Bitcoin Forum

I’ll be honest, the hoarding mania has got to go if bitcoin protocol is ever to support a fully fledged BTC currency.

Don’t get me wrong, I do agree that speculators are an essential part in building a bitcoin-based economy, but can we really rely on this trigger-happy group to provide our beloved BTC with the key functions of money: a medium of exchange (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medium_of_exchange), a unit of account (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_of_account), and a store of value (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Store_of_value)?

Think about it for a minute, how do the key functions of money ever come into existence — what makes them tick, so to speak? In particular, what groups of money users are responsible for sparking and sustaining each of these functions? For example, would BTC have a “unit of account” function if it wasn’t for the miners keeping the block chain alive and intact?

It seems to me, the parties responsible for infusing BTC with the key functions of money are:

• Unit of account is a product of miners contribution;
• Medium of exchange is a product of consumers contribution;
• Store of value is a product of merchants contribution.

But what about the speculators, you may ask? Well, as it turns out, speculators merely help to grease the fourth function of money for the money changers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_changer) (Mt.Gox et al.): a standard of deferred payment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_of_deferred_payment). However, as you may have already come to your own realization, when it comes to BTC, that particular function of money would soon be irrelevant, since BTC is truly a global currency (https://twitter.com/BTConomist/status/333773722337034240). So, unless some of you (and especially miners) are planning on establishing trading agreements with the aliens any time soon, the money changers and their highly speculative worker bees shouldn't be your main focus.

So, let's use our speculator-driven bubbles wisely, shall we?... Update a mining equipment, bootstrap a new product/service, etc... BTC is meant to be spent, not hoarded! It's what makes it a real currency. I also hope that some of you will find time to read between the lines, as I wouldn't want a panic to ensue, if you know what I mean... Godspeed!

If I am a speculator wishing to bet that the future exchange rate will rise, then BTCs to me are meant for saving (hoarding, if you prefer that term).  That's what their value is to me, if I'm solely a speculator.

But that doesn't mean my saving bitcoins prevents someone else from spending theirs.   Yes, I do understand that as Bitcoin gains traction as a currency then the current exchange rate value of a bitcoin is more justified but it isn't like everyone holding bitcoins today is preventing that traction from occurring.

And what are people going to spend their coins on?

You say people should spend their coins, not hoard them.

But why not do both? Spend a little, save a little more.

Hoarding actually does very good for bitcoin:
- increases price making bitcoin useful*
- the higher bitcoin price the more press is writing about bitcoin and more people are wanting to hear about it

*you cant transfer big amounts of cash using bitcoin if price is low because it causes massive price volatility at exchanges. if you would like to transfer $1.000.000 you would have to buy 1000 bitcoins and sell it three hours later while at price $1.000.000 per bitcoin you would have to buy only one btc. And imagine if more than one transaction like this would have happend at once then most people would assume its another attack on exchange or whatever.

That's precisely what's happening... It's a matter of bookkeeping activity, where as more BTC-based transactions take place the equity associated with each bitcoin in circulation (a.k.a. a line item in the general ledger) begins to pile up, since every party to a transaction would want to exchange their BTCs for something more valuable than what they had given up in order to acquire those BTCs. So, if the accounting books are never opened to record new transactions, no additional value hits the books — empty rows remain as empty rows.

Please treat the above only as a hint, and not as an explanation of what goes behind the curtain. As was stated in the OP, at this point I'm only interested in people reading between the lines, so not to cause a panic prematurely... There's still hope that miners would hear my plea for them to start spending while the exchange rates are still rather tasty.

Given what goes behind the scenes, when relying on accounting principles instead of speculation for price discovery, your suggestion would chip away at BTC's value, whereas "save a little, spend a little more" would add to BTC's value. Try to play around with those two alternative approaches in your head, see if you can figure out why I tend to hold a different view regarding the BTC price discovery mechanism. This is still only a hint — not meant as an explanation.

Sorry but maybe i dont understand your wise statements but i suppose you are still in inflating money lovers camp. Stop forcing people to spend they coins if they don't want to do this. Deflationary  currencies works opposite to inflationary: you don't force people to spend they money but you encourage people to make better services so people want to buy them. And this is what you should be doing: create your own business that accept bitcoin or convince people to do the same. If they will be good enough quality, people will spend they bitcoins on them.

Yet the values of both are still driven by spending: one slowly looses its value as the money supply increases (i.e. more currency units in circulation), the other slowly gains its value as the money supply increases (i.e. more bitcoin base units in circulation; bitcoin base units are not to be confused with bitcoins — currently, there are 100,000,000 base units per each bitcoin).

I know what it means but it seems you don't understand the difference they make. People need something to store value they earned and are tired about forcing them to drive economy. Humanity don't need such high consumption and waste of resources only because some smart asses want to have nice economy growth charts. Time to change whole system and the way people are thinking about what they really need.
Like i said, the best we can do is to simply offer more services for bitcoin. I'm working on new game i will be selling for bitcoin only (and i am paying for everything using bitcoin where possible). And guess what. I am going to HOARD them. Get over it.

High consumption and waste of resources steams from misappropriation of money. I'm not even remotely trying to suggest that miners go loose with their spending sprees and start financing government projects that the central banks are so in love with. The beauty of bitcoin is that those with the mining power behind them get to decide which projects to finance, be it all-inclusive resorts in the Bahamas, a lemonade stand on every 10 mile block along the favorite bike route, or a nanotechnology breakthrough (https://twitter.com/ContiproGroup/status/299449033708171264).

BTC is not actually serving those 3 functions well if at all, and your assessment that different groups provide these functions is quite silly, all those groups need to work in concert for any of the functions.  

BTC is not a real unit of account as prices in BTC are constantly altered to reflect a dollar price that both the buyer and seller actually evaluate a purchase upon, everyone recognizes that BTC is too volatile to serve as any kind of accounting unit.  Store of value is also poor in BTC, deflation is as antithetical to store of value as is inflation, a deflating commodity is absorbing value not storing it.  The value that BTCs are absorbing is from a combination of media driven growth of new users with a crippling shortage of coins, the deflation is essentially a tax being payed by everyone who uses or adopts BTC now and it is payed to the earlier adopters, speculators and exchanges.  What most people don't understand about store-of-value in currency is that it is not a prerequisite to HAVE a thing that's value remains constant merely for it to be currency, ALL currencies have fluctuated to some degree and some have been inflationary and some deflationary, all were capable of performing the role of currency.  Stable valuation is a prerequisite of FAIR currency, mildly unfair currency still gets the job done just like mildly unfair contracts or courts or marriages or any other imperfect human institution.  Now their obviously come a point ware some level of unfairness causes the system to break, and I'm of the opinion that hyper-deflation is just such an unfairness.

So all that left is medium of exchange.  Now here you could made an argument that BTC is fulfilling that but I think this not quite right.  BTC is acting more like a payment-service for dollars and other fiat money, virtually ever BTC purchase is really a dollar purchase that is 'tunneling' though BTC as an intermediate carrier of the dollars value.  So I'd say that BTC is a "medium for the medium of exchange".  If BTC could satisfy

Don't tell me what to do with my bitcoins.

Bitcoins are not universally "meant" for anything.

I spend some of my coins and I save some of them. Am I a spender or a hoarder? Sorry, did I make your brain explode? 99% of bitcoiners do the exact same thing. Is there a magic ratio of spending:hoarding that they need to meet in order to meet your personal criteria for being a spender?

I hope you're not one of those "people don't spend deflationary currencies" goons, if so; explain to me how gold and silver were used as currency for millenia if people don't spend deflationary currencies. I ask because usually the "hoarders r bad" people usually accompany their ridiculous beliefs with neo-keynesian bullshit.

Professor Fekete has some interesting things to say about hoarding. Hoarding is healthy for any currency, because the hoarders serve to regulate supply in the same way that miners do. Why? Because everyone has a price. If there is too much of a currency in circulation, hoarders will hoard it. If there is not enough, price will rise and hoarders will eventually meet "their price," introducing more into circulation. This is why bitcoin is not going to skyrocket to $10,000 in a single week. Take away the hoarders (or create a stupid post telling everyone else what to do with their coins) and there is nothing to slow down extreme spikes and extreme dips. What we have right now is a new economy with some very concentrated positions, and for that reason we cannot blame "hoarders" for the price manipulation; they are doing it because they have the power to do it and it makes them money. What are you going to do, whine about it? Instead, just wait for price to rise and concentrated positions will de-concentrate to a certain degree, because their holders are not robots.

Tell me what is the magic ratio of spending to saving that one must accomplish in order to not be considered a "hoarder?" That is the one thing I keep asking of the "lol stop hoarding" goons, and not one of them has been able to provide a definitive answer of what is a hoarder.
If I spend 10 coins a day and have a 100 saved while continually investing USD am I a spender or a hoarder
If I have a thousand saved and spend 7 per month, am I a hoarder or a spender
If I have 600 saved and spend .75 per day am I a spender or a hoarder.
How about I just stop telling other people what to do with their coins? ;D

Unfortunately this is what happens with a currency that has a limited amount of units. If btc was limitless, then there would be no need for hoarding and thus its value would plummet as there would be btc in abundance. As an example, communities in the US are starting to use time as a unit of currency which is itself limitless in supply, thus eliminating the need to hoard. See www.themoneyfix.org

Interesting.

But it is limitless!... Unfortunately, at this point, most would have to read between the lines in order to confirm for themselves the existence of that hidden gem, as I am still in the very early stages of negotiations with the miners cartel (a.k.a. the central banks of bitcoin economy). If the terms we agree on are favorable to both consumers and merchants, the bitcoin debit card business will continue as usual, unless of course it becomes a hindrance, once again.

If anyone wants to form a foundation around this — one that would speak on behalf of bitcoin consumers and businesses — please send me a PM. And if you are a writer, please state so in advance and let me know your rates in BTC (just say how much you would like to get per "published" article vs. blog post). The sooner we can persuade the miners that there's more to bitcoin than for it to be used as a debit card, the sooner we can all enjoy using BTC as money.

Let's face it, if you were a "non speculative" bitcoin miner, would you entrust your most prized possession in the hands of those who will treat it as nothing more but yet another GOLD 2.0 fix (sorry for the drugs analogy, couldn't resist)? So, doing away with the GOLD 2.0 mania throughout the bitcoin community (through education on the inner workings of BTC currency) is the first step to getting the miners to start putting into circulation more batches of bitcoins.

You are wrong, it is limited and finite by issuing 21 million coins in its lifetime.


http://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

Halving of rewards occurs every 210,000 blocks being solved, see geometric equation:
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/161/how-many-bitcoins-will-there-eventually-be

Look to "incentive can transition entirely to transaction fees" as a clue.

What made you think that I'm not aware of 21MM supply of bitcoins?

I know, it is unfair to ask everyone to read between the lines.

But I need the GOLD 2.0 mania to last a little longer.

Listen, I do not represent a collective of mining unions and I am not here to entertain you. If you cannot read a computer science paper, that isn't my problem mate. Your question has already been answered by myself and others; finite currencies will always have a hoarding phenomena (I know you can't be arsed to look into the link I gave you) and transaction fees is not the same as a block reward!

It is limitless and unlimitless at the same time. Yes there can be only 22M coins, however you can split them in pieces as small as you want. It's not unthinkable that in the future people will pay with 0,00000001 for example.

We're obviously both blindfolded, touching an elephant and describing entirely different animals.

If you want to describe the Bitcoin ledger as having rows and each row represents a unit of value, then Bitcoin has 2,100,000,000,000,000 "rows" to work with.    (21M BTC, and 1 BTC = 100,000,000 rows (each equal to 1 Satoshi).

Most transactions cover millions of "rows" at a time.  (e.g., a 0.123 BTC payment covers 12.300,000 "rows").

So even if 99.9% of those rows are locked up with no activity, there are plenty of rows remaining with which commerce can occur through  (though yes, that would occur at a higher exchange rate due to supply being restricted to 0.1% of the coins issued).


Panic?  

People understand supply and demand.   As the price rises, supply increases from those who previously were hoarding and then have attained the purchasing power that they were targeting.   At the same time demand by others decreases as plans to acquire coins at the higher exchange rate due to sticker shock.

Bitcoin is not the first commodity or form of money with a limited supply.

So, be bold and describe to us how this panic you fear will emerge.

Pretty much all types of currencies have that phenomena (as a store of value function)... I'm just trying to point out that there are two types of hoarding: "hoarding by money users (http://mises.ca/posts/blog/dead-money-the-circular-flow-fallacy/)" and "hoarding by central banks" (the issuers of that money). The former serves as a confirmation that a store of value function is present and working well within a currency, the latter destroys all three functions of money. Now, you seem to be in favor of the latter... What gives?

I am not in favour of central bank policies nor support any form of centralised monetary issuer as the beneficiaries are the elite few. Just to be clear that as a miner like anyone else who is a bitcoin user:

1) I am one of many btc miners - no centralization here, its distributed, hence everyone gets an equal share of the pie!
2) Every person has the right to earn the bitcoins that are rightfully theirs  just as they have spent their own time and money on equipment.
3) Every person have the right to either SPEND or SAVE their bitcoins and see fit how to recoup losses on equipment purchased.


Where have I said that I am in favour of centralised banking?

You might be right. Or perhaps there is the concept of yin-yang at play here? Either way, it's important that the miners look beyond the debit card use of bitcoin. Let's put it this way, does a debit card or a business that issues it (Mt.Gox et al.) gets to make a profit? (An please, remember, everything I have been saying so far is to be interpreted strictly as hints; it's up to each individual to do their own hacking around the hints.)



For those who are not yet paralyzed by the GOLD 2.0 bug, spend some time contemplating about the above two lines (thanks Stephen for summarizing it so neatly), then look at 1) the market cap (http://bitcoinwatch.com/), 2) the average volume of bitcoins being traded at Mt.Gox et al., 3) the average bitcoins sent per hour, and finally, look at 4) the total number of mined bitcoins. And if you are among the lucky few bitcoin miners who suddenly get the aha moment from this little brainstorming exercise, please take advantage of the receding bid orders.

Spend all of my BTC on drugs, cam-girls, and satoshi dice?
...OR...
Save my BTC for 10 years and build a large company and/or build an apartment complex(or 2).

Decisions, decisions...

Time is limitless only if you are immortal.

So what is your point?

The idea between a fiat and a community currency (if you bothered to watch the documentary it discusses about the use of River hours named after the community it is used in) is that fiat money is itself limited by the supply that is being produced and thus would encourage hoarding. Time is a currency that anyone can give to the community (obviously within the life expectancy of the person) and there is no reason to hoard this type of currency as it is limitless. Therefore, people within the community contribute to their local economy when there is a need which brings to the opposite end which are wage slaves which is what you see nowadays people working to make ends meet.

Which do you prefer? Being a slave your entire life or work only when you need to?

So I think hoarding and speculating is ok for BTC.... until the speculators get spooked. The problem is that they could artificially inflate the price and then suddenly decide to sell when the price drops a little. This would increase supply and cause the price to further lower and cause a chain reaction (Like when the price dropped from 250 to 100?). The problem isn't that people are quick to buy its that the same people are quick to sell.

Seems like the opposite of hoarding to me, seems like you are participating in the bitcoin economy.

You are engaging in some interesting rhetoric and it is difficult to see if you are agreeing or not.

If you equate work with slavery (which I don't, the difference is coercion vs freedom to contract) and the hours of your life are the currency of the land, then everyone would be participating in a slave economy.  Take a look at what policy goals you are looking to achieve with the currency in play.  The same incentives for hoarding exist whether you pay someone in gold or in hours.  Money in its simplest form is the means used to convince someone to do something that they would not do for free.
Bad money in circulation drives good money into hoards.

 

If you want to know my stance on fiat money, I am against it. I would like to live in a world where central banks have no power to control currency flows and impose tax levies on its people on the currency issued via loans and debt. This is the reason why I am trying to convince people to use bitcoins because I have faith in a crypto-currency that is controlled by the people and not the few elites. I will mention several themes which I believe it to be connected with the rise of bitcoins.

In terms of slavery, I do not equate work with slavery and I will define the aforementioned as "wage slavery" and not "work slavery" - both are different in context and I am looking at the former. The wage slavers would be required to do any job to make ends meet whilst someone who is trained and works in a profession HE LIKES, would earn enough to live comfortably. My definition of wage slavery thus is someone who can not elect his chosen job and engages in a routine, monotonous work. This is what you refer to coercion vs freedom to contract. If I wanted to work in my profession, it would be the latter, other wise, it would be the former.

In our working life, people are already participating in a hierarchy economy where CEO's earn more than 600% of salary in comparison with other peers since the 80's. This is the grossest example of hoarding I have seen- 1% vs the 99%. Look at how Carlos Slim got his wealth from the telecommunications industry and how Indian entrepreneurs are hoarding $3 billion worth in profit over night. If you examine how an average person spends his day, it would be 8 hours working, 8 hours sleeping and 8 hours playing (1/3 of a 24 hour period for each activity). In lower classes, there is a disparity in these figures where people are not able to spend more play time than work time or even sleep.

You state Gresham's law - "Bad money in circulation drives good money into hoards". Silver is an example of a face value metal that has risen in value in comparison to its face value due to its applications in industry and its limited supply. With Bitcoins, because of it's market volatility, people desire to make a profit because there is distrust with the fiat currency as it is constantly devalued and prefer to use bitcoins as a safe haven investment (like gold or silver). The people from PIIGS have been rumoured to sell euros and instead buy bitcoins because of what is happening in the "euro rescue package bubble " - compare this with the real estate bubble that caused Lehman brothers to crash in 2008.

To reverse this behaviour, the value of bitcoins would either have to be devalued, lose confidence, or have an unlimited supply of coins in circulation to make people spend.

Well, I have to warn you, with BTC as a currency you will get to keep all of those things (except for the debt part).



Could you please define what you mean by control?
I may have another surprise for you when it comes to bitcoin.

That is the problem when bitcoin is backed by fiat which it should not be the case as it's value will be determined by a debt ridden fiat currency.


Control as in private banking taking control of issuing currency via loans. In bitcoins, the control is passed on to those who produce the hashing power. I already took a surprise at how money is made (via debt, loans and added interest) and I would not be surprised if bitcoins would be headed that way as exchanges pop up.

I speculate its going to shoot up again to new heights before another painful crash way to the bottom  :'(

Very unlikely to shoot up again, especially as I'm slowly beginning to provide eye openers (https://twitter.com/BTConomist/status/338718963552899072), here (https://twitter.com/BTConomist/status/339087089410928640) and there (https://twitter.com/BTConomist/status/338831960640196609) (still in a hint form though). The third link can be especially useful for the GOLD 2.0 fanatics.

Thank you for clarifying.  It looks like we do agree on much, though we may have a different degree and scope of concern.
(I don't much care about wage disparity, for example, provided it is engaged in though voluntary negotiation)

In point of fact, am even looking to "back" Bitcoin with silver by accepting Bitcoin in trade for silver.  ;D ;D  I just have to convert enough Bitcoin to fiat in order to pay the taxes, (which are minimal as I don't keep much on the trade in order to increase quantity).

No we aren't. Isn't this exactly what people are complaining about? NOT selling?

Your masters (early adopters/programmers) know exactly what they're doing. Relax.  ;)

I think he was saying that they're quick to sell when the value is on the quick decline. Somebody holding a large amount isn't inclined to sell when it goes from $125-$133 in a week, but they'll sell like it's going out of style when it drops from $250 to $120 in a week (further driving the decline).

This is what I believe should be done in the exchanges; that is to allow the person to trade either gold, silver or other precious metal (platinum or palladium).

Those are not eye-openers.  Your rhetoric sounds like someone on investorhub.com forums panicking about their short position and bashing the hell out of a stock.   ::)

+1 you hit the nail right on the head. I don't know what this "BTConomist" guy's deal is, but he's certainly not much of an economist ;D 

That's correct, I'm not an economist... there's BTC in place of "ec"!

Although that was funny, let's keep it civil. This is a good thread with minimal bashing. Some good ideas are being put forth.

Here are a few thoughts:

* No reason to get butthurt about hoarding - you do what you want with your coin.
* Basic necessities and durable good will always be in demand - let's make these available via BTC!
* WE ARE ALL SPECULATORS - Bitcoin is not proven yet: we could all lose 100% of value, or increase our wealth 10-fold...
* Inflationary currency encourages spending and punishes saving, deflationary currency encourages saving and punishes spending (however, "life is finite", as one said here)
* Bitcoin is an inflation hedge - the fact that it's stable right now implies that it's losing a bit of value against fiat...
* Bitcoin is SIMILAR to the financial networks that the global elite use - every day US $5 trillion changes hands electronically...

In case nobody has noticed: we're pretty close to World War III right now, which will have a dramatic impact on trade, valuations, and the global geopolitical balance.

You two bitcoin is inflationary as long as we live
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supply
Block   Reward Era    BTC/block    Year    Start BTC    BTC Added    End BTC    BTC Increase    End BTC % of Limit
0   1   50.00   2009   0   2625000   2625000   infinite   12.500%
52500   1   50.00   2010   2625000   2625000   5250000   100.00%   25.000%
105000   1   50.00   2011   5250000   2625000   7875000   50.00%   37.500%
157500   1   50.00   2012   7875000   2625000   10500000   33.33%   50.000%
210000   2   25.00   2013   10500000   1312500   11812500   12.50%   56.250%
262500   2   25.00   2014   11812500   1312500   13125000   11.11%   62.500%
315000   2   25.00   2015   13125000   1312500   14437500   10.00%   68.750%
367500   2   25.00   2016   14437500   1312500   15750000   9.09%   75.000%
420000   3   12.50   2017   15750000   656250   16406250   4.17%   78.125%
472500   3   12.50   2018   16406250   656250   17062500   4.00%   81.250%
525000   3   12.50   2019   17062500   656250   17718750   3.85%   84.375%
577500   3   12.50   2020   17718750   656250   18375000   3.70%   87.500%
630000   4   6.25   2021   18375000   328125   18703125   1.79%   89.063%
682500   4   6.25   2022   18703125   328125   19031250   1.75%   90.625%
735000   4   6.25   2023   19031250   328125   19359375   1.72%   92.188%
787500   4   6.25   2024   19359375   328125   19687500   1.69%   93.750%

And that's the chart for the short term XD Speculators

Anyways just uses good ol copy and paste here

Because the monetary base of bitcoins cannot be expanded, the currency would be subject to severe deflation if it becomes widely used. Keynesian economists argue that deflation is bad for an economy because it incentivises individuals and businesses to save money rather than invest in businesses and create jobs. The Austrian school of thought counters this criticism, claiming that as deflation occurs in all stages of production, entrepreneurs who invest benefit from it. As a result, profit ratios tend to stay the same and only their magnitudes change. In other words, in a deflationary environment, goods and services decrease in price, but at the same time the cost for the production of these goods and services tend to decrease proportionally, effectively not affecting profits. Price deflation encourages an increase in hoarding — hence savings — which in turn tends to lower interest rates and increase the incentive for entrepreneurs to invest in projects of longer term.

So don't get me wrong guys but I'm just saying that I'm going to Side with The Austrians and Kick Keyne's points and OP to the curve :)
Sure spend it save it but the economy will solve these problems itself

Doesn't anyone notice that my thinking is not driven by neither Austrian nor Keynesian economics?
When interpreting my hints, try not to lead with the economic viewpoint that's familiar to you.
Focus on the roles that the miners play in the context of bitcoin-based economy.

Are you a bitcoin miner? If you are, do you mind sharing how does it feel to be a central bank of bitcoin economy?

Well if we don't use economics that leaves human actions and psychology and of course philosophy
If you wish we can discuss it from Political Economy and meet halfway :)

How can you compare a single miner (if he was) to being a central bank?? That comparison is out of order.

"a" central bank, not "the" central bank... Together, they represent the miners cartel (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=216386.msg2277785#msg2277785).

I think BTConomist theories are built on assertion that it is possible to monopolize mining or at least that it is somehow possible for decisively big proportion of miners to collude or to follow common goal which goes against interests of majority of BTC Economy.
I simply do not share this assertion in the longer than short-term.

I believe BTConomist has a theory that there is an oligopoly going on with the miners. I do not share BTConomist's view like ZephramC has already stated because I believe that these are unfounded claims and based on speculative analysis of one person who wants BTC to crash; OP title says it all!

Dunno about the posts. just wanted to tell you about my part in Bitcoin. I speculate, Mine, Hoard, spend (Alot on alot, directly and not through fiat), Using Bitcoin to startup my upcoming services and goods that I offer for bitcoins (Anime shop, VPN solution, others). Hoarding is not bad, There is the wealth effect, need to accumulate capital and other aspects and not just hoarding for savings and speculating on future prices.

I do the same, mine, hoard and spend just like anybody does with fiat. The problem is that not many businesses (or local businesses) accept bitcoin which is a shame.

That's because, as a miner, you are not giving the merchants a good enough reason to accept it... Remember, speculative bubbles are mainly designed for the speculators, not merchants! Fortunately, there is an approach (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=218702.0) that can benefit both parties to a transaction, all thanks to the speculators: the original VCs of bitcoin economy. The only problem is that we have to wait for the vaccine (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=219623.msg2322169#msg2322169) to do its magic first, don't we? And if the vaccine doesn't work, there's always a poison pill we can fall back on.

Why do you individually target miners? Do you have a grudge against them? Where have I said that I was not giving merchants a reason?

One of the problem genres which you are really missing here is education which leads to adoption; not many people still know what a bitcoin. Especially people living in rural areas were broadband is virtually non existent suffer from this divide. I would call this the "bitcoin divide" following from the digital divide where there are people who do not have access to a computer with Internet access or do not have an idea what it is or how to use it. It is complex aleady for someone with very little computer experience to understand technicalities on PKI's, encryption and security overall.

I am more focussed about small businesses and communities taking this as a form of payment rather than starting with the corporate giants.

BTC's been here since June 2011 even he must admit it is progressing forward  ;D

Why are miners not circulating coins?  Are you implying that they should PRODUCE more coins or just SPEND more coins?

By "circulating" I merely imply SPEND more coins... But to answer you first question, why would miners be motivated to consistently spend coins to fuel the bitcoin economy if they believed in the GOLD 2.0 miracle? Hence the need for the vaccine against the GOLD 2.0 bug.

So the vaccine is for the miners who don't spend.  I see.

Yes, because we'll still be using Bitcoins in 2147. If we're not off this planet this century, I'm going back in time to tell the aliens not to bother.

Calling Tortoise and Achilles, there's a 3rd degree Zeno incomputence emergency in forum 121342. Zeno 3 forum 121342. Over.

Well miners accepted it and then it went down 10 bucks and napped here  ;D

its not hoarding, its saving . . .

Saving is done by consumers and merchants; Hoarding is done by miners (a.k.a. the central banks of bitcoin economy).

A little jealous, are we?

"Hoarding" is a derogative term used by people who are pouting because they were late to the party.

Lol Haha made me :)
Was thinking more along the lines of spenders who live beyond their means who cannot understand savers

OP should consider giving a definition of hoarding. Personally, I like the investopedia definition:

Hoarding: "The purchase of large quantities of a commodity with the intent of pushing up the price"

Going by this definition, the current exchange rate, and market depths, I think it's easy to conclude that most forum members here lack the ability to hoard because they do not have the means to purchase enough BTC to make a dent in the price and start a speculative run. A million USD clearly won't do much, perhaps ten million, I don't know.

Anyhow, I agree that speculators have undoubtably caused unsustainable run ups in prices, most likely by buying large quantities. Clearly that was happening in 2011 when the entry price to cause a price run was low, and it's reasonable to conclude that part of the run to $266 was a result of something similar.

So, unless you are a Winklevii, I don't think you are hoarding. And even if you have that kind of cash, it's only a risk that you may dump it in the future and tank the price. But in the meanwhile, the increase in value benefits everyone in relation to their BTC holdings.

In order to avoid the consequences of a massive hoarder dumping onto the market and causing exchange volatility, there are really only three things other BTC holders can do.

1. Buy as much coin as possible and drive up the cost for a big fish to make large purchases.
2. Be prepared to sell some coin if prices are rising too rapidly, in order to further discourage an entity that is purchasing large enough quantities to really drive of the price and cause a risk.
3. Sell as soon as a hoarder starts unloading a large amount of coin, in order to decrease their profit from hoarding and then selling. Tough to do in practice though.

Official definitions aside most of us ARE hoarding. We are misers like that character Silas Marner or that dude in LOTR:

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lnfmz9ZMWj1qfrvjzo1_400.jpg

Next, the miners would get the name of The Red Shield bank... and I would be called Nathan Rothschild :) Mega-hoarder of the World!

Not to burst your bubble or anything, but the Rothschild's built their name and fortunes by increasing the currency circulation (starting with the Napoleonic Wars (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_family#The_Napoleonic_Wars)), not by hoarding and trading gold (which, sure, had preceded the former). One could even say that this was the only difference between the Smeagols and the Rothschilds.

I am aware of the Red shield and how they got their wealth. They amassed their wealth during the Battle of Waterloo (Jacob funded the French war machine and Nathan the British war machine). They drove investors speculation cause panic in the London stock exchange, thus selling out hearing that the French won when they actually lost. When the chance came, they bought out all the London Stock shares which where worth pennies. The British people were paying their taxes which went to the Red shield private bankers hence how Nathan got more rich by controlling the output of money. That is not currency circulation as you put it, it is total and complete control of how money is produced. This is very different to how miners work who are;

1) Many in numbers
2) Distributed
3) Non organised
4) Non hierarchical

Unlike the banks are:

1) Fewer in numbers
2) Centralised
3) Organised
4) Hierarchical from a cashier to the CEO earning 650 times more than a regular person is
...and 5) Total control of the money flow with hidden taxations and thus increase inflation devaluing fiat currency by producing more debt money; i.e loans.

Miners need to pay for their equipment first by selling bitcoins to recoup losses and then "save" for future uses. Miners also DO NOT FUND WARS like Rothchild's did and make money! Also the Rothchild's family hold more wealth than the US GDP in excess of > $500 trillion. In any anti-capitalist eyes, that is hoarding!

I always had a slight lingering doubt about deflationary currencies until I thought about land.

From that, the shortest argument that came to me is this: hoarding Bitcoins is much less evil than lending real estate for rent. Since then I've been comparing what happens to land with what could happen to Bitcoin. I am more confident that Bitcoin at least doesn't take away anything from what we already have.

yeap i am inclined to agree with this 1.

furthermore, i think its time we all stopped using the term hoarding, its saving.

this is exactly the reason bitcoins are gaining traction and will continue to do so.