Capitalism requires a free market for money. We haven’t lived under capitalism since World War I (probably even before that). What we call capitalism today is a façade—an economy built on centralized monetary control, legal tender laws, and credit manipulation. The core of every market has been distorted. Today’s economic woes aren’t the failure of capitalism. They’re the inevitable consequence of central planning masquerading as free enterprise. Bitcoin fixes this.

I’ve always found this punctuation rule a little strange: in American English, the period goes inside the quotation marks. Like: > She shouted, “Hey.” I don’t think this convention is logically sound. Maybe that doesn't matter. I don’t know. But allow me to make my case. A sentence ends when all of its information has been delivered, and a period is supposed to mark that end. But the end of a sentence can’t arrive when there’s still another piece of information coming—like the closing quotation mark. That mark carries meaning. Without it, the reader wouldn’t know the quote was over. So if the period comes before that, it’s stepping in early. The sentence is saying “Sentence over!” and then giving you one more piece of itself. That’s logically inconsistent. Sometimes what you’re quoting is a full sentence, and sometimes it’s not. I think you should punctuate accordingly. > She shouted, “Hey". “Hey” isn’t a sentence. It doesn’t need a period. You should mark the end of your sentence after all pieces of information. In cases where the quoted material is a full sentence, and that quote is the final part of the larger sentence, the period really belongs in both places—inside the quote to complete the quoted sentence, and outside the quote to properly mark the end of the full sentence. She said, "I don't want you to go.". That feels logically consistent to me, even if it breaks every style guide. Am I alone in this?

The four year Bitcoin cycles are starting to feel like the movie "Groundhog Day".

Bitcoin is economic jiu-jitsu—It doesn’t attack the financial establishment head-on but redirects its weight, exploits its overextensions, and uses timing, leverage, and positioning to subvert it from within. Bitcoin turns the strengths of its opponents—centralization, inflation, control—into liabilities, forcing them into compromised positions they can’t escape from without surrendering their advantage. It is silent, technical, and unrelenting.

Sovereignty is taken, not given. Bank involvement was always inevitable. There is no path to monetization without that. You don't have to use banks, and there are ways to hide. Many will choose the easy path and sacrifice freedom, but then again, many already do.

The government is being looted. It's been so for a while.

Forever, Laura