Pages:
Author

Topic: What happens when the US makes crypto-currency illegal? - page 4. (Read 8827 times)

legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
I am a human and I am an Irish citizen.

Then tell me what a citizen is for christ's sake. It shouldn't be so difficult if yoy think you are one, should it?

If you think the 2 can't be combined, you are a fool.  

If you can prove with facts and evidence that a human = citizen, then you will convince me. So far you only claim to be both at the same time, but this claim has not been substantiated with anything that can be rationally or empirically verified.

Meanwhile, what's with people trying to use Latin to make stupid statements sound clever?  

Why do you think people care about your loaded questions?

How stupid are you?  Of course a human != citizen.  Do you think anyone imagines slaves were citizens?
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
Born to chew bubble gum and kick ass
I am a human and I am an Irish citizen.

Then tell me what a citizen is for christ's sake. It shouldn't be so difficult if yoy think you are one, should it?

If you think the 2 can't be combined, you are a fool.  

If you can prove with facts and evidence that a human = citizen, then you will convince me. So far you only claim to be both at the same time, but this claim has not been substantiated with anything that can be rationally or empirically verified.

Meanwhile, what's with people trying to use Latin to make stupid statements sound clever?  

Why do you think people care about your loaded questions?
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
You say that a person can't be both human and a citizen.

If a ''citizen'' does not equate a ''human'' than it is impossible for any object in this universe to be both a human and a citizen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If a ''citizen'' equates a ''human'' than we all are both citizens and humans.

But be careful, humans have lived on this planet for at least 200 thousand years. You would need to prove that those humans were also citizens to be able to equate a ''human'' to a ''citizen''. I wish you luck in proving humans who lived on this planet 20 thousand years ago were citizens.


Everyone who is both human and a citizen proves you are an idiot.  

So far you proved yourself to be an idiot (that non-sequitur of yours).


I am a human and I am an Irish citizen.  I am proud of both aspects of my life. If you think the 2 can't be combined, you are a fool. 

Meanwhile, what's with people trying to use Latin to make stupid statements sound clever? 
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
Born to chew bubble gum and kick ass
You say that a person can't be both human and a citizen.

If a ''citizen'' does not equate a ''human'' than it is impossible for any object in this universe to be both a human and a citizen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If a ''citizen'' equates a ''human'' than we all are both citizens and humans.

But be careful, humans have lived on this planet for at least 200 thousand years. You would need to prove that those humans were also citizens to be able to equate a ''human'' to a ''citizen''. I wish you luck in proving humans who lived on this planet 20 thousand years ago were citizens.


Everyone who is both human and a citizen proves you are an idiot.  

So far you proved yourself to be an idiot (that non-sequitur of yours).

legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
...snip...

I'm a citizen.  I'm a human.  That means you are an idiot.
Look up non sequitur. http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html this will help you out.

The concept of Citizen, and the concept of human (beyond just a tag for the species homo sapiens) is a complex subject. My opinion, stated above, is incomplete as it must be in a short reply. Yours has no obvious thought behind it, nor even any explanation of what it means, to you, to be a citizen. The standard definitions of the word are contradictory. The most common understanding of a citizen, vs. a subject, is that you have some hand in your own governance in exchange for some loss of autonomy. In the modern world's actualities, that exchange is so uneven as to be meaningless, OBJECTIVELY.

I may be an idiot, but it certainly doesn't follow from what you posted.

Actually, it follows perfectly.  You say that a person can't be both human and a citizen.  Everyone who is both human and a citizen proves you are an idiot.  

If to be human means to be part of a hive, then I am an idiot. If to be human means to be a discrete individual with discrete motivations, then I am not. History seems to be on my side here.
Further more, ad hominem is usually used when you are unsure of or don't have a valid counterargument.

ad hominem is also used when someone says something so stupid that you have to wonder what Darwin was smoking. How does someone so deluded who thinks that the rest of humanity are idiots get to reproduce?  Is there an infinite supply of drunk sluts?
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1022
Anarchy is not chaos.
...snip...

I'm a citizen.  I'm a human.  That means you are an idiot.
Look up non sequitur. http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html this will help you out.

The concept of Citizen, and the concept of human (beyond just a tag for the species homo sapiens) is a complex subject. My opinion, stated above, is incomplete as it must be in a short reply. Yours has no obvious thought behind it, nor even any explanation of what it means, to you, to be a citizen. The standard definitions of the word are contradictory. The most common understanding of a citizen, vs. a subject, is that you have some hand in your own governance in exchange for some loss of autonomy. In the modern world's actualities, that exchange is so uneven as to be meaningless, OBJECTIVELY.

I may be an idiot, but it certainly doesn't follow from what you posted.

Actually, it follows perfectly.  You say that a person can't be both human and a citizen.  Everyone who is both human and a citizen proves you are an idiot. 

If to be human means to be part of a hive, then I am an idiot. If to be human means to be a discrete individual with discrete motivations, then I am not. History seems to be on my side here.
Further more, ad hominem is usually used when you are unsure of or don't have a valid counterargument.
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
...snip...

I'm a citizen.  I'm a human.  That means you are an idiot.
Look up non sequitur. http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html this will help you out.

The concept of Citizen, and the concept of human (beyond just a tag for the species homo sapiens) is a complex subject. My opinion, stated above, is incomplete as it must be in a short reply. Yours has no obvious thought behind it, nor even any explanation of what it means, to you, to be a citizen. The standard definitions of the word are contradictory. The most common understanding of a citizen, vs. a subject, is that you have some hand in your own governance in exchange for some loss of autonomy. In the modern world's actualities, that exchange is so uneven as to be meaningless, OBJECTIVELY.

I may be an idiot, but it certainly doesn't follow from what you posted.

Actually, it follows perfectly.  You say that a person can't be both human and a citizen.  Everyone who is both human and a citizen proves you are an idiot. 
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1022
Anarchy is not chaos.
I would almost posit that you cannot be both a citizen and a human.

Is a ''citizen'' the same as a ''human''?

If the correct answer is ''no'', then you cannot be both a human and a citizen at the same time.

Let me give you an example: is a ''lampshade'' the same as a ''human''. If the correct answer is ''no'', then certainly you cannot be both a human and a lampshade at the same time, can you?

I would like to hear from people (i) believing they are both humans and citizens or (ii) believing a human is the same as a citizen.

Well, you already got my opinion, but just to firm it up:

No, I do not believe you can be a human and a citizen. To be a citizen is to ABDICATE individuality, which is a fundamental condition of humanity. You are either a human, or something rather less.

I'm a citizen.  I'm a human.  That means you are an idiot.
Look up non sequitur. http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html this will help you out.

The concept of Citizen, and the concept of human (beyond just a tag for the species homo sapiens) is a complex subject. My opinion, stated above, is incomplete as it must be in a short reply. Yours has no obvious thought behind it, nor even any explanation of what it means, to you, to be a citizen. The standard definitions of the word are contradictory. The most common understanding of a citizen, vs. a subject, is that you have some hand in your own governance in exchange for some loss of autonomy. In the modern world's actualities, that exchange is so uneven as to be meaningless, OBJECTIVELY.

I may be an idiot, but it certainly doesn't follow from what you posted.
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
I would almost posit that you cannot be both a citizen and a human.

Is a ''citizen'' the same as a ''human''?

If the correct answer is ''no'', then you cannot be both a human and a citizen at the same time.

Let me give you an example: is a ''lampshade'' the same as a ''human''. If the correct answer is ''no'', then certainly you cannot be both a human and a lampshade at the same time, can you?

I would like to hear from people (i) believing they are both humans and citizens or (ii) believing a human is the same as a citizen.

Well, you already got my opinion, but just to firm it up:

No, I do not believe you can be a human and a citizen. To be a citizen is to ABDICATE individuality, which is a fundamental condition of humanity. You are either a human, or something rather less.

I'm a citizen.  I'm a human.  That means you are an idiot.
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1022
Anarchy is not chaos.
I would almost posit that you cannot be both a citizen and a human.

Is a ''citizen'' the same as a ''human''?

If the correct answer is ''no'', then you cannot be both a human and a citizen at the same time.

Let me give you an example: is a ''lampshade'' the same as a ''human''. If the correct answer is ''no'', then certainly you cannot be both a human and a lampshade at the same time, can you?

I would like to hear from people (i) believing they are both humans and citizens or (ii) believing a human is the same as a citizen.

Well, you already got my opinion, but just to firm it up:

No, I do not believe you can be a human and a citizen. To be a citizen is to ABDICATE individuality, which is a fundamental condition of humanity. You are either a human, or something rather less.
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
In Hashrate We Trust!
Governments (Banks) cannot stop bitcoin, they are rather forced to create a cryptocurrency of their own and promote big companies to use it in their payment systems. Bitcoin will still be legal and used at independent shops and online but will never reach a massive scale since large companies like Mc Donalds, Starbucks, Amazon etc will ignore bitcoin.

The media will of course play their part to discourage a widespread bitcoin usage by talking negative about bitcoin and mentioning its usage in drug deals (the truth is USD is the biggest drug currency). Our subconscious accept opinions and lies for fact if is it is repeated many times, and that is the job of media to repeat until they have manipulated the opinions of average joe (to not use bitcoin).
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
Born to chew bubble gum and kick ass
I would almost posit that you cannot be both a citizen and a human.

Is a ''citizen'' the same as a ''human''?

If the correct answer is ''no'', then you cannot be both a human and a citizen at the same time.

Let me give you an example: is a ''lampshade'' the same as a ''human''. If the correct answer is ''no'', then certainly you cannot be both a human and a lampshade at the same time, can you?

I would like to hear from people (i) believing they are both humans and citizens or (ii) believing a human is the same as a citizen.
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1022
Anarchy is not chaos.

Got any candidates? (Not snark, I mean it. I hate what the USA has become. It doesn't even resemble the nation I grew up in, and I am only middle aged.)

Although I agree significantly, I'm not really completely convinced that the US has ever been all that angelic.  The Vietnam war and the Latin American activities which transpired during at least part of my early lifetime were pretty repulsive.  It is true, however, that the spoils of our 'activities' have been more evenly distributed in times past.  Of course that does not excuse morally wrong activities, but it does add incentive to not wish to participate.  And as sure as eggs are eggs, an increase in income gap brings with it the need for enhanced internal security apparatus.

The Assange thing knocked Sweden way down no my list of interesting options and elevated Ecuador to near the top.  As best I can tell the actual people of Ecuador themselves had some understanding of the Wikileaks/Assange details, and support their government's actions.  To me this says a lot about the people.  Like most folks though, I've mostly thought about such thing and have made little concrete action.



Agree thoroughly with the 1st paragraph. I too am old enough to remember the Southeast Asia War games. Was very young, but old enough to remember. But the domestic police state and it's broad acceptance is pretty new. Kids didn't get arrested for having a plastic steak knife or a heated argument when I was a young adult, let alone a kid. Hell, most of us brought our rifles to school on the opening day of hunting season as late as 1980 in Wyoming.

Now, SAYING that could get you arrested.

Land of the free, my Cherokee ass!
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1022
Anarchy is not chaos.
Literally, someone who lives in a city.

Someone (human?) living in a city (densely populated area / building saturated area?).

Then if a human lives in a rarely populated area / building unsaturated area, such a human cannot be a citizen (therefore is not a citizen)?

Well, having done both, I would almost posit that you cannot be both a citizen and a human. To live in a city requires so much loss of self/autonomy as to fundamentally alter you.

But, yes, the original meaning did exclude the rural folk. It's an old, largely useless concept, and in its modern/Roman conception, anti-human.
legendary
Activity: 4690
Merit: 1276

Got any candidates? (Not snark, I mean it. I hate what the USA has become. It doesn't even resemble the nation I grew up in, and I am only middle aged.)

Although I agree significantly, I'm not really completely convinced that the US has ever been all that angelic.  The Vietnam war and the Latin American activities which transpired during at least part of my early lifetime were pretty repulsive.  It is true, however, that the spoils of our 'activities' have been more evenly distributed in times past.  Of course that does not excuse morally wrong activities, but it does add incentive to not wish to participate.  And as sure as eggs are eggs, an increase in income gap brings with it the need for enhanced internal security apparatus.

The Assange thing knocked Sweden way down no my list of interesting options and elevated Ecuador to near the top.  As best I can tell the actual people of Ecuador themselves had some understanding of the Wikileaks/Assange details, and support their government's actions.  To me this says a lot about the people.  Like most folks though, I've mostly thought about such thing and have made little concrete action.

sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
Born to chew bubble gum and kick ass
Literally, someone who lives in a city.

Someone (human?) living in a city (densely populated area / building saturated area?).

Then if a human lives in a rarely populated area / building unsaturated area, such a human cannot be a citizen (therefore is not a citizen)?
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1022
Anarchy is not chaos.
Hi Bitcoiners,

At some point in the not too distant future, the government of the United States will figure out that Bitcoin is a very high risk to its Hedgmony. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegemony, Alan Greenspan loved this word.) The United States will make cryto-currency illegal because it will threaten the government's form of money (Federal Reserve Notes). Something similar happened on April 5, 1933 with Executive Order 6102. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102). History tends to repeat itself.

Those who disobey the upcoming Executive Order or new law will learn what truly backs a Federal Reserve Note, that is, the force of its military and growing internal police state.

What is the solution to prevent the United States government from implementing such an action against cryto-currency?


move to a real country . . .

Got any candidates? (Not snark, I mean it. I hate what the USA has become. It doesn't even resemble the nation I grew up in, and I am only middle aged.)
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1022
Anarchy is not chaos.

Do you actually have any evidence there are such mysterious objects in this universe as citizens?

Do me a favour and tell what a citizen is factually.

A citizen is an undead cartoon of a human, an enslaved payer of protection money to the state/church mafia, farmed in monogamous pairing families.

This is an opinion. I asked for facts. I wanted him to tell me what a citizen is factually.

BTW, I find your opinion on what a citizen is 99% in concordance with mine  Grin

Literally, someone who lives in a city.

I mostly agree with the above opinion as well. Through no choice of my own, I am a subject of the Empire, but I refuse to bend the knee so far as to be called a citizen.
KSV
sr. member
Activity: 398
Merit: 250
SVERIGES VIRTUELLA VALUTAVÄXLING
Surely it's not possible to ban them as it would be tantamount to banning the Internet. U.S.A. don't really control the world anymore hahahaha  Grin

they never controlled the world anyways, tried to - failed miserably.
KSV
sr. member
Activity: 398
Merit: 250
SVERIGES VIRTUELLA VALUTAVÄXLING
Hi Bitcoiners,

At some point in the not too distant future, the government of the United States will figure out that Bitcoin is a very high risk to its Hedgmony. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegemony, Alan Greenspan loved this word.) The United States will make cryto-currency illegal because it will threaten the government's form of money (Federal Reserve Notes). Something similar happened on April 5, 1933 with Executive Order 6102. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102). History tends to repeat itself.

Those who disobey the upcoming Executive Order or new law will learn what truly backs a Federal Reserve Note, that is, the force of its military and growing internal police state.

What is the solution to prevent the United States government from implementing such an action against cryto-currency?


move to a real country . . .
Pages:
Jump to: