pull down to refresh

Is "taxation of Bitcoin at gunpoint" something worth worrying about?
188 sats \ 7 comments \ @kilianbuhn 6h bitcoin_beginners
So under the premise that the word hyperbitcoinizes. And Bitcoin is the world currency in 2050. Big if, but lets go with it.
Know, a few of us have a lot of the whole Bitcoin supply and everyone else - the large majority of people came too late.
Wouldn't it be fair to assume the overwhelming majority of people would like to have these Bitcoin, right? 🤔
So presumably, what are my KYC free Bitcoin even worth if I can't reveal that I own KYC-free money at all?
Is this an actual scenario worth thinking about? Or is it a waste of time since this scenario could never come true?
Is the "in the spirit of Bitcoin" scenario of Hyperbitcoinization the only scenario? Is it 100%? Even if it is 99%, shouldn't we worry about the 1% scenario? Because 1/100 isn't nothing.
write
preview
related posts
37 sats \ 1 reply \ @justin_shocknet 2h
Did you think the Citadel memes were a joke?
It doesn't matter what the money is, if you have resources when others are desperate for them you are target subject to overwhelming force.
Call that taxation or simply being ransacked by a mob, the result is largely the same.
Bitcoin is only a tool to sell or acquire your labor, your garden, your pantry, your solar generator and AR-15. Now posit for a moment that in the year 2050 the world is desperate for these real world resources. You may have these things to be sovereign or self-sufficient, but that means nothing when you're outnumbered 20, 50, 100, even 1000 to one.
If 2050 doesn't have real-world resource issues, then the incentives default to the same protections as today... as demonstrated with the unrealized capital gains psyops. The state is a tool for people with resources to coordinate beyond their own personal compounds and mire have-nots in process.
Bitcoiners will shape the laws just as oligarchs today do, this is already happening. Confiscatory/unrealized capital gain taxation would be no more or less likely than it is now. But if the conditions present themselves such that only Bitcoiners have real-world resources, then your Bitcoin is only worth what you can physically defend.
The state is just a Citadel at scale.
reply
17 sats \ 0 replies \ @halalmoney 1h
Appreciate this.
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @optimism 4h
So presumably, what are my KYC free Bitcoin even worth if I can't reveal that I own KYC-free money at all?
Why would you reveal your assets?
reply
127 sats \ 2 replies \ @DarthCoin 6h
You have the wrong assumption that in a hyperbitcoinized world govs will still exist... Just explain me how in the fuck people willingly will let anybody to rob their sats?
reply
38 sats \ 1 reply \ @kilianbuhn OP 5h
  1. what makes you so sure govts will not exist? Is there any reason we know this for sure?
  2. in a sense it doesn't matter if its goverments or the masses of people outside
reply
107 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 4h
In a bitcoin world govs have no meaning. Govs are for handicapped people that cannot govern themselves.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @327c19b153 1h
  1. not that fair to assume. Why should they, by then, all of a sudden start demanding bitcoin?
  2. Non-kyc bitcoin will be valuable to those who are operating outside of 'the existing system' (for lack of a better term. I call it the synthetic stack.). Why would you be worried about being unable to reveal your non-kyc money. Hyper bitcoinization most likely will end up looking like this: a majority of the world operating on a bitcoin standard but all KYC'd up, taxed and regulated. And the minority will be living quite the opposite life: non-kyc and sovereign. There will likely be a premium on non-KYC bitcoin at that point as well.
  3. People coming to try to steal your bitcoin at gunpoint is not something to worry about for the future. Its a concern now.
  4. i dont understand the last set of questions, but that may be my lack of context.
reply