Bitcoin Forum

It is just hilarious watching some of these ivy-league puffed-up idiots stumbling and tripping over the basics when commenting upon Bitcoins.

It is as I have suspected since getting involved in gold over 16 years ago. They haven't got a clue about the fundamentals of money, some nor about finance, and economics is mostly about money.

Their illusions of grandeur are fading fast as they get left behind by the technological revolution. Many have only got to positions of 'authority' by trumpeting favourable noises for the banksters fiat crap-sandwich status quo. The whole economics profession and industry surrounding it maybe the greatest example of a mis-allocation of precious resources, made possible by centralised fiat monetary systems.

I'm left wondering what these guys would do if they had to earn a real living, it certainly would not be anything technical, perhaps swinging a hammer, pushing a broom ... who knows.

Pics or it didn't happen.

Pretty sure he means this: http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2011/04/the-economics-of-bitcoin.html

Tyler completely missed it. I guess if you study interventions and monetary policy enough, that when you run into something that deems those worthless, it's hard to see the merits.

I believe it was Upton Sinclair who said "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his paycheck depends on him not understanding it."

His analysis was laughter inducing. I think it's easier for computer scientists to understand economics than it is for economists to understand computer science.

The perceived crappy analysis of bitcoin economics lead me to write this: http://bitcoinweekly.com/articles/generation-and-assimilation-of-bitcoin-knowledge

We need to distribute bitcoin knowledge to the wider public and I am willing to pay for such articles.  8)

MR piece was stoopid.

Can you imagine any economist actually inventing Bitcoin (or similar) ??

Although, some kudos should go to Jon Matonis for championing the cause for monetary freedom for so long on his blog ...

http://themonetaryfuture.blogspot.com/

We're lucky to have him posting here.

economists understand as much about the economy as MBAs understand about business.

or as astrologers understand about the physics of a star...

There are some good economists out there. Walter Block is my hero.

Bitcoin is weird to them, as it is a 'money' that is 'worth something' and doesn't require 'force' to use.

x2


I don't get why every discussion about bitcoin has to involve complex debates about what atributes value to a currency!

It's so simple! If I write in a post-it "$1,15" and find 2 other people who agree that post-its with my handwriting are worth that value and they even trade it with me, voi là: I just created a new currency!!

Are you serious with that offer?

5 BTC per article
http://bitcoinweekly.com/pages/submission

And the price offered is change to 2.5 BTC.

The people who want bitcoin to be inflationary should pause to think about this: if we knew that inflation would force Kiba to keep raising the price he pays for articles, we would never write anything because we could always get paid more later :)

Still looking for an eloquent defense of deflation.

I have 4.17 BTC reserve, so it's enough for an article.

On deflation, see...

In Defense of Deflation by Doug French http://mises.org/daily/4623

Deflation and Liberty by Jörg Guido Hülsmann http://mises.org/resources/3726/Deflation-and-Liberty

I am paying for an eloquent article that defend Satoshi's decision to limit the bitcoin supply to 21 million. Plus, Mises articles are not public domain. I want public domain.

BTW, Mises Institute articles do fall under the creative commons license for republication. I am not seeking the btc bounty ;-) , but I wanted to point out that eloquent defenses of deflation already exist.  It matters not that the monetary unit is btc or gold or silver. The 21 million decision was an arbitrary number. Any economic defense regarding deflation will most likely point to deflation and metals as the "state of nature" starting point.

I think a more critical issue related to the static supply of bitcoin is how the distributed system deals with lost or destroyed bitcoin that never return to the system.  Not a major impact right now but with a 5% average attrition rate, the ~21 million supply could be significantly eroded because there is no expiration. I would suspect that at least 2% are already gone due to unrecoverable hard drive crashes.

I just noticed this "It's just a fucking integer" thread...
http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=111.msg39861#msg39861

Very true. Therefore, the deflation argument that needs to be defended is that even with 8 decimals and the largest nominal attrition occurring in the earliest years, bitcoin supply is not only static but decreasing.  This is a slightly different economic defense than the deflation inherent in a static gold-based economy, because in the case of durable precious metals, they are usually found by someone else. Bitcoins can be completely eliminated and never found unless you luck upon the private key.

It's also unknowable if the bitcoin are lost or possessed by someone, unless someone point out all the public address they lost bitcoin in. However, people can never be sure if they lost it if the person is telling them the truth, and nothing but the truth.

Bitcoin ownership is pretty much absolute and more sure than property ownership in land but it's also almost impossible to know without people telling the truth.