Self-fulfilled prophecy. To be honest many stock investors even a year ago had been saying that the new stock crisis is already late. Depending on the measures taken by the authorities and the time of travel ban in countries, the virus can impact the economy by somehow disrupting the demand-supply chain (because if factories are not working due to staff shortage, production will be halted). If eg. car manufacturers because of that will be able to produce for few months in a row 50% or less of planned vehicles, this could trigger the panic sell-off on a huge scale capable of starting that crisis.

Therefore the question is - will they sell whole portfolio at once in the worst case scenario, or slowly in small parts. If the latter, and without panic selling off, we should rather not worry.

In the past, due to the religious reasons and ethics based on them, the rich had the moral obligation to help poorer ones. "The more wealth I have, the more people I could help". So then beside paying taxes, they had been founding churches, hospitals, bridges, universities, sometimes feeding poor etc.

As a result, their reputation had been increasing among other living, and stayed in the history - as the buildings or institutions had often been named after the founder.

The current economic system is has recessions and booms as one of its vital elements. We cannot avoid either recessions or booms.

What we can do is to limit the damage/increase the resistance of people and companies.
We can try to teach people to avoid going with the hype and panicking with the heard when investing (remember dotcom bubble burst?), and diversifying their portfolios. The bigger challenge would be to make people to stop living on a loan-fuelled consumption model. Live more modest, avoid loans, instead of showing off with gadgets and holidays (yup, there are such people) start saving (maybe buy BTC with some of your savings?) so then in worst case scenario (unemployment), you have enough savings to be able to live 6 months without a job.

As well, few last recessions were fuelled in a huge part by banks themselves - giving very risky loans to people who were unable to pay them off (eg. mortgage crisis in the US) or made shady/risky investments which either caused the collapse of some banks or declaring them "too big to fail".

Anyway, many economists claim you can see the recession coming by checking industrial production and housing reports - of these go down significantly, we are close to the recession.

Totally agree. As well, you should not use the same device for cryptocurrency transactions as for private and personal use (even if we are speaking about thousands, not millions of USD). Especially if on that device you are browsing for potentially unsafe content eg. porn, downloading files while having saved passwords stored in your browser. 

This is why in the end the authorities are aiming at having the same type KYC for crypto users as for bank account owners. And of course do not forget about one important thing - if the funds can be tracked, they can be easily taxed! Still, if we compare cryptocurrencies and banking system, there are differences which are an obstacle in making the same elements of applicable regulations.

The travel ban is a good example. For buying cryptocurrencies it is easy - you can ban people from different countries subjet to eg. UN sanction list from buying cryptos at your website. But as with the crypto wallet addresses, we do not have something like IBAN/SWIFT codes assigned to the specific country. Of course, there can be a partial solution provided - no access/registration for online wallets from such country, but what about paper wallets you can generate by yourself?

As BTC was created after the last financial crisis, we still need to see the reaction of investors during the financial crisis. If the demand and trading volume is going to skyrocket when stocks turn red for a longer time - it would be sufficient. So far in few countries struck with the local crisis the local reaction seems to be in favour of safe-haven asset class for BTC.

The question is - if investors will use Bitcoin as a safe haven asset of course - are we going to see a sudden massive dump and panic sell once crisis will be over?

In longer-term, the virus caused travel ban can have a negative impact on eg. availability of GPU or mining rigs (as factories/transport services in China are not operating on its full capacity, in accordance with contractual obligations)

In such a case, one of possibly best elements of European integration - Schengen Area becomes a real problem. Without regular borders and checks, people infected in Italy can get in a car and move almost anywhere in Europe by car within just a matter of hours. Considering that the Coronavirus infected might be unnoticed for almost a month - this could have a terrible effect and panic in the whole EU

What are the harms to the economy which take place due to the plague? Of course it would depend on the amount of infected, deceased and whether there will be a ban on travelling imposed.

If companies will be heavily understaffed/not able to operate (travel ban/stay at home order), they will not be able to produce in their full capacity/at all (or there will be no effective way of transporting already produced goods). Therefore the companies will not be able to meet their contractual duties.
Example? The 1st world. hi-tech is in many elements dependant on the Chinese supply (rare soil minerals, elements produced in China and assembled in the West, successfully exported elsewhere).

Is it going to hurt Chinese companies? Sure! Is it going to hurt 1st world companies? Sure - imagine that a car/smartphone manufacturer cannot deliver for several months enough quantity of their products, as the supply of eg. screens or batteries thanks to the issues with China is insufficient. If their sales would drop thanks to that by 50% (due to insufficient supply of parts), this would be a real issue for the company related to the industry. And as often industries and hi-tech are examples of overall local economy condition, this would be a problem.

Next - internal consumption and tourism. In such a situation, the tourism would be badly struck thanks to the global panic - people will be afraid to travel abroad (or even in one country). As such, the services sector will suffer (empty restaurants, hotels etc.). And many regions or even whole countries live from tourism itself.

All these elements will be then published in reports by officials about industrial production, employment rate, GDP changes as well as corporations reports - what will take place in two months from now on.

Such bad news at the end of April can trigger a big sell-off on stocks, or even initiate a financial crisis (depending from casualties, travel ban and panic fueled by the mass media). But as this would take place close to the period of Bitcoin halving, we could expect BTC (and some other cryptos) to gain 10-15% daily because of the stock market panic.

The point is that we are living in a global economic system. If we will observe such enormous economy as China crumble due to the super-deadly virus (which so far is not the case of coronavirus), the global supply-demand chain would be broken. This would not only affect China but the US as well - as really a lot of devices/tools/components are produced in that Far East country and assembled in the USA. Including well known American brands as Apple with their products.

It is hard to believe, that anyone in the US would think seriously that it would be worth to trigger a full-scale global crisis lasting several years, affecting all the sectors of the economy - services (including tourism), industry or even agriculture (as USA export food to China).

And imagine if China would have collapsed. Rebuilding industries, which are right now almost non-existent anymore in the Western countries (due to the own high costs, CO2 taxes etc. these had been outsourced to China) would take several years, cost an enormous amount of money and then provide such products at price levels a few times higher than the current ones.

Unless of course there are some madmen like in the first half of the last century...

It is more of a coincidence. Italy is not a centre of cryptocurrency mining being suddenly halted due to the virus.

What is and surely will be affected is the global economy in general. Due to the coronavirus, the demand-supply chain is already damaged. Components and elements produced in China are less available now (factories are either not operating, or just with partial capacity), therefore assembling or selling products from China is slowly becoming a minor issue for the economy of the 1st world. For buying vehicles/electric devices and whole industries being the final producers.
This could be one of the last nails in the coffin named global financial crisis. If this would turn to be true when seeing the global GPD slowdown (even negative territories) presented in official reports (like statements, that industrial production in Q1 2020 was -20% in comparison to the previous quarter), the stocks are going to turn really red, fuelled by panic - and we could see another ATH rush for BTC, and of course for precious metals as well.

Otóż mieliśmy już przykład w XXI wieku - na Cyprze kilka lat temu, zamrożono wszystkie konta bankowe, a następnie nałożono jednorazowy podatek na wszystkie konta z dodatnim balansem.

Nie zdetronizowały. Waluty tradycyjne były najpierw złotymi (bądź srebrnymi/miedzianymi) monetami (o mniej lub bardziej globalnie takiej samej wartości, więc można było nimi płacić na całym świecie), które następnie (bo było to wygodniejsze) zastąpiono kawałkami papieru potwierdzającymi, że ma on 100% pokrycie w złocie (znajdującym się w skarbcu królewskim/państwowym - które w każdej chwili można wymienić i nim płacić), oparte na autorytecie i reputacji danego państwa. Dopiero zbrojenia związane z pierwszą wojną światową i konieczność zadłużania się państw by rozbudowywać na gigantyczne skale armie i ich wyposażenie z budżetów państw spowodowało najpierw przejście ze 100% pokrycia w złocie na rezerwę cząstkową w złocie (i przejście bardziej w kierunku reputacji i gospodarki państwa jako czynnika wyznaczającego wartość waluty), a następnie totalne oparcie się wyłącznie na tej reputacji i ekonomii. Co miało miejsce przy prawnym ograniczeniu zakresu środków płatniczych akceptowalnych na terenach państw.

Do dzisiaj wielu ludzi nawołuje, by fiaty były jak niegdyś były potwierdzeniem złota z banku centralnego. Natomiast tak, możemy spodziewać się, że waluty w obrocie fizycznym będą zastąpione państwowymi coinami do użytku wewnętrznego państwa (które mogą bazować na części rozwiązań oferowanych przez alty). Pytanie brzmi tutaj - czy będzie wtedy jakaś forma zapotrzebowania na zdecentralizowane kryptowaluty w sensie płatniczym?  

Unless you keep separately private keys/seed phrases hidden.

Nawiązując do jednego z tematów na głównym forum BTC. Złoto było już historycznie rekwirowane w imieniu prawa i poprzedni właściciele w najlepszym wypadku dostawali grosze w ramach kursu ustalanego odgórnie przez państwo (USA za Roosevelta). Mało komu udawało się je ukryć, a do tego kary za jego ukrywanie były naprawdę wysokie (do 15 lat kary pozbawienia wolności).

Wyobraźmy sobie, że np. w 2025r. władze państwa, w którym mieszkacie/mieszkamy stwierdzą iż osoba fizyczna nie może posiadać więcej niż np. 1 BTC i nadwyżki muszą być oddane na rzecz Skarbu Państwa za kwotę 100 PLN/1BTC.

O ile przy KYC będzie łatwo wytropić osoby, które kupiły BTC, to jak uważacie potoczyłaby się dalej sytuacja z takimi osobami? Bo zakładając, że (o czym dyskutowaliśmy tutaj w innym wątku) w wypadku cold/hardware walletów, zawsze można skopiować go (lub zostawić backup), a następnie stwierdzić, że się nieodwracalnie straciło dostęp do niego - więc nie mogą ani wydać swoich Bitcoinów, ani np. zapłacić podatku za nie.

Co w takiej sytuacji? Czy uważacie że władze odpuściłyby takiej osobie (w kwestii zarówno zarekwirowania jak i opodatkowania zawartości takiego portfela), gdzie wszyscy mieliby świadomość, że utrata dostępu to tylko zagrywka? Bo jednak raczej niemożliwym przez najbliższe lata zdaje się włamanie na taki portfel celem jego wyczyszczenia.

Technically, if you transfer crypto to the cold wallet, you can always "forget" access details to such a wallet. And good luck to anyone trying to brute force hack BTC cold wallet!

If we will have internet available everywhere, we will see traditional fiat (notes and coins) to disappear for the sake of state issued stable coins equal in value to the national currency. Because anyway, banknotes as such had come into being as a promise, that you can exchange the note for a specific amount of gold. It can be totally same with digital state coins - as a promise that you could exchange them to physical banknotes, and then making them on the same reputation of the state as a modern currency

coins with a hole in the middle, allowing you to turn them into a part of some sort of jewelry.

In accordance with the legislation - $1000 and above requires verification each time anyway, but you need as well to check all transactions with "unusual patterns" and "without clear economic purpose". And this is one of the reasons why the verification process is extended even for very small amounts.