Bubble, bubble, toil and trouble: Mt. Gox goes poof!

Mt Gox has gone bust.

Ahem.

We’ll take a quick bow (along with Gary North, Robert Wenzel, Bionic Mosquito, and several others).

We Bitcoin-deniers stood our ground in the face of relentless and shameless]pumping, supported by rent-a-libertarians, like the former chief editor of the Daily Reckoning, Joel Bowman and shameless other opportunists

[On rereading this, I think I want  soften my tone, since the anti-BTC’s have been proved by events.[

See the two MBP posts below:

BTC: My Comments at EPJ

Bitcoin: My Comment at EPJ and Block’s Reversal

See also the following anonymous comments at EPJ in December and November 2013:

My comments are anonymous, because I was worried that the elites might attack people who criticized BTC, just as they trashed Assange critics all over the net:

Comments at EPJ on December 3

 

  1. Anonymous (Lila )
  2. Stick with Gary North, Wenzel.

    Better the known devil than the unknown.

    And talking about unknown devils, who is this Paul Rosenberg from Cryptohippie?

    Who owns Cryptohippie?

    Might they have connections to TOR, Wikileaks, Assange, and/or the Internet billionaires (Zuckerberg, Brin, Thiel, Omidyar)? If so, can DARPA be far behind?

    How would we know since Bitcoin is so mysterious……

    In fact, how would we know if Bernanke himself wasn’t moonlighting as an “anti-Fed” bit-coiner?

    Answer is we wouldn’t.

    Also, what reason could there be for the inventor of an invention of this magnitude (purportedly) to coyly refrain from taking any credit or recognition?

    Another question, why does Julian Assange tout it?

    These are the things which must be investigated before anyone other than fools and gamblers will go near this scheme.

    Anonymous (Lila Rajiva)
  3. Maybe they gain something personally from promoting Bitcoins? Credibility with the hacker-anarchist world, for instance. Maybe even money. How do you know?

    It takes a big person to stick to his guns, even when peer pressure might suggest otherwise.

 


 

Comments at EPJ on December 12:

 

  1. Anonymous (Lila)
  2. @anonymous

    I don’t have time to refute step by step.
    Just the obvious points.

    You claim bitcoin allows you to transfer any amount of wealth anywhere in the world almost instantly and almost free.

    Actually, you can already do that with an ACH transfer (upto 10K), wire transfer ($25 for any sum) cash (as much as you can stuff undetected into your suitcase or cash cards. You can also do hawala.

    The limits in all these cases don’t arise from the medium, but from government restriction, which could be enforced much more thoroughly through BTC than by other means.

    Second. Bitcoins aren’t “free.” They require not only a very good computer, but an excellent internet connection, encryption of a very high order not only for the connection but for the hard drive.. and considerable technical knowledge to thwart the net-savvy people who swarm around bitcoin users.

    None of that is free or widely prevalent.

    In most countries, you don’t even have good enough internet.

    Plus, all of it can be snooped on and shut down.
    That is just one objection out of dozens I could raise.

    Reply

 

1.  Nov. 25, 2013 comments at EPJ

 

  1. Anonymous (Lila)
  2. Shame on anyone who is so credulous to believe this is the “free market” at work.
    Shame on anyone who supports this kind of elaborate con played by the very cartels that anarchists are supposedly fighting.

    Bitcoin is a Rothschild-backed intelligence-funded pump-and-dump. The purpose is to destabilize the dollar and provoke demand for a global single currency.

    It is the global elite-backed “controlled opposition,” using spokesmen from the CIA-infiltrated/ hard-money or “libertarian” community. The ones pitching it will make money as the proles rush in.

    It is easily tracked, easily gamed.
    More so than the dollar or gold.

    This massive swell of interest and pumping by all and sundry is a sure sign of intel involvement.

  3. People promoting this might as well have INTEL stamped on their forehead.
  4. Or FRAUD.

 

Anonymous (Lila)

 


 

 

@Philip, Anonymous, edward.

 

Intelligence and government are multi-layered, not unitary.

 

The right hand doesn’t know what the left hand is doing. Sometimes even the left hand doesn’t know. Just a finger or a nail knows.

 

Intelligence might take a while to understand the potential in something their scientists come up with. So it might take a year or two or more. Then they embrace it.

 

The MSM media is brain-washed one way – the obvious mainstream, Keynesian brainwashing.

 

The alternative media, including hard money people, are past the mainstream brainwashing, but they fall for the second-level brainwashing – they fall for Snowden, Assange, Hacktivism, Crypto-currency, Wikileaks, and all such black operations, meant to appeal to gullible, egoistic anti-govt types.

 

There are legions of agencies involved who profile dissent and come up with the red herrings that will be swallowed by the maximum number of fools and opportunists.

 

The economic dissenters trust their hard-money gurus, but that crowd is filled with two-bit cons who will fit their agenda to whatever the intelligence agencies tell them.

 

Please go back and look at when Bitcoin mania started and look at who has promoted it.

 

Be wise as serpents, my friends. Wenzel’s instincts are right. I hope he will not be dazzled by Mayer’s “expertise” and misled into supporting this con game.

 

As for sources. Do some research directly yourself and see what you find.

 

Reply

 

their ‘endgame’ …. .

 

 

Anonymous (Lila)

 

 

@Phil McKreviss, EndtheFed,

 

There are a few libertarian (rightist and leftist) blogs where Assange and Snowden have been deconstructed thoroughly. No need to reinvent the wheel here. Let your fingers take a walk and you will see that they are both mouthpieces for the global elites.

 

Some reliable sources you could read: Cottrell, Rappaport, Creighton, Rajiva, Madison…off the top of my head.

 

China – China is a COMMUNIST country, my friends. Goldman Sachs has a big presence there.

 

End-game is control – maximum control over your assets, your money, your movements, your writing, your thoughts – so they can harvest it all for themselves.

 

The elites would be gods…and for that, they need for you to be less than men. They need for you to be little BITS of a machine.

 

Read everything critically, inwardly, not in this trusting fashion.

 

Rest assured, when something shows up on the internet, with this much fanfare, the elites approve.

 

Freedom is hard.

 

It will not come without sacrificing some time, effort and along the way, some favorite delusions and consolations too.

 

Biggest delusion is to believe that there is any quick simple remedy whereby you get to make a ton of money quicker and liberate “the world” too.

All that is Grimms Fairy Tales in a special edition for libertarians.

15 thoughts on “Bubble, bubble, toil and trouble: Mt. Gox goes poof!

  1. Well done Lila. You are amazing :-)

    Keep it up…

    I notice that I visit your website almost daily…

    I also read your review of the Economic Hitman…. very well written. You are an exceptional analyst! And your cynicism is justified.

    Can I leave you a link to my much tinier cynicism of John Perkins (with whom I had actually conversed, to try and get my own maiden book published after reading that his EHM book had in fact been turned down over fifty times by his own admission. To John’s credit, he had put me in touch with Barret-Kohler way back in 2004. They turned mine down). Here is the link to the introduction letter I had written to my activist friends for John’s followup book, A Game As Old As Empire, and my cynicism of John as the EHM is in the Redux footnote at the end (and once again, to John’s credit, I recall that he had published my critique on his own blog but without commenting):

    http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2007/03/introducing-game-as-old-as-empire.html#Redux

    Who knows…. the fact that he revealed what was already self-evident like all the rest of the whistleblowers …. I would like to learn what is not public knowledge, i.e., a real secret, for a change. And I know that were that ever the case, before the secret is revealed, the man or woman of conscience will sleep with the fishes.

    Best wishes,

    Zahir Ebrahim
    Project Humanbeingsfirst.org

  2. @Zahir,

    It does do Perkins credit that he allowed you to voice your honest appraisal of his conduct on his web site.

    You never know under what kind of pressure activists operate.

    Maybe someone has the goods on Perkins and only allows him so much slack.
    We should call people out, as needed, but we should also cut them some slack.

    I’ve had a few people threaten me covertly and it’s not pretty. It’s very very frightening.
    Unfortunately (for them), they were barking up the wrong tree. Indeed, up a forest of wrong trees.

    Seems to me, before you embark on a career in the underworld, the first thing you do is check the dynamite in your file. You want the real stuff not just a dud.
    Seems some of my would-be foes swallowed one of the millions of red herrings that swim around the net..
    I mean, no sense in threatening a masochist with a horse-whipping or a pyromaniac with fire and brimstone…..

  3. Hello,

    I read through all your links on this, and then some more study on my own. Again I am impressed with your tenacity to stay with your own gut instincts. You obviously understand these financial and monetary matters far more in depth than most people.

    Can you perhaps take a look at my long-standing ( but outright ignored) proposal to all monetary reform advocates across the board including folks in your turf, specifically messrs. Ron Paul, the Rothbardians, and Mises et. al., and offer some sensible critique, accurate refutation, or further enhancement to the first order arguments I have made:

    Monetary Reform: First Look at the Gold Standard

    http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-gold-standard-boondoggle-revisited.html#

    Why is it continually ignored you think? Meaning, why are the issues raised in it not addressed by these learned monetary reform advocates?

    Thanks.

    Zahir Ebrahim
    Project Humanbeingsfirst.org

  4. 1. There is a incredible fraud being perpetrated on the people by the central banking, fractional reserve banking and usery based current system.
    2. The right solution is public banking and usery free banking. American Monetary Institute, Stephen Zarlenga, Ellen Brown, Bill Still, Anthony Mitchell are offering the right solutions.
    3. Austrian Economics is a false solution. It is promoted by the same elites to prevent real solutions from ever getting any traction. They use time tested methods of deception including the limited hangout and the Hegelian dialectic.
    4. Gold Standard is also a false solution. Elites own all the gold and the citizens have all the debts. The elites want you to pay back all the debts and taxes in gold and not in paper. The people can’t even pay them in paper, tell me how will they pay these huge debts back in gold? Gold standard will cause a terrible deflation and depression and do nothing to free the people from the monetary slavery.
    5. What I know for a fact, for you it will always be a theory. You have to do your own research to understand that what I am saying indeed is a fact.
    6. Not many people in this world have the time and energy to do the research into these monetary matters. Monetary research is complicated by the fact that all economic theory taught and propagated in universities is institutionalized scientific fraud.
    7. We all need “family wisdom” to teach and point us in the right direction. Because as children by a natural instinct you learn to trust your parents and family. The elites want to replace your family wisdom by the core curriculum. Schopls teach excellent good stuff most of the time then slip in some propaganda like climate change to vaccines, deviant sex etc as new normal. The modus operandi is always the same. The limited hang out. The confidence tricks and the Hegelian dialectic.
    8. That is why the destruction of men, women and family is such a high priority of the elites. They want to cling on to the monetary system that has given them incredible intergenerational wealth and power. People need to be dumbed down and the first step is they should have no family wisdom.
    9.When things are low key Fluoride is used for maintenance of dumb state. Sometimes Marijuana needs to be added to the mix to fog the brains when people are waking up.

  5. It seems this system that we have or some derivative of it will persist for a long time. Some group will always be in control. Any alternative can also get taken over by people who are corrupt and they could turn out to be even worse. Best bet for mankind is the hope that a concencious, benevolent faction of the elites ultimately remains in control.
    Remaining ignorant and dumbed down however is not an option. Knowledge is the key to a brighter future.

  6. Wow, R. You think Ellen Brown’s ideas are the way to go, and “Schopls teach excellent good stuff most of the time”?

    I can see why you don’t like Austrian Economics.
    Perhaps you should do a double take and reconsider?

    If people cannot pay back their debts with Dollars, it matters little if money is gold.
    It’s simple. The debt will not be paid back.
    Now think about how a “do-over” works best. Is it if a gooberment controls the money, or if people can just dig it up out of the ground?

    I know Lila has a few problems with the Rothbardians, of whom I generally agree with, but the pure Austrians, I doubt (and hope) you’ll find her on your side there.

    Anyway, @Lila:

    “The alternative media, including hard money people, are past the mainstream brainwashing, but they fall for the second-level brainwashing – they fall for Snowden, Assange, Hacktivism, Crypto-currency, Wikileaks, and all such black operations, meant to appeal to gullible, egoistic anti-govt types.”

    Ouch. …Kindof. Sort of.

    P.S.

    You’ve had a couple of graphic photos on of late that I could do without seeing and having seared upon my mind as I was already convinced. I really do hope they made a difference to someone,… somewhere.

  7. @Clark

    I think R needs to look a bit more into Ellen Brown’s inspiration – Bill Still.

    I don’t know about their program – I haven’t read it in detail. I think their point is that some sorts of money printing aren’t inflationary, because of the way it’s done. And that digital debt and shortage of currency aren’t the same thing.

    I’m not enough of an economist to know whether that’s really so or not and in what way.

    So I won’t dismiss all their points entirely, but when she says stuff like “we can borrow it from ourselves,” then she loses me.

    Also – there is a difference between interest and usury and the Brownians don’t seem to see that.

    (Neither do some Catholics).

    I have differences with any body who is a Utopian and Rothbardians are utopians even though they strenuously object that libertarianism is ONLY a political theory, not a game-plan for life. Their actions speak louder than their words.

    I have no ideological position outside being as truthful as possible in public life. I don’t mean confessionals, ala Naomi Wolf – we need less of that kind of truth. I mean, just being plain-spoken about the mechanics of power.

    Yesterday, a family member was nervously asking me what the sedition laws in this country were and wouldn’t I run afoul of them.

    I said, I’m very confident that I am far from being seditious and well within my first amendment rights.
    I wouldn’t like to become a test case, but in general I don’t poke hot sticks into the eyes of ferocious beasts. Leviathan, especially.

  8. It was disappointing to read your reply, “I think their point is that some sorts of money printing aren’t inflationary, because of the way it’s done. And that digital debt and shortage of currency aren’t the same thing.”

    The one is the same as the other. [And, as if a delay means the outcome is not the same?]

    Is this you saying you’re not an Austrian, too?

    First Libertarianism, now Austrianism?

    What end of the plank you find? ….What then?

    Thank goodness she looses you when she says, “we can borrow it from ourselves,”

    Also, well of course Rothbardianism is a game plan for life. How is it possible to look at a direction and not see it as a game plan for life? Is “humanism” not the same?

    If you ask me,… “Humanism” IS Rothbardiasim.

    Two Utopian ideas seeking a similar outlet?

    Who says Rothbardianism isn’t a game-plan for life?

    I mean, so many people make it a practice to incorporate the N.A.P. into their lives as a result of embracing Rothbardianism, how can it Not be a game-plan for life, and why wouldn’t you want that?

    You say, “Yesterday, a family member was nervously asking me what the sedition laws in this country were and wouldn’t I run afoul of them.”

    I’m not so confident of your response.
    Of myself, that is.

    Ten years ago. Sure.
    Today.
    Not so much.
    Five years from now.
    ???

    Are the Rothbardians completely different from the Austrians?

    Do you find yourself more in agreement with the Rothbaridans than with any other group?

    Also, you say, “but in general I don’t poke hot sticks into the eyes of ferocious beasts. Leviathan, especially.”

    You’re joking! You are the hottest stick poking hornets nest shaking chick I never met.

  9. Crap! My long winded comment isn’t awaiting moderation.
    It’s gone into the either?

    That’s what I get for not copying before pasting.

    Anyway, Give or take a bit here and there, Humanism IS Rothbardianism.

    No mention of Austrian Economics, I noticed.

    Except a hint at this: “I think their point is that some sorts of money printing aren’t inflationary”

    Ya. Ok. [Sarc oFF].

    Thank goodness, when she says, “we can borrow it from ourselves,” then she loses me.

    Count me in as a Rothbardian camp who thinks that it’s not a political theory, but a game-plan for life.

    For what is Humanism? Utopianism?

    You say, “Yesterday, a family member was nervously asking me what the sedition laws in this country were and wouldn’t I run afoul of them.”

    Ya. yesterday, you didn’t.
    Today and tomorrow,, eh, maybe no? Keyword: maybe.
    Same question I face.

    ANd yes, You DO poke hot sticks into the eyes of ferocious beasts. Leviathan, especially.

    I’m amazed you think otherwise.

  10. Oh dear…

    This constant searching for signs of “deviation” gets tiring.

    I think money printing is inflationary, OK?

    But, when I talked to a gold-bug Swiss banker (Austrian) with an advanced degree in economics, he told me that the way it is used (it being the term “printing”), it isn’t accurate at all, since most of our debt is DIGITAL and far in excess of the actual currency requirements needed to service the debt.

    I believe some version of that is what Bill Still MIGHT be getting at.

    I don’t know. I haven’t read his program and don’t intend to.

    I think the problems with society are so great that printing or no printing, we’re in for big trouble.

    So I take care not to say anything I am not utterly sure of, such as, claiming that all forms of “printing” are always the same in effect.

    They might not be. That doesn’t mean I support QE. Of course not. I wrote a whole book against it. I have repeatedly attacked (over several years) the Federal Reserve for it. I did that long before Wenzel, by the way. It wasn’t me who was cheering on Ron Paul when he suggested some measures not too different from what Brown proposed (during the elections).

    When I say something like that it just means I understand the point that Still and company are trying to make. I try to understand what someone is saying before I try to refute them or come up with counter arguments.

    One of the big problems of debate is that people aren’t looking to refine their own arguments or understand someone else’s but rather always playing gotcha or figuring out if this or that person (me in this case) is on “our team” or not. It makes for sloppy thinking.

    So I’ll make it short. I’m NOT a libertarian of the kind at LRC. I don’t think everything is the fault of the government, or even of the state. I don’t think all governments are equal evils or all government programs. I don’t think people without governments are always going to be the lovely little cherubs of libertarian imagination.

    That doesn’t mean I don’t think society can never function well without govt. Not at all. It could. It does right now, mainly because government is irrelevant to the functioning, even though it obstructs it.

    I don’t think drug dealers are “just businessmen” and prostitution is just another line of work.

    I might think the drug war is a bad thing and that criminalization of prostitution isn’t a good idea, but that’s a different thing, and I’m willing to listen to conservatives who have arguments about why criminalization might be right. I am always looking for new ways to look at things. My highest priority is being in alignment with reality and truth, not giving myself emotional brownies and joining in with the team. I don’t have a team, of that kind.

    I think intellectual property is more important than physical property and crimes of the spirit morally worse than those of the flesh. It doesn’t mean I want to censor anyone.or expropriate Americans.

    Rothbard. I don’t hate Rothbard but I don’t think everything he wrote was always correct and he had an abrasive personality. Apparently, so do I.

    Austrianism is OK so far as its basic notion of keeping the study of human society close to axioms and far from mathematics. No problem with that or with the notion of “real” money. But for me, I can arrive at those conclusions from much firmer foundations, in religion.

    I found a home, briefly, in Austrian thinking, because it matched my antiwar positions, formed by religion.

    But where Austrian teaching draws conclusions at radical variance from religious teaching I diverge from it.

    That doesn’t mean I side with Pope Francis over Tom Woods. I think Francis makes mistakes from one angle and Woods from another. But I like a lot of what Woods says otherwise.

    I do have a problem with this constant purity- testing and thought-control. It smacks of the KGB.
    It’s what makes me think sometimes that libertarians are shills for the left, which also practices ideological discipline.

    I am way to the RIGHT of most of you out here in Amreekistan and one of the ways I am more to the right is I fervently detest that kind of ideology because it privileges theory over human beings and contexts.

    That’s why you don’t understand why I am mild in my criticism of someone like Brown and mistake a restatement of Brown’s position for a statement of mine.

    The reason I am mild with her has nothing to do with her theory and everything to do with context:

    1. She acts and appears to be a lady and she is older than me. She is a mother.
    2. She is polite and sweet in debate.
    3. She has been to India, likes it. That prejudices me in her favor.
    4. In her personal behavior and life (so far as I know them) she seems to be an excellent human being.

    That trumps whatever belief she professes.
    I never see her using foul language, slandering anyone, stealing ideas (oops- maybe she pinched her stuff from Still, as some say).

    Her mistakes and errors are intellectual ones only.

    So I treat her differently from even ideological soul -mates who happen to be crude thugs at a personal level.

    I don’t agree with her but I will never bash her, as I am quite happy to bash them. I voice my differences circumspectly.

    That’s not a sign of my left “deviationism,” it’s a sign that I change my style depending on the person to whom I’m talking and that I respect an older lady and do not respect a young thug, however smart or correct.

    If the Rothbardians didn’t look for devils under every rug, they would see that my positions end up very close to theirs, about 90 percent of the time. The other ten percent, where I diverge, I am right and history will prove me right.

    They won’t admit it and will shade their arguments to make it look different, but that will be the truth.
    Doesn’t matter if they have ten Rothbards on their side and each 200 times as brilliant and learned as the original.

    What I am saying is firmly grounded in objective reality and in dharmic principles.
    So it will be borne out as surely as darkness falls at evening.
    And the NWO cannot prevail against those principles, because the universe is moral and founded on truth, not lies.

  11. @Anonymous

    You’re mistaken about different kinds of printing not having different effects. They do.
    Depends on where in the system it’s released, what’s happening elsewhere (is the Fed buying in the open market etc), how it gets spent.

    That doesn’t mean I endorse the Brownian “public works” stuff. I think that’s “more of the same.”
    But it needn’t be.

    The non-aggression principles is a very watered down version of the religious injunction to practice non-violence.

    I take the latter seriously though I often fail to follow it.
    I am sorry to disappoint you, but you’re in good company – I disappoint myself too.

    Theory interests me less than history. There is so much to know.
    I never read Marx (except for college courses)
    I still read the Gospels and Upanishads.

    If I had spare time, I would spend it studying Sanskrit and Patanjali and figuring out who Jesus was… and Krishna.

    Rothbard doesn’t even show up on the list of things I want to study more closely. He has enough admirers without me.

    I’d like to read more Indian social/political theorists. I have a lot of guilt that I didn’t spend more of my time studying Indian thought..or Asian, and like every suburban desi signed up for the Western civ. bit.

    I put it down to family pressure (very gentle, but quite powerful).
    I really wanted to study Sanskrit and comparative religion, not “arts” and English or any of the soft sciences. I wish I’d been a herbalist/astrologer or an Indologist.

    I use the term humanist only to mean that I don’t believe in imposing my beliefs in the legal sphere.

    I’m actually an obscurantist of the worst sort. I believe in the existence of God, holy angels, the divine mother, the efficacy of prayer, the resurrection of the body, the mysterious order of the stars. I got to know the great “occult” texts because of such interests.

    Lately, I spend my time reading about plants and gardening. I prefer the kind of people I meet in that line of work than most of the people I’ve met in other lines.

    I try not to be unnecessarily provocative. If I come off that way, it’s only because I see no other way to deconstruct what’s happening.

    My astrology chart shows that I will influence public opinion, be good at any kind of deep research/investigative work, be in danger of falling afoul of the government, have powerful enemies (whom I ultimately defeat), know ancient wisdom traditions, be argumentative,choleric, and accident-prone…

    Apparently, this is my last life on earth. No more reincarnations (wink).

    Now why would any sane libertarian/Rothbardian/socialist want me in their camp?
    I would just be an embarrassment.

  12. Very interesting comments, Lila. Very.

    I had to look up ‘obscurantist’.

    No wonder I have such a hard time figuring you out.

    [Did I just get called an insane thug?]

    Ya. You seem like a fine Rothbardian. I don’t agree with everything Rothbard wrote either (thanks to you for informing me of that) but nothing is perfect and Rothbardianism is close enough to do.

    P.s.

    Have you got a secret for watering container plants?

  13. Not really.
    I’m sitting here in my small cubby-hole listening to the rain on the awnings. Endless. It’s been raining for about ten hours continuously.
    High winds too. All that water gone to waste.
    I’m planning on a drip system. It uses less water than sprinklers. Maybe that’s the best for containers, as well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>