Bitcoin is being killed by governments and nobody seems to care! - page 8.

Elwar

legendary

Activity: 3598

Merit: 2386

Viva Ut Vivas

Quote from: SEC agent on May 22, 2013, 07:39:04 PM

That makes no sense. At all.

Ignoring the fact that you apparently think taxes are stealing (even though you are provided with education, fire dept, police and military protection, roads, social safety net, etc, etc with those taxes)

The act is still theft, what is done with the loot afterwards does not change the act.

DoomDumas

legendary

Activity: 1002

Merit: 1000

Bitcoin

Using CaVirtex (Canada) as always been fast and easy ! Almost no delay, great customer service, good pricing.. I still very happy to use CaVirtex !

SEC agent

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

America, land of the free

Quote from: Loozik on May 22, 2013, 07:27:47 PM

Because civil and criminal ''laws'' are not laws; just a few examples of contradictions:
- ''criminal law'' says it is illegal (i.e. morally wrong) to initiate force against anybody to steal, yet it creates exception: when you do not pay the protection fee, i.e. ''taxes'', the so called criminal law ''allows'' to steal property from you to pay it against your will; can you imagine a gravity law that says ''every object dropped from a 10th story falls into the ground with an exception of a child (because child might get hurt)
- ''criminal law'' says it is immoral to beat the shit out of other people unless attacked, yet ''allows'' the police (guys in blue costumes with sign ''police'' on their huts) to beat the shit out of you if you do not appear in court on time; can you imagine Archimedes law that says ''any object drowned in a bathtube displaces the amount of fluid equal to its weight, except for guys in blue costumes who will displace 1/3 of their weight''?

That makes no sense. At all.

Ignoring the fact that you apparently think taxes are stealing (even though you are provided with education, fire dept, police and military protection, roads, social safety net, etc, etc with those taxes) and the fact that you believe that police can legally beat you for no other reason than a failure to appear in court; the fact that a rule/regulation/law may be specific enough to provide exceptions to said rule, doesn't mean that the rule is invalid.

Besides that, as I stated before, laws represent the collective will of the people. When laws like the Jim Crow laws are no longer considered acceptable by the general public, they are removed.

Loozik

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Born to chew bubble gum and kick ass

Quote from: SEC agent on May 22, 2013, 07:00:48 PM

How exactly is civil and criminal law a "non-valid" concept?

Because civil and criminal ''laws'' are not laws; just a few examples of contradictions:
- ''criminal law'' says it is illegal (i.e. morally wrong) to initiate force against anybody to steal, yet it creates exception: when you do not pay the protection fee, i.e. ''taxes'', the so called criminal law ''allows'' to steal property from you to pay it against your will; can you imagine a gravity law that says ''every object dropped from a 10th story falls into the ground with an exception of a child (because child might get hurt)
- ''criminal law'' says it is immoral to beat the shit out of other people unless attacked, yet ''allows'' the police (guys in blue costumes with sign ''police'' on their huts) to beat the shit out of you if you do not appear in court on time; can you imagine Archimedes law that says ''any object drowned in a bathtube displaces the amount of fluid equal to its weight, except for guys in blue costumes who will displace 1/3 of their weight''?

Elwar

legendary

Activity: 3598

Merit: 2386

Viva Ut Vivas

Quote from: SEC agent on May 22, 2013, 07:11:33 PM

Quote from: Elwar on May 22, 2013, 06:37:53 PM

Quote from: SEC agent on May 22, 2013, 06:29:46 PM

Those citizens who are unsatisfied with how they are being represented should vote for people who represent their interests better or run for office themselves.

Our government is, as Lincoln stated, "of the people, by the people and for the people".

Should. But they do not.

They vote for the guy they think can win during the primaries then vote for the lesser of two evils in the general election.

That's a problem of the people, not a problem of the system. The government doesn't force people to vote that way, the people choose to vote that way themselves.

Well the system perpetuates it. Politicians take money so they can spread their message in a favorable way. You cannot blame politicians for taking money, the system allows it so the output will trend toward them chasing the money. You cannot blame the citizens who try to get as much out of the system because the system allows it and the output will trend toward them chasing the money and voting for politicians that will reward them. You cannot blame the lobbyists since they are rewarded for supplying money to the politicians who will use the power of the government to favor them. The system allows it.

The one step in there that can be blamed is the use of force against people to gain money and power (at the point of the gun under threat of being kidnapped and held prisoner). That is the problem with the system.

TippingPoint

legendary

Activity: 905

Merit: 1000

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Therefore, Bitcoin was created.

noedaRDH

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

Finding Satoshi

Quote from: SEC agent on May 22, 2013, 06:29:46 PM

Those citizens who are unsatisfied with how they are being represented should vote for people who represent their interests better or run for office themselves.

Our government is, as Lincoln stated, "of the people, by the people and for the people".

LOL, okay there, "SEC agent". Hahahaha.

SEC agent

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

America, land of the free

Quote from: jdbtracker on May 22, 2013, 07:10:25 PM

Laws are made, but they cannot be followed if the individuals choose not to believe in them.

Was segregation right? was it moral? It was a law once.

Exactly. When the people decided that segregation (Jim Crow laws), slavery, etc was no longer morally acceptable, the laws were removed.

The people of this country make the laws and have equal power to dismantle them. Our laws represent the will of the people.

Loozik

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Born to chew bubble gum and kick ass

Quote from: JamesTaylor on May 22, 2013, 06:58:27 PM

My real question about governments is:

1) With Bitcoins is really easy to launder money and do not declare your earnings. That means less money payed to taxes.
2) Even though everyone complains about taxes, the majority agrees, because they want public streets, schools, healthcare...
3) What if the state forces to remove Bitcoin because if people keep doing it they will need to increment taxes.
4) Taxes increment -> More people have nondeclared money. Go to 1).

How is that not a problem? In most "standard" (let me call it like that) countries, not only USA, is going to be a problem if it ends up being very popular.

Solutions? I don't know.

Here is diagnosis:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGIgOIFdnMQ&list=PL8BAD2CAEDA93AAD8 watch the whole series
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xbp6umQT58A

Here is the solution (download audiobooks and listen when you have time):
http://www.freedomainradio.com/FreeBooks.aspx
recommended: How (not) to achieve freedom, Practical anarchy, everyday anarchy

deadweasel

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Quote from: SEC agent on May 22, 2013, 07:11:33 PM

Quote from: Elwar on May 22, 2013, 06:37:53 PM

Quote from: SEC agent on May 22, 2013, 06:29:46 PM

Those citizens who are unsatisfied with how they are being represented should vote for people who represent their interests better or run for office themselves.

Our government is, as Lincoln stated, "of the people, by the people and for the people".

Should. But they do not.

They vote for the guy they think can win during the primaries then vote for the lesser of two evils in the general election.

That's a problem of the people, not a problem of the system. The government doesn't force people to vote that way, the people choose to vote that way themselves.

The only vote you have is what you do with your time, or more specifically, how you act in every waking second. Everything else is an illusion.

SEC agent

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

America, land of the free

Quote from: Elwar on May 22, 2013, 06:37:53 PM

Quote from: SEC agent on May 22, 2013, 06:29:46 PM

Those citizens who are unsatisfied with how they are being represented should vote for people who represent their interests better or run for office themselves.

Our government is, as Lincoln stated, "of the people, by the people and for the people".

Should. But they do not.

They vote for the guy they think can win during the primaries then vote for the lesser of two evils in the general election.

That's a problem of the people, not a problem of the system. The government doesn't force people to vote that way, the people choose to vote that way themselves.

jdbtracker

hero member

Activity: 727

Merit: 500

Minimum Effort/Maximum effect

Laws are made, but they cannot be followed if the individuals choose not to believe in them.

Was segregation right? was it moral? It was a law once.

no government no matter how corrupt can truly rule without the consent of the people. Individuals may get elected into office and make ludicrous proclamations but if the people do not choose to follow those proclamations then they are invalid; The people will find a way around them, regardless of the consequences, these are individuals who have made it their motto to live with freedom without security.

In an ideal society there would be no prisons, because people accept the law on a logical and mutually beneficial basis, whenever force is needed to convince the population to concede then you are no longer living in a democracy you are living in a dictatorship free of logic, free of education, free of choice; You have no say in what is truly best for you, your choice is being delegated to someone else to make it for you.

Elwar

legendary

Activity: 3598

Merit: 2386

Viva Ut Vivas

Quote from: SEC agent on May 22, 2013, 07:00:48 PM

Quote from: Loozik on May 22, 2013, 06:56:52 PM

Quote from: SEC agent on May 22, 2013, 06:43:14 PM

You are confusing scientific law with civil and criminal law.

No, you are confusing science (laws) with pseudocience (jurisprudence, including non-valid concepts like civil and criminal ''laws'').

How exactly is civil and criminal law a "non-valid" concept?

Most civil and criminal laws are not valid concepts.

They are mainly the initiation of force against people who have not themselves initiated force.

SEC agent

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

America, land of the free

Quote from: Loozik on May 22, 2013, 06:56:52 PM

Quote from: SEC agent on May 22, 2013, 06:43:14 PM

You are confusing scientific law with civil and criminal law.

No, you are confusing science (laws) with pseudocience (jurisprudence, including non-valid concepts like civil and criminal ''laws'').

How exactly is civil and criminal law a "non-valid" concept?

SEC agent

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

America, land of the free

Quote from: Jace on May 22, 2013, 06:46:20 PM

I think you are. You seem to think that creating laws against Bitcoin is going to have any more effect than creating laws against gravity or Archimedes' principle.

It's going to happen, whether they (=some government or whoever) like it or not.

No one created "laws against Bitcoin". Exchanges failed to comply with existing anti-money laundering laws and regulations.

JamesTaylor

newbie

Activity: 30

Merit: 0

My real question about governments is:

1) With Bitcoins is really easy to launder money and do not declare your earnings. That means less money payed to taxes.
2) Even though everyone complains about taxes, the majority agrees, because they want public streets, schools, healthcare...
3) What if the state forces to remove Bitcoin because if people keep doing it they will need to increment taxes.
4) Taxes increment -> More people have nondeclared money. Go to 1).

How is that not a problem? In most "standard" (let me call it like that) countries, not only USA, is going to be a problem if it ends up being very popular.

Solutions? I don't know.

Loozik

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Born to chew bubble gum and kick ass

Quote from: SEC agent on May 22, 2013, 06:43:14 PM

You are confusing scientific law with civil and criminal law.

No, you are confusing science (laws) with pseudocience (jurisprudence, including non-valid concepts like civil and criminal ''laws'').

TippingPoint

legendary

Activity: 905

Merit: 1000

The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen.

SEC agent

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

America, land of the free

Quote from: Gordonium on May 22, 2013, 06:41:20 PM

A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where 51 percent of the people may take away the rights of the other 49.

That's not how the us government works.

The president isn't chosen by popular vote, and presidents have lost the popular vote and still won the election. Representatives and senators are voted in by localities and represent the interests of the individual states they serve (not 51% of the country).

51% of the votes in this country gets you nothing.

Jace

sr. member

Activity: 288

Merit: 251

Quote from: SEC agent on May 22, 2013, 06:43:14 PM

You are confusing scientific law with civil and criminal law.

I think you are. You seem to think that creating laws against Bitcoin is going to have any more effect than creating laws against gravity or Archimedes' principle.

It's going to happen, whether they (=some government or whoever) like it or not.

Topic: Bitcoin is being killed by governments and nobody seems to care! - page 8. (Read 8700 times)