Wealth officially redistributed; someone out there is going to enjoy the socialist paradise, it's just not going to be me.

Bitcoin is money, so naturally it can fund anything.  I wouldn't be interested in bitcoin if there was some way it couldn't.

Don't forget about King attempting to copyright "candy" and "saga".  On top of that, their game is a ripoff of another game which precedes it, Candyswipe, which they tried to sue, too.  It's incredible, the extent to which intellectual property destroys the market.

Such is life under crapitalism: if you don't shut out the competition, someone else will shut you out.

I'd rather be screwed by my own stupidity than be screwed by something out of my control.

http://www.the-spearhead.com/2013/11/18/obamacare-is-a-bachelor-tax-that-will-fail/


You know, the typical leftist "we have to save the X (at the expense of young white males)" nonsense.

That which we call government is a mere manifestation of the dark desires of men; nothing in the external can do anything about our willingness to force others to do our bidding via violence, including bitcoin, as the state stems from the internal: ergo, to destroy the government, we must decide to stop supporting it, which occurs when we decide to solve our problems instead through negotiation.

Can bitcoin help people resort to negotiation instead of violence?  Perhaps, but it likely won't be a major cause.  An individual learns how to negotiate primarily in their childhoods, and learns to prefer negotiation over violence through a parent which opts to negotiate instead of, say, spanking, or putting in time-out.  Most people you talk to think negotiating with a child is ridiculous, mainly because their own parents would not negotiate with them.  It's no coincidence that the relationship your average child has with their parents is the same relationship your average citizen has with their government: it's a relationship of authority and obedience.  That's what people understand: you are either obedient, or you are the authority, and those who don't wish to be obedient get into politics.  This is commonly referred to as "human nature" due to its prevalence, but it's not, it's just how most people are raised.

What do you mean test version?  It's already a fully functioning global currency.  If you mean a global fiat currency, we must first compare apples to oranges and see how fruitful that endeavor becomes.

B-b-but, muh idealism!!!

Correct, which is why we can't have a state: those with the power are too selfish to handle it, unless they're made of metal and wire, and always use it to make themselves rich.


Correct, when you have a state; people can't get rich when you don't give them your money, and if you give them your money then you agree they should have it.  The only time this is not true is when the money is taken from you forcibly, either by taxing you directly or inflating the currency or giving special rights to businesses (i.e. corporations.)  The divide between the poor and the rich without the state depends on how much good you contribute to the world, which I find entirely justified as a poor individual in this society will provide no benefit in being wealthy despite his lack of contribution, i.e. socialist beliefs are anti-humanitarian as they take from those successful in improving the world and give to those unsuccessful in improving the world, even bringing the world down.  This makes 0 sense in a world with a state where rich people get rich because they pillage, but it makes sense in the libertarian ideal where people actually have to do good to become wealthy.


They must, otherwise they'll have no other venue to remain rich.  To be successful in the market is to successfully accommodate people's needs and desires; if you don't do this, you won't be rich.  Except when there's a state.


What'll they do without a military at their beck and call, beg you to donate all your money to them?  You could have a million Dicks and Mitts for every Warren and Bill, it wouldn't matter if they have no justified force.


You seem to be under the impression that libertarianism is "rule by the rich".  All I can say here is that you have a very mistaken understanding of libertarianism (unless you're referring to minarchists and TLP, who are just as confused as you are.)  Libertarianism has a very, very basic and fundamental political philosophy, but a far more expansive economic counterpart which will help you understand what I'm talking about: https://mises.org/

Furthermore, I'm not rich nor white by any means.  Maybe you just happen to be white and know a lot of rich white people.

I'm not saying you should never argue, but when you argue with a guy who thinks Hitler and Free Market are analogous...

How to make money as a reporter 101


Emotional response (ITC racism) -> more views -> more holla holla get dolla from advertisers

May the rioters and their victims be damned.

I'm really not worried about it; as far as I know about the disease, while its effects are extreme, it's hard to actually get the stuff; you'd have to actually be near a person who has it, then you have to get some of his fluids not just on you, but in you, which even then the former can be subverted by washing your hands with regular soap.  Until I hear about ebola cases occurring in my own town, I'm not going to lose much sleep over it.  There is no scare, it's just that the areas in Africa in which ebola is occurring, the people are stupid as hell.

Doesn't matter if it's illegal or not, people would still drink.  Only difference is, government would get a cut from fines.  They tried to do it in the past but the public backlash was so severe they couldn't keep it outlawed, it was costing more to outlaw it than not as they were losing support.

I presume you're asking this in relation to marijuana laws; until people really start pushing back against the law, it'll never be legalized.  There was enough anti-marijuana propaganda in public school to following the 60's revolution to keep people from doing so, but the public opinion seems to be steadily moving into acceptance.

Uhm, google is voluntary.  You can opt out.  Guess what you can't opt out of that actually is controlling our lives?  It's like people forget government even exists.

What is government if not terrorism?


Ah, but don't worry, they invented a new definition which solves that conundrum:




Expect more violence and chaos until there's a major ideological shift.

That's actually a misquotation, here's the actual quote:


Money itself is not the root of evil; this precludes that evil did not exist prior to money.  It's essentially saying that greed is bad, not making a remark on money.

The natural lifespan of a business is in its ability to meet the consumer's desires for as long as those needs exist; Coca-Cola, for example, is still around because people are still buying Coca-Cola products.  Businesses are not like people, they don't die when they get old, they die when they stop being useful.

To forcibly end a business because it has been around for a while just creates a giant vacuum in which people will demand said business be reinstituted so they can continue buying the products they wanted.  There is no law which has ever curbed man's desire; you make anything illegal, man willingly becomes criminal to continue getting the item he desires.

The only thing such an action will accomplish is making a lot of people lose work and costing all related businesses a good deal of money to replace the lost business, e.g. replacing all soda machines in every restaurant and venue in regards to Coca-Cola.

If you have an issue with corporations, why not advocate their special governmental rights be removed?  A corporation, after all, can only exist through politics:



This would certainly even the playing field and, with much fairer competition, other businesses can now compete much harder than before and, if a once corporation cannot compete, it'll die on its own.  This way, we don't have that massive production gap between having a business and not having a business, and there won't be a sudden loss of jobs as per your idea.

Currencies come and go all the time, actually.  Not only has this changed a thousand times in the past, but there's no reason for it not to continue to change.