3 ms·

I know it sounds silly but it’s legit. Tons of stories of people driving out to buy a car, getting pulled over, having $10k seized without being charged with a

I know it sounds silly but it’s legit. Tons of stories of people driving out to buy a car, getting pulled over, having $10k seized without being charged with a crime, and then having to sue to get it back under a presumption of guilt. Bitcoin is harder to seize under civil asset forfeiture. ETA: in the US. Not sure about other countries.

gamblor956 6y ago
Or they could have just used a bank account. More people have lost money to Bitcoin scams and exchange fraud (see e.g. Mt Gox) than have lost their money to civil forfeiture. Depending on the price of Bitcoin, but (based on the current price of Bitcoin) more $$$ has been lost to crypto fraud as well.
- maerF0x0 6y ago
  proof of your claims?
- lixtra 6y ago
  Lehmann alone lost almost 300B USD of others peoples money. Banks are safe until they aren’t.
  - colinmhayes 6y ago
    Lehman was an investment bank, not a commercial bank. Commercial banks aren't allowed to go into crazy leverage like Lehman did.
  - gamblor956 6y ago
    Not even remotely the same thing. Lehmann Bros was an investment bank, meaning that the value of accounts was tied to the value of the securities investments contained therein, and Lehmann engaged in trading activity on behalf of those account holders. (And note: by 2013, all of Lehman's account holders had been made whole for their losses https://www.ft.com/content/f06762de-cf94-11e2-a050-00144feab7de https://www.ft.com/content/f06762de-cf94-11e2-a050-00144feab...) Savings accounts (and checking accounts) are regulated very different from investment accounts.
    - lixtra 6y ago
      > Not even remotely the same thing. Well, Mt. Gox and Bitcoin? Not even remotely the same thing.
      - gamblor956 6y ago
        Right, because Mt Gox was purporting to be a bank where you could store your Bitcoin, when it actuality it did not have sufficient crypto to pay out depositors as a result of many hacks and other shenanigans perpetrated by their own employees or contractors and it was openly lying to customers. (By the time of the fatal "hack," Mt Gox was already insolvent.)
- oarsinsync 6y ago
  > More people have lost money to Bitcoin scams and exchange fraud (see e.g. Mt Gox) than have lost their money to civil forfeiture. Can you please back this statement up with some citations for this? I'd be hugely surprised if the number of victims, or even the USD value, of BTC related fraud or foolishness outnumbered state sanctioned theft in the USA, considering how lucrative the theft is for the state, without any need for laundering the ill-gained funds either. At the same time, it would be remarkable if more people lost money, or more money was lost, in BTC than through civil forfeiture, and possibly an ironic statement that exploiting foolishness is the quickest way to riches, rather than deploying state sanctioned violence.
- adrianmonk 6y ago
  Some people can, but there are people who can't use a bank account. There are a surprising number of people who can't or don't. One reason is that banks will refuse to open an account for people whose records show past behavior they don't like (bouncing checks, overdrawing accounts, leaving fees unpaid, etc.). Some other people could open a bank account but have practical reasons not to. For example, identity theft. Someone drained all your accounts, but you still have a good-paying job. If you open another account, maybe they will drain that one too? Maybe not a good risk to take when you're trying to stabilize your situation. Another example, probably more common, is poor people who have court judgments against them from people they owe money to. You have medical debt, or you got evicted and owe back rent, or you messed up withholding and you owe the IRS back taxes. You might be living so close to the brink that your monthly income is $1500 and you need $1499 to survive. The court lets the creditor garnish money from your account, so one day you check the balance and find $500 gone, and you can't pay your rent or buy gas to drive to work. So you prevent that scenario by dealing entirely in cash and not opening an account.
- panarky 6y ago
  This thread compares holding your wealth with a third party (such as in a bank) with holding your wealth yourself (such as in Bitcoin). Your example isn't about Bitcoin, it's about third parties. Far more $$$ has been lost to third parties than to Bitcoin.

gamblor956 6y ago

Or they could have just used a bank account. More people have lost money to Bitcoin scams and exchange fraud (see e.g. Mt Gox) than have lost their money to civil forfeiture. Depending on the price of Bitcoin, but (based on the current price of Bitcoin) more $$$ has been lost to crypto fraud as well.

maerF0x0 6y ago
proof of your claims?
lixtra 6y ago
Lehmann alone lost almost 300B USD of others peoples money. Banks are safe until they aren’t.
- colinmhayes 6y ago
  Lehman was an investment bank, not a commercial bank. Commercial banks aren't allowed to go into crazy leverage like Lehman did.
- gamblor956 6y ago
  Not even remotely the same thing. Lehmann Bros was an investment bank, meaning that the value of accounts was tied to the value of the securities investments contained therein, and Lehmann engaged in trading activity on behalf of those account holders. (And note: by 2013, all of Lehman's account holders had been made whole for their losses https://www.ft.com/content/f06762de-cf94-11e2-a050-00144feab7de https://www.ft.com/content/f06762de-cf94-11e2-a050-00144feab...) Savings accounts (and checking accounts) are regulated very different from investment accounts.
  - lixtra 6y ago
    > Not even remotely the same thing. Well, Mt. Gox and Bitcoin? Not even remotely the same thing.
    - gamblor956 6y ago
      Right, because Mt Gox was purporting to be a bank where you could store your Bitcoin, when it actuality it did not have sufficient crypto to pay out depositors as a result of many hacks and other shenanigans perpetrated by their own employees or contractors and it was openly lying to customers. (By the time of the fatal "hack," Mt Gox was already insolvent.)
oarsinsync 6y ago
> More people have lost money to Bitcoin scams and exchange fraud (see e.g. Mt Gox) than have lost their money to civil forfeiture. Can you please back this statement up with some citations for this? I'd be hugely surprised if the number of victims, or even the USD value, of BTC related fraud or foolishness outnumbered state sanctioned theft in the USA, considering how lucrative the theft is for the state, without any need for laundering the ill-gained funds either. At the same time, it would be remarkable if more people lost money, or more money was lost, in BTC than through civil forfeiture, and possibly an ironic statement that exploiting foolishness is the quickest way to riches, rather than deploying state sanctioned violence.
adrianmonk 6y ago
Some people can, but there are people who can't use a bank account. There are a surprising number of people who can't or don't. One reason is that banks will refuse to open an account for people whose records show past behavior they don't like (bouncing checks, overdrawing accounts, leaving fees unpaid, etc.). Some other people could open a bank account but have practical reasons not to. For example, identity theft. Someone drained all your accounts, but you still have a good-paying job. If you open another account, maybe they will drain that one too? Maybe not a good risk to take when you're trying to stabilize your situation. Another example, probably more common, is poor people who have court judgments against them from people they owe money to. You have medical debt, or you got evicted and owe back rent, or you messed up withholding and you owe the IRS back taxes. You might be living so close to the brink that your monthly income is $1500 and you need $1499 to survive. The court lets the creditor garnish money from your account, so one day you check the balance and find $500 gone, and you can't pay your rent or buy gas to drive to work. So you prevent that scenario by dealing entirely in cash and not opening an account.
panarky 6y ago
This thread compares holding your wealth with a third party (such as in a bank) with holding your wealth yourself (such as in Bitcoin). Your example isn't about Bitcoin, it's about third parties. Far more $$$ has been lost to third parties than to Bitcoin.