Topic: Government vs Bitcoin - page 3. (Read 1188 times)

Are you sure about this?  My countries economy is not based on Bitcoin, and as far as I know all country in Asia's economy is not based on Bitcoin. Can you share where you read that?


I am a bit confused, Most cryptocurrency trades are not getting taxed since many countries have yet to establish its taxing system for Bitcoin,   I agree that Bitcoin startups offer job but I don't think it has a huge impact on the employment statistics of a nation.

Well, this is not entirely true because, In major cities as of today, people still need to convert their Bitcoin to fiat currencies before they can spend it on goods and services.

So going by the above, money saved or kept in Bitcoin can be considered money invested, same way people invest in stocks, real estate, businesses and so on, money invested in Bitcoin can as well be invested in a real estate, do government still task real estate that is undeveloped and has not yielded any profit for the investor ?,  of course not.

The only reason why government are against Bitcoin is solely because they have no control over it, and are afraid since they see it as a potential threat to the fiat which they have 100 percent control over through the bank .

Bitcoin has changed the economy in various countries. Its admirable that cryptocurrency trading has closed employment shortages in numerous economies, but this narrative should be viewed with care. Relying on a decentralized, volatile currency like Bitcoin is risky, especially if a government's revenue depends on taxes. Integrating tax collection for each transaction accelerates the process, but banks must maintain robust and faultless systems. Can a decentralized currency anchor a nation's economy?

Yes also the government thinks that legalizing bitcoin will take everything out of its hands. Fiscal policy tools are used by governments to influence the economy in addition to revenue cuts. These primarily include changes in tax levels and government spending to stimulate growth taxes are cut and spending is increased. It often involves borrowing by issuing government debt also if bitcoin becomes legal government taxes from other sources will decrease.

Where and for what reasons do people have such thoughts that countries began to prosper economically after accepting Bitcoin as a means of payment? At least they would post a list of statistics “before” and “after”. So at least we would have some data for comparison. And so, nothing more than simple speculation and nothing more. Still, nowadays people trust facts. And they do it right.
It’s already annoying to see how Bitcoin is credited with some positive qualities that it may not possess. Boost the country's economy? )) Yeah, of course... All the states have already set their eyes on it and are lining up to buy it)

The most of the countries economy was based on the bitcoin now.The population of many countries was more and employment to them was low.So many people doing bitcoin trading as their real time employment.The person who do cryptocurrency trade will do the tax payment.So now most of the countries government was depend on the tax from the people.For this reason the government legalise the bitcoin in their country and regulate the bitcoin in proper way in their system.So the bank itself collects tax from people in every transaction.Bitcoin giving employment to unemployed in many ways.This forum also allow us to earn some dollars from the signature campaign.

First of all, we know that Bitcoin was created by the founder not to oppose the government of each country. That's why other governments of countries think badly of Bitcoin; others think that it is a threat, and they know even when it will not be regulated under the government.

And any government also knows that because Bitcoin is decentralized, this decentralization is the reason the government can't control Bitcoin. But the government has the ability to not accept it in their country or other countries, and many people did it, but in the end they also withdrew it because they could not stop the trend regarding Bitcoin, especially since there are other countries that have already made it a legal tender currency, such as El Salvador and others.

But even without bitcoin, corruption and money laundering still happen every day and even happen to the government system.  don't blame bitcoin for those things when those evils appeared hundreds of years before bitcoin was born.  in my opinion, the decentralized nature is what makes governments unhappy with bitcoin because it would make it impossible for them to retain their power.  If the government accepts bitcoin and allows people to use bitcoin, people will stop using banks and fiat money, then they will lose all power and it will lead to collapse.

It is not easy for Bitcoin to be accepted by a government; of course, it must be adjusted to the situation of the government itself and whether it is able to accept the consequences that will occur.As you said, the government is scary because it can be used for undesirable things such as escaping the proceeds of corruption as well as money laundering, which results in government losses. but now the government is also more familiar with it and does this with regulations that can prevent abuse from happening, so they don't dare to do things that could violate the rules.

I mean right now I could totally see the Bitcoin adaptation in my country it is already used a lot by a lot of companies and even allows trading this cryptocurrency in their platform which is already a big thing since there are millions of users there that are having a good chance to invest in cryptocurrency or probably just have there interest of it. There are probably some governments that misunderstand Bitcoin or don't really want or support Bitcoin but there are still a lot of countries that support cryptocurrency or blockchain development. Cryptocurrency projects are already starting to give jobs in my country so as long as the government doesnt interfere to probably not banned cryptocurrency it's probably going to be fine since cryptocurrency continues to adapt in most of the country and projects are already starting to be big, and even starting to give jobs to developers here in the Philippines.

There are probably some things that the government doesnt like about cryptocurrency since it is decentralized and they can't really put a tax on it, but it is probably indirect since they could tax the platform that is doing it if it is operating here in the Philippines. I mean it is getting a lot of money out of our economy and the government doesnt really want something that they cant really control. But still, there are some that are just neutral about it because it still has positive and negative.

If a country were to attempt to manipulate Bitcoin prices for the purpose of stabilizing its own economy, would other nations and influential cryptocurrency holders simply stand idly by? Certainly not; each entity's actions regarding Bitcoin would be driven by their individual interests. In essence, if one nation seeks to control Bitcoin's price, but it doesn't align with the objectives of other countries, an economic power struggle to dominate Bitcoin would ensue.

Now, if hoarding all the Bitcoin is deemed a sound idea, could everyone easily part with it at a low price when indications of a monopoly become apparent to both the less fortunate and the affluent Bitcoin holders? Certainly not, my friend.

This is also an opportunity that can be exploited by the state because the state can impose taxes on local crypto exchanges that are still operating to serve their local traders. So it is quite logical for the state to make regulations that allow markets to operate forever by binding them through taxation so that every year there is always income for the state.

I also agree that regulations have become the key for the state to control parts of the market, because market users will also be faced with these regulations to understand that they actually have to pay taxes to the state every time there is trade. I see this has started to happen in several of my local exchanges so I am not too worried because the market can continue to operate quite well until now without any obstacles with rules and regulations.

regulation is indeed the key if they want to get a hold some of this market. because they are now seeing that even without their mandate, this market will continue to grow. so instead of banning the use of it, why not just regulate this market via implementation of protocols attached to this business? they can get tax from these local crypto-exchanges if they want to because before they can operate, they need to accomplish docs like business permit and others. i believe, most governments are changing their approach towards the crypto market especially now that they are seeing big financial companies which are into this market.

Control of people can be achieved through rules that are introduced by regulatory in the government. If the rules are strict for buying and selling Bitcoin, then this will to some extent prevent people from making exchanges. The regulator may also impose a very large tax on Bitcoin profits, which will force large holders to look for a more favorable country. I want to say that the regulator has a significant impact on Bitcoin and I would not like the tightening to continue in all countries.

I am 100% sure that governments around the world have assigned people to study what Bitcoin is in detail, but they will definitely reject it because they discovered that they cannot control Bitcoin. governments in many countries don't like it when their power of control over something is weak, they only like and support things that they can control and which only benefit them while they feel that bitcoin is not profitable at all. but there is nothing to worry about, so far bitcoin has continued to grow without support from governments in many countries.

Well ideally self governing people would be best, but once a group of people gets big government and organizations get involved.

I would prefer to have less government, but you need far more space for people then the world has.

Bitcoin at best offers a way to flee from government a to government b which may simply be out of the frying pan into the fire concept.

I do not agree that it is not beneficial for them. Just because they can't control it directly, doesn't mean that they can't control people. And just like how they let you have gold and stocks, they could also let you have bitcoin as well.

Let's take a look at it from an American perspective, USA is not controlling the price of gold, they can try, but they are not doing it all by themselves that easily, they would have to spend insane amount of money and the same way could be done for bitcoin, or stocks, stocks in the USA could be manipulated by the country, but they can't stop someone from buying stocks in another nation, which they can't control. So bitcoin is as controllable as any other asset and they just tax it.

Should governments relinquish control over their currencies, they face the imminent danger of losing their power and being susceptible to overthrow. The government is a centralized collective, while bitcoin is a decentralized system where power is divided equally among everyone, which is actually harmful to the government. So it's understandable that they don't accept bitcoin in their place.

In the case of El Salvador, although they have embraced bitcoin as legal tender, they have not eliminated the USD from their economy. This cautious approach indicates a lack of complete trust in bitcoin. Moreover, El Salvador seems to treat bitcoin more as an investment rather than a fully recognized currency.

I highly agree that the government is well-informed about Bitcoin, it is that their announcement is not fueled by honesty but by political sense, so we might find the majority of announcement or statement of the government institution somehow vague and assumptions making their citizen cautious since they don't have any access or control over the Bitcoin network while they are plannng and preparing regulation on the Bitcoin engagement.

I think the Governments negative stance towards Bitcoin is rooted in concerns about losing control over their national currencies and potential risks like unregulated criminal activity. El Salvador has adopted Bitcoin because of its benefits while many other countries are still undecided leaving transactions mainly unprotected. I also thing Even in the face of sanctions by nations like China the increasing global acceptance of Bitcoin implies that such initiatives won't impede its ascent. Bitcoin value is anticipated to increase because of how rare it is compared to official money.