|
They are not the only company implementing this concept. It's inevitable that as Bitcoin reaches critical mass and governments start to want to implement taxation and regulation, that someone somewhere is going to legislate for correlation of bitcoin addresses to people or legal entities such as corporations. If it happens sooner and voluntarily this will help Bitcoin enormously, as people will then be able to send money to a bitcoin address with a high degree of confidence of who they are sending it to, thus avoiding the anonymity scams that are plaguing Bitcoin at moment.
|
|
|
|
|
This looks like a hoax, but even if it's not, like US prohibition years, the more you ban something, the more people will covet it.
|
|
|
|
The story: "The federal government will tax digital money such as Bitcoin".
The rest is peripheral, no matter how shiny.
Can they do it? Can they tax global entities? Can they tax mathematics? Can they tax abstractions? Can they tax global mathematical abstractions in their little corner of the world?
Time will tell.
Of course they can tax it, simply passing a law requiring all bitcoin wallet addresses of US citizens and corporations to be declared for tax purposes would suffice. How many people then choose to avoid tax by not declaring is another question all together, but I suspect most would rather not risk prison, and 'most' is all you need. |
|
|
|
The owners of BTC-E are 100% Russian. What will happen if EU / US / NATO impose sanctions on BTC-E?
Already happened with Visa/Mastercard having suspended cards issued through some russian banks. So do NOT rely on this service unless you want to find your funds stuck in diplomatic limbo for the next 25 years! In fact, in the current climate you would have to be insane to put or keep ANY funds in BTC-e unless of course you are Russian! |
|
|
|
|
So if Bitcoin is not currency but property, then technically buying or selling anything with Bitcoin is really barter!
|
|
|
|
|
Not to intelligent IMHO, they have set themselves up for a forced future U turn as whether it is legal tender or not will be irrelevant if defacto most people in the world come to use it at some future date.
The comparison with gold is not really valid, as you cannot carry out trade with gold (normally anyway).
|
|
|
|
nobody "loses" 116 million worth of bitcoin and then randomly refinds them. He was planning to steal them and when people were digging deep he realized he wouldnt be able to get away with stealing them slowly over time.
If the above is true, then he seemingly has control over the other ~600,000 BTC. Doesn't that make sense? No it doesn't. The current conspiracy theorists allege that he realised he had a whole bunch stolen due to his own incompetance, and realised the company would not survive so decided to take the rest himself and blame it all on the original theft. Astute lawyers on the Canadian class action traced what appeared to be a large part of the money being washed through thousands of wallets, this may have caused him to realise he was not going to get away with it, hence the "oh look, i've just found 116 million in this account we thought was empty"!! yeah rightttttt... |
|
|
|
I feel there is a very good chance that 1 BTC will buy 1 share of Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK-A) before Warren Buffett dies.
And I would bet that even then BTC owners would not part with their BTC for BRK-A |
|
|
|
This is the most important part.
Owning shares in Peta is akin to owning ghs on the exchanges that sell them, except Peta will reinvest on your behalf and you can still cash out at your leisure.
If you bought 1 share and then sold after dividends were paid you cashed out with a positive roi, regardless of what's going on behind the scenes.
Only true if the asset values do not go down because re-investment did not keep up with BTC difficulty! Suggesting to people they cannot lose assumes the share price won't go down, which it obviously will if the above happens! Somewhat disengenuous of you! How is it disingenuous? Your assuming that a lot of shares will be dumped after dividends, a bad assumption on your part. As long as the dividends are steady or slightly increasing more will hold than will sell. You obviously missed my point entirely and are just looking for an argument. I refuse to argue with anyone that would try to argue Petamine share price is a "sure thing". Makes you either stupid or deliberately misleading. If you were a stockbroker you would be facing mis-selling charges. No you refuse to allow logic and commonsense invade your cognitive dissonance. I never said that the share price was a sure thing. What I said was it was a bad assumption on your part to assume a severe drop in price right after dividends have been paid. BIG BIG Difference. It is obvious that you have no clue how stocks and other commodities are priced. You have take many many factors into account when your dealing with investments, and with vehicles such as petamine that pay a dividend, it is likely that the price will stay steady, outside of the bots screwing with the price, or someone intentionally painting the tape. You sound just like the type that flog bad investments to vulnerable people from boilerrooms. "it is likely that the price will stay steady" gives you away for the idiot or miscreant you are. |
|
|
|
This is the most important part.
Owning shares in Peta is akin to owning ghs on the exchanges that sell them, except Peta will reinvest on your behalf and you can still cash out at your leisure.
If you bought 1 share and then sold after dividends were paid you cashed out with a positive roi, regardless of what's going on behind the scenes.
Only true if the asset values do not go down because re-investment did not keep up with BTC difficulty! Suggesting to people they cannot lose assumes the share price won't go down, which it obviously will if the above happens! Somewhat disengenuous of you! How is it disingenuous? Your assuming that a lot of shares will be dumped after dividends, a bad assumption on your part. As long as the dividends are steady or slightly increasing more will hold than will sell. You obviously missed my point entirely and are just looking for an argument. I refuse to argue with anyone that would try to argue Petamine share price is a "sure thing". Makes you either stupid or deliberately misleading. If you were a stockbroker you would be facing mis-selling charges. |
|
|
|
Still in, no point in getting dinged the restocking fee, along with current btc value now compared to end of 2013.
You are assuming they are refunding on a BTC value at order time basis not a $ value at order time basis, i've been trying to get an answer out of bobsag for weeks on that!! Sent 3 PMs (IGNORED) and raised the quesion of forum several times (IGNORED). Personally, i've got invoices that show $ value (even though I paid with BTC) so would expect any refunds to be at the $ value. Refunds so far (from what I have read, from what bob has said and from my own experience) have been in BTC. I received the exact BTC value that I paid for my shares back. this has been the case. so if you purchased with btc at 1000 usd value asking for a refund is not a good idea. I made 12 shares across 7 orders at various btc price points. I cashed in 7 shares and was refunded pretty quickly as most of my shares were purchased at about 750 usd a btc. I held back the 5 highest shares purchased over 1000 usd a btc as I would have had a bigger fiat loss cashing those 5 shares in. If thats true bobsag is profiting from the difference (as BA orders charged in $, paid in BTC and instantly converted to $ on payment). I hate to sound cynical, but it's no wonder he's doing the BTC refunds "out of his own pocket initially" as he described earlier. If he's getting $ value refunds out of BA later! For some of those orders that could represent 40-50% profit, which would mean he could actually not cancel a lot of the orders with BA, keep the mining capacity (+late bonus capacity) and still not be out any cash! If you were not being so unresponsive bobsag, I wouldn't be so cynical about whats really going down here! It's certainly not transparent to the 'members' of the cooperative. This all brings back into focus the conflict of interest between you being a coop organiser and being a BA reseller. |
|
|
|
Still in, no point in getting dinged the restocking fee, along with current btc value now compared to end of 2013.
You are assuming they are refunding on a BTC value at order time basis not a $ value at order time basis, i've been trying to get an answer out of bobsag for weeks on that!! Sent 3 PMs (IGNORED) and raised the quesion of forum several times (IGNORED). Personally, i've got invoices that show $ value (even though I paid with BTC) so would expect any refunds to be at the $ value. |
|
|
|
This is the most important part.
Owning shares in Peta is akin to owning ghs on the exchanges that sell them, except Peta will reinvest on your behalf and you can still cash out at your leisure.
If you bought 1 share and then sold after dividends were paid you cashed out with a positive roi, regardless of what's going on behind the scenes.
Only true if the asset values do not go down because re-investment did not keep up with BTC difficulty! Suggesting to people they cannot lose assumes the share price won't go down, which it obviously will if the above happens! Somewhat disengenuous of you! |
|
|
|
It should be noted that 46%, as stated on havelock at time of posting this, is a pretty attractive yield and considering that we are nowhere near our initial guestimated hashing power, I myself feel that the shareholders/investors are doing a considerably great job keeping the share price at a stable price of approximately 0.07btc. The 35% reinvestment fund is the make or break part of this operation. If we can get to the 8.68gh/share real quick and the reinvestment funds are used adequately to keep up with the difficulty increases then this could most probably be the best mining fund out there for its value. I see cryptx is taking his time out each week to update shareholders with information of what the dividends consist of, which is fair play, but the schedule of mining equipment coming online has not been so forthcoming. Seeing the difficulty rises have not been as cut throat as many have expected, I think it is safe to say now that the development and supply of mining equipment has been delayed across the board and has not just affected this particular mining fund.
Using the 'Yield' figure at this stage of the project is completely meaningless. As you correctly pointed out the re-investment is the key, and unless the re-investment rate can keep up with bitcoin difficulty, the asset base will devalue, which means the shares will devalue. In essence we will be robbing peter to pay paul if we are taking dividends whilst the asset base devalues and will lose overall. I think at the first sign of not being able to keep up with difficulty, Cryptx should take a vote on more dividend going to re-investment. |
|
|
|
They'll lose this cold war too if they try to take everyone on alone again.. Morons.
Well they have at least sealed their fate, the west will pull away economically from them and pressure other countries to do the same. It may take twenty or thirty years, but when (EU)kranian's are driving their BMW's to visit their relatives in Russian Crimea, they will laugh at what skilled motor mechanics they have all become to keep their 30 year old Skoda's running! |
|
|
|
We too believe what the State tells us, but it's easier to swallow because we've all got smartphones, power, and just turn a knob when we want clean drinkable water.
Do 'We'? I certainly do not, I question pretty much everything I see/hear/read these days, and that's whilst living in one of the worlds more democratic countries! I think it behoves us all to fight for proper democracy by challenging everything, even when you think you live in a truly democratic nation. |
|
|
|
Why are people surprised that Russia is tyrannical about economic freedom? When have they done anything different since the czar? It's not like the oligarchs are into sharing.
I think it's very unfair to paint the people of russia as bad because they happen to be run by corrupt oligarchs who also control the media they see. If you watch Russian TV you would think the west is demonically plotting against the russian people. It's somewhat sad that they seem to have gone back to the days of believing what they are told by the state, just like China, North Korea, Iran etc... |
|
|
|
I disagree, stick to eligius and not go solo. Eligius has been around for ages and has shown them selves to be trustworthy.
Why add variance into the mix when we can avoid it?
Gox was around for ages, till they lost everyones money! Why keep a trust dependency we don't have to? |
|
|
|
Uh. No. Both blood and language mixed during the viking invasion. The original people, and their language, are long gone. The current brits are a mix of vikings and those who lived there originally, among others. The original people are gone and will never return.
And a timeline for "hope" of a thousand years is not precisely helpful to those of us living in the present...
Sorry your most definately wrong there Ibian, the Gene pool research was comprehensive and definitive (Professor Jobling from Leeds University I believe). It was a study aimed at understanding the effects of fresh gene pools on established ones, and it basically showed that unless the new gene pool built and maintained a critical percentage (Cannot remember the exact figure, but I think it was about 30%) of the old gene pool, that the old gene pool would reassert itself and gradually dilute out the new gene pool over time. Hence my statement that Brits are Brits not Viking muts is true! Language is of course intermixable, and to some extent we are all language muts. Edit: Quote from his research: "Jobling found little evidence that mtDNA sequences characteristic of Norwegian populations were present in either the medieval or modern group of British men" |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
