Um, no.  Rent Seeking does not require capital.  Taxation is rent seeking.  Corporations lobbying for subsidies is rent seeking.  Enimnet Domain is rent seeking.

Rent seeking is not when a landlord charges rent, that's a contract.

Yes, but if parents wish to have their kids educated by others, then those others still need to get paid.  Even homeschooling parents need to earn a living, so if homeschooling interferes with that ability, the kids' education will suffer or their quality of life will suffer, and probably both.

The difficulty is a relative metric that tells us how powerful the network hashing power is over a two week period.  The harder the hashing is, the more difficult it becomes for an attacker to overwelm the blockchain by brute force computation.

Yes.

Then you oppose yourself.  Do you own any tools, or any property whatever?  If you are really a priest, do you own a bible?  Any property that is required to earn a living is, by it's very definition, capital.  Ownership is defined by primary possession, not some government edict on a piece of paper that says someone (or some corporation) owns something.
I could, yes.  However, if you are not willing to have an open mind and, at a minimum, read a book; then I'm not willing to waste my time repeating the work of others.

Must?  Of course not.  Why would that be a requirement?  Opposing natural laws (of economics or anything else) are achievable so long as those who wish to do so are willing to dedicate resources to that end.  It's comparable to sailing up river.  Sure, it can be done; but it's naturally easier to sail down river.
I wasn't claiming that either.  I said that the political structures are not capitalist.  Those who participate in the political structures are capitalists in the same manner that you are, but exist within a system that is most demostratablely anti-capitalist.

You really don't know of what you speak.

That's called "rent seeking", and is not capitalism. 

But it can't.  The educators must make a living.  Said another way, they must make a profit, otherwise they will have to find some other way to eat.  It's unavoidable.
There is no such thing, and there never has been.
See above.

There, I fixed that for you.

That's a hard one to answer, but the first question would be, how much is enough?

Based on who's determination of value?  Yours?

Please keep this on testnet.

We were not discussing the code, but the protocol.

Outstanding!  I stand corrected.

Not strictly correct.  Anarchism is an anti-state philosophy, not necessarily anti authoritarian.  After all, Father, what is the ultimate authority, if not God?

"You keep using that word, but I don't think in means what you think it means..."


In practice, perhaps.  Not in ideology.  The problem that persists with your conversations is that the word "capitalism" is different for different people.  What you rail against is actually corporatism.  Capitalism is not an ideology, but a definable set of natural economic laws.  Capitalism exists in every human society, whether the people involved wish to acknowledge it or not.  In places where capitalism is respected, societies prosper in general.  There are some downsides to capitalism, but overall it is always best to go along with nature rather than fight it.  Really Father, you should actually read some of the recommended reading on the subject that has been presented already.  I particularly recommend Economics in One Lesson.


Case in point, political structures are, by definition, not capitalist structures.  The political rulers in the UK are not capitalists.  The same is true for every other nation on Earth.  There is no such thing as a capitalist nation, and there cannot be.
Why would it make sense?  Education has always been a for-profit, vocational venture. 
If they were raised to understand the natural laws of God, then yes, we can. 
Probably we should not.

Okay, then who are you?  Are you a professor?  Where are you published?  And in what way have you publicly supported Bitcoin?

I, for one, never assumed that until after I understood the system, and realized it's elegance.  I seriously doubt that anyone can come up with a better system.

It's not that no one will mine, it's that only those who are already vested, and those who have particularly favorable electric rates, will continue to mine.  If every marginal miner stopped mining as soon as it was economicly unfavorable for them to do so, the difficulty would stagnate at that level until something changed.  The value of the bitcoin could go up, which would make mining profitable again at the same difficulty level; or the difficulty level could go down.  This is how the balance is created.  As it is, there is already evidence that balance has been found, as the difficulty appears to track the 6 weeks rolling average price closely.  Said another way, as the price goes up, more miners join the network; and as the price drops, the most marginal miners drop out first.

Sure...

www.PayPal.com

I can't see this.

The defining characteristic is this...

If you refuse to pay the gated communities fee, what happens?

If, at any point, you risk physical harm done to you by officials of the gated community, or incarceration, then the gated community is a government and the fee a tax.

If, instead, everyone you know simply asks you to contribute or leave, then it isn't.  Consent implies the practical ability to withdraw consent, in which case the community can withdraw the benefits of consent.  The worst form of punishment that a non-state could impose upon you is to walk you to the front gate, and insist that you pay your dues if you desire to re-enter.  This is exactly how it works if you don't pay your condo fee in a secured urban condo building.  Anyone who enters the building does so with the invitation of a member in good standing, whether the person is a vistor, a family member or the dues paying member himself.  Even the employees of the building manager doesn't enter without the implict invitation of the condo association.

By any metric, governments are the largest polluters.  Yet they are universally exempt from damage claims.

Please define "fair" in this context.

I am.  I have one of those and I never even though to attempt it.

Anyone who is buying an entire truck load is willing to wait 10 minutes.

Yes, but this was the kind of thing that I was thinking of...

http://www.sustainabletable.org/shop/csa/

...except that CSA's are an ongoing agreement.  Such a farmer could pre-sell half of his crop via a weekly CSA agreement, an additional 30% on an ad-hoc basis on the website two days before the Farmer's Market, and any other marketable crops at teh farmer's market itself.  In this way, the farmer gets the advantages of futures support without the futures, and sells most of his weekly product before he even picks it.  The Farmer's Market trip then becomes mostly an active advertisment for the service as well as a chance to unload the remainder of his product.