4 ms·

People forget that government authority comes from their monopoly on the right to bust down your door, take your physical possessions, and imprison you. Sure, y

People forget that government authority comes from their monopoly on the right to bust down your door, take your physical possessions, and imprison you. Sure, you might have billions of dollars worth of BTC, but that's no good for you from the inside of a prison cell or if the government prevents you from acquiring the physical possessions that wealth normally lets you buy. If you come up with some way to cheat the tax man, the tax man will come up with a way to make you pay interest and penalties. One man can evade all of the taxes, and all people can evade some of the taxes, but all people can't evade all of the taxes. The state always wins and will always take as much of a cut of the economy as it wants to.

doggosphere 6y ago
At some point people just leave. Or revolt. There's a reason there isn't a 90% income tax.
- JumpCrisscross 6y ago
  > At some point people just leave. Or revolt. Sure. But this has almost nothing to do with which currency is used.
  - doggosphere 6y ago
    It was a reply to: The state always wins and will always take as much of a cut of the economy as it wants to.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- jokethrowaway 6y ago
  It looks like governments in the world keep getting bigger and bigger. If all western countries all agreed to raise taxes, people wouldn't have much of a choice. Is saving more of your income worth living in Africa, South America or South Asia? There have been proposals for a Global Minimum Tax which is pretty scary. There are also alternative ways to redistribute wealth from individuals to a centralised state. The Great Reset seems to go in this direction.
  - doggosphere 6y ago
    If democratic western countries increase taxes, then it may be the will of the majority of the people, given that they have the power of governance via elections.
- xirbeosbwo1234 6y ago
  There used to be! In the U.S., the top marginal tax rate was 90% or higher from 1944 to 1963 and was 70% or higher from 1918 to 1920 and 1936 to 1980. Source: https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-historical-table-23 https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-historical-tabl... For the past few decades, the top tax rate has been extremely low. People have paid much higher tax rates without revolting or leaving the country.
- heavyset_go 6y ago
  There was a 91-92% top marginal tax rate 70 years ago, and there wasn't a mass exodus or revolt. People with incomes that high have too much to lose in a revolution. Also, part of being filthy rich is living wherever you want without having to worry about the cost, which is why most rich people live in the most expensive locales in first world countries.
  - doggosphere 6y ago
    There was a 91-92% top marginal tax rate 70 years ago, and there wasn't a mass exodus or revolt. What percentage of the population was affected?
  - gruez 6y ago
    >There was a 91-92% top marginal tax rate 70 years ago, and there wasn't a mass exodus or revolt. AFAIK the real tax rate at the time wasn't anywhere near that because there were tons of exemptions/deductions.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
coinward 6y ago
Power like what you've described comes from control of the money supply. If I have billions of dollars worth of BTC I may start paying men with guns to defend me from the other men with guns, well then we have a power struggle.
- JumpCrisscross 6y ago
  > Power like what you've described comes from control of the money supply So Ecuador [1] and every member of the Eurozone are powerless? As well as practically every revolutionary force in history? What about governments when we were on the gold standard? > If I have billions of dollars worth of BTC I may start paying men with guns to defend me from the other men with guns, well then we have a power struggle This works equally well with your holding Bitcoins or dollars or renmimbi. Wealth conveys power. Whether it is held in gold or Bitcoin or Amazon stock is irrelevant. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_of_Ecuador https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_of_Ecuador
  - coinward 6y ago
    Do you think revolutionary armies didn't pay their soldiers? Gold standard reflected sound monetary policy and kept government misallocations in check. Since moving to the fiat standard, governments have unleashed record spending. Bitcoin is exposing what happens to the money as a result of the monetary expansion. Bitcoin has replaced gold, and those of us who have adopted a BTC standard will have separated in prosperity levels from our fiat based peers within a generation or two.
    - JumpCrisscross 6y ago
      > those of us who have adopted a BTC standard will have separated in prosperity levels from our fiat based peers within a generation or two What you’re describing is true of any asset that appreciates in value. The wealth confers power. That it is a currency is irrelevant. If the U.S. switched its legal tender to Bitcoin tomorrow, it would change how we borrow and spend. But it would be no more of a shock to the system than a balanced budget amendment on the Treasury and the Fed. (Less, in fact, since the U.S. on Bitcoin could still deficit spend.)
specialist 6y ago
My phrasing: the USA military determines the value of the USA dollar. I binged on David Graeber last year. I so appreciate criticisms of the Liberal tradition from outside of the Liberal (left vs right) sphere. It's like only being able to appreciate the forest once you get out of the forest. Anyway. Graeber asks a lot of hard questions. Such as "What is money?" And provides historical precedents which may lead to answers. Like prior relationships between money, currency, debt, empire, military, markets, capitalism. For a long time, governments minted gold (or whatever) into currency. Then we adopted some kind of virtual currency, so now there's more money than their is actual currency. (Which, humorously, is not first time in history.) More recently, non government systems like bitcoin are minting electricity into currency. I don't really care that "there's no there there". Meaning the lack of a physical existence (eg gold or unobtainium or whatever) doesn't bother me. However, I am concerned that there's no big ass military compelling everyone to treat bitcoin as a fiat currency. Until then, bitcoin is just an escrow or collectible. A very, very fragile escrow. It feels like the tulip bulb craze. aka Castles in the sky. Bitcoin's preceived value is held up by everyone's belief that they can sell their holdings to the next sucker. Which is fine. Until it isn't. What happens when the inevitable shock happens? When there's the equivalent of a run on the bank? When everyone tries to "withdraw" by converting bitcoin to US dollars at the same time? Who's gonna step in and stabilize the system? Right now, no one. So then all that currency, minted bitcoin, just goes up in smoke. Poof. We've seen this story play out so many times.

doggosphere 6y ago

At some point people just leave. Or revolt. There's a reason there isn't a 90% income tax.

JumpCrisscross 6y ago
> At some point people just leave. Or revolt. Sure. But this has almost nothing to do with which currency is used.
- doggosphere 6y ago
  It was a reply to: The state always wins and will always take as much of a cut of the economy as it wants to.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
jokethrowaway 6y ago
It looks like governments in the world keep getting bigger and bigger. If all western countries all agreed to raise taxes, people wouldn't have much of a choice. Is saving more of your income worth living in Africa, South America or South Asia? There have been proposals for a Global Minimum Tax which is pretty scary. There are also alternative ways to redistribute wealth from individuals to a centralised state. The Great Reset seems to go in this direction.
- doggosphere 6y ago
  If democratic western countries increase taxes, then it may be the will of the majority of the people, given that they have the power of governance via elections.
xirbeosbwo1234 6y ago
There used to be! In the U.S., the top marginal tax rate was 90% or higher from 1944 to 1963 and was 70% or higher from 1918 to 1920 and 1936 to 1980. Source: https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-historical-table-23 https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-historical-tabl... For the past few decades, the top tax rate has been extremely low. People have paid much higher tax rates without revolting or leaving the country.
heavyset_go 6y ago
There was a 91-92% top marginal tax rate 70 years ago, and there wasn't a mass exodus or revolt. People with incomes that high have too much to lose in a revolution. Also, part of being filthy rich is living wherever you want without having to worry about the cost, which is why most rich people live in the most expensive locales in first world countries.
- doggosphere 6y ago
  There was a 91-92% top marginal tax rate 70 years ago, and there wasn't a mass exodus or revolt. What percentage of the population was affected?
- gruez 6y ago
  >There was a 91-92% top marginal tax rate 70 years ago, and there wasn't a mass exodus or revolt. AFAIK the real tax rate at the time wasn't anywhere near that because there were tons of exemptions/deductions.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

coinward 6y ago

Power like what you've described comes from control of the money supply. If I have billions of dollars worth of BTC I may start paying men with guns to defend me from the other men with guns, well then we have a power struggle.

JumpCrisscross 6y ago
> Power like what you've described comes from control of the money supply So Ecuador [1] and every member of the Eurozone are powerless? As well as practically every revolutionary force in history? What about governments when we were on the gold standard? > If I have billions of dollars worth of BTC I may start paying men with guns to defend me from the other men with guns, well then we have a power struggle This works equally well with your holding Bitcoins or dollars or renmimbi. Wealth conveys power. Whether it is held in gold or Bitcoin or Amazon stock is irrelevant. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_of_Ecuador https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_of_Ecuador
- coinward 6y ago
  Do you think revolutionary armies didn't pay their soldiers? Gold standard reflected sound monetary policy and kept government misallocations in check. Since moving to the fiat standard, governments have unleashed record spending. Bitcoin is exposing what happens to the money as a result of the monetary expansion. Bitcoin has replaced gold, and those of us who have adopted a BTC standard will have separated in prosperity levels from our fiat based peers within a generation or two.
  - JumpCrisscross 6y ago
    > those of us who have adopted a BTC standard will have separated in prosperity levels from our fiat based peers within a generation or two What you’re describing is true of any asset that appreciates in value. The wealth confers power. That it is a currency is irrelevant. If the U.S. switched its legal tender to Bitcoin tomorrow, it would change how we borrow and spend. But it would be no more of a shock to the system than a balanced budget amendment on the Treasury and the Fed. (Less, in fact, since the U.S. on Bitcoin could still deficit spend.)

specialist 6y ago

My phrasing: the USA military determines the value of the USA dollar. I binged on David Graeber last year. I so appreciate criticisms of the Liberal tradition from outside of the Liberal (left vs right) sphere. It's like only being able to appreciate the forest once you get out of the forest. Anyway. Graeber asks a lot of hard questions. Such as "What is money?" And provides historical precedents which may lead to answers. Like prior relationships between money, currency, debt, empire, military, markets, capitalism. For a long time, governments minted gold (or whatever) into currency. Then we adopted some kind of virtual currency, so now there's more money than their is actual currency. (Which, humorously, is not first time in history.) More recently, non government systems like bitcoin are minting electricity into currency. I don't really care that "there's no there there". Meaning the lack of a physical existence (eg gold or unobtainium or whatever) doesn't bother me. However, I am concerned that there's no big ass military compelling everyone to treat bitcoin as a fiat currency. Until then, bitcoin is just an escrow or collectible. A very, very fragile escrow. It feels like the tulip bulb craze. aka Castles in the sky. Bitcoin's preceived value is held up by everyone's belief that they can sell their holdings to the next sucker. Which is fine. Until it isn't. What happens when the inevitable shock happens? When there's the equivalent of a run on the bank? When everyone tries to "withdraw" by converting bitcoin to US dollars at the same time? Who's gonna step in and stabilize the system? Right now, no one. So then all that currency, minted bitcoin, just goes up in smoke. Poof. We've seen this story play out so many times.