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

[ChartBuddy]

Coin

Explanation

[1713567254]

1713567254

[1713567254]

1713567254

[1713567254]

1713567254

[1713567254]

1713567254

[1713567254]

1713567254

[Fatman3001]

Perhaps you mean DEMOCRATIC socialism, like the People's DEMOCRATIC Reublic of Korea, Like the People's Republic of China, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Lao People's Democratic Republic, and don't forget former East Germany—the German Democratic Republic.

Not THAT kind of democracy. Ok let's be SUPER FAIR and use a European country, the Birthplace of democracy: Greece. The people Elected a PM and a Ruling party specifically to end Austerity. What happened? Austerity. This in spite of a national referendum specifically to reject austerity.  Yeah, democracy!

Democratic Socialism isn't just evil. It doesn't even work. 

You may say it's a perversion of democracy, but what good is a democracy so easily perverted? 

You're not even cherry picking. You're just ranting.

Sweden has it's own currency. It isn't even in the Monetary Union. To claim Europe's economy is bigger than the U.S. by including them (and presumably Great Britain, Switzerland etc) is disingenuous.  If you include them, then you must also include eastern Europe, the Balkans, etc.

Look, retard, I never said anything about Europe. I even tried to explain to you that Europe was a continent, not an economic entity. What I, The IMF, The World Bank, and your friggin CIA has been talking about is = THE EUROPEAN UNION

You say our population is large, then how about comparing per capita income? Again, including Turkey, Slovenia, etc.  After tax per capita income makes us Yanks look even better. We made so much money we could afford to bail out Europe and defend your asses when attacked from National SOCIALISTS or threatened by the Union of SOCIALIST Soviet republics. 

US Nominal GDP per capita is greater than that of the EU as a whole, I have no problem with that. This isn't a contest.

Sweden, like America, is coasting. We are enjoying the benefits of the freedoms of earlier, more economically free generations. They built up credit and now we are living off of it. Those benefits are running out. Greece is the Ghosts of Christmas Future.

... The US had a budget surplus when Bush Jr took over and introduced Big-Government Conservatism. Socialists didn't flush the american economy down the toilet, right wing loons did. I know we're supposed to blame Obama, but the only mistake he made was that he thought he could work with the republicans. He should have run them over. They're bad for the country.

[JayJuanGee]

Wonderful, its barely back up to where I bought it at last week.

DON'T be such a pessimist during these celebratory times.


 

[billyjoeallen]

Perhaps you mean DEMOCRATIC socialism, like the People's DEMOCRATIC Reublic of Korea, Like the People's Republic of China, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Lao People's Democratic Republic, and don't forget former East Germany—the German Democratic Republic.

Not THAT kind of democracy. Ok let's be SUPER FAIR and use a European country, the Birthplace of democracy: Greece. The people Elected a PM and a Ruling party specifically to end Austerity. What happened? Austerity. This in spite of a national referendum specifically to reject austerity.  Yeah, democracy!

Democratic Socialism isn't just evil. It doesn't even work. 

You may say it's a perversion of democracy, but what good is a democracy so easily perverted? 

You're not even cherry picking. You're just ranting.

Sweden has it's own currency. It isn't even in the Monetary Union. To claim Europe's economy is bigger than the U.S. by including them (and presumably Great Britain, Switzerland etc) is disingenuous.  If you include them, then you must also include eastern Europe, the Balkans, etc.

Look, retard, I never said anything about Europe. I even tried to explain to you that Europe was a continent, not an economic entity. What I, The IMF, The World Bank, and your friggin CIA has been talking about is = THE EUROPEAN UNION

and that's not ranting? I'm kinda fuzzy on the distinction.

[!! pop]

... The smallest minority [on earth] is the individual.

To be that clever...

[Fatman3001]

We're talking about collectivism vs. individualism.  Take all the victims of all the individual serial killers in the world, add them up and compare the numbers to those murdered by the State and see what you come up with. Hell, take all the murders ever committed by anyone not in a uniform or a robe and stack them up against the victims of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Hussein, and Pol Pot. 

No, we're not. That's the point. You're not allowing your brain to process what I'm saying because your conformist mind won't allow you to agree with any socialist ideas. So you throw every extreme example of socialist (and for some reason, fascist) tyranny in my face to shut me up and convince yourself that you won't have to break out of your conformist world view.

You claim to care about minorities. The smallest minority is the individual. Care about him. 

I do. And I want that individual to be protected by a welfare state which has complete monopoly of violence and works according to the rule of law.

[billyjoeallen]

Look, retard, I never said anything about Europe. I even tried to explain to you that Europe was a continent, not an economic entity.

This whole thing started when I said that the U.S.A. was the world's largest economy. You brought up Europe as a counterclaim and now you are saying it's not an economic entity. What the fuck, Man?

... The US had a budget surplus when Bush Jr took over and introduced Big-Government Conservatism. Socialists didn't flush the american economy down the toilet, right wing loons did. I know we're supposed to blame Obama, but the only mistake he made was that he thought he could work with the republicans. He should have run them over. They're bad for the country.

You won't catch me defending that idiot Bush.  He himself said he had to "sacrifice his free market principles in order to save the free market" meaning of course he had no free market principles. It could be argued that is was a Republican congress who gave us the budget surplus under Clinton, but I won't. It was additional tax revenues from the loose money boom and stock bubble caused by Fed Chair Alan Greenspan.
Also from low oil prices when the U.S. was a net importer.

I'm not a conservative but get your facts strait. Bush was not right wing. He's the son of Rockefeller Republican GHW Bush. He federalized education (no child left behind), appointed exclusively Catholics and Jews to the supreme court (not wrong, but not conservative either), and increased immigration from Latin countries. Again, I am not criticizing those policies here, but bush was an establishment warmonger, not even a conservative socially. Absolutely, incontrovertibly not a fiscal conservative. 


 

[ahpku]

...

You claim to care about minorities. The smallest minority is the individual. Care about him. 

I do. And I want that individual to be protected by a welfare state which has complete monopoly of violence and works according to the rule of law.

You do realize that you're no longer arguing with an American fireman, but with a Russian-born children's books writer, from whom his independent ideas are borrowed verbatim.
Think of this as having a political discussion with someone passionately quoting Babar the Elephant or Go, Dog. Go!

[billyjoeallen]

I want that individual to be protected by a welfare state which has complete monopoly of violence and works according to the rule of law.

A system where the State violates the very rules in enforces on others (especially re the initiation of force and coercion) is not Rule of Law. it is Rule of Man.  A government that selectively interprets and enforces the very Constitution that supposedly limits its power is not limited.

The government cannot provide anything that it does not forcibly take away in the first place (by taxing) or by borrowing (promising to tax in the future). The State cannot credibly protect rights when it is dependent on violating rights (extortion-taxes, potato-spud) just to exist.

Anarcho-capitalism is the only system that consistently applies the only three rules society needs: don't  hurt or threaten people. Don't take or mess with their property. Keep your promises. That is Rule of Law.

You want to help people in need. Good. Most people do or we wouldn't have subsidized healthcare, etc. But you want other people to pay their "fair share" even if they don't want to. There's no such thing as a "fair share" taken by force.  Forced contribution is as close to charity as rape is to love. In other words, you're monsters masquerading as philanthropists. Fuck you. My money is my money and nobody should tell me what to do with it, least of all some economically illiterate morons with good intentions.

Subsidize poverty, you get more poverty. Tax wealth and you get less wealth. Regulate innovation and you get less innovation. 

[Fatman3001]

Look, retard, I never said anything about Europe. I even tried to explain to you that Europe was a continent, not an economic entity.

This whole thing started when I said that the U.S.A. was the world's largest economy. You brought up Europe as a counterclaim and now you are saying it's not an economic entity. What the fuck, Man?

Read it out loud, it usually helps me.

Are you serious? You think we get our ideas from Rupert Murdoch?  We have the largest economy in the world because of...what exactly? The Teamsters?

You don't, that's the EU. If you're talking about sovereign state economy, it's because you have one of the largest populations in the world.

... The US had a budget surplus when Bush Jr took over and introduced Big-Government Conservatism. Socialists didn't flush the american economy down the toilet, right wing loons did. I know we're supposed to blame Obama, but the only mistake he made was that he thought he could work with the republicans. He should have run them over. They're bad for the country.

You won't catch me defending that idiot Bush.  He himself said he had to "sacrifice his free market principles in order to save the free market" meaning of course he had no free market principles. It could be argued that is was a Republican congress who gave us the budget surplus under Clinton, but I won't. It was additional tax revenues from the loose money boom and stock bubble caused by Fed Chair Alan Greenspan.
Also from low oil prices when the U.S. was a net importer.

I'm not a conservative but get your facts strait. Bush was not right wing. He's the son of Rockefeller Republican GHW Bush. He federalized education (no child left behind), appointed exclusively Catholics and Jews to the supreme court (not wrong, but not conservative either), and increased immigration from Latin countries. Again, I am not criticizing those policies here, but bush was an establishment warmonger, not even a conservative socially. Absolutely, incontrovertibly not a fiscal conservative. 

You think appointing jews and catholics is "not conservative"?

Suddenly I understand why americans don't like to talk about politics.

Oh, and this:

Ah, yes."[true conservatism]". [Conservatism] has failed everywhere it's been tried because it wasn't "[true conservatism]".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

[ChartBuddy]

Coin

Explanation

[!! pop]

Anarcho-capitalism is the only system that consistently applies the only three rules society needs: don't  hurt or threaten people. Don't take or mess with their property. Keep your promises. That is Rule of Law.

And don't forget the most important rule of all: You just have to believe in yourself!

[Fatman3001]

I want that individual to be protected by a welfare state which has complete monopoly of violence and works according to the rule of law.

A system where the State violates the very rules in enforces on others (especially re the initiation of force and coercion) is not Rule of Law. it is Rule of Man.  A government that selectively interprets and enforces the very Constitution that supposedly limits its power is not limited.

The government cannot provide anything that it does not forcibly take away in the first place (by taxing) or by borrowing (promising to tax in the future). The State cannot credibly protect rights when it is dependent on violating rights (extortion-taxes, potato-spud) just to exist.

Anarcho-capitalism is the only system that consistently applies the only three rules society needs: don't  hurt or threaten people. Don't take or mess with their property. Keep your promises. That is Rule of Law.

You want to help people in need. Good. Most people do or we wouldn't have subsidized healthcare, etc. But you want other people to pay their "fair share" even if they don't want to. There's no such thing as a "fair share" taken by force.  Forced contribution is as close to charity as rape is to love. In other words, you're monsters masquerading as philanthropists. Fuck you. My money is my money and nobody should tell me what to do with it, least of all some economically illiterate morons with good intentions.

Subsidize poverty, you get more poverty. Tax wealth and you get less wealth. Regulate innovation and you get less innovation. 

You're making the same mistake the communists made. You demand that there be no plurality of political conviction. Your "system" will fail if there's a group of "statists" among you, so you'll have to keep an eye out for "statist sentiments". And so on...

[billyjoeallen]

You think appointing jews and catholics is "not conservative"?

"Conservative" generally means "resistant to change". In Russia the conservatives are communists. In America, they are free market protestants.  It's not a good thing or a bad thing. In fact, conservatism is doomed to failure eventually because the only constant in the universe is change. With no change, time stops.

I'm bored with this hypersensitivity to even the faintest whiff of perceived racism. This is not the place for such discussions. I regret even mentioning Rothbard, Rand and Marx were Jews.  I merely meant to point out that my hero Murray Rothbard was absolutely not an elitist like Rand.  I forgot how easily children get distracted by things that don't matter.

I'm culturally conservative and that's both good and bad. I say it not to boast or confess. It shouldn't matter. Intellectually I'm a free market individualist. Economically I'm an Austrian. Google that shit if you don't know what I'm talking about.

Now, can we get back to talking about something other than me, such as whether or not the Chinese are going to continue the European pump?  I think $300 is the level to watch, but there are till too many longs and not enough shorts to ensure a bottom is in.

[Fatman3001]

...

You're entirely to moderate and realistically rational for this venue, I'm afraid.

Not really. I'll tell you a little secret: I'm not even a socialist.

[billyjoeallen]

You're making the same mistake the communists made. You demand that there be no plurality of political conviction. Your "system" will fail if there's a group of "statists" among you, so you'll have to keep an eye out for "statist sentiments". And so on...

I demand nothing. I cannot use force or threat of force to impose my ideas. I simply think the State will destroy itself and I will try to help provide an alternative.

The only thing you could say I demand is a sincere or at least entertaining discussion or I will not participate. Not a big loss if you don't value my contribution.

I think there will always be a few Statist around and that will be useful to remind us why we abandoned Statism.

[Fatman3001]

You're making the same mistake the communists made. You demand that there be no plurality of political conviction. Your "system" will fail if there's a group of "statists" among you, so you'll have to keep an eye out for "statist sentiments". And so on...

I demand nothing. I cannot use force or threat of force to impose my ideas. I simply think the State will destroy itself and I will try to help provide an alternative.

The only thing you could say I demand is a sincere or at least entertaining discussion or I will not participate. Not a big loss if you don't value my contribution.

I think there will always be a few Statist around and that will be useful to remind us why we abandoned Statism.

I'm sorry. Bad humour. I actually consider myself a social liberalist, but in your eyes it would probably look like socialism anyways. I don't think I've written anything I don't believe in. Sorry for calling you a retard though. Sometimes the setup is just too good to pass. 

[billyjoeallen]

I'm sorry. Bad humour. I actually consider myself a social liberalist, but in your eyes it would probably look like socialism anyways. I don't think I've written anything I don't believe in. Sorry for calling you a retard though. Sometimes the setup is just too good to pass. 

No worries, Man. I've been called far worse.  I couldn't very well advocate radical free speech without having thick skin.

[adaseb]

One thing I learnt about this thread is this

* When price is going up and everybody is like "BITCOIN IS GOING TO THE MOON" or "Here $10,000 we come" it means its time to sell or go short.

* When price is crashing and everybody is like "BITCOIN IS A SCAM" or "BITCOIN IS GOING TO $1" it means its time to buy or cover.

[!! pop]

... I regret even mentioning Rothbard, Rand and Marx were Jews.  I merely meant to point out that my hero Murray Rothbard was absolutely not an elitist like Rand.  I forgot how easily children get distracted by things that don't matter.

The only cause I've found for concern is the following inaccuracy: while Messrs. Rothbard and Marx were, in fact, Jews, Mme Rand was a Jewess. A Jewess.