Live data from Hacker News

EFF to FinCEN: Stop Pushing for More Financial Surveillance

eff.org

51–60 of 132 posts

Re: EFF to FinCEN: Stop Pushing for More Financial Surveillance

#51

I believe privacy advocates needs to be more involved in the financial sector for there to be any meaningful change and provide counter proposals to balance. The problem now is that a lot of cryptocurrencies are prime targets for money laundering, financing organized crime and terrorism networks. I often get shat on when mentioning that, especially by loud proponents of cryptocurrencies, but it is a real issue that m…

> The problem now is that a lot of cryptocurrencies are prime targets for money laundering, financing organized crime and terrorism networks.

You cannot fight money laundering by demanding something that does not impede launderers as such.

I believe prime majority of laundering happens in 100% legally compliant businesses, and banks.

Re: EFF to FinCEN: Stop Pushing for More Financial Surveillance

#52

The main real-world uses for bitcoin are (1) evasion of currency controls and (2) facilitation of extortion and fraud. That's all illegal, btw. The surprise is FinCEN didn't act until now to align its surveillance of bitcoin with the rest of the financial world. I also would speculate that the short action timeline and comment period have a typically cynical purpose to deploy one of a grab-bag of regulatory actions a…

>>Bitcoin isn't worth fighting for here, sorry EFF, but it is a useful canary warning about the current state of low financial freedom and privacy (by historical standards) and surprising degrees of unofficial suppression of viable alt-moneys. I would be happily surprised if the FinCEN reg forced unlawful use cases out of the bitcoin ecosystem leaving a vibrant, healthy marketplace....

This is a completely incoherent paragraph. In the first half you bemoan the lack of financial privacy and freedom, and in the second cheer on privacy-violating and freedom-suppressing FinCEN regulations.

Re: EFF to FinCEN: Stop Pushing for More Financial Surveillance

#53
post #32
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With cryptocurrency you can travel across a border with a million $ worth, by just keeping a 12-word recovery phrase on you. Cryptocurrencies can never be stopped, and will more likely outlive governments than vice versa. Long live tax evasion! Vive la liberté!

The problem isn't tax evasion per-se, but rather logic inconsistencies. For example, I've met quite a bit of people that don't want to pay any taxes. Yet they all want for them and their goods to be able to use roads for free, roads that are built and maintained with taxes. That's actually ok: two incompatible goals just means you have to make a trade-off; welcome to engineering. The problem is that none of them unde…

>For example, I've met quite a bit of people that don't want to pay any taxes. Yet they all want for them and their goods to be able to use roads for free, roads that are built and maintained with taxes.

That's a complete strawman and you know it. Any libertarian would say they'd be happy to pay to use privately-run roads.

>No idea why they are not able to understand that both things are incompatible. If there is some option that allows both that I am missing, they didn't manage to explain that.

Privately owned/built roads! These even already exist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_highways_in_the_United.... What's hard to understand about roads being built by people that aren't the government? Yes such roads might not be as optimally placed/efficient, but the libertarian's goal isn't efficiency, it's minimising what they consider the moral injustice of taxation.

Re: EFF to FinCEN: Stop Pushing for More Financial Surveillance

#54
post #32
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With cryptocurrency you can travel across a border with a million $ worth, by just keeping a 12-word recovery phrase on you. Cryptocurrencies can never be stopped, and will more likely outlive governments than vice versa. Long live tax evasion! Vive la liberté!

The problem isn't tax evasion per-se, but rather logic inconsistencies. For example, I've met quite a bit of people that don't want to pay any taxes. Yet they all want for them and their goods to be able to use roads for free, roads that are built and maintained with taxes. That's actually ok: two incompatible goals just means you have to make a trade-off; welcome to engineering. The problem is that none of them unde…

While I certainly know people who for whatever reason fail to understand the relationship between taxes and benefits, I don't think they are really at all a significant portion of people who have taxation-related policy objections. The problem is amplified in America because of the long history of institutionalized subjugation and discrimination and the liberal use of violence both at home and abroad are taxpayer funded. Thanks to civil and administrative asset forfeiture that adds up to billions of dollars worth of cash and property seized without the government establishing a link to actual criminality that they can establish probable cause on (or for administrative forfeiture, there's no hearing at all, and they account for $500 million to $600 million a year). In a particularly galling and absurdist sort of way, Americans every day are paying for their own robberies, or paying in part for the settlement they receive after especially egregious cases manage to get past all of the legal hurdles protecting the authorities. Since most victims of what normal people would consider egregious abuse won't even get past that, we're talking about the victims of Chicago PD's systemic Holamn Square torture site and the likes, chipping in, along with their fellow citizens, while the perpetrators received pensions and when needed, covered for each other. All that are your taxpayer dollars at work. In some places, the police, with a hefty chunk of change from the Treasury and DoJ throigh "equitable sharing", are simply more incentized to use that taxpayer money to conduct more no-knock raids, because the war on drugs gets the feds involved which gets the local PD a chunk of federal funding as well. All that come directly from your tax dollars, in many cases far more than what goes into infrastructure.

Your taxx dollars pay for the carceral state, they pay for ICE raids conducted through ruses and guises ordinarily illegal but not in the administrative law context. DHS has a discretionary budget of around $50 billion a year. A similar amount is earmarked for nondiscretionary disaster relief which pretty much lost all meaning lately. Of course, the agencies bring in somme revenue as well, but that's usually even worse news. In July an IG's report fouhnd that the DEA, without legally required congressional oversight, have been profitably laundering money for the cartels for most of the past decade, and had even somehow got involved in buying a private jet that was then left off initial budget reports. Like Aliens v. Predator, whoever wins, we lose, since this is self-justifying behavior, not in the public's interest but to create reasons for their own relevance. Some degree of fraud, waste,and abuse is bound to happen in all bureaucracies, but in America the impact isn't felt evenly. Black and brown parents have to have a second talk with their kids about encounters with the police. Immigrants, documented or not, pay taxes but receive either abbreviated or absolutely no means-t4ested benefits. In spit4e of contributing to the continued survival of social security, they're literally considered second-class citizens subject to indefinite detention. Or, for about a few thousand Americans, you'll experience the exact same because that's about how many Americans get deported a year to god knows where.

And there's plenty of indicators showing that mere spending isn't really sufficient to achieve any of the goals we thought we could just throw taxpayer dollars at. HHS has a $2 trillion budget, almost half of that is used in conjunction with medicaid programs and grants, yet, neither party seems particularly happy with the status quo, not to mention that it excludes 20 million or so immigrants. And we have really convinced ourselves that money can cover up expertise and competency. American farmers are seeing their entire year's revenue coming from subsidies due to the trade war this year. For so many communities in this country, it makes perfect sense to wonder where the tax money go, since frankly it's pretty difficult to see sometimes, and what's most visible sometimes is also the most disturbing, egregious, and kafkaesque one can witness in the system. When that's the vector you interact with what your tax dollars pay for, it's perfectly logically consistent to want actual services yet not want to pay for the abuse. And we don't do public infrastructure stuff well anymore anyway. Think how long it took for the 2nd Avenue subway to go up 3 stations.

Re: EFF to FinCEN: Stop Pushing for More Financial Surveillance

#55
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only valid for the criminal underworld if eventually there is a way to convert back to a legitimate currency and launder it efficiently.

Stolen goods seem like an efficient enough way, and I can't see theft going away even if you eliminate the "elephant in the room" which is drugs (by either decriminalizing them or hypothetically winning the war on drugs)?

If criminals are the only people using cryptocurrencies, it becomes socially trivial to criminalize the possession of software that interacts with cryptocurrencies.

Re: EFF to FinCEN: Stop Pushing for More Financial Surveillance

#56
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't tax evasion per-se, but rather logic inconsistencies. For example, I've met quite a bit of people that don't want to pay any taxes. Yet they all want for them and their goods to be able to use roads for free, roads that are built and maintained with taxes. That's actually ok: two incompatible goals just means you have to make a trade-off; welcome to engineering. The problem is that none of them unde…

>For example, I've met quite a bit of people that don't want to pay any taxes. Yet they all want for them and their goods to be able to use roads for free, roads that are built and maintained with taxes. That's a complete strawman and you know it. Any libertarian would say they'd be happy to pay to use privately-run roads. >No idea why they are not able to understand that both things are incompatible. If there is som…

[deleted]

Re: EFF to FinCEN: Stop Pushing for More Financial Surveillance

#57
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea of fiat currency only works when people are forced to participate in it. The petro-dollar was fairly obvious in the late 20th century, but now things are more subtle. The key thing is ensuring that all exchanges of wealth only occur within a currency controlled by the authorities. They are not really concerned about minor instances of tax avoidance; the primary concern is that large scale economic activity c…

I'm way behind on my news and weak on understanding. I thought I had read that the total number of bitcoin has an upper bound. How can you have interest when there's an upper bound?

Some people will inevitably default on their bitcoin loans.

Re: EFF to FinCEN: Stop Pushing for More Financial Surveillance

#58
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it a bad thing? Maybe taxes shouldn't be a thing, or should be low enough that it's easier to pay them than to dodge them? One of my problems with taxes is that it's essentially a free, automatically-replenishing pool of money for stupid politicians/government officials to spend recklessly (often prioritizing short-term wins that give them the most political clout) without the "pressure" a typical business in a co…

Very few low-tax countries are pleasant to live in for the average human being. Clamors for low tax are inevitably made by millionaires or misguided people that believe they might one day be millionaires. Taxes exist for a good reason and have a demonstrable positive effect on the societies where they are levied. Trust in politicians doesn't factor into that, as taxes are generally spent by government officials.

Maybe in the nice countries taxes are high because it's possible for them to be high, what with it being a nice country full of nice rich people that accept to be taxed.

Maybe in not-so-nice poor countries (which again means the people, we're not talking about the landscape here) the goverment would love nothing more than to raise taxes but it's impossible for them because the people just won't take it.

Oh, and if you're still thinking the other way around: No, starting with high taxes doesn't work to make your not-so-nice country into a nice one (Google "Communism")

Re: EFF to FinCEN: Stop Pushing for More Financial Surveillance

#59
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only valid for the criminal underworld if eventually there is a way to convert back to a legitimate currency and launder it efficiently.

Stolen goods seem like an efficient enough way, and I can't see theft going away even if you eliminate the "elephant in the room" which is drugs (by either decriminalizing them or hypothetically winning the war on drugs)?

Theft doesn’t scale that very well. You try laundering $10 million by selling stolen goods at the pub. It’ll take you a while, and I can guarantee that the police are gonna notice.

Even then you’re just turning your goods into cash. Which is still difficult to spend when buying high value assets like property. At some point if you’re a criminal that wants to spend their cash, and live in a developed country you need to turn your crypto into clean fiat in a bank account, or prove the crypto didn’t come from illicit sources.

Re: EFF to FinCEN: Stop Pushing for More Financial Surveillance

#60
post #32
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With cryptocurrency you can travel across a border with a million $ worth, by just keeping a 12-word recovery phrase on you. Cryptocurrencies can never be stopped, and will more likely outlive governments than vice versa. Long live tax evasion! Vive la liberté!

The problem isn't tax evasion per-se, but rather logic inconsistencies. For example, I've met quite a bit of people that don't want to pay any taxes. Yet they all want for them and their goods to be able to use roads for free, roads that are built and maintained with taxes. That's actually ok: two incompatible goals just means you have to make a trade-off; welcome to engineering. The problem is that none of them unde…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN