This is not only psychological. In case you don't solve a block and the difficult increases, I guess we can say you would earn less with solo mining.
I'd say solo mining is interesting only for those who can be sure to generate more than one block at each difficulty period.

Although I don't tend to agree with leftists, they are right when they say US military spendings are much more outrageous than welfare.

Welfare uses unethical means for helping people who frequently don't deserve it, causing bad consequences for the economy.
Military spending uses unethical means for killing and controlling innocent people, causing bad consequences for the economy.

The OP has a point. The incentive is crystal clear. It's impossible to know how many women change their decisions with the help of such incentives, but certainly in a population of 300million there may be some. Some women hate the idea of quitting smoking during pregnancy, if you add a financial benefit for them not to, it may change their mind, why not?

Anyways, I believe there are worse consequences of welfare than this one particularly.

If you are among those who think state welfare is fundamental in helping those in greater need, you should consider watching this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwTDKt_k9kQ

This is true. But, unless you're part of these leftists, still, no reason to be ashamed.



So, what are your speculative theories about it? Did he really try to rape the girl, was it an orchestrated coup?
My guess is that he was expecting a prostitute and the poor woman had to beat him really hard for him to realize it was not her.

Honestly, this is silly, at least. Imagine if I were going to feel ashamed every time someone who born inside the same imaginary lines I was born did something horrible... haha, I'd never leave home anymore!

Bitcoin volatility would make it extremely risky to do so with investment goals. And just spending the money like that is quite dangerous...

On the other hand, it is true that they charge nothing and the last time I saw they had no ads... you have a point there, they could be financing themselves with a chunk of people's money. That would be fraud, since it's not advertised as such. But, if they just spend a small percentage, they might get away with it for a long while.

Unless - trying to be nice to your professor here - she meant that in the sense of "governments will outlaw this so they can keep inflating their currency on their favor". Then she might have a point, although I think it's not easy at all to outlaw something as bitcoin.

Have you ever seen people loaning bitcoins enough to make a fractionate reserve anywhere?

Comparing Newton to most economic professors of today - particularly one that thinks leaving the gold standard was necessary and good - is a major offense to the name of such a revolutionary scientist.

+1

Minar con CPU es puro desperdicio de energía... debes utilizar una GPU si quieres tener alguna chance.

This is off-topic and should not be on this board.

Answering the OP, what makes you think government could protect us from such a thing?

I've seen people evoking the scenario of an apocalyptic meteor in order to defend the initiation of violence... they just ignore that no government can stop an apocalyptic meteor outside the realm of Hollywood. Your example is pretty much the same thing.

I was having this problem a second ago, and when I clicked to answer you everything got fixed.

But, I need to access the forum through https://174.143.149.98/ - which automatically appeared in the RSS links by the way. When I try bitcoin.org it doesn't work.

Nothing has inherent value. Value is subjective, it's an opinion people have on stuff, not an inherent attribute of stuff themselves.

And if you think BTC have no value, why would you buy them? Keep your pounds in such case...

Seriously? I did not know that! No wonder why such an incompetent "economist" won it then...

haha, the "economy Nobel prize" is given by a central bank.. how ironic...

Monetary stability (which normally implies in price deflation) is good for the economy.

And besides that, who would want bitcoins if they inflate constantly? If you have the choice of storing your wealth in something that is constantly created or in something which offer is stable, which would you prefer?

Sorry, I was just reading too fast, it was not intentional.

I repeat that's not about taking anything from anyone, quite the contrary. It's about stop coercively taking people's resources. These health care state programs you mention are financed through theft. That's not only extremely unethycal as it is also counter-productive from an economical point of view.

And if you really care about helping those in greater need, you should really consider this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwTDKt_k9kQ

And in this video he doesn't even consider the future improvements that lower government spendings can cause to all, particularly the most poor.

Either they will raise the limit, or the Fed will print more money.

Paul Krugman doesn't deserve credit. Just for you to have an idea of how bad he is, he still believes in the broken window fallacy, something already demonstrated as false by Bastiat in the 19th century! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QG4jhlPLVVs

He has been defied by Robert Murphy to a debate, if he accepts, a charity institution would earn something like $60K, and Krugman hasn't yet accepted. http://www.thepoint.com/campaigns/campaign-0-1240