Real Solid has made some serious bucks.
Btw, I never had any withdrawal probs on McX and he was even paying interest. The site looked well programmed and more secure, than most of the trading sites around.
Topic: Silk Road Founder Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison - page 5. (Read 50169 times)
http://www.theverge.com/2014/6/19/5825578/heres-a-list-of-who-wants-to-buy-silk-roads-bitcoins-leaked-by-a-us
https://www.linkedin.com/in/ken-armitt-9906184a
You guys remember Ken Armitt, don't you? If not, search this site to get up to speed.
Quote
Daniel Folkinshteyn, assistant professor at Rowan University
Malcolm Oluwasanmi, chairperson of Little Phoenix Investment Group
Fabrice Evangelista, quantitative arbitrage at BNP Paribas
Michal Handerhanm, co-founder and COO of Bitcoin Shop
Dave Goel, managing general partner of Matrix Capital Management
Dinuka Samarasinghe, investment professional
Chris DeMuth Jr., Rangeley Capital
Fred Ehrsam, co-founder, Coinbase
Jonathan Disner, corporate counsel at DRW Trading Group
William Brindise, head investment manager at DigitalBTC
Michael Moro, director at SecondMarket
Jennifer R. Jacoby, lawyer at WilmerHale
Sam Lee, co-founder, Bitcoins Reserve
Shem Booth-Spain, artist and musician
Avarus Corporation
Malcolm Oluwasanmi, chairperson of Little Phoenix Investment Group
Fabrice Evangelista, quantitative arbitrage at BNP Paribas
Michal Handerhanm, co-founder and COO of Bitcoin Shop
Dave Goel, managing general partner of Matrix Capital Management
Dinuka Samarasinghe, investment professional
Chris DeMuth Jr., Rangeley Capital
Fred Ehrsam, co-founder, Coinbase
Jonathan Disner, corporate counsel at DRW Trading Group
William Brindise, head investment manager at DigitalBTC
Michael Moro, director at SecondMarket
Jennifer R. Jacoby, lawyer at WilmerHale
Sam Lee, co-founder, Bitcoins Reserve
Shem Booth-Spain, artist and musician
Avarus Corporation
https://www.linkedin.com/in/ken-armitt-9906184a
You guys remember Ken Armitt, don't you? If not, search this site to get up to speed.
I think that we're on the same team here. We need to start fixing our system from the top down instead of the
bottom up. Instead of disarming citizens by attacking the Bill of Rights, disarm big money by limiting their control over the populace. What many US citizens forget here is that the power of the US Constitution lies in the fact that the people have the power to enforce it if need be. Bitcoin and its ability to decentralize the control of the flow of "money" is the means by which we might achieve those goals. Instead of attacking people like Ulbricht, we should be concentrating on the solutions to fixing our corrupted economical power base. I believe that an attack on Ulbricht is an attack on the Bitcoin community in general!
Quote
Punishing Ulbricht can't really be compared to a worldwide recession. In a recession many factors come together to create an economic decline. There is no one industry or business to blame and there certainly isn't one individual to blame. I suppose you could blame most of the problem on the mortgage industry that allowed 3-1 and 5-1 arm mortgages with unbearable balloon payments to crush the banks with foreclosures but how do you punish them? That's different from punishing an individual that committed a crime against society.
How the banks are punished is that when their loans do not repay, that business fails and no longer exists. Working parts are passed onto more steady hands to manage and pay off debt. That is the cost of capital that you lose ownership if your efforts are not profitable to justify the ideas and setup used. The main reason this didnt happen is the banks were acting on a government scheme and it was government who had been wrong in encouraging what was a failed idea, so they diverted what should have been a collapse of that idea. Comparatively if bitcoin had a fatal flaw or if mt.gox was propped up by Ulbricht it would be a nonsense, but I imagine with enough money diverted he may have done it. People would hate that idea but thats basically the dollar system, lopsided to rely on certain ideas to balance the books and nobody dares challenge that weakness or deal with its failureThat's the most rational and accurate argument I've seen so far. I do agree that capitalism is a flawed system that unwittingly creates favoritism in its treatment of certain market sectors. At best it promotes inequity and at worst it supports devastating failures. Voodoo economics, trickle down theory, Obama's bailout bonanza, Carter's ignore it economics, Clinton and Nixon's outright economic corruption are all testimony to the failure of the current system. Auto manufacturer bailouts and bank bailouts are a joke played on the American people.
What can you do about it? That's the real question and the impossible task at hand. The core of the problem and the reason for the lack of change is blinding in its simplicity. The American people have a standard of living that is just good enough to keep them pacified and content. Historically, strife and pain have fueled rebellion. US citizens are too fat, dumb and happy to rebel. Oh sure, they crawl on top of their soapbox occasionally, holding the keys to their new car in one hand and a Big Mac in the other, preaching about this minor issue or that one but always afraid to really change anything for fear of losing it all. This situation will continue until every God fearin merican really knows suffering.
I think that we're on the same team here. We need to start fixing our system from the top down instead of the
bottom up. Instead of disarming citizens by attacking the Bill of Rights, disarm big money by limiting their control over the populace. What many US citizens forget here is that the power of the US Constitution lies in the fact that the people have the power to enforce it if need be. Bitcoin and its ability to decentralize the control of the flow of "money" is the means by which we might achieve those goals. Instead of attacking people like Ulbricht, we should be concentrating on the solutions to fixing our corrupted economical power base. I believe that an attack on Ulbricht is an attack on the Bitcoin community in general!
Quote
Punishing Ulbricht can't really be compared to a worldwide recession. In a recession many factors come together to create an economic decline. There is no one industry or business to blame and there certainly isn't one individual to blame. I suppose you could blame most of the problem on the mortgage industry that allowed 3-1 and 5-1 arm mortgages with unbearable balloon payments to crush the banks with foreclosures but how do you punish them? That's different from punishing an individual that committed a crime against society.
How the banks are punished is that when their loans do not repay, that business fails and no longer exists. Working parts are passed onto more steady hands to manage and pay off debt. That is the cost of capital that you lose ownership if your efforts are not profitable to justify the ideas and setup used. The main reason this didnt happen is the banks were acting on a government scheme and it was government who had been wrong in encouraging what was a failed idea, so they diverted what should have been a collapse of that idea. Comparatively if bitcoin had a fatal flaw or if mt.gox was propped up by Ulbricht it would be a nonsense, but I imagine with enough money diverted he may have done it. People would hate that idea but thats basically the dollar system, lopsided to rely on certain ideas to balance the books and nobody dares challenge that weakness or deal with its failure BADecker, you draw too many conclusions from things that are totally unrelated.
Even if we did revamp the government from the ground up, I would still want people like Ulbricht to be imprisoned. I might let them out of prison in their 70s because the chance of them doing much harm at that point is over. I still want controls on anyone that promotes hard drug use (directly or indirectly), weapons distribution or harms children among many others. In fact, I would drastically increase penalties for some things like cruelty to animals.
Even if we did revamp the government from the ground up, I would still want people like Ulbricht to be imprisoned. I might let them out of prison in their 70s because the chance of them doing much harm at that point is over. I still want controls on anyone that promotes hard drug use (directly or indirectly), weapons distribution or harms children among many others. In fact, I would drastically increase penalties for some things like cruelty to animals.
the high level of natrual DMT in some peoples brains is a worry
they create n artificial world around them inspite of obvious
cracks in the seams of social fabric they seem completely
oblivious too!
Actually, if we revamped the government from the ground up in the right way, everyone would have guns. Then the dangerous drug users would be dead, and the rest of us could use our leisure drugs peacefully. In addition, if anyone wouldn't learn to take responsibility for his life and his habit, he wouldn't live long. Problem solved... and lots of other government problems solved as well.
BADecker, you draw too many conclusions from things that are totally unrelated.
Even if we did revamp the government from the ground up, I would still want people like Ulbricht to be imprisoned. I might let them out of prison in their 70s because the chance of them doing much harm at that point is over. I still want controls on anyone that promotes hard drug use (directly or indirectly), weapons distribution or harms children among many others. In fact, I would drastically increase penalties for some things like cruelty to animals.
Even if we did revamp the government from the ground up, I would still want people like Ulbricht to be imprisoned. I might let them out of prison in their 70s because the chance of them doing much harm at that point is over. I still want controls on anyone that promotes hard drug use (directly or indirectly), weapons distribution or harms children among many others. In fact, I would drastically increase penalties for some things like cruelty to animals.
the high level of natrual DMT in some peoples brains is a worry
they create n artificial world around them inspite of obvious
cracks in the seams of social fabric they seem completely
oblivious too!
This is one of the reasons it would be so difficult to accomplish anything even if an attempt was made. I would want changes in complete opposition to what you desire.
Yes, I think Ulbricht should be in prison, although mainly for charges other than the drug selling (I remember reading something about an attempt at hiring a hitman and weapons being sold on Silk Road). We have many legal "drugs" in the US. I do not need a nanny state to tell me which harmful drugs I'm allowed to use and which ones I am not. They are ALL harmful to an extent and I am more than capable of weighing my own pros and cons in substance use. The money spent on the war on drugs would be better put to use in education, treatment and addiction facilities.
It also appears from your previous posts you are in favor of tighter gun controls or even an outright ban on civilian gun ownership. Both of which I oppose fervently. What's the oft coined phrase?
"If you criminalize gun ownership then only the criminals will own guns."
I know the nuances of gun control laws and consequences cannot simply be boiled down to a 2 dollar catch phrase on a NRA poster, but France has much tighter gun laws than the US and yet criminals can just as easily mow down a street of people there as they can here.
I respect your desire for change and modernization, I just think you are pulling at the wrong threads if you want to realistically bring the majority of our country behind a change. Lobbyists, corruption, governmental transparency, the revolving door between congress and corporations, term limits for positions that have none, etc are more pressing issues that have a greater feasibility for public support.
I think that we're on the same team here. We need to start fixing our system from the top down instead of the
bottom up. Instead of disarming citizens by attacking the Bill of Rights, disarm big money by limiting their control over the populace. What many US citizens forget here is that the power of the US Constitution lies in the fact that the people have the power to enforce it if need be. Bitcoin and its ability to decentralize the control of the flow of "money" is the means by which we might achieve those goals. Instead of attacking people like Ulbricht, we should be concentrating on the solutions to fixing our corrupted economical power base. I believe that an attack on Ulbricht is an attack on the Bitcoin community in general!
That is a very powerful statement and one that I fully support. It's important to have that option even if no one ever wants to have to go to those means to protect their family/property. The argument of throwing off the reigns of an oppressive government may have a few holes in it with the current power of major nation states, but it is still significant to the founding of our country. Its significant to the spirit our culture. It isn't really about the individuals of the time, more of what they represent. This idea of what we strive to be as a society, guns are a part of that narrative. Now it may be personal bias from my own upbringing but that to me is a culture of freedom and sacrifice; something worth preserving. Some people with just as much citizenship as myself (and just as much right to an opinion as myself) might think such a cultural tie is a little outdated in today's world. That's OK.
Without trying to sound like a conspiracy nut, the insidious thing about our current system is that it works well enough. Well enough to NOT bare arms over. Well enough for most people to ignore things like senior corporate executives writing our trade laws such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership(/1EzkWiY]http://[Suspicious link removed]/1EzkWiY). To ignore that we don't truly make any of the important decisions. Decentralized voting was the most exciting idea when I first discovered Bitcoin. A tamper proof system that can be used to vote on government budgets, which programs get green lit, and even a President without 50 recounts! The people can decide whether to go to war for more oil or to rebuild our infrastructure with solar powered roads(http://www.solarroadways.com/intro.shtml). I'm still not sure exactly how it would work, I would be interested to know of any projects on the subject if anyone wants to share.
I'm not even the type to have a locker full of guns in my home, waiting for society to collapse and the apocalypse to begin; I simply think that with arguments presented to the citizens you would never obtain a significant, lets say two-thirds, majority in favor of removing anything from the Bill of Rights, much less the 2nd Amendment. The danger lies in "clarification" of the 2nd Amendment. Until we have a voting system as described I honestly do not trust the government to "clarify" any of my rights. I prefer to interpret them as written.
Quote
I believe that an attack on Ulbricht is an attack on the Bitcoin community in general!
I wouldn't go that far, the US government seems to be fairly nonreactive to Bitcoin in general. Only so much to say that the same corrupt rules apply to your new fancy internet moneyz.
This is one of the reasons it would be so difficult to accomplish anything even if an attempt was made. I would want changes in complete opposition to what you desire.
Yes, I think Ulbricht should be in prison, although mainly for charges other than the drug selling (I remember reading something about an attempt at hiring a hitman and weapons being sold on Silk Road). We have many legal "drugs" in the US. I do not need a nanny state to tell me which harmful drugs I'm allowed to use and which ones I am not. They are ALL harmful to an extent and I am more than capable of weighing my own pros and cons in substance use. The money spent on the war on drugs would be better put to use in education, treatment and addiction facilities.
It also appears from your previous posts you are in favor of tighter gun controls or even an outright ban on civilian gun ownership. Both of which I oppose feverently. What's the oft coined phrase?
"If you criminalize gun ownership then only the criminals will own guns."
I know the nuances of gun control laws and consequences cannot simply be boiled down to a 2 dollar catch phrase on a NRA poster, but France has much tighter gun laws than the US and yet criminals can just as easily mow down a street of people there as they can here.
I respect your desire for change and modernization, I just think you are pulling at the wrong threads if you want to realistically bring the majority of our country behind a change. Lobbyists, corruption, govermental transparity, the revolving door between congress and corporations, term limits for positions that have none, etc are more pressing issues that have a greater feasibility for public support.
I think that we're on the same team here. We need to start fixing our system from the top down instead of the
bottom up. Instead of disarming citizens by attacking the Bill of Rights, disarm big money by limiting their control over the populace. What many US citizens forget here is that the power of the US Constitution lies in the fact that the people have the power to enforce it if need be. Bitcoin and its ability to decentralize the control of the flow of "money" is the means by which we might achieve those goals. Instead of attacking people like Ulbricht, we should be concentrating on the solutions to fixing our corrupted economical power base. I believe that an attack on Ulbricht is an attack on the Bitcoin community in general!
BADecker, you draw too many conclusions from things that are totally unrelated.
Even if we did revamp the government from the ground up, I would still want people like Ulbricht to be imprisoned. I might let them out of prison in their 70s because the chance of them doing much harm at that point is over. I still want controls on anyone that promotes hard drug use (directly or indirectly), weapons distribution or harms children among many others. In fact, I would drastically increase penalties for some things like cruelty to animals.
Even if we did revamp the government from the ground up, I would still want people like Ulbricht to be imprisoned. I might let them out of prison in their 70s because the chance of them doing much harm at that point is over. I still want controls on anyone that promotes hard drug use (directly or indirectly), weapons distribution or harms children among many others. In fact, I would drastically increase penalties for some things like cruelty to animals.
This is one of the reasons it would be so difficult to accomplish anything even if an attempt was made. I would want changes in complete opposition to what you desire.
Yes, I think Ulbricht should be in prison, although mainly for charges other than the drug selling (I remember reading something about an attempt at hiring a hitman and weapons being sold on Silk Road). We have many legal "drugs" in the US. I do not need a nanny state to tell me which harmful drugs I'm allowed to use and which ones I am not. They are ALL harmful to an extent and I am more than capable of weighing my own pros and cons in substance use. The money spent on the war on drugs would be better put to use in education, treatment and addiction facilities.
It also appears from your previous posts you are in favor of tighter gun controls or even an outright ban on civilian gun ownership. Both of which I oppose fervently. What's the oft coined phrase?
"If you criminalize gun ownership then only the criminals will own guns."
I know the nuances of gun control laws and consequences cannot simply be boiled down to a 2 dollar catch phrase on a NRA poster, but France has much tighter gun laws than the US and yet criminals can just as easily mow down a street of people there as they can here.
I respect your desire for change and modernization, I just think you are pulling at the wrong threads if you want to realistically bring the majority of our country behind a change. Lobbyists, corruption, governmental transparency, the revolving door between congress and corporations, term limits for positions that have none, etc are more pressing issues that have a greater feasibility for public support.
BADecker, you draw too many conclusions from things that are totally unrelated.
Even if we did revamp the government from the ground up, I would still want people like Ulbricht to be imprisoned. I might let them out of prison in their 70s because the chance of them doing much harm at that point is over. I still want controls on anyone that promotes hard drug use (directly or indirectly), weapons distribution or harms children among many others. In fact, I would drastically increase penalties for some things like cruelty to animals.
Even if we did revamp the government from the ground up, I would still want people like Ulbricht to be imprisoned. I might let them out of prison in their 70s because the chance of them doing much harm at that point is over. I still want controls on anyone that promotes hard drug use (directly or indirectly), weapons distribution or harms children among many others. In fact, I would drastically increase penalties for some things like cruelty to animals.
For those interested in not paying your taxes. I'll visit you in prison and sorry I don't want to change tax law. I like having a working infrastructure. I've gotten used to streets with lights over them. lol
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
Yes, there's nothing wrong with paying your fair share. But, you'd have to admit that the tax laws in the United States unfairly tax the middle class more the upper class. Which again points directly at the disparity in the system where webpage designers, like Ross Ulbricht, get life in prison for setting up a "dark payment system" while these rich fat cat bankers get paid to steal our homes and don't face a single day in jail!
Of course, you'd have to be blind to not see the inequities. I'm not as shocked that inequity happens as I am that this complex system works as well as it does. The US system of laws are a hodge podge of code slowly built up over generations of changes to suit changing times. I would like to see change and modernization. I'm probably more radical than you are in that regard. I would like to see a fourth continental congress and rewrite/update the current system. Too many people are afraid that we will end up with a worse system than we have now if we try. I don't think so. I don't see anything special about the original founding fathers. Our current society can duplicate their brain power. I also don't think you would see the sweeping changes that you might suggest. It would be more of a clarification of the existing laws than an entirely new legal system.
I support our constitution! I don't know if it needs to go through the revisions necessary to convene a Continental Congress; however, I wouldn't be opposed to it. I think that the bigger problems the United States faces at the moment are economical....The very rich have powers that are greater than the executable powers of the constitution. I think that "the people" have forgotten, or have ignored, their duties to enforce that which the constitution enumerates. The constitution wouldn't be the constitution without those who were willing to stand up for it. Too many of us are being influenced by the power of the dollar to realize the injustices that are happening right before our eyes.
I mean....life for Ulbricht for setting up an anonymous transaction service, but for those who stold millions of homes in the US, a $700B gift. Not one person went to jail for a single day from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the American International Group, the Lehman Brothers....etc.
I support but don't really appreciate the current constitution. We need a new one that covers the current world we live in. Since when do we need people walking around wearing a six shooter or the government quartering solders in your barn. The document is way outdated.
Punishing Ulbricht can't really be compared to a worldwide recession. In a recession many factors come together to create an economic decline. There is no one industry or business to blame and there certainly isn't one individual to blame. I suppose you could blame most of the problem on the mortgage industry that allowed 3-1 and 5-1 arm mortgages with unbearable balloon payments to crush the banks with foreclosures but how do you punish them? That's different from punishing an individual that committed a crime against society.
See that just it! Ulbricht got punished for what everybody else was doing in this "dark market" he created. He was just the figurehead....So, by that logic, Ben Bernanke should be doing life in prison for allowing the banking system to create its own money and cheating the working poor out of their homes and ruining millions lives. Ulbricht took the fall for all the crooked stuff that went on in his market, so Bernanke should take the fall for all the crooked stuff that went on in his?
What a funny idea. I think most of the responsibility would fall on the shoulders of Alan Greenspan not Ben Bernanke but I get the idea. You can't really blame the chair of the fed because they are just appointees of the president. Knowing that, we couldn't really hold Alan Greenspan responsible we would need to punish the president that appointed him. Ronald Reagan appointed Greenspan but Reagan died in 2004 so we can't hold him responsible.
This is what I'm talking about. Why is the political appointee of a dead president allowed to sit in office as his masters bones rot in a pine box? We've learned a lot in the last couple of hundred years and the basic documents that control the country need to be updated with that knowledge. This isn't a feudal society. Very few people in this country work as trappers or hunters so why is every Tom, Dick and Harry allowed to walk around with a gun? The system of governance is outdated.
That's the point of Bitcoin. If Bitcoin were to become popular, there would be no controlling it by government. Government would lose its popularity and reduce in size. But, the beginnings of Bitcoin are now. Almost everything that has a beginning, struggles in its beginning. Ross is simply a casualty of the Bitcoin beginnings, even though he doesn't have to be.
For those interested in not paying your taxes. I'll visit you in prison and sorry I don't want to change tax law. I like having a working infrastructure. I've gotten used to streets with lights over them. lol
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
Yes, there's nothing wrong with paying your fair share. But, you'd have to admit that the tax laws in the United States unfairly tax the middle class more the upper class. Which again points directly at the disparity in the system where webpage designers, like Ross Ulbricht, get life in prison for setting up a "dark payment system" while these rich fat cat bankers get paid to steal our homes and don't face a single day in jail!
Of course, you'd have to be blind to not see the inequities. I'm not as shocked that inequity happens as I am that this complex system works as well as it does. The US system of laws are a hodge podge of code slowly built up over generations of changes to suit changing times. I would like to see change and modernization. I'm probably more radical than you are in that regard. I would like to see a fourth continental congress and rewrite/update the current system. Too many people are afraid that we will end up with a worse system than we have now if we try. I don't think so. I don't see anything special about the original founding fathers. Our current society can duplicate their brain power. I also don't think you would see the sweeping changes that you might suggest. It would be more of a clarification of the existing laws than an entirely new legal system.
I support our constitution! I don't know if it needs to go through the revisions necessary to convene a Continental Congress; however, I wouldn't be opposed to it. I think that the bigger problems the United States faces at the moment are economical....The very rich have powers that are greater than the executable powers of the constitution. I think that "the people" have forgotten, or have ignored, their duties to enforce that which the constitution enumerates. The constitution wouldn't be the constitution without those who were willing to stand up for it. Too many of us are being influenced by the power of the dollar to realize the injustices that are happening right before our eyes.
I mean....life for Ulbricht for setting up an anonymous transaction service, but for those who stold millions of homes in the US, a $700B gift. Not one person went to jail for a single day from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the American International Group, the Lehman Brothers....etc.
I support but don't really appreciate the current constitution. We need a new one that covers the current world we live in. Since when do we need people walking around wearing a six shooter or the government quartering solders in your barn. The document is way outdated.
Punishing Ulbricht can't really be compared to a worldwide recession. In a recession many factors come together to create an economic decline. There is no one industry or business to blame and there certainly isn't one individual to blame. I suppose you could blame most of the problem on the mortgage industry that allowed 3-1 and 5-1 arm mortgages with unbearable balloon payments to crush the banks with foreclosures but how do you punish them? That's different from punishing an individual that committed a crime against society.
See that just it! Ulbricht got punished for what everybody else was doing in this "dark market" he created. He was just the figurehead....So, by that logic, Ben Bernanke should be doing life in prison for allowing the banking system to create its own money and cheating the working poor out of their homes and ruining millions lives. Ulbricht took the fall for all the crooked stuff that went on in his market, so Bernanke should take the fall for all the crooked stuff that went on in his?
What a funny idea. I think most of the responsibility would fall on the shoulders of Alan Greenspan not Ben Bernanke but I get the idea. You can't really blame the chair of the fed because they are just appointees of the president. Knowing that, we couldn't really hold Alan Greenspan responsible we would need to punish the president that appointed him. Ronald Reagan appointed Greenspan but Reagan died in 2004 so we can't hold him responsible.
This is what I'm talking about. Why is the political appointee of a dead president allowed to sit in office as his masters bones rot in a pine box? We've learned a lot in the last couple of hundred years and the basic documents that control the country need to be updated with that knowledge. This isn't a feudal society. Very few people in this country work as trappers or hunters so why is every Tom, Dick and Harry allowed to walk around with a gun? The system of governance is outdated.
For those interested in not paying your taxes. I'll visit you in prison and sorry I don't want to change tax law. I like having a working infrastructure. I've gotten used to streets with lights over them. lol
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
Yes, there's nothing wrong with paying your fair share. But, you'd have to admit that the tax laws in the United States unfairly tax the middle class more the upper class. Which again points directly at the disparity in the system where webpage designers, like Ross Ulbricht, get life in prison for setting up a "dark payment system" while these rich fat cat bankers get paid to steal our homes and don't face a single day in jail!
Of course, you'd have to be blind to not see the inequities. I'm not as shocked that inequity happens as I am that this complex system works as well as it does. The US system of laws are a hodge podge of code slowly built up over generations of changes to suit changing times. I would like to see change and modernization. I'm probably more radical than you are in that regard. I would like to see a fourth continental congress and rewrite/update the current system. Too many people are afraid that we will end up with a worse system than we have now if we try. I don't think so. I don't see anything special about the original founding fathers. Our current society can duplicate their brain power. I also don't think you would see the sweeping changes that you might suggest. It would be more of a clarification of the existing laws than an entirely new legal system.
I support our constitution! I don't know if it needs to go through the revisions necessary to convene a Continental Congress; however, I wouldn't be opposed to it. I think that the bigger problems the United States faces at the moment are economical....The very rich have powers that are greater than the executable powers of the constitution. I think that "the people" have forgotten, or have ignored, their duties to enforce that which the constitution enumerates. The constitution wouldn't be the constitution without those who were willing to stand up for it. Too many of us are being influenced by the power of the dollar to realize the injustices that are happening right before our eyes.
I mean....life for Ulbricht for setting up an anonymous transaction service, but for those who stold millions of homes in the US, a $700B gift. Not one person went to jail for a single day from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the American International Group, the Lehman Brothers....etc.
I support but don't really appreciate the current constitution. We need a new one that covers the current world we live in. Since when do we need people walking around wearing a six shooter or the government quartering solders in your barn. The document is way outdated.
Punishing Ulbricht can't really be compared to a worldwide recession. In a recession many factors come together to create an economic decline. There is no one industry or business to blame and there certainly isn't one individual to blame. I suppose you could blame most of the problem on the mortgage industry that allowed 3-1 and 5-1 arm mortgages with unbearable balloon payments to crush the banks with foreclosures but how do you punish them? That's different from punishing an individual that committed a crime against society.
See that just it! Ulbricht got punished for what everybody else was doing in this "dark market" he created. He was just the figurehead....So, by that logic, Ben Bernanke should be doing life in prison for allowing the banking system to create its own money and cheating the working poor out of their homes and ruining millions lives. Ulbricht took the fall for all the crooked stuff that went on in his market, so Bernanke should take the fall for all the crooked stuff that went on in his?
For those interested in not paying your taxes. I'll visit you in prison and sorry I don't want to change tax law. I like having a working infrastructure. I've gotten used to streets with lights over them. lol
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
Yes, there's nothing wrong with paying your fair share. But, you'd have to admit that the tax laws in the United States unfairly tax the middle class more the upper class. Which again points directly at the disparity in the system where webpage designers, like Ross Ulbricht, get life in prison for setting up a "dark payment system" while these rich fat cat bankers get paid to steal our homes and don't face a single day in jail!
Of course, you'd have to be blind to not see the inequities. I'm not as shocked that inequity happens as I am that this complex system works as well as it does. The US system of laws are a hodge podge of code slowly built up over generations of changes to suit changing times. I would like to see change and modernization. I'm probably more radical than you are in that regard. I would like to see a fourth continental congress and rewrite/update the current system. Too many people are afraid that we will end up with a worse system than we have now if we try. I don't think so. I don't see anything special about the original founding fathers. Our current society can duplicate their brain power. I also don't think you would see the sweeping changes that you might suggest. It would be more of a clarification of the existing laws than an entirely new legal system.
I support our constitution! I don't know if it needs to go through the revisions necessary to convene a Continental Congress; however, I wouldn't be opposed to it. I think that the bigger problems the United States faces at the moment are economical....The very rich have powers that are greater than the executable powers of the constitution. I think that "the people" have forgotten, or have ignored, their duties to enforce that which the constitution enumerates. The constitution wouldn't be the constitution without those who were willing to stand up for it. Too many of us are being influenced by the power of the dollar to realize the injustices that are happening right before our eyes.
I mean....life for Ulbricht for setting up an anonymous transaction service, but for those who stold millions of homes in the US, a $700B gift. Not one person went to jail for a single day from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the American International Group, the Lehman Brothers....etc.
I support but don't really appreciate the current constitution. We need a new one that covers the current world we live in. Since when do we need people walking around wearing a six shooter or the government quartering solders in your barn. The document is way outdated.
Punishing Ulbricht can't really be compared to a worldwide recession. In a recession many factors come together to create an economic decline. There is no one industry or business to blame and there certainly isn't one individual to blame. I suppose you could blame most of the problem on the mortgage industry that allowed 3-1 and 5-1 arm mortgages with unbearable balloon payments to crush the banks with foreclosures but how do you punish them? That's different from punishing an individual that committed a crime against society.
One of the best websites that show you the basic requirements that government has, and the court cases to back it all up, is http://voidjudgments.com/. If Ross doesn't use the rich info found on this site, he loses. If he does use it, government not only loses, but also, government pays Ross for harm and damage done to him by government, including the return of all his property.
I really dare you to try this stuff out in court someday, - best case outcome you get held in contempt before sentencing, worst case a judge angry at your shenanigans hands down a harsher sentence
Actually, this is being done all the time. Sure, the way people are using it is open to the good graces of the courts, but the courts allow it to work because they don't want people digging in too far. If people dug in too far, they would find out how to make it work all the time, like Karl Lentz has.
----------
The fine line between common law usage, and civil law usage.
See how to make the Feds obey the law. First, watch this video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twn96nj0jfw&index=10&list=PLHrkQxgz0mg6kUBciD-HIvTXByqjcIZ-D.
Then Listen to the first two audio MP3s on the right side of this page - http://www.myprivateaudio.com/Karl-Lentz.html.
Then listen to audios 01 and 02 at the bottom of this page - http://recordings.talkshoe.com/rss127469.xml.
Then contact Karl here - http://www.broadmind.org/Contact.html.
----------
http://www.myprivateaudio.com/Karl-Lentz.html = Angela Stark's Talkshoe.
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5duR4OvEHHxOSdEZhANETw = TrustInAllLaw snippets of Karl's audios.
http://www.broadmind.org/ = Karl's main page.
http://www.unkommonlaw.co.uk/ = Karl's United Kingdom page.
http://www.youtube.com/user/765736/videos?view=0&live_view=500&flow=grid&sort=da = Craig Lynch's snippets page.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOkAHRzuiOA&list=PLHrkQxgz0mg6kUBciD-HIvTXByqjcIZ-D = Ten great Youtube videos, might be the best introduction to Karl.
http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=127469&cmd=tc = Karl's Talkshoe site.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iua56K4Mysk = Karl Lentz - The Brian Bonar Incident - YouTube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdHLHWS4gPE = Lentz-Sense - don't be a More~On - YouTube.
Other Info
http://voidjudgments.com/ = The Secret is most judgments are Void on their face and not merely voidable.
http://educationcenter2000.com/Trinsey-v-Paglario.htm = Trinsey v. Pagliaro - Attorneys cannot "speak" in common law trials if the one who is bringing the suit orders it. Holding from Trinsey v. Pagliaro: "An attorney for the plaintiff cannot admit evidence into the court. He is either an attorney or a witness."
----------
For those interested in not paying your taxes. I'll visit you in prison and sorry I don't want to change tax law. I like having a working infrastructure. I've gotten used to streets with lights over them. lol
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
Yes, there's nothing wrong with paying your fair share. But, you'd have to admit that the tax laws in the United States unfairly tax the middle class more the upper class. Which again points directly at the disparity in the system where webpage designers, like Ross Ulbricht, get life in prison for setting up a "dark payment system" while these rich fat cat bankers get paid to steal our homes and don't face a single day in jail!
Of course, you'd have to be blind to not see the inequities. I'm not as shocked that inequity happens as I am that this complex system works as well as it does. The US system of laws are a hodge podge of code slowly built up over generations of changes to suit changing times. I would like to see change and modernization. I'm probably more radical than you are in that regard. I would like to see a fourth continental congress and rewrite/update the current system. Too many people are afraid that we will end up with a worse system than we have now if we try. I don't think so. I don't see anything special about the original founding fathers. Our current society can duplicate their brain power. I also don't think you would see the sweeping changes that you might suggest. It would be more of a clarification of the existing laws than an entirely new legal system.
I support our constitution! I don't know if it needs to go through the revisions necessary to convene a Continental Congress; however, I wouldn't be opposed to it. I think that the bigger problems the United States faces at the moment are economical....The very rich have powers that are greater than the executable powers of the constitution. I think that "the people" have forgotten, or have ignored, their duties to enforce that which the constitution enumerates. The constitution wouldn't be the constitution without those who were willing to stand up for it. Too many of us are being influenced by the power of the dollar to realize the injustices that are happening right before our eyes.
I mean....life for Ulbricht for setting up an anonymous transaction service, but for those who stold millions of homes in the US, a $700B gift. Not one person went to jail for a single day from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the American International Group, the Lehman Brothers....etc.
For those interested in not paying your taxes. I'll visit you in prison and sorry I don't want to change tax law. I like having a working infrastructure. I've gotten used to streets with lights over them. lol
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
I will be happy to pay all taxes that are due, as long as the government pays me what THEY owe.
As far as the income tax, all receipts from that tax go towards funding federal transfer payments and interest on the national debt (Grace Commission Report); none of it goes towards what people expect to be paying for. LOL?
Now If you think that the tax code (or any code) applies to living people, then by all means pay your tribute and do NOT question the authorities. If you have doubts, then ask the question and be prepared to stand up for yourself when you get the run-around from these authorities.
By the way, to get out of prison... See Volume 1 of the Statutes at Large: An Act providing for the relief of persons imprisoned for Debts due to the United States. 5th Congress 2nd Session Chapter 49.
This act allows one to petition the Secretary of the Treasury to make a conveyance out of one's estate in order to discharge oneself from prison. The foreign de facto UNITED STATES are holding our estates in offshore mortmain accounts, that is why Social Security has been modified by the queen of ENGLAND.
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_Statutes_at_Large/Volume_1/5th_Congress/2nd_Session/Chapter_49
For those interested in not paying your taxes. I'll visit you in prison and sorry I don't want to change tax law. I like having a working infrastructure. I've gotten used to streets with lights over them. lol
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
Yes, there's nothing wrong with paying your fair share. But, you'd have to admit that the tax laws in the United States unfairly tax the middle class more the upper class. Which again points directly at the disparity in the system where webpage designers, like Ross Ulbricht, get life in prison for setting up a "dark payment system" while these rich fat cat bankers get paid to steal our homes and don't face a single day in jail!
Of course, you'd have to be blind to not see the inequities. I'm not as shocked that inequity happens as I am that this complex system works as well as it does. The US system of laws are a hodge podge of code slowly built up over generations of changes to suit changing times. I would like to see change and modernization. I'm probably more radical than you are in that regard. I would like to see a fourth continental congress and rewrite/update the current system. Too many people are afraid that we will end up with a worse system than we have now if we try. I don't think so. I don't see anything special about the original founding fathers. Our current society can duplicate their brain power. I also don't think you would see the sweeping changes that you might suggest. It would be more of a clarification of the existing laws than an entirely new legal system.
For those interested in not paying your taxes. I'll visit you in prison and sorry I don't want to change tax law. I like having a working infrastructure. I've gotten used to streets with lights over them. lol
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
Yes, there's nothing wrong with paying your fair share. But, you'd have to admit that the tax laws in the United States unfairly tax the middle class more the upper class. Which again points directly at the disparity in the system where webpage designers, like Ross Ulbricht, get life in prison for setting up a "dark payment system" while these rich fat cat bankers get paid to steal our homes and don't face a single day in jail!
For those interested in not paying your taxes. I'll visit you in prison and sorry I don't want to change tax law. I like having a working infrastructure. I've gotten used to streets with lights over them. lol
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm
Jump to: