Hillary Clinton Cautions That Bitcoin Could Potentially Undermine The Role Of The Dollar And Destabilize The Country

[tabzer]

SOURCE.

Fyi, I am not a pretend journalist who rewrites news articles. Read the source, or the source of the source. It's good practice.

My commentary is that everytime a politician disparages Bitcoin, it's an endorsement. Bitcoin was created and embraced, largely, due to the loss of faith in politicians who undermine currencies and destabilize countries.

Side note: didn't take her to be a white supremacist nationalist.

 

[Veho]

My virus protection blocked the link from loading. Funny, that.

My commentary is that every time a politician disparages Bitcoin, that even a broken clock is right twice a day.

 

[tabzer]

My virus protection blocked the link from loading. Funny, that.

My commentary is that every time a politician disparages Bitcoin, that even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Your "virus protection" is the system ruling you, man. Also, I'm on 24:00 clocks so IDK what you are talking about.

More seriously, are you suggesting we should sell our BTC for USD; not because it is more profitable, but because it is the moral thing to do?

 

[Veho]

More seriously, are you suggesting we should sell our BTC for USD; not because it is more profitable, but because it is the moral thing to do?

I don't care about what you do with your dollars, I'm just saying a currency that halves in "value" every time a major player sneezes might just be a little too volatile and not really the solution to all our problems.

 

[tabzer]

I don't care about what you do with your dollars, I'm just saying a currency that halves in "value" every time a major player sneezes might just be a little too volatile and not really the solution to all our problems.

That literally has nothing to do with politicians talking about bitcoin destabilizing the dollar and risking national security. I appreciate your reluctance, but pretending that it is a threat to "the democracy" is rather amusing.

If you are looking for stability, I'm afraid that the status quo won't assist you anymore. Volatility shows a lack of understanding. Using that as the reason to be disinterested is just compounding the error. It would have been more honest to not have said anything.

 

[Veho]

That literally has nothing to do with politicians talking about bitcoin destabilizing the dollar and threatening national security. I appreciate your reluctance, but pretending that it is harmful to democracy is rather amusing.

Literally nobody mentioned democracy, here or in the article.
Having an unpredictable, volatile money sink destabilizes any economy, and an economic collapse is not exactly beneficial to national security.

Edit: Sorry, I shouldn't have said "volatile", I meant "with zero checks, balances or accountability, and almost entirely under the control of one tiny handful of extremely shady characters" but really that's just potayto-potahto.

 

[tabzer]

Literally nobody mentioned democracy, here or in the article.

I'm aware. That part was bait. Thanks for acknowledging that "national security" is more important than democracy. Whether that makes you a fascist or an authoritarian, I'll let you decide.

Having an unpredictable, volatile money sink destabilizes any economy, and an economic collapse is not exactly beneficial to national security.

What's a "money sink"? You have infinite dollars. You can't lose.

 

[Veho]

I'm aware. That part was bait. Thanks for acknowledging that "national security" is more important than democracy

Yet another thing literally nobody claims nor does it follow from anything anyone here said but OK. You're also implying that bitcoin somehow promotes or ensures "democracy" which is completely false.

You have infinite dollars.

You have infinite bitcoin. What's your point?

 

[x65943]

Clinton? Next up Shigeru Miyamoto's opinion on how to make spaghetti

 

[JuanMena]

El Salvador made bitcoin one of it's official currencies.

It didn't worked.

 

[tabzer]

Yet another thing literally nobody claims nor does it follow from anything anyone here said but OK.

You suggested that the stability of the country is more important than what people think about bitcoin. That is exactly what I insinuated, in broad terms.

You're also implying that bitcoin somehow promotes or ensures "democracy" which is completely false.

Bitcoin is provably democratic where USA is definitely sus.

You have infinite bitcoin. What's your point?

Infinite? As in 1.000000~?

Do you know what you are talking about?

El Salvador made bitcoin one of it's official currencies.

It didn't worked.

It can't be an "official currency" because it's not backed by a nation, their army, or their propaganda. Bitcoin is capable of existing after "the fall of civilization", lol.

 

[Veho]

You suggested that the stability of the country is more important than what people think about bitcoin.

Nope. I never suggested that.

Bitcoin is provably democratic

No, not really.

Infinite? As in 1.000000~?

Do you know what you are talking about?

You said I had infinite dollars. How is that any different?

 

[Jayro]

As usual, if tabzer says something is bad, then it's actually good for the people, and vice-versa.

 

[tabzer]

Nope.

You said Hillary was right. What do you mean "nope"?

No, not really.

Yes, you can inquiry any node, and see everyone that agrees with them. You can also see those who disagree, and create their own fork (or attempt to). Everyone is represented, and the history of that cannot be erased. Is that strange or somehow less democratic than what you are familiar with?

You said I had infinite dollars. How is that any different?

Dollars have no limited supply and this contributes to inflation, especially with how politicians practice responsibility in issuing/printing it. This is why you can't get a can of Coca-cola for 50 cents from the vending machine anymore.

Bitcoin has a limited supply of 21 million. As its use case grows and people see convenience and security in it, it trends an increase in value. This is, in part, why pizza used to cost 10,000 bitcoins, but now it costs about 1,700 pizzas for a bitcoin. You can still see the transaction for that pizza, to this day.

This is usually one of the first things people learn about bitcoin. I am happy to be the first to share this information with you. I didn't expect that.

As usual, if tabzer says something is bad, then it's actually good for the people, and vice-versa.

The only thing I said that was good was the practice of reading sources, and that was tongue-in-cheek. Didn't expect you to actually disagree with it. Stick around and be schooled.

Next up Shigeru Miyamoto's opinion on how to make spaghetti

That could be his next game.

Edit: Sorry, I shouldn't have said "volatile", I meant "with zero checks, balances or accountability, and almost entirely under the control of one tiny handful of extremely shady characters" but really that's just potayto-potahto.

Zero checks, balances or accountability? That is exactly what the blockchain is. If you are talking about how people behave with money or other things considered to have value, well those problems aren't exclusive to bitcoin. The traceability that BTC offers could reduce crime. For example, Karpeles was put into jail because the blockchain proved his actions. The reason he had so many charges acquitted was due to the fiat and record keeping side of things. In this example, bitcoin brought justice while fiat and your legacy systems lets him walk.

 

[Taleweaver]

SOURCE.

Fyi, I am not a pretend journalist who rewrites news articles. Read the source, or the source of the source. It's good practice.

Okay... But your article doesn't explain why she thinks so. Or other government officials. Or Donald Trump. It's just a 'we think this could happen' kind of article from someone who values her opinion more than that of a former president.

My commentary is that everytime a politician disparages Bitcoin, it's an endorsement. Bitcoin was created and embraced, largely, due to the loss of faith in politicians who undermine currencies and destabilize countries.

Erm... How old were you when bitcoin was created exactly? It was a direct response to the financial market's crash in 2008. It became clear that big banks pretty much controlled the world. Governments barely had an influence on their currency or their countries' stability.
And to be fair: i don't think much has changed since then.

Side note: didn't take her to be a white supremacist nationalist.

Okay. Good to know.

 

[tabzer]

Okay... But your article doesn't explain why she thinks so. Or other government officials. Or Donald Trump. It's just a 'we think this could happen' kind of article from someone who values her opinion more than that of a former president.

That's true, but the article wouldn't be able to explain why she thinks so without putting words in her mouth. Many reasons have been cited in the past, but I find a lot (not all) of the critique capable of being applied to fiat (dollars).

Erm... How old were you when bitcoin was created exactly? It was a direct response to the financial market's crash in 2008. It became clear that big banks pretty much controlled the world. Governments barely had an influence on their currency or their countries' stability.
And to be fair: i don't think much has changed since then.

Satoshi wrote this on the Genesis Block:

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"

I don't think you can really divorce politicians/governments from being involved.