Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 25993. (Read 26608399 times)

Explanation

DAE vote 'idk' impulsively without reading the question?

Private property is a solution to "The tragedy of the commons" problem, it align, success with responsibility, (as a meme it has been the most successful cultural idea thus far) but is it not a solution, it creates a new problem.

Private property is problematic because it disrupts the free market, or ecology in nature (it allows for monopolies by decree), in that the granting of title to land, creates a right for one at the expense of the rights of others.  the "Private Property" Problem is what energized Marx - he elegantly illustrates the problem in his observation :Theft of Wood, and the Working-Class", where the aristocracy, to prevent people from taking wood from the forest - used in industry to create chairs, carts and cooking, the aristocracy then began to charge for it and punish those who didn't pay, (obviously the aristocracy were trying to prevent The tragedy of the commons - or get some of the action in a growing economy) but it had an negative effect on the wealth of the people, and a positive wealth effect on the aristocracy ie it was not only unfair but destructive as a whole.

 James D'Angelo presents the principal to the solution here, the future solution to the problem of property, he has applied it to a cap and trade system that effectively distributes equally the right to pollute to the individual level, (rights are only held by the living), and can be exchanged at will but remain an inherent right that cant be take away, just redirected according to free market principals. pure genius. check it out, vote for it its the future.  

the idea of private property is necessary as you point out, but it cant interfere with nature or fundamental right of freedom, and with bitcoin we now have a solution.

(Chart's design style by Blockchain.info)

This chart represent what I might believe is possible. Just with some more waving between middle and end.

But I still believe that we will see a rally till th end of a year =)

Where is th september pump?

All I see is we going lower and lower

And my Bitcoin payments worth less and less

This is ugly. Wow

damn looks really more and more like down

Explanation

  Made me laugh...  

"borat of philosophy"

Brilliant.. but nevertheless sometimes he does say something that gets the mental gears churning... little bit of madness never hurt... ....

well bitcoin is bottoming nicely

what do you think, 850 by the end of the month?

 

The Fappening Effect.

I like Chomsky.. but do you think he may be getting a little out of touch these days himself?

i am 90% sure that its going to be a denied 6h positive macD into another medium red candle, on the way to 450$~ we go

He was quoting Oscar Wilde



"There is also this to be said. It is immoral to use private property in order to alleviate the horrible evils that result from the institution of private property. It is both immoral and unfair.

Under Socialism all this will, of course, be altered. There will be no people living in fetid dens and fetid rags, and bringing up unhealthy, hunger-pinched children in the midst of impossible and absolutely repulsive surroundings. The security of society will not depend, as it does now, on the state of the weather. If a frost comes we shall not have a hundred thousand men out of work, tramping about the streets in a state of disgusting misery, or whining to their neighbours for alms, or crowding round the doors of loathsome shelters to try and secure a hunch of bread and a night’s unclean lodging. Each member of the society will share in the general prosperity and happiness of the society, and if a frost comes no one will practically be anything the worse.

Upon the other hand, Socialism itself will be of value simply because it will lead to Individualism.

Socialism, Communism, or whatever one chooses to call it, by converting private property into public wealth, and substituting co-operation for competition, will restore society to its proper condition of a thoroughly healthy organism, and insure the material well-being of each member of the community. It will, in fact, give Life its proper basis and its proper environment. But for the full development of Life to its highest mode of perfection, something more is needed. What is needed is Individualism. If the Socialism is Authoritarian; if there are Governments armed with economic power as they are now with political power; if, in a word, we are to have Industrial Tyrannies, then the last state of man will be worse than the first. At present, in consequence of the existence of private property, a great many people are enabled to develop a certain very limited amount of Individualism. They are either under no necessity to work for their living, or are enabled to choose the sphere of activity that is really congenial to them, and gives them pleasure. These are the poets, the philosophers, the men of science, the men of culture – in a word, the real men, the men who have realised themselves, and in whom all Humanity gains a partial realisation. Upon the other hand, there are a great many people who, having no private property of their own, and being always on the brink of sheer starvation, are compelled to do the work of beasts of burden, to do work that is quite uncongenial to them, and to which they are forced by the peremptory, unreasonable, degrading Tyranny of want. These are the poor, and amongst them there is no grace of manner, or charm of speech, or civilisation, or culture, or refinement in pleasures, or joy of life. From their collective force Humanity gains much in material prosperity. But it is only the material result that it gains, and the man who is poor is in himself absolutely of no importance. He is merely the infinitesimal atom of a force that, so far from regarding him, crushes him: indeed, prefers him crushed, as in that case he is far more obedient.

Of course, it might be said that the Individualism generated under conditions of private property is not always, or even as a rule, of a fine or wonderful type, and that the poor, if they have not culture and charm, have still many virtues. Both these statements would be quite true. The possession of private property is very often extremely demoralising, and that is, of course, one of the reasons why Socialism wants to get rid of the institution. In fact, property is really a nuisance. Some years ago people went about the country saying that property has duties. They said it so often and so tediously that, at last, the Church has begun to say it. One hears it now from every pulpit. It is perfectly true. Property not merely has duties, but has so many duties that its possession to any large extent is a bore. It involves endless claims upon one, endless attention to business, endless bother. If property had simply pleasures, we could stand it; but its duties make it unbearable. In the interest of the rich we must get rid of it. The virtues of the poor may be readily admitted, and are much to be regretted. We are often told that the poor are grateful for charity. Some of them are, no doubt, but the best amongst the poor are never grateful. They are ungrateful, discontented, disobedient, and rebellious. They are quite right to be so. Charity they feel to be a ridiculously inadequate mode of partial restitution, or a sentimental dole, usually accompanied by some impertinent attempt on the part of the sentimentalist to tyrannise over their private lives. Why should they be grateful for the crumbs that fall from the rich man’s table? They should be seated at the board, and are beginning to know it. As for being discontented, a man who would not be discontented with such surroundings and such a low mode of life would be a perfect brute. Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man’s original virtue. It is through disobedience that progress has been made, through disobedience and through rebellion. Sometimes the poor are praised for being thrifty. But to recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less. For a town or country labourer to practise thrift would be absolutely immoral. Man should not be ready to show that he can live like a badly-fed animal. He should decline to live like that, and should either steal or go on the rates, which is considered by many to be a form of stealing. As for begging, it is safer to beg than to take, but it is finer to take than to beg. No: a poor man who is ungrateful, unthrifty, discontented, and rebellious, is probably a real personality, and has much in him. He is at any rate a healthy protest. As for the virtuous poor, one can pity them, of course, but one cannot possibly admire them. They have made private terms with the enemy, and sold their birthright for very bad pottage. They must also be extraordinarily stupid. I can quite understand a man accepting laws that protect private property, and admit of its accumulation, as long as he himself is able under those conditions to realise some form of beautiful and intellectual life. But it is almost incredible to me how a man whose life is marred and made hideous by such laws can possibly acquiesce in their continuance."

"The Soul of Man under Socialism" - Oscar Wilde-  on a libertarian socialism bent.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The take away for me though:

"The proper aim is to try and reconstruct society on such a basis that poverty will be impossible."  Oscar Wilde.

Not been made a reality yet, something that has evaded the world... will technology solve the problem? not on its own... as the man made mechanism behind the problem needs to alter too..

I would even go for "extreme poverty will be impossible" to start off with...

I do not think the answers to our solutions are behind us... but in the future world.. I think some of the concepts we bring from centuries past may have to continue to change, even down to core concepts like money, property, work.

Peering into the future....and taking into account exponentially increasing technology and not to mention increasing population and the increasing automation we are going to see in the coming decades, if we reach some sort of state of technological abundance,  then poverty, extreme poverty at the very least will be a thing of the past, we would hope.... however with the massive automation of tasks coupled with massive life extension, hugely increasing population, minimal space are going to bring new problems. This is assuming that we can achieve a form of technological abundance and solve our resources problem. A world of abundance is also probably a world of technological unemployment, an abundance of human labor will exist because there will be more people than jobs, so what would be the solution, control the supply of labor by limiting the amount of hours people can work? shorter work days/weeks or early retirement? also if there is an abundance of goods in part because of the ever increasing digitisation of everything? ..........and if there are more people than work, then what are the solutions?
 artificial scarcity? banning technologies? or will work and income and therefore property have to all change? for example will the answer be to provide unconditional income - just paying people for nothing? or some sort of conditional means tested money transfers system? or perhaphs just a direct supply of basic needs met including food, housing, health care, or is it that the government provide jobs i.e  construction of national infrastructure, community service, reading a book, playng a violin... cracking virtual rocks..


For now though a form of pseudo capitalism and psuedo socialism will continue to live side by side slowly morphing and losing their meaning

they are trustworthy. But often target of DDOS attacks

Finally some trades getting through if you look at bitcoinwisdom

BTC-e is down? Soooo is this a good sign or a bad sign? I can't really make up my mind about that to be honest. I mean, as long as they're running their exchange smoothly, it's fine with me, but if they do get more shady, I rather have more legit and more trustworthy exchanges in town.

I almost forgot about DDOS attacks.  It has been so long since there has been one.  Is this bullish? 

Aaaaand they're back online. No panic.

edit: well, at least for the website. Still no trading happening.

down for over 2 hourse and still not tweets?

Mhh....... Another small dip incoming before the see finally a rise again?