Is it unpatriotic to use cryptocurrencies?
I am expecting sooner than later we will begin to see an increase in rhetoric surrounding the morals of using Bitcoin, Dash, and other cryptocurrencies.
As it is today, we know that there is a strong push to make this technology appear as a danger, linking it to crime and overall people that don't want their identity to be known.
We heard it before when we were made aware that the NSA was spying on us, something along the lines of "if you haven't done anything wrong then you have nothing to fear."
Mark my words, I've been saying this since I created my Steemit account, the terrorism bogeyman will be used to try to keep people away from this technology over fear of ending up in some government blacklist.
We keep being told that we are being spied on but don't we know this already? Maybe the whole point is to deter us from acting all together, to get people to fear not being able to cover their tracks enough or having trouble over simply trying to cover their tracks.
If patriotism is reduced to supporting your team no matter what, then one could say is not very patriotic to support cryptocurrency adoption or use this tech, so long as the government doesn't endorse it.
But I would like to think that those who identify as patriots do so because they want to see their surroundings improve, not so they can say they're the best but so they can feel like the best because their environment allows for it.
I think a very good display of patriotism can be observed when we prioritize how good the nation works as opposed to how good it looks.
There are people that refuse to recognize their country has wronged in any way, there is no way to improve anything if everything is always fine.
Cryptocurrencies can offer a way to keep our representatives accountable, and that's why they will say anything to try keeping people away from it. Imagine hustling for 30-40 years to land a seat in government and do whatever you want thanks to the patriots that will support you no matter what...then all of the sudden you are told that not only you don't get to do what you want, but that we will keep a closer eye on what you are doing than what everyone else may be doing because you are a public servant.
Imagine working all those years, doing things you didn't want to, just so that you'd have some power over managing the books and right when you thought you bagged it, some youngsters come along telling you that an incorruptible computer network will be taking care of the books instead...I'd be screaming in terror too!
Patriotic to the federal reserve, that's funny.
You are correct. The framing of the debate using guilt and shame, and conflating the nation with the government has been going on for a long time. I'm surprised they've let crypto get this far. Money is power, after all.
nice post =)
I dont think they will keep all the people outside of certain things, but only those the dont pushes the mainstream thoughts.
But what if the world is not going so good as we hope and these crypto currencies, just are some kind of a trojan horse in order to get control over the people?
They pushing harder and harder for removing cash. Afterwards we will have only have electronic money, which will be easier to control and manipulate. But maybe this is what they want us to adapt.
Do we really know who created bitcoin?
Can we really trust there is no back door for hidden powers?
If a man made it, a man can hack it
(this would be interesting to hear Jeff Berwick's thoughts)
thoughs anyone?
I'm not worried as long as we get people to understand how blockchains are different than the record keeping systems we are currently using, why this technology is so important.
In my opinion, as long as people understand this we will have some protection against the very real danger of government being the author of bitcoin. As long as there is competition, as long as we are not limited to a single chain or private chains, then I'm not really worried about the origins of the technology or whatever is planned around it.
yeah, your right about that. I hope it stays like that and people can choose their own money. The only thing is, they have a ten-dense to remove your options. Here, you can choose between pest or cholera....
Then I guess we should make extra emphasis in this technology giving us more options, the options being voluntary, the importance of having competition, ect. We need to be proactive as opposed to waiting to be framed to start defending these concepts. Thanks for your input! I also noticed that you're new here, welcome!
yeah, thank you. I agree
wow very nice
nicely written.
anyone who claims that that supporting the national currency is patriotism while at the same time undermining that currency for their own profit is a liar (Helloooo Wall Street). The TARP bailouts , the "stimulus" packages, and the "easing" policies all devalued US currency while putting money into the hands of politicians and corruptocrats.
An economy's health depends on employment numbers (something else the politicians have subverted with illegal immigration and H1B's) and creation of wealth (undercut by waves of nonsensical regulations); usually a currency's strength is based from that...whatever damage the politicians did on those scores was multiplied by the other policies I mentioned.
Using crypto has no effect on employment or wealth creation one way or another (well, minimal effect)...
but it does provide an individual protection from corruptocrat financial sabotage and theft.
Do you consider an illegal immigrant paying more taxes than one who has paperwork and is local to still be in the wrong? I honestly don't see a problem with immigration a long as there are enough resources so others don't go without and the person is complying with the coexistence rules in place. Can you tell me more about these immigration rules you think are affecting the economy negatively? I find this subject very interesting and would love to know your thoughts about it because I understand a lot of people think immigration is not good.
as long as there is a single unemployed citizen, then we don't need the immigrant.
HOWEVER, we can modify that need by industry.
If we run short on doctors, b/c the citizens start trying to be rappers, for instance, then we allow a certain number of doctors to become citizens.
But when we talk about low skill labor, it isn't needed (in America); 21% of the country is on welfare benefits. Obviously, not everyone on welfare is capable of employment, and the spin on these numbers from both left and right is amazing.
In any case, every low-skill immigrant (whether legal or illegal) has the following effect (these are American figures, btw, other countries have different numbers):
It's not that immigrants are bad inherently; there has been a need for low-skill labor before, there may come a time it's needed again.
But immigration to the United States isn't going to solve Third World problems of poverty, especially those caused by native cultures (statism, socialism, kakistocracy, tribalism, and most importantly overpopulation). I don't mean "native" as in "primitive", but native as inherent to the culture.
Immigration certainly isn't going to fix those problems caused by globalization.
Finally, the best advice there is to fight poverty anywhere in the world, including America, is this:
don't have children you cant afford to feed
https://census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2015/cb15-97.html
This post has been ranked within the top 80 most undervalued posts in the second half of Mar 15. We estimate that this post is undervalued by $1.55 as compared to a scenario in which every voter had an equal say.
See the full rankings and details in The Daily Tribune: Mar 15 - Part II. You can also read about some of our methodology, data analysis and technical details in our initial post.
If you are the author and would prefer not to receive these comments, simply reply "Stop" to this comment.