Sorry and maybe I am overstating, but did you think this egregious socialism was free ride forever?

The majority are dependent on the government and debt. When those are defaulted, the majority are unfunded. For example in the USA (and apparently Europe is worse) the government has $200 trillion in actuarial (Net Present Value) constituent liabilities, yet even if we confiscated every asset in the USA, it wouldn't reach $200 trillion.

As far as I can calculate in my mind, mathematically there are only two possibilities.

1. We default on these obligations and debts, thus the majority will be impoverished. We could then rebuild faster as capital would be freed up to invest.

2. We avoid austerity and defaults by stealing all the capital to sustain the socialism, thus impoverishing everyone over time and sliding towards a Dark Age.

My assumption is the powers that be prefer #2, because it maximizes their gains in terms of political transfer to global institutions such as the IMF and it maximizes the relative stature of the multi-nationals versus the millionaires who can be fleeced with the socialism of "99% versus the 1%" (which actually means the 1% elite and poor against the upper middle class).

For example all the environmentalism (and feminism) crap was set into motion (by Rockefeller) a long ago as the 1972 U.N. Convention on Human Environment, so now the elite will reap the rewards as they can set these carbon taxes against the millionaires and businesses, and these turtle habitats against ranchers, etc.. Watch Texas's sovereignty become shredded.

I don't see what can resist this outcome. This is perfectly set up by the global elite to slide into the abyss. The forces that would resist this are all gone, because the masses have been converted into socialists.

Sorry but I think Armstrong is entirely missing the point of how serious this is.

Welcome to 1984 in 2032. But first we have to burn all the bridges.

There is no escape in any traceable asset.

I am trying to find the source of two quotes which I think were attributed to anonymous sources within the Treasure department (perhaps Larry Summers).

"We are going to destroy all the millionaires".

"We will burn the fingers of the goldbugs up to their armpits".

We are headed into something quite different than the Great Depression.

The globalists want to eliminate all competition from millionaires. The millionaires will be isolated and few in numbered compared to the improverished masses (as the middle class is sliding into poverty all over the world). Thus it will be very easy to turn the masses against the millionaires.

The next step will be to bring the mainstream Europeans middle class into poverty, then the fireworks will really begin in earnest.

No, no, you are not.

This coin has made tremendous progress [for an abandoned coin] long before you and Zebedee showed up "to help us out".

You and Zebedee have [thus far] been nothing more than a source of anxious FUD spinners.

You don't phase me and you're not gonna derail our plans and momentum with your fear-based bullshit.

Nice try, though.

I've got to admit,  it's alot of insane thinking.   But what the heck, let's see how this experiment pans out.  

I think because CEX.io is involved, this is indeed tremendous progress for IXC.

Edit:  This is my biggest worry, that this Counterparty update will either be majorly flawed or very mediocre.  Such an update would be a huge waste of time and make us look like idiots and that's a sure way to lose CEX.io.

That's exactly what I have been told.  If things change we will then change our strategy as well.

I have a feeling if iXcoin becomes a player, a coin with a future, other pools will update as well, to remain competitive and to get fees.

This is why it's crucial we release a very good update this time around.  Something incredibly useful and not just window dressing.

Other pools will follow the biggest pool, presuming there's something going on.

And it's not any more odd than 1 pool, barely 1 year old, controlling over 40% of Bitcoin.

We're very lucky to have CEX.io so let's make use of them for the best.

Wrong on all counts - I already considered everything you have posted [and more] before I cast my vote.

I have an Econ degree and I understand what deflation does - it is as bad, long term, as inflation [for the poor].

The 2 economists you quoted are 100% right.

And BTW:  Bitcoin is deflationary in that it has a fixed amount of coins [for now].  Valuations look at that and not at just the fact there's new coins being minted [temporarily].

IDEALY [in the long run] it's best to have a small nominal inflation strategy, like 1%-3%, this is ideal and correct.

My rationale does not come from selfishness, I could easily then vote for a 10% PoS and get richer than everyone else - this is exactly what bankers do, this is what the fed and the elite do a it is a stealth tax on the poor and middle class, and I have no intention of doing that, LONG TERM.

I'm simply thinking about what will lead to the quickest mass adoption path.  And that is:  To be as close to the standard, which is Bitcoin, as possible.

This is our biggest advantage against the hundreds [and soon thousands] of other alt-coins.
If we advertise ourselves as Bitcoin's twin, it would be a lie if we were actually printing more coins beyond the 21 million hardcap, and that is one of Bitcoin's biggest selling point against the hate people have for Fiat.

And you suggest it's a good idea to give that massive advantage away.  NEVER!

Bitcoin will inflate, they will add PoS, the 21 million hard cap will be raised, I've said this since last year, but for now they have not and neither will we, UNLESS it is absolutely necessary to keep the miners going, and in this case, given we have CEX on our board, it is NOT necessary.

Okay...  if you got Jeffrey's word that IXC will not be pulled with zero subsidy.  You have better be 100% certain about this.    

I am perfectly fine with this scenario.   Of course,  it's just really weird that a single pool controls 100% of the coin.

Agree with your statement about the lack of incentive to secure the network.   This of course assumes that the interests of the pools are the same as the miner. Generally it is. 

I continue to favor a 1 coin per block mining rate after we hit the limit.   Others may disagree,  however let's see what indeed happens.   The code fix is indeed trivial,  however what is not trivial is if a pool like GHash.IO removes IXC from its merged mining... that is not a trivial event to fix... that will absolutely kill the coin.

Further perspective

XLC = It would cost ~1.4 BTC to own 10% of ALL the LitecoinPlus in existence.

LTCX = It would cost ~19523 BTC to own 10% of ALL the LitecoinX in existence

I wish to use this coin to buy some hemp cereal. Can I do that? What happens if I spend cannabiscoin on a product that has no cannabis in it; like a teeshirt?
The OP explains the difference between cannabis and hemp by not listing what hemp is at all. lol
What does 420 mean? Can you explain this?
What is cannabis coin doing to help end cannabis prohibition?
Is cannabis coin better then dabcoin? Cause I hear dabbing is all the new rage.
And how the hell is cannabiscoin backed by marijuana? If bitcoin is accepted for marijuana then is bitcoin backing marijuana?
and finally is it cheaper to mine cannabis coin, then trade for cannabis
or is it cheaper to just grow some cannabis?
or better yet, is it easier to walk into  a dispensary and buy cannabis with $ or is it better to use $ to buy [(edit) bitcoin then] buy cannabiscoin then buy cannabis?

(1) If CEX.IO (i.e. GHASH.IO) supports IXCoin with zero subsidy....   then that's great.

I have always said a 1% inflation rate would be fine.  

This Friday, the Uro Protocol (which the four companies have agreed to) will be be publicly released. Next Monday the Uro Protocol will be signed and ratified by all parties. For now that's is all we are announcing - as promised last Friday.