14 ms·

Netherlands must ban cryptocurrencies immediately: CPB head

141 points by omnibrain 5y ago

ionwake 5y ago
Nobel laureate Robert Shiller calls bitcoin a 'contagious narrative' Anyone else find articles like these hard to take seriously?
- fb13 5y ago
  > Nobel laureate... Maybe we should start taking reputable people like this more seriously.
  - abnry 5y ago
    Depends. Is Shiller recommending to buy vitamin C?
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - aww_dang 5y ago
    The "Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel" is not a Nobel Prize. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Economic_Sciences#Relation_to_the_Nobel_Prizes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Econom... As the name implies, it is a prize created in "honor of" Nobel by the Swedish central bank. As such, there is an inherent ideological bias. Many would dispute the claim that it is "reputable". Shiller is famous for suggesting that consumers don't actually know what is good for them, while the state supposedly has better information about appropriate consumption habits. He also misappropriated the word "Phishing" in this context. https://cdn.mises.org/Review%20Essay%20Phishing%20for%20Phools%20The%20Economics%20of%20Manipulation%20and%20Deception%20by%20Akerlof%20and%20Shiller.pdf https://cdn.mises.org/Review%20Essay%20Phishing%20for%20Phoo...
  - Zachsa999 5y ago
    Another buerocrat?
- dqpb 5y ago
  Nobel laureate Robert Shiller should have a conversation with Turing Award winner Silvio Micali.
- Zachsa999 5y ago
  I usually stop reading when people start throwing around "big" names in an argumentativw essay. This time I disagreed so heartily that I finished reading. Are you convincing me of a nobel laureates opinion, or are you convincing me that bitcoin is bad for The dutch economy. I think he's just an integrated buerocrat trying to make his way in the world. The comments said enough about this.
  - BitwiseFool 5y ago
    I feel the same way every time someone references Paul Krugman. The man is so often wrong and yet still revered by the press because he once won a "Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences", which isn't even an actual Nobel Prize.
bifftastic 5y ago
See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27470109 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27470109
lucb1e 5y ago
I was happily surprised to see someone proposing this, assuming it was about PoW when reading the headline... but unfortunately it's just someone trying to time the market on our behalf?! Like, should we also ban stock trading when we expect the next pandemic or .com bubble?
- throwawayffffas 5y ago
  I think their argument is that cryptocurrencies not just (PoW) but (PoS) too are just a meme with no social benefit (unlike the stock market), yet people put large amounts of money on them and it will end in tears.
  - Bishizel 5y ago
    I mean, this type of thinking was applied to the early internet as well. “No one will ever buy anything over the internet, people want stores!” The same lack of imagination is leading to most of these takes.
    - paulryanrogers 5y ago
      Except the fundamentals of the Internet were sound and scalable: near instant global communication and commerce. Cyroptocoin fundamentals don't offer much (any?) value over digitized fiat systems once externalities are considered.
      - practice9 5y ago
        > Cyroptocoin fundamentals don't offer much (any?) value over digitized fiat systems once externalities are considered. If I'm not mistaken, Bitcoin whitepaper was originally about easy P2P payments. Bitcoin has not full-filled this vision yet, but the cryptosphere as a whole is working on this (if you ignore the hype and speculation). Visa/Mastercard, PayPal, banks can block or prohibit any kind of transactions if they wish so. Look up stories of sex workers, OnlyFans creators etc about being banned from using these traditional payments systems. Also look up fees that some banks charge for remittances - those range from 1.5 to 12% of the amount [1], depending where you're sending it. This does not include the cost of getting a bank account and a debit/credit card in those countries. Receiving a SWIFT transfer may be an issue if you don't have the necessary documents that explain why you have received the money. PayPal actually does not even support most of the worlds countries. If you're writing a book you want to sell online, but Paypal doesn't support your country - you will NOT be able to get the money out of the publishing platform (gumroad [2], if you need an example). People are excluded from the creator economy. Banks in developing countries use legal workarounds to get more fees from merchants using their systems or pay terminals. Merchants often have no choice but to raise prices, accept cash only or use some other kinds of P2P solutions. And don't get me started on the absolutely insane inheritance taxes in some countries - the state is effectively robbing people (and their descendants) after their death. [1] https://remittanceprices.worldbank.org/en https://remittanceprices.worldbank.org/en [2] https://help.gumroad.com/article/223-payoneer-and-gumroad https://help.gumroad.com/article/223-payoneer-and-gumroad
kuroguro 5y ago
There's plenty of valid criticisms against crypto, I feel like they've picked some of the weakest ones. > cryptocurrencies are used because people think they will one day replace traditional money Maybe a tiny minority, sounds like a strawman. > a contagious story in which people believe because other people believe in it Isn't fiat the same? Money only has value because people believe it has value / will have value in the future / trust whoever prints it.
- zeepzeep 5y ago
  > Maybe a tiny minority, sounds like a strawman. I don't think so, i believe many people think that a private and decentralized solution will replace traditional money. That just isn't an argument against it. If anything, it's an argument FOR cryptocurrencies. > Isn't fiat the same? haha yes.
  - NicoJuicy 5y ago
    No, fiat is backed by economies. In case of the USD, it's the biggest economy there is.
- mortehu 5y ago
  Fiat is slightly different in that the government can guarantee a certain level of demand for it by requiring taxes to be paid in it. If you you don't like jail and have a tax liability in US, you can't think dollars are worthless.
  - rootsandstones 5y ago
    FYI I can pay my taxes in crypto in Switzerland.
    - bpt3 5y ago
      Are your taxes calculated in Swiss Francs or Bitcoin?
    - acdha 5y ago
kilnr 5y ago
>"Cryptocurrencies are essentially neither money nor a financial product, but an example of what Nobel laureate Robert Shiller calls a 'contagious narrative': a contagious story in which people believe because other people believe in it." How is this different from money or the financial markets? Why do those continue to exist if not for the belief we collectively have in them? And why is that only a problem for bitcoin?
- chadash 5y ago
  > How is this different from money or the financial markets? A big difference is that the sovereign requires you to pay taxes in a given currency at the threat of punishment. So long as everyone needs to pay the taxman, the currency that the tax man accepts is gonna have at least some value.
  - mech422 5y ago
    Only to the tax man... There have been and still are(?) economies where the local currency was only used for 'official' business, and most trade was carried out in another, more stable currency.
  - felipeko 5y ago
    They can make this difference disappear by accepting bitcoin then.
    - bpt3 5y ago
      Taxes will still be calculated in the local currency, not in BTC.
- toyg 5y ago
  Because the Netherlands make significant money from funnelling money to their tax havens. If people can do it themselves with bitcoin, how are these tax-pros supposed to live? /s
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
BreathHiker 5y ago
Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27470109 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27470109
candiodari 5y ago
So wait ... this guy wants 2 things: 1) banning bitcoin 2) massive money injections into Dutch companies, Dutch government, and "in between" (ie. private companies in e.g. healthcare that effectively work exclusively for government). He has an article on how "basically every last Dutch political party wants a massive increase in spending" ( https://www.cpb.nl/column-een-ruk-aan-het-stuur https://www.cpb.nl/column-een-ruk-aan-het-stuur ) And with Bitcoin his main argument is that it may present the government with even more debt (no explanation as to why a crash in Bitcoin would increase the Dutch government's debt burden) However the last of his problems with Bitcoin is very out of step with the other ones: "financial instability". He is afraid, in other words, of the effect of Bitcoin's existence on the currencies he (helps) control. NOT of it's effect on people (it would be very weird of the "government bank" (that's what CPB is) to care about the effect of anything on people. That is very much not his job). So the obvious explanation for this combination of behaviors is simple: he wants to use Dutch (or European) funds that aren't his (say pension funds, perhaps even savings accounts) for government policy, and is afraid of Bitcoin providing a way out of his measures. He is afraid of a massive RISE in Bitcoin, not a drop. He wants to safeguard his ability to take extreme measures (like confiscating things) to make massive government spending possible. That must mean concrete plans exist. So I would say this guy is on the philosophical side of the Bitcoin "lunatics". He's just on the other side of the battle, and afraid of the effect on his own policies. He is afraid of the protection that Bitcoin offers.
ma2rten 5y ago
"Hasekamp stated that several countries took steps to curb cryptocurrencies [...] The Netherlands is lagging behind. " It seems like The Netherlands would be the first western country to do so. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_bitcoin_by_country_or_territory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_bitcoin_by_country...
AzzieElbab 5y ago
Reasoning seems strange. All thing financial can crash. It is more about control
ineptech 5y ago
How? 100% tax on crypto-to-fiat transactions? National firewall inspecting traffic for numerically-low hashes? Police kicking down doors of suspected miners, looking for GPUs? Something else? I'm sympathetic to some of the reasons, but isn't the devil sort of in the details here?
- Tenoke 5y ago
  The same way monero is banned in Australia - you don't allow exchanges to offer it to your citizens, and for them to cash it out. This can't stop everyone but as exchanges require KYC for cash deposits/withdraws it can curb the majority of the usage especially for speculation purposes. For a US example, look at how binance.com is banned in the US and imagine the same but for every exchange. If anything banning all of crypto is easier than banning a specific crypto and payment operators are pretty friendly to LE.
- tluyben2 5y ago
  Of course not: if you are fined heavily if you use them, most people won't use them and that's it. Follow the crypto through the chain and if it seems to originate from you, you pay 100x whatever is in the address. Or jail if you cannot pay that. Would work no? You do not need technical measures if you are a resident of a country. But you catch them at the point of conversion to fiat. And then it becomes too much risk and hassle. I think it would weaponize blockchain: the fact you can be lifted from your bed in 20 years for an illegal transaction because it is on the chain would be enough for most to never touch it.
raptor99 5y ago
Use the archive link for this article instead (the site is a dumpster fire of ad and tracker shit): https://archive.is/oBQre https://archive.is/oBQre
enchiridion 5y ago
Could a powerful country just take over Bitcoin as an extension of its fiat? What would happen if tomorrow the federal reserve announced it will exchange 1 BTC for 50000 USD? Obviously there would be an immediate price spike... but then what?
- charlesmunger8 5y ago
  > what would happen cybercrime would skyrocket
  - enchiridion 5y ago
    Why? Genuine question. Also say hi to Warren for me
Kiro 5y ago
> He believes that a crash of cryptocurrencies is unavoidable and that the Netherlands should act as soon as possible. How would he know and who is he to tell me what to do with my money? His other reasons are sound but that is just stupid. Don't patronize me by deciding what risks I'm allowed to take or act like you know something the rest of us don't.
cpb 5y ago
…
jl2718 5y ago
Ironically this is exactly why it has value to begin with.
ArkanExplorer 5y ago
Bans are totally justified. They will achieve two major outcomes: 1. Tank the price, thus freeing up energy and advanced manufactured goods (which are in shortages right now) for proper productive use. 2. Significantly lessen the instances of Ransomware, since companies will have no legal mechanism to actually pay. Whether the coins continue to exist informally and are traded in some kind of primitive barter system is irrelevant.
- rantwasp 5y ago
  yup. also we’ll end covid, catch all the people involved in human trafficking, give everyone free clean water, free organic food, free internet and a free tesla. climate change? gone. everyone’s IQ is gonna increase by 120 points. We’re gonna develop space technology that will put us on another habitable planet, outside of the solar system before the end of the decade!!! next time you think a ban is a good thing, imagine I would ban something you do. It doesn’t even have to be something essential. Maybe I ban a hobby of yours. How does that feel?
  - EvilEy3 5y ago
    Of course not, meme currency will do that! Look how much good did it bring, all those GPU shortages, all the wasted electricity.
- wickoff 5y ago
  As long as we're banning things we should also ban all videogames, they are too addictive. There is nothing more precious than time and it can be spent much more productively. And alcohol for obvious reasons.
  - vanviegen 5y ago
    The difference being that the harm caused by Bitcoin (or at least the negative effects pointed out by GP) is externalized from the investors to society as a whole.
    - 5y ago
cblconfederate 5y ago
Nobody buys tulips anymore
- mech422 5y ago
  What! I missed the tulip pump! dang... :-) come to think of it...maybe if we got elon to tweet about it, we could start a tulip pump.
- rijoja 5y ago
  that is simply not true
elzbardico 5y ago
It makes a lot of sense for a country that has significant portions of its territory below sea level. But, I wonder. For years I was absolutely baffled by how the world decided to ignore crypto environmental footprint. Then, out of the blue, a few months ago, it looks like EVERYBODY is talking about it. Then, the G-7 wants to impose the beginning of a global tax regime upon the developed nations (that's what it is basically). Doesn't it smell funny?
- koheripbal 5y ago
  He cites: "citing fraud, criminal use, and financial instability" - not environmentalism. Also, that argument only applies to PoW coins, not PoS coins.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - thih9 5y ago
    PoW - proof of work (computationally intensive), https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_work https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_work PoS - proof of stake, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_stake https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_stake
- arcadeparade 5y ago
  apparently ripple (xrp) is behind the fud campaign against POW, which is why we've seen such an uptick in negative news against it recently
- gifwithaj 5y ago
  The "nobody visibly cared, then some people cared more loudly, then everyone cared" pattern exists in essentially everything. Climate change, opioid addiction, police murders, genocide in China, microplastics, childhood obesity, #metoo, whatever other thing. That's just how society works. There are a billion different things happening every day, at any given moment some are gaining attention and some are losing attention. Everybody will care about the most popular one for a while, some laws might get passed or someone might go to jail or get elected or give a speech, and then it'll fade from the mainstream news and daily conversation will move on to the next issue. This isn't some coordinated conspiracy, this is the pattern of how literally every issue ebbs and flows in attention.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
aerique 5y ago
So this pretty much came out of the blue. The Netherlands has been a pretty good place for cryptocurrencies. Not actively promoting them like some places but also not actively campaigning against it like others and the taxes on it are light. It needs to be mentioned that the CPB head is saying this as a personal opinion, so it has people wondering what his agenda is.
- rantwasp 5y ago
  this is a bunch of bs if you ask me. in today’s world everyone is an expert in everything. you can’t have X! Why? It’s for your own protection!!!1 what about Y? this looks bad and should also maybe be banned? no, no, no. you don’t understand this stuff. there’s reasons and people’s livelihoods depend on it and pepe silva. Look at drugs. You have alcohol which by any measures is bad that’s widespread and people do dumb stuff while on it all the time. Ban it? Nah fam, it’s just good fun. And people enjoy it and it doesn’t hurt anyone, right? RIGHT? And you have “hard drugs” that are bad for ya and you’ll end up doing hard time if you ever get caught remotely near it. It’s for your own PROTECTION!!!1
Hoasi 5y ago
> "Cryptocurrencies are essentially neither money nor a financial product, but an example of what Nobel laureate Robert Shiller calls a 'contagious narrative': a contagious story in which people believe because other people believe in it." Which is exactly what money is, to begin with.
- Salgat 5y ago
  No, money has value because the government makes it law that debt is payable with it; that's what gives a government's currency legitimacy. If the government made a law that debt could be paid with bitcoin, it would no longer fit Shiller's description.
  - huerlisi1 5y ago
    We can pay local taxes in Bitcoin in Zug, Switzerland. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-03/swiss-canton-takes-taxes-in-bitcoin-as-crypto-goes-mainstream https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-03/swiss-can...
    - Salgat 5y ago
      We've had this in the U.S. for a while too, the trick is that they don't actually accept bitcoin, they just pay a 3rd party which charges a fee and converts it to regular currency.
- paulsutter 5y ago
  Like the stop sign bubble. Those stop signs dont actually stop cars, they just work because of the contagious narrative
  - riffic 5y ago
    well, there's also the force of law behind stop signs.
    - 5y ago

141 points by omnibrain 5y ago

Nobel laureate Robert Shiller calls bitcoin a 'contagious narrative' Anyone else find articles like these hard to take seriously?

fb13 5y ago
> Nobel laureate... Maybe we should start taking reputable people like this more seriously.
- abnry 5y ago
  Depends. Is Shiller recommending to buy vitamin C?
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- aww_dang 5y ago
  The "Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel" is not a Nobel Prize. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Economic_Sciences#Relation_to_the_Nobel_Prizes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Econom... As the name implies, it is a prize created in "honor of" Nobel by the Swedish central bank. As such, there is an inherent ideological bias. Many would dispute the claim that it is "reputable". Shiller is famous for suggesting that consumers don't actually know what is good for them, while the state supposedly has better information about appropriate consumption habits. He also misappropriated the word "Phishing" in this context. https://cdn.mises.org/Review%20Essay%20Phishing%20for%20Phools%20The%20Economics%20of%20Manipulation%20and%20Deception%20by%20Akerlof%20and%20Shiller.pdf https://cdn.mises.org/Review%20Essay%20Phishing%20for%20Phoo...
- Zachsa999 5y ago
  Another buerocrat?
dqpb 5y ago
Nobel laureate Robert Shiller should have a conversation with Turing Award winner Silvio Micali.
Zachsa999 5y ago
I usually stop reading when people start throwing around "big" names in an argumentativw essay. This time I disagreed so heartily that I finished reading. Are you convincing me of a nobel laureates opinion, or are you convincing me that bitcoin is bad for The dutch economy. I think he's just an integrated buerocrat trying to make his way in the world. The comments said enough about this.
- BitwiseFool 5y ago
  I feel the same way every time someone references Paul Krugman. The man is so often wrong and yet still revered by the press because he once won a "Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences", which isn't even an actual Nobel Prize.

bifftastic 5y ago

See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27470109 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27470109

lucb1e 5y ago

I was happily surprised to see someone proposing this, assuming it was about PoW when reading the headline... but unfortunately it's just someone trying to time the market on our behalf?! Like, should we also ban stock trading when we expect the next pandemic or .com bubble?

throwawayffffas 5y ago
I think their argument is that cryptocurrencies not just (PoW) but (PoS) too are just a meme with no social benefit (unlike the stock market), yet people put large amounts of money on them and it will end in tears.
- Bishizel 5y ago
  I mean, this type of thinking was applied to the early internet as well. “No one will ever buy anything over the internet, people want stores!” The same lack of imagination is leading to most of these takes.
  - paulryanrogers 5y ago
    Except the fundamentals of the Internet were sound and scalable: near instant global communication and commerce. Cyroptocoin fundamentals don't offer much (any?) value over digitized fiat systems once externalities are considered.
    - practice9 5y ago
      > Cyroptocoin fundamentals don't offer much (any?) value over digitized fiat systems once externalities are considered. If I'm not mistaken, Bitcoin whitepaper was originally about easy P2P payments. Bitcoin has not full-filled this vision yet, but the cryptosphere as a whole is working on this (if you ignore the hype and speculation). Visa/Mastercard, PayPal, banks can block or prohibit any kind of transactions if they wish so. Look up stories of sex workers, OnlyFans creators etc about being banned from using these traditional payments systems. Also look up fees that some banks charge for remittances - those range from 1.5 to 12% of the amount [1], depending where you're sending it. This does not include the cost of getting a bank account and a debit/credit card in those countries. Receiving a SWIFT transfer may be an issue if you don't have the necessary documents that explain why you have received the money. PayPal actually does not even support most of the worlds countries. If you're writing a book you want to sell online, but Paypal doesn't support your country - you will NOT be able to get the money out of the publishing platform (gumroad [2], if you need an example). People are excluded from the creator economy. Banks in developing countries use legal workarounds to get more fees from merchants using their systems or pay terminals. Merchants often have no choice but to raise prices, accept cash only or use some other kinds of P2P solutions. And don't get me started on the absolutely insane inheritance taxes in some countries - the state is effectively robbing people (and their descendants) after their death. [1] https://remittanceprices.worldbank.org/en https://remittanceprices.worldbank.org/en [2] https://help.gumroad.com/article/223-payoneer-and-gumroad https://help.gumroad.com/article/223-payoneer-and-gumroad

kuroguro 5y ago

There's plenty of valid criticisms against crypto, I feel like they've picked some of the weakest ones. > cryptocurrencies are used because people think they will one day replace traditional money Maybe a tiny minority, sounds like a strawman. > a contagious story in which people believe because other people believe in it Isn't fiat the same? Money only has value because people believe it has value / will have value in the future / trust whoever prints it.

zeepzeep 5y ago
> Maybe a tiny minority, sounds like a strawman. I don't think so, i believe many people think that a private and decentralized solution will replace traditional money. That just isn't an argument against it. If anything, it's an argument FOR cryptocurrencies. > Isn't fiat the same? haha yes.
- NicoJuicy 5y ago
  No, fiat is backed by economies. In case of the USD, it's the biggest economy there is.
mortehu 5y ago
Fiat is slightly different in that the government can guarantee a certain level of demand for it by requiring taxes to be paid in it. If you you don't like jail and have a tax liability in US, you can't think dollars are worthless.
- rootsandstones 5y ago
  FYI I can pay my taxes in crypto in Switzerland.
  - bpt3 5y ago
    Are your taxes calculated in Swiss Francs or Bitcoin?
  - acdha 5y ago

kilnr 5y ago

>"Cryptocurrencies are essentially neither money nor a financial product, but an example of what Nobel laureate Robert Shiller calls a 'contagious narrative': a contagious story in which people believe because other people believe in it." How is this different from money or the financial markets? Why do those continue to exist if not for the belief we collectively have in them? And why is that only a problem for bitcoin?

chadash 5y ago
> How is this different from money or the financial markets? A big difference is that the sovereign requires you to pay taxes in a given currency at the threat of punishment. So long as everyone needs to pay the taxman, the currency that the tax man accepts is gonna have at least some value.
- mech422 5y ago
  Only to the tax man... There have been and still are(?) economies where the local currency was only used for 'official' business, and most trade was carried out in another, more stable currency.
- felipeko 5y ago
  They can make this difference disappear by accepting bitcoin then.
  - bpt3 5y ago
    Taxes will still be calculated in the local currency, not in BTC.
toyg 5y ago
Because the Netherlands make significant money from funnelling money to their tax havens. If people can do it themselves with bitcoin, how are these tax-pros supposed to live? /s

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

BreathHiker 5y ago

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27470109 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27470109

candiodari 5y ago

So wait ... this guy wants 2 things: 1) banning bitcoin 2) massive money injections into Dutch companies, Dutch government, and "in between" (ie. private companies in e.g. healthcare that effectively work exclusively for government). He has an article on how "basically every last Dutch political party wants a massive increase in spending" ( https://www.cpb.nl/column-een-ruk-aan-het-stuur https://www.cpb.nl/column-een-ruk-aan-het-stuur ) And with Bitcoin his main argument is that it may present the government with even more debt (no explanation as to why a crash in Bitcoin would increase the Dutch government's debt burden) However the last of his problems with Bitcoin is very out of step with the other ones: "financial instability". He is afraid, in other words, of the effect of Bitcoin's existence on the currencies he (helps) control. NOT of it's effect on people (it would be very weird of the "government bank" (that's what CPB is) to care about the effect of anything on people. That is very much not his job). So the obvious explanation for this combination of behaviors is simple: he wants to use Dutch (or European) funds that aren't his (say pension funds, perhaps even savings accounts) for government policy, and is afraid of Bitcoin providing a way out of his measures. He is afraid of a massive RISE in Bitcoin, not a drop. He wants to safeguard his ability to take extreme measures (like confiscating things) to make massive government spending possible. That must mean concrete plans exist. So I would say this guy is on the philosophical side of the Bitcoin "lunatics". He's just on the other side of the battle, and afraid of the effect on his own policies. He is afraid of the protection that Bitcoin offers.

ma2rten 5y ago

"Hasekamp stated that several countries took steps to curb cryptocurrencies [...] The Netherlands is lagging behind. " It seems like The Netherlands would be the first western country to do so. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_bitcoin_by_country_or_territory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_bitcoin_by_country...

AzzieElbab 5y ago

Reasoning seems strange. All thing financial can crash. It is more about control

ineptech 5y ago

How? 100% tax on crypto-to-fiat transactions? National firewall inspecting traffic for numerically-low hashes? Police kicking down doors of suspected miners, looking for GPUs? Something else? I'm sympathetic to some of the reasons, but isn't the devil sort of in the details here?

Tenoke 5y ago
The same way monero is banned in Australia - you don't allow exchanges to offer it to your citizens, and for them to cash it out. This can't stop everyone but as exchanges require KYC for cash deposits/withdraws it can curb the majority of the usage especially for speculation purposes. For a US example, look at how binance.com is banned in the US and imagine the same but for every exchange. If anything banning all of crypto is easier than banning a specific crypto and payment operators are pretty friendly to LE.
tluyben2 5y ago
Of course not: if you are fined heavily if you use them, most people won't use them and that's it. Follow the crypto through the chain and if it seems to originate from you, you pay 100x whatever is in the address. Or jail if you cannot pay that. Would work no? You do not need technical measures if you are a resident of a country. But you catch them at the point of conversion to fiat. And then it becomes too much risk and hassle. I think it would weaponize blockchain: the fact you can be lifted from your bed in 20 years for an illegal transaction because it is on the chain would be enough for most to never touch it.

raptor99 5y ago

Use the archive link for this article instead (the site is a dumpster fire of ad and tracker shit): https://archive.is/oBQre https://archive.is/oBQre

enchiridion 5y ago

Could a powerful country just take over Bitcoin as an extension of its fiat? What would happen if tomorrow the federal reserve announced it will exchange 1 BTC for 50000 USD? Obviously there would be an immediate price spike... but then what?

charlesmunger8 5y ago
> what would happen cybercrime would skyrocket
- enchiridion 5y ago
  Why? Genuine question. Also say hi to Warren for me

Kiro 5y ago

> He believes that a crash of cryptocurrencies is unavoidable and that the Netherlands should act as soon as possible. How would he know and who is he to tell me what to do with my money? His other reasons are sound but that is just stupid. Don't patronize me by deciding what risks I'm allowed to take or act like you know something the rest of us don't.

cpb 5y ago

…

jl2718 5y ago

Ironically this is exactly why it has value to begin with.

ArkanExplorer 5y ago

Bans are totally justified. They will achieve two major outcomes: 1. Tank the price, thus freeing up energy and advanced manufactured goods (which are in shortages right now) for proper productive use. 2. Significantly lessen the instances of Ransomware, since companies will have no legal mechanism to actually pay. Whether the coins continue to exist informally and are traded in some kind of primitive barter system is irrelevant.

rantwasp 5y ago
yup. also we’ll end covid, catch all the people involved in human trafficking, give everyone free clean water, free organic food, free internet and a free tesla. climate change? gone. everyone’s IQ is gonna increase by 120 points. We’re gonna develop space technology that will put us on another habitable planet, outside of the solar system before the end of the decade!!! next time you think a ban is a good thing, imagine I would ban something you do. It doesn’t even have to be something essential. Maybe I ban a hobby of yours. How does that feel?
- EvilEy3 5y ago
  Of course not, meme currency will do that! Look how much good did it bring, all those GPU shortages, all the wasted electricity.
wickoff 5y ago
As long as we're banning things we should also ban all videogames, they are too addictive. There is nothing more precious than time and it can be spent much more productively. And alcohol for obvious reasons.
- vanviegen 5y ago
  The difference being that the harm caused by Bitcoin (or at least the negative effects pointed out by GP) is externalized from the investors to society as a whole.
  - 5y ago

cblconfederate 5y ago

Nobody buys tulips anymore

mech422 5y ago
What! I missed the tulip pump! dang... :-) come to think of it...maybe if we got elon to tweet about it, we could start a tulip pump.
rijoja 5y ago
that is simply not true

elzbardico 5y ago

It makes a lot of sense for a country that has significant portions of its territory below sea level. But, I wonder. For years I was absolutely baffled by how the world decided to ignore crypto environmental footprint. Then, out of the blue, a few months ago, it looks like EVERYBODY is talking about it. Then, the G-7 wants to impose the beginning of a global tax regime upon the developed nations (that's what it is basically). Doesn't it smell funny?

koheripbal 5y ago
He cites: "citing fraud, criminal use, and financial instability" - not environmentalism. Also, that argument only applies to PoW coins, not PoS coins.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- thih9 5y ago
  PoW - proof of work (computationally intensive), https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_work https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_work PoS - proof of stake, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_stake https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_stake
arcadeparade 5y ago
apparently ripple (xrp) is behind the fud campaign against POW, which is why we've seen such an uptick in negative news against it recently
gifwithaj 5y ago
The "nobody visibly cared, then some people cared more loudly, then everyone cared" pattern exists in essentially everything. Climate change, opioid addiction, police murders, genocide in China, microplastics, childhood obesity, #metoo, whatever other thing. That's just how society works. There are a billion different things happening every day, at any given moment some are gaining attention and some are losing attention. Everybody will care about the most popular one for a while, some laws might get passed or someone might go to jail or get elected or give a speech, and then it'll fade from the mainstream news and daily conversation will move on to the next issue. This isn't some coordinated conspiracy, this is the pattern of how literally every issue ebbs and flows in attention.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

aerique 5y ago

So this pretty much came out of the blue. The Netherlands has been a pretty good place for cryptocurrencies. Not actively promoting them like some places but also not actively campaigning against it like others and the taxes on it are light. It needs to be mentioned that the CPB head is saying this as a personal opinion, so it has people wondering what his agenda is.

rantwasp 5y ago
this is a bunch of bs if you ask me. in today’s world everyone is an expert in everything. you can’t have X! Why? It’s for your own protection!!!1 what about Y? this looks bad and should also maybe be banned? no, no, no. you don’t understand this stuff. there’s reasons and people’s livelihoods depend on it and pepe silva. Look at drugs. You have alcohol which by any measures is bad that’s widespread and people do dumb stuff while on it all the time. Ban it? Nah fam, it’s just good fun. And people enjoy it and it doesn’t hurt anyone, right? RIGHT? And you have “hard drugs” that are bad for ya and you’ll end up doing hard time if you ever get caught remotely near it. It’s for your own PROTECTION!!!1

Hoasi 5y ago

Salgat 5y ago
No, money has value because the government makes it law that debt is payable with it; that's what gives a government's currency legitimacy. If the government made a law that debt could be paid with bitcoin, it would no longer fit Shiller's description.
- huerlisi1 5y ago
  We can pay local taxes in Bitcoin in Zug, Switzerland. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-03/swiss-canton-takes-taxes-in-bitcoin-as-crypto-goes-mainstream https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-03/swiss-can...
  - Salgat 5y ago
    We've had this in the U.S. for a while too, the trick is that they don't actually accept bitcoin, they just pay a 3rd party which charges a fee and converts it to regular currency.
paulsutter 5y ago
Like the stop sign bubble. Those stop signs dont actually stop cars, they just work because of the contagious narrative
- riffic 5y ago
  well, there's also the force of law behind stop signs.
  - 5y ago