Bitcoin Forum

Since there is a variety of things you can buy with it, i don't see the hate. Sure i'm all for bitcoin but i don't hate fiat money as well, i find it weird that some people just don't approve of it. Do they live off bitcoin or something? No offense. I'm just curious.

society is sick of debt money.

another point, if you live in the states, just look at ever increasing national debt - does anyone sane think it's healthy?!

Perhaps you are confusing hate with reasoned rejection. If you were to learn more about how fiat money works, you might reach the same conclusions.

Watch vids in my signature

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mII9NZ8MMVM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mII9NZ8MMVM)

Another great video on the subject.

I think you'll find that a lot of folks in the Bitcoin community prefer to live below their means and accumulate savings.  Those who live beyond their means and tend to accumulate debt sometimes have a hard time understanding Bitcoin and are actually better off with fiat.

Money isn't just a medium of exchange.  It's also a store of value.  Bankers can't steal the purchasing power of bitcoins by creating more of them and then handing them over to politicians like they can with fiat.

Simple:

Bitcoin, chosen by each participant in the network freely = freedom
Fiat forced upon us by governments = slavery

I, a free man need no fucking Nimrod-In-Chief and his clique to tell me how to live my life. In fact, I find their presence harmful.

Hate is inward-directed negativism.  

Just buy low and sell high.  Don't worry about the rest.

I think the core objection to fiat money is that the issuer can create an unlimited quantity of it, depriving other people of value and imposing a hidden tax.

Upon reading the title of this thread, I couldn't help but wonder why rocks hate moving water.

You've probably just opened a huge can of worms here, my friend. ;D  This is a deep and interesting topic that could span many books, but here is my abridged take, the ideas of which permeate the other comments in the thread.

The core basis beyond Bitcoin's popularity runs deeper, IMHO, than merely that fiat is inflationary and can be created by the press of a button by a certain privileged few, although that is certainly a big part of it.  In fact, as I'm sure many people on this board knows, it wasn't always the case that the US dollar was inflationary.  In fact, at one point in time, the US dollar was pegged to gold, and it wasn't until quite recently that the dollar became free-floating.  See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_shock.  A free-floating dollar, printable by the Fed, enables all sorts of activities that are favorable to some, and not favorable to others.  While it is true that the dollar as it exists today benefits USG and enables it to do all sorts of things it would otherwise be unable to do, it would be incorrect to say that the dollar as it exists today only benefits the government.  An inflationary currency, generally speaking, benefits debtors at the expense of savers.  In addition to this, the current structure of USG and its banks allows certain parties to benefit more from the money-printing than others.  Those closer to the creation of money can reap the benefits of this new money before its effects are distributed to the wider populace.  In the US, these are mainly banks and other entities that have close ties with the Fed and central government.

My view is that Bitcoin is popular because it confers great power to the individual, power that central governments have managed to co-opt for most of history.  Indeed, the power of coinage is one of the greatest weapons a government can have, and enables the government to do one main thing that it would otherwise be unable to do - grow.  Giving up this power is something governments will not abide.  It is not a coincidence that Bitcoin is popular among a certain group of techno-libertarians, and population subset that doesn't conveniently align with the traditional political classifications that we're taught to identify with.  Having this as background with give a lot of context to the hostility of governments have for Bitcoin and virtual currencies.  While many might view Bitcoin has merely a new virtual currency that make certain payments easier and more cheaply, governments are quite aware of Bitcoin's true implications.

Learn some real history and not the bullshit in schools or universities, then you'll understand precisely why many people in the Bitcoin users hate paper money :) I've actually decided I won't do business in paper anymore unless it's absolutely necessary. Nevermind all the economics stuff behind it, those twats will do anything to get your personal information and credit/debit card information so this is the best way I can think of to tell them to fuck off.

How you buy food?
Bitcoin?

i've been looking up #bitcoin on instagram a lot lately. have been seeing more and more pictures of business popping up that accept bitcoin. i encourage instagram users to photograph and post the businesses / shops name and location that accept BTC using hashtags. if you have a shop, put a BTC accepted here logo in your window. this form of advertisement helps your business and the btc economy and makes it easier for folks who want to use bitcoin exclusively.

do you live on the streets with canned foods or something?

Coz Bitcoin won't survive if its price is not 1000000+ USD for a coin. This possible only if all fiat currencies die.

nice idea ! put up a thread  :)

Bitcoin hates nothing and no one.  Some of the bitcoiners don't understand how fiat works, and, like most dull normals, hate what they can't understand.
Throughout history, mankind had a love/hate relationship with money -- from Biblical "... love of money is the root of all evil" to money changers, bankers & the rich, money was simultaneously envied & loathed by the great unwashed.
Nothing much changed:  The same bitcoiners who hate bankers are lending bitcoins at hyper-usurious rates, plan on becoming filthy rich without putting in work, and ape the real financial sector in every way open to them -- from trading on mock stocks exchanges to profiteering from currency instability to swindling each other with ponzi schemes.
It's a bit of inept imitation, a bit of a cargo cult, and plenty of envy-fueled hate -- of the scammers who did it first & did it right.

That was better than average.

I think hate it the wrong word.  Anger it is more like it.

I think this (directly from the horse's mouth) sum up the reason for our fear/anger/hate nicely:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?id=BASE

Because it can be hyperinflationed at will, just by printing tons of it. Printing more money=stealing the value from what i have. And i don't like someone stealing value from me.

Printing more money = indirect tax. Taxes is a good thing. Unfortunately, most of people are selfish, they don't like this, they call this stealing.

Bitcoin doesn't allow to print more money, it even helps to evade taxes. It's the biggest disadvantage of Bitcoin (http://qubic.boards.net/thread/6/solution-biggest-disadvantage-bitcoin).

☑ Printing more money = indirect tax
☐ Taxes is a good thing
☑ most of people are selfish
☑ they don't like this
☑ they call this stealing
☑ Bitcoin doesn't allow to print more money
☑ it even helps to evade taxes
☐ It's the biggest disadvantage of Bitcoin

problem with taxes is that everyone of them gets abused before the ink dries - yes we need everyone to pitch in for certain things to keep going but its like 90% BS these days and getting deeper everyday

that is why there is fiat..  so they can keep overspending.   Instead of waiting to collect taxes, they just go ahead and spend 3 years worth and worry about getting the money later..   paying taxes is more of a control tool in the USA now anyway.  They spend a trillion more than than collect each year now so what's the point?  The point is to control and scare people

Time is money, but money is freedom.  They don't want everyone to sit on a stash of cash since it is a lot harder to get those people to kiss their boots for loose change

It's an indirect tax only on people who hold money though. If you tax windows, people will want fewer windows. Taxes that burden people in some kind of a just way are one thing, but taxes on specific, avoidable things cause people to dislike those things. Hidden taxes are even worse because they undermine the Democratic process that's supposed to control taxation and spending. Inflation is the worst type of tax -- one that is hidden, burdens the poor more than the wealthy (because they need to get raises in their salary just to keep it the same), but is avoidable by those who understand it.

Err...  Those are called "rich people."  You would like to tax the people who *do not* hold any money, the dirt-poor?  Other than being pretty hard to do, also seems a bit nasty, no?

No, they're called suckers. Rich people are smart enough not to hold money, which they know loses value. Instead they hold things they expect to gain value, such as real estate, stock, art, gold, and so on.

Dirt poor people don't receive a paycheck? They don't have bank accounts? Inflation doesn't tax the dirt poor because the dirt poor have no value to take. It hits people just above that level the hardest.

You have it completely backwards. Inflation disproportionately burdens the poor, particularly by eroding the real value of their paychecks and secondarily by eroding their savings.

Let's see what you've done here.  You've shown that rich people don't hold any money because they invest it, and i'm afraid poor people don't hold any money because, by the time they get their paycheck, all the bills are due -- they pay those off and run up that evol CC & get 1% cash back.  So according to you, inflation doesn't hurt anyone.  

As far as eroding the real value of (the poor's) paychecks, that's what raises are for, JoelKatz.  Even the minimum wage gets bumped up once in awhile.  

The Moar U know, JoelKatz.

Perhaps by "poor people" you mean people who are extremely poor. But there are plenty of poor people who save up to put a down payment on a car. There are plenty of poor people who save to put their kids through college.

If salaries stayed the same in real terms, employers would have to negotiate reductions in salary to reduce salaries in real terms and every time an employee got a raise, it would be a real increase in their salary. But inflation games the system such that employees have to get regular raises just to stay put. This gives a huge advantage to the employer because he wins if no deal is struck.

The more your job pays and the more educated you are, the more likely that you can negotiate regular increases in your salary to keep up with inflation and even outpace it. The less your job pays, the less educated you are, and the more you are replaceable by others who do the same job, the less likely you can get your salary to keep up with inflation. Lawyers, CEOs, and professional athletes don't have much trouble, but cashiers, fast food cooks, and farm workers find it a bit more difficult.

And, of course, if you're talking about a pension or social security, you cannot negotiate a raise.

I believe:

Bitcoin represents people together supporting an ideal.
People who will one day represent a chapter in history books.

Fiat money represents Debt, and the increase of the same Debt.

Bitcoin is not money, as a Banana is not money but only a Banana.

and you can eat and trade the Banana. get it?

if you didn't get it:
Fiat money is only paper and coins, and you can not eat paper or coins, at least not if you want to live healthy
and yes, you can trade your papers and your coins, but your papers and coins are worth the value the Banks, the Government wish it to be.
They can print paper and coins, and buy mansions and yatchs. If you print fiat in your printer, you will not only face jail time, but also be named 'the dumbest man of the day', oh but 'they' can print fiat money as much as they want, even if you don't want. Yes you can trade your papers and coins for Bananas, but one day you will need more papers for a Banana.

And the day will come that no one will give you a Banana for your papers and coins.

Legally, Fiat money has no value:
http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Currency/Pages/legal-tender.aspx

How can you be taxed on something that has no value?

When people don't go to jail for not paying their taxes then you can tell me that taxes are a good thing and isn't stealing, it always amazes me the way government loyalists come here to lecture Bitcoin users about paying their taxes.

no, the society is built on it. and you thinks its sick.

unfair question, as must of this forum thinks that the definition of sanity depends on ones standpoint on macro economics.
which makes the answer to the question no, as any sane person by this forums collectively unwritten definitions does thinks its unhealty.

@OP:
i don't hate fiat money, there are many pros and cons in the bitcoin vs. fiat debate, i use and like both.

But this forum is filled with screaming libertards wanting to go back to the good old days of the gold standard, and feels unfairly treated by most of the society as they live under an evil regime called democracy.

I don't see how you can call it a democracy until ever single person has the right to vote!

What about all those poor unfortunate corporations?  Sure, it has been ruled that as persons they have the right to spend as much money as they want in any election - but this entire class of "persons" still, even in this modern day and age, have not been granted the right to vote.

I don't think you should be throwing around the word democracy so lightly.

;)

Lolz, "saving up for a car down payment"?  Just how many years do you think these "middle-of-the-road poor" spend saving up to buy a car?  If it's less than 2 years, the last 2 years would have devastated their savings by ~3 percent (unless they put all the money in their mattress (savings accounts pay interest) at the start of the first year, in which case they're simply stupid -- they should have bought the car two years ago).  I don't reach for contrived examples, so stop, pl0x.


This is simply absurd -- you're saying that the employer wins when his workers quit?  If you feel that it's more profitable to search for, interview, train & risk new employees than it is to offer a 2% yearly raise, you should learn more about economics and the real world -- both will be full of surprises.


Awesome incentive to get an education/ become skilled labor?  The poor always get screwed, but they get screwed more in a deflationary system.  Much more.  OOdles more, JoelKatz.


And, of course, this is an entirely unrelated issue.  If inflation rates skyrocket, your pension is worth much less than you expected it to be.  This shows that *escalating* inflation rates are bad, but says nothing about inflation as a whole.  That's why economy is like a beauuutiful garden, JoelKatz -- too little water, and it withers, too much -- it rots.  That's why my gardener lives so well :)  
http://eng.cinemacity.org/media_lib/files/being_there4.jpg

I can't eat bitcoins either, can u?
Bitcoin is neither money nor a banana, learn shapes & colorz pl0x.

When people don't go to jail for not paying their taxes for the car they stole, Lethn, you'll have a point.  Till that happy day?  You gots none.

Let's go back to the topic.

If fiat doesn't die, Bitcoin won't survive. IMO.

Don't see it.  Bitcoin and fiat can both exist at the same time.

"Good" is subjective; we can argue, night and day, that killing the people of another nation with the missiles government purchased with your tax dollars is good or bad.  However, the one thing we can agree on is that saying taxes are good is completely dependent on the individual; since government cannot reasonably represent the people, then, people would be better to represent themselves, as they are a much better candidate to being represented than by a complete and total stranger who cannot possibly understand everyone's desires.

In the example of bombing other nations, if we, the people of country X, agree we should bomb the nation Y, then we would be throwing our money at whatever businesses are going to make those bombs and take care of shipping them off head-first to whatever other plot of land we don't like.  However, if that's not what we want, then the businesses taking care of that cannot go through with it, nor would people want to buy from those businesses again (in response to their own morals.)

Likewise--what you're likely only thinking about is the roads and the hospitals and the ambulances etc.--if we, the people of country X, would like those things, we would willingly pay for them.  To assume that people are so incredibly selfish that they--and I mean the majority of a nation's people--would live in complete filth and disarray to save a buck, unless someone pointed a gun to their heads and told them to live well, then what argument do we have for most people enjoying the very same services they're forced to pay for?  Obviously, we like these services, and we've purchased far more useless things than roads, and hospitals, and ambulances.

Is it selfish to not want to be robbed?  If so, why do we punish the mugger?  We actually like this; we like it when the people who rob us are punished.  Is this selfish?  It's possible to argue such a point; perhaps the mugger was very hungry, and if he didn't rob you at gunpoint, he would've starved the next day--how could you be so incredibly selfish to deny a man of money so he can buy himself a meal?  Of course he robbed you; you deserved to be robbed for having so much more money than him.  So, you see, this person mugged you for a noble cause, and you're being selfish by calling the police on him.

However, I don't believe it's possible to be selfish when you cannot also be charitable; the man with the gun did not ask you for money, he demanded it.  In this case, even if you wanted to give that man money, he would've taken it from you anyway; even if you planned on giving him money anyway, it isn't charity.  You aren't being charitable by giving the government money when it demands it with threats of violence.  You cannot be selfish by saying "no" when you have no other option.  Even now, though I don't agree with taxation, I pay taxes on my every purchase.  I would gladly pay for the roads, the hospitals, the ambulances, the firefighters, security, and it wouldn't even be charity, but an exchange of my money for their business; however, I would not pay for SS, unjustifiable and endless wars, or the salaries of every politician, and that's why you're told that taxation is, no matter the circumstance, good.

Some times a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Bitcoiners go as far as realizing that, all the money being created is lent to banks which in term lend it to society - with interest being charged all the way.
Eventually this on it's own has deteriorating effects on the economy since the interest keeps compounding, seemingly with no end in sight.
So far so bad...

What they fail to realize is that debt is sometimes not expected to be paid back. It is simply written off.
That occurs in regular intervals on all levels along the debt chain, with the result being that the system actually is sustainable if the creditors foresee their profits from time to time.

Mining is becoming less and less profitable each day. If Bitcoin doesn't go mainstream then its price in pieces of bread will be low and only little resources (hardware + electricity) will be spent on mining. Digital fiat is a tough competitor, while it's on the stage Bitcoin has very low chances to become popular. Hence the only real way to survive is to "kill" fiat. I don't see other ways coz Bitcoin offers only a few advantages (mainly anonymity pseudonymity and warm fuzzy feeling of "controlling" own money).

You forgot the HUGE advantage Bitcoin has that you can't print a never ending supply of it. Just watch...as more and more fiat money get perpetually printed all over the world. Think of Bitcoin as a piece of artwork....it is unique and one of a kind, the only difference is you can split up Bitcoins into very small units and easily transfer them between people.

Also, looking at history, except for the current batch, all fiat currencies have eventually gone to zero.

Deflation of Bitcoin is the HUGE disadvantage. The best currency would be one with 0% inflation/deflation.

So all fiat currencies have failed, except the ones that haven't?
Deep.

Won't survive ?
Until when? 2015?
 ::)

It really doesn't matter. So long as the inflation/deflation is predictable and the inflation isn't due to an increase in supply not associated with an increase in real value and the deflation isn't due to a destruction of value, it all cancels out. In fact, you can argue that deflation equal to the average rate of investment return is optimal, as that permits those who want to minimize their risk to just hold currency, minimizing the transaction costs associated with choosing investments.

The inflation is not disadvantage because fiat is meant to be using for immediate spending. To retain fiat value, you can not just sit on it, you have work with it. Those who dont understand it are highly dissapointd with fiat

In foreseeable future.

Remember those unique, one-of-a-kind artworks ur mom used to hang on the fridge?  What are those masterpieces going for now? (please cite auction records & documented gallery sales)

Also, looking at history, except for the stuff currently alive, everything is dead.  Love a good truism.

I only dislike Fiat because one instance of it is forced on people.

While I'm more Austrian than Keynesian, I do not acknowledge that debt-based, inflated money must be bad. Bad is forcing people to accept exactly one instance of it with no proof of its superiority whatsoever -- and bullying alternatives on a regular basis.

You do not have to accept anything -- you are free to trade in bitcoins or bark -- as long as you pay your taxes in fiat (the government, just like you, can decide how it wants to be paid).  At least that's the way it works in US.

I'm afraid this isn't true; the US has a vested interest in ensuring its currency has no competition, thereby forcing people to use that instead of an alternative:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_Dollar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_Dollar)

According to the Associated Press, "Federal prosecutors successfully argued that von NotHaus was, in fact, trying to pass off the silver coins as U.S. currency. Coming in denominations of 5, 10, 20, and 50, the Liberty Dollars also featured a dollar sign, the word "dollar" and the motto "Trust in God," similar to the "In God We Trust" that appears on U.S. coins".[29] Von NotHaus's attorney is appealing the decision and the arguments made by the prosecution in the case. Dollar, for example, is a term used by many nations for their currency and has a German-language, not American, origin, the original form being "thaler", from Joachimstal in Bohemia (now the Czech Republic). --wikip

Bitcoin is currently legal in US, is treated as virtual currency, and subject to largely the same body of law as real, state-issued currency (a major exception: it is not legal tender).  Case in point.
Be fruitful and multiply.

That doesn't matter; the point is, there was a private currency, and the U.S. Government shut it down, ultimately for the reason explained: "making, possessing, and selling his own currency".  It is illegal under federal law to print your own currency.

No.  He was shut down as a counterfeiter/scammer, not issuing currency.  If you're talking about 18 USC § 486 - Uttering coins of gold, silver or other metal, it's *coining your own money*, *coins* claiming to be precious metals. 

If there is federal law forbidding alternative currencies, sauce plox.

You don't have book tokens in the US?
Or store gift cards?
They are 'currency', issued by a private organisation, and redeemable for value only at select subscribing places.

Mileage plus miles...

If you sell a stolen car, you can describe the prosecution as being for, ultimately, "selling a car". But that kind of ignores the fact that the car was stolen. The key fact is that von NotHaus was counterfeiting US currency and this fact was key to his prosecution.

There is a little more to it than that.
That explains his conviction for paper-based money.
He would have been convicted for his coins anyway, it is illegal to coin your own currency, even if it clearly different to USD.

It wouldn't have mattered if the currency looked alien, he was prosecuted for issuing a currency.

For issuing coins. That section does not prohibit issuing paper currency.

i was going to say "why rocks hate vegetables" but this will suffice ;D

Very strange; so, if the man decided not to issue the coins, but instead set it up so the bills could be swapped for PMs, it would then have been legal?

Why are coins targeted specifically?

My guess is that it dates back to when the worth of the coin was the metal it was made out of, rather than it simply being an alternative form of IOU.

if they have the same size a fiat coins, you really have to look at them, to know the difference. where the giant face of an old and long gone president on a piece of paper is way more recognizable.

its easier to trick people to accept 'wrong' coins.


just my guess.

The point is the man did decide to issue coins, running afoul of 18 USC § 486.
If you are interested in deeper understanding, such as the reasoning behind this law, i'm sure adult education classes are available.

owned.

More topically, didn't someone produce actual physical Bitcoins?
Were they made of metal? :)

I'm not interested in the topic enough to drop the cash, but thanks for the advice.

Anyhow, doing a little more research on the topic, it seems issuing a private currency is not completely illegal, but due to the USD being subsidized, and the restrictions placed upon anyone but the U.S. Feds issuing cash, it's just not feasible for a private currency to reach national usage; it's the same reason why private entities don't rise to take the work the government provides.


Now this has me curious; if it applies to the LD, why not physical BTC?

Because Chuck E Cheese's also minted their own coins, and the rat was not sentenced to any jail time.  Friends in high places, i suppose.

http://www.chuckecheese.com/_content_assets/files/images/wallpapers/winning_wheel.jpg Gob'ment>>http://s21.postimg.org/ard6ao91z/image.gif

The LD was counterfeit. If someone tried to pass off physical BTC as "current money", or encouraged others to do so, they'd run afoul of the law too.

I see now; so it's not a matter of issuing coins, it's a matter of issuing any money with resemblance to other money.  So this is why legal advisers exist :-\

As a practical matter, von NotHaus was prosecuted because he encouraged counterfeiting -- it was part of his business model. As a legal matter, I wouldn't suggest issuing metal coins that are intended to circulate as money for general use. For more details, see http://www.dictocracy.com/libertydollar/commentary/pdfs/1164570384.pdf

fiat money is a system of slavery where by those who print the money get to diminish your wealth for their own ends and there is nothing you can do about it

Those who print the money are your betters.  Be a good randian and give them respect, adoration & slavish obedience that is their due., pl0x.

It's okay. At this point, if you're still reading this thread, you've likely come to grand new conclusions which have tested your prior understanding of reality, and indeed who you are yourself. Things make sense for the first time: the struggle, the suffering or perhaps the days-in and days-out of mind-numbing boredom, none of them are anything more than illusions, holograms - a collective of minds.

Don't withdraw from your friends. Accept everyone else around you who doesn't know this truth. Try to show them the way. You will find, everyone does know, they just deal with it in certain ways.

On a scale from Alex Jones to Kanye West, there is an undercurrent you've just been taken by.