Bitcoin Forum

What will happen to cryptocurrencies (BTC) if when these 2 disc jockey's say, no more bitcoin ?!

Do You even care of what they think of it ?!
 ::)

Fixed that for you.

First of all the second most powerful man on earth is no longer the Russian President but the Chinese one; Xi Jinping.

Second; The whole point is that we do not need the government, bitcoin for many reasons one being that we do not need central banks to tell us how the money supply should be controlled.

In the U.S., creating a law requires more than just the President.

First you have to find at least one Congressman to write/submit the bill.

Then you generally need multiple Congressmen to agree on it for it to get through a committee.

Then you need the Speaker of the House to be willing to bring it to the floor.

Then you need approximately 218 Representatives to vote in favor of it.

Then you need the Senate to be willing to bring it to the Floor.

Then you need 60 Senators to be willing to allow the bill to be brought up for a vote.

Then you need 51 Senators to be willing to vote in favor of the bill.

Then you need the President to be willing to sign the bill rather than veto it.

I'm not saying all this can't or won't happen.  I'm just saying that there's a lot more involved than just what the disk jockey thinks of it.

Ever heard of executive order? Son...

what grounds would they say no?  Would businesses push back?

The Bitcoin economy could still exist but exchanging it with dollars might be very hard to do.

Yes. And the things that can be accomplished with executive order are quite limited.

Hmm... I always thought of it as a hell of a wild card.

It will possibly happen, one day.

Bitcoin is for now under no administration by its nature, this would cause many legitimate issue like money laundering.

Corporations choose what currency to accept not governments!  :D

Did you see PayPal said they were considering using Bitcoin yesterday? (3min in)

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/paypal-sees-20-billion-in-mobile-transactions-WlokACTBRterdjHAJGNB6w.html

This is a thinly veiled message to governments I suspect.

The legal implications of bitcoin are interesting, governments can get a handle on it through 2 mechanisms (that I have read about, maybe more)

1. regulating the exchanges which convert bitcoins into their currency
2. regulating the bitcoin miners (this one is harder to do for mining pools since it's so vastly distributed.)

Yeah but governments can regulate corporations.  Why else are 99+% of current currencies issued by governments?

And then the power goes off, you get empty store shelves, the bodies and trash collect in the street everyone has to get around on a push bike. Trust me we tried that in the 70s. It's called Communism (government takes over the means of production).

You'll still live in a basement, but it won't be your mothers.

If the gov't finds some issue with Paypal and takes action to shut down the business.  (I know this is an extreme example but let's just take that as an assumption.)

Don't you think there will be another corporation that will pop up that does the same thing except adjusting their policies to follow the gov't?  I am assuming we are talking about US here.

The same as what happened when they said "no more piracy / bittorrent / music & movies downloading / etc". Nothing is gonna change. Maybe some sites are gonna be closed down, but they will simply re-appear in other countries and/or TOR.

Exchanges are no problem, there are already exchanges where the exchange's bank account is not involved, such as bitcoin.de and numerous OTC alternatives.

Websites and online stores accepting Bitcoin will just have to move to servers in other countries. For example if the U.S. forbids Bitcoin, hosting companies in Asia and South-America can expect some booming business (at the expensive of the US's own hosting companies, who can thank their government for destroying their business).

Not much, only to the extent that whatever they say may temporarily and unjustly scare some people away from Bitcoin.

Eh, no, not at all. There will be some temporary inconvenience until the alternatives (that already exist today) have grown and can replace the current bank-account-dependent exchange business.

1. You can already purchase directly with bitcoin now. Image what would happen in years.
2. Mining makes less and less sense since more and more people are joining.

There WILL probably be some resistance to bitcoin from the Old Establishment. Look at the forces trying to protect the Euro right now, or look at all the wars started to protect the petro-dollar. They won't just give away their power to the first digital currency that comes along.

That said, in the long run I don't know if there's much they can do. The best bet they have to defend themselves would be to offer an establishment-controlled alternative that seemingly had many of the same benefits (seemingly to commoners, that is.)

Bitcoin is a true disruptive technology that strikes at the heart of the western governance system (debt-based money!), interesting times are ahead.

No, because who wants to start a corporation in a country where the money is worthless, and the government can take your assets?

When it gets bad, the corporations just shut down and leave, until the population screams blue murder and revolts.

1. yes but how much regulation is there on mtgox transactions?  how much reporting do they do.  This will increase as bitcoin volume increases.
2. but the big players will start to get regulated.

The point is with time as bitcoin matures, regulators will follow and gain more control over the situation.

It will happen... in another realities ;D

That is a fair point.  Zimbabwe is a good example.  But that being said, USD is far more stable than that.  I assume you are talking about inflation and lack of trust for central banks.  In my humble opinion, for the US case, the central bank is doing the right think in quantitative easing.  They will print money until the economy comes back and stop very quickly.  They are not going to print forever, so the end result is that they are maintaining stability.  Trying to call US, Zimbabwe is incorrect here.