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

[Dump3er]

Please let come back volatility to stop anarcho-antisocial-aristocracy discussion.

[JayJuanGee]

If you have ever heard about the multiplier effect of money, you would come to realize that distributing money in various ways... especially to poor people has much better multiplier effects than giving that money to an ever narrowing sliver of people who neither need the money NOR deserve the money.

Ignoring the moral implications of taking from one person to give to another, you are forgetting the overhead effect of the government performing such actions. Overhead which typically ends up in the pockets of... the rich.

Even if I have NOT talked about various overhead or administrative costs does NOT mean that I forgot about it.

My point in mentioning multiplier effect is to describe how investing money towards certain directions (such as widely distributing it) has a much better effect on the overall economy as compared with spending it in another direction (giving the money to the 10 richest people).

Yes, there maybe various differences in the administrative costs (and there likely are in most instances), yet the money still goes further and multiplies further when distributed more broadly.. and also there are studies that show certain kinds of industries have a greater multiplier effect than others.  For example the military industrial complex frequently has a very low multiplier effect as compared with some social services or roads and bridges and trains or even health care.

[deeplink]

but basic education should be available to all, and probably at all stages in life...

See, I have absolutely no problem with that. And I certainly will not be one to stand in your way when you choose to fund it.

Why would he, if he can vote for people that force you to fund it?

Are you  a part of the community or NOT?  If so, you have some obligations.  Thank you very much - that is how modern society works.. you can have your input in various ways too, including your vote and including getting involved in the public space.

No thanks. Your community has failed again and again. I reject coercion and will only interact on a voluntary basis.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[dropt]

No thanks. Your community has failed again and again. I reject coercion and will only interact on a voluntary basis.

Will you voluntarily fuck off when people refuse you the services built on the back of their involvement where you opted out?

[Richy_T]

Yes, there maybe various differences in the administrative costs (and there likely are in most instances), yet the money still goes further and multiplies further when distributed more broadly.. and also there are studies that show certain kinds of industries have a greater multiplier effect than others.  For example the military industrial complex frequently has a very low multiplier effect as compared with some social services or roads and bridges and trains or even health care.

I am no fan of the military-industrial complex either. I view it as all part of the same package.

[justusranvier]

Taxation is NOT rape, and it is NOWHERE near even close to rape... and people are being disingenuous and deceptive when they are attempting to frame reasonable conversation with such inappropriate and diverting analogies.

They are both involuntary impositions of one person's will onto another person.

In the case of rape, the victim submits to unwanted sex either because they are physically incapable of stopping it, or because they've been threatened with even greater harm unless the cooperate.

In the case of tax, the victim pays either because the money has been taken from them before they had the opportunity to resist, or because they are threatened with greater harm unless they comply.


The analogy is perfectly accurate, which is exactly why those humans who use the state to prey upon other humans hate it. Their work is much easier if they can do it in the shadows, and cloak their predations in the illusion of respectability.

[Richy_T]

No thanks. Your community has failed again and again. I reject coercion and will only interact on a voluntary basis.

Will you voluntarily fuck off when people refuse you the services built on the back of their involvement where you opted out?

How does one opt out of coercion?

If it is not coercion, he may well choose to interact on a voluntary basis.

[spooderman]

I enjoyed reading this page

At a time when anarcho-capitalism just started appealing to me, bitcoin came along and gave us a means to circumvent the force-initiators.

Thank you Satoshi.

[bassclef]

Yes, there maybe various differences in the administrative costs (and there likely are in most instances), yet the money still goes further and multiplies further when distributed more broadly.. and also there are studies that show certain kinds of industries have a greater multiplier effect than others.  For example the military industrial complex frequently has a very low multiplier effect as compared with some social services or roads and bridges and trains or even health care.

I am no fan of the military-industrial complex either. I view it as all part of the same package.

If we could start funneling money that goes toward needless aggression around the world to bridges and roads, that would be a start. Hell, just splitting up a fraction of the US defense budget and distributing it equally to Americans would be a better use of it. Ideologically to libertarians this is disagreeable, but I find it more agreeable than violence. Best case they could lower taxes to reduce the violence of collecting it in the first place.

In reality none of this is going to happen. We will continue to renovate the Middle East until we go bankrupt.

[deeplink]

No thanks. Your community has failed again and again. I reject coercion and will only interact on a voluntary basis.

Will you voluntarily fuck off when people refuse you the services built on the back of their involvement where you opted out?

Why would they refuse a paying customer? That would be bad business and would cause them to go broke sooner rather than later.
Unless they can force people to fund their business, whether they use their services or not.

But yes, if a business refuses to interact with me, I would fuck off.

[Finski]

The ultra-individualism/liberalism is strong in this thread!

Historically speaking it's almost funny how individualistic we are in the west these days. So much so that I don't think it's going to last.

Just sayin'..

[JayJuanGee]

 

You say "Sounds like..." and "You imply..." a lot.

Maybe you could try reading what I wrote and taking it at face value, or at least responding to it directly, instead of replying to some vague interpretation you drew from it.  

Maybe I can choose whatever words that I want in order to most reasonably reflect what I would like to say? 

What about that?

I am not an anarchist, and I am, for the most part, not inclined to generalization, but your every response seems to assume such of me, while at the same time not providing much, other than hand-wavy generalization as support for your own argument - if you really have any thing to say other than "Government is good.  You are a fool not to blindly accept it as your savior, as I have".

The burden is NOT upon me to provide examples regarding how if or in what ways the government is good.

If you are making suggestion that we need to change some institutions in the status quo set up and you have some vision about why too much government is bad in such set up, then buren is upon you to describe your vision of how we get from point A to point B, not me.

As far as multiplier effects go, I recently read a study done by an economist at the San Francisco branch of the Federal Reserve, who attempted to measure the "jobs multiplier" of the stimulus package promoted by the incoming Obama administration back in 2009.  He determined that the president's claim that the stimulus had 'created or saved' ~2,000,000 jobs was an accurate claim.  He also noted that this represented a cost of ~$400,000 per job.  I think this is fairly representative of the multiplier effects I have seen from the government attempting to do the job of the private sector.

Sounds as if you have a very limited knowledge of the concept of multiplier effect in terms of the various ways that government money can be spent... And, attempting to couple this with Obama's performance seems to be a bit narrow minded on the topic... and maybe even a distraction from my original comment, which was merely that much more societal wealth will be created when we find ways to distribute money more broadly.. so take from the rich and spread across the poor in various ways, rather than doing the opposite.. which would be, for clarification, taking from the poor and giving to the rich (which has largely been the case for at least the last 20 - 30 years).

Oh, and again - do you really believe Americans are poorer now than they were in the '30s?  I have never seen the American standard of living decline in my lifetime.  When I was a kid, we didn't even have a telephone, or air conditioning (in the deep south!).  Now, even the poorest people I know have cellphones and HDTVs.  Is it different where you live

In a couple ways, you are fucking amazing.  1st... I mentioned comparing the 1990s to 2014, and then second if you believe that cell phones, air conditioning and HDTVs are indications of wealth then you are likely looking at the situation too narrowly.  I believe in one of my recent posts I took into account other considerations and that is how much we make and how many hours we work, but I was NOT tryin to get into the weeds on this.  I do think, however, you are making a considerable assumption if you believe people are generally better off now than they were 25 years ago.  Maybe you drank the Fox news coolaide?  sounds like it.   

[deeplink]

The ultra-individualism/liberalism is strong in this thread!

Historically speaking it's almost funny how individualistic communistic we are in the west these days. So much so that I don't think it's going to last.

Just sayin'..

Agreed

[JayJuanGee]

Oh, and again - do you really believe Americans are poorer now than they were in the '30s?  I have never seen the American standard of living decline in my lifetime.  When I was a kid, we didn't even have a telephone, or air conditioning (in the deep south!).  Now, even the poorest people I know have cellphones and HDTVs.  Is it different where you live?

You have to be careful there. The amazing advancement of technology has somewhat masked the loss of (inflation adjusted) income. Sure, you have a TV in every room, two cars in the driveway and a supercomputer in your pocket but your housing costs now take up half your income, you're eating processed, not real food, your wife has to work and you have two kids, not five.

NOW you are talking, dude!!!   

[Davyd05]

How can someone be dirt poor, but never had to go hungry or unclothed. Hardly what I'd describe as dirt poor lol. Also sounds like he didn't live in an inner city. You fail to realize you had jobs available to you in your area, the fact you think there abundantly available to everyone is mind boggling lol @ xyzzy099 not to mention you forgot the benefit of having both parents...and apparently the added awesomeness of great parents.


You sound psychopathic or sociopathic @justusranvier ...not everyone thinks taxation is bad..but more if not all would agree the corruption that lead to it not being spent on what it should've have been is bad. However I've yet to meet anyone who thinks rape would or could serve a purpose.

taxation = a better tomorrow when applied correctly, however do to loopholes and greed we currently don't get the full value.

rape = can't be argued that it would help any situation...well maybe a fucking global population crisis but I still think a plan to go out and rape would never be seen as a solution.



On a bitcoin note.. I hope this is the beginning of new buyers testing the water like I did last year following the drop to $80, was not until 143.50  that I stuck a toe in the pool.

[Richy_T]

Oh, and again - do you really believe Americans are poorer now than they were in the '30s?  I have never seen the American standard of living decline in my lifetime.  When I was a kid, we didn't even have a telephone, or air conditioning (in the deep south!).  Now, even the poorest people I know have cellphones and HDTVs.  Is it different where you live?

You have to be careful there. The amazing advancement of technology has somewhat masked the loss of (inflation adjusted) income. Sure, you have a TV in every room, two cars in the driveway and a supercomputer in your pocket but your housing costs now take up half your income, you're eating processed, not real food, your wife has to work and you have two kids, not five.

NOW you are talking, dude!!!   

I blame the government, of course

[JayJuanGee]

but basic education should be available to all, and probably at all stages in life...

See, I have absolutely no problem with that. And I certainly will not be one to stand in your way when you choose to fund it.

Why would he, if he can vote for people that force you to fund it?

Are you  a part of the community or NOT?  If so, you have some obligations.  Thank you very much - that is how modern society works.. you can have your input in various ways too, including your vote and including getting involved in the public space.

No thanks. Your community has failed again and again. I reject coercion and will only interact on a voluntary basis.

Yes... You can choose which community to live in, and you can hopefully learn to accept your obligation to contribute to the community rather than being a leech.... The community has a variety of cost of which you either directly or indirectly benefit. Otherwise, you can go move to Alaska and freeze your ass off, or some other place that you find suitable for individualistic living... but the rest of us live in communities and there are not enough islands to have one person per island... so we have to figure out ways to get along and to share... NOT easy but necessary, unless we are going to kill off 90% of the planet.  Are you suggesting population reduction?  and if so, how?

[JayJuanGee]

No thanks. Your community has failed again and again. I reject coercion and will only interact on a voluntary basis.

Will you voluntarily fuck off when people refuse you the services built on the back of their involvement where you opted out?

No s/he (deeplink) wants the benefits of the infrastructure or clean air, but s/he does NOT want to contribute to such preservation and/or creation. 

Seems like a typical definition of either a freeloader or a leech or an opportunist or a selfish bastard... or to give the benefit of the doubt, maybe s/he has NOT thought that far ahead?

[JayJuanGee]

Yes, there maybe various differences in the administrative costs (and there likely are in most instances), yet the money still goes further and multiplies further when distributed more broadly.. and also there are studies that show certain kinds of industries have a greater multiplier effect than others.  For example the military industrial complex frequently has a very low multiplier effect as compared with some social services or roads and bridges and trains or even health care.

I am no fan of the military-industrial complex either. I view it as all part of the same package.

Yeah, but it still becomes a public decision about where to draw the line and whether to have any kind of military.  Currently, those decisions do NOT seem to be made be responsible and/or responsive politicians in terms of what the public wants... yet these public feelings evolve when they get scared, too.