lichess.org
Donate

Bitcoin

I have no intention to debate anarchism with you. Even if I had had such an intention, the amusingly disagreeable way in which you behave, among other things, would have changed my mind. I leave you with my comments, though I understand you didn't find in them what you were looking for.
>I have no intention to debate anarchism with you.

That's fine. I'm quite use to drive-by style (and blatantly false) accusations and assertions devoid of any substance or evidence.

>Even if I had had such an intention, the amusingly disagreeable way in which you
>behave, among other things, would have changed my mind.

...and I'm a jerk, for reasons which (among other things) you would rather not specify, but of course you are above all that and merely amused by my antics... I can see there will be no getting under your skin so easily. You're obviously a real tough cookie... and smart too: as vague as possible when you would rather cast aspersion than defend a poorly chosen position, that way the other party may not make any remarks in rebuttal or defense about it. Super clever.

>I leave you with my comments, though I understand
> you didn't find in them what you were looking for.

I found in them nothing I don't expect and haven't already seen and addressed many times in my life before, and also by the majority of authors and researchers I have made reference to, but thanks for making them all the same.

You're so clever that you attack the first paragraph of a short two-paragraph message before reading the second paragraph, and then misunderstand the second paragraph as you have forgotten the first one. Surely a more elaborate and precise discussion with you must be very fruitful, and any reasonable person should engage in it with no delay. And you're so wise that you think you are winning a debate because the other person is not interested in having it with you (or at least you think that saying so will lead them to proceed with the debate, which is just as childish).

> I found in them nothing I don't expect and haven't already seen and addressed many times in my life before, and also by the majority of authors and researchers I have made reference to, but thanks for making them all the same.

Two ideas have taken hold of your two neurons. By now anything that may come to you from the outside world is either rejected or distorted through this lens, and nothing can change your mind. That's what fanatism is, whether religious or anarchist. Be aware that the distinctive mix of claimed moral superiority and uncivil behavior that you share with religious fanatics tend to get on the nerves of people. In Roman times they did end up giving some of those crazy Jews and Christians to the lions as there was nothing else that could be done with them. I confirm to you that their individual sovereignty was not fully respected. The community is stronger than the individual; you should get used to it as it will never change.
>Two ideas have taken hold of your two neurons. By now anything that may come to
>you from the outside world is either rejected or distorted through this lens, and nothing
>can change your mind.

That assessment means a lot coming from someone who has provided no facts or reasoning as refutation, and a stated unwillingness to debate or defend assertions made.

>Be aware that the distinctive mix of claimed moral superiority and uncivil behavior
>that you share with religious fanatics tend to get on the nerves of people.

Can you quote instances of my claimed moral superiority as well as uncivil behavior, I'd appreciate that very much, as I don't recall any name calling or personal attacks on my part, nor can I find or recall any time I have claimed to be personally morally superior to anyone else. My point is not and never has been about how much better I am than anyone else, but to point out the immorality and violence of statism.

I find the tactic of switching the focus to criticize one's person ("you're disagreeable, you're ignorant, uneducated, don't see with at "outside look" etc.") rather than sticking to the merits of the issue itself is a common tactic of people who want to avoid discussing the actual issue (especially when the particulars do not tend to support their position). This is a form of intellectual dishonesty.

>The community is stronger than the individual; you should get used to it as it will never change.

Violence is immoral, and the state is violence. These are the facts, and excusing or trying to justify the choice to employ violence with nice sounding mean-nothings like the above statement or the assertion that "political community" is "natural" will never change those facts. Individuals like me will never stop resisting that violence, so you should get use to it.

@xochinla

Lets just see if your claims become true:

"I am betting that bitcoin will go into multiple 100's of thousands, maybe $200,000 to $300,000 in the next pump cycle, crash to $40,000 to $60,000 from there"

Ok. Currently it is at $10 000. Will give you ten years. if it then has reached $250 000 once and is worth more than $50 000 at the end, then i will invest.

*Puts gun on chest*
>Ok. Currently it is at $10 000. Will give you ten years. if it then has reached $250 000 once
>and is worth more than $50 000 at the end, then i will invest.

Similar sentiments were of course expressed when bitcoin reached, against almost all expectations, 1 whole dollar... then again at $100, $1000, and now here we are at $10,000. This thing is no where near done, bitcoin will still be a good buy at $100,000. At what point does one admit to oneself that this isn't a tulip mania?

I don't think you'll have to wait 10 years to get in at $50,000, probably only 3-4 years (2023 maybe) at which time $50,000 will be analogous to 2018's $3100. The numbers are of course not going to be precise, but the scale will be ball-park accurate.

My basis for this statement is the consideration of the decreasing supply (at set 4 year intervals) vs increasing awareness and demand, and the likelihood that this will continue and have similarly proportional market dynamics in a 4 year cycle. Of course there is an upper limit where exponential growth will top out, but I am convinced that this will not be until the entire global fiat economy has been displaced and dismantled considering the cost that system has to humanity.
Yeah, lets kill Fiat money, but please lets keep some form of paper money :-)
While at it, lets also make compound interest illegal for EVERYBODY and lets do a global debt cut.
>Yeah, lets kill Fiat money, but please lets keep some form of paper money :-)

For sure. Cash is king for anonymity of transactions, and digital transactions are ridiculously difficult to achieve that level of financial privacy with. I think gold and silver coin is good and can serve in that regard again, though history has demonstrated the strong preference for transacting paper over metal.

There are ways to create bitcoin paper "cash" by embedding the private key into the paper that can be revealed only once for instance by scratch off or removal of a seal. As long as the seal or obscurement is in place, you can be relatively confident that the key remains confidential, and the value and spend history of the address can be verified anywhere there is internet access. Of course that necessitates some level of trust in the producer, but as long as reputation and track record is good, it can surely be trusted to a useful extent, suitable for briefcase transfers of smaller denominations ;)

There are already some efforts in this regard and I expect demand for crypto paper currency (and physical coins) will ramp it up especially as governments continue to clamp down on fiat cash... as long as people aren't too mass brainwashed into accepting the cashless dystopia like we see rolling out in China.

>While at it, lets also make compound interest illegal for EVERYBODY and lets do a global debt cut.

Usury cannot be stopped by laws. This is a fox/henhouse situation. People must voluntarily quit taking loans from corrupt institutions, (or even accepting fiat currency at all) which every bank is. Every fiat bank is part of the same corrupt network. As usual, laws cannot and will not replace people becoming educated as to how money works and making a decision to act morally and responsibly.

Any "solution" that does not include that is never going to work. An immutable law is that aggregate freedom is proportional to aggregate morality (and of course knowledge), and there is no amount of policy, laws, or enforcement that can alter this ratio or eliminate the necessity of the mass of humanity waking up and learning to take personal responsibility. Besides, every law that is suppose to protect people inevitably is corrupted and used to abuse far more than protect.

As for the global "debt", it's a fiction, a scam, and should not be considered as valid by any stretch of any imagination. It's only a vile and false claim to the exploited productivity of humanity, nothing more.

Interesting stuff you say about the Bicoin paper money. I dont get your "its a scam" comment about debts. I dont care if it is a scam or not, i want to get rid of it. If you have a better solution than a global debt cut, tell me about it.

--

"Usury (alias compound interest) cannot be stopped by laws"

German Civil Code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch) forbids compound interest for everybody, except banks. www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bgb/englisch_bgb.html#p0748 : "An agreement reached in advance that interest due should in turn bear interest is void." ( Section 248, Compound interest )

Sharia forbids compound interest alias Ursury ( http://www.islamandquran.org/fatwas/economics/usury-in-koran-and-sunnah.html ) and islamic banks dont do it (But most Muslims seemingly do it). Islamic Banks have been shown to be more resistant: www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2015/09/28/04/53/sores100410a . Maybe you already know this, as you said 'Usury' which is the translation of the words used in the Quran.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.