Dude are you mentally ill? How do you think that people are only able to buy something or give something a value if it contains debt that was payed in advance.
Don't insult people because you don't understand how the banking system operates. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is a scam in which you must invest something real, and then wait for new buyers or investors to save you from that scam.
Doesn't the same thing happen in the stock market? Those who bought N-company shares for $1 are waiting for the opportunity to sell for $100-1000 to new investors. You don't call it a scam. Why? Just because the system that exists in the stock market has long been formed? And between what is there, what is here, systematically, the same thing happens, if we consider investing. No assets, no money. Nothing tangible nor intangible. Nothing physical nor digital. Instead, people are just paying for numbers to be changed next to their addresses. In economics, a transaction is an instance of buying or selling something. A payment is an instance of transferring a thing that was bought or sold. In the Satoshi's system nothing is bought or sold. Nothing is transferred. Only numbers are changed next to the addresses. So, Bitcoin doesn't exist and the Satoshi's system is not actually a payment system, but a system for changing, storing and protecting numbers.
The same thing happens in the traditional banking system. When using an electronic money transfer, nothing is transmitted from the sender to the recipient, only information in the form of 1 and 0. Nothing is physically transferred. Or when buying in cash, a piece of paper is physically transferred. What is the value of a piece of paper? Why is this piece of paper better than a piece of toilet paper roll? Yes, nothing. The only difference is the faith people put into the paper printed by the central banks. Question for Snowshow. If you think bitcoin is a scam, then what don't you consider a scam? Traditional banking system? Traditional banking system contains debt. From debt people benefit when debt is paid. The banks grant loans to borrowers, loans are used to get people's goods, services and labor, and then the borrowers return those back to people to be able to get money for their loan repayments. So, in the traditional banking system people benefit from within the system. Meaning, borrowers, which are part of the system, provide them goods, services and labor. In the system that contains equity/capital (stocks) people benefit because capital produces goods and services, or on their own, this capital can be used to satisfy human needs(real estate for example). So here as well, people are able to benefit from within the system. However, in the case of bitcoin system no one is able to benefit from within that system, and, the same as members of all investment frauds, people must exist the bitcoin system to be able to benefit. They need new buyers or investors, who will give them access (banknotes/bank deposits/stocks) to traditional banking system or equity system where they can benefit as explained above. |
|
|
|
Whatever your motivation is to keep continue with your statements here, I'm very happy to think of you again in 10 years when your biggest regret will be to spam the forum and not instead mine or buy bitcoin.
Oh, you're able to see the future. Wow. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is real, but Bitcoin is not fake. Bitcoin is a digital currency that is created, stored and exchanged in digital wallets and traded on virtual exchanges. Bitcoins are not printed, like dollars or euros – they're produced by people, and increasingly businesses, running computers all around the world, using software that solves mathematical problems. The digital coins are then stored in online wallets, or traded on exchanges, to be spent by the owners.
If bitcoin is real and valuable, then why people must exist the bitcoin system in order to benefit? And enter, for example, into the fiat currency system? The very fact that people must exist the system to be able to benefit, proves that bitcoin is not real. If a system contains a real thing, people are able to benefit within the system. Nobody within the bitcoin system is able to benefit, which is why, they must run into other systems that contain for example debt( fiat currencies/bonds), commodities, equity (stocks), products, real estate, etc. Bitcoin is a scam in which you must invest something real, and then wait for new buyers or investors to save you from that scam. |
|
|
|
I think what you are describing in your opening post has one flaw: You describe an asset that is sold to people for their fiat money with no real value behind it in return. This for Bitcoin ist not true, since bitcoins were not sold to people by Satoshi Nakamoto. He only created the network and let people do work (mine) to get the bitcoin. If satoshi would have just sold all coins to people and then left it would be a scam, I can agree with you. This is done by many premined coins but as I said was not done with bitcoin. So in order to get bitcoins you also have to perform work, which makes it in return also debt based. TADA: it is not that different form other currencies, except it is digital.
It's a scam in a sense that Satoshi in the Whitepaper claimed that his system produces money. Money is an economic resource from which people can benefit without new buyers or investors. Also, no one knows how many addresses Satoshi has in the system. So he is essentially benefiting from the disinformation written in the Whitepaper. He got real economic resources and left the holders only with units of his imagined number (21 million). Which is why literally all holders need the new buyers or investors to get the resources back. Without them, they are doomed. Hence, a classical investment scam. I'm sorry but you are not understanding bitcoin correctly, since you are assuming that satoshi exchanged bitcoins for fiat money and then left. This is not the case since it is only recorded that he mined two blocks and one of them is unspendable. Meaning he owns 50 BTC in total and those were not spend also. Ofcourse he could have mined more blocks later but everyone could have done this so it is not right what you are saying. Can you maybe tell what is the reason for you to fight random people on the internet about Bitcoin? So, I don't understand Bitcoin because, you know that an anonymous guy has only one address in a system where the address holders are anonymous? Do you realize how nonsensical your statements are? You ignored the entire point. So, I am going to make it easy for you by asking you one simple question: can anyone in the bitcoin scheme benefit from the scheme without new investors entering the scheme?
First of all, this is getting silly. First, it is you who is ignoring my point. You are intentionally doing this because your arguments are becoming less and less valid with each of our posts. I already answered your question multiple times in my previous replies. Second, you continue to use the word 'scheme' next to Bitcoin which is more than definitely deception. It is not a scheme, it is a system. Back to the rest of your question. I can send you $100,000 worth of Bitcoin without a third party interfering with our transaction and requesting documents for identification and proof for source of funds. I can move $1,000,000,000 abroad without making anyone notice that I did. It is a transaction stored in a public and transparent legder, but pseudonymity makes it so that there is no clear evidence of who I am and with enough privacy and care, I can make it close to impossible with the current knowledge, information and technology to link the transaction to my identity. I can purchase a ton of goods using Bitcoin directly, at my own will, even by physically shopping and checking out in a similar way to credit card payments. Only without banks. I can store information directly on the blockchain. I can use my own resources and energy to 'generate' or, as we say, mine Bitcoin at my own will. These are just a few of the things I can do with Bitcoin. This is how I benefit from it. Tell me where exactly is the 'new investors' part in any of the five scenarios I have mentioned above. Exactly, there is not. If we are talking about price increasing from purchases and decreasing from sales. That is how ANY asset works. Offer and demand. If you think I am benefiting from others who are purchasing Bitcoin and making the price increase, then any other asset in this world is by your definition a scam. Gold miners are tricking you into believing Gold has value and scamming you out of your real asset: cash. Because how else would they benefit from Gold if there was no new investor to purchase it? But wait. Now the state is tricking you into believing cash actually has value and scamming you out of your real asset. Because how else would they benefit from cash if there was no new investor to purchase it? And the list goes on, infinitely. Now instead of intentionally ignoring all of my previous questions and replying with 'I know best, I do not even care what you are saying anyway', try actually answering them for once, you genius. Because you always ignore questions but ask yours and want them to be replied to by us. Either participate in a conversation or keep your monologue and conspiracy theory to yourself. - Regards, PrivacyG I really don't care about your questions. I only care that you prove me wrong. I simply said that nobody in the system is able to benefit within the system, which means that zero economic resources exist in the system and literally all members of the system require what members of all investment scams require: new investors. Without them they are doomed. So, you can scream all you like, but you cannot prove me wrong in that way. Society decides what has value and what does not. A piece of stone can be of great value to some people and at the same instant is worthless to other people . When a rectangular piece of paper has value and able to get you a launch or an item, it is because the society decided to make it to have value. The same goes for Bitcoin or other cryptocurrency. cryptocurrency is seen as the future of money and has numerous benefits when compared to fiat. With cryptocurrency, you are in control of your money. You don't need to keep it with a third party.
Why then the holders in the Satoshi's system require new buyers or investors? If the thing they own in the system is valuable, why all of them must sell that thing, that is, get something from outside of the system? And then, whoever enters the system, also must exist the system and get something for the outside to be able to benefit. How's that possible if, within the Satoshi's system something valuable exists? Are you people even aware how naive you are? |
|
|
|
S obzirom da nisi ništa bitno rekao o pravnim i zakonskim aspektima Bitcoina, pozabavit ću se onda ja malo tvojom omiljenom tezom da moramo dati neki ekonomski resurs da bi dobili Bitcoin, koji sam po sebi ne vrijedi ništa i može pasti na nulu.
Primjer 1: Bitcoin faucets
Dok radim nešto drugo na Internetu otvorim sa strane stranicu sa Bitcoin faucets.
Na toj stranici korisnicima se pokazuju oglasi a u zamjenu za to svakih sat vremena dodijeli se određeni iznos BTC korisnicima.
Internet bih i tako gledao i imam neograničen internetski paket a sa tom stranicom sa btc faucetsima nemam nikakav trošak a dobijam potpuno besplatno btc.
Čak i ne moram biti za kompjutorom i bilo što raditi.
Koji sam to ekonomski resurs morao ovdje razmijeniti za btc?
Čak štoviše, i da btc potpuno propadne, da li sam išta zapravo izgubio? 😁😁
Primjer 2: Signature kampanje
Volim pisati na internetskim forumima. To me zabavlja i hobi mi je u slobodno vrijeme, obično desetak minuta navečer, poslije posla.
S obzirom na to, odlučim prihvatiti ponudu neke firme da stavim njihov potpis u svoj profil.
I dalje pišem na forumu kao i prije, ono što bih ionako radio jer volim razgovarati sa istomišljenicima i prijateljima na forumu ali sada svaki tjedan dobijem određeni iznos btc za ono što sam prije radio besplatno, jer držim potpis te firme koja me plaća za držanje njihovog potpisa.
Koji sam to ekonomski resurs ovdje morao razmijeniti za btc?
I da btc i u ovom slučaju propadne, da li bi se bilo što promijenilo? Ne bi, i dalje bih pisao na forumu kao i prije.
Već sam ti naveo 2 primjera gdje tvoja teza nije točna i nema veze sa stvarnošću.
Pametnom dosta.😁😁
Odgovorio sam koje su implikacije odluke EU suda, i smatram da je ono što sam rekao jedino bitno. A ti ako ne smatraš, tvoja stvar. Nisam tvoj potrčko pa da po tvojem nalogu štancam odgovore dok ti ne budeš zadovoljan. Drugo, ja nisam iznio nikakvu tezu. Nego činjenicu da su ljudi uložili enormne količine ekonomskih resursa u shemu, od struje, do raznih usluga, rada, proizvoda, vlasništva duga(fiat) itd. No, za uzvrat nisu dobili drugu vrstu ekonomskih resursa, nego su samo njihovim online adresama atribuirane jedinice ili dijelovi jedinica Satoshijevog zamišljenog broja. Odnosno, svi trenutni holderi nemaju nikakav ekonomski resurs i zato trebaju nove investitore da im iste donesu. To je činjenica koju sam izrekao. Dakle kad odgovaraš, odgovaraj na ono što stvarno piše, a ne na nekakve vlastite fikcije. Inače, ovo što radiš u logici se zove pogreška Slamnati čovjek. " Ta pogreška nastaje kad tezu oponenta (namjerno ili nenamjerno) pogrešno protumačimo tj. zamijenimo tezom koju je lakše opovrgnuti. Najčešće je riječ o tumačenju teze u pojednostavljenijem ili ekstremnijem obliku. Uspješnim opovrgavanjem tako zamijenjene teze stvara se privid uspješnog opovrgavanja izvorne teze. Ime ove pogreške dolazi iz srednjovjekovne viteške prakse vježbanja borbe na strašilima za ptice. Takve je “protivnike” očito bilo lako pobijediti. Po analogiji, pogrešno tumačeći tezu oponenta mi njegov argument oslabljujemo, pravimo od njega “čovjeka od slame”, kojeg zatim lako “pobjedimo”." Konačno, tvoji primjeri su promašaj. Ne radi se o tome jesi li ti osobno uložio nešto ili ništa resursa, nego da nisi dobio nikakav ekonomski resurs od firme čiji potpis držiš. Nisi plaćen. Nego, tvojoj online adresi atribuirani su dijelovi jedinica Satoshijevog zamišljenog broja. Znači nisi uložio ekonomski resurs - nisi dobio ekonomski resurs. Dobio si udjelništvo u Satoshi shemi, gdje trebaš novog investitora da ti donese ekonomski resurs. Plaćanje je davanje ekonomskih resursa, a ne davanje udjelništva u investicijskim prevarama. |
|
|
|
I think what you are describing in your opening post has one flaw: You describe an asset that is sold to people for their fiat money with no real value behind it in return. This for Bitcoin ist not true, since bitcoins were not sold to people by Satoshi Nakamoto. He only created the network and let people do work (mine) to get the bitcoin. If satoshi would have just sold all coins to people and then left it would be a scam, I can agree with you. This is done by many premined coins but as I said was not done with bitcoin. So in order to get bitcoins you also have to perform work, which makes it in return also debt based. TADA: it is not that different form other currencies, except it is digital.
It's a scam in a sense that Satoshi in the Whitepaper claimed that his system produces money. Money is an economic resource from which people can benefit without new buyers or investors. Also, no one knows how many addresses Satoshi has in the system. So he is essentially benefiting from the disinformation written in the Whitepaper. He got real economic resources and left the holders only with units of his imagined number (21 million). Which is why literally all holders need the new buyers or investors to get the resources back. Without them, they are doomed. Hence, a classical investment scam. |
|
|
|
You can benefit from the security and the anonymity of the system. One crypto owner can buy a good from another crypto owner and therefor both benefit from the bitcoin system. There is no need for a new buyer to enter the bitcoin ecosystem.
But "buying" is still investing or bringing economic resources into the system. I am asking HOW holders can benefit within the system? From their holdings. When someone voluntarily entes the system and bring in the economic resources so that the current holders can benefit, that's not benefiting within the system. It is simply the definition of a currency. A universal storage of wealth that can be used to be exchanged for goods and services. Tell me how bitcoin is different than other currencies? How can you benefit from the USD without exchange it for goods and services? USD is debt. From debt you benefit when debt is paid. I explained this a dozen times on this forum. So, you're admitting the obvious - the holders are unable to benefit from their holdings, but only from new buyers/investors. Their holdings are then not money/currency/asset, but shares in an investment scam. And that's exactly the point of this topic. |
|
|
|
You can benefit from the security and the anonymity of the system. One crypto owner can buy a good from another crypto owner and therefor both benefit from the bitcoin system. There is no need for a new buyer to enter the bitcoin ecosystem.
But "buying" is still investing or bringing economic resources into the system. I am asking HOW holders can benefit within the system? From their holdings. When someone voluntarily entes the system and bring in the economic resources so that the current holders can benefit, that's not benefiting within the system. |
|
|
|
Ne zanimaju me vaše ekonomske teorije i razmišljanja.
Moje pitanje je bilo vrlo konkretno i odnosilo se na pravne i zakonske implikacije odluke Suda EU u predmetu C-264/14, od 22. listopada 2015. o trgovanju bitcoinom a na to pitanje mi niste odgovorili ništa konkretno, osim nekih fraza.
Koliki je pravni i zakonski značaj te odluke na trgovanje bitcoinom možemo vidjeti i iz činjenice da je porezna služba RH morala postupiti po toj odluci.
Molio bih vas da ubuduće odgovarate na pitanja koja su vam postavljena, inače je ova diskusija gubljenje vremena i nema je smisla nastavljati.
Očekujem vaš konkretan odgovor na ovo pitanje a ako ga nemate, molim da mi ne odgovarate ponovno, jer takva rasprava gdje ja postavljam pitanja o zakonskim i pravnim aspektima određene tematike a netko odgovara sa nekim ekonomskim teorijama i razmišljanjima zaista nema smisla i znači nepoštovanja sugovornika, pa čak, sukladno pravilima ovog foruma, i spamanje ili trolanje.
Ako je tako onda u spamanje i trolanje spada kad se na temi o Buffettovoj izjavi postavljaju pitanja o odlukama EU suda. I što ćemo sad? Ja sam odgovorio na pitanje upravo u kontekstu teme jer je Buffett praktički rekao da ne bi platio ništa za sve BTC jedinice u shemi. A moj odgovor opisuje i objašnjava činjenicu da niti jedan holder u shemi ne posjeduju nikakav ekonomski resurs. I naravno onda da Buffett ne bi platio ništa. Jer bi dobio ništa. No svejedno, ako zanemarimo čistunstvo u pridržavaju forumskih pravila, odgovorio sam na pitanje: implikacija je naplata poreza na pozitivan izlazak iz sheme. Definiranjem imena "BTC" kao "financijskog instrumenta" ili kupoprodaje tog imena "financijskom transakcijom" vlast po zakonu može naplatiti porez na razliku između prodajne cijene i cijene po kojoj je ime bilo ranje kupljeno. No niti jedan kupac imena "BTC" i dalje nema nikakav ekonomski resurs u svom vlasništvu. Samo neke jedinice ili dijelove jedinica broja kojeg je Satoshi zamislio u svojoj glavi (21 milijun), a njegov sustav atribuirao online adresama. U tom smislu, ljudi mogu kupovati i dionice nepostojeće ili propale kompanije, npr. Enrona. Staviš ime - "ENE" na burzu, i ljudima preko brokerskog softvera atribuiraš jedinice dionica nepostojećeg kapitala. Broj tih jedinica neka je predefiniran na npr. 11 milijuna. I ljudi onda kupoprodaju ime ENE, a softver im atribuira jedinice predefiniranog broja. Baš kao kod imena "BTC". Ali niti jedan holder tih jedinica ne bi posjedovao nikakav resurs, nikakav kapital zbog čega bi korist mogao ostvariti samo od uloga novih kupaca - investitora. Baš kao u ponzi shemama, piramidama, lancima sreće i ... kriptu. Kupovati dionice nepostojeće ili propale kompanije je glupost, a mega glupost bi bila kad bi se cijena napumpala sa $0 na $70,000 po dionici. No, vlasti bi to odgovaralo jer ima novi bazen iz kojeg može grabiti porez. Odgovaralo bi i brokerima jer mogu naplaćivati provizije. Odgovaralo bi i stručnjacima koji mogu prodavati proročanstva o cijeni. No na kraju, zadnji holderi tih dionica bi bili oni koji bi platiti ceh. Tako će biti i sa holderima jedinica Satoshijevog zamišljenog broja. To je suština. A ne nekakve deklaracije EU suda u korist poreznog haračenja. I jedna zanimljivost za kraj: u Satoshi shemu uložena je ogromna količina energije, struje. Holderi su dodatno uložili ogromne količina stvarnih ekonomskih resursa. Sve to da bi vojska trenutnih holdera imala nula ekonomskih resursa te bila na milost i nemilost novih investitora koji moraju dobrovoljno ući u shemu kako bi holderi došli do takvih resursa i ostvarili korist. Takva investicijska ludorija je neviđena u ljudskoj povijesti. Ja sam pokretač ove teme i moje je pravo da originalnu temu, odnosno uvodni post, i proširim ako to smatram potrebnim, a također kao pokretač ove teme imam pravo i zaključati cijeli topic ako rasprava ode previše u offtopic i moguće da ću to i učiniti ako se rasprava nastavi u trenutnom smjeru. Slučaj Buffetta sam uzeo samo kao ilustraciju puno šire priče o bitcoinu i različitim razmišljanjima i pogledima na Bitcoin. Što se tiče ostalog, ponovno mi na pitanje o pravnim i zakonskim aspektima odluke Suda EU o trgovanju BTC odgovarate sa svojim ekonomskim teorijama što ne smatram odgovorom na svoje pitanje. Očito je da je daljnja rasprava o ovim pitanjima besmislena s vama i gubitak vremena a ako se spamanje moje teme nastavi biti ću prisiljen zaključati cijeli topic. EDIT: S obzirom da se opseg rasprave proširio a ne želeći ograničavati ovu vrlo zanimljivu diskusiju koja se dotiče prirode i obilježja samog BTC, upravo sam, u skladu sa svojim ovlastima pokretača teme napravio update naslova i uvodnog posta topica. Kako god. Može se ključati što se mene tiče. Ja sam rekao ono što je bitno. |
|
|
|
You ignored the entire point. So, I am going to make it easy for you by asking you one simple question: can anyone in the bitcoin scheme benefit from the scheme without new investors entering the scheme?
Yes you can benefit from it since it is NOT a storage of wealth like so many idiots in this forum believe, but it is a decentralized currency that you can use to send payments. You're supposed to explain HOW holders can benefit without new buyers - investors, not talk about concepts. Try again. P.S. "A payment" is a new buyer entering the scheme. The question is how holders can benefit without new buyers entering the scheme. |
|
|
|
Volim govoriti činjenicama i zbijati dobre i loše šale osobito s lažljivcima, a ako ti optužuješ druge da su lažljivci, onda znaš što te čeka. Ako misliš da je Bitcoin scam prevara obrati se i žali se HANFI koja zna mnogo više o Bitcoinu od tebe.... možda idi ne neku od njihovih edukacija naučiti nešto. https://www.hanfa.hr/Kladim se da će ljudi tebe u potpunosti podržati CBDC digitalne valute koji spremaju banke... to su pravi brojevi na ekranu: https://off-guardian.org/2022/05/06/report-90-of-nations-planning-central-bank-digital-currency/I am not the person you are talking about.
Laž. So, you're the second person who thinks I am someone else.
Laž. You are imagining something about someone and expect from me to verify your fictions by revealing my personal info.
Laž. Like I've said. These ideas, theories, indications or whatever are just products of your imagination.
Laž. Neću više odgovarati na tvoje prazne komentare i na poruke svih tvojih alt accounta. Natrag na ignoriranje. Ovo je tema o Buffetovoj izjavi, a ne o tvojim mislima vezanima za korisnike foruma. |
|
|
|
You benefit from the economic resources that new investors are bringing into the scheme.
Products and raw materials. From them people benefit through consumption or building them into final products. And again, no new buyers, that is, investors, are required. That is what economic resources are. They are things that provide benefit to people without the need of new investors.
At this point I think you are trolling. Let us say I bought an entire Bitcoin, in a Peer to Peer manner. I gave them cash, they gave me Bitcoin. Why have I been fooled? Let us say I sold an entire Bitcoin, in a Peer to Peer manner. They gave me cash, I gave them Bitcoin. Why have they been fooled? Now onto the second quote. You are telling me purchasing a piece of metal from a hardware store is a scam because they swapped Dollars for that piece of metal and now they can only benefit from it by finding a new investor. What the heck? You can purchase a TON of goods DIRECTLY using Bitcoin. The company accepts Bitcoin, you get the goods. Corporations did this a while ago, some of them still do it. Steam did it. Microsoft did it. eBay is looking forward to doing it. These are all just names out of my short memory, there are many more. Look at El Salvador and tell me how this is a scam? If I purchase a t-shirt off eBay using Bitcoin DIRECTLY, where is this 'investor that needs to exist for me to benefit off my Bitcoin'? Answer is nowhere because, as I keep repeating, this is all just a fantasy of yours and nothing more. In this situation, most antrepreneurs are scammers. The local grocery store is scamming you because they can only benefit off their food by finding victims who voluntarily purchase from their store. Admit it. Your conspiracy theory is very flawed. - Regards, PrivacyG You ignored the entire point. So, I am going to make it easy for you by asking you one simple question: can anyone in the bitcoin scheme benefit from the scheme without new investors entering the scheme? Here is a take on "new investors" entering a "scheme", as you put it. Let's imagine we live on an island in the south pacific, that has not been discovered, maybe off the coast of the Pitcairn Islands. But now we have discovered the rest of the world, and so we wish to join their economy to get stuff we have never seen before. So apparently the rest of the world tells us on the island that we need "dollars". We wish to get a satellite phone, and a satellite connected computer, but first we need to get these newly discovered "dollars". We don't currently have "dollars", but we have lots of coconuts. We trade some of our coconuts for these "dollars". ... Now we can buy that new satellite phone. ... After trading our coconuts for "dollars", and trading our "dollars" for a new phone, guess what has happened? ... We have just entered this new "scheme" of "dollars" as a new "investor". (now just replace every word "dollar" in the comment above with the word "bitcoins", and you'll understand PrivacyG's comment) Dollar is the name or word for debt. Debt is an economic resource. You can replace words all you like but you can't create economic resources in that way. |
|
|
|
Translation of the above: "I don't have any other arguments, I desperately need you to shut up, 'cause I know I'm right".
Well, you can say or think whatever you want about me. But people will still be unable to benefit within the Satoshi's system like they are benefiting within the banking system. Just imagine. All that energy spent for mining, all that economic resources invested into the Satoshi's system. The result? The holders have zero economic resources from which they can benefit, which is why they are at the mercy of new investors who voluntarily decide whether or not to enter the system and bring in the economic resources to save the holders. Crazy, isn't it? Instead of acknowledging this important fact, your are rather playing semantics on the forum and engaging in ad hominem attacks. How pathetic is that? |
|
|
|
Ne zanimaju me vaše ekonomske teorije i razmišljanja.
Moje pitanje je bilo vrlo konkretno i odnosilo se na pravne i zakonske implikacije odluke Suda EU u predmetu C-264/14, od 22. listopada 2015. o trgovanju bitcoinom a na to pitanje mi niste odgovorili ništa konkretno, osim nekih fraza.
Koliki je pravni i zakonski značaj te odluke na trgovanje bitcoinom možemo vidjeti i iz činjenice da je porezna služba RH morala postupiti po toj odluci.
Molio bih vas da ubuduće odgovarate na pitanja koja su vam postavljena, inače je ova diskusija gubljenje vremena i nema je smisla nastavljati.
Očekujem vaš konkretan odgovor na ovo pitanje a ako ga nemate, molim da mi ne odgovarate ponovno, jer takva rasprava gdje ja postavljam pitanja o zakonskim i pravnim aspektima određene tematike a netko odgovara sa nekim ekonomskim teorijama i razmišljanjima zaista nema smisla i znači nepoštovanja sugovornika, pa čak, sukladno pravilima ovog foruma, i spamanje ili trolanje.
Ako je tako onda u spamanje i trolanje spada kad se na temi o Buffettovoj izjavi postavljaju pitanja o odlukama EU suda. I što ćemo sad? Ja sam odgovorio na pitanje upravo u kontekstu teme jer je Buffett praktički rekao da ne bi platio ništa za sve BTC jedinice u shemi. A moj odgovor opisuje i objašnjava činjenicu da niti jedan holder u shemi ne posjeduju nikakav ekonomski resurs. I naravno onda da Buffett ne bi platio ništa. Jer bi dobio ništa. No svejedno, ako zanemarimo čistunstvo u pridržavaju forumskih pravila, odgovorio sam na pitanje: implikacija je naplata poreza na pozitivan izlazak iz sheme. Definiranjem imena "BTC" kao "financijskog instrumenta" ili kupoprodaje tog imena "financijskom transakcijom" vlast po zakonu može naplatiti porez na razliku između prodajne cijene i cijene po kojoj je ime bilo ranje kupljeno. No niti jedan kupac imena "BTC" i dalje nema nikakav ekonomski resurs u svom vlasništvu. Samo neke jedinice ili dijelove jedinica broja kojeg je Satoshi zamislio u svojoj glavi (21 milijun), a njegov sustav atribuirao online adresama. U tom smislu, ljudi mogu kupovati i dionice nepostojeće ili propale kompanije, npr. Enrona. Staviš ime - "ENE" na burzu, i ljudima preko brokerskog softvera atribuiraš jedinice dionica nepostojećeg kapitala. Broj tih jedinica neka je predefiniran na npr. 11 milijuna. I ljudi onda kupoprodaju ime ENE, a softver im atribuira jedinice predefiniranog broja. Baš kao kod imena "BTC". Ali niti jedan holder tih jedinica ne bi posjedovao nikakav resurs, nikakav kapital zbog čega bi korist mogao ostvariti samo od uloga novih kupaca - investitora. Baš kao u ponzi shemama, piramidama, lancima sreće i ... kriptu. Kupovati dionice nepostojeće ili propale kompanije je glupost, a mega glupost bi bila kad bi se cijena napumpala sa $0 na $70,000 po dionici. No, vlasti bi to odgovaralo jer ima novi bazen iz kojeg može grabiti porez. Odgovaralo bi i brokerima jer mogu naplaćivati provizije. Odgovaralo bi i stručnjacima koji mogu prodavati proročanstva o cijeni. No na kraju, zadnji holderi tih dionica bi bili oni koji bi platiti ceh. Tako će biti i sa holderima jedinica Satoshijevog zamišljenog broja. To je suština. A ne nekakve deklaracije EU suda u korist poreznog haračenja. I jedna zanimljivost za kraj: u Satoshi shemu uložena je ogromna količina energije, struje. Holderi su dodatno uložili ogromne količina stvarnih ekonomskih resursa. Sve to da bi vojska trenutnih holdera imala nula ekonomskih resursa te bila na milost i nemilost novih investitora koji moraju dobrovoljno ući u shemu kako bi holderi došli do takvih resursa i ostvarili korist. Takva investicijska ludorija je neviđena u ljudskoj povijesti. |
|
|
|
You benefit from the economic resources that new investors are bringing into the scheme.
Products and raw materials. From them people benefit through consumption or building them into final products. And again, no new buyers, that is, investors, are required. That is what economic resources are. They are things that provide benefit to people without the need of new investors.
At this point I think you are trolling. Let us say I bought an entire Bitcoin, in a Peer to Peer manner. I gave them cash, they gave me Bitcoin. Why have I been fooled? Let us say I sold an entire Bitcoin, in a Peer to Peer manner. They gave me cash, I gave them Bitcoin. Why have they been fooled? Now onto the second quote. You are telling me purchasing a piece of metal from a hardware store is a scam because they swapped Dollars for that piece of metal and now they can only benefit from it by finding a new investor. What the heck? You can purchase a TON of goods DIRECTLY using Bitcoin. The company accepts Bitcoin, you get the goods. Corporations did this a while ago, some of them still do it. Steam did it. Microsoft did it. eBay is looking forward to doing it. These are all just names out of my short memory, there are many more. Look at El Salvador and tell me how this is a scam? If I purchase a t-shirt off eBay using Bitcoin DIRECTLY, where is this 'investor that needs to exist for me to benefit off my Bitcoin'? Answer is nowhere because, as I keep repeating, this is all just a fantasy of yours and nothing more. In this situation, most antrepreneurs are scammers. The local grocery store is scamming you because they can only benefit off their food by finding victims who voluntarily purchase from their store. Admit it. Your conspiracy theory is very flawed. - Regards, PrivacyG You ignored the entire point. So, I am going to make it easy for you by asking you one simple question: can anyone in the bitcoin scheme benefit from the scheme without new investors entering the scheme? |
|
|
|
But, you don't benefit from those. Nobody is able to benefit from them. You benefit from the economic resources that new investors are bringing into the scheme. Why isn't this true for fiat currency, again? It is explained to you a dozen times already in this and previous topic. I won't repeat it again. You are free to think whatever you want. All four of you are making one critical error in your reasoning. Namely you falsely assume that you benefit from the units of Satoshi's imagined number (21 million") that you call "bitcoin". But, you don't benefit from those. Nobody is able to benefit from them.
Except for the part where that's complete and utter horseshit and the real and tangible benefits we have all experienced have been explained to you. You're just an ignorant fuckwit with zero comprehension. We tell you repeatedly what the benefits are, yet you simply ignore us and repeat your nonsense claims that it's all entirely fictional because you're too gormless to understand it correctly. You are the one who has been tricked because you want to defend the system where just about every nation on Earth right now is experiencing massive inflation because the people in charge cannot be trusted to maintain the economy responsibly. You are the one who is entirely beholden to the decisions made by central banks and governments. You have no control over your environment. We are the ones who have made an informed decision to try an alternative to that. We can opt in or out as we please. We are in control of our money and, more crucially, we're collectively responsible for our monetary policy. If we don't like the rules in Bitcoin, we even have the power to fork ourselves off the network and start a brand new currency of our own. You couldn't dream of having power like that in fiat. And, once again, some of us are quite happy with our choices, thank you. You might fool a few gullible newbies, but you're not fooling us. You are fooling yourself. That's why you are so pissed off. You know that you invested economic resources into the scheme, and no such resources exist in the scheme. That's why you desperately need new investors otherwise you are unable to benefit. And that's what pisses you off. |
|
|
|
O lažovčino starog kova, evo našao sam jednu tvoju fotografiju na kojoj pokušavaš objasniti ljudima kako prevare funkcioniraju... Pitam se koliko te plaćaju da gubiš sate, dane i godine otvarajući nove bitcointalk naloge....ne znam imaš li ti život van foruma, ili očekuješ medalju jer si kao nekoga spasio. A moraš biti 100% lud da voliš i podržavaš Buffeta i slične cirkuske klaunove, ali ti možda i voliš biti njihov rob   Legendo, di si bio na 60k?  Sigurno se skrivao u svom podrumu. Ne isplati se pričati s dokazanim patološkim lažljivcima, oni misle se da je sve što kažu istina. To vrijedi nesto, zar ne...?
Ako ništa, barem te je potaknuo da nešto napišeš na forumu  Yeah, tako ti to dođe kad nemaš argumente. Vrijeđanje. "Patološki lažov". Hahaha. Znači lik koji je u Whitepaper lagao da njegov sistem stvara, rudari novac - tj. ekonomski resurs, nije lažov. Iako na vlastite oči vidiš da nitko u shemi ne može ostvariti korist unutar sheme nego svi trebaju resurse od novih investitora za ostvarivanje koristi. Baš kao u svim investicijskim prevarama. Nego je lažov, i to patološki, onaj koji govori istinu koju i sam vidiš. Ludilo. K tome, uspješni i iskusni investitori poput Buffetta su psihopati i sociopati. Vrijeđati i napadati one koji pišu istinu ili poslovno uspješne pojedince, a klanjati se anonimnom liku koji te uvalio u investicijsku prevaru je čistiti primitivizam. Da se vratimo na snowshow i njegovo mišljenje o bitcoinu. Sud EU i porezna uprava RH se ne slažu s vama tako da vaše mišljenje nema pravno ni zakonsko uporište. Ukoliko i dalje smatrate da je Bitcoin ponzi shema i prevara predlažem vam da kao odgovorni građanin koji ima saznanja o kaznenom djelu (što ponzi shema je) to prijavite MUP-u ili pokrenete postupak na nadležnom sudu. Mislim da iznosite koncepte a ne konkretne činjenice. Trgovanje bitcoinima smatra se financijskom transakcijom, sukladno presudi Suda EU-a u predmetu C-264/14, od 22. listopada 2015. te se slijedom prethodno navedenog, na dohodak ostvaren po osnovi trgovanja bitcoinima, kao i svim ostalim kriptovalutama, plaća porez na dohodak po osnovi kapitalnih dobitaka, budući se radi o dobitku po osnovi kupoprodaje te kripto, odnosno virtualne valute, što je ekvivalent instrumentima tržišta novca. Porez se plaća na razliku između nabavne i prodajne cijene umanjenoj za možebitne troškove trgovanja. Izvor: https://www.porezna-uprava.hr/HR_publikacije/Lists/mislenje33/Display.aspx?id=19590Nije moje mišljenje da holderi u bitcoin shemi ne mogu ostvariti korist bez novih investitora. To je činjenica. Hoće li politika ili sud jedinice ili dijelove jedinica Satoshijevog broja(21 milijun) nazivati "financijski instrument" ili "novac", "virtualni novac", pa vam na pozitivan izlazak iz sheme naplaćivali porez, potpuno je svejedno. Obična semantika. Koja niti imatelje Terre ili Lune nije spasila. Činjenica i dalje ostaje da niti jedan sudionik kripto shema ne posjeduje nikakav ekonomski resurs, a svoje su uplatili za ulazak u sheme. Ekonomski resurs je npr. dug ili potraživanje. Ono kad banka odobri kredit i evidentira ga depozitima, koji se mogu povući i kao novčanice. To je nastanak duga. Onda ljudi ulažu u taj dug razmjenom roba, usluga i rada sa zajmoprimcima za depozite i novčanice. Konačno, banka preko založnih prava prisiljava zajmoprimce da podmire dug, pa ovi mijenjaju svoj rad, usluge i robe natrag za depozite i novčanice. Depozitima i novčanicama podmiruju dug i tako se posao zaključuje, a depozi i novčanice odlaze van cirkulacije do novog kredita. Zato su depoziti u cirkulaciji evidentirani u poslovnim knjigama banaka kao obveza. Novčanice pak su naravno otkupne za depozite. Banka dakle duguje, a imatelji depozita potražuju. Kad zajmoprimci imateljima vrate robe, usluge i rad, te depozitima plate kredite, u poslovnim knjigama banke se obveze i potraživanja poništavaju. Bankarski dug je dakle ekonomski resurs zato jer ljudi pri njegovoj naplati ostvaruju korist(robe/usluge/rad). I ne treba novi investitor ući u sustav radi te koristi. U bitcoin shemi, imatelji jedinica Satoshijevog broja ne potražuju od nikoga. Nisu vlasnici duga. Nemaju niti resurs u obliku kapitala. Nisu niti vlasnici proizvoda, roba ili sirovina. Nemaju doslovno nikakav ekonomski resurs. I jedini način da vrate uloge te ostvare korist jest da novi investitori uđu u shemu i donesu im svoje ekonomske resurse. A to je značajka doslovno svake investicijske prevare. Konkretno, ovdje je prevara u Whitepaper, gdje je anonimni lik napisao da njegov sustav stvara novac - dakle ekonomski resurs. Što je laž. Sustav samo atribuira jedinice i dijelove jedinica njegovog broja online adresama. To što su ljudi prihvatiti njegovu laž kao istinu pa dobrovoljno ulažu u sustav, nije prevara u kaznenopravnom smislu. Ti svoj novac možeš bacati sa zgrade ako ti lik u podnožju zgrade kaže tj. laže da će ti novac doletjeti natrag uvećan nekoliko puta. To je samo tvoja glupost. Nisi sklopio nikakav dogovor ili ugovor s likom gdje bi ti ovaj obećao povrat na ulog, niti ti je novac uzeo nasilno. Isto i ovdje. To što ljudi vjeruju Satoshijevim lažima, pa nekome daju ekonomske resurse preko njegovog sustava je samo njihova lakovjernost i naivnost. |
|
|
|
<error>
<error>
<error>
<error>
All four of you are making one critical error in your reasoning. Namely you falsely assume that you benefit from the units of Satoshi's imagined number (21 million") that you call "bitcoin". But, you don't benefit from those. Nobody is able to benefit from them. You benefit from the economic resources that new investors are bringing into the scheme. Economic resource are things from which people can benefit without new investors. For e g. - gift cards. When issued and sold to people, gift cards provide benefit to people at redemption. So, whoever holds a gift card is not required to find a new buyer to benefit from the card. Another example. Debt in the banking system that the holders of banknotes or deposits own. They benefit when that debt is paid, as I already explained in this topic. So again, they don't need to find new buyers to benefit. Capital. From capital people benefit because capital produces goods and services. Again, no new buyers required. Products and raw materials. From them people benefit through consumption or building them into final products. And again, no new buyers, that is, investors, are required. That is what economic resources are. They are things that provide benefit to people without the need of new investors. However, from the Satoshi's units attributed to online addresses, no one can benefit. Which is why the influx of new investors is needed. Just like in all investment scams. So, try to accept that Satoshi's tricked you, instead of trying to find countless excuses for his scheme. |
|
|
|
Što je ovo? Online dating site? Tema je koliko vidim Buffetova izjava, a ne vaša osobna zanimacija za nekakve likove ili nickove. <some random foolish talk> Gdje si surferu, kućo stara! Što je? Covid teorije zavjere i antivakserske kampanje zamrle pa se vratio svojoj staroj ljubavi, Bitcoinu? Ma, neka si ti nama takav, bilo nam je dosadno bez tebe. Keep up the good work!Usput, budući da si, čini se, propustio 2017. i 2019./2020., kupuješ li barem ovaj dip? Treba nam svježe krvi u našoj "Satoshi shemi". Jel' ovo stvarno online dating site? Druga reakcija, druga zanimacija za likove. [...] Jer, da je Bitcoin resurs koji postoji, resurs koji se rudari, onda bi holderi od njega imali koristi. [...] [...] si opet zaboravio one tri "male" usluge koju BTC nudi (a za koje banke obracunavaju silne troskove): 1. store of value; 2. value exchange; i, 3. transport of value. [...] [...] Što se tiče ova tri koncepta. To su ... koncepti. [...] Da, jasno je da su vam ti "koncepti" vec godinama nejasni. Sto ne znaci da te usluge ne pruzaju ekonomsku vrijednost. Mogu - na primijer - kupiti automobil ili kucu, otvoriti aplikaciju, prebaciti BTC i voila; value exchange. Tako isto mogu otvoriti applikaciju, prebaciti BTC mojim kontaktima na drugu stranu svijeta i oni tamo mogu lokalne valute iz bankomata da izvade u roku od nekih 10 minuta. Ponovo jako vrijedna ekonomska usluga; transport of value. Ali da, koncepti koji su vama totalno nejasni. Sve jasno. Koncepti su ljudske misli, a kako je ono rekao dobri stari Clint: "mišljenje je kao šupak, svatko ga ima". Ja se niti ne trudim razumijeti koncepte. Ne bavim se njima uopće. Time se bave filozofi. Ili kupci i prodavatelji magle. Ja samo objašnjavam kako funkcionira ova prevara. Kako prevaranti hvataju žrtve. Općenito, prevaranti u investicijskim prevarama na udicu stave mamac nečega što stvara privid ekonomskih resursa i onda pecaju. U klasičnom investicijskim prevarama pecaju pričama o lukrativnim biznisima, dakle nekakavom kapitalu u kojeg se kao ulaže. No nikakvog kapitala tj. ekonomskog resursa nema u shemama i žrtve mogu ostvariti korist jedino iz uloga resursa od strane novih investitora. Ovdje imamo isti slučaj. Samo, umjesto priča o lukrativnom biznisu imamo priče o revolucionarnom novcu. No ponovno, nikakvog novca tj. ekonomskog resursa nema u shemi. I vidi vraga, holderi mogu ostvariti korist jedino i isključivo ako novi investitori uplaćuju u shemu. Tebe vidim ne zanima kako te varaju, nego se rađe baviš konceptima. No čak ni te koncepte ne razumiješ. Naime, "value exchange" znači "razmjena resursa". "Value" u ekonomiji znači resurs. U ekonomiji se proizvode, razmjenjuju i distribuiraju resursi. Ti meni kuću ja tebi udio u vlasništvu duga. Ti meni proizvod, ja tebi sirovinu. Ti meni rad, ja tebi nektetninu. Ti meni uslugu, ja tebi udio u vlasništvu kapitala. Itd. U Satoshijevoj shemi nema razmjene ekonomskih resursa nego uplata istih za ulazak u shemu. Shemu gdje se online adresama atribuiraju jedinice Satoshijevog zamišljenog broja kako bi se stvorio privid količine resursa. Kako bi se stvorio mamac za pecanje. No, tebi nitko ne brani da grizeš mamac i smišljaš ili korisiš koncepte jednom kad si se upecao. Čak i koncepte koje ne razumiješ. Samo naprijed. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
