin was always to evade taxes and launder money, both of which are criminal enterprises, the only thing that is changing is enforcement.
The value of bitcoin was always to evade taxes and launder money, both of which are criminal enterprises, the only thing that is changing is enforcement.
The value of bitcoin was always to evade taxes and launder money, both of which are criminal enterprises, the only thing that is changing is enforcement.
Someone will reply and say it's not actually cheaper, but what is available for the average joe it is definitely cheaper. It's also faster and more convenient if both sides have bitcoin exchange accounts.
The value of bitcoin was always to evade taxes and launder money, both of which are criminal enterprises, the only thing that is changing is enforcement.
The value of bitcoin was always to evade taxes and launder money, both of which are criminal enterprises, the only thing that is changing is enforcement.
But to your point, even these laws are part of a new trend. Money laundering is a relatively new crime, and widespread taxation of private transactions only came into force in the early 20th century, with governments around the world instituting income taxation.
50 years ago, almost all transactions were in cash, and the income tax was widely evaded through the use of cash. The government knew very little about what people were buying and how much wealth they had. With the emergence of electronic payment systems, large Trusted Third Parties emerged that collated transactions, and settled them periodically through the respective central bank. These TTPs became gatekeepers and information gatherers, and enabled central authorities to monitor the most intimate interactions of the population - their financial interactions - in incredible detail. Cryptocurrency holds the promise of returning privacy and economic power back to the decentralized distribution that historically existed, but power, once attained, is jealously guarded, and those who have it will likely not want to give it up.
To understand why, you have to understand System D. System D is the global informal economy, and it is $14 trillion in size.
It provides a lifeline for hundreds of millions of people around the world who cannot operate in the formal economy due to a myriad of structural deficiencies in their economy. The only type of money that works in System D is cash. With electronic cash, the opportunities System D affords expand. Suddenly people in the informal economy can rent servers, and sell digital music online. They are not just confined to their local economy. The benefits of economic development through expansion of System D, in reducing mortality rates, crime and civil strife, far outweigh the cost of criminal activity that is enabled by electronic cash at the margins.
So if I sell a bitcoin to my friend for cash, I'm breaking the law?
(Edited to add that IANAL and none of this is actually legal advice.)