OK, I'll agree about holding Bitcoin, but only if no KYC was done. However I think your usage of the term "counter-economics" is unusual here. The way I see it it requires either production or exchange outside the state's view.

> less of the boss/worker model and more self-employment. 

I'm not sure I buy this. I agree that very large corporations such as Google or Pfizer would get a hit if the government was to disappear tomorrow. But I don't think that the optimal size of a company would fall all the way down to 1. There still would be a lot of bosses and workers.


REDACTED

> outside the State
> lowering your tax bill within the law.

Very outside

> To own Bitcoin is to be anti-State.

Not necessarily? Pretty sure a lot of people own Bitcoin but still worship the State.

> free market and anti-Capitalist 

You use the word Capitalism in a sense that's not understandable to me.

> Am I being unclear?

This.