4 ms·
> without capital controls from coercive and corrupt governments And conversely too! letting corrupt governments and corporations transfer money with ease!
by mint2 6y ago
> without capital controls from coercive and corrupt governments
And conversely too! letting corrupt governments and corporations transfer money with ease!
- toyg 6y agoLet's not forget druglords, illegal arms dealers, hitmen...
- meowkit 6y agoPaging argument from 2010... You would use Monero or physical cash for those activities. Bitcoin is much easier to trace once you have a lead.
- toyg 6y agoIt's just a tradeoff between opsec and ease of use. Monero is harder to turn back into cash, precisely because it carries a worse reputation. Note that my argument was pro btc - I can see underground demand sustaining its price in the long run.
- Solvitieg 6y agoBecause you definitely can't do that with fiat... This is such an old, tired take.
- bayesian_horse 6y agoNo, you really can't do that easily and sometimes at all with "fiat". Which is why "money laundering" is a thing. Or drug cartels having the problem to stash or move hundreds of thousands of small dollar bills over North and South American borders. A somewhat trustworthy state having control over or transparency into money transfers generally is a very good thing. If your government isn't trustworthy enough, you have bigger problems than the currency.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- toyg 6y agoWhen it comes to truth, old != bad. The oldest profession is still around, for example, because demand will always be there.
- panarky 6y agoThat's always the problem with freedom, it works for good guys and bad guys alike.