June 2011 - cypherpunks-legacy

[tor-talk] US Senators Seek to Crackdown on Bitcoin
by Eugen Leitl 14 Jun '11

14 Jun '11

----- Forwarded message from "Christopher A. Lindsey" <CLindsey(a)GarudaLLC.com> -----

2 1

The recipe is not necessary to us - Meridia,Oxy Codone/Hydrocodone Bitartrate,Tramadol (Ultram),Adderall,Mogadon (Nitrazepam)
by Sang Williamson 14 Jun '11

14 Jun '11

The small price and Any pills for the help at diseases Weight Loss. Weight Loss. Osteoporosis http://chotalink.com/vg The special offer for inhabitants of the USA. Goods delivery for 2-3 days! The qualitative goods and anonymous delivery http://3cm.kz/8bd1

1 0

The most interesting news from the world of fashionable bags and smart clothes
by Julie Amos 14 Jun '11

14 Jun '11

Fashion, Graceful Bags and accessories, smart footwear, season - spring 2011 http://url.mn/27eac43

1 0

Re: [cryptography] attacks against bitcoin
by Eugen Leitl 14 Jun '11

14 Jun '11

----- Forwarded message from Ian G <iang(a)iang.org> -----

2 1

bits and bob
by Eugen Leitl 14 Jun '11

14 Jun '11

http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2011/06/virtual-currency Virtual currency Bits and bob Jun 13th 2011, 20:30 by J.P. | LONDON AND G.T. | MELBOURNE MILTON FRIEDMAN famously called for the abolition of the Federal Reserve, which he thought ought to be replaced by an automated system which would increase the money supply at a steady, predetermined rate. This, he argued, would put a lid on inflation, setting spending and investment decisions on a surer footing. Now, Friedman's dream has finally been realisedbalbeit not by a real-world central bank. BitCoin, the world's "first decentralised digital currency", was devised in 2009 by programmer Satoshi Nakomoto (thought not to be hisbor herbreal name). Unlike other virtual moniesblike Second Life's Linden dollars, for instancebit does not have a central clearing house run by a single company or organisation. Nor is it pegged to any real-world currency, which it resembles in that it can be used to purchase real-world goods and services, not just virtual ones. However, rather than rely on a central monetary authority to monitor, verify and approve transactions, and manage the money supply, BitCoin is underwritten by a peer-to-peer network akin to file-sharing services like BitTorrent. The easiest way to store BitCoins is to sign up to an online wallet service through which all transactions are carried out. This, of course, means trusting the provider of that service not to cheat, or go out of business, taking clients' savings with it. Warier users can install a personal digital wallet on their own computers. They must then, however, keep it safe from viruses or physical damage. If a laptop went up in smoke, so would the virtual coins stored on its hard drive. (Keeping back-up copies would do the trick.) All transactions are secured using public-key encryption, a technique which underpins many online dealings. It works by generating two mathematically related keys in such a way that the encrypting key cannot be used to decrypt a message and vice versa. One of these, the private key, is retained by a single individual. The other key is made public. In the case of BitCoin transactions, the intended recipient's public key is used to encode payments, which can then only be retrieved with the help of the associated private key. The payer, meanwhile, uses his own private key to approve any transfers to a recipient's account. This provides a degree of security against theft. But it does not prevent an owner of BitCoins from spending his BitCoins twicebthe virtual analogue of counterfeiting. In a centralised system, this is done by clearing all transactions through a single database. A transaction in which the same user tries to spend the same money a second time (without having first got it back through another transaction) can then be rejected as invalid. The whole premise of BitCoin is to do away with a centralised system. But tracking transactions in a sprawling, dispersed network is tricky. Indeed, many software developers long thought it was impossible. It is the problem that plagued earlier attempts to establish virtual currencies; the only way to prevent double spending was to create a central authority. And if that is needed, people might as well stick with the government devil they know. To get around this problem, BitCoins do not resemble banknotes with unique serial numbers. There are no virtual banknote files with an immutable digital identity flitting around the system. Instead, there is a list of all transactions approved to date. These transactions come in two varieties. In some, currency is created; in others, nominal amounts of currency are transferred between parties. In the very first transaction the creator's computer forged 50 units of the currency. The next transaction would have involved subtracting some amount from the creator's account and crediting it to a recipient's. These actions, and any subsequent ones, were automatically broadcast to the entire network. At first, when the network was small and transactions few and far between, verifying them was been straightforward. The first person to confirm the new transactions would offer his updated log as the one against which any future transactions ought to be judged. Once everyone else agreed that this candidate register was indeed accurate, it would be adopted and the new transactions included in it confirmed. If anyone tried to game the system by erasing an old transaction (so he could re-use the same money again) or adding an unwarranted new one (transferring the same money as before, say), he would be promptly found out, his proposed log discarded, and the transactions rejected as invalid. However, as the network expands from dozens of users to thousands, and transaction volume grows, so does the number of logs vying for the official crown. Getting everybody to scrutinise the first proposal aired across the network for inconsistencies soon becomes impractical; the whole system grinds to a halt. Some way is therefore needed to ensure that the official register can be updated and agreed on in real time (or nearly), while preventing individuals from tampering with it. Mr (or Ms) Nakomoto's ingenious solution involves two related cryptographic techniques: hashing and forced work. A hashing algorithm converts a message into a number called a hash value, or a digest. If this number is big enough, it provides a unique representation of the original (since the same algorithm could not conceivably yield identical hash values for different messages). Moreover, it is impossible to reconstruct the original on the basis of the digest alone. Nor is it possible to predict what the digest would be for even a slightly tweaked version of the original message; fiddling with a single letter will produce a completely different digest. In that regard, digests appear to be generated at random. As a result, hashing is what computer scientists call an irreversible process. Consider a hashing algorithm which converts anything fed into it to a whole number between one and 1,000. For random sets of data, the algorithm would spit out a value below 11, say, once in every 100 tries, on average. Now suppose some data are given in advance. How does one find a number that needs to be appended to these given data to produce a hash value below 11? Because hashing is irreversible, and digests are essentially random, the only way to do this is through trial and error: by splicing different numbers onto the old data and hashing the whole lot until the desired result pops out. On average, this will require 100 tries. However, once the answer is found, everyone else can verify whether the problem has indeed been solved by running the hashing algorithm just once, with the proposed solution. This type of puzzle can only be cracked using brute force, which is why it is dubbed forced work. With BitCoin, all new transactions are automatically broadcast across the entire network and analysed in portions, called blocks. Besides any new as-yet-unconfirmed transactions, each block contains the digest for the last block to have got the nod from the network. That last block will always come from tip of the longest chain of blocks currently on the network. This chain is, in effect, the official logbconfirmation that all the previous blocks tot up. For a new block to be deemed valid, some computer on the network must create a transaction log for it that dovetails with the previous blocks. To prevent acceptance of bogus logs, giving it a seal of approval has to be prohibitively costly to any individual user, but relatively cheap for the network as a whole. This is done by making it into a forced-work task, which involves using the valid blocks and the new transactions to generate a digest consisting of 256 bits (ie, any number between 0 and 2256). The task is complete when the system's algorithm spits out a hash value below a preset target (like 11 in the example above). The target is set so that the puzzle is solved by someone on the network, and a new block approved, every 10 minutes. To keep this rate constant as the network's ranks swell and its combined computing power grows, the target is lowered in order to make generating a value below it harder. (Conversely, if the network were to shrink, it would get easier again.) Creating the doctored block and having it validated and attached to the official log would thus require outpacing the network's combined computing power. This can only happen if a fraudster controls more than half of the network's total number-crunching capacity, which is possible, but extremely expensive for any one person. The system can thus rely on users to police it. As a reward for giving up some computing power to that end, the first user to crack the forced-work task gets 50 coins for the effort. This is done by always making the first new transaction in each block the conjuring up of 50 coins out of nothing. When other participants agree to append the new block to the official chain, they also validate the creation of the new money (they would, of course, reject it if someone tried to game the system by minting more than 50 coins). This is also how BitCoin niftily gets around the problem of increasing the money supply without a central mint. Since blocks are created at a constant average rate, and there is a set number of coins minted per block, the total money supply, too, increases at a steady clip. For now, this is 300 coins every hour on average. Every four years, though, the minting rate is set to fall by a half. It will drop to 25 coins per block in 2013, to 12.5 coins in 2017, and so on, until the total supply plateaus at 21m or so around 2030. The idea is to mimic the extraction of minerals (the transaction-validating software is called the BitCoin miner). As the most readily accessible resources are exhausted, the supply dwindles. Unlike real resources, however, there is no as-yet-undiscovered, hidden lode a fortunate prospector can strike to disrupt the money supply. Should a powerful new computer be introduced to the network, the difficulty of the forced-work challenge would soar, keeping the rate at which blocks are approvedband new money createdbunchanged. In theory, then, the system ought to keep a lid on inflationbmaking it attractive to critics of interventionist monetary policy of the sort practised since 2008 by America's Federal Reserve under the label quantitative easing. (The mineral analogy, in particular, appeals to proponents of a return to a gold standard.) It offers other apparent benefits, too. The currency can be used by anyone (unlike credit cards, for instance), anywhere. Transaction costs are also likely to be lower than those for traditional payment systems, though these are not in fact zero. Some are reflected in the hardware and energy used to police the system. Some surely creep in whenever those who have no wish to mine BitCoins themselves purchase them for dollars, euros and several other currencies at specialised sites like Mt. Gox. Legally, BitCoin exchanges are subject to the same regulations as ones trading commodities. For example, an exchange must report any transaction above $15,000, a policy meant to stem money laundering. For the purposes of taxation, meanwhile, reimbursing somebody for a product or service in BitCoins is treated as barter. The tax code makes provisions for such practices, though, admittedly, they can be tough to enforce. This has not stopped some American politicians from expressing grave concern about the virtual currency. Charles Schumer, a prominent Democratic senator, has inveighed against it, claiming it is just what drug dealers have been waiting for. All the clever cryptography means BitCoin dealings are difficult to trace. But not impossible. According to BitCoin's defenders, its users may be more difficult for a government agency to pinpoint than someone paying with a credit card. But they are easier to catch than those using cash. Moreover, any drug trade involves sending physical products to recipients. Authorities already track many packages sent by groups under investigation. When it comes to physical delivery, the method of payment is irrelevant. Another worry, for the authorities at least, is that, in theory, a BitCoin account cannot be frozen. But, like cash, Bitcoins can be nabbed by seizing the computer on which they are stored. Ordinary folk, meanwhile, have different concerns. They fear being bilked by a cabal of clever boffins, who can insidiously fiddle with the system's software to take advantage of less geeky types. This queasiness, though understandable, may be misplaced. As an open-source project, the computer code which undergirds BitCoin can be viewed, and modified, by anyone. As with all such ventures, however, if a change is introduced that most participants do not accept, they will simply refuse to download that version of the software. Since the self-professed geeks who make up the web's open-source communities often delight in (and excel at) scrutinising seemingly impenetrable lines of computer language, it is highly unlikely that someone could get away with surreptitiously inserting a command to create excess BitCoins and siphon them off to his account, for instance. For the same reason, the open-source nature of the project is also a bulwark against hackers or malware. Indeed, as cybercrime goes, BitCoin may be safer than traditional financial institutions, which are often on the receiving end of such attacks. And then there are the currency's economics. These have engendered a surprisingly lively debate. One particular bone of contention is whether it makes sense to decrease the rate of money creation with time. Some people think this will entail disastrous deflation if the demand for BitCoins grows at a faster rate than new coins are minted. As recent wild swings in their dollar price amply demonstrated, they are not the most predictable of vehicles. The volatility is largely down to the fact that the currency remains illiquidbonly 6.5m currency units (divisible to eight decimal places) are currently in circulation among some 10,000 users (including several hundred merchants who accept payment in BitCoins). This seems unlikely to change in the foreseeable future, as even BitCoin's most ardent supporters admit. That is not because people are queasy about intangibles. After all, much of modern pecuniary activity already involves bits rather than bob and consumers have embraced credit cards, electronic transfers and the like. The difference is that established fiat currenciesbones where the bills and coins, or their digital versions, get their value by dint of regulation or lawbare underwritten by the state which is, in principle at least, answerable to its citizens. BitCoin, on the other hand, is a community currency. It requires self-policing on the part of its users. To some, this is a feature, not a bug. But, in the grand scheme of things, the necessary open-source engagement remains a niche pursuit. Most people would rather devolve this sort of responsibility to the authorities. Until this mindset changes, BitCoin will be no rival to real-world dosh.

1 0

. Как уменьшить страховые взносы
by . Налоговое планирование 14 Jun '11

14 Jun '11

Место проведения: г.Санкт-Петербург 27-28 июня 2011 года ТЕМА: Налоговое планирование в 2011 г. с учетом изменений законодательства (НДФЛ, страховые взносы, НДС, налог на прибыль - практика в налоговых схемах, поиск и принятие оптимальных решений) (2 дня) \Моск. код/ 7_9*2_2-I/2\2 <<<>>> 445/З2*66 День1: СНИЖЕНИЕ СТРАХОВЫХ ВЗНОСОВ внедряем допустимые схемы снижения выплат налогов на доходы физических лиц. Ставка обязательных страховых взносов с зарплаты с 2011 года составляет 34% почти для всех плательщиков (включая субъектов УСН и ЕНВД). При этом регрессивная шкала ЕСН заменена отменой уплаты взносов с суммы дохода свыше 463 тыс. рублей, но доступно это будет только для высокооплачиваемых сотрудников. Если вспомнить про 13% НДФЛ и НДС, который тоже косвенно является налогом на зарплату, то многие предприниматели и руководители видят только один путь √ назад, к "черным" схемам. Курс посвящен поиску путей выживания компаний в новой ситуации при условии легальности всех выплат доходов физическим лицам. Участники узнают, как можно и как нельзя оптимизировать "зарплатные" налоги с учетом будущих изменений законодательства, судебной практики и тенденций развития правоприменительной практики. Программа: * Обзор изменений законодательства, связанных с повышением ставки страховых взносов Сколько и каких налогов и взносов платят предприятия и ИП на общей системе налогообложения и спецрежимах в 2011 гг. Какие схемы стали невыгодными; у каких налогоплательщиков положение даже улучшилось. * Понятие и принципы налогового планирования: платить налоги, но не переплачивать. "Черные", "серые" и "белые" схемы. Классификация методов оптимизации налогообложения доходов физических лиц. * Использование специальных налоговых режимов: * Условия применения всех схем: Непритворный характер заключаемых сделок. Экономическая целесообразность расходов ("деловая цель", "легенда", отсутствие дублирующихся функций). Грамотное обоснование цен и документальное оформление расходов. Неаффилированность, прямые и косвенные признаки аффилированности, ее негативные последствия и когда она допустима; "искусственное дробление бизнеса с целью уклонения от уплаты налогов" (подход "как к ЮКОСу"); "деловые цели", обосновывающие деление бизнеса. Самостоятельность низконалоговых субъектов. * Использование вспомогательных организаций: * Использование иностранных (низконалоговых) компаний. Корпоративные или личные пластиковые карты иностранных банков. Перевод на них или на карты российских банков зарплат, гонораров и иных легальных доходов от нерезидентов * Как компенсировать "выпадение" отчислений в Пенсионный фонд на накопительную часть пенсии, в ФСС и ФОМС при применении налоговых схем, не предусматривающих выплату зарплаты. * Использование процентных займов от физлиц. Расчет эффективности. * Специальные методы. Все виды компенсаций (за несвоевременную выплату заработной платы, за использование личного имущества, за разъездной характер работы, "золотые парашюты" и др.). Выплата арендной платы. Закуп у физлиц ТМЦ. Суточные. Обучение сотрудников с заключением ученического договора, как способ налогового планирования. * Потребительское кредитование, компенсация процентов по ипотечным кредитам и другие эффективные способы замены заработной платы безналоговыми источниками материальной выгоды, * Создание недоимки по налогам с ФОТ на фирме, не обремененной активами √ пример "серой" схемы (как нельзя "оптимизировать"!), * Способы подтверждения источников крупных расходов физлиц и когда это необходимо. * Ответы на вопросы. По желанию √ индивидуальное экспресс-моделирование схем налогового планирования для компаний-участниц семинара. ----------------------------- День2: Оптимизации налога на прибыль и НДС, практика оптимальных решений: как снизить расходы и увеличить прибыль Программа: 1. Понятие и принципы налогового планирования: платить налоги, но не переплачивать. Как можно и как нельзя оптимизировать налоги с учетом будущих изменений законодательства, судебной практики и тенденций развития правоприменения. "Черные", "серые" и "белые" схемы. Краткий обзор методов оптимизации налога на прибыль и НДС. Принципиальная невозможность экономии НДС "белыми" схемами и случаи, когда это все же возможно. 2. Низконалоговые субъекты: * субъекты специальных налоговых режимов √ ЕНВД и УСН, в тч. патентная система, а также субъекты УСН из "низконалоговых" регионов, где введена минимальная ставка единого налога при объекте "доходы минус расходы" (5%) на все или почти на все виды деятельности, а также простое товарищество с их участием, * зарубежные офшоры или связанные с ними компании-нерезиденты из респектабельных юрисдикций, * экзотические варианты: ИП на общей системе, физлица (при условии несистематичности извлечения дохода), "инвалидные" структуры, убыточные предприятия и фирмы, имеющие переплату НДС, Незаконные варианты: "недобросовестные налогоплательщики" и контактирующие с ними риск-структуры ("белая" - "серая" - "черная" фирмы). Примеры "серых" схем (как нельзя "оптимизировать"!). Как не стать "недобросовестным". Способы переноса налогооблагаемой базы по налогу на прибыль на низконалоговых субъектов: * нефиктивные услуги, работы, * выплата процентов по долговым обязательствам. Включение процентов в расходы в любом размере, * платежи за использование и обслуживание объектов основных средств и нематериальных активов, в т.ч. франчайзинговые, * штрафные санкции, возмещение убытков, включая демередж и прочий простой, * платежи за увеличенный срок и/или объем гарантийных обязательств, * плата за залог или поручительство, делькредере. * механизм трансфертных цен, Условия применения всех схем: Непритворный характер заключаемых сделок. Экономическая целесообразность расходов ("деловая цель", "легенда", отсутствие дублирующихся функций). Грамотное обоснование трансфертных цен. Неаффилированность, прямые и косвенные признаки аффилированности, ее негативные последствия и когда она допустима; "искусственное дробление бизнеса с целью уклонения от уплаты налогов" (подход "как к ЮКОСу"); "деловые цели", обосновывающие деление бизнеса. Самостоятельность низконалоговых субъектов. Займы как способ возвратного рефинансирования √ преимущества и недостатки, риск ведения незаконной банковской деятельности. Безналоговое рефинансирование (возврат) и капитализация выведенной прибыли предприятия (холдинга) через уставный капитал или безвозмездную передачу имущества. Ст. 27 Закона "Об ООО". 3. Простое товарищество субъектов упрощенной системы налогообложения, в т.ч. из "низконалоговых" регионов. Нужно или нет платить НДС? Перенос прибыли товарищества на низконалоговых субъектов (УСН 6%, ЕНВД, офшор и др.). Отсрочка уплаты налога при непередаче прибыли на счета товарищей. Возможен ли обход с помощью простого товарищества правил налогового учета (гл. 25 НК) и ограничений гл. 26.2 НК РФ в части перечня затрат? 4. Экономия НДС в торговле, производстве, выполнении работ, оказании услуг через разделение финансово-товарных потоков "с НДС" и "без НДС". Ограничение использования: покупатели/заказчики, не нуждающиеся в вычете НДС, как их выявить или создать искусственно. Риски и рекомендации по использованию схемы. 5. Иностранные низконалоговые компании, цели применения. Их использование при проведении внутрироссийских операций для оптимизации налога на прибыль: традиционные (торговля, проценты, дивиденды, роялти, услуги и т.п.) и нетрадиционные схемы (простое товарищество, агентские). Выбор низконалоговых юрисдикций. 6. Обзор изменений налогового законодательства в 2011 г., как они повлияют на налоговые схемы. Ответы на вопросы. По желанию √ индивидуальное экспресс-моделирование схем налогового планирования для компаний-участниц. По вопpоcам pегucтаpацuu обpащайтеcь по тел: +7 (код Москвы) 445_3-9\6.8 или 7-42.9I-98

1 0

The Information Policy Case For Flat Tax And Basic Income
by Eugen Leitl 14 Jun '11

14 Jun '11

http://falkvinge.net/2011/05/19/the-information-policy-case-for-flat-tax-an… The Information Policy Case For Flat Tax And Basic Income Ibve spent the last week experimenting with Bitcoin. Like with any new technology that fundamentally shifts perspectives, there are both zealots and luddites, there are Pollyannas and there are Valentis. I will be returning to deeper analysis in a series of posts. For now, I will just say that it stands beyond a shadow of a doubt that distributed cryptocurrency is here to stay. Its use case is so hands-down attractive that it beats the legacy banking and transaction systems on walk-over on point after point. What bank holidays? What frozen assets? What taxes? What bank fees? All these are concepts that become as irrelevant and anachronistic as, say, the union rules of stablekeepers. It may not be Bitcoin that comes out as the ultimate cryptocurrency standard, but that doesnbt matter, just like it doesnbt matter if we use BitTorrent, OneSwarm or something more resilient for distributed file sharing. Itbs the file sharing on the conceptual level that is interesting, not BitTorrent. The same thing goes for distributed cryptocurrency. The b aha!b moment you experience when you transfer a few bitcents to somebody on the other side of the planet, and they have it instantly, without any single being knowing that you just sent that money or that the receiver got it, and with no single being being able to stop you from doing the transaction with anything less than physical restraint in your home b that feeling is profound. As are the ramifications. In this post, I will focus on the political implications, and subsequent posts will go deeper. The use case is limited by the networking effect for now. You canbt use Bitcoin for, well, anything practical. But as I said, Ibll be returning to that. >From a political perspective, this development means that taxation and welfare systems must be rethought and rewired considerably and immediately. Rethinking taxes in a world with cryptocurrency Cryptocurrency brings new challenges to the table. The government canbt see the wealth of an individual, nor their inflow or outflow of funds, not with any amount of applied force. I know a lot of individuals in government will react with normalcy bias to this statement and say b but we have to!b. It doesnbt matter if you have to. You canbt. Period. This means that neither taxes nor social support systems can be based on income or wealth. It doesnbt matter if only 5% of the population use cryptocurrency; the tax morale is dependent on a sentiment in the general population that everybody is pulling their own weight and that there is a significant risk associated with trying to get a free ride. When just a tiny portion use cryptocurrency, this breaks down and snowballs. Webll arrive at this point within a decade. There is no time for ostriching. So taxation first, then. Taxes can neither be based on income nor on wealth. All income taxes go out the window, both those that the employer pays and those that the employee pays. (As a positive side effect here, illicit untaxed work ceases to exist by definition.) This leaves us with a couple of other things we can tax. We can tax land, like they did in the 1800s. But then, isnbt that, likeb& 1800s? What else is there? We can tax buildings, homes, cars, fuelb& all very impopular tax targets. Very much so indeed. Oh, and we can tax consumption. The value added tax (VAT) is already one of the largest sources of revenue for the European governments. It is different from a sales tax in that it is applied to every step of the way in the sales chain: assuming we have a VAT of 25%, the original manufacturer adds this tax to his wholesale price. In the next step, the retailer gets this tax back from the government (b inbound VATb) when buying from the manufacturer, but needs to add 25% tax on his own outgoing price (b outbound VATb). This has the nice effect of adding an incentive for every step in the chain to report taxes, as they will want their inbound VAT back. Using numbers from Finland and France, if we roughly double the VAT, we can abolish all other personal taxes. The tax pressure would be the same, as would the governmental income: it would just be based on consumption and not on income. Usually, these correlate to a high enough degree. This has two other nice side effects: first the obvious advantage of abolishing personal taxation. No individual going about their daily business needs to have anything to do with the Tax Authority again, ever. Itbll just be a thing for corporations (although the tax is taken from personal consumption, corporations collect it, just like today). The second advantage is that all the infrastructure and bureaucracy already is in place. We just have to adjust a percentage. Once that is done, a whole lot of bureaucracy (the part with all the other taxes) can just go out the window. But there are also drawbacks, of course. The major one is that this means taxation is entirely flat. It would hit hard against the least fortunate, which is something we want to avoid. Progressive taxation is generally seen as a good and fair aspect of a functioning society. The normal way of doing this would be to have a basic tax deduction. But we canbt do that with VAT. We canbt argue that the kiosk clerk should deduct the VAT from the bottle of coke because here, look at this certificate, I still have some part of basic deduction left. So webll need to turn it the other way around. Rethinking welfare in a cryptocurrency world Welfare systems have always been based on a lack of income, a lack of wealth, or both. So when you canbt measure or inspect any of them, what do you do? I would argue that you only have two options: you can give welfare to nobody or to everybody. Since giving it to nobody isnbt really an option, all that remains is to give it to everybody, completely without condition. The basic unconditional income case. Citizenbs salary. This kills two birds with one stone, as it also solves the progressive taxation case: a basic unconditional income for every citizen is basically the same thing as a basic tax deduction before taxes start to apply plus a guarantee that you have minimum sustenance. We already have those two anyway. This also has the nice side effect of killing the need for all other welfare systems, from unemployment benefits to student loans, and the bureaucracy that comes with them. Some people argue that a citizenbs salary will kill the incentive to work at all. I have previously explained why this is hogwash. Short version: GNU/Linux and Wikipedia. Conclusion Cryptocurrency is coming. It could be Bitcoin, it could be something else, it could be a new trading framework that incorporates many cryptocurrencies. The important thing is that in a decadebs time, governments will have lost the ability to look into their citizensb wealth and income. This, in turn, means that no taxation or welfare can be based on wealth or income. I argue that the proper way to tackle this problem from an information policy perspective is to shift the taxation base entirely to consumption and therefore shift all income tax to VAT. To keep taxation progressive, and to keep welfare systems functional, you will also need to combine it with a basic unconditional income for every citizen that amounts to some level of minimum sustenance. MORE ON BITCOIN This is an article on bitcoin. You may also want to read about why I am putting all of my savings into bitcoin, and my first thoughts on the subject where I call it The Napster of Banking.

1 0

Re: [cryptography] Digital cash in the news...
by Eugen Leitl 14 Jun '11

14 Jun '11

----- Forwarded message from "James A. Donald" <jamesd(a)echeque.com> -----

1 0

Re: [cryptography] Digital cash in the news...
by Eugen Leitl 14 Jun '11

14 Jun '11

----- Forwarded message from lodewijk andri de la porte <lodewijkadlp(a)gmail.com> -----

1 0

[serval-project-dev] OpenBTS, OLSR and Serval
by Eugen Leitl 14 Jun '11

14 Jun '11

----- Forwarded message from Jeremy Lakeman <jeremy(a)servalproject.org> -----

1 0