Bitcoin Forum

Do I even need to say it: he obviously doesn't quite "get" Bitcoin.

He'll get it after a while I suppose. Rand, if you happen across this consider if the MERS mortgage title company had utilized the block chain to track ownership - for a legislator, that should be enough to get them thinking correctly.

For those who don't know, MERS was the unregulated organization that banks created to 1. forge signatures on mortgage docs 2. trade these documents bypassing local municipalities, in effect, stealing doc fees at the local level 3. double spend! there are cases of mortgages being held / claimed by multiple lenders... and other problems with that corrupt data base (MERS).

MERS scandal that could have been avoided with the bitcoin protocol: http://deadlyclear.wordpress.com/2013/08/20/wall-streets-mortgage-fraud-scandal-you-can-have-a-house-that-is-fully-paid-for-and-still-end-up-in-foreclosure/

"Wall Street’s Mortgage Fraud Scandal. 'You can have a house that is fully paid for and still end up in foreclosure”

Rand, what's the value of bitcoin now?

He'll get it after a while I suppose. Rand, if you happen across this consider if the MERS mortgage title company had utilized the block chain to track ownership - for a legislator, that should be enough to get them thinking correctly.

For those who don't know, MERS was the unregulated organization that banks created to 1. forge signatures on mortgage docs 2. trade these documents bypassing local municipalities, in effect, stealing doc fees at the local level 3. double spend! there are cases of mortgages being held / claimed by multiple lenders... and other problems with that corrupt data base (MERS).

MERS scandal that could have been avoided with the bitcoin protocol: http://deadlyclear.wordpress.com/2013/08/20/wall-streets-mortgage-fraud-scandal-you-can-have-a-house-that-is-fully-paid-for-and-still-end-up-in-foreclosure/

"Wall Street’s Mortgage Fraud Scandal. 'You can have a house that is fully paid for and still end up in foreclosure”

Rand, what's the value of bitcoin now?

gaud, that brings back bad memories.

so sad the robosigners they hired to do their dirty work as well.  the banking system is so disgusting and deserves all the scorn we heap upon them everyday.

no wonder i've gone down the rabbit hole with Bitcoin.

...As a result of MERS’ actions, coupled with an intricate network of document preparers, it has virtually caused clouds on over 60,000,000+ titles to property in every state in the United States. In doing so, its membership base has saved millions of dollars in recordation fees, by hiding behind MERS’ electronic wall. By doing so, it has deprived the counties of the United States millions upon millions of dollars in badly-needed recordation fees; necessary for not only maintenance of property records (one of the basic tenets of American wealth) but also for the funding of certain county services, which have then had to raise property taxes to accommodate the lack of funds or simply cut back on services it used to be able to pay for on its own...

This is the intriguing part of BTC.  What will be able to plug into the block chain for authentication purposes?  How does that affect future transaction fees as miners make less BTC rewards and want to be compensated for authenticating transactions?  Will future price of BTC offset that?

This is the intriguing part of BTC.  What will be able to plug into the block chain for authentication purposes?  How does that affect future transaction fees as miners make less BTC rewards and want to be compensated for authenticating transactions?  Will future price of BTC offset that?

Didn't mean to sour your meal sour, but you've got the cure in the last statement.

If you can stomach it, here's a relevant paragraph from the linked article:

And actually my theory, if I were setting it up, I’d make it exchangeable for stock.

Ron Paul's opinions on bitcoin reflect a broader crisis of misunderstanding that has simultaneously struck the libertarian movement and the Austrian School.

Of the latter, proponents of the Austrian school are not doing themselves any favors by steadfastly refusing to evolve their theories beyond a contemporary quasi-Cult-of-Personality based upon the founders. Antal Fekete, et al, have brilliantly attempted to bring the best aspects of Austrian theories into a modern, functional context (real bills of credit, hedging theories, etc), but his work often falls upon deaf ears because he does not dogmatically accept the gospel of the early Austrians. The modern Austrians, by blindly holding to ossified theories, are becoming as stubbornly entrenched in their beliefs as the Keynesians and Friedmanites.

Definitely not getting it.  Bitcoin is backed by the thing that it already is.  Backing requires trust.  Most people dont get that bitcoin doesnt represent anything.  It is the thing.

Its funny the way bitcoin is kind of a litmus test for a certain aptitude.

Rand....

even thinking of backing bitcoin by stocks is obsurd as stocks can be manipulated by corporations.

I think this is very hard for people to grasp since a "scarce digital commodity" seems like an oxymoron at first.

it is amazing isn't it?

having been involved since the beginning of 2011, i would've thought by now, especially after all the ramps in price and interest, that the general population would be able to comprehend basic Bitcoin principles.  nope.  sorry.  the ignorance displayed everyday astounds me.

we really are still in the early adoption stages.

 Bitcoin will free your mind ;->

Rand Paul, the undeclared yet arguably front-running Republican presidential contender, was trying to impress 40 young tech executives and entrepreneurs. Over happy-hour beers in San Francisco earlier this spring, the Kentucky insurgent fielded standard-issue queries on his opposition to National Security Agency spying practices and the Affordable Care Act. But Chris Morton, co-founder of BlockScore, an online fraud-prevention company, asked a question that tested Paul's tech chops: What did the senator think of Bitcoin?

Turns out that not only was Paul enthusiastic about its possibilities, but before its recent troubles he had asked his staff to explore how he might go about accepting campaign contributions in the digital currency. "People were impressed," said 29-year-old Garrett Johnson, the founder of SendHub and the organizer of the event.

Wooing the Patagonia-wearing, Blue Bottle coffee-sipping denizens of Silicon Valley, and especially San Francisco, may seem like a fool's errand for much of the GOP, but not for Paul, who recently made his second swing through the Bay Area in as many years. Indeed, his libertarian leanings, which can rankle Republican Party pooh-bahs, resonate in the Valley, where folks are messianic about private enterprise's potential to solve all the world's challenges. (Exhibit A: Google CEO Larry Page saying he'd rather bequeath his wealth to entrepreneur Elon Musk than to philanthropy.) Among the technorati, Paul's willingness to engage ideas outside the mainstream isn't a liability -- it's his strongest virtue.

On his recent trip in late March, he talked like a native too: publicly delivering a harangue against the federal surveillance regime at Berkeley, which earned him two standing ovations in the liberal stronghold, and privately dropping by investor Tim Draper's entrepreneurship school and gamely entertaining the billionaire's quixotic pitch for splitting California into six states. (Paul says he's dubious but hasn't formed an opinion.)

It's all part of Paul's high-stakes gambit to expand the GOP's appeal in precincts generally hostile to conservatives. "I see almost unlimited potential for us in Silicon Valley," Paul tells Fortune in an April interview in his Capitol Hill office after his trip. "Many more of them are libertarian-leaning Republicans than they are Democrats, and they may not know it yet."

Here's another article that touches BTC and Rand Paul pertaining to when an executive in Silicon Valley asked him about it in recent times. And considering he's the Ace for liberty that will likely run for President and actually have serious shot at it, it's worth a read: http://money.cnn.com/2014/05/01/technology/rand-paul-silicon-valley.pr.fortune/index.html (http://money.cnn.com/2014/05/01/technology/rand-paul-silicon-valley.pr.fortune/index.html)
http://i62.tinypic.com/3469e35.jpg

Why can't we elect doctors instead of warriors?

Do I even need to say it: he obviously doesn't quite "get" Bitcoin.

People who suggest Bitcoin should be "backed" by something, be it gold, stocks or whatever, seldom say anything about how to do it practically. It can't be done without giving up the decentralization which is the whole point with Bitcoin. A central entity would have to hold the whole value of the Bitcoin-economy in gold/stocks/whatever. A central entity that can easily be attacked by governments. This has already been tried, it was called e-gold. We all know how that went down...

"Capital gains, dividends and interest would also be tax free at the individual level . . ."
http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/31/pf/taxes/rand-paul-flat-tax/index.html?iid=HP_LN


This is perhaps the single most important reason to support Rand Paul in the upcoming election cycle because it neutralizes the position of the IRS with respect to the Bitcoin payment network.

Rand Paul has proven to be really intelligent, so he will catch up.
When enough people kept asking him about Bitcoin, eventually he was bound to answer.
Over time he will learn all about it.

Full article here:

http://newsbtc.com/2014/05/01/rand-paul-thinks-bitcoin-backed-stocks/ (http://newsbtc.com/2014/05/01/rand-paul-thinks-bitcoin-backed-stocks/)

"And actually my theory, if I were setting it up, I’d make it exchangeable for stock. And then it’d have real value. And I’d have it pegged, and I’d have a basket of 10 big retailers. Because I read [Marc] Andreessen’s article a couple months ago. What fascinated me about it was those 2 to 3% margins. If you multiply that out for all of Wal-Mart and they don’t have to use Visa anymore, I’m guessing the people who have to be worried here are Visa and MasterCard. I think it would work, but I think, because I’m sort of a believer in currency having value, if you’re going to create a currency, have it backed up by — you know, Hayek used to talk about a basket of commodities? You could have a basket of stocks, and have some exchangeability, because it’s hard for people like me who are a bit tangible. But you could have an average of stocks, I’m wondering if that’s the next permutation."

Yes.  And I think over time many people will begin to catch up. 

I was having beers with my dad a few nights ago (who's held bitcoin for a while now) and he was asking about why they have value and why they are scarce.  Trying to explain it really made me realize how foreign and mind-bending the concept is. 

I was explaining how bitcoins are very difficult to find.  That right now bitcoin miners across the word are testing 60 quadrillion numbers every single second looking for that special number that will generate the next bitcoin in the chain.  I could see that he would sort of "get it" for a few seconds--how difficulty adjusts automatically, how this keeps the inflation rate known, and how this creates the situation where producing a new bitcoin costs an amount roughly equal to its value at the time.

But he kept saying "that really makes my mind bend" and he is right.  Bitcoin is unlike anything else.  It is our first scarce digital asset and anyone can find them--you just need that magic nonce. 

It will be better if Bitcoins are backed by stocks, bonds, bullion and other investment material. The Bitcoin foundation can create a centralized Bitcoin exchange, and the profit from that can be used to purchase these assets.

+1

Naked short selling is just a cute way of saying "counterfeiting". This is done regularly to manipulate prices. If Bitcoin "value" gets attached to paper instruments the way gold and silver have then we're screwed.

Only if the instrument to do that naked shorting is used to set the prices of bitcoin in the p2p economy.
If we choose to ignore it for price determination, then the central banks can print as much money as they want to sell it naked short and no one will care.  Then that strategy will impoverish them and show their weakness.

Unlike gold and silver, taking delivery of the actual bitcoin is swift, easy, and doesn't require some insured massive vault and armored trucks and air-force planes to protect the delivery.  It happens swiftly and at low cost.

Only if the instrument to do that naked shorting is used to set the prices of bitcoin in the p2p economy.
If we choose to ignore it for price determination, then the central banks can print as much money as they want to sell it naked short and no one will care.  Then that strategy will impoverish them and show their weakness.

Unlike gold and silver, taking delivery of the actual bitcoin is swift, easy, and doesn't require some insured massive vault and armored trucks and air-force planes to protect the delivery.  It happens swiftly and at low cost.

Yes.  And I think over time many people will begin to catch up. 

I was having beers with my dad a few nights ago (who's held bitcoin for a while now) and he was asking about why they have value and why they are scarce.  Trying to explain it really made me realize how foreign and mind-bending the concept is. 

I was explaining how bitcoins are very difficult to find.  That right now bitcoin miners across the word are testing 60 quadrillion numbers every single second looking for that special number that will generate the next bitcoin in the chain.  I could see that he would sort of "get it" for a few seconds--how difficulty adjusts automatically, how this keeps the inflation rate known, and how this creates the situation where producing a new bitcoin costs an amount roughly equal to its value at the time.

But he kept saying "that really makes my mind bend" and he is right.  Bitcoin is unlike anything else.  It is our first scarce digital asset and anyone can find them--you just need that magic nonce.