Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[Richy_T]

Y'know, if we're not going to trim followups, what this thread really needs is a cascade.

[1715255933]

1715255933

[1715255933]

1715255933

[1715255933]

1715255933

[1715255933]

1715255933

[1715255933]

1715255933

[KeyserSoze]

If you put words in other peoples mouths rather than attempt to understand what they are actually saying, that is known as a strawman argument and is a well-known fallacy.

Strawman is more fun! But I hear your "tax is theft" mantra. Instead of complaining, be the change you want. Go make flying cars so we don't need roads. Whew, imagine having to pay for that! Talk about a tax!

If you're not talented enough to make flying cars then consider one of these many other options to deal with the tax:
1) pay the tax and enjoy that you live in a wonderful country with roads, or
2) Have a Boston Tea Party -- don't pay tax plus risk jail, or
3) start an organization whose goal is the repeal of road taxes, or
4) move to a country without road tax, or
5) start your own country and learn firsthand why we have road taxes, or
6) opt out of life. After death and estate taxes you should be pretty well tax-free after that.

You have choices. Why sit in a barely known internet forum and rail on a poorly constructed fantastical argument when you could actually be out making the world tax free?

[Richy_T]

I do NOT know about the circumstances or the rationale for the road in your non-rural tennessee location, except for your proclamation (one citizen's assessment) that it was NOT necessary b/c they could have substituted flying cars in that location.  

It is certainly a solution but is it the best solution? Are not people running around waving their hands in the air about the amount of CO2 motor vehicles are emitting? What about traffic fatalities? Trees plants and animals killed and destroyed by increased paving?

[ErisDiscordia]

Since you are still conflating the words "community" and "government". Here's what your post would look like, if we substitute one for the other.

Roads are NOT going to be built in any kind of efficient way without public funding.  Surely, there may be better ways to go about accomplishing the same objectives, but roads are within the governments desires about the solution.  If you want another solution, besides roads, you have to convince the government to move in that direction.  In your rural Tennessee example, that is converting to a less rural existence, the government seems to have decided that it wants more roads.... b/c they see that as the solution to the issue of having more people in the area.

Haven't you ever heard of a situation in which what the government wants is perceptibly different from what the community wants. You keep using sentences like

Roads are NOT going to be built in any kind of efficient way without public funding.

, stating them as fact and acting like you have provided an argument. You treat your opinions like fact (at least your statements lead me to believe this) and that makes debating you quite annoying imo. Take octaft for example. He seems to view matters similarly to you but seems to have a much more open mind about it.

Anyway do you really believe the government is an accurate expression of the will of the community? That they are functionally the same thing?

If you are an American (or another western country), you have won the lottery, b/c you can move almost anywhere in the world with your passport and find some haven that has little to no taxes.

and still be hounded by the IRS lol  

[Zapffe]

No sh*t, Sherlock

http://galeri3.uludagsozluk.com/138/facepalm_227785.jpg

http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/srcstc.gif

[Richy_T]

You have choices. Why sit in a barely known internet forum and rail on a poorly constructed fantastical argument when you could actually be out making the world tax free?

Cause the rocket ships are taking their time refuelling.

[dreamspark]

Literally?    I do not want to get caught up in the meaning of literally. 

Anyhow, part of the reason that we have some of this back and forth communication on this topic is b/c we have differing understandings on some terms, including the term coercion.  So, at this point, I am a little unclear about the point that you are making Dreamspark?  Did you want to chime in to clarify what is so clear about coercion and why living in society is coercion? 

There are people from third world countries who are fighting for the chance to live in america, in spite of all its supposedly "coercive" taxes.

Clearly in its original meaning as he had just told you why. * facepalm

Anyhow, you can try and say we have different understandings of the term but that is not the case. You have a different understanding of it in comparison to the real definition. Look, "Persuade (an unwilling person) to do something by using force or threats:" is the dictionary definition of coercion. If you can argue that being a part of society in regards to paying taxes against your will under the threat of force is not coercion then I'll be flabbergasted.

Perhaps we can try a different approach cause Im pretty bored of seeing your sensless rants. Can you explain how it is not coercion as an explaination as to why it is coercion has been offered several times.

[aminorex]

The system of governance and the community are in competition for resources.  When the system has more power, the available resources are allocated into the growth of the system.  When the community has more power, the available resources are allocated to the welfare of the community.  Decentralization removes power from the system, and adds it to the community.

The general problem with socializing things is that in practice costs are socialized, and benefits are privatized.  A lack of effective checks and balances will mean that the fox is always hired to guard the henhouse.

Roads are NOT going to be built in any kind of efficient way without public funding. 

I'm glad you emphasized that because otherwise I would have thought it wasn't true.  I've seen the road work around here, and it's pretty clear that the ratio of supervisors to workers is 4:1, that roads are rebuilt when they are in perfectly good condition (presumably because someone's brother-in-law owns the tar & sand company), that roads are built in places where nobody wants them, that roads are not built in places where people want them, that millions are spent on roads, but no one can be chuffed to spend a couple thousand on a traffic light until at least 4 or 5 people get killed at a given intersection, that the competence of traffic planning falls somewhere between the Riddler and the Joker.  Why?  Because there's no competition which demands excellence, or even a slight whiff of competence.

the community seems to have decided that it wants more roads.... b/c they see that as the solution to the issue of having more people in the area.

If it works like it works around here, the community has precious little to do with it.  County commissioners hire managers who decide what happens.  There's no real community participation and no real accountability for what they do. Certainly the system has done what you say in the example you reference, but whether the community has done so is a separate question.  

[seriouscoin]

Adam, time to close this damn thread and make a new one....

This shit has gone Mexico

[JayJuanGee]

I really do NOT understand the point of arguing about our supposedly being in a better position (possibly) if we did NOT have roads.  That makes very little sense (even if it were true).   Currently we have roads, and that is our starting point.. NOT some hypothetical fantasy land world without roads, and that life without roads may be more of a Richy_T argument rather than attributable to other libertarians.   

Again, you miss the point. It is not about the roads directly, it is about government control of the roads. Now, you will say that the government has to be in control of the roads and that, indeed, is the point of contention. That centralized control reduces the opportunity for a wider range of solutions.

Yes, roads seem to be a very good example of a public good, and if roads are a public good, then the public has a right to have input into their direction, extent, quality and quantity... amongst other things related to such, in the event that they are considered to be public. 

As we know, sometimes roads can be private too.. as I would presume most of us recognize there are still concepts of private property rights that are recognized that will end up involving private roads built on the private property.

Having public input will likely result in varying degrees of control, and sometimes, these control may be given up - depending upon the extent to which public interests are perceived to be a factor.

[donut]

Anyhow, part of the reason that we have some of this back and forth communication on this topic is b/c we have differing understandings on some terms, including the term coercion.  

At the risk of repeating myself,


Coercion /koʊˈɜrʃən/ is the practice of forcing another party to act in an involuntary manner by use of intimidation or threats or some other form of pressure or force, and describes a set of various different similar types of forceful actions that violate the free will of an individual to induce a desired response. These actions can include, but are not limited to, extortion, blackmail, torture, and threats to induce favors. In law, coercion is codified as a duress crime. Such actions are used as leverage, to force the victim to act in a way contrary to their own interests. Coercion may involve the actual infliction of physical pain/injury or psychological harm in order to enhance the credibility of a threat. The threat of further harm may lead to the cooperation or obedience of the person being coerced.
src

Care to provide the definition you are using?

[KeyserSoze]

Why sit in a barely known internet forum and rail on a poorly constructed fantastical argument when you could actually be out making the world tax free?

Cause the rocket ships are taking their time refuelling.

LOL... to the moon!

[aminorex]

the question is why would the world adopt it, it can't be trust in the institution

Whenever someone complains that bitcoin isn't "backed by anyone", the correct answer is:  That's the point.  There can be no counter-party risk when there is no counter-party.  Corpcoin is cranking up the counter-party risk to 11.

[dreamspark]

Adam, time to close this damn thread and make a new one....

This shit has gone Mexico

Once we start moving again in either direction and theres money to be made the topics will change, this is just a manifestation of how stagnant the market is atm  

[BubbaGumpShrimpinBoatCapn]

Adam, time to close this damn thread and make a new one....

This shit has gone Mexico

This

[JayJuanGee]

I do NOT know about the circumstances or the rationale for the road in your non-rural tennessee location, except for your proclamation (one citizen's assessment) that it was NOT necessary b/c they could have substituted flying cars in that location.  

It is certainly a solution but is it the best solution? Are not people running around waving their hands in the air about the amount of CO2 motor vehicles are emitting? What about traffic fatalities? Trees plants and animals killed and destroyed by increased paving?

Who gives a flying fuck (there I go again, with my recent favorite expression in this thread)?     

These are all factors that the non-rural tennessee public could have taken into account when they were deciding about the best solution in the circumstances of that particular community.  Did you go to any of the meetings that involved the discussion of the road?  You could have had your input regarding the better flying car solution?

[Richy_T]

While we're on the subject of roads, one of the factors that make the US so much a heavier user of cars than the rest of the world (besides just being less densely populated) is government mandated zoning ordinances. In much of the world, people can simply live near where they work because things grew organically without regulation. In the UK, I lived a ten minute walk from work. I had a car but it was largely superfluous (the supermarket was a 20 minute walk). Even in New York City, it is not uncommon for people to not have cars.

[Richy_T]

Who gives a flying fuck (there I go again, with my recent favorite expression in this thread)?     

These are all factors that the non-rural tennessee public could have taken into account when they were deciding about the best solution in the circumstances of that particular community.  Did you go to any of the meetings that involved the discussion of the road?  You could have had your input regarding the better flying car solution?

I dunno but presumably government the community did not have their eye on the ball when despite it taking ten years to complete the ring-road, they completely failed to widen the few miles of interstate that joined it up to the large and rapidly growing business area nearby.

[BubbaGumpShrimpinBoatCapn]

Flying car prospect is an automatic win from my perspective.  No government is ever going to allot us this freedom.  We will have to take it upon ourselves to see that kind of liberty.

[JayJuanGee]

Since you are still conflating the words "community" and "government". Here's what your post would look like, if we substitute one for the other.

Roads are NOT going to be built in any kind of efficient way without public funding.  Surely, there may be better ways to go about accomplishing the same objectives, but roads are within the governments desires about the solution.  If you want another solution, besides roads, you have to convince the government to move in that direction.  In your rural Tennessee example, that is converting to a less rural existence, the government seems to have decided that it wants more roads.... b/c they see that as the solution to the issue of having more people in the area.

Haven't you ever heard of a situation in which what the government wants is perceptibly different from what the community wants. You keep using sentences like

Roads are NOT going to be built in any kind of efficient way without public funding.

, stating them as fact and acting like you have provided an argument. You treat your opinions like fact (at least your statements lead me to believe this) and that makes debating you quite annoying imo. Take octaft for example. He seems to view matters similarly to you but seems to have a much more open mind about it.

Anyway do you really believe the government is an accurate expression of the will of the community? That they are functionally the same thing?

If you are an American (or another western country), you have won the lottery, b/c you can move almost anywhere in the world with your passport and find some haven that has little to no taxes.

and still be hounded by the IRS lol  

Yes community and government are very similar terms - that is true..     And, varying levels of government are going to be more accessible than other levels of government and treat different public interest issues and jurisdictions.

I would imagine that you know as much as me that there are varying levels of government. 

so what if Octaft is nicer than me..?  who cares?    people have their different styles and different levels of patience.


regarding my renditions of what I believe to be the facts versus opinion.... Yes, sometimes, I make statements about matters that are assertions that may or may NOT be under contention. 

Frequently, people who live in fantasy lands attempt to create new facts or get caught up in technicalities... so maybe I am just trying to avoid too much fantasy...  I am NOT trying to take away from anyone's ability to challenge my assertions  b/c I have NO intention to misstate actual material facts - except for when it is fun to do so (with immaterial facts)... such as the flying car example... hehehhehe....

 If you believe I misstated something material to be a fact that is NOT a fact, then let me know.