[ale] [OT] (but computer and cryptography related) Bitcoin, Litecoin

[Michael B. Trausch]

On 03/30/2013 04:50 PM, Ron Frazier (ALE) wrote:
> Actually, it's not true to say that you can trade anything you want.
> Hypothetically, if person A has atomic bombs that he wants to trade
> with person B who has boxes of heroine, that would clearly be
> illegal.

The fact that we have controlled substances doesn't invalidate the logic
of the point.  The Treasury cannot declare a _currency_ illegal, and
they cannot make _barter_ itself illegal.  Just because there are
substances, materials and technologies which the government does not
allow people to have without regulation, or in some cases (such as
illicit drugs) at all, doesn't mean that the barter itself is even illegal.

If I have an atomic bomb, and you have 250 pounds of pure heroin, and I
decide that your heroin is worth my atomic bomb, we can make the trade.

The government won't punish us for the barter, they'll simply punish us
for possession and distribution of controlled and/or regulated
substances.  Totally different concepts.

> Also, it is illegal to trade with certain entities that the
> state department has on their black list.

I'm not sure why we're bringing embargos and economic sanctions into
this conversation.  Red herring.

> There is talk in
> Washington about making this type of currency illegal since it can be
> used for money laundering and fostering other illegal activities.

And I welcome them to try.  Nothing in the US Constitution empowers the
Congress to regulate foreign currency, fiat or otherwise.  Trading with
a foreign entity can be banned, trading with a labelled terrorist
organization can be banned, but trading in a particular _currency_ goes
beyond the charter of _this_ government as I understand it.

> Who knows what will actually happen?  They can pass laws to say that
> anything they want is illegal, including trading pebbles.  It doesn't

Again, I'd welcome them to try.

> have to be logical, and it doesn't have to be sensible, and it
> doesn't have to be even constitutional, at least in the short term
> before it gets challenged and overturned.

Doesn't make it any more constitutional.

> If a law is passed and
> funded, they can fine you and put you in jail for breaking it, like
> it or not, assuming they can catch you.  Suffice it to say that, if
> this activity was already illegal, I wouldn't want ! to be doing it.

And that makes you a sheep.  If an action is clearly unconstitutional,
SOMEONE must get arrested for it, and then APPEAL THE LIVING SHIT out of
it to get it overturned.

Or, as they used to say:  stand up in what you believe in.

If everyone thought as you do, nothing would ever be overturned, nothing
would ever be ruled unconstitutional, because nobody would have the
balls to gain the standing to even be allowed to present the argument to
a lower court, let alone obtain certiorari to present and argue the case
to the SCOTUS.

> What the Treasury department DOES want is for you to report your
> income and pay taxes on it, no matter how you get it.

Which I do anyway, and will do regardless of the method of exchange.
That'd be why the law requires people to keep accurate books that
"clearly" reflect income and assets.  A commonly cited example that I
have heard many times in the past is that the IRS doesn't give a rats
rear if you're a drug dealer, as long as you report your income.  After
all, it wasn't "regular" law enforcement that took down Al Capone, but
the IRS.  And the government was trying to get him on federal charges of
violation of the 18th amendment to the United States Constitution, but
they couldn't.

They don't even care if you document your expenses correctly, because if
you don't, you just pay more tax anyway.  If you hide income through
excessive expenses, or hide assets through dubious transactions, or
whatever, you're not with the law any longer and the consequences are on
you.

There are corner cases and grey areas, too, of course.  If you trade in
moon rocks, both parties to the transaction are going to have to find
some way to represent that in terms of value in the currency used for
the books; if I have a brand-new monitor, in the box, that I paid $200
for, and you have a 50 year old collection of moon rocks that Armstrong
personally gave you, we'd need to agree on a value of the two, in a
good-faith manner.  In such a situation, one would probably want to
involve an appraiser, honestly, in order to ensure that there's at least
solid documentation that you were operating on a good-faith basis.

	--- Mike

-- 
Michael B. Trausch, President
Naunet Corporation

Telephone: (678) 287-0693 x130
Toll-free: (888) 494-5810 x130
FAX: (678) 287-0693

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 901 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.ale.org/pipermail/ale/attachments/20130330/ea2896a1/attachment.sig>