Happy Birthday Bitcoin!

A better question is, if they are going to tax it, and put the burden of proof on you, the taxpayer to explain where every penny came from and went, is that good for Bitcoin as a libertarian technology?

I don't think so. But it was always inevitable.

If you can't count on privacy with Bitcoin, and you can't pay your taxes with Bitcoin, but you have to pay taxes on all of your Bitcoin related earnings, what is the point of Bitcoin?

No one can inflate it? You've already got that with gold or silver, both of which have uses in industry, art and fashion.

Oh but it is digital.

Yeah, so was e-gold. Digital WITH RESERVES.
 


guerilla said:
A better question is, if they are going to tax it, and put the burden of proof on you, the taxpayer to explain where every penny came from and went, is that good for Bitcoin as a libertarian technology?

I don't think so. But it was always inevitable.

If you can't count on privacy with Bitcoin, and you can't pay your taxes with Bitcoin, but you have to pay taxes on all of your Bitcoin related earnings, what is the point of Bitcoin?

No one can inflate it? You've already got that with gold or silver, both of which have uses in industry, art and fashion.

Oh but it is digital.

Yeah, so was e-gold. Digital WITH RESERVES.
Click to expand...

If it is illegal to download movies and music, why do people still do it?

E-gold had a central authority to take down.
 
guerilla said:
A better question is, if they are going to tax it, and put the burden of proof on you, the taxpayer to explain where every penny came from and went, is that good for Bitcoin as a libertarian technology?

I don't think so. But it was always inevitable.

If you can't count on privacy with Bitcoin, and you can't pay your taxes with Bitcoin, but you have to pay taxes on all of your Bitcoin related earnings, what is the point of Bitcoin?

No one can inflate it? You've already got that with gold or silver, both of which have uses in industry, art and fashion.

Oh but it is digital.

Yeah, so was e-gold. Digital WITH RESERVES.
Click to expand...

If the burden of proof is on you how would they know you have used it? Taxing would be hard, I think making it 'illegal' would be more probable.

e-gold was a very different system from what i read, I have no experience with it.

I have my doubts about bitcoin too, but I don't see these as arguments.

If bitcoin has any chance its because there is no reserves and no centralized hub to take down, but at the same time this is what makes it vulnerable to collapse. OH THE IRONY.
 
you will be assimilated aka all your bitcoin belong to us aka STS is now STB

21cwbx2.jpg
 
o hai guyz said:
US Senate hearing on the 18th to discuss bitcoin and if they're going to try to regulate it or not. What do you guys think the outcome will be?
Click to expand...

Well, the US government doesn't really mind if people trade oil in other currencies so they will probably just let BTC go unregulated as well.
 
BlokBlok said:
If the burden of proof is on you how would they know you have used it?
Click to expand...
You misunderstand the burden of proof. With the tax authorities, they don't have to prove anything. You have to prove innocence. It's completely the opposite of how it works in court.

Now, you can use BTC for transactions IF you can isolate those transactions from ever (1a) touching the physical world, (1b) being exchanged to other currencies and (1c) having any record (electronic or otherwise) tying the transaction to you.

Any possible way to detect a trail will become standard procedure in an audit.

BlokBlok said:
Taxing would be hard, I think making it 'illegal' would be more probable.
Click to expand...
Taxing is easier to do than enforcing its illegality. See alcohol versus drugs.

Do we really think the USG is going to allow people to have a transparent black market currency to engage in non-taxable, and potentially "illegal" trades?

BlokBlok said:
I have my doubts about bitcoin too, but I don't see these as arguments.
Click to expand...
I am not invested in Bitcoin's failure or success. I believe my anti-state credibility is as solid as anyone here.

Whatever is money 20 years from now is what I will use.

As I said to Mattseh last night, a tax management strategy has to be more than simply arbitraging currencies.
 
I think it is a bit naive to say on the one hand, Bitcoin is going to bring down the state, and then on the other, say Bitcoin won't be the target of the state.

And it is even more naive to think that Bitcoin exists entirely outside the law. Everyone who has talked about BTC on this forum can be tracked down, and subjected to extraordinary rendition.

But wait you say, they can't jail 350 million people.

You're right. They only need to jail Luke for example, and half the people on here using BTC would stop. Public discussion of it would almost completely stop. That's how fear works. That is how the government collects taxes.
 
slayerment said:
Could you elaborate on what you mean by this?
Click to expand...

The methods used to get money into and out of the Bitcoin world is how you regulate Bitcoin. You don't have to regulate Bitcoin when you control all of the banks and merchants and the entire digital infrastructure that the technology relies on.

guerilla said:
You misunderstand the burden of proof. With the tax authorities, they don't have to prove anything. You have to prove innocence. It's completely the opposite of how it works in court.
Click to expand...

More people need to understand this.
 
groneg said:
doesn't this already go down with the standard dollar?
Click to expand...
The dollar is very traceable because all transactions conducted in it are accountable to tax. Every financial service, money changer, bank etc is subject to regulation.
 
guerilla said:
The dollar is very traceable because all transactions conducted in it are accountable to tax. Every financial service, money changer, bank etc is subject to regulation.
Click to expand...

I think he's referring more to non-electronic cash, ie. if the gov's point is "you can buy drugs on tor with btc" then by that logic US cash should be outlawed because "you can buy drugs on the street with cash."

- which is a good question. I guess it's because you can't really buy anything expensive with cash (houses, cars)
 
o hai guyz said:
I think he's referring more to non-electronic cash, ie. if the gov's point is "you can buy drugs on tor with btc" then by that logic US cash should be outlawed because "you can buy drugs on the street with cash."

- which is a good question. I guess it's because you can't really buy anything expensive with cash (houses, cars)
Click to expand...

One is legal tender, one is not.
 
o hai guyz said:
I think he's referring more to non-electronic cash, ie. if the gov's point is "you can buy drugs on tor with btc" then by that logic US cash should be outlawed because "you can buy drugs on the street with cash."
Click to expand...
There is no logic to the state whatsoever. It's a religion.

o hai guyz said:
- which is a good question. I guess it's because you can't really buy anything expensive with cash (houses, cars)
Click to expand...
You should see how weird my bank gets whenever I want to withdraw or deposit 5 figures of cash. They make me sign forms promising I am not a drug dealer or terrorist.
 
guerilla said:
You should see how weird my bank gets whenever I want to withdraw or deposit 5 figures of cash. They make me sign forms promising I am not a drug dealer or terrorist.
Click to expand...

wow, dude. my bank only makes me pinky-swear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom