I don't see the point of this coin...
That's just to maybe use it in a shop that could open maybe one days if the next French president legalize cannabis?
Isn't it a bit too risky? xD
No it is not risky Wahou with such argument I'm already greatly convinced xD |
|
|
|
|
I don't see the point of this coin...
That's just to maybe use it in a shop that could open maybe one days if the next French president legalize cannabis?
Isn't it a bit too risky? xD
|
|
|
|
Still waiting for a response from admin and we both know you've seen my post. Time for a little honesty for a change, Bitvest.
Dude calm down Oo It's been like... 1 hour since your previous post? You know you'll probably have to wait for a day or two right? No company is going to answer you immediately! Especially if you're being so... rude... |
|
|
|
Before you argue that communism is democracy show me at least one example of a successful Communist country. For the beautiful words and slogans lurks the hellish entity. As the Bible says "paved with good intentions the road to hell"
There is no example BECAUSE THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A COMMUNIST COUNTRY! Is that so hard to understand?? Give me an example of a communist country -> There is none. That's freaking easy to understand for god's sake! |
|
|
|
I know this is a controversial topic so I'll keep it inoffensive and just make some clarifications based on my (biased) views. Most of the countries mentioned were not communist. I do not believe that their aim was communism either, except maybe the USSR pre-Stalin. The reason that these countries call themselves communist is because the idea is so positive - the idea of total equality, in which selfishness is not rewarded like in capitalism but accepted as a negative asset.
Communism and democracy are not mutually exclusive. Communism advocates a workers' uprising which is achieved by the working class (proletariat) and in modern society I would argue that this includes the parts of the middle class who do not run businesses. This accounts for the vast majority of people in a country and is therefore in itself democratic. Furthermore, communism advocates a form of economic democracy in which workers decide who leads and manages them, which could never happen universally in capitalism due to the private sector.
The arguments that communism "doesn't work" appear to be unnecessary, because if you believe the USSR was communist you believe that communism worked for 70 years, which is easily long enough to show that it is a sustainable system, even though the USSR was terribly authoritarian and arguably resulted in many deaths.
I'd also like to say that capitalism has taken the better part of 200 years to get where it is today. In the early days of capitalism and even today in many areas of the world there were corrupt leaders, deaths caused by excessive consumption, and the inherent flaws of regulation being impossible for all business at once.
If you want to respond to these arguments please read carefully and don't insult me because you think I don't understand.
Thank you for being a member taking the time to develop his idea with real arguments. We should have a system to ban the spammers that surround posts like yours. I think all I can say is: I perfectly agree with you. I'd even say that communism can only be democratic. If it is not, it means it's not communism. And an important point would also be adding that it's not because communism failed once or twice that it's internally broken! |
|
|
|
I ignore you and stop answering.
You're just spamming your signature and polluting the thread.
Here is a definition of proletariat in case someone doubts you're saying pure shit: "The proletariat (/ˌproʊlᵻˈtɛəri.ət/ from Latin proletarius) is a term for the class of wage-earners, in a capitalist society, whose only possession of significant material value is their labor-power (their ability to work); a member of such a class is a proletarian."
Proletarians are workers. They're the vast majority.
The dictatorship of proletarian means that the people impose their will.
That's what democracy is, the rule of the will of the majority.
You are spam this thread. You're obviously Russian and was a bad student in school. Read the writings of your idol Lenin and read the story to what led to the dictatorship of the proletariat in Russia. Salaried people in offices is the proletariat? Stop your Communist propaganda.... Proletariat is a latin word... That's not propaganda that's etymology... And Russia has NEVER been in a dictatorship of proletarians, that was Staline's dictatorship nothing else... It seems that contrary to you I had latin, history and philosophical classes at school... Ignored too |
|
|
|
|
I ignore you and stop answering.
You're just spamming your signature and polluting the thread.
Here is a definition of proletariat in case someone doubts you're saying pure shit: "The proletariat (/ˌproʊlᵻˈtɛəri.ət/ from Latin proletarius) is a term for the class of wage-earners, in a capitalist society, whose only possession of significant material value is their labor-power (their ability to work); a member of such a class is a proletarian."
Proletarians are workers. They're the vast majority.
The dictatorship of proletarian means that the people impose their will.
That's what democracy is, the rule of the will of the majority.
|
|
|
|
Si tu pense que la technologie seule fait baisser la volatilité tu te met le doigt dans l’œil.
Si tu penses que la technologie est la seule chose qui ait changé en 700 ans c'est pas que le doigt que tu te mets dans l'oeil  C'est ridicule de dire "regardez en 700 ans la volatilité a baissé, c'est grâce à la spéculation!", y a pas l'ombre du début d'une preuve là, y a des MILLIONS d'autres critères qui interviennent, la technologie étant just UN de ces critères! Augmentation de la population (ça parait important dans la baisse de la volatilité non?), stabilité politique, réduction des conflits, industrialisation, éducation généralisée etc... L'augmentation rapide de la population est plus une cause d'instabilité que le contraire. L'URSS a été stable de 1922 jusqu'à 1991 : un seul et même régime politique, on ne peut pas faire plus stable. Comme je l'ai dit, la technologie ou l'industrialisation ne vaut rien si ce qu'elle produit ne circule pas efficacement sur un marché. L'éducation oui je te l'accorde. L'augmentation de la population ne peut être qu'une cause de baisse de la volatilité! C'est juste de la statistique de base, a situations identiques on a une plus grande stabilité de résultats avec un plus grand échantillon... Je suis ravi de savoir que ta parole est absolue et que donc la technologie et l'industrialisation n'ont rien à voir! Moi qui croyait que la révolution industrielle avait pu avoir un impact sur la société! Et ravi que tu m'accorde que l'éducation a un rapport aussi xD Du coup on est d'accord sur le fait que y a peut-être un ou deux (ou 3 millions) autres critères à prendre en compte que la spéculation sur une courbe de 700 ans? On a l'exemple de tous les pays de l'URSS et autres pays communistes.
Ils avaient (ou ont pour ceux encore existant) strictement la même technologie mais ont eu de nombreuses famines (ou en ont toujours comme au Venezuela).
Pas des petites famines non, les pires de toute l'Histoire.
Spécifiquement car ils avaient interdit le libre marché et la spéculation.
Ah ouais donc genre carrément maintenant tu fais du déni historique? Là aussi c'est uniquement parce qu'ils avaient interdit la spéculation? Le côté totalitarisme et sectaire n'a aucun rapport c'est juste à cause de la spéculation interdite? xD n'a aucun rapport, désolé. À moins que par totalitarisme tu veuilles dire planification. Sinon les famines n'existent pas dans les régimes autoritaires permettant la spéculation. Toutes les Monarchies du Golfe qui sont aujourd'hui extrêmement riches, doivent leur survie et prospérité à la spéculation (quasiment rien ne pousse dans le desert) , pas seulement du pétrole et du gaz mais sur divers marchés financiers. Par exemple, l'économie de Dubai repose sur le marché immobilier, la construction, le diamant (l'échange), l'or (l'échange) et enfin l'industrie et la fabrication. C'est pourtant une monarchie absolue ayant une religion plutôt sectaire. Autre exemple : Singapour. Régime autoritaire, l'une des villes les plus riches au monde, capitale de la finance en Asie du Sud. On peut avoir la prospérité dans un régime autoritaire à condition de... spéculer. La démocratie (seule) n'est pas le garant de la prospérité, loin de là. Encore une fois tu déformes mes propos, c'est juste fatigant. Si tu tiens absolument à débattre avec un archétype de syndicaliste moustachu de 50 ans qui n'a pas le bac, va en trouver un et arrête de mettre dans ma bouche des arguments qui ne sont pas les miens. Ce que je dis c'est qu'encore une fois tu dis que TOUT est dû uniquement à la spéculation ou son absence et que faut peut-être pas déconner y a quand même des facteurs autres comme le côté totalitaire qui a eu d'innombrables conséquences avec, entre autres choses, la plannification oui. J'ai jamais dit que la démocratie était le garant de la prospérité, juste que le régime politique a une influence quand même non négligeable sur la société! Ah et juste un truc, ce que tu dis sur les régimes du Golfe et autres dictatures sauvées par "la spéculation" est à mon sens faux. Ce n'est pas la spéculation qui les sauve, c'est la vente de ressources importantes. Il se trouve que le moyen qu'ils ont choisi pour vendre ces ressources c'est de s'insérer dans un système spéculatif. Ca n'est pas de la spéculation que leur richesse vient, c'est juste leur choix de canal de distribution. C'est comme dire d'un agriculteur qu'il tire son revenu du marché sur lequel il a un étal. Non. Il tire son revenu de sa production, qu'il choisi de liquider par ce canal de distribution. Est-ce que je peux avoir ton opinion là dessus sans tout ton discours sur comment je suis un gauchiste et sans mauvaise foi ou est-ce que tu refuses complètement de discuter de théorie politique et économique? Bon app à toi aussi! Faudrait VRAIMENT que tu finisses par me dire où j'ai écris que la spéculation c'était le mal du méchant monde quand même hein, ou on va finir par croire que tu t'obstines à faire des attaques ad hominem parce que t'as pas d'argument  Tu le dis depuis le début et personne n'est dupe. Si j'ai eu des propos très appuyés c'est pour nuancer les tiens qui sont binaires et manichéens. NON BON SANG Tout ce que j'essaie de faire c'est de discuter de l'utilité et de la nécessité de la spéculation aujourd'hui! Il me semble qu'on pourrait et peut-être même devrait s'en passer! Qu'on en a aujourd'hui les moyens. Bon sang comment on fait moins manichéen que ça: Pour le Venezuela résumer le problème à l'absence de spéculation serait aussi peu pertinent que si je disais "regarde au zimbabwe y a de la spéculation et c'est une des pires économies du pays, clairement la spéculation est à l'origine de tous les problèmes!!!"
La spéculation est UN aspect d'UN problème. J'ai jamais dit que c'était l'origine du mal et la source de tous nos problèmes hein!
Exemple simple des dommages de la spéculation. Et c'est loin d'être une pure invention (les chiffres le sont, jme souviens pas du nombre de licenciés ni de combien l'action a grimpé) c'est ce qui est arrivé avec Sanofi.
En revanche j'ai toujours pas vu d'exemple concret de l'intérêt de la spéculation, mais c'est peut-être qu'il me manque un élément.
Tu trouves ça binaire toi  |
|
|
|
Et du coup t'as que 2 solutions, plannification par l'Etat ou spéculation sans régulation? C'est chaud ta vision du monde!
Superresistant a raison. La spéculation est une assurance pour les uns, un risque calculé pour les autres. Vouloir "réguler" la spéculation c'est mettre des bâtons dans les roues et des boulets aux pieds sans aucune justification autre que morale. Alors déjà une justification morale peut suffire. Dans une société humaine une très grande partie des règles n'ont d'autres raisons d'être que la "morale". Ensuite je ne suis pas d'accord mais alors pas du tout! Tu veux un exemple extrême pour illustrer? Imagine que la spéculation soit non régulée. J'ai donc le droit de spéculer sur par exemple la date de ta mort. Ca ne te pose pas de problème? Parce que c'est une conséquence de la spéculation, des actions visant à optimiser le profit d'une spéculation effectuée.
Certains condamnent la "spéculation" car certains s'enrichissent beaucoup avec cet outil. Or pour un collectiviste, l'enrichissement des uns est forcément l'appauvrissement des autres. Ils partent du principe que le marché est un jeu à somme nulle, ce qui est, bien évidemment, complètement idiot et largement démonté.
Comme il est complètement idiot et largement démontré de croire que le marché pourra continuer à maintenir une croissance suffisante pour compenser la répartition inégale des richesses.
Il faut faire la différence entre les règles qui fluidifient et sécurisent les échanges et les règles arbitraires qui se veulent "justes" et "morales". Les premières sont nécessaires alors que les secondes sont nuisibles.
Ah cool ça, et t'es qui pour dire ça? Donc selon toi les règles ne doivent qu'optimiser et sécuriser les échanges? Toute autre règle doit être supprimée? Ben je crois qu'on a trouvé le point de dissension majeur entre nos deux visions du monde là |
|
|
|
Funny how everyone is spitting on an economic system that was implement only in dictatorships and say that it can't work because it failed everytime...
Like a totalitarian State can succeed.
Communism is an interesting ideology that has much more sense than what all the brainwashed Americans seem to believe. The main idea of communism is that we produce far too much compare to our needs, and hence that people should be allowed to own their tools of production in order to spread in an equal way the wealth produced.
People simplify it by "everyone owns nothing and they all have the same wage" while it's incredibly more complex than that!
Communism means true democracy, share of powers and responsibilities. It doesn't mean people will stop working! It's a different project of society in which the word "working" has a completely different meaning than in capitalism!!!
Not saying it's a perfect system, but stop using bullshit arguments like those ones, it's a complex idea that might be a good way to follow or at least to inspire more projects.
Nothing interesting in the communism there. You argue because I have never encountered communism in the flesh. View the consequences of the construction of communism in North Korea, the Soviet Union. Do you even read what I wrote or you're just spamming for your sig campaign? I'm well aware of the effects in North Korea and USSR. But that's completely irrelevant! That's like accusing capitalism of the atrocities of third Reich! Those two are totalitarian states, whatever the economic system you put in place the consequences will be disastrous!!! No, you're wrong. What do you know about communism? This is the reason not in a totalitarian state, and the state becomes totalitarian due to the fact that professed by Communist ideology. And what is the dictatorship of the proletariat, you know? What you're saying is a complete nonsense... Dictatorship of the proletariat... That's democracy idiot xD Proletariat is the vast majority of the population. The dictatorship of the vast majority of population? That's the very definition of true democracy. And those 2 communist states are (were for USSR) totalitarian states, the proletariat has no power here. Are you talking about what you don't understand. Dictatorship is always violence. The proletariat is only a part of society, what is not the best and educated. The dictatorship of the proletariat is terror beggar the illiterate population. You're not even writing in English now... Stop spamming for your signature, either shut up or start bringing real arguments. Proletariat is the opposite of the capitalistic bourgeoisie. It means proletariat is all the WORKERS who actually PRODUCE things. Proletariat is thus the whole working population, it's like 95% of the population. So dictatorship of proletariat is democracy... The exact definition of democracy. |
|
|
|
Funny how everyone is spitting on an economic system that was implement only in dictatorships and say that it can't work because it failed everytime...
Like a totalitarian State can succeed.
Communism is an interesting ideology that has much more sense than what all the brainwashed Americans seem to believe. The main idea of communism is that we produce far too much compare to our needs, and hence that people should be allowed to own their tools of production in order to spread in an equal way the wealth produced.
People simplify it by "everyone owns nothing and they all have the same wage" while it's incredibly more complex than that!
Communism means true democracy, share of powers and responsibilities. It doesn't mean people will stop working! It's a different project of society in which the word "working" has a completely different meaning than in capitalism!!!
Not saying it's a perfect system, but stop using bullshit arguments like those ones, it's a complex idea that might be a good way to follow or at least to inspire more projects.
Nothing interesting in the communism there. You argue because I have never encountered communism in the flesh. View the consequences of the construction of communism in North Korea, the Soviet Union. Do you even read what I wrote or you're just spamming for your sig campaign? I'm well aware of the effects in North Korea and USSR. But that's completely irrelevant! That's like accusing capitalism of the atrocities of third Reich! Those two are totalitarian states, whatever the economic system you put in place the consequences will be disastrous!!! No, you're wrong. What do you know about communism? This is the reason not in a totalitarian state, and the state becomes totalitarian due to the fact that professed by Communist ideology. And what is the dictatorship of the proletariat, you know? What you're saying is a complete nonsense... Dictatorship of the proletariat... That's democracy idiot xD Proletariat is the vast majority of the population. The dictatorship of the vast majority of population? That's the very definition of true democracy. And those 2 communist states are (were for USSR) totalitarian states, the proletariat has no power here. |
|
|
|
Funny how everyone is spitting on an economic system that was implement only in dictatorships and say that it can't work because it failed everytime...
Like a totalitarian State can succeed.
Communism is an interesting ideology that has much more sense than what all the brainwashed Americans seem to believe. The main idea of communism is that we produce far too much compare to our needs, and hence that people should be allowed to own their tools of production in order to spread in an equal way the wealth produced.
People simplify it by "everyone owns nothing and they all have the same wage" while it's incredibly more complex than that!
Communism means true democracy, share of powers and responsibilities. It doesn't mean people will stop working! It's a different project of society in which the word "working" has a completely different meaning than in capitalism!!!
Not saying it's a perfect system, but stop using bullshit arguments like those ones, it's a complex idea that might be a good way to follow or at least to inspire more projects.
Nothing interesting in the communism there. You argue because I have never encountered communism in the flesh. View the consequences of the construction of communism in North Korea, the Soviet Union. Do you even read what I wrote or you're just spamming for your sig campaign? I'm well aware of the effects in North Korea and USSR. But that's completely irrelevant! That's like accusing capitalism of the atrocities of third Reich! Those two are totalitarian states, whatever the economic system you put in place the consequences will be disastrous!!! |
|
|
|
Putin declared war on the entire Western world. It is unfortunate that the West or afraid of it or simply do not understand the dangers of the situation. If not to ratchet up economic pressure on Russia, you will have to fight.
It's definietly Putin sho invades other countries for money or power and support ISIS. Putin is an enemy of the democratic world! He is doing everything to destroy the very concept of democracy and sponsors around the world autocratic regimes. Not had Duterte come to power in the Philippines as Putin offered him weapons and support. Duh. Please give me an example of a Western democracy. I'd love to see that. Putin is a dictator but it's not like we're doing much better. Let's take for example America. Yes, I agree that American democracy is not perfect, but the President chose almost 50: 50. In dictatorial countries such as Russia votes for Putin's 80-90% of the population. If you're interested I still have a lot of examples. Choice of head of the state has nothing to do with democracy. You can have a monarchy which is democratic. Democracy means the power is in the hand of the people, which would mean that laws and fundamental principles of a country can be modified at will by the people. A complete study made by Harvard showed that 80% of laws that were passed in USA were against the will of the people and in agreement with the will of the 1% richest of the population. Which means that USA is the exact opposite of a democracy, people have no power. You chosing your president is NOT democracy, stop using this word for what is just an autocracy. |
|
|
|
Well you're a "nazi" when you firmly believe that the aryan race exists and is superior to other individuals and deserve to dominate the others.
By extension i guess you could qualify as a nazi everyone who believes the same thing but about another race. I
Nazi is now a word use for people who are in fact kind of "superracists" believing the sacred race should clearly dominate and/or destroy the other races.
In order to understand who the Nazis you just look at the Russian who live in Russia. The whole Russian propaganda 24 hours a day zombiruet people and inspire them that Russian is the greatest nation. That's fascism not Nazism. Fascism is the use of patriotism and the idea that one's nation is the strongest and greatest in the world, everything made under a strong State with high military. Nazism is directly linked to the idea of racial superiority and biological right for one race to dominate all others (normally Aryans) And what is the contradiction? Hitler's Germany was a Nazi state. The same what is now Russia. People of Caucasian nationality they call "black". What is this if not racism. I do not see any difference between Putin and Hitler, between Russia and Nazi Germany. If you don't see the difference between a nationality and a race I can't do much for you, just look at a dictionary. |
|
|
|
C'est prospérer, aussi, le terme exact.
L'humain tend à prospérer ... hors il faut bien admettre qu'il regresse actuellement à cause d'une cotation économique au mieux absurbe, au pire ... mafieuse.
Tout à fait d'accord. Actuellement la spéculation est un des éléments qui tend à creuser le fossé entre la réalité et la vision de l'économie. On a des gens qui spéculent sur des produits qu'ils n'ont jamais vu de leur vie, dont parfois ils ne savent rien! Juste à base d'analyse théorique sur les tendances. Et encore je dis des gens, quand on a de la chance! Une grande partie des transactions sont passées par des robots. |
|
|
|
PD should try to raise communication on its maintenance Maintenances are perfectly normal on a big site! But trying to warn users before would be cool |
|
|
|
Je suis content de t'avoir fait rire superresistant! Bien sûr, il aurait été plus interessant de lire des arguments mais encore eut il fallut que tu en eusses quelques uns... Et on est d'accord tu as montré un graph de données entre 1300 et 2010 pour "prouver" que la speculation fait baisser la volatilité? XD Cest sûr que c'est un bon argument! Heureusement que l'augmentation de la speculation est la seule chose qui ait changé en 700 ans sinon ton argument ne serait pas valide. Mais c'est bon y a clairement pas eu d'autre changement important, je pense que tu nous as tous convaincu! Si tu pense que la technologie seule fait baisser la volatilité tu te met le doigt dans l’œil. Si tu penses que la technologie est la seule chose qui ait changé en 700 ans c'est pas que le doigt que tu te mets dans l'oeil C'est ridicule de dire "regardez en 700 ans la volatilité a baissé, c'est grâce à la spéculation!", y a pas l'ombre du début d'une preuve là, y a des MILLIONS d'autres critères qui interviennent, la technologie étant just UN de ces critères! Augmentation de la population (ça parait important dans la baisse de la volatilité non?), stabilité politique, réduction des conflits, industrialisation, éducation généralisée etc... On a l'exemple de tous les pays de l'URSS et autres pays communistes.
Ils avaient (ou ont pour ceux encore existant) strictement la même technologie mais ont eu de nombreuses famines (ou en ont toujours comme au Venezuela).
Pas des petites famines non, les pires de toute l'Histoire.
Spécifiquement car ils avaient interdit le libre marché et la spéculation.
Ah ouais donc genre carrément maintenant tu fais du déni historique? Là aussi c'est uniquement parce qu'ils avaient interdit la spéculation? Le côté totalitarisme et sectaire n'a aucun rapport c'est juste à cause de la spéculation interdite? xD
La planification par l'État est tellement un ratage total qu'ils laissent pourrir les récoltes.
Bah oui, le chef du parti craked5 nous a pas dit de récolter !
Houlà t'es parti loin dans ton délire! Et du coup t'as que 2 solutions, plannification par l'Etat ou spéculation sans régulation? C'est chaud ta vision du monde! Qu'est ce que ca fait de vivre dans le déni ?  J'ai juste l'impression de vivre dans un monde où je considère d'autres facteurs que la spéculation mais à te lire TOUT arrive grâce ou à cause de la spéculation ou de son absence xD  Sur ce je passe à table. Bon app' (à tout ceux vivant dans le méchant monde de la spéculation). Bon app à toi aussi! Faudrait VRAIMENT que tu finisses par me dire où j'ai écris que la spéculation c'était le mal du méchant monde quand même hein, ou on va finir par croire que tu t'obstines à faire des attaques ad hominem parce que t'as pas d'argument |
|
|
|
if i build a bank of bitcoin that operating like a traditional fiat money bank when people can save the money and get interest for their saving and also people can get a loan from my bank but the fiat money is change for bitcoin, the question is would you guys trust me to save your bitcoin on my bitcoin bank that i want to build ?
What would be the point of such a bank? :/ Loans? You can get there on lots of different sites Interests? What interests could you give which would be enough so we take risks with btc, a currency that has the best inflation of the world |
|
|
|
Why is this fake crypto going up? They still reversing transactions they don't like? Can't believe people still fall for this coin. Nothing but scammers and fraudsters in ethereum. https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereumfraud/Because contrary to usual and traditional crypto it has another use and purpose Ethereum is a token, it's used as a currency but it's much more than that! While btc... Btc is just a currency. Nothing else. Nothing more can happen with it. |
|
|
|
I'm looking to find the best site for soccer betting, one with many options like: Over/Under 1.5/2.5/3.5, and that accepts low leagues too. With minimum deposit. Something like bet365 but with bitcoin.
I found directbet.eu but they don't have all options that I want. cloudbet.com has but I see many people not being able to withdraw their money.
You got hundreds of subjects like this already... The answer is easy, anything but Betcoin.ag Otherwise most are trustful, you'll see many different kind of comparison so it all depends on what you're looking for (best design, best odds, easy site...) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
