Topic: Banks Are Finally Openly Fighting Bitcoin In Australia And USA (Read 2012 times)

This is hilarious at some point banks clean the drugs and guns,and black market deals without problem ,on the last year,since the mafia and those person just change their methods to house,restaurants ,and others  services to clean the money,now they wanna to block bitcoin because they cant allow you to be able to buy and sell your coins from money?Hell if i wanna to buy anything and use my account to pay they have to pay,the money is mine not them.Ifs a funny think bank wanna to control your own money and restrict the way you use,thats why bitcoin is getting powerful.

yes we would win against banks,i said we not to worry about this,as long we have so many bitcoin expert and developer,they will not give up on conditions,i'm sure because i'm not in US or Australia

Keep dreaming. Saying that ppl want financial freedom without government is as stupid as saying that ppl dont want to be spied by corporation and governments. Yet vast majory of ppl is happy using google, windows, non-rooted smartphones, facebook, twitter, etc.

Thread is nonsense crap

Bitcoin babe's FB runs anti Bitcoin stories

We don't even need bitcoin to destroy banks to make big money & become successful through owning bitcoin's. If somehow banks could recognise bitcoin as an official currency & allow it per se the price would rise & we would gain more adoption. I guess this is what Coinbase is a pioneer in, unfortunately Armstrong is a jerk off.

The thing is, when governments see that lots of people are using bitcoins, they will find a way to control/regulate bitcoins to a degree at least. So whichever way it goes the governments are determined to remain relevant. Take that from me.

It was obvious that something like this will happen, soon or later.
Bitcoin is much more simple to use, anonymous, no centralization etc. and more and more people using it.
Of course that banks can't ignore it any more but they already lost this fight in the long term.
They have no chance to win because people wants financial freedom and don't want to be controlled by the governments.
It's natural development and nothing can stop it.

There is an upside to the bank's flags.

I like Bitcoin and both hold some and use it, but being responsible for securing Bitcoins would worry me if I was holding a million dollars worth. If it was in the bank and someone tried to force me to give it to them by beating me with a baseball bat the bank would stop any transfer over $10k and start asking questions.

With Bitcoin I would quickly be forced to hand over my million dollars. If I held a million dollars worth of Bitcoins and someone found out I would never feel safe holding them. I would only feel safe if nobody knew I had them. I'm all for Bitcoin, but that's one of its few drawbacks.

I recently read about a south American drugs baron nicknamed shorty who has been recaptured. His fortune is estimated to be half a billion dollars. That's roughly what Satoshi's worth. Would you feel safe walking around with half a billion dollars in your pocket if anyone found out you had it?

i know. in the UK there are multiple flags. some banks even have flags for amounts higher than your income being wire transferred out in one lump EG £1200
and for those on benefits some banks have been known to even question amounts under £500.

but the general rule of the wire transfer regulations in the UK is £10,000 which is where it creates the biggest headache for banks.. all of the smaller flags are not regulatory limits that cause banks headaches but more internal banks own choice and preferential flags to avoid fraud/theft/scam payouts. so it does not cause them headaches for these lower amount flags.. but the £10,000 flag does.
all flags are annoying to customers but its the £10,000 that is the headache for banks as its not their choice and its something they do need to enforce with a hard whip, and unavoidable unless you as a customer have consulted with a bank that they should expect these size payment in the near future, to pre-warn them

also pay attention to structuring even smaller transactions can get you flagged if you've not done anything like it before.

My CC company once flagged me for far less (blocked/suspended my account) just because I cleared the balance of about GBP4k. They said it was a 'risk review' but never told ma anything more about it. It got resolved eventually but it took 3 weeks several phone calls, and far more hassle than enjoyable.

It's going to need to be able to interact with fiat for a long time to come. If bitcoin is made a pariah by conventional banking then its utility is massively reduced. There will continue to be holdouts in dark corners but for most it'll become useless.

Doesn't matter. What he said will happen. Governments will attack sooner or later en masses. BTC may be banned allover the world if it starts being a challenger against the status quo, so we need more decentralization and anonymity.

I mean, I agree with franky1 that you're seriously starting to get on people's nerves by spamming this everywhere. But it's true that you have a point. Bitcoin is not fully anonymous. And I think it might be because of it that it's still not illegal now. Promoting a fully anonymous altcoin is extremely dangerous. Governments aren't as easy to cope with as banks are. A full-anonymous coin will just end up being made illegal, with full support from the masses.

Governments like transparency when it comes to money transfers. Without transparency, everyone can avoid taxes easily, and Governements don't like it when people can avoid taxes, thus, naturally, anything that brings more transparency will please Governments. I think the only reason that Government isn't taxing Bitcoiners now is because they want more people to start using the system before starting to lay down taxes on them. If they do so too early, it might just frighten away lots of potential users. Because I mean, most of us are holding bitcoins with a history and a smell. Cash doesn't have a smell, they say, but bitcoins sure do. I had to give my phone number to buy mine, for instance. And do I need to remember you that to buy a phone number you need to show your ID card? Governments can have access to such information.
In other words: anything that attacks Governments head on is bound to be made illegal. But Bitcoin is not illegal, and things don't seem to be moving in this direction either. There has to be a reason behind this, because Governments have already been provided with more than enough excuses to make bitcoin illegal, but still they haven't done so (and war against terrorism is one of the most obvious as well as populist amongst all these excuses). It has to mean that Bitcoin, in some way, isn't a threat to Governments. Now it is indeed a threat to Banks, and knowing the decision power that bank lobbies have over Government's policies it would be surprising that in the case where the Government itself simply didn't care about Bitcoin, no negative decision would be taken because of pressure coming from Banks. Thus my conclusion is that Governments actually like Bitcoin. They probably recognized a quality that they could use for themselves inside it, such as transparency.
What do you think of this?

Now there's something that I don't quite understand, given what I said, it's the policiy of the Taiwanese Government regarding Bitcoin. They spoke against it on several occasions, but yet retained a neutro-sceptical stance regarding it. Taiwan is one of the "less bitcoin tolerant countries" (but still, they tolerate it, you'll tell me). Could Taiwanese Government just have failed at understanding how Bitcoin could be useful to them? Or is it because of mafia lobbies? (Yes, the mafia has quite a bunch of decision power over political decisions in Taiwan). I mean, if you come here one day, one of the first things you'll notice is that apart from 7 eleven, no one is registered and almost every single business is illegal. You'd think that the Government would jump on the first occasion to claim more money from taxes that already exist but no one pays? You'd think they'd welcome bitcoin? But no, they don't seem to.

Unless you're working under the table (not declaring your income/cheating on your taxes), pretty much impossible to live just on bitcoin, but that's nitpicking.

Bitcoin (in my opinion, if this needs to be said) shouldn't be treated as a sideshow curiosity. Sure, people stayed up for weeks on top of flagpoles. Did their pole-sitting bring about a revolution, exodus from conventional, outmoded house-living & mass-adoption of the pole-sitting lifestyle? I'd say no. Not many have turned to each other, gushing "Agnes, we've been so darn blind! Let's dump this idiotic house, and buy us a nice pole!"

Bitcoin's aim is not to limit you -- to the one grocery store near you that takes BTC, to the only house you can rent with BTC, etc. It's not a universal tool we need to force onto every problem. That sort of thing is only good for making bitcoiners look like fanatics, "Jersey Man Eats Only Alfalfa, Claims So Can You!"

Banks just want a quiet life so they can get on with laundering drug money. I would've thought their major beef with BTC is regulatory uncertainty and hassle from The Man rather than feeling ideologically threatened.

In most of this cases, the money comes from a hacked/stolen account

the biggest reason i got into bitcoins to start with , so fed up with these fucking banks.

This is not a surprise.  Anytime innovation arrives there are factions that fight to remain the top technology but nothing can stop an innovation such as Bitcoin. It is actually a good sign there is a struggle because it means they understand the significance.

Did you even read the website?  Its about providing information to people, just like bitcoin.org. But according to you, bitcoin.org is also probably about misleading people and promoting other things when they say bitcoin is not anonymous on number of their pages, e.g.,

https://bitcoin.org/en/you-need-to-know
https://bitcoin.org/en/protect-your-privacy
https://bitcoin.org/en/faq#is-bitcoin-anonymous
https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-core/features/privacy

I really do not see the point in them doing this. it is useless for them.