reply on: The absurdity of Bitcoin as legal tender + Warren agonistes \ stacker news ~bitcoin

pull down to refresh

1 sat \ 9 replies \ @DarthCoin 22 Mar 2022 \ on: The absurdity of Bitcoin as legal tender + Warren agonistes bitcoin

People don't know what really means "legal tender".

The point is that you cannot force a retailer to accept legal tender or indeed any other form of tender. If, however, you buy something from them and there is no contractual barrier to the use of any form of tender, and you offer legal tender payment, and they refuse it, then they cannot enforce the debt in court.

That's what legal tender means: is't about discharging debts.

If you incur a debt you can discharge it with legal tender, but you cannot be forced to incur the debt in the first place, if you see what I mean.

For Bitcoin, any gov or country that declare bitcoin as "legal tender" means nothing. Bitcoin doesn't give a shit and users too.

I use as money whatever I want and my trading parties accept it. This is free market.

Also nobody can have authority or jurisdiction over my own money.

If any gov comes to my door asking about my BTC, I would simply ask "please provide any document or contract where I signed and I gave you full authority and jurisdiction over my own money (bitcoin) and my labor".

Nobody can come up with such paper, because it doesn't exist and in case they would ever produce such paper, that will means SLAVERY... then they would have a much bigger problem recognizing slavery as official matter.

So any gov or authority can GO FUCK THEMSELVES.

0 sats \ 7 replies \ @cryptocoin 22 Mar 2022

There are many political jurisdictions where there are laws (explicit in code, in regulations, or religious laws or tradition, or simply implicitly understood) that specify what currencies can be used, and to a greater extent, what payment methods can be used even.

In the U.S. the government arrested someone about a dozen years ago for paying someone else for a meal using a one once silver round. Then after conviction, the government called him a "domestic terrorist." (Bernard von NotHaus is to whom I am referring).

In China, and some other countries, accepting bitcoin for payment has been made illegal.

In Nigeria, SARS (a special category of police) used to steal ("confiscate") bitcoin from the mobile phones of youth found just carrying it even (with impunity, as it was claimed it was done under "suspicion" as to the source).

So whether you agree they should have the right or ability to determine what you use as money, it happens in much of the world, today.

10 sats \ 5 replies \ @DarthCoin 22 Mar 2022

the right or ability to determine what you use as money

WHO give them that authority and/or ability? Show me the proof.

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @cryptocoin 22 Mar 2022

In Nigeria, for example, the SARS police gave themselves that authority. Expressing a significant level of dissent as to the extent of their authority has been known to be fatal.

The IMF is pressuring El Salvador to repeal their change to their legal tender law regarding bitcoin. Who gave them the authority? Well, the U.S. gov't, for one.

And who gave whomever the authority to ensure that Muammar Gaddafi would never reach the point that gold was the payment method for Libya's oil?

5 sats \ 1 reply \ @DarthCoin 23 Mar 2022

Your mind is still living in the "authority cage", is fine, you need to learn more about this stuff, I know is not easy. But first step is to step out of that cage and think freely, only then you will be able to understand how this works. If you do not make this step, you will always be constrained to that thinking.