Bitcoin Forum
April 18, 2014, 09:15:59 PM *
News: Due to the OpenSSL heartbleed bug, changing your forum password is recommended.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Liberals, why do you like Bitcoin?  (Read 11644 times)
Anonymous
Guest

May 25, 2011, 08:39:20 PM
 #1

It has the potential to hamper the government's ability to run society by allowing for citizens to control the earnings of their labor in an anonymous private environment. There is little accountability in a citizen paying their dues. How could you like this? Why are you here? Why don't you just keep supporting the US dollar or other fiat currencies?
The Latest in ASIC Scrypt Miners. FREE Same-Day Shipping.
GAWMiners.com - Promo Code: FREESHIPPING
Mining Made Easy
For Everyone

Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1397855759
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1397855759

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1397855759
Reply with quote  #2

1397855759
Report to moderator
1397855759
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1397855759

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1397855759
Reply with quote  #2

1397855759
Report to moderator
vragnaroda
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 40


View Profile

Ignore
May 25, 2011, 08:54:17 PM
 #2

this should be interesting.

“99% of quotes on the Internet are wrong.”  -- Abe Lincoln
1Bv7pZAXK53L61defJR3m5HgXmh67hc4Ze
barbarousrelic
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 650


View Profile

Ignore
May 25, 2011, 08:57:56 PM
 #3

It's possible to wish for the government to provide welfare or regulate the economy while also wishing for an honest hard money system. These goals are not incompatible or contradictory.

I don't think Bitcoin hampers a government's ability to fund itself any more than the use of cash does. Any business of significant size won't be able to get around paying all legally required taxes regardless of whether they use USD or alternative currencies. Bitcoin no more subverts the welfare state than shopping at the farmers' market.

Do not waste your time debating whether Bitcoin can work. It does work.

"Early adopters will profit" is not a sufficient condition to classify something as a pyramid or Ponzi scheme. If it was, Apple and Microsoft stock are Ponzi schemes.

There is no such thing as "market manipulation." There is only buying and selling.
Basiley
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile

Ignore
May 25, 2011, 09:07:23 PM
 #4

there is no BitCoin specific here.
some people have golden hearts, some was had stone-made inside.
also fundamental mistake here: not government run society, but society run government. smoke politology a bit, please.
bittersweet
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224



View Profile

Ignore
May 25, 2011, 09:33:46 PM
 #5

I think there is no way you could provide social-democratic type of welfare with "honest hard money system". I think welfare is largely based on the dishonesty of the fiat currency and central banking. Fiat currency and ever-growing public debt is a way around the fact that welfare simply leads to bankruptcy. Plain and simple. People just don't see how their money is stolen from them until the government is completely bankrupt like in Greece. With "honest hard money system" people would see it from the start and there would be soon a bloody revolt. If you think you could just rise taxes for some rich people and fund welfare to millions of unproductive types, you are a lunatic.

My Bitcoin address: 1DjTsAYP3xR4ymcTUKNuFa5aHt42q2VgSg
niklas_a
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


View Profile

Ignore
May 25, 2011, 09:43:33 PM
 #6

I see BitCoin as a more secure way to handle money with low transaction fees. Not that I like taxes but governments could still tax corporations and individuals in a BitCoin economy.
MoonShadow
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile

Ignore
May 25, 2011, 10:10:53 PM
 #7

Bitcoin no more subverts the welfare state than shopping at the farmers' market.

This is certainly true.  Do you know any farmers who pay sales taxes because they sell extra veggies at a farmers' market?  I know I don't.  The goverment agents don't get sideways with them because 1) it's a small market with little expected gain 2) it's bad p.r. because they know that the public favors these markets and 3) it would help to come down on publicly advertised farmers' markets because they know that there is already a great deal more private activity that they can't find.  Farmers' markets are like advertising for the farmers that do this kind of thing, they aren't the bulk of the dark market activity.

If Bitcoin ever goes truly mainstream, the governments of the "Western" nations are most definitely going to feel the pinch, and most of them already have enough trouble paying for the social services as it is.  Considering that governments worldwide really do consider "national defense" (however they define it) to be their primary reason for existence, do you think that social safety nets are going to be supported while the pentagon has to hold a bake sale?

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
MoonShadow
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile

Ignore
May 25, 2011, 10:14:27 PM
 #8

I see BitCoin as a more secure way to handle money with low transaction fees. Not that I like taxes but governments could still tax corporations and individuals in a BitCoin economy.

I'm sure that they will think of something, rather than just close up shop.  Still, that does not mean that governments will be able to continue as they have for the past 60 years.  Most governments wouldn't stand a chance getting a deficit budget to work without the central bank's implicit ability to manipulate the value of the currency.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
foo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 408



View Profile

Ignore
May 25, 2011, 10:41:25 PM
 #9

Rick Falkvinge had an interesting post on this topic recently:

http://falkvinge.net/2011/05/19/the-information-policy-case-for-flat-tax-and-basic-income/

I know this because Tyler knows this.
Sweft
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 136


View Profile

Ignore
May 25, 2011, 11:45:54 PM
 #10

Why you preoccupied with liberals, politics, conservatives - etc.

Who gives a fuck?  Seriously?

I'm here to make money.  Guess what?  No ideology makes sense,  in fact, nothing does.
benjamindees
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


View Profile

Ignore
May 26, 2011, 12:16:20 AM
 #11

I'm here to make money.  Guess what?  No ideology makes sense,  in fact, nothing does.

Quote
Take the lyrics to Land of Confusion. In this song, Phil Collins addresses the problems of abusive political authority.

Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics
ron
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile

Ignore
May 26, 2011, 01:20:58 AM
 #12

It has the potential to hamper the government's ability to run society by allowing for citizens to control the earnings of their labor in an anonymous private environment. There is little accountability in a citizen paying their dues. How could you like this? Why are you here? Why don't you just keep supporting the US dollar or other fiat currencies?


World record for the most loaded question.

1LBHH768cGpu3ZsmJ8ciYMyVN5PMheDUn7 for Tips and Donations
compro01
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 483


View Profile

Ignore
May 26, 2011, 03:28:09 AM
 #13

I see no functional difference between bitcoin and cash in this regard.

i don't "like" bitcoin per se, but i find it an interesting idea and am interesting in seeing how an economy will function with a non-inflationary currency.

just because a portion of the bitcoin community is populated by anarchists, lunatics, and hopefully not terrorists doesn't means i can't find bitcoin useful and/or interesting.
netrin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322


FirstBits: 168Bc


View Profile

Ignore
May 26, 2011, 04:02:34 AM
 #14

Would the poster care to define the term 'liberal'?

It seems some Americans have twisted the definition. In the rest of the world economic liberalism is what American's call conservatism. Social conservatism is something like parenting. From my understanding of the terms, conservative implies content to preserve the status quo, tradition, tending not to change, and obedience to authority. Where as liberal, sharing the same root as liberty and libertarian, stands for freedom, generosity, and equal rights. Liberals rejected hereditary status, established religion, and monarchy in favour of the rule of law and fundamental rights to life, liberty, and property. At what point did the term change for the negative?

Are asking those liberals defined above why they support BitCoin?

Greenlandic tupilak. Hand carved, traditional cursed bone figures. Sorry, polar bear, walrus and human remains not available for export.
benjamindees
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


View Profile

Ignore
May 26, 2011, 04:09:05 AM
 #15

At what point did the term change for the negative?

Pretty much at the point that liberals decided to abandon the concept of rights in favor of mobocracy and wealth redistribution.

Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics
Sweft
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 136


View Profile

Ignore
May 26, 2011, 04:14:58 AM
 #16

At what point did the term change for the negative?

Pretty much at the point that liberals decided to abandon the concept of rights in favor of mobocracy and wealth redistribution.
The mob is an evolutionary outcome.  You can't avoid it, just like you can't avoid stupid people.  A product of evolution.
MoonShadow
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile

Ignore
May 26, 2011, 04:47:43 AM
 #17

Would the poster care to define the term 'liberal'?

It seems some Americans have twisted the definition. In the rest of the world economic liberalism is what American's call conservatism. Social conservatism is something like parenting. From my understanding of the terms, conservative implies content to preserve the status quo, tradition, tending not to change, and obedience to authority. Where as liberal, sharing the same root as liberty and libertarian, stands for freedom, generosity, and equal rights. Liberals rejected hereditary status, established religion, and monarchy in favour of the rule of law and fundamental rights to life, liberty, and property. At what point did the term change for the negative?


Sometime after the death of FDR, the "progressive" movement that characterized the entire first half of the last century in the United States was discredited as having largely been co-opted by socialists.  Following this, these same socialist-lite progressives altered the public image during the next several decades by taking the term 'liberal' from what was once the libertarians of the day.  The liberty minded liberals of the 1900's and earlier are often called "classical liberals" today, and that means roughly the same thing as the term "libertarian" in the modern lexicon; which is a word that was made up in the 1970's because 'social progressives' had distorted the term in the view of the US political context.  So when you hear someone from the United States say "liberal" or "progressive" in a political context, Europeans can safely hear "socialist" and be pretty close.  Although Europeans are not likely to look at Obama and think that he compares with the socialists or progressives in European politics, this is because Obama can only do so much without severe political backlash and not a fundamental difference in ideology.

However, your understanding of "conservative" in the US context is also a bit wrong.  Generally speaking, a "conservative" in the US political context is not someone who wishes to 'preserve' the status quo, but a 'fascist lite'.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
ron
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile

Ignore
May 26, 2011, 05:31:13 AM
 #18

At what point did the term change for the negative?


When the conservative election winning professionals blabbed about it to the uneducated fox news viewers.


To answer the OP.

Bitcoins are not going to change the way society operates but if they do, great. If you sit down 1 on 1 with a liberal ask them how they feel about the value of the dollar I doubt your answer would be much different then that of a "conservative". You're implying an awful lot about liberals and come off as rather elitist in your main post.   

1LBHH768cGpu3ZsmJ8ciYMyVN5PMheDUn7 for Tips and Donations
MoonShadow
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile

Ignore
May 26, 2011, 05:33:49 AM
 #19

At what point did the term change for the negative?


When the conservative election winning professionals blabbed about it to the uneducated fox news viewers.

In my experience, people who say stuff like this don't watch Fox News enough to even know anything useful about the network or their viewership.  Like those who blab about how crazy Glenn Beck is only know what he looks like from two minutes youtube outakes.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
ron
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile

Ignore
May 26, 2011, 05:53:53 AM
 #20

I never implied anything about Glenn Beck. Fox news has great ratings and has the older Conservative demographic and have used that platform to help successfully turn Liberal into a bad word. I'm not bashing fox news and I actually like judge napolitano and bill o'reilly, they seem to be the smartest people on the network. Shepard Smith is great also.

1LBHH768cGpu3ZsmJ8ciYMyVN5PMheDUn7 for Tips and Donations
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!