Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 33526.

Coinseeker

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:32:33 AM

...where as [sic] Bitcoin is in violation of the laws of nearly every country.

...followed by post after post of people banging their heads against a brick wall trying to explain to Coinseeker that virtually all of the premises behind his ludicrous statement are untrue. I think he's sort-of got most of it by now but it would help if people actually made a little effort (Google is your friend) to understand what they're talking about before just coming out with baseless rubbish.

I'll try Reddit!

Awww....does it bother you that I don't blindly follow internet rhetoric. At least I have the intelligence to be open to facts as they are presented, where most on this site are so ideologically dug in, that the only "facts" they see are the ones they have created in their own minds.

Starting with the continuing delusion that Bitcoin is immune to governmental intervention.

Coinseeker

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Quote from: crumbcake on May 15, 2013, 06:52:50 AM

Is there a TL;DR on THE news in the last 8 hrs?

Same story running. No new info released. It's still only 8am here, 5am on the west coast.

ChartBuddy

legendary

Activity: 2352

Merit: 1819

1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ

thoughtfan

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 506

Quote from: crumbcake on May 15, 2013, 06:52:50 AM

Is there a TL;DR on THE news in the last 8 hrs?

I don't know. I did my usual of going back a page or two from this thread and scrolling through to see if there's anything I should know about only to find this:

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 05:32:33 AM

...where as [sic] Bitcoin is in violation of the laws of nearly every country.

...followed by post after post of people banging their heads against a brick wall trying to explain to Coinseeker that virtually all of the premises behind his ludicrous statement are untrue. I think he's sort-of got most of it by now but it would help if people actually made a little effort (Google is your friend) to understand what they're talking about before just coming out with baseless rubbish.

I'll try Reddit!

Missionary

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

Quote from: crumbcake on May 15, 2013, 06:52:50 AM

Is there a TL;DR on THE news in the last 8 hrs?

Some centralized service in the US froze some funds. Bitcoins unaffected.

crumbcake

newbie

Activity: 42

Merit: 0

Is there a TL;DR on THE news in the last 8 hrs?

crumbcake

newbie

Activity: 42

Merit: 0

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 06:50:13 AM

Quote from: crumbcake on May 15, 2013, 06:49:02 AM

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 06:48:05 AM

Quote from: crumbcake on May 15, 2013, 06:39:38 AM

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 06:29:25 AM

Quote from: MickeyT2008 on May 15, 2013, 06:22:54 AM

Bitcoin might be a currency but since it's only numbers in a computer and not a physical object can it even be said to exist? Anyway, surely it wouldn't be a crime for someone in the US to pay someone else in Euros or Stirling if they were both happy about it. If the US government start using a clause like that then it's obviously only because they're miffed about not getting to tax it, but they'd probably use some BS excuse like counter-terrorism, protecting kids, etc like they always do for things they don't like.

See these are all the questions no one really has answers to. There is all this grey area because of the internet. But if the government is not getting it's cut, they are not going to let that ride. Crypto certainly has it's challenges ahead. This online tax bill in congress is alot bigger than I think some people understand. The USG is looking to remove that grey area. I'm not saying any of this is right or fair...I'm just saying it is what it is.

There's no "gray area" if you consider fiat currency to be a sound system. Bitcoin dilutes the fiat economy, without introducing any value. Just like printing more money. If you are holding $$$, it's certainly not in your benefit for Bitcoin to succeed.

I'm not talking personal ideology, I'm talking grey area from a legal standpoint. The USG is coming for their taxes. You can bet with 100% certainty this will be the case. But the USG will want to have solid legal footing to do so. Because of the internet, it requiring updated rules, regulations and policies to deal with it.

I'm not talking ideology either -- simply the mechanics of trading Cheesy

My apologies. This forum has obviously made me hypersensitive. Wink

No worries, i leave politics outside Cheesy

Coinseeker

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Quote from: crumbcake on May 15, 2013, 06:49:02 AM

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 06:48:05 AM

Quote from: crumbcake on May 15, 2013, 06:39:38 AM

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 06:29:25 AM

Quote from: MickeyT2008 on May 15, 2013, 06:22:54 AM

Bitcoin might be a currency but since it's only numbers in a computer and not a physical object can it even be said to exist? Anyway, surely it wouldn't be a crime for someone in the US to pay someone else in Euros or Stirling if they were both happy about it. If the US government start using a clause like that then it's obviously only because they're miffed about not getting to tax it, but they'd probably use some BS excuse like counter-terrorism, protecting kids, etc like they always do for things they don't like.

See these are all the questions no one really has answers to. There is all this grey area because of the internet. But if the government is not getting it's cut, they are not going to let that ride. Crypto certainly has it's challenges ahead. This online tax bill in congress is alot bigger than I think some people understand. The USG is looking to remove that grey area. I'm not saying any of this is right or fair...I'm just saying it is what it is.

There's no "gray area" if you consider fiat currency to be a sound system. Bitcoin dilutes the fiat economy, without introducing any value. Just like printing more money. If you are holding $$$, it's certainly not in your benefit for Bitcoin to succeed.

I'm not talking personal ideology, I'm talking grey area from a legal standpoint. The USG is coming for their taxes. You can bet with 100% certainty this will be the case. But the USG will want to have solid legal footing to do so. Because of the internet, it requiring updated rules, regulations and policies to deal with it.

I'm not talking ideology either -- simply the mechanics of trading Cheesy

My apologies. This forum has obviously made me hypersensitive. Wink

crumbcake

newbie

Activity: 42

Merit: 0

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 06:48:05 AM

Quote from: crumbcake on May 15, 2013, 06:39:38 AM

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 06:29:25 AM

Quote from: MickeyT2008 on May 15, 2013, 06:22:54 AM

Bitcoin might be a currency but since it's only numbers in a computer and not a physical object can it even be said to exist? Anyway, surely it wouldn't be a crime for someone in the US to pay someone else in Euros or Stirling if they were both happy about it. If the US government start using a clause like that then it's obviously only because they're miffed about not getting to tax it, but they'd probably use some BS excuse like counter-terrorism, protecting kids, etc like they always do for things they don't like.

See these are all the questions no one really has answers to. There is all this grey area because of the internet. But if the government is not getting it's cut, they are not going to let that ride. Crypto certainly has it's challenges ahead. This online tax bill in congress is alot bigger than I think some people understand. The USG is looking to remove that grey area. I'm not saying any of this is right or fair...I'm just saying it is what it is.

There's no "gray area" if you consider fiat currency to be a sound system. Bitcoin dilutes the fiat economy, without introducing any value. Just like printing more money. If you are holding $$$, it's certainly not in your benefit for Bitcoin to succeed.

I'm not talking personal ideology, I'm talking grey area from a legal standpoint. The USG is coming for their taxes. You can bet with 100% certainty this will be the case. But the USG will want to have solid legal footing to do so. Because of the internet, it requiring updated rules, regulations and policies to deal with it.

I'm not talking ideology either -- simply the mechanics of trading Cheesy

crumbcake

newbie

Activity: 42

Merit: 0

Quote from: crumbcake on May 15, 2013, 06:44:44 AM

Quote from: MickeyT2008 on May 15, 2013, 06:41:28 AM

Quote from: Stephen Gornick on May 15, 2013, 06:32:25 AM

So that doesn't mean using anything else to pay is illegal, it simply means I cannot force you to pay in anything other than the medium defined by law as legal tender. If you and I want to trade using seashells (which are anonymous, and can be traded anymously), that is not using legal tender but it most certainly is not prohibited by law.

Of course though if you declare seashells legal tender then you'd have a serious inflation problem due to their availability. This would make it necessary to pump so much acidic industrial waste into the sea that they all dissolve.

It's more than that. If all the fiat in country A bought one cow, and an agent within that country issued a new currency, the worth of which was claimed to be .2 cows, where does the extra .2 cows come from? Huh

Edit: unless the agent also creates an extra .2 cows, he's simply devaluing the $$$ -- $$$ no longer buys 1 cow, only .8 Cheesy

Coinseeker

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Quote from: crumbcake on May 15, 2013, 06:39:38 AM

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 06:29:25 AM

Quote from: MickeyT2008 on May 15, 2013, 06:22:54 AM

Bitcoin might be a currency but since it's only numbers in a computer and not a physical object can it even be said to exist? Anyway, surely it wouldn't be a crime for someone in the US to pay someone else in Euros or Stirling if they were both happy about it. If the US government start using a clause like that then it's obviously only because they're miffed about not getting to tax it, but they'd probably use some BS excuse like counter-terrorism, protecting kids, etc like they always do for things they don't like.

See these are all the questions no one really has answers to. There is all this grey area because of the internet. But if the government is not getting it's cut, they are not going to let that ride. Crypto certainly has it's challenges ahead. This online tax bill in congress is alot bigger than I think some people understand. The USG is looking to remove that grey area. I'm not saying any of this is right or fair...I'm just saying it is what it is.

There's no "gray area" if you consider fiat currency to be a sound system. Bitcoin dilutes the fiat economy, without introducing any value. Just like printing more money. If you are holding $$$, it's certainly not in your benefit for Bitcoin to succeed.

I'm not talking personal ideology, I'm talking grey area from a legal standpoint. The USG is coming for their taxes. You can bet with 100% certainty this will be the case. But the USG will want to have solid legal footing to do so. Because of the internet, it's requiring updated rules, regulations and policies to deal with it. This is all new for everyone.

el_rlee

legendary

Activity: 1600

Merit: 1014

Quote from: Pzi4nk on May 15, 2013, 06:41:41 AM

Quote from: el_rlee on May 15, 2013, 06:39:25 AM

Can't you sue the DHS? Some loaded early adopter should be able to afford an expensive lawyer, and that's what it's all about in USA, isn't it? [emphasis by Pzi4nk]

I wouldn't limit it to the USA.

Hopefully this will get a precedent for legal BTC usage.

MickeyT2008

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

This account was recently hacked

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 06:45:01 AM

Quote from: Pzi4nk on May 15, 2013, 06:40:17 AM

Actually, business transactions ARE private. Only debts to the government are public. There is nothing stopping businesses in the US from legally accepting bitcoin.

Yes actually I have conceded that point. From the info provided I don't see the transactions being illegal but if the business were to not pay taxes on said transactions, that would be the violation. I think that's a fair understanding up to this point.

This is true, it's also one of the reasons that we like bitcoins!

Coinseeker

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Quote from: Pzi4nk on May 15, 2013, 06:40:17 AM

Actually, business transactions ARE private. Only debts to the government are public. There is nothing stopping businesses in the US from legally accepting bitcoin.

Yes actually I have conceded that point. From the info provided I don't see the transactions being illegal but if the business were to not pay taxes on said transactions, that would be the violation. I think that's a fair understanding up to this point.

crumbcake

newbie

Activity: 42

Merit: 0

Quote from: MickeyT2008 on May 15, 2013, 06:41:28 AM

Quote from: Stephen Gornick on May 15, 2013, 06:32:25 AM

So that doesn't mean using anything else to pay is illegal, it simply means I cannot force you to pay in anything other than the medium defined by law as legal tender. If you and I want to trade using seashells (which are anonymous, and can be traded anymously), that is not using legal tender but it most certainly is not prohibited by law.

Of course though if you declare seashells legal tender then you'd have a serious inflation problem due to their availability. This would make it necessary to pump so much acidic industrial waste into the sea that they all dissolve.

It's more than that. If all the fiat in country A bought one cow, and an agent within that country issued a new currency, the worth of which was claimed to be .2 cows, where does the extra .2 cows come from? Huh

Coinseeker

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Quote from: MickeyT2008 on May 15, 2013, 06:41:28 AM

Quote from: Stephen Gornick on May 15, 2013, 06:32:25 AM

So that doesn't mean using anything else to pay is illegal, it simply means I cannot force you to pay in anything other than the medium defined by law as legal tender. If you and I want to trade using seashells (which are anonymous, and can be traded anymously), that is not using legal tender but it most certainly is not prohibited by law.

Of course though if you declare seashells legal tender then you'd have a serious inflation problem due to their availability. This would make it necessary to pump so much acidic industrial waste into the sea that they all dissolve, thus re-valuing your currency.

Well that shouldn't be hard.

Pzi4nk

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Move over clarinets, I'm getting on the band wagon

Quote from: el_rlee on May 15, 2013, 06:39:25 AM

Can't you sue the DHS? Some loaded early adopter should be able to afford an expensive lawyer, and that's what it's all about in USA, isn't it? [emphasis by Pzi4nk]

I wouldn't limit it to the USA.

MickeyT2008

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

This account was recently hacked

Quote from: Stephen Gornick on May 15, 2013, 06:32:25 AM

So that doesn't mean using anything else to pay is illegal, it simply means I cannot force you to pay in anything other than the medium defined by law as legal tender. If you and I want to trade using seashells (which are anonymous, and can be traded anymously), that is not using legal tender but it most certainly is not prohibited by law.

Of course though if you declare seashells legal tender then you'd have a serious inflation problem due to their availability. This would make it necessary to pump so much acidic industrial waste into the sea that they all dissolve, thus re-valuing your currency.

Pzi4nk

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Move over clarinets, I'm getting on the band wagon

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 06:24:36 AM

Quote from: solex on May 15, 2013, 06:20:23 AM

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 06:02:01 AM

Coinage Act of 1965, Section 102 states: “All coins and currencies of the United States (including Federal Reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal Reserve banks and national banking associations), regardless of when coined or issued, shall be legal tender for all debts, public and private, public charges, taxes, duties, and dues.” Only United States currencies (including Federal Reserve Notes) are currently legal tender in the US.

Keyword being LEGAL tender. Thanks for that BTW.

"An astute reader may note that legal tender only concerns the repayment of debt, taxes, duties, and dues."
Citizens are free to use any currency for an unofficial transaction.

Quote from: needmorecoins on May 15, 2013, 06:17:44 AM

Not familiar with any laws (or how to read them lawyer speak) so might a dumb question...but does the USD being legal tender in the US mean that other currencies are illegal? Or the other currencies can still be be used but just not legally obliged to be accepted?

That's your answer. Legal tender only matters where the government or judicial system is involved.
So you can't pay taxes in bitcoins. But you can pay your neighbor bitcoins for some vegetables.

You know, upon rereading that, that could be a really good legal loophole as long as transactions remained private. That still would prevent legal mass adoption by businesses I would think, as every legal business needs a business license issued by the government but that is an argument that could be made. Nice.

Actually, business transactions ARE private. Only debts to the government are public. There is nothing stopping businesses in the US from legally accepting bitcoin.

crumbcake

newbie

Activity: 42

Merit: 0

Quote from: Coinseeker on May 15, 2013, 06:29:25 AM

Quote from: MickeyT2008 on May 15, 2013, 06:22:54 AM

Bitcoin might be a currency but since it's only numbers in a computer and not a physical object can it even be said to exist? Anyway, surely it wouldn't be a crime for someone in the US to pay someone else in Euros or Stirling if they were both happy about it. If the US government start using a clause like that then it's obviously only because they're miffed about not getting to tax it, but they'd probably use some BS excuse like counter-terrorism, protecting kids, etc like they always do for things they don't like.

See these are all the questions no one really has answers to. There is all this grey area because of the internet. But if the government is not getting it's cut, they are not going to let that ride. Crypto certainly has it's challenges ahead. This online tax bill in congress is alot bigger than I think some people understand. The USG is looking to remove that grey area. I'm not saying any of this is right or fair...I'm just saying it is what it is.

There's no "gray area" if you consider fiat currency to be a sound system. Bitcoin dilutes the fiat economy, without introducing any value. Just like printing more money. If you are holding $$$, it's certainly not in your benefit for Bitcoin to succeed.

Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 33526. (Read 26495280 times)