[2014 - 05 - 21] HARVARD ECONOMICS PROFESSOR MAKES THE CASE FOR BITCOIN

[BitDreams]

http://cryptocrimson.com/2014/05/harvard-economics-professor-makes-case-bitcoin/

According to Rogoff, another plus for digital currency is that it could actually increase tax revenue, based on the notion that without cash, the government could finally track transactions, elimination the potential for tax evasion. While critics of digital currencies like bitcoin say it promotes misuse and illegal conduct, Rogoff says that it has the potential to do just the opposite, meaning that with increased tracking, illicit operations would no longer be possible.

I wonder if he read my post at Reddit last month:

If bitcoin proves to be the most efficient means of collecting taxes ever, there should be many benefits to efficiency never before realized. Eliminating the fraud, maybe all of a sudden it makes sense to not collect tax on food, fuel and charity for example. Once bitcoin becomes the most reliable reporter of income, IRS suddenly dumps big business and wall street accounting for the new sweetheart, bitcoin. http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/21c9fe/irs_declares_bitcoin_as_property_not_currency/cgbvkkw

1. With Bitcoin as the major tax pool it is ultimately Bitcoin consensus that governs.

2. Bitcoin government will be project based. Bloating won't exist as projects reach end of life after returning dividends to sponsors and participants of the network.

- just dreaming.

[1713277527]

1713277527

[1713277527]

1713277527

[1713277527]

1713277527

[BitDreams]

Do you have a link?

Fixed, thank you. I was too busy bragging about my own self

[erono]

This HARVARD ECONOMICS PROFESSOR is real smart. I'm surprised they didn't give him a nobel prize yet.

[thezerg]

Can someone from a .gov, or a supposed "2nd or 3rd world" country (lol at some of the countries on there) grab the article and post it here?  There's a $5 paywall otherwise (if it was BTC, I'd pay! )
Thx!
http://www.nber.org/papers/w20126#navDiv=6

[dwdoc]

If bitcoins can be traced to individuals and therefore taxed then they can also be red-listed which will destroy their utility as a fungible currency. Coin mixing, dark wallets, etc. will become an essential tool.

[BitDreams]

If bitcoins can be traced to individuals and therefore taxed then they can also be red-listed which will destroy their utility as a fungible currency. Coin mixing, dark wallets, etc. will become an essential tool.

Personally, I hope that coin mixers and dark wallets will demonstrate the futility of attempting to collect taxes on the virtual economy and to tax income. Instead, tax collectors will focus on actual consumption. Because 'government' projects will be handled in the block chain through dedicated alt chains / side chains, a major portion of government funding will become voluntary.

[IYFTech]

This HARVARD ECONOMICS PROFESSOR is real smart. I'm surprised they didn't give him a nobel prize yet.

You have to drone bomb entire nations & kill thousands of men, women & children to get awarded one of those coco tin lids.

[BenAnh]

Why should anyone listen to this guy again as he's always wrong?

[BitCoinDream]

Can someone from a .gov, or a supposed "2nd or 3rd world" country (lol at some of the countries on there) grab the article and post it here?  There's a $5 paywall otherwise (if it was BTC, I'd pay! )
Thx!
http://www.nber.org/papers/w20126#navDiv=6

Are you talking about this paper ?

http://www.nber.org/papers/w20126.pdf

[Trading]

Well, people have to tell those things in order for bitcoin to be more accepted, but I doubt any Government will believe that bitcoin can be tax friendly. On the contrary, bitcoin can provoke much more headaches for the tax men than off shores do.
Take in account that the bitcoin can be changed in order to introduce higher levels of anonymity, taking in account advances introduced by other alt coins.

[BitDreams]

Well, people have to tell those things in order for bitcoin to be more accepted, but I doubt any Government will believe that bitcoin can be tax friendly. On the contrary, bitcoin can provoke much more headaches for the tax men than off shores do.
Take in account that the bitcoin can be changed in order to introduce higher levels of anonymity, taking in account advances introduced by other alt coins.

I believe it will pressure them to change the nature of taxation relieving pressure to tax income and increasing pressure on consumption tax. One of the changes I've been hesitant to speak of is that Bitcoin protocol will likely strengthen borders. That is, money may pass through borders as if invisible but the things you purchase will be highly visible.

This is all speculative, imagine handing someone one of the first credit cards in 1950 and ask them to speculate how they'll be using it 20 years later when the first ATM is to be introduced, few could imagine.

[Trading]

Even if that kind of change was made, the lack of banking records, the relative anonymity of bitcoin and of several exchanges, would make very hard to tax services, digital goods or small companies that don't have organized accountability. If bitcoin reaches the masses, the state will have to fight for their financial survival, probably adopting measures of online control of the use of cryptocurrencies.

And take in account that consumption tax is unfair, because taxes rich and poor on the same terms. Alright, the rich spend more money, but he will be paying under the same tax rate of the poor.

[TheButterZone]

"Harvard  [Cock]..." -Penn Jillette

[BitDreams]

Even if that kind of change was made, the lack of banking records, the relative anonymity of bitcoin and of several exchanges, would make very hard to tax services, digital goods or small companies that don't have organized accountability. If bitcoin reaches the masses, the state will have to fight for their financial survival, probably adopting measures of online control of the use of cryptocurrencies.

And take in account that consumption tax is unfair, because taxes rich and poor on the same terms. Alright, the rich spend more money, but he will be paying under the same tax rate of the poor.

A bitcoin wealth effect might allow something similar to universal living wage. I truly believe that the bitcoin protocol will eliminate so much waste from government, privatizing much of it in the form dedicated social contracts within the block chain, that the cost of government will plummet. In super optimist mode, I believe that taxes could eventually move to a totally voluntary status. Get your name on a park bench for example.

Tax robots and software and machines and distributed autonomous corporations not humans. If 'government' stops serving the people, they bite the hand that feeds and that form of government goes offline, landing in some archive while society rewrites the contract with amazing speed.

[BitDreams]

Well, people have to tell those things in order for bitcoin to be more accepted, but I doubt any Government will believe that bitcoin can be tax friendly. On the contrary, bitcoin can provoke much more headaches for the tax men than off shores do.
Take in account that the bitcoin can be changed in order to introduce higher levels of anonymity, taking in account advances introduced by other alt coins.

If I believe bitcoin will change the world I believe bitcoin will change government. The question is bitcoin brothers and sisters, do you believe? 

[BitDreams]

Even if that kind of change was made, ...

EditP Trading, I liked your question so much I answered it twice.  

Bitcoin will change government more than government will change Bitcoin. Forget taxes on services. It's gone. Instead tax the consumption of those who've earned money through servicing. There would be a basic living exemption.

The loophole is this: A person could claim poverty and cheat the system of food, water, shelter and medical care by claiming they are flat broke. Those all would be affordable costs to a government operating at peak servitude. An efficient government, not at war, married to consumers instead of industry (DAC) can afford it. Imagine government when taxation is voluntary. Don't like government, don't ride the public block chain.

The moment that greedy wealthy person (described above) acquires and attempts to transport something (borders) it becomes apparent they consumed. That's the most efficient point of taxation.

[bryant.coleman]

I like Kenneth Rogoff... and I have a grand idea in mind. Why can't we have a live televised debate between Kenneth Rogoff (on the pro-Bitcoin side) and Mark Williams (on the anti-Bitcoin side) on the future of the digital currency?

[Lethn]

Because in any legitimate debate where they are made to answer difficult questions about Bitcoin the anti-Bitcoiners would lose badly and they don't want that to happen, it's like how mainstream politicians don't get into debates with the 'crazy' minor parties because they know they'd lose. It's much easier to trash talk and insult an enemy from a high up tower where they can't reach you than actually go out and fight them one on one which is essentially what these people have done, they've created a system where it's impossible for anyone but their allies and friends to talk to them.

[Ron~Popeil]

Even if that kind of change was made, ...

EditP Trading, I liked your question so much I answered it twice.  

Bitcoin will change government more than government will change Bitcoin. Forget taxes on services. It's gone. Instead tax the consumption of those who've earned money through servicing. There would be a basic living exemption.

The loophole is this: A person could claim poverty and cheat the system of food, water, shelter and medical care by claiming they are flat broke. Those all would be affordable costs to a government operating at peak servitude. An efficient government, not at war, married to consumers instead of industry (DAC) can afford it. Imagine government when taxation is voluntary. Don't like government, don't ride the public block chain.

The moment that greedy wealthy person (described above) acquires and attempts to transport something (borders) it becomes apparent they consumed. That's the most efficient point of taxation.

I am a fairly ardent anti big government person, but you could collect a reasonable amount of sales tax that businesses can build into cost. The pay off would be having a public block chain so we can see how government is spending what we send them. You can then vote with your economic activity and government would be forced to live within it's means. You can't start constant wars if you can't afford bullets.   

[bryant.coleman]

Because in any legitimate debate where they are made to answer difficult questions about Bitcoin the anti-Bitcoiners would lose badly and they don't want that to happen, it's like how mainstream politicians don't get into debates with the 'crazy' minor parties because they know they'd lose.

I know that the mainstream TV stations will turn down the offer to broadcast such a debate. But if Mark Williams agrees to it, we can have a debate, and then upload it to video sharing sites, such as YouTube.