Among the last three terms on my topic, each has representatives, and they've been having disagreements; the Government and banks against Bitcoin. With no tangible reason why it's so? I mean, Electricity came, the government and the bank accepted it and placed an electricity bill, the internet came they both accepted it and the Government works with ISPs to take bills from data subscriptions. Bitcoin came they took advantage of centralized exchanges, yet they're not satisfied. I've read multiple bad reasons placed on bitcoin volatility, fraud, etc, and don't see it tangible because every innovation has its risks and importance.
On the contrary, why do Bitcoiners quarrel with them? knowing that they, Government and Bank, got no strong evidence to tarnish the image of Bitcoin completely. I think the quarrel will make Bitcoin very famous to the extent that both opponents will have no other option than to submit to Bitcoin.
There were already good answers in this thread, including taxation and control etc.
I would like to add to this: One of the main reasons for major disagreements among all three players is the fact they have
completely different underlying reasons for their actions.
- Banks are profit oriented organisations, tangled between legislation and their aim to pull max profit from potential customers.
- Goverments should ideally serve their citizens, however the reality is, most of them try to keep and increase control over them instead.
- Bitcoin is a liberation from both, exaggerated govermental control as well as greedy banksters and associated big corps. It is decentralized (!= banks), it is borderless (!=governments), it is open-source (!= banks & governments), uncensorable and most importantly out of any direct control from both banks and governments.
Just looking at these massive differences or even opposing internal motivations makes it clear why there is disagreement among all three of them.