this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
217 points (93.9% liked)

politics

18870 readers
4775 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] null@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I clarified it for you:

How is it bullshit to point out the fact that supporters of Bitcoin, which has a fixed supply, would obviously be critical of printing off more of a fiat currency?

Explain how that's bullshit. Or keep shadow-boxing. Up to you.

[–] CaliforniaSober@lemmy.ca -3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

This is not worth it.

You’re asking me to explain why bitcoin supporters would support bitcoin?

I get it! You call the world a fiat printing bs machine. Im sorry im not directly refuting that. All in due time.

In the next five minutes are you okay with tostadas while the man dives from a cave? Why are you so upset?

[–] null@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

This is not worth it.

And yet you keep engaging, despite not even being the person I replied to in the first place.

You’re asking me to explain why bitcoin supporters would support bitcoin?

Of course not. Let me spell it out for you again:

The person I replied to tried to use bitcoin supporters complaining about the Fed creating money as a gotcha.

I explained how that doesn't land because:

supporters of Bitcoin, which has a fixed supply, would obviously be critical of printing off more of a fiat currency.

Then you called it bullshit, but have been incapable of explaining why that is. Instead choosing to shadow-box with made up arguments.

[–] CaliforniaSober@lemmy.ca -1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

So you’re saying that you do not prescribe to bitcoins approach?

You believe that it’s all bullshit and are not saying the whole world’s financial systems are about to topple on a whim?

[–] null@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

So just shadow-boxing it is then. Carry on.

[–] CaliforniaSober@lemmy.ca -1 points 3 weeks ago

I mean the shadow is pretty clear. You offer no substance.