Topic: France Is Planning To Prohibit Cash Payments Over €1,000 - page 3. (Read 6302 times)
Grizzly Taylor, although rude was very right. French politicians are doing literally everything they can to destroy the French economy. They will succeed.
Because bitcoins act sorta like cash, is it illegal to make a bitcoin transaction over the threshold as well?
How do they possibly think they will be able to police this? Cash transactions are untraceable, how is making a law going to make them any more traceable?
How do they possibly think they will be able to police this? Cash transactions are untraceable, how is making a law going to make them any more traceable?
Newsflash: Lawbreakers break laws.
You're correct. This is inane.
Ohhhh, tax evasion is going to be high once everyone knows how to use Bitcoin 
There's no reason to think it will be any higher than it is now with cash. People get caught for tax evasion not because the government can track every dollar spent but because they claim one income and are obviously enjoying a different standard of living, i.e. Al Capone.
Also unlike your average tax evader who takes everything in cash under the table, there are ways of proving that a careless evader spent a specific amount of BTC through a specific address to a specific address at a specific time. So it's entirely possible the tax evader who spends BTC will get caught red-handed with what amounts to mathematical proof of their tax evasion.
BTC, unlike cash, requires separate efforts to ensure anonymity, since there is nothing inherently anonymous about the protocol itself.
Ohhhh, tax evasion is going to be high once everyone knows how to use Bitcoin
There's no reason to think it will be any higher than it is now with cash. People get caught for tax evasion not because the government can track every dollar spent but because they claim one income and are obviously enjoying a different standard of living, i.e. Al Capone.
Also unlike your average tax evader who takes everything in cash under the table, there are ways of proving that a careless evader spent a specific amount of BTC through a specific address to a specific address at a specific time. So it's entirely possible the tax evader who spends BTC will get caught red-handed with what amounts to mathematical proof of their tax evasion.
BTC, unlike cash, requires separate efforts to ensure anonymity, since there is nothing inherently anonymous about the protocol itself.
It's not enough to say "tax evasion is high". A good government should:
1) Prove it with data.
2) Show that the area where evasion is high, is actually a significant contributor to overall tax revenues.
3) Provide a convincing calculation of the costs of implementing the proposal.
4) Show that the revenue gained is significantly higher than the costs.
In this case I am skeptical they're doing any such calculations.
1) Prove it with data.
2) Show that the area where evasion is high, is actually a significant contributor to overall tax revenues.
3) Provide a convincing calculation of the costs of implementing the proposal.
4) Show that the revenue gained is significantly higher than the costs.
In this case I am skeptical they're doing any such calculations.
Ohhhh, tax evasion is going to be high once everyone knows how to use Bitcoin
I doubt that. Everyone who tries to run a Bitcoin related business larger than a process on a machine under their desk has one of two reactions when the powers that be tell them to jump:
1) Ask 'how high' (e.g., Mt. Gox)
2) Exit the industry (e.g., GLBSE)
Makes perfect sense since there are distinct limits to the amount of pressure that an individual is willing to tolerate for a particular reward, and they tend to be well under what is possible to apply.
Crypto-currencies generally are a tax-mans dream. Taxes can be assessed at the mining level and I have every expectation that they will be when a certain level of consolidation takes place.
This is the main reason I do not wish to see a situation evolve where operators cannot be widely distributed, reasonably covert, and operating on a budget which can be written off without much pain.
Ultimately I don't trust that it will be possible to find friendly jurisdictions in which to operated large scale efforts. Bitcoin (in it's original form) is not a very welcome development to any central government and any protection it may enjoy as an artifact of geopolitical economic conflict is likely to be transient.
Lol this can't even exist, it's like trying to ban gay relationships or something. The bottom line is you can't ban such a fundamental part of society. People have cash, and prefer cash. I don't trust banks, I don't like banks, and I don't like a digital number on a screen instead of hard earned money, and tons of other people in the world agree with me.
I bought a rolex watch at a dealer and paid him with 10 grand in cash, he didn't look deterred a bit as this is fairly normal when dealing with luxury goods. Pawn shops pay out huge amounts of cash all the time, because the person selling the item/loaning doesn't want the complications that a bank transfer or cheque causes. This law is a joke and reflects the government that is issuing it.
This is completely unrelated to bitcoins, this is simply a joke on society.
I bought a rolex watch at a dealer and paid him with 10 grand in cash, he didn't look deterred a bit as this is fairly normal when dealing with luxury goods. Pawn shops pay out huge amounts of cash all the time, because the person selling the item/loaning doesn't want the complications that a bank transfer or cheque causes. This law is a joke and reflects the government that is issuing it.
This is completely unrelated to bitcoins, this is simply a joke on society.
Funny for someone who sells bank cards
Lol this can't even exist, it's like trying to ban gay relationships or something. The bottom line is you can't ban such a fundamental part of society. People have cash, and prefer cash. I don't trust banks, I don't like banks, and I don't like a digital number on a screen instead of hard earned money, and tons of other people in the world agree with me.
I bought a rolex watch at a dealer and paid him with 10 grand in cash, he didn't look deterred a bit as this is fairly normal when dealing with luxury goods. Pawn shops pay out huge amounts of cash all the time, because the person selling the item/loaning doesn't want the complications that a bank transfer or cheque causes. This law is a joke and reflects the government that is issuing it.
This is completely unrelated to bitcoins, this is simply a joke on society.
I bought a rolex watch at a dealer and paid him with 10 grand in cash, he didn't look deterred a bit as this is fairly normal when dealing with luxury goods. Pawn shops pay out huge amounts of cash all the time, because the person selling the item/loaning doesn't want the complications that a bank transfer or cheque causes. This law is a joke and reflects the government that is issuing it.
This is completely unrelated to bitcoins, this is simply a joke on society.
It's not enough to say "tax evasion is high". A good government should:
1) Prove it with data.
2) Show that the area where evasion is high, is actually a significant contributor to overall tax revenues.
3) Provide a convincing calculation of the costs of implementing the proposal.
4) Show that the revenue gained is significantly higher than the costs.
In this case I am skeptical they're doing any such calculations.
1) Prove it with data.
2) Show that the area where evasion is high, is actually a significant contributor to overall tax revenues.
3) Provide a convincing calculation of the costs of implementing the proposal.
4) Show that the revenue gained is significantly higher than the costs.
In this case I am skeptical they're doing any such calculations.
Ohhhh, tax evasion is going to be high once everyone knows how to use Bitcoin
A couple quick thoughts on this.
Any law like this is going to be very specifically directed at cash because it is virtually unenforceable otherwise. You can't really prohibit barter if nothing in question is not directly valued in currency terms.
The value of a currency is dependent on the ability to use it in transactions. If you limit people's ability to use currency you have essentially destroyed its value. People will switch to something else, whether BTC or even Tide laundry detergent, just to pick a ridiculous example that, nevertheless, people have actually used.
However, even if you make the law very clear as to what is prohibited, people will probably just ignore it. People involved in illegal activities will just ignore it because they generally ignore laws. Normal people will ignore the law because it is stupid. There are places like restaurants and clubs where people like flashing around money. So it will basically piss off wealthy people and damage service industries.
So you basically drop a bomb on the legitimate economy without touching the illegal activities you're supposedly trying to stop. There is also no shortage of countries who would love to have their currency used in any kind of economic activity and will not hesitate to fill the breach. Like the United States, which never objects to dollars being used anywhere. Nothing spends quite like greenbacks for those CIA black budgets. Though as BTC continues to catch on, I wouldn't be surprised if you see it replacing some of this kind of use of cash.
Any law like this is going to be very specifically directed at cash because it is virtually unenforceable otherwise. You can't really prohibit barter if nothing in question is not directly valued in currency terms.
The value of a currency is dependent on the ability to use it in transactions. If you limit people's ability to use currency you have essentially destroyed its value. People will switch to something else, whether BTC or even Tide laundry detergent, just to pick a ridiculous example that, nevertheless, people have actually used.
However, even if you make the law very clear as to what is prohibited, people will probably just ignore it. People involved in illegal activities will just ignore it because they generally ignore laws. Normal people will ignore the law because it is stupid. There are places like restaurants and clubs where people like flashing around money. So it will basically piss off wealthy people and damage service industries.
So you basically drop a bomb on the legitimate economy without touching the illegal activities you're supposedly trying to stop. There is also no shortage of countries who would love to have their currency used in any kind of economic activity and will not hesitate to fill the breach. Like the United States, which never objects to dollars being used anywhere. Nothing spends quite like greenbacks for those CIA black budgets. Though as BTC continues to catch on, I wouldn't be surprised if you see it replacing some of this kind of use of cash.
Because bitcoins act sorta like cash, is it illegal to make a bitcoin transaction over the threshold as well?
How do they possibly think they will be able to police this? Cash transactions are untraceable, how is making a law going to make them any more traceable?
How do they possibly think they will be able to police this? Cash transactions are untraceable, how is making a law going to make them any more traceable?
"How will The Man make sure noone transacts more than 1k Eur?"
Same as "How will The Man make sure you can't turn fiat into Bitcoins without him knowing?"
MtGox enforces KIY, as do most/all other exchanges too, afaik. Same with money. Cardealers do file taxreports and stuff, *they* enforce the ban. Of course I can and do OTC trades. Just like people will, after the 1k Eur ban, do private 1k+Eur stuff.
What I like about the whole development? It will bring Bitcoin from the current "Paypal replacement" to "Fiat replacement".
Think about it: This strengthens OTC, and people will routinely work or produce or sell for btc, leaving out fiat right from the start!
Yes, it will somewhat radicalize the whole Bitcoin thingie, and will make it more difficult to use and grasp for the average person. But then they still are free to use Mt* with full KIY and all other regulations..
On another note:
Italy and now maybe France restricting cashflow is one of the brightest signs for serious turmoil coming. Endgame, anyone?
Ente
There is but one form of transaction the government would be happy to let you conduct: the one that is easily traceable and stoppable by the authority, whereas there are almost an infinite number of mediums that could be potentially used as cash, and Bitcoin is cash's ultimate reincarnation. Moreover, cash is not going to die because governments brainwash their people to believe it's unnecessary and evil, you'll almost always spontaneously turn something into cash when you really need it.
Armstrong picked up on the Matonis article:
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/02/16/are-we-headed-toward-another-french-revolution/
I don't recall him ever issuing any opinion on Bitcoin, probably still evaluating it, but I trust he's smart enough to eventually come to the right conclusion.
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/02/16/are-we-headed-toward-another-french-revolution/
I don't recall him ever issuing any opinion on Bitcoin, probably still evaluating it, but I trust he's smart enough to eventually come to the right conclusion.
actually, its interesting Matonis didn't mention Bitcoin once in his article. he probably forgot.
Armstrong picked up on the Matonis article:
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/02/16/are-we-headed-toward-another-french-revolution/
I don't recall him ever issuing any opinion on Bitcoin, probably still evaluating it, but I trust he's smart enough to eventually come to the right conclusion.
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/02/16/are-we-headed-toward-another-french-revolution/
I don't recall him ever issuing any opinion on Bitcoin, probably still evaluating it, but I trust he's smart enough to eventually come to the right conclusion.
What you say was already obvious. You are clearly a very simple person.
Obviously
I asserted that you were 'simple'. Not 'stupid'. There is a difference...though also often a correlation.
What you say was already obvious. You are clearly a very simple person.
Obviously
I won't bother to dig up a quote, but a lot of my words on this forum and particularly those of my posts on this thread are distinctly inspired by Sun Tzu's thoughts about the importance of knowing one's enemy. Specifically, in this case, understanding his tactics through either analysis or history or both.
Well I too have read the Art of war, but in relation to your comment I originally took issue because of your comments they implied elitism and possible eugenicist type attitude, because of your misdirection I still do not know your stance, but franlky I care less and less.
What you say was already obvious. You are clearly a very simple person.
I won't bother to dig up a quote, but a lot of my words on this forum and particularly those of my posts on this thread are distinctly inspired by Sun Tzu's thoughts about the importance of knowing one's enemy. Specifically, in this case, understanding his tactics through either analysis or history or both.
Well I too have read the Art of war, but in relation to your comment I originally took issue because of your comments they implied elitism and possible eugenicist type attitude, because of your misdirection I still do not know your stance, but franlky I care less and less.
Nope. I observe and comment. It brings me pleasure so I'll continue as long as it is possible and not completely unsafe to my health and welfare.
I have no problem with that and I will always defend your right to say whatever you like.
I won't bother to dig up a quote, but a lot of my words on this forum and particularly those of my posts on this thread are distinctly inspired by Sun Tzu's thoughts about the importance of knowing one's enemy. Specifically, in this case, understanding his tactics through either analysis or history or both.
Nope. I observe and comment. It brings me pleasure so I'll continue as long as it is possible and not completely unsafe to my health and welfare.
I have no problem with that and I will always defend your right to say whatever you like.
Quote
Edit: add following observation by Goring which I've always liked. It's about war, but is just as applicable to the (likely) attempt to get rid of cash:
"...But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."
...Interviewer mentions people's power of will in a Democracy...
"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
"...But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."
...Interviewer mentions people's power of will in a Democracy...
"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
"The few who understand the system, will either be so interested from it's profits or so dependant on it's favors, that there will be no opposition from that class." — Rothschild Brothers of London, 1863
"Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws" — Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson
This could be good news for all my French friends over at Bitcoin Central.....
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmatonis/2013/02/14/france-plans-to-prohibit-cash-payments-over-e1000/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmatonis/2013/02/14/france-plans-to-prohibit-cash-payments-over-e1000/
Well the whole world is turning against cash. But, people like the feelinf of money
Jump to: