100% Bitcoin will be denied

[Arros]

A decentralized cryptocurrency becoming international standard will indeed be against the interest of the US and some other governments. They'll find some reasons to suppress it's adoption.

That's one of the reasons why I'm pessimistic about the future of cryptocurrencies.

[Carlton Banks]

A decentralized cryptocurrency becoming international standard will indeed be against the interest of the US and some other governments. They'll find some reasons to suppress it's adoption.

That's one of the reasons why I'm pessimistic about the future of cryptocurrencies.

It's true, but the reasons for optimism are much greater than the pessimistic ones. The more they act towards Bitcoin users like they are towards whistleblowers right now ("drone them, cage them, trans-gender them"), then we know they're truly scared. The UK government said they arrested David Miranda under Anti-Terror legislation to "protect the public from terrorist threats", and they can use that form of very indirect causality logic to arrest, well, just about anyone doing anything. Arrest dogs for being potential suicide bomb mules, arrest restaurant waitresses for "providing a means of sustenance to a suspicious Sikh", arrest the parents of fracking protesters for "failing to prevent or report an act of terror". Take your pick.

These people are shit scared that the public will start scratching their heads en masse.

[VolanicEruptor]

Hey Carlton, remember when you and Will got pulled over for appearing identical to some car thieves, and the cops told you they pulled you over "because you were driving too slow", and then you played the race card?   I hate that episode, because I'm white and I was pulled over once for driving too slow.  They even did a drug search on my vehicle.  The cops were white.  I'm white.

This is the only Fresh Prince episode I didn't like, other than that, carlton, ILU MAN

[TitanBTC]

A decentralized cryptocurrency becoming international standard will indeed be against the interest of the US and some other governments. They'll find some reasons to suppress it's adoption.

That's one of the reasons why I'm pessimistic about the future of cryptocurrencies.

It's true, but the reasons for optimism are much greater than the pessimistic ones. The more they act towards Bitcoin users like they are towards whistleblowers right now ("drone them, cage them, trans-gender them"), then we know they're truly scared. The UK government said they arrested David Miranda under Anti-Terror legislation to "protect the public from terrorist threats", and they can use that form of very indirect causality logic to arrest, well, just about anyone doing anything. Arrest dogs for being potential suicide bomb mules, arrest restaurant waitresses for "providing a means of sustenance to a suspicious Sikh", arrest the parents of fracking protesters for "failing to prevent or report an act of terror". Take your pick.

These people are shit scared that the public will start scratching their heads en masse.

I'm also a fan of your dance moves, Carlton. 

I think greed and power are the stronger motivators here.  Governments are made of legislators and legislators want to "steer the ship".  If we can give them some illusion of control, bitcoin will get a huge boost.

[domob]

And you just expect everybody to do what the US government tells them?

Now you can buy pizza using btc, you can exchange btc to USD and etc.
If bitcoin is denied, the only way to use them is to pay to another person (not company, only person).
So bitcoin is going to be like cash now. Do you often use cash?

I use only cash (except for online purchase) but I might be abnormal. I withdraw like 500-1000$ from the ATM at a time so my spending habit stay private.

I think that's a good attitude, I do the same.  Although it may be a bit more "normal" where I live than it is in the US, where credit cards seem to be far more abundant than here.

[kik1977]

Ok, still you have not replied to my question! I don't understand the assumption taxes=evil ...

It's quite simple. Who do you trust to spend the money in your pocket better, you or the government?

Governments are inefficient. The bigger they are the more inefficient they are. I'll list three quick examples from the top of my head. The DMV. Do you think the DMV could be run more efficiently by government or private companies? I'm not saying private companies should do it, I'm asking about efficiency.

How about FEMA... For Hurricane Katrina FEMA eventually decided to melt thousands of pounds of ice stored at a cost of $12.5 million after trucking it thousands of miles south then back north finding that much wasn't needed.

What about the VA? I'm not a veteran but I've heard terrible things about the service there. Wouldn't more be expected of a First World country that holds the world's reserve currency and a multi-trillion dollar economy?

Another example is the government paying $16 per muffin for conferences.

Last, Detroit has some of the highest property taxes in the country. How are they doing? I could go on and on.

This is what happens when costs are not tied to actual market values and the natural regulators of free market forces. If people are free to pay only for what they deem valuable then those items will be up to scratch or not exist at all.

You're right and I cannot agree with you more, I'm not from the US but I'm pretty sure you're right and I can tell you that in my country it is exactly the same, like probably everywhere else..BUT..the fact that our taxes are often misused and sometimes our money is literally thrown away by idiots doesn't make taxes evil..
It's like if you live, like I do, in a condominium with your lovely neighbors, and you pay a fee every month for the elevator, cleaning of the common parts, electricity, repairing of broken stuff, etc. Now you have an administrator who collects the money and manages it . Now you can often have an idiot as administrator who maybe buys stupid things for the condo or maybe steals some money. The good thing in a condo is that, being a small environment, you can easily detect his misbehavior and kick him out. But you wouldn't say "I hope I had bitcoins so I can avoid paying my monthly fee, because you will be against all your neighbors.
A State is much bigger and the problem is that you cannot easily kick our politicians out but this doesn't mean that collecting taxes for the common good is bad. Have a look at the scandinavian countries where their taxes are sooooo huge, they don't usually complain because their money is used very efficiently and they receive in return great services..
So, even in a perfect world where BTC is the only currency, don't you think there should be a way to let everyone pay their taxes? Then HOW, that's the tricky part! Directly - you pay depending on what you earn - this could be done by your employer OR indirectly -you pay when you consume - like VAT? Dunno...      

[Peter Lambert]

So, even in a perfect world where BTC is the only currency, don't you think there should be a way to let everyone pay their taxes? Then HOW, that's the tricky part! Directly - you pay depending on what you earn - this could be done by your employer OR indirectly -you pay when you consume - like VAT? Dunno...      

Why do taxes have to depend on what you earn? Why not just have a simple system where everybody owes the same amount of money every year, wouldn't that be more fair?

The how of paying taxes with bitcoins is really easy: the government sends each citizen a bitcoin payment address, they send the bitcoins owed to that address.

[kik1977]

So, even in a perfect world where BTC is the only currency, don't you think there should be a way to let everyone pay their taxes? Then HOW, that's the tricky part! Directly - you pay depending on what you earn - this could be done by your employer OR indirectly -you pay when you consume - like VAT? Dunno...      

Why do taxes have to depend on what you earn? Why not just have a simple system where everybody owes the same amount of money every year, wouldn't that be more fair?

The how of paying taxes with bitcoins is really easy: the government sends each citizen a bitcoin payment address, they send the bitcoins owed to that address.

Yes, they must depend on what you earn.. How can you ask a citizen earning 10 to pay 5 and also ask another citizen who earns 5.5 to pay the same amount. What about a person unemployed? How can he pay 5? That's the principle of progressive taxation, the one earning 10 will pay more than the one earning 5, so that the unemployed can still receive some services even if he cannot pay taxes.

[herzmeister]

They'll find a way to force everybody to use a validated wallet (except themself). Welcome to brave new world of total financial surveillance.

so I'm gonna use a non-validated wallet inside a VPN hosted offshore?

[Abdussamad]

I've always like the saying that (basically) BTC is all about the OTHER 6 billion people in the world

Those who think it's all about America have never traveled...  It'll be a while (5 - 10 years) but I hope we can eventually see BTC as a currency and STOP comparing it to dollars...

Actually it is you that looks like he hasn't travelled much. Or if he has he has done so in typical american fashion lecturing the natives about how they should live their lives and not listening one bit to what they have to say.

The US controls the world financial system. They can even make an oil rich country like Iran an outcast that can't legally sell its oil to the world because a) sanctions b) it is blocked from receiving payments via SWIFT which is the standard for international wire transfers. Iran has to resort to barter to sell its oil. Can you imagine barter for billions of dollars of oil? In this day and age?!!

The US can destroy bitcoin if it chooses to do so. But I don't think it wants to do that for a number of reasons:

1) Bitcoin will spur innovation in finance and that is good for the US economy.

2) Bitcoin transactions are all public so its a rich source of data for the government including the taxmen. It just needs some clever algorithms to mine that data.

So let's hope that I am right and the US isn't out to destroy bitcoin and just wants to regulate i.e. control it.

[Mike Christ]

Yes, they must depend on what you earn.. How can you ask a citizen earning 10 to pay 5 and also ask another citizen who earns 5.5 to pay the same amount. What about a person unemployed? How can he pay 5? That's the principle of progressive taxation, the one earning 10 will pay more than the one earning 5, so that the unemployed can still receive some services even if he cannot pay taxes.

In other words, "In America, we punish success."  And then we wonder why there aren't any jobs...

A flat tax rate would force government to tax the poorest of people at a rate which they can still live reasonably well; this would decrease taxation by a huge amount, and force government to be smart about where they allocate tax money (such as what we pay them to do, like roads and bridges and a REASONABLE military to STOP INVASIONS, not big enough wage war against every other nation and blow the planet to smithereens.)

Instead, we throw more money at government, beg them to help us and to tax the rich to shit until they leave (and take their capital, and jobs, with them, to other nations), and cry that we can't support ourselves and need welfare as a staple of our lives, since we threw more of our money at government, and begged them to help us,...

[kik1977]

Yes, they must depend on what you earn.. How can you ask a citizen earning 10 to pay 5 and also ask another citizen who earns 5.5 to pay the same amount. What about a person unemployed? How can he pay 5? That's the principle of progressive taxation, the one earning 10 will pay more than the one earning 5, so that the unemployed can still receive some services even if he cannot pay taxes.

In other words, "In America, we punish success."  And then we wonder why there aren't any jobs...

A flat tax rate would force government to tax the poorest of people at a rate which they can still live reasonably well; this would decrease taxation by a huge amount, and force government to be smart about where they allocate tax money (such as what we pay them to do, like roads and bridges and a REASONABLE military to STOP INVASIONS, not big enough wage war against every other nation and blow the planet to smithereens.)

Instead, we throw more money at government, beg them to help us and to tax the rich to shit until they leave (and take their capital, and jobs, with them, to other nations), and cry that we can't support ourselves and need welfare as a staple of our lives, since we threw more of our money at government, and begged them to help us,...

You're right Mike, although I'm not from US and I am not talking about US, but the same principle applies basically to every country.
You raised very good points about taxation, but I guess we're going well out of the topic. What I was trying to say is that if we want to go mainstream with Bitcoin, they should be taxed as any other currency, otherwise I believe the system cannot grow enough to replace established currencies.

[Mike Christ]

You're right Mike, although I'm not from US and I am not talking about US, but the same principle applies basically to every country.
You raised very good points about taxation, but I guess we're going well out of the topic. What I was trying to say is that if we want to go mainstream with Bitcoin, they should be taxed as any other currency, otherwise I believe the system cannot grow enough to replace established currencies.

Sorry to use the US specifically; I live here and it's the only place I know, so I can't speak for any other country.

This is why Bitcoin is so disruptive; we know we cannot continue our lives as we know it and just as well expect Bitcoin to succeed.  Either Bitcoin will need to change to accommodate government, or government will need to change to accommodate Bitcoin.  No technology is more disruptive than that which threatens a government's lifeline.  I have no doubt that Bitcoin will reach the masses, in time, and I have every expectation that there will be conflict.  But it seems, in the future, government is going to have a lot less power, the more Bitcoin spreads.  The complexities of the tax system we have today rely on a controlled currency; with Bitcoin, a flat tax seems to be the only method of taxation left; the age where we taxed money every time it moved is closing.

[NewLiberty]

And you just expect everybody to do what the US government tells them?

Now you can buy pizza using btc, you can exchange btc to USD and etc.
If bitcoin is denied, the only way to use them is to pay to another person (not company, only person).
So bitcoin is going to be like cash now. Do you often use cash?

I use only cash (except for online purchase) but I might be abnormal. I withdraw like 500-1000$ from the ATM at a time so my spending habit stay private.

Consider:
You know the bills are serialized, yes?  Maybe you are getting them from a machine with a camera in it that can see/photograph you (and knows you from your card as well) and it may be possible for that machine to read the serial numbers too...
Maybe pseudo-private?  How many years that information is retained...

Bitcoin is also serialized in its own way though.

For the purely fungible money you won't find it in paper, but at least there is the pocket change, and the commodities.

[wiggi]

A decentralized cryptocurrency becoming international standard will indeed be against the interest of the US and some other governments. They'll find some reasons to suppress it's adoption.

But if they do, it's even more against their interest. As long as Bitcoin is treated as some
weird foreign currency, governments can control all merchants and exchanges but if Bitcoin is only used
in black market/"System D" part of the world economy there will be no taxes at all, and no control.
Governments aren't rational, of course.

[NewLiberty]

So, even in a perfect world where BTC is the only currency, don't you think there should be a way to let everyone pay their taxes? Then HOW, that's the tricky part! Directly - you pay depending on what you earn - this could be done by your employer OR indirectly -you pay when you consume - like VAT? Dunno...      

Why do taxes have to depend on what you earn? Why not just have a simple system where everybody owes the same amount of money every year, wouldn't that be more fair?

The how of paying taxes with bitcoins is really easy: the government sends each citizen a bitcoin payment address, they send the bitcoins owed to that address.

You are sort of missing the big picture here.  Bitcoin is transformative in the realm of public works expenses.

Bitcoin would be MUCH better for taxes/community purchasing.  A community could very easily use highly granular micropayments for services used, and provide greater transparency for costs and payments for those.  
It could entirely obsolete the very stupid broad-brush taxation schemes currently used like VAT, Income tax, inheritance tax and the rest by making fee for service more pervasive.  These census based headcount taxations are thousands of years old and very obsolete with the diverse tapestry of humanity today.
It would also allow for better transparency into the government accounting if we forced non-anonymity on the government money uses and required our governments to use cryptocurrencies.

We are at the very early days yet, but the potentials are truly amazing.

[rolling]

Yes, they must depend on what you earn.. How can you ask a citizen earning 10 to pay 5 and also ask another citizen who earns 5.5 to pay the same amount. What about a person unemployed? How can he pay 5? That's the principle of progressive taxation, the one earning 10 will pay more than the one earning 5, so that the unemployed can still receive some services even if he cannot pay taxes.

There is another way.  Take a look at http://www.fairtax.org/

[notme]

But US got the strength (army guns knowlage)... Pretend you are in grade school and there is no teachers, who is the boss ? Biggest guys leads and if you dont want to follow them you get hit until you change your mind. Do not forget this

How many guns does it take to destroy the Bitcoin code?

How many wars has the US lost? Think a civil war against the government would be any prettier?

Nobody wins wars.  The US has only created more enemies for themselves.

[NewLiberty]

But US got the strength (army guns knowlage)... Pretend you are in grade school and there is no teachers, who is the boss ? Biggest guys leads and if you dont want to follow them you get hit until you change your mind. Do not forget this

How many guns does it take to destroy the Bitcoin code?

How many wars has the US lost? Think a civil war against the government would be any prettier?

Nobody wins wars.  The US has only created more enemies for themselves.

Although those that fight always lose, the private central banks usually win them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfEBupAeo4

[crumbs]

A decentralized cryptocurrency becoming international standard will indeed be against the interest of the US and some other governments. They'll find some reasons to suppress it's adoption.

That's one of the reasons why I'm pessimistic about the future of cryptocurrencies.

It's true, but the reasons for optimism are much greater than the pessimistic ones. The more they act towards Bitcoin users like they are towards whistleblowers right now ("drone them, cage them, trans-gender them"), then we know they're truly scared. The UK government said they arrested David Miranda under Anti-Terror legislation to "protect the public from terrorist threats", and they can use that form of very indirect causality logic to arrest, well, just about anyone doing anything. Arrest dogs for being potential suicide bomb mules, arrest restaurant waitresses for "providing a means of sustenance to a suspicious Sikh", arrest the parents of fracking protesters for "failing to prevent or report an act of terror". Take your pick.

These people are shit scared that the public will start scratching their heads en masse.

In other words:
1. Governments already arrest & abuse their citizenry without showing reasonable cause or bothering with convincing logic.
2. They might arrest dogs, by claiming they're suicide bombers.
3.  ? ? ?
4.  They must be running scared, we win!!1!

Lawd have mercy, what would those yeller-bellied bastard do if they weren't scared