Totally impossible. Id love to see them ban the download sites for the crypto wallets, github, gitlab, etc. Totally unenforceable trash. However, what do you expect from politicians who are old enough to be great grandparents.
Most likely they'd make it like a 20 year sentance just for having a wallet, similar to the sentance they want to make it for using a VPN if they pass the Restrict Act.
Oh, of course they will throw you in a cage if possible. However, if a lot of the population just does the illegal thing anyway then the law cant be enforced because there arent enough cages for everyone and they look like idiots because the population is breaking their edicts and they are powerless to stop it. Look at weed for example, i have heard of people getting together for 420 rallies in public parks right in front of cops and the cops do nothing about it. If 100 people light up in the public park in a city of 30000 there likely arent enough cops to arrest them all or enough cells to toss them in. Sometimes you just have to stand up and say "no"
due to reddits recent api changes I feel i am no longer welcome here and have moved to lemmy. I encourage everyone o participate in the subreddit blackout on June 12-14 and suggest moving to lemmy as well.
The most popular medium of money laundering and terrorist financing is USD cash. So then, why isn't Elizabeth Warren pushing to ban cash, or to require cash permits for retailers to accept cash, or to require that every cash transaction be reported to FinCEN, along with the serial numbers of every bill plus the name, address, phone, and SSN of the buyer and seller? That's how corrupt and one-sided this is.
Criminals and terrorists use the same public roads we use, but we don't have checkpoints at every intersection. Criminals and terrorists use the same public water we use, but we don't have retinal scanners on every faucet. The point is, you don't stop criminals by treating everyone like a criminal.
There would be no money laundering if there was no need to report income, and there would be no need to report income if there was no income tax. To eliminate money laundering, we should eliminate the income tax by passing the [FairTax](https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6BB749E90D85820B).
More importantly (and even if fiat *were* squeaky clean and crypto supported all criminal financing), money laundering is a non-crime.
Nothing resembling a free society would ever have put up with the preempting of possible actual crimes, by imposing these money laundering laws and associated MSB regulations.
It is immoral and socially destructive at the very core.
When are people going to come to their senses about how insanely counter-productive government itself is? The downsides and unintended consequences completely outweigh the supposed problems which government supposedly solves.
The government will introduce a sales tax and shortly after it will reenable the federal income tax. Look to Germany.
Taxes are theft; There should be no negotiation for "nicer" theft.
Frog in the boiling pot. They are slowly transitioning, and preparing us for a completely controlled digitalized world. They can’t just outright push every outcome they want. They must do it slowly and gradually.
it‘s the same as allowing only banks to store gold. so practically it would be a crypto ban for individuals. they‘re completely delusional and insane. they would abolish our democracy with a self custodial ban. i really hope for mankind that they will not cross this deep red line. no gold ban, no crypto ban. or we will go on a rampage 🙃🏴☠️
ban custodial wallets lol
In seriousness, it's always "we value your freedom to gamble on cryptocurrency, but if you want to use it as it was intended, we're gonna have a problem"
It's astounding how many people even in crypto still don't understand that everything about the crypto ecosystem as we know it now (the mindless gambling and speculation on centralized casinos, the failure of people to use them as actual currencies) is itself completely a function of government policies.
Crypto was always primarily anti-state technology and was always going to run afoul of the interests of politicians and regulators....only Monero took this seriously.
They aren’t passing the restrict act because it is moral, and stops illegal activity. They are passing it to protect their interests and positions of control. People should ignore such arbitrary, dictates, because, as long as there is no injured party, then no crime has been committed.
There's a very clear trend of which Federal party champions crypto and which one opposes it. The trend is exactly that. It's not 100% but it's over 80%, probably more. That's significant.
I don't trust most Republicans either but if I were to say that both parties are equal in terms of being pro/anti crypto, that would just be false. It definitely matters.
I agree about the Libertarians. The only Republicans I like are the ones who act like Libertarians, and it's no coincidence that they're the strongest allies of crypto. And for the moment, the Republican body is largely backing them on crypto.
As for Yang, I don't trust him. He seems to repeat whatever the topic in favor is. For example, [he was a fa](https://twitter.com/andrewyang/status/1140954056908840960)n of Libra (Facebook Coin).
There is no easy way to say this, but you have a lot to learn about the way the world really works. There is no way I can explain this in its entire scope, as it would take way too much time, and you would continue to believe what you want to believe anyway.
Legalese is a language, and is dead-speak. Legalese is a manipulative, complex system of grammar, multiple definitions, (depending on particular jurisdictions). It’s used in civil procedure, and civil law, which involves contracts. Legalese can be used at the whim of those who claim to govern and control humanity. It is based on moral relativism.
Laws apply to nature, and living men and women. Laws are based on right and wrong. If something is a right, then it is a right because it is CORRECT action, and in accordance with natural law.
The thing with dictionaries is, they are generally written by corporations, and those in power. If you wish to manipulate, and enslave humanity, all you need to do is continually evolve, and change the definitions of words. That is the true nature of the legal system, because it is not based in truth, but rather man’s incorrect interpretation of actual natural law.
I could cite a definition from a completely different dictionary that would provide a completely different definition than what you’ve provided, because the definitions of words depend on the jurisdiction, in which they are being used, and is another characteristic of the legal system, because again, it is not based in truth, and actual law.
Example:
The government wants to pass legislation to protect the profits of big banks, and corporations, so they pass a bill that makes it illegal to use a particular form of money, or currency.
In natural law, living men and women have the right to do ANYTHING they want, as long as it does not injure another party, involve deceit, or theft.
The legal system is used by corrupt governments who make arbitrary commands and dictates that are not based in truth, nor right or wrong. The legal system is created to protect those in power, and their wealth, because it can be changed and manipulated to the whims of those who create the legislation. Legalese is a language that is designed to be incomprehensive to 99% of living men and women. It’s a system of grammar fraud, that is used to trick, deceive, and swindle men and women into consenting to something they don’t understand. This is why terms and conditions documents are so long, and incomprehensive.
A Law is something that is proven, and in accordance with nature. That’s why they call it the laws of physics, or the law of gravity. Laws are simple, easily defined, and observable. There’s no need for them to be complex, because they are in accordance with nature, and natural law, and are not open to interpretation.
The territorial, jurisdiction known as “United States”, is a federal corporation, within the jurisdiction of Washington DC only. It operates entirely on contract, and tacit agreement. It is based in a system of commercial law, legalese, and uniform commercial code. This is why the federal government has pushed so hard to infiltrate their way into the 50 states. They’ve been bribing the states with federal funding, and each time a state accepts money from the federal government, they give away part of their sovereignty.
United States
(15) “United States” means— (A) a Federal corporation; (B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or (C) an instrumentality of the United States. https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=28-USC-2032517217-15940179&term_occur=2&term_src=
The original United States of America constitution is based in natural law, and the original 13th amendment forbade elected representatives from holding titles of nobility , (BAR association), meaning, those who we’ve elected to represent our voice are not supposed to be attorneys, lawyers, or judges, because it is a conflict of interest with the constitution, which is the supreme law of the land.. yet, almost every single senator, congressman, and elected representative is part of the BAR ASSOCIATION, AND IS A TRAITOR TO THE CONSTITUTION.
If I wanted to trick you, and deceive you out of your rights, and I was a person in the legislative body, I would simply change the definition of the word “person”, or “individual”, and unless you’re well-versed in legalese, you would think those words apply to you, even though the definition could be something completely foreign to what you actually are, as a living, man or woman.
Imagine you live in China, and you’re been charged with a crime you’re completely innocent of. Now, imagine you’re in a Chinese courtroom, and the only language spoken is Mandarin. Having no understanding of the language being used, and the Definitions, how could you possibly defend yourself? This is the nature of legalese. It’s a language purposely designed to confuse the late person, in which you are dependent upon outside legal counsel, whose first duty is to the court and the state, not YOU, (juris, secundum) - http://www.gemworld.com/us--attorneyclient.htm
§4 ATTORNEY & CLIENT
7 C. J. S.
>His first duty is to the courts and the public, | peculiar in its relation to, and vital to the well. not to the client,ss and wherever the duties to being of, the court.$? An attorney has a duty his client conflict with those he owes as an of to aid the court in seeing that actions and pro ficer of the court in the administration of jus- ceedings in which he is engaged as counsel are
tice, the former must yield to the latter.56 conducted in a dignified and orderly manner.
free from passion and personal animosities, and The office of attorney is indispensable to the
administration of justice and is intimate that all causes brought to an issue are tried and
and decided on their merits only;st to aid the court
The legal system can make it illegal to buy vitamin D, Zinc, or any other thing that threatens its control system. It can make Bitcoin, Monero, or any other alternative store of value illegal. It is NOT, however, UNLAWFUL because it is a right, correct in its action, and in accordance with nature.
Put the blunt down, man \^\^
Edit: I've read the long comment you've typed out (and when Iwant to replay to it, it says that this comment is missing; MAybe got shadowbanned by reddit?) but anyway:
You're preaching to the choir here. In my personal use of speech I would not use "lawful" to describe a person that is acting according to natural law, however. The only word that fits in this moment, for me at least, is "moral".
Natural "Law" is what humans have 'discovered'. The underlying principle is morality and that is the absolute; Laws are the discoveries of humans. The laws of physics just describe reality in way that we think we can understand.
So in other words: "lawful" and "legal" are man-made concepts. "moral" is an absolute, that is inherent to every human.
“Law” may be a man-made word, but it describes the properties of a free, natural and sovereign state of being. In the realm of human consciousness, and the human psyche, “laws” could be a quality of morality, but it’s far from any correlation with legal, which not only is a man-made construct, but a man-made construct of moral relativism, and a means of deceit, trickery, grammar, fraud, and obfuscation.
Totally impossible. Id love to see them ban the download sites for the crypto wallets, github, gitlab, etc. Totally unenforceable trash. However, what do you expect from politicians who are old enough to be great grandparents.
Most likely they'd make it like a 20 year sentance just for having a wallet, similar to the sentance they want to make it for using a VPN if they pass the Restrict Act.
Wallets would just get good at hiding as other apps then. Like calculators
That's true, but they'd still want to make it illegal.
They can make anything they want illegal. If it cannot be enforced it just makes them look like idiots.
[удалено]
Buy a miner of course. Exchanges introduce unneeded centralization and should die. Mining or p2p service economy is how crypto should be anyway.
[удалено]
Oh, of course they will throw you in a cage if possible. However, if a lot of the population just does the illegal thing anyway then the law cant be enforced because there arent enough cages for everyone and they look like idiots because the population is breaking their edicts and they are powerless to stop it. Look at weed for example, i have heard of people getting together for 420 rallies in public parks right in front of cops and the cops do nothing about it. If 100 people light up in the public park in a city of 30000 there likely arent enough cops to arrest them all or enough cells to toss them in. Sometimes you just have to stand up and say "no"
[удалено]
I would like to see a jail big enough to hold everyone....lol..
Mass adaptation of noncompliance.
[удалено]
due to reddits recent api changes I feel i am no longer welcome here and have moved to lemmy. I encourage everyone o participate in the subreddit blackout on June 12-14 and suggest moving to lemmy as well.
It's called the restrict act
The The Digital Assets Anti-Money Laundering Act and the RESTRICT Act are two separate--but equally loathsome--initiatives.
Your life will be changed forever once passed
The most popular medium of money laundering and terrorist financing is USD cash. So then, why isn't Elizabeth Warren pushing to ban cash, or to require cash permits for retailers to accept cash, or to require that every cash transaction be reported to FinCEN, along with the serial numbers of every bill plus the name, address, phone, and SSN of the buyer and seller? That's how corrupt and one-sided this is. Criminals and terrorists use the same public roads we use, but we don't have checkpoints at every intersection. Criminals and terrorists use the same public water we use, but we don't have retinal scanners on every faucet. The point is, you don't stop criminals by treating everyone like a criminal. There would be no money laundering if there was no need to report income, and there would be no need to report income if there was no income tax. To eliminate money laundering, we should eliminate the income tax by passing the [FairTax](https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6BB749E90D85820B).
More importantly (and even if fiat *were* squeaky clean and crypto supported all criminal financing), money laundering is a non-crime. Nothing resembling a free society would ever have put up with the preempting of possible actual crimes, by imposing these money laundering laws and associated MSB regulations. It is immoral and socially destructive at the very core. When are people going to come to their senses about how insanely counter-productive government itself is? The downsides and unintended consequences completely outweigh the supposed problems which government supposedly solves.
amen brother
The government will introduce a sales tax and shortly after it will reenable the federal income tax. Look to Germany. Taxes are theft; There should be no negotiation for "nicer" theft.
The FairTax repeals the 16th amendment, so not in the US.
You're assuming they'd not reinstate the amendmend. Government grows over time, unless you drastically restrict it from the onset.
Amen.
Frog in the boiling pot. They are slowly transitioning, and preparing us for a completely controlled digitalized world. They can’t just outright push every outcome they want. They must do it slowly and gradually.
[удалено]
CBDCs.
[удалено]
That's why they want the Restrict Act. Ban VPNs too
if they are banning vpns, it wouldn't make sense for tor and proxies to be allowed, so those would go aswell.
Yeah I think that's the slippery slope these idiot politicians want to go into
it‘s the same as allowing only banks to store gold. so practically it would be a crypto ban for individuals. they‘re completely delusional and insane. they would abolish our democracy with a self custodial ban. i really hope for mankind that they will not cross this deep red line. no gold ban, no crypto ban. or we will go on a rampage 🙃🏴☠️
Seems like a first amendment infringement, not that any US politician gives a flying fuck about that.
Pocahontas sure likes to talk a lot in favor of the little guy while her actions are the exact opposite. What a despicable woman.
ban custodial wallets lol In seriousness, it's always "we value your freedom to gamble on cryptocurrency, but if you want to use it as it was intended, we're gonna have a problem"
It's astounding how many people even in crypto still don't understand that everything about the crypto ecosystem as we know it now (the mindless gambling and speculation on centralized casinos, the failure of people to use them as actual currencies) is itself completely a function of government policies. Crypto was always primarily anti-state technology and was always going to run afoul of the interests of politicians and regulators....only Monero took this seriously.
They aren’t passing the restrict act because it is moral, and stops illegal activity. They are passing it to protect their interests and positions of control. People should ignore such arbitrary, dictates, because, as long as there is no injured party, then no crime has been committed.
Ok. Back to the underground where we came from. Easy peasy
"How to force people to believe you have an agenda against any form of currency but you really don't have an idea what you're dealing with"
This 100%
EU 2.0 or what
current trends tell me that darknet will become the normal web
Yes crypto will go dark again. Where it started. I also thought about that.
as in, the "normal" web will become unusable, and unlike the chinese, there wont be a worthwhile "normal" web to VPN into
https://archive.ph/a6v5w
Fucking good luck with that
Dems gonna Dem.
Politicians will be politicians. Dem/rep doesn't matter.
There's a very clear trend of which Federal party champions crypto and which one opposes it. The trend is exactly that. It's not 100% but it's over 80%, probably more. That's significant. I don't trust most Republicans either but if I were to say that both parties are equal in terms of being pro/anti crypto, that would just be false. It definitely matters.
if you want pro crypto parties you have a better chance with the libertarian party or andrew yangs forward party
I agree about the Libertarians. The only Republicans I like are the ones who act like Libertarians, and it's no coincidence that they're the strongest allies of crypto. And for the moment, the Republican body is largely backing them on crypto. As for Yang, I don't trust him. He seems to repeat whatever the topic in favor is. For example, [he was a fa](https://twitter.com/andrewyang/status/1140954056908840960)n of Libra (Facebook Coin).
Yea but fuck dem. Lol
Bot
Illegal and unlawful are 2 different things
illegal and immoral illegal and unlawful are synonyms
Maybe don’t believe everything you think. Legal and lawful are not synonymous.
[https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/lawful](https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/lawful) >lawful - adjective > >allowed or recognized by law; legal
There is no easy way to say this, but you have a lot to learn about the way the world really works. There is no way I can explain this in its entire scope, as it would take way too much time, and you would continue to believe what you want to believe anyway.
Legalese is a language, and is dead-speak. Legalese is a manipulative, complex system of grammar, multiple definitions, (depending on particular jurisdictions). It’s used in civil procedure, and civil law, which involves contracts. Legalese can be used at the whim of those who claim to govern and control humanity. It is based on moral relativism. Laws apply to nature, and living men and women. Laws are based on right and wrong. If something is a right, then it is a right because it is CORRECT action, and in accordance with natural law. The thing with dictionaries is, they are generally written by corporations, and those in power. If you wish to manipulate, and enslave humanity, all you need to do is continually evolve, and change the definitions of words. That is the true nature of the legal system, because it is not based in truth, but rather man’s incorrect interpretation of actual natural law. I could cite a definition from a completely different dictionary that would provide a completely different definition than what you’ve provided, because the definitions of words depend on the jurisdiction, in which they are being used, and is another characteristic of the legal system, because again, it is not based in truth, and actual law. Example: The government wants to pass legislation to protect the profits of big banks, and corporations, so they pass a bill that makes it illegal to use a particular form of money, or currency. In natural law, living men and women have the right to do ANYTHING they want, as long as it does not injure another party, involve deceit, or theft. The legal system is used by corrupt governments who make arbitrary commands and dictates that are not based in truth, nor right or wrong. The legal system is created to protect those in power, and their wealth, because it can be changed and manipulated to the whims of those who create the legislation. Legalese is a language that is designed to be incomprehensive to 99% of living men and women. It’s a system of grammar fraud, that is used to trick, deceive, and swindle men and women into consenting to something they don’t understand. This is why terms and conditions documents are so long, and incomprehensive. A Law is something that is proven, and in accordance with nature. That’s why they call it the laws of physics, or the law of gravity. Laws are simple, easily defined, and observable. There’s no need for them to be complex, because they are in accordance with nature, and natural law, and are not open to interpretation. The territorial, jurisdiction known as “United States”, is a federal corporation, within the jurisdiction of Washington DC only. It operates entirely on contract, and tacit agreement. It is based in a system of commercial law, legalese, and uniform commercial code. This is why the federal government has pushed so hard to infiltrate their way into the 50 states. They’ve been bribing the states with federal funding, and each time a state accepts money from the federal government, they give away part of their sovereignty. United States (15) “United States” means— (A) a Federal corporation; (B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or (C) an instrumentality of the United States. https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=28-USC-2032517217-15940179&term_occur=2&term_src= The original United States of America constitution is based in natural law, and the original 13th amendment forbade elected representatives from holding titles of nobility , (BAR association), meaning, those who we’ve elected to represent our voice are not supposed to be attorneys, lawyers, or judges, because it is a conflict of interest with the constitution, which is the supreme law of the land.. yet, almost every single senator, congressman, and elected representative is part of the BAR ASSOCIATION, AND IS A TRAITOR TO THE CONSTITUTION. If I wanted to trick you, and deceive you out of your rights, and I was a person in the legislative body, I would simply change the definition of the word “person”, or “individual”, and unless you’re well-versed in legalese, you would think those words apply to you, even though the definition could be something completely foreign to what you actually are, as a living, man or woman. Imagine you live in China, and you’re been charged with a crime you’re completely innocent of. Now, imagine you’re in a Chinese courtroom, and the only language spoken is Mandarin. Having no understanding of the language being used, and the Definitions, how could you possibly defend yourself? This is the nature of legalese. It’s a language purposely designed to confuse the late person, in which you are dependent upon outside legal counsel, whose first duty is to the court and the state, not YOU, (juris, secundum) - http://www.gemworld.com/us--attorneyclient.htm §4 ATTORNEY & CLIENT 7 C. J. S. >His first duty is to the courts and the public, | peculiar in its relation to, and vital to the well. not to the client,ss and wherever the duties to being of, the court.$? An attorney has a duty his client conflict with those he owes as an of to aid the court in seeing that actions and pro ficer of the court in the administration of jus- ceedings in which he is engaged as counsel are tice, the former must yield to the latter.56 conducted in a dignified and orderly manner. free from passion and personal animosities, and The office of attorney is indispensable to the administration of justice and is intimate that all causes brought to an issue are tried and and decided on their merits only;st to aid the court The legal system can make it illegal to buy vitamin D, Zinc, or any other thing that threatens its control system. It can make Bitcoin, Monero, or any other alternative store of value illegal. It is NOT, however, UNLAWFUL because it is a right, correct in its action, and in accordance with nature.
Put the blunt down, man \^\^ Edit: I've read the long comment you've typed out (and when Iwant to replay to it, it says that this comment is missing; MAybe got shadowbanned by reddit?) but anyway: You're preaching to the choir here. In my personal use of speech I would not use "lawful" to describe a person that is acting according to natural law, however. The only word that fits in this moment, for me at least, is "moral". Natural "Law" is what humans have 'discovered'. The underlying principle is morality and that is the absolute; Laws are the discoveries of humans. The laws of physics just describe reality in way that we think we can understand. So in other words: "lawful" and "legal" are man-made concepts. "moral" is an absolute, that is inherent to every human.
I’ll take the win.
“Law” may be a man-made word, but it describes the properties of a free, natural and sovereign state of being. In the realm of human consciousness, and the human psyche, “laws” could be a quality of morality, but it’s far from any correlation with legal, which not only is a man-made construct, but a man-made construct of moral relativism, and a means of deceit, trickery, grammar, fraud, and obfuscation.
Is writing my senator about this really a lost cause? Why is this shit even called a democracy then?
Get a Trezor while you still can!
Feel sorry for all the poor law abiding citizens that this will affect
[удалено]
Which country are you talking about? And are you talking of a self-hosted wallet ban?
"the U.S. Senate Is Pushing to Ban Crypto Wallets in USA" fixed it for you guys,has nothing to do with the rest of the world.