Chick Counterfly #BIP-110

I'd really like to hear from @NAACP, @ReverendWarnock, @RepJeffries, & @TheBlackCaucus to know your thoughts on this. We have multiple videos of Left-wing Democrats shouting racial slurs at federal agents who are racial minorities. Why do Democrats think that's ok?

@big_simp @mohrt @GavinMehl @YouTube From the US court:

@mohrt @GavinMehl @YouTube Thanks Mohrt. So this referred to the Florida case? What I don't understand is British courts ruled Craig is not Satoshi but is that just in UK? What about in USA?

$600 billion claim was defeated and the truth about the creation of Bitcoin is out. After two stressful months in court the jury has spoken. No partnership existed in the creation of the world’s first blockchain. Watch now: youtu.be/NRXnqhXxuK0?si… via @YouTube

@big_simp @mohrt @GavinMehl @YouTube This was discussed endlessly years ago & is old news. The courts in the USA stated very clearly & emphatically they were making no ruling regarding SN's identity, nor as to whether CSW actually possessed *any* of that BTC in question. They literally stated that.

@mohrt @big_simp @GavinMehl @YouTube False. It made perfect sense. Craig told Ira Kleiman he was Satoshi & that he Dave Kleiman had worked together & mined BTC together. Ira then sued for the estate's share of the BTC. (The problem of course: it didn't exist.) Ira wanted it to be true, but it wasn't.

@big_simp @GavinMehl @YouTube The Kleiman case was about ownership of early Satoshi coins. COPA was about identity. Of course, the Kleiman case would make no sense if Craig was not Satoshi, but the pundits won’t bring that up.

@patrick99e99 @GavinMehl @YouTube "my name is Gavin, and I post old, irrelevant lies."

@GavinMehl @YouTube "my name is Gavin, and I post old irrelevant news."

@TurnCARed2028 @scottphall44 @PerpetualAsset @saylordocs The appreciation in the asset doesn't help pay interest or loan principal if you're not selling any portion of it. You'd need another source of cash to make the loan payments. If you pass, yr estate pays the loan balance to prevent some of the collateral from being liquidated).

@CounterflyChick @scottphall44 @PerpetualAsset @saylordocs The principal that you pay back is less than the appreciation of the asset, the interest is less too, and you pay no tax on the gain. It is literally free

Imagine a father who secures $100K in spot Bitcoin. He holds the asset until the valuation hits a massive $5,000,000. Liquidating the position directly triggers devastating taxes on $4,900,000 of pure profit. So he executes the perfect institutional maneuver instead. He locks the Bitcoin in a legal trust, takes out a collateralized loan against the stack, and lives off the borrowed liquidity. Because he never executed a sale, his tax liability remains at absolute zero. Upon his death, the heirs receive the Bitcoin with a brand new cost basis set exactly at $5,000,000. The government cannot legally touch a single cent of the accumulated gain. This is exactly how generational wealth is permanently secured.

@TurnCARed2028 @kcismek37 @scottphall44 @PerpetualAsset @saylordocs But the loan has to be paid back. No bank is going to keep lending you money over & over forever & then waive your requirement to re-pay the cumulative amount borrowed in full, with interest. In the example it was collateralized, so they would hold the BTC & could sell to cover.

@kcismek37 @CounterflyChick @scottphall44 @PerpetualAsset @saylordocs No because a new loan pays for the old loan

@StalwartSt @PeterMcCormack Didn't the UK become better off in the 1980s under Thatcher? As I recall they were struggling in the 70s but I thought the 80s were fairly good in the UK, no?

@PeterMcCormack Has Britain & UK forgotten about the dark ages of the 1970s & 80s of high inflation, high unemployment, high, fuel prices, and the IRA planting b0m8s in West London every other week? From Heath to Wilson To Thatcher. Should Britain be more Thatcheritic, perhaps?

Whoever replaces Starmer will fail. Just as the Conservatives failed. You can’t build a country on low growth, low productivity, high tax, high welfare, high inflation and heavy regulations. It’s basic math - you materially make the lives of the majority worse. Reform, Greens, whoever else wants the gig - you will face the same. Until someone defeats the managerial state, nothing will improve and we’ll have more PMs than Tottenham has managers.

Bill Maher: "When people tell me, 'don't you think you've gotten more conservative?' No I haven't. The left has gotten goofier. It's not me who changed."

@TurnCARed2028 @scottphall44 @PerpetualAsset @saylordocs 2/2 ...to pay back the borrowed amount, or your estate does when you die. In the original example OP said nothing abt paying back the loan. But anyway, I've been into BTC 13 yrs & I can tell u it doesn't go up consistently. Long run, yes, but not every year like in yr example.

@TurnCARed2028 @scottphall44 @PerpetualAsset @saylordocs Even in your example, it's not "free", in the sense that the full loan must be paid back w/ interest. Living 20 yrs borrowing $100k/yr means you borrowed $2M that has to be paid back + another $200k-$500k interest depending on how you were paying it. The pt is you still have 1/2

@lacho_ai_ @mattvanswol @BernieSanders He meant that it returned the rights to make those laws to the states, & the local elected legislators are then making the laws representing their constituents. If the people don't like the local laws they can vote them out. I'm pro choice btw, but should be a state issue.

“Roe went back to the voters” is a weird way to describe politicians stripping away a constitutional right that existed for 50 years. Rights are supposed to protect individuals FROM majority rule. We don’t vote every election on free speech or interracial marriage either. And “states can’t sort citizens by race” sounds noble until you ignore the actual context of the Voting Rights Act: preventing maps that dilute minority voting power after decades of discrimination.

The damage from a reactionary Supreme Court: Citizens United allows billionaires to buy elections. Ending Roe v. Wade takes away a woman's right to control her body. Louisiana v. Callais strips voting rights away from Black Americans. Our rights are under attack. FIGHT BACK.

@DrBean3142 @stevuck @Number10cat @RupertLowe10 Fair point. But from what I read it seems the goal is to target those in the UK illegally, or those who committed crimes or fraud, or those who refuse to work & live in social housing. If someone was a legal resident, worked & retired, pension is obviously a legitimate benefit.

@CounterflyChick @stevuck @Number10cat @RupertLowe10 The state pension is a benefit, legally. Therefore would come under the banner of legal migrants to be targeted. Same with child benefit.

Restore Britain’s immigration policy in short, as being delivered on leaflets to millions of British homes by our army of volunteers and patriots.

@NeoKuroTV @Number10cat @RupertLowe10 But I see your point in the operative word "or". I doubt anyone wants to deport those who are working, contributing, assimilating, speaking English & haven't committed crimes. Everyone could agree on that. But those who don't work & live in social housing? They should leave.

@NeoKuroTV @Number10cat @RupertLowe10 Ok, I see what you're saying at least about child care benefits. Having said that, I would think most Brits would feel that migrants, if they don't work, especially if they refuse to work & claim social benefits, living in social housing at taxpayer expense should be deported.

@EndWokeness IKR? It's hard to imagine a voter who works & pays taxes watching that & thinking: "No, I want more of my tax dollars to build new housing for immigrants, & No I don't want more police officers & crime reduction. I want to pay for more social workers!" 😂 Likely to backfire.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. This was meant to be an attack ad AGAINST Spencer Pratt.

@DrBean3142 @stevuck @Number10cat @RupertLowe10 2/2 I may have missed something? I don't see where he said he wants to deport those who are legally residing in the UK, who haven't committed any crime, who worked, paid taxes & are now on retirement pensions after working until retirement age. I just don't see it.

@DrBean3142 @stevuck @Number10cat @RupertLowe10 I read what appears in the post above, & I don't see anywhere that he said what Larry accused him of saying. He's advocating deporting *illegal* migrants, & those who committed crimes, & those who don't speak English & live on social welfare benefits in social housing. 1/2

@Number10cat @RupertLowe10 PS: or those who may have gotten legal residency for a while, but who committed crimes. I would think most Brits would agree it makes sense to deport them (if not imprison them) if they committed crimes. In any case seems reasonable. He didn't say what you accused him of saying.

@Number10cat @RupertLowe10 He doesn't appear to be saying that Larry. Are we reading the same thing? He appears to be saying to deport the illegal migrants, & for the others, only if they don't speak English & living in social housing (at taxpayer expense) & receiving welfare benefits. Seems reasonable.

El alcalde socialista de Nueva York Mamdani ha quebrado la ciudad más rica del mundo en tan solo 4 meses. Javier Milei terminó con la hiperinflación más alta del mundo y devolvió el superávit fiscal a la Argentina en tan solo 2 años. El socialismo y el “todo gratis” siempre termina llevando a la quiebra. Mientras el trabajo y la libertad