Printable View
The school (the buyer) is getting a loan from, horrors, a bank. A fairly large one even. That bank engages in fractional reserve banking, and is connected to...wait for it...the Federal Reserve system.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xmac
So I'm kind of thinking that there aren't baskets of smoked clams, or racks of repurposed graphics GPUs senselessly wasting electricity, backing the funds.
Incidentally, I'm as libertarian, free market as they come. It'd be nice to have one...a free market that is.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
Right, there's only one thing backing them...wait for it...beliefQuote:
So I'm kind of thinking that there aren't baskets of smoked clams, or racks of repurposed graphics GPUs senselessly wasting electricity, backing the funds.
See how long THAT holds up as a store of value.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afWqKcqntfs
I have this bill in my wallet...Quote:
Originally Posted by Xmac
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-i...Awesomized.jpg
I have living relatives who went through this:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance...r-republic.jpg
And yet I'm accepting payment from the school in US dollars, not bitcoin... Dollars which I will likely put into a bank briefly, before reinvesting in Something Else. Horror.
Not yet. You'll get your chance.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
Good for you. It takes smart investing to stay ahead of a Ponzi scheme.Quote:
Dollars which I will likely put into a bank briefly, before reinvesting in Something Else. Horror.
This is about the future of money, not old spending habits.
I don't understand how Bitcoin is superior to dollars. Neither has intristic value, both are only worth what someone will trade for them. The big difference is the dollar has the backing of the U.S. government at this time,that has a substantial military at its disposal.
The reason renewable energy is big in Germany is because they have an overly generous government subsidy, the feed in tarriff system, that promotes it. And you picked an odd example-- the German economy is very reliant on financing from big banks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xmac
It's superiority is in its potential, velocity, open ledger and advanced security.Quote:
Originally Posted by dmc
Presently, the military can attack countries that openly stop using the dollar. It is ineffective, however, for stopping individuals and companies from using Bitcoin, assuming the companies have state of the art security.
Silk Road, an underground website that was known for selling and buying anything, was shut down by government authorities and in just a few months, Silk Road 2.0 was launched. Then, that was shut down and 3.0 was up in a day...or two?
But that's not the end of it. Open Bazaar will make any interference impossible because it is an open source market place, which, being de-centralized makes it impossible to shut down.
So, the military won't play much of a role, if any, in enforcing the dollar or stopping Bitcoin.
Say what?Quote:
Originally Posted by Xmac
My point is that they have the capacity to effect entities like countries and governments, not individuals.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yossarian
If we had a stable amount of currency it probably wouldn't matter. As the economy grew the value of the currency would rise over time. Savers would be rewarded for saving, or if they wanted to take a risk to receive higher returns beyond the increasing value of the currency they could loan it to someone at interest. Banks that wanted deposits in order to be able to make loans would have to show themselves to be reasonably skilled at underwriting the risk of loans. Only viable projects would be able to receive funding. People wanting to borrow for riskier projects, like fracking enterprises that succeed or fail based on the whims of oil prices, would have to pay higher rates of interest. Instead we're in a situation currently where frackers were able to borrow money at only slightly higher rates than treasuries pay which, if oil prices remain low, is going to prove to have been foolishness that was encouraged by poor federal reserve policy. The soviet union proved that central planning is not an especially effective way of running an economy. I'll never understand why anyone thinks that a bunch of people at the federal reserve can do any better.
And how is Bitcoin and other digital currency's stable? What is backing them? I'll take a wait and see approach at this time and keep my dollars.
And what's to guarantee some other digital currency doesn't take the market from bitcoin?
I think I'll stay out of that market as well, though if I was to get in it wouldn't be 5% of my income (yikes) maybe more like 1%, 2% at max - because that's the most I'd consider "play money" as far as investment goes. Because I don't entirely know what to make of it but it seems a lot of smart people have raised their doubts about bitcoin.
Bitcoin seems based on a Ponzi scheme to me too, where everything depends on getting in first, hardly the most ethical monetary scheme in my view (but more or less ethical than the dollar? gah, I don't know! :doh: I'm not a fan of the empire either).
The context of stable I meant is simply that the quantity can't be expanded endlessly. Once 23 million, or whatever the number is, have been mined, that's it. After that, assuming that adoption of it for usage continues to grow, the value of each coin will grow in value due to their relative scarcity, as compared to the ever declining value of dollars due to their ever growing quantity.Quote:
Originally Posted by dmc
It's certainly possible that some other digital currency might become more popular, or equally likely, that several digital currencies could coexist at the same time at a floating exchange rate no different from the way national currencies current float, except without central banks trying to constantly devalue them in an attempt to make exports more desirable even though it also makes saver residents poorer at the same time.Quote:
Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore
Over time the value of bitcoin, assuming that it becomes ever more widely adopted, will continue to go up because the same amount will be used to purchase more and more goods. Getting in early isn't really a necessity unless one's goal is only to get rich by speculating on them.
Yup, I withdraw it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yossarian
It's also about their strong manufacturing base...to give any example in what was basically a hypothetical was a mistake on my part because there are just a handful of countries that do not have central bank systems and there is myriad of factors involved.
I still say that the system makes all kinds of difficulties larger, whether for the planet or the people. We already know what we have hasn't worked, to say the least. The worst that could happen with Bitcoin is no worse than what we're facing globally now and the upside potential is so much higher.
Then good. Let the masses decide. I much more interested in the idea of the block chain and decentralization. It doesn't necessarily have to be one currency either. On average, one new cryptocurrency is launched everyday. Most will fail or not gain widespread adoption but some will and they have very interesting features.Quote:
Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore
I believe I said (or at least meant) disposable income.Quote:
I think I'll stay out of that market as well, though if I was to get in it wouldn't be 5% of my income (yikes) maybe more like 1%, 2% at max - because that's the most I'd consider "play money" as far as investment goes. Because I don't entirely know what to make of it but it seems a lot of smart people have raised their doubts about bitcoin.
I've waited to hear, and looked around for, a solid reason against it, but I haven't found one that holds up to scrutiny. The smart people that I hear against it are either don't understand it and/or are threatened by it.
If you invested money into the internet when the media was saying it was going to be a den of thieves, prostitutes, terrorists and child pornographers et al, and nobody else would touch it, then I'd say you ought to be rewarded for your prescience. Early adopters made money, BUT, focusing on its price totally misses the boat AND focusing on just the currency still misses the greatness of the innovation.Quote:
Bitcoin seems based on a Ponzi scheme to me too, where everything depends on getting in first, hardly the most ethical monetary scheme in my view (but more or less ethical than the dollar? gah, I don't know! :doh: I'm not a fan of the empire either).
I recommend to everyone to just take a deep breath and with an open mind search more videos with Andreas Antonopolous, especially the earlier ones. He understands it deeply and communicates it to the layman very effectively.
If you dig into this a bit you'll see that almost everyone who first came across it dismissed it, including Andreas A. If you listen to mainstream media, you will not understand it. You will hear nonsense, distractions or half truths.
This thing has crashed at least a couple times and keeps coming back. Since when do Ponzi schemes do that?
Bitcoin's traceability is questionable at best (anything electronic can be manipulated). Mt Gox ring a bell? (still haven't recovered peoples money and the place is out of business, so hard to go after)Quote:
Originally Posted by Xmac
Also anything webbased is subject to needing access (which can be hacked or traffic shut down as Korea was recently). That isn't to say there isn't other tech out there, to mirror bits (think of Echelon and such), physical seizure, lack of regulation etc. The goverment seized all the Silk Road bitcoins (we discussed that before) and can seize any property (property is NOT innocent until proven guilty), let alone they haven't decided on how they want to deal with it from a tax perspective.
And it has the same problem as ANYTHING that one wants to use as currency, both parties need to accept and believe in it.
"Traceability is questionable". ???Quote:
Originally Posted by ToomuchStuff
How is that different than cash? And other currencies?Quote:
Mt Gox ring a bell? (still haven't recovered peoples money and the place is out of business, so hard to go after)
Have credit card companies fixed fraud and identity theft in that antiquated system?
Likening Mt Gox to Bitcoin is like likening a bank with shoddy security to the dollar and shows a profound misunderstanding of what Bitcoin is.
Websites can be hacked, and will be hacked, the de-centralized network that Bitcoin uses has had many hacking attempts, to which none has prevailed and it has only served to make the network more resilient against attack.Quote:
Also anything webbased is subject to needing access (which can be hacked or traffic shut down as Korea was recently).
One tiny communist country 'shutting down traffic' TEMPORARILY is a mere hiccup as it will be in the future. These shut downs can be easily worked around and you would know that if you watched the video.
If you don't have the keys, you don't get the Bitcoin. If people haven't been careful with the keys, which is to be expected with a new technology, they will learn digital security the hard way.Quote:
That isn't to say there isn't other tech out there, to mirror bits (think of Echelon and such), physical seizure, lack of regulation etc. The goverment seized all the Silk Road bitcoins and can seize any property let alone they haven't decided on how they want to deal with it from a tax perspective.
Governmental entities are not able to seize Bitcoin which is properly made secure. They can seize bodies which can be manipulated to give up keys, but governments that do this regularly, as a matter of policy, will expose their own tyranny, usage will become more stealth/underground and the larger Bitcoin commerce will move elsewhere in the world to develop and thrive.
That is not a problem to the millions exchanging it now all over the world.Quote:
And it has the same problem as ANYTHING that one wants to use as currency, both parties need to accept and believe in it.
Your statement demonstrates what I've been saying: anything has value and utility as a currency when there is agreement to use and hold it as such. That "problem" is quietly solving itself everyday as startups are launched, adoption spreads and usage grows.
California just passed a law making Bitcoin legal tender...BTW.
http://www.businessinsider.com/bitco...ew-year-2015-1
"Bitcoin is under $300 for the first time since November of 2013. It's down ~16% to start 2015."
I tell you what---let you kids in on a little secret, just because you're my friends---I got my money tied up in Martian Real Estate. I always figure---Buy on the edge of town, and wait. It'll go up in Value.
Im developing a new fiat currency myself, dmc bucks, I'll trade some for a few lots.Quote:
Originally Posted by Packy
I'm so happy, I can get in on this in a bigger position than before. This is tantamount to the arrow being pulled back on the bow.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
Yes, I saw someone trying to get readers call it a "crash". The price has "crashed" about three or four times. Bubbles crash and don't come back. Bitcoin, as you'll see, will continue to gain use/adoption.
Or maybe you won't see because you're looking at price volatility (not usage stability which is all a currency really needs) the way anxious investors watch the daily stock market gyrations.
Way to risky for me, but good luck.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xmac
Now that's it's down under $200 you can buy even more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xmac
How much are you buying, or are you waiting to see of it continues to drop?
It's not dropping, it's just gyrating.Quote:
Originally Posted by dmc
Once again, if you think the current price is what is significant you will remain oblivious to the obvious technological genius behind the currency.Quote:
Originally Posted by dmc
It has always been the small upstart that has overturned the apple carts for established monopolies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wq8yOMl8IUs
Yes, gyrations, it's already back over $200 :moon:
I've belonged to an investment discussion group for about 20 years now. One of our longstanding rules is that we post our trades. Eliminates much of the puffery, and weeds out the fantasy-football types.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xmac
Is there a dollar price for bitcoin below which "mining" becomes a losing proposition?
Since I own none the price does not effect me. I assume you are in for less than $200, if so good for you. As I said it's too risky of an investment for me. I'll stick with dollars, stocks, bonds, and hard assets for now. If I miss a big run up, oh well, I've missed a few in the past. I've also had some big losses in the past also.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xmac
I see golds over $1200 now, Someone's still buyin that.
i don't get the "mining". Is this where you get Bitcoin out of thin air? I just don't understand it, how can something have value with nothing backing it. Why don't others just make up there own currency?Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
Marketwatch discusses it here: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bit...1-14-121034915Quote:
Originally Posted by dmc
I don't know that you can't just make up your own currency. Pre-Civil War, there were any number of currencies backed by banks, local communities, stores, etc. The real limiting factor was how generally accepted it was and how credible the issuer was.
The Federal Reserve Note, actually not a dollar, is backed by nothing but acceptance/usage (and possibly military threat). It too is created out of thin air.Quote:
Originally Posted by dmc
The dollar does not have innovative technology as significant as the internet behind it, Bitcoin does. If you think there's gold backing the dollar, you're mistaken.Quote:
I just don't understand it, how can something have value with nothing backing it.
There is a new cryptocurrency being created, on average, once a day. Local currencies are also being used and are thriving. In my backyard, there is a local currency called BershireBucks (I think that's what they call it) and it is thriving AND beind accepted by BANKS!Quote:
Why don't others just make up there own currency?
All the latest pronouncements that Bitcoin is dead are quashed here:
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin-dead-dumb/
It's getting old, these uninformed/misinformed arguments which never hold water.
Just now seeing this (been working too much, at least another month to go)
Just because something is legal tender, doesn't mean one has to accept it. I've dealt with businesses that won't do cash (medical places/copays, COD drivers, internet retailers), and that is perfectly legal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xmac
I've never understood "investing" in currency. It wasn't just pre civil war, look at Confederate money, or German's currency before WWII (there depression, where money was used in wheelbarrows). Currency is a means to an end, a tool. Investing in it, seems like buying more of the same type of tool. Your still limited by other factors (number of hands, time, etc).Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
dmc "how can something have value with nothing backing it"
Trust is what backs our currency. Not gold or silver, etc. Trust is an intangeable "asset". (can vanish)
Why does that matter? The only relevance to the gold standard that I can see is the check on expansion of the money supply. Since gold has limited intrinsic value you are really just substituting one arbitrary medium for another. Maybe someone should establish a currency exchangeable for something useful (water, chickens, sushi, vodka, orgasms or whatever) so that we there is intrinsic value in the currency.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xmac
The dollar is still backed on the faith to the US government, who still has a sizable military to help back it. I don't see it going away anytime soon. And if it does there are going to many more things to worry about. So far everyone that I have dealt with take dollars in one form or another. Now it's getting more the norm to transfer numbers from one account to another, but it's still in dollars.
Arnt we even pricing Bitcoin in dollars? And how do you purchase them if not with dollars.
The criticism, as I understand it, that's at issue here is that Bitcoin can't be money, or is somehow illegitimate, because it is not backed by anything. If this is referring to substance redeemable assets, Bitcoin can: cryptobullion, because this is the flexibility of a decentralized open source ledger. The Federal Reserve Note, strike one.Quote:
Originally Posted by dmc
If there is no substance, the issuing entity of fiat must demonstrate reliable and trustworthy stewardship. A fiat currency can work if it is tightly controlled without any corrupting influences. Strike two for the FRN.
When (not if) the U.S. "dollar" crashes as result of excessive money printing via Quantitative Easing and/or the decoupling of oil from the dollar and dumping by other nations (which has started already), with what currency is the military to be paid in? Strike three.
Besides, a military can back dollar hegemony only against single sovereign states. Its use is very limited as countries form alliances favoring other currencies and it's useless against a cryptocurrency possibly displacing the dollar's reserve status.
Bitcoin may be the best alternative (though not the only) for international trade because many other fiat currencies will go down with, or before the dollar.
Bitcoin is priced in most currencies, for now. They can be bought with many currencies, earned or mined.Quote:
And if it does there are going to many more things to worry about. So far everyone that I have dealt with take dollars in one form or another. Now it's getting more the norm to transfer numbers from one account to another, but it's still in dollars.
Arnt we even pricing Bitcoin in dollars? And how do you purchase them if not with dollars.
The question was, "how can something have value with nothing backing it?" My answer was in reference to substance redeemable currency. That the FRN has no tangible value backing it, which is what is always touted as a valid criticism of Bitcoin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yossarian
Actually, anything can have value if two or more agree it does.
Gold provides no such check. Trustworthy people can, as long as they do but history has shown, they eventually don't. Unless, there is a system in which there is an open accounting for all to see: Bitcoin. This is how the block chain technology could create gold backed currencies that are tamper proof.Quote:
The only relevance to the gold standard that I can see is the check on expansion of the money supply.
As I said many times on this thread, if you think Bitcoin the currency, is the only innovation, you're not paying attention. Bitcoin the currency is to the block chain as email was to the internet, just the beginning.Quote:
Since gold has limited intrinsic value you are really just substituting one arbitrary medium for another.
Intrinsic value is a myth. If gold was as plentiful as granite, it would be taken for granted>8) Seriously though, where's the intrinsic value then? What if people in the digital age didn't want it anymore because it was too cumbersome, too much difficulty distinguishing
authentic purity, too difficult to divide etc. etc., where's the intrinsic value then?
:0!:laff:Quote:
Maybe someone should establish a currency exchangeable for something useful (water, chickens, sushi, vodka, orgasms
Hahaha, I think that is the oldest form of currency, right?
Me:
Likening Mt Gox to Bitcoin is like likening a bank with shoddy security to the dollar and shows a profound misunderstanding of what Bitcoin is.
Toomuchstuff:
I don't think so, because it has a lot of the same issues. That stolen loot, wasn't able to be traced anymore then bills someone buries in the ground somewhere.
Me:
The same issues, yes. Those issues are PEOPLE. People steal money, people are not careful with their money.
How does one take people out of the equation of currency...ever?
The difference with all traditional money and Bitcoin is that if I memorize my private key, no one can steal it from me unless they drug me or torture me and they would have to assume or know, I had memorized a private key.