Bitcoin Forum

The money must be printed by the Ministry of Finance. Do you agree?

No! Never!
That means total absence of any control. Like in Zimbabwe or Argentina. It's a bit safer when the control of the money supply is not in the hands of politicians. A bit safer I said, not much.

Aboslutely never let them to print it because the politician is got so many guile. They will get some and always keep for themself without anyone notice better let the bank do it for now. May be after sometime when bitcoin skyrocketing try to repeal bank then

Banks and politicians together take wealth from everyone else by issuing money and debt and using state power to prop up their values.

In this partnership, one cannot do without the other.  The banks obviously want the state to guarantee their debt with taxpayer money, etc., but without banks, the state's issuance of money and debt would be severely limited by market pressure and public opinion.  People would much more easily see state issued money and debt as a way to receive "free" wealth and power from the public.

Banks contribute brain power to this enterprise by dreaming up innovative assets that investors might believe in at least temporarily.  The bank "deposit" was one of the greatest.  Of late they have been securitizing mortgage and consumer debt.  All of this provides a "use" for state issued money and debt so people don't use them to buy things, drive up inflation, and expose the over-issue of the state assets.

This is fundamentally why "too big to fail" and loose regulation aren't going away any time soon.

Politicians don't get elected by governing best.  They get elected for making good use of the "free" money coming from issuing debt that savers still trust.  They, as a class, are not going to eject their most profitable career partners without a fight.

No. But the European system is crazy.
Normal banks are getting the money from the central bank. Then normal banks are lending it to EU countries.

That is the work around that the EU uses.  I will lend you money for almost nothing and you can lend it for a bit more to a country that needs it.
It's classic EU bureaucracy, why do something in one step when you can pay a middle man and rerquire more steps than necessary.

I think central banks should actually be free from politics, they have a mandate, that is to keep inflation in line, everything else they do it playing politics.

the money should not be printed at all, there should be a fixed limit like with bitcoin, to raise the defaltion a bit, then you can start print again, when the inflation is extinguished

a cycle must be done to prevent another crisis like the current one

I think, it is a good idea. It is more democratic system.

Democratic system we have in our countries as now is closer to fiction than to real democracy from our textbooks. You think that people have the choice and elect their representatives, not really, it is just giant puppet show. The only way money should be created is not by financial institutions (Central Bank) or political structures (Ministry of Finance) because there will be always problem how much money they print. They should disclose publicly how quantitative easing works, we need transparency in this sector more than anything.

Well said but what other choice do we have? There must be some organization or institution that will keep an eye on. Also in times of economic collapse those institutions must intervene (of course in a right way). So I think the question is rather haw to make those institutions independent from politics and private banks.

Authorities should stay out of money totally.  Money is the place of gold, silver, bitcoin, and any other form that doesn't require an authority.  As soon as you have an authority, there is no way to make it independent, unless you can find the Knights of the Holy Grail and hire them.

The idea that financial crashes require central banks and governments to save the world from ruin is based on the existence of such crashes in the first place.  But these crashes are, without exception (going all the way back to the Dutch tulip bubble,) caused ultimately by the issue of money by some authority.

Politics is impossible to stay out of money. We are not living in a police state. People decide about their money.

But human society has done fine for millennia with the state mostly or completely out of money.  (The state might have minted gold or silver coins and extracted a 'seigniorage'.  When this became too big people looked for alternative monies.)

Only after the Renaissance, when economic growth was so good that governments and banks could receive a lot of free power and wealth by manipulating money, and still keep the economy more or less stable and prosperous (including using imperial devices to shift most of the pain to poorer countries,) that largely-or-completely state-based money has been possible, at least so far.

“IT'S NOT WHAT BACKS OUR MONEY, IT'S WHO CONTROLS ITS QUANTITY”

Bill Still


You need to study some history of economics. The Fiat money invented in ancient Rome. It was the most revolutionary economic system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=7qIhDdST27g#t=738

Politicians have no  idea of doing business. Let the banks who have better knowledge of business and finance matters print the money, look what is happening to Argentina and Zimbabwe this could happen to countries who let the ministry of finance print the money.

Again Bill Still:

"It doesn't matter what backs your money. All that matters is who controls its quantity. Will it be your elected officials or will it be some unelected banker?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=7qIhDdST27g#t=1588

What is your justification?

Assuming that there won't be any economic crisis in the future is a wishful thinking. Sooner or later there will be crisis no matter who is manages/cnotrols money.



The last big economic crisis was caused by banks...
http://www.economist.com/news/schoolsbrief/21584534-effects-financial-crisis-are-still-being-felt-five-years-article (http://www.economist.com/news/schoolsbrief/21584534-effects-financial-crisis-are-still-being-felt-five-years-article)

Financial asset prices go up and down naturally, people make mistakes about investing, and unexpected events happen.  All these things can move asset prices pretty significantly.  People win and lose, and if they're not forced to take risks by the monetary system, and they're reasonably sensible, they won't bet the farm on anything.  (If money's value was stable, they would probably do nothing with most of their savings.)

Major bubbles, however, requires some sort of fragility, and the biggest type of fragility happens when the state artificially props up the value of something, directly or indirectly.  The fundamental reason the state can and wants to do this (wants to because it wants to create demand for its money and debt) is that the state runs money.

People who live in the modern period have seen so many financial crises around the world that they think crises are inevitable.  This is because money has been managed by the state, and/or by the dominant world power, since the founding of the Dutch and English central banks in the 16th and 17th centuries.

This Bill Still quote is on point, and that's what makes BTC the ultimate money system that will inevitably take over the entire world: No one can ever control it's quantity (total supply).

Banks ARE the ones who create money. In most countries, money is not created simply by printing more bills or stamping out more coins. If physical bills and coins were all that our money supply consisted of, it would strangle the economy. The government does influence the money supply through fiscal and monetary policy, but the actual creation of money is done by the banking system.

The system replaced? Then what happens to all the elder people or people who been enslaving to work for their money held in the banks?

Do they just say oh well? There needs to be a measurement, for the banks  within their own from a third party to say you are crossing the line step back until you pay the balance like how they issue our credit to us as well.

Those people are just going to be inflated out of their money or have their savings stolen at some point in the future anyway!

I expect the transition to a new system will be fast, but old fiat will have to be transferred into the new system somehow.  I don't really know how it worded in the past after hyper-inflations happened, but it would probably be the same again this time.

Hyperbitcoinization?

Yes, everything is better than USA - FED way

I agree that banks should be removed from our economy, but if the power to print money is given to politicians, we're going to have the same problem. Instead, we should use a currency which cannot just be increased in supply at whim, like gold, or, in a modern world, something similar to bitcoin.

totally disagree, policy pursued by the Ministry of Finance will not be much better than the decision will be undertaken by Banks are all aiming for its own sake and the customer is always the victim,in my opinion to decentralized financial systems such as Bitcoin be a better solution of the options above.

First things banks should not removed from economy because there is somehow another investment in it. Some people with the real fiat money will invest in it because its easier altough the interest is low. Some people dont want to think about it and just want to get some money for it thats why they invest in banks. Second is if you give politician the power I think we will be doomed since they can easily print money for themselves so they have a higher chance to corrupt every single money in this world. And that is not a good choice

Printing additional money isn't the only problem. Devaluation, deliberate lowering the exchange rate, fixed exchange rate, etc. Banks and politics all over the world are abusing their positions to all kind of manipulating. Even if you use gold for exchanging someone may wont to lower its value just to gain litter extra.

You cant takeaway the entire system, you have to change their policy or their operations of someone to oversee them.

It also needs to be a private company with a governmental approved, since most government staffing lacks in these areas. The better the oversight the better reduction of more less fiance mess, the credit agency was doing this role until they started getting paid to give AAA ratings on all investments.  

The oversight needs to be in 2 places, or just 1 on the credit agency either way works.

I dont know why everyone was freaking out. We dont need the banks anyway. Thats what bitcoin is all about!

I'm sorry to disappoint You but so far I don't see banks being replaced/liquidated in the future. Even if bitcoin becomes dominating global currency banks will still exist, they have too strong position in the global market, they lend money, they keep most of the savings, and they will also adapt to bitcoin.

the banks will be repealed naturally, when everyone will start using only bitcoin, bitcoin need to acquire a big portion of the whole "monetary users" before that occurs

their strong position is only strong thanks to us, because we continue to use their shitty fiat

And they still will be strong because some people will want to lend money, because bitcoin can be collected and used for investment. Bitcoin alone wont end banks domination. Also banks as an institution is not a bad thing as long as there is someone to keep them under control.

Banks are a useless invention. There is no reason to exist anymore. Politicians can do better job and the most important: Politicians are elected.

the world we live in has been created by them

The fundamental job of a bank is to give credit. Politicians can't do that.
Why would you think banks don't have a reason to exist anymore?

Why i need a bank to give credit? Are you joking?

I don't know about Your situation but there are many people that need or want to get credit (for investment, for buying a house or for emergency situations). Also there are many companies that need to use credit in order to do needed investment, some people get credit to start there own company. How else are you going to get needed money if you don't have banks?

they could start to deploy automatic atm everywhere instead of those big construction called banks, where there are insiders doing useless job, that could be replaced easily by a machine

we don't need banks or any other human holding our money yet

Why don't you get your credit from your government?

Lol and from where those atms would get the money? Banks are needed as an institution and no matter is it on line banking, department or any other form of managing money, banks are needed.

From the government.

That's something called Socialism. And if You didn't notice, there are no rich countries with that kind of political system. Poland after Second World War had that system for almost 50 years, ask Poles what do they think about Socialism today.

it's all electronic now money don't exist, there is just a guy writing a number behind a screen and that appear on your bank account display, in fact you do not own anything

money would come in the same way they come when you withdraws from any atm

I am talking about elections, not Socialism. There were no elections in socialist countries. But besides that, after the last economic crisis capitalism has failed.

And how would that work?
Banks are working on virtual money and that's the issue with banks today. So the solution is that banks should have gold or physical money to back up the virtual ones (which today isn't always the case). But liquidating banks right now or replacing them with government money is unacceptable, because country's budget cannot be used for landing but for investments, scientific development, education, military etc.

even more important is understand how 'fractional reserve banking' works,  if you are unfamiliar with this i suggest you check it out and its history...... also ask yourself (or go look up)  how do banks interact with the imf....  these are imo the most troubling aspects beneath all this....

Everything should be replaced by Bitcoin, so there is no actual printing needed to be done. Needing to print money on demand = faulty design from the start.

How the current banking system works.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFDe5kUUyT0

If anyone see's that, then they'll understand what a farce it is.   We are all slaves to that system... that's why I love the concept of bitcoin.  Now there is a way to free yourself before it's too late. 

How are you going to replace all things with bitcoin? If you did that how are you going to buy bitcoin? And how are you going to invest in it? With disaperance this bitcoin gone you can't do things with only just bitcoin. There is no standard price for bitcoin

Countries like Sweden are pretty rich and have high welfare system and the life quality is great, so no, your example is flawed.

Not really, there's a huge divide in Sweden between Providers and Users (Abusers)  and it's just going to keep growing.   It's proven time and time again that socialism does not work... ever!

that's the whole problem of today economy and inflation, the money are not backed up by anything it is just a rally of stamping more pennies, and there is no solution apparently

we could have a better system were salary are fixed and pre-build for everyone, and like i said before, an automatic atm that give you money based on your job


in the same way that you are going to buy usd(and you know that you are not actually buying usd but its stock), bitcoin stock could be your answer