By Bitcoin Majalah - 4 sababaraha bulan kapengker - Waktos Bacaan: 13 menit
Bangsat The Fed, Go Lokal
Artikel ieu diulas dina Bitcoin Majalah urang "Masalah primér". Pencét Ieuh to get your Annual Bitcoin Magazine Subscription.
Klik Ieuh to download a PDF of this article.
Dina 6 Nopémber 2012, Washington sareng Colorado janten dua nagara bagian munggaran di Amérika Serikat anu ngalegalkeun panggunaan ganja pikeun rekreasi. Bari pamakéan ubar tina tutuwuhan geus diwenangkeun di California saprak 1996, sarta ditampa nyebar lalaunan dominoed sakuliah nagara leuwih 20 taun hareup, Washington jeung Colorado éta kahiji pikeun ngidinan pamakéan rekreasi légal di tingkat kaayaan.
Ieu momen watershed dina pulitik sosial. Gampang ngilangkeun momen ieu salaku kamajuan anu teu aya artina, teu aya bahan anu teu aya dina hal kauntungan politik, sareng janten kameunangan pikeun anu sanés lian ti stoners deadbeat. Tapi éta leres-leres, dina rasa sadayana, mangrupikeun momen anu jero.
Dua nagara bagian ieu nangtung dina nolak kabuka tina Undang-undang Zat Dikontrol féderal. Seueur undang-undang médis nagara sacara téknis ogé ngalakukeun ogé, tinangtu klasifikasi ganja salaku zat Jadwal I - hartosna éta henteu nampi panggunaan médis - tapi sacara sosial éta masih masalah anu béda-béda. Éta dianggap salaku ubar anu diperyogikeun ngalawan indulgence pilihan, ngajantenkeun tindakan féderal pikeun ngabantah undang-undang nagara sacara politis picilakaeun. Sanajan konflik jeung hukum federally, éta hiji hal geus socially kaliwat titik tabu. Ieu implicitly ditarima sanajan hukum diwenangkeun pikeun penegak ngalawan lampah misalna.
Klik gambar di luhur pikeun ngalanggan!Undang-undang rekreasi ngalangkungan jalur éta kana wilayah anu masih pisan diatur ku tabu sosial di bagian ageung nagara. Pasién kanker nganggo ganja pikeun ngatasi seueul sareng efek samping kémoterapi sanés mangrupikeun hiji hal; a stoner bisa leumpang kana toko ganja sakumaha maranéhna ngalakukeun hiji toko minuman keras pikeun légal mésér ganja pikeun meunang stoned sadayana dinten, éta sejen. Éta jelas dina waktos éta yén démo kakuatan individu nagara-nagara moal ditiru dina tingkat féderal pikeun waktos anu lami - upami kantos. Washington sareng Colorado dasarna nyéépkeun jalan satapak pikeun ngabébaskeun kagiatan anu ngagaduhan dukungan sosial anu ngabagi tapi lega di sakumna nagara, tapi henteu cekap pikeun ngadorong parobahan tina Kongrés. Aranjeunna panaratas dina nyarioskeun pamaréntah féderal pikeun bangsat sorangan.
Éta jalan satapak bakal seueur halangan sareng kasusah, boh internal sareng eksternal. Sakabéh skéma lisénsi kedah dirarancang sareng ditetepkeun supados usaha tiasa ngamimitian operasi. Tanpa rezim sapertos kitu, nagara moal gaduh cara pikeun ngumpulkeun pajeg pikeun penjualan ganja - faktor motivasi anu ageung pikeun tagihanana. Ieu henteu janten sapinuhna pikeun sababaraha taun, sareng nagara-nagara ngan ukur ngamimitian ngaluarkeun lisensi dina 2014. Dina 1 Januari, penjualan ganja anu sah munggaran dimimitian nalika toko anu parantos dilisensikeun tungtungna diidinan ngamimitian operasi.
Butuh dua taun pinuh pikeun nagara ngawangun hiji skéma lisénsi pikeun sakabéh industri pikeun fungsi légal. Ieu kalebet lisénsi pikeun operasi ngembang, distribusi, pikeun fasilitas uji laboratorium anu ngajamin produk henteu kacemar, sareng tungtungna pikeun toko ritel anu saleresna. Tiap hambalan tina prosés merlukeun lisénsi eksplisit ti nagara, sarta pikeun tiap produk kudu dilacak ti pisan awal produksina nepi ka distribusi di toko sabenerna. Ieu dasarna mangrupikeun blueprint pikeun program legalisasi unggal nagara saprak Washington sareng Colorado.
Saatos sagalana indit hirup nyaeta nalika fun bener dimimitian. Badan Penegak Narkoba (DEA) mimiti nyerang toko ganja sah di Colorado ampir langsung. Ieu mangrupikeun kaayaan anu luar biasa ngabahayakeun pikeun usaha ieu. Parantos henteu mampuh ngahontal rekening bank dina waktos éta kusabab bédana antara undang-undang nagara bagian sareng féderal, sadaya usahana dilaksanakeun sacara tunai. Serangan ieu henteu ngan saukur nyababkeun kaleungitan inventaris produk ayeuna sareng aliran kas, tapi ngarampas timbunan kas anu ageung dikonci dina brankas dina premis sabab toko-toko henteu ngagaduhan cara sanés pikeun nyimpen artosna. Sanaos ieu kajantenan salami fase ngan ukur médis di Colorado, serangan ieu ngajemput uap saatos legalisasi rekreasi. Sedengkeun House di DC jeung pangadilan féderal California di 2014 dihalang DEA ti raiding légal medis toko ganja jeung usaha, toko rekreasi sarta usaha éta masalah sejen sakabehna.
Pamaréntah féderal nyobian ngirim pesen ka Colorado yén aranjeunna moal diidinan ngalanggar hukum féderal. razia ieu dituluykeun pikeun taun dina frékuénsi luhur, tapi sanajan panganyarna, turunna relatif, aranjeunna masih lumangsung di sababaraha nagara bagian nepi ka poé ieu. Cannabis masih sah di nagara-nagara ieu, ngahasilkeun usaha milyaran dolar per taun. Ku kituna naha ieu masih lumangsung?
Insentip.
Nagara-nagara anu ngalégalisasikeun ganja sadayana parantos ngadamel pajeg khusus pikeun penjualan ganja beda-beda ti 15% dugi ka langkung ti 35%, gumantung kana kaayaan sareng kategori produk. Colorado di 2021 ngahasilkeun $ 423 juta pendapatan pajak tina penjualan ganja waé. Sanaos ieu ngan ukur bagian leutik tina APBN taun 2021 - kirang ti 1% - pikirkeun sapertos kieu: Nagara ngaluluskeun sareng ngadamel undang-undang ieu saatos suksés, sora populér langsung, sareng di luhur patuh kana kahayang pamilih, aranjeunna ogé nyieun ampir satengah miliar dollar sataun dina ngalakukeun kitu. Kacuali pamaréntah féderal mungkir dana féderal pikeun program nagara, teu aya alesan pikeun ngabalikeun undang-undang éta.
Janten naon anu inti tina dinamika adversarial ieu di dieu?
Tegangan antara pamaréntah féderal jeung nagara-tingkat nalika nyaimbangkeun pamadegan populér nasional jeung pamadegan populér di tingkat nagara bagian.
Naon palajaran di dieu?
Éta pamaréntah lokal anu langkung alit tiasa nangtung sareng ngalanggar hukum pamaréntahan anu langkung ageung upami aya dukungan lokal anu cekap pikeun éta. Hiji-hijina patarosan sésana nyaéta naon insentif maranéhna pikeun ngalakukeunana. Naon anu maranéhna kudu meunang jeung naon maranéhna kudu leungit?
Dina kasus legalisasi ganja, aranjeunna gaduh sumber pendapatan pajeg anu ageung pikeun dimeunangkeun, ogé kasugemaan ngeunaan masalah ti padumukan lokal anu gaduh kahayang sareng sikepna ditingali dina hukum. Dina sisi naon maranéhna kudu leungit, dina ekstrim, resiko nyaeta poténsi withholding tina waragad féderal, negation tina hukum kaayaan di pangadilan féderal, atawa bentuk sejen tina paksaan ékonomi teu langsung. Nalika ngeunaan masalah legalisasi ganja nagara, pamaréntah féderal dina waktos ieu sigana ningali tindakan sapertos overréaksi. Aranjeunna geus kalibet dina euweuh di antarana. Mahkamah Agung malah nampik gugatan ti Oklahoma sareng Nebraska ngalawan Colorado pikeun masalah anu disababkeun di nagara-nagara éta ku legalisasi. Seueur jalma ti nagara-nagara éta angkat ka Colorado kanggo mésér ganja sareng ngarambat deui meuntas wates nagara. Pangadilan féderal pangluhurna sabenerna salamet panerapan legalisasi Colorado urang ti tantangan ku nagara séjén.
patarosan Bitcoiners should be asking themselves is: Can Bitcoin be a similar issue? Where in the United States (or local territory in your country if you aren’t American) is there enough popular support for Bitcoin (or individual freedom in general) to practically inspire defiance of overbearing regulations or restrictions that might come? Bitcoiners should not be concerning themselves with winning over politicians in Washington, D.C., or attempting to pass protective legislation at the federal level. Things are too divided at that scale. Even something like cannabis, which has been legalized in almost half the country at the state level, still does not have the degree of popular support necessary to pass at a federal level. And as hard as it might be for Bitcoiners to hear, cannabis has much more popular support with more users (at least politically involved ones) in the issue than Bitcoin does — by a wide margin.
Skeptics to my line of thinking here might be wondering how this dynamic and strategy can be applied to Bitcoin. They might think that cannabis is just a harmless drug, so why would the federal government really care at the end of the day about states defying them? Bitcoin is much more dangerous; they will care about that. Well, let’s look at something a lot more “serious” than cannabis legislation that has demonstrated the same political dynamic and tension: Gun laws.
Taun 2021, nagara bagian Missouri ngaluncurkeun jalan satapak dina masalah anu langkung kontroversial sareng ngabagi tibatan legalisasi ganja. Aranjeunna ngaluluskeun tagihanana HB0085T anu ngabatalkeun sadaya larangan gun féderal di nagara bagian Missouri. RUU ieu bahkan dugi ka ngajantenkeun ngalanggar pikeun otoritas nagara ngabantosan dina penegak larangan bedil féderal, ngajantenkeun perwira anu ngalakukeunana nanggungjawaban kana denda dugi ka $ 50,000. Dasarna kaayaan anu sami sareng legalisasi ganja pikeun masalah anu langkung "serius". Taun 2021, belasan nagara bagian - Alabama, Arkansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Karolina Kidul, Tennesse, Wyoming, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, Virginia Kulon, sareng Iowa - parantos ngadamel, atanapi nuju, léngkah-léngkah pikeun ngenalkeun undang-undang anu sami. sacara lokal. Ieu ngawujud janten masalah ageung salajengna anu pamaréntah nagara sacara kabuka nolak pamaréntah féderal.
Situasi jinis-jinis ieu pamustunganana ngagentos sifat kumaha pamaréntahan leres-leres ngaskalakeun penegak hukum di daérah anu ageung sapertos Amérika Serikat. Aya loba gawé babarengan luhur jeung ka handap dina "tumpukan" yurisdiksi, ti pamaréntah kota lokal ka tingkat county, tingkat kaayaan, sarta tungtungna kabeh jalan nepi ka tingkat féderal. Masing-masing tingkat gumantung kana tingkat di handapna pikeun ngabantosan ngalaksanakeun hukum ti tingkat pamaréntahan anu langkung ageung. Pamarentah féderal teu boga cukup tanaga pikeun aktip pulisi jeung ngalaksanakeun hukum féderal sakuliah nagara. Aranjeunna gumantung kana agénsi langkung lokal pikeun nyekel angka nu gede ngarupakeun violators tina hukum féderal, sarta ngarujuk aranjeunna sanggeus ditewak atawa kahariwang dina urusan séjén pikeun biaya kriminal. Loba nyinggung anu palanggaran hukum féderal sabenerna pernah prosecuted; gumantung kana severity atawa konteks, nyinggung sapertos oge palanggaran hukum nagara nu ngan ditinggalkeun ka jaksa tina yurisdiksi éta. Yurisdiksi lokal sering pisan ngaluluskeun undang-undang anu ngagambarkeun undang-undang féderal, ngamungkinkeun hal-hal didelegasikeun ku cara ieu.
Pamustunganana, tagihan ganja Colorado sareng tagihan senjata api Missouri ditarik tina kerjasama terpadu ieu antara yurisdiksi anu béda dina masalah khusus ieu. Ieu nyiptakeun dinamis metot. Lamun hiji wewengkon atawa wewengkon opts kaluar gawé babarengan ieu, mangka masih meujeuhna pikeun agénsi féderal reallocate sumberdaya pikeun ramping up tindakan penegak di wewengkon éta. Nanging, upami sajumlah ageung daérah milih kaluar tina gawé babarengan ieu, maka éta gancang janten teu mungkin pikeun agénsi féderal nyebarkeun personel sorangan pikeun tetep ngalaksanakeun hukum féderal di daérah ieu. Ieu pisan masalah hayam-jeung-endog. Sakali hal mimiti domino, éta gancang jadi prohibitively mahal pikeun yurisdiksi gedé pikeun ngalaksanakeun hukum yurisdiksi leutik teu malire.
Demonstrasi anu hadé ieu nyaéta usaha Virginia anu gagal pikeun ngalangkungan larangan senjata narajang taun 2019-2020. Aya langkung ti 75 kabupaten di nagara anu Kantor Sheriff sacara kabuka nyatakeun niatna pikeun nolak ngalaksanakeun larangan éta upami ngalangkungan legislatif nagara. Pikeun kontéks, ngan aya 95 kabupaten di Virginia; meh 80% tina kabupaten di Virginia bakal nampik ngalaksanakeun panerapan diliwatan dina tingkat kaayaan. Legislatif nagara malah ngancam, sateuacan tagihanana gagal, pikeun ngaktipkeun sareng nyebarkeun penjaga nasional pikeun ngalaksanakeun hukum di kabupaten dimana sheriff nolak. Éta pamustunganana naon kaayaan ieu bakal salawasna turun ka: Kabutuhan pikeun hiji mahal tur lengkep kaluar tina deployment biasa tina tanaga pikeun nyokot slack pikeun agénsi lokal uncooperative. Ieu sanes pilihan scalable lamun beuki loba jurisdictions nolak cooperate.
Ieu kumaha Bitcoiners should be approaching the subject of politics and law when it relates to Bitcoin. The idea of Washington, D.C., as some territory that can be “conquered” through politicians aligned with Bitcoiners’ goals is frankly delusional. D.C. is a cesspool of corruption, lies, and broken promises; it’s also just slow and inefficient. Almost half of the United States has legalized cannabis, yet no real progress has been made at reflecting that federally. Not even a removal of cannabis from the schedule system — which could be done to leave the matter entirely up to state governments as opposed to explicitly legalizing it nationwide — has been successfully floated. Gun laws that are more and more restrictive keep gaining momentum, despite disapproval from a large chunk of the population. Yet half of the country has Sheriff’s Offices that would not enforce gun laws they disagree with or find unconstitutional. Many state governments are looking at approaching the issue of gun rights in the same manner that cannabis legalization has been. Still, politicians in D.C. continue to push for more restrictive gun laws. Still, agencies like the Bureau for Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms push more restrictive interpretations of existing laws. The entire process is broken and out of alignment with the conflicting popular opinions of different segments of the population. Do you see the pattern? Things to loosen restrictions don’t happen; things to increase them do. That’s the gist of the direction things move in D.C.
Ayeuna, aya aspék penting pikeun mertimbangkeun dina hal approaching hal cara ieu. Anu mimiti, konsési. Cannabis teu dilegalkeun sacara bébas tanpa dipikiran ku pamaréntah nagara anu ngadopsi undang-undang pikeun ngalakukeunana. Aya sababaraha kaayaan, kaasup skéma lisénsi diperlukeun pikeun kalibet dina wewengkon béda tina bisnis: Sagalana ti tumuwuh, pemurnian, jeung distribusi sabenerna mun konsumén diperlukeun hiji lisénsi pikeun beroperasi ku nagara jeung patuh kana peraturan kaamanan. Pajeg éta badag sejen. Pajak wakil anu rada luhur parantos diterapkeun sacara konsistén di unggal nagara anu parantos ngasahkeun panggunaan ganja pikeun rekreasi. Pamaréntah hoyong motongna, khususna nalika sababaraha tingkat résiko atanapi komplikasi aya pikeun aranjeunna nolak yurisdiksi anu langkung ageung anu aranjeunna aya.
Janten patarosanna, naon anu anjeun badé masihan pikeun kéngingkeun anu anjeun pikahoyong? Budak leutik kudu boga insentif pikeun nangtung nepi ka bodo badag. Naha insentif éta kauangan, ideologis, atanapi sababaraha kombinasi dua éta, henteu masalah. Perlu aya insentif.
Bitcoin can create a number of different incentives all across the board. Mining is probably the biggest example here in terms of potential for revenue generation or other indirect financial benefits. They are a potential source of tax revenue (although realistically any meaningful tax here could be a serious handicap to miner profitability). They are a possible source of heat for any other business activity that requires heat generation, improving the profitability of any such business. They are a very beneficial presence for the operation of electric grids by being a consumer of excess electricity generation that can be spun down almost immediately if that capacity is required for other uses. Just looking at the mining industry alone, these are three separate financial incentives that can be created for state governments to take a protective attitude toward Bitcoin regardless of what regulations the federal government may attempt to pass: One direct, albeit small, revenue stream and two material benefits for business owners and every citizen of the state.
Texas is actually in the process of doing this right now with HCR 89, which explicitly protects and codifies Texan citizens’ right to hold bitcoin in self custody. It also specifically carves out liability for people who develop software for Bitcoin. This preemptively puts Texas in a position where federal laws enacted to restrict any of these activities will not be enforced by any agency under the control and jurisdiction of the state of Texas. Now imagine Kentucky, Tennessee, Wyoming, and Florida all follow suit with similar laws.
Klik gambar di luhur pikeun ngundeur PDF artikel.That completely changes the cost if the federal government were to restrict those rights or activities, because now enforcing them in all those states means doing so without the assistance of any state-level agency. The consideration of federal restrictions of Bitcoin becomes a very different game if a large number of states proactively enshrine protections for using Bitcoin. Rather than amortizing the cost across all the local agencies in the area, the federal government must bear those costs entirely on its own.
Legislation could take further steps beyond just protecting the right to own or mine bitcoin if popular support was substantially built up. Many Americans do not necessarily care about people’s right to use Bitcoin specifically, but large swathes of the population do care deeply about the right to conduct activities that do not negatively affect others without government interference.
A popular meme in this space is Uncle Jim, the notion of a more experienced Bitcoin user holding someone’s hand to protect them from losing access to their coins. Imagine a specific exemption for people who run small custodial LN banks, or clones of services like Casa and Unchained without charging any fees or profiting from it in any way. This could be a major benefit to the security of unsophisticated users without forcing them to depend on larger companies or services. There are numerous very small-scale (or some large-scale) custodial tools in this ecosystem, and many of them have or are operating in a legal gray area. Legislation could address this and give these operations the option to operate in a safe haven either under certain scales or as long as they are not generating profit directly from charging users.
Tumindak anu langkung alit sareng langkung lokal pasti langkung éfisién, langkung gancang, sareng pamustunganana langkung efektif tibatan nyobian ngarengsekeun masalah legalitas sareng pangaturan di tingkat féderal. Konsensus langkung gancang ngawangun di tingkat lokal, sareng saatos suksés, éta janten faktor utama dina tingkat anu langkung ageung. Éta ogé mungkin di tingkat lokal pikeun malire pamadegan populér jalma di luar wewengkon éta, sedengkeun nyoba enact panerapan atawa robah di wewengkon nu leuwih gede bakal merlukeun kalibet jeung satisfying pamadegan dissenting maranéhanana.
Bitcoin is a ground-up grassroots system; on a technical level that is how it has evolved and functioned for its entire existence. It’s also the most effective way to ensure it continues functioning socially.
Oh, sareng bangsat Fed.
Artikel ieu diulas dina Bitcoin Majalah urang "Masalah primér". Pencét Ieuh to get your Annual Bitcoin Magazine Subscription.
Klik Ieuh to download a PDF of this article.
sumber aslina: Bitcoin majalah