Here's my question: What choice do we have?
If the government decides they want businesses to report what Bitcoin addresses they are using (say, on a new virtual currencies tax form), and who has sent them money and who they have sent money to, it will effectively de-anonymize the whole network. Businesses couldn't operate legitimately without compliance, and businesses who complied would effectively rat out all of those who didn't.
If the government decides to implement it, it wouldn't be hard to get enough businesses onboard to make it eventually fully effective.
I agree this would effectively kill Bitcoin - no one wants every financial transaction they make to be aired to the public. Basically, the government is in control of Bitcoin's future.
the redlisting - mike hearn idea.. will kill bitcoin, tainting coins and having people then required to publicise themselves to reclean the coin wont work. what makes me even more furious is bitcoin has no country. so why does mike hearn think US congress is the best government to seek legitimacy (word used VERY losely).. why not a country with less strict criteria. EG switzerland.. imagine it, businesses following switzerlands regulations. thus we still get the legitimacy that exchanges are being run correctly, but with the financial freedoms that USA would never have.
mike hearn should definetely not have been picked as a legal advocate.