Wake up people! Banks are not governments. They can't make things illegal!

[justusranvier]

You're just splitting hairs.

When a central bank's legal department recommends banning the use of bitcoins in the banks it is not splitting hairs to say that the country (Bolivia) did not ban bitcoin.

That's a different issue.

The thread's claim is "banks can't make things illegal."

[ArticMine]

This depends to a large degree how the central bank is structured. In many parts of the world it is simply an arm of the government, a ministry or department, and not "independent" as is the case for example in the United States. If one visits the Central Bank of Bolivia website http://www.bcb.gob.bo/?q=Funciones%20del%20Banco%20Central it says:

El Banco Central es una institution del Estado

or

The Central Bank is an institution of the State

So yes in some countries central banks can make things illegal. As I indicated in this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=658405.0;all I believe that the Bolivian Central Bank tried to ban Bitcoin but failed because they worded their resolution very poorly.

[BittBurger]

coin desk is getting worse!

They're definitely putting out click bait news titles which is irritating the sh*t out of me.   But I guess that's the natural progression the larger you get. 
The Shrem news article threw me this week, claiming the "Govt banned him from speaking at the conference".
In reality he simply wasn't allowed to leave NY, and he was free to speak at the conference remotely.

[electerium]

Banks are not countries. Banks are not states.

Bolivia did not ban bitcoins. Bolivia's banks did.

Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, etc.  are not warning against using bitcoins. Their banks are.



Saying that a country bans bitcoins when their main banks ban them is like saying that a country has banned Whoppers because McDonalds in that country has banned all Whopper sales in their restaurants.


News alert, banks do not transfer bitcoins. Banks do not hold bitcoins in their accounts. Banning their use in their banks is meaningless.

do you understand that those banks in bolivia are state run? which makes them defacto governments?

[Elwar]

Banks are not countries. Banks are not states.

Bolivia did not ban bitcoins. Bolivia's banks did.

Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, etc.  are not warning against using bitcoins. Their banks are.



Saying that a country bans bitcoins when their main banks ban them is like saying that a country has banned Whoppers because McDonalds in that country has banned all Whopper sales in their restaurants.


News alert, banks do not transfer bitcoins. Banks do not hold bitcoins in their accounts. Banning their use in their banks is meaningless.

do you understand that those banks in bolivia are state run? which makes them defacto governments?

Can those banks write laws?

They stated that they will only use government currencies in their banks. This does not make all other things illegal in Bolivia.

[franky1]

banks can only stop people from getting bitcoins from banks.

the bank announcement says that banks won't directly handle / offer bitcoins, burgerking whoppers, baked beans, or tamagotchi electronic pets. they will however offer you a toaster when you open an account.

this does not make whoppers, bitcoins baked beans, tamagotchi's illegal. and toasters legal.
this does not make it a criminal act for people/private businesses to personally hold, buy or sell whoppers, bitcoins baked beans, tamagotchi's

[bananaeater]

Banks certainly have a country's economy under control but in the end their power is not overwhelming. They are not fully able to ban a currency, which is futhermore virtual and decentralized.

[#Darren]

True, but....

the banks OWN most nations, including the uSA.  Most of us are glorified slaves serving the banks.

Unless you come from Iceland, who have thrown off and jailed their oppressors.

[Kprawn]

Well to be more specific... Reserve Banks, are directly linked to government. They decide, how much currency will be "created" and then it's channelled to banks.

So your bank loans money from the reserve banks and then your bank loans the money to you.

So if your government decide not to back BTC they would "advise" the reserve bank, and the reserve bank, will "advice" their banks, and then your bank will freeze your accounts, dealing with bitcoins.

Well that is how, I was told, how it works. So if I am wrong, I beg your forgiveness. 

In short, governments pulls the strings, and we are the puppets. And when you deal only in BTC and do not convert to fiat, the strings are cut. 

[franky1]

True, but....

the banks OWN most nations, including the uSA.  Most of us are glorified slaves serving the banks.

Unless you come from Iceland, who have thrown off and jailed their oppressors.

get off the illuminati titled videos of youtube, come back to reality.. dont walk into the light..

banks cannot tell you that its illegal to pick your nose, to breathe, to swim in an ocean, to watch endless illuminati videos..

you are a human you have the choice to even ignore me asking you to stop sniffing the glue while watching the videos.

same goes for bitcoin. so please put into context banks control into real world, real reality scenarios. and not youtube fantasy.

summary
a bank tomorrow wont make a criminal law that outlaws bitcoins for consumer use between people. banks can lobby governments, and those governments can have there many months of meetings sending the request up the chain of command to the law makers, who then have thier own processes of evaluating the pro's and cons.

but a bank cannot click its own finger and thumb and outlaw bitcoins tomorrow.

alot of you activist mindsets try to make it appear that banks can directly ban bitcoins in an instant, with no processes, no chances of public hearings, petitions, overviews, decisions by anyone outside the banking system

[SpontaneousDream]

You're a fool if you think the banking institutions are not closely tied to government officials. Banks have A LOT of power and lee-way in this world (at least in the US). They're going to lobby hard for whatever they want, and there's not much the average person can do.

[franky1]

You're a fool if you think the banking institutions are not closely tied to government officials. Banks have A LOT of power and lee-way in this world (at least in the US). They're going to lobby hard for whatever they want, and there's not much the average person can do.

not from your sofa...

but i do love how these sofa surfing activists have alot to say on a forum but would never step foot into a government hearing to make their voice heard..

.. "because the government is illuminati".. i hear them cry

luckily im in the UK, and yes i do go to political events and other things that matter. so i have a better grasp of reality than the youtube viewing sofa surfing armchair activists that are posting apocalypse stories

[Elwar]

You're a fool if you think the banking institutions are not closely tied to government officials. Banks have A LOT of power and lee-way in this world (at least in the US). They're going to lobby hard for whatever they want, and there's not much the average person can do.

Most big companies have lobbyists that can push for laws. That is different from saying that companies can write laws.

[Beliathon]

Banks have A LOT of power and lee-way in this world (at least in the US). They're going to lobby hard for whatever they want, and there's not much the average person can do.

Power is more complex than you think, child. Public perception matters a great deal - now more than ever for the banks. They're on thin ice, and so is the US government. They're smart enough to know it, they won't be kicking any political hornets nests anytime soon.



This ain't China. Americans have guns and tempers. Imagine what could happen if the government managed to piss everyone off enough to unite Teaparty militiaman and Occupy Wall Street anarchists... It wouldn't be pretty, that's for damn sure.

[spazzdla]

Amercian's do have guns, is it starting to make sense now that gun violence is dropping massively but the media is still pushing the anti gun agenda..  Do you see what is going on.... it's quite scary.
Hitler removed all the guns from his people... it was celebrated as a great victory.. a few years later people were rounded up and gased..

[Beliathon]

Amercian's do have guns, is it starting to make sense now that gun violence is dropping massively but the media is still pushing the anti gun agenda..

I'm pushing the anti-gun agenda, and I hate the mainstream media. I don't think human beings need to be using violence to solve our problems in 2014. I think it's a fucking barbaric travesty that we still do.

Here are some facts to help deprogram your gun-loving brainwashing:



You like your guns because someone a whole lot smarter than you figured out that if they can program a nation of 300 million people to love guns, they could make a shitload of money selling guns to idiots who don't need them.

Gun culture = PROFIT, in exchange for your blood. Simpleton.

[franky1]

Amercian's do have guns, is it starting to make sense now that gun violence is dropping massively but the media is still pushing the anti gun agenda..

I'm pushing the anti-gun agenda, and I hate the mainstream media. I don't think human beings need to be using violence to solve our problems in 2014. I think it's a fucking barbaric travesty that we still do.

Here are some facts to help deprogram your gun-loving brainwashing:

forgive me for being british, but i have never been a gun lover or someone that see's the point in them.

if someone breaks into your house why is the mindset to kill them. wouldnt stun guns, or tranquilizer guns do a better job. as most people know unless average joe public was a marksman and could guarantee a headshot. a gun wont kill instantly, it usually just stops them in their tracks, injures them and a few minutes later they die due to blood loss.

a stungun does a better job of dropping someone to the floor even if you shoot them in the arm.. and there is no blood to clean up after, meaning your nice white shagpile rug doesnt need to be thrown out.

secondly in a apocalyptic world of zombies and disaster (the other reason gun lovers say they need to arm up) killing a military soldier would get 20 soldiers killing you. but stunning them with a tranquilizer would be less risky to your life, as they would know their colleague was still alive, and concentrate on getting him out of the danger zone and conscious

[BADecker]

Actually, banks just might be the government. Probably the strongest nation in the world is the United States. And here's how the banks are the government for the United States. And since they are government for the U.S., they are the government for the world, since the U.S. is the strongest nation in the world at this time.

House Joint Resolution 192 in the U.S. (1933) declared the bankruptcy of the United States. See:
http://www.truthsetsusfree.com/HJR192.htm.

For more significant understandings about this, see:
http://abundanthope.net/pages/True_US_History_108/US_Congress_House_Joint_Resolution_192_of_June_5_1_3312.shtml.

The U.S. bankruptcy was a chapter 11-like bankruptcy, a reorganization bankruptcy. In a chapter 11, the business that has gone bankrupt - in this case, the United States - is placed into a trust with a trustee running the show. The idea is to let the business continue operations with a trustee overseer guiding it so that it starts to operate in profit rather than in loss.

So, who is the trustee for the United States? Well, bankruptcy has to do with money, which has to do with banking. So it is probably the Federal Reserve Bank, or the International Monetary Fund that is the trustee.

In a bankruptcy, business bylaws are suspended in favor of trustee directives. In the case of the United States, the Constitution has been suspended in favor of the "orders" set down by the trustee. That is why the Federal Reserve Bank prints the money, controls lending and inflation, regulates anything having to do with money, and thereby indirectly controls government.

Now, there is the possibility (probability?) that the bankruptcy was a lie, set in place to bring even the U.S. into the One World Government. If we can find the lie, we just might be able to use it to escape the whole bankruptcy idea from within. Until then, Bitcoin is one of the few things that just might be able to fly in the face of the U.S. bankruptcy and destroy it from the outside.

[spazzdla]

True, but....

the banks OWN most nations, including the uSA.  Most of us are glorified slaves serving the banks.

Unless you come from Iceland, who have thrown off and jailed their oppressors.

get off the illuminati titled videos of youtube, come back to reality.. dont walk into the light..

banks cannot tell you that its illegal to pick your nose, to breathe, to swim in an ocean, to watch endless illuminati videos..

you are a human you have the choice to even ignore me asking you to stop sniffing the glue while watching the videos.

same goes for bitcoin. so please put into context banks control into real world, real reality scenarios. and not youtube fantasy.

summary
a bank tomorrow wont make a criminal law that outlaws bitcoins for consumer use between people. banks can lobby governments, and those governments can have there many months of meetings sending the request up the chain of command to the law makers, who then have thier own processes of evaluating the pro's and cons.

but a bank cannot click its own finger and thumb and outlaw bitcoins tomorrow.

alot of you activist mindsets try to make it appear that banks can directly ban bitcoins in an instant, with no processes, no chances of public hearings, petitions, overviews, decisions by anyone outside the banking system

What will happen to me if I refuse to pay my taxes as I do not want to support the central banks which our countries loan money from illegally and we pay back with interest?  We are slaves.

[BADecker]

What will happen to me if I refuse to pay my taxes as I do not want to support the central banks which our countries loan money from illegally and we pay back with interest?  We are slaves.

There are about 3.79 million square miles in the United States. That's something over 7.5 acres for every person in the country. But since most of the people live in the big cities, you could live off the land in some vacant area of the U.S. If you happen to be gregarious, you could live off what you find in dumpsters in the big cities.

Check out http://abundanthope.net/pages/True_US_History_108/US_Congress_House_Joint_Resolution_192_of_June_5_1_3312.shtml to see how you can use the bankruptcy to make the banks your slave.



EDIT: Incidentally, if the bankruptcy is declared a lie, and if the banks lose there control, and the treasury takes over the money, and the Constitution is found to be the controller of the U.S. again, Bitcoin might not be needed any longer.