The basis of being a poor- how little or how big? Awhile ago, there was a study done on infants which were born addicted to hard drugs. Their final conclusion was that being born into poverty is a far more debilitating and crippling condition than being born addicted to crack or assorted hard drugs. The mentalities, attitudes, conditions and values which lead to people being in poverty could be contagious and harmful to human development. And so being born into that environment and being in constant contact with those living that life could have severe negative effects upon a person's mindset, attitude and soul. That's the best I can come up with atm. |
|
|
|
OAG sent out a letter with a 34-point questionnaire to 13 crypto exchanges, including some without active operations in New York, asking them to take part in its Virtual Markets Integrity Initiative aimed at fostering greater transparency into their operations. The 13 exchanges addressed were GDAX, Gemini, bitFlyer USA, Bitfinex, Bitstamp USA, Kraken, Bittrex, Poloniex, Binance, Tidex, Gate.io, itBit Trust Company, and Huobi.Pro. https://www.ccn.com/cryptocurrency-exchanges-binance-kraken-may-be-operating-unlawfully-in-new-york-ag-report/I would be interested to know if coinbase were excluded from their 34-point questionaire as it is not listed. For US residents, there could be concern that regulatory practices will seek to establish a centralized monopoly where coinbase processes the vast majority of transactions. To help achieve this precedent, we could see a crackdown on exchanges like binance which cater to american customers. Kraken, I'm not familiar with. But if it turns out those 2 exchanges are the only ones out of the 13 which offer service to american customers, that might ring a few alarm bells. It should also be noted that new york and california are statistically two of the most corrupt & dysfunctional states in the US. Any initiative coming from those two places should be subject to a higher degree of scrutiny. |
|
|
|
Ok, I reckon I already read that assumption from you before. But in any case, if Conor wins what would that say about Khabib? That someone with a cocaine and an alcohol addiction problem can beat him, or are the stories of his addiction untrue hehehe.
Also, is Khabib as tenacious as Nate? No, I reckon. If Conor wins, it depends upon how he wins. Khabib is a far superior wrestler to Nate Diaz, both in his athleticism and his technique. That's the most obvious and glaring difference. One thing that is certain about Khabib is, he hasn't absorbed much damage in his fights. He hasn't taken many punches, elbows or kicks. There could be two sides to that good and bad. The good side is, Khabib's chin is likely to be in good shape. The bad side is, Khabib's body might be suspect due to him not taking many body shots and it not being tested. Conor always praises his coach John Kavanagh. Looking @ Conor's team of guys trained by John Kavanagh however, they are suspect in their wrestling and grappling. You can see it in Artem Lobov's fights where he freezes when he's on the ground or winds up in a grappling situation--example his fight with Ryan Hall. A lot of SBG Ireland fighters have little confidence in their ground game and it shows. That could be a tremendous obstacle for Conor to overcome, especially against someone like Khabib who specializes in that area. |
|
|
|
if the dollar collapsing then how the bitcoin or other coins value will be calculated?? From the example of nations like turkey, its been established that when fiat currencies collapse or inflate, people look for alternatives to store their wealth to avoid devaluation. Turkey's inflating lira has fueled it attaining one of the highest bitcoin ownership rates in the world. Likewise in venezuela we see the state turning to crypto currencies when their own native fiat currency, the bolivar, hyperinflates or devalues. When fiat collapse/inflates the value of crypto currencies and bitcoin, increases. That's the precedent we have seen and the one which is likely to continue into the future. if the dollar collapsing then how the bitcoin or other coins value will be calculated??Lets say all the fiat money will be gone and crypto currency will be used how the bitcoin price will be calculatwd??
If the dollar is falling the USDT...virtual currency will be still the base currency for crypto? USDT is tether. That is a somewhat different topic. This article from bitcoin magazine did a good job explaining tether: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/clearing-misconceptions-how-tether-should-and-does-work/ |
|
|
|
Interesting. Has anyone ever thought insurance could be similar to a ponzi scheme?  Well, I have wondered if insurance could be similar to a pyramid scheme or ponzi in that there are those on the top of the "pyramid" whose costs are being covered by those on the bottom. The main differences may be ponzi schemes relying more heavily upon a growth of their userbase to sustain costs, wheras insurance tends to be more institutionalized with a more thoroughly saturated userbase. And of course there is a necessity context to insurance. I guess the main question is whether insurance policies are officially mandated to produce greater profits for various institutions. Or whether they're necessitated by other factors. I think historically people had healthcare long before health insurance was invented. There could be historical precedents for systematically analyzing and perhaps even putting forth a decent argument contending that various forms of insurance could be eliminated and replaced with better frameworks for achieving identical goals. |
|
|
|
Economics usually measures happiness with a mechanical approach. Just as in thermodynamics, we are beings converting energy into work – so logic dictates that the happiest beings are the ones who can spend less energy and create more work.
In other words, the less energy you spend and the more work you get done, the happier you are. Translating work into money, we can argue that the more money you make, from each individual unit of energy spent, the happier you are.
In general, the more money one has the happier that person is. But measuring economic growth by itself does not correlate to the general population’s happiness. The key metric is, of course, how much money does everyone have. It may interest you to know there is a branch of economic study known as "thermoeconomics" which is associated with points made in your(?) article. Thermoeconomists maintain that human economic systems can be modeled as thermodynamic systems. Thermoeconomists argue that economic systems always involve matter, energy, entropy, and information.[3] Then, based on this premise, theoretical economic analogs of the first and second laws of thermodynamics are developed.[4] Moreover, many economic activities result in the formation of structures. Thermoeconomics applies the statistical mechanics of non-equilibrium thermodynamics to model these activities.[1] In thermodynamic terminology, human economic activity may be described as a dissipative system, which flourishes by consuming free energy in transformations and exchange of resources, goods, and services.[5][6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ThermoeconomicsBoth keynes and hayek are commonly cited on the topic of applying analytical frameworks to economic discussions. It is possible both keynes and hayek stances can be improved on through the utilization of thermoeconomics and less nuanced contextual approaches, which are more scientific in nature. Exchange and transmission of energy draws many parallels to exchange and transmission of money. Centuries of history and commonly held views about finance, economics and money function could be blindly to a degree. What could be required here is a different perspective which advances towards eliminating the ages old misconceptions people have about money that are blinding and prevent us from seeing things clearly. |
|
|
|
|
I think there's a chance Conor McGregor damaged his heart/cardiovascular system from doing cocaine et al. Coke abuse is associated with reduced heart function and decreased capacity to circulate blood. The same can be said of steroids and some PED's. If this is true, it means Conor might need an early finish to win the fight. It also means Conor will get tired much faster than normal if Khabib is able to get the clinch position, hold Conor against the cage or force Conor to repeatedly defend takedowns.
Conor didn't seem like himself during the press conference. It may be that Conor is aware of all of these things. He's seeing his cardio decline from alcohol and substance abuse. Promoting whisky could mean that Conor is already looking at life past fighting as if his career were over.
I'm picking Khabib to win. I know that Conor is a very, very, good fighter. But Conor hasn't shown that one punch KO power @ 155 pounds. It took him a number of punches to finally finish Eddie Alvarez. Like Daniel Cormier said about his fights with Anthony Johnson, his focus was on not letting Rumble land the follow up shot to get the KO. I think Khabib fighting out of AKA and training with DC, will follow suit. His goal will be to not let Conor land more than one punch before Khabib gets the clinch. I don't think Conor has the power to get it done with 1 punch. And so I think Khabib is winning this.
|
|
|
|
“This space needs to be properly regulated, otherwise there is the risk of financial crime,” FSRA chief executive Richard Teng was quoted as saying by The National. “Every time a coin gets stolen or lost, it affects the confidence in this asset class.” That quotation doesn't make much sense. Regulation usually doesn't do anything to increase security. There are instances where regulation makes things worse. An example of this is governments pushing to weaken encryption standards. The regulatory push to standardize backdoors built into many software and hardware platforms is another example of regulation weakening security. Government security standards also tend to be open to criticism. An example of this is Hillary Clinton's well known server containing classified information being located in a bathroom closet. The USA is known to have spent trillions of dollars developing stealth fighter planes and it is known that a good portion of data related to defense stealth programs was hacked and stolen by foreign nations, including china who used the information to develop their J-20 stealth fighter much quicker and easier than they otherwise would have. If you look at security grades for government or state run institutions(in the USA), they never get top grades which would be an A+. Instead, they typically get very low grades D's and F's. The idea that regulating industries makes them more secure may be open to scrutiny. |
|
|
|
"On Sunday 16th, 2018, LG Uplus, the cellular carrier owned by LG Corporation, Korea’s fourth-largest conglomerate and parent company of LG Electronics announced its plans to join forces with other telecom partners in the United States, Taiwan and Japan to offer subscribers an overseas payment service solution built on blockchain." What does this portend for Bitcoin and Crypto as a whole? Big game players taking interests again. Like Pwc the other day. This is good news i suppose. What do you guys think?The full details here - https://cryptocoin.news/news/lg-uplus-to-test-blockchain-payment-solution-for-overseas-travelers-20348/Strange news. AT&T is on their way to centralizing and perhaps monopolizing the US telecom market with their purchase of Time Warner. With a great deal of effort and resources being invested in centralizing markets, its hard to imagine them inviting new players to participate in US telecom markets who could diminish the monopolistic nature of the centralized market they have strove to create. That said, south korea is supposedly one of the most pro bitcoin and pro crypto nations on earth. They love crypto there. South korea could become a major hub of crypto finance/trading in the future. It could make sense for telecoms to want to ally themselves with what they perceive to be a future shift in power. Perhaps they would prefer to delegate the development process intended to compete with paypal, square, apple payments, etc. I would be interested to know what the nature of this relationship is, should this news turn out to be true. |
|
|
|
Don't forget: Both Circle and Poloniex are owned by Goldman Sachs.  A conveniently omitted point. A substantial amount of crypto regulation may also be written by banks. This precedent applies not only to the USA or europe but to the entire world. Global crypto markets are by and large regulated by banking institutions. Coulld big players in an industry also having the power to regulate their own markets constitute a conflict of interest as well as an unfair advantage over smaller players with less capital and resources? Hm, well. I doubt anyone will ever pose that question in any relevent setting. Although I might go so far to say that it could be worth asking at some point. .
|
|
|
|
If arbitrage is your game and your goal is to sell bitcoin @ a high price on an exchange, then buy bitcoin on another exchange where its priced lower. There are regional differences which can be leveraged. A prime example of this are crypto exchanges in countries like africa which typically price bitcoin much higher than exchanges in other countries. However it should be noted that regulation does not approve or arbitrage and has taken steps not only to shut down arbitrage opportunities but to make it more difficult for people to know the buy and sell price of bitcoin and crypto currencies in some places. Random exchanges offering to buy or sell crypto at outrageously exaggerated prices should trigger suspicion. Big unexplainable swings in prices outside the realm of market mechanics can sometimes be scams. x-crypto.com is a scam website to not use at any cost. The guys running this website are so desperate that they are paying people to spam on several forums. They are well known to spam the web. If they could, they would spam the bus stop by gluing advertising posters
This guy knows what he's talking about ^.  |
|
|
|
Picks for this card~
-Elizeu Zaleski Dos Santos
-Sam Alvey
-Randa Markos
-Livia Souza
-Renan Barao
Hit 2/4 picks (with Randa Markos' fight being a draw). This UFC event and the past two have been very shameful for the picks I posted(even though my average accuracy has been around 60% which might be considered "ok").  Upcoming MMA events~ Bellator 206 is on september 29th. Gegard Mousasi (c) vs. Rory MacDonald Quinton Jackson vs. Wanderlei Silva Douglas Lima vs. Andrey Koreshkov Aaron Pico vs. Leandro Higo Keri Melendez vs. Dakota Zimmerman Then UFC 229 Conor McGregor vs Khabib Nurmagomedov is october 6th. Khabib Nurmagomedov (c) vs. Conor McGregor Tony Ferguson vs. Anthony Pettis Ovince Saint Preux vs. Dominick Reyes Derrick Lewis vs. Alexander Volkov Michelle Waterson vs. Felice Herrig Sean O'Malley vs. José Alberto Quiñónez Sergio Pettis vs. Jussier Formiga Aspen Ladd vs. Tonya Evinger Lina Länsberg vs. Yana Kunitskaya Scott Holtzman vs. Alan Patrick Gray Maynard vs. Nik Lentz Ryan LaFlare vs. Tony Martin So Barao is overweight. Lol. His fight purse is deducted 30%. And wtf is going on with him anyway? He used to be really good (and actually BW champ at one point), now he's just like a bum happy to get paid. I think it might be fair to say that most people circle to the left when fighting southpaws to make it harder for them to land that left hand. Barao actually circled to his right in the beginning to mid portions of the fight & didn't move in the "approved direction" until late in the fight, which is something rare to see from a veteran who has been fighting for 10-15 years. |
|
|
|
It seems as though the majority of this forum are capitqalism worhsippers, ceo worshippers, blame the poor for making stupid decisions. I believe people in general have more freedom, rights and liberties under capitalism than they do under socialism. That's the reason I support it. Capitalism isn't perfect but I can't say I've seen anyone point out a system that is better. I've looked at the data, uncoditional UBI makes complete economic and social sense. A lot of jobs are "bullshit jobs" anyways which serve no real purpose. Most of the jobs are becoming automated anywyas so UBI is absolutely necessary or there will be mass revolution.
In the USA, UBI would likely be a slight variant of social security with a different name. For those familiar with social security they may recognize reasons why such a system might be untenable. UBI could work in theory if its design and implementation were improvements on the existing social security system. Of course, there aren't many who know exactly what those improvements would consist of which makes things difficult as most would not recognize whether it were implemented correctly. |
|
|
|
|
Notes~
--This will be Evan Dunham's retirement fight.
--Thales Leites also retiring after this event.
--Antonio Rogerio Nogueira (Little Nog) is 42 years old. This might also be a retirement fight for him if he doesn't do well.
--Renan Barao moved gyms from Nova Uniao to American Top Team around december 2017, if I remember right. His fighting style did change a little with the move. While Barao did lose to Brian Kelleher his last time out. It was an extremely close fight and Barao is still very dangerous.
--Hector Lombard technically won his last fight but was disqualified due to hitting his opponent with a KO punch after the bell.
--Sergio Moraes may have lost his last fight with Tim Means but been awarded the winning decision from hometown judges.
Picks for this card~
-Elizeu Zaleski Dos Santos
-Sam Alvey
-Randa Markos
-Livia Souza
-Renan Barao
|
|
|
|
|
I'm interested in their long term profit potential.
They're essentially taking over the weed business from drug cartels and organized crime in regions where legalization occurs. Its been estimated the US black market for weed is worth in excess of $50 billion. That could represent an upper tier for earnings growth over the next few decades if it gradually becomes more regulated.
There is also the potential for legal weed to takeover some of the markets enjoyed by big pharma. Things like aspirin and pharmaceutical remedies for many varying medical conditions would eventually be taken over by legalized marijuana.
The industry definitely has potential to sustain high growth.
|
|
|
|
“The system of multilateral cooperation, which took years to build, is no longer allowed to evolve. It is being broken in a very crude way. Breaking the rules is becoming the new rule,” he said. “The ability to impose sanctions arbitrarily and with no control fosters a temptation to use such restrictive tools again and again, right and left, in every case, regardless of political loyalty, talks about solidarity, past agreements and long cooperation,” he said. One interesting point here is sanctions mainly being imposed against nations which geographically border china. Sanctions against both north korea and russia made both countries more dependent upon china. This in turn gave china leverage in trade & negotiations with both countries fueling china's economic growth. So while sanctions on the surface may appear designed to punish north korea and russia, the true end game may be forcing both to become more dependent upon china, to fuel china's economy. There is a substantial and widespread precedent for this scenario being possible with china typically being shown massive favortism by media, banks and global policies around the world which benefit china at the expense of american and european economies. That's a good point Putin made about global "cooperation" being largely replaced with "isolationism" or "protectionism". People may be losing their capacity to cooperate and coordinate which could be a significant negative trend over the long term as workers fail to cooperate in unionizing and citizens fail to cooperate to support the right economic or financial policies and so on. |
|
|
|
Citi Research believes Amazon should split itself up to reduce the risk of regulation and increase shareholder value. The firm reiterated its buy rating for Amazon shares, saying the technology giant is its "top pick" in the internet industry. "There has been greater noise of late regarding the desire to investigate and potentially regulate the company," analyst Mark May said in a note to clients Monday. "By separating the retail and AWS businesses, Amazon could minimize or avoid the risk of increased regulatory pressure." Amazon shares declined 3.2 percent Monday. The analyst noted reports that President Donald Trump is obsessed with Amazon, whose founder, Jeff Bezos, owns The Washington Post, and that his administration could potentially go after the company on antitrust grounds. May added the internet giant is getting more scrutiny due to its roughly $1 trillion market valuation and Bezos' status as the richest person in the world. After a separation, May said, Amazon's retail business will be worth materially less than its cloud computing company. He estimates a roughly $400 billion enterprise value for the company's retail segment versus $600 billion for Amazon Web Services. "A smaller market cap Amazon retail business may bring (slightly) less attention to its market size and dominance," he said. May reaffirmed his $2,250 price target for Amazon shares, representing 14 percent upside to Friday's close. Here are the seven other reasons May believes Amazon should separate its retail and Amazon Web Services businesses: 1. "To better align stock-based compensation/incentives." 2. "To plan for Bezos' succession and to promote and retain key executives." 3. "To take advantage of the HQ2 planning." 4. "To avoid/minimize conflicts of interest." 5. "To improve shareholder selection." 6. "To achieve a better valuation as a pure play." 7. "To provide a more attractive M&A currency for potential acquisitions." Amazon shares are significantly outperforming the market this year. Its shares are up 68.5 percent year to date through Friday versus the S&P 500's 8.7 percent gain. The company declined to comment on the Citi report. In March, former Walmart U.S. CEO Bill Simon also said Congress should look into splitting up Amazon. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/17/amazon-should-split-its-retail-and-cloud-computing-businesses-citi.html.... There's an interesting slant to every "anti trust" story in the news. It goes like this: only american business and corporations can be guilty of "anti trust" violations. Middle eastern owned corporations with monopolies over oil can never be guilty of anti trust. The african blood diamond monopoly can never be guilty. Nor can chinese companies attempting to achieve a monopoly over the steel industry. Even russians with monopolies over the world's uranium fuel market would never be considered as being in violation of anti-trust laws. Anti trust fines and negative restrictions can only be found in cases where it weakens the american economy. Perhaps "anti trust" is a poor label for it. Anti-americanism might be more accurate here. Another form of anti-americanism might be found in countless crypto exchanges not accepting business from US residents. Everytime I see a crypto platform advertising something like a sports betting contest, I usually can't participate. Why? Because I'm an american and my country is blocked. Want to do leveraged trading on bitmex? Can't do it. US resident. Trade deals and environmental regulation in the form of the kyoto and paris accords might also be considered "anti-american" to a degree given the way they deregulate foreign nations and heavily restrict US business. Is there a silent and secret war being waged against the united states and its economy? Is this the reason why bitmex and many others do not accept US residents? What do people think of this? |
|
|
|
Actually, the bone of content here is that does gambling cause an increase in various kinds of related criminal activities? Few examples of the major points raised were Criminals profit from business that is illegal. In places where gambling is legal, criminals do not profit from it. Gambling is similar to legalized marijuana. A big part of its negative stigma comes from illegalization and criminal activities which spring up as a result of state policy. Once legalized things become more manageable, prices decline, quality of product rises and criminal activity greatly ceases if it does not cease altogether. Right now there are many who are demanding that governments ban and illegalize animal trophies. The downside with that type of heavy handed authoritarian approach is, making animal trophies illegal would increase their cost and give criminals yet another market to leverage for profits. In some instances legalization of things like marijuana and gambling could be the better option, in contrast to illegalization of those things. |
|
|
|
there are talks the boxing might be removed by IOC in Olympics. They also tried to remove wrestling as an olympic sport although it is not nearly as judging intensive as boxing. I suspect there are political motivations for it. The type of personalities associated with boxing and wrestling might be described as representing a "rugged individual" demographic. They're individuals like Conor McGregor who went from being on state welfare to becoming a multi millionaire within 5 years. These are the types of personalities sports like boxing and wrestling produce. The value system of boxing/wrestling is if someone works hard and can outsmart their opponents there is little limit to what they can achieve in life. All of the perspectives and values I mentioned could clash with modern day political rhetoric. And perhaps that is the real reason behind campaigns to remove sports like boxing and wrestling from the olympics. |
|
|
|
|
Fiat money, gold and precious metal standards and crypto currencies are all barter systems imo. I know economics academics might disagree with this notion. There isn't a massive or substantial difference separating a farmer exchanging 12 chickens for a goat or a consumer purchasing an internet domain name for 0.0005 bitcoins.
Introducing a happy medium of currency makes it easier for buyers and sellers to achieve a universal standard of barter item which can be utilized by everyone and exchanged for anything. This can result in markets which are more flexible and efficient which roughly translates to greater economic prosperity and wealth. Despite this innovation, financial transactions are still derived from tit-for-tat barter systems.
Some believe the US dollar has not truly been backed by gold since the guarantee of each dollar being exchangeable for its value in gold was removed as a legal protection in the 1970s. People are always looking for new evolutions and progress in terms of money. Unfortunately its often defined in terms of small players being afforded less protections and options, while big players at the top of the food chain are granted additional protections. Perhaps @ some point we'll define it in terms of a paradigm shift towards a more balanced approach. But it would seem that day has not yet come.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
