Bitcoin Forum

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/28/bitcoin-is-evil/?smid=tw-NytimesKrugman&seid=auto&_r=1&

More of his usual "I can't figure out what backs bitcoin."  

Now after reading it, I am disappointed because he didn't really explain why he thought it was "evil."  He just made one reference to bitcoin being a tool to escape central banking and limit the government's ability to monitor its citizens' financial transactions and collect taxes.  He then said he "doesn’t like that agenda" but didn't really explain how such an agenda was "evil."

yes, I am glad I live my life by what Krugman predicts.    His prediction that the impact of the internet to the global economy would be less than the fax machine was brilliant.

Doubt the NYT will show this comment:
Someone who can't even get "BitCoin" correct as "Bitcoin" or "bitcoin" (see the wiki) wants to be believed about all the other stuff?  Paul, you don't just miss the little stuff, you are missing the big picture.  The bitcoin blockchain answers a large theoretical question in Computer Science, provides nearly instant, nearly frictionless transfer around the world.  Hint: Bitcoin could have much more impact on commerce than the fax machine (and internet, lol) did.

Since Krugman thinks the second to last paragraph in his column is a good way to encourage polite discussion, I suspect that Krugman likes Keynesian economics because it pushes his big government, central bank, inflation loving, control-freak fetish which pleases his masters in government.  

Regarding why he thought it was evil, I think this part was what the title referred to:


Krugman is an authoritarian statist at heart who wants to "monitor" citizens financial transactions and thinks that is a good thing!  When the state has the power to monitor, it means control and that is their goal.

I find it very telling that the article quotes that part saying that Bitcoin is "intended to damage central banking and money issuing banks".  If he and his masters were not worried about the potential, he would not be obsessing about Bitcoin (or BitCoin as he says - he probably calls the Federal Reserve the "FED" too) repeatedly over the last year.

Krugman et al know that their games that they play with paper money are being exposed by technology and don't like it because it ruins their plans to monitor and control the rest of us.

The "agenda" which Krugman and Stross don't like is the hoi polloi are tired of having their purchasing power stolen by central planners and are starting to realize they don't have to put up with it any more.

Kk thx for the info bai.

Well...

I propose that the writer is in bed with the fed right now.  ;)

A glorious antidote to the bile from Krug-I-am-an-idiot-Man.

http://www.krugmaniswrong.com/

Hopefully there will be a rebuttal of the latest idiocy.

I have it on good authority that Stefan Molyneux will be taking on Krugman and Stross in a combined rebuttal.

Now, "Conscientious Liberal" Paul Krugman is really pissed off...  ::)

BitCoin looks like it was designed as a weapon intended to damage central banking and money issuing banks, with a Libertarian political agenda in mind—to damage states ability to collect tax and monitor their citizens financial transactions.

I think its his Lack of Education and Information about Bitcoin you need to start from the point in time or space at which something starts.

Isn't this the fellow who praises the welfare state?  It should come as no surprise that a villain would paint a vehicle of good as evil; of course bitcoin would be harmful to men such as he.

SWEET! The N.Y.TIMES allows one to actually TWEET comments INSTEAD of the article!!!

Skip the article, tl/dr, go to comments, locate Jim H from Waco, read it, and Tweet the comment NOT the article.  8)

Bitcoin is a tool for freedom. The ones who oppose it have their motivations clearly displayed. 

I mean, what's the point on writing a meaningless (yes it's meaningless, no explanations given on most part) title Bitcoin is Evil?
He probably doesn't even know that a blockchain exists and that's what "backs" bitcoin.

Hit piece by the paid mouthpiece ... the tools of his tyranny are becoming ever so transparent.

noble prize, not.

Krugman is Evil

"Do no Evil" - Google

That's exactly why BTC is important, good and supported by the people. If there's anything evil in this world it's the banking system. Govermental control is good? How can he even look in the mirror after talking such bullshit.

I am extremely pleased to read such articles by Krugman, being a Nobel laureate, he deigned to come up with so many posts about Bitcoin only shows how panic he is with it. I know you are shaking in your boots Paul, you sense that something inevitable is coming and you are desperate.

Essentially Krugman says, any kind of money, which is not government money, is evil.

When I read that article, I could not believe that words and quotes like that would ever be written by a Nobel laureate.  It almost seems that he is feeling genuinely threatened, which actually blows my mind.  We have two other threads analyzing his post in more detail:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=389565.0

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=389545.0

"I'm really good at killing people" Barack Obama, Nobel Peace Prize Winner 2009

I'm more and more convinced that this guy was bought by the central bankers, especially the swedish riksbank who gave him 1 million dollar price money ;)

Paul Krugman has been a strong supporter of foreign exchange controls http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/siren-song-exchange-controls (http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/siren-song-exchange-controls) so it is hardly surprising that he would consider Bitcoin evil. Convertible fiat currencies such as the USD, EUR etc have nothing to fear from Bitcoin, but non convertible fiat currencies such as the INR, VEF or ARS have everything to fear from Bitcoin.

A convertible hard virtual currency that can be instantly sent across international borders, without the intervention of a bank, is the death knell of any foreign exchange control regime.

No he has been going directly against the IMF by promoting foreign exchange controls.

The irony of this opening sentence is that everything Krugman writes is about normative economics -- how he thinks things should be. He writes about social policy, not economics, and then wonders how others can disagree on what he thinks are facts, but are really just opinions.

I have yet to agree with any of his opinions. I believe that he is evil.

This is why Bitcoin has so much potential already: it eliminates capital controls. This is a "killer app" for it. Even the EUR is afflicted as capital controls exist in Cyprus.

Yes. State terrorists and their representatives in panic mode. A very promising sign. India's (client downloads) ranking is increasing with intensified state terror.

no,Bitcoin is good.

He is not a Nobel laureate. He is a Swedish central bank (Riksbank) laureate.  Nobel never had a "Economy prize" in his will. The full title of the award is "Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel" AKA "Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences".

I see a lot of Krugman "bashing" in threads like these. But please let's not forget that Krugman fulfills an important function:
He is the representative spokesperson of the System. The system which consumes and destroys our future, progress and happiness and which will not stop until life itself is extinct.
As such, we should pay close attention to what Krugman says, since he is the closest line of communication to our most mortal enemy. And it reveals their thinking...

He does not represent "the system" as it is today, he represents a small but growing element within the system that wishes to return to the capital controls of the 1940's-1970's. This is why he also dismissed the Internet, since international trade in goods and particularity services at the retail level is incompatible with capital controls. Ever wonder why PayPal was forced to suspend domestic transactions in Argentina? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19605499 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19605499) I still remember going through customs in the UK in the 1970's as a teenager and there were signs saying it was illegal to take out more than a certain amount of sterling out of the country. I recall something in the neighbourhood of 10 - 25 GBP. Many young people today do not have any direct experience with this evil which is far worse than most of the "evils" of "the system" today.


Yes this may well turn out to be the killer application for Bitcoin. Just take a look at the response from China and India. Both of these countries have capital controls. One thing to keep in mind here is that if it is illegal for residents of a country to trade and / or hold USD or gold, then expect similar restrictions on BTC.

Krugman deserves to be bashed not because he is part of the system, but because he is trying to turn the system into something far worse.  

Thank you ArticMine.  I am frustrated by the number of posters here who see "the government" (aka "they") as some monolithic, Borg-like entity, with a single purpose and perfect coordination.  The truth is that "government" is a bunch of individuals with various viewpoints and ideologies.  The current system sticks together right now because, on the whole, its working for the people involved.  

The one thing you can say about government is they share certain common features in terms of goals and ways of achieving them - otherwise they would not all work in the same organization.

So it's valid shorthand most of the time to treat them as a single entity.

Colored Coins, Master Coin, Open Transaction currencies, etc. will allow states to introduce Bitcoin derived fiat currencies with limited capital controls. You can create debt based currencies, fractional reserve banking, and inflation while piggybacking on the Bitcoin network. They basically function by multiplying the value of bitcoins by several orders of magnitude if they are processed through centralized servers. Bitcoin will not eliminate these, but will serve to eventually wean states from capital control dependence.

I'll buy that justusranvier.  The government, or "they" refers to the larger system itself, and not directly to the individuals that make up the system.  The system takes on a life and personality of its own. 

I was thinking about this last night, cbeast.  In particular, I was wondering if a case could be made that "bitcoins" become less valued, in a world where colored-coins are more widely used.  

The conclusion I came to (which of course may be wrong) is that transaction fees and the transaction-priority formula would always make it better to have more bitcoins, thus placing a floor beneath their value.  The floor would still be much greater than the current market value, since adoption is still so small at this time.    

Recently I've tried to stop using "the government" in favour of using "government" as a plural noun.

Government doesn't realize that their policies will drive the legacy currencies into the ground though endless quantitative easing.

I like That turn of the phrase!

Paul Krugman is an ass. But there are lots of them around.

If you think "Government" is bad, wait until SkyNet gets ahold of your bitcoins.  ;D

Now you've got me paranoid :(

It just means your becoming a vet here empowe it just does haha

Keiser just kicked his butt that was Dec 31 for Me :)
A russian calling him a communist and True Statist is Ownage in my books coming from a Neo-Liberal who is supposed to be open to free trade ^^
Goes to make a cheerful topic in the press board
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDDZEJnK5NE&feature=youtu.be