You "investors" laughing at us day-traders is like a marathon runner laughing at a sprinter or a Motor-rally driver laughing at a F1 driver.
It probably has to do with all the posts calling buy-and-holders idiots while regaling us with tales of their perfect 20-20 hindsight... I wonder if marathon runners are that hostile. |
|
|
|
|
You "investors" laughing at us day-traders is like a marathon runner laughing at a sprinter or a Motor-rally driver laughing at a F1 driver.
|
|
|
|
That's more like confirming than debunking, if the patent is a decade old, even worse, and if you look at the flowchart there are thing like payment conformation and certification. Right, this probably is a troll patent, but that doesn't make it any less threatening. Just remember the world we live in and what an army of highly payed lawyers, bribes and corruption can do it it. |
|
|
|
Stop reading shittybitcoinpumpdumpnews.com
yes |
|
|
|
|
Where is the Bruce Wagner hentai featuring thai ladyboys?
|
|
|
|
|
If you are fairly confident about that, take some of your Bitcoin profits and get busy on the comex futures market. It would be stupid not to.
You are also fairly alone with that too and many people would take the counterpoint of your position as heavy resistance at gold parity suggests. Look over to China... I'm sure there enough people with plenty of funds.
|
|
|
|
Why title change? Trolling?
This and, this kind of high impact media are correlated with bubble pops, don't you remember how we were joking about that happening two years ago and what would happen afterwards? As I did read that happend with the dotcom bubble as well as the real estate bubble, oh well... |
|
|
|
Ok, fine  I'll get back at you this evening. The thread was originally planned as me posting funny pictures about the topic but it turned out to be heavily debated which is fine, just unexpected. And I like a good debate  |
|
|
|
|
protip: trying to troll somebody in his own self-moderated thread doesn't work. (Especially if it's somebody who is accused of trolling on a regular basis anyway)
|
|
|
|
Property rights exist because people agree they exist. People want the comfort of having a place they call "home" where they can consider themselves "safe", so they are willing to allow others to have that comfort as well. As long as most people agree that owning property is a right, they aren't going to complain when someone ignores that right and is punished for it.
It's a start. But getting people to agree on something is hardly a proper justification. History has shown that people will agree to lots of things many of which we currently see as unjustified if they are coerced enough. I guess the joke is on me since the guy who's unwilling or unable to give me a proper debate is Butthurt I deleted his post and you delete all your posts anyway and I can't really debate you that way either.  |
|
|
|
Again, no bitcoin bought yesterday. People are scared away?
pump & dump |
|
|
|
|
Try again. Discussion is not allowed to continue until I get a proper response to my arguments.
Hint: My authority is granted by the forum and the fact that I came up with the thread, however I do not own it.
|
|
|
|
|
As previously said, I often read from the Libertarian standpoint that property supposed to be either a) natural or b) a "god-given" right or a mixture of both.
Analogies like "two people can't eat the same apple" are used.
When it comes down to it I have seen no proper justification for the authority to claim property at all. What I often see is muddling property with consumption (which is justified by need).
I have not seen any proper justification for the authority over ownership of land for instance, you might start with that if you don't know where to start. If you know better it's fine if you start somewhere else.
|
|
|
|
Libertarianism is the bastardization of Anarchism. It takes a philosophy based on a simple principle (Authority must be justified) and exempts the concept of property from said principle.
Elwar gets bonus godwin points.
what??? perhaps we are wrong about what does and does not justify acquisition, but your claim that we do not believe that property ownership must be justified is prima facie ridiculous. we are CONSTANTLY debating ad nausium amongst each other about what does and does not justify acquisition. If you actually believe that we do not believe that property ownership must be justified than you clearly have made very little effort to understand our position. tip: Ownership can't be justified with a circular argument - as such not by any term used in describing capitalism. But lets assume you are right and I haven't researched your position: Then I should be baffled by a fitting explanation of that position by you. Yes just write it down in your own words and lets see where it leads us. |
|
|
|
I can't wait till Max Kaiser turns on you idiots just like Bruce Wagner did.
He wants to sue me because he can't read german? HAHAHAHA... only possible in the states  No he will scam you suckers out of your money in such a way that he has plausible deny ability. |
|
|
|
|
I can't wait till Max Kaiser turns on you idiots just like Bruce Wagner did.
|
|
|
|
|
Nice find long squeeze incoming.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
