That was the point that I was trying to make, I phrased the first sentence poorly. I only meant to say that all the fees are paid by the merchant, unlike some atm transactions where the customer is charged. And that after trying credit card surcharges and cash discounts merchants just embedded to fees into the standard price.

If a car dealer can suddenly save $1,000 when selling a car due to a 3rd party he is not going to reduce the price of the car $1,000 immediately. We do not have similarity between cost increases and cost savings with respect to what the customer sees.

Also, a car analogy does not fit here. There is a difference between things that have a posted price (ex gasoline) and things that have a negotiated price (ex car) in the U.S. The courts have been through this before. Back in the day as people switched from cash to credit cards the gas stations, which operate on a very low margin, tried to pass on the swipe fee to consumers. The courts said no. The gas stations then tried to offer a cash discount. The courts said no, it was a credit card surcharge by a different method.

Therefore in the U.S. prices will reflect credit card swipe fees and any saving from a Bitcoin based transaction will go into the merchant's pocket, just like when we pay cash.

In the U.S. consumers don't pay the transaction fees on credit and debit cards, and in many states merchants are prohibited from adding a surcharge to cover this fee or offering a discount for a cash transaction.

Bitcoins only allow merchants to avoid the credit/debit transaction fee and receive a greater profit margin. Note merchants tend to convert bitcoins to USD immediately upon receipt, the fee for this conversion is usually far far lower than the credit/debit card fee. Sometimes even a flat fee for the month.

In NJ its all about who you know. For example, John Corzine, a close political ally of President Obama. "Former New Jersey governor and U.S. Sen. Jon Corzine, whom President Obama once hailed as an “honorable man” and one of his “best partners” in the White House, has been subpoenaed to testify before Congress about his role in the collapse of the investment firm MF Global." http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/po... [go.com]

Even in ages where Roman citizens took more seriously their voting franchise, the legislative process, the judicial process, the defense of the city, etc ... they still were reluctant to pay taxes and felt they were overtaxed.

That is a quite silly statement. The state is a vehicle for collective security and economic prosperity.

The security and economic opportunity provided by the state is the payment. The "bread and circuses" were buying political votes, nothing to do with paying for security.

Untrue. They were also called upon to defend colonies (fellow citizens), allies (often those who materially aided Rome when it was threatened, including supplying their own troops to aid Rome) and friendly neighboring states (perhaps an economic partner, sometimes a state that took in and sheltered Roman citizens when the sh*t hit the fan in Rome territory).

Whoa .. your time references are way off. I am largely referring to Republic Rome. Imperial Rome was not the start of the decay in "civic virtue" as Juvenal put it, it was one of the later effects. Here is the true original context "bread and circuses":
"Already long ago, from when we sold our vote to no man, the People have abdicated our duties; for the People who once upon a time handed out military command, high civil office, legions — everything, now restrains itself and anxiously hopes for just two things: bread and circuses"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses

Your example is a bit disturbing. I'd like to offer a substitute.

For close quarters battle a 12-guage pump shotgun is deadlier than a fully automatic M-16. Go back to the old video of U.S. Marines training to assault Iraqi trenches and bunkers in the first Gulf War. The lead Marines were carrying 12-guage pump shotguns, Mossberg 500 family IIRC, rather than their M-16. The lead Marines were to be the first to drop into the trenches. The first to enter the enemy bunker.

Shotguns are not generally carried because of their severe range limitation and their limited utility in suppressive fire. Police carry shotguns for similar reasons. In close quarters it is absolutely the most effective weapon.

Also note that the 12-guage pump shotgun can have its tubular magazine refreshed while keeping it fully at the ready.

So no, a maniac is not best equipped with a full auto. That is Hollywood BS. And unless the most basic pump 12-gauge shotgun is outlawed society is not really safe from maniacs.

You missed the GP's point with respect to "assault weapon" bans. The 5 million or so AR-15s are NOT fully automatic, "assault weapons" are a political fiction based on cosmetics not fullauto capability. Put a 5 round magazine into an AR-15 and it is functionally identical to various popular semiauto small game and target rifles that have detachable magazines. Put a 30 round magazine into one of these small game and target rifles and they are functionally identical to the gun banner's poster child of crime, the AR-15.

The point being that there are FAR more than 5 million semiauto rifles with detachable magazines AND there were only 348 people killed with rifles of any kind in 2012 out of a population of 312 million. The GP's point about "assault weapon" bans stand.

I am that OP and I did make the civic virtue argument: "Undermined the idea that citizens (both patricians and plebeians) should contribute to the greatness of their country, not that the greatness of their country entitled them to freebies."

Or if you prefer here is the original quote of Juvenal:
"Already long ago, from when we sold our vote to no man, the People have abdicated our duties; for the People who once upon a time handed out military command, high civil office, legions — everything, now restrains itself and anxiously hopes for just two things: bread and circuses"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses

That is what an elderly man once taught me when I was a child. He also taught me that it was regrettably necessary at times. The elderly man was once a paratrooper who jumped into Normandy the night before the D-Day landings.

He deeply regretted the regular army troops they killed, he wished there had been some way to get to those responsible for the war without going through these men. But there was not so they did what was unfortunately necessary. He had no regrets about the SS troops they killed, they were part of the political machine that caused the war.

Einstein also wrote letters to President Roosevelt to convince him to create an atomic bomb. If you read the quote you offer you will find that it refers to offensive wars for patriotic reasons. It does not preclude defensive wars in response to an actual threat. Which is the context in which he wrote President Roosevelt.

The quote you offer in fact contradicts your premise. Even Einstein believed that some wars were justifiable. In this case a war resisting the Nazis.

Before you offer his later quote regretting his role in the atomic bomb's development note that it was in the context that Germany would not have developed the bomb prior to its defeat. That the fear of a Nazi a-bomb would never have been realized. He still considered his action justifiable in the sense that at the time (1939) it seemed very plausible that that Nazi's might attain the a-bomb.

Wrong. The loss of civic virtue argument goes back to ancient Rome.

"Rome, even more than Greece, produced a number of moralistic philosophers such as Cicero, and moralistic historians such as Tacitus, Sallust, Plutarch and Livy. Many of these figures were either personally involved in power struggles that took place in the late Roman Republic, or wrote elegies to liberty which was lost during their transition to the Roman Empire. They tended to blame this loss of liberty on the perceived lack of civic virtue in their contemporaries, contrasting them with idealistic examples of virtue drawn from Roman history, and even non-Roman barbarians."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civic_virtue

Actually it is you who is having their ideology cause them to see things that are not there, to falsely interpret things. "Entitlement" is an old word, it predates your hot button politics.

No one said anything about food, shelter, or medicine for the poor. What is being referred to are freebies to any voter, poor or not. Its simple vote buying. And selling your vote to whoever promises you the most is part of the formula for decay. In the earlier days of Rome more care was shown for the abilities and policies of political candidates. They were more inclined to vote for what was best for the country, not necessarily what was best for themselves.

Here is the context for "bread and circuses" that clearly eludes you:
"Already long ago, from when we sold our vote to no man, the People have abdicated our duties; for the People who once upon a time handed out military command, high civil office, legions — everything, now restrains itself and anxiously hopes for just two things: bread and circuses" - Juvenal, Satire 10.77–81
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses

JFK was very different from today's Democrats. He believed in moderate taxation. Only moderate federal meddling in local affairs. He was much like the conservative Democrats or moderate Republicans that just can't get elected any more.

JFK was also later misrepresented by more liberal Democrats. For example the notion that he was going to withdraw the U.S. from Vietnam. His brother Robert, who served as his Attorney General, had stated that JFK was committed to fighting in Vietnam and defeating communism. His commitment to manned spaceflight was also misrepresented. He voted against manned missions as a senator, he thought manned flight too expensive and thought what we would now refer to as robotic mission would be a better idea. He became pro manned spaceflight as a concession to Lyndon Johnson, who was his Vice President, and due to Yuri Gagarin's spaceflight. Space, another arena where the communists must be defeated.

Some of the preeminent scholarly works regarding the fall of Rome refer to a decline in "civic virtue". A loss of a sense of responsibility and duty to the Roman state, replaced with a greater loyalty to a person (general or politician) who offered the greater rewards. To inform yourself as to what this "civic virtue" and sense of responsibility once entailed try reading Livy.