Bitcoin Forum

Bitcoin => Bitcoin Discussion => Topic started by: pdawg on May 01, 2014, 10:47:06 PM



Title: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: pdawg on May 01, 2014, 10:47:06 PM
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, Iíd make it exchangeable for stock. And then itíd have real value. And Iíd have it pegged, and Iíd have a basket of 10 big retailers. Because I read [Marc] Andreessenís 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 donít have to use Visa anymore, Iím guessing the people who have to be worried here are Visa and MasterCard. I think it would work, but I think, because Iím sort of a believer in currency having value, if youíre going to create a currency, have it backed up by ó you know, Hayek used to talk about a basket of commodities? You could have a basket of stocks, and have some exchangeability, because itís hard for people like me who are a bit tangible. But you could have an average of stocks, Iím wondering if thatís the next permutation."


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: jonald_fyookball on May 01, 2014, 10:49:41 PM
Do I even need to say it: he obviously doesn't quite "get" Bitcoin.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: lynn_402 on May 01, 2014, 10:53:48 PM
Do I even need to say it: he obviously doesn't quite "get" Bitcoin.

+1
Bitcoin and other cryptos are already backed by many things:
- Millions of dollars of electricity and equipment
- Its users, merchants and community
- A great technology that can't be exploited

Hopefully one day it will be well understood that digital is not equal to virtual; numbers actually are tangible in the information-age.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: pdawg on May 01, 2014, 10:56:09 PM
Yeah he needs a quick primer.  I think it's helpful though that they see the potential for commerce to switch to this type of system and get rid of the CC fees.  CC companies should be shaking in their boots.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: BitDreams on May 01, 2014, 11:03:52 PM
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 Streetís Mortgage Fraud Scandal. 'You can have a house that is fully paid for and still end up in foreclosureĒ

Rand, what's the value of bitcoin now?


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: cbeast on May 01, 2014, 11:06:06 PM
Bitcoin, or rather colored bitcoins can be backed by stocks.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: cypherdoc on May 01, 2014, 11:08:12 PM
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 Streetís Mortgage Fraud Scandal. 'You can have a house that is fully paid for and still end up in foreclosureĒ

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.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: pdawg on May 01, 2014, 11:09:49 PM
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 Streetís Mortgage Fraud Scandal. 'You can have a house that is fully paid for and still end up in foreclosureĒ

Rand, what's the value of bitcoin now?

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?


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: BitDreams on May 01, 2014, 11:11:29 PM
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 Streetís Mortgage Fraud Scandal. 'You can have a house that is fully paid for and still end up in foreclosureĒ

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.

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

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

Quote
...As a result of MERSí 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 MERSí 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...

And people wonder why we don't like banks.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: BitDreams on May 01, 2014, 11:13:17 PM

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?

Imagine the knock-on benefit to the economy by making the core of everything, instantly auditable and fraud free. Bring on the fees! As a shopper I've always been happy to pay a premium for quality service/goods - which is what bitcoin offers.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: cbeast on May 01, 2014, 11:14:08 PM

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?
I've been advocating for a long time that we declare a minimum transaction based on the cost of electricity and the fee to pay the miners and use that as a base transaction for colored coins. There is only a 40 bit block reserved for metadata in the blockchain itself, but that is supposed to be enough to color a coin to authenticate a share of stock.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: cypherdoc on May 01, 2014, 11:14:39 PM
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 Streetís Mortgage Fraud Scandal. 'You can have a house that is fully paid for and still end up in foreclosureĒ

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.

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:

Quote
...As a result of MERSí 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 MERSí 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...

not to mention all the interest rate derivatives they sold to municipalities country-wide who then had to pony up millions/billions as they manipulated Libor inexplicably lower thru the Fed.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: MarketNeutral on May 01, 2014, 11:18:59 PM
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.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: Mobius7 on May 01, 2014, 11:23:25 PM
Quote
And actually my theory, if I were setting it up, Iíd make it exchangeable for stock.

Luckily bitcoin was not invested by him lol.  :D


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: franky1 on May 01, 2014, 11:25:33 PM
fiat is backed by a promise and only a promise. which people trust. the only thing is that the promise can and has been broken many times.

bitcoin is based on maths. nothing can break maths.

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


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: BitDreams on May 01, 2014, 11:26:02 PM
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.

I've heard it stated more than once that the bitcoin protocol allows us to test each of these economic theories at an accelerated pace and may the best theories rise to the top! I'm sure in each theory there is plenty of truth and I suspect that there is no one size fits all, in our future bitcoin universe we'll probably examine the problem, requiring one economic theory or another as the best approach and someone will say 'there's a coin for that!'


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: MrBea on May 01, 2014, 11:28:12 PM
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....


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: BitDreams on May 01, 2014, 11:33:52 PM
Going to send him an email link to this thread.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: cypherdoc on May 01, 2014, 11:36:52 PM
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....


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.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: Peter R on May 01, 2014, 11:51:16 PM
even thinking of backing bitcoin by stocks is obsurd as stocks can be manipulated by corporations.

Already a company could created coloured coins that act as a sort of bearer certificate for the company's stocks.  They could probably trade against bitcoins in a trustless way using coinjoin transactions.  It would be a sort of decentralized stock exchange. 

So we already have the ability to do what Rand Paul is suggesting.  In fact, with bitcoin we can create digital tradeable IOUs for any asset we want. 

Yet there is only one asset that is not someone else's liability--bitcoin itself.  I think this is very hard for people to grasp since a "scarce digital commodity" seems like an oxymoron at first.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: franky1 on May 02, 2014, 12:02:09 AM
I think this is very hard for people to grasp since a "scarce digital commodity" seems like an oxymoron at first.

scarce digital asset



Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: rocks on May 02, 2014, 12:21:32 AM
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....


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.

This really gets to the heart of bitcoin and the misconception most have.

Bitcoin's advantage is that it is a "trustless" system, and does not have any dependencies outside side of itself. Any and all dependencies represent weak points in a system. For example if there was a centralized ledger keeper such a keeper could block your transactions if you are deemed a traitor (example Snowden) or the keeper could effectively steal your wealth by creating more units (FED Reserve).

But society has changed so much over the years that people now think nothing is real unless it is blessed by the government and "backed" by something, but that backing could itself fail. That is the weak point of our credit based system today, everything is backed by promises which ultimately if the FED can't honer will breakdown.

Paul's comments regarding "pegging" bitcoin to something are equally absurd. To "peg" bitcoin to lets say the dollar requires an entity to be able to add and withdraw the supply of bitcoin to match current market demand to keep the peg.

Countries (such as Argentina) have time and time again tried to peg their currencies to the dollar, but the problem is at some point you run out of dollars to maintain the peg and there is a violent market correction. The only way the US Gov could maintain a peg to bitcoin if they have the ability to influence the supply of bitcoins. Since the US Gov does not have this ability, it is not possible to maintain a peg.

We've lived under manipulated markets for currencies for so long that no one remembers how a truly free market functions anymore.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: BitDreams on May 02, 2014, 12:21:46 AM
I would argue that it could be both scarce yet available to anyone who can type on a keyboard and press the enter key.

My bitcoin universe allows for each post on this message board to be represented in the block chain. Every twitter, every facebook post, every cookie stored on a computer, every command sent to an internet connected lightbulb to switch on and off. Maybe scarcity or value if you will, is eventually tied to status or importance. If the protocol is to enable a home security system, I'd want a rock solid layer of anonymity built into it. A mixer, allowing my wallet to track my own transactions but a trusted and lawful central authority, who would chase down evil doers who may have somehow hacked into my door lock...  a messaging system that alerts all the cameras in a community to be on the lookout for... yet thinks-first before sending neighbors of the reporting house to their windows with shotguns... moral code built in through consensus, rulings such as no victim, no crime... dignity code protecting against embarrassment (such as this half-baked post), maybe it's the Ladies Tuesday Night card club and they get together to go over their neighborhood bitcoin reports... after all, we need to have something to do after so many jobs are replaced by bitcoin - meet the new job, same as the old job - only more fun, more neighborly, complete with a peer group who generally has been proven to care... otherwise bitcoin couldn't exist, Satoshi Social Contract. - perhaps a centralized know your customer node that dials emergency services when an alarm triggers... if the protocol were to represent shares in a company, I'd want wide open disclosure to... perhaps a limited audience... such as shareholders and regulators but not competitors.

Sorry for the ramble but I have a feeling this is a forum where I'll be forgiven :D

Has this been said yet?  
Quote
 Bitcoin will free your mind ;->


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: Chef Ramsay on May 02, 2014, 12:38:25 AM
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

Quote
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."


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: cypherdoc on May 02, 2014, 12:47:39 AM
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

Quote
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."

you know Ron is having a hard time too.

and he's a freakin doctor, albeit an old one.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: BitDreams on May 02, 2014, 01:05:25 AM
Why can't we elect doctors instead of warriors?


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: greenlion on May 02, 2014, 06:11:54 AM
I think Rand Paul heard something vaguely somewhere about DACs and stock issuance via blockchain, didn't understand it, and in his mind flipped it around into the notion of bitcoin being backed by stocks. His last sentence is what suggested that to me.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: Lethn on May 02, 2014, 06:22:56 AM
Why can't we elect doctors instead of warriors?

I haven't done a heavy amount of research into this but I think you'll find most of the people in American politics just join the army for the political points and didn't even really fight in the wars most of the time, people like Dick Cheney for example bragged about his time as a POW but really if they're being treated relatively humanely that's nothing compared to getting shot at constantly in a war zone as most armies will keep their prisoners far away from the fighting.

It's a bit like declaring how religious you are, in America voters just love that stuff so the politicians will do whatever they can to make themselves look good, these guys will do almost anything if it kept their career going, but yes, you're right, if we elected doctors, mathematicians ( Putting them in charge of the economy instead of economists ) and scientists, our countries would be in a much better place.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: Bit_Happy on May 02, 2014, 06:55:06 AM
Do I even need to say it: he obviously doesn't quite "get" Bitcoin.

I was really surprised by his comments.
The second reading wasn't quite as bad.

Edit:
He certainly doesn't have much time to read up about BTC.
Maybe some of us should email his office info about crypto...?


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: Mike Christ on May 02, 2014, 07:00:07 AM
The Pauls keep letting me down.  Maybe it's the generation gap.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: RomertL on May 02, 2014, 07:14:34 AM
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...


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: Bit_Happy on May 02, 2014, 07:20:44 AM
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...

Liberty Dollar also, they had a good thing going for several years.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: herzmeister on May 02, 2014, 10:09:44 AM
Bitcoin, as its own technology and system, is its own "stock". It has the stock already built in. It is backed by itself. That's the ultimate thing that newcomers from the old world have to grasp.

The 10 most important tech companies of the future (with the stocks that seem to be so important to him) will all directly or indirectly be related to Bitcoin.

Bitcoin combines IT and finance, how much more obvious can it get.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: JazzCouncil on May 02, 2014, 10:16:42 AM
"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.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: gagalady on May 02, 2014, 10:20:25 AM
Rand Paul doesn't know what he is talking about... How he can talk about bitcoin actcually not knowing It.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: Lethn on May 02, 2014, 10:41:15 AM
"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.

The IRS and any other tax systems would be neutralised simply by companies everywhere accepting the currency, these days you could technically buy several thousands worth of gold or silver and there's no law preventing you from doing that.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: bryant.coleman on May 02, 2014, 02:18:37 PM
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.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: QuantumQrack on May 02, 2014, 02:27:55 PM
Rand Paul doesn't get it.  Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies are a new (NEW) kind of asset.  Currently there aren't many good definitions yet for bitcoin.  People are trying to put bitcoin into a predetermined size of box...and that won't work.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: Bit_Happy on May 02, 2014, 03:13:35 PM
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.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: Peter R on May 02, 2014, 05:16:22 PM
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.

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. 


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: aztecminer on May 02, 2014, 05:33:27 PM
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, Iíd make it exchangeable for stock. And then itíd have real value. And Iíd have it pegged, and Iíd have a basket of 10 big retailers. Because I read [Marc] Andreessenís 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 donít have to use Visa anymore, Iím guessing the people who have to be worried here are Visa and MasterCard. I think it would work, but I think, because Iím sort of a believer in currency having value, if youíre going to create a currency, have it backed up by ó you know, Hayek used to talk about a basket of commodities? You could have a basket of stocks, and have some exchangeability, because itís hard for people like me who are a bit tangible. But you could have an average of stocks, Iím wondering if thatís the next permutation."



doesnt seem like a very good idea since stocks are manipulated paper. then the federal reserve can manipulate the stocks using their ppt to manipulate btc.. maybe with a reset of gold and silver to their real values instead of manipulated values then maybe have something.. i think stocks is not going to be able to compete against any currency backed by gold and silver which is a real tangible asset. maybe that is what he really meant.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: cypherdoc on May 02, 2014, 06:14:25 PM
Backing bitcoin with stocks is the absolute worst idea ever.

Before getting into bitcoin stock trading was my main means of investing. I guarantee you that it is a snake pit  full of manipulation and corruption. Just ask Patrick Byrnes about naked short selling. HFT's are a nightmare as the flash crash of 2011 reminded us. I'm out now, except for my pm shorts and am better off now for it.

Wait until we get the next crash; I'm sure it will be breath taking.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: solarion on May 02, 2014, 06:20:44 PM
+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.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: Bit_Happy on May 02, 2014, 06:23:28 PM
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.

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. 

You are fortunate to be able to have that talk with your dad.
It is our first scarce digital asset...
Need to make sure I memorize that, since it really helps to describe BTC


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: NewLiberty on May 02, 2014, 08:45:18 PM
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.

Ugh... whatever.
TBF can do that, some folks might care, and if so it would be a central point of failure and attract attacks.

Better is what is already happening and what Rand Paul (and you) seem to be missing.
Bitcoin is backed by the full faith and credit of the p2p community of people that value it.
It is not backed by force, it is backed by our own goods and services.

For my own part, I am backing bitcoin with silver and gold.  Last year I committed to back it with 84 Million ounces of silver, redeemable on demand, and minted into Bitcoin Specie (link to the thread below).  Today that backing is inadequate and it has had to increase along with the value of bitcoin.
Anyone can participate in the DECENTRALIZED bank of bitcoin and back it with their own assets and services.  We all do this every day.

So what Rand Paul is hoping might happen, has already happened.  Many times over.  This decentralized system of valuation based on our own market making activities is far more robust than any central bank could hope to be, and much less costly.  We do not need a giant army to defend the fort where our gold is hidden, it is scattered all over the globe and individually protected.

We are the army, we are the bank, we are the issuers of the currency... and we need no central authority to give us permission to be that, it is an accomplished feat.  Done.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: NewLiberty on May 02, 2014, 08:51:29 PM
+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.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: cypherdoc on May 02, 2014, 09:15:54 PM
+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.

this is what i fear might happen with the Second Market exchange. 

the setup is there.  twice daily "prices" determined by auction by a closed set of major Wall St. players with the stated goal of limiting "volatility".  as if that really is a problem that is unexpected in a nascent currency that is only 5yo.  closed at night and on weekends like the legacy markets.

i smell price collusion and naked shorting close by. 


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: solarion on May 02, 2014, 10:05:49 PM
+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.

Agreed, but it's still something to be wary of imo. People don't bother reading contracts even when they have large sums on the line. Case in point PM etf's that are optionally redeemable in fiat. The masses are too dull, busy, wracked with ADD, or some combination of all of these conditions to be bothered reading their own contracts. I agree that bitcoin's easy portability and cost free storage qualities are certainly an effective counter. I've no interest whatsoever in paper bitcoin exposure, unless it's a paper wallet for my bitcoins.


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: adamstgBit on May 02, 2014, 11:51:22 PM
i think its a gr8 idea.

have a market where to can place bids/asks on the DOW or S&P 500 etc.. with bitcoin

that would be gr8!

it would be so easy to for anyone in the world to trade in or out of that market, thanks to bitcoin

not sure why this idea is getting so much hate...

i say, do it!



Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: adamstgBit on May 02, 2014, 11:59:34 PM
Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks

Adam  Thinks Stocks Should Be Backed By Bitcoin

 8)


Title: Re: Rand Paul Thinks Bitcoin Should Be Backed By Stocks
Post by: jubalix on May 03, 2014, 02:23:42 AM
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.

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. 

one of the reasons its mind bending, is that the education of fiat has value has been around for many generations.

most people can't conceive this is possible without a state issuer.

Every advert, job, house, purchase, even self worth to some extent has been measured in USD or other currency. They now are faced with the prospect that's not true....in a big way....consider BTC has evaluated between 500,000 x to 1000,000 times since its launch vs the USD. It puts the question irrefutably on the table. That 50,000,000 ~ 100,000,000%. I'm not sure there has be any such rise of anything in recorded history, perhaps commodities vs the Riechmark in the 1920's