Yup, pretty sleazy. It's also a matter of perspective; I think this calls for a quote from one of the greats:


With that in mind, Eurocrats simply take the full "voluntary donation" that's been confiscated from taxpayers without even offering the illusion that they contribute anything in return, other than demagoguery. Which is worse?

I also really like the idea that taxation is a "voluntary" agreement between a government and its citizens when any government is a monopoly on the services it dominates, and prevents all possibility of alternatives to voluntarily choose from. You can have any color car you want, as long as the color is black.

Of course, without control over a universally-accepted money, both bankers and politicians are powerless. This has been a key factor for history favoring gold and silver over any other form of money - there can be concentrations of it in the hands of a few, but then it is no longer universal for lack of circulating availability (i.e. liquidity). Without liquidity, an alternative will be spontaneously chosen or the metals will be forcibly liberated through either market forces or physical violence. We know liquidity can be provided by distributing more paper, but the illusion keeps spreading thinner until alternatives are sought.

The very same principles are why Bitcoin and crypto-currency systems derived from it are so strongly supportive of free markets over central authorities - and why governments are becoming so desperate for measures to stamp out the possibility of their very existence.


It isn't a comforting thought that there's been such important activity going on for a while without being disclosed. Same with MF Global - I wonder what else isn't being announced.

Rogers is deserving of kudos, although I think it's less a case of Bernanke only knowing how to print as one of printing being the only realistic option given the circumstances. We've already begun to see what austerity measures will do, and things haven't even gotten very violent in the US... yet.


Okay, here's the opinion (and the usual heap of reasoning behind it):

Silver has recently been flirting with backwardation and there will definitely be a full shift in the immediate future; a primary spike should occur this month (bigger & faster than the July-August rise) and a similar one by mid-December. My targets for the end of the year are still a minimum range of gold at $2,000-2,400/oz up to ~$3,000/oz and silver between $70-90/oz with potential for a very brief breach of $100. Those upper marks are getting into truly scary realms, indicating that the financial system is bordering on being exposed for the sham it is; the same goes for extreme lows.

Bank defaults have been ridiculously modest for a long time; no more than 3-4 per week when we should be seeing multiples of that; with major events, there's a bell curve of results, not a linear progression (the majority of defaults will hit all at once). Sovereign defaults probably won't ever occur officially, but as many have written: practical defaults have already happened. The big players won't fall for a long time yet, if ever.

And now the explanation of why (it's not as entertaining as accusing the Illuminati):

From my political perspective, a crisis now and into early 2012 gives the current administration time to set up an appearance of being the entire world's savior. In order to get Obama re-elected, saving just the country from imminent disaster isn't enough. By mid-2012 American politicians will be able to point at Europe as the fall-guy, suggesting that the US was being dragged down and had to step in as a good socialist neighbor to help the rest of the world prevent fire & brimstone that would've dragged everyone down. European pols will be able to say they did what they had to do in order to protect Europe while making much ado about the nothing recovery that will take place, just like the US after both major rounds of QE. The Japanese will be able to point to an uptick in manufacturing and exports to the nations they help to bail out, even though most of the recovery is due to rebuilding that would've been undertaken in any case post-Tohoku/2011.

Never let a serious crisis go to waste; the bigger, the better.

As the extra government-supplied zeros funnel into the major collaborating financial institutions around the world, there will be an abundance of ammunition with which to persist in the controlling actions they're accustomed to. In particular, an inordinate amount of wealth will be flooded into the long side of stock markets and dumped on the short side of precious metals and commodities in general - greater than any amount seen to date. That is what will crush the commodity sector back down near current levels from the new highs. It will take several months for the real assets to recover after that, and it is those numbers that pols will point to again as "evidence" of success. By then, people will be wising up in greater numbers than now with the transfer of funds advocated by Occupy Wall Street, so stricter capital controls will be implemented almost overnight; this will gradually lead to an increase in adoption of alternative means of wealth storage, including Bitcoin.

Most of the world (Africa, Asia, Middle East, South America) outside of western nations will continue to see through the smoke & mirrors and keep accumulating/cultivating real assets as though they caught Saci. This will maintain a steadily accelerating rise in the bottom level of price ranges for everything tangible, especially gold and silver. I also think everything is in place on the western front and the straw-man catalyst will be proposed via the G-20 meeting this week.

Looking at the COMEX gold & silver contracts, January and/or February are often large delivery months as well. Typically, for book squaring at year-end, a good amount of metal supply will be sold into the market so money managers can show a profit to their clients. This supply makes it easy for the shorts to pound the price and make it past another significant hurdle (by forcing leveraged contract holders to close or scaring them out), after which the rest of the year is mostly gearing up for the big December contract again. With their backs against the wall, I expect the big shorts to make a final assault in the low-liquidity last week or so of 2011 or early January. Watch for a delay in CFTC position limits from January 1^st, 2012 - if that happens, the shorts will pull out all the stops.

If you see anything questionable, please point it out and state a case for an alternative. We can all thrive from the mess that's building and prepare for what's coming by making use of the banks' & governments' openly-available playbook and history. I know my money would be better spent on green energy companies and a graduate degree in engineering than bank and nation bailouts.

Something that I've been doing with forex (yes, using leverage - my disposable fund) is accumulating the Australian dollar against the Canadian, Hong-Kong, Singaporean dollars. It's been a good carry trade, maintaining a wide but stable range for over a year now. Since the range is well-defined, it's been easy to scale in and out for both profit-taking near the highs and accumulation near the lows, not to mention the interest income at a modest (for these days) 25:1. There's increasing potential for an Aussie rate drop, so mind your stops and/or hedge (preferably against the New Zealand dollar) if using this technique - remember: there's always another good deal.

My money's on Cap'n Crunch.

Precisely; none of that has taken place in this thread.

A contemplative discussion was begun and information regarding asset protection has been provided. That information is relevant for any and all individuals living, working or residing in any country. In fact, supportive information for the reporting of Bitcoin assets to US tax authorities was provided.

Just like the assumption regarding some of my links, the emotional reactions toward the tax information and thoughts provided assumed what I spoke of was only pertaining to the US. It is true that the information is applicable to the US as well, but the responses were derogatory and bordering on zealotry, as thought the world outside of America doesn't exist.

Nowhere have there been claims of wrong-doing or malicious intent; the conceptual discussion has been objective and pertaining to defensive measures. At worst, a suggestion of avoidance regarding becoming a guinea pig in setting precedent was mentioned. It was already pointed out that once wealth leaves the Bitcoin system, even if functioning as a tax haven, it is subject to whatever rules are applicable to the instrument the wealth has been transferred into. The issue of wealth that remains in the Bitcoin system is a different matter that wasn't broached because of one individual's ill temper.

Yes, I should've ignored the troll. Even with that admission, any actions taken to offline status move into a clearly-defined precedent, especially if that happens with international significance. The emotional reactions taken offline by a certain participant in this thread have been uncalled for and these actions may be seen as grounds for harassment with serious legal repurcussions, including both civil and criminal slander and libel suits in multiple juridictions.

If the challenge is to be persisted in after witnessing multiple lengthy replies of lucid clarification from myself and considering the extensive measure of legal contacts that accrue in some industries, then it will be met will the fullest extent of legal defense. Reminder: offline harassment is a clear case - in some instances a felony.

Note the following statements that were made prior to the threat of offline action, then the initial direct statement implying good-natured discourse (again, nation-agnostic) and multiple escalating offers for the instigating offender to cease hostilities (after which the offender's comments were addressed indirectly):





Now that that's done...


Everything you need to protect your assets the way the "selfish and greedy" do has been handed to you on a silver platter, but that's selfish and greedy? If I'm using that information and the same is given to you, it cannot logically follow that making use of the information is selfish or greedy. Please explain your view, preferably without the profanity.

Who determines what the "share" is? You? Me? Some nameless, faceless person who has barely a vague idea about either of us, or the drunkard subsisting on government hand-outs? What if Ireland demanded that all persons holding an Irish passport had to pay taxes to the nation, even if income were made in the US? Would America stand for that?

Get out of where? Mine is a sentiment that's part of a small, but rising global chorus. It's a mindset of live and let live. I don't dictate to you and don't dictate to me; I don't pay your way, you don't pay mine. Is that so threatening?

These aren't necessarily easy questions, nor is there an easy answer at this point.

If it were simple, why is there so much debate? There is much more to this than capital gains laws.

Yes, when in Rome... However, that applies to conducting one's interpersonal behavior. If my private assets are not in Rome, what then? What if I become a Roman citizen? Does Rome then have a claim on those assets held in other countries? Who owns me: myself or a government? How, why and to what extent? Not as simple anymore.

Does it make any sense for a business operating and generating income exclusively in Singapore to pay taxes to the UK government just because its owner is a citizen there? Should a German national having his savings at a bank located in the UAE be subject to an account seizure by the FCTO? When a US citizen owns property in Brazil, what right is there to any share of the property by the owner's government?

There's a boggling morass of compensation clauses in tax legislation around the world that have been produced under the guise of "fairness" but primarily result in politicians getting their cut no matter what actions they choose to pursue or whether it's the will of the people or not. If these taxation activities had not be legitimized by those in power, they would be considered extortion and fraud.

People tend to conflate morality with ownership: if one person has more than another, that must be "immoral" or "unfair" simply based on the disparity. Not paying your "fair share" is blindly assumed to be reprehensible, but according to whom? There is often no examination of the process by which the assets were obtained. It's a focus on quantity (of assets) to the exclusion of quality (of owner).

An individual investor might diversify across various sectors (agriculture, finance, mining, etc); a company can do the same, diversifying across various regional jurisdictions. The protection offered is the same: distribution of risk - if one region becomes hostile or unprofitable, there are others that can provide a way to survive and thrive. Corporations have been internationalizing themselves for ages. This is not caused by loopholes; attempts to artificially and forcefully control investment leave those loopholes as incentives to keep capital from fleeing entirely until it can be trapped and the loopholes closed, solidifying control and an exclusive power base (this has been the pattern for every empire and today's governments are following the same path).

Individuals can internationalize the same way as corporations do. If all of a person's assets and investments are in one country, such as Argentina, and people are forced to keep their money in a risky economy, the chances for losses are greater and the incentive to make use of that money domestically is reduced. This is the same response companies have to politicians' perpetual desire to do dumb things, and there's nothing preventing the individual from protecting himself the same way. It is the most effective form of wealth protection possible.

It would help to be part of the class that creates, revises and enforces the rules in order to be granted the same privileges. If you aren't, that special treatment is probably out of reach.

I'd still be very wary of claiming losses from Bitcoin-related holdings - anything unfamiliar is highly likely to be flagged and/or investigated as potential fraud rather than granted leeway, especially in times of economic duress. Even GoldMoney, which has been around and officially registered globally for a decade, continues to trigger warnings with several national tax agencies. The universal government motto should be: "When in doubt, use your clout!"


I agree, to an extent. If I thought the consequences of speaking up were outweighed by the benefits of remaining silent, I wouldn't have said anything. The problem is, there are too few protecting themselves and that leaves those on the side of freedom outnumbered. I'd rather risk ire than watch as liberty around the world becomes further eroded until I have to fight to the death (literally or figuratively) for mine.

Extremism is building throughout the world with a growing polarization: on one hand, there is the oppression of Sharia law and on the other is western totalitarianism. The former promotes intolerance and death while the latter institutes slavery through indentured servitude. Neither are acceptable to me.

When a person discovers what freedom to own oneself means, he will live and die as a free man regardless of the costs.

To reiterate: a certain loser whose name here starts with 'B' and ends with 'c' is utterly transparent and a squealing, naked little bitch; unable to compete as anything but an intellectually-stunted schoolyard bully when faced with someone who calls bull on his blustering inanities.

Let's reassess the facts (n.b. rules are subject to change at the whim of politicians):

• IRS hooey doesn't apply to non-Americans
• No national organization even officially recognizes Bitcoin yet
• The case has just been reinforced in regard to the IRS being the US version of Nazi Germany's Gestapo
• Nothing I've offered is illegal in western nations (yet): the same methods presented are those typically reserved for legal asset protection among high net-worth individuals and organizations

If you choose to ignore your own nation's predatory tax-related activities, you are at risk whether you're compliant with their rules or not.

The 'reporting' done by the bitch (who would be executed for crimes against humanity had such things been done during WWII, if not dismembered before then by angry citizens) should be example enough of how easy it is for someone with an axe to grind to turn anyone they dislike into mutton. The bitch is also obviously limited in capacity for distinguishing between tax fraud and legitimate planning. Unlike the bitch's dull mental faculties presume, I am fully compliant with the tax laws I'm subject to.

As for anyone else: what USD$1 discrepancy could your government find deep within its tax laws to build a case and turn you into a criminal? Who would know the truth, and would it matter to anyone else? There doesn't even need to be a factual claim, as the above childish act clearly displays. You would have no recourse or means of protection if you hadn't taken steps to ensure you were diversified outside of your home country when that kind of event takes place.

Having all of your assets in one country is the same as having one bank account. If that account is ever frozen for an extended period or the contents seized, how will you survive?

Yeah, these movements are nothing but a shell game - no real ammunition left. I'd like to know where the trillions of Yen are coming from - newswires were screaming about multiple USD$500mm equivalent size JPY orders being dumped into the forex markets.

MF is run by ex-megabankers & associates, so they've probably had a hand in it. I suspect it's a bad-bank/scapegoat entity full of mega-bank waste that will be targeted to blow a crater a la Lehman, drawing attention away from GS/JPM, et al.

I'm patiently waiting for signs that the harsh reality in commercial loans is going to come crawling out of CIT Group. The retail layer hasn't evaporated enough just yet, but there's enough panic to consider it imminent.


Hear, hear!

Since you're apparently unable to participate in a conversation as a mature and rational individual, you do not warrant humour or respect from me. The ineptly ignorant ridicule from you has been dismissed. Now, you're just a fun target to rile up.

Here's the fully-valid rationale for your edification: Bitcoin is a world-wide phenomenon and there are those who read this forum without knowing English as their native language. Spend time with people from various non English-speaking countries and you'll notice that certain idioms and idiosyncrasies might not be so easily understood by those from other cultures. Your own ignorance and closed-mindedness is on display. What have you contributed to this discussion?

Assuming everyone knows what a certain phrase means is asinine, as was your feeble attempt at being funny. You don't seem to think there's a reason for certain items that might seem of dubious import to you, even though none of it was explicitly for you. I'll translate that into something moronic enough for you to hopefully understand: "hurr durr, no1 uze lnks 4 nethng i thnk iz obveus or i cal u a DUM!"

Neither of us have talked with each other, but the first thing you do is throw out ad hominem attacks when you haven't a clue what your target's reasoning is? Grab your foot and shove it all the way down your throat like the phallus-swallowing douche you are. The approach you followed is the same as insulting a random person on the street, expecting him to either instantly turn into your buddy or cower in the presence of your petty tyranny. Try that with me in person, if you can manage to get your swollen ass out of your parents' basement.

Use the right term to describe yourself: you're not worthy of being called an asshole - you're a little bitch. You mad bro? Maybe you should punch your computer, since you don't use it for anything worthwhile. Get a life that involves more than terrible efforts at bad jokes or just go play a dating game.

I'm smiling while letting a custom natural language processor designed for my graduate computer science course run through this thread. You're so worthless, even the algorithm is rating your text: inconsequential fail.

There - you've received a reply that's stooped to your communication level, so there's no way I can further explain your retarded actions. Do you really want to continue this? I don't - it's as vile as you.

The JPY intervention has hit under the premise of Japan lending support to EU debt: ~75.5 to ~78.5 within a few minutes. This was confirmed by BOJ shortly after. JPY continued declining to nearly 79/USD, probably due to a massive number of margin calls. Reversal hitting rapidly.

Gold and silver have also been hit (obvious and counter-intuitive price action), but hardly moved by comparison. This effort is yet another hail Mary attempt to quell precious metals demand. The timing is not a coincidence; end-of-month delivery orders are to be made before close of the US trading session and monthly charts being painted as low as possible serves to moderate large buyer interest that could overwhelm seller positions before sufficient shorts can be covered.

All fiat currencies are in danger due to gold/silver rising. Failure on the part of shorts here will result in PM prices rising tremendously to entice selling of physical demand positions, then being slammed down again to prevent rapid re-emergence of buying. The next take-down should occur somewhere between $2,000 to $2,400 (potentially up to ~$3,000 but not as likely) and will result in prices near the current levels.

The only stupid thing I've done in this thread is reply to you after having seen your persistently childish replies elsewhere. Maybe that's the only form of communication you understand?

Your links are to sites that are irrelevant to the topic; pictures of faces and balls, the latter of which you don't seem to have, hiding behind ridicule as your only replies. I provided links to information that supports what I've said. Where's the substance to your argument?


A shame, you don't have the decency to be civil or even support your position. Enjoying your trolling?

Ignorance regarding the history of government actions during crises means you need an education (oh, look - more relevant information). If you had one, you'd be aware of the rapidly growing potential for wholesale confiscation of assets by government and the dangers that precedent promotes. Have fun when your neighbor reports you as a terrorist after a dispute...

I won't be expecting a reply with any backing of value, only more insults; but it's still nice to hope fools might grow a brain someday. If you're under 30 years of age, you can be excused for being young & dumb. If you're over 30 and still this immature, well - you're just pathetic. Either way, I don't have time for stagnant minds. Bye.

For anyone else with an interest in freedom and moving forward instead of struggling in a dying system, hopefully you gained something from this thread; there's a world of opportunity out there.

The future is a big ball of 'guess' so I probably won't be entirely accurate. My observation so far is that System D won't collapse as it is built from a much more solid base than the crumbling mess the traditional nationally-based economic network is resting on now. Instead, it will supplant that contemporary economy with a much more genuine one-world economy; possibly even a one-world currency (Bitcoin?). Somalia's economy is a particularly interesting model of these events.

With maturity of the global system, there'll be efforts to control it. Overall, a general balance will develop that should preclude any single force from fully dominating all. In addition to that, increased incorporation and reliance upon computers, various technologies and the resulting software is moving the reigns of control away from human fallibility.

If there is going to be turbulence with assimilation and harmonization of disparate cultures into the global community, then System D could experience a few cycles of growing pains before settling. By following the course humanity is on, we are effectively creating a cocoon. Beyond that stage, it's hard to even make an educated guess about what's next.

Worst-case scenario for failing mega-banks:

• As many liabilities will be dumped on goverments
• Remaining assets will be marked-to-market
• Anything of value will be acquired by stronger firms

In effect, the biggest banks will consolidate their strengths. As you pointed out, they'll off-load or socialize the losses.

The real losers in this are governments. Banks can simply shift their operations to another region, but governments are geographically locked-in and will have to either relinquish control or fight for survival.

An excellent indication of what's coming is posted here.

Great find! If I could, I'd make this post sticky. The article describes exactly what makes a society strong and why certain technologies like Bitcoin will eventually flourish.

Ad hominem. Again, immature; defensive ridicule is the sign of a lazy mind. If you can't defend your position logically, it's better to not say anything at all.


Yes, it was intended as such. Many laws are pointless as well, only serving to cover up mistakes (or sometimes intentional "errors") that generally introduce additional riders which produce more problems than they solve.

Your rebuttal is just a different perspective; I offer that there would be no hole if the present tax system did not exist. I futher suggest that the present tax system is destructive and has built a byzantine morass of legislation that obfuscates the legitimate utilization of taxpayer wealth while precluding meaningful reform. Therefore, unless tax system bloat in most of today's nations is torn down to a point of stability, additional changes will serve to disguise and exacerbate the root problem while trapping the citizenry in an escalating cost-basis.

There was no suggestion that it already has been taken advantage of, only that it could be. Your assertion that there is no hole is tenuous because, as mentioned above, any law at higher levels rests upon prior legislation that may be mis- or re-interpreted by judicial decree. Indeed, there have been many instances of politicians proposing "solutions" that benefit only themselves or a lobbying interest, and judicial decisions that have overturned prior rulings.

The relevant quote:


Moving on...



As entertaining as the fight video was, including a few more informative links would help. Perhaps an analysis of the 30-day rule or a study on entropy.

Anyway, good example. Windows was riddled with security holes and bloat; instead of fixing the underlying codebase, additional features were heaped on. Microsoft finally deciding to take the correct steps to remedy that situation: the entire platform was audited, heavily redesigned and cleaned up. Much of it was simplified and standardized throughout, much more so than before. That also allowed for cleaner implementation of newer features and more reliable updates to existing ones.

Isomorphisms abound: whether "destructive greed" from political corruption or malware, the end result is damage. Mitigating that is not done by obscuring the core, but by redesigning it with updated techniques that fundamentally strengthen it. I agree that complexity alone does not lead to failure, so long as the overall system is stable; complexity built from a faulty or damaged base increases the potential for collapse. If an unstable base is not addressed, adding patches to it counter-intuitively destabilizes the system further instead of helping.

Since western nations have settled into a habitual pattern of adding complexity by way of attempts at legislating problems out of existence, the underlying decay will force a familiar pattern of behavior which involves surreptitious theft until blatant abuse of power becomes the only option available to maintain existing governments. We have seen the early stages of that with bank bailouts since the 1980s and recent nationalization of certain major corporations. Those are the easy targets - individual citizens are in the crosshairs, but will be persuaded to offer themselves up by the the millions, only to be devoured by their respective nations.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." ~George Santayana


Rationalization is not reason. Nor is self-aggrandizement and/or proclamation of "success" a certification of reputability.



If you have a particular area of expertise and would like to discuss concepts, I'd be glad to learn and share ideas. A flame-war isn't productive.

Not many prefer the extra weight and "jingliness" of coins over an effectively weightless piece of paper.

The investor in me wants to hold all three with a bias toward silver (2) and Bitcoin (1) a close second. Most of the people I know would gravitate toward the fiat paper bill (3) with its clearly visible denomination of 50.

Insults are juvenile and history is replete with examples of taxation creating domestic slavery.

A familiar example is taxation without representation. Slavery is "a civil relationship whereby one person has absolute power over another and controls his life, liberty, and fortune" - any citizen of a nation that can incarcerate its own without due process of law, and confiscate or freeze assets with the same lack of procedure, is granted the privilege of autonomy which can be revoked at any time. This is not freedom based on personal responsibility, and the argument that it's for the citizens' own "safety" suggests that all are guilty until proven innocent.

Taxation is nothing more than a usage fee for services rendered. However, there is a threshold beyond which taxation is forced, regardless of the quality provided or even which services are offered. There is sufficient infrastructure and technology available today to fully eliminate monolithic government and heavy-handed, illegitimate financial imposition.


So instead of one point of failure, there will be multiple points of failure; fixing one problem creates others. Fighting entropy demands simplicity, not complexity.

Governments eventually become massive points of failure. They both make laws and enforce them. They collect wealth from the populations they govern. They direct the police and militia, lending further ability to enforce laws and collect taxes irrespective of any other factors.

Controlling a government means the entire nation is owned; in the case of Europe and the US, that ownership is primarily by the major banks.


A hole was dug in the ground because there was no hole? What's the purpose of the hole (tax system)? When blindly following decrees without exercising reason and asking 'why', the activities are meaningless.


I pay reasonable prices based on the quality of goods and services provided, no matter the field or industry involved. There is no need for authoritative taxation to facilitate business and commerce or even contracts and law.

Besides, what government can prosecute on an international scale when there is disparity between national laws, and no basis for taxation from an individual? The only losers are the same politicians who effectively pay no taxes, yet reap the benefits of the systems they govern - supported by you.

What you consider tax fraud, others consider archaic subservience. Would you accept a doctor's prognosis if he reeked of alcohol and were slurring his words, or would you opt for a second opinion? Nations act like drunkards when they're flush with undue amounts of power and influence. I will take my business to sober nations that respect business and the individual rather than intoxicated brutes with penchants for violent outbursts on the warpath against freedom.

If you're unwilling to discuss a topic, even if the end result is arriving at an agreement to disagree, your fate is sealed.


Emotions and patience are among the most difficult things to master. The result of success is a clear sense of reason.

Which country are you going to be reporting in? I'll be sure to avoid it until the backlash forces change.


Key word. Of course, no examples have been made of those using new technologies such as BitTorrent. Attacking and punishing people for using a new technology instead of understanding it and creating a progressive environment is obviously the first step taken, because the middle-men would never fight progress to save themselves.

Government is the ultimate middleman.

All in the name of "fairness" right? Do you think it would be worthwhile to keep all of your gains and make use of them as you see fit, or send them off to any number of governments that have proven more than willing to use your funds to bail out banks and give habitual drug addicts their narcotics and provide tax-free salaries to politicians? What is "fair"?

Governments do good in early stages, when they're manageable. As people relegate more of their responsibilities to a central authority, it builds to a momentum that can no longer be controlled - it becomes destructive.

Anonymity is your first line of defense. Pointing the way to your assets just makes the tax-man's job that much easier.


This isn't directed toward you (in fact, I'm glad to see people making a profit), casascius, but the system itself. Do you see the absurdity? Intentionally taking actions that could produce losses, not for the purpose of progress but just to avoid penalty? What kind of bureaucratic idiocy is that?


Once again: how many conditional variations and rules need to be taken into account just to be sure you're compliant? Which rule open a loophole and caused the problem that created this snowball effect in the first place? Why spend all this extra time figuring out what has to be done when you could just be doing what you're good at? What's the point of even paying someone else to maintain such a bureaucratic monstrosity with your assets simply for the redistribution of your funds to destinations without any decision from you? Isn't that taxation without representation?


Prevention of "wash sales" because of a deficiency in the tax code that created a loophole? What happens if an issue is found with the 30-day rule? Another piece of tax code intended to patch yet another hole in a mess that never had to exist initially? Why?

A peasant serf in the middle ages might have difficulty imagining a democratic republic, thinking the existing system was all that held society together. People today seem to reject the notion of independence and direct democracy, assuming that taxation and centralized government is inevitable. What seems an innocent law today can easily spin out of control, especially with authorities that have already proven their detachment from general society. The existing system does hold the existing society together, but that doesn't mean individuals can't transcend the deranged aspects; many corporations already do. This is also how society evolves.

Keeping most of your BTC balance in the Bitcoin system offers a good amount of protection even if reported. However, playing the authority's tax game is like playing poker against the house. The house always wins in the end. If you're lucky or skilled, you won't go home broke; if you have a home left.

Internationalization using the information available from the links in my earlier post allows even the individual to put governments in their place - to make them work for your money instead of just demanding and taking it. If the rules amount to theft, you can just say no; if they're conducive to reasonable investment, you can put your money to work in their jurisdiction.

It's very simple: look at governments as businesses that need your investment to function. This is the difference between a business like the modern Microsoft (could be equated with Singapore) that provides products (Xbox, research division, etc) which are worthwhile and encourage your investment versus a business like Microsoft pre-Google (who else, the US) that relied on manipulative business practices to create high barriers to competition and foist a deficient product on its customer base, largely ignoring opposition.

If a government offers you a low tax rate or no taxation at all to put your wealth into its financial system, what's bad about that? When another government makes threats, demanding numerous taxes and concessions just for the privilege of being associated with it, where's the benefit?

My overall point is that there is a choice between genuine freedom and an illusion. I'd rather be surrounded by free individuals who understand self-sufficiency and responsibility than those who give up everything and settle for happiness in slavery because it's easier.

Now I'm going back to my post in front of the stock exchange to await a rubber bullet to the face (not really, it won't do much good until the IRS is occupied).

+1


+1

Two points to Vlad!

Maybe.

Because...


I agree: if positions aren't already established below $1,680 for gold and $32 for silver, it'll be better to wait for the rally to run itself out from this point. Picking up some positions here won't be bad, just more harrowing to endure.

There's some ambiguity on that in regard to options - many can still be had on the cheap, but that will change over the next few trading sessions. XAU calls (ideally, Jan-Mar '12) are still tempting, even at relatively high strikes.


If it helps, great!


They did; it is; well said. I still think you'll regret dumping most of your physical, though. The gold numbers are probably going to be completely cooked to mask the lack of physical backing the complicit ETFs and exchanges. When the popular scramble to acquire occurs, there won't be anything real to claim - only promisory certificates.

Thankfully, there are a few gold miners that either are or have plans to pay dividends in-kind. The two most prominent so far are: Evolving Gold Corp. (TSX:EVG) and Gold Resource Corporation (AMEX:GORO). Gold mined, gold paid. It's the closest most individuals can get to the Chinese style of accumulation by parterning with mining operations or buying them outright.

Critically low levels of warehouse stocks are present with the major western exchanges and the open interest has been rising rapidly in both gold and silver. The knockdowns in price have forced and/or scared out all the weak holders, yet there are still far more steadfast positions than there is available metal. If those strong holdings can't be enticed to sell for paper profits, there'll be a default. Therefore, the metals are most likely heading toward a doubling in gold (from the mid-$1,500 range) and as much as a tripling in silver (from ~$30).

This all has to happen before November 22^nd - the December COMEX options expiration. If hundreds of futures options holders decided to exercise for delivery, the exchanges could be looking at 100-1000x more precious metal demand than there is available supply; much worse than the situation with standard futures contracts alone. So both the spike high and subsequent decline need to be forced during the next couple of weeks for enough traders to either take profit or be shaken out. The past week's rise of ~$150 in gold wasn't exactly the jaw-dropping event I suggested: it's looking like there was some short-covering as a prelude to the real moves.

Would you sell for anything less than double your money in a raging bull market marked by severe shortages of the demanded product?

Bingo! A gradual awakening to the options that exist.

Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.
~Charles Mackay

It's becoming ever-easier to access the Bitcoin system, either directly with a BTC wallet or indirectly via exchanges. I'm also developing a method that will facilitate a distributed wallet so the local wallet.dat becomes a centralized backup. No more lost wallets!