Pages:
Author

Topic: Is a Madmax outcome coming before 2020? Thus do we need anonymity? - page 9. (Read 102809 times)

newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
Folks we are frogs being slowly boiled to death. Only a few of us see what is coming in terms of 90% taxation and confiscation of wealth.

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/18/japan-considering-exit-tax-to-leave-country/


So what are our options, what's the solution(s)?
Is there no hope?

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9884655
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0

CoinCube is describing that unconstrained dynamic systems composed of autonomous actors can't always converge....

A little bit flawed, why do you need a constraint, i mean surely the people will gravitate towards the better outcomes/solutions and the unpopular crazy ideas would always be in the minority.

I suspect CoinCube agrees with me that it is best not to argue with someone who doesn't understand the math and science, because it is impossible to have an intelligent discussion when the other person doesn't know the math background.

I was not really disagreeing with you. I was mostly agreeing and then was trying to teach you something extra, but you apparently (and I don't say this in a snotty tone, just politely) still don't understand the math of how dynamic systems converge on a pattern distinguishable from disorder (a.k.a. noise or lack of information). Study for example Differential Equations and the concept of Q for example in audio systems along with the terms critically damped, underdamped, etc..

People gravitating (i.e. inertia) is a constraint.

I agree with you that decentralized systems are more resilient, but you need to understand that all decentralized systems also have order, e.g. the ants have a rule-based order to their decision matrix. Do you know what 100%indiscernible disorder is? A black hole where nothing discernible exists.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0

CoinCube is describing that unconstrained dynamic systems composed of autonomous actors can't always converge....

A little bit flawed, why do you need a constraint, i mean surely the people will gravitate towards the better outcomes/solutions and the unpopular crazy ideas would always be in the minority.

In fact anarchy is the best solution for evolution, because then nothing would constrain the human evolution, and the human race could evolve democratically.

For example:
1) The state taxes highly people and people have small incomes so they have to work extra hours
2) Because of this, stress levels in humans could reach critical points
3) Stress levels cause heart problems and in longer terms it may evolve our species into the wrong direction
4) In long term this could cause a decrease in live expectancy, and new infants could also be born with heart problems

So you see how this could affect evolution in the long term, surely you dont want the working drones that work 18 hour/day to cause bad mutations in the human genom, so obviously if you give infinite number of choices to the people and not constrain them into something negatitive, then the majority will decide and will evolve into that, based on our current adaptation.

First we were hunters gatherers, then we were laborers, now we are mostly office workers or service sector employees.
We are not fit for survival in a jungle, most of us, but we dont need it, because we have tools that protect, enhance us.

That is what evolution is about, to circumvent our flaws and enhance our intellect and knowledge.

For example if a worldwide catastrophe would occur and all people got into the streets rioting, then we dont really need to make spears and arrows for ourselves, and tools like hammers and stuff to build a new society, because we already have knowledge of better technology: guns and 3D printers.

If atleast 1 people knows or has backed up the blueprints for our current technology, then even if we destroy our current civilization, we wont have to start from square 1.

See thats the beauty of evolution Smiley
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0


I know man, i`m a peaceful guy, i dont wish for any revolution or anything, because i know that any kind of revolution (especially a proletarian one) will cause more havok that it was before. Because no matter what the intention of the revolutioners were, guess what the leader of the revolution will be the new opressor after that, and will treat the opposition as the new enemy.

Thats not the solution, no matter what change will happen, it must be a peaceful intelectual one. I prefer to call it an intellectual Renaissance.Or the 2nd renessaince.

In the First Renaissance we crippled the powers of the organized religions (which still unfortunately exist, but not that influential anymore, atleast not in the western world).
The Second Renaissance will cripple the powers of the corrupted states worldwide, and only after that the human race shall know peace and real prosperity, or utopia of any kind depicted by some Hollywood movies.

And I completely agree with you man, i dont know why you disagree with me, i just say what you said, because i know that any organized opposition will cause only more civil war and unrest. It must be a peaceful intelectual resistance, and for that we need to educate the zombie minded sheeple about this.

Technology can be a great helper, but also a great opressor (based on who is using it). If people use it then we can build decentralized economies, if the government uses it, it will build mass surveilance grids and spying softwares.

So who is more eligible for using it? Cheesy

This is a competition between decentralized free market and corrupted organized states, the competition is big, and whomeves has better things to offer will win. Obviously in the long term the state will lose, as it has nothing to offer but taxes, regulation and war, which one day could destroy the human race.

The only way that we can survive as a race is to put our minds together and invent alternatives to everything centrally controlled, if not then the next Stalin clone will destoy the human race.

newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
Folks we are frogs being slowly boiled to death. Only a few of us see what is coming in terms of 90% taxation and confiscation of wealth.

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/18/japan-considering-exit-tax-to-leave-country/

Quote
Japan Considering Exit Tax to Leave the Country

The trend on a global basis is getting really scary. Our forecasts have been computer generated and are by no means my PERSONAL opinion of what I would like to see. This is getting to be really horrible as government simply go after more and more money without any consideration what happens when you have extorted everyone and there is nothing left?  Japan is now moving to become the latest country to consider taxing wealthy individuals who move abroad to take advantage of lower rates or to simply guard their freedom.

Governments look upon the people as the great unwashed. We were born to serve their special interests and have no rights even to exist. What we earn and produce belongs to government and we should be grateful that they allow us to play with some toys. Now the Japanese ruling party lawmakers are proposing an “exit tax” under which people with over ¥100 million ($857,000) in financial assets would have to pay a tax on any unrealized capital gains on those assets if they moved out of Japan.

We are economic slaves – nothing more.


http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/17/eu-looking-to-centralize-corporate-taxes/

Quote
EU Looking to Centralize Corporate Taxes

President Jean-Claude Juncker of the EU has instructed all member countries to provide information on their tax decisions (breaks) provided corporations to the authorities in Brussels from 2010 to 2013. Brussels is now on the offensive to raise money and they are now targeting international business. Taxes should be determined whether competition is distorted by selective tax breaks in the internal market within Europe. The hunt for taxes is expanding everywhere.


http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/17/german-socialists-so-eager-to-destroy-germany/

Quote
German Socialists So Eager To Destroy Germany

After the exemption rule inheritances and gifts are then relieved when in the course of the transfer of the jobs are largely protected. The operation was allowed to continue for five years and kept the employment stable during this transition period. Eventually, 85 percent of the tax will then be due. Exempt from this payroll clause arewere companies with up to 20 employees, almost 90 percent of all companies.

[Now] With the German high court ruling on inheritance tax, the SPD-Left has introduced a new proposal in Germany. This alone illustrates the collapse in the world economy because of socialism that is underway.  The German socialists want to seize small business that employ about 70% of the civil work force globally. When a company’s heir has a tax liability for inheritance that they cannot pay, the state will seize access to shares in the company of family. The state will then destroy the business selling the assets for taxes since they are incapable to managing such a concern.


http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/07/18/who-is-in-that-hated-top-1-could-it-be-you/

Quote
Who is in that Hated top 1% – Could it be You?

IF you make $100,000 a year (salary and investment), you are in the top 1% and those like Piketty hate your guts. And the Press love this guy.




http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/04/22/the-cadillac-tax-obama-will-all-your-benefits-as-part-of-obamacare/

Quote
Whenever the government enacts some program there is always a hidden agenda. Bush Senior had to veto the Clean Water Act because the add-ons that had nothing to do with clean water exceeded the cost of the clean water by about double.

In Australia they called it the luxury tax that they would go after the fur coats, French wines, and Ferrari sports cars. The dumb people cheered – ya – go get ‘em. The tax passed and what was included? All electrical products.

OBAMACARE was perhaps the most toxic enactment ever to be implemented by the Democrats using the poor to raises taxes on the working class – not even the “rich”.

Not only will OBAMACARE cap small business from expanding due to its massive penalties, but it will soon begin to tax benefits employers give workers. At the discretion of the government, they will be able to move the line at which any benefit that exceeds some arbitrary number not adjusted for inflation will become taxable income. The Obama secret agenda has been to raise taxes in every possible manner and OBAMACARE was the typical political way to get people to cheer for raising their own taxes. Obama wants to personally raise taxes back to 70% but without the deductions and to include ALL benefits as income.

EVERYONE who gets healthcare as a benefit, including retired persons who have worked for the private or public sector, will wake up and find that those benefits are suddenly TAXABLE income. Yes – that is correct. If it costs your employer $1000 per month for your healthcare, that will be taxable income. Hence, you will pay about $4,000 more in taxes for benefits worth $12,000.

This is the real reason Obamacare should be repealed. It would have been cheaper to just pay the medical expenses of the 8 million who signed up than to tax the other 300 million.

The coming decline in the Economic Confidence Model after 2015.75 will be the worst decline since the Great Depression because these people are destroying world trade, causing capital to hoard rather than invest and create jobs, and then the agenda is to raise taxes back to 70% while eliminating CASH to prevent people from avoiding taxes.


http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/10/30/crowd-walks-out-on-obama/

Quote
The Democrats are likely to lose the Senate and they feel that he is the leading cause. Just wait for the worst of the Obamacare to hit when people are taxed on benefits and the IRS starts seizing people’s houses and property just for fun. Of course Obama delayed that part until 2016 when he gets to go out-of-town.


http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/08/20/the-obama-dark-age/

Quote
Suspending the deadline for the Obamacare mandate [until 2016] that requires large employers to provide health insurance for their workers that was supposed to begin on Dec. 31, 2013 was a political decision that he does not want to take effect until he leaves office for it will cause serious rise in unemployment. Any company with even slightly more than 50 employees will fire all excess to avoid such expenses. Others will split companies and still others will hire temp employees if not move to contract status rather than employee status. This will also set in motion the end of pensions.


http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/01/03/what-was-in-the-fiscal-cliff-bill/

Quote
Despite the news pretending taxes went up on the rich, sorry, they got everyone. The Payroll Tax Cut was allowed to Expire. While technically not part of the new law, Congress has let the temporary reduction in payroll taxes expire. Wage earners in all brackets will feel the pain of this expiration in their take-home pay starting now. The will see about a 2% increase in taxation.



Use higher taxes to force all savings into government bonds, so that all savings can be nationalized for corruption.

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/01/29/cycles-obamas-tax-free-bonds/

Quote
Obama is using the Executive Order to create tax-free bonds because the Fed bought back long bonds under QE and now cannot resell them. They fear they cannot sell bonds to China and need to regain their sovereignty so they can act irresponsibly and not have to answer to anyone. To accomplish that, they need to sell bonds to the average person and are making them tax-free to do so. We are following the Japan model whereby their debt is the worst in the world, but it is domestically held and the USA now sees that as the solution.


http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/14/the-three-bombshells-tucked-inside-the-continuing-resolution-to-fund-the-govt/

Quote
This provision would allow the promised pension benefits of up to 1.5 million workers and retirees to be cut. It would affect the pooled pension plans — called multiemployer plans — of mostly union workers across a bunch of companies, where it looks like the plans won’t be able to cover full benefits in coming decades.


http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/04/30/obama-is-ready-to-impose-tolls-on-all-interstate-highways/

Quote
I have reported that Obama’s dream is to reverse the Reagan Tax Cuts (Not Bush) and return everything to the 70% tax rate. His cronies in the IMF put out a paper saying the US should match France and going to 80%. Thomas Piketty  is also at the 80% level and its being cheer by the total socialist in Princeton – Paul Robin Krugman.

BELIEVE IT OR NOT, he is proposing installing a toll on all federal interstate highways. Obama is completely nuts.


http://armstrongeconomics.com/2012/09/02/obamacare-the-death-squads-maybe-real/

Quote
Obamacare – The Death Squads maybe real.
Posted on September 2, 2012 by Martin Armstrong   

I have not been able as yet to verify the veracity of this subject. It is offered for your consideration. The Death Squads maybe real. Thanks Obama.

Phone_call_from_Neurosurgeon_32bps




    First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Socialist.

    Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Jew.

    Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
CoinCube is describing that unconstrained dynamic systems composed of autonomous actors can't always converge their solution space on a local minima, thus oscillate all over the solution space chaotically without any solution. An example in real life would be starting a new altcoin with mutated features every 5 minutes, so there is never any adhesion. Even ant colonies have built in constraints to their decision network (e.g. protect colony as highest priority, forage for food as second priority, protect self as third priority, etc), which enable them to accomplish goals.

...The role of the state is to provide this constraint.

...the mutation rate at each loci in a genetic sequence...

Life requires entropy to exist, but critically such entropy must be limited and contained. Entropy/mutation must not be allowed to exceed the error threshold...

It is also worth noting that at least with genetic algorithms natural selection tends to reduce the mutation/entropy rates on rugged landscapes (but not on smooth ones) so as to avoid the production of harmful mutations, even though this short-term benefit limits adaptation over the long term.

...In its most extreme form anarchism can drive the entropy of society past the Error Threshold at which point information is destroyed rather than created.  A madmax outcome is indeed possible. It would arise from the death throes of excessive socialism. Like a spring pushed too far in one direction a system trying to find equilibrium is likely to overshoot in the opposite direction when the unstable order dissolves. In the industrial era the backlash lead to communism. The collapse of socialism may lead us to pure anarchy = madmax.

So we are really looking for is congruence or harmony (aka resonance and I have written about this w.r.t. to potential energy and even explored Tesla's work) but if we can't eliminate all necessary barriers then increased degrees-of-freedom in one sub-area might be suboptimal, ineffective, or perhaps counter-productive.

This is the key point. Unrestrained anarchism does not eliminate all necessary barriers. Instead it forces conformity to the nearest local optima effectively raising barriers to distant more global optima. I am an anarchist currently because the solutions of anarchy including anonymous cryptocurrency are what is needed to restore balance in our era. Had I been around at the dawn of the industrial revolution I would have been a socialist.

...

We may not need the State to provide the constraint.

For example, block chains don't mutate every day. We are even having difficulty overcoming Bitcoin's inertia to improve upon it.

Instead we may end up with (even anonymous) benevolent dictators such as Linus Torvalds, who lead the way.

The State (and group religion) is (are) merely an obfuscation of which Czars are pulling the strings behind the curtain, and their motivations to rape the population.

There will never be 100% anarchy, because it doesn't converge on any outcome. Always there will be leaders.

The key distinction in my mind is as follows.

Unlike the unabortable collectivized constraint models, decentralization technology (e.g. open source, PoW, and end-to-end principle) enable bottom up competition for leadership.

May I kindly suggest Nokia (Symbian) and Apple (iOS) didn't prove that installed base network effects in 2008 were unassailable. Android was a paradigm shift. The smartphone market battle is over given Android is approaching 80% market share and a billion users. The crypto-currency market battle has only just begun. It appears possible the same category of weakness may exist for Bitcoin et al, as did for iOS and Symbian; they may not be optimally open ecosystems thus scale less than optimally. I can't state this with certainty, but it is something worth pondering.

http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/chart32-640x429.jpg


Not to mention, this alleged power is meaningless considering the amount of military hardware in local police's hands and all the hollow points that homeland security has when you compare all that to the small amount of actual militia types that would have the mindset to engage such a large occupying force. These politicians stacked up their legions to protect them from us in the end.

Please enlighten me, where is the instruction manual for shooting a paradigm shift?
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
You may have misunderstood the part where I said I am between a minanarchist and a free market anarchist. What I mean is that we have to prove to what degree technology can mute or render impotent the power of the State. Pontification is not the same as implementation. Even though it sounds nice, the reality is that the State exists because humans disagree and fight. This is why for example Proof-of-Work was such a major technological breakthrough, because it enabled centralized trust of decentralized untrusted parties. Ditto the end-to-end principle pushes the trust out to the ends of the network, so the untrusted intermediaries are just dumb relays. Please see my prior post where I mentioned that some decentralized (insufficiently damped) systems don't converge and instead oscillate. It is not enough to just say "magic wand decentralized!". We have to actually build decentralized technologies that solve real problems. Also decentralized systems may have tradeoffs. For example, an entirely anonymous, decentralized economy means human trafficking may become less traceable. OTOH, government is the most egregious human trafficker, bribing our women (with inequality employment laws, welfare, subsidizing hypergamy, and divorce battering ram) to ignore men forsaking child rearing (birth rates have collapsed in Western nations where government is > 50% of the economy) and conscripting our men to kill each other in silly wars.

http://blog.jim.com/economics/the-future-belongs-to-those-that-show-up/
http://blog.jim.com/images/JapanFert4.png

Tangible assets are very illiquid without a market maker, because they are not fungible like money is (e.g. not every person who has a fish wants to trade for a gold nugget). The centralized intermediary ruins the end-to-end principle. I have suffered greatly dealing with gold dealers. Tangible assets will not scale to a knowledge economy. Sorry.

The government can never entirely take down the internet. We hackers are too resourceful. Heck we can even 3D print guns out of plastic and build contraptions out of junk we find in a gar(b)age (can).

For one thing, we can retrofit WiFi routers to form mesh networks across communities, then connect those with HAM radio or what ever.

Let them try to shut it down, it will be just like when they shut down Napster, which will incentivize us to produce decentralized solutions.

We do need to re-design crypto-currency to adapt to multiple chains, if regions are temporary unable to communicate with each other.

There is a lot of work that needs to be done in crypto-currency that is not being done on Bitcoin.

We are starting to win. Even Sergei and Larry of Google were hackers before they became famous.

Quote from: Eric Rayond - progenitor of the term "open source"
Oh. Wait. We did invent them. Where do you suppose Sergei and Larry came from? Why do you suppose they’ve been running Summer of Code and hiring a noticeable fraction of the most capable open-source developers on the planet? Well, here’s a flare-lit clue: before those two guys were famous, they sent me fan mail once.

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/18/apparently-our-blog-is-now-suggested-by-google/

http://i0.wp.com/armstrongeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Google-Screen-Shot.jpg?resize=584%2C973


P.S. I don't agree with blog.jim.com on every point. Note he is the first person who ever communicated with Satoshi in a public forum.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
Ah yes add to my prior post that the savings is not in the hands of the actors in the economy, instead in the hands of the Czars.

Yes, until there are centralized money collectors (banks) , until then the state can always make up an excuse to loot them (especially the civilian money stored inside it, not the banks profit). Stupid people blame it on the banks, which is bullsh*t, the bank would never do such thing, as it hurts its reputation. It's always the state that is the most evil, i saw what happened in the USA, the occupy wallstreet BS, and it was a propaganda BS, as it blamed everything on the banks, when in fact it was the state that did all the evil there.

Huge taxation, Inflation, and extreme regulation is the most disgusting thing that i can imagine.They take advantage and humiliate the average citizen, and push it into the mud, while time to time giving him a bone (socialism) so that he doesnt feel so helpless, but throughout the life of an average person, he gets the worst from his state.

Yet, 90% of the population are still statist drones, so brainwashed that its disgusting.These mindless sheeps will never get it, the fact that slavery was never abolished in the 1800's, in fact its bigger than ever was, it's just that its hidden so well that you cant even detect it.

Every single day i see legislation depriving citizens from their rights, throughout the world, and its disgusting. Brave countries that once were remarkable turned into police states: USA,Canada, Switzerland, once were nice countries and now they are controlled by evil forces that want the total enslavement of all people.


Tangible money violates the end-to-end principle, i.e. we at the ends can't autonomously exchange it for another form of value, instead rely on a physical exchange with an intermediary dealer (between us and what would be the block chain in crypto-currency) which makes us vulnerable to fraud, government dragnet, and mugging.

Perhaps but then again, if the big collapse will happen worldwide, i think physical goods have their value, anything could happen to the internet, and then the crypto world could be endangered.

Of course the disadvantage of that is that the government can confiscate it, but atleast its physical.


I suppose minanarchism (or more precisely Contentionism) best describes my current political-economic philosophy, only because of the realism that technology can't entirely eliminate the State so in order words the statism is minimized as much as technology can. Also I am not a capitalist in the traditional sense, because I theorized stored value is waning as knowledge capital takes over the future. But that doesn't make me a communist either. I am pro free market, i.e. free market anarchism.

I disagree there, it is possible to bring total anarchy with capitalistic principles, because the state has never done anything positive ever. Nobody needs it, its just a burden in all of us, the free market could perfectly satisfy all needs.
For elderly/children/disabled you could set up charities. For civilian services like ambulance/firefighters etc you could set up a payment system, i mean everything could be privatized.

Sure everything would cost money, and there would be a money sign everywhere, but atleast there would be no opressor, only lazy people want free stuff, but even freedom comes at a price, the price of everything not being free is the price of freedom, because once you start introducing socialist elements and state elements, then you start to lose freedom.

Looks like people have chosen so far free socialist stuff but give up all their liberties and dignity to be abused by the state as much as possible, and now they cry that they have a police state, i mean give me a break Cheesy
These stupid sheepherd couldn't even tie their shoes without a government regulation and subsidies, damn these idiots who support these slavemasters  Cry

There is massive global Stockholm syndrome in the world, when i see a politician on TV it makes me vomit, but then again if they speak in an arena, 10.000 of idiots cheer them like if they were messiahs or similar, when in fact they are just slavemasters, and few months later they get tax increases and more regulation so that they get jobless and then they are even more dependent on socialist aids, its so disgusting.
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0

FYI, most of that tax money is going into a HUGE fund that Norway is saving up for when they run out of oil. They know

Yeah sure which will get looted by greedy politicians:

Ah yes add to my prior post that the savings is not in the hands of the actors in the economy, instead in the hands of the Czars.

Precious metals could be also a good idea, however that is too visible and could be confiscated by the state, so not a good idea.

Tangible money violates the end-to-end principle, i.e. we at the ends can't autonomously exchange it for another form of value, instead rely on a physical exchange with an intermediary dealer (between us and what would be the block chain in crypto-currency) which makes us vulnerable to fraud, government dragnet, and mugging.


Are you an anarcho capitalist because i like your views?

I suppose minanarchism (or more precisely Contentionism) best describes my current political-economic philosophy, only because of the realism that technology can't entirely eliminate the State so in order words the statism is minimized as much as technology can. Also I am not a capitalist in the traditional sense, because I theorized stored value is waning as knowledge capital takes over the future. But that doesn't make me a communist either. I am pro free market, i.e. free market anarchism.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0

FYI, most of that tax money is going into a HUGE fund that Norway is saving up for when they run out of oil. They know

Yeah sure which will get looted by greedy politicians: Cyprus,Greece,Hungary, and now USA, yeah sure that pension is very safe there, when it takes only an executive order to loot it all  Angry

Obviously you underestimate the greediness and evilness of todays political era

Also bank accounts could be looted aswell, due to our magnificent and brilliant Keynesian fractional reserve banking system which is very sound and logical (or atleast this is what the propaganda says), only about 3-4% of the money is covered, so if there is a panic all banks freeze their accounts and confiscate some or all the money (current or debit accounts aswell) + the rest of it gets covered by taxpayer money, and even this is sometimes not enough, so it needs some additional money printing by the CB to cover this.

Meaning that if there will be (and it will be) the big crash, then nobody would be allowed to withdraw money from the bank and all funds will be lost. I`m not saying that keeping money under the pillow is better, because there too it gets vaporized by immense inflation, so the only safe haven is digital decentralized currencies with no goverment intervention.

Precious metals could be also a good idea, however that is too visible and could be confiscated by the state, so not a good idea. 


Are you an anarcho capitalist because i like your views?
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
Quote
In Norway, companies drilling for North Sea oil pay a 78% tax rate on income...

Omg that is monstruos, no wonder why the oil markets are tanking, these idiot bureocrats just never learn from their mistakes.

FYI, most of that tax money is going into a HUGE fund that Norway is saving up for when they run out of oil. They know they won't be able to sustain their oil funded social programs for long, especially once the oil runs out, so they are saving a whole lot of money into a fund that they hope will be able to sustain them for long after.

Ah, found the name and wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Pension_Fund_of_Norway#The_Government_Pension_Fund_Global

I grow weary of trying to explain the difference between bottom-up (free market) and top-down (collectivization, democracy, large corporations, religion) systems and the fact that only the former can optimize.

Any one who doesn't understand that tax is an enslavement paradigm is clueless. I am tired of explaining it.

Let me quote from that link for you.

Quote from: Eric Raymond - the progenitor of the term "open source"
The benefits of political market-rigging can be concentrated to benefit particular special interest groups, while the costs (in higher taxes, slower economic growth, and many other second-order effects) are diffused through the entire population.

...

There is no form of market failure, however egregious, which is not eventually made worse by the political interventions intended to fix it.

Political demand for income transfers, entitlements and subsidies always rises faster than the economy can generate increased wealth to supply them from.

Although some taxes genuinely begin by being levied for the benefit of the taxed, all taxes end up being levied for the benefit of the political class.

The equilibrium state of a regulatory agency is to have been captured by the entities it is supposed to regulate.

The probability that the actual effects of a political agency or program will bear any relationship to the intentions under which it was designed falls exponentially with the amount of time since it was founded.

The only important class distinction in any advanced democracy is between those who are net producers of tax revenues and those who are net consumers of them.

Corruption is not the exceptional condition of politics, it is the normal one.

The problem of collectivization of impacts is that individuals don't react with global optimization, but rather with rational self-interest which is globally destructive. Collectivization removes the degrees-of-freedom from individual actions of rational self-interest, and places the adjustments in the hands of top-down Czars, who can't possibly optimize each of the individual lives of the actual actors in the economy. In other words, a Tragedy of the Commons. Note however, the Knowledge Age may offer us the hope of an Inverse Commons which has the opposite result (it actually gets better the more we share with "open source").

This is why I compared this in the past to simulated annealing, which is nature's only known general optimization algorithm, i.e. the molecules in ice are allowed to locally self-organize if ice is top-down cooled more slowly, so the frozen ice is more optimized in structure with less cracks.

The constituents have structured their lives, expectations, life planning, investments, low birth-rates, etc based on a subsidy. This is inertia that can't be undone (old non-productive people, few socialistic indoctrinated youth). As I explained upthead, the Norwegian GDP (direct oil businesses + government reliance on tax from oil) is 50% dependent on oil.

And they haven't saved anything net. Their external debt is $700+ billion and their sovereign fund is 800+ billion and their annual government expenditures are $160 billion.

You see they are not prepared, because top-down collectivized systems can't anneal, only bottom up systems can.

I don't want to explain this again. This is the umpteenth time I have explained (argued) it.

Edit: please read the caveat about the expediency of top-down systems, that all bottom up systems are composed of top-down actors, and bottom up systems don't necessarily converge without some top-down incentives. The implication is there is an ongoing contention between the two forms of systemic structure.
legendary
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1035
Quote
In Norway, companies drilling for North Sea oil pay a 78% tax rate on income...

Omg that is monstruos, no wonder why the oil markets are tanking, these idiot bureocrats just never learn from their mistakes.

FYI, most of that tax money is going into a HUGE fund that Norway is saving up for when they run out of oil. They know they won't be able to sustain their oil funded social programs for long, especially once the oil runs out, so they are saving a whole lot of money into a fund that they hope will be able to sustain them for long after.

Ah, found the name and wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Pension_Fund_of_Norway#The_Government_Pension_Fund_Global
legendary
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1035
What is coming is much more subtle slavery. The only way to permanently enslave people is when they don't realize they are enslaved. Those who are awake will feel the world is in some sort of Stepford Wives zombie, deluded blissful state.

So, basically the entirety of what Soviet Union was.
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
Great thread!

So, in the 3rd quarter of 2015, should we expect bitcoin  to start trending upwards and possibly being another bubble?
If so, do you have a number in mind?

+/- a few months

My guess is gold and bitcoin to a few $1000s after bottoming. It is cashing out without paying what I expect to be globally ubiquitous confiscation level taxes by 2017 (e.g. 90%?) that is the potential snag.
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 250
No, we don't need.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
The 78% tax has NO effect on the price of gas for the people of Norway- they produce about 2.5% of the world production-not enough to have an effect.

I don't get how you think the oil company should get the oil they extract from Norway land- for free or very cheap.

It's not just Norway that taxes it heavily, there are plenty of other nations that do the same thing, greedy politicians want all the money for the goverment to then use if for corruption or buy themselves government cars, mansions, etc. Believe me i`ve seen plenty of this, its all propaganda.

I suppose that you talk about foreign companies drilling in Norway (because obviously small Norway companies have absolutely no access to the oil mainly because of the regulation and the high tax makes them uncompetitive in the first place)

An other solution could be to implement some merchantilist policies, so that the oil drilled in Nw can only be sold in Nw, if you are concerned about "their oil", because its better to be merchantilist than socialist in my opinion.

But even then, if you are concerned that the big company is running away with all the oil, then highly taxing them is not the solution, banning it is lunacy, so the only option is to introduce new competitors, thus proving once again my point, so that the competitors to survive, then need less regulation and considerably smaller taxes.

Otherwise its only the Nw people who will get buttf*ck€d, not them, which you are trying to protect in the first place.
legendary
Activity: 1449
Merit: 1001
Nope- not a socialist. Why do you think the oil companies should get free money from their countries resources?
And do you really think the price of oil is decided by the tax on the oil drillers in norway? The price is decided in very high places
in Saudi Arabia and their friends and of course supply and demand. Even if there was ZERO tax they would still sell the Norwegian oil at the current price in the world.

Disagree, if there are plenty of oil competitors then the price of the oil will stay low , given that there is enough supply of it, which for now it is (although its rapidly decreasing).Nobody says that only 1 or 2 companies should drill that oil, big competition is the recipe for a healthy economy and free market.
If you tax it with 78% then defacto you get +78% more expensive oil, which of course the small firms and people will pay from their pockets.

If there is a trust in the oil market then thats another problem, but it is largely contribuited by the big taxes and the regulation. If you highly regulate them and tax the sh*t out of them, then obviously no new oil companies will rise to the top, and there will be no competition, thus the trusts could agree on the prices.

Not to dive into the other big one, the global QE program which is also a major contributor to big oil prices, which is caused by central banks by printing toilet paper money to debase the currency so every price goes up relatively to it.

So either way the politicians are the bad guys here.

The 78% tax has NO effect on the price of gas for the people of Norway- they produce about 2.5% of the world production-not enough to have an effect.

I don't get how you think the oil company should get the oil they extract from Norway land- for free or very cheap.
Pages:
Jump to: