[PAX] The Impeachment of Donald J. Trump

Of course I am involved in politics and government. That is why I am so alarmed.
Ok, what kind of things have you done in politics and government? If you don't feel comfortable talking about it then that's ok too. I'm just curious.

I spent a year in transportation and was with public safety for two metropolitan areas within my state. This was early in my adult career. Public safety was one of the most purposeful jobs I've ever had and that's saying quite a lot given some of my other more lucrative opportunities. I didn't think it was fair to ask without offering my information.
 
It depends on how the CC system is designed with respect to the network and encryption. Technically, nothing is outside the range of hacking if given enough computing power. Here are 3 CC examples if you are really interested in this with respect to this discussion:

  • Monero (XMR): Launched in 2014, it is the most private cryptocurrency, making it virtually impossible to trace transactions or connect them to individual users.
  • Zcash (ZEC): Allows users to choose when to share transaction or address information, providing selective transparency.
  • Dash (DASH): Utilizes an encoded PrivateSend feature similar to CoinJoin to enhance privacy.

DOGE was created to get rid of waste, fraud, and abuse. Auditing is just one of the first step in that process, as is the case with any data analytics.

Many 3rd party tech companies have access to sensitive private data. Government employees are terrible when it comes to designing and managing these large data systems so they hire companies to design and implement in a turnkey fashion. Contractors are regularly involved in day to day management. IBM has historically been the biggest player but times have changed and other companies have been included. I know this because I've been involved in some of these projects.

Bureaucratic agencies are the worst about working between the private and public sectors. Unlike DOGE, which has an expected end date, some private sector companies are perpetually involved through lobbying, managing (through movement between public and private), and even legislating.

Regardless of what people think of DOGE, it will continue because it is being used by the executive branch (per the presidents authority) for fixing problems associated with agencies under the purview of the executive branch.

Having been involved in information technology for decades, I see no value in offloading any data to another network in this process as that would be tedious and painstakingly slow. It's much easier and quicker to do everything directly on the federal IT infrastructure.

Personally, I'm not as concerned with the social security administration knowing things as I am with national security monitoring everything I do. Similarly, Big Tech already knows more about what people are doing then most people realize and they don't need a SSN to do it. If you carry a smartphone then Big Tech likely knows more about you than you know about yourself. Having worked in IT security, I can tell you that it's difficult to limit what Big Tech knows even after I've enhanced my privacy. Like we've already both stated (in different ways), privacy and security within data systems is mostly a "bastardization of the language." I would probably go as far to say that China already has all of the US SSN's (through hacking) and the DNA data from a large portion of people who have used a company for genealogy or health reasons (through direct or indirect ownership of labs). If I allow myself to worry about it, I'll make myself sick.

BINGO. People voted for Trump knowing full well that he'll appoint Musk as his special advisor (or whatever the correct term is) to take care of government efficiency. Trump won the popular vote and has the full mandate of American people. And according to the recent poll his approval rating is from 53-55%. So he is delivering just what people wanted and more.

While I think that DOGE will not succeed in cutting 2 trillion of deficit and probably not even close to one trillion, it's succeeding in exposing corruption and bringing small wins for American people (as intended). What's more interesting is what is going on in the geopolitical arena and with head of treasury Scott Bessent. I think there is a way to reduce US deficits in some multilateral currency agreement like Bretton Woods or Plaza accord. Maybe Mar-a-Lago accord.

And Trump never said that cryptocurrency will replace fiat currency, what is that nonsense? As for are they decentralized? Well, in Bitcoin's case there is cca 1 million of coins mined by Satoshi in 2010 which are just sitting there (public addresses known). It's a public bounty, so why cannot Musk, Trump, Putin or Xi access those coins and spend them? Because they cannot, that's why.
 
And Trump never said that cryptocurrency will replace fiat currency, what is that nonsense?
For many years it has seemed as though the entire system has been moving towards a shift in the way currency operates. A digital currency dose seem like the best option if a shift is the goal. Like you, I do find it difficult to imagine because so many people already struggle to manage money without having to learn the technical aspects of using it.

My struggle with crypto has always been it's inability to provide a consistent method for micro-transactions. Of course, volatility has also been a problem but with enough volume that could probably be overcome. When I listen to high level money managers, they were always bearish with respect to embracing crypto but in the last few years I've been hearing an increasing acceptance for "other reasons." I feel a little vulnerable not knowing what is being said under the breath.
 
For many years it has seemed as though the entire system has been moving towards a shift in the way currency operates. A digital currency dose seem like the best option if a shift is the goal. Like you, I do find it difficult to imagine because so many people already struggle to manage money without having to learn the technical aspects of using it.

My struggle with crypto has always been it's inability to provide a consistent method for micro-transactions. Of course, volatility has also been a problem but with enough volume that could probably be overcome. When I listen to high level money managers, they were always bearish with respect to embracing crypto but in the last few years I've been hearing an increasing acceptance for "other reasons." I feel a little vulnerable not knowing what is being said under the breath.

Over the years the free market participants decided that value proposition of cryptocurrency is not to be a better visa/mastercard which can process more transactions for cheaper fees. That can be done (especially with stablecoins) but it's true that those cryptocurrencies are not especially decentralized and in the grand scheme of things not that valuable; biggest stablecoin Tether currently has market cap of "only" 120 billion dollars. So if you in Argentina or Turkey or Nigeria, at least you have a choice: do you trust your local's government fiat currency more than an US based company that can give you digital dollars.

The biggest cryptocurrency by far, Bitcoin (current market cap of around 2 trillion dollars at $98k per Bitcoin) is primarily used as a store of value. It's not being used for micropayments, but the fact that you have optionality to move a billion dollars for a fee of 2-5 dollars everywhere in the world in 10 min still makes it magnitudes better when you compare to other store of value assets (real estate, gold, valuable art etc.). You can also transact peer to peer without any centralized party involved that can ban you from the network or close your account.

So market decided that store of value is more important and comes first. Later down the line other uses cases will also grow, I imagine. Cryptocurrency is a bit of misnomer when applied to Bitcoin - it's better to say it's cryptographic asset or "digital gold". I find that more people in the mainstream understand it better when explained in those terms.

It's not about speed and volume of transaction, but about it's properties like security, limited supply and digital nature that give it's value. It essentially gives you property rights and a way to preserve your capital over space and time in a world where fiat can be printed out of thin air.

The other "use case" of crypto is just speculation and the promise of outsized returns in short space of time. Kinda like penny stocks. But like I say, Bitcoin and stablecoins are currently 70% of crypto market. The other 10 billion coins barely muster up the the remaining 30% and if you ask me, even that is too much.
 
Last edited:
@philostam thank you for the explanation. That makes sense.

In the past I have taken time to understand some of the technical features of the currency but I haven't explored all of the uses and how feasible each is for various purposes. Though I consider myself above average, I have hesitated to dive into it because I felt it still needed a punch to breakthrough to mainstream use. When you explained above, I was imagining an invisible pipeline for moving and storing money on a global scale. I never thought of it as "digital gold" because the volatility seemed in sharp contrast to a tangible asset, yet when I reflect on the value of gold now I can see that it really is similar in that the value is related to demand rather than the actual asset.

I am but a grasshopper and you are the master of crypto. I bow to you.
 
As for are they decentralized? Well, in Bitcoin's case there is cca 1 million of coins mined by Satoshi in 2010 which are just sitting there
Does Satoshi own those coins? That's $100B in current market value. That's approximately 5% of all coins at peek.
 
Last edited:
@philostam thank you for the explanation. That makes sense.

In the past I have taken time to understand some of the technical features of the currency but I haven't explored all of the uses and how feasible each is for various purposes. Though I consider myself above average, I have hesitated to dive into it because I felt it still needed a punch to breakthrough to mainstream use. When you explained above, I was imagining an invisible pipeline for moving and storing money on a global scale. I never thought of it as "digital gold" because the volatility seemed in sharp contrast to a tangible asset, yet when I reflect on the value of gold now I can see that it really is similar in that the value is related to demand rather than the actual asset.

I am but a grasshopper and you are the master of crypto. I bow to you.

Well...the reason is that for me it's not just theory, I have been a happy customer for last 4 years and had to research everything. I don't think it's possible to get it if you don't have skin in the game. Nowadays there's literally not a single argument against Bitcoin that can discourage me, I've been trough them all.

It's certainly volatile but it's calming down a bit. In the last 2 years the biggest draw-down in BTC was 25% which is not that bad considering YoY returns were 100%+ in both years. But yeah, I can see it drop it for 50-60% again when if the macro picture really turns (like in 2022) or if we get a black swan. But hey, volatility is vitality is a meme in the space. :D

Does Satoshi own those coins? That's $100B in current market value. That's approximately 5% of all coins at peek.

We don't know his identity but yeah, it's all there. It's assumed that those coins are lost or that he died. It could shock the market if those coins would move, that would certainly be a black swan. Quantum computer could also potentially break the encryption of those early coins because public keys are not hidden, so in that case Bitcoin would have to move to quantum resistance algorithm or we would need to reach some other consensus. But be sure that 2 trillion market cap network would defend itself against quantum attack.

Anyways...not to derail this thread too much. I don't think Trump team suggested that they wanted to replace USD, the talk was only about strategic Bitcoin reserve or some sort of sovereign wealth fund that would invest in many assets. Option would be also to revalue the price of gold, because all the gold reserves that US has (apparently, they're not really audited) are still marked to market at $45 an ounce, while the current market price is $2900 an ounce.

There's many threads they could pull and they will have to with the mounting debt the world has. The era of can-kicking has apparently ended, that's why we also see all this (crazy) talk about Greenland, Canada, Panama...
 
Last edited:
if we get a black swan.
Diversification is always wise during times of great chaos and the world is quite unstable atm. I know you know this, I'm just saying it out loud to keep it in your head.
There's many threads they could pull and they will have to with the mounting debt the world has. The era of can-kicking has apparently ended, that's why we also see all this (crazy) talk about Greenland, Canada, Panama...
When a world is built on debt (fiat), it will magnify the very thing it values (debt in this case). We need a world built on balance but that always seems to lead toward a discussion that discourages talent to attain its full potential. If only we had the wisdom of Solomon.

You have excellent insight and I really enjoy reading your posts.
 
Cool, a full blow activist, I don't get the opportunity to speak to such a species out on the plains. I do hope they pay you well, because they need you far more than you need them.

I wouldn't use any of them now that you've posted your choices online. Just seems like common sense to me.
 
Not everyone, but it is more common than not for protesters to be aligned with special interest groups. Are you aligned with a special interest group or are you doing it for love of country?

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind either way unless it causes a problem for the site. I like talking to the people here.
 
Lol
"Are you really involved in political action"
"Yep"
"No, not like that"
 
A special interest group related to the rule of law would be a group that is seeking to alter the rules of law within a country. There are many countries that would have an interest or stake in altering the rule of law in the United States. This becomes an even greater number when we consider the tariffs that are being placed on various countries.

With respect to the site, this becomes quickly complicated.
 
A special interest group related to the rule of law would be a group that is seeking to alter the rules of law within a country. There are many countries that would have an interest or stake in altering the rule of law in the United States. This becomes an even greater number when we consider the tariffs that are being placed on various countries.

With respect to the site, this becomes quickly complicated.
WTF? my interest is mainly in preserving the rule of law, not changing it. I believe that if the citizens vote trump in as president then, once he takes the oath, he is president. i do not believe that that empowers him to then ignore his oath and not abide by the laws as constituted in the constitution. How does that make me into some kind of adherent to a special interest group (perhaps aligned to some foreign entity) interested in altering the rule of law?
 
I said special interest groups and you said you were with relation to the law. If you want to twist words then that's up to you.

I don't care about what anyone thinks about political parties or politicians. If you want to spray hatred to everyone and anyone then go have at it. I do however care if it affects the site and it can if you are involved in spreading certain activities through this site. This is not rocket science, but if you need me to spell it out for you I can do that. I really don't want to spell it out because that puts pressure on the site.

You seem educated so I can only assume that you are either intentionally being cryptic or you're being passive aggressive. Either way it's childish.
 
Back
Top