Well, the problem is that you say these things standing on the shoulders of society.
A lot of people that you don't care about helped the world get to this place.
Most charities are there to help wealthy people get rid of their guilt and are actually artrociously inefficient.

In our current society noone has to die because they are a burden. There is enough room to take care of these people.

The point is also that the world economy turned for the better when we started to take care of people as an integral part of society.
As i said before, we are social animals so once you start this kind of stratification there is no end.
Paris Hilton would propably shit on your head whenever she felt like because, you know, she is clearly the better human because she is in a better position than you. What would be her motivation to not put a bullet in your sorry head for not being as successfull in society as you?
So you have to realise that there are even greater assholes than you and they would think the same way about you as you about the people you want to leave for dead.

Fortunately this is not how most people think and actually most people realize we need each other. Economy is highly connected.
But what's even more crucial is that genetics are highly connected.
The whole pure genes/perfect human thing is a myth.
In our daily life we as a species completely fail at judging people on this level of connectedness altho it plays a major role in social dynamics.

If you want to look at humanity strictly as a tool for creating an economy then you can swap them out like light bulbs. But that is a groce oversimplification as the economy has a lot of symbiotic caracteristics that can only happen in these highly connected meshes of social relations.
A single idea from a disabled person can start a whole industry.

So the very least i can say is that things are not so simple that you can just say "let them die".
Of course you can have your opinion but i'm just telling you that it is not a healthy one for society.
What do you think will happen to the mental health of people that are for some reason near to the survival barrier? They will live under constant stress and think about their survival all the time. These people will have a much harder time participating in society because of the angst that may not have any food the next day.

'let them die' is just a very crude and uneducated opinion.

How about both?

Because I don't think the state has any business issuing money, or supplying money or even have information on the amount of money I own. The system I am proposing would even work with bitcoin, see the colored coins concept.

To be honest I'm not fond of the idea of tying it to the accumulated wealth (not income, but it is affected), I find the system where only consumption is taxed by the amount over time as of demising returns much more beautiful.

I've just gotten started doing business in bitcoins and I'm curious what solutions other bitcoin businesses use for bookkeeping.

As a small (micro) business I need to keep expenses infinitesimal. Is there any bookkeeping software or website that can handle btc and dynamically import exchange rate data? Anything that offers an API extensible enough to add this?

Crap... Even for a mining rig only?

Yeah you're probably right. Next choice is a flash drive.


Any experience with Windows 7 on a flash drive?

Is there any possibility of running Windows 7 off of your Ram only?

Because savings shouldn't be taxed, at least not on an individual basis. This happens with inflation or demurrage, or in case of bitcoin: NONE!

Again I suggested taxing wealthy people higher than the middle class and a negative tax for the poor. The extent could be governed by either by the amount of total consumption (including employing people and what is now usually written of as "investment") or the accumulative wealth (just add).
And only because rich people consume less of their total wealth doesn't mean they aren't still the biggest consumers per person, either way they would still pay the highest taxes in absolute value.

The reason why I am so argumentative about this is that is a simple system which allows for a reduction of bureaucracy otherwise not archive able.

Well, most people on earth realize that our society can only exist if we take care of everyone.
We are social animals and thus feel compassion for others because everyone knows that there is a good chance that they themselfs may need help at some point.
If everyone thought like you then we would not live in this relatively nice and stable world.
It would be dog eat dog and only assholes would survive.
Now, would you want to live in a world composed primarily out of assholes or is it enough for you to look in the mirror in the morning?

You are not arguing about it either?  
Even while income taxes are considered illegal and were only implemented during draconian periods and kept. Even while property taxes are a relic out of pre-republic times.
Even while profit taxes applied selectively to those who aren't in with the cronies.

currently a copper penny is worth.. a penny.
145 pennies is roughly a pound (could be wrong just googled it)
thats $1.45

1lb of copper on kitco says 3.70.

the copper its made from is worth more than the penny.

as far as I know most scrap yards are not going to accept a bucket full of pennies but who knows.

if your talking about the collector aspect to it then ya keep em.

who knows copper pennies could be the next rare american eagle coin (highly doubtful with the amount of copper pennies in circulation)

Still not convinced that taxing only consumption instead of income, profit, property and consumption is a good thing?

How do you even know that the coins do not belong to them? Maybe Dr. Nefario is just paying double as an apology to former users of Good Luck Bitcoin Special Entity. I've seen this happen before in my Japanese Animes.

When I hear a statist, keynesian economist talking about how people from all walks of life shouldn't save their money and how they should spend their paychecks completely, I think of natural disasters, economic collapses or other personal crises and how people will be running towards the government for assistance. Instead of using their own means to recover, they will depend on a higher power to get back up again.

To me, the whole notion of not saving money is very authoritarian. To say people shouldn't prepare and save is like saying every man is the government's bitch and your survival is dependent on their ability to bring you up again. It implies the government can never fail, which is clearly wrong.

Just my 2 cents.

As for the effectiveness of depending on the government when shit happens, that's an entirely different debate that could be discussed here.

My point is hoarding has its purpose: Stored wealth is supposed to be your safety net when times are bad. At the very least, it's mine. I don't think of going on welfare or to the food bank when I lose my job among other things. I think of my own Plan B. I believe you should consider doing the same.

Rich people have tend to spend a smaller proportion of their income than poor people (its called the marginal propensity to consume). Presumably because the poor people can't afford to save...

Anyway, by taxing the rich and giving to the poor, you are taking money from people who only spend say 70% of their income to give to people who spend 99% of their income. That is going to have the effect of increasing consumption. Western economies are heavily dependent on consumer spending, so increasing consumption increases economic growth. It's probably not the only factor, but it might contribute to it.

There are no updates on the BTC on hold yet.

cheers,
~Roman