Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 231 posts

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#71

Post by ethanwillis »

dqpb wrote: post #39
kgwgk wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing of value is being created, at least not of the magnitude of the apparent “value” of the bubble, so making money off bitcoin is by definition getting money from someone else. Clearly it cannot work forever, and those who are left holding the bag won’t be happy.

For an “infrastructure” that burns dozens of terawatts of power per year I would at least expect fast transactions, and yet...

MFW it takes up to two weeks for an international wire transfer to clear.

MFW banks are closed on Sundays.

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#72

Post by Agebor »

pedrocr wrote: post #35
Agebor wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that speculative on the long term IMO. In the 80s and 90s, we found a way of connecting many computers together and here we are. Now we found a way to create programmable: trust, value, scarcity and incentives. If that's not going to change the society over the next 20-30 years, I don't know what will. Only land ownership could remain in the space of interest of governments then (being immovable).

>Now we found a way to create programmable: trust, value, scarcity and incentives. I've seen variations of this argument repeated often. It sounds sexy but then when you probe it's hard to nail down something big enough we can't currently do that becomes possible. Financial markets are already very sophisticated and if anything retail investors are still not using the great products out there as much as they should (…

> index funds are huge and yet most people still prepare very poorly for retirement

Retail financial products are only just now entering the internet era. At least in UK, before 2017 we did not have Vanguard, Monzo, Revolut. Nutmeg was less known. Older banks and investment accounts are still relatively hard to use via the internet (e.g. requiring ancient identity verification methods) and understand for unexperienced.

Cryptocurrencies have a chance to bring much faster improvements to this space. I think the biggest question right now is whether crypto can become self-regulated in practice and avoid being regulated by traditional centralised means. If we can protect average Joe from scams and help him navigate the finance space cheaper and simpler, we don't need old government for this.

It's pretty much inevitable IMO, given enough time, because removing intermediaries reduces cost and friction of the flow of value. In the future, the average Joe might:

- create his personal wealth account with a portfolio, after evaluating his character and beliefs (similar to how robo-advisers work) - instead of keeping any wealth in cash money, a small chunk of his portfolio will be spent for each transaction he makes (while being converted on the fly to a chunk of seller's portfolio, with value expressed in a stable-coin)

I think the goal should be to stop using any form of cash as a store of value, which is just a part of pre-internet history now. With cryptocurrencies available now for anyone to invest, make mistakes and learn, we have a pretty good start.

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#73

Post by adsfasdf2332 »

non_sequitur wrote: post #2

Updated: South Korea Clarifies Position After Reports of Possible Ban on All Crypto Transactions "On Monday, Financial Services Commission (FSC) Chairman Choi Jong-ku clarified to reporters at a luncheon meeting that “the FSC is mapping out measures to restrict [cryptocurrency] transactions to some extent,” which he did admit include “an all-out ban,” Yonhap reported. “The restriction is aimed at minimizing side effe…

haha. A ban is not going to happen when their neighbor Japan has legitimized cryptocurrencies and they risk being left behind in a possible economic shift.

Keep dreaming though!

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#74

Post by adsfasdf2332 »

thkim wrote: post #48

Bitcoin and cryptos ought to be banned for good. Cryptocurrencies are scam and outright bubble that will bring down the world economy. There is no currency without an authority to guarantee its value. Cryptos are pure bubble. If there is any good in this thing, it's ease of transaction, which is a question of underlying technology - it has nothing to do with lack of authority or decentralized scheme that cryptocurren…

This could potentially completely shift the world economy, but not because it is a bubble.

The fact that cryptocurrencies don't need an authority to guarantee it's value is exactly the point of cryptocurrencies.

The value is in the mathematically unforgeable ledger, and the network that remains secure even after 7 years of the juiciest, sweetest honeypot ever presented to hackers.

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#75

Post by fragsworth »

thkim wrote: post #44
smaili wrote: post #8

> Australia’s central bank governor Philip Lowe warned on Wednesday the fascination with the assets felt like a “speculative mania.” Just curious, what is it about speculation that has govs so worried? It’s quite clear at this point Bitcoin has grown far too large and most are now speculating on its value as a store so what benefit is there to step in, attempt to regulate it, and risk its undoing? To me, I’m reminded…

When a bubble bursts, it's not just about some people, but it brings down the whole economy. I can't believe people have already forgotten what CDO has done to this economy. Bitcoin & cryptos are financial weapons of mass destruction. Any responsible government ought to outright ban them all already.

> Bitcoin & cryptos are financial weapons of mass destruction.

You need to explain this. Many of us just think it's a good replacement for gold and other precious metals. Is gold a "financial weapon of mass destruction"?

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#76

Post by thkim »

fragsworth wrote: post #75
thkim wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When a bubble bursts, it's not just about some people, but it brings down the whole economy. I can't believe people have already forgotten what CDO has done to this economy. Bitcoin & cryptos are financial weapons of mass destruction. Any responsible government ought to outright ban them all already.

> Bitcoin & cryptos are financial weapons of mass destruction. You need to explain this. Many of us just think it's a good replacement for gold and other precious metals. Is gold a "financial weapon of mass destruction"?

that's a valid question. three reasons why bitcoin & crypto is NOT like gold and very dangerous. 1) limited supply: drives up price enormously. almost endless. minimal supply, infinitely increasing demand. depending on how far this will go it can potentially suck up all liquidity in the world. 2) no authority, no price stabilization, meaning extreme volatility that adds fuel to vol & price rise, 3) ease of access: anyone can buy with a dollar, also fueling to vol & price rise.

how bitcoin will end looks very ugly to me in any case. either collapsing a global economy or bringing an unprecedented global inflation

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#77

Post by indubitable »

pedrocr wrote: post #35
Agebor wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that speculative on the long term IMO. In the 80s and 90s, we found a way of connecting many computers together and here we are. Now we found a way to create programmable: trust, value, scarcity and incentives. If that's not going to change the society over the next 20-30 years, I don't know what will. Only land ownership could remain in the space of interest of governments then (being immovable).

>Now we found a way to create programmable: trust, value, scarcity and incentives. I've seen variations of this argument repeated often. It sounds sexy but then when you probe it's hard to nail down something big enough we can't currently do that becomes possible. Financial markets are already very sophisticated and if anything retail investors are still not using the great products out there as much as they should (…

I think the major appeal is in what can't be done.

Did you know, for instance, that in the past ~8 years we nearly quadrupled the US monetary base? [1] What are your opinion on the economic decisions that led to this? The Fed themselves seem to believe it has failed to achieve what they set out to do which was to increase inflation, and to indirectly increase the real GDP. Here are a couple of interesting articles. [2][3] What of increasingly speculative ideas like negative interest rates? How do you feel about the government's decision to more or less ignore the mounting debt of the US? If the US dollar lost strength, perhaps as we move beyond the petro dollar, do you think it will maintain it's value as world reserve currency? Do you believe that banks, the Fed, and the government have your best interest in mind when making their decisions? [4]

These questions are rhetorical because your response doesn't matter. Nobody's does. Except 7 people in a room (currently 4). They make their decisions, you live with the consequences. Decentralized currencies change this enabling people to place their 'value' into something that nobody can manipulate, beyond normal market forces. The current absurd rise of Bitcoin is indeed somewhat scary and looks like it should be due for a major price correction at the minimum. If there was a central body in charge of Bitcoin then now might be the next time they decide that the next few hundred blocks will yield 10,000 bitcoins instead of 12.5 - just to try to lower the price and 'stabilize' the currency a bit. But this will not happen. The currency will continue unabated, controlled by market forces alone. This could be a good thing, it could be a bad thing. But you can make a decision without having to worry about the implications of what 4 people in a room decide. Interestingly this [inflation of supply] could be done theoretically in a fork, but then again it would be up to the market to decide the value and merit of such things instead of our 4 people.

In my opinion taking trust and centralization out of anything is a good idea. And this is something that decentralized currencies offer. Currencies whose value tends to increase over time have a sordid past. On the other hand I think that rather begs the question of whether we've 'solved' economics, or are just building up for an even lovelier epitaph before we even hit the centennial of 1929.

[1] - https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/BASE/

[2] - https://www.stlouisfed.org/Publications/Regional-Economist/J...

[3] - https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/t...

[4] - https://today.yougov.com/news/2017/05/11/trust-banks-not-uni...

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#78

Post by fosco »

fragsworth wrote: post #75
thkim wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When a bubble bursts, it's not just about some people, but it brings down the whole economy. I can't believe people have already forgotten what CDO has done to this economy. Bitcoin & cryptos are financial weapons of mass destruction. Any responsible government ought to outright ban them all already.

> Bitcoin & cryptos are financial weapons of mass destruction. You need to explain this. Many of us just think it's a good replacement for gold and other precious metals. Is gold a "financial weapon of mass destruction"?

it is far easier to transfer 10 million dollars wworth of bitcoin than it is 10 million of gold.

this comparisons are _not_ doing either bitcoin nor gold justice.

bitcoin is far more liquid, accessible and usable than gold ever will be. I will start calling it Internet Liquid Gold... because while the transactions might be slow, being able to transfer it across continents multiple times back and forth is possible before someone can go to their version of fort knox and put actual gold in a truck.

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#79

Post by abcdefghijklm »

freehunter wrote: post #41
dmichulke wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't they? Surely they can indebt every person with accumulating govt deficits (currently 62k in the US) so what's different? https://ycharts.com/indicators/us_per_capita_public_debt

I'm not on the hook for "my share" of the national debt. The government isn't going to knock on my door with a $62k tax bill next month. That's the government's debt, not mine. If I spend all my money but still owe creditors more, that's what I'm on the hook for. That's real debt.

No, they won't knock on your door with a tax bill. Because it's easier to tax you through inflation to finance that debt:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seigniorage#Seigniorage_as_a_t...

"Economists regard seigniorage as a form of inflation tax, redistributing real resources to the currency issuer. Issuing new currency, rather than collecting taxes paid out of the existing money stock, is then considered in effect a tax that falls on those who hold the existing currency."

Re: South Korea considers cryptocurrency tax

#80

Post by tomtimtall »

fosco wrote: post #78
fragsworth wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bitcoin & cryptos are financial weapons of mass destruction. You need to explain this. Many of us just think it's a good replacement for gold and other precious metals. Is gold a "financial weapon of mass destruction"?

it is far easier to transfer 10 million dollars wworth of bitcoin than it is 10 million of gold. this comparisons are _not_ doing either bitcoin nor gold justice. bitcoin is far more liquid, accessible and usable than gold ever will be. I will start calling it Internet Liquid Gold... because while the transactions might be slow, being able to transfer it across continents multiple times back and forth is possible bef…

People don't move gold around. They trade gold IOU's which can be transferred faster than bitcoin, with far lower fees.
Post reply on HN