Hold on to your chair guys. This is HUGE!

InTheWoods

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Oct 12, 2014
721
941
263
@TanteStefana

As most people know already governments don't really go back on already imposed taxes. In Europe there's huge VAT consumption tax + dozen of other taxes. Not to mention the hidden inflation tax.

Historically taxes have only gone up. No country has ever lowered taxes in the long term. Unfortunately this is a huge downside of our current political system. Gov and friends get addicted to that money, votes are bought in exchange for promises....vicious circle.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

InTheWoods

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Oct 12, 2014
721
941
263
Not really, Bitcoin will simply be taken over by the banks. They will use it's one function, transfer of value. They need Bitcoin because it is the only crypto out there with decent market cap and mining hash rate (which can not be overcome to cheat the blockchain). They need the market cap, which is still teeny tiny, to be useful. There is no way, even for banks to replicate that, because they need the diversified network. They don't even want anonymity. They do, if any of them understand, want a lot of full nodes. None of this is achievable by them alone, they need Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the entryway for the rest of the world to crypto. Being a one trick pony is just fine. In fact it's desirable and if you don't think the guys at MIT know this, your mistaken. They know, and they keep those developers on a string with the illusion that they (the developers) are in charge of the direction Bitcoin goes in. The powers that be do see the writing on the wall. The Banksters want to keep it down as long as possible until they control the situation (IE, have had enough time to collect enough BTC to feel in control) then, slowly, they'll start using it in their systems. BTC has a huge potential for growth, because it will become the main banking/governmental coin. But in the end, they will not be able to control the outflow to other cryptos, so they will be losing a lot of power to the people in the end, as Satoshi Nakamoto originally intended. No matter how institutionalized Bitcoin becomes, Satoshi Nakamoto is, and will always be the biggest hero of the 21st century.

I think you're 100% accurate in this assessment. I strongly believe Bitcoin is being taken over by banksters *was taken over actually. This deserves a whole new thread because it's a very big topic.
 

Bridgewater

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Dec 14, 2014
183
164
203
Yup. We have to admit, people want a government for good reason. Government helps most people resolve differences, helps protect individuals and businesses from fraud and theft by creating a system where one can get help. It's VERY imperfect but works for most people most of the time. The thing is, if there isn't enough money, we can't have a huge central government, it's repetitive and wasteful. The only way to function is for most of the money and effort to always be at the local level. That's how it should be in my opinion. Not every one agrees, I know, but the closer to the community a governing body is, the better it is at servicing the needs of the people, the more flexible it is, the more efficient, and the more responsive.

I'm not saying poor communities should be isolated, but I'm certain that even a state can do the job better than a federal government.
Without big government, you'd have to have your own army and defenses to protect your interests in dealing with others. The big companies you see today would be small governments themselves. Everyone would be responsible for protecting their own wealth and safety. This is highly inefficient for society, trade and innovation, though. When like-minded, like-morality people get together and agree on rules and propriety, they can then elect a government to enforce those rules, and thus not have to expend nearly as much resources on personal protection compared to going at it alone. You can start to "rely" on government regulation so you can trust unknown 3rd party entities with your money. It works great for a while (industrial revolution, moon landing, computers, etc).But as we can see, this all starts to go out the window when it goes too far in the direction of complete laziness and trust without ANY personal responsibility, and the wealth and power is slowly drained from the hands of the people actually producing and into the hands of the few in control of the system.

You still need to be able to control and protect your own money. More to the point, you still need to have guns to protect yourself--not against your peers but against the government if/when it decides it no longer has to serve the will of the people who originally created it. The real check and balance system is ultimately the people themselves.
 

TanteStefana

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Mar 9, 2014
2,861
1,854
1,283
Yah, inTheWoods, the thing is, when everyone has digital cash freedom, the faucet will be turned off on the Government. Their only recourse will be to tax in the open, then the people can be incited to rebel so much easier. I see massive governmental employees being laid off in the future. I don't dislike people just because of where they work, but frankly, we all have had to deal with losing our jobs, they haven't. They will rebound, they will find other work.

This is the only way we can ever hope of shrinking government without a war.

I was posting while you wrote the above. I totally agree with you.
 

TanteStefana

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Mar 9, 2014
2,861
1,854
1,283
The public are being fed that we're a bunch of gun carrying, anarchistic crazy people. Really, we all just want to make a better world with less waste and no wars. And we simply have the gall to think.... no we know, this can be done and it must be done.

We are simply a segment of the population that actually loves our world and our fellow human beings (well, maybe not Camo ;P) , and are willing to fight to make it better......
 

InTheWoods

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Oct 12, 2014
721
941
263
The public are being fed that we're a bunch of gun carrying, anarchistic crazy people. Really, we all just want to make a better world with less waste and no wars. And we simply have the gall to think.... no we know, this can be done and it must be done.

We are simply a segment of the population that actually loves our world and our fellow human beings (well, maybe not Camo ;P) , and are willing to fight to make it better......
Satoshi, whoever he may be, regardless of his left or right political affiliation, wanted to destroy the central bank monopoly on money. This much we know as it was his stated goal. Goes without saying that if we are correct in our assessment, Bitcoin in its current form, hijacked by banksters, has failed in its mission. Banksters/private banks are just mere extensions of central banks. If private banks have taken over Bitcoin it's just another way of saying central banks have taken over Bitcoin.

You can't possibly expect to be able to challenge the central banks` monopoly while currency is not private. There is a simple reason for that. Private banks have clever ways to bypass KYC/AML compliance for their biggest customers which means Bitcoin being fully scrutinized and chocked by the fully regulated exchanges that are WAY more draconic than actual banks stands no real chance of being any kind of monopoly breaker in this area.

This means an alternative like DASH with a sustainable growth model is sorely needed. A transnational form of private digital cash that can really shatter the bankster monopoly.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: Dunedoo

Bridgewater

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Dec 14, 2014
183
164
203
We don't have to worry about Bitcoin fixing its problems. It may have limitations but it does NOT have problems, and that's why it has been successful.

So far no so-called attack has ever been successful, has it? Gox and similar accidents (thefts) are a result of people not using bitcoin as intended (holding it themselves). The spamming of small transactions is not sustainable because of fees. The block size limit is a non factor because of fees. The speed is not a factor because it can simply be used to transfer larger quantities of wealth slowly with large fees. Theres no reason bitcoin can't become the primary currency for inter-governmental trade, while an alternative currency with supremely better features (A.K.A. Dash) is employed by individuals for daily use.

Economically, a fundamentally unchanging Bitcoin with huge hashing power can bee seen as a simple fact of nature like rocks or water. This actually GIVES it value and potential as a base money like gold as toknormal has expertly explained before. That's how it has garnered the investment base it currently has right now.

If any of these recent chinese speculators thought bitcoin was going to change, they'd get out right quick. IMO, Bitcoin itself is what it is and will probably never change again...that is the way it will gain the most value. Interestingly, some of the strongest advocates for Bitcoin change are the payment processors (bitpay, coinbase, etc) who do business in the facilitation of transactions, rather than using bitcoin DIRECTLY in the real-world economy. They know their days are numbered, just like the banks know it.

The only unknown for me is whether further innovation will come by means of 3rd party integration with Bitcoin or simply the use of Alts with these functions built-in. Maybe both? Extrapolate all of that 3rd party Bitcoin stuff into the long term and notice that it becomes a wasteful infrastructure that Dash handles orders of magnitude more efficiently at the protocol level! Dash will be way cheaper to use because the end-users would not have to pay nearly as much to support all of that service infrastructure. Additionally, Dash's decentralized proof of service will also be more elastic and adaptable than any for-profit 3rd party infrastructure built around Bitcoin. It is entirely possible that we'll see it all built for Bitcoin and later on at some point everyone will simply jump ship and Dash over to a superior currency.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TanteStefana

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Mar 9, 2014
2,861
1,854
1,283
What's really beautiful, even if people like Christine LaGarde, whom I actually find very intelligent and charismatic, really can't see that Bitcoin is THEIR future, it will not be long before Banks are converting funds to Bitcoin. Frankly, I think Ms. LaGarde knows very well, but they're still trying to see if they can do this themselves and not have the disadvantage of being "latecomers" to Bitcoin. I don't think they'll find a solution though, as the trust comes from distrust :) and there will always be the bigger banks with more hash power that the smaller banks won't trust (rightfully).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dunedoo

InTheWoods

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Oct 12, 2014
721
941
263
What's really beautiful, even if people like Christine LaGarde, whom I actually find very intelligent and charismatic, really can't see that Bitcoin is THEIR future, it will not be long before Banks are converting funds to Bitcoin. Frankly, I think Ms. LaGarde knows very well, but they're still trying to see if they can do this themselves and not have the disadvantage of being "latecomers" to Bitcoin. I don't think they'll find a solution though, as the trust comes from distrust :) and there will always be the bigger banks with more hash power that the smaller banks won't trust (rightfully).
Banks are already doing that and have been doing that via several funds that have popped up in recent years like Berry Silbert's and others. I believe he even listed one such fund on the pinkshets on the OTC market so banks can buy Bitcoin just like stock. On top of this there's the fully compliant regulated Gemini where banks can also buy Bitcoin.
I don't think this changes things much though.

Christine LaGarde recently said banks should not be worried about Bitcoin because as long as Bitcoin is chocked with draconic AML/KYC banks have nothing to worry about when it comes to their future. I think she's right. In this sense Bitcoin has failed its intended mission as Satoshi envisioned it, which was to destroy the central bank monopoly on money. Bitcoin will be just another safe heaven asset like gold (for a while) but nothing more. It will never replace fiat currencies in its current form.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TanteStefana

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Mar 9, 2014
2,861
1,854
1,283
You may be right, but I do see Bitcoin being more secure than anything the banks can come up with, and it's speed (compared to banks, it's super fast) will draw them in. That's not even taking into account it's cost, which is minimal especially at the amounts they trade daily. So maybe Bitcoin is "playing by the rules" of AML and KYC, it only effects small time users. You're right that Satoshi's hope for bringing down the the world banking organization has failed. But lets face it, total chaos isn't in anyone's interest. I still see all this as being extremely empowering to the people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dunedoo

TanteStefana

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Mar 9, 2014
2,861
1,854
1,283
Christine LaGarde seems to be telling this lady from the African republic of the Congo that remittances and technology is going to change and that some people should be worried about the disrupters in that particular field. Who could she be talking about except Bitcoin?

I suspect that the articles i've been reading that seem to imply that she has dismissed Bitcoin were misinterpreted :)
 

stan.distortion

Well-known Member
Oct 30, 2014
865
507
163
I think you're 100% accurate in this assessment. I strongly believe Bitcoin is being taken over by banksters *was taken over actually. This deserves a whole new thread because it's a very big topic.
I'd come to the same conclusion, the vampire squids tentacles have been worming their way through it and now they appear to have it in a stranglehold. Part of the way they operate is to appear all-powerful though and that's often an illusion, their seemingly iron grip on the markets slipped recently so they're not invincible and there's plenty of scenarios that could result in their hold slipping on the Bitcoin blockchain but that's just one side of the story, the tentacles are still worming their way in elsewhere. The obvious sign of the takeover was banking getting friendly with Bitcoin, they simply don't do that with anything they can't control and now IBM and Microsoft are getting friendly and they'll be a little more difficult to out-evolve in the tech race.

Our biggest opponent in all this isn't the banks, it's not the tech giants, it's ourselves. "If there was hope, it MUST lie in the proles", and we can see why that statement was clearly false, our resilience to change is incalculable, we can easily be diverted into squabbling over trivialities and we're satisfied with crumbs from the cake and ignore who's getting the slices. I'd never realised it before Dash but that cake might be the key, bitcoin started handing out slices and it took great effort by those who consider the cake their own to turn that back into crumbs but a genie was let out of another bottle, incentivisation is a very powerful tool.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InTheWoods

InTheWoods

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Oct 12, 2014
721
941
263
You may be right, but I do see Bitcoin being more secure than anything the banks can come up with, and it's speed (compared to banks, it's super fast) will draw them in. That's not even taking into account it's cost, which is minimal especially at the amounts they trade daily.
Bitcoin may be faster than wire transfers which can take a few business days. BUT Bitcoin is slower than Paypal which is instant and has zero fees when transferred between Paypal accounts and Bitcoin is slower than Mastercard or Visa who have instant transactions and can be used for day to day shopping.

DASH with InstantX cancels out the advantage of hipster banks like Paypal and payment options like Visa/Mastercard.

So maybe Bitcoin is "playing by the rules" of AML and KYC, it only effects small time users. You're right that Satoshi's hope for bringing down the the world banking organization has failed. But lets face it, total chaos isn't in anyone's interest. I still see all this as being extremely empowering to the people.
Not the small users are the problem but the big money actually. Banks under the umbrella of AML/KYC launder huge amounts of money for certain groups and they get away with it. They only apply nasty KYC/AML to small people who are not worth messing around with due to poor risk/reward ratio. :) One such example is HSBC laundering huge amounts of drug money or UBS bankers moving money in and out for clients using clever tactics like putting diamonds in toothpaste tubes. HSBC is biggest bank in the UK, one of the biggest in the world and so is UBS, the Swiss banking giant.

You speak about total chaos....well if you believe that central banks cause boom and bust cycles and trigger economic crises as a result, than removing central banks from the equation would create a much more stable financial system and much more order, the very opposite of chaos. The central banks create the chaos. This was Satoshi's point of view and I believe it's totally accurate.


In other words DASH not Bitcoin is the best bet at this point to move the vision of Bitcoin forward.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TanteStefana

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Mar 9, 2014
2,861
1,854
1,283
No matter what, Banks and Governments, who are in bed together, are extremely powerful. They don't even teach economics in grade school, and for a very good reason. The most they will teach is basic accounting and how to balance a checkbook (I don't think they even do that anymore, do they?) Anyway, I agree that Dash is the only crypto currency that can act as cash, but the entire world needs to be converted over. That's actually easiest in the lowest economic tiered countries. For the top tier, man, it's going to take a lot of time. I can't see cryptos taking over finances in less that 20 years. I can, however, see them take big bites out in as soon as 5 years.

If you listen to Christine LaGarde in the clip above, you can see that she believes in social engineering as well as Environmental and Economical. The people at the top want to do good, but feel they can do it artificially by imposing taxes, and forcing their will (which is RIGHT) on all people of the world, etc... And of course it's always from the point of view of Westerners, what is good, what is bad. I'm sure that if they help people at all, they actually do it at an exorbitant cost, which is of course well justified from their point of view.

Their beliefs and ours are different but still beliefs. Beliefs are deeply rooted in our souls. Somewhere we have to come together. Because, frankly, they have more people on their side in the world than we do. If the point of Bitcoin is to rain in large governments, war and increase the reach of funding to the far corners of the world, we will have to work together. There is no black, no white, only grey.

To win this conversion, it will take time. It'll take at minimum a generation. Those hippies have to die off, man. I'm at the tail end of that era, and I see their point of view. But I see it having warped into being exactly the same thing as what they fought in the first place. The whole structure of how governments are paid and what banks do has to change. They won't disappear entirely, but they will have to eventually fundamentally change.

Anyway, I think we must at least think along these lines if we want to evaluate how cryptos might fair in the world of tomorrow. We also must think about how to subvert an agressive international governmental/bankster coalition to stamp out cryptos. I really feel that won't happen though.
 

Buer

New Member
May 6, 2018
3
1
1
22
I am new here can anyone detail me what is Dash bitcoin?
It's best you first of all read up on the whitepaper, and then perhaps have a go at our FAQ. DASH is the future, but you must first understand it before you partake of it!!