Bitcoin Forum

Could not stop thinking of that simple chart:


I mean, thats economics 101! It is going down at some point! (hell, it is even outperforming bitcoin's super exponantial hypothesis!)

And they claim that bitcoin is actually more volatile/dangerous.. i mean.. seriously???
How can they misguide 7Bn of human being like foolish sheeps into the depth of their incompetence without an ounce of remorse?
Are they all corrupted or do some of them actually buy this? ('they' = medias, governments, central banks and so on...)

The FED is EVIL (and surely not Bitcoin):





edit: although i believe most people in this forum are actually aware of this, i figured that this 'bed intruder song' fits the FED perfectly ;D

Most people on this forum have already known about this for awhile now but yes, it is pretty amazing how the central banks have such a huge amount of the population completely fooled, to be honest, I just look at it as a far better chance of me becoming a millionaire than the lottery.

As long as they can constrain inflation in reasonable limits as they do, it doesn't matter. In fact, the FED is fighting with deflation which is more dangerous for the economy (the Japan example is pretty evident, since they lagged with their QEs)...

Uh, get the fuck out. I cannot stand this fucking lie. That only is true if you want to disincentivize any travel beyond your national border. Perhaps governments do.

My wife is Japanese. Besides some major corporations that can afford to export their products again, let me tell you something. There was no homelessness or joblessness, no credit misuse -- they don't even have CCs except for international travel, and everything is cash or RFID-debit-card (PASMO, SUICA, etc).

The only thing that's different now that they've done their own QE, for 99.999% of Japanese is the JPY/USD rate went from $1 = 73¥ to 100¥ in mere months. It's at like 105¥ now. And the USD is depreciating against other assets (like the CNY) so that's not even the whole story. So for a Japanese, that just means one thing: Your wages are the same, your savings are the SAME, but unless it's bread and rice bought IN JAPAN, it costs 130% what it did. There goes your retirement trip to Guam, or Hawaii. Trips to NYC to buy American fashions.

All of a sudden your money doesn't do near as much. And for what? Why would they do this foolishness?

1) Pressure from all the foreign bankers and governments in regimes more inflationary.
2) Japan had also succumbed to the ponzi promise of social security, paying for today's retires with estimated future GDP. With no luck getting the birthrate up, there was only QE.

Regarding #2, there is immense sadness and irony because perhaps your pension and social security comes in now, as due, but you can't buy shit with it if you leave Japan. So I hope your retirement dream was to sit at home and not travel.

FUCK you for perpetuating the lie, fuck the banks for doing it, fuck Abe-san for agreeing to this madness. Her parents now have to be far more careful about when to visit, or how to travel. Just 1 year ago this was not even a thought in their minds, but now I have their daughter 6000 miles away and all of a sudden their savings are worth 2/3 what it once was, through no fault of their own. 

What are you even going on about? You people need to take a fucking chill pill every once and awhile  :D

Just taking this part of your post

For an export oriented country (which is Japan) this is good on the economy level. If you don't get what it means or just can't fathom how this can ever be possible, I may try to explain this to you in simple terms. It means that when your currency is depreciating against the currencies of your trade partners, the life of population on average becomes better, because you (your country) begin earning more abroad from your exports than you spend on your imports (simple arithmetics), whereas domestic goods (bread and rice) stay the same as you correctly noted...

Kid, just don't. I'm far more qualified to discuss any form of mathematics you care to invoke. You can begin by recognizing that the plural of arithmetic is arithmetic. I'm not going to bother listing qualifications; they're floating around here in places, and this is a forum so who gives a shit if I claim to be the Prince of Wales, but I will not be party to any "if you don't get..." condescension. I know more about this than you can possibly imagine. My qualifications are, let's say, very related and strongly math-based. And yes, I am fucking pissed, because this just reminds me of how goddamned heartbreaking it is for her parents and millions of others in the same situation. They aren't getting anything out of this. There are other ways of fixing it.

Put simply: QE is not incentives-compatible with repairing economic mismanagement in a global economy.

Go nuts, show me how it is, with your "arithmetics".

Lol, I can always back off that English is not my mother language, but this is irrelevant to the point I made about economics (and which is not about mathematics) as well as your notion about arithmetics (and you are wrong (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arithmetic) actually about even this, so your qualifications are strongly doubted). Now it is your time to explain where I am wrong (besides sheer nitpicking and unrelated semantics)...

You may use either arithmetic or arithmetics, I don't care as long as you're concise and your ideas are clear

Pretty sure you said you had arithmetic to show me wrong. Prove it already. Break out the Cambridge equation, move some numbers, account for variables, and show me your mastery of the interactions of myriad semi-isolated economies in the context of the global economy. Don't leave out any currencies or subeconomies where value can be transferred and stored.

The burden is absolutely on you. Not only has it not worked anywhere else its been tried, not even here; and, not only was John M. Keynes himself utterly against it, though the so-called Keynesians would be shocked to find this out I'm sure; but we have multiple clear examples where wealth has been absolutely stolen from populations who have spent their lifetimes maintaining and acquiring it responsibly, under the murky guise of some economic doomsday that could not have been solved any other way!

Show me. Give me a sliver of mathematical proof that hints that your theory is right.

No problem really. Just you admit at first that you were wrong with arithmetics. I think now I may claim such a privilege...

Ignore the plural / singular shit. In my anger I committed a logical fallacy; let's not continue that bad habit. Your use of arithmetics, right or wrong (or regional, which is more likely) has little bearing on your point. Likewise, my qualifications are not as a linguist, so we can safely disregard it I reckon.

But if you believe that economics is not mathematics, we may have to part ways now, because you might as well predict and model it with astrology if you aren't using math.

You raised that shit and it remains on you

Fair enough gentlemen, please stop comparing your junks. ;D
I believe no one can seriously think QE is a sustainable policy for any country and considering the long run (and the future generations).
Wealth has to be created.. not printed.. ;)

I don't believe, I know this for sure. Economics is about human psychology, first and before all. I never said anything about economics being based on astrology. And yes, astrology also uses some math (should we discredit mathematics on account of that?). Your assumption is wrong again...

Should we go on?

Are you absolutely dense? I just admitted that I brought up the pluralization of arithmetic foolishly, illogically, and emotionally. Move on with your end. Stop sidetracking the issue. No one here cares to allow you to belabor the fact that I made a poor debate choice 6 posts ago. I admit it, now on with the math, please.

How can I be sure that you won't go on like that, lol? You discredited yourself, period. Hope this will serve you a lesson, though scarcely...

Oh, fuck me, you're one of those.

Never mind, no, don't go on. I might as well debate Scientology.

Astronomy uses math. Astrology uses superstition regarding temporally-relative positions.

To properly model economics and include the element of human behavior, some brilliant fellows laid the groundwork for game theory, thus allowing it all to still be math. This is the calculus of economic modeling. Not using this is akin to trying to work out quantum field theory with an abacus. No wonder you're lost.

/subthread... carry on gentlemen. Derailed due to emotional response at mention of Japan; it turns out the commenter has no knowledge of Japan, or any general economic theory relevant in the last two decades.


Ah. Yes. I trust that we can all look past this... I certainly am much more clear on who knows what. I have learned my lesson, please forgive me my assumptions... all of them...

Lol, the deepest insights into the most important economic matters (such as subjective valuation of things which makes exchange ever possible) can be formulated with primitive mathematics (or even without it) and are based entirely on human psychology...

Now to the point (let's forget about you being a douchebag)

Your country exports 1000 units of goods (in money terms) and imports 500 (typical export oriented economy). Due to depreciation of its currency it can now export twice as many, i.e. 2000 units, and import twice as less, i.e 250 units. But since it has got the net surplus of 1000 units through exports, it can now easily buy missing 250 units and still have a surplus of 750 units

I can think of not a single case when such an oversimplification could be useful. You have disregarded almost every variable and initial condition possibility. There are more countries, timescales are involved, natural resources. This is so absurd I will not bother to go on. Please just stop.


Primitive indeed. Let's just stare at the stars and rationalize them as fireflies on a bedsheet. That sounds so very peaceful... I hope you'll join me...

I didn't expect anything different from you (but I was ready). You can't prove me wrong mathematically here (that is what you were bragging about). I gave you arithmetics you required. In reality, there are a myriad of things that complicate matters and can change everything dramatically, but you can't beat the principle which is still there. You can overwhelm it but simply can't get rid of it...

These are the basics of macroeconomics

You didn't give me math, you gave me words, based on fantasy values, completely devoid of any applicability to a world other than one in your mind. The only logical premise I can sort of try and infer is that you believe export-oriented economies should be inflationary. Reversing the values, consumer economies should be deflationary. So, the US should be deflationary?

I've also taken the liberty of reviewing your posts, which seem primarily to be advertisement-for-pay for PrimeDice. I should have known better, with such an astronomical (note: not astrological) ratio of posts relative to your registration date. Dozens a day, all meaningless, often combative, insulting, and always simple. If only this forum had a signal-to-noise indicator below the Ignore button.

Please, please, stop replying. I can't stop you, but I can promise this will the the last reply of yours in this thread I answer. Feel free to use the most trollish reply you can muster to draw me back. It is doubtful you will succeed.

You two should fix the issues you have with yourselves before fixing the issues you have with others.
Anyway, you don't need mathematics, arithmetic or human psychology to understand that QE is shit. Common sense is enough.

And we should rename this thread... I'm thinking of "Nomad vs Sedentary" or "deisik the tree vs FenixRD the wind".

Focus on raising export, reducing import, that is focus on the trade balance, is a fallacy called mercantilism. It is rampant today. Free trade is all about removing it.

The fallacy comes into the clear when it is explained this way:

Imagine first that you have world money, or, which is the same thing, the two countries' money is stable in regard to each other. It does not matter if the units have different value, just that the exchange rate is stable. Now, the people in one country wants the wares of the other country. To get that, they trade their own products. The more they can produce and export, the more they can import. The purpose of producing is to consume, either what they produce themselves, or imported goods traded for their own. The money is just oil in the machinery, the imports are paid with exports. There does not have to be any net inflow or outflow of money. Now if money flows out, the people in the country will want to repair their money loss, because they have a certain preference for holding money in reserve. Therefore they will produce more and export. Thus the balance is restored.

Now to devaluation. The government intervenes to reduce the value of their own money. This means that the producers get less value for their production, prices of the products go lower. Basically the importing country pays less, and the loss is on the producers in the exporting country. The corresponding imports will rise in price, making the imported volume lower. So the workers in the devaluing country gets less for their work and pay more for the imports. This is just bad for the people in the devaluing country. How can it be better? A number on the governments accounting books.

Now imaging that to reduce the value of a currency, there is in the end really one way to do it - to dilute the money with increasing the money supply. And where does the new money go? Whoever gets them, this is the people who wants the devaluation to happen. So for personal gain, they are willing to reduce the wealth of a whole population. That is evil.

And without any arithmetic at all  ;D

Feel free to dress it in numbers, if you think it is necessary.

No, no! You misunderstand my perspective. You've stated it quite nicely. Perhaps numbers can be used to prove you right — and of course they can, or something is wrong! — but your premise is free of logical contradiction and stands well, numbers or not. Indeed, I read your words and see numbers, and they are right. I was merely admiring that, while I see it all with numbers, that you managed to state the truth clearly without breaking out a whiteboard. Not a popular trick at dinner parties, I assure you.

dammm you good! i really wish i had some economics teacher like you :D
glad we came basically to the same conclusion (FED=EVIL). be sure i will be using your flawless statement when arguing this subject

thx buddy.

England, France and Germany defaulted during the 1930's, meaning they could not pay their debts.

The 1930's will happen again, and it will be called the 2nd Great Depression.

The only open question is, how many people will die due to the war that will result because of the renewed financial crisis?

It won't be in the hundred million range this time, it will be in the 1-3 billion deaths range.

That's the scary part. The financial pain ALWAYS causes subsequent deaths. It's the only constant in human history.

Hopefully you're the first to go

The balance is restored through adjusting the exchange rates of the trading countries as well as increasing national debt (Japan is the second largest holder of U.S. government debt, if I'm not mistaken). Your first assumption is incorrect since currencies are actually floating against each other

The whole story is not that simple as you tell it here. It can actually be better as you don't take into account that the exporting country can in fact sell more (since the importing country pays less and thus can pay for more volume), so producing more wealth and profits, providing higher employment and fuller utilization of productive capacities even at lower prices...

thanks to that nuclear disaster in japan there will only be about a 5th of its population less than 25 years by that time they will be lucky to make 40 let alone retire

Yep, time to go on an ignore spree. Reviewing deisik and kungfu's posts, it's pretty clear, their true colors and purposes.

That's one…

And of course Deisik because he is either very slow or deliberately trying to troll Erdogan by misreading his very clear prose. I'll leave these fools to others; I haven't the patience anymore, as you can see from when I lost it earlier. So, that's two.

Thank you, I misread your earlier comments.

Now you see why I find I'm better off speaking with numbers. :-\

I agree that in practice there are different dynamics, but to describe the phenomenon clearly, it helps to take away some variables, like having a common currency or having a steady exchange rate. Anyway, listen to the politician talk in Europe, they have in fact a common currency. The italians complain that the germans produce quality cars at a good price. They think that this fact makes the germans evil, when in fact both countries profit on it. The italians get good cars, the germans get good money for their effort to import useful stuff from other countries including Italy. Mercantilism is just stupid, and I have problems understanding why the public swallows it. Probably it is only special interest groups that have the necessary budget to drown the public with their publicity. People should just be critical to news and use their own basic reasoning power.

Thanks for that comment, it makes up for twenty negative comments made by people who is stupid and close-minded.

Yes, this is a common practice which is obviously not applicable here and makes confusion only (and confuses people at that). We were "talking" (lol) about Japan and their counter parties (that would primarily be the USA) in which case the whole picture is aggravated not only by floating exchange rates (this could be dealt with), but also by the discrepancy in the trade balance which from the mid-1960s has been in Japan's favor ($60 billion in 1987). Apparently, this imbalance was made up for by an increasing accumulation of U.S. government debt. If you call that mercantilism, well, let it be so. But where's fallacy here?

Actually, I'm curious whether your post about mercantilism is referred to mine at all

If the difference is just accumulated in foreign debt, it will not affect the exchange rate. I agree that accumulating foreign debt is quite common. It is a problem because it causes the market not to clear, and therefore suppresses changes in prices and therefore the signals to the market actors to change production and consumption.

Yep, you seem to have pinpointed my whole idea, congrats! If the trade imbalances were fixed through the exchange rate, this would instantaneously kill the exports oriented economy of Japan. Now you have to make just another step ahead (out of logical necessity) and agree that the rational, thought-out policy of easing is not that evil on the economy scale as it may appear at first glance...

well said fenix, the whole Japan deflation thing was a complete lie. The media kept saying that prices were going down like its a bad thing, like constantly rising cost of living is a good thing, it's pathetic.

Not at all. I think I was clear. Do not engage in mercantilism. Use sound money. Let the markets work.

I don't get your point. You disagree with the current state of things or just find me wrong in describing it?

Clarify your stance

Your answer to economic problems in general is to lower the value of a country's currency.

This is irrational in two ways. 1: This can obviously not be done for all countries, you end up with a currency war. 2: It is not the money that is essential, the money is oil in the machinery, the real imports and exports are goods and services. Trying to manipulate the value of money is not helpful.

In fact, modifying the value of money in ways not obvious or predictable to the actors, only distorts the markets, and destroys the markets' ability to continuously adapt to changing real world conditions, and the result is lower wealth. If you do not think lower wealth is a problem, think hunger, freezing, sickness, growing up in nescience.

The money printing also redistributes wealth from the poor to the privileged businesses. I suspect this is the real goal. Else they would just spread the new money around to everybody. Why wait for the trickling down, why not just give it to everybody right away?

For abenomics this is specially irrational:

He wants the public to spend more to "support" the economy, at the same time plans to increase the value added tax. WTF? There is a very real and immediate response to the VAT increase from the public. Spend less. What else can they do. Due to ignorance I guess they will dedicate their love to him when they do their harakiri.

I was talking about Japan and in a more general way about exports oriented countries, which I made clear right from the start. I gave a simple example to show how it works for them. You said that the producers of the exporting countries in this case would get less value for their production while the importing country would pay less, and the loss would be on the former. I think I showed it pretty cogently that this is not true in general and the lower prices (which you assumed as a result of the money value manipulation) can actually increase domestic production, provide higher employment, etc., and ultimately bring in more profits through volume. This is especially true for exports oriented countries. In fact, that's what they are doing from time to time (devaluing their currency)

Then you again tell me about that the goods and services are real and not the money. Do you actually read my posts? Read again if you failed to get it, exports oriented countries specifically devalue their currency to raise production (i.e. your real goods and services). Their mileage may vary, but they don't do it just for the fun of it

As you said, that is just what they want you to 'think/believe'.

This is not what I can be made think or believe (it is just basic economics). But you can always check with the trade balance sheet (http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance). Yeah, I know, this can be faked between countries, but sorry, I am not much into that conspiracy shit...

Though the site seems to be down presently, probably, they are busy forging data, lol...

seriously dude you havent reply a single constructive post in this thread. plus i just saw you have created one named "why bitcoin is doomed to fail". you just cant never agree cant you? forget it im not even interested in your answer. congrats you are the first one in here i ignored.

Isn't the concept of "exports oriented economies" flawed from the start ? How are "imports oriented economies" that are a necessary counterpart supposed to buy stuff from the former ?

To me it's pretty clear the US is scamming the entire world and has been doing it for decades, not just since the start of QE.

It's also interesting to look at Germany and "southern European" Euro countries to see that even with the same currency and without money printing (although now there is also money printing, to wage a currency war with the US and Japan) trade imbalances are causing real problems.

Yeah, they "export" debt, it has already been mentioned in the thread (though nobody paid close attention to it). It may look unfair at first glance, but assume for a moment that they ("import oriented economies") would have otherwise to lower their currency purchasing power instead (to get imports balanced with exports), or, rather, let the currency market do this job...