Assuming that bitcoin always remains the top cryptocurrency, that makes sense.  But it is possible that other cryptocurrencies surpass bitcoin in popularity and the demand shifts from bitcoin to something else.

Police only "bully" citizens because of drug prohibition.  Before that police was seen similarly to firemen...helpful folks that are keeping a place safe.  Once drug prohibition started, the monetary reward for corruption and opportunity to profile people came about.  Around that same time, people started feeling less safe in the presence of the police.  Look at the police in Portugal, where are drugs are criminalized.  They're cool.

I'm not sure you understood what I said, but quick to call others stupid.  Obvious sign of a good dude
I'm not saying anything has fault...nor am I blaming private or public companies.  The marketplace dictates what the price of something will be based on simple supply and demand.  Now the government can manipulate that based on decreasing or increasing supply or demand.  Giving access to debt allows the price to increase and still have demand.  Many are not price sensitive when it comes to education.

You think public service in the USA is better than private?  I don't think many would agree with you.  Do you enjoy the customer experience of being in the DMV?  The public organization with no legal competition.  The monopolized public service.  It's a terrible customer experience, and the tax payers are forced to do business with them.  You can't go anywhere else to get a licence.

I don't think "private" or "public" businesses are bad.  It depends on how they're implemented and executed.  Our current public service is inefficient and has a poor level of service for the cost.  I don't think many would disagree (I live in Canada, but I'd say this for North America in general).  If the government hired passionate and interested people only, and minimized corruption and special interests, it could absolutely be great.  But it's not that way right now.

"Public service" isn't always what it seems.  For example, if the public no longer wants a particular service and would rather not fund it, would those public servants gladly get laid off?  Or would they value their own personal job and income over the service they provide?  I live in Canada and as soon as there is a department that is going to get funding cuts, they start picketing and threatening to go on strike.  So keeping a job is priority #1.  That type of public service will tend to acquire lower talent, and offer subpar service.  I'd say private companies will always provide better service, because they need to compete for business.

Healthcare and education in the states is regulated, plus the government provides access to huge amounts of debt.  It is the government that enables colleges and universities to basically require you to take out a mortgage for your education.  If students couldn't access that type of debt, prices would have to fall as a result, as the non affluent population wouldn't be able to afford it.

I think the adoption will be highest where government regulation is easier to bypass and where the national currency is weak to begin with.  So adoption would be easier in developing countries, especially where the local currency is weak (most developing countries in Asia and South America).  Regulation and taxation is more stringent in developed countries, so it's harder for businesses to accept bitcoin until the government recognizes it and is able to tax it.  Not sure how far down the process that is.

Hi,

I've submitted the signature campaign form and have the signature.  Is there anything else required to join the signature campaign?

Thanks.

Yes agreed, that would be for adults and adults would be responsible for their kids.  For kids, at least for me, and I grew up in Canada - as I child I wasn't informed about drugs as a kid.  Instead, we were fear mongered that trying anything would turn you into a helpless heroin addict.  Everything was negative about it rather than being informative.  The problem with keeping drugs illegal is that it is much easier for kids to get a hold of, than something that is legal and regulated (like cigarettes or alcohol).

And for where the government steps in, they actually step in for all of society and prohibition of (some) drugs is for adults, regardless of the reason, and especially targeted to ethnic minorities (in North America).  Many highly addictive drugs remain legal because big pharma has lobbied for it (oxycontin for example) which doctors prescribe.  Then you can have a guy that didn't take care of his health, maybe smoked a pack of cigarettes a day with no physical activity that ends up with cancer, and is prescribed cannabis.  You can have another healthy guy that smokes cannabis and goes straight to jail without harming anyone.  I wouldn't agree with a law that would make these situations possible.

Most people are very misinformed about drugs unless you look to science, and very few people do - this thread would be a great example of that.

The entire drug empire has been working just fine with fiat.  I wouldn't expect cartels to switch over to bitcoin, especially when the value fluctuates so greatly, but that's just my opinion.  Unless all parties involved are cool with making the switch, fiat would remain the method of payment.  At the end user level, I can see bitcoin transactions being beneficial, but cartels are several levels beyond that in the supply chain.

Do you consider people that use drugs to be "bad"? And people that don't use drugs are "good"? Who should tell you which drugs are fine and which aren't?  If you trust the government to tell you what to put in your body, when they are lobbied by pharmaceutical companies, then you can think that way, but shouldn't force that ignorance on others.

You should put whatever you want in your body as long as it brings no harm to me, and I should be able to do the same if I don't harm you.

There's nothing wrong with a currency being used for illegal transactions; that's its purpose.  Until bitcoin, all illegal activity was done with fiat currencies, and no one lost sleep over it, nor did they lose trust in the currency for that reason.

How are you getting one in millions?

Wouldn't the odds of getting "10,000" with 10,000 possibilities be 1:10,000?

Excellent point of view.  Or maybe just because I agree with it.

I am not necessarily against taxing, but I am usually for minimal government because it is a very poorly executed business from my experience.  It has the potential to be beneficial, but it seems to very easily grow into a self serving institution when people value their government job more than the service they provide to the public.  I think government should play a role in setting regulations and slowing the destruction caused to the environment in hopes of profit.  The private sector can take care of the rest.

No problem.  Thanks for letting me know.

Hi, I'd like to join this campaign.

Username: freeyourmind
Rank: Full Member
Post count as of this post: 385
BTC address: 1FPqw4Vd3MBV4GMvrsp9xVDQUz3oLVnZ49
Posts link (Profile > Posts > Copy URL): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=485146;sa=showPosts

Is there a minimum amount of posts per week/month in this campaign?  Didn't see anything on the OP.

Thanks.

Thank you sir.

That concept of buying something cheaper and likely lower quality can be applied to any product or service; not just cars.  The issue is the experience or standard of living obviously drops when you spend less.

The other part about the car is that you have an asset worth a certain amount.  When you go to sell that 25k car, after a few years, it will have a higher value than a car that was already old and cheap in the first place.

There is no risk with faucets and signature campaigns, whereas there is risk with trading and gambling.  With trading it may be a little more in your control but with gambling, the odds are against you in the long term.

I'm probably not explaining myself well enough.  I'm talking from the perspective of (the government) tracking people with bitcoin and bitcoin transactions.  That tracking can only be done if you are exchanging your bitcoin with fiat (not cash), so that there will be a record with your bank.  Other bitcoin purchases that are not taxed, wouldn't be traceable.

So in the even that the government outlawed bitcoin, I think you'd still be able to use it as long as you don't have transactions between your bitcoin account and your fiat bank account.

Everyone expresses their problems differently.  Some keep it to themselves and others are comfortable sharing.  The issue with sharing suicidal thoughts is the way you're going to be treated going forward.  People will treat you differently, and you will be advised to be medicated with psychoactive substances that will alter the way you think.  I can see why people in that situation would want to skip that process.

But in terms of friends and family - it would be best for friends and family if you find a way to close those relationships off before checking out, if there is enough planning that has gone into it and it's not just an impulsive decision.

Have you seen her speak?  She has a very strong form of blind faith...I don't think atheism is even a possibility for her.

She is paid to do a job, and she seems unable to do it.  Instead of treating her with a sense of entitlement, she should simply be let go and replaced.

I was listening to an evolutionary psychologist about gambling the other day and apparently winning a bet produces a dopamine response, which can be physiologically addictive aside from the possibility of winning.