TheWorx

I love how Mr. Krugman of the NY Times keeps up the pressure on our state of inequality as in this article, The Undeserving Rich - NYTimes.com , however, I would like to point out a minor fallacy in a minor example he uses to explain how the rich get away calling themselves "deserving." Mr. Krugman says that it is because the super rich and their minions lump the not-so-rich into the "rich" category--the 0.1% that I and Mr. Krugman disdain--and this thereby makes it seem as if there are many more at the top. This is a very valid observation but he makes a point of including LAWYERS in that "dilution" phenomenon, and with that, I take issue as I do with most people with government-issued licenses. No, there is nothing wrong with licenses per se (it is only that after the issuing, they are no longer regulated except for very egregious and, oftentimes, only serendipitous discoveries.) Now, what is it about the inclusion of lawyers that I find so objecti...

Today I learned that one of the biggest owners of Bitcoin is our government here in the U.S. That leads this conspiracy theorist (armchair) to ask what would a government do that feels threatened by a "citizen's currency" like Bitcoin? Well, if you know that the currency is volatile, you buy up and cause a crash by suddenly selling everything with the intent of decreasing faith in Bitcoin and restoring faith in greenbacks. This kind of thinking keeps me away from buying Bitcoin. I also learned that the FBI had confiscated Bitcoins from someone allegedly engaged in illegal activities. Bitcoin is supposed to have privacy and security built into it. So, how did the FBI crack the account? Remember, unlike with traditional financial institutions, government has no one to go to to confiscate your funds. So, how did they get their hands on it? The how, ultimately, doesn't matter because government wouldn't be government if it didn't do whatever the heck it wanted...