1 sat \ 11 replies \ @Undisciplined 25 Apr \ parent \ on: Civil Forfeiture And Samurai Mixed Bitcoin bitcoin
The problem is that there's a reduced burden of proof for civil forfeiture, that's why the state loves it.
Obviously, you can keep your bitcoin secure, but you'll be charged with obstructing justice or aiding and abetting, or some other statist bs, for doing so.
And then?
reply
It probably depends on whether they want to make an example of you. Irwin Schiff died in prison for not giving into the state's demands.
Maybe you just sit in jail for a while and lose your job, because you no-call no-showed.
Most people will probably cave, which is the point.
reply
Most people will probably cave, which is the point.
I was thinking yesterday before all this broke about the miner centralization issue (almost 50% of the hash power being essentially antpool). And the thought I had was that it's better we get to these battles now.
Both of these problems (Miner centralization or a state attack on utxo fungibility) go right to the very core of what bitcoin was designed to solve.
If bitcoiners can't resist them we are better off figuring out what needs to change now rather than when there are more players like etfs (who I imagine don't care at all about centralization or fungibility) involved.
reply
And the thought I had was that it's better we get to these battles now.
The problem is, there are no battles being fought. People, by far and large, are compliant, because the state apparatus of fear is extremely effective. Those who resist are few and far between and are effectively (and publicly) made example of.
I'm not an expert in sociology and/or revolutions and I honestly don't see how we get from current state to widespread noncompliance (which they can't handle).
Governments became more effective in modern times (through the use of socialist policies) at keeping the populace content "just enough" so that widespread discontent does not happen on any issue (like "magic internet money").
reply
"Governments became more effective in modern times (through the use of socialist policies) at keeping the populace content "just enough" so that widespread discontent does not happen on any issue (like "magic internet money")."
I imagine that the populace will experience "widespread discontent" soon enough if they don't manage to get a grip on inflation, and the latter will prove interesting to said individuals.
reply
I don't know, man. Never in history has hyperinflation led to a permanent collapse of a government, only replacement with another, which eventually becomes just as shit as the previous one.
I fear they will just paper it over with more handouts. They'll invent something like "inflation compensation scheme" and normalize the fact that inflation numbers are out of control but handouts are keeping up, and you can still put food on the table, so everything is A-OK.
reply
You certainly might be right. That is what has happened in the past. It really feels like America is on some sort of brink, though.
I don't think it's far-fetched, at all, that America could dissolve as a nation. What is far-fetched is that the remnants won't be some sort of nation states.
reply