i agree they are out of control, and it's sometimes hard to figure out how bad the US is compared to russians.
At the least Russians are honest, they want to take over someone they do it. They don't play proxy influence wars. Or murder people on other side of the world... That is exactly what they are doing. They are supplying money, training, and weapons to the seperasts. They are not admitting to doing this, but it is well known that they are. |
|
|
|
Mining in General is unprofitable and will likely not ROI after electricity and the miner is paid for. Even if you get a tax deduction you will simply lose less money but would not cause a profit.
Yes. Yet, most new comers still attract to the mining business. And the only ones that get more or less constant flow of income are the mining equipment producers. Also, the question is inevitable as to why would they sell mining equipment if they could just mine themselves? The mining equipment manufactures are mining themselves using the new model machines which are energy efficient, less noisy and tiny. After the new model is launched, then they keep mining with new model and sell out the old model. They grab a lot of profit not only from mining but also from selling mining machine. This is true, however I consider this to be very unethical. Manufacturers using customer money to build miners and then use the miners for their own profit is very wrong. I think that the customer should receive the bitcoin earned from these machines, less any electricity used. |
|
|
|
I would not keep money in Cyprus. They try to convince people that it is safe now, but I doubt it.
Cyprus was just the weakest link. You think others are much stronger? Other country's banks are stinger then Cyprus's banks are/were, however they are still generally unsafe by most standards. |
|
|
|
Import duty isn't calculated based on what you declared or what you paid, its based on what the thing you bought is actually worth.
You could still be liable for import duty if you got the item for free, paying with BTC or declaring it in BTC doesn't really matter. You can declare whatever you like and if they don't check it you'll pay based on that but in the end its up to customs to decide what its worth and what you should pay.
Declaring it in BTC won't change anything, you'll still need to pay your taxes with legal tender.
What qualifies if a duty is owed is where you purchased the item from and the value of the item that your purchased. Your method of payment does not affect the amount of duty. |
|
|
|
|
Whales, just like institutional investors in the stock market, will have a large impact on the price of bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
No internet = bitcoin dead.
This is a pretty simply way to putting things. However it is correct. Bitcoin relies on this decentralized network called the internet, if this network were to go 100% down then bitcoin would have no way of mining, nor would it have any way of confirming transactions, nor preventing double spends. |
|
|
|
none
no coin is a good investment except btc, the 2% or whatever from pos is worthless compared with the potential of btc to go up in price
alts are pump and dump speculation not long term investment
+3 This is correct. Most alt coins have zero long term value. |
|
|
|
bitcoin is not a stock, bitcoin is money.
in fact it is the only thing besides precious metals that has all the properties that money needs to have.
money needs to be:
1. a medium of exchange - it should be easy to give money to another party in exchange for goods and services.
2. it needs to be portable - it should be easy to carry around.
3. it needs to be durable - it should not be easily destroyed over time.
4. it needs to be divisible - it should be easy to split it into smaller units.
5. it needs to be fungible - all units must have the same value, it should be hard to counterfeit.
6. it must retain purchasing power over long periods of time - its supply must not grow rapidly and arbitrarily.
both fiat and stocks fail at 6 as they can be created by corruptible men at will.
precious metals are protected by the laws of nature from being created arbitrarily.
bitcoin is protected by mathematics from being created arbitrarily.
Money actually only needs to be a medium of exchange, a store of value and a unit of account. That is it. |
|
|
|
Paying back the loan destroys money as it either destroys the electronic deposit at the bank or withdraws cash from the economy to the bank's balance sheet (cash vaults e.g.).
If banks have any excess capital then this would not be the case. This is only true when all of a bank's money is deployed, which pretty much never happens. I don't get your point, care to elaborate? If a bank has all of their capital deployed then unless they earn money they cannot make additional loans. If a bank has some extra amount of capital then they are able to make additional loans. The same is true for the overall banking system. If there is no excess capital in the banking system then banks are not able to make additional loans. If there is excess capital in the overall banking system then banks can make more loans. When someone pays back a loan then money is essentially taken out of the banking system. If the banking system did not have excess capital then it would need to "call" some of the loans in order to have the proper amount of capital on hand. If the banking system does have excess capital then the banking system would simply have less excess capital after the loan is paid off. |
|
|
|
You can't be a consumer if you are unemployed. Would you rather have a job and pay higher prices or have your job off-shored and pay lower prices?
1) So long as you're eating / consuming electricity / using gas / drinking water / etc... you ARE a consumer and will benefit from lower prices. Its literally that simple. So stop BSing about terminology here. 2) Yes, except the guy overseas who took your job (A) is willing to accept lower wages thus is a more worthy candidate than that job than you and (B) he lives among more poor people and therefore is in a much worse situation than you are when unemployed. And (C) hiring the other worker results in everyone else benefiting from lower prices. Of course from YOUR perspective you want the job over your competition. But in what economic/moral/logical way does that make ANY SENSE whatsoever? The answer is it doesn't. When someone is unemployed they have very limited resources. It is very rare that someone will not consume anything at all (only use stockpiles of food, ect) but it does happen. |
|
|
|
Lots of people see it coming with the insane lending going on in the housing sector. So, it is not unpredictable as the mainstream media portray it. Knowing that it's coming isn't usually the problem. Anyone who knows anything about finance knows another crash is coming. The problem is figuring out when, how far the markets will fall in the crash, and also how much the markets will go up before we start the descent. Timing is everything. Correct, if you pull out now (from stocks, housing), you may loose some appreciation. What you can say, is that those assets are risky, and they become riskier. Yes, as valuations increase, assets become riskier. The stock market is starting to get pretty high now by historical standards, so one would think that we'll probably get at least a correction in the not-too-distant future. But as an old saying goes, markets can behave irrationally longer than you can stay solvent. So it's by no means a good idea to short, but it is time to be cautious. a more accurate statement would be, 'as the expected return on assets increase, the assets become riskier' With that being said, as assets become more expensive, there is a greater chance of a, at least short term pull back in the price. |
|
|
|
1 - Attract people saying bitcoin price increased by 1 million percent in the fast 4 years, and they can get millionaires if they have some bitcoins.
2 - Complain they don't spend bitcoin, and for this the price is not rising.
Seems some people are doing the wrong propaganda of bitcoin.
Maybe I'm misreading what you're saying, but for #2, hoarding will increase the price, not make it fall. If you spend bitcoin, I think most merchants will convert it to fiat very quickly, which will lead to a drop in price. If I'm not misreading OP, he said we need use our bitcoins to bring mass adoption. Since mass adoption = bitcoin value skyrocketing, he's saying that we need spend bitcoin to make its value rise, at least in the long run, but bitcoin is sold by many people like the investiment with biggest return ever created(the HODL people from the speculation subforum), so there is no incentive to use it(= lose big money in the future). If no one wants bitcoin, the price will plungue even if everyone just hold it. This sounds a lot like the 'what comes first, the chicken or the egg' question. |
|
|
|
Has the use of Bitcoin for illegal things such as purchasing drugs, weapons, fraudulent documents and laundering money effected it value?
I would say that in the early days sites like Silk Road likely has a positive impact on the price of bitcoin. I would say that this site likely cussed a lot of the early demand and press about bitcoin. Today I am not so sure about how these kinds of sites affect bitcoin. I agree, I think that buyers on illegal drug sites probably were behind a lot of the price appreciation from 2011 up until the bubble of 2013 as it made world headlines that you could buy drugs on the internet using bitcoin as this was when the price really started to rally strongly. |
|
|
|
I just hope that people actually post constructive comments and aren't just 'trolling' or harassing the people devising those regulations. Talking about a mature community and a currency that's evolved enough to enter Wall Street and the banking sector.
I would agree that this will be very important if any of the "anti regulation" comments are to be taken seriously. If they get a lot of comments like "horse shit" then they will think you are a 13 year old and will likely ignore you. |
|
|
|
Regarding the bitcoins that were sold to Mtgox, you just have to wait for the japanese court to handle them and then all of the USD that was owed to you will come without much more delay.
Or at least that's what they're hoping for.
I have read rumors that MtGox may decide they will pay out their creditors in bitcoin for those that are owed bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
Generally speaking, both running a faucet and using a faucet will be very unprofitable. The only real reason to run a faucet is to try to get people educated as to how bitocin works and to potentially get them to use your referral links to sites like coinbase and LBC.
|
|
|
|
I don't know if it is really a country thing. Some people are freaking out because even Bitstamp, which I consider rather trustworthy, is located in eastern Europe and uses single accounts to keep their customers FIAT money. I know there may be complications in case of some freeze but that hasn't happened as of now...
I think the bigger concern for bitstamp is the fact that they are located in a very politically and economically unstable part of the world. |
|
|
|
I'm a lawyer and I can learn  but generally I only do personal injury and employment related matters. Not sure if you can help me there. I would accept BTC as a form of payment depending on the type of job, if anyone's interested. Personal injury lawyers and lawyers doing the type of work that the OP is talking about are very different. As they are toe very separate parts of the law. I know. I wish I knew more about the type of work that OP was mentioning, that's why I said I could learn  as I'm still young and I understand some of the technical aspect of it at least. I can certainly figure out some of the tax and regulatory stuff, as most lawyers probably can. So I was really just adding that I would accept bitcoin as a form of payment. I wonder if any lawyers accept bitcoin and if it raises any issues for their practice and they would be willing to share? I am curious as to how many years out of law school you are. This is generally something that someone would have specialized in law school. |
|
|
|
So, Mr. Douche aka Ben Lawsky has come out with proposed NY regulations. http://www.dfs.ny.gov/about/press2014/pr1407171.htmlAfter reviewing these proposed regulations, it is clear what the objectives are. 1. Restrict and greatly Monitor all Bitcoin users, get rid of all privacy 2. Maintain the status quo by making it so businesses cannot take profit in BTC. So we have to keep relying on Banks. 3. Stifle innovation and force companies out of USA I do not find the attempt surprising, it was going to happen eventually. However, they will fail. Bitcoin has proven itself resilient, and it will overcome these trivial hostilities. Here is a good article on the matter. http://www.fentonreport.com/news/bitcoin-why-engage-with-ben-lawskyNo bitcoin company is going to want to do business with NY customers.. they can only hurt themselves. You can't kill the bitcoin, remember? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMQg546agpUWhat did you expect from the goverment? Of course they want to control and regulate everything. Bitcoin is an alternative to fiat. Of course it is in their interest to restrict it. When liberals are in office they tend to try to control as much of peoples' lives as possible. |
|
|
|
|
They have authority because they are regulating businesses that will deal with customer funds, and because they will be dealing with funds in terms of fiat.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
