Re: Is Bitcoin legally a Currency?
What has historically made a currency legitimate defacto is the ability to pay perceived tax obligations, so no, Bitcoin is not a currency, because currently no taxing authority will accept it.. In the USA the US Dollar must be accepted for existing debt, under law and criminal penalties if not, so it appears the modern definition, at least in the USA, is to pay existing debt byway of coercive threat of force/death. Some might confuse "currency" with "legal tender". The meaning is as distinct as the spelling. The first has a practical definition, the second a legal one. There are private currencies. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_currency(Hey look, Liberty Dollar made the list and not yet Bitcoin? Someone should update it.) Then I guess the hinge-pin is my use of the word 'legitimate'. Allow me to replace that with 'defacto'. Bottom line at the end of the day is mean men with guns will kill me if I dont pay them with it and resist their attempts to imprison me for my inaction, which realistically requires me to earn it and use it, or I could go to prison or die, because they never deescalate or back off until equal-to-greater force is applied. They will keep sending more and more men until I pay, am in prison or dead. Then they take my property away from my heirs, sell it and recoup my refusal to obey. So, for my purposes, I meant a currency you can pay Caesar what is Caesar's with. You maintain the confusion between terms. Your description is of legal tender, and nothing really to do with currencies, legitimate, defacto or otherwise. That a particular currency is legal tender within a geographic region does nothing to invalidate all other currencies that may be bartered about. Legal tender just means that it can settle a debt under the law, such as a tax debt, which you can get by hanging out in an area with a government that taxes people. Legal tender also means that you are obliged to accept it to settle any other debt. It does not require you to transact using it, only to not refuse it if used to pay a debt (you can't require BTCBTC instead if $$ are offered) unless these are specific terms in a contract, and if that contract gets litigated, it will likely end up being $$ anyway as "specific performance" (another legal term that can require a different payment) is much more difficult to get from a judge. Look at other debts such as a restaurant bill. The restaurant is required to accept legal tender if paid, but is free to accept dishwashing, a good review in a magazine, hugs or anything else they might choose. So dishwashing can be a currency. What makes a currency is the fluidity by which transactions can occur with it. Like the current in a river, the more money flow, the more defacto it is a currency. So bitcoin is a "currency" but there is nothing either illegitimate or legitimate about that term. 50K transactions a day make it a pretty good one (though maybe not as good as hugs). Currency is not a legal term of art in the way that "legal tender" or "current money" are. |
|
|
|
CEOs tend to be Strong ENTJ types, though there are many exceptions. When you have just an ENTJ alone, you don't have a company, you just have a frustrated asshole looking to order people around that aren't there.  BTW this isn't meant to be mean spirited at all, I greatly enjoy the company of CEOs. They get the humor of this. The ability to be bothered by all the right things, and to maintain self-knowledge is part of what drives them to success. |
|
|
|
An AP-Ipsos poll
conducted August 6-8, 2007 showed that 27% of adults
admitted they had not read a book “last year” (Fram, 2007).
A recent report of reading in the U.S. indicates that 80%
of American families did not buy or read a book “last year,”
And 70% of American adults have not been in a bookstore in
the last five years (Candalmo, 2007).
This is sad. I <3 books. |
|
|
|
Looks like I missed the point? Maybe you can argue that Bill Gates and Steve Jobs sat around twiddling their thumbs, and just by chance they made billion dollar companies, but Zuckerberg made Facebook. Without him, it would not exist. So how could Facebook make a dollar let alone millions if it never existed?
I could argue that, but that would be stupid wrong made up nonsense and would just look foolish. If you want to argue against things that no one is arguing for, you risk looking like that too. Some CEO are overpaid, some aren't. My point was that none succeed alone, they tend to be CEOs of companies (which have employees that individually contribute). For what its worth, Gates, Jobs and Zuck each famously owe much of their success to stealing seminal ideas from others, and then successfully developed and sold them. |
|
|
|
Re: Is Bitcoin legally a Currency?
What has historically made a currency legitimate is the ability to pay perceived tax obligations, so no, Bitcoin is not a currency, because currently no taxing authority will accept it.. In the USA the US Dollar must be accepted for existing debt, under law and criminal penalties if not, so it appears the modern definition, at least in the USA, is to pay existing debt byway of coercive threat of force/death. Some might confuse "currency" with "legal tender". The meaning is as distinct as the spelling. The first has a practical definition, the second a legal one. There are private currencies. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_currency(Hey look, Liberty Dollar made the list and not yet Bitcoin? Someone should update it.) |
|
|
|
|
I'll have some to be sure. Selling is a different question.
There are only a few minted at the moment, and most of these are spoken for already.
As it turns out I spent most of today on the mint factory floor today as there is some equipment problems which will delay the volume production for a little while so I surely won't have enough to sell any meaningful amounts.
In case it wasn't clear earlier, if you want to pre-order to lock in the silver price at the current rates. That can be done at any time.
|
|
|
|
Also, keep in mind, a CEO might earn 2 million a year, but if he rakes in 50 million a year for the company it's a worthy investment.
No CEO has ever done that alone. Do you have proof? Would Microsoft exist without Bill Gates? Would Apple have existed without Steve Jobs? Would Facebook have existed without Mark Zuckerberg? Looks like you missed the point, we aren't discussing existentialism. Though each made great contributions, none of those are alone in those contributions. On the existence question, would any of those companies exist without the folks in the trenches? The CEO that claims they are making all the difference has more hubris than leadership. |
|
|
|
|
Apologies, deleted them for you.
I innocently thought you might be interested in a reliable alternative, no harm meant.
I've ordered silver from many places that seemed less reputable than akcoins and sometimes been delighted, but never from them yet.
If you do, let us know how it goes.
|
|
|
|
Also, keep in mind, a CEO might earn 2 million a year, but if he rakes in 50 million a year for the company it's a worthy investment.
No CEO has ever done that alone. |
|
|
|
|
Great! It looks like there are at least a few folks that will take part. Thank you all for that.
At auction will be one of the first strike pieces, suitable for presentation.
I'll organize the details as soon as we get some of the photography back (so you can at least see more clearly what you will be bidding on).
I appreciate all the fellow collectors here (as I am), but really this piece is made to be worthy of circulation and trade more than as a collectible. Durable enough to carry in your pocket and still be fully functional after years of wear and use. It represents a lot of earned expertise in private minting design, and a deep love of the great Bitcoin experiment. We hope they will be around and in use for many years to come and should hold up well.
Only time will prove that out, but as long as you have at least one current piece that has a good readable QR, your stack should be easily traded at current display value.
They are made to be inexpensive enough that everyone should be able to have one in their pocket and not worry about it too much. We will not limit the minting of these pieces going forward, they will be produced to meet demand ad infinitum. In quantity, can get prices that will let you use them at a small profit and they are priced to move. We know that we are not going to get rich from these and those that distribute them will have a better margin than we the producers will have.
All that said, these are also ground-breaking pieces, the first of their kind and a little bit of history in the making. There are only 40 of these first strike "hero pieces" made for photographic purposes and they are highly coveted by all of us working to make this project come to fruition so hopefully the auction winner will have something they can treasure.
We are also contemplating some early release volume sales (with some important limitations). If you are interested in getting some of the brilliant uncirculated general release pieces ahead of our launch, that might be possible. All we would ask would be that you not offer them for resale until after the formal launch date Oct 1 2013 at The European Bitcoin conference.
|
|
|
|
|
Some folks choose coins for their ease of hiding underground.
Some PVC pipe cut to fit your stack, some plumbers tape for a good seal against water, and X marks the spot.
|
|
|
|
If you like the Casascius pieces, as I do, you might also like our new pieces. You can't load them with anything, but they also do work as outreach and Bitcoin education. The QR code on them shows the current recommended trade value of the piece in Bitcoin. They are a nice way to introduce the notion of bitcoin as value. They can scan the QR on the silver as often as they like to see how Bitcoin and Silver relative value changes, as well as the value of silver to fiat currencies. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=269535.msg28835935They are not expensive at .25 BTC each so you can get as many as you like. |
|
|
|
I believe that the Bitcoin Foundation's argument is that in California BTC doesn't meet the definition of a currency.
That's irrelevant as it never went to court therefore it's not case law like the Texas ruling is. I've read various portions of California law and they are very explicit. They uniformly define "money" as something authorized by the U.S. or foreign governments. The laws distinguish between "money" and "monetary value", and in many cases the two are treated differently. Granted, these definitions apply only to the specific context (in this case, California financial regulations). From the California Financial Code 2000. This division shall be known and may be cited as the Money Transmission Act.
...
2003. For purposes of this division, the following definitions shall apply:
...
(m) "Monetary value" means a medium of exchange, whether or not redeemable in money.
(n) "Money" means a medium of exchange that is authorized or adopted by the United States or a foreign government. The term includes a monetary unit of account established by an intergovernmental organization or by agreement between two or more governments.
So next you need to look at the definition of "authorized or adopted by the United States". Since California relies on the US Federal for this, for that geography, there is a strong argument to be made that anything that requires authorization by the US Federal FinCEN as a MSB is an example of "authorized by the United States". This is far from a decided issue, as the FinCEN guidance is yet to be formalized by either the legislative branch or judicial. |
|
|
|
Yes, that is not a decided case, nor appellate reviewed (which is something you really want if you are looking for a strong precedent). The question of "legally a currency" is a strange one to raise. Law is defined by geography so depending on where your feet are at the moment, the answer can change. Whether it is a "currency" or not isn't even much of a matter of law as there is very little law on currency. There is law on "current money" which is a very different thing. A better question would be whether Bitcoin has "value" under the law, and that is clearly a yes is most jurisdictions that will matter. Value can give you standing before the law, as losses, damages, and enforcement will all hinge on this. Chickens can be a currency, hugs can be a currency, whether or not Bitcoin is a currency is not so important to the law. What matters more is value. What irked me a bit was the weird logic used by the defendant using outdated literature that said that Bitcoin had no specie, and that this would count against it as to whether it was money. It now does have specie. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=269535.msg2883593#msg2883593And, for what it is worth. The USA Federal Reserve Notes don't have any specie either. |
|
|
|
|
We have had some requests for purchasing some of the first strike pieces made for the marketing phase. Typically we have reserved these to be awarded to those that are assisting in the project development. Some few have already been committed for this, and there will be more needed for that.
We recognize that we have done precious few sales through the BitCoinTalk forum, and have not engaged in any auctions through this site. So if you are interested in getting one of these early released pieces, and would be willing to help us test this process out by doing so through an auction here, let us know and we will work to arrange an auction swiftly.
|
|
|
|
…and of course, there was Al Capone.
And Heidi Fleiss... That's what she went down for too.. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
