Was just checking out the cold wallets for some gambling places, though it seems like the one for Crypto-Games is fresh out. I'm more or less expecting this to be an issue with updating the site, but I would like to know if I'm missing an announcement or something like that.

Let me know folks, this is the link to their normal cold wallet - https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/19JK42EVP192PXwxiektEu7CT5PfersA1X

Not surprised to see the news here.

Trumps AG has been asked to resign, and he has resigned. This is after a pretty open knowledge of the two not getting along and Trump publicly berating his AG -- who he felt wasn't on the same page as him and was hostile towards Trump.

This is breaking news at the moment article is here - https://www.wsj.com/articles/attorney-general-jeff-sessions-resigns-from-trump-white-house-1541619893

I think a President should have everyone within their cabinet that they want there, it doesn't make sense to have this sort of infighting.

I'd like to make this the mega thread for all midterm related / watch party talk. We all may have our own views on certain things, but tonight (and leading into tomorrow) is going to be when we'll see what actually happens from these months of campaigning.

I'll post some exit polls on here when they come out, I'd like for people to post what they think is going to happen and resources relating to polls/counting of votes / etc.

I personally think that if the Democrats do win the house, the majority is going to be VERY small. The Republicans are going to keep the Senate, and this is going to be a divided government.

If that's not the case, then I think that  GOP keeps the House and Senate with small margins.

Now everyone else!

I've heard some exorbitant fees are being charged by the people that own these Bitcoin ATMs (which are probably a huge turn off to people, but then again if people are willing to pay for it then so be it) But I wanted to know if anyone on here actually owned one and could provide some insight into the amount of money that can be made by owning one of them, two of them, etc.

Let me know!

Crazy to see, after being at the helm for about 16 years Angela Merkel is going to be stepping down from her position in her own party and then will not be seeking the role of chancellor in the next election.

Not surprising to say the least, after the recent election her coalition government is most likely going to dissolve as the other side has hinted they're going to do. Right (or even far right) leaning parites have seen massive gains as the open borders movement from Angela Merkel is being frowned upon by her voters.

Check out the article here - https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46020745 - This is going to be a fun chat.

I’d like to setup a thread for all conversations relating to the death / murder of the Saudi Journalist.

Hellfish and I were chatting on this, and I think we’ve both agreed (after little research, from us) that we don’t think the US should go into full world police mode over something like this.

Article link here (archive for paywalls) - http://archive.is/x7Lmf

[we found that we agree on something!!!!!!]

I've discussed this multiple times before, but this is the first time that I'm going to legitimately write down what I think about the subject and explain my thoughts on it. I've even discussed it with the commie that moderates this forum, and crazily enough we found that we agree on something!!!!!!

I think that politics is a sham, I think that both parties need one another to stay relevant. If the Republicans dominate politics, with no Democratic challengers, then you're going to see a world with little to no reason for people to fundraise for Republicans and supporting their views -- it's just natural that we have Republican policy.

Think of it like this, if it's a given that we have Republican Presidents that support big oil and no opposition (at least in government) that doesn't support big oil, then there's no reason for big oil to donate large sums of money to political campaigns.

This line of thinking goes both ways, as Planned Parenthood wouldn't be donating to Democrats if they were the only party in the government and Republicans weren't attempting to cut their funding and such.

Batman Needs the Joker, or he's not needed.

What do yall think about this line of thinking? Am I just a crazy conspiracy theorist, or is there some reason behind what I'm thinking? (Just making it moderated to fight the trolls, I'm not going to silence anyone - I promise!)

[flying hellfish]

I know it may be tough for some to accept (cough cough flying hellfish commie bastard cough cough) But we, in the United States, have our newest Supreme Court Justice on the court. He has been confirmed by one of the slimmest margins in history when it comes to justices and will go down as the most controversial justice nomination (talking about the process, and what occurred during it) that has successfully made it onto the court.

I'd like to speak to everyone in the P&S section and see exactly what you think about the man. What you think he's going to do, and what you think his nomination is going to mean for the future of the US country and American politics.

I do think that the sexual assault allegations against him are going to invigorate the Republican base to go out and defend their seats for this midterm election. I don't think we're going to see an overturning of Roe V Wade, but I do know that we're going to see the Conservative presence back on the court that we haven't had for a long time.

[even though people try to tarnish America's reputation by stating that America is more unequal than other countries (in regard to income distribution), this fact isn't true through some simple fact checking and data analysis.]

Read an article today in the Wall Street Journal which pretty much laid out that even though people try to tarnish America's reputation by stating that America is more unequal than other countries (in regard to income distribution), this fact isn't true through some simple fact checking and data analysis. As the problem with the current model which is used to determine inequality by country is that it doesn't represent the United States' governmental program transfers to the people within these programs.

I'm going to assume that this is due to the fact that there are so many US welfare programs, which stretch from federal programs to local programs -- meaning that there could be hundreds of thousands of programs which are present in the United States -- leading to an issue of underreporting benefits

I'm going to quote the article below and then provide the picture I took, as the archive.is link doesn't provide the picture which is pretty vital to this talk.

ARTICLE LINK - http://archive.is/RpY40

PICTURE LINK - https://imgur.com/a/8jWBarA

I'd love to have a discussion with all of you regarding anything I've posted here, even on the grounds of how truthful the article is. Thanks for the debate, I really do enjoy being a member of P&S

[This practically means that the current system does not incentivize growth, it incentivizes you to stay under the imposed income (and other barriers) to get your benefits.]

This is going to be a long one, and I want people to be involved with this issue so I can hear all sides of the argument.

In the recent years, there has been a push from the right and the left to introduce a Universal Basic Income (UBI) -- which in short, is a set amount of income (pegged to inflation) which is provided to you if you're a US citizen. This money is given to you with no strings attached. I'm going to use an example and say that every American is given $10,000 a year regardless of the income that they have their marital status, and so on.

This in and so of itself removes the cliff dive which is apart of the welfare system we have now. As the welfare system, we have now may give a large number of benefits to someone who makes under $35,000 -- but won't give a dime to someone who is married and makes $36,000 a year. This practically means that the current system does not incentivize growth, it incentivizes you to stay under the imposed income (and other barriers) to get your benefits.

This new UBI system would give you money either way and then you'd be allowed to go work as hard as you want or as little as you want. I think (alongside some economists) that this is going to spur growth as it incentivizes people to go ahead and work hard to continue to succeed as they aren't held down by welfare limits.

I also want to say that with this system, some conservatives and libertarians think that the entire welfare system should be removed -- which includes, Medicare, Medicaid, and then the various federal and state programs which go alongside with it. To them (which I agree with), this plan is a substitute for every single other program that is currently present in the US relating to welfare. I'm not going to go into detail about what the left thinks the right thing to do with UBI is, but I do think they want to remove some programs and then add this on to the current welfare system -- but I think some of the liberal-leaning people who post here can chime in with that side of things.

I do want to stress that I don't know if $10,000 per year is the right number, it may be different based on research. I was JUST using an example.

I do think that UBI can work as a way to remove the hundreds of state and federal programs which aren't necessary when the benefits can come from one central source -- which only has to vet if you're a US citizen or not -- This is a way to remove the massive bureaucracy, and then introduce a program which will have the same effect to the people who need welfare.

Seems to be some pretty big news out of Washington. I do think that this is the right course to take, as it has allowed the door to open to further discussions and it will allow the farmers in the United States to not be killed by retailiatory tariffs during a time where only negoiations are occuring.

I don't take this as a loss, I take this as a time out to allow for the country to focus on countries that are really commiting some real trade issues -- such as China --

I'd like to hear what others think about this.

WASHINGTON—President Donald Trump and European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker turned down the heat on a trade dispute between two of the world’s largest economic powers, suggesting Wednesday they would hold off on further tariffs while they talk through their differences.

Speaking in a joint news conference in the Rose Garden on Wednesday, the two leaders agreed to begin discussions on eliminating the tariffs and subsidies that hamper trade across the Atlantic, and to resolve the steel and aluminum tariffs the Trump administration had imposed this year as well as the retaliatory tariffs the European Union imposed in response.

The package of measures announced by Messrs. Trump and Juncker would have the EU buying more liquefied natural gas and soybeans from the U.S., and the two sides would begin a “dialogue to reduce differences on regulatory standards between the two economies,” Mr. Trump said. The two sides also suggested they would hold off on further tariffs—a nod to Mr. Trump’s threats to apply tariffs on imported cars.

While the two sides said the deal was contingent on negotiating in good faith, there was no schedule set to complete the talks, meaning that what amounted to a temporary truce could turn into a permanent one—or fall apart if one side accuses the other of lagging behind. To complete a deal, the EU would also face the difficult task of forging a consensus among all its 28 members, including both France and Germany, who often have divergent trade priorities.

Through the deal, the Trump administration seeks to reduce trade barriers to lower the $152 billion U.S. deficit in merchandise trade with the EU, while European counterparts want an end to repeated threats of new tariffs and other measures to restrict access to the U.S. market.

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
 Obviously the European Union, as represented by @JunckerEU and the United States, as represented by yours truly, love each other!

1:49 AM - Jul 26, 2018
23.7K
10.5K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
The proposed pact comes a day after the Trump administration faced criticism on Capitol Hill for its use of tariffs. The GOP-controlled Congress in recent days has spoken out against the prospect that the Trump administration could apply new tariffs on imported autos on top of aluminum and steel tariffs, with lawmakers considering legislation to counter the president’s initiatives.

Before the Oval Office meeting, EU trade representatives had paid visits to Capitol Hill in an effort to recruit allies to pressure Mr. Trump to cut a deal. EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström also came to Washington to meet with U.S. lawmakers, trying to gauge the chances that the Republican-led Congress would advance legislation, according to a person familiar with the conversation.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch (R., Utah), who last week sent a letter to Mr. Trump warning of legislation if he didn’t pull back from his threats to apply more tariffs, told Ms. Malmström that senators were evaluating their options, the person said. A spokeswoman for Mr. Hatch said he encouraged the commissioner to work with Mr. Trump, taking steps including the reduction of tariffs.

Mr. Trump had been scheduled to meet with lawmakers from farming states after his talks with the European delegation. Instead, a hastily planned Rose Garden event was announced following the talks, with podiums and flags rushed outside the Oval Office for the announcement.

Lawmakers were also asked to attend the event, Mr. Trump specifically calling each of them out by name and declaring his love for American farmers.

News of a deal was welcomed in Congress. “This is an important first step,” said House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady (R., Texas), who was part of a group that met with Mr. Trump at the White House immediately after the president’s meeting with the EU chief wrapped up. “This could lead to exempting Europe from steel and aluminum tariffs.”

Mr. Juncker, meanwhile, came bearing gifts for Mr. Trump, offering to engage in extensive reviews of barriers for U.S. goods to reach European markets. Mr. Juncker also gave Mr. Trump a picture of the military cemetery in his native Luxembourg where U.S. Gen. George Patton, who led U.S. troops in France and Germany at the end of World War II, is buried.

On the picture, Mr. Juncker wrote “Dear Donald, let’s remember our common history,” the EU official said later Wednesday during a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank.

The effort to set aside the trade fight with the EU would help the U.S. focus its economic firepower more specifically on China, which Mr. Trump and his advisers see as the bigger trade priority.

The EU also has concerns about China, and had expressed hopes, earlier in the Trump administration, that it could join forces with the U.S. for a unified front in addressing Chinese trade practices. The U.S. alleges that China pressures U.S. companies to transfer technology to their Chinese partners and unfairly subsidizes its companies, leading to a massive U.S. trade deficit.

Before the Trump-Juncker meeting, Qualcomm Inc. said it planned to scrap its $44 billion purchase of Dutch chip maker NXP Semiconductors NV because it couldn’t get approval in China, adding yet another irritant to the U.S-China trade fight.

China and the EU have retaliated against U.S. tariffs with their own levies on U.S. farmers, a core Republican constituency. The U.S.-EU deal specifically calls for the EU to import more soybeans, a crop targeted by Chinese tariffs.

The U.S. and the EU, as part of their agreement, agreed to try to use the World Trade Organization to deal with issues of intellectual-property theft, government pressure on companies to transfer technology to local partners, and excess capacity in many industries—the heart of the U.S. concerns about China. That would be a big change in tactics for the U.S., which has relied mainly on unilateral actions—including tariffs on $34 billion in Chinese goods—to get Beijing to change course.

Five years ago, then-President Barack Obama formally launched similar broad trade talks with the EU under Mr. Juncker’s predecessor. The talks made little progress, and the Obama administration subsequently focused on the Trans-Pacific Partnership with Asian countries. Mr. Trump blocked the pact immediately after taking office last year.

Under the previous negotiations with the EU to form a Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, or TTIP, many European officials were unwilling to change rules that limit U.S. agricultural exports to the bloc, while the Obama administration declined Brussels’ requests to align its financial regulations with Europe’s. Still, the Trump administration never formally rejected TTIP.

Newsletter Sign-up

Ms. Malmström, in a meeting with Mr. Hatch, Sen. John Cornyn (R., Texas) and Sen. Ron Wyden (D., Ore.), the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, also floated the idea of reaching an industrial bilateral agreement, the person familiar with the matter said. The term generally refers to cutting tariffs on manufactured goods. The senators didn’t have an immediate reaction, the person said, in part because she didn’t provide details.

Whether the deal with the EU goes further and will result in zero tariffs on autos and trucks is an open question. The joint statement put out by the EU and U.S. said that zero-tariff initiative involved “non-auto industrial goods.”

Mr. Brady said that before the White House meeting, he had urged Ms. Malmström to agree to zero tariffs on automobiles, saying such a concession would be “a big step forward.” But lowering auto tariffs to zero faces political hurdles both in the U.S., which has its own 25% tariff on imported light trucks, and in the EU, which imposes 10% tariffs on auto and light-truck imports.

After the announcement with Mr. Juncker, the president arrived to a closed-door meeting with GOP lawmakers, said Rep. Mike Conaway (R., Texas), who attended.

Lawmakers told the president they were worried about retaliatory tariffs on farmers back home. “He seemed legitimately concerned,” said Mr. Conaway, chairman of the House Agriculture Committee. “He will keep negotiating.”

I'm not one who would invest in precious metals, but I have noticed that a good amount of the older generations are pretty keen in investing in these metals. They see it as a way to bet against the market, and a security that will always be safe -- even in the times of a market downturn/country failure as a whole.

I personally wouldn't even want to buy these metals in those events, as I don't see the reason to. I'd rather invest in securities that go up when the market shits itself (Payroll lending companies and so on and so forth)

Does anyone here know the reason behind people loving precious metals?

Working on a couple sites for a client at the moment, as I handle the hosting for them.

But I am looking for some more people to help me in some reworkings of websites, I'm going to need one person who is familiar in Wordpress developing (As that is how the site is hosted), and someone who does graphics design as well.

Thanks.

I'd like to buy some Antminer S9's from people, I'd be using escrow from OGNASTY (or another reputable member of the forum) and would be willing to either pick up the Antminers (if you live close enough) or to go through some sort of shipping method.

I'd like to buy a good amount of these, post here (or pm) the amount you have, the price, and the quality of the machine itself. (and if you have the PSU for it)

Make sure to clarify if it is 14th/s, 13.5Th/s, or 13th/s.

Thanks.

Buying Bitmain coupons $350, $400, $420, $450 and $500.

PM me your offer, quantity and coupon expiration dates.

I would like to buy some $250 antminer coupons.

Please let me know below if you have some, I'd be using escrow for this and paying in bitcoin. Let me know.

I'm looking into a company to do some repairs on rigs, and I've seen MyRig.com come up time and time again.

Has anyone used this company before? What are their prices for repairs? Time of Repairs? Etc.

They seem to show little to no information, so it would be nice to confirm they are legitimate from people here.

I've used bitcointaxes before, but I would assume that there are a lot more resources online (and advertising here) that would be able to parse through a ton of trades (and some regular income, mining, etc) and tell me what I owe on different tax brackets.

Is there anyone that knows of these resources and could link them below with their prices? Thanks all!

I've been on here trying to get more and more people away from cloud mining, telling them that their either getting into a scam or they're just not going to make a profit (or their money back at all) but still more and more people get into cloud mining and lose out and then complain.

Why is it that people get into cloud mining? Why can't they see the writing on the walls that they're not going to do well and they should be doing other things?

I personally am not a big fan of the merit system for ranks on here, I think it pushes for people to simply beg for merit, account farm, or pay people to give them merit. As there is no incentive at all, for people to give away their smerit to others -- which doesn't make sense to me as people don't want to hand them out.

What do others see in regard to the flaws for the merit system? I'd love to see what some others think.