If the government issued a digital currency, they would still control the money supply, and in a way, that is what the government does today.  Most transactions are done digitally.  The unique characteristic of Bitcoin would be that the supply is static right?

I don't think it's a big surprise that Mastercard would take a stance against Bitcoin.  It fits the normal corporate model to reject something new out of fear of losing existing business.  Adopting a model with cheaper transactions would cannibalize some of the revenues they currently make.

I believe the side that argues that there should not be a choice for abortion is largely religious, and Catholic in particular.  Because one group of people believe that it is wrong, does that mean someone that doesn't think it's wrong should have to follow the same rule?  For example, if a 15 year old gets pregnant and lives in a trailer, and doesn't have the resources to raise a child, should she be forced to have the child and take care of him/her?  Doesn't make sense.

Don't want to take this too far off topic, but there is a difference between morally sound behaviour and sin.  Some sins have become illegal even though they are morally sound, and that is because of large groups of religious voters.

There are a lot of links between religion and law.  For example, the only reason that there is an issue with abortion or gay marriage is because those laws came from Christianity.  Catholic schools are also publicly funded and religious organizations are tax exempt.

Polarized.

There seems to be a large gap between extreme wealth and extreme poverty.  I did enjoy traveling through parts of India and it is a special place to me.

I think that when people want to have their problems solved, they just want to have it solved in as little time as possible, without having to wait for extended periods of time, and without having to call back in.

Customer service in the form of chat is becoming more popular as the wait times are far less, and you don't have to deal with an IVR or transfers.  I'm sure a small part of customer service requires dynamic problem solving, but the bulk of it is a step by step process, which could be automated without too much trouble.

Interesting video.  I think it really depends on when the technology will be cheap enough to hit the mainstream.  If most companies are making decisions from a profitability perspective, then when it makes sense financially, costs will be reduced significantly to the point that it may be difficult to compete without automation if the rest are doing it.

My job is a series of decisions and interactions/negotiation/communication with other people.  It can be done by a machine if the interaction is no longer necessary, meaning if the interactions are done with other machines.  I think it'll be a long time before that happens though.

Agreed.  Other than kids who are not legally permitted to work, it really is a terrible wage.  When I was <16 years old though, it's probably something I would have done for awhile, especially when bored.

How is $1/hour a good thing?  It's not passive income because he is needing to do work for it.  Passive income is where you don't really need to invest your own time for the income you receive.

It depends on where he lives and what his expenses are like, but there must be better options available than $1/hour for a job that isn't even enjoyable.

Half of your money in Bitcoin?  That's still a pretty large investment in something so speculative and volatile.  There is no rate of return on holding Bitcoin other than speculating that the exchange rate will move in your favour.  It would be cool if one day there were financial investments within Bitcoin that do offer a rate of return in the form of interest, coupons, dividends, etc.  That would also increase the demand for Bitcoin.

Are you talking about Bitcoin as a national currency?  I agree that is very unlikely to happen.
But I think that along with many other things, anything can succeed without government support.  All online piracy continues without government support.  All drug trafficking around the world also continues against government policy.  To legitimize Bitcoin and have it as a payment option for all purchases and taxes is another story, but people are still free to use it as long as there are people willing to accept it.

I live in Canada, and aside from a couple friends, I don't know anyone that knows about or cares about bitcoin.  I also haven't seen any retailers accepting it.

I'm curious as to why the size of principal matters?

If you have the ability to generate consistent positive returns, then it makes sense to invest; and if you don't it doesn't make sense to invest - regardless of the size of the bank account.

So if a criminal is defined as someone that breaks a law, then everyone is a criminal right?  But more importantly, what is the basis of the law?  Moral integrity?  No not really.  There are several crimes to which there is no victim, yet there is unusually harsh punishment.  So really that is just a law taking away civil liberty (gambling, consenting prostitution, illicit drugs, gay marriage) partly due to the lack of separation between church and state and partly because of the profit incentive.  At what point does civil liberty become priority vs. implementing restrictions to which there is no benefit?

Another problem is that the government creates laws and then polices or enforces the laws.  But who polices the police?

Countries with large, small or no government can all be good places to live.  If the government is benevolent, then it's good, but I don't see many realistic examples of that.  And in that case, smaller government is better.  No technological solutions, innovation or evolution (which are really the only solutions) comes from government.  It's the only place where you can be treated like shit and still have no choice but to do business with them.  I'm not saying that's always the case, but it is definitely the case sometimes.  Any private organization run like the government would go bankrupt.

What do you define as a criminal?  The government has made drugs illegal, so it has evolved into a worldwide black market with conflict resolution coming from violence.  It is government policy that has created the violence and "criminals" who are put into jail without having a victim.  Which wars would take place without government?

Private companies can construct roads (and do today).  Roads can be privately owned and charge a toll for anyone that uses it.

You should read on the spectrum of societies with different levels of government involvement from communism to socialism to minarchism and anarchy.  All of them can work given proper execution, however I don't expect proper execution from current governments.  I expect the bare minimum service with corruption and policies that benefit a select few over the greater population.  With that expectation, the less government you have, the better it is.

The government definitely has the power to discourage the use of bitcoin by implementing regulations, fees, penalties, etc.  However my response was to BTCevo and the government adopting and taking full control of bitcoin.

Does this assume that demand remains constant?  Change in the demand of bitcoin can influence its price incremental to any price movement from fiat expansion.

Currently, everyone values and accepts fiat currency, and pretty much anything can be purchased with fiat.  There are many people that do not value bitcoin, and would not accept bitcoin as a form of payment and I think that plays an important role in bitcoin's valuation.

How would you go about getting "full control" of a decentralized currency?  Government has two tools when it comes controlling or manipulating an economy which is the monetary and fiscal policies.  Monetary policy being the interest rate and money supply, both of which don't apply to bitcoin.

Of all the fiat currencies available, all the government can do is market their own home brew and make you think that the thin air that is backing "our" currency is far superior to the thin air backing another currency.

No investment is always profitable, and as someone that is currently experiencing negative returns on gold, I can say along with many others that gold is not always profitable.  I'd say it's a good alternative store of value, especially for those that have lost faith in fiat, but it's still very possible to have losses in gold.