3 ms·

There's no need for anonymity. I don't understand why that's relevant. > extremely volatile asset with ~2x price swing within recent couple of years Can be he

by zelly 6y ago

There's no need for anonymity. I don't understand why that's relevant. > extremely volatile asset with ~2x price swing within recent couple of years Can be hedged with futures. Also S&P 500 had ~1.5x price swings recently and no one cared. The derivatives market has solved the problem of volatility in all markets not just Bitcoin. There are already several billionaires who publicly say they have lots of BTC, prob many more who don't speak up. Jack (8B), Chamath (1B), Paul Tudor Jones (6B), Winklevii (1 B), Peter Thiel (2B). Eventually it will be known as the tax haven coin (already kind of is) and that will be its killer app.

sbierwagen 6y ago
>There's no need for anonymity. I don't understand why that's relevant. A US wealth tax would obviously apply to BTC holdings too.
- zelly 6y ago
  That would be impossible to enforce or prove. Bitcoin may not be anonymous but it is pseudonymous. The government could make a case that you own this or that public key hash, but that can be litigated till kingdom come since they have no physical evidence. This is assuming our standards of jurisprudence as we know it would still exist in the future where the government attempts to seize coins. I suppose the government could always torture you. Imagine a world where the government tortures citizens to extract Bitcoin because they are forced into a corner by the abandonment of inflationary currency and they have to resort to actually "earning" money. That seems a bit extreme though (just to collect taxes) even for warlord countries let alone the USA. Which is why it wouldn't happen--there wouldn't be a government at all in that scenario, it would just disappear, and humanity would finally be free as it once was.
  - sbierwagen 6y ago
    >That would be impossible to enforce or prove. I am confused. In your view of the world, does KYC/AML not exist at bitcoin exchanges?

by zelly 6y ago

sbierwagen 6y ago

>There's no need for anonymity. I don't understand why that's relevant. A US wealth tax would obviously apply to BTC holdings too.

zelly 6y ago
That would be impossible to enforce or prove. Bitcoin may not be anonymous but it is pseudonymous. The government could make a case that you own this or that public key hash, but that can be litigated till kingdom come since they have no physical evidence. This is assuming our standards of jurisprudence as we know it would still exist in the future where the government attempts to seize coins. I suppose the government could always torture you. Imagine a world where the government tortures citizens to extract Bitcoin because they are forced into a corner by the abandonment of inflationary currency and they have to resort to actually "earning" money. That seems a bit extreme though (just to collect taxes) even for warlord countries let alone the USA. Which is why it wouldn't happen--there wouldn't be a government at all in that scenario, it would just disappear, and humanity would finally be free as it once was.
- sbierwagen 6y ago
  >That would be impossible to enforce or prove. I am confused. In your view of the world, does KYC/AML not exist at bitcoin exchanges?