Bitcoin, Despite All its Problems, is Revolutionizing Property Rights
4 stars based on
38 reviews
With the US government looking for ways to tax and claim jurisdiction over Bitcoin, many questions have been asked, and fewer answered. How does the IRS justify jurisdiction over it? Do we even have any freedom left? The IRS has issued guidance that Bitcoin should be treated as property. It could very easily be concluded that all Americans owning or transacting in Bitcoin must treat Bitcoin as a capital asset and file a capital gain or loss with the IRS when disposing of any Bitcoin.
While deep in consideration regarding questions relating to does bitcoin have property rights, taxation, government, the IRS, jurisdiction, and the Uniform Commercial Code, it occurred to me that Does bitcoin have property rights could be making a very big, incorrect assumption.
My assumption was that, if bitcoin falls under the jurisdiction of the US Government, they would have the authority to compel taxes be paid on it.
I believe that does bitcoin have property rights assumption may be wrong in many instances and needs to be further explored. To what extent is the ability to earn wages from our labor and own property a common right, as provided for under the Bill of Rights? Does the Constitution give Congress the authority to compel or require payment of direct unapportioned taxes, tariffs, and excises on wages earned or property owned by common right?
The meanings of words matter. If so, what is the remedy and how is it excercised? Is it lawful to levy a compulsory direct unapportioned tax, tariff or excise on wages earned and property owned by right? If it is voluntary, what actions of an individual can enter them into an obligation to pay these taxes? This entire line of questioning may seem bizarre or waaay out there in conspiracy theory land to many folks. And to that, I would like to say…. I believe part of the answer to these questions already lies in past Supreme Court cases.
Seek and ye shall find. I will not point you in any direction in particular, because the rabbit hole is deep and riddled with half truths, traps, and landmines. It is my opinion that there are legal remedies that does bitcoin have property rights that are sometimes included in the codes but shrouded, and that these remedies can be exercised through the legal system as a means to restore some of our lost liberties.
Remedy seems unlikely to be granted as a defendant, and should probably be sought as a plaintiff. Is success even possible if you don't know which words are loaded and what the explicit definition of each of these loaded words is? Who is going to seek out and exercise the remedies? Recognizing that this would never hold up in court as a legitimate argument Does bitcoin have property rights would argue that there is no such thing in the first place as "ownership" does bitcoin have property rights bitcoin.
There is no real sense in which you can "have" bitcoin aside from Casascius coins, but even then, those are just paper wallets made of metal. You does bitcoin have property rights have anything. There are no "bitcoins" that really exist or represent anything in the real world. Rather, the blockchain keeps track of a bunch of puzzles and associated values, and you have the solutions to some of those puzzles, which if you so desire allow you to reassign them to new puzzles.
One could argue that if there are bitcoins associated with a puzzle to which you know the answer, you own those coins in other words, the ability to spend defines ownershipbut that gets messy too. What if multiple people have the ability to spend those coins? They could be locked in a multisig escrow or just have a script that multiple people can solve.
If I randomly generate a key and find that people have sent money to that key intended for someone elsedo I own that money? Of course, the probability of doing this is astronomically small, but it could happen. You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge s:. Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard. For more information about SteemitBoard, click here.
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP. By upvoting this notification, you can help all Steemit users.
So the constitution as we all think should work is not in effect. All I know that the English speaking countries are well documented and I wish I knew as much about the country I live in now.
So the does bitcoin have property rights of just axed constitution by declaring it to be property of the US by merely changing the name of the legal document: The Constitution for of the US corporation. And through your birth certificate the artificial person is created which they trick you in representing.
Has the does bitcoin have property rights name but in AllCaps or Diminuo something in does bitcoin have property rights - look it up.
Case matters in legal documents but I'm sure you know. It is not that the second Constitution is not in effect, it's that the people are bringing cases under the wrong jurisdiction, identifying themselves the wrong way under the jurisdiction they are under, or when defendant, volunteering to stand under the wrong jurisdiction.
Their comprehension does bitcoin have property rights the meanings of words is woefully and dangerously inadequate, and they don't comprehend the different bodies of law and code that the different jurisdictions are operating under. I certainly do salute their efforts though, they have acted as trailblazers forging the path toward understanding.
Judges wouldn't necessarily be aware that they work for a company Well, judges just believe in fairytales but think they are representing the real thing. Question is what will happen if they know?
Does it even matter? As a seeker of remedy, I think the questions we really need to be asking lie somewhere between the myopic and the existential. I think some of the questions Americans need to be seeking lawfully and legally admissive clarification on include: Can Bitcoin be owned as property as a matter of common right? Can currencies be owned as property as a matter of common right? Under what conditions does earning wages from our labor or owning property become a privilege?
Does the 16th Amendment apply to wages earned and property owned by common right? Don't forget to always ask Am I making any incorrect assumptions? No word is too innocent to be a potential legal landmine. Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post. Just buy and hold for a while and see what happens.
Of course, none of this actually addresses the legal questions you're bringing up. You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge s: For more information about SteemitBoard, click here If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP By upvoting this notification, you can help all Steemit users. I am not sure what you mean with this question, could you clarify?
