Topic: High possibility major governments will BAN Bitcoin in the near future - page 5. (Read 1021 times)

Banning will be a shot on their foot, this will be like drugs, cutting off the supply will not be enough but instead will in turn increase the prices overtime. People have a history of resisting oppressive authority, banning bitcoin with the narrative that it does not help with the interest of the state will only spark a problem that does not need to exist in the first place, bitcoin never hurt anybody it's the people that does, don't shoot the messenger as they said. Banning will only make the prices higher and make more people flock to it, introducing the same concept will not work because shitcoins have existed.

I love it. This is the way to point out the issues with OP's post.

It is very easy to speak in grand generalities but when one has to be specific, and put up real money, it certainly sharpness and forces one to crystallize the position.

It reminds me of the innumerable discussions about "needing bitcoin to expire if not moved for X years".  No one has had a successful fork that incorporates those provisions because they are idiotic.  This sounds similar where a simple request stops the nonsense.

The odds that all the countries will do this is infinitesimal because there is competition.  Would Russia cooperate with China or the US or Europe or Central or South America or Africa or Asia to do this?  No, they want to beggar they neighbor and competition will help keep them semi-honest. (Well, at least somewhat honest with regard to bitcoin,  nothing else.)

Ban for what? because they will make their own cryptocurrencies? I highly doubt. There are already existing cryptos which are fiat based but that doesn't seem to affect other cryptos negatively. Things will coexist, I believe. It is more likely to happen that regulation to cryptos will be implemented than for them to just ban the use of this technology. In such way they will be able to tax every transactions, which is their primary concern. I do really think there's no need for total restriction and it does seem for me that they won't. This is just I think an assumption since there's no given supporting details for the claim and, this is just making no sense.

Lol I love how some very very foolish gullible people seem to think if something is banned it disappears. Firstly doing this is beyond unconstitutional even bordering the line of civil disobedience. I can promise you right now I would both reject and fight the government with everything I have if ever they did this. May as well bring back slavery laws. STOP SPREADING FUD!!!

Ok so.... Drug war? Increased the price of drugs and increased the number of users. increased the black market hold and profit for criminals. Great job government.
Ban on gold? People still hold it. There is no way to know who has and who does not hold gold. You don't even have to hold the gold in your own country.

This will never happen and will explode in the government's face.

A ban is just a sily law written in a book it means nothing. If a ban happened as a write this no one will sell anything. In In fact we will all laugh at the government.

Before the government wants to point pictures they should stop corruption that robs the taxpayer.

Not even remotely likely. It's like saying the US government will ban Fedex and UPS because they are direct competitors to the Postal Service.

Also, Bitcoin is not a direct competitor to nations upgrading their legacy digital money systems to cryptocurrency (CBDC). It is inevitable that nations start issuing their fiat currencies as cryptocurrencies because it is a superior technology. This inevitability was brought about by the invention of Bitcoin. But Bitcoin is very different than CBDC's. In fact CBDC's aren't anything different than the fiat that is already used, it's just a tech upgrade. Why would nations suddenly ban bitcoin just because they gave their own monetary systems a tech upgrade?

So, no, it doesn't matter at all that nations will eventually all upgrade their digital money systems to use cryptocurrency tech. It's not changing anything about fiat itself. Nothing in the bitcoin/fiat relation changes simply because nations upgrade their monetary tech. This does nothing to make it more likely nor less likely that nations will ban bitcoin. It is a non-factor. And Bitcoin is not going away, that much has been obvious for a few years now, so the answer is no, bitcoin is not going away, and free nations have no reason to ban bitcoin, and certainly not just because they gave their own monetary systems an upgrade which in no way changes government's relationship to Bitcoin.

Governments can do as in Russia. There, some officials were ordered to get rid of the storage of cryptocurrency by April 1, after this period, responsibility for its storage will be in effect.
It is possible that states and their governments will try to restrict or even ban the circulation of cryptocurrency. This cannot be ruled out. Their digitized central bank currencies will be issued anyway, as this makes their circulation faster, more convenient and cheaper to maintain. At the same time, stablecoins of states will indeed be used to compete with cryptocurrencies.

My question is;
If the state and government completely prohibit bitcoin, either the owner, miner or trader will be punished and jailed. How can they find out or trace who owns the address?

Maybe they can find out the owner of the wallet address through centralized exchange transactions that require users to do KYC. But, what if someone sends and receives a certain amount of BTC via a decentralized wallet?

Governments have been struggling to prohibit the total ban of illicit goods for decades, and most of these goods are even being smuggled and distributed by the people of the government. How sure are you that these same people would be rallying for a ban on bitcoin, especially now that their best buddies--the institutional investors--are already in the game with billions of dollars already dunked in the crypto? They might restrict the usage of bitcoin on some fronts and impose regulations that limits the normal user on what to do with their coins, but full-on ban is most likely not on their list; not now, not ever.

I disagree with you.


Wouldn't hold your breath for what? You are the one saying that something is going to happen...yeah...definitely don't hold your breath for that. It is not happening.


It would be getting killed but it's just a fiction of your mind at this point. Think about it...when it went from $1 to $15000.00 they did nothing and that is a MUCH bigger move than $15000 to $40000. I'll do the math for you: $1 to $15000.00 is 1,500,000 %. Probably nearly every rich person in government has Bitcoin now too so...

And it will certainly continue to do so for the next 10 years, it is simply something that is in the nature of the human mind. Beginners who have no idea about the basics of Bitcoin or anything related to finance in general live in some conspiracy theories all the time.


If the OP is really convinced of their claims then it would be easy money - but I don't think the kids really have $2000 or even 10 times less to bet on something like that.

---

CBDC is a reality, but it’s just a digitized fiat and nothing more. Of course governments have mechanisms to harm Bitcoin, but wouldn’t it have been easier if they had done so long before the whole thing became so popular? The genie is out of the bottle and I would love to see who will bring it back.

Ban it or not government has not full control of Bitcoin pity for them because we can still use it no matter what. If these countries are working on cryptocurrency of their own then there is no reason for them to ban Bitcoin because without it their shitcoin won't work the way they create and want it to be.

Do you have any reference that the government is treating Bitcoin as how they treat gold in the 1930s? I don't think it will ever be the same because they can't cease the crypto that different people have possibly multiple wallets even. It's just unnecessary for them and probably know that they are not going to be able to completely stop it with its technology.

They are basically digitizing fiat, what's the difference now? It's still won't be internationally accepted easily unless those two countries would be in partnership or something. It's mostly like how fiat is being traded but not being directly accepted by the masses.

---

I can't wait to watch those kinds of bets happen. Dabs have offered escrow already. Make it official!

I love your bet,  
and it's really not easy for the country to control us who have lived with bitcoin for a long time, and are trying to ban our bitcoin ownership.

This will not happen, while we are still vigorously moving bitcoins, and we and bitcoiner will agree with you too.
let us see, as thought or just as a sleeping flower ....

Oh, a bet? Let me know if there is an actual bet, I can hold it for y'alls.

by "major government" you mean Venezuela and India. then yes they had been laying the groundwork for their own cryptocurrency and Venezuela already created their own and was a big failure. they didn't ban bitcoin though, that part is just a FUD that always comes at times like this when the bitcoin market is getting ready to see another big rise. the real "fact" is that people started buying more bitcoin when their government started talking about cryptocurrency of their own!

Who cares if every government comes out with their centralized coin, there is a major difference, bitcoin is a decentralized currency and it is not even a competition. 


China does have its restrictions, but Japan already legalized bitcoin and they cannot jump from a pro bitcoin country to anti bitcoin because there are businesses that run as well, Europe will not criminalize bitcoin.


I would like to see the price of bitcoin around $1000  .

I'm not sure. There are conflicting elements here. The higher the price goes, the more seriously governments will consider BTC and potentially legislating against it. But the higher the price goes, the more institutional adoption there is. So the situation is that the more pension funds and other institutional investors buy in and become exposed to BTC, the more the government wants to take action... but they'd be taking action not against the cliched money-laundering bitcoin criminal underworld, but rather against Wall St and friends.
So I don't know. The time to ban a thing is before it becomes a part of the fabric of society, i.e. before it becomes a threat. But governments are notoriously reactive rather than proactive, they are slow to move and pathologically short-termist.
Obviously it could go either way, but I take incoming establishment money as a good sign, and one that makes BTC's long-term survival and success more probable.

The governments of the world can't agree on anything. I wouldn't even consider it being an option of any of this happening until the institutional investors and the wealthy dump all of their Bitcoin. China has their cryptocurrency going...do you think that they consulted any governments before they did that?

Anyway, with all of your questions you subsequently dismiss anyone's responses and talk about Bitcoin dropping to nothing. Why even ask?

They have a hard time agreeing when they have opposing views. In this case they share the same view of stopping Bitcoin to protect their own national interests and currencies. So I wouldn't hold my breath.

$300 is something, it would still be worth money, it won't go to zero. But I would consider going from 31K to 0.3K getting killed.

Yes.


No? Oh, ok.  Then no.


Might?  I thought you said "IT IS A FACT that these countries are working on cryptocurrencies of their own".  It only takes a few seconds to fork the open source code.  Any team of qualified programmers can then modify that code into yet another alt-coin in a matter of days.  Either it's a "FACT" and therefore happening right now, or you're just spewing nonsense.


Probably?  Or "High possibility"?  Make up your mind, which is it?

Are you accepting my bet or not?  Do you truly believe what you are saying? Or did you read some nonsense somewhere, and now you're using that nonsense to geet your post count up higher for some signature ad campaign?

What a load of bull.