Factory takeover? Riot cops. You mean the attempted armed robbery, and possible murder of a factory owner? Attempt to overthrow a slaveowning profiteer? Millitary bloodbath. People are not property. We're on the same side here. Strikes? Picket lines? More riot cops or at least arrests and brutality. Not without a State. I wouldn't try to violently stop any strike-breakers, though. Protesting company policy? Hundreds of riot cops. Not without a State. Your source is biased and wrong imo. There's no chance in hell you've read Man, Economy, and State in the time since I gave you the link. I read Proudhon, and Marx. Least you could do is give Rothbard a shot. Ever been on the wrong side of a line of riot cops? AnCaps don't tend to get violent enough to bring out Riot cops. We do get arrested pretty frequently, though. Ever talk to the Chief executive officer of exxon or shell, monsanto or any not hypothetical capitalist? You're talking to one now. Are you a 'sucessful' capitalist? Have you ever lived on or under the wages capitalists enforce? In order: moderately, and yes. And they don't enforce those wages, sweetheart. That's the market. The only enforcement is the minimum wage. And that prices people out of the marketplace entirely. Now, I'm done derailing this thread. If you'd like an explanation of free-market capitalism, I will be glad to answer any questions you have, and explain that capitalism is not your enemy, and in fact, both you and I share the same enemy. In another thread.  |
|
|
|
FYI: It's HAAARP. High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is like any other income - if the government knows about it, it will be liable to tax.
Liable... but not accessible. |
|
|
|
But, deflation is accompanied by a very tough labor market. [citation needed] especially given my (admittedly anecdotal) experience in an inflationary economy that the job market sucks. Chapter 1, beginning with "Of the Wages of Labour" Admittedly rooted in sound money economics, which may not directly apply to modern reality. Could you point out where it states that "In an economy where the value of money is increasing, labor is in small demand"? 'Cause I don't see it. I'm not sure about those summaries, I would read the source material. Anyway, it is not always correlated because deflation doesn't cause a tough labor market. Thank you. Automation can sometimes cause a tough labor market (in the industry undergoing automation), but that's not the same as deflation causing a tough labor market. |
|
|
|
US national debt is something i don't understand no matter how i think about it. First, while it's debt, i can't see it in the same sense as i see *my* debt. If i default on my mortgage, my house will be taken away. Bad thing. If US defaults on its loans,  What happens? China (or any other nation with enough of our debt) dumps the dollar en masse, the economy tanks, and we're all boiling shoes - or each other - to eat. Why would China want to do that? It'll lose a valuable trading partner & the money it is owed, plus risk what's politely called "armed conflict"? They crazy? Edit: If you have bought into a pyramid scheme, and you're guided by greed alone (euphemism: "invisible hand"), would you yell "scam" & out the perpetrator, or keep quiet for a chance to get out with your $$$? No, they wouldn't (probably) do that. But the threat of doing that is usually enough to keep the US on nice terms with China. To compare it to your analogy, It would be like blackmailing the scammer with the threat of outing him, to ensure that you're one of the first ones cashed out. |
|
|
|
Saying the government has taken your house and car but that you have avoided paying tax is silly. Assuming your cash is in a secure location, every example you give is true for cash as well.
Even the Cryptostocks? Somehow, I don't think the finance committee is going to appreciate a budget denominated in cars and houses. But let's set that aside for a moment. Say I'm looking to transition to warmer, friendlier climes. I could sell the house and the car, and try taking all my cash with in a few dozen suitcases, but they generally don't like that. OR, I could turn it all into Bitcoins, and waltz across the border - any border - with it securely stashed in my brain. Try doing that with Krugerrands. |
|
|
|
US national debt is something i don't understand no matter how i think about it. First, while it's debt, i can't see it in the same sense as i see *my* debt. If i default on my mortgage, my house will be taken away. Bad thing. If US defaults on its loans, What happens? China (or any other nation with enough of our debt) dumps the dollar en masse, the economy tanks, and we're all boiling shoes - or each other - to eat. |
|
|
|
But, deflation is accompanied by a very tough labor market. [citation needed] especially given my (admittedly anecdotal) experience in an inflationary economy that the job market sucks. Chapter 1, beginning with "Of the Wages of Labour" Admittedly rooted in sound money economics, which may not directly apply to modern reality. Could you point out where it states that "In an economy where the value of money is increasing, labor is in small demand"? 'Cause I don't see it. |
|
|
|
On a more serious point, Bitcoin does not mean the end of taxation. A person who earns money with Bitcoin is no different from a person who earns money with cash.
Except they can physically take your cash. We've had this conversation before. Yes you can live in a tent and cycle to the shops. But if things are going well in your life, you will have a salary Paid in bitcoins, on the internet. , a house, a car, So they steal my house and car. Now they have a house and a car, not taxes. a pension, stock investments On Cryptostocks. and all sorts of other things that the taxman can take if you are convicted of tax evasion. They can even lock me up, but I'll still have my money. So those of us who earn some money in Bitcoin are no more invulnerable than those of us who earn money in cash.
As I've shown, actually, yes we are. It's not 100%, but it's a big step in the right direction. |
|
|
|
You can still be jailed for not giving the passwords for the other accounts. Claiming "I don't know them" is not a valid defense.
Fuck 'em. It's true. I can't give what I don't know. Which is exactly what most of the controversy is about, since even if you genuinely do not know the password, they will jail you anyway. The flip side is that anyone could get away with not giving up a password just by claiming to not know it.  |
|
|
|
You can still be jailed for not giving the passwords for the other accounts. Claiming "I don't know them" is not a valid defense.
Fuck 'em. It's true. I can't give what I don't know. |
|
|
|
On a more serious point, Bitcoin does not mean the end of taxation. A person who earns money with Bitcoin is no different from a person who earns money with cash.
Except they can physically take your cash. |
|
|
|
But, deflation is accompanied by a very tough labor market. [citation needed] especially given my (admittedly anecdotal) experience in an inflationary economy that the job market sucks. |
|
|
|
The problem with that argument is the long periods of deflation in the 1800s when the currency was gold.
Still seeing deflation as a necessarily bad thing, huh? No - replying to the post saying that deflation is a result of money printing. In a gold - or other stable monetary system - economy, deflation is an indication of economic growth. Specifically, that the economy is growing faster than the money supply, and therefore the individual monetary unit is growing more valuable as it represents more real wealth. Still think Japan's deflation was a problem? |
|
|
|
Capitalism proper requires that masses of people are physically kept by the threat of tax funded violence out of control of the means of production. Wut? Capitalism is defined as a social and economic system where capital assets are owned and controlled by private persons, where labor is purchased for money wages, capital gains accrue to private owners, and the price mechanism is utilized to allocate capital goods between uses. No mention of "tax-funded violence." In fact, it seems that your definition of capitalism is actually socialism: Socialism is an economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy. "Social ownership," as in, the State. |
|
|
|
myrkul - I'm bored of the threat theme now you have taken a more civilized stance. Have the last word and lets move on.
Then you have retracted your support of taxation and government mass murder? You've decided to stop threatening peaceful people? I'm so happy! |
|
|
|
The problem with that argument is the long periods of deflation in the 1800s when the currency was gold.
Still seeing deflation as a necessarily bad thing, huh? No - replying to the post saying that deflation is a result of money printing. I have an open mind on deflationary currencies in a world where there is a choice of currency. In a world where there is only 1 legal tender, then yes, deflation is very bad indeed. Well, there's your problem. Legal tender. And that's why we are here...we have an alternative in Bitcoin that might be the most disruptive innovation of our lifetimes. Indeed. A currency completely shielded from government force. A currency incapable of being influenced by Keynesian policies. It's going to be amazing. |
|
|
|
That post from cryptoanarchist is a direct threat. Your posts in support of it are supporting that threat and amplifying it saying you would also kill me.
Vim Vi Repellere Licet. I stated that if you made a statement of threat to me, I would respond violently. I advise against threatening people. |
|
|
|
The problem with that argument is the long periods of deflation in the 1800s when the currency was gold.
Still seeing deflation as a necessarily bad thing, huh? No - replying to the post saying that deflation is a result of money printing. I have an open mind on deflationary currencies in a world where there is a choice of currency. In a world where there is only 1 legal tender, then yes, deflation is very bad indeed. Well, there's your problem. Legal tender. |
|
|
|
...snip...
I'm not. I'm not going to kill you simply for disagreeing with me. You, on the other hand, have no problem with paying the people who would kill me for disagreeing with you.
Well you pay your taxes as well - I don't think that entitles me to kill you. Any taxes I pay, I pay under duress. Giving the mugger your wallet doesn't mean you support being mugged. You, on the other hand, gladly hand over the wallet to the mugger, and tell everyone how resisting the mugger is wrong. And if I should refuse to hand over the wallet, you would applaud when he shot me down. I'm glad you've come back to your senses. It would have been a strange turn if I had to lecture you on the NAP and how it applies to free speech. Tsk... You seem to think I have changed my stance. You're still threatening me with lethal force. You said you would kill me if I disagreed with you. No, that's how you misinterpreted my statement. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
