Bitcoin Forum

Other than the fact that the dollar would be destroyed, I don't think there would be much difference.

That would bring huge changes, with countries unable to run a deficit.

That would call for an entire new class of politicians, as those who are in power now have no idea of what a balanced budget is.

Like a deflationary hell.

Imagine how peaceful the world would be if governments could not print currency to fund wars. How would history look if the Soviets had to pay for the invasion of Afghanistan with real currency? Or if the Third Reich simply didn't have the hard currency to build their war machine.

eating a wagyu foie gras hors d'oeurve.

Why does the general consensus seem to be that there would not be debt based govt money?

The price will be huge (1+ million per coin) the price would be really stable and you could sleep at night knowing you would wake up with the same price.

There could be but if Bitcoin is the main reserve currency, it means it is widely used and a lot of people don't fall for the fiat sleezy tactics so there would be less fiat systems.

Hey guys,

I was thinking about how the world would change if it used BTC as reserve currency in the future.

1 What would need to change for this to happen?
2 What would change once it actually is used for it?
3 What would be the benefits of this?
4 What would be the downside of this?

Lets hear some answers, then I will tell what I think will change. I don't want to bias this thread!

Hey guys,

I was thinking about how the world would change if it used BTC as reserve currency in the future.

- What would need to change for this to happen?
- What would change once it actually is used for it?
- What would be the benefits of this?
- What would be the downside of this?

Lets hear some answers, then I will tell what I think will change. I don't want to bias this thread!

Old money won't let this happen, since this will necessarily bring forth redistribution of real wealth, and the wealthy elites won't be happy up to the point of physically eradicating the new competition. So, for this to happen (that is for a world with BTC as a reserve currency to come about), you first need to strip the global elite of their power. In the past this happened through natural disasters (like epidemics, famine,  catastrophes, etc) or warfare...

No, why can't they just invest in bitcoin too? They are capitalists aren't they, they should adjust themselves to the market situations.

Sure now they have total control over the monetary system, but if they buy enough bitcoins they can control the bitcoin network too. They own the capital, they can control, simple as that.

They won't lose their power only if they are utterly stupid to wait until it completely takes over. If they are smart they invest in it now, which they probably do, hidden of course.

If they already have total control over the monetary system, why would they need anything else? Until they see a threat to their position, they won't do anything. The question is why you think bitcoin somehow threatens them. The bitcoin market is minuscule at best and it doesn't grow, so why should they care?

They don't need it, but we do. And eventually bitcoin will take over, so they will have no choice but to adapt or perish. So if they are smart, and they are, they will just probably invest in it, and then take over bitcoin by owning a big market share.

This is called wishful thinking. You say that eventually bitcoin will take over, but how come that it had fallen from over 1,100$ per coin to around $250 (and sits there for now)? This is surely not what you would expect from a deflationary coin that is going to take over the world... Was it a false start?

You could still borrow BTC. Or work with a token that could be redeemed for  BTC.

Govt will always be running some kind of fractional reserve. Don't you think?

Imagine Greece without the €. Cost of borrowing would be huge.

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Mar 16: Euro is not an example that nations won't want a one-world reserve currency
From:    iamback
Date:    Mon, March 16, 2015 7:27 am
To:      "Armstrong Economics" <armstrongeconomics@gmail.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------



The Euro was not a reserve currency. It replaced the national currencies and it was a partial attempt at a European Community political union too with the Troika or at least the European Commission and EC Parliament.

Clearly the Euro + EC failure will be used to support the concept of a one-world reserve currency that is orthogonal to the domestic politics and currencies of nations. Because for example, Euro is toast because the banks were required to buy sovereign bonds of for example Greece, but Greece borrowed in Euros when there was an ingress of capital surge, but now have to pay it back while there is an egress of capital exodus, and Greece has no policy tools because they don't control the Euro central bank.

The nations of the world will agree to a one-world RESERVE currency (not a political union!) because they resent the free ride the USA has gotten by being in control of the world's reserve currency.

But please realize this is all just a ruse for the global banksters to have even more control and do even greater corruption in the future by cleverly hiding their central banking manipulation in "international policy objectives" just as the Fed is hiding their funding of the banksters in "domestic policy objectives".

It is one big charade that even Armstrong is gullible about.

The only way the powers-that-be will allow Bitcoin to become the one-world reserve currency is if they control it. As I said, Bitcoin is controlled by 1 - 4 mining peers (i.e. they have greater than 50% of Bitcoin's network hash rate), thus the powers-that-be will be able to easily control Bitcoin when they are ready to take over control.

Perhaps you don't understand that you could have 20 mining pools all secretly owned by the same entity. In proof-of-work, the variance of earnings is inversely related to the percentage of the network hash rate the mining pool has, thus users will always favor mining pools that have double digit percentage of the Bitcoin network hash rate.

Bitcoin will never be decentralized. I already quoted upthread my other thread that explains how to get true decentralization by having multiple competing currencies each pegged with an options market to the domaindominant unit-of-account. This will be the future of crypto-currency. But this will not be a dominant unit-of-account. The dominant unit-of-account will always be what is regulated, because fractional reserve banking (i.e. debt-based booms and busts) is demanded by the public that loves debt financiing and it is inherently a bankrupt financial system paradigm.

Hey guys,

I was thinking about how the world would change if it used BTC as reserve currency in the future.

- What would need to change for this to happen?
- What would change once it actually is used for it?
- What would be the benefits of this?
- What would be the downside of this?

Lets hear some answers, then I will tell what I think will change. I don't want to bias this thread!

Being able to track and see what your bitcoin taxes are being spent on (by the government) would be interesting to say the least.

Browsing through the financial records of all politicians would surely be an eye-opener :)

They wouldn't allow for such transparency. They would probably use a mixer or something.

The cost of borrowing of Greece is not low now, even with the Euro.
Even if there is no currency risk (because Greece borrows in Euros), investors factor in a premium for counterparty credit risk.

http://www.bankofgreece.gr/Pages/en/Statistics/rates_markets/titloieldimosiou/titloieldimosiou.aspx

According to the Bank of Greece site, the current yield on 3-year Greek bonds is ~13% and has crossed 20% in the last 2 months. This is not cheap at all.  :)

It is. Borrowing would much more expensive, and nearly impossible, if Greece leaves the €.

They wouldn't allow for such transparency. They would probably use a mixer or something.

...there would be an uprising if people realized how much money our governments waste on a daily basis.

The Majority Are Just Fools

In 2000, Bill and Hillary Clinton owed millions of dollars in legal debt. Since then, they’ve earned over $130 million. Where did the money come from? Most people assume that the Clintons amassed their wealth through lucrative book deals and high-six figure fees for speaking gigs. Now, Peter Schweizer shows who is really behind those enormous payments.

I was asked to review the documents when Hillary amazingly made hundreds of thousands of dollars trading futures at the same precise time she was in meetings. Her lawyer had an account at the same firm and a trade would be put on but left open until the end of the day. It would be a spread long and short the same commodity. At the end of the day, the losing trade went to her lawyer and the win into her account. Today, that is called money laundering.

This is why society must crash and burn. It is just too damn corrupt and the majority are simply sheep who believe whatever they say. The politicians know the people are stupid and the press is on their side. So how can we reform without being forced? Sorry, it is just impossible.

Greece will leave, then spain, then portugal, then italy...

So much for the actual topic of the thread ... sigh

Hfleer, how about changing the topic of this thread and starting a new one?

I don't follow your argument. What is wrong with this thread?

This is called wishful thinking. You say that eventually bitcoin will take over, but how come that it had fallen from over 1,100$ per coin to around $250 (and sits there for now)? This is surely not what you would expect from a deflationary coin that is going to take over the world... Was it a false start?

Oh c'mon man, you skeptics are saying the same thing over and over again.

I explained this in the Economics section already like 10 times already

1) Bitcoin is new, 6 years is not exactly a good sample to look at, but the mere existence of BTC proves that it will go on much longer
2) It was a bubble phase like with everything else.

The fact that the tulip mania in the 1600's crashes means that there is nobody selling tulips today? No it just means that the price of it got to a real level, the same can be said about bitcoin

3) The yearly inflation of BTC is still a bit high, so wallstreet is not that interested in it yet, but it will decrease eventually to 0%
4) The media demonizes it and statists are trying to sabotage it with regulation

Under these conditions its hard to grow to the moon, but dont be afraid it will get there eventually.

5) Just wait until Greece collapses and takes the EU with it (the 1000$ burst was because the maffia started seizing Cyprus accounts, what will happen when the Greeks start robbing their accounts => They are already looting private pensions lol) So yeah...

6) The US debt and Japan's debt is also not very shiny, so as the global economy gets worse and worse bitcoin will act as the perfect safe haven currency!

7) You are very impatient bro, stop looking for get-rich-quick and focus on longer picture!! :)

Nobody has written about your topic.

First, 6 years is not exactly what you would call "new", at least in modern times. Second, your example with tulips actually works against you since the price for tulips today is nowhere near where it had been in 1637 at the peak of tulip mania (in relation to the price of other goods). 377 years has passed since then, and how long should we wait till another bitcoin bubble unfolds?

I changed the font size and color of you reply to normal, since this in no case could have any persuading effect on me but is in fact irritating, sorry

Ok i highly suggest you to watch this video about Bitcoin's growth curve:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHUPPYzzZrI

Also every single mass mania had atleast a 7 year unfolding period: facebook founded in 2003 it needed until 2007-2008 to become mainstream...

And so on, besides facebook and others had massive money backing them while bitcoin is only founded by the people, as i pointed out wallstreet is not interested in it yet, plus banks have other agendas trying to discredit it so that their own ponzi finance can become in monopoly.

Bitcoin is just challenging the global ponzi scheme, and if the nasty regulators dont interfere, it will eventually replace it.

Even if you just look at the money processing aspect, its far more superior than western union, credit cards and other BS. Instead of waiting 4 days for a transaction you wait 10 minutes....

The only, and i emphasize the only thing holding bitcoin back is the lack of media attention + progaganda trying to demonize it.

If people are dumb enough to hold Greek bonds, then they are dumb enough to believe the demonization of Bitcoin, just like you believe in it (no offence meant)....

SO you see, media is the utmost important factor here, and the propaganda is strong believe me.

What you write here in big red letters (and beyond that) looks just what you are preaching against. Besides, have you ever had a bank card? I have a few, and the money is transferred to and from them almost instantaneously. And almost instantaneously here means that the money is credited (or debited) within just a few minutes. You don't have to wait for an hour or so until you get enough confirmations on the blockchain (most vendors require at least two confirmations)...

Someone recently said that even if the money had been shown on your bank card balance immediately after the transfer, you still couldn't spend it at once. I checked, and in fact I could

Man you are totally offtopic. Those 7 points that i emphasized there (exactly for the purpose of people understanding it, but looks like they dont) is exactly valid, and if you look around the financial sector for other new ventures from the post .com era you see that all of them needed between 5-12 years to reach mainstream. Bitcoin is halfway through and its doing a pretty good job so far, so i dont understand whats your problem about that.

I was talking about wire transfer, it takes 4 days to clear with all those stupid AML regulations, a grandma sends 15$ for his grandson in another contry and shes a suspect for terrorism is pretty ridiculous, yes she also has to wait 4 days.

A credit/debit card is not a money transmitter, it's more like a shopping coupon/token, because you can only purchase from preselected vendors (approved by our beloved ruling class), and you can't transmit money p2p with it. Also a card is directly bound to the owner, and can't be transferred, while a bitcoin address can.

So in this perspective, you have to go through like days of AML verification processes, (just look how many identity verification exchanges need for you to buy bitcoin from them), and it still takes 4 days to clear it's pretty silly.

Not to forget that they also charge 5% comissions. for card shopping and more for wire transfer.

On the other hand, you can "open a bitcoin account" in 2 seconds (depending how fast your processor generates the address), send money in 10 minutes, and you can also sell your bitcoin address, however it has no particular reason to do it.

Don't you see the crucial difference between the traditional financial system and bitcoin or are you just playing the ignorance?  :)

You were talking about western union and credit cards (if you don't believe me go read you own post), exactly what I replied to you. Now you are obviously pedaling this issue off and begin talking about wire transfers. Okay then, where I live wire transfers take a few hours, and I don't pay anything for them in my bank, just nothing. I periodically send money from one bank to another in the afternoon and receive the money back in the evening (there is a purpose in this). And it may surprise you greatly, but I even get 1% money-back for shopping...

I don't see much reason in being able to give my bank card to anyone. Just in case, there are non-personalized (nameless) bank cards

Where do you live man, it souds like a paradise?

You must be one of the 0.0000001% exeptions that give some validity to the current banking system.

I`m sure though most of us have to wait 4 days to transfer, pay a  20€ fee + 3%, have shitty customer service at the bank and also credit cards charge alot too +2~3% and also they audit you if you send many 10€ transactions because you become suspect of money laudering  >:(.

So it's good to be in the minority but the majority has definitely other experiences with the current banking system :)

You can look through my posts to get an idea (where I live). So you are obviously looking for a new bitcoin bubble to unfold, though it may never happen again (like gold may not reach 1900$ per ounce in the foreseeable future)... I'm curious, how many bitcoins you have, and at what price you bought them?

Hey guys,

I was thinking about how the world would change if it used BTC as reserve currency in the future.

- What would need to change for this to happen?
- What would change once it actually is used for it?
- What would be the benefits of this?
- What would be the downside of this?

Lets hear some answers, then I will tell what I think will change. I don't want to bias this thread!

In a way it would be much like the world before the US dollar (with, as I understand it, gold as the reserve currency) with one major difference: governments could transact trillions of dollars almost instantly at very little cost.

The concern that I see is that governments would likely have to create a mining arms race to maintain the security of the network. The U.S. could not allow China to control 51% of the network and vice versa, so billions would be spent to constantly keep a competitive hash rate. This would likely result in private mining becoming impractical. Governments might use their monopoly of the network to increase fees in an effort to recoup costs. As a result, Bitcoin transactions might become too expensive for anything but large institutional transactions.

Thoughts?

In a way it would be much like the world before the US dollar (with, as I understand it, gold as the reserve currency) with one major difference: governments could transact trillions of dollars almost instantly at very little cost.

The concern that I see is that governments would likely have to create a mining arms race to maintain the security of the network. The U.S. could not allow China to control 51% of the network and vice versa, so billions would be spent to constantly keep a competitive hash rate. This would likely result in private mining becoming impractical. Governments might use their monopoly of the network to increase fees in an effort to recoup costs. As a result, Bitcoin transactions might become too expensive for anything but large institutional transactions.

If these pitfalls were escaped, I suspect the exchange rate would become significantly more stable.

Thoughts?

Those are legit concerns, even tho i've read its not 51%, you would need more than it actually. We've had 51% scenareos before and nothing happened. My main concern is the transaction volume being too hardcore for the 1MB block size.