What you fail to notice is that you don't need a lot of money to have electricity for your bulb and a heater and that toast in the morning. Anyone can afford it by spending just a few hours a day doing something productive. If they can't get those few cents to pay their bill, they won't get more to improve their lifestyle. They are alive, so they are eating something and living somewhere. What makes you think that supporting these needs will make homeless bums pursue a better life?
first of all you have to learn why people cant get jobs. you will find that thse people who you call bums usually have a health issue or two which makes keeping a job difficult. then when having problems holding down a job, some find that the issues and stresses of signing on for 'job support' benefits is beyond their mental capabilities so they end up being left outside of social security. if you take away the snobbery of fox news and media protrayal of homeless and start actually addressing the problem properly you will see that its not as simple as 'just get a job' take for instance.. veterans.. good work history, shows they follow orders, organised even willing to risk their lives for an income.. yet there are reasons why veterans end up being homeless and starve to death. its not just about "get a job" now imagine. that without it being TAX.. the treasury(public funds) could pay for social securities and health and education without... (i am going to emphasis this for the Nth time) without TAX
second of all the amount of "tax" that goes to pay for unemployment is such a small percentage of the treasury budget that just the interest rate alone covers it
thirdly im not just talking about unemployment. im talking about pensions and public sector funded housing/elderly care homes/ health. so dont try to turn it into a snobby debate about the poor must be scum if they need help.
fourthly for emphasis so dont try to turn it into a snobby debate about the poor must be scum if they need help. my hypothetical is about taking "tax" away from the debate. by making pblic sector issues self funded.. not tax funded. so snobby comments about tax burdens dont even come into the debate |
|
|
|
What these damn miners are not getting is this : --> Higher fees = less transactions --> Higher fees = less adoption People will use Bitcoin less as a currency and more like a investment commodity. What happened to the "Cashless payment system" envisioned by Satoshi? Will greed ultimately kill this technology too.... I think so.  seriously stop reading reddit!! its core that remove the fee control mechanisms not the pools try to follow the code updates not the reddit scripts. i have noticed over the last couple years your posts have been diluted down to just bing the repeated rhetoric of reddit script writers. please take time to research stuff because your content is starting to appear more and more like the crap rhetoric rather than the open minded researched stuff you use to post about. |
|
|
|
51% the shit out of the blockchain to reshape it how you wanted it?
This. Without the slightest hesitation. first you claimed nashian religion of bitcoin with nash as satoshi then you claimed you knew all about bitcoin but failed understanding of consensus now you want to split bitcoin... you are obviously not interested in bitcoin and just want to disrupt it. so please either spend 6 months learning bitcoin. or go play with your fiat and stop making bad judgements of bitcoin looking at Dinos other posts.. I don't see why a chain split is to be avoided ; I would say, on the contrary: the more it splits, the more different versions can compete in the market, and the better the outcome will be.
its obvious he doesnt know about the network and only wants to split the network many many times to multiply coins so he can get rich before running back to fiat. guys like this care nothing about bitcoins longevity. |
|
|
|
who cares about sig spammers income. maybe they should care more about bitcoin and less about spamming posts for an income trying to force something in where only 30% of the nodes want to keep uptodate with the latest core software https://bitnodes.21.co/nodes/ - Satoshi:0.14.1 (30.54%) only 32% of pools want segwit http://bitcoin.sipa.be/ver9-2k.png and even on litecoin the pools are not even using segwit.. their blockrewards remain as L addresses not segwit 3 addresses. discusfish(f2pool) - LajyQBeZaBA1NkZD... litecoinpool.org - LTCPodKwHJoVsRJn... givemecoins - LachGCFMERH3SbVB... multipool.us - LTr4CoxaLaKLRn9x... just goes to show how many are actually wanting to change what should be don now is not make it mandatory activation.. but instead make a plan B. something the community can accept. no more cludgy code of bad maths, temporary/empty gestures of hope and fake features.. but actual code that can actually do the job most of these blockstream huggers have no clu how segwit even works after activation. and should have spent more time reading code and learning the reality of it and not just sig spammed for income their fake worship of wanting core as their god. to: pereira4 &billy bob. no matter how much you kiss ass copying each others glossy images of pie charts and scripted out of context crap. most people care more about the code than your sig spamming wishes |
|
|
|
Economically, that would be six of one and half a dozen of the other
In fact, it would be even worse than inflation tax (via outright printing excessive amounts of money) since when government prints money, it just enters figures in their spreadsheet on a Central bank server without much ado and beating about the bush. Thus, it doesn't damage the environment by burning electricity to mine coins, while mining coins via block rewards is basically the same printing money out of thin air (with terrible waste of resources at that). In short, you obviously don't understand how money works and on which principles it is created. Strictly speaking, banks don't create money out of thin air, they create credit but they can't do it unless there are borrowers. No borrowers no money, no money no honey
i actually do understand again this topic is about hypotheticals. meaning you can stretch the imagination beyond the limited concepts of wall street. imagine something new. something that actually solves problems. if you just try to change crypto to fit wall street world you are failing the point of crypto.. but if you try to change the world to fit crypto then many beneficial things can happen think deeper than just standard fiat world here ill give you a magic wand. (___ (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((___() here ill also give you a ladder so you can get out of the box || || ||======|| || || ||======|| || || ||======|| now pretend you could do anything, and come up with hypotheticals of how things could change for the better. remember its hypothetical. so dont limit yourself to the old archaic rules.. free your mind |
|
|
|
|
if there was a more efficient way to do things, ofcourse you would use it.
its not as much about personal gains. its also about adding more strength to the network.
all this asicboost crap about some say to temporarily nuke it with segwit, is just opening up the possibility of outsiders using it to compete with less hardware.
its always better for bitcoiners to use it on the mainnet. than to not use it and let some outsider make an alternative chain that overtakes the main chain and then gets introduced as the main chain later.
..
its much like the GPU days. should we have not allowed ATI gpu's to mine because open CL was better than geforce's Kuda
its much like the CPU days. should we have not allowed dual/quad core to mine. because they were better than single core
in my eyes if there is a more efficient way to do things. then everyone should be allowed to do it. to protect the network.
trying to rule it out with cludgy code is not protecting the network. its slowing down the growth of strength of the network due to 'politics'
|
|
|
|
|
as for the OP's point
he is right
within a less than a thousand transactions you will spend 1BTC.
imagine it this way it does not matter if you have $2000 or $200,000
within a thousand transactions you are going to spend $2000 just on fee's
yes the snobby rich will say "thats fine because i have $200,000" ... but if you think passed the snobbery and realise the unbanked developing countries see $2000 as alot of money
for the snobs:
stop trying to preach to the converted how bitcoin is utopia and works perfectly. it doesnt
the core devs have REMOVED fee control code. removed reactive fee facilities that bring fee's down during low demand
stop turning bitcoin into something only the snobs should use and be 'entitled' to by pretending that its bitcoins intended purpose or only possible utility, by allowing devs to remove/halt utility with their snobbery
|
|
|
|
Wonder how many realize this. Basically you are feeding the whales. At this time PayPal fees are cheaper  Based on this and other analysis I have read, I don't think the fees is way cheaper than bitcoin and aside that even if it is PayPal is cheaper, I would still prefer bitcoin than that simply because of the regulations around PayPal where scammers can exploit the most important is the reversible nature of transactions no matter the mode or form of transferring it. i suggest you never use LN.. research CSV revoke codes and you will see what i mean |
|
|
|
While the fee looks very high and not suitable for small/micro transaction, it still lower than most payment service if you're from different country or send big amount of money. If you're angry with high fees, consider use altcoin, use lower fees if you're not in hurry or use payment service that you think have lower fees  facepalm its not about small/ micro transactions. its about normal people transactions. an average tx is about 400~ bytes. fee on average is 250sat/byte. = 0.00100000 = ~$2 which even paying a week of groceries or a week of car fuel is like 4% tx fee yep 4% of first world utility weekly things or worse 6 months of thing in developing countries has a 4% tx fee.. again dont compare bitcoin to the most expensive 'other' methods.. think of it in comparison to average/normal methods remove utility for average joe and bitcoin becomes useless to average joe. bitcoin becomes only used by the snobby rich. thus becomes as corrupt as how snobby rich have corrupted fiat bitcoin meant to exist to solve this issues of snobby rich, to help the unbanked. letting core halt REAL natural growth is a snobby mindset and dont even go exaggerating it to be about 'gigabytes by midnight' or 'coffee'.. again thats just the snobby rich excuse to not let bitcoin naturally grow. telling people to use other services or alternative networks is just trying t push people away from bitcoin (triple facepalm) there are many ways to code in rules to find a equilibrium without going into making bitcoin only for the snobs. P.S i have many many many btc and born and raised in a first world country with a long anscestry of such. yet even i can see passed my own lifestyle to recognise the issues .. remember this. people on this forum have already heard about bitcoin. they dont need snobs to try stroking ego's and glossing over the bad points to sell the ever narrowing path to what they pretend is utopia. they dont need to be preached to be converted. people reading this forum dont need the gloss.. they prefer the hard truths. you can only solve an issue when you admit there is an issue |
|
|
|
imagine every school hospital and emergency service was the 'mining pool' of a new fiat coin.
the rewards pay for the public services and the wages of public servants trickle out the funds to the wider economy.
What's required for a miners to exist? Transactions. Who would want to buy, hodl, and spend some coin for your local community outside of your local community? Would that small volume be enough to support the currency and therefore generate the rewards from mined blocks to fund the public services? Most areas of the world already have welfare assistance...what does Universal Basic Income do that welfare programs are lacking? And please don't tell me that UBI would be more money for every person, because if that's what it is then it's just a fancy world for a tax hike. And that's fine, but let's call it what it is. 1. this whole topic is about hypotheticals. so feel free to expand your mind beyond the walls and rules of wall street. 2. its not about more money for everyone. its about ensuring everyone has a minimal SURVIVAL amount 3. my hypothetical is not about everyone gets a lifestyle income to go on non-stop vacation because money is meaningless.. its about everyone has a basic SURVIVAL amount to not starve/freeze to death. 4. my hypothetical is not about being funded via tax. its about taking the 'money creation' away from corporate banks. and making money creation occur in the public sector.(government treasury only funded by blockrewards) thus no tax is required to fund the vulnerable, which is actually a tax reduction, not hike imagine it. no corporate banks. only public sector mining pools. no transaction fee's(tax) only block rewards |
|
|
|
I don't think that Bitcoin price increase is related with Segwit, though you pointed out good questions here and I'm also wondering. Especially data on https://coin.dance/blocksBtw yes Emergent Consensus is Bitcoin unlimited. BTW emergent consensus is not only bitcoin unlimited but others too... only you wont hear about them because of the reddit scriptwriters turning everything into a 2 brand civil war about who should be king (facepalm) |
|
|
|
....
oh billy. did you even look at the article  |
|
|
|
Every tax dollar the state collects is spent.
This means new programs like universal basic income can only be funded through tax hikes.
Whenever politicians discuss "new programs" (that are unfunded), it means they must raise taxes to collect funding.
Universal basic income can only be funded through tax hikes on those with jobs.
your thinking too fiat-minded. imagine every school hospital and emergency service was the 'mining pool' of a new fiat coin. the rewards pay for the public services and the wages of public servants trickle out the funds to the wider economy. no more 'banker' money creation. but 'public service' money creation. basically a trickle UP economy. not a trickle down |
|
|
|
mr Miagi says speculation like painting fence, .. up.. down... up.. down  |
|
|
|
|
8 days
i guarantee you within a couple days the tx would have got dropped by the network anyway. at which point you could have made a fresh tx with a higher fee to become more tempting.
however it seems you just allowed it to re broadcast out the same tx with the same low fee again
|
|
|
|
why does everyone tries to come up with these crazy numbers these days, rise to $5000, drop to $1000 and all that. can't you people just enjoy the rise, i mean we are already 100% higher than the beginning of this year. i call that a big win! and if you want to buy in, then just close down bitcointalk and stop reading silly comments about bitcoin price from random people and just buy the damn thing usually if someone wants $5000 its because they bought in at $2500.. standard psychology "double your money" greed. there is always a pattern.. those that want it to go up have already bought and want it to double. those who have not bought. want it to halve to buy in cheap. |
|
|
|
The fact is that there is nothing magical about voting to redistribute property. If I come take your car, it's called theft. If myself and two others vote before we take your car does that change the morality of it? Theft is theft and political rituals called Democracy don't change that.
Come up with a consensual, voluntary way to support the less fortunate and operate under free market principles. Then I'm all for it.
where have i even said once that the funds should come from taxing people. or theft. my theory of new fiat. it would be the NEW money.. starts at the bottom and trickles up... not starts at the top and trickles down imagine if all the public services and social services/care was funded via block rewards. thus 'tax' is not of concern
On the condition that they have a job in the first place before breeding. Otherwise the breeders will breed in greater numbers.
im not talking about a basic lifestyle. im talking about a survival amount. not a 50"tv broadband, not free electric to run a cinema 24/7 along with a houseparty.. not full english breakfast, a roast lunch and a takeaway evening meal im saying a survival amount just 5 hours of electric a day, to run 1 lightbulb at a time in the evening and enough to make toast in the morning and heat up an evening basic meal in a microwave basic meals like toast for breakfast a chicken salad sandwich for lunch and something simple and basic in the evening as for your "breeders will breed in greater numbers".. seems you have been reading the snobby media that exaggerates things to make the banking disaster of 2008 some how the poors fault for syphoning funds. here in the UK the 'lazy people' account for under £2bill, not even 1% of the treasury(and even that is using exaggerated numbers) yet the government hands over £45bill to banks, £30 billion to corporations(atleast) anyway my theory take that snobby 'burden' away from tax payers by making the money creation cover all the public services with a trickle up not a trickle down monetary policy. |
|
|
|
I suggest subsidize the working poor over the lazy poor, but of course that takes away gibs and votes.
if you stop watching fox news and other snobby news that the rich love. you will find out that the 'lazy' people only account for a very very small percent of the population. im not talking about giving them a living lifestyle amount. but just a survival amount. so no one need to be homeless/starve. |
|
|
|
|
my belief is that every human should always have a BASIC roof over thier head and enough funds to keep a fridge and microwave functional to make food. enough funds to cover the most basic food to prepare the most basic healthy meals there are.
and then people work to improve their lifestyle.
no one should be homeless and starving. but no one should be living luxury lifestyles of 50" TV and caviar lifestyle on social security.
as for funding this.. is simple. instead of banks making billions a year .. the 'money creation' covers the basic 'survival' public services/health.
if you take away the "my taxes are paying for laziness" debate. and make the social security funded not by the public but by money creation. then it can work
|
|
|
|
theorising new FIAT systems. each idea are separate
starting with the basics. the new money and who deserves it
idea 1
'new money' /blockreward.
this should be used as the public services treasury.
the funds of blockrewards pay for public services as the way to 'trickle down' funds into circulation. not hoarded by bankers/pools. but done as a way to pay for public services without the people needing to be taxed by 20-50%.
EG hospitals, fire/police/social security office/schools become the 'pools'
idea 2
'new money'
this should be used as the public services treasury.
but is not created by 'blockreward' but instead by parents and doctors forming new multisigs as a 'birth registration' when a child is born that gets funded XXXXXX fresh coin which is then collateral in some format to pay for that persons public services (health, school, pension, unemployment) at a rate of say 15-25 years of healthy living.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
