Bitcoin Is an Existential Threat to the Modern Liberal State

Post by tantalor » Sat, Apr 06, 2013, 7:10 AM UTC

sliverstorm wrote: post #78

tantalor wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're implying that there are always back channels? What if they could effectively limit the supply of something? Can you buy a live sample of measles?

You're getting way off track here. The assertion was that the government is afraid that it can't stop you from spending bitcoins, the implication being that it can with cash. Bitcoin vs. USD doesn't solve your ability to purchase weaponized measles.

Post by venomsnake » Sat, Apr 06, 2013, 7:39 AM UTC

tantalor wrote: post #75

johnvschmitt wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excellent points. This would, of course, lead to any individual, or entity, simply keeping 2 sets of keys. One legit, taxed, & one gray/untracked. That way, they could play either the clean or dirty markets. But, they still couldn't launder, or cross between dirty & clean easily. They'd still need a collaborative cleaner in between... Such cleaners are easily built in the model you mention. (Out of country, with hand…

You'd still need a good excuse for receiving money from out of country. "Sold a drawing of my cat on Etsy for $1000" will only work so many times.

Post by nullc » Sat, Apr 06, 2013, 8:19 AM UTC

lmkg wrote: post #33

gojomo wrote: post #25

FTA: Taxation: How do governments collect taxes on transactions in Bitcoin? The answer is they don't, and they can't. Though many Bitcoin fans don't quite realize it, Bitcoin's radical transparency could in fact be a tax-collector's wet dream. Every public-key, balance, and transaction is public. A government that wants to coopt and efficiently tax Bitcoin could announce the following policy, based on the idea of 'ta…

It's even more simple than that: There's nothing about paper money that enables tax collection either. And yet somehow, taxes continue to exist. Bitcoin is only a currency, not an entire financial system. It is a replacement for pieces of paper or shiny metal with doodles of George Washington stamped on them. It is not a replacement for banks, or credit cards, most other ephemera that people have constructed on top o…

Post by Drakim » Sat, Apr 06, 2013, 9:51 AM UTC

networked wrote: post #73

gojomo wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's money they're not expecting, no problem: they just declare and forfeit it to the tax authorities, like a bag of cocaine-drenched cash that was found in their store. If it's money given to them in payment for goods/services, they reject it as non-legal tender. "I'm sorry, sir, we can't take that form of payment, do you have another?" Software makes this very easy... even automatic.

Wouldn't this open up the possibility of a DDoS-type attack performed by having millions of transactions of 1 satoshi (0.00000001 BTC) in dirty coins flung at the merchant by someone's botnet? It would force the merchant to reject each one at a computational cost, whether by giving the money back or by transferring it to the government.

Post by eurleif » Sat, Apr 06, 2013, 10:02 AM UTC

skore wrote: post #88

trotsky wrote: post #34

The only way you could think bitcoin is a threat to state revenue is by misunderstanding methods of taxation. Income and corporate taxes are determined almost entirely by self reporting and laws that shift tax burdens from one entity to another which require disclosure. It's relatively easy to evade taxes as long as you operate in a closed loop where no one reports even with modern financial instruments. The problem…

> just ask anyone sitting on the large piles of stolen bitcoins that have yet to be retransfered. Wow, I never thought about that. Very interesting! Does anybody have more insight into this?