99% of the people who ultimately argue about avoiding the banking system engage in behavior that is either morally questionable or explicitly illegal. I'd say about 1% are true "what i do with my money is my business and my business only" libertarians

Maybe you missed the fact that money in the bank are no longer trusted and can be confiscated for any reason by whatever government or entity?

I guess I indeed missed this recent confiscate event. Can you point me to where I can read about it? Last major financial disaster I've heard about is Cyprus. Where people deposited money in the banks, the banks gambled with the money and lost it. Which is "slightly" different than confiscation. The involvement of "governments" and "entities" only helped the depositors to lose less of their money.

Bitcoin is vulnerable too. A dedicated effort by collaborating governments could destroy or severely damage Bitcoin, by e.g. blocking the protocol, seizing powerful hashing equipment, downing exchange websites, performing a 51% attack, and so on.

This notion that Bitcoin is some robust, untamperable currency system is simply incorrect.

Or just make things uncomfortable for the people changing coins for other currencies.

It's sort of interesting how the liquid dollar market for bitcoins makes it impossible to judge whether someone accepting bitcoins as payment trusts it much.

Bitcoin is less than in 1% of hands. Also, when did you ban cash transactions and made it morally required to pay wire transfer fees?