4 ms·
This is very shocking. So the government makes it illegal to sell narcotics, regardless, some individuals take a risk and deal drugs to be able to sustain them
by Rulero 12y ago
This is very shocking.
So the government makes it illegal to sell narcotics, regardless, some individuals take a risk and deal drugs to be able to sustain themselves or finance a lifestyle of their choice.
Now the government start prosecuting someone, seize their assets (Which were turned over through illicit methods) and release this dodgy money back to the market.
What's more disturbing about this whole scenario is the fact that someone is getting done over. What if the government kept prosecuting dealers and then selling their assets back to the market? Those assets should be "destroyed" - just the way narcotics are destroyed when dealers get caught.
This is a joke.
- danielweber 12y agoIf the government found a drug dealer with a suitcase full of Canadian dollars, the government wouldn't destroy them. Bitcoins aren't what made Silk Road illegal.
- halviti 12y agoThat's a silly analogy. The government has already stated that bitcoin is property, and they are treating it like any other legal property, selling it just like they would sell seized cars or houses. You really want bitcoin to be on the same level as illegal narcotics? Why?
- dragonwriter 12y ago> Those assets should be "destroyed" - just the way narcotics are destroyed when dealers get caught. Why? You keep rephrasing the claim that what the government is doing is wrong and then say they ought to be destroying seized assets seized as instrumentalities or proceeds of crime the way they (generally) do seized items that are illegal-in-themselves like narcotics, but you actually don't make any argument for why this is the case. Why should the government ever destroy property that is legal to own and possess and has value in the market? That seems to be a net loss to society anyway you slice it.