|
Lol at 1 (Hitler) vs. 16 (Bitcoin)
|
|
|
|
|
Or, you can do both.
I pay taxes, but I'm also involved with more noble projects like Bitcoin, supporting it and promoting it. If and when the status quo shifts, then I will no longer need to pay taxes. But complaining that we have to pay taxes and not doing so doesn't do anything. It's not selling out -- it's called mitigating personal stress and the stress of others while simultaneously doing all I can within the context that I am ultimately constricted to, i.e. acting within my capacities.
Yes, taxes are used for wars, bailouts, etc., but they are also used for infrastructure, for medical purposes, for education, and for other noble purposes, even if those purposes are not being fulfilled by the most efficient of means. I cannot be held responsible for the actions of others. Societal law indicates that the tax money should be used purposefully, and I am doing my fair share to contribute towards that intended purpose. If others fuck it up, that's a problem, but it's a problem for which I cannot be held accountable.
If you do pay taxes, sure, it's possible that your dollars were specifically used to purchase a gun that ended up killing an innocent civilian in Iraq. Or, perhaps, they were used to provide medical treatment that saved the life of a person with cancer. You don't know, but you do your best. Communities progress when people intend to think and do their best. Bitching and complaining is not a productive use of one's time or energy. All that time you spent bitching you could've been doing something useful, or at the very least, you could have been appreciate of the good aspects of our society so that you aren't so pissed off all the time. Nobody likes to be around someone who is stressed all the time. When you're stressed and angry, you tend to make poor choices and you make bad decisions, and you make others around you unhappy and stressed. It inhibits your ability to deconstruct a situation effectively.
|
|
|
|
|
Two assumptions you've made that are incorrect.
1) I felt the same way about taxes before I got this job. I was hired literally 8 days ago. My opinion on taxes didn't change overnight.
2) I got through college and graduate school with about a 33% attendance record. I have a litany of emails from previous professors saying things like "Hey, you do great work, but you need to come to class or else I'll have to drop you according to school policy." I had 6 professors tell me I entered the wrong profession (social work), and I developed a reputation among the professors at my graduate college for being the type of person that goes against the grain. I'd be willing to bet I've spent as much time (if not more) educating myself outside of the classroom as you or most others on this forum. I think that many of my previous posts on this forum reflect this.
I agree with you that the system is flawed. I'm not sure that you actually picked up on the fact that I believe this. What I'm saying is that the way to fix a flawed system is NOT to rebel in a way that is going to damage people. When you say things like "I don't want to pay taxes because there are better ways of doing things," you miss the practical point -- you're hurting people based upon the system we currently have. I wouldn't want to pay taxes either if we had a society that didn't require them. But, we don't have that society yet, and I want to pay taxes because it really does make a difference. Besides, saying you don't want to pay taxes won't do a damn thing to make the kind of society you'd like to see exist actually exist.
Though I'm still quite immature, I've spent a considerable amount of time during my (even) more immature years whining and bitching about society and saying things like "fuck taxes" and "fuck banks" and finding very good reasons to support my beliefs. Deep down, I still have those beliefs. I believe many social systems could be a whole heck-of-a-lot better. So, to that extent we share something in common. The difference, however, is that I've learned how to let go of the stress associated with these things at the same time that I fight against them. How do I do this? It's simple. I can only control what I can control, and that's it. All I have to work with is this moment right now, and all I can do is the best in my environment right here, right now. And, right now includes the current societal structure we have. So, accordingly, I will do the best I possibly can in the current societal structure we have. This means I will pay taxes and I will expect others to do so because I am not powerful enough to change the entire societal structure.
Societies progress when individuals collectively move toward certain goals. I figure that if I simply do the best I can, and if others do the best they can, then society will naturally change for the better -- that is, if everyone does the best they can, then society will do the best it can. But, fighting against societal structure itself means I am fighting against people, people that I need to help make this society a better place. For every policy that you can find which hurts a person, you will find someone else whom it helps. When people fight against society, they are not doing the best they can. They are misrepresenting their place in society, and all of a sudden everyone is trying to run their own show. When people end up running their own show, you get what we see today, which is people at the top of the pyramid making selfish decisions that hurt everyone else. When you make a selfish decision like "I don't want to pay taxes," you may not think you're hurting everyone else, but you are. You just don't see it that way because you don't have as much influence as those at the top.
|
|
|
|
I don't think it's necessarily aggressive, but let's assume it is. Do you know why? Without taxes, there goes infrastructure. There goes roads, bridges, sewer and septic systems, the electric grid, food and agriculture, etc. Taxes are there so that everyone can contribute to the communal pot to keep shit working. This is exactly what Obama is trying to convey and you can't seem to understand it. If we don't have that overarching infrastructure, then no, you won't get to have your precious business. Try maintaining the electricity, the septic system, the roads for your customers to get to your business, etc. without that overarching infrastructure. Shit would collapse in a heartbeat if it wasn't for the government. The electric grid, transportation, food and agriculture, etc...all of this would collapse without infrastructure. Taxes support that infrastructure.
Taxes support the government. Not the infrastructure. Roads, sewage, everything that is actually needed can, by that very feature (necessity) be paid for privately. Telling me that I have to support them because they provide something I need is much less impressive when they don't let anyone else provide it. I'd like to point out that I believe you contradicted yourself. Specifically, you said that taxes don't support the infrastructure but that they support the government, and then you go on to say that the government doesn't let anyone else provide the infrastructure. So...then who is providing the infrastructure? Yes, taxes absolutely support the infrastructure. Taxes support the government. Not the infrastructure. That government provides the infrastructure simply means that some - or even most - of those taxes are wasted in also providing the other, unnecessary "services" that people do not want, nor need. Tax money funds: streets bridges education police protection and law enforcement national defense Medicare Medicaid libraries parks social security fire protection interest on the national debt water sanitation septic infrastructure the electric grid city councils and town municipalities hospitals nature conservatories welfare housing and urban development Regarding "services that people do not want, nor need", that's very debatable. We're a democratic nation. Most of the leaders we have were voted into office. This population has voted for Sarah Palin, George Bush, Jerry Springer, George Blegojevich, etc. These are people that the nation has collectively chosen. What you witness is the result of democracy. I'm sure that you and I both agree that 2000-2004 was a pretty horrific time in American politics. And guess what happened? Bush got voted in again! If the people really were desperate for such radical change, they would be on the streets protesting like crazy. Actually, some are. The vast majority are not. It's not that important to them to protest. They would rather do something else. Here's a question I always ask myself. If I didn't have access to a television, the Internet, or a newspaper, would I care what's going on in Washington? Would I even know what's going on in Washington? I've barely seen any effects of national policy in my life -- maybe some small variances here and there, but nothing radical or crazy. I know this -- I like myself. I'm a product of society. Are there things in society I don't like? Sure. Do I think things could work better? Sure. But again, I like myself, and I'm a product of society. So, society can't be that bad. I'm not going to bitch. I have all my basic needs met. ***And, I have a job because of taxes. I was just employed in a full-time position in a Medicare-only funded hospital. Thank you, taxes. |
|
|
|
I don't think it's necessarily aggressive, but let's assume it is. Do you know why? Without taxes, there goes infrastructure. There goes roads, bridges, sewer and septic systems, the electric grid, food and agriculture, etc. Taxes are there so that everyone can contribute to the communal pot to keep shit working. This is exactly what Obama is trying to convey and you can't seem to understand it. If we don't have that overarching infrastructure, then no, you won't get to have your precious business. Try maintaining the electricity, the septic system, the roads for your customers to get to your business, etc. without that overarching infrastructure. Shit would collapse in a heartbeat if it wasn't for the government. The electric grid, transportation, food and agriculture, etc...all of this would collapse without infrastructure. Taxes support that infrastructure.
Taxes support the government. Not the infrastructure. Roads, sewage, everything that is actually needed can, by that very feature (necessity) be paid for privately. Telling me that I have to support them because they provide something I need is much less impressive when they don't let anyone else provide it. I'd like to point out that I believe you contradicted yourself. Specifically, you said that taxes don't support the infrastructure but that they support the government, and then you go on to say that the government doesn't let anyone else provide the infrastructure. So...then who is providing the infrastructure? Yes, taxes absolutely support the infrastructure. Could there exist a societal structure in which taxes are not needed. Yes. Does that structure exist currently? No.Asking to not pay taxes because you'd prefer a society in which infrastructure is supported by private ventures is like asking for an honorary Ph.D because you think you have more knowledge in a particular field than someone who has paid the time and money to obtain a post-graduate degree. Sure, you may actually be more knowledgeable, and it might be a better idea to judge credentials based upon actual knowledge and merit rather than a piece of paper -- but too bad, that's not the reality we live in right now. Suck it up and deal with it. When a large enough percentage of the people realizes that a certain type of society can exist that does not require taxes nor pieces of paper certifying academic credentials, then that society will take shape. But, the truth of the matter is that people either simply do not know how to make such a society a reality yet (it's a very, very complex problem), or they're pretty darn happy with the way things currently are. |
|
|
|
Wow, what a bunch of dicks. Are they going to sue McDonalds next because the "M" is too similar? Fucks sake.
Actually, I remember that some girl in Chicago got sued by McDonald's for something equally ridiculous... Her last name was McSomething (let's just say it was McCoy). Anyway, she decided to hold a fundraiser for charity. She organized the entire thing herself and all of the proceeds were going to go to some charity. She actually managed to raise tens of thousands of dollars if I remember correctly...all for charity. Then, McDonald's sued her because she called the charity event the 'McFest' or 'McFestival' or something. |
|
|
|
You know what happens when we get people questioning things like "all men are created equal?" We get people that breach social contracts and become selfish assholes.
The social contract is not to agress against others. This includes not letting the government agress us via taxes. I have no problem paying taxes. But I do. Because I do not have the option of not paying, that is aggression. Nobody is forcing you to pay taxes. What aggression? Asked... It's coercion. And answered. I don't think it's necessarily aggressive, but let's assume it is. Do you know why? Without taxes, there goes infrastructure. There goes roads, bridges, sewer and septic systems, the electric grid, food and agriculture, etc. Taxes are there so that everyone can contribute to the communal pot to keep shit working. This is exactly what Obama is trying to convey and you can't seem to understand it. If we don't have that overarching infrastructure, then no, you won't get to have your precious business. Try maintaining the electricity, the septic system, the roads for your customers to get to your business, etc. without that overarching infrastructure. Shit would collapse in a heartbeat if it wasn't for the government. The electric grid, transportation, food and agriculture, etc...all of this would collapse without infrastructure. Taxes support that infrastructure. Bottom line, if you don't contribute a fair share to society, you're going to get burnt. Don't contribute by getting a job? Then you get to be poor and live in shitty conditions. Don't contribute by paying taxes? Then you get the IRS on your back. If you don't pay taxes I hope they come after you because I pay my taxes, and my share is holding your ass up and keeping you afloat. |
|
|
|
You know what happens when we get people questioning things like "all men are created equal?" We get people that breach social contracts and become selfish assholes.
The social contract is not to agress against others. This includes not letting the government agress us via taxes. I have no problem paying taxes. But I do. Because I do not have the option of not paying, that is aggression. Nobody is forcing you to pay taxes. What aggression? It's coercion. They are saying to you, "Hey, pay taxes or else we're going to come after you." Well, why do they get to do that? Actually, it's because of their abilities, as you pointed out. Lot's of people don't pay taxes. If they don't do it, apparently nobody was forcing them to do so. |
|
|
|
You know what happens when we get people questioning things like "all men are created equal?" We get people that breach social contracts and become selfish assholes.
The social contract is not to agress against others. This includes not letting the government agress us via taxes. I have no problem paying taxes. |
|
|
|
You're the type of person that would have a problem with the phrase "all men are created equal" too, wouldn't you? And for the same reasons.
Because we are not. Unless you can do math in your head like Stephen Hawking, and also run as fast as Usain Bolt. All men are created with equal opportunity. Not equal ability. Do you have any idea what you're saying? Where to begin... First of all, I don't think opportunity means what you think it means if you're isolating it from ability. Equal opportunity = inequal non-opportunity, or, essentially, equal circumstance. Guess what, if you're born different, then your opportunities will be different. If you're born inequal, your opportunities will be inequal. Moreover, who is to say that rights are equal if people are born inequal? Why should they be equal? You're confusing what you think should be the case (i.e. people should have equal opportunities) with reality (i.e. people have inequal abilities). Stay congruent. Now, let's just assume that what you're saying is true. Alright, so if people are born with inequal abilities (or, inequal socioeconomic status), then some people will rise to the top and have power over you. Or, some groups of people will. Right now, the government is one such group of people. It wields an inequal amount of power and they can exercise it however they choose because you can't stop them. Naturally, the end result of this will be inequal opportunities because those that are more closely connected to those in power will have the opportunistic advantages of the powerful. Ugh, it really bothers me when people say cliche shit that does not make any sense whatsoever. You know what happens when we get people questioning things like "all men are created equal?" We get people that breach social contracts and become selfish assholes. Guess what -- when you're a part of a group, you can hurt yourself by hurting the group (a la metagame theory). Are people individuals? Yes. I'm all for individual accomplishments and achievements, and there is a time and place for individual recognition since individual recognition of accomplishments facilitates motivation and positive self-esteem. But it is absolutely impossible to isolate an individual event from the collective. It's logically absurd. |
|
|
|
I agree with everything you just said, and I agree President Obama's intended sentiment (although that speech writer should be fired) even though I am not a statist.
I don't disagree with what I think his intended sentiment was, either, but what he meant, "We should recognize the advantages working together has given us," versus what he said, "If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen," is what really gets me. Bitcoin without users is still a great piece of cryptographic math. Bitcoin without Satoshi is Paypal. You're the type of person that would have a problem with the phrase "all men are created equal" too, wouldn't you? And for the same reasons. |
|
|
|
Obama acknowledged both individuals and groups. Quit the black or white garbage when it's clearly both.
He acknowledge both, true, but minimized individual achievements, and glorified the group. Sounds humble. Wouldn't that imply that Obama is also minimizing his own victory in the 2008 election? I.e. he couldn't have done it without the people? Btw, I don't vote and I don't care for either Obama or Romney. |
|
|
|
See what I did there? And people have a problem with this...why?
If he had said only the things you highlighted in the second example, then we'd have no problem with it. But he didn't. He also said those things you highlighted in the first example. Those phrases change the meaning of the speech from "Hey, isn't this system we've built together great?" to "Fuck your achievements. That's all the system's doing, you didn't do shit."  Uh, what? And if he had only said the things that I highlighted in the first example, then people would have just reason to have a problem with it. But he didn't. He also said those things I highlighted in the second example. Those phrases change the meaning of the speech from, "Fuck your achievements" to "Hey, isn't this system we've built together great?" Again, see what I did there? Regardless, here's a fine example. Your parents made you. Without your parents, you wouldn't have been able to do jack shit. So, the reason anybody's company exists to begin with is because of parents. In other words, no, no company in the history of this entire planet could have been established without others, nor could anything have ever been built without others. Obama acknowledged both individuals and groups. Quit the black or white garbage when it's clearly both. |
|
|
|
Wow... Ok. Let's break this down a bit. If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.
The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.
So we say to ourselves, ever since the founding of this country, you know what, there are some things we do better together. That’s how we funded the GI Bill. That’s how we created the middle class. That’s how we built the Golden Gate Bridge or the Hoover Dam. That’s how we invented the Internet. That’s how we sent a man to the moon. We rise or fall together as one nation and as one people, and that’s the reason I’m running for president — because I still believe in that idea. You’re not on your own, we’re in this together. If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.
The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.
So we say to ourselves, ever since the founding of this country, you know what, there are some things we do better together. That’s how we funded the GI Bill. That’s how we created the middle class. That’s how we built the Golden Gate Bridge or the Hoover Dam. That’s how we invented the Internet. That’s how we sent a man to the moon. We rise or fall together as one nation and as one people, and that’s the reason I’m running for president — because I still believe in that idea. You’re not on your own, we’re in this together. See what I did there? And people have a problem with this...why? |
|
|
|
|
It's backed by the system of people using computers.
1) Without people, nobody hits the "go" button on their miners or opens their client software, and nobody makes transactions.
2) Without computers, transactions are not confirmed and thus there is no confirmed value.
You need both. Computers without people operating them are useless, and people without computers cannot use Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
This thread is a complete joke. "Relax, have fun, invest." = "Trust me but don't think about it, then give me your money." An "investment fund" with 8.5 BTC? And you're giving away 0.1% shares to your investor? Wow, aren't you generous  So, even if you make 10,000 shares (for a face-value of .00085 BTC apiece), the investor, receiving 0.1% of them, will have a whopping 10 shares with a face-value sum of .0082 BTC. By the way, I mine that much BTC in like 1-2 minutes. And, then there's still the absolutely ludicrous fact that you only intend on repaying your investor if you break even! Do you have any idea how long it will take you to break even aka 100% ROI? Well, unless you're investing through pirate or a similar pass-through, my guess is that it will take 6-12 months if not longer. Yeah, thanks but no thanks. How about a 8.5 BTC loan with a payback of 9-10 BTC in 7 days? This is one of the least thought out and unprepared business proposals I've ever heard. |
|
|
|
|
Yes, the BTC are stored locally on your computer within your wallet.dat file. But the transaction itself is made public through the blockchain records.
|
|
|
|
It would be more awesome if they offered escrow. I wouldn't put up serious money for it without that. Yep. This reeks of scam, especially when its 3.21 oz. and the "buy now" price is less than 1 oz. |
|
|
|
|
This was a very interesting thread to watch. The incentive to take the 100 BTC seems great because you wouldn't even be labeled a scammer for it. But, you would essentially be writing off any chance of regaining a solid reputation.
Are reputations worth 100 BTC to some people? Yes. How many? Who knows.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
