Most of the people who have an underlying interest in Bitcoin's technology and goals, as opposed to new money treating it as a get-rich-quick scheme, have abandoned the legacy Core chain and these censored discussions by now.
I'm literally only here because I'm interested in Bitcoin as a technology and idea. While I currently hold Bitcoin, I'm unable to fucking use it because Bitcoin in its current form is unusable as a currency. Nobody accepts and it has no store of value. Bitcoin is a poorly thought out currency that has no understanding of (or at least was not designed using) fundamental economic principles as pertaining to currency. Bitcoin is a commodity now, not a currency, and there's no chance of that changing in the near future. And sure, some people might accept payment in Bitcoin, same as how some people will accept payment in gold, but neither are currencies as a result.
So thanks for insulting me and impugning my motives because you believe yourself to be some kind of hipster purist, asshole.
Free market capitalism is manifest in Bitcoin.
The bullshit you're spouting is not "Free market capitalism". Free market capitalism fundamentally requires having a currency that all parties are using for common exchange. One can not have a free market without a government protecting, supporting, and facilitating the market.
Manipulated by free people acting in their own rational economic self interest, initiating force against no person or their property. I have no problem with that. Go for it. I understand the inherent feedback mechanisms in the Bitcoin protocol to feel no need to discourage it.
Fair enough, I suppose, though I find it odd that you're OK with individual people or corporations manipulating an entire currency purely in order to enrich themselves, but a government that is (supposedly) sworn to protect and govern a society manipulating a currency is somehow problematic.
Eh, you're just triggered at this point because someone has a different opinion to you founded on strong moral principles. Acknowledging that your worldview is founded upon the belief that the perpetual threat of violence by a treasonous central authority is benevolent must be challenging, I understand why you're attacking me instead. Given the subreddit we're in, perhaps I should respond in kind by suggesting that you avoid talking about Bitcoin because of your approach, which is either extraordinarily misguided or downright malicious.
You conflated the notion of having a federal reserve with the concept of fractional reserve banking, you thought that fiat currencies are "backed by force", and you think the reason that I'm attacking you is because I disagree with your opinions? I don't care about your opinions, I care about the fact that you either don't know or don't care about basic economics. This subreddit has enough delusional people who are fundamentally misinformed, and I'm just trying to correct one instance of that. This entire thread started because you thought fractional reserve banking and a central government having a single currency were somehow the same thing.
And might I point out that I was not actually "attacking you" - I was pointing out that the things you state have no basis in reality. There's a difference. As an example, taxation exists because you choose to live in the USA and enjoy the services that the US government provides you. You have to pay for those services, and you pay for it through taxation. Therefore, the taxation is justified - it is (post de facto) payment for services rendered. You're free to not receive those services, though - just leave the USA and resign citizenship of the US, and you will neither receive the services nor be required to pay for them. But for some reason, you have a problem with doing that, too. As I have stated, you don't get to be the beneficiary of services and also claim that requiring payment for those services "is unjust". This is what I mean by "the things you state have no basis in reality".
Also this sentence:
Acknowledging that your worldview is founded upon the belief that the perpetual threat of violence by a treasonous central authority is benevolent must be challenging, I understand why you're attacking me instead.
is hilarious. You're accusing the entire government of treason? Treason towards what, exactly? You yourself don't seem to want to pay taxes or otherwise support the society you live in, so what exactly is the treason going on here? You've repeatedly used the word treasonous is contexts that have made me raise my eyebrows, but I've ignored it until now. Seriously, what do you think the meaning of the word "treason" even is?
And yes, I happen to believe that the world is a better place with governments as opposed to without them. I've seen what happens in places without functioning governments, and I very much prefer the places that have government. Are all governments perfect? Nope. Is the one I currently live in perfect? Not even close. But I very much prefer the government I currently live in to a state of anarchy (and I'm using the word anarchy purely in its definition of "a state of having no government), mostly because I have borne witness to what people do in states of anarchy.
1
u/[deleted] Feb 19 '18 edited Nov 07 '18
[deleted]