Money in offshore tax havens is somewhat difficult to deposit, and doesn't need to move very often, yet it still provides a very useful service. Bitcoin's "offshore tax heaven" status simply can't be beat, so at the least that will still continue.
The hard part is obtaining them and making sure they can't be traced back to something illegal when you want to use them. The depositing bit is pretty easy. Buying Bitcoins doesn't really make the hard part easier. 
Topic: Bitcoin is DEEPLY WATCHED. (Read 3412 times)
Could you elaborate?
It was a reply to Gabi's reply to me. He didn't quote, so I didn't bother to do it either. 
Unfortunately that's just wishful thinking, which there is a lot of here. It makes it easy to find safe bets on the Bitcoin betting sites, though.
Could you elaborate? 
Comparing it to the alcolhol prohibition like Matonis does, doesn't make sense because it's not like Bitcoins are the only money available. The only advantage of Bitcoins to normal people is that in some cases it is more convenient and cheaper than using banks. That advantage can easily be taken away by banning money transfers to entities who buy or sell Bitcoins. Banks would probably be very happy to comply and report anyone they suspect of doing it. If the only way to buy and sell them is through Localbitcoin and similar sites, the barrier to entry will be too high for most people.
Money in offshore tax havens is somewhat difficult to deposit, and doesn't need to move very often, yet it still provides a very useful service. Bitcoin's "offshore tax heaven" status simply can't be beat, so at the least that will still continue.
There's also the issue that any ban on Bitcoin will be thought of as a stupid law that bans something that doesn't really hurt anyone (it's just digital internet tokens you can use on gambling sites or to buy internet services, what's the big deal?). As such, people will likely think the law is not fair, and will ignore it, just as they do with file sharing and downloading music/movies. The more laws like these that gets passed, the more everyone will become a criminal, and the less people will think of laws, since they're already breaking them, anyway.
It's sure that it is deeply watched.
Unfortunately that's just wishful thinking, which there is a lot of here. It makes it easy to find safe bets on the Bitcoin betting sites, though.
I don't agree, bitcoin is very different from any other money. And it doesn't need to be exchanged to work, once the bitcoin economy is big enough
Comparing it to the alcolhol prohibition like Matonis does, doesn't make sense because it's not like Bitcoins are the only money available. The only advantage of Bitcoins to normal people is that in some cases it is more convenient and cheaper than using banks. That advantage can easily be taken away by banning money transfers to entities who buy or sell Bitcoins. Banks would probably be very happy to comply and report anyone they suspect of doing it. If the only way to buy and sell them is through Localbitcoin and similar sites, the barrier to entry will be too high for most people.
haha its just one story on bloomberg and the more exposure the better, thanks for the link much appreciated 
The use of language in the debate is important.
The ECB calls the bitcoin threat "reputational" whereas Professor Hanke, whom Bloomberg interviewed, correctly calls it a "competitive threat".
The established central banks, and regulatory agencies, may well begin a dirty war blaming bitcoin for many problems, e.g. money-laundering.
The bitcoin community should point out that "fiat currencies are being printed to destruction and inflation is a stealth tax on the savings of the hard-working public".
The ECB calls the bitcoin threat "reputational" whereas Professor Hanke, whom Bloomberg interviewed, correctly calls it a "competitive threat".
The established central banks, and regulatory agencies, may well begin a dirty war blaming bitcoin for many problems, e.g. money-laundering.
The bitcoin community should point out that "fiat currencies are being printed to destruction and inflation is a stealth tax on the savings of the hard-working public".
Yes, the Bitcoin Foundation should have their ducks in a row, because any moment now the phone's going to start ringing and it will be journalists asking for quotes.
The bitcoin community should point out that "fiat currencies are being printed to destruction and inflation is a stealth tax on the savings of the hard-working public".
+1is that all there ever is gonna be?
21 000 000 8 10^8 if you consider every satoshi.
Forbes usually have Jon Matonis writing about bitcoin, so Forbes magazine doesn't really count.
That Forbes article is on target!
This, a thousand times over. If I hear from those insisting on "seeking compliance" about how "naive" the rest of us are one more time....
Also from that article:
Beautiful stuff.
Quote
Which brings us to the giddy, pro-banking-integration spokespeople for Bitcoin that tend towards full compliance because it’s required or, worse, preemptive compliance because they believe it to be safe. What happens to their rosy world when bitcoin exchanges can no longer operate in the open without fear of State retaliation? After all, they were patiently counting on ‘railroad tracks’ and connected links with existing financial institutions to grant Bitcoin a legitimacy mandate.
This, a thousand times over. If I hear from those insisting on "seeking compliance" about how "naive" the rest of us are one more time....
Also from that article:
Quote
Joel Bowman writing at The Daily Reckoning clearly recognizes that bitcoin’s future doesn’t depend on State legitimacy let alone low-cost sanctioned transactions:
I would add that it’s also a bet on income and consumption privacy becoming the norm over ‘reportable earnings’ and invasive transaction tracking. It’s a bet that career mobility and independent contractor businesses will eventually outstrip the growth of the corporate wage-slave population. It’s a bet that the degree of an individual’s financial privacy is selected solely by the individual and not by what the State reluctantly permits.
Quote
In the end, bitcoin is a bet on the other side of The State’s coin; the free market side. It’s a bet that voluntary trade will, in the end, overcome neanderthalic force and coercion. It’s a wager that the conversation currently underway in the shadowy ‘black’ market is far more intriguing, far more complex, far more nuanced and exceedingly more interesting than the yip-yapping that distracts the undead, mainstream TV-consumer for an hour or so around feeding time every evening.
I would add that it’s also a bet on income and consumption privacy becoming the norm over ‘reportable earnings’ and invasive transaction tracking. It’s a bet that career mobility and independent contractor businesses will eventually outstrip the growth of the corporate wage-slave population. It’s a bet that the degree of an individual’s financial privacy is selected solely by the individual and not by what the State reluctantly permits.
Beautiful stuff.
Bitcoin is very watched, I see articles popping up everyday.
People realize Bitcoin has TONS of potential, especially for beginning adopters.
People realize Bitcoin has TONS of potential, especially for beginning adopters.
Best response to a dullard reporter asking if bitcoin is being used for "money-laundering" ...
.... hmmmm, ahhh, meh.
.... hmmmm, ahhh, meh.
Well. Has anyone ever heard of the US$ or euro being used by money-launderers?
The bitcoin community should point out that "fiat currencies are being printed to destruction and inflation is a stealth tax on the savings of the hard-working public".
+1is that all there ever is gonna be?
Best response to a dullard reporter asking if bitcoin is being used for "money-laundering" ...
.... hmmmm, ahhh, meh.
.... hmmmm, ahhh, meh.
The bitcoin community should point out that "fiat currencies are being printed to destruction and inflation is a stealth tax on the savings of the hard-working public".
+1The use of language in the debate is important.
The ECB calls the bitcoin threat "reputational" whereas Professor Hanke, whom Bloomberg interviewed, correctly calls it a "competitive threat".
The established central banks, and regulatory agencies, may well begin a dirty war blaming bitcoin for many problems, e.g. money-laundering.
The ECB calls the bitcoin threat "reputational" whereas Professor Hanke, whom Bloomberg interviewed, correctly calls it a "competitive threat".
The established central banks, and regulatory agencies, may well begin a dirty war blaming bitcoin for many problems, e.g. money-laundering.
that strategy is doomed to fail. just look at the numerous articles out about major intl banks laundering billions. dickheads.
Quote
The bitcoin community should point out that "fiat currencies are being printed to destruction and inflation is a stealth tax on the savings of the hard-working public".
+1
The use of language in the debate is important.
The ECB calls the bitcoin threat "reputational" whereas Professor Hanke, whom Bloomberg interviewed, correctly calls it a "competitive threat".
The established central banks, and regulatory agencies, may well begin a dirty war blaming bitcoin for many problems, e.g. money-laundering.
The bitcoin community should point out that "fiat currencies are being printed to destruction and inflation is a stealth tax on the savings of the hard-working public".
The ECB calls the bitcoin threat "reputational" whereas Professor Hanke, whom Bloomberg interviewed, correctly calls it a "competitive threat".
The established central banks, and regulatory agencies, may well begin a dirty war blaming bitcoin for many problems, e.g. money-laundering.
The bitcoin community should point out that "fiat currencies are being printed to destruction and inflation is a stealth tax on the savings of the hard-working public".
Yes, the Bitcoin Foundation should have their ducks in a row, because any moment now the phone's going to start ringing and it will be journalists asking for quotes.
Jump to: