3 ms·
I've been saying that this type of thing would be happening increasingly often. The government wants to control people's money. In the future, you will need a l
by cryptica 5y ago
I've been saying that this type of thing would be happening increasingly often. The government wants to control people's money. In the future, you will need a license to sell company shares and other private property and only the top 0.01% elite will be able to get such a license... The media will gaslight the public into thinking this is normal and 'for the public good' or to protect investors from making bad decisions.
For any law, there will always be a group of richer people just above the victimized group who will support it to protect their wealth at the expense of the poorer group. They will trick/coerce people from the lower classes into playing along. The bottom class will keep getting destroyed, one layer at a time until only the 0.01% richest people have all of what little remains of the nation's wealth... The numbers will be bigger and more concentrated than ever but the real economic value underlying those numbers will be smaller than ever because almost everyone else will be unemployed and living in the metaverse using as little energy as possible.
Maybe in the longer term, the economy won't be able to afford letting people unplug themselves from the metaverse and disconnecting their Soylent feeding tubes... The media will demonize the anti-feeding-tubers as selfish terrorists. Heck, they won't even be against feeding tubes, they will be demonized for being against the feeding tube mandates.
The best escape I can see are cryptocurrencies but it will take some time to make a transition to the extent that people are creating real value around them. It's not really the case now IMO.
- pfisch 5y agoCan we allow a small minority to shut down an economy indefinitely? That seems like a big problem. It is also hard to gauge just how small of a minority of Canadians this is though. It feels pretty small but it is hard to tell. If 80% of Canadians are vaxxed that means this is just 5-10% of people at most.
- Wolfenstein98k 5y agoThere are vaccinated people there too. Don't fall for the "team sport" false dichotomy - there are many who are rational enough to get vaccinated but still largely side with the "less / less broad restrictions" side of the debate. (For instance, I am vaxxed, extremely pro-vax, and quite anti-restriction. Give everyone a chance to get vaxxed, even make it free - but then let them manage their risk from there. Even the most effective restrictions, from a case load perspective, such as here in Australia, just left us completely naive when Omicron arrived. Shortly thereafter we had world record cases per capita.)
- pfisch 5y agoAre you using your truck to block the economy of Canada right now? Have you participated in the protests with your actual body in any way? Do you even live in Canada or do you represent the interests of another country entirely?
- retrac 5y agoDoes their nationality, or who they represent, have any bearing on the logic of their argument? Don't forget where you are.
- pfisch 5y agoHe claimed pro vax people like himself are the people protesting. How can he make such a loaded claim if a) he isn't protesting and doesn't know any pro-vaxxed protesters and b)he doesn't even live in Canada and couldn't be in the protest even if he wanted to.
- Wolfenstein98k 5y agoI know people (online) who have attended, and I know various libertarian vaccinated people who support it.
- pfisch 5y agoAre those online people vaccinated?
- Wolfenstein98k 5y agoDo you eat with chopsticks? Have you participated in a blood ritual? Do you even live north of the equator or do you represent the interests of another hemisphere entirely? Are we just asking each other preposterous questions?!
- pfisch 5y ago
- nisegami 5y agoCryptocurrencies rely too heavily on infrastructure from our economic and societal systems to provide any kind of defense against economic deterioration.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- TheOtherHobbes 5y agoI'm reliably confused by people who suggest cryptocurrencies aren't just a different kind of fiat.
- cryptica 5y agoThere are two key differences: - Supply of tokens is limited or otherwise is entirely predictable. In the cases where the supply is not limited, the rules for minting new coins are clear in the code and for the vast majority of cryptocurrencies, the inflation is a fixed number of tokens; meaning that the inflation expressed as a percentage drops over time so it has deflationary characteristics. If the annual inflation is 100K tokens per year, these 100k new tokens will represent a smaller percentage of the total supply as time goes by. This is very different from fiat currencies where inflation is expressed as a percentage. In fiat, 10% inflation this year represents A LOT MORE in dollar terms than 10% inflation represented 20 years ago. - They do not rely on trusting a single government or entity. There are no single points of failure where somebody could steal funds or tamper with records.