Are you just listing a few random ways that Bitcoin is more convenient than cash? The OP was about spending money at a bar.
But okay, here's how cash is more convenient: I can walk outside my office and use this dollar bill at any store anywhere around me. It has apparent value to everyone I will talk to. I don't need the internet.
If you need to "program" or "backup" your money, I guess Bitcoin is your medium. No argument there.
>Maybe chill out a bit on the accusatory kneejerk reaction, this is meant to be a forum for civil discussion.
Without fail, during any discussion about tech and gender on these boards, "nice guys" come out of the woodwork as staunch advocates of equality in the workplace, their message couched in accusatory and bullying language.
I'll bet they're closer to being part of the problem with the industry, rather than the solution.
>that sends a million little cues about what girls are supposed to do.
Why do you assume this is cause rather than effect? I find it hard to imagine we set out to define gender roles, rather than those roles evolving over a long time due to a billion factors.
>It doesn't protect against the insurers going bust
Can you clarify? I mean, I agree that your diversification should extend beyond the stock market (bonds, some metals, real estate). But I'm not sure what you mean by the above.
>because it's not an investment but a safety net like gold and silver
Only if you're a resident of an unstable country.
Can you name a crisis where having a stash of gold and silver mattered? Do you think people are going to trade valuable goods (food? water? ammo?) for your metal bars? I can't imagine the circumstances.
When SHTF the government (or someone else) will confiscate that wealth. They have in the past. Personally, I think metals will matter less in any apocalypse, because they have no practical use.
>It doesn't work that way. The best startups are ones that solve a pain point you yourself have experienced.
This is a natural extension of "startup founder" becoming a an aspirational occupation for kids fresh out of college. Who needs real-world experience? Disrupt!
>If union rules had been written down, even in 2005
What are "union rules"? Each union is free to bargain their demands collectively with the employer. If your members think such a rule is stupid, they won't demand it. But your lack of knowledge and disdain of unions is noted.
>The fact that the NYT is somewhat affiliated with them
So a disclosure that they use a massively popular product is now an advertisement?
Just one time I'd like to open the comments and not have someone saying "fake news" or "this is just an ad" or "stick with the facts".
Vanguard is an interesting company doing big things. They invented the index fund. They are massive. The New York Times profiles companies like this often.
Personally I find this more interesting than a Musk tweet announcing an announcement six months in advance.
I think both sides think it's ridiculous. But it serves a purpose for the union: job protection.
Corporations want as few people doing as much work as possible. And they will have no qualms about laying people off to achieve that (TFA). Putting absolute restrictions on tasks puts a floor on employment. It's not ideal, but somewhat effective.
>We would have a budget surplus if we actually made Social Security/other Gov. retirement program replacement actually sustain itself perpetually. What. A. Concept.
Why is running a budget surplus necessarily a "good thing"?
Seems like if people are willing to trade real assets for paper, we should do that as long as there are willing counterparties.
But okay, here's how cash is more convenient: I can walk outside my office and use this dollar bill at any store anywhere around me. It has apparent value to everyone I will talk to. I don't need the internet.
If you need to "program" or "backup" your money, I guess Bitcoin is your medium. No argument there.