|
I just logged in. All my BTC was there, and seems back to normal.
|
|
|
|
|
I just logged in. All my BTC was there, and seems back to normal.
|
|
|
|
I just get "Login incorrect! Please try again!"... on all my accounts
+1 also |
|
|
|
I'm of the opinion that our economy is in for a very rough ride. The first thing you should have is a rainy day fund. MINIMUM of 6 months worth of expenses, more if you can.
This is very good advice, with the caveat that you keep this rainy day fund in REAL money like gold/silver instead of dollars. If we want to talk about "ships that have sailed" it's the US Dollar  |
|
|
|
|
Anyone who gets BTC below thousands of dollars each is "getting in" before the ship has sailed. This ship is one that will either fly humanity to a new galaxy or will crash and burn before it exists the atmosphere. It'll be worth thousands within a few years, or it will be worth almost nothing. It's an either-or thing. In a year, bitcoin will be WAY higher than $15, or it'll be sub-$1.
A run up to 30, back to 10, up to 20, back to 15... so what!!! This is all noise in a highly volatile, revolutionary new marketplace. 99.9999% of humanity has no idea what Bitcoins are. The client is still in beta! Hardly missing the boat, IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I can help you get such a site made if you need a team. Guessing $450-$850 based on requirements. PM me if interested.
|
|
|
|
You've got the rhetoric down well: list only the negatives of government, list only the positives of private business.
You'll overlook private market greed giving birth to companies like Enron, who systematically decreased electricity supply to sections of California to fake a lack of supply, thus allowing them to jack electricity prices and tack on obscene service charges to fix problems that never existed. The free market did that.
You'll forget about all the factory farms that cut corners on cleanliness and pest control, action that has led to numerous e.coli and salmonela outbreaks in the last few years. That's the free market's standard of food safety.
Let's just ignore tobacco companies that knew the negative affects of their products as early as the 1930's, but continued to market them as perfectly safe until government regulation cracked down on them over thirty years later.
So easily you forget AIG that sidestepped and mislead regulators about the finanical instruments they had created, of course, out of greed, and brought world-wide financial system collapse - because they only cared about themselves and making a quick buck.
And oh, all the Chinese companies using lead paint in toys. Forget about them, they don't matter. That's the free market saving a buck at the expense of the populace. That didn't stop until government regulators put an end to it.
You criticize market advocates for "listing only the negatives of government, and listing only the positives of private business." And then the rest of your post is you committing the same offense in reverse. Let's examine your examples: 1) Enron - First of all, the energy industry is one of the most regulated of all. Please don't claim it's a "free market." It's not even close. Second, the moment it was discovered that Enron was cooking the books and scamming people, it's share price collapsed to zero and it went out of business. Now it's gone, and it's leaders are behind bars for fraud (punishing fraud is one legitimate role of government). This is an example of GOOD interaction between gov and business. The market collapsed the company when the fraud was discovered. The gov put away the criminals. Well done all. 2) Factory farms and clean food - You watch too much television news. Food in the United States is extremely safe, let's not pretend that we live in a world of poison food lol. I'm 27, I eat 3 meals a day, and have gotten food poisoning twice in my life (both times from fast food chains that are HEAVILY regulated by the food safety boards). US food is very safe. You'll credit the regulations, I'll credit the fact that poisoning your customers is bad for business and thus food providers have severe interest in maintain standards themselves. It's fine if we disagree here, but please don't pretend that food companies would cut every possible corner to save money. ONE mere mention of poison chicken almost put Tyson out of business. 3) If a tobacco company lies about what's in its product, or about known effects of its product, that is fraud and should be handled by courts. You don't need a government "crackdown"... you just need to enforce anti-fraud laws. 4) In a free market, AIG would've been out of business if they fucked up so badly. In our corporatist/socialist centrally-planned economy, however, they were bailed out and they get to remain in operation. NOT FREE MARKET 5) Regarding lead paint in Chinese toys... DONT BUY STUFF FROM CHINA IF YOU'RE SCARED OF IT. If people would just take responsibility for themselves instead of trusting mommy-government to protect them, they'd make market decisions which would quickly make it unprofitable for the Chinese companies to continue using lead. Just like with poison food - it's bad for business to hurt your customers, and even the possibility of harm can mean bankruptcy. Only a few regulations are needed for a healthy world. Don't steal. Don't damage property (this includes pollution externalities, etc). Don't defraud. |
|
|
|
and by you sponsoring it you are part of the immorality?
i am christian so i have to admit sometimes i have trouble sleeping at night.
Water is used to quench the thirst of every terrorist. That's why I don't drink it. |
|
|
|
|
Agreed... but the problem is in mitigating the chargeback risk. Solve that, and a million such services will spring to action.
|
|
|
|
Atlas I think it would be baller to put an ad on the front page of WSJ. However, I also agree with the other poster that btc doesn't need publicity right now - it needs dedicated enthusiasts to build more efficient businesses and services around it. We need easy, secure wallets. We need easy, secure exchanges. We need a client that doesn't have to download half a gig of transaction history before it can work. We need intuitive online banks and smartphone payment apps. These things take time, and I know people are working on them. SO- what would perhaps be better is to shelve your WSJ ad until sometime in the future when the anti-free-market forces have started publicly beating down upon Bitcoin. THEN, we should pool some big money, make a kick-ass "Atlas is Shrugging" type advertisement and slap that on the paper. It's something for the future, not for now. Great idea, of course |
|
|
|
Just out of curiosity, where do you get your silver planchets? Or are they just coin blanks?
I have connections to a private mint... not sure where they get their stuff from. I imagine they poor huge glowing smelters of ore into little coin shapes, but that's probably not how it works  |
|
|
|
Out of curiousity, are these actually tied to BTC in any way besides the branding?
No, just novelty... and a kinda cool combination of two kinds of real money. |
|
|
|
We don't need to. Again, we're not based within the United States.
Atlas gets +1 for being correct, +1 for reaching profitability, and +1 for figuring out how not to pay US government extortion money. Nice! |
|
|
|
I went to a private college, thanks. You're probably the product of public (or no) education, hence why think it's valid to compare these countries while ignoring what other forces and historical events got them to where they are now.
Ah so you agree public education is inferior! And yet you want the same ineffective organization, with the same non-market incentives to manage the economy - a vastly more complex apparatus. |
|
|
|
Except for the proven track record of centrally planned nations having much better standards of living and faster growth than more "free market" nations (See: China, Sweden, Japan, India, almost any pre-revolution socialist Latin American country, etc.).
LOL I guess you're right so long as you ignore these examples... - North Korea vs South Korea - East Germany vs West Germany post WWII - East Germany under USSR vs. East Germany after unification - Haiti vs. Dominican Republic - Cuba vs. Costa Rica - Any Chinese City vs. Hong Kong - China vs. Taiwan - China under communism vs. China today - India pre-market reformations vs. India post-market reformations - Any Malaysian City vs. Singapore - Vietnam vs. Singapore - UK vs. Ireland over the past 20 years - Chile pre-Pinochet vs post-Pinochet (not that Pinochet wasn't also a violent douchebag) - Venezuela vs Chile - Zimbabwe vs South Africa - Burma vs. Thailand - Syria vs. United Arab Emirates - Communist Estonia vs. Post-USSR Estonia - Soviet Russia vs. Russia post 1989 And surely I needn't mention US history from 1776 up through about 1920, when it was actually a generally capitalist, free-market nation and grew from mere peasantry to the world super power in 150 years. Every single example above compares a territory that is/was more centrally planned vs a territory that is/was more free. And you're going to tell me there's a "proven track record that centrally planned nations have much better standards of living?" I guess this is what government-monopolized public education gets us... |
|
|
|
The bottom line here is that financial reward in a free market system is NOT tied to how hard one works.
Beautiful isn't it? It's actually tied to how much value you produce for people.
BINGO |
|
|
|
Hence the question of this forum topic: "Why does the Left Fear Libertarianism"?
Answer: A leftist can't win an economic argument against the right, because central planning fails. But, the leftist CAN win the moral argument against the right in terms of personal liberty, rights, tolerance, etc. So when the damn libertarians come around and pull that rug out from under the leftists also, they get understandably pissed. So a leftist can't win economic NOR personal liberty arguments with a libertarian. That is why they hate them - and would much rather debate a conservative. Leftists and rightists balance each other out... they are both half wrong on the issues and thus can perpetuate arguments indefinitely against each other. Libertarians make the leftists look like inconsistent fascists (which they are), and they also make rightists look like inconsistent socialists (which they are). It's no wonder that everyone hates a libertarian. His consistency is confounding and infuriating. The last defense of the left, and the right? "Libertarianism can never work," they say, and so they go back to arguing amongst each other to figure out who is more effective at enslaving humanity. |
|
|
|
Productivity and/or hard work is generally inversely related to wealth.
Hmmmm. So then does it hold that the harder I work, and more productive I am, the less wealth I will accumulate? Or does the inverse of that hold, so that the less I work, and the less productive I am, the greater my fortune will become? Certainly you can't believe those things? |
|
|
|
Quote me where myself or Smith said anything about inhereting money, then I'll conceed the point.
Perhaps I misunderstood. What is your thesis? |
|
|
|
Then obviously I didn't mistate your opinion because that's exactly what you said before and it is equally untrue.
My thesis: most wealthy people earned their money. My statistical source: "Only 16% of high-net-worth individuals inherited their stash, according to Capgemini." - Economist article, http://www.economist.com/node/17929057Your thesis: most wealthy people did not earn their money. Your statistical source:  And even if 100% of wealthy people inherited their money, you don't have the right to steal it from them. Unless a rich man stole his wealth (such as a congressman who taxed it away from its rightful owner), you have no claim to it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
