Mh yes probably it should be also available with the people having a "C" residence permit (need a job for this).
But I think there would be a strong Pull-effect on immigrants, no matter if they can get the basic income (C residence permit) or not.
Actually it matters a lot, if you think about it. If a programmer is paid, say, 8500 CHF per month, and basic income of 2500 CHF is intruduced, then someone with basic income will actually get 11000 CHF per month. Then, why should you go to work there from abroad, when natives are paid much more than you? You'll likely search elsewhere. In reality the likes of programmers and much before that income don't gain anything from basic income. Atleast if the system isn't totally crazy. Their tax burden is increase by the amount of basic income. Though they still get double or more to hand than those on basic income. |
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure about if 2500 francs is too much. But with good tax structure it could allow people who work at jobs with short or irregular hours just for some extra income over the basic income.
Currently the system in Finland really doesn't support short term work, either you lose the benefit to nearly 1:1 and/or you have to re-apply for benefits and be without them for weeks or months...
|
|
|
|
I don't believe it is worth their time at the moment.
If things go really bad they always have option of alt coin and mandating it's use. Gain the majority of regular folks by taxes, benefits, large institutions etc. and you are done... |
|
|
|
Bitcoin can hit 100k$, though the worth of dollar at that point...  Based on that logic (quite reasonable), there is no upper limit to bitcoin's value in fiat terms.  True, just think how many zimbabwean dollars one btc could have been worth |
|
|
|
Bitcoin can hit 100k$, though the worth of dollar at that point... |
|
|
|
the gov is not funded for quite some time
it just invents money any time its missing a bit
but don't worry the grandchildren of today's citizen would still pay those debts
I wonder how long it would take to gain same status if some time people went just: "Nope, we won't pay these debts!" Short term pain, over the long term one... Too bad people can't handle that. |
|
|
|
I've said this 100 times before. You shouldn't power off your miners ever. Even if you are running in the red. It's not about the immediate compensation. Quotes like " It's not worth it to mine because you are losing money on the power," & " It's time to shut off my GPU's because it's not worth it" I believe you are thinking to narrowminded. Yes you are right, you are not/cannot make money if you are running in the red, but in the end, there is a finite amount of bitcoins. A total mass of BitCoins that can not be exceeded. You can't mine more after that. So keep your miners running until that day happens. Every fraction of a bitcoin you find, it will be worth something, someday. That .0004 you are getting today, could be worth $100 dollars in 10 years once BitCoin has exhausted it's mining potential. It's been the plan, the entire time that difficulty will increase at rapid rates when more & more people join, when ASIC becomes the norm and when whatever replaces that after. You just need to step back and see where you fit into the plan. This plan was set in motion some time ago, and it's unfolding beautifully.  The correct move is to get what you can get for your hardware and then invest that to bitcoin. I believe in most cases that would outpeform mining in long term... |
|
|
|
|
Buy BTC. Set sell order to something crazy and wait...
|
|
|
|
One evening the bitcoin blockchain came to a halt, it turns out Chuck Norris had mined all the remaining bitcoins, and the difficulty was larger than Graham's number.
Chuck Norris started mining bitcoin, he left it with target of 0. |
|
|
|
Possible? Probably yes Of course, 51% would have to agree by updating to new clients That is NOT how a hard fork work  Wouldn't this kind of transaction require a software support? But this sort of thing is very questionable. Where do we start from and where do we end. And what is chosen acceptable and what is not. |
|
|
|
what you also find is that people that want to buy in while cheap, wont tell many people about it, thus keeping prices down. they will also spread fud to sway people away, again keeping prices down..
eventually once they have eating their lot and cant get anymore, they will change over and say its great everyone should buy.. to cause a ramp on the price.
its standard banking and stock practice.. whatever the 'advisors' say... do the opposite. usually advisors short term advice pays off but the bigger picture is the opposite.
EG
this commodity is tanking sell sell sell..
this in real world proper advice means.
dont sell at a loss, instead buy to average out the costs, to get more commodotys cheaper and wait for the flash crash to correct to be in profit.
These experts... If they are so good why are they working for someone else? I think that either you go in long term or do the obvious bids. I wish I had invested in oíl in 2008, didn't have the money or the knowledge of how to though. It should have been pretty clear that in long run it would go back up from there. |
|
|
|
|
I'm not entirely sure, but I do feel that there would be some fear of someone hitting pot of 10k BTC in future.
Just think about how much that would mess up things in 100 years time or so...
I don't know if the situation is even fixable with bitcoin... Likely unless there is periodic resets it will always exist...
Either way, things don't look good from this perspective for bitcoin in very long run.
|
|
|
|
|
Blockchain tells about 500k wallet users.
Then there is 25 million transactions total... Which sufficiently large part is probably satoshi dice and others.
Couldn't find info on unique addresses in chain.
But my estimate would be around 5M max...
Which is the 0.2% of 2 400 000 000 internet users in 2012...
And that would be upper end of one time users... The real count is probably lower...
|
|
|
|
i see your point/anger, but it is not going to happen, and i also dont think it would be a good thing either. They said the same thing about the USSR. It's a different decade and a different Evil Empire this time around, but the ending will be the same. But wasn't it the USA that "ended" the USSR (unofficially of course!)  Maybe Russia will return the favour now then USA lead USSR to crash. But in general unsustainable systems can't last forever. I think USA will crash by it's own work. Or China's... |
|
|
|
|
End of USA might be good thing for the world. That stuff is scary.
|
|
|
|
I don't think they can tax enough...
The total debt is over the GDP...
That's the whole point about of the national debt hoax. An ever growing tax system until... until we woke up and say NO or being completely enslaved. It's up to us to decide. You mean global debt hoax? |
|
|
|
|
I don't think they can tax enough...
The total debt is over the GDP...
|
|
|
|
The appeal is that such a tax, if it is implemented before avoidance
is possible and there is a belief that it will never be
repeated, does not distort behavior I don't think this is possible, there will always be people who know about it before it happens and who are able to profit from this knowledge. Also most people won't believe that such a thing will only happen once, politicans have broken too many promises before. Also take debt down to 2007-level? That would probably just start the progress of building debt again. If you go to such length, why not kill all debt and don't allow it to be built up ever again. There exist fundamental limit of where debt can be expanded to. And on other hand system can't be or won't be allowed to correct itself. That is massive defaults. Full reset is only real option if we want to continue on what we are doing for considerable. The other is fundamental change in what fiat-currency is and how it's managed. |
|
|
|
It 100% will cause rampant inflation. When rich people are holding they money, the money does not enter circulation, ie. buying up food/electronics/furniture etc..., it's just sitting in their bank account or invested in some stocks. but when you distribute these to the masses...
That is not true. Money doesn't just sit in a bank account. It is loaned out and spent. Money "invested in some stocks" is spent by the person that sells the stock. However, I believe it will cause inflation. With an income of 2500 francs per month for doing nothing, a portion of the population will stop working, and the GNP will fall. More money chasing fewer goods will cause prices to rise. Eventually it will reach a balance. Then the whole system will be cheaper than existing system and everyone have incentive to work to gain more than minimal standard of living. |
|
|
|
|
So:
With 0 cost of electricity.
Is there any machine that I can order now and get positive ROI when I get it and run for it's lifespan?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
