It is a nice design, it has some similarities with our design, but we are not competing with your project.
Your project has some unique features that are very special (the unique names is a great feature and adds a lot of value)

Instead we are focused on issuing a value based piece in high quantity that can be used as barter in perpetuity without removing Bitcoins from the market, requires no trust (not even needing to trust the issuer that they haven't already spent an embedded bitcoin) and one that maintains the same anonymity that you might expect from the change in your pocket without any special procedures.

The simple reason is that you don't fix accounting compliance matters in the currency, you put those fixes in accounting software.
The accounting software stores all the additional fields that are important to it as a part of the transactions.
Then the small business quickbooks software, can send a payment to the larger company SAP software (which has to contend with multi-jurisdictional compliance issues) which further issues payroll in 11 different countries.

The fact that there isn't a currency that does GAAP compliance on its own may be because GAAP rules change, and currency is not meant to change, it is meant to be stable.

The surest way to get a project to fail, is to try to make that project do things that it ought not be doing.

There you have it.  That may be the essence of your disagreement with them.
Your claim is that capitalism is basket of things that includes states.
Their claim, (which is inherent in their very name), is that capitalism can exist without a state, and that this would solve the problems that you have in the capitalism basket.

I can't claim to speak for the AnCaps, but I think they do not ignore state power in any way.
Rather they seek to make state power redundant or obsolete, and to separate the influence of capital upon state power.
By your description of the oppression and coercion inherent in naked stateless capitalism, it seems you often mean what most might call enticement.  The rights of violence is the monopoly of the state.

This reason for payment record is the responsibility of the compliance software.  Not the responsibility of the currency.

Easy or not, it is the wrong place to solve that problem.  Compliance regimes vary with geography, jurisdiction, and time.
The burden of them must be tied to those compliance regimes, not to the currency, even when the currency is software.
The fact that bitcoin goes further toward making compliance easy than any other currency existing, does not change where the responsibility rests.
GAAP compliance software is the place for it. 
The same is true for PCI compliance software, FINcen compliance software, and the plethora of other local and regional regulation authorities.
Not all compliance regimes are even compatible with each other.  If currencies were responsible for all compliance, a global currency would be forever impossible.

Easy money covers over a lot of problems. 
Junk bonds were only paying 5-6% and were selling well.
Now that money is starting to tighten, the game is going to change.  We are going to start to see those problems poking through the paper.

Is your claim that quickbooks can never be used to make payments with BTC because if quickbooks puts a reason of payment in its ledger it will somehow break bitcoin?
Or are you completely misunderstanding my proposal as being one where bitcoin is changed to accommodate GAAP rather than accounting software be expanded to accommodate bitcoin?

The labor union might resist, but why would the toilers resist getting a better tool?
Those tools tend to make fewer people more productive with less toil, often followed by increased payment in competitive markets.

Payment for toil is a signal to the market regarding which jobs require automation.  It is both an easier to measure and more accurate signal, than whether the worker is learning something, to determine automation priorities.

Why progress in the dark?

This suggests that you would not oppose those AnCap fellows, if only you believed it were possible.
But you believe instead that Capitalism requires a state so there can never be such a thing as an Anarcho Capitalist geography?

Every job I've had has taught me something.
The learning is the responsibility of the learner.
The aware awaken, the sleepers slumber.

The point being, when we lose the difference between the aware and the sleepers, society loses.
That difference, often, is pay.

Payment is a signal.  It is information.  When we lose information we lose something of value.  a society that willfully destroys that, is not going to be at an advantage to one that retains it unless there is something of greater worth to replace it.  Present that counterbalancing social benefit and I will convert.

The nouns.

The subtle humor of the address was a delight. and the count-down is precious.
Thank you for that.  
Another tax on people bad at math is Darwin's 21's century gift to the cognizant delivered by santa l0phie.

The data is here:
http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/tic/Documents/tressect.txt
From the US Treasury.

The monthly variation has a fairly high beta compared to 12 month rolling, of course.

Pay is to coercion as exoneration is to execution.  This does not in any way suggest that pay is equal to exoneration.
Pay is merely a civil agreement to perform for compensation so no it does not let you all the way out of state control, this is not its promises.
However it very well may put you all the way out of any particular capitalist's control, if by control you really mean enticement.


Taking the example of the fisherman.  I had a tenant that would fish in Alaska during the season, so I know just a little about it.  I do know he would work dangerous and difficult 18 hour shifts for weeks at a time with no break.  All the fishermen would get a share of what the boat catches and they pressure each other to be excellent, and the boat captain and owner gets extra for risking their equipment.

After each season he would then take some months to relax, vacation, and enjoy himself in the city of his choice around the world until he ran out of money.  Then he would go back and fish again.
He is a good fisherman.  Some of his friends worked several seasons in a row and together bought a boat.  He now works for them.
All of those people have choice and voluntarily made that life for themselves.  They are friends, and each are happy, though they are no longer all on the same side of the employee/employer relationship.
None of them consider themselves slaves, even if you might.

Replacing pay with coercion is similar to replacing execution with exoneration.  
It changes the meaning to the polar opposite.
One is force, the other is enticement.  One is compulsion the other opportunity and choice.

Consider instead that being an employee is the step after generalized schooling.  
It is that part of your training to be an entrepreneur, where you get paid to learn.
Its like graduate school for those that want to do things rather than research.
Those that graduate and become entrepreneurs can then engage in training their own employees.

+1

The government is some 22 million people.
Some of them may like bitcoins, some may not. 
The different parts often don't know each other.
To think that "the government" acts as a single entity, that is as naive as thinking that bitcoin acts as a single entity.

The sock analogy might be useful but here's a summary of what Money Laundering means to the US IRS
http://www.irs.gov/uac/Federal-Statutes---Money-Laundering

Knowledge of the laws in your own geography may be helpful in avoidance of trouble for yourself and those with whom you do business.