It inhibits tax collection, which funds common goods. It also thwarts law enforcement, which is counter to public benefit.
We can debate whether taxes or laws or governments should exist. But they do, and most people seem to favor that. Debating a thing and actively subverting it are different. Just as subverting a thing and expecting such subversion to have no consequences or response are different.
It is pointless to debate the need for taxes with the corrupt governments and their taxmen. They make the laws, they have a monopoly on the use of force and they do not want to relinquish their power. The only possible move is to subvert them.
> Debating a thing and actively subverting it are different. Just as subverting a thing and expecting such subversion to have no consequences or response are different.
We know there are consequences. That is why technology must take that into account. They make their ridiculous laws, we make it impossible for them to be effectively enforced. They'll have to stoop to ever increasing levels of tyranny in order to maintain the same level of control they previously enjoyed.
Is there a limit? I don't know. I fully expect them to try to link cryptocurrency to terrorism or something.
If you have something that lets you "transfer large sums of cash untraceably across the globe, with no way for the government to do anything about it," it's going to make it easier to hide income and assets. That inhibits tax collection. (Same way cash does.)