Topic: Be careful what you wish for, it might happen - page 2. (Read 883 times)

There is indeed nothing wrong with taxes used for public services in a smart way. It helps all individuals and society as a whole.

Problem is with a decentralized payment system governments will lose track of payment flows and it will be much more difficult to tax. Possibilities to dodge taxes will be endless.

Also it will be very hard to perform efficient monetary policies when there is nobody in charge of the macro economic movements. Money printing can be a bitch but it can also give air to your economy

There is nothing sad about paying taxes especially when this tax money is being used to provide all the required public services that enable you as a citizen of that state or country to enjoy peace and security.
Assuming you are living in a country full of insecurities as a result of government negligence, you will not be able to enjoy having your btc with you because you won't feel secure enough. Also if people don't pay tax and the government can not afford to provide the needed security, having financial freedom will be meaningless.
You can only be sad when you pay tax and the money is not utilized in the right way.

Indeed I fully agree people are looking for only a decentralized payment system but to me that’s hard to achieve without further decentralization. It can coexist but only when it’s in the ‘gimmick phase’ and not
Being the backbone of economy.

Hence also the title for this topic. People wish for a payment system but to me they have to sacrifice some other things in order to achieve what they are wishing for

Government taxation is necessary to any country as it is where the government of any country gets it's fund to run it's nation. Unfortunately, crypto taxation is quite confusing especially for investors as you cannot tax something that is a potential profit. This is why crypto regulations has been set to better managed each and everyone's crypto assets.

Also, even if businesses and establishments with accept bitcoin as a payment method, it will still require to be taxed since it will be included on their tax filing. But still, having an option to pay thru bitcoin and other crypto, it will be a good thing as massive adoption will be much more achieved.

The sad thing is, that the government will continue to tax us no matter where we keep our assets or where we use Bitcoin as a currency. Taxing is everywhere and is present in every purchase that we do because we all know that businesses that sell our daily necessities don't accept Bitcoin is still regulated by the government. If there will be more establishments and businesses that will accept Bitcoin, I think we can quite feel the financial freedom that we want.

You are not exactly far from the truth with the whole decentralization talk. I agree with decentralization to some extent or should say to certain aspects of living and not all otherwise there will be a lot of oppression from the strong to the weak.
Well i guess what people mostly are looking for is decentralized financial system where people can have total control of their funds and not a decentralized world because that will be a different ball game if you take a sec to think about the disadvantages as against the advantages.

Yes, bitcoin has given users the freedom to manage their finances independently. It is like a bank in our hands and every bitcoin user who has complete control over his wallet is the owner of that bank. Our Bitcoin is our rule, and it's the opposite of the fiat system.

We can't force the government to agree to everything we want about bitcoin, that's impossible because bitcoin is basically not a currency that governments really expect to be better than fiat. Decentralization and centralization will never be the same, they will continue to be opposites. But bitcoin has offered us a better option as a means of payment.

But Bitcoin will still preserve a workers savings over time, something fiat can’t do. Anyone has the opportunity to go in right now at the same price, yet a lot of people are spending more time defending fiat or demanding crazy policies(not you), than to take some actions that can benefit their future. It’s a lost cause to reach even distribution in a free market, because people aren’t rational enough to go in early. These earlier risk takers made it possible in the first place and later on they pay the same price as everyone else. There needs to be some incentive to build something.

The people that are rich later on will also need to start using their coins in real economic activity/ spending if they want to benefit from it, as there is no mechanism to create new coins that can make them richer without work or risk like in fiat. Better distribution will occur naturally when thiers law starts coming into play and Bitcoin will be used as a medium of exchange.

Im the case many rich people don’t use their coins at all, they’re like lost coins and out of the circulation, which also benefits the average individual again, as their coins in circulation will become more valuable.

There is unique things about a Bitcoin economy that benefits the average person, they won’t get purely exploited like in fiat. This is about fixing money and not getting rich, not everyone can be rich in the first place, yet Bitcoin still smh protects the interests of the individual again.

A government that serves its people should have no fears of abandonment, maybe they should rethink who they really wanna serve.

You would take away fiat that is controlled by Government and replace it with Bitcoin. Government would never actively allow this so in a Bitcoin world there would be some deconnection from central authority.

For me Bitcoin and reduction of government involvement would go hand in hand. Maybe not in extremes in the beginning but would be a logic consequence

The people that bought Bitcoin very early were already higher in the Pyramid than general since they owned a computer and had some (advanced) IT knowledge. From there on the distribution was probably more an average of society.

Also imagine there will still be a big boom ahead. New entrants will probably invest like 0,1btc while rich people will start with a full one. Same risk profile but bigger pockets

I really wonder if there has even been a moment in your life where this way of talking to people was successful. Let’s start by telling somebody is an idiotic that will work 😄

As I mentioned there are indeed some individuals that became very rich but those or not really moving in the needle in the whole of society.

In my experience all my friends have some crypto, the richer they are the more they invested and they more risk they took.

Overall social positions will remain the same

Well, I don't see any special function middlemen proffer apart from offering services for rewards. They too can find another niche if what they're into snaps them out of it. No one remains in a company if it folds up or dies from the reality of it. They move on and eventually settle in on other engagements. You know, before some establishments started making use of robots for their services many people thought that would be the end of earning from certain jobs. That isn't the case now. Those seemingly affected by robot replacements have moved on to even better things. So, for me decentralization is a gift; not a curse.

Again, just a few rich men actually. Most are still skeptical about Bitcoin, at least in public. Now, look at it this way – Anyone who isn't prudent in the little they've won't be in the much they will have. Early adopters got Bitcoin for almost nothing. So, if they sell off and the rich buy them at a higher price; it's expected that the early adopters should have enough to diversify their portfolios and get into other businesses or buy back their Bitcoin if they truly know how to trade and earn. That's also a way of creating more wealth for themselves, don't you think so?

I think the exact opposite, since bitcoin so far has made many people rich that had nothing but interest in coding and cryptography. You could invest next to nothing at the beginning of bitcoin and would be incredibly rich today. It was not a point of how much you would invest, but that you had the nerdy interest to put some time and effort into the project. This is very different to most assets, since those will usually give a fixed return (like 10%) which will make rich people have a higher return than poor people.

You shouldn't worry about it because 100% decentralization will never happen. Decentralized systems need to be perfect. But guess what, human beings ain't perfect. We are far from being perfect. We make mistakes and sometimes mistakes need to be "fixed"

Since it is not going to work with the decentralized systems, it is never going to get super big in the future.

Being perfect simply don't comply with HumanOS.

Thanks man appreciated ! Not agreeing is always better for the discussion 😊

I do agree that people can grow and become stronger. It’s not a given you cannot get out of a bad situation. That’s also one of the main tasks for society, support people (temporary) until they are back on their feet. The issue for me with decentralization is that there is a risk individuals remove middlemen in their operations and by that cut in the available social layer. The removal of that support was in fact the increasing disbalance I was describing.

The redistribution of Wealth by Bitcoin I have to disagree Apart from the people that got in really early😊. Rich people are also buying into Bitcoin and will have more units compared to ‘regular’ people. Also they will have more assets to build more Bitcoin using that balance. For me there is no really new dynamic in Bitcoin to change this.

I wish I had some merit to splash on your post for your effort at expressing your point of view. Though I disagree with you in more ways than one. For instance, this quoted part to start with. Remember that axiom – No condition is permanent? Exactly! You can't of a certainty say that the "stronger" will continue to get stronger while those suffering will perpetually suffer. That's not how life works. There's bound to be a change somehow.

Bitcoin is expected to disrupt world economics and redistribute wealth where it ordinarily wouldn't go to. It's succeeding in this, I must say. It's granting financial independence to a whole lot of people. If that's the "disbalance" you're talking about then I think it should do more of that.

taking away the idiotic views, and just concentrating on the concept.

lets run that scenario through.. again .. but using potholes as the public service instead of his biases of poor people.. just to be more fair to the concept he is probably trying to make

imagining the current system where a neighbourhood pays state taxes via employment income tax and hoping one day the state finally inspects the neighbourhood and see's the roads with potholes and finally does something to repair them via tax..(i know annoying right. you pay money in but feel you never get anything out of it personally)

sbrys, instead is probably envisioning a 'choice' where he and his neighbourhood can collectively or individually seek out a road repair service from YELP, and get a few quotes and decide on the best deal and then he himself funds the pothole infront of his yard/driveway. or collectively with his neighbourhood they all chip in a share of funds into a multisig to pay for numerous pot holes that even he bumps in and out of on his route out of his neighbourhood..

however he needs to think. not all residents will voluntarily want to pay the upkeep of their road. or even care about the pot hole infront of their driveway because they learned to drive around it.. or they cant afford it this year
..or if there is an annoying pothole 5 houses down the road that he bumps into. if he wants it sorted he would pay for more of it then the share of the neighbourhood because others might not have that same equal annoyance of said pothole or funds at hand to pay it..

thus it becomes a tale of spite and arrogance in the neighbourhood where sbrys thinks he is not responsible for the pot hole 5 houses down where it should be the home owner 5 houses down that repairs that hole. (which that home owner doesnt care about as they drive around the hole). and now the neighbours are fighting, each making excuses not to pay for the repair. or arguing about paying for other peoples responsibilities

what then happens is a neighbourhood committee is formed to set rules for the neighbourhood where everyone has to pay in a neighbourhood service charge where it appears as a small% each on a regular bases rather then singular lump sums at surprise times

see where this is going.. simply swap the word 'committee' for 'local government'. and then add in the concepts of how neighbourhoods then club together to get 'group discount/bulk purchase' discount. and let that concept expand..
and within years. guess where you end up.

..
now lets inject some of sbrys poverty bias
in a scenario of neighbourhood/local government committee (playing his views to the extremes(not using his words verbatim))
he would be first to tell the 'committee' to make someone homeless and steal their house and make sbrys profit, simply because they didnt pay their pothole service charge and is a rule break. and they dont deserve any special treatment.
because yea he sees their avoidance of paying the pothole service charge as a sign of weakness and he thinks the poor deserve to not survive in his neighbourhood, and he sees how he should profit(get stronger) out of their suffering by making sbrys profit from confiscating their home to pay for sbrys's costs of the neighbourhood charge.

now its all played out. here is the lightbulb moment
.. see the scenario from the other side..
by sbrys saying he doesnt want to pay taxes.. he is considered the weak neighbour that shouldnt survive

Why it has to be decentralized society just because we have decentralized system, even the extreme conspiracy is one world one currency but your imagination gone behind that since you are talking about world with no government, or am I missing something?

Only the mode of payment is decentralized with limited money supply so no more minting and no more inflation but the government should implement regulations to support this so they will keep generating the revenue aka taxes as always and keep running the society.

But the problem is that many governments don't feel ready for the change from bitcoin so they still have a lot to learn about bitcoin and how they can tax every crypto user. In the future, maybe the government will be even stricter in implementing the tax because the tax from crypto can be very large, considering that many old players have joined in crypto and have a lot of assets. We will see what the government will do in the future and prepare ourselves for it.