Bitcoin Forum

I'm from eastern Europe. In the soviet era noone could own private property, everything was belonging to the state. Then, the state rationed food to you, allowed you to use one of their homes in exchange for labour, allowed selling produce on government-controlled prices, and buying in predetermined quantities.

So let me ask a question. When you buy a home with all your life savings, does it become yours? What makes it differ from the soviets? I mean, obviously they recorded your rights to the building on paper, and now they record it in digital databases. But is it REALLY that different? You don't truly own either. It's all the government's promise to let you access it and keep away whomever should not access it, until they don't.

The only thing you truly own is bitcoin. The rest are promises.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make in your post, OP, but what I do know is that any cryptocurrency we buy besides Bitcoin that is in our non-custodial wallets
can be considered to be truly under our control.

Because if we buy Bitcoin or cryptocurrency but store it in a centralized exchange, we don't have 100% control of our assets there. We are only given the authority to access them, which is no different from a bank that can freeze our account at any time. Unlike non-custodial wallets, they can't do that, and the same goes for DEX platforms,
as long as we hold the seed phrase of our account address.

Anywhere in the world, everything is a form of rent. Even when you buy something and hold the property, in practice you’re just paying to use it during the time you live. After we die, things are left for other people. Nothing is truly ours. The only real form of ownership might be Bitcoin. But while we’re here, that’s how it is: once life ends, so does our right over anything. That’s why I think it’s not worth getting too attached to this idea, otherwise a person ends up falling into paranoia.

In the case of property or land, you never truly possess your property since there are taxes, rules and the state can still take it away provided there are some conditions. More like you are leasing it out of the system as long as you can maintain the rules. With Bitcoin this is not the case as no one can relieve you of it provided you have control of your keys. That is where the difference is. The first relies on the trust within the government, the second merely relies on yourself and the network.

Well I get your point and it's a valid one. But the difference between the Soviets and us is simply that we can decide not to labor and your home will still be yours. Yes I believe that no one truly owns a landed property because if the government for any reason needs to use it they can do it. But under the law, you are legally the owner of that portion of land..

Bitcoin is far different from this because we don't need to depend on the government for storage. You literally are in charge of what ever happens to your coins. So if you fail to store it well, you literally would loss it..

Freedom is the answer to your question. Communism control the financial freedom of its citizens through setting rules and limits on what you can use which means you will have the same properties even if you work harder than others.

On other type of government such as democracy, people have a freedom to do whatever they like and live on their own in exchange to paying taxes to the government that run the country public services.

Both capitalism and communism make the individual to a manager of promises. In communism, your life is run by the state. In capitalism you deal with debt, taxes, credit ratings. In both, autonomy is rationed. The first serious alternative that is not rationed in centuries is Bitcoin. It is just there, without caring about your identity, your passport or your ideology

Whether property under capitalism is different or not, the Soviet model is not the real provocation. Whether we are gaslighting ourselves on ownership or not. Perhaps the most we have ever really owned is what we can get without permission. Bitcoin is that. Your house does not

Look.

There's a big difference with the Bitcoin you can own if you live in capitalism and communism.

If living in communist country only make you able to invest $500 per month, if you live in capitalist country, it vary from $0-$99999+.

There's also a difference with the way you live, if you can't hire a housekeeper in communist country, you can hire housekeeper, babysitter, personal driver, personal coach etc if you're successful in capitalist country.

I understand your point, most things that we own are controlled one way or another by the government, they can decide that they need the potion of your property for development or whatever and you cannot fight them. They can decide to regulate an industry that you have interest in and you cannot also do anything about it, you have ownership but the government have an overall ownership of everything within their sovereignty.

Bitcoin is different because it is decentralized and that is why many governments were against it until some of them started to see that it is a store of value and now they are gradually accepting it. Bitcoin is truly freedom and privacy for it's holders, as long as it is in a none custodial wallet and you have your seed phrase only you have a total control of it.

Rationally thinking about this and I feel you’re somewhat right and but the thought is quite ridiculous and will sound obsolete to some hearing and understanding but I would say that it might seem not too different for real but it is, buying off a property right now is like paying a Permanent rent to the government through who ever is in charge of it, where your linage could hold to it and say it’s there ancestral home, I don’t really know how it’s done in your part of the Europe but where I’m from you know a property it’s more like a registration for permanency even though the government comes to take it away from you either through development then you will get compensated for it. Let’s assume you own a bitcoin as you claim it the only assets one can truly own, you’re prone to hacks and other kinds of threat so if you get attacked you may not not truly only the bitcoin no more.

Airs just some complicated stuff

The biggest difference is, in communism, the party decides who lives a better life.

You think in soviet Russia EVERY house was exactly the same, oligarchs of that era, the party big members, lived better than normal regular people. Plus, whoever was more loyal to the party, got the better position, instead of just merit.

In capitalism, you can be wealthy, some people are, but not all, just like the poor of communist, the poor of capitalist lives the same life, at the bottom, nothing changes.

Look at USA, homeless, drunk, drugged, terrible living conditions at the bottom, soviet Russia actually had better bottom than that. BUT, humanity decides who gets rich, Elon got rich because we bought his cars, not because he was loyal to the party.

I think the key difference is in choice. Bitcoin is unique in that sense because it flips the arrangement no one can seize it, inflate it or dictate its use without your consent. It’s the closest thing we have to pure self-sovereign property. The difference between state property and modern ownership is more about degree than kind but Bitcoin really does stand apart as something fundamentally different.

Capitalism gives everyone the opportunity to work hard and climb the social ladder to the top. People go to the US poor and they put in much effort and within a few years, they are millionaires. I know it doesn't sound easy the way I said it but such things happen. You can hardly find an African billionaire in Russia but there are plenty in the US and Europe. 

My country practices capitalism but the land also belongs to the government. You are given a certificate of occupancy and not a certificate of ownership. But the difference is that I can decide what I want to do with my house or land with less control. I can make decisions on selling and renting the house without much influence from the government. But you still don't own it because you need permission for almost everything you want to do with the land. The difference is that in communism the control is very strict.   

You are correct, Bitcoin is not controlled by any government and it gives full rights of ownership. You can move your Bitcoin to any country and still have full ownership.         

It depends on the government policies, in my country if I won the land then it's completely belong to me but there is nothing stopping the government if they want to take it and I have no other choice and most of the time they don't even give the right compensation for it and that's almost same for everywhere even if you own both the land and house still government can take it.

Gold is yours to,o right? But anyone remember Executive Order 6102, issued by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1933, "That order required all U.S. citizens to turn in their gold coins, bullion, and gold certificates to the Federal Reserve in exchange for paper dollars at a fixed rate of $20.67 per ounce."

So if the government wants to take what is in their citizens possession then they can take it in one way or the other but good things with bitcoin is digital so as long as you are not leaking your bitcoin possession data to government by KYCing to centralized platforms and using it on your primary wallet linking that reveals what is under your possession so if you want them not to take away wha is yours then keep your main stash away from your KYC linked addresses.

OP correctly noticed the similarity. Of course, strictly speaking, there has never been a single communist country. There were socialist countries. That's a very big difference. So, in fact, socialism differs from capitalism in that under socialism, instead of many capitalists/oligarchs, there is only one giant capitalist. This is the state itself. Legal opportunities that were absent under socialism were replaced by illegal opportunities. Since at least half of the country's economy was shadow (and this is typical for all socialist countries).

Maybe you don't understand property rights, especially as you seem to confused on the topic, but I guess it also depends on which country you live in. Many developed countries will have quite strong legal systems and independent judges who do not bend to changing government politicians. I'm not sure why you think bitcoin, which most people will generally store on a physical device, is any safer against government seizure. The fact that you say the soviet system the government assigned you housing, like it was some special gift that a citizen should be grateful for and could be ripped away at any moment, shows quite a brainwashed mindset. If you do not support the singular government, however broken and corrupt it was, your right to live in a house would cease to exist - that is completely different to a capitalist system where you'd have a fighting chance to keep your paid off home.

There is a big difference between communism/socialism and capitalist system (considering its current model in western countries). You own your house and it's your right to sell or make improvements on it. There are legal guarantees on that matter.

And in case the government for some reason doesn't respect your right to private property, it means they are breaking the legal terms which rule the country, so they are going outlaw. Therefore, it's not the same capitalist model we are talking anymore, but a subversion of it, perpetrated by the government in dictatorial and abusive manners.

So it's more accurate to compare that hypothetical model to communism/socialist, instead of comparing to our current capitalist one.

You already answered the question you asked if you go through your first paragraph. In communism, everything belong to the state and if your country is not practicing communism now but capitalism, then if you buy a home it is yours and truly yours if you got all the necessary approvals and papers. My country practices fake capitalism, fake because they can still cook up something to steal your natural resources and land, yet we still have right to sue the government when they try to encroach and they will plead for out of court settlement. So it depends on the country you come from and how well the people in power respect their laws and institutions.

I think it is in poor taste to equate communism to capitalism.

A lot of people who lived in communism can tell you all about how unfair, corrupt and destructive communism really is. In communism the state not only owns all the things but they also own your life. And if they decide you must die, then you will not be given a choice. In theory, it could work if the ones making the decisions were not human themselves and had no desire to enrichen their own lives. But that is what happens under communism. Everyone is equal but some are more equal than others.

Yeah after buying it becomes yours and the government does not have rights over it except there was a construction by the government that could extend up to the place you have the property and even so the government will still pay for the house and other things that might be there before they would claim possession of the property. You can only pay and it remains the government property when is the property they built for revenue, were someone would pay to stay on the property for the years they paid for and after then they take back possession. If is not allowed for individual to own a house in your country that is not how it is in my own country because everybody is allowed so long as you have the money.

It is true that the government can take away your properties should you violate some laws. Which gives off the impression that the government can just do anything to your property. But the difference in a soviet and a non soviet nation is freedom of movement. In soviet, you can't buy or sell your property but you can do that in a non soviet nation. So basically, be a good citizen and you can do whatever you want with your properties in a non soviet nation.

Communism is mostly aimed at the societal benefits where all properties and assets are collectively owned by the state/government.In systems like capitalism and socialism,the citizens interest are always valid, there's nothing like private ownership of land.Everyone works and benefits according to their needs.

In my country what ever property you buy through legal means and can prove it then that property is your, the only issue is that if you land is of important interest to the government they may reach an agreement with you and compensate you immensely so that you can give up the land. There is obvious difference between capitalism and communism.

I don't see this as a reliable comparaison because you can compare bitcoin to all other goods and propreties and he will always win. Using the same logic we can say that we don't have any mean of proprety of bitcoin if miners decided one day to stop adding more blocks to the blockchain, does this mean we don't really own our bitcoins. As for lands for example, it's part of mother nature; you may have a labor land then suddenly got burned by natural factors or invaded by troops of lions, does this mean nature take off your land from you?
In a transparent trustworthy system, your proprety is your proprety which should be determined by laws and legislations. No one but the government can take off your proprety and this should be for valid reasons and in exchange for equivalent value.

Well in actual sense landed property are all rented and not owned. there is nothing we can really call ours because government still have the legal right to change their mind and take back the property. Paying for this property for ownership doesn't mean you have %100 right to do what pleases you. Like I said everything belongs to government and they can do anything any day.without interference.

Yeah Bitcoin is the only asset we can invest and have total control over since it does not require government permission to make transaction.

Almost all users missed the point entirely and are writing irrelevant things about communism.  ;D

I think this is precisely the point that he is trying to make. There is no real ownership of any of this, it can be seized at will. It is more like an illusion of ownership. They can take it away tomorrow and you could not do anything about it.

This is where Bitcoin is entirely different. They can't take it from you, they can't even prove that you have it if you use it correctly. Sure they could keep you imprisoned until you give it up or torture you to force it out of you, but that is a totalitarian level of existence where Bitcoin seizure will be the least of our problems.

Are you asking questions about owing property for government or owning Bitcoin for personal or you trying to compare the two or you advising us to own Bitcoin and forget about owning property that government will later come take it away from you.

All these are what happened sometimes in some certain area where the state government has more rights over property situated in that environs. If the government decides to build some wide infrastructure, then all the buildings in the area will be demolished while paying little amount to the owners to vacate the area.

It happens, it's only better to own a property in your own rural home town for security reasons.

In the Philippines, you get a land title in your name after you purchase and pay it in full. But, there's still a yearly tax that we have to pay, which is called "amilyar" or real property tax. And you're right that we don't truly own it because it seems that we're still renting from the government and have an obligation to pay it yearly. Also, once you sold the property, we're also obliged to pay a lot of fees, capital gains tax, doc stamp taxes, etc. Too many processes and that's why I have come to that idea that if I'm going to invest, much better if I go with Bitcoin and other digital assets that won't obliged me to pay a lot of fees, and taxes after taxes.

If everything in the Soviet Union was controlled by the government, then of course people would not be able to buy a house there on their own. If everything was in the name of the government, then if the government gave access to those houses to the people for money in exchange for working hard, then it would not be private property at all. But not in all countries, but most of them have private property. Maybe there is such a rule in the Soviet Union, but in all other countries there is no such rule, but it is the private property of the people. But yes, you are right about the last point that since nothing is private in this place, if people use Bitcoin and invest in it, then it will be their private property.

Taxes exist in many countries in different forms in our country many taxes even we are buying home or having other things always paying taxes few are yearly it's not problem because countries are running through these taxes here main talk is communism.
I have no enough facts about this but as things are going into China which is also called once communist country, but now they are changing things through deep roots its surely giving positive view while in Russia things have never been like this here geopolitics also have important role.

Few things still need to understand no system is complete because pos and cons are in all with few are taking good limelight due to control on media and few things have never been opened up due to restrictions.

In functioning capitalist democracies, the house would become your property after you legally acquire it with your money and as long as you are within the legal limits of society you are pretty much allowed to do whatever you want with that house, you could demolish it if you wanted, destroy it without giving any explanation, as it belongs to you. In a communist country where the house does not actually belongs to you, you would not have the power to do whatever you pleased with that property as it belongs to the state.
Here in my country, as soon as you pay for a house it belongs entirely to one, so we can modify it as we please and the state is very unlikely to take over it.

Probably this Soviet union is limited to some countries cause for what I know when you purchase a house it's all written under your name and handed over to you, but not the otherwise. Or maybe you're trying to differentiate between when you buy a house under the Soviet union rule, the government will be in possession of the properties till whenever. So I don't really get the point on where your driving at but still I still think it's limited to some countries though.

Now, I would have to comment based on how it's done and controlled in our country. Usually when an individual owns a building it doesn't affect the government after registration and of course before it's erected there are some local government and bodies that consult a survey and register it's within under the council of that jurisdiction and when it's done there would be no further taxation from any body.

Then, when you bought a building from an external body there is always a change of ownership from the government and with your lawyer to attest and prove that a building was purchased from Mr A, to Mrs P. After the changes of ownership is done aren't to be taxed or controlled by government and any external body except for the utility bills which Is normal in every states and country.

Down to Bitcoin, of course Bitcoin is always seen as a safe haven and whenever you make investment on Bitcoin there are tendency you profits above expected only when you focused on Long term goals. Bitcoin can't be compared with rentals, though even though some people pays monthly while some pays yearly, Bitcoin reduces the stress and make you think less.

Man, I even agree with you in some points, but I think we are in a much better situation than it was during the Soviet Union... even though I did not experience it, I only know what I learned in school.

Anyway... if you really look at it, I agree that there's a big difference, considering that the state/government can simply take what we have if we dont pay taxes, for example. But the difference now is that we have much more freedom to sell, rent, inherit, or modify our assets with considerable autonomy in a country with good laws. This was completely impossible or much more restricted under the old communist regime, right?

That's why my opinion is that we shouldn't evaluate the difference between communism and capitalism based on whether you or I own something, but rather on the difference between the control and freedom that exist between them.

And of course, for those who want to completely disassociate themselves from the State/governments, Bitcoin is an excellent tool because it cannot be confiscated... you are its true owner (and the only one) as long as you can control the private keys to your wallet.

AFAIK, there's no property tax in China. Once you buy your property, it's all yours or you'll only have to pay a one-time fee, I don't know. That's what I've read from short comments in social media but I haven't asked that question from a mainlander.

You're right, and it also means that there is no system that's perfect. Even the richest ones have some flaws but if it's working well for their citizens, that's the kind of political that gives them peace of mind. Although as the government becomes better, people's satisfaction is never ending and we'll always find a better one and the worse out of it.

Just because of this I already mentioned in many countries not in all countries because few countries always think about their citizens, and they bring policies which always helps them for having peace in mind and live good life.
Most of the developing countries are facing corruption just because of these peoples suffer unexpected and unusual taxes and other problems, but sadly they are having no enough sources to handle these corrupt peoples because they use power and all things for pressing them and keeping them silent.

Rule of law and good education is always brought good changes but its always works in books and theories never works in practical which is dilemma for many countries and societies.

It doesn't give "everyone" the same right. There are still inconsistency, inheritance, bribery, corruption, there are still plenty of ways, and if you are a good person, like actually good human, with no rich parents, it would be very very low chance for you to have a decent life. Do you have the possibility?

You do, but it's a very low one. And we traded that for a better life. People saw communism, and said that we should not be like that, and then they went right the opposite direction, and yet, there are many European nations, that have socialistic approach, like how some nations prevent people to be at the very bottom, while charging higher taxes for the rich.

My suggestion is be a liberal/capitalist nation, but also make sure taxes are good for the corporations too, not individuals.

We're a developing nation and you're right. Corruption is rampant here but I still see some hope that someday with the new generation being educated and aware of who should their vote as our next leaders will help us become a better country. Corruption is the reason why the progress of our country seems to be sluggish. And there is a division due to political systems party and one and the other have their own personal views which they think they're better than the other. But, we can't remove those that have their personal interest.

Communism is stricter regarding land regulations, as all land is controlled by the state. This contrasts with capitalism, where individuals can fully own land.
In my country, which adopts many capitalist principles, when you purchase land, it becomes entirely yours. You can build on it, cultivate it, or use it however you like, provided you fulfill obligations such as paying taxes and complying with spatial planning regulations. This is why many people here have long invested in large tracts of land, particularly in city centers, since urban land values tend to rise over time and can provide substantial returns in the future.


While it's true that Bitcoin gives you complete control over your assets, and no one can take them away from you... but it's also your responsibility to protect them to prevent theft or loss due to your own negligence.

This is a very interesting topic but I think differently about this subject. I really think that it's not much different from communism what we have in our world because as you say, you couldn't afford private property in communism and today you simply can't buy it, so? What's the difference? If I can't buy/get an apartment, it doesn't matter for me whether it's a communism or capitalism if the outcome is the same for me.
The fact is, in reality, communism is bad but capitalism is worse over time. Capitalism is only good in the beginning but it always ends up badly. Rich people do not love giving money away, they tend to love collecting more as their income growths.

Funny how government seems to be perfectly capable for seize bitcoins when they arrest someone. Or where you think those bitcoins are from that governments have been selling?

So how does that differ from governments promise of not confiscate your stuff? It's literally all based on those promises. Promise that fiat money has value, promise that government won't take your stuff when you behave, or promise that you can keep your privatekey and no one will take it off you by force and throw you in jail.

But i am surprised if this a new thing to you. You don't "own" anything, not even your life. Because absolute ownership that wouldn't be based on contract and promise is a false concept.