Pages:
Author

Topic: Wake up people! Banks are not governments. They can't make things illegal! - page 3. (Read 3104 times)

legendary
Activity: 1397
Merit: 1019
Banks are not countries. Banks are not states.

Bolivia did not ban bitcoins. Bolivia's banks did.

Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, etc.  are not warning against using bitcoins. Their banks are.



Saying that a country bans bitcoins when their main banks ban them is like saying that a country has banned Whoppers because McDonalds in that country has banned all Whopper sales in their restaurants.


News alert, banks do not transfer bitcoins. Banks do not hold bitcoins in their accounts. Banning their use in their banks is meaningless.


It may be but most of the time banks controls governments.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
I'm really quite sane!
Banks are not countries. Banks are not states.

Bolivia did not ban bitcoins. Bolivia's banks did.

Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, etc.  are not warning against using bitcoins. Their banks are.



Saying that a country bans bitcoins when their main banks ban them is like saying that a country has banned Whoppers because McDonalds in that country has banned all Whopper sales in their restaurants.


News alert, banks do not transfer bitcoins. Banks do not hold bitcoins in their accounts. Banning their use in their banks is meaningless.

As others have said, banks are integral to and have significant control over governments. I'd just like to add an addendum that we are all quite awake.
legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1002
legendary
Activity: 888
Merit: 1000
Monero - secure, private and untraceable currency.
Banks are not countries. Banks are not states.

Banks are countries, banks are states.
member
Activity: 97
Merit: 10
Banks sometimes can be more cruel than worst governments are
hero member
Activity: 672
Merit: 500
Banks are not countries. Banks are not states.

Bolivia did not ban bitcoins. Bolivia's banks did.

Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, etc.  are not warning against using bitcoins. Their banks are.



Saying that a country bans bitcoins when their main banks ban them is like saying that a country has banned Whoppers because McDonalds in that country has banned all Whopper sales in their restaurants.


News alert, banks do not transfer bitcoins. Banks do not hold bitcoins in their accounts. Banning their use in their banks is meaningless.

Pretty sure McDonald's doesn't have the authority to ban a Burger King product  Grin
legendary
Activity: 3598
Merit: 2386
Viva Ut Vivas
Banks can certainly influence governments and get their candidates elected just like large corporations or unions or any other large economic force.

But until a bank has the power of guns and can kidnap you and lock you in a cage in a socially acceptable manner, they cannot make things illegal. Only governments are allowed to do that.

And since no government has passed a law saying that they will kidnap you and lock you in a cage if you use bitcoins then it has not been made illegal.

Even the bank of Bolivia, as powerful as it may be, has not influenced their government to pass such a law. Hence, Bolivia (the country's government) has not banned bitcoins.
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
★☆★Bitin.io★☆★
Banks are not countries. Banks are not states.

Bolivia did not ban bitcoins. Bolivia's banks did.

Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, etc.  are not warning against using bitcoins. Their banks are.



Saying that a country bans bitcoins when their main banks ban them is like saying that a country has banned Whoppers because McDonalds in that country has banned all Whopper sales in their restaurants.


News alert, banks do not transfer bitcoins. Banks do not hold bitcoins in their accounts. Banning their use in their banks is meaningless.

I agree with you on many levels, but unfortunately banks do run governments. Not the other way around.

I am no conspiracy theorist, but I am starting to believe this.
sr. member
Activity: 274
Merit: 250
News alert, banks do not transfer bitcoins. Banks do not hold bitcoins in their accounts. Banning their use in their banks is meaningless.
bigger newsflash , Banks are more involved with Governance then people imagine. One can be used to exercise the will of the other, and often happens. But hey, you are right, they can't "write" into law their own stuff, but their lobbyists can. and if you can't use the technology at the FIAT point of exchange, you are handicapping the convenience, and therefore the adoption by users.

Let's take it up a notch.

Banks don't think or do anything. Governments don't think or do anything. Individual people within banks and governments guide these institutions.

There are plenty of individual people in both banking institutions and governments that are PRO Bitcoin and changing their FIAT for Bitcoin.

Create more Bitcoin followers in the banks and governments, and the banks and governments will support Bitcoin. (If banks and governments "do" anything.)
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
--------------->¿?
Banks are not states but they do have a powerful lobby.
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1029
Banks are not countries. Banks are not states.

Bolivia did not ban bitcoins. Bolivia's banks did.

Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, etc.  are not warning against using bitcoins. Their banks are.



Saying that a country bans bitcoins when their main banks ban them is like saying that a country has banned Whoppers because McDonalds in that country has banned all Whopper sales in their restaurants.


News alert, banks do not transfer bitcoins. Banks do not hold bitcoins in their accounts. Banning their use in their banks is meaningless.

I agree with you on many levels, but unfortunately banks do run governments. Not the other way around.
hero member
Activity: 854
Merit: 500
Nope..
Consider your local bank branch as a convenience store.  Once the "convenience" is removed, it is no longer sustainable and closes (lost revenue, local marketing influence, reduced investment opportunity, etc.).  Banks are a dying breed.
legendary
Activity: 961
Merit: 1000
Simple solution: stop listening to the banks. People can easily take the banks power away from them.

The same goes for politics: it's your vote that counts Wink

The only problem is, who is counting the votes ? Wink

Or, are your voting options really only 2 sides of the same face?
hero member
Activity: 1582
Merit: 502
Simple solution: stop listening to the banks. People can easily take the banks power away from them.

The same goes for politics: it's your vote that counts Wink

The only problem is, who is counting the votes ? Wink
sr. member
Activity: 338
Merit: 250
Simple solution: stop listening to the banks. People can easily take the banks power away from them.
legendary
Activity: 4424
Merit: 4794
yes we understand the economics lesson.. we understood it years before you were born...

but the point is, its not law right now that bitcoins are banned from human use.
its not even banks policy.

try to translate the banks announcement (not the media's opinion) and you will see its an announcement/recommendation. that only tells banks not to personally hold bitcoins.

so until someone is arrested under some law for using bitcoins.. shut up trying to exaggerate an announcement into a countrywide ban against human use.!!!!

seriously this is like telling the world that termites eat houses, then someone announces their house is made of wood. and you shout out that termites are destroying everyones house and eating everyones wooden leg and clothing.

chill out bolivians (human beings) can still use bitcoins. they just cant go to a standard bank owned bureau de change to get them. they will have to get them through businesses, localbitcoins, meetups..

the same as the rest of the world

now lock this thread
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
Banks are not countries. Banks are not states.

Bolivia did not ban bitcoins. Bolivia's banks did.

Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, etc.  are not warning against using bitcoins. Their banks are.



Saying that a country bans bitcoins when their main banks ban them is like saying that a country has banned Whoppers because McDonalds in that country has banned all Whopper sales in their restaurants.


News alert, banks do not transfer bitcoins. Banks do not hold bitcoins in their accounts. Banning their use in their banks is meaningless.

i guess we live in different worlds. maybe the situation is different in bolivia, but banks DO run countries.. especially in the USA. our politicians work for the big corporations, and banks have A LOT of money to throw at them. in spite of what happened in 2008, there have not been any major players who were arrested for the shit they pulled. do you think that's a coincidence?

It depends on the country indeed. I don't know about Bolivia, but not in all countries the banks are the most powerful;
 

yeah i don't disagree with that.. but banking is one of the most powerful instutitions in the world, and i don't think people realize that. all wars need to be funded, cartel drug lords need to be funded, terrorism, presidential elections, politicians.. they all tie back to banks. money makes the world go round, and who do you think are the brokers of money?
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1012
you can't buy on internet without a bank.
that why bitcoin must rease !
sr. member
Activity: 518
Merit: 250
Banks are not countries. Banks are not states.

Bolivia did not ban bitcoins. Bolivia's banks did.

Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, etc.  are not warning against using bitcoins. Their banks are.



Saying that a country bans bitcoins when their main banks ban them is like saying that a country has banned Whoppers because McDonalds in that country has banned all Whopper sales in their restaurants.


News alert, banks do not transfer bitcoins. Banks do not hold bitcoins in their accounts. Banning their use in their banks is meaningless.

i guess we live in different worlds. maybe the situation is different in bolivia, but banks DO run countries.. especially in the USA. our politicians work for the big corporations, and banks have A LOT of money to throw at them. in spite of what happened in 2008, there have not been any major players who were arrested for the shit they pulled. do you think that's a coincidence?

It depends on the country indeed. I don't know about Bolivia, but not in all countries the banks are the most powerful;
 
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
Banks are not countries. Banks are not states.

Bolivia did not ban bitcoins. Bolivia's banks did.

Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, etc.  are not warning against using bitcoins. Their banks are.



Saying that a country bans bitcoins when their main banks ban them is like saying that a country has banned Whoppers because McDonalds in that country has banned all Whopper sales in their restaurants.


News alert, banks do not transfer bitcoins. Banks do not hold bitcoins in their accounts. Banning their use in their banks is meaningless.

i guess we live in different worlds. maybe the situation is different in bolivia, but banks DO run countries.. especially in the USA. our politicians work for the big corporations, and banks have A LOT of money to throw at them. in spite of what happened in 2008, there have not been any major players who were arrested for the shit they pulled. do you think that's a coincidence?
Pages:
Jump to: