BITCOIN

bugbyte_2

How very terrible.

Some truckers don't want to be vaccinated so bring the capital of Canada to a stand still for 22 days because they can, and the Government does something about it to enable its citizens to get their lives back. 

What am I supposed to be angry about again?

User232002

bugbyte_2 said:

Some truckers don't want to be vaccinated 

Not the point of the protests. The point is that these people are being coerced in to taking the vaccine by having their freedoms stripped. 

bugbyte_2 said:

so bring the capital of Canada to a stand still for 22 days because they can, and the Government does something about it to enable its citizens to get their lives back

By utilising legislation designed for war and threats to national security. To declare its own citizens terrorists for giving money to a cause they support. A cause that tens of millions of people in the USA, The Netherlands, Belgium, France & Australia would seem to also support. 

bugbyte_2 said:

What am I supposed to be angry about again?

This isn't a right or left issue, its simply a case that governments should not hold this power without checks and balances. You should be angry because people that haven't committed a crime are having their assets frozen.

Custodial financial services allow governments to unilaterally freeze accounts first and then sort out who is innocent or guilty later. Self custodial money, Bitcoin, forces governments to bring a case, under judicial oversight, and charge people with a crime before they can seize assets. But cash does this also right? Funny, theres an article in the WSJ today pointing out how banks are coercing owners of small independent ATMs to discontinue their use because cash is too private and, therefore, risky.

Incidentally, this is also the reason why CBDCs are precisely zero threat to Bitcoin.

Thrugelmir

darren232002 said:

bugbyte_2 said:

Some truckers don't want to be vaccinated 

Not the point of the protests. The point is that these people are being coerced in to taking the vaccine by having their freedoms stripped. 

Then they should emigrate to China...............

Hexane

darren232002 said:

Ah, I see. So when you said that confiscation of money and seizure of assets wasn't a problem in a first world country, 

I don't remember saying that.

Hexane

darren232002 said:

By utilising legislation designed for war and threats to national security. 

I consider it perfectly reasonable to view an economic blockade as a threat to national security.

Zola.

It's stupid though - in a time where the world is removing all their mandates and pandemic controls, Trudeau is going the opposite way. It doesn't make any sense either given that truckers are vital to making the economy work, and they spend 22 hours of the day in isolation. He has gone way overboard and will end up paying the price for it.. All he has done is stoke tensions and bring more people onto the streets. 

He also didn't deny that if you as a Canadian citizen donate money to a political cause they don't like they can freeze your assets without any powers to sue them if you are proved innocent of whatever they suspect you to be.. This sort of power always leads to an abuse of power and is totally disproportionate. 

bugbyte_2

Zola. said:

It's stupid though - in a time where the world is removing all their mandates and pandemic controls, Trudeau is going the opposite way. It doesn't make any sense either given that truckers are vital to making the economy work, and they spend 22 hours of the day in isolation. He has gone way overboard and will end up paying the price for it.. All he has done is stoke tensions and bring more people onto the streets. 

He also didn't deny that if you as a Canadian citizen donate money to a political cause they don't like they can freeze your assets without any powers to sue them if you are proved innocent of whatever they suspect you to be.. This sort of power always leads to an abuse of power and is totally disproportionate. 

But don't you think bringing a city to a standstill for nearly a month is an abuse of power? They could only do it because they own large trucks. If you think it is OK for them to do this then you need to empower every difference of opinion to do the same. Would you, for example, be happy if your city ground to a halt for a month because FOREST were given a load of trucks and parked them on your main roads because they want to smoke in restaurants? Because by rights they should be able to annoy the life out of anybody and everybody for any amount of time if Truckers (and tube drivers) can do it.

Or is there a line somewhere? and does that line include a clause where if you continue being a nause beyond what is acceptable you will have your assets taken off you?

If 'Thank you for drawing this to our attention, we have considered it but to be frank, you are a fruit case, now **** off' doesn't work what would you do? The checks and balances are the election of our representatives.

Zola.

It's only lasted this long because it was first a very bad idea, poorly implemented and it's been exacerbated so much with JT's subsequent terrible strategic moves... He has backed himself into the corner now.. 

Theres footage of police horses trampling on protestors as they are lying on the ground which isn't going to do much to remedy the situation..

User232002

Thrugelmir said:

Then they should emigrate to China...............

Interesting that China is synonymous in the west with 'no freedoms,' yet it hasn't imposed vaccine mandates.

Hexane said:

darren232002 said:

Ah, I see. So when you said that confiscation of money and seizure of assets wasn't a problem in a first world country, 

I don't remember saying that.

You liked a Malthusian post that made this point. But yes, you like so many anti-Bitcoin posts just because they are anti-Bitcoin posts its probably hard to keep track.

Hexane said:

darren232002 said:

By utilising legislation designed for war and threats to national security. 

I consider it perfectly reasonable to view an economic blockade as a threat to national security.

As usual, your view is incorrect. This is not a matter of opinion as there is a quite extensive body of case law on this matter. Articles 6 & 9 ECHR are not subject to qualification on grounds of national security, they are absolute rights. Sure, Canada isn't subject to EU law but (1) its a commonwealth country, so its probably pretty close and (2) our law should determine the grounds by which we judge others, particularly a nation like Canada. Fully expect Trudeau's actions will be declared illegal by a court in 2 or 3 years and the state ordered to pay damages to most of the peoples accounts they froze.

Lastly, 'national security' is defined as 'in time of war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation.' As in, the nation state itself may very well cease to exist. Being inconvenienced on your commute to work or having the price of biscuits go up a bit doesn't cut it no matter how 'perfectly reasonable' you think this is.

bugbyte_2 said:

But don't you think bringing a city to a standstill for nearly a month is an abuse of power? They could only do it because they own large trucks.

Extinction rebellion did it without large trucks.

bugbyte_2 said:

Because by rights they should be able to annoy the life out of anybody and everybody for any amount of time if Truckers (and tube drivers) can do it.

As annoying as they were, I'll defend the tube drivers right to strike and protest if they genuinely thought sitting on their !!!!!! all day for £60k/yr+ was a bad deal. The problem was the continual capitulation of TfL. 

bugbyte_2 said:

If you think it is OK for them to do this then you need to empower every difference of opinion to do the same.

No, definitely not. Democracy says power flows from the people; it is not simply about voting, it is also about listening to and representing the wishes of those who are not in the majority. There's an idea known as 'dictatorship by majority' where (again, game theory) you simply do enough to get 51% of the vote and then legislate in your own interests. 

The key here is that "I'm vaccinated. I believe that the vaccine is safe and effective. I do not believe in forcing others to take it." is patently a fair and just opinion, demonstrably held by a significant percentage of the electorate.

bugbyte_2 said:

Or is there a line somewhere? and does that line include a clause where if you continue being a nause beyond what is acceptable you will have your assets taken off you?

If 'Thank you for drawing this to our attention, we have considered it but to be frank, you are a fruit case, now **** off' doesn't work what would you do? 

What you're basically asking is, "What percentage of the electorate do we believe it is completely reasonable to completely ignore?" If you want to demand an investigation looking in to the lizard people then sod off, but when you've got a few million people supporting your cause its time to listen.

Assets should never be taken off you for raising a political point of view and protesting that in a legal way, and indeed there is no legal precedent for this (unless you're going to repurpose national security laws and deal with the fallout later). To accept otherwise is to put us on par with those African countries where the leader of the opposition goes missing in the run up to an election. 

bugbyte_2 said:

The checks and balances are the election of our representatives.

We have 4 year election cycles and despite politician approval/opinion ratings being at an all time low, re-election rates are at an all time high (especially for incumbents). The check and balance on the executive is the judiciary.

Zola.

On Bitcoin Mining within the Oil & Gas industry...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvq6fFSMpgM