Is "money laundering" really that big of a deal?

[Elwar]

There are all of these rules and laws about "money laundering" to make it sound so scary and evil like Scarface moving his dirty money.

But what is money laundering anyway? Someone commits a crime involving money and does not want that money traced back to them for that crime, so they launder the money.

So essentially, these are monetary crimes. And since the law enforcement cannot solve the crime or catch the "bad guys" they have to lock down the whole monetary system just in case "bad" money makes it through.

So because some people may use money for bad things and they are too incompetent to catch them, the government must know every transaction that anyone ever makes with money?

Why stop there? Why not have ID checks at every corner of every city of every country so that if a crime happens on one street they can trace the crime by knowing who was on that street at that time? Oh, but those of us who would be against that would be "supporting terrorists" or drug dealers and criminals.

Sure, if someone steals money from someone else it would be nice to track that money down. But is it worth locking down a whole currency because of it?

[Stampbit]

Ask the IRS, they're the ones you have to answer to.

[Elwar]

Ask the IRS, they're the ones you have to answer to.

And that is the whole point behind locking down the currency claiming they care about money laundering because of terrorists and drug dealers.

It is all about getting their cut.

[Ichthyo]

"money laundering" is an artificial, made-up crime.

It was created by the ability to track monetary transactions, not by any real evildoing.

People committed crimes since ages, but only at the point when it became possible, thinkable or feasible actually to track monetary transactions, such a thing like "money laundering" started to exist.


Thus, applying the same logic: once it is thinkable to "optimise" the human genome, there will be a new crime: spreading "unoptimised" genes.

[franky1]

It is all about getting their cut.

its not about getting their cut. fiat is owned by the governments. so its not a cut.. they own it all anyways.. all they want is to control who has it and how much those that have it use for crimes.

the fiat in your pocket is not yours.. it is the governments, they just have a free licence for citizens of that country to use, unless it is found to be used for crimes, where they can revoke your freedom to use their property (take your fiat off you).

now your seeing the benefit of bitcoin.. its not theirs!!

[agnostic98]

It's kind of similar to tax evasion really. Most people that got their money through illegal means wouldn't file the tax properly and thus need to hide it. it's just an easy way for the government to collect the taxes due to shut down the entire system.

If you noticed in the press coverage that Preet Bharara invites you to get your money back if you were using Liberty Reserve for legit purposes. Well criminals aren't obviously going to call. and if you call, well, probably need to start reporting them in taxes as well. govt takes all.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/29/nyregion/liberty-reserve-operators-accused-of-money-laundering.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0  

[cp1]

It depends how big you are.  if you're as big and wealthy as HSBC then you can help out terrorists.  if you're a small player then you better not get caught doing anything.

[BitcoinAshley]

If you are HSBC or the CIA you can launder money anytime you want, with no repercussions (unless you consider the following "repercussions:" a whole bunch of underfunded law enforcement and regulatory agencies bickering about who has jurisdiction, taking 5 years to build the case, and then forgetting about it.) 

If you are a normal dude/chick you can't launder money, you are subject to all these AML regulations/laws. What gives? Why can't I launder money just like the big corporations and government agencies that helped write the anti-money laundering regulations?

[Daily Anarchist]

Money laundering is a heroic job.

[Trongersoll]

There is nothing worse than smelly money, everyone should launder their money once in a while.

[ar9]

It's an easy target for governments to hinge their attacks on.

[hayek]

No. It's not.

Money Laundering is a made up crime

[FreeMoney]

its not about getting their cut. fiat is owned by the governments. so its not a cut.. they own it all anyways.. all they want is to control who has it and how much those that have it use for crimes.

the fiat in your pocket is not yours.. it is the governments, they just have a free licence for citizens of that country to use, unless it is found to be used for crimes, where they can revoke your freedom to use their property (take your fiat off you).

That would be dubious even if they made that explicit claim. If anyone anywhere ever trades a thing they made for another thing then the original is no longer theirs. Even their own courts would not enforce the money printers taking back the money they paid for buying giant slabs of marble or cleaning their mansions.

[solex]

"money laundering" is an artificial, made-up crime.

It was created by the ability to track monetary transactions, not by any real evildoing.

People committed crimes since ages, but only at the point when it became possible, thinkable or feasible actually to track monetary transactions, such a thing like "money laundering" started to exist...

Absolutely. It is a vast excuse to enable syping on the financial affairs of citizens, just as terrorism has became overblown in order to further the surveillance state.

AML is also lazy policing. Organized crime should be stopped on the streets while it is happening, not by behind-a-desk policing of the proceeds  of crime afterwards.

[oakpacific]

They will attack you wherever you have no means of self-defense.

So we need an anonymous, P2P trading platform, even just as a last resort. I disagree with the narrative in this community that we shouldn't expect to beat government to it, we can cooperate with them as long as it's reasonable and out of our self-interest, but not outright capitulation.

[btceic]

It is all about getting their cut.

its not about getting their cut. fiat is owned by the governments. so its not a cut.. they own it all anyways.. all they want is to control who has it and how much those that have it use for crimes.

the fiat in your pocket is not yours.. it is the governments, they just have a free licence for citizens of that country to use, unless it is found to be used for crimes, where they can revoke your freedom to use their property (take your fiat off you).

now your seeing the benefit of bitcoin.. its not theirs!!

Actually the money in our pockets are considered a debt.

[TippingPoint]

They will attack you wherever you have no means of self-defense.

So we need an anonymous, P2P trading platform, even just as a last resort. I disagree with the narrative in this community that we shouldn't expect to beat government to it, we can cooperate with them as long as it's reasonable and out of our self-interest, but not outright capitulation.

I agree.  We are in a conflict over "Control".  It has already started.  They have published their guidelines, and they have taken action against Bitcoin exchanges.

[franky1]

its not about getting their cut. fiat is owned by the governments. so its not a cut.. they own it all anyways.. all they want is to control who has it and how much those that have it use for crimes.

the fiat in your pocket is not yours.. it is the governments, they just have a free licence for citizens of that country to use, unless it is found to be used for crimes, where they can revoke your freedom to use their property (take your fiat off you).

That would be dubious even if they made that explicit claim. If anyone anywhere ever trades a thing they made for another thing then the original is no longer theirs. Even their own courts would not enforce the money printers taking back the money they paid for buying giant slabs of marble or cleaning their mansions.

read this

In 1775, the Continental Congress authorized the issuance of currency to finance the Revolutionary War. The obligation printed on these notes read:

This bill entitles the BEARER to receive Three Spanish milled Dollars, or the Value thereof in Gold or Silver, according to a resolution of CONGRESS, passed at Philadelphia February 17, 1776.

keyword entitles..

if you break the law your no longer entitled to the money. the government own the money and they choose who is entitled to it.

you can also tell its government property because of counterfeiting laws.

unlike music. if you make a song, you can produce as many copies as you like and you get to say and be incontrol of who else can make copies or if you even allow them to make copies.. because its your property..

money is not your property.. you are just an entitled bearer(holder) of it. do something illegal, and you will lose your entitlements.

maybe my last post should have used the word entitlement as oppose to licence to use

[CasinoBit]

Well one could argue that money laundering would not be even needed in a truly free society...

[fellowtraveler]

It's kind of similar to tax evasion really. 

In a way, it's the opposite. Tax evasion is about moving legitimate money out of of the system such that people can't find it, so you don't have to pay taxes on it.

Whereas "money laundering" is about moving illegitimate money into the system, such as through a car wash, and making it appear to be legitimate ("clean") money, so you can pay taxes on it, so that people don't suspect it of being drug proceeds.