DO NOT ALLOW TAXATION IN BITCOIN

[RenegadeMind]

Should? Why?

Why ? Because if revenue is not able to be raised by Govt./Councils etc thru taxation then the kind of things that taxation (at least partially) funds today - namely, social services - would not be funded at all by the private sector/wealth. Its not profitable. Welcome to the jungle.

Well, not really.

What do you want to fund? There isn't a single example of anything that people on their own can't do. Sure, some things might be difficult or mildly inconvenient, but government adds no value. They are middle-men seeking rent.

ISPs are a great example of private companies offering services. The government doesn't do that. If anything, they make the situation worse by allowing cartel behaviour.

Roads? That problem has been solved. Besides, the government doesn't provide roads to everyone anyways. (I have relatives that have had the state refuse to build roads on their street.)

But, other examples just get long and tedious.

For things like state controlled health care, it's a disaster.

Not in the UK - the NHS is a much loved, albeit underfunded, part of the fabric of British society.

Underfunded? Or do you mean they piss away so much money and create overbearing regulations that hike costs so that they further piss money away to the point that providing decent service is near impossible?

That's probably much more likely than "being underfunded".

Canada has this problem - the same issue as the UK. A 1-payer system where they piss money away and force people to go abroad to get health care. 1% of people.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/01/16/report-tens-of-thousands-fled-socialized-canadian-medicine-in-2013/

Lots of horror stories.

Meanwhile, when doctors stop taking state insurance and just charge for their services, they drop prices by over 50%.

"Free" health care is anything but free. But only if you look at the evidence and not the state propaganda.

If anything, the inability of the state to steal wealth from people because they use bitcoins will only make Bitcoin more attractive.

It might short term - to a certain type of free market evangelist - but over the medium term it will make it untenable as any kind of a serious alternative to fiat currency.

I'm not sure why you say that. But I think that starving the state is a good thing. Less wars, etc. etc.

I can see that BTC is attractive to a certain brand of anarchism and/or free market laissez faire capitalism (though I'd have thought the two were mutually exclusive tbh - ironically)

Very much. If you don't believe in using violence to get your way, then Bitcoin is a godsend.

But for me the decentralised nature of BTC is today attractive via its ability to bypass the wests banking system's Ponzi scheme that only serves to urinate on the shoes of the masses - and then tell them that its raining - and makes them pay for the rain 

AMEN to that!

Well... probably more like urinating in their faces, but potato potato.

I'm rooting for the collapse of the bankster ponzi sham.

   Not because it provides the means by which none of us will have to pay any more tax.

Well, I'm also rooting for the demise of the state and for voluntary, non-violent interaction. So, I'm hoping that more and more people use Bitcoins and other crytpo currencies to avoid having the state steal from them.

I'm hoping that Bitcoin helps starve the kleptocratic, fascist police state that we have. I want it to die. Salt & burn its bones.

And to be honest, the only people that would back that concept would be the 1% who control 80% of the wealth.

I think that's a separate issue from just taxation.

The 1% have used the kleptocratic ponzi sham of the banksters and state to steal wealth from everyone else. We need to get rid of their mechanism of theft before we can ever begin to actually enjoy the fruits of our labours. Right now, they enjoy the fruits of our labours. We are little more than animals that they farm for profit. We are tax and debt slaves to be whipped and slaughtered as they see fit.

[practicaldreamer]

Hey, if the BTC movement is relying on Canada's Fraser Institute for guidance on its economic direction  - then it could be in trouble - especially if you are an anarchist !

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraser_Institute

What do I want that the private sector can't give me ? Child protection social workers maybe 

Re. NHS and funding problems. You, Renegademind, are basically espousing (wether you realise it or not) the right wing doctrine that large state owned enterprises lead to (lame duck) inefficiencies - red tape, beaurocracies etc etc

   Maybe you are right.

 But, just as a matter of interest, BOC (http://www.boconline.co.uk/en/index.html) , who had, for a long time, a monopoly on the supply of oxygen to the NHS, were for a long time one of the most profitable companies in the UK. The taxpayer funding private sector shareholders profits again - same old same old ......     I'll not even go into/mention the drugs companies scamming the NHS.

  BTC, IMHO, wants to be careful it doesn't facilitate the very system that (it seems as a newbie here) many on here are (in a consensus about) wishing to overthrow.

[practicaldreamer]

The buzz word seems to be decentralisation - as opposed to,for example, the centralised concentration of wealth, power and opportunity that central government, through its subservience to corporate interests and its attendant free market dogma, has come to represent.

   I understand and sympathise with this. But I can only say again that in my view democracy and freedom are not compatible with the private ownership of the means of production. It is this ownership of the assets of the nation (world) by the 1% that corrupts Govt., media etc etc.  It isn't necesarily a fundamental flaw in Govt in itself that is the problem here.

   As Bob Dylan said "The masters make the rules, for the wise men and the fools"

Or put another way - Goldman Sachs make the rules, for the coders, just as they do for those that rely on their labour alone

[Jungian]

What do I want that the private sector can't give me ? Child protection social workers maybe 

First off. Child protection workers in a government system rely on kidnapping for thier means of works.
Nothing could be more immoral than this. The state doesn't own the child and forcefully removing them from parants are nothing short of the child abuse they are claiming they are trying to stop.
A free system would need to provide a better option for children in order to have them willingly go with them.

Re. NHS and funding problems. You, Renegademind, are basically espousing (wether you realise it or not) the right wing doctrine that large state owned enterprises lead to (lame duck) inefficiencies - red tape, beaurocracies etc etc

And you are espousing the Stalinist/Hitlerist idea doctrine that they don't.
See what I did there? It doesn't matter who has the ideas, or what you call them. The only thing that matters are if the ideas work, and are moral or not.

But, just as a matter of interest, BOC (http://www.boconline.co.uk/en/index.html) , who had, for a long time, a monopoly on the supply of oxygen to the NHS, were for a long time one of the most profitable companies in the UK. The taxpayer funding private sector shareholders profits again - same old same old ......     I'll not even go into/mention the drugs companies scamming the NHS.

Yes, do you now see how inefficient it is? Anything in the free market doing such a silly thing as paying for ridonkleysly overprized oxygen would be fired fastar than the time it takes to pour a coffee.
They are not scamming the NHS, the are working within a system that gived them the incentive to provide overprized goods.

But I can only say again that in my view democracy and freedom are not compatible with the private ownership of the means of production.

Then you don't want freedom at all. You want slavery, as a man not owning himself is owned by another. You can call it freedom, but than again, you can call anything freedom. But what freedom is that when you deny a man the right to self ownership.

Or put another way - Goldman Sachs make the rules, for the coders, just as they do for those that rely on their labour alone

They make the rules, government enforce them. Without government, the rules would apply no more than to the world than if I had posted them here.

[practicaldreamer]

What do I want that the private sector can't give me ? Child protection social workers maybe 

First off. Child protection workers in a government system rely on kidnapping for thier means of works.
Nothing could be more immoral than this. The state doesn't own the child and forcefully removing them from parants are nothing short of the child abuse they are claiming they are trying to stop.
A free system would need to provide a better option for children in order to have them willingly go with them.

The whole reason I mentioned child protection social workers at all was that they seem to me to be doing work that in a total free market economy would provide no value/profit at all - and so quite possibly no such a social service would be undertaken or funded at all.

  Indeed, it wasn't too far back in history that in the UK children were sent down coal mines to work 12 and 14 hour days. It was said that the private coal mine owners would be more put out by the death of a pit pony than that of a child. Why ? Because they had to pay to replace the pony.
     Welcome to the free market.

   "A free system would need to provide a better option for children in order to have them willingly go with them" - and while you are waiting for that to happen children will be being sexually,physically and emotionally abused, there abusers totally unperturbed by the interference of those pesky social workers.

But, just as a matter of interest, BOC (http://www.boconline.co.uk/en/index.html) , who had, for a long time, a monopoly on the supply of oxygen to the NHS, were for a long time one of the most profitable companies in the UK. The taxpayer funding private sector shareholders profits again - same old same old ......     I'll not even go into/mention the drugs companies scamming the NHS.

Yes, do you now see how inefficient it is? Anything in the free market doing such a silly thing as paying for ridonkleysly overprized oxygen would be fired fastar than the time it takes to pour a coffee.
They are not scamming the NHS, the are working within a system that gived them the incentive to provide overprized goods.

What sort of back to front, upside down cock eyed analysis is that ?

Thats like blaming the victim of abuse for the abuse !! - the abuser gets off scot free because they are somehow working within the system (?) (the abusers get to make up the rules)


Anyhows - I haven't come on this forum to argue the toss with free marketeers - of course, the free market has its place. I'll leave it at that.

[Jungian]

The whole reason I mentioned child protection social workers at all was that they seem to me to be doing work that in a total free market economy would provide no value/profit at all - and so quite possibly no such a social service would be undertaken or funded at all.

What the hell are you talking about? Nothing could me more profitable for a society than helping children. It's a million times more expensive to pay for protection against once you failed them.

Indeed, it wasn't too far back in history that in the UK children were sent down coal mines to work 12 and 14 hour days. It was said that the private coal mine owners would be more put out by the death of a pit pony than that of a child. Why ? Because they had to pay to replace the pony.
     Welcome to the free market.

And yet the choose this over the other options, so you can imagine how wretched life is was in this statist society when you choose to send your children to work 12 hours rather than not.
But as we always see, when you have a free market, so much value is created fast that child labour, something that has existed for HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of years in human history disappered in less than a century.

 

  "A free system would need to provide a better option for children in order to have them willingly go with them" - and while you are waiting for that to happen children will be being sexually,physically and emotionally abused, there abusers totally unperturbed by the interference of those pesky social workers.

Eh, what? Waiting for...? What are you talking about?

But hey, lets kidnap children and put them in state driven prisons so they don't get abused, right?

What sort of back to front, upside down cock eyed analysis is that ? Huh

Thats like blaming the victim of abuse for the abuse !! - the abuser gets off scot free because they are somehow working within the system (?) (the abusers get to make up the rules)

Is that really what you take from the this? That the poor, poor little NHS who is only backed by the only entity allowed to make the rules are abused? How are they abused?
Did BOC hold a gun to their head? Did BOC force them to pass a law?

[practicaldreamer]

What the hell are you talking about? Nothing could me more profitable for a society than helping children.

Yes - I do understand that (FFS  )

My point is that there are no dollars in child protection. In a totally free market economy who will pay for it ? Me ? My kids are fine and well looked after thanks - and I'm already getting screwed by the now private healthcare insurance premiums . You ? Are you gonna put your hand in your pocket because someone out there are shit parents ? What we gonna do ? Insure for it ?

  I think Amir was touching on a similar problem with the free market when he was talking about immunisation in this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2041.msg26201#msg26201

Did BOC hold a gun to their head? Did BOC force them to pass a law?

BOC had a monopoly on the supply of oxygen to the NHS - what is it about this concept that you don't understand ?

when you have a free market, so much value is created fast that child labour, something that has existed for HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of years in human history disappered in less than a century.

Total bollocks - what happens is, is that via global capitalism, the child labour merely gets exported to where people like you can't see it and so are able to pretend that it isn't happening anymore - and then pontificate on forums like this (forums that deserve better than this crap, and indeed were initially setup for greater ideals than those that you espouse) about how we shouldn't pay tax and how BTC offers that life changing opportunity.
   Have a look here at Primark's fine example http://www.theguardian.com/business/2008/jun/23/primark.children or here for Apple's http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/jan/25/apple-child-labour-supply

Now I have done on this particular thread .

[Jungian]

Yes - I do understand that (FFS  )

No you don't. If you did, you would understand that there is a profit motive to helping children.

My point is that there are no dollars in child protection. In a totally free market economy who will pay for it ?

Everyone, as it is in thier personal interrest to do so, much more expensive to get mugged by these kids later on. You know what the first question everyone asks is? How will be pay for x, and then they think that no one cares about this stuff.

Me ? My kids are fine and well looked after thanks - and I'm already getting screwed by the now private healthcare insurance premiums

My private insurace is very very very cheap compared to what I would have to pay in taxes for the same service. You should probably look more in to that.

. You ? Are you gonna put your hand in your pocket because someone out there are shit parents ? What we gonna do ? Insure for it ?

Of course. The same as I want to pay for protection, and everything else that makes the world go round.

Did BOC hold a gun to their head? Did BOC force them to pass a law?

BOC had a monopoly on the supply of oxygen to the NHS - what is it about this concept that you don't understand ?

See any monopolies in a free market? Nope.

Total bollocks - what happens is, is that via global capitalism, the child labour merely gets exported to where people like you can't see it and so are able to pretend that it isn't happening anymore - and then pontificate on forums like this (forums that deserve better than this crap, and indeed were initially setup for greater ideals than those that you espouse) about how we shouldn't pay tax and how BTC offers that life changing opportunity.

Who pretens it doesn't happen anymore? It still happens in countries who are on the same economic level as Britian used to be a few hundred years again. And as we see, the more you allow the free market the faster we lift them out of poverty.

  Have a look here at Primark's fine example http://www.theguardian.com/business/2008/jun/23/primark.children or here for Apple's http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/jan/25/apple-child-labour-supply

Yes, they sure wish Apple would leave China. You know what these children used to do before Apple? WORK FOR LESS.

Now I have done on this particular thread .

Fine, leave. Your totalitarian statist theories are refuted by reality, so I wouldn't want to stick around repeating them either.

[countryfree]

There is no incentive whatsoever for the tax authorities to redistribute coins.

The purpose of tax has never been redistribution.
Taxes have been invented to raise armies, finance wars, and make fat cats fatter. A very little part of your tax money is actually used to help the needy.

[glendall]

What do you do when your own government doesn't follow its own rules though?

Both income tax and making money that is not backed by gold or silver were forbidden by the Constitution, by the founders of the country.

Oh ya right, the Constitution.

Oh ya right, your currency is going to crash because you are printing it endlessly? And you want to tax my bitcoin to pay for the interest on the debt that is pushed forward every day to pay for things the country can't afford?  Ya sure checks in the mail.