Arizona Senator Introduces Bill To Make Bitcoin Legal Tender In the State (bitcoinmagazine.com) 88
State Sen. Wendy Rogers (R-AZ) has introduced a set of bills aimed at making bitcoin legal tender in Arizona and allowing state agencies to accept bitcoin. Bitcoin Magazine reports: The proposed legislation (PDF) aims to recognize bitcoin as a legal form of currency in Arizona, allowing it to be used to pay for debts, taxes and other financial obligations. This would mean that all transactions that are currently done in U.S. dollars could potentially be done with bitcoin, and individuals and businesses would have the option to use bitcoin as they see fit. Specifically mentioning bitcoin alone, the legal tender bill defines bitcoin as, "the decentralized, peer-to-peer digital currency in which a record of transactions is maintained on the Bitcoin blockchain and new units of currency are generated by the computational solution of mathematical problems and that operates independently of a central bank."
The acceptance bill is more broad, saying that, "A state agency may enter into an agreement with a cryptocurrency issuer to provide a method to accept cryptocurrency as a payment method of fines, civil penalties or other penalties, rent, rates, taxes, fees, charges, revenue, financial obligations and special assessments to pay any amount due to that agency or this state." The report notes that Sen. Rogers introduced the same amendment in January 2022, but it "died by the second reading."
The acceptance bill is more broad, saying that, "A state agency may enter into an agreement with a cryptocurrency issuer to provide a method to accept cryptocurrency as a payment method of fines, civil penalties or other penalties, rent, rates, taxes, fees, charges, revenue, financial obligations and special assessments to pay any amount due to that agency or this state." The report notes that Sen. Rogers introduced the same amendment in January 2022, but it "died by the second reading."
Makes sense... (Score:2, Funny)
Makes sense, because when the dollar does a Zimbabwe style hyperinflation due to the debt ceiling issues, there is a stable, secure currency to fall back on, to prevent total government collapse.
Re: (Score:2)
The guy must have a few bitcoin and he is hoping to pump the value using his limited political power. Which is why we are glad it is limited since he cannot pass this kind of stuff on his own.
Re: (Score:3)
So one guy is now the party? The guy must have a few bitcoin and he is hoping to pump the value using his limited political power. Which is why we are glad it is limited since he cannot pass this kind of stuff on his own.
You know, it's hard to be sure these days, but my guess is Wendy Rogers does not identify as a "guy". I never heard of her before, but it seems she's quite a piece of work. [npr.org]
Re: (Score:1)
Oh wait, indeed!
That piece of shit SBF admitted he gave just about as much to Republicans, but just donated to them quietly so they wouldn't FREAK OUT on Fox News and other right-wing "news" outlets.
He was playing both sides of the aisle all along. Of course, they didn't echo that in your chamber, so the only truth you know is SBF only gave to Democrats. Not true!
Re: (Score:2)
Just about as much? The only publicly-available numbers indicate he gave a tiny fraction to Republicans of what he gave to Democrats.
Plus many Democrat donors funded pro-Trump candidates in 2022.
Re: (Score:3)
"I donated to both parties. I donated about the same amount to both parties"
“All my Republican donations were dark, The reason was not for regulatory reasons, it’s because reporters freak the fuck out if you donate to Republicans. They’re all super liberal, and I didn’t want to have that fight.”
"I've been their third-biggest Republican donor this year as well,"
- Sam Bankman-Fried
Re: (Score:1)
You're right a margin of 2 to 1 is virtually identical, plus I wouldn't take any statements about where "dark" money went from Sam "Who knew Alameda research was double spending collateral" Bankman-Fried as having any
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Ah yes, the mythical (illegal) dark money donations from left-wing fucboy SBF which nobody seems to be able to find. Because we should believe a scam artist at his word.
Re: (Score:2)
You believe everything trump says. Why should this be any different?
Re: Makes sense... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
stick with gold
In a societal collapse established means of commodity trading are also going to fail. It's not unreasonable to suppose that at some point an economy will emerge that values gold and gemstones but in the immediate aftermath you want to be the guy holding canned food who can eat it or set the terms for trading it for gold or gems (for the long term) or whatever else you need. You'll get a better exchange this way than if your holding gold and hoping someone else a. wants that more than the food they have and
Re: (Score:2)
Just because the government falls away doesn't mean the zombie apocalypse is next. Trade will still happen, you'll still report to work, you just need a new currency, if anything without regulation and taxes everything will become cheaper and people will start focusing more on what is happening in their immediate area and environment rather than expecting a benevolent skydaddy (the government) to fix everything.
Re: Makes sense... (Score:1)
This is a government.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with this. Gold will be a great fallback if the dollar collapses but we don't turn to anarchy (which would be unlikely.)
If that time comes, I'd rather have a stockpile of weapons and food then a stockpile of gold.
Re: (Score:1)
I agree with this. Gold will be a great fallback if the dollar collapses but we don't turn to anarchy (which would be unlikely.)
If that time comes, I'd rather have a stockpile of weapons and food then a stockpile of gold.
Guys who stockpile gold don't even really stockpile gold. They own a little record on a website -- maybe a piece of paper -- from an investment bank that says they own gold, rather than having it in their possession. Additionally, even supposing possession, how long do you figure the average Slashdotter is going to be able to hang on to his gold when some warlord decides he wants it (supposing some societal collapse)? Goldbugs are all dumber than pigshit.
Re: (Score:2)
Additionally, even supposing possession, how long do you figure the average Slashdotter is going to be able to hang on to his gold when some warlord decides he wants it (supposing some societal collapse)?
That was always my thought too. I figure I would be more a target with gold therefore less safe
Re: Makes sense... (Score:1)
How about GOLD ammo!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Makes sense... (Score:5, Insightful)
So theoretically you can accept payments in crypto where when you accept it you immediately cash out.
What I don't know how you handle is the fluctuations in value during a transaction.
Say you want to pay a 10k tax bill. During the minutes the transaction takes, by the time the state can cash it it might be 9950 or 10050.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Budget problems are a boon for them. There's a Democrat as governor, so they'll start screaming about fiscal responsibility. The crowd will go wild. What caused the budget deficit is beside the point. Their voters don't care about that.
Re: Makes sense... (Score:2)
It would make more sense to accept Canadian dollars as legal tender. Or pesos, or literally any other stable currency. Which economy would we then be doing the most trade with, theirs, because there isn't a Bitcoin economy.
Re:Makes sense... (Score:5, Informative)
Poe's Law [wikipedia.org] is strong in this one...
Re: Makes sense... (Score:2)
JHC. Do we need another one of these effing internet âlawsâ(TM). I followed your link hoping to be enlightened by some aspect of human behavior. Seems like sarcasm to me. And you might say, like a patent troll, âyeah, but Iâ(TM)ve added the internet.â(TM) We need a law for that?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, we need a law for that. We have arrived at the point where there's enough lunatics running rampart that it's simply no longer possible to tell sarcasm and irony from someone actually being seriously suggesting something outlandishly inane.
Re: (Score:2)
there is a stable, secure currency to fall back on
So you're ruling out Bitcoin then.
Re:Makes sense... (Score:4, Insightful)
Makes sense, because when the dollar does a Zimbabwe style hyperinflation due to the debt ceiling issues, there is a stable, secure currency to fall back on, to prevent total government collapse.
You think the Bitcoin ledger will hold together in that scenario and Bitcoin will be worth something?
Bitcoin only works so long as the "system" holds together. The ledger becomes worthless the moment the big mines start going off the grid. Anybody who thinks Bitcoin will be worth something in the apocalypse is an idiot.
Re: (Score:1)
A few dogs, a hand gun, a rifle or shotgun, several boxes of ammo, a lot of water and dried/canned food, friendly neighbors who are like you.
Hm, bitcoins and equities don't seem to be on the list but neither is gold.
Re: (Score:3)
That stuff is not going to last very long.
Re: (Score:1)
No, but it's a good start. No one is going to be able to store a life time supply of anything. I think it's the first few months where things will be the most chaotic before everyone left settles into some new norm.
It also depends on the reason for societal collapse. Economic catastrophe, nuclear war, global plague wipes out 98%, asteroid strike, Noah level flood, and so on.
Whatever else goes on you'll want a few good dogs. And if you live in that kind of place, horses. Can't think of any other animal
Re: (Score:2)
The ledger becomes worthless the moment the big mines start going off the grid.
What? Why? All you need is enough computers to record new transactions on the blockchain. If there are fewer computers in the pool, then recording new transactions becomes (computationally) easier. All that is required is that everyone agrees on the contents of the blockchain (consensus).
Re: (Score:2)
I think the big requirement would be a working network.
Re: (Score:2)
Makes sense, because when the dollar does a Zimbabwe style hyperinflation due to the debt ceiling issues, there is a stable, secure currency to fall back on, to prevent total government collapse.
This does exist, and it's called gold. If regular currency colllapses, do you think you can survive by throwing ones and zeroes at the feet of an angry mob?
Re: (Score:2)
If things truly go tits-up, even gold will have little value.
My stash is dried soybeans, rice, and 5.56mm ammo.
Re: (Score:1)
Gold won't save you in that case either.
Re: (Score:2)
That's unconstitutional (Score:5, Informative)
Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution says: "No State shall...make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts..."
So they can do gold coin or silver coin but not Bitcoin.
Re:That's unconstitutional (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
BCG already exists:
https://coinmarketcap.com/curr... [coinmarketcap.com]
Re: (Score:1)
The law doesn't. It says they "may" accept bitcoin. Which does not make it legal tender.
They may accept pretty much anything, but you cannot force anybody to accept bitcoin.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: That's unconstitutional (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Not completely, witness how many small stores won't break a hundred. In America, it is good for settling debts, but even then a contract might override it. Here in Canada, there are also limits on coinage, 25 cents in pennies, or $40 in toonies as examples.
Re: (Score:3)
Legal tender means the creditor MUST accept the tender as payment.
There is a difference between "the debtor can offer" and "the creditor must accept".
Re: (Score:1)
This.
Morons are gonna moron.
Elect stupid politicians, receive stupid bills. A more specific iteration of: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I'm no expert on constitutional law, but if it weren't unconstitutional they wouldn't need to introduce a bill, would they?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Sometime in the 2000s or early 2010s some state made noises about minting its own gold coins that would be legal tender "at face value" which of course would be much less than the melt-down value. I think this was somehow related to "prepper" (prepare for the zombie apocalypse) movement, but don't quote me on that.
At least some modern United States precious metal coins are legal tender at face value [usmint.gov]: "All American Eagle Coins are legal tender coins. Although their face value is largely symbolic, it provid
Re: (Score:2)
Most all have to take it if you show up with actual silver dollars or gold eagles minted by the US government, it's legal tender.
I also saw someone on YouTube who claimed to be buying rolls of 50 cent pieces and finding silver coins in the rolls, though that was likely a bank rather then government office, still possible to get change from a government office and it being silver.
Re:That's unconstitutional (Score:4, Informative)
The summary is wrong. The law doesn't establish legal tender, it lets you pay taxes (or fines or whatever) to the state in Bitcoin. It also doesn't require any state agency to accept it: it allows the agencies to accept it if they want to.
Yeah but (Score:1)
Bitcoin and crypto in general is completely unsuited as a currency. The lack of regulation and the fact of its value is largely found it on Ponzi schemes and money laundering coupled with the technical challenges of securely and safely transferring it
Well... (Score:5, Informative)
I'm guessing it'll surprise no one that Senator Rogers is one of those "Stop the Steal" Trumpistas - and she also believes the latest Arizona governor's race was rigged. So her relationship with facts and logic is tenuous at best.
Re:Well... (Score:5, Insightful)
Any politician backing proposed legislation like this should not be allowed within a thousand miles of any financially-related policy.
But then, there are a lot of them that shouldn't be allowed to be involved in policy at ALL, so it's kind of like a subset of the overall issue.
Re: (Score:1)
True. Absolutely nothing squirrelly happened in the last Arizona election. It was a text book example of how to run a clean trust worthy election. Anyone who wants to even look at it is insane and stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
The "Cyber Ninjas" team didn't find any bamboo fibers in their forensic analysis. What are you complaining about?
Re: (Score:1)
How do you know a fad is over? (Score:4, Insightful)
Politicians jump on it.
Re: (Score:2)
Feds will stop it (Score:3)
The second any type of law like that gets passed by a state the Federal government is going to sue them and take it to the Supreme Court, who will overturn the state's attempt to mint their own currency or make anything other than the dollar a legal currency in the US. They're incredibly protective about that, and there are clauses in the constitution to slap down anyone who tries.
Re: (Score:2)
Normally I'd be 100% with you, but with this Supreme Court? Eh. They might just as well demand the state move to Scaliabucks or Ginnybucks.
So stupid (Score:2)
I live in Arizona and constantly am asked to explain Kirstyn Sinema, Wendy Rodgers, etc.
**Here you go**:
We're one of the 50 states.
We have reasonable people. We have stupid idiots. The majority of the state is stupid aka "red".
Don't judge all of us based on the few of them.
Wendy is a FUCKING MORON. Bitcoin WILL NEVER BE ACCEPTED FOR ANY DEBT PUBLIC OR PRIVATE.
Wait did I say MORON because technically she just may be a FUCKING IDIOT.
Either way this will end up her liker 2022-Jan Bill: dead on arrival.
Nothi
Re: (Score:2)
She is probably crazy like a fox. More than likely she has a bunch of BitCoin or friends (of one kind or another) who do.
I can think of a better way to divest large quantities of BitCoin than to pay taxes with it, valued in current dollars because we all know its going to $0, what better bag holder than government.
Why? (Score:2)
Unconstitutional and easily defeated (Score:2)
Article I, Section 10 US Constitution:
On a totally separate note, thanks to modern technology, we have a viable solution for cash that is both backed by real assets AND convenient
Anything can be "voluntary" currency (Score:1)
There are 4 states where these are legal, voluntary currency.
As long as both parties of the transaction treat it as currency, it is, for all practical purposes, currency for that transaction.
Let me list a few:
Wooden nickles, "[Renaissance-]Faire bucks", unopened packages of cigarettes (in WWII battle fronts), etc.
Now, if you meant that the state government would accept "Aurum notes" for payment for taxes or other services, well, say so.
How much will she profit from it? (Score:2)