Welfare is socialism.  It's horrible because it's taking someone's cash and giving it to someone else, through force, without consent (outside of "If you live here, you have to do it.")

Though you're right that not everyone can produce money, it's also costly to produce Bitcoin, and normal people can't live off it.  If everyone mined, you'd make very little (or less than what you're paying for the mining rig,) because everyone would be competing to the point where it was no longer profitable.  People stop mining when they can't profit.  Other people make more money when people stop mining, and it becomes profitable again.  If everyone mined, they'd have to do so out of force, because nobody wants to plug up a machine that works at a loss.

People need to work these things out on their own.  Government intervention only causes problems.  You cannot improve Obamacare, outside of destroying it.  That's socialism at work.  It's artificial.  If people are given the freedom to do as they please, they'll also find the freedom to do the work they want.  You'll see businesses shutting down for not finding people willing to work at the wages provided (minimum wage; thanks, government, for telling people 7.25 is supposed to be living wage.)  You'll see businesses rising from those who once said, "There's no jobs, I can do nothing," and flourishing; do you know why Apple is outsourcing all its labor to China?  Regulation makes it unprofitable to do it in America.  If people, which is behind the system you tout, are the key, why must we introduce a state?  The state is great at tax farming, but they're not so great at letting people do what they want.  It's a conflict.  For people to be free to choose their work, their businesses need to be free.  What good is the state, then, when it comes to a free market?  What is their service?

We already have that, America is what you're referring to.  So far, it hasn't been working out, thanks to regulation and socialism.

Ahh--my bad.  To do this, you stop regulating, by removing the government (or limiting them to the point where they can do nothing.)  Why must it be the guy with all the soldiers who provides these "services"?  What services are these which a normal business who lacks military force cannot provide?

I'm afraid you're the one arguing with yourself.  You don't say, "I want people to be free and I want to end economic slavery", and then turn around and say, "By the way I agree that we need to be ruled and ordered by the state."

Which is it?  Are you for freedom, or are you against freedom?  Your thread implies you're pro-freedom.  Now you're saying you're pro-control.  Choose a side of the fence.

Couldn't be sure of it myself; as is solipsism, the only thing I can be sure of is that I have something with which to interpret, I could never prove to myself that what I was experiencing was real, or not; all I can know for sure is that I am.

Therefor, it's as pointless as pondering life after death.  Since I just don't know, and can't know, I may as well continue believing that I'm not the only existing mind in the world.  It also seems to encourage people to believe in whatever they want to believe, since they can never "know it".  For example, my apple is an orange--wait, no it isn't, because I can't prove it exists either way!  Except that's silly; since I can't know that I can't know, I may as well assume my apple is not an orange because it's an apple, not because I can't know it does, in fact, exist.  Certainly, I may be a brain in a vat and imagining it all to begin with, but since I don't know that, I'm going to figure I'm not.

Besides, if I subscribed to solipsism, I'm not sure you even exist.  But in your mind, you're not sure if I exist.  You're a figment of my imagination, and I'm a figment of yours.  We can always assume that you're the real one and I'm not, and vice versa, but I think I find it better to say that, since we can never know that, it's better to assume that we're both existing, and that, since we're not sure which one's the one having the illusion of life, we may as well run off of what is most likely: we're both two guys who have computers and experiencing life through two different minds.  I could go in circles and say something like, "But what if everything isn't real!", but then I'd realize I still can't know that.  Since the illusion is this, and not something else, I'm going to roll with it, and take it as reality; unless another reality (a second illusion) takes the spot of this one, and since the first has not been changed since my inception, it's safe to say that this is it.

Also, it seems to be popular with the autistic crowd, which isn't surprising, as they're already disconnected from reality, so why not take it to the next level?

This is a neat idea.  Personally, everything I can do can be done remotely, so I have no real need to meet with anyone locally.  But it would be good to have economies starting up around my area (Dallas/Fort Worth)

Ha ha maybe not as easy as I'm making it.  But for example: Bill wants to be a video game designer.  But there's no positions available anywhere!  What does Bill do?  He goes indie, maybe gets a few buddies who are good at music or coding etc., and makes his own video games.

No work?  Create work

 That's hilarious.  So much for solipsism.  Even if I was just a brain in a vat and you were all in my head, I can never prove it.  All I can do is assume this is all real, and play the game.

What was your first?

lmao that's exactly spot on.  Let's not forget the part about being a brain in a vat.

The argument is, how do we do the following:

A. Become free (by removing the state)

and

B. Ensure everyone's playing nicely through socialism (to make this system work)

They're in direct conflict; A requires there to be no state, but B requires a state to keep the system in check.  In this case, robosocialism requires machines to act as the state.  Because machines are programmed by people, they're merely another proxy; who programs the machines?  Who invents these rules, and how would we change them?

Huh.  Considering the world's about 70% water, seasteading seems like a neat idea.

What happens when your city springs a leak, tho?

At some point in time, almost all jobs requiring lots of physical work and little to no thought will be replaced by machine.

However, this leaves the important jobs to people: jobs that require you to use your head.  If we're assuming America doesn't change by the time this happens, we can expect to see a lot of people dying.    But anyway, people will still work, I presume mostly for themselves.  Since people will have a lot more leisure time and a lot less work exhaustion, we'll see a spike in intelligence, in which we'll fit the last piece to the puzzle for a post-scarcity economy (hopefully by then, we'll be in a state of post-scarcity anarchism.)

I'm still trying to figure out how any of our current economies can apply here.  But in any case, I do not believe mining is the end-all solution.  There will still be work, it just won't be Taco Bell anymore.  People have this weird thing where, when they're not working for someone else, they start working for themselves.  I don't know why it happens, but we love to do stuff--that is, when we're not exhausted from doing stuff we don't like to do.  Considering a world in which we no longer have to compete for food or shelter (which still rings the overpopulation issue, as a world without starvation and access to medical promotes life), I can see any economic system working, just as long as it's voluntary.

If you've ever seen people make giant murals of their favorite stuff in Minecraft, you're looking into the future.  Why do they work?  Hell if I know, but they love to do it.

Exactly the same here.  I was in favor of gun bans (for some reason, I thought this might help anything) and thought anarchists were a bunch of loonies who had no idea how "the system worked".  Realized they're like Atheists; they know more about the state more than anyone supporting the state does, which is why they're against it to begin with.

The #1 reason for me is that it's not controlled by any bank.  It's peer to peer money.  My assets are safe.

So far, everyone seems to be coming from all over the place

It's certainly educating me   Now I can educate others.

Did you PM a mod about it?  What'd they say?