Bitcoin Forum

The dealer can (and might) take steps such as using "throw-away" wallets to try to unlink the transfer from his person, but that's dangerous.  In all jurisdictions "structuring" transactions to evade money laundering or reporting constraints is a separate and unique crime and usually is a felony.  Therefore, the very act of trying to split up transactions or use of "throw-away" wallets in and of itself is likely to be ruled a crime, leaving any party doing that exposed to separate and distinct criminal charges (along with whatever else they can bust you for.)
[...]
Since the records never go away your exposure, once you engage in a transaction that leads to liability, is permanent.\
[...]
Because Bitcoin is not state-linked and thus fluctuates in value there is an FX tax issue.  Let's say you "buy" Bitcoins (whether for cash or in exchange for a good or service you provide) at a time when they have a "value" of $5 each against the US dollar.  You spend them when they have a "value" of $20 each.  You have a capital gain of $15.  At the time of the sale you have a tax liability too, and I'm willing to bet you didn't keep track of it or report it.  That liability never goes away as it was wilfully  evaded and yet the ability to track the transaction never goes away either!
[...]
Those who are using Bitcoin as a means to try to foil currency controls or state prohibitions on certain transactions are asking for a criminal indictment not only for the original evasion act itself but also the possibility of a money-laundering indictment on top of it, and the proof necessary to hang you in a court of law is inherently present in the design of the currency system!
[...]
I do not now and never will support Bitcoin or its offshoots, nor will I accept and transact in it in commerce.  I prefer instead to effort toward political recognition of the duties that come with the privilege that is bestowed on a sovereign currency issuer in the hope of solving the underlying problem rather than sniveling in the corner trying to evade it.

 We should never allow our natural right to financial privacy be interpreted as some violation of the law.

For many years I've made sure that every one of Karl's posts are in my daily list of required reading.

Karl Denninger, writes on Bitcoin:

He can't accept Bitcoin because he's fully capable of recognizing its potential and he'll do everything he can to oppose the idea of a stateless society. Expect more venom from him as Bitcoin becomes increasingly successful.

I do not now and never will drive a car, nor will I accept a ride from someone driving a car.  I prefer instead to effort toward equine recognition of the duties that come with the privilege that is bestowed on horse trainers in the hope of solving the underlying problems of horse travel rather than sniveling in the corner trying to evade it. 

I do not now and never will support Bitcoin or its offshoots, nor will I accept and transact in it in commerce.  I prefer instead to effort toward political recognition of the duties that come with the privilege that is bestowed on a sovereign currency issuer in the hope of solving the underlying problem rather than sniveling in the corner trying to evade it.

Is this guy what passes for leadership among mainstream libertarians nowadays?

This position is just one manifestation of a deep-seated authoritarianism that lies below his libertarian facade.

I used to read his blog a lot. But recently Im starting to suspect that he is an authoritarian masquerading as a libertarian.

He used his blog to constantly attack Ron Paul in the GOP primaries, and then during the election he constantly attacked the libertarian candidate Gary Johnson. Then after the election Denninger suddenly resigned from the libertarian party.

Its hard to believe someone can put out that much material on a daily blog without being paid by someone. IMO Denninger is a paid propagandist for the establishment.

to be able to spend that coin I must make the fact that I hold it and you transferred it to me known to everyone as well.

The design is such that when the system was initialized it was reasonably easy to compute a new solution, and thus "mine" a coin.  As each coin is "mined" the next solution becomes more difficult.  The scale of difficulty was set up in such a fashion that it is computationally infeasable using known technology and that expected to be able to be developed in the foreseeable future to reach the maximum number of coins that can be in circulation.  Since each cryptographic solution is finite and singular, and each one gets progressively harder to discern,

those who first initiated Bitcoin were rewarded with a large number of easily-mined coins for a very cheap "investment" while the computational difficulty of "extracting" each additional one goes up.

At its core the problem is that someone has to control the quantity of issued currency and credit in the economy via some means; since both currency and credit are fungible you must control both or you may as well control neither.

Thats proof that Denninger doesnt understand bitcoin.

In a bitcoin monetary system, money and credit are not fungible. Bitcoins cannot be typed into someones account. Bitcoins are easily distinguishable from credit.

A merchant can refuse to accept payment in MtGox credits and demand actual bitcoins instead.

Just like on the gold standard, banknotes were distinguishable from gold. A merchant could refuse to accept payment in banknotes, and demand actual gold or silver.

Absolutely.
Karl has fired from the hip without thinking more deeply.
When the Bitcoin fx rate hits $1,000 then he will realize the shot went into his own foot.

why $1000?  he didn't get gold when it hit there.

When he's staving in a gutter, we can all laugh at him.

Why is Yamhead Douchinger considered a Tea Party founder?

"Yamhead" bwahahah.  That's gold Jerry.  Gold!

Why is Yamhead Douchinger considered a Tea Party founder?

That's 100% pure misinformation AFAIK.