Yes.

Most people struggle to understand the fiat monetary system...perhaps 2% of the general population and perhaps 30-40% of 'Bitcoiners' do. It is via control of the narrative that fiat rules. Yes it is lack of understanding that obstructs Bitcoin adoption most fundamentally and education can slowly change that and it is changing that very slowly, but the forces and momentum of narrative construction are firmly in favour of the fiat narrative drivers- the banks and governments as can be seen by the overwhelming narrative around Bitcoin. Most 'Bitcoiners' have swallowed the NGU speculative commodity narrative hook line and sinker. Most people do care about complying with the law unless they understand very well a very good reason for not complying- even then a majority will comply...unless there is a good reason not to as in side hustles where compliance is easily avoided when using cash...using Bitcoin now might be seen as risky as 90%? plus has already been KYCed! Lawful Bitcoin use as a MoE has been made impractical and that greatly assists the speculative commodity capture and control narrative. Deny reality all you like but it does not change reality.

Control of the narrative is 90% of market capture and control...and they have achieved it without you even seeing it! Sly. I gave the largest example above- others are the debanking of businesses who accept bitcoin, the 70% of humanity who live under authoritarian governments who mostly OUTRIGHT ban MoE use and perhaps most importantly the capture of the narrative by people touting Bitcoin as a (kyced and CG taxed) speculative commodity and so it is thus seen and used as a speculative commodity not a MoE.

The suits and ETFs are pushing this narrative and the obstructive and effectively impracticable tax obligations of MoE use reinforces it- to use Bitcoin as a MoE lawfully is effectively impractical due to the tax obligations attached to it via designation as a speculative commodity.

Fuck all Bitcoin is now held with the intent to use as a P2P MoE- ETFs expressly and explicitly prevent such use and Treasuries do also.

If you dont get it now ok- you don't want to get it...they have captured and controlled your perception and its evident.

The protocol was created to enable P2P payments. The protocol is being captured and controlled by the fiat operators as a speculative commodity, KYCed, taxed and increasingly custodied by bankers and other corporate slime. If you do not understand this you probably have not read and understood the white paper and are definitely falling for the speculative commodity capture and control narrative that degrades Bitcoin into a harmless plaything for bankers and governments and that decapitates the revolutionary P2P MoE intent that is explicit in the white paper. Read the white paper and consider what has been done to the protocol since by the sly fiat operators.

Bitcoins use as a MoE has been very slyly and successfully OBSTRUCTED by the bankers and governments who benefit from the fiat monetary system which relies upon its MoE dominance. Even most Bitcoiners do not understand this. Yes it is a war of subterfuge where lawfully using Bitcoin as a MoE has been in almost all jurisdictions made effectively impractical. By designating Bitcoin as a speculative commodity liable for CGT using Bitcoin to buy a coffee makes that transaction liable for CGT- so who is going to calculate and pay tax everytime they use Bitcoin for such transactions? Nobody is and so Bitcoin MoE is slyly designated unlawful. Merchants can accept but only conveniently if they use an application which immediately converts the sats prior to them arriving in their fiat bank account as fiat, not sats. So why would merchants accept a payment that very few customers have or even understand and of those few potential customers most would be breaking tax laws to use? Very very few is the answer. The fiat operators have effectively obstructed Bitcoin MoE use without most people, even Bitcoiners understanding/realising.

What does he mean by? "I've noticed more and more you pay in Bitcoin. It takes a lot of pressure off the dollar — and it's a great thing for our country."

Can anyone explain Trumps logic here, in particular to his claim 'it takes a lot of pressure off the dollar'- or is there none?

1- If you are investing in Bitcoin with the primary intent and hope of maximising fiat denominated speculative gains, you are fundamentally misguided and missing the entire fucking point of bitcoin.

2- If you truly resent taxes so much you should go live somewhere where there are no taxes or government and see how you like it- I confidently predict you will be a shivering, quivering, jibbering wreck within a very short time begging for the safety, security and economic framework that government and taxes provide you where you live now.

Very good food for thought!

Most fiat money is created via usury. Since the Keynesian limits on this debt issuance were removed by the amoral neoliberal bankster lobbyists in the 1980s, the culture of debt slavery has become so universal that most people do not even see it.

There are some BTC accepting merchants in ChiangMai and elsewhere in Thailand-

Support them!

My favourite in ChiangMai would be Sababa who have weekly BTC meetups and fantastic kebabs!

Use BTC maps to find them. https://btcmap.org/

People need icons and ideas to aspire to and to feel a sense of belonging. This is why religion and governments are so universal. Even secularists believe in their own ideologies and get a sense of collective belonging and security from such ideologies. It is natural as humans are weak alone, but strong in groups. Libertarian ideologs have a lot to learn about life. DNA and the reality of existence.

Naive Libertarians who think the state is a wholly oppressive and burdensome apparatus when the truth is they would be shivering helpless wrecks without its provision of law and order, security and economic framework. Bitcoin is important because the banks and governments have over reached their positions of trust and power and need to be returned to being subservient to citizens and free markets- fiat money is not a free market but a corrupt and rigged state imposed monopoly operated by private bankers who in turn have too much control and influence over government. Bitcoin can (hopefully) fix this.

Most people recognise the convenience and security of living under the nation state system. You would not last a week, probably even a day of cast out into the wilderness without the security and comfort that the state provisions you. You would be begging for a blanket, a coke and a Big Mac within hours of being cast out into the lawless wilderness where dog eats dog and there is now government protecting you.

Several politicians have tried here in New Zealand but there is huge incentive for politicians to play on peoples short sighted greed and selfishness and cancel longer term solutions when governments changes that has happened repeatedly here in NZ over the last 50 plus years. The original universal pension was introduced by a populist politician who scrapped a program (similar to your 501 scheme I believe) which would have given everyone a retirement fund built up over their working life. Many times since any attempt to change the system to something more sustainable has been reversed by populist backlash and revisions.

If you remove all welfare for the elderly then it does provide a strong motivation for people to have and raise children who might take care of them in their old age....and to save for their own retirement.

New Zealand was the first country to introduce a (very modest pension) in the 1890s, apparently for guys who had come here to mine gold, never married and were now unable to work and had no family to care for them.

I do not think we can politically return to zero welfare, but means testing welfare does go some way to restoring market incentives and the potential for families to take more care of themselves rather than dependency on the state.

Yes, I think that was the general theory behind the original scheme which established this system we have, but it was established at a time (1970s) when the demographics were much different- there were far fewer older people and far more younger people in work to support the retirees. And yes not means testing does make it very simple to administer.

But as the demographics have changed since the 1970s the cost burden on younger people has become much heavier- I cannot blame younger generations for resenting the Boomers (of which I am one) for this seeming inequity.

While agreeing politicians will always meddle with these things like abatement rates and thresholds I just struggle with the idea that very very wealthy people in my country can claim a retirement welfare benefit that they do not need when younger people are paying taxes for that benefit and often cannot access other welfare or government services because of lack of funds.

The current expense of the pension is greater than all other welfare paid in NZ, and it is increasingly rapidly as the population ages.

I am curious to know how you all (especially Libertarians) would respond to the retirement benefit system here in New Zealand. At age 65 everyone is entitled to a state (taxpayer) funded pension of about NZD$500/week...there is no means testing. How many people would decline this welfare payment (you do need to apply for it) if they had sufficient wealth to not need it? My personal opinion, is that it should be means tested so that only those with minimal-moderate savings and wealth would get this welfare...wealthy people with millions of dollars in assets do not need it.

Stop being reliant upon these Third Party provided gadgets.

Learn how to build your own secure and enduring cold storage.