December 2022 - cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Cryptocurrency: Your Enslavement Becomes Real at 0.20% per Annum
by grarpamp 16 Dec '22

16 Dec '22

The USA was already running 90x that, still sits at 15x that, and is laughably targeting a 10x that it will obviously never reach again, and hasn't hit except for a week in crash of 1986 (SGS-CPI-Alt1980), lol... Wake Up You SLAVES ! No Surprise: Wall Street Wants To Raise The Target Inflation Rate Above 2 Percent https://mises.org/wire/no-surprise-wall-street-wants-raise-target-inflation… https://mises.org/wire/after-years-stimulus-come-surging-debt-and-falling-w… Price inflation in the United States remains stubbornly high, with October's print at 7.7 percent. The Fed's preferred measure, so-called core inflation is only two-tenths of a percent below 40-year highs, at 6.3 percent. Yet, it was just last year that the Federal reserve and other "experts" were concerned that inflation wasn't high enough. In January 2021, for example, Jerome Powell stated that the Fed wanted price inflation to run above the "2-percent goal" because it had run below 2 percent for too long. The 2-percent inflation target, of course, is the arbitrary target picked by the Federal Reserve (and many other central banks) as the "correct" inflation rate. Now with inflation running near 40-year highs, many are wondering what will be necessary to bring price inflation back down to the target level. More specifically, how many hikes in the target interest rate will be necessary, and how severe of a recession will be required? Wall Street is especially interested in the answer to this question because Wall Street is no longer about fundamentals. Rather, the "market" depends overwhelmingly on how much easy money the central bank pumps out. Naturally, the banker class wants a return to "normal"—i.e., quantitative easing and ultralow interest rates—as soon as possible. Moreover, Washington wants the same thing since the political class wants low interest rates to help ease the path to ever more government debt and higher deficits. It's not the least bit surprising that we're already hearing calls for the Federal Reserve to abandon the 2-percent inflation target and instead embrace even higher perpetual inflation rates. For example, last week Bank of America economist Ethan Harris suggested that the 2-percent target CPI inflation rate be raised. We've seen similar urgings from both the Wall Street Journal and from think tank economists in recent months. The push for higher inflation rates is just the latest reminder that wealthy bankers and other members of the ruling class aren't harmed by price inflation the way that ordinary people are. Billionaires and technocrats often benefit—either financially or politically—from high price inflation. We should expect to see growing pressure from Wall Street and Washington insiders if the Fed actually attempts to keep any modicum of monetary tightening going into next year. Wall Street Wants More "Flexibility" for the Central Bank Harris's comments for Bank of America help reveal how comfortable Wall Street is with high price inflation. Harris began by stating that "there is nothing special about 2% other than the fact that it is the official target in many countries." Harris is right, but his intentions in doing so are unfortunate. Harris merely points to the arbitrary nature of the 2-percent standard in order to call for a more activist Federal Reserve. Harris claims "The evidence is that steady 4% inflation imposes very small additional costs compared to steady 2% inflation. Either way the economy adapts. ...Perhaps the inflation target should be 3 or 4%?" The part about the market adapting is especially capricious. It seems that for banker economists detached from real people and the real economy, the "economy" is an abstract thing that "adapts" and there's really no need to worry about it. The "economy" however is not some mere idea, but is composed of actual people. For ordinary people, it's a little more difficult to "adapt" when one's wages are negative in real terms—as has now been the case for months—or when the boom-bust cycle brought on by inflationary monetary policy leads to unemployment. Middle-class pensioners whose fixed incomes don't keep up also don't find it so easy to "adapt." Investment bankers and billionaires with hedge funds, on the other hand, can indeed "adapt" because they can simply take on higher and higher levels of risk in the process of searching for yield above the inflation rate. Sure, if things go badly, they may have to sell a vacation home or take a hit on their stock options, but they'll hardly have to switch to the generic mac and cheese to feed their children. Harris isn't alone in pleading for more price inflation. Earlier this month, Wall Street Journal writer Jon Sindreu was already on the same bandwagon when he asked “Why must inflation be around 2%?” He went on to claim that what really matters is not low inflation but stable inflation. Thus, the real problems with inflation "stem from inflation accelerating, not its being high." Thus, he asks what if inflation stabilizes at a higher rate—say between 4% and 6%? In this plausible case, central banks may be compelled to start needlessly raising rates again. ... Inflation of 4% is perfectly compatible with a healthy economy that isn’t overheating. This came only a few weeks after the Roosevelt Institute—where New Keynesian economist Joseph Stiglitz is head economist—called for a higher inflation target. Specifically, the Institute wants an inflation "range" from 2 to 3.5 percent using the PCE deflator. This would lead in practical terms to real shift upward in target inflation. After all, according to the PCE measure, price inflation barely exceeded the 3.5 target even at the height of the housing bubble in 2008. In other words, even in a red-hot bubble economy, price inflation could still come in within the preferred range, meaning monetary tightening would almost never be seen as necessary or urgent. Clearly, the trial balloons for higher target inflation are already being floated, and once CPI inflation returns to anywhere near 4 percent, we should expect to hear howls from Wall Street and Washington about the "need" for the Fed to once again drive down interest rates while propping up asset prices. How Target Inflation Keeps Moving Up We've been down this road before. 26 years ago, the debate was over whether or not the target inflation rate should be raised to 2 percent. Before that, Congress had put into legislation a target of zero percent. In the "Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1978" Congress explicitly added a "stable prices" mandate to the Federal Reserve Act, and stated that CPI inflation should be reduced to 3 percent or less. Moreover, by 1988, the Act imagined that the official inflation rate should be reduced to zero: Upon achievement of the 3 per centum goal ... each succeeding Economic Report shall have the goal of achieving by 1988 a rate of inflation of zero per centum." The drive for zero-percent inflation had advocates among some monetarists and other "hard money"—"hard" in the relative sense—advocates who opposed the Keynesian consensus that had produced the runaway inflation of the 1970s. The triumph of these hawks was short lived, however, and by the end of the 1980s, the more dovish forces had come to the fore in the form of Alan Greenspan and up-and-coming economists like Janet Yellen. Even Volcker had again moved back toward easy money as can be seen in his support for the Plaza Accord. In his book The Case Against 2 Per Cent Inflation, economist Brendan Brown writes: The Volcker Fed's abandonment of "hard money" policies and the monetarist experiment led directly to the global monetary inflation of the late 1980s featuring virulent asset inflation, most spectacularly the bubble and bust in Japan. Germany was the last to abandon monetarism formally with the launch of the euro. Within a few years there was the start of anew stabilization experiment-the targeting of perpetual inflation at 2% p.a. A key milestone was the FOMC meeting of July 1996 which considered the issue of whether with inflation now down to below 3% the Fed should go easy on its drive to ever-lower inflation and accept a continuing stable low inflation around 2%. Janet Yellen presented the paper in favour. There followed no firm resolution. Nevertheless then Chief Greenspan agreed to a pause. A stronger commitment to a target of perpetual "low inflation" emerged in subsequent years, both under the late Greenspan years and more especially under Chief Bernanke. The European Central Bank's formal embrace of a 2-percent standard was followed informally by the Fed at first, and then formally adopted in 2012. Even that was short lived. In August 2020, the Fed announced a switch to "average" inflation targeting of 2 percent, which meant the Fed would sometimes target inflation above 2 percent with the goal of 2 percent over time. Now in 2022, we're talking about hiking the target inflation rate yet again, perhaps to "between 4% and 6%" as The Wall Street Journal suggests. Not mentioned is the fact that the upward creep in inflation targets enabled the Fed to ignore inflation as it relentlessly rose throughout 2021. The Fed at that point wanted inflation well above 2-percent in order to achieve that new "average" of 2 percent. The result was a complacent Fed that let inflation rise to a 40-year high. The allure of easy money never fades, especially for those who benefit from easy money most. This latter group includes a growing army of zombie corporations, governments mired in debt, and a financialized Wall Street where valuations disregard fundamentals but are based on the ability to borrow at cheap rates and capitalize on rising stock prices. The easy-money chorus couldn't care less about small entrepreneurs squeezed by high prices, or by old ladies on fixed incomes. All that matters is a return to easy money, and if that means ever higher inflation targets, so be it.

1 1

Cryptocurrency: Must Regulate Itself, Else It's Corrupt, And Its Mission Will Fail
by grarpamp 16 Dec '22

16 Dec '22

Human Freedom depends on cryptocurrency regulating itself. Not so much for regulation per se, as the free market is free to compete via proofs open transparency and reject shady operators, but as part of the need to recognize realign and rally its volunteer forces in regimentation against the fiat enemy that must be starved out, which can only happen via offering a sound alternative to adopt... crypto. Losing sight of the fiat enemy, of soundness, by becoming drunk in your own corruption towards users, the space, and the fight... will lose. Crypto has wasted years worth of advantage and resources, it must sober up, end the pointless shitcoin nonsense, rejoin its forces, clean up its act, take the high road, and start winning the war. It's much easier and sooner than you think.

1 6

Cryptocurrency: Bogus "Audits", Corrupt Exchequers... Drive Adoption of Old School P2P Tx and DEX
by grarpamp 16 Dec '22

16 Dec '22

Binance's Alleged Crypto Audit Failed, Not Even Its Auditor Would Vouch For It Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com, Binance says an audit shows proof of reserves of customer funds. But its auditor will not vouch for the reserves nor the methodology demanded by Binance... "CZ" Image likeness courtesy of Coin Telegraph article below Binance's Proof of Reserves Statement When we say Proof of Reserves, we are specifically referring to those assets that we hold in custody for users. This means that we are showing evidence and proof that Binance has funds that cover all of our users assets 1:1, as well as some reserves. When a user deposits one Bitcoin, Binance's reserves increase by at least one Bitcoin to ensure client funds are fully backed. It is important to note that this does not include Binance’s corporate holdings, which are kept on a completely separate ledger. What this means in actual terms is that Binance holds all user assets 1:1 (as well as some reserves), we have zero debt in our capital structure and we have made sure that we have an emergency fund (SAFU fund) for extreme cases. The above Proof of Reserves Claim is interesting. If you have assets 1:1 then you should not need an emergency fund for extreme cases. Audit by Whom? The pseudo audit was by Mazars, a mid-tier global accounting firm according to the Wall Street Journal. Its U.S. arm Mazars USA previously worked for former President Donald Trump’s company. Earlier this year Mazars USA said it would withdraw from its work for Mr. Trump’s company and could no longer stand by financial statements it had previously prepared. Binance didn’t specify which of Mazar’s offices would be doing the verification of the reserves. A Mazars spokesman declined comment. Mystery Finances After the collapse of Crypto exchange FTX, Binance Is Trying to Calm Investors, but Its Finances Remain a Mystery. Mazars said it performed its work using “agreed-upon procedures” requested by Binance and that “we make no representation regarding the appropriateness” of the procedures. The report didn’t show total assets or total liabilities. Rather, its scope was limited only to bitcoin assets and bitcoin liabilities. Binance said it would begin releasing information about other crypto tokens in the coming weeks. “It’s important for us to show users that the coffers are not bare, like at FTX,” said Binance’s chief strategy officer, Patrick Hillmann. In an interview, Binance’s Mr. Hillmann said the Mazars letter covered all the bitcoin assets and bitcoin liabilities for the company’s Binance.com exchange—although the Mazars letter itself didn’t say this. During the interview, Mr. Hillmann also at times referred to the work performed by Mazars as an “audit.” Asked about the appropriateness of Binance’s use of the term “audit” in the news release and elsewhere, Mr. Hillmann said: “We’re talking about a review of our assets in custody.” He also said: “I would just say we’re parroting others’ descriptions of this as an independent audit.” Other basic information about Binance is lacking. Mr. Hillmann said he couldn’t provide the name of Binance’s ultimate parent company because Binance over the past year and a half has been in the process of a broad corporate reorganization. First Rule in Truth Telling The first rule in telling the truth is "Don't lie". The second rule in truth telling is to not sound like you are hiding something. This is especially important when overall trust is in the gutter anyway. This was not an independent audit. Mazars did not describe it that way and the company would not certify the methodology it used. Heck, neither Mazars nor Binance disclosed the precise methodology. Who was Hillmann parroting in describing the procedure as a audit? Sadly no one asked, but my bet is Hillman was parroting himself or someone else at Binance. Nor would Binance disclose its parent company due to a 1.5 year reorganization. WTF? Potential Kiting @cz_binance talk is the cheapest and not so sweet. His word is mud Binance in Hot Water After Moving $2.7B Out of Proof of Reserves Wallethttps://t.co/fv1RamYiSY https://t.co/NfGf3QPzBB — Nouriel Roubini (@Nouriel) November 18, 2022 Binance is receiving flak from the crypto community after moving $2.7 billion out of its proof-of-reserves wallet. The exchange responded, saying the move was to a TRX cold wallet. The procedure was even more bizarre because it comes on the heels contradictory statements by Binance CEO Changpeng “CZ” Zhao. If an exchange have to move large amounts of crypto before or after they demonstrate their wallet addresses, it is a clear sign of problems. Stay away. Stay #SAFU. 🙏 — CZ 🔶 Binance (@cz_binance) November 13, 2022 "If an exchange have to move large amounts of crypto before or after they demonstrate their wallet addresses, it is a clear sign of problems. Stay away. Stay #SAFU." Binance CEO Explains 127K BTC Transfer Please consider the Coin Telegraph Binance CEO Explains 127K BTC Transfer. A few weeks ago, CZ declared that it’s bad news when exchanges move large amounts of crypto to prove their wallet address. Cryptocurrency exchange Binance is moving large amounts of cryptocurrency as part of its proof-of-reserve (PoR) audits, according to its CEO, Changpeng “CZ” Zhao. “The auditor requires us to send a specific amount to ourselves to show we control the wallet. And the rest goes to a change address, which is a new address. In this case, the input tx is big, and so is the change." Wait! What? CZ says it’s bad news when exchanges move large amounts of crypto to prove their wallet address. CZ Moves 127,000 Bitcoins CZ says the auditor demanded this but Mazars, the alleged auditor, does not call it an audit. Mazars would make no representation regarding the "appropriateness” of the procedures. Mazars said the “agreed-upon procedures” were requested by Binance not by Mazars. Not to worry 1 BTC = 1 BTC 127,000 BTC = 127,000 BTC (unless they have been counted multiple times) Meanwhile please note Global Squabbles Erupt Around the World Over the Remaining Crypto Assets of FTX

1 0

Cryptocurrency: Buttcoiners Debate Anarchism v Libertarianism
by grarpamp 16 Dec '22

16 Dec '22

"I'd rather have this planet burn than having the government control our freedom" by an environmentalist https://old.reddit.com/r/Buttcoin/comments/zmfkbc/id_rather_have_this_plane… [–]No-Significance-7355 442 points 22 hours ago "I’m more of a libertarian than an environmentalist". You don’t say. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]breecher 349 points 21 hours ago So not an environmentalist at all then. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]SinibusUSG 167 points 18 hours ago They would prefer the environment be positively impacted all else equal, but are unwilling to countenance even the slightest action to save it, and will in fact endorse initiatives that harm it. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Chad_Broski_2 57 points 17 hours ago Basically "I wish the environment wasn't fucked but if the gubbermint tries to save it and gubbermint = bad then I can't abide" The classic libertarian dilemma of...let's give everyone unlimited freedom to pollute our air and water and destroy the planet because I'm sure everyone will be responsible enough to not let that happen! permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]skycake10 33 points 16 hours ago "yeah I'm an environmentalist: I believe the environment has always existed and always will exist no matter what we do to it" permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Direct-Cranberry1307 4 points 12 hours ago It will certainly exist. Whether or not it remains capable of supporting human life is another matter. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]karma911 40 points 17 hours ago No you see, he's an environmental originalist: He believes the environment should be viewed through the lens of when it was first created, which is the good old days when it was a large ball of molten rock and ash. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Jaazeps 1 point 14 hours ago This needs to be the top reply permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]rwhitisissle 50 points 16 hours ago I'm gonna say that because this is reddit, I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt and say he's just a confused 19 year old that's trying to figure out who he is and he's trying on different hats that "feel right" without any concern for ideological consistency. "I like nature and stuff and realize climate change is real" - environmentalist hat. "I hate the government because they took $200 out of my paycheck at my part time job and I had to wait an extra two weeks to buy a PS5" - Libertarian hat. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]DororoFlatchestwarning, I am a moron 10 points 13 hours ago He's 46. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]rwhitisissle 4 points 10 hours ago Yeah, but mentally he's 19. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]agent_double_oh_piPlease reset my flair 7 points 21 hours ago Came here to say this. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]unweariedslooth 2 points 11 hours ago Basically he's a selfish short sided jerk trying to pretend to have some moral position to mitigate being a total clown. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]No-Significance-7355 5 points 21 hours ago I’m not sure what it means TBH. It can mean they work as a technician in an environment field, it does not necessarily mean activism, does it ? permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]pnt510 34 points 21 hours ago No, it definitely does mean activist. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]No-Significance-7355 12 points 21 hours ago So yeah. Definitely not environmentalist (In my language it means both) permalink embed save parent report give award reply continue this thread [–]JMBBZ 6 points 19 hours ago It mostly means stupidity permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]No-Significance-7355 25 points 19 hours ago Libertarian ? I agree permalink embed save parent report give award reply continue this thread [–]xoxchitliac 76 points 20 hours ago These people are just top-tier morons. Even Milton fucking Friedman thought the government should regulate against environmental harm. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]No-Significance-7355 48 points 19 hours ago They are literal 2yo babies : entirely self-centered and irritated by any form of limit or rules permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]not_mahiNot sure what to type. We are fucked. 22 points 17 hours ago Or house cats, fiercely independent so long as there's a system taking care of all their needs that they don't acknowledge or appreciate. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]No-Significance-7355 14 points 15 hours ago Cats make me less depressed. Libertarians have the opposite effect permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]taggospreme 11 points 15 hours ago cats are probably a bad example since they're not even truly domesticated. They self-domesticated and are still highly effective predators to the point of massive environmental damage. Maybe a pug. Inbred to the point of deformity and has difficulty breathing. Poor instincts for the wild. And would be just a snack to a hungry predator. permalink embed save parent report give award reply continue this thread [–]Redqueenhypo 10 points 16 hours ago That guy was weird. Genius mathematician who invented statistical tests still in use today, also advocated against seatbelt laws. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]xoxchitliac 21 points 16 hours ago He also ruined the world by inspiring Reagan and Thatcher to shrink the state at the cost of any semblance of social cohesion and we're still dealing with the after effects today. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]dan_pitt 12 points 15 hours ago Very true. Though I question whether he "inspired" them so much, but rather was a convenient excuse for their selfish, pro-rich policies. Friedman was their fig leaf. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]powercow 9 points 14 hours ago people against seatbelt laws should have to spend a week cleaning up the dead who flew through windshields at the low pay our gov low level workers get. And then remind us why they are against the law. We dont do the law to keep republicans from killing themselves. WE do the law because not having seatbelts is more expensive to society. Accounting for this reimbursement, the first year savings to the State by implementation of a primary seat belt law would be about $0.6 million. Arkansas could expect to have saved $4.2 million in the first 5 years and $11.1 million over 10 years. HEY REPUBLICANS AND LIBERTARIANS, THis means their is more money for a tax cut for people who absolutely dont need a tax cut, like yall are so fond of doing. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]DororoFlatchestwarning, I am a moron 1 point 13 hours ago 'Seatbelts are communism!' permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]VoiceofKane 15 points 15 hours ago "I like the planet a lot, but I hate poor people more." permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Kilahti 6 points 14 hours ago I would have gone with: "I like the planet a lot, but if something were to inconvenience me, then it has gone too far." ...But your comment describes a lot of Libertarians too. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]dan_pitt 1 point 15 hours ago I'm stealing this. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]redholio 32 points 19 hours ago Greed won against virtue signaling. He was never an environmentalist. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Potential-Coat-7233Crypto is a stick fort in the backyard. 14 points 18 hours ago I went through a libertarian phase, and in theory, if you could properly price the damage that economic actors do to the environment, a proper tax by the government would be appropriate. Of course assigning that price is next to impossible and even if they tried, those same theorists would fight it. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]not_mahiNot sure what to type. We are fucked. 21 points 17 hours ago I've met even more extreme libertarians who think that if the free market didn't want them polluting they just wouldn't support them with their wallets. Talk about delusion. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]taggospreme 10 points 15 hours ago Exactly. Just think about the most asshole thing you can do and given the freedom to, someone will do it. Got a bunch of pollution to dump? Dump it on your competitors. Then when they get a bad rep and fold, you can keep charging exploitative prices on your necessity products. Plebs getting angry at price gouging and so they kicked down the gate with pea shooters in hand? Send out the private security. We'll see how some assault rifles fare against trained mercenaries with better weapons and even some armor units. Not even hard to come up with this shit because it's already happening and has happened over and over around the world. The problem isn't the current system, whatever it is, it's always the people. Not even all of them, just the assholes. Assholes will always maximize whatever they can get away with, regardless of "morals" or any consideration of others. And to think "vote with your wallet" would stop them in their tracks just shows what kind of insulated life these naive people have. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]zepperoni-pepperoni 2 points 15 hours ago I would say that the problem is the current system, as it seems to be perfectly made for the assholes to climb up the ranks in power. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]powercow 7 points 14 hours ago Rand Paul might have that beat. He said mines didnt need safty regs because people wouldnt work at mines where people die a lot. Of course this depends on not being one of those who died, and having some other means of earing enough to eat, because of course hes against helping these people get away from the area to economic opportunities besides mining. He added that, by honoring the free market above all, “no one will apply for those jobs” if a mine doesn’t do a good job protecting worker safety. LETS JUST IGNORE HISTORY SAYS BULLSHIT, we didnt use to have as many regs protecting workers, we added them because they died too much on the job. and i like this little quote... As Paul explained, he doesn’t understand mine safety rules, “so don’t give me the power in Washington to be making rules.” But we should allow you the power to block those same rules you dont understand? permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]JohnDavidsBooty 2 points 12 hours ago lol like, that's literally the reason we have administrative rulemaking, because of course it's ridiculous to expect Congresspeople to understand the complexities of every single thing that happens everywhere so we create a system of regulatory agencies where those who do know what they're talking about are empowered to make the rules, subject to public notice and comment controls and Congressional oversight and override to protect against them getting out of hand permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]SaltyPockets 4 points 14 hours ago And in the next breath they'll say they're not required to publish information about how their products are made. They're just assholes basically. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]not_mahiNot sure what to type. We are fucked. 2 points 14 hours ago Bro you can't ask tether to publish an audit bro how they keep their dollar backing is a trade secret bro permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]CoDn00b95 3 points 13 hours ago I saw one once who said that the worst thing people can ever say about private corporations is that they don't provide a good service, as opposed to governments executing people. Uhh, I'll think you'll find that the worst thing people can say about private corporations is more along the lines of, "Oh no, they put antifreeze in the wine again". permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]No-Significance-7355 24 points 17 hours ago "Tax by the government" is probably the least libertarian thing you could say permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Potential-Coat-7233Crypto is a stick fort in the backyard. 13 points 17 hours ago To be more specific, the vision outlined by Milton Friedman was a carbon offset market with government mandating compliance, and he viewed it as a justified role of government. The carbon offsets, if priced appropriately, would discourage bad behavior, or if collected, be used as revenue by the government. It sounds good, but in reality libertarians would fight against it. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]TheCleaverguy 5 points 6 hours ago Libertarianism sure does struggle with facing actual reality. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]dotnon 5 points 17 hours ago Moderate libertarianism would accept some taxes, it's just the option of last resort. What we're dealing with here are absolutist loons. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]HermanCainsGhost 9 points 16 hours ago I find, as a dude who is nearly 40, libertarians in their 20s that I’ve encountered tend to go in two paths - one, they go hardcore absolutist, and in the other, they tend to go more and more left. I’ve seen both on multiple occasions permalink embed save parent report give award reply continue this thread [–]Feed_My_Brain 7 points 17 hours ago Dr. Libertarianism Or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Carbon Tax permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Potential-Coat-7233Crypto is a stick fort in the backyard. 3 points 17 hours ago There’s no farting in the gas room!!! permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]stoatsoup 3 points 17 hours ago if you could properly price the damage that economic actors do to the environment And if I had unicorns in my garden, I could fertilise the rosebush more effectively. :-) permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Potential-Coat-7233Crypto is a stick fort in the backyard. 3 points 17 hours ago that’s why I’m not a libertarian anymore. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]powercow 3 points 14 hours ago You just gave one of the main arguments against libertarianism. External costs. and WE DO DO THIS TO A DEGREE. THink of the public lands grazing fees that dickhead republican took over a reserve because he didnt want to pay for the damage his cattle do to public lands. To help maintain those lands so his kids cattle could also eat on those lands. anyways everything about your comment is non libertarian as it would take an even stronger regulatory and oversight network to do it your way than just do it the way we do now with fees and rules. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]DororoFlatchestwarning, I am a moron 1 point 13 hours ago a proper tax by the government No libertarian believes any such thing is possible. What are you, a communist? /s permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Nonadventures 4 points 17 hours ago I’m more of a meat eater than a vegetarian permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]No-Significance-7355 -3 points 17 hours ago Then you don’t understand what environmentalist means permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]hoodied 2 points 15 hours ago I'd rather everyone be dead instead of having government. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]powercow 1 point 14 hours ago libertarian is code for anti society douchebag. My biggest complaint about that lot is they think its never been tried when new markets mostly start off reg free and we add regs when that blows up in our faces. Most other "isms" try to fix the flaws in libertarianism. ITs kinda the default concept to not regulate activities. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Sine_Fine_Belli 1 point 2 hours ago r/enoughlibertarianspam permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]TheGangsterrapper 128 points 19 hours ago This person is not an environmentalist. permalink embed save report give award reply [+]dougChristiesWife comment score below threshold (9 children) [–]MagnesiumOvercast 1 point 7 hours ago Warhammer 40k villain LET THE GALAXY BURN permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]casapulapula 81 points 22 hours ago Not a cult! permalink embed save report give award reply [–]EmergencySituation90 5 points 16 hours ago They're just still early, you'll see! permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Cruix_09 74 points 18 hours ago I am an enviromentalist Spoiler: He never was and made that up. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]StableCoinScamflair value guaranteed by limited supply 31 points 15 hours ago This is equivalent to "i have black friends". permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Rokey76Ponzi Schemes have some use cases 27 points 14 hours ago "Some of my best friends are black for Halloween." permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]SamSibbens 1 point 5 hours ago I accidentally did this once... In my defense, I was 11 years old. I was dressing as a monk and the goal was to give me somewhat of a tan. The makeup thing I used made my skin a LOT darker than intended. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]clit_eastwood_ 48 points 22 hours ago What do they mean by CBDC being “rolled out”? Is this actually happening now? permalink embed save report give award reply [–]Jankylad 111 points 22 hours ago He read on Twitter the FTX collapse was a plot (((they))) made to take over crypto and introduce CBDCs. Like he said, he has no choice but to burn down a rainforest to send imaginary coins to centralised exchanges based in the Caymans who can't pass an audit. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]not_mahiNot sure what to type. We are fucked. 16 points 17 hours ago Centralized exchanges based on Caymans? Excuse me, no one knows where Binance is based out of. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Jankylad 10 points 16 hours ago True. Centralised exchanges with postboxes in the Caymans as the only physical way of contact* permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Rokey76Ponzi Schemes have some use cases 1 point 14 hours ago I think Caymans is where Tether is. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]hydroza 19 points 22 hours ago Their version of FUD. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]option-9I Paid the Price 13 points 19 hours ago India made the digital rupee (it's not going well). Russia is working on the digital rubel, I believe. I can recognise a pattern when I see one. The reminbi (spelling?) and real must be next! permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Stenbuck 9 points 18 hours ago Our central bank has mentioned the digital real a few times already, so right you are! But it could just be talk also. And we already have a very robust free, instant, 24/7 payments system that although isn't technically a digital currency, is close enough in functionality that it won't really change that much for most people. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Chicago_53 0 points 14 hours ago I think a digital US currency is inevitable, and I’m not sure if I like the idea at all permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]option-9I Paid the Price 1 point 13 hours ago I'm not sure what upgrade a CBDC would be over existing digital money. Just guessed some currencies with R where I could see such a thing happen (and I'd put Brazil in a "similar to Russia and India" basket here, for China I'd just expect them for eventually outlaw cash and use a CBDC to reinforce surveillance) permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Stenbuck 1 point 12 hours ago Basically allowing people to have accounts directly with the central bank, reducing counterparty risk and forcing private banks to provide better yields on deposits to attract clients. If it would actually work or not I don't think is possible to know at this point, but that's the general idea, I guess. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Rokey76Ponzi Schemes have some use cases 2 points 14 hours ago As far as I can tell, most of my US dollars are digital. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]option-9I Paid the Price 1 point 13 hours ago They're not a CBDC, unlike the two I mentioned. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Rokey76Ponzi Schemes have some use cases 1 point 12 hours ago What is the difference and why would I care? permalink embed save parent report give award reply [+]jackietreehorn2022 comment score below threshold (7 children) [–]MacHaggis 78 points 20 hours ago Late fiscal policy made by this whole Covid19 thing wtf does this even mean? permalink embed save report give award reply [–]bee_administrator 105 points 19 hours ago Governments intervened to support the workers when the economy was shut down. This made Libertarians very, very angry. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]csappenf 16 points 15 hours ago Back when I was a 19 year old libertarian, I would just smoke a bowl whenever I got angry. Which was pretty much most of the time. Then I would rant about how the smog in LA was a result of the government not letting the free market solve the problem. Somehow. I had reasons, but I was also on a lot of drugs and can't remember what they were. In retrospect, I think I was a libertarian because they were always cool about the drugs. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]ApatheticWithoutTheA 3 points 13 hours ago That’s exactly why I supported Ron Paul back in college in 09 lol. Legalizing drugs was number one on my list of priorities regardless of if the country would have went to hell. Legalizing drugs is still important to me but I’m not voting for a fucking Libertarian to do it. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]mandiblesofdoom 26 points 17 hours ago Angry libertarians! Oh no! permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Praximus_Prime_ARGOne True Libertarian 15 points 16 hours ago Angry libertarians! Oh no! As a Libertarian you won't like me when I'm angry permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]MacHaggis 9 points 16 hours ago Oh wow, an actual libertarian VS librarian. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Flatbush_Zombie 6 points 14 hours ago Is this the same guy? permalink embed save parent report give award reply continue this thread [–]Isredel 1 point 9 hours ago so, uh, when was the last time you hugged your children? Dayum. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]CoolSwim1776 19 points 19 hours ago It's like the worst people gravitate to the worst things. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]MKorostoffNot Big Tony. Anything but Big Tony! 13 points 17 hours ago $1000 says this guy's been in the cult for years. This post reeks of /r/asablackman permalink embed save report give award reply [–]Kat-Shaw 13 points 16 hours ago "by this whole Covid19 thing" So gonna presume he is one of those conspiracy whackos. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]WillistheWillow 29 points 21 hours ago* Can someone explain the difference between Libertarianism and anarchy to me? It seems modern Libertarianism is in favour of no government at all, which means no rules or laws. That's what's so wacky about these people. If we reached this level of anarchy, we would find ourselves back in feudal times, where the biggest bully with the most amount of soldiers and weapons is in charge. Basically we'd be living in dictatorships, where we're forced to fight for our dictators or starve. EDIT: Thanks everyone, didn't mean to spark a debate, but some really interesting and well informed perspectives. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]Broke22 31 points 20 hours ago Can someone explain the difference between Libertarianism and anarchy to me? It seems modern Libertarianism is in favour of no government at all, which means no rules or laws. Libertarians irrationally believe than money will still keep working after the goverment collapses, so they will still be able hire private security and live safely in fortified compounds. (Cryptolibertarians believe than fiat will stop having value but crypto will). That's what's so wacky about these people. If we reached this level of anarchy, we would find ourselves back in feudal times, where the biggest bully with the most amount of soldiers and weapons is in charge. Basically we'd be living in dictatorships, where we're forced to fight for our dictators or starve. Basically this, except they believe their bitcoins will make them the feudal lords. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]TheGangsterrapper 12 points 19 hours ago* Libertarians irrationally believe than money will still keep working after the goverment collapses, so they will still be able hire private security and live safely in fortified compounds. The gangsterrapper once had a discussion with a guy who said that bitcoin would survive the collapse of civilization. He was not really able to counter the argument that the collapse of civilization would likely mean the loss of electricity. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]cherrypieandcoffee 58 points 20 hours ago Libertarianism is anarchy for people who hate humanity. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]righthandofdog 22 points 18 hours ago* Libertarianism is anarchy for rich assholes Anarchists believe in some combination of people helping each other because they want to or being strong enough to not need help. So Anarchists and Libertarians both believe humanity is just a wolf pack. But Libertarians blame the government for not being the alpha already. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Cruix_09 16 points 17 hours ago* Anarchists believe in some combination of people helping each other because they want to or being strong enough to not need help. Almost. Anarchists mostly just believe that every hierarchy comes down to being unjust in itself. Especially if the topic at hand is something like country borders. However if you're not an "an"cap ("anarcho"capitalists)/libertarian (those two have basically the same set of believes, even though "an"caps believe that someone respects private property without a government to enforce it), then Anarchists usually are not about the wild wolf pack thing or there being no rules at all. Anarchists still believe that there are people who will need support and that helping each other is a good and right thing to do and that people should in the end develop the conclusion, that profit motivations are more of an conditioning by capitalism, which in itself is unjust and always hierarchy based. "An"caps on the other hand believe that they will rise to some feudal highlord, who will be able to have first night with your new wife, while you will just love to bend the knee and never revolt against them. Even if they let you starve, the only thing preventing them from being pure beings of power/the top of the foodchain is the evil government, socialists and so on. And they want to "discuss" age of consent laws a lot..and way too open minded. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]righthandofdog 2 points 11 hours ago more of an anarcho-syndacalist myself permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]dumwitxh 7 points 17 hours ago And both are dumb permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Cruix_09 -2 points 17 hours ago r/enlightenedcentrism permalink embed save parent report give award reply continue this thread [–]yakultjapa 3 points 14 hours ago Not exactly, Anarchist believed people doesn't need to have a central power or a hierarchy of power to enforce rules and organization, that if people can decide and organized by itself, then any type of government it is, by definition, tyrannical. The most common concept on anarchism is people are willing to work each other as community and overcome any social inequality as free will, without need some incentive like money (in capitalisms) or some central state (in communism) since any kind of hierarchy of power can leave for abuse. The different between libertarian and anarchist is, anarchist focus on common good and to achieve need to end any kind of property to explore other people (like has many houses to live by rent or have a machine and keep the profit by themselves). Libertarian believe no one can interfere in freedom of other while keep capitalisms existing. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Redqueenhypo 2 points 16 hours ago Hilarious fact: Ayn Rand said exactly this! She said it was just right wing collectivism which she saw as worse than left wing anarchy. She also called libertarians “right wing hippies” and disliked Reagan, she didn’t like anyone. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]livingxf4llacy 39 points 20 hours ago Anarchy is about abolishing all hierarchies, including those that the capitalist system imposes on us. Libertarians basically believe that hierarchies are great, and they CLAIM to believe that any sort government is fundamentally immoral, so they deny that any mechanism that is used to maintain and impose capitalism is not infact government or a system. Libertarianism is a vague, cruel and nonsensical political philosophy, and you're right some libertarians have openly advocated for feudalism, and a free market of babies. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]vodrake 13 points 18 hours ago* Anarchists have more of a left-winged slant that government is used to serve the rich and oppress the poor and disenfranchised. They believe that removing government would allow comunities to run themselves in a more equal and harmoneous manner as they see inequality as coming from the top down. Libertarians have more of a right-wing slant and believe that government oppresses individual liberty and the free market, generally at the expense of the wealthy or "future" wealthy. Removing government would allow these individuals to prosper at the expense of the community, which libertarians believe is fair as its a dog eat dog world out there and it should be an individuals responsibility on whether they survive and prosper. They seem to believe there are no inequalities amongst people, so those who prosper would do so purely because they deserved to, and not because they were already in the most privilaged position. They all of course think that they would be in the group who would rise to rule over the new system, rather than being one of the peasants who would be exploited by the new feudal class now there's no laws to protect them. A lot also seem to have odd ideas regarding age of consent laws permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Holiday_Parsnip_9841 10 points 19 hours ago In my experience growing up in a state with too many libertarians and anarchists, there’s not much daylight between the two. The big distinguishing factor is libertarians start conservative and anarchists start progressive, then both become so extreme that horseshoe political theory kicks in and they end up with very similar beliefs and practices. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Redqueenhypo 4 points 16 hours ago They both have a tendency to shift towards identical theories about how “they” control finance and the government permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]GunnSmokeeee 2 points 18 hours ago if you go far enough to either side you meet the other side - Thomas Shelby permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]ButtcoinSpy 2 points 20 hours ago Libertarians are just pro weed conservatives. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]AmericanScream 2 points 15 hours ago There are all kinds of libertarians, but the most common version people talk about right now are the right-wing styles: minarchist, anarcho capitalist, that are basically anarchists, but they don't mind the existence of a central authority, provided that central authority exists to exclusively represent and defend their personal interests. Yes, it's that narcissistic and childish. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Traditional-Ad3161 2 points 15 hours ago Anarchists oppose feudalism. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]WillistheWillow 1 point 14 hours ago I'm sure they do. But in an anarchic system, might is right, feudalism would take root whether anarchists like it or not. Unless there were unlimited resources of every imaginable kind. Which is impossible. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]skycake10 2 points 16 hours ago Anarchy and libertarianism are superficially similar, but they arrive there from basically the opposite directions. Libertarianism prioritizes the rights of the individual and thinks the state should exist in the smallest amount possible (in theory, I doubt most libertarians would actually be okay driving on only private toll roads). It's inherently hierarchical because in practice it's not much more than "might makes right". Anarchism has some right-wing flavors too, but the one most people think of is left-wing and also considers the state an inherently oppressive force, but instead of being focused on the individual it's focused on small, in theory non-hierarchical communities. I don't think anarchism is much more viable than libertarianism in practice, but I'm MUCH more sympathetic to the ideology. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]StopHavingAnOpinion 3 points 18 hours ago The difference in practice is little but in theory is pretty much the attitude. Anarchists believe that the government is bad because government's are bad.jpg, but lolbertarians believe governments are bad because they prevent them from exploiting more than they already do. Usually under the guise of "overregulating" when you aren't allowed to force someone to work 20 hours in a coal mine. Both are delusional and both have their varying levels of cruelty, but libertarians don't hide their intentions or their model world, which anarchists can at least hide behind reasonable doubt to escape criticism. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]devliegende 0 points 18 hours ago* Libertarianism as it existed before the internet and bitcoin mostly said that government should be confined to the essentials. In the case of the USA the Federal government would have 4 departments. State (Foreign Affairs). Defence, Treasury and Justice. Everything else should be at the State and Local level or private. Kinda 1750s with a bill of rights. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Sr_Carlos_Danger 6 points 16 hours ago A Bill of "Rights" with no enforcement mechanism. A Bill of good vibes permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]devliegende 1 point 11 hours ago Dept. Of Justice consists of the courts, the fbi and marshals. Anything you want to enforce, can be enforced. The president may also activate the military. Like Washington did during the whiskey rebellion. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Sr_Carlos_Danger 1 point 7 hours ago Lol unless there are, you know, rights you might want to have that don't involve having people shot. There's no number of thugs that will make chemo administer itself, there's no dictatorship so competent that you won't notice your kids can't read, and there's nobody you can sue to bring back life and free speech. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]pointman -4 points 17 hours ago You’ve received a lot of silly un-serious responses. Let me try. Libertarians believe people shouldn’t use force to compel others to do something they don’t choose for themselves, including the government. The one exception would be to enforce laws that are designed to protect people from others using force against them. Basically, maximum freedom up to the point of people using their freedom to restrict the freedom of others. Maximum personal responsibility and minimum government required to maintain that system. Anarchists don’t even want a government police force. They are not the same. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]KamikazeArchon 3 points 11 hours ago Libertarians believe people shouldn’t use force to compel others to do something they don’t choose for themselves, including the government. The one exception would be to enforce laws that are designed to protect people from others using force against them. This is significantly incomplete. The actual biggest exception libertarians want is the enforcement of laws designed to enact the will of a specific group, "the wealthy". Libertarians would be more correctly termed "propertarians", as the actual #1 rule for them is that the state-enforced monopoly that we call "property rights" must be enforced above all else. Of course, this "exception" is big enough to drive a fully-loaded Saturn V rocket through, and largely obviates any claim to seek "maximum freedom" because pretty much every form of control can be reframed as "oh, I own X, you have to do what I say if you want to touch X." permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]pointman 1 point 11 hours ago This is a good addition to my comment. Thanks. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]NotRickDeckard 1 point 9 hours ago Yo, I'm reading The Dispossessed right now. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Sr_Carlos_Danger 4 points 15 hours ago Don't be naive. Libertarians want maximum government, they just want minimum accountability for their bad governance. It is anti-politics in the worst and most barbarous way. Anarchists are silly utopians but have a legitimately varied and fully thought out political tradition, to say they all don't want any kind of police is just incorrect permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]pointman -2 points 14 hours ago Putting all libertarians in 1 single group is fair, but putting all anarchists in 1 single group isn't? In your head that argument sounded solid enough to give you the confidence to insult me? Let's not turn buttcoin into another cult of lazy arguments, please. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Sr_Carlos_Danger 0 points 12 hours ago I mean, those groups are defined by the the criterion we're using to group them in the first place, so yeah. They're both movements that identify themselves relative to concepts of leadership and government, it wouldn't make sense to ignore how their relationship to actual existing government and leaders is fundamentally different. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]WillistheWillow -2 points 14 hours ago I think what you say was true at one time, but not any more. It seems libertarians these days are anti-government as a concept. I refer you to the image in the OP. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]pointman 0 points 14 hours ago The question was about the philosophy, not about the hypocrisy of one random teenager on twitter. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]WillistheWillow 0 points 14 hours ago Not sure what you're on about there fella. permalink embed save parent report give award reply continue this thread [+]incubus4282 comment score below threshold (3 children) [+]xToniGrssx comment score below threshold (4 children) [–]bigtitsfanclub 17 points 18 hours ago I don’t think this guy is an environmentalist because environmentalists protest and raise awareness for environmental regulation from a federal level. Between his support for cryptocurrency and anarchy, he’s calling himself an environmentalist that wants to see the planet burn. This guy is the walking definition of oxymoron with great emphasis on the moron part. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]Agreeable-Pea-2220 -1 points 14 hours ago Environmentalists can aim for federal regulations, but that is just one goal. I don’t know where you got the idea that that’s the definition of environmentalism. This person is not an anarchist, they’re a libertarian. Both oppose state power but are extremely different politically. Kind of embarrassing to equate them, honestly. You’re correct that this person is a liar and an idiot, but you might want to exercise more critical thinking about why they’re an idiot instead of basing it off of incorrect definitions of words you don’t know. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]bigtitsfanclub 2 points 13 hours ago I didn’t say it was the definition of environmentalism I said advocacy for federal government action is fundamental. Nothing about the rhetoric of his post suggests he’s a libertarian other than identifying as one. This post is up for interpretation and you can view it from any lense really because he doesn’t say much beyond a critique of America’s fiscal agenda during the pandemic. I would be more inclined to have a discussion with you but you saw this as an opportunity to say ‘gotcha’ and I recommend you exercise more critical thinking in your judgement. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Agreeable-Pea-2220 1 point 13 hours ago What about their post makes them sound like an anarchist? Anarchism and environmentalism aren’t incompatible things. Neither is being an anarchist while also protesting for federal regulation. It’s absurd for you to call them an anarchist based on nothing and then say that their own self-identification isn’t enough evidence of libertarianism. Also you say nothing suggests libertarianism, except for this person has a hard on for decentralized deregulated crypto. I’m not trying for a “gotcha”, I just don’t think that you understand anarchist or libertarian ideology and equating the two of them is offensive (to anarchists, I couldn’t give a fuck about libertarian tears). It’s about as misguided as comparing socialism and fascism. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]snek_charm 7 points 17 hours ago I don't want the gov to control my finances, I want a small cabal of anon grifters to. Liberty! permalink embed save report give award reply [–]titangord 4 points 17 hours ago Libertarians have to be some of the dumbest people alive.. even the cultist conservative republican christians have more cohesion in their positions permalink embed save report give award reply [–]cherrypieandcoffee 2 points 20 hours ago What a totally reasonable gentleman. Gotta stick to those principles, even if it means global heat death! permalink embed save report give award reply [–]Latino_sniper 3 points 18 hours ago Becoming homeless to own the libs: permalink embed save report give award reply [–]blackmobius 4 points 17 hours ago When it comes to positive self labeling, a lot of people put themselves in groups bases on the slightest whim. Someone put a quarter in a salvation army bucket when they were a kid but they loathe beggars and homeless people; they say “Im so generous and giving”. You see people that have major anger issues say the stupidest shit like “I consider myself a kind and forgiving person” eight before making some wild ass violent threat. Its like if they self identify with some cause that its just uncontested and true. And dont get me started how literally every single major marketing propaganda piece from one party features someone that used to “identify as an avid and involved voter for X party” but “this action is a step too far” and “im never going back”. Anyways a person that sees how power intensive a mining rig is, and turn around and call themselves an “environmentalist” is absolutely lying to everyone including themselves. Environmentalism is a lot more than just liking a tree in the park that one time permalink embed save report give award reply [–]Praximus_Prime_ARGOne True Libertarian 4 points 16 hours ago As a Libertarian I consider biodiversity to just be another way the state enforces diversity permalink embed save report give award reply [–]Old-and-grumpy 3 points 22 hours ago Unfortunately you'll get both. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]longstreakof 3 points 18 hours ago There are some fucked up people around and this is one prime example. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]Ok-Row-6131 3 points 18 hours ago That was a real quick jump from "I am an environmentalist" to "I don't care about the environment". permalink embed save report give award reply [–]sv_ds 3 points 18 hours ago An environmentalist libertarian omfg, my brain melts. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]ItsJoeMomma 3 points 16 hours ago So, in other words, you're just giving in to the greed. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]astrange 3 points 16 hours ago The weird part is they think governments don't already see/control all money transmissions. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]Severe_Echo5413 3 points 15 hours ago Got to love a libertarian who tells a group “I am one of yours now” permalink embed save report give award reply [–]DrMonkeyLove 3 points 13 hours ago Like, I really don't want to generalize or anything, but every libertarian I've ever met has been kinda dumb. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]dyrnwyn580 2 points 13 hours ago I’ve never met a poor libertarian. It’s a philosophy born out of luxury. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]iStayedAtaHolidayInn 3 points 13 hours ago r/asablackman permalink embed save report give award reply [–]your_mind_aches 3 points 12 hours ago The whole thing is stupid and infuriating but what makes me the most mad is him saying "this whole Covid19 thing". I thought we were past downplaying the seriousness of this virus. But nah people are still out here denying in such a blasé way. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]__SpeedRacer__ 4 points 20 hours ago True environmentalists don't call themselves that. In this case, it shows. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]loveandcs 2 points 19 hours ago Imagine being this confused permalink embed save report give award reply [–]little_jade_dragon 2 points 17 hours ago I'm sure he'd have the same response if he lived in a desert wasteland with no clean water, food, fresh air and in burning heat. Totally worth it for line go up. I mean, we might have trashed our future but hey, at least the stock exchange had a good decade! permalink embed save report give award reply [–]GunterWatanabeThe bitcoin knows where it is at all times. 2 points 17 hours ago If this guy ever tries to take a dump in a mall, he’ll find the government already controls our freedom, while simultaneously contributing much more to public discourse than his post. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]hackinistrator 2 points 16 hours ago that''s just 'the daily buttcoin motivational post.... pump , pump .only this kind of posts are allowed on that subreddit anyways . he's too dumb to be an environmentalist . permalink embed save report give award reply [–]jaxdaniel86 2 points 16 hours ago So they are under 25 or more likely a teenager. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]crowbayashi 2 points 15 hours ago These people need serious help. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]user24781482 2 points 15 hours ago another lunatic next in line to join this cult permalink embed save report give award reply [–]amprok 2 points 14 hours ago tHe FrEe MaRkEt WiLl SaVe ThE eRff. Ron Paul 24! permalink embed save report give award reply [–]LordPubes 2 points 14 hours ago Greed before life. It’s the libertarian way permalink embed save report give award reply [–]XPaarthurnaxX 2 points 14 hours ago Lmao what a donkey permalink embed save report give award reply [–]zenithfury 2 points 14 hours ago lol if you were any kind of environmentalist, then you would rather see humanity go extinct if it means that Earth can continue to sustain the rest of the lifeforms. But anyway, environmentalism is about humanity sharing the planet with everything else. Not only does bitcoin use up way too much energy, it doesn't even help mankind at all. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]Inevitable-Writer817 2 points 14 hours ago goofy ass crypto dork aint foolin anyone permalink embed save report give award reply [–]Busy-Ad6502 2 points 13 hours ago Honestly, I'm against government regulation for cryptocurrency as well. When it is unregulated, it is a magnet for scammers and so vacuums up scammers that would otherwise be gumming up productive parts of the market. And, the crypto-crowd needs to learn firsthand what no regulation looks like. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]dawgz525 2 points 12 hours ago Every single, "I'm a ___, but I support __ now, because ____ just went too far!" Is A. a lie or B. the dumbest and most idiotic cry for attention I can imagine. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]BadPure8272 2 points 9 hours ago He realized that he couldn't marry children yet and his libertarian core just exploded with rage. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]Shiriru00 2 points 8 hours ago Wow, what would it be if he wasn’t an environmentalist! permalink embed save report give award reply [–]jimmyr2021 2 points 17 hours ago Lol how does a libertarian expect someone to enforce environmental regulations if they hate the government? I'll throw this on the pile of middle school logic or someone who is doing a good job trolling. Also, have the butters chearing the collapse of these centralized exchanges now turned that into a bad thing and part of a deep government conspiracy? A few weeks ago it was a good thing because it would usher in their defi utopia that would be even less useful (hard to believe I know). permalink embed save report give award reply [–]LogicIsTheSecret 4 points 21 hours ago Mental illness is a sad thing. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]74hct595 19 points 20 hours ago That's not mental illness. Just an awful person lacking empathy. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Nipae -3 points 17 hours ago Xrp permalink embed save report give award reply [+]birdman332 comment score below threshold (5 children) [+]xToniGrssx comment score below threshold (8 children) [–][deleted] 21 hours ago [removed] [–]AutoModerator[M] 1 point 21 hours ago Sorry /u/buibvhikn, your comment has been automatically removed. To avoid spam/bots, posts are not allowed from extremely new accounts. Wait/lurk a bit before contributing. I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]back_fire 1 point 19 hours ago Ahh you see I am an environmentalist all along! You wouldn’t believe though, I’m a libertarian all along though! permalink embed save report give award reply [+]Present_Ad_1576 1 point 19 hours ago (0 children) [–]3meow_ 1 point 18 hours ago Well with the fusion breakthrough, maybe the two aren't mutually exclusive any more. Ofc that last line is dumb af permalink embed save report give award reply [–]CasualBrit5 1 point 18 hours ago How much do they think the government is going to respect their individual liberty in the post-apocalypse, pray tell? permalink embed save report give award reply [–]FuguSandwich 1 point 17 hours ago CDBC? Central Dank Bitching Currency? permalink embed save report give award reply [–]skycake10 1 point 16 hours ago CDBC is not even close to a real thing yet! To the extent that it will be real (it won't) it'll almost certainly be at an inter-bank level and not anything an average person uses. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]DuncanSoriano 1 point 16 hours ago In theory, a suitable tax by the government would be appropriate if you could accurately assess the harm that economic actors do to the environment. I went through a libertarian phase. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]astrange 0 points 16 hours ago Carbon taxes are a bad approach to climate change because carbon is mostly emitted by other countries (true no matter which country you are), which means if you want to reduce it, you're better off inventing new green technologies and selling it to every other country. permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]madmac086 1 point 16 hours ago For at least 9000 years, humans in every society have been told acting according to their nature angers the weather gods. As a collectivist control mechanism. Using that to oppose individual freedom is an ancient tactic, and seeing right through it has always been called 'stupid' by those who can't. "I'd rather burn in Hell than let the Church-State control me" is a 'stupid' statement, but only to a true believer. Oh, and fuck Bitcoin for wasting electricity. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]Singmetosleep123 1 point 15 hours ago Until proven otherwise I refuse to believe this is not some form of satire. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]I_Hate_Leddit 1 point 15 hours ago Crypto isn't going to save your ass from being busted for weed if big gubmint really wants to come down on you, my guy. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]ii-___-ii 1 point 14 hours ago r/EnoughLibertarianSpam permalink embed save report give award reply [–]FlightOfThePigs 1 point 14 hours ago Life is really really good living in America (assume that's where they are from). You have plenty of freedom here to do nearly anything you want within reason obviously. Like all cryptobros he wants to burn down the planet so he has a chance at making a few bucks. This is what it boils down to. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]thephotoman 1 point 14 hours ago Ah, yes. We've gotten to the point where they larp as converts because nobody's buying their shit anymore. permalink embed save report give award reply [+]Animpro 1 point 14 hours ago (0 children) [–]powercow 1 point 14 hours ago This sounds earily like, Im totally a progressive liberal dem, but the left has gotten so incredibly radical and run by the far left, im voting republican. meanwhile AOC which we call "far left" has no real power in the party, while MTG has macarthy's balls in her hand. Id have to see his post history to believe he has said a damn thing environmental I do find it humorous he thinks we could have gotten through covid without increases in spending, in a nation that really never took seriously the idea of a world pandemic despite people like fausi have been warning about this for years..I guess we could have raised his taxes rather than print so much. But either way the money would have been spent. You can argue the size of it all.. but zero nations tried to get through this with no funding. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]Bigfornoreas0n 1 point 14 hours ago And? permalink embed save report give award reply [–]b1daly 0 points 14 hours ago It’s of a piece with this demented, conspiratorialist mindset, where various right wingers and lolbertarians are convinced that ‘things have never been so bad’ (in countries of the West) apparently such individuals have no ability to comprehend just how bad things are for billions living now, and the billions living before. The last 40 years have been exceptional for those lucky to live in the West The ‘wokies’ have their own version of impeding apocalyptic doom, literally believing mass calamity is here with climate change (this individual makes a glancing reference to this hysterical mental state in his OP) It’s a complete lack of awareness—self and the world permalink embed save report give award reply [–]fm22fnam 1 point 14 hours ago Bitcoin is not libertarian. I don't get why these people think it is. It's based on nothing, like the dollar, which libertarians hate. Invest in precious metals instead. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]KVRLMVRX 1 point 14 hours ago Lmaoo what are these priorities permalink embed save report give award reply [–]DocSanchezAOE2 1 point 13 hours ago I must be free! To have payments slowly processed and be able to lose all my money after forgetting a seed phrase... permalink embed save report give award reply [–]bdora48445 1 point 13 hours ago Damn another buttcoiner gone to the dark side 🫡 permalink embed save report give award reply [–]jdmgto 1 point 12 hours ago The absolutely cultists language is not indicative of a problem. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]NumberOneJewBoi 1 point 10 hours ago I want to hear what the Buttcoin community has to say about this response that I wrote to the original post: Bitcoin is only bad for the environment in so far as we have been failing to switch to effective and clean energy sources. If you compare the Co2 to emissions of the banking industry to the Bitcoin industry, the reality sets in that commerce simply requires energy, and has always required energy. In the past it had costed literal horsepower to move money across the country, then coal to power the shipping vessels. In modern times the revolution of the internet has allowed us to easily transact online, but we forget how much energy it requires simply to run the internet. Commerce requires energy, and bitcoin could be the path to push for greener energy sources because of the implications for energy waste. For example, solar panels on a sunny day can only store so much energy with their batteries, but by using that energy to mine bitcoin, we preserve the energy that would be otherwise lost, and would then allow entities to purchase the energy back with the bitcoin made from mining. The bitcoin mining industry will continue regardless of whether the general public buys bitcoin or not because of the institutional money flow which has increased so dramatically and is likely only to increase over the next few years. In my opinion, the small purchases of the retail market don’t effect price action much (and thus bitcoin mining), except for whale movements - therefore the average retail purchaser isnt having much of an effect on the environment. Mining will continue and the only money the exchange is making from retail to invest in mining is fees (assuming self custody). Therefore go purchase some bitcoin and don’t feel bad about the environmental impact. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]Low_Progress9787 2 points 5 hours ago Dude, pretty much every one of your arguments we get pretty much weekly. You can do about 500,000 visa transactions with the amount of energy for one BTC transaction. Some sites have claimed up to 1 million to 1.5 million transactions for 1 BTC transaction. The amount consumed is about 40 days power usage for a single household. This isn't even factoring in the e-waste. The worst part is that this isn't even really being used for buying stuff. It's just used for a giant decentralized pyramid scheme. So, it's burning the earth so people can scam eachother. Hooray! permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]NumberOneJewBoi 1 point 3 hours ago I appreciate the reply, it good to hear from those outside the echo chamber 😂. I’m sure there are only so many arguments for bitcoin, I’m not surprised youve heard em, I’m no genius on the topic. Theoretically, if energy production was efficient and clean enough that we no longer lose 1/2 of our energy generation due to heat waste and transmission, the energy efficiency of visa would be unimportant. I have no notions that Bitcoin can replace fiat as there isnt enough supply, but future inventions could simulate the working aspects while addressing any core issues. Crypto may not be the panacea its touted to be, but clearly many governments recognize that it is a necessary development, with the US, china, and India interested in CBDC (a dystopian nightmare). Idk what the future holds but i really hope our fate isnt in the fiat system, cuz if so we r screwed permalink embed save parent report give award reply [–]Transhumanistgamer 1 point 9 hours ago I'd ask if this guy is too stupid to understand that if the planet burns, he's not going to have any freedoms as any remaining civilization will be super authoritarian by necessity but then I remember that he's a libertarian so the answer is obviously yes. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]montjoye 1 point 8 hours ago with a burned planet you won't have a government.. nor any freedom! because you'll be dead!! win-win permalink embed save report give award reply [–]Tenter5 1 point 8 hours ago If this person is libertarian then they are no way an environmentalist too… permalink embed save report give award reply [–]ZoidsFanatic 1 point 6 hours ago You know, I remember a time when the insane conspiracist theories were actually interesting. Remember the Black Helicopters of the New World Order, or the FEMA death camps, or whatever the fuck all those militia movements were going on about? I do. But now it’s just a bunch of circle jerking internet twits trying to defend magic internet money while also being a racist and sexist. Well, least we get to enjoy them losing their money. permalink embed save report give award reply [–]Funny-Following1729 1 point 5 hours ago There are a few paths to freedom. One way is to have the skills and experience to live off the land. Another way is to save every penny, enough to buy bonds and live off the interest, most won't make enough or be disciplined enough to reach this state. Buying cryptocurrency is the most foolish thing one can do with their money. permalink embed save report give award reply [+]LostSkullofThe78 1 point 5 hours ago (0 children) [–]Evenfisher01 1 point an hour ago I font know what this person was trying to say permalink embed save report give award reply [–]Altruistic_Split9447 1 point an hour ago Btc uses electricity. I mean electric is green right permalink embed save report give award reply [–]ApprehensiveSorbet76 1 point 48 minutes ago He’s going to love his “unstoppable” freedom once miners are classified as money transmitters. He will be free to transact after passing the unavoidable KYC check and obtaining authorization to submit requests to the mempool. permalink embed save report give award reply

1 0

Wokeism is Doomed
by professor rat 16 Dec '22

16 Dec '22

More Gramps-style garbage and misinformation. The WaPo was bought for 250 million by Bezos so it can't have declined that much since it was already flatlining. Then this ridiculous notion there is something leftwing about conformist and far-rightwing news sites like WaPo and the NYT. WTF are these conservative coughs US nutcase fascists smoking? Then this dipshit moron spammer Grarpamps has the front to complain about spam! Chutzpah be thy name. Go fuck your boyfriend Alex Jones up the arse, Gramps. You are not a cypherpunks arsehole. FUCK OFF!

1 0

Cryptocurrency: It's Properties as Barbarous Relic Help Civilized World and Peace
by grarpamp 16 Dec '22

16 Dec '22

https://mises.org/wire/barbarous-relic-helped-enable-world-more-civilized-t… The "Barbarous Relic" Helped Enable A World More Civilized than Today's https://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.pdf https://www.owngoldandsilver.com/article/deposit-and-loan-banking.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_run https://www.owngoldandsilver.com/article/fractional-reserve-banking.html https://mises.org/books/economics_public_welfare_anderson.pdf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichsbank https://www.garynorth.com/public/8372.cfm https://www.gold-eagle.com/article/war-and-inflation https://europevideoproductions.com/france-travel-photos/american-cemetery-a… https://www.ucs.mun.ca/~jmaclean/es.wwI.html https://www.wanttoknow.info/warcoverup https://www.econlib.org/library/YPDBooks/Keynes/kynsCP2.html One of history’s greatest ironies is that gold detractors refer to the metal as the barbarous relic. In fact, the abandonment of gold has put civilization as we know it at risk of extinction. The gold coin standard that had served Western economies so brilliantly throughout most of the nineteenth century hit a brick wall in 1914 and was never able to recover, or so the story goes. As the Great War began, Europe turned from prosperity to destruction, or more precisely, toward prosperity for some and destruction for the rest. The gold coin standard had to be ditched for such a prodigious undertaking. If gold was money, and wars cost money, how was this even possible? First, people were already in the habit of using money substitutes instead of money itself—banknotes instead of the gold coins they represented. People found it more convenient to carry paper around in their pockets than gold coins. Over time the paper itself came to be regarded as money, while gold became a clunky inconvenience from the old days. Second, banks had been in the habit of issuing more bank-notes and deposits than the value of the gold in their vaults. On occasion, this practice would arouse public suspicion that the notes were promises the banks could not keep. The courts sided with the banks and allowed them to suspend note redemption while staying in business, thus strengthening the government-bank alliance. Since the courts ruled that deposits belonged to the banks, bankers could not be accused of embezzlement. The occasional bank runs that erupted were interpreted as a self-fulfilling prophecy. If people lined up to withdraw their money because they believed their bank was insolvent, the bank soon would be. People had no idea their banks were loaning out most of their deposits. They did not know fractional reserve banking, a form of counterfeiting, was the norm. Gold coin redemption requirements put limits on fractional reserve banking. Such limits were not welcomed by banks. Since banks could loan to the government, limitations also capped government spending, so the government did not like the limitations of gold coin redemption either. Which brings us to the wall gold allegedly hit. Preparing for War Means Preparing for Inflation In his 1949 book, Economics and the Public Welfare, economist Benjamin Anderson tells us, “the war [in 1914] came as a great shock, not only to the masses of the American people, but also to most well-informed Americans—and, for that matter, to most Europeans.” And yet, Germany, Russia, and France began accumulating gold prior to the war (with Germany starting first in 1912). Gold was taken “out of the hands of the people” and carried to the reserves of the Reichsbank, the German central bank. People were given paper notes “to take the place of gold in circulation.” When war broke out in August 1914, Gary North explains that the pre–World War I policy of gold coin redemption was independently but almost simultaneously revoked by European governments. . . . They all then resorted to monetary inflation. This was a way to conceal from the public the true costs of the war. They imposed an inflation tax, and could then blame any price hikes on unpatriotic price gouging. This rested on widespread ignorance regarding economic cause and effects regarding monetary inflation and price inflation. They could not have done this if citizens had possessed the pre-war right to demand payment in gold coins at a fixed rate. They would have made a run on the banks. Governments could not have inflated without reneging on their promises to redeem their currencies for gold coins. So, they reneged while they still had the gold. Better early contract-breaking than late, they concluded. If governments had not broken their promise to redeem paper notes for gold coins, they would have had to negotiate their differences rather than engage in one of the deadliest wars in history. Abandoning the gold coin standard, which had always been under government control, was the deciding factor in going to war. Though the US did not formally abandon gold during its late participation in the war, it discouraged redemption while roughly doubling the money supply. Blanchard Economic Research discusses the situation in “War and Inflation”: War also causes the type of inflation that results from a rapid expansion of money and credit. “In World War I, the American people were characteristically unwilling to finance the total war effort out of increased taxes. This had been true in the Civil War and would also be so in World War II and the Vietnam War. Much of the expenditures in World War I, were financed out of the inflationary increases in the money supply.” Governments had a choice to make: fight a long, bloody war for specious reasons, or retain the gold coin standard. They chose war. US leaders found their decision irresistible. It was not J.P. Morgan, Woodrow Wilson, Edward Mandell House, or Benjamin Strong who would be fighting in the trenches. When we hear that “going off gold” was the prerequisite for global peace and harmony, we should remember places such as the Meuse-Argonne American Cemetery in France, where grave markers seemingly extend to infinity. These are mostly the graves of young men who died for nothing but the lies of politicians and the profits of the politically connected. Gold wanted no part in the slaughter. But politicians and bankers knew a paper fiat standard was the monetary prerequisite to achieving their goals. Conclusion John Maynard Keynes, who coined the term “barbarous relic” in reference to the gold standard, wrote about the world that was lost when gold was abandoned: What an extraordinary episode in the economic progress of man that age was which came to an end in August, 1914! . . . The inhabitant of London could order by telephone, sipping his morning tea in bed, the various products of the whole earth, in such quantity as he might see fit, and reasonably expect their early delivery upon his doorstep. . . . He could secure forthwith, if he wished it, cheap and comfortable means of transit to any country or climate without passport or other formality, could despatch his servant to the neighboring office of a bank for such supply of the precious metals as might seem convenient, and could then proceed abroad to foreign quarters, without knowledge of their religion, language, or customs, bearing coined wealth upon his person, and would consider himself greatly aggrieved and much surprised at the least interference. But, most important of all, he regarded this state of affairs as normal, certain, and permanent, except in the direction of further improvement, and any deviation from it as aberrant, scandalous, and avoidable. If Keynes had read what he wrote, he might have been a better economist. And we might be living in a better world today.

1 0

How a Cocaine-Smuggling Cartel Infiltrated the World’s Biggest Shipping Company
by Gunnar Larson 16 Dec '22

16 Dec '22

How a Cocaine-Smuggling Cartel Infiltrated the World’s Biggest Shipping Company https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2022-12-16/how-world-s-top-shipping…

1 0

EU regulatory arbitrage swine apply lipstick and prices for backdoor entry
by professor rat 16 Dec '22

16 Dec '22

Below the preset limits, transactions would be invisible to third parties. https://cointelegraph.com/news/researchers-use-zero-knowledge-to-address-pr… Reposts desperately seeking anal-sex

1 0

Trump says he’d ban government from labeling speech as misinformation
by Gunnar Larson 16 Dec '22

16 Dec '22

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3776629-trump-says-hed-ban-government… Former President Trump said Thursday that he’d ban the U.S. government from labeling any domestic speech as “misinformation” or “disinformation” if he returns to the White House. “I will sign an executive order banning any federal department or agency from colluding with any organization, business or person to censor, limit, categorize or impede the lawful speech of American citizens. I will then ban federal money from being used to label domestic speech as mis- or disinformation,” Trump said in a pre-taped video shared with the New York Post. The former president also said he’d fire federal bureaucrats who he perceived to have engaged in domestic censorship. “Directly or indirectly, whether they are the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Health and Human Services, the FBI, the DOJ, no matter who they are,” he said of those he’d seek to fire. Trump further pledged to direct the Department of Justice to “aggressively prosecute” the alleged censorship. Among other initiatives, the former president called for the federal government to break ties with any nonprofits and academic programs that are aimed at tacking mis- and disinformation. “If any U.S. university is discovered to have engaged in censorship activities or election interferences in the past, such as flagging social media content for removal of blacklisting, those universities should lose federal research dollars and federal student loan support for a period of five years, and maybe more,” he said. The Biden administration has sought to clamp down on the rampant spread of disinformation, particularly regarding the coronavirus pandemic. “The unvaccinated are responsible for their own choices. But those choices have been fueled by dangerous misinformation on cable TV and social media,” President Biden said last year. Trump’s comments about censorship come amid the release of the “Twitter Files,” installments which new Twitter CEO Elon Musk says will reveal information about “free speech suppression” on the platform before he bought it. National Archives releases thousands of JFK assassination records Bipartisan committee chairs push for boost in Taiwan, Ukraine weapons sales Since his takeover of the social media app, Musk moved to reinstate Trump’s account, which was banned following the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol. The former president said in his video that the most recent release confirms a “censorship cartel” and “a sinister group of deep state bureaucrats, Silicon Valley tyrants, left-wing activists and depraved corporate news media” at work to censor Americans’ speech. Trump announced his 2024 bid to reclaim the presidency last month. Categories: Campaign, Media, Technology Tags: 2024, Campaign, Censorship, disinformation, Free speech, misinformation, Trump.

1 0

That crypto-currency-mixers are such a dangerous national-security threat we regard as a merit.
by professor rat 16 Dec '22

16 Dec '22

That crypto-currency-mixers are such a dangerous national-security threat we regard as a merit. Just goes to show the worlds last superpower fucks with cypherpunks at their own peril. Death to America means life for everyone else - welcome to the global anarchist revolution. The USA's regulatory arbitrage bid looks like matching the EU's - that's when they get their crypto regulations act together - it presently recedes before them like a mirage in the desert. And even if it comes - and betters the Chinese - that still only means massive money laundering is guaranteed just below the threshold. Page 459, " Too big to fail" by Andy Sorkin "...Goldman had been on Wachovia's payroll as its adviser, and as such, knew every aspect of its internal numbers..." https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/03/us-bank-mexico-drug-gangs

1 0