On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > 2013/12/18 Telmo Menezes <[email protected]> >> >> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > 2013/12/18 Telmo Menezes <[email protected]> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > 2013/12/17 Telmo Menezes <[email protected]> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 9:02 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> > On 12/16/2013 12:53 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 5:59 AM, meekerdb <[email protected]> >> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> On 12/15/2013 4:23 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Bruno Marchal >> >> >> >>> <[email protected]> >> >> >> >>> wrote: >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> On 14 Dec 2013, at 23:27, LizR wrote: >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> I haven't had a chance to watch it, but I do know that banks >> >> >> >>>> are >> >> >> >>>> stealing >> >> >> >>>> our wealth - as indeed are rich people generally, since "wealth >> >> >> >>>> breeds >> >> >> >>>> more >> >> >> >>>> wealth" and that more wealth has to be extracted from you and >> >> >> >>>> me. >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> Money and richness is not a problem. It is the blood of the >> >> >> >>>> social >> >> >> >>>> system. >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> Money and richness is a problem only when it is based on lies, >> >> >> >>>> and >> >> >> >>>> when >> >> >> >>>> it >> >> >> >>>> is used to hide the lies and perpetuate them. >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> Honest money enrich everybody. True, it is slower for poor, and >> >> >> >>>> quicker >> >> >> >>>> for the rich, but when people play the game "honestly", >> >> >> >>>> everyone >> >> >> >>>> win, >> >> >> >>>> and >> >> >> >>>> poverty regress. >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> In a working economy, there are few poor. Presence of poverty >> >> >> >>>> means >> >> >> >>>> that >> >> >> >>>> there are stealers and bandits (or war or catastrophes). >> >> >> >>>> Accusing >> >> >> >>>> the >> >> >> >>>> system >> >> >> >>>> and money itself is all benefices for the bandits. It dilutes >> >> >> >>>> their >> >> >> >>>> responsibility and wrong-doing in the abstract. It helps them >> >> >> >>>> to >> >> >> >>>> feel >> >> >> >>>> like >> >> >> >>>> not guilty. >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> As I said, criticizing the economical system is like >> >> >> >>>> attributing >> >> >> >>>> to >> >> >> >>>> the >> >> >> >>>> blood cells the responsibility of some tumor since the blood >> >> >> >>>> cells >> >> >> >>>> feeds >> >> >> >>>> it. >> >> >> >>>> It hides the real root of the problem, and focus on the wrong >> >> >> >>>> target. >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> I agree, unsurprisingly. :) >> >> >> >>> I also agree with Liz, in that it is clear who is stealing the >> >> >> >>> money. >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> The "rich get richer" is a very fundamental phenomenon. Even if >> >> >> >>> we >> >> >> >>> remove >> >> >> >>> money from society, it will still happen because it also applies >> >> >> >>> to >> >> >> >>> social >> >> >> >>> interactions. The more friends and alliances you have, the more >> >> >> >>> likely >> >> >> >>> you >> >> >> >>> are to get new ones. This is the reason why every entrepreneur >> >> >> >>> seeks >> >> >> >>> the >> >> >> >>> allegiance of celebrities. It's a more subtle form of currency. >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> However, we got trapped into a system that effectively amplifies >> >> >> >>> "rich >> >> >> >>> get >> >> >> >>> richer" dynamics. This system is central banking -- since the >> >> >> >>> powerful >> >> >> >>> have >> >> >> >>> the capacity to issue fiat money in the form of debt, two things >> >> >> >>> happen: >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> It doesn't take central banking to make the rich get richer. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Yes, that is what I said. My claim is that central banking >> >> >> >> amplifies >> >> >> >> the >> >> >> >> effect. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Ever since >> >> >> >>> civilization began the rich have been able to get richer just by >> >> >> >>> owning >> >> >> >>> stuff. For a couple of millenia it was owning land. If you >> >> >> >>> owned >> >> >> >>> land >> >> >> >>> then >> >> >> >>> serfs and peasants had to pay you for working the land. Then >> >> >> >>> merchantilism >> >> >> >>> added ships to what you could own. Then industrialization added >> >> >> >>> mines >> >> >> >>> and >> >> >> >>> oil and factories. Banking and insurance added financial >> >> >> >>> instruments >> >> >> >>> that >> >> >> >>> you could own. But it's all of a piece. If you own stuff that >> >> >> >>> you >> >> >> >>> can >> >> >> >>> rent/lend you're rich and you can get richer. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> But central banks can print new money. This new money is lent. >> >> >> >> The >> >> >> >> more money you have, the more new money the banking system will >> >> >> >> lend >> >> >> >> to you. Thus the amplification. Also, the marginal value of money >> >> >> >> decreases the more you have, so this devaluation and speculation >> >> >> >> with >> >> >> >> new money exposes the poor to more risk, while they don't >> >> >> >> actually >> >> >> >> have access to the investment opportunities that the rich have. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > You always refer to "central" banks. But all banks always did >> >> >> > this. >> >> >> > The >> >> >> > bank would take 1M$ in deposits and then make 10M$ in loans, >> >> >> > depending >> >> >> > on >> >> >> > the fact that statistically only a few depositors would ask for >> >> >> > their >> >> >> > money >> >> >> > at any one time. So they collected interest on 10M$ while only >> >> >> > having >> >> >> > to >> >> >> > pay interest on 1M$ (if at all). >> >> >> >> >> >> I agree. It is interesting to notice that it is highly illegal if a >> >> >> private citizen does this, but it is the business model of modern >> >> >> banks. An advantage of bitcoin is that it removes the need for the >> >> >> bank as a storage facility. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Bitcoin is not a solution, >> >> >> >> Depends on the problem you're considering, I think it can lead to a >> >> society with more individual freedoms, for example. >> > >> > >> > I don't think it can... can you give argument how bitcoin would achieve >> > that >> > ? >> >> Ask the people who had money from their bank accounts confiscated in >> Cyprus. > > > It doesn't explain how bitcoin would give more freedom...
So you are arguing that governments do not impose any restrictions on monetary transactions with fiat currency? > it will certainly > give an insane amount of wealth (without any work done, only > """""mining""""" when it was easy to do) to early adopters if it ever stick > around, that's the only thing sure. Well, if it sticks around it will be because a lot of people are benefiting from it, because participation is voluntary. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > the first to use the system get richer as the >> >> > system is adopted in time... >> >> >> >> Yes they do. >> > >> > >> > A system that enrich its creator cannot be good. >> >> Ok. I don't share this ideology. > > > So you think it is normal, early adopters to get an insane amount of wealth > just because they created the moneytary system ? It's sure we don't share > our ideology. Ok so what do you propose? Bitcoins should be made illegal? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > new comers don't get a share to enter, they >> >> >> >> They can work for bitcoins in a number of ways already. >> > >> > >> > What a joke... bitcoins were fast to mine at the beginning, not now, >> > giving >> > an unfair amount of them to early adopters. >> >> I cannot think of a single concept that introduced more violence and >> misery into the world than the pursuit of "fairness", > > > Current capitalist system ? No, I don't think so. >> >> to be determined >> by some enlightened minority. I would much rather have non-coercion, >> and bitcoin provides that. You are free to participate in the market >> or not, and you are free to change your mind at any point. >> >> >> >> >> The more this >> >> is possible, the more bitcoin will have succeeded in replacing >> >> conventional currencies >> > >> > >> > Being deflationnist, it can only be adopted by speculator... you won't >> > buy a >> > pizza with a money that double its value in one month (or lose it >> > because of >> > that speculation). >> >> Deflation is not a binary proposition. You can have a lot of it or a >> little of it. > > > Bitcoin is a lot of it, if the system stick, as the number of bitcoin is > limited, an insane amount of wealth will be confiscated by early adopters > through deflation... it's crazy to accept such a thing. Well, then don't. Nobody is forcing you. Telmo. > Quentin > >> >> The hope of the proponents of bitcoin is that it will >> become more and more stable as it grows. Of course it's in the >> speculative phase now, but it cannot possibly keep doubling in value >> every few months forever. >> >> > >> >> >> >> . Some stores and cafes around my neighbourhood >> >> in Berlin already accept them. >> >> >> >> For newcomers to get a share to enter would require precisely the type >> >> of central control that Bitcoin hopes to replace. >> > >> > >> > An economic system unfair to new comers cannot be a good economic >> > system, >> > why replace the one we have now with something that's not better in that >> > respect. >> >> Unfair according to your ideas of fairness. Bitcoin is a benevolent >> idea, because you are not forced to participate if you feel that way. >> >> >> >> >> Mining is more >> >> elegant. >> > >> > >> > It's BS... >> >> Ok then, I guess... >> >> >> >> >> It provides an incentive for early adopters, which are badly >> >> needed in the beginning, and then it gets progressively harder. >> >> >> >> > have to buy it with external real accepted currency... >> >> >> >> Is there any reasonable criteria for a currency being "real and >> >> accepted" beyond the existence of a market where people are willing to >> >> trade with it? >> >> >> >> > it does more looks >> >> > like a con system, than a faithful replacement to fiat money. >> >> >> >> Bitcoin was created by the release of a paper that describes the >> >> system. >> > >> > >> > I know the system, it's a con system, and only used for speculation and >> > money laundering... if you buy coffee with it instead of speculate with >> > it >> > you must be very *special*. >> >> >> http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/apr/26/bitcoins-gain-currency-in-berlin >> >> > >> >> >> >> Anyone could learn all the details from the beginning and >> >> decide if they want to enter the market or not. It could be a con if >> >> the creators didn't believe it would work in the long term. Even if >> >> they didn't, it doesn't really matter. It only matters if it works or >> >> not. >> >> >> >> > Plus bitcoin is inherently deflationist... >> >> >> >> On purpose. >> > >> > >> > That leads people to keep their money, and no investment... it only >> > works >> > now because of speculation. >> >> Maybe. I don't know the future and you don't either. >> >> Telmo. >> >> > Quentin >> > >> >> >> >> Some people, like me, believe this could be a better model >> >> for society. With a completely free currency market, deflation could >> >> lead to technological evolution actually freeing mankind from unwanted >> >> work. >> >> >> >> The beauty of systems like bitcoin is that nobody can decide or impose >> >> anything. They will succeed or fail on their own merits. Isn't it good >> >> that the experiment is being made? >> >> >> >> Telmo. >> >> >> >> > Quentin >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> It will still be useful to have security >> >> >> experts providing safe wallets, but they will not be able to behave >> >> >> as >> >> >> banks and lend your money. >> >> >> >> >> >> We already have pear to pear lending, although it is illegal in many >> >> >> places. Again, with bitcoin, it will be very hard to regulate >> >> >> against >> >> >> such behaviours, and I think that is a good thing. >> >> >> >> >> >> The current situation is very unfair. We need banks to store our >> >> >> money, and they get to invest it in ways that we are not allowed. >> >> >> Then, we don't get any of the profit the bank generates from our own >> >> >> money. This also amplifies "rich get richer" dynamics. >> >> >> >> >> >> > Of course this occasionally resulted in >> >> >> > "runs" on banks and consequence failure of the bank. Central >> >> >> > banks >> >> >> > were >> >> >> > set >> >> >> > up as part of a system to regulate this. The central bank insures >> >> >> > deposits, >> >> >> > but also the same regulatory system limits the discount rate, i.e. >> >> >> > the >> >> >> > amount of money a bank has to have as a fraction of what it can >> >> >> > loan. >> >> >> > So >> >> >> > Central banks exist to *limit* the "printing" of money. >> >> >> >> >> >> I guess you buy into the narratives of power more easily than I do. >> >> >> We >> >> >> have different personalities in that regard. Maybe you're right, but >> >> >> I >> >> >> don't think you are. >> >> >> >> >> >> What I observe is that central banks control the supply of money and >> >> >> the price of money. This is bound to create an elite that has >> >> >> incredible power over the rest of us, including power over >> >> >> governments. >> >> >> >> >> >> "Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who >> >> >> writes >> >> >> the >> >> >> laws." >> >> >> - Mayer Amschel Rothschild >> >> >> >> >> >> A simple, straightforward solution in terms of regulation would be >> >> >> to >> >> >> forbid fractional-reserve banking by default. No central banking >> >> >> needed. If banks wanted to loan my money, then they would need my >> >> >> agreement and they would need to share the profits, and I would >> >> >> share >> >> >> the risk. But this is never on the table. >> >> >> >> >> >> In the same vein that politicians tell us that bailing out the big >> >> >> banks is unfair but unavoidable, but they never comment on why not >> >> >> bail out the people who's lives have been destroyed by the banks, >> >> >> and >> >> >> who payed the taxes that make the bailout possible in the first >> >> >> place. >> >> >> Again, never on the table. >> >> >> >> >> >> > And the policy is generally adjusted to try produce small, but >> >> >> > positive >> >> >> > inflation. This is because deflation is considered unstable. >> >> >> > Inflation >> >> >> > is >> >> >> > stable and encourages investment because just holding money loses >> >> >> > value. >> >> >> >> >> >> Yup, it's the current dogma. Infinite growth. I would argue that if >> >> >> you want to cut CO2 emissions, this would be a good place to start. >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Of course you can also >> >> >> >>> influence government and governments exist largely to protect >> >> >> >>> your >> >> >> >>> property >> >> >> >>> rights. >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> - The money I have in my pocket is not safe. They can devalue it >> >> >> >>> and >> >> >> >>> there >> >> >> >>> is nothing I can do about it. They have a strong incentive to >> >> >> >>> devalue >> >> >> >>> my >> >> >> >>> money because they can give the new money they created to their >> >> >> >>> allies, >> >> >> >>> through sophisticated mechanisms. It is very cleverly disguised, >> >> >> >>> but >> >> >> >>> it's >> >> >> >>> still plain old theft; >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> That means you have a strong incentive to invest/spend your >> >> >> >>> money. >> >> >> >>> And >> >> >> >>> that >> >> >> >>> applies also to a rich person that has a lot of money - >> >> >> >>> inflation >> >> >> >>> encourages >> >> >> >>> him to spend it on something. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Right, and this prevents the bulk of the population from escaping >> >> >> >> wage >> >> >> >> slavery even though technology could replace labour. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > The reason technology doesn't allow them to escape is that they >> >> >> > generally >> >> >> > can't buy the technology to replace their labor. When they can, >> >> >> > as >> >> >> > for >> >> >> > example farmers do by buying tractors, cultivators, etc, then they >> >> >> > replace >> >> >> > the laborers they would otherwise employ. This causes the latter >> >> >> > to >> >> >> > escape >> >> >> > wage slavery by being unemployed. >> >> >> >> >> >> True, but in other models, like the deflationary model implied by >> >> >> bitcoin, as the need for human labour contracts, the fees for the >> >> >> remaining that is necessary increases (in a free market). A good >> >> >> direction for society would be to reduce the amount of years one has >> >> >> to work to pay for one's life. Imagine the deal: maybe society >> >> >> doesn't >> >> >> really need any more physicists urgently, but maybe it needs >> >> >> plumbers. >> >> >> What if you could work as a plumber for 5 years and then spend the >> >> >> rest of you life pursuing your own interests? I don't see why we >> >> >> couldn't create a system with this type of incentive, except that >> >> >> it's >> >> >> never on the table. Democracy provided for a very limited menu. >> >> >> Sometimes there's a special, but unlike nice restaurants, you get >> >> >> last >> >> >> week's meal with some food colouring to pretend it's lobster >> >> >> casserole. >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> So one of the reasons for the current >> >> >> >>> recession is that wealth is very concentrated by inflation is >> >> >> >>> quite >> >> >> >>> low, >> >> >> >>> so >> >> >> >>> corporations and wealthy persons are not motivated to take much >> >> >> >>> risk >> >> >> >>> on >> >> >> >>> investing their money; they can easily wait and see. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I would argue that a deeper reason is that technology made many >> >> >> >> jobs >> >> >> >> disappear, but the inflationary economic system we live under >> >> >> >> cannot >> >> >> >> accommodate that. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > I'd say it accommodates that just fine from an economics >> >> >> > standpoint. >> >> >> >> >> >> If it did we would need to work less years to pay for our lives. >> >> >> Instead, we have to work more and get less money for it. >> >> >> >> >> >> > In the >> >> >> > U.S. the recession only lasted a year after the mortgage crisis; >> >> >> > the >> >> >> > GDP >> >> >> > started back up. BUT unemployment has remained high for three >> >> >> > years. >> >> >> > And I >> >> >> > think you are right that technology is a good part of the reason >> >> >> > for >> >> >> > that. >> >> >> > But the other part is just because many are unemployed and many >> >> >> > more >> >> >> > are >> >> >> > concerned about their economic security, consumer spending is low. >> >> >> > The >> >> >> > rich >> >> >> > won't invest in making stuff if they think it will be hard to sell >> >> >> > it. >> >> >> > So >> >> >> > there's a negative feedback - deflationary instability. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> - The more wealthy, who can invest, can leverage their >> >> >> >>> investments >> >> >> >>> by >> >> >> >>> orders >> >> >> >>> of greatness. The more money you have, the more you can leverage >> >> >> >>> it >> >> >> >>> (by >> >> >> >>> effectively creating new "fake" money). The poor are the most >> >> >> >>> vulnerable >> >> >> >>> to >> >> >> >>> the inevitable systemic collapse that a debt-based economy will >> >> >> >>> create. >> >> >> >>> The >> >> >> >>> poor implicitly risk their homes and means of survival when the >> >> >> >>> rich >> >> >> >>> play >> >> >> >>> the big casino game of leveraged investments, derivative markets >> >> >> >>> and >> >> >> >>> so >> >> >> >>> on. >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> But that money isn't fake. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Yes, maybe a better word is stolen, because it was created by >> >> >> >> diluting >> >> >> >> the value of the money in people's banks accounts, but it is then >> >> >> >> given to other people. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> The poor may lose their home which has real >> >> >> >>> value. And even if they don't lose their home they end up >> >> >> >>> paying >> >> >> >>> excessively for the money they borrowed to buy it - that's real >> >> >> >>> labor >> >> >> >>> value. >> >> >> >>> The rich gain real money, not just fake. All over Southern >> >> >> >>> California >> >> >> >>> houses whose value dropped and are threatened with foreclosure >> >> >> >>> are >> >> >> >>> being >> >> >> >>> bought up for cash. It's not poor people who can pay $500,000 >> >> >> >>> in >> >> >> >>> cash >> >> >> >>> for a >> >> >> >>> house. >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Bitcoin might solve these two problems. >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Naah. It's just another medium of exchange. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Unlike the existing mediums of exchange after the end of the gold >> >> >> >> standard, a central authority cannot issue more bitcoins. >> >> >> >> Bitcoins >> >> >> >> can >> >> >> >> only be produced by mining, with a predictable and increasing >> >> >> >> computational effort, and up to a certain amount. So in some >> >> >> >> point >> >> >> >> in >> >> >> >> the future the last bitcoin will be mined, and that's it. If I >> >> >> >> own a >> >> >> >> bitcoin right now, I do not have to fear that it will get >> >> >> >> devalued >> >> >> >> by >> >> >> >> political decisions. Also, it is not possible for a bank to lend >> >> >> >> bitcoin that it doesn't own or that were lend to it, so there is >> >> >> >> no >> >> >> >> amplification effect. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > That's like going on a gold standard. There's only so much gold. >> >> >> > Which >> >> >> > is >> >> >> > both an advantage, in that is prevents inflation devaluing the >> >> >> > gold, >> >> >> > but >> >> >> > also a disadvantage in that there's not enough to support the >> >> >> > level >> >> >> > of >> >> >> > international trade. But ultimately trade depends on trust in the >> >> >> > system. >> >> >> > There's nothing to prevent a bank that owns 1M bitcoins from >> >> >> > lending >> >> >> > 10M >> >> >> > in >> >> >> > bitcoin value. It's all numbers in ledgers. >> >> >> >> >> >> With bitcoin, why would I risk my money with fractional-reserve >> >> >> banking when I can store it myself with some strong cryptography, >> >> >> including backups in services that are much cheaper than banks and >> >> >> gain no control over it? >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I'm not saying that Bitcoin is a silver bullet that will solve >> >> >> >> all >> >> >> >> of >> >> >> >> the problems, but I find it hard to argue that it does not >> >> >> >> prevent >> >> >> >> inflation by the actions of central authorities and that it does >> >> >> >> not >> >> >> >> prevent the ability of the rich to leverage their investments by >> >> >> >> 1000x >> >> >> >> like they can do in derivative markets with fiat currency. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Whoever owns a lot of stuff >> >> >> >>> will still be able to use it to get more - >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Yes, this is true even without money, as I said before. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> without actually producing the >> >> >> >>> extra value, rather by taking it from those who have little. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> One advantage of having rich people is that they can tolerate >> >> >> >> more >> >> >> >> risk. This allows for the allocation of resources to speculative >> >> >> >> ideas >> >> >> >> that could improve everyone's lives in the future. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > That's fine and companies like H-P and Apple and Google were >> >> >> > started >> >> >> > that >> >> >> > way. But some enterprises are too big and risky for private >> >> >> > investors. >> >> >> > So >> >> >> > satellites, vaccination, GPS, the internet, radar,...were >> >> >> > underwritten >> >> >> > by >> >> >> > government investment. >> >> >> >> >> >> It's hard for me to argue against this because it's circular. The >> >> >> private sector is not allowed to do certain things under free >> >> >> competition (as is he case with communications and health care), and >> >> >> then people argue that the government is needed to do these things. >> >> >> Maybe you're right, but we don't really know. I think it's worth a >> >> >> try, but that is not on the table. Also, notice that all of the >> >> >> above-mentioned innovations were motivated by increasing military >> >> >> power. Then they had nice externalities for the general population, >> >> >> but I very much doubt that the government would care if it weren't >> >> >> for >> >> >> the military applications. I would rather have a slower pace of >> >> >> innovation and no wars. >> >> >> >> >> >> > The problem with rich people is many just inherited their wealth >> >> >> > and >> >> >> > then >> >> >> > they grow it just by "renting" it, without contributing anything >> >> >> > actively. >> >> >> >> >> >> I agree, this is a problem. However, I cannot think of any way to >> >> >> fix >> >> >> it that doesn't introduce even more unfairness (because it doesn't >> >> >> matter what regulations you come up with, a lot of money will buy >> >> >> you >> >> >> a way around them). You see this with taxes, where the power >> >> >> narrative >> >> >> is social fairness but the reality is that the middle class ends up >> >> >> paying all of them. >> >> >> >> >> >> > I always find it fascinating when a candidate for the U.S. >> >> >> > Presidency >> >> >> > is >> >> >> > asked about his wealth (and most of them are wealthy). He >> >> >> > generally >> >> >> > disclaims any knowledge of how it is managed and says he has put >> >> >> > it >> >> >> > in a >> >> >> > blind trust. This always raises the question in my mind, "If >> >> >> > you're >> >> >> > not >> >> >> > even managing the money (and you probably haven't for years) why >> >> >> > should >> >> >> > any >> >> >> > of the proceeds go to you? It's just money earning money." >> >> >> >> >> >> This is similar to the height of the Roman Empire. I think there are >> >> >> a >> >> >> lot of similarities between the US and the Roman Empire, especially >> >> >> in >> >> >> their respective transitions from Republic to Empire. >> >> >> >> >> >> "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." >> >> >> -- Mark Twain >> >> >> >> >> >> Telmo. >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Brent >> >> >> > >> >> >> > -- >> >> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> >> >> > Groups >> >> >> > "Everything List" group. >> >> >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >> >> >> > send >> >> >> > an >> >> >> > email to [email protected]. >> >> >> > To post to this group, send email to >> >> >> > [email protected]. >> >> >> > Visit this group at >> >> >> > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> >> >> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> >> >> Groups >> >> >> "Everything List" group. >> >> >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >> >> >> send >> >> >> an >> >> >> email to [email protected]. >> >> >> To post to this group, send email to >> >> >> [email protected]. >> >> >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> >> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy >> >> > Batty/Rutger Hauer) >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> >> > Groups >> >> > "Everything List" group. >> >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >> >> > send >> >> > an >> >> > email to [email protected]. >> >> > To post to this group, send email to >> >> > [email protected]. >> >> > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> >> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> >> >> -- >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> >> Groups >> >> "Everything List" group. >> >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >> >> an >> >> email to [email protected]. >> >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy >> > Batty/Rutger Hauer) >> > >> > -- >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> > Groups >> > "Everything List" group. >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >> > an >> > email to [email protected]. >> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > > > -- > All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy > Batty/Rutger Hauer) > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
