Technologies like this would be a boon to many developing countries like mine where tax evasion and corruption is rampant. It would enable the government to collect funds for infrastructure, education, environmental protection and healthcare (and yes, I am a progressive liberal who would rather have the government provide these at subsidized cost rather than private entities; even at the cost of "efficiency" if need be).

That's simply not true. When I do my taxes I have to report my yearly income. The kind of system where a government can monitor all of my transactions in real time is without any court involvement is insane.

You might as well use your bank card as at least those require a warrant or subpoena to acquire.

> When you pay with Taler, your identity does not have to be revealed to the merchant. The bank, government and mint will also never learn how you spent your electronic money.

Or something. The details aren't there yet.

Sounds like a strictly proportional system only, then?

I don't think Taler is meant to help you do your taxes at the end of the year.

And the reason you report your income correctly, and trust that your neighbors do too is...

Bitcoin is more valid money then paper currency. we can directly verify the creation of the transaction.

Many may think or assert that, especially based on the trendy anti-government dogma, but I disagree. They have a vested interest in a fair and enforced taxation system. Otherwise they lose effective government and its services, both of which are absolutely essential to their safety and prosperity.

You may be taxed to pay for them, but you don't have to use them all.

The IRS, or their equivalent, are the price of entry into whatever society you wish to be part of (or whichever will take you.

It's like a social club, if you don't want to pay your dues you don't get to use the facilities.

You realize the IRS != US? We got along financially just fine (some would say better) before it.

I just get riled up by the "It's wrong! They have no right to tax me! I have property rights!" stance, because it's inconsistent.

You have a choice of many countries in the world, with all sorts of different rules decided on by the people there.

If a currency system was available that made taxation appear entirely optional to the public the trust in the tax system would erode in a hurry (Why should I pay when my neighbor or Acme inc. isn't paying?). Tax morale is alreay too low in many countries. Making more loopholes available would just not be good.

This is a great example of an argument from ignorance. We can't conceive of a high-functioning society without taxes, therefore, let it be known that one cannot exist.

  - Humphrey, this paper says that if we cancel Trident and bring in conscription, we
    shall have £1.5 billion for tax cuts, and what do I find?
  - What do you find, Prime Minister?
  - The Chancellor opposes me. A great chance to be popular with the voters and he
    says no. Doesn't that surprise you?
  - No.
  - Why doesn't it surprise you?
  - He's advised by the Treasury and they don't believe in giving money back.
  - It's not theirs. It's the taxpayers'.
  - That's not the view the Treasury takes. Not once they've got it.
  - But if they don't need it?
  - Sorry?
  - If they don't need it.
  - Taxation isn't about what you need.
  - What is it about?
  - The Treasury doesn't work out what they need to spend and then think how to raise
    the money.
  - What DOES it do?
  - They pitch for as much as they think they can get away with, then think what to
    spend it on. If you start giving money back because you don't need it, you're
    breaking with centuries of tradition!

I'm not sure what exactly this kind of tracking helps with; it would be nice if they had more examples or case studies.

That said, I agree, we're surveilled enough thanks.