Subject: Re: [bitcoindev] HODL Tax Proposal

From: Keagan McClelland <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:12:42 -0700

This is never going to happen.

While demurrage has been proposed before and may ultimately be a
consideration that the Bitcoin users want to ensure that costs are borne
fairly by the different use cases, this mechanism is somewhat laughable.

The proposal you present also seems to reflect a deep misunderstanding of
how the Bitcoin protocol works:
1. Self assigning a bip number defies the bip assignment process and claims
a level of legitimacy that this proposal does not have.
2. Bitcoin for the most part does not really understand "days". There is a
timestamping mechanism that is used to reconcile difficulty adjustment
periods with the targeted time, but this is not something that can be more
widely used.
3. The way that "balances" are tracked and audited by Bitcoin nodes does
not lend itself easily to being just "deducted from"
4. You cannot "automatically deduct" a fee from an "address". Addresses
don't technically exist at the protocol level.
5. Miners do not "contribute proportionally" to computational work of
finding a block. There's the winner, and then everyone else.
6. Bitcoin cannot and will not make any legal or jurisdictional
considerations whatsoever when considering design choices.
7. Dennis Porter is irrelevant and does not have any authority to grant or
withhold "permission"
8. This proposal, like all demurrage proposals, clearly has negative
tradeoffs to be considered.
9. Centrally planning the price and inactivity period of demurrage is
antithetical to Bitcoin's decentralized market design mechanisms in use
thus far.

Stick to journalism. Maybe learn about Bitcoin a bit before trying to
extract the wealth of savers.

Keags

On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 2:13 PM Richard Greaser <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> It has become apparent to me that there is an issue where users of the
> network holding their coins, are not adding value to the network.
>
> As miners continue to get squeezed post halving, they would benefit
> tremendously from fees being taken from individuals refusing to move their
> coins, providing increased security to the network.
>
> I have written out a proposal more in depth and is attached below.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email-masked].
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/6512db18-bd15-462e-92fd-7549b5e885e7n%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/6512db18-bd15-462e-92fd-7549b5e885e7n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email-masked].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CALeFGL0jBUhwmgE3CJ1Sv_UfQHeGq6madh1HQo2DKUek%2BpUpnw%40mail.gmail.com.