Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

To libertarians and anarchists

2456789

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Except for the slight problem that it depends upon convertibility with fiat currencies, since not many people are dumb enough to accept payment for work in Bitcoins.
    Permabear wrote: »
    Nobody is denying that Bitcoin is in its infancy. But that does not mean that it does not pose a challenge to government-issued fiat currency. We now have a privately issued peer-to-peer global crypto-currency, growing in popularity, that is outside the control of central banks and governments. That advances libertarian ideals by removing control of money from government and threatening the very concept of a "national currency." See F. A. Hayek's The Denationalization of Money and Bernard Lietaer and Jacqui Dunne's Rethinking Money: How New Currencies Turn Scarcity into Prosperity.
    Good luck paying your taxes in Bitcoin; it's pretty easy for government to force dominance for a fiat currency, by making it the only currency acceptable for taxes.

    Whether you're earning in Bitcoin or fiat, you've still got to pay taxes on it (in the currency of governments choosing), or it's tax fraud + jail.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭Jonny7


    SupaNova2 wrote: »
    Do you have anything you can link me to on the effect of these stiffer rules?

    Well it varies from country to country, and also the type of financial institution and what their business is

    Here's one overview
    http://personal.lse.ac.uk/ANDERSOR/Regulatory%20Reform%20and%20the%20Changing%20Landscape%20of%20Banking.pdf

    A general "populist" overview from the BBC
    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-20811289
    the most important part of which would be this (for the UK banking sector)
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16759437

    From personal experience, Lehman was one of the big catalysts for change, the effect of which is that it's now harder (not impossible of course) for a situation like that to repeat, they had the collateral - they just literally didn't have the cash, most of those who were exposed have since been covered, but it took years

    To give one specific example - it's going to be harder to automatically advance cash from certain types of movement in the overnight, each movement has to pass a credit control instead of the whole lot just being green-lit. Sounds a bit technical and obscure, but considering these movements account for hundreds of billions, then it's easy to see how tighter controls are eliminating risk that was simply overlooked pre 2008 due to much more relaxed internal mechanisms


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Jonny7 wrote: »
    Well it varies from country to country, and also the type of financial institution and what their business is

    Here's one overview
    http://personal.lse.ac.uk/ANDERSOR/Regulatory%20Reform%20and%20the%20Changing%20Landscape%20of%20Banking.pdf

    A general "populist" overview from the BBC
    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-20811289
    the most important part of which would be this (for the UK banking sector)
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16759437

    From personal experience, Lehman was one of the big catalysts for change, the effect of which is that it's now harder (not impossible of course) for a situation like that to repeat, they had the collateral - they just literally didn't have the cash, most of those who were exposed have since been covered, but it took years

    To give one specific example - it's going to be harder to automatically advance cash from certain types of movement in the overnight, each movement has to pass a credit control instead of the whole lot just being green-lit. Sounds a bit technical and obscure, but considering these movements account for hundreds of billions, then it's easy to see how tighter controls are eliminating risk that was simply overlooked pre 2008 due to much more relaxed internal mechanisms
    This just stops liquidity problems? It doesn't stop a huge unsustainable buildup of private debt.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭Jonny7


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    If it remains that way - it will always be inherently risky - which will drive away and discourage investors and encourage those who seek quick profit

    A simple example is - how do we trust exchanges like MtGox? without any independent oversight or basic rules/controls then risk is greatly increased

    There will be more MtGox's until an independent authority of some type is set up, with standards and rules for exchanges, transparency - which will provide trust, which will ultimately help grow bitcoin.

    Bitcoins lack of regulation and controls is not a threat to any currency, it's simply a threat to itself


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭Jonny7


    This just stops liquidity problems? It doesn't stop a huge unsustainable buildup of private debt.

    Which part of you referring to.. my example was specific to custody on financial instruments


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Jonny7 wrote: »
    Which part of you referring to.. my example was specific to custody on financial instruments
    Well, I've looked through all the articles, and skimmed the PDF - none of it really seems to address the root problem of the crisis, which was the buildup of unsustainable private debt, and the 'perverse incentives' which make that kind of short-term profit seeking so profitable for those who control banks.

    The reforms all seem to paper over a lot of ancillary issues, without actually resolving the core problems that caused the crisis.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭Jonny7


    Well, I've looked through all the articles, and skimmed the PDF - none of it really seems to address the root problem of the crisis, which was the buildup of unsustainable private debt, and the 'perverse incentives' which make that kind of short-term profit seeking so profitable for those who control banks.

    The reforms all seem to paper over a lot of ancillary issues, without actually resolving the core problems that caused the crisis.

    Well debt is a fundamental underlying issue to everything, but the specific causes of the 2008 crisis itself were a long list of shady practices, dubious credit controls, easy lending, bad market practices and so on - they've had no option but to address them. We know what they are now, in 2006/2007 we either weren't aware or were just sliding them under the carpet

    As for unsustainable private debts, if that's truly the case then we'll see commercial banks failing..


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Ya like there's been no volatility and hyperinflation/crashes in the value Bitcoin, to show that it's in any way 'unsafe' or 'inherently risky', for people using the currency for transactions instead of speculation - no historical basis for that at all.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 899 ✭✭✭sin_city


    Jonny7 wrote: »
    Bitcoin is for fun, but as a real currency it would need many changes.

    According to who? Bitcoin is the market at work. People in the US can't play poker...guess what, through Bitcoin they have the freedom to do so.

    A real currency? Do you mean a banking cartel monopoly where if you oppose it you go to jail? That's a real currency?

    The internet was just for fun in 1997, 1998, 1999 and many companies came and went.

    I expect the same thing for crypto-currencies. Bitcoin is a possible protection against inflation. If they banking cartels try to outlaw it the market will just come up with another crypto-currency and so on.

    It could be a true revolution to take power away from bankers and back to the people.
    Jonny7 wrote: »
    I wouldn't see it as a "challenge", that's the wrong way of looking at it - it's an alternative - and completely in it's infancy - no use on a national level in any country

    No use on national level....Do you think the existing banking cartels would be happy to give their exclusive power to print the nation state's currency to the market?? Come on mate...Naive in my opinion...The banking industry runs most countries in the west.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 899 ✭✭✭sin_city


    Jonny7 wrote: »
    Yeah I'm going to need a definition because it varies from person to person

    My point in these posts is that the 2008 financial crash happened to to lax market rules and less oversight

    It's something that occurred on all levels from top to bottom

    I already had a debate with you and it is clear that excessively low interest rates for too long under Greenspan where the main cause of the 2008 crash.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 899 ✭✭✭sin_city


    Good luck paying your taxes in Bitcoin; it's pretty easy for government to force dominance for a fiat currency, by making it the only currency acceptable for taxes.

    Whether you're earning in Bitcoin or fiat, you've still got to pay taxes on it (in the currency of governments choosing), or it's tax fraud + jail.

    Exactly....government equals use of force....I don't see any difference between a goverment and the mafia.

    This has me thinking more and more about moving from libertarian to anarchist. The use of force.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Moving back to the OP's question, 2008 was a pivotal year in my own thinking of these matters. A number of things happened during that year that changed me from your typical centre left type (dare I say it was was a floating Sinn Fein voter) to an avid believer of libertarianism.

    A) A majority lead FF government bailing out the banks by writing a blank cheque guaranteeing all the debts of Irish financial institutions. This left me seething with anger and rage. How could this be, the government which is supposed to look out for the Irish people and its long suffering tax payer socialising the debts of banks. No say, no referendum, no second chance. It was done and that was that. People go on continuously blaming the Irish banks but they must look at the hard truth and no true free marketer or libertarian would welcome such state action. At the end of the day the government bailed them out which I have no doubt at the time that they meant well or they were sincere in their motives but that is the core of the problems when it comes to large interventionsit government actions. Well meaning government action more often than ends with more problems then it tries to solve.

    It was the state that saddled the Irish population with that extra debt because they thought they could control and contain the situation by using government intervention, the old nod and a wink. The markets chewed them up and spat them out like some penny sweet. Obviously it was a disastrous decision, arguable the worst the Irish state or any state for that matter has ever done. This shook my trust of the Irish state to look after the interests of the tax payers to its core.

    B) Visiting Cambodia's notorious S-21 I experienced the ultimate culmination of what state control of the individual will lead to and how dangerous collectivist and socialist ideals can be given the right environment and circumstances. Just have a quick read over the 'rules' of this prison.
    1. You must answer accordingly to my question. Don’t turn them away.
    2. Don’t try to hide the facts by making pretexts this and that, you are strictly prohibited to contest me.
    3. Don’t be a fool for you are a chap who dare to thwart the revolution.
    4. You must immediately answer my questions without wasting time to reflect.
    5. Don’t tell me either about your immoralities or the essence of the revolution.
    6. While getting lashes or electrification you must not cry at all.
    7. Do nothing, sit still and wait for my orders. If there is no order, keep quiet. When I ask you to do something, you must do it right away without protesting.
    8. Don’t make pretext about Kampuchea Krom in order to hide your secret or traitor.
    9. If you don’t follow all the above rules, you shall get many lashes of electric wire.
    10. If you disobey any point of my regulations you shall get either ten lashes or five shocks of electric discharge.

    If the above was not bad enough reading the poem 'The New Regime' by Saraith Pou while surrounded by those infamous photographs of executed dead Cambodians all seeming to want to whisper their own tale was an earth shattering moment for me personally. I had to take a time out for a minute to collect myself and gather my thoughts.

    It was then I feel on reflection that I concluded that there is nothing more powerful in this world of ours than the state. It can take away your property, it an take away your children's wealth, it can take away your life, it take away your individuality all for the 'greater good' on the whims of those in power. Over time I discovered and researched various aspects of libertarianism and found that humanity and society has benefited most by following a classical liberal methods when it comes to government and economics and that the freedom of the individual should be respected and enshrined by civilisation.

    'The New Regime' - a poem by Sarith Pou
    No religious rituals.
    No religious symbols.
    No fortune teller.
    No traditional healers.
    No paying respect to elders.
    No social status. No titles.

    No education. No training.
    No school. No learning.
    No books. No library.
    No science. No technology.
    No pens. No paper.

    No currency. No bartering.
    No buying. No selling.
    No begging. No giving.
    No purses. No wallets.

    No human rights. No liberty.
    No courts. No judges.
    No laws. No attorneys.

    No communications.
    No public transportations.
    No private transportations.
    No traveling. No mailing.
    No inviting. No visiting.
    No faxes. No telephones.

    No social gatherings.
    No chitchatting.
    No jokes. No laughters.
    No music. No dancing.

    No romance. No flirting.
    No formication. No dating.
    No wet dreaming.
    No masturbating.
    No naked sleepers.
    No bathers.
    No nakedness in showers.
    No love songs. No love letters.
    No affection.

    No marrying. No divorcing.
    No marital conflicts. No fighting.
    No profanity. No cursing.

    No shoes. No sandals.
    No toothbrushes. No razors.
    No combs. No mirrors.
    No lotion. No make up.
    No long hair. No braids.
    No jewelry.
    No soap. No detergent. No shampoo.
    No knitting. No embroidering.
    No colored clothes, except black.
    No styles, except pajamas.
    No wine. No palm sap hooch.
    No lighters. No cigarettes.
    No morning coffee. No afternoon tea.
    No snacks. No desserts.
    No breakfast [sometimes no dinner].

    No mercy. No forgiveness.
    No regret. No remorse.
    No second chances. No excuses.
    No complaints. No grievances.
    No help. No favors.
    No eyeglasses. No dental treatment.
    No vaccines. No medicines.
    No hospitals. No doctors.
    No disabilities. No social diseases.
    No tuberculosis. No leprosy.

    No kites. No marbles. No rubber bands.
    No cookies. No popsicle. No candy.
    No playing. No toys.
    No lullabies.
    No rest. No vacations.
    No holidays. No weekends.
    No games. No sports.
    No staying up late.
    No newspapers.

    No radio. No TV.
    No drawing. No painting.
    No pets. No pictures.
    No electricity. No lamp oil.
    No clocks. No watches.

    No hope. No life.
    A third of the people didn't survive.
    The regime died.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 899 ✭✭✭sin_city


    Great post jank...Never saw that perspective from anyone


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,942 ✭✭✭20Cent


    Corporations have more in common with totalitarian regimes than representative democracies. Besides the electrification and lashes that list of rules in Janks post wouldn't look out of place in your average multinational.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    20Cent wrote: »
    Corporations have more in common with totalitarian regimes than representative democracies. Besides the electrification and lashes that list of rules in Janks post wouldn't look out of place in your average multinational.

    You see, this is why people can't take the hard left seriously. They try and deflect obvious historical facts and criticism with their believed ideology with some random straw man and retort while ignoring any obvious questions raised. I see these types of people all the time around where I live (I live near Sydney Uni, UTS and UNSW so plenty of students to go around, Socialist Alternative, Marxist alliance, Communist Party of Australia they all have a voice and get a look in). They even go as far as commemorating the anniversary of the October revolution as an example when 'Workers took power!'. To me that is just incredible ignorance of history and is akin to celebrating the Munich Putsch or Mao's Long March.

    Anyway, of course the 'average multinational' will pay their employees, somewhat different to torture, mass murder and genocide don't ya think?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,942 ✭✭✭20Cent


    jank wrote: »
    You see, this is why people can't take the hard left seriously. They try and deflect obvious historical facts and criticism with their believed ideology with some random straw man and retort while ignoring any obvious questions raised.

    Of course the 'average multinational' will pay their employees, somewhat different to torture, mass murder and genocide don't ya think?

    Why you calling me hard left?

    If you don't want elected governments then the rules will be made by whoever has the power probably corporations this is called corporatism.

    Using Cambodia to dismiss the idea of government is like using Fred West to dismiss the idea of humans. Now that's a straw man.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    jank wrote: »
    You see, this is why people can't take the hard left seriously. They try and deflect obvious historical facts and criticism with their believed ideology with some random straw man and retort while ignoring any obvious questions raised.
    That's a lot like your average post jank, to be fair - it's fairly frequent that you argue exclusively with straw-men, ignoring the content of the persons post, with so many straw-men you would be practically arguing with yourself.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,555 ✭✭✭✭Sir Digby Chicken Caesar


    20Cent wrote: »
    Why you calling me hard left?

    :D:D:D:D
    That's a lot like your average post jank, to be fair - it's fairly frequent that you argue exclusively with straw-men, ignoring the content of the persons post, with so many straw-men you would be practically arguing with yourself.

    holy ****, my head just exploded. lol


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,942 ✭✭✭20Cent


    :D:D:D:D



    "Hard left" is a pointless term without context, what it means is very subjective I've been called everything from a communist to a fascist by right wing extremists on boards for expressing regular left of centre opinions.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    20Cent wrote: »
    If you don't want elected governments then the rules will be made by whoever has the power probably corporations this is called corporatism.

    Using Cambodia to dismiss the idea of government is like using Fred West to dismiss the idea of humans. Now that's a straw man.

    Where did I dismiss elected government in my post, please quote the specific part where I said that.

    About straw men, well that prize goes to you comparing working for the 'average multinational' to a concentration/death camp. Now THAT is a straw man if there ever was.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    20Cent wrote: »
    "Hard left" is a pointless term without context, what it means is very subjective I've been called everything from a communist to a fascist by right wing extremists on boards for expressing regular left of centre opinions.

    I hardly think the opinions expressed by these groups are just centre left opinions.

    http://www.sa.org.au
    http://www.cpa.org.au
    http://www.socialist-alliance.org

    In the 2013 federal election Socialist Alliance accounted for 0.04% of the vote which was 73,000 votes less than the Australia Sex Party. These are fringe groups popular with students and older people pining for the return and times of the revolution (what ever that may be).
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Representatives_results_for_the_Australian_federal_election,_2013


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,942 ✭✭✭20Cent


    jank wrote: »
    I hardly think the opinions expressed by these groups are just centre left opinions.

    http://www.sa.org.au
    http://www.cpa.org.au
    http://www.socialist-alliance.org

    In the 2013 federal election Socialist Alliance accounted for 0.04% of the vote which was 73,000 votes less than the Australia Sex Party. These are fringe groups popular with students and older people pining for the return and times of the revolution (what ever that may be).
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Representatives_results_for_the_Australian_federal_election,_2013

    Still didn't say why your calling me hard left though. Ive nothing to do with any of those organisations you linked to. Think I'd be against them for the most part.

    Aren't libertarians and anarchists fringe groups?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    20Cent wrote: »
    Still didn't say why your calling me hard left though. Ive nothing to do with any of those organisations you linked to.
    Yes, didn't someone mention 'straw-men' a minute ago?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,942 ✭✭✭20Cent


    jank wrote: »
    Where did I dismiss elected government in my post, please quote the specific part where I said that.

    About straw men, well that prize goes to you comparing working for the 'average multinational' to a concentration/death camp. Now THAT is a straw man if there ever was.

    Didn't know which branch of libertarianism or anarchism you were coming from so made an assumption. Apologies for that. So you do believe in elections and having governments thats good anyway.

    I did not compare a multinational to a concentration camp no where near that.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    20Cent wrote: »
    Still didn't say why your calling me hard left though.

    Comparing the 'average multinational' to a concentration/death camp is the same rhetoric exposed by the hard left.
    Besides the electrification and lashes that list of rules in Janks post wouldn't look out of place in your average multinational.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭Jonny7


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Safer.

    We don't have any examples of currencies which are free from regulation/central bank controls. The only countries that don't actually have central banks are Andorra and Monaco and they use the Euro

    If Andorra and Monaco were to introduce their own currencies - with no government regulation or controls - let's just say those currencies would be very high on the risk tables in every financial institution


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 899 ✭✭✭sin_city


    Jonny7 wrote: »
    Safer.

    We don't have any examples of currencies which are free from regulation/central bank controls. The only countries that don't actually have central banks are Andorra and Monaco and they use the Euro

    If Andorra and Monaco were to introduce their own currencies - with no government regulation or controls - let's just say those currencies would be very high on the risk tables in every financial institution

    Let's just say?

    Let's just say that there is a limit of 21 million bitcoins...Let's just say all debt based monetary systems are ponzi schemes....If you can define how they aren't, please go ahead....Let's just say ponzi schemes are not Safe.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,942 ✭✭✭20Cent


    jank wrote: »
    Comparing the 'average multinational' to a concentration/death camp is the same rhetoric exposed by the hard left.

    Which I didn't do. Straw man. There is a very large caveat in the line you quoted. Take iut the physical force part and the rules you list wojld be common in many workplaces. They have a lot of control over how one dresses, interacts with colleagues, even what is done by employees in their time off. Fortunately there are anti discrimination laws to protect employees. Some of these regulations libertarians and anarchists hate so much. Remove them and the workplace can be a very dictatorial place which gives people less freedom not more.

    Libertarians seem fine with employers enforcing regulations on their employees yet think society applying laws to corporations is a terrible thing. One of the many contradictions.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭Jonny7


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    "Central bank control and government regulation" isn't homogeneous, give an example of a recent currency meltdown and we'll examine the reasons why it occurred

    Otherwise my argument still remains - a complete lack of controls and regulations is inherently too risky. Which is why we have no real world examples of real world currencies being treated as such


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭Jonny7


    Anarchist conference



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭Jonny7


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    There's no need to go into depth

    Right now most state-issued banknotes are safer, much safer than cryptocurrencies. That's just a fact.

    There is risk with all currencies. The risk with cryto's at the moment is just far higher, there's no oversight, no controls, no regulation, no transparency

    You make a transfer of all your savings to an exchange you know nothing about? that's mental. That exchange can have the nicest webpage, extoll all it's virtues - means nothing, there is a need for objective body to examine the exchange and confirm information allowing us to know the risk involved. That's just one example of many needed to build trust toward a new currency.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,259 ✭✭✭alb


    Jonny7 wrote: »
    You make a transfer of all your savings to an exchange you know nothing about? that's mental. That exchange can have the nicest webpage, extoll all it's virtues - means nothing, there is a need for objective body to examine the exchange and confirm information allowing us to know the risk involved. That's just one example of many needed to build trust toward a new currency.

    Thats only an argument for regulation of the risks of online exchange businesses, as counter party risk is not an inherent risk in crypto currency. You can use Bitcoin without depositing any of your money to any online exchange, and transactions require trust in no 3rd party (that's kind of the whole point).

    To demonstrate my point, when Mtgox went under it took dollars and yen with it too as well as Bitcoins. I'll also say that regulation as you describe will come, and there will be a regulated US exchange, probably before the end of this year, that will be as trustworthy as any traditional financial company is. This will not affect the integrity of the crypto-currency itself though, it will still have permission-less transactions, enable free-trade and predictable controlled inflation.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    alb wrote: »
    Thats only an argument for regulation of the risks of online exchange businesses, as counter party risk is not an inherent risk in crypto currency. You can use Bitcoin without depositing any of your money to any online exchange, and transactions require trust in no 3rd party (that's kind of the whole point).

    To demonstrate my point, when Mtgox went under it took dollars and yen with it too as well as Bitcoins. I'll also say that regulation as you describe will come, and there will be a regulated US exchange, probably before the end of this year, that will be as trustworthy as any traditional financial company is. This will not affect the integrity of the crypto-currency itself though, it will still have permission-less transactions, enable free-trade and predictable controlled inflation.
    The whole problem with decentralized cryptocurrencies, is that you can't match them to economic activity - you can get uncontrolled inflation/deflation, depending upon how much economic activity there is - so it's not really possible to have predictable controlled inflation, outside of extremely short periods.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Uhm, that's exactly what you're doing with Bitcoin.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭Jonny7


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    You are either misunderstanding or missing my point..

    You are arguing from a hypothetical view, I am pointing out the reality

    Right now.. Bitcoin.. is more risky than the Euro, or the Dollar, or the YEN or GBP

    There's no debate regarding that. I'm a bitcoin user. That is a fact.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,259 ✭✭✭alb


    The whole problem with decentralized cryptocurrencies, is that you can't match them to economic activity - you can get uncontrolled inflation/deflation, depending upon how much economic activity there is - so it's not really possible to have predictable controlled inflation, outside of extremely short periods.

    Well I meant monetary inflation, as in the supply of new Bitcoins. But yes we've discussed this before on another thread regarding controlling the currency supply in terms of economic activity and crypto in no way addresses this. This is a problem with economies not with crypto currency, and I'm not sure it's a big deal. Has this only been possible since moving off the gold standard anyway? and was moving off the gold standard by the US done so they could print money to fund war?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    alb wrote: »
    Well I meant monetary inflation, as in the supply of new Bitcoins. But yes we've discussed this before on another thread regarding controlling the currency supply in terms of economic activity and crypto in no way addresses this. This is a problem with economies not with crypto currency, and I'm not sure it's a big deal. Has this only been possible since moving off the gold standard anyway? and was moving off the gold standard by the US done so they could print money to fund war?
    Yep 'Monetary Inflation' and 'Inflation' are pretty important things not to mix-up/confuse.

    Well, the lack of a way to stop excessive inflation/deflation with Bitcoin and decentralized currencies in general (potentially hyper inflation/deflation, if there's a particularly big change in the usage of the currency), pretty much rules it out as replacing fiat in the future as Permabear and others promise - it also rules out anything other than short-term price stability.

    That's definitely a problem with the currency, if people suggest it would replace fiat - price stability issues is exactly what caused the gold standard to be dropped, and is why it will never return on a worldwide scale again.

    That's why commodity-based currency (which Bitcoin is 'kind of' analogous to, given it's hard-coded supply limits), is a no-go in general: You need (or rather, it is far more advantageous for your economy and society) for your currency to be adjusted in line with your level of economic activity, to provide price stability - this requires a central authority.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,942 ✭✭✭20Cent


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    If you don't like the States rules you can either get elected and change them or campaign to have them changed. In a corporation not so much. We have had unregulated business in the past didn't work out so well for the employees.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,942 ✭✭✭20Cent


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    It's called democracy it's messy imperfect and slow but better then alternatives. independents have kicked off largest reform in the justice system since the beginning of the state for one thing. What have libertarians done?
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Beloved state?
    Lots of help out there for entrepreneurs and start ups. Agree that they could do more for them but thought that was against the "libertarian" ideals.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    20Cent wrote: »
    Take iut the physical force part and the rules you list wojld be common in many workplaces.

    Again what average multinational or workplace advocates rules like the following.
    Don’t be a fool for you are a chap who dare to thwart the revolution.

    or
    Don’t tell me either about your immoralities or the essence of the revolution.

    Go ask the average employee in Ireland in the hundreds of multinationals that reside here and enquire if they think working for the likes of Facebook, or Pfizer or Kerry Group is akin to working in a Cambodian death camp.

    Your motive behind your glib comment is for all to see. Instead of actually addressing any point I raised regarding the terrible events that account in Cambodia that resulted in millions dying, you respond by clutching onto some Marxist or Dickinson concept in regards the relationship of the employ and employer. One is merely a 'slave' while the other is evil and exploits. Then of course you don't think of yourself as hard left. :pac:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 899 ✭✭✭sin_city


    20Cent wrote: »
    It's called democracy it's messy imperfect and slow but better then alternatives.

    Ah yes, democracy...that's what brought Hitler to power wasn’t it?....True, it can be messy like in this case.....give me a constitutional republic any day of the week.


    20Cent wrote: »
    Beloved state?
    Lots of help out there for entrepreneurs and start ups. Agree that they could do more for them but thought that was against the "libertarian" ideals.

    Lots of help? Why don’t they just stay out of the way and let entrepreneurs be entrepreneurs.

    You get punished for being successful if by some miracle you can get to that stage and you get free money for doing nothing…needless to say the values that society holds today are of a very low moral standing in comparison to what they were when you had to work for a living and when you got rewarded for it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,942 ✭✭✭20Cent


    jank wrote: »
    Again what average multinational or workplace advocates rules like the following.



    or



    Go ask the average employee in Ireland in the hundreds of multinationals that reside here and enquire if they think working for the likes of Facebook, or Pfizer or Kerry Group is akin to working in a Cambodian death camp.

    Your motive behind your glib comment is for all to see. Instead of actually addressing any point I raised regarding the terrible events that account in Cambodia that resulted in millions dying, you respond by clutching onto some Marxist or Dickinson concept in regards the relationship of the employ and employer. One is merely a 'slave' while the other is evil and exploits. Then of course you don't think of yourself as hard left. :pac:

    If you are just going to make stuff up about me no point in replying really is there?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,942 ✭✭✭20Cent


    sin_city wrote: »
    Ah yes, democracy...that's what brought Hitler to power wasn’t it?....True, it can be messy like in this case.....give me a constitutional republic any day of the week.





    Lots of help? Why don’t they just stay out of the way and let entrepreneurs be entrepreneurs.

    You get punished for being successful if by some miracle you can get to that stage and you get free money for doing nothing…needless to say the values that society holds today are of a very low moral standing in comparison to what they were when you had to work for a living and when you got rewarded for it.

    Gone Godwin already.

    So are you an anarchist or a libertarian decided yet?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 899 ✭✭✭sin_city


    20Cent wrote: »
    Gone Godwin already.

    So are you an anarchist or a libertarian decided yet?

    That's what this thread is about for me..Learning.

    Now, back to your point on democracy...you support the form of government that brought the Nazis to power?


  • Advertisement
Advertisement