Sigh...If there was no TSA, I'd be headed for NYC for my birthday.  EDIT: Unless she gets temp work at the JFK TSA , ofcourse  |
|
|
|
|
damn, did you type all that?
|
|
|
|
|
For a New Liberty - Murray Rothbard
How an Economy Grows and Why It Crashes - Peter D Schiff
The Revolution: A Manifesto - Ron Paul
End the Fed - Ron Paul
|
|
|
|
Why would I want a physical currency whose value that is subject to the whims of a higher power, when I can have sound money that doesn't lose value everyday?
Where can I find this sound money that doesn't lose value? Funny, but it isn't fair to generalize the context of his statement. He said "that doesn't lose value everyday;" this is an expression, and not to be taken literally. If I interpret him correctly, he is asserting the strength of Bitcoin in its evasion (or rather, structural immunity) to the powers of centralized authority. So basically his statement is incorrect, misleading, and completely worthless. EVERYTHING is subject to value fluctuations in an open market. I'd take a currency that doesn't lose value over one that does anyday... but that's irrelevant because that currency doesn't exist and never will. Only on the Internet can people like smellybobby and AyeYo roam around these forums making the most fallacious arguments and speak so arrogantly about it. Look guys, you are not fooling anyone. You just dismiss the points made without tackling them because you cannot. No one ever said that gold, silver, btc, sea shells or whatever "never lose value". That's incorrect and you know it. You are being intellectually dishonest. It is fact that with gov fiat money anywhere in the world you are at the mercy of the whims of Central Banksters. Have a look at my avatar. I had a nice time using Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe notes that were debased to enrich Mugabe and his cronies. Regardless of ideology, this is a fact. Central bankers have historically robbed populations the world over. That was fact before this thread and will continue to be so regardless of what anyone says here. This shit has been going on for a long long time. Fact is, sound money hold value over time and the only thing that fiat money does over time is return to it's intrinsic value, ZERO. The original post is not even worth addressing. Your basic logic is govt A is better than govt B therefore ALL govt is good. Then you go on to count paper as wealth. What an idiot *facepalm* EDIT: Oh and by the way, the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange experienced GIGANTIC gains at the height of hyperinflation while people died of cholera because this "prosperous country" couldn't afford water treatment chemicals to purify drinking water. |
|
|
|
Has an example of a 'perfect' government system been developed yet?
Look in a mirror. That is the perfect government for you. classic! |
|
|
|
This isn't news to anyone that doesn't have their head up their ass (so it'll be news to a lot of people on this board). Properly, centrally planned economies have been outpacing the growth of more "capitalist" economies like the US for... ever.
Interesting note: These wars all over the world that the US is involved in, those ARE results of the capitalist economy. The big, greedy defense contractors are big and greedy and want more money, so they set their cronies up in government positions and off to war we go.
Don't you think it's ironic that a staunch supporter of central planning is supporting a currency that aims to dislodge central planning? |
|
|
|
We need to focus on bitcoin.org in a Belarus version, Greek Version and to a lesser extent a Spanish and Portuguese version of the site.
Look those economies are 2 inches from collapse... it's literally now or never to get some adoption rate in those countries.
My idea is that if we can get some adoption in those countries.. it can snowball from there... so we need to market them in those areas...
I think a native language version of the site along with some way to better communicate the concept of bitcoins being a financial way to save their "money" when their currency is being devalued is the best option.
I very much agree. I just watched a movie about the Greek Crisis called 'Debtocracy', it's really good. I highly recommend it. It has some underlying socialist premises but it exposes the corruption of corporatism in the greek context http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKpxPo-lInk&feature=player_embedded |
|
|
|
Bitcoins are an incredible creation, and a testament to mathematical elegance. But they will not be the iteration of digital currency ultimately adopted by society. This is what it ultimately comes down to.
Why? |
|
|
|
The idea is inspired by revcoin's topic http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=19278.0To prevent deflationary spiral that may come some day, I have a very simple suggestion: all the miners and mining pools make an agreement that transaction fee should be a function of activity(or "age") of payer's address/account, which can easily checked by tracing back it's information in old blocks. Old account will spend more transaction fee to make the transaction confirmed, unless the payer build a powerful mining rig and successfully create a block to include that transaction. For those account with huge amount of bitcoins, if the owner want to spend them in some day that each bitcoin can exchange for 10000$, he/she may only be able to trans 1% of them, and the rest 99% will be charged as transaction fee. He or She will still be a rich person, but bitcoin will not make any one a billionaire by simply hold a large amount of bitcoin for several years.I think the idea is feasible： miners can earn more by this 'rule', and daily users of bitcoin will not worry about the bitcoin they spent will have severalfold purchasing power after one year and grudge to use them. With this "rule", bitcoin will become a "currency" rather than "digital gold". What is so wrong with early adopters becoming rich. What incentive is there for people to participate during the early hard time like the Mt Gox hack, DEA crackdown on SIlk Road and theft of $500,000 worth of BTC? What is the incentive if people come along and decide that it wrong to make profit for taking risk? Furthermore, the whole deflationary spiral thing is a myth of Keynesian economics. More info: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Deflationary_spiral |
|
|
|
|
Mt Gox is working with the Feds. DO NOT TRUST THEM
|
|
|
|
I have not received anything yet. Would you like to change that? |
|
|
|
|
While I am sympathetic to ideas of wanting to "back" btc with something, it is impossible to do without some degree of centralization which is unacceptable. For instance, if your proposal were to be adopted it would effectively mean that miners have to pay for your backing plan. So essentially miners are supposed to pay into a "when sh*t hits the fan" fund that will benefit everyone at their expense.
Furthermore, your plan gives an unfair advantage to Mt Gox. Why should they benefit from the guaranteed volume as a result of processing the "back btc auction"? Can we even trust Mt Gox since they came out the other day saying they will hand over details of peaceful people who freely exchanged goods to the thugs who call themselves the DEA.
Who is going to take the role of uncle sam and redistribute wealth from miners to Mt Gox & "society"?
I think this post is a great insight into how socialism begins. The reason you are able to make such a proposal is that you don't have to pay for it. Otherwise you'd just "back" btc yourself at your price with your money.
|
|
|
|
Ever since I found out about the revolutionary potential of bitcoin, I've been ruminating on how the hypothetical AnCapistan will deal with certain issues. After reading this article about a 17y.o. that sold his kidney to buy an iPad 2  - http://thenextweb.com/apple/2011/06/02/chinese-student-reportedly-sells-his-kidney-to-buy-an-ipad-2/ -I was thinking that if I needed a transplant I'd rather not get it from a kid who might not know the implications of his decisions. So I was wondering if the market can come up with a more "humane" way of providing organs for those in need. It would be possible for a car/life insurance company to offer reduced premiums in exchange for your organs if you die in a car crash. Depending on the price of organs as dictated by the market, you might not even need to pay car/life insurance anymore. This could be very beneficial to young people as they have relatively higher insurance premiums. What do you think of this idea? |
|
|
|
I just came across this interesting article: http://evoorhees.blogspot.com/2009/07/record-of-federal-reserve.htmlLet’s talk about The Federal Reserve. Consider the following facts:
* From 1776 to 1912 (136 years), the value of the dollar, relative to the Consumer Price Index, increased 11%. A dollar could buy 11% more goods in 1912 than in 1776. Thus, if in 1776, you sat on your savings pile of $1,000,000 for 136 years, it would then be worth $1,110,000 in purchasing power (it will have appreciated in value by 11%). A loaf of bread for Thomas Jefferson cost the same as a loaf of bread for Lincoln 50 years later and again the same for J.P. Morgan 50 years after that.
* The United States Federal Reserve was created in 1913. The stated purpose of the Fed, by its own definition taken from its website, is to “conduct the nation's monetary policy by influencing money and credit conditions in the economy in pursuit of full employment and stable prices.” Note that “stable prices” is another way of saying “stable dollar,” they are two sides of the same coin (couldn’t resist the pun).
* Then after The Fed’s creation, from 1913 to 2008 (95 years), the value of the dollar, relative to the Consumer Price Index, decreased by 95%. A dollar could buy 95% fewer goods in 2008 than in 1913. Thus, if in 1913, you sat on your savings pile of $1,000,000 for 95 years, it would then be worth only $50,000 in purchasing power (it will have depreciated in value by 95%). One would now need to pay about 20X more than J.P. Morgan for one’s bread. Ask my mother how much the price of milk has increase just in the last ten years alone. |
|
|
|
Yeah well I've been a libertarian since before the internet existed. And I'm perfectly aware of the contradictory views of some libertarians. So please just try to address the issues presented. Because at the moment you're conflating my responses with those of MoonShadow, and just throwing out spray-fire of anti-capitalist nonsense instead of making any rational points.
You're also conflating a sustainable system with a just system. Capitalism is derived from the facts of nature. Natural resources are limited. Human stupidity is infinite. Yet it is not inherently just or particularly equitable without some additional considerations. It would be perfectly sustainable, for instance, for 50% of the world's population to just be periodically marched off to die in war, or to instate a global one-child policy, or forced labor camps or what have you. These systems are not, however, particularly just.
So there are considerations beyond just unfettered capitalism and sustainability; there are reasonable restrictions that even most ardent capitalists agree are beneficial. For instance, a power plant produces electricity which can benefit everyone, but it also produces pollution which can do harm. The common aim of sustainability, libertarianism, and even capitalism, is to identify and quantify the harm, and to mitigate or prevent it without also destroying the benefit.
Thirdly, you're conflating capable government with big government. Libertarians tend to believe that self-government is the most effective form of regulation. That's not necessarily true. But it's certainly a limiting case. So you may assume "capable government" to be a utopian fantasy. But ultimately governments can be replaced when they fail to meet the most basic requirements of those governed.
Wow, a semi-reasonable post. My apologies for lumping you in with the rest of the corporatists in disguise. I still think (know) that you're belief system is out of touch with reality and too utopian to work, but I'll at least give you large amounts of credit for not being one of the many here who are latched firmly onto the corporate teet. Funny how, again, you seem to skirt the issues being presented. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
