It will pass. Pass OUT! 

Feeling fuzzy in the head yet? Or just generally confused?

The awesome fuzzies and hallucinations you see on day three of this sleep depravation are awesome. Let us know if you see any of those.

Depends on whether you use this as an excuse for having a shitty life and why others should feel sorry for you. Since this is the first I see you post about it, I guess not? Though you're still quite a hell of an immature ahole though.

Government regulations corrupt + government courtrooms corrupt = we can't do shit! Wheee!

Is that what you're saying? I haven't seen quite as much corrupt civil litigation btw. Plenty of companies avoiding fines in the rulings though. Good thing those companies also have government law enforcement to keep the hurt and pissed off masses at bay.

Libertards fully support being able to sue companies that put the lives of their employees and customers at risk. They just don't support there being arbitrary laws that may or may not allow that risk to exist in the first place. Considering that those same companies now use those same laws to get away with their bullshit, basically using them as guidelines for how far they can go, and when they fuck up and kill a lot of people, point to the laws and say that they were still within the regulatory limits, thus are prevented from being sued, since everything they did was legal (never mind that they fucked up and hurt people), I'm starting to agree with the libertards more and more.
BP is excellent example. Not only were they within EPA's approval, the "fine" of $15 billion or so they eventually paid out is WAY LESS than the ammount of damage they actually did, but thanks to the agreement with the government to pay that fine, they are now exempt from lawsuits by citizens needing to get their ruined oily shit fixed. So, thanks to government regulation and oversight, probably most of the environmental damage done by BP won't get cleaned up now. Especially not by BP.

Yeah, I remember feeling stuck as the mature one among a sea of stupid, stuck-up, vapid, and immature 17 year olds, too. Was a pretty shitty experience. But, oh well. A lot of them are much worse off that I am now. Them being stupid and immature as teenagers just turns into them being stupid and immature as employees and family members when they grow up. Same drama, fighting, and totally idiotic life choices, just different settings. I end up having a nice, polite, and loving relationship in my family, where we are considered the "well off" ones, then end up fighting all the time about stupid shit, and declaring bankruptsy, or just never having enough money for anything. People don't change much when they grow up, either. Immature at 17 is still immature at 40. The only thing that changes is people either forget how, or are too tired, to have fun when they grow up.

And no, greyhawk, I didn't endulge then, and I'm still not endulging now. Others I know endulged then, and are still endulging now 15 years later.

Btw, I should add that, in my case, I resented the immature idiots in private. Mostly.

Also:

Hmm, I stand corrected http://www.concertedaction.com/2011/11/11/holders-of-italys-public-debt-and-government-securities/

Italy debt is mostly to themselves, so if they do get screwed, they would mainly be crewing themselves and their own pensions/retirements? Considering Italian family-oriented culture, though, I'm not too concerned about anyone starving in the streets.

That won't happen until Americans can feel the debt impacting them directly. If every bit of new spending, be it war or stimulus, required a mandatory tax increase on EVERYONE to cover the difference we wouldn't be in this mess. But since we're throwing around money we borrowed from China and elsewhere, and didn't sacrafice anything ourselves to get it, no one cares, really.
Maybe if US defaulted on domestic debt only, crewing up everyone's treasury and bond holding they have either in plain investments or in retirement accounts, people would sit up and take notice. But I doubt that would happen, since naturally we would first screw the outsiders before screwing ourselves.

You would end up with a lot of people getting things because they want them, but not knowing how to use them. It's like taking out the pilot of a 747 mid light, and giving controlls to whoever wants to play with them most. Won't be fun for the rest of us. After a long while of everything crashing and burning, and all physical goods being looted in the chaos due to lack of controls, things may stabilise, and we'll just have free markets along with rich who became rich by looting during the chaos.

While the government may become more open to legalizing certain businesses for tax revenue, we are also coming up with new technologies to avoid doing business in the old way and avoid paying taxes. Bitcoin is a perfect example. I think as government keep pushing for more taxes, censorship, and copyright controls, money, information/data, and business will become more and more decentralized, with stuff like buying and selling privately in secret overseas without declaring income, running data distributions through mesh networks, etc.

I think you are giving them WAAAAY to much credit. From my time spent as a personal financial advisor, and based on stats of how many people retire ok vs those who have to keep working till they die, I'm very convinced that vast majority of people just don't understand money or wealth, period.
So it's really closer to:

BELIEF 1

"Things should be fair"


BELIEF 2

"Some people have more than others, which is unfair"


BELIEF 3

"Someone should do something to make things more fair."


The question of why things are "unfair" or what can effectively be done about it never even enters peoples' minds.

As for why Bitcoin is hated? If I were to guess, it's a combination of the technology's grandiose claims and possibilities butting up against the group who uses "The Internet is serious business" sarcastically. They don't understand it, it's different, and it threatens to change what they are already used to, and it's also on the internet, and since "everyone knows you can't make money on the internet," they can only mock it and its supporters. This whole thing is almost exactly like what happened with SecondLife, where the technology promised to reinvent the web and expand how we do business (grandiose claims), but since it's on the internet, it can't be serious, so was mocked incessantly, even despite people earning hundreds of thousands on it from fairly successfull businesses (personally, I only earned hundreds of $10s). Once they get bored with mocking and hating, they will move on and eventually accept it.

Most of the things I hear is about banks (from both ows and tea party), and Bitcoin can definitely be about that. Though I still believe Bitcoin's biggest need is in third world and developing nations with restrictive financial systems, where people with skill and intellect would be able to use it to source their skills to the rest of the world (such as a poor engineer in India or Russia being able to easily do work long distance online for someone in US or Europe)

Regarding education, those that n/ow pay more in taxes to support education will very likely pay for that education directly. Companiez already subsidize education of their employees, and technology companies are giving a lot of money to my university to support the local well educated labor pool. Without taxation their contributions will be higher, and likely more selective.

Buying low and selling high using the same money does not affect the overall price. It's just taking profits from volatility. Someone else still has to buy at the high and sell at the low for that to work. If Gox is doing that, all they are doing is risking other peoples money, not manipulating prices. I hope they are not risking other peoples money, and doubt they are.

If that's true, then Google has just made a MASSIVE business blunder.

But subsidies come from taxation. Are you saying taxation is a self sustaining perpetual need, where new people must be taxed because they were helped by taxation of previous people?

Bitcoin is a finite resource. Opinion on leaving your heir a USB stick with a few 100k BTC?...

You and I are on the same side regarding this part. I am not a fan of the trickle down theory, and I do believe the poor will keep getting poorer relative to the richer. I am also EXTREMELY against things like bailouts, subsidies, and guarantees. Any sort of corporate welfare, really. So you won't see me defend that. But you at least got to admit that those gadgets and luxuries the rich enjoy eventually make their way down to the poor as well (I mean they get cheaper and integrated into everything eventually). For instance, I used to use a GPS system when they were $1,200 and no ones heard of them, but now everyone has them, and google phones have them for free. That's one hell of a luxury right there (yes, I know the government actually pays for the satelites).