|
|
|
|
|
|
by JumpCrisscross
3068 days ago
|
|
|
> the point is whether the increasing marginal costs of enforcement are worth it to the government and society The same applies to cash. Investigating them is expensive. We don't bust the kid who fails to report the proceeds from their lemonade stand because (a) it's too small and (b) it's too mean. > privacy coins + tumblers + crypto + VPNs + TOR will make it very hard for a government to punish motivated individuals Analogs for each of these exist for cash. None of this is new, it's just shinier. (In any case, now you're talking about willful money laundering.) |
|
|
Yes, but again, costs matter (this time on the other side). Money laundering with physical cash is expensive, risky, and time consuming.
You need to first get a bunch of physical cash, which itself raises suspicion and is easily tracked. Then you need to find someone in the physical world that you trust to help launder for you.
If you reduce the cost of 'money laundering' by 2-3 orders of magnitude, it indirectly raises the cost of enforcement significantly, because then the government will have to sort out all the 'harmless' infringement from the serious crimes that it cares about today.