Topic: We once had a barter system here, but the government smashed it - page 2. (Read 510 times)

You have seen this "so much bad media" for the past few years, right? You see any difference in anything? Nope, you don't. But things have changed a lot. It is just that people aren't noticing. The government isn't pushing everything in one single day. They are imposing small rules and policies in such a way that people aren't even noticing the changes (all these small changes in a decade together has caused a huge change! People are just too distracted to notice!).
I would say this is one of the strategy the government is taking so that they can bring crypto currencies under their control through regulations without people making any noise.
Nothing we can do. It's inevitable.

It's a big deal when it comes to limit the usage of links on the internet to control bitcoin and it's way too impossible to stop the internet since this modern era of us takes place by using the internet.

^ Bater system was found out that there is no standardized value, you cant completely exchange your one sack of rice into a pair of shoes.
But I cant compare this to the BTC, government did not allow adoption in cryptocurrency just because this is a non-regulated currency, all currencies must be regulated by the government.
Nevertheless, see how the differences between the barter system and the currency and for sure it is different to BTC as a currency.
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/061615/what-difference-between-barter-and-currency-systems.asp

I'm just a senile old senior ( and half drunk again. here at 3:30 am MT.) ,but was bit coin not originally intended for p2p trading ? I'm not sure that it was ,but The silk road ,and tor, along with what is called the dark web , were what brought it to my attention.

It was several years later that folks started using it as an investment . (I think)

Awe Christ , now I gotta get up n pour me another glass of my homemade booze. all this stress over BTC is causing me to drink .

The government's severe crackdown will inevitably affect the benefits of Bitcoin in the world, but Bitcoin is still on an upward trend worldwide

Fiat markets are government sanctioned monopoly.

Barter system threatens the monopoly of government.

And so naturally they would take steps to protect it.



Elected leaders of the united states might restrict the crypto industry to weaken its economy in contrast to the rest of the world.

While the rest of the world deregulates and offers tax cuts to its crypto industry to strengthen their economy in contrast to the USA.

That seems like the most obvious outcome. Seeing as how the USA tries so hard to kill its own big tech industry and most successful business enterprise and regions like silicon valley. We love economic suicide.




Visit: youtube or a search engine.

Search: houses for sale 1 dollar.

Its surprising how many things that sound like myths and legends turn out to be true, sometimes.

 

What I learned from your story is that it is only barter ads in the paper that were prohibited, but not the barter itself. The government cannot prevent you from interacting with other people, they can't forbid you to make voluntary exchanges between individuals. Trades occurring between people cannot be physically regulated by the government. However, the tools employed to advertise this kind of interaction can easily be by the reason that these intermediaries are subject to such regulation. That is why when dealing with bitcoin it is always suggested to avoid any intermediaries and make P2P transactions instead.

Where was your country OP? I think the government was unfair in that decision,,, but I see it as impossible now for them to stop anyone from trading and bartering on their own. In fact, why not just do that with Telegram or some other app that cannot fall under state surveillance? People do it all the time in this current economy.

davis196
I'm in the province of Alberta ,western Canada , until about 10 years ago In this province only ,any residencial property mortgage could be assumed. I could ( and did ) buy a house with a mortgage ,then walk into the bank that held the mortgage ,and have them transfer it into my name . They didn't like it ,but nothing they could do about it.

In 1982-1984 we had a horrible recession when our prime minister ( the father of this putz who is running things now ) decided to create a huge tax on crude oil , since Alberta ran on oil royalties , all the drilling rigs left for USA, Oil Sands layed of people to, Oil explorartion stopped also . So many people had moved here from other parts of the country ,that finding themselves out of work, no government assistance ,they moved back to where they had lived before coming here .the glut of houses on the market caused a 35% drop in prices.
To save their good credit standing they would sell their house for 1$ and the buyer took over the mortgage. leaving the seller in good standing at the credit bureau !

But the good part is yet to come  ( how about this you bank haters? ) .
The buyer would rent the house out for very attractive price ,but not pay the bank a cent ( sounding good? ) after 3 months of threatening letters to the new holder of the mortgage the bank would take him to court , it was easy to stall the banks off in court for 9 months before the sheriff came and physically booted the tenents out and reclaimed the house . In those days you could rent a house out for $500 ,which was attractive even with the recession .
So for one buck you got the house and mortgage in your name and $500 free and clear for 9 months  $4,500 on each of the houses you bought .
Your credit went to zero but who cared , good blue collar wage was $11 per hour , less than $1,800 per month before taxes ,so you can see the incentive . My lawyer bought over 200 of them .   

I'm sorry to say that,but exchanging goods for goods and services for services is tax evasion indeed,at least in the eyes of government officials.
The legal side of the crypto industry is paying taxes and complying by the KYC policies,so I can't find a reason  why any government would want to ban the crypto companies,which are paying taxes and following the rules.
Selling houses for $1 and walking away?Damn,in which part of the world is this country?
Buying real estate for $1 is a great opportunity,unless that real estate is in Afghanistan or Somalia.

Precisely. It is indeed an old school system which is totally different with Bitcoin.
Government may try to crack Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies.
At the beginning, they may be winning but at the end they will be a loser, Bitcoin is designed to become decentralized that will no one can control it even the government.
Barter system is opposite of paying money, which paying money system or buying items/services comes with payment method that Bitcoin can be use.

Barter system is too complicated for worldwide usage. The majority of people dont have anything to offer except money

The problem with the barter system are actually manner. it will be highlighted below;
1. problem of getting the person who needs what you want to exchange, and has what you need.
2. Problem of ending government revenue through such system.

The first problem was solved via the invention of money, with money you could buy anything without having to exchange another thing for it.

The second, the government needs funds to continue its operation and providing public services. so, banning such batter system would be a good option or looking for a way to tax such transition would be a better option.

---

Yes, that is a fact. I believe that the government cannot ban or unfairly regulate what it is generating revenue from. But, i feel that a government would do anything to tackle a system that makes it impossible to generate funds, such as the barter trading. In fact, the problem with the batter system is higher than this...

[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

The two situations are not comparable. For starters bitcoin is a global currency while the situation you explained is only a local one. Not to mention that a currency can not be taxed but an investment can and they have already done that so there isn't much left to do.
Besides the situation you explained was in a place where the government was starving for revenue so they had to do something, we aren't in that situation in 90% of the world. And bitcoin is not going to provide any more revenue for the government than it already does (taxing the traders).

What the government might have been preventing was not the trade but the value that the people are trading are disregarded, they might be preventing hoarders that will try to amass quantities of items to sell at a higher price. Calling them tax evaders is a pretty bullshit notion. EU is a union of free countries so free market is a needed thing there, in some countries, corruption and free market is not the best interest for those in power so they do their best into cracking down on this kinds of people uniting together.

It's because back then bitcoin is not yet in the radar of the government, or any agency for that matter. But after the Mt. Gox heist, you will hear a lot of negativity starting to pop up. In the last 5 years or so, government are taking notice, hence KYC/AML verification is now in full effect.

However, this is the best effort they can put forward, they can't really stop bitcoin's trading. One way to do that is to stop internet, but I doubt they will have the power to do that.

which contains me curious from the 150 people, what do they use without the use of technology at this time?
if they are not entrepreneurial technology users, then how are they able to reach the network to every corner of the world?
this sounds like a conspiracy inside the pyramid of Giza in its time. they they planned the promised land conspiracy, by changing the system of exchanging gold for paper money that has inflation.

The crisis in your country and crypto are incomparable.

Any fiat system or crypto is better than any barter system. We are not 2021BC. Even if you can agree on the swap 'prices' in your region, 5km away people will not.

If you haven't noticed, Government is alright trying to control how we trade with exchanges now forcing people to first carry out KYC verification before using their platforms. I wasn't here when Bitcoin started, but I believe there was so much freedom trading Bitcoin back then than it is right now.

Some exchanges are also already being forced to delist certain privacy or anonymity leaning coins like DASH, Monero, ZEC. This all the same as what you just stated in the OP.

This is really strange they did not allow you to trade. What laws were you breaking by bartering?

In the EU you can trade at will for free, without any government interference, even if you make profit. If I remember correctly there's a law in my country which states that used things that belong to you and weren't purchased with the intent to trade like books, tools, clothes, can be sold tax free. You can place ads online and sell them for fiat or cash. That's why people rarely trade. It's much easier to price things.