Bitcoin Forum

Everyone's talking about bitcoin being godlike and all good, but is there some downside to it, excluding the funding of terrorism and whatnot, but as the deisik said:

Some scenarios like this, where bitcoin can destroy one's economy or something similar. Theories.

That's actually one of the positive use cases of Bitcoin. Hedge against inflation of your local fiat currency. Bad monetary policies ruin currencies all on their own, no need for Bitcoin on that.

This happens with all currencies. For this reason governments will never accept bitcoin. On the other hand bitcoin is the salvation for people. But you will agree that bitcoin will not help you in a country like Venezuela. If the economy is the fact you simply will not be what to buy and where to spend their money.

Everything has the good and bad sides, so does the Bitcoin too. Yes, it's used for ransomes, criminal activities, financing terrorism but so are the fiat currencies too. And it's been spoken about this before, no one is denying that bad things happen with Bitcoins too. But that doesn't make it bad.

Given the choice between the government or the people suffering during an economic attack, then better the government bear the brunt of it. Besides, the government would still be functioning if the people merely use bitcoins for earning money. I doubt it would be that easy for a country to go to 100% bitcoin use and the money citizens are earning would fuel consumption.

It would also have an effect on the attacker, remember how Taliban backfired on the US? A country going full bitcoin would attract the attention and fascination of people, which could lead to a wave of bitcoin adoption, eventually threatening the attacking country as well.

Since people in most countries can exchange Bitcoin for their country's fiat and use it to shop & pay for bills what's the difference? This only helps people bring more money to their countries thus raise their living standards and expands their career/job opportunities.

A run on a currency to bitcoin sounds like a great scenario. In a free market every entity needs to prove they are worthy of  investment and attention from the market.

And in the end, is it bitcoin that's bad or is it people that are bad?

It doesn't mean people won't use it if it's prohibited. The USA prohibited drinking alcohol and it didn't work out. Then they prohibited marihuana and it didn't work out either. Drug market is booming thanks to illegality.

Indeed, it's more likely as an advantage for bitcoiners and citizens who lives in countries with financial problems. Make their living entirely off bitcoin maybe harder to do than just say it due to bitcoin scarcity and high costly to get it especially after bitcoin reach higher price such as $10,000.

We understand, some people could use bitcoin for illegal activities such as terrorist financing, buy illegal drugs or money laundering, that's why govs have to regulate bitcoin and exchanges as the entrance to convert bitcoin into cash.

[/quote]

It smells only vitimization for me. There is always someone taxing the USA as a villain while the poor countries are victims. If the USA is rich it's because they worked hard in the past to build their country, if the poor countries are in precarious situations for a long time already it's because their own people. So, I don't think that is a negative impact that Bitcoin can generate.

I can't even imagine how powerful countries could ruin other countries via Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin price itself is not so much of a problem due to divisibility and hopefully lower volatility once prices such as USD 10.000,- are reached. The high cost factor to actually get your hand on Bitcoin in some countries may be a problem however, that's true.

Nonetheless I daresay that most illegal financing still happens with plain old cash and "clean" bank accounts and probably will so for the foreseeable future.But that's just an educated guess.

As if a coin has two sides, each and everything has got two side. The good side is appreciated and accepted by the one who understands it and the bad side is prioritized by users who always need to be on the safe side without complications. So depending on the user the good and bad of bitcoin varies. On recent days the bad thing happened with bitcoin is the security issue. More than 300btc got stolen from an exchange.

Why would the US, or any "powerful nation" for that matter, want to destroy weaker governments? They would just be seen as bullies by other countries and that would basically put a target on their back. Also, what would they gain from doing that? They would have to spend a lot of time and money to completely destroy a government, it is not as easy as just pressing a button. I don't understand how the first part of the paragraph is the bad side of Bitcoin. I think it is great that people from poorer countries are getting into Bitcoin and earning a living off it. If that is a way they can provide for their family and make sure that their kids don't go hungry at night, then so be it. If their government suffers, it is their own fault. The governments of 3rd world countries are always so corrupt, not to stereotype, and can't help out their citizens. It is the governments fault that it's people have to resort to Bitcoin just to survive. I live in Australia so my currency is pretty weak against the American dollar so I like to keep some of my assets in Bitcoin. This way I don't get affected too much by the devaluation of my money. Even though the devaluation is small, there is still money being lost that doesn't need to be.

Because the main actor is the human itself. The goverment just try to prevent the civilians to do something is include in the bad act. but remember the human has the brain. There is no reason for any parties to prohibited all of the things.

The premise of this theory is wrong. How is it even possible for an entire country to abandon their jobs and focus on bitcoins? What will happen to agriculture, construction, banking etc all very important to their survival?

In a country like Zimbabwe it is highly unlikely because of lack of electricity. Urban cities have outages too. The internet infrastructure isn't there, and where will the poor people in rural areas find the funds to buy smart phones or computers they cannot even power?

Your arguments are really convincing, but you did not mention the fact that in order to speak about the circulation of bitcoin as a currency need to have it all. For example, if the food retailers won't accept bitcoin because they're used to Fiat that will eat the users of bitcoins.The economy of any country cannot work with two currencies.

Any currency can be used for bad purposes, but bitcoin has a bit more advantage due to anonymity. This is not an excuse to ban it or stop using it, because a lot of people just earn money from it or do charity work.

This is something that wont be in motion for very long time. Japan tested first before they fully accepting it last month. So you need lots of preparations and lot of background work for this to be in motion at all. For everything in this they will always be good and bad point of view. Its normal that some accept it other dont that how thing work in real life.

Would like to say the same thing on which why would a powerful nation would tend to destroy weaker ones since they know already that they are more powerful than them and yes it acts like a bully  and theres no point on destroy weaker governments unless if its their mortal enemy then it would be possible. There are lots of things which bitcoin can really be used too as long you do have the power and the money to do it but it wont be simple as we think.

Currently people who live off Bitcoin still have to exchange it for their local currency, and they still pay taxes in a form of value-added tax if it's present in their country. So, a government which is "attacked" by Bitcoin can simply find a way to tax it. Of course people might start using Bitcoin directly to avoid taxation, but it's not much different from cash and current tax evasion practices, so I don't see any radical differences that can make Bitcoin a "weapon of mass destruction".

Anonimity can also be the danger in btc. Because as stated by the op quoted "funding terrosism". Certainly not every on can easily divulge there identity but it is a certain that anyone with enough knowledge could use it. Thats why there are always bad scenerios in every businesses out there. No matter good reason, there is always an speculation about some bad scenarios. It would be easy to avoid but there can be reasons to use it in bad purposes because of anonimity and thats a fact.

It's difficult to avoid taxation altogether, even when you buy stuff with Bitcoin directly (I hope this is what you meant), you're probably still paying sales tax if you're buying from a shop.
I guess you can find ways to also avoid paying that, by only using marketplaces for example, but that would be pretty diffucult if you want a full range of options when you're spending your Bitcoins.

For me government is a symbol of Corruption. I would be more than happy if government receive less taxes. It would help nation in two ways.
One is that people's real income will increase and this will cop-up with inflation raised.
Due to less tax income, government will spend larger part of taxes on public services and put less than before in their pockets.

If your government is already corrupt, they will always put themselves before the well-being of the public. Which means that less tax income will only lead to even less money for public services.

When Bitcoin accept by all people on the world's, the goverment will find the ways can control and tax fee Bitcoin. Maybe, they can use technology blockchain from Bitcoin to creating new coin for the world's or every country. This can helps easy to control user

I think what a lot of bitcoin users see as a great scenario -- Bitcoin bringing down the banks, changing the world economy, destroying the use of fiat. - This scenario has it's own associated bad scenario that millions of actual people would suffer during this shift of economic function. IMO.

In a country like Venezuela with high inflation, bitcoin could be used in a positive way if an employee gets paid in their native fiat currencies and they he immediately trades it for bitcoins. He can hold his earnings without the negative affect of high inflation. I don't know it that country allows this, but if it did and if there were convenient ways to convert it could be greatly beneficial.

For me the worst scenario is the loss of people's confidence in crypto currencies. Infighting between the miners and the users can cause more harm than the opposition to the government. In addition need time to adjust all the negative aspects associated with the use crypto currencies. Dinosaurs were unable to adapt to changing conditions and died out. The same can happen with crypto currencies.

The assertion might be right quite well but where I see the fault is the assumption of a government of the weaker country that is so weak and the US will just take over. Aside that US will not just come and take over any country they won't have any interest which mostly  will be oil and for a country as that, I see them having a controlling force over their citizen which in actual sense makes this assertion all wrong.

If countries are failing to provide something as basic as a currency, which is literally backed by nothing aside from maybe gambling on a country's economy, then there's a high likelihood that their country should be subject to such of an economic attack. If it wasn't for some countries supporting them, then they would very quickly be taken over by other countries and it would be game over for them. In this, it's worst-case an internal "takeover" by people who are fed up with economic incompetence.

Why should be bad scenario in bitcoin but not everyone focus on bitcoin. I work elsewhere but bitcoin is just as extra in my life. So I do not think there is any bad scenario in bitcoin. Because I still use fiat money as a means of payment. And I will not continue to focus on bitcoins. Because bitcoin is a way of transactions that use the internet network. So it's impossible for me to continue doing my activities in bitcoin. Because there are still many obstacles in the face. In other cases I still need fiat money as a tool of other transactions. So I do not understand what you call bad scenario on bitcoin

The very idea that Bitcoin can be utilized by a rich country (let's say USA) to manipulate and destroy another country's economy and political stability seems already far-fetched. Yes, it is quite possible but I don't think anybody already interested to do just that for now. What is happening right now in Venezuela has nothing to do with Bitcoin and in fact Bitcoin is becoming like a blessing to some of them...just to be able to survive in an economy running amok.

We have to remember also that there is a limit of Bitcoin in circulation. I think to use it to destroy even a medium-sized economy may require a huge load of Bitcoin and getting the supply for that operation can be a big problem. Anyway, this scenario is already making Bitcoin to be like the be-all and the end-all of the global economy. Compared to the global economy, Bitcoin and even the whole cryptocurrency market is still relatively small.