Would you support a 6102 if it meant price would increase and you would receive a token for your confiscated BTC? This might be a very good outcome and help price increase.
There's an important difference, since gold was the legal tender of the day. This was a scam to devalue from $20/ounce to $35/ounce. Unless, there were a peg to bitcoin, I don't see why this would happen.
What's much more likely to me is some sort of civil asset forfeiture order for bitcoin suspected to have been used during the commission of a crime.
That said, I will continue to maintain that I don't have any bitcoin, which is exactly what I would have done in 1933.
a discharge doesn't cancel the debt, it just removes the charge, and for any practical purpose in a fiat system, the debt is settled.
but, lawfully speaking, it's not payed, there was no exchange of a tangible asset
we both get that fiat is a scam
legal tender vs lawful money
you should know the diff between legal and lawful
I don’t think any government would be able to do this now. Maybe I’m naive but the beauty of BTC is that this kind of thing is, I think, almost impossible. Governments may try but I can’t see them having much success.
you got it wrong, lemme explain:
First, it was not all gold, eg jewellery
Second, it mentions only persons, not people. Persons are fictions of the law, personas, masks, corporations. The government has only jurisdiction over it's creations, the ens legis entity by wich you identify. If you know you are a living man, you just have to tell the truth and live it.
The gov doesn't have jurisdiction over bitcoin, only over the ious they are pushing
the "hack" is to tell officials you are the user (or beneficiary) of the person, not the person itself, wich would make a joinder and make you the trustee.
it's called a reverse trust scam
1 BTC = 1BTC