Do you really think governments will allow a 500 billion dollar crypto-economy?

[Timetwister]

governments are there to serve the people, not the other way around.

Do we really allow a handful of people to decide what the rest of the world should do?

Do we?

That's what we are doing in the majority of countries.

[Zarathustra]

The question is not whether governments will allow a $X bitcoin economy, the question is whether Bitcoin will allow oversized governments to exist and retain the kind of power they currently do.

Excellent point.  
You are absolutely right my friend.

Yes, excellent. Neither Gold nor Gold 2.0 will disappear as long as the civilization doesn't. It is the state that always disappeared, together with its debt. The history of the state is the history of failed states. If Bitcoin will destroy all states (and it has the potential to do it) Bitcoin and Gold will be obsolete, as it has been in pre-state epoches of humankind. Humans beyond the state live(ed) in self-sufficient communities without Gold, without money, without a market.

[subcoin]

What do you think governments will do...

You probably mean what the people controlling the government (bankers) will do.
They will do everything they can to hold on to their power.
Would you willingly give away your bread and butter for the "better" of humanity?
I think not.

[Peter R]

What do you think governments will do...

You probably mean what the people controlling the government (bankers) will do.
They will do everything they can to hold on to their power.
Would you willingly give away your bread and butter for the "better" of humanity?
I think not.

No, but you may give away your bread & butter for steak & lobster.  Those in power can leverage bitcoin for their individual benefit too. 

[subcoin]

Those in power can leverage bitcoin for their individual benefit too.

Those in power are already controlling the entire planet.
They can produce endless amount of money at will.
Bitcoin with its limiting factors does fit well into current setup.
If anything, it will be limiting their ability to manipulate the system.

[DeathAndTaxes]

Last time I checked my government was still fighting a pointless and utterly futile war on drugs (estimated $1 trillion spent in the last 40 years excluded the oppertunity cost).
Last time I checked people still grew, smoked, consumed, bought, sold, transported and generally used those things the government doesn't want them to.
Someone interesting the estimated value of the global drug trade is pretty close to your headline number ... $321 billion USD annually.

Note this doesn't mean I advocate a war between crypto-currencies and global governments.  Bitcoin will "bootstrap" much faster if it can springboard off the existing financial system.  The point is that it doesn't really matter what governments want to do, it is what they are capable of doing.  Governments are generally able to attack centralized institutions (like other governments, companies, singular leaders, etc) rather well but they tend to be rather inept at killing decentralized global networks even when they waste forty years and a trillion dollars trying to do it.

[monsterer]

Governments are generally able to attack centralized institutions (like other governments, companies, singular leaders, etc) rather well but they tend to be rather inept at killing decentralized global networks even when they waste forty years and a trillion dollars trying to do it.

They don't need to spend any money to stop bitcoin replacing fiat in the long-run. They just make a new law saying any ISP suspected of allowing bitcoin related traffic will be shut down. Bitcoin would then truly only be a currency for 'criminals', the price would crash and mass adoption would be almost impossible.

In fact, IMO this is virtual currency's only possible future other than completely replacing all fiat currencies.

[justusranvier]

The forum needs a "Concern Trolling" section where threads like this can be moved.

[Coin_Master]

The question is not whether governments will allow a $X bitcoin economy, the question is whether Bitcoin will allow oversized governments to exist and retain the kind of power they currently do.

Agreed.  It is important to remember that the introduction of Bitcoin in 2009 was as a result of the epic failure of our governments and banks worldwide in 2008.  If the people employed to run our government offices/departments are unable or unqualified to do so, then what justification would they have in interfering with a solution (provided by a brilliant mind) to the mess they allowed to happen.  They should concern themselves less with Bitcoin and other fun things "the people" do with their time, and focus more on the jobs they are employed to do "cleaning the sewers" , "fixing roads" , "building schools".  They have shown they (the current generation of leaders) are completely incapable of running the finances of the countries they are responsible for.  It is entirely laughable that they should want to be involved in anyway with Bitcoin, why would we want them to screw this up to?  I say "get back to work" and stop worrying about things that do not concern you.

[DeathAndTaxes]

Governments are generally able to attack centralized institutions (like other governments, companies, singular leaders, etc) rather well but they tend to be rather inept at killing decentralized global networks even when they waste forty years and a trillion dollars trying to do it.

They don't need to spend any money to stop bitcoin replacing fiat in the long-run. They just make a new law saying any ISP suspected of allowing Bitcoin related traffic will be shut down. Bitcoin would then truly only be a currency for 'criminals', the price would crash and mass adoption would be almost impossible.

The one world government?  A government may do that and innovation and technology will simply flow to where governments are more realistic in their regulation.   I don't think cryptocurrencies will replace national fiat but they will coexist.  The genie can't be put back into the bottle.  Stilll the global money supply is on the order of $75T (M2) so even if Bitcoin grew to support a $500B money supply (the number from the OP), it is a rounding error and thus hardly is a danger that it will replace all national currencies.

[BurtW]

They don't need to spend any money to stop bitcoin replacing fiat in the long-run. They just make a new law saying any ISP suspected of allowing bitcoin related traffic will be shut down. Bitcoin would then truly only be a currency for 'criminals', the price would crash and mass adoption would be almost impossible.

Let's take a look at the bolded statement here.   Historically you are 100% wrong.  What actually happens to the price when the gov makes something the public wants illegal (alcohol, pot, gold, etc.)?

[MineForeman.com]

And it's supposed to be decentralized, anti-government.

Another tinfoil hat wearing paranoid delusional fool.

True, it is decentralized but anti-government?

YOU may be but bitcoin is a protocol, not a semi-mythical power.  If the government you speak of tax bitcoin, own bitcoin or even start to mine bitcoin it will not become self aware and fight back.

Get a grip.

[Mylon]

Instead of calling contributors to your thread fools, why don't you go study history and quote 1 example of a power being successful in stopping the adoption of a technology they did not like?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKmYqUSDch8

Ahh the oil industry, always looking to find the next thing to replace oil, and make sure it never gets out of the laboratory.

Good find though.

Now lets rephrase the question to actually suite bitcoin:

why don't you go study history and quote 1 example of a power being successful in stopping the adoption of a distributed technology they did not like?

(this is like trying to stop the internet, or bittorrent)


To OP, you shouldn't shoot down contributors to your thread... out of principle I shouldn't reply by here is my 2 cents,

You can't ban or regulate bitcoin. Thats impossible, in order to regulate bitcoin, you would actually have to change the code and consensus would have to be achieved. (since no-one likes taxes no-one would vote yes for tax regulation into bitcoin, per example)
You can attempt to ban it... You can actually become quite successful at this... However go ask in China, Iran, Egypt, Syria to name a few, whether you can truly ban something on the internet, making it impossible for anyone to access.

You should already know the answer to that, we wouldn't have heard about either the things in Egypt or Syria without it.

So allow... they don't have a choice, they can speed it up, or delay it. The only way however that they will stop Bitcoin reaching 500 Billion market cap is by inventing something that is even better. (though luck after the financial industry has been sitting on their ass and not innovating for 50+ years. -- Andreas Antonopolous has great comments on this, (innovating with and without permission) google his talks on conferences --

And after all that, as a group of governments it has no benefit to them, and the banks will beg them to put a stop to it. However, if you look from the point of any individual government, excluding the US, you see a foreign reserve currency that no-one controls, opposed to a foreign reserve currency that is being controlled by a government, a competitor. (if I may call it so) Since its obvious no-one trusts a foreign government, everyone is looking at this non-government controlled currency and is thinking... How much shit will I get for jumping in first... And how big will be benefits be... And currently this is being weighed in a good 50 nations (the other 100+ not being fully aware yet... but will be soon and weighing the same thing)
Where does this put us... We need to keep pushing our governments... to accept. The only unknown in this whole story is the US government... Will they voluntarily give up their place at the top of the food chain... I don't expect so... On the other hand what are they going to do... Go to war with the rest of the world all at once? (Note, Canada & Australia are looking pretty positive towards bitcoin, so does Germany, Switserland & East Europe, haven't heard much in the south of Europe about it yet, but kinda expecting it to be a boom there too, since they are having all those issues in Greece, Italy and Spain / Portugal) Then you have the unknown in here, which is China, will they remain neutral, side with the US or side with the rest of the world... Personally I'm expecting China will do whatever they can to piss off the US.

Either way, the next 5 years are going to be very rough, and a lot of things are going to happen very rapidly. Hopefully in 5 years everything will have quieted down again and we live in a better world.

[Peter R]

Nice post Mylon.

[str4wm4n]

government is just a stupid idea in peoples minds, bitcoin however is real

[beetcoin]

The question is not whether governments will allow a $X bitcoin economy, the question is whether Bitcoin will allow oversized governments to exist and retain the kind of power they currently do.

....and we have the first jap-anime inclined fool chiming in with deluded sense of 'power' they hold.

Why don't you go hang in chinese and russian government custody with the weaboo kiddy snowden and find out life doesn't work out like a shounen manga/comic?


REALISTIC discussions.

definitely deluded. whether BTC makes big leaps depends on whether government wants to control it. the ball is in their court, not BTC's.. unless you are deluded.

[tabnloz]

A serious question.




Major investors and many people have been making predictions about bitcoin rising to 40,000 USD per coin.


Going by recent figures, that would mean the total market size of crypto economy will rise to half a trillion dollars.


That's easily more than half of several top 20 economies in the world. Around near 13% of annual US federal budget.




And it's supposed to be decentralized, anti-government.




Is there really a realistic possibility that a market of such size can exist without either 1. some form of governmental oversight/regulation, or 2. going fully underground as an illegal form of black economy?



Only recently a national government acted to shut down a significant portion of crypto economy. That's only when BTC reached 1200 USD. What do you think governments will do when they figure such a significant market is trying to become a national economy in its own right?


Realistic discussions please. How can crypto survive to reach the level many people want to see? Remember, nothing is particularly fool-proof. What has been made can be unmade. Nothing is absolute.


How can this work?


Discuss.

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out. The community can brainstorm ways to defeat bitcoin through regulation in order to figure out ways to circumvent it quickly when it happens because there is little chance of bitcoin being allowed to evolve without interference.

However, I think the crypto cat is already out of the bag and it isn't going back in. You say that what is made can be unmade, but I disagree: what has been invented cannot be uninvented.

As Nassim Taleb said a while back the thing that kills bitcoin is a lack of publicity. If it continues to grow in the public mind, it will be a case of adapt or die. So far, so good.

The regular punter is frightened about regulating bitcoin out of existence (and so far the Chinese have put a dampener on the market by doing so) but like bittorrents we all know it cant be eradicated completely, and the brightest minds seem to think the protocol is the basis for the major disruption, not the bitcoin currency itself.

Knowing this, it's a cat and mouse game: the compromised financial sector is nervous but they no doubt see the potential for profit. Governments will want to maintain control & their tax revenue. But, regulate it and risk a whole sector moving to friendlier areas.

Imagine Greece set up a bitcoin friendly financial environment. Jobs, boost to local economy and potential for longer term economic benefits if bitcoins grows further. Better than what they are now.

[johnyj]

Government is in desperate need of bitcoin to save them from a total financial collapse

[Mikcik]

They don't need to spend any money to stop bitcoin replacing fiat in the long-run. They just make a new law saying any ISP suspected of allowing bitcoin related traffic will be shut down. Bitcoin would then truly only be a currency for 'criminals', the price would crash and mass adoption would be almost impossible.

Let's take a look at the bolded statement here.   Historically you are 100% wrong.  What actually happens to the price when the gov makes something the public wants illegal (alcohol, pot, gold, etc.)?

Thats a stupid argument, i adresses it several times. Gold banned? Where? Global: Hardly, Locally, maybe... did you see any GREAT swing in price of gold due ot ban? No, maybe swing downwards yes...

About the other two, yeah, but these are substances that make you feel good, you can try to ban these things but because it GIVES something to you, youll never trully ban it, its like hookers :-), if a simple holding and using bitcoin makes you "feel good" then you are weird... :-).

Ig bitcoin is banned by gov. the majority wouldnt give a fuc* and risk some problems due to some stupid virtual money... Belive me that. There would have to be serious financial economical issues globally to encourage people having problems with gov. simply by using bitcoin. You didnt realize that??

[Mikcik]

Instead of calling contributors to your thread fools, why don't you go study history and quote 1 example of a power being successful in stopping the adoption of a technology they did not like?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKmYqUSDch8

Ahh the oil industry, always looking to find the next thing to replace oil, and make sure it never gets out of the laboratory.

Good find though.

Now lets rephrase the question to actually suite bitcoin:

why don't you go study history and quote 1 example of a power being successful in stopping the adoption of a distributed technology they did not like?

(this is like trying to stop the internet, or bittorrent)


To OP, you shouldn't shoot down contributors to your thread... out of principle I shouldn't reply by here is my 2 cents,

You can't ban or regulate bitcoin. Thats impossible, in order to regulate bitcoin, you would actually have to change the code and consensus would have to be achieved. (since no-one likes taxes no-one would vote yes for tax regulation into bitcoin, per example)
You can attempt to ban it... You can actually become quite successful at this... However go ask in China, Iran, Egypt, Syria to name a few, whether you can truly ban something on the internet, making it impossible for anyone to access.

You should already know the answer to that, we wouldn't have heard about either the things in Egypt or Syria without it.

So allow... they don't have a choice, they can speed it up, or delay it. The only way however that they will stop Bitcoin reaching 500 Billion market cap is by inventing something that is even better. (though luck after the financial industry has been sitting on their ass and not innovating for 50+ years. -- Andreas Antonopolous has great comments on this, (innovating with and without permission) google his talks on conferences --

And after all that, as a group of governments it has no benefit to them, and the banks will beg them to put a stop to it. However, if you look from the point of any individual government, excluding the US, you see a foreign reserve currency that no-one controls, opposed to a foreign reserve currency that is being controlled by a government, a competitor. (if I may call it so) Since its obvious no-one trusts a foreign government, everyone is looking at this non-government controlled currency and is thinking... How much shit will I get for jumping in first... And how big will be benefits be... And currently this is being weighed in a good 50 nations (the other 100+ not being fully aware yet... but will be soon and weighing the same thing)
Where does this put us... We need to keep pushing our governments... to accept. The only unknown in this whole story is the US government... Will they voluntarily give up their place at the top of the food chain... I don't expect so... On the other hand what are they going to do... Go to war with the rest of the world all at once? (Note, Canada & Australia are looking pretty positive towards bitcoin, so does Germany, Switserland & East Europe, haven't heard much in the south of Europe about it yet, but kinda expecting it to be a boom there too, since they are having all those issues in Greece, Italy and Spain / Portugal) Then you have the unknown in here, which is China, will they remain neutral, side with the US or side with the rest of the world... Personally I'm expecting China will do whatever they can to piss off the US.

Either way, the next 5 years are going to be very rough, and a lot of things are going to happen very rapidly. Hopefully in 5 years everything will have quieted down again and we live in a better world.

Yeah, this is a nice post, didnt consider that the gov. might like a currency which is "noones" so nobody will manipulate with it, this is good argument, didnt thought about it before, nice thought. On the othewr  hand, having a currency that cannot be manipulated is good, but having the currency that i can manipulate is even better... If you are strong, why settle for consensus...why benefit all, when i can benefit only me with greater role/power (sure this is option only for a strong state as russia, usa or china but still is better for them. If you have power... go share it (you wouldnt, states wouldnt)... if you are weak (small states) you would accept the offer, if you are strong (usa, russia, china) you would reject it.).

The first part is nonse however, because govs can really simply ban bitcoin by banning all the bussiness that accept it.. if no normal bussines (grocery, electronic, housing, energy, transport etc. etc. etc.) accept it, the price CRASHES= bitcoin is dead. (using it only in the black market wont save it). Decentralization is worthless argument here.