Wow!! I cant believe this thread...
In the last month, I've 'lost' money I've wired into bitcoin24 trying to buy bitcoins, I've got a wire into MtGox that hasn't been acknowledge in over 2 days yet, but... Just yesterday I logged into my Western Union account online and sent US dollars; from a non-US country, to another, different non-US country and the money was available in minutes to a person who could go almost anywhere and pick it up.
WU has nothing to worry about...especially after asicminer destroys the whole economy anyway.
You have something to worry about - lack of long term perspective. Plus, don't believe anything those bicycle repairmen say. Man cannot build machines that will fly. |
|
|
|
just an innocent question, why fuck would sovereign state store its national treasure in another sovereign state's vaults, anybody?
the fed's vaults are not a "sovereign" state. the fed is a private corporation. that lends money to the US I actually disagree with the theory that Fannie May, Freddie Mac, the Fed, etc, etc, ad nauseum, are "separate from the US". They are so created to create the appearance of distance between entities, yes. ANYWAY, interesting question. Suppose Germany were to sell some of the gold in the FED vault - auction it on the market. What price would they get? LOL... A good one. They would sell it as an option to produce the gold for a certain price: Paper gold. Why, here's the way it would have to work in this twisted fucked up bankster world. You buy the option for the FED held gold from Germany, then by a credit derivative swap as a bet that they don't pay off. Then you get the gold if they pay, and the gold if they don't pay. Wait....something's wrong there..... You forgot something. You need to sell a future on this one, being a bank and all, with the option to buy it if they happen to ship before day X. That is, you get a piece of paper that allows you to buy a piece of paper on day x, if the gold backing the piece of papers has been audited yet. At 5% management fees, of course. Hey, the lite's going on in my small brain. So then I get these pieces of paper of my own, like, I own them fair and square. Then I can sell paper on paper, and the paper that I sold, well people could do paper on top of that. I could get rich.... But wait....something's not quite adding up... |
|
|
|
just an innocent question, why fuck would sovereign state store its national treasure in another sovereign state's vaults, anybody?
the fed's vaults are not a "sovereign" state. the fed is a private corporation. that lends money to the US I actually disagree with the theory that Fannie May, Freddie Mac, the Fed, etc, etc, ad nauseum, are "separate from the US". They are so created to create the appearance of distance between entities, yes. ANYWAY, interesting question. Suppose Germany were to sell some of the gold in the FED vault - auction it on the market. What price would they get? LOL... A good one. They would sell it as an option to produce the gold for a certain price: Paper gold. Why, here's the way it would have to work in this twisted fucked up bankster world. You buy the option for the FED held gold from Germany, then by a credit derivative swap as a bet that they don't pay off. Then you get the gold if they pay, and the gold if they don't pay. Wait....something's wrong there..... |
|
|
|
Mexico, the place with drug violence gone rampant and a state that doesn't allow proper economic action to take place?
You have to look at many factors that are involved in the issue before making a straight comparison.
Yes, we can simple add drug violence gone rampant and no proper economic action to the US! Fixed!!!!  |
|
|
|
pay off debts, pay for wars and buy prostitutes.
You don't "buy" whores, you rent them. And they get more income per hour than most miners. I dunno. Watching Deadwood series there was one night a week that was nickel whore night. I guess they was rented, though. |
|
|
|
That's pretty much all politics and no economics.
The division of labor, coupled with the massive increase in productivity (both demanded and supplied) will create all the jobs needed....
Sure, just like it has in Mexico... |
|
|
|
Can we just agree that EVERYONE Austrian or Keynesian expects the exchange rate for real goods and services against BTC will rise and BTC's will buy more in the future. All you Austrians have been arguing that will happen, have been advocating people hoard coins in anticipation of future consumption higher then the consumption deferred to buy and hoard the coins and so far (outside of some crashes) your prediction has been correct, BTC appreciated massively. Now if a Keynesian when using the term 'deflation' means that price appreciation then by golly they are correctly describing BTC by what that word means to THEM. If someone else with this weird idea that these words mean only nominal changes in money supply says BTC is inflating then yes they are also right by what that word means to them. All we have here is a disagreement over what words mean, not the nature of BTC which everyone agrees on undeniable fact, that of growing supply and appreciation in value. Now I'm going to argue that the so called 'Keynsian' (really everyone excluding a few wackos) definition of inflation/deflation is correct. Why because it actually MEANS something to an economy and an individual, where as the nominal money supply tells us nothing about an economy or what to do as an individual. Real inflation is an incentive to spend, real deflation is an incentive to save, BTC clearly falls under that latter kind of incentive structure (the Austrian and Keynsian would now have an actual disagreement over if this is good or bad). If I make a statement about nominal money supply while ignoring the population of users, the quantity of production and the demand for consumption of those users I've ignored so many CRITICAL factors that I no longer say anything meaningful about the signals being sent, are individuals under an incentive to spend or to save, I haven't said one way or the other unless I make the assumption that ALL the other factors are constant which this narrow definition explicitly excludes if it mean ONLY nominal money supply. And you know who else agrees with Mr. Keynes on this definition, VON MISES, quoted directly from Theory of Money and Credit, at http://archive.mises.org/19306/inflation-and-deflation-austrian-definitions/an increase in the quantity of money (in the broader sense of the term, so as to include fiduciary media as well), that is not offset by a corresponding increase in the need for money (again in the broader sense of the term), so that a fall in the objective exchange-value of money must occur. Well said, let me only add one thing. Modern "Keynesian economics" is NOT the economics of Keynes. |
|
|
|
And going down this road, we can in fact generate entire strata of dialects full of innuendo, jokes and insults which people right in the conversation do not understand, Cockney slang for example.
While the subtleties, complexities and general mystique of the forum quotation syntax being apparently outside your zone of comfort might suggest this isn't exactly your cup of tea, it's nevertheless what Bitcoin is all about: entire strata of dialects etc. That aside, your "thousands of years" and other references are both weak and the hallmark of ignorance. I don't think we can be friends, and I don't think you have any sort of future here. Not sure what you are getting at here. But you are conversing in the realm of logic, and our understanding of history, and it's relation, if any, to current events. So don't get mad at me. In the realm of discussions of logic, nothing is true because you or I say it is, and everything is open to be verified or refuted. And of course there's nothing I've said that I can't back up....or I wouldn't have said it... |
|
|
|
Wow!! I cant believe this thread...
In the last month, I've 'lost' money I've wired into bitcoin24 trying to buy bitcoins, I've got a wire into MtGox that hasn't been acknowledge in over 2 days yet, but... Just yesterday I logged into my Western Union account online and sent US dollars; from a non-US country, to another, different non-US country and the money was available in minutes to a person who could go almost anywhere and pick it up.
WU has nothing to worry about...especially after asicminer destroys the whole economy anyway.
ALL HAIL THE GREAT AND WISE! THE OMNIFICENT! THE MAGNANIMOUS OVERLORD OF THE POOR AND THE HUNGRY! The Western Union.... BWAFFAFAFAFAF! |
|
|
|
Not if the alternative is WU at 30% fees.
Where are WU fees 30%? The WU global average fee is about 5%. The countries where this is higher is intra-Africa i.e. from one african country to another, but the volume of these transactions are small. The vast majority of WU transactions are from the developed world to the third world and the fees 10% or less. To replace these with BTC both parties would need computers or mobiles and an ability to spend it in BTC, otherwise they'll just get charged by someone else to change it into cash. Show us a real example of how a Filipino maid working in UAE can send it home to a family member in BTC and they can then spend the BTC on their rent and food and I'll start to be convinced WU is at risk. 5%?  ? Here's the linky for calculating rates and total costs. https://wumt.westernunion.com/WUCOMWEB/priceShopperRedirectAction.do?method=load&countryCode=US&languageCode=enNote they make money on the currency translation as well as on the 'moving of the money'. For the phillipine peso they do an exchange rate of 39.7, but standard at this moment is 40.9, and street is 50. I assume you would agree with using the street exchange price, and then including the fees, there's your 30%. More or less. |
|
|
|
Atm Bitcoin is inflationary due to the new coins mined.
But in the long run Bitcoin is deflationary by the amount of coins lost.
The article uses, as do you, a meaning of inflationary based on percent new coins added, but that isn't correct. Inflation could also occur with fewer coins, with higher monetary velocity, or it could NOT OCCUR, with more coins, but with usage increasing at a similar rate as new coins. There is also the "latent inflation", which is existent but yet to be realized in price levels on the street, and this is typically seen when governments start printing money like crazy. I suppose there could be some similar thing with bitcoins. This is a sizable quantity of words which do not seem to carry any sort of meaning. If you'd be kind enough to proceed systematically from some sort of commonly known point it'd probably help. Well, the commonly known points consist of the thousands of year old abstractions understood from observations .... here's a first cut. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantity_theory_of_moneySecondly, we can observe these phenomena and comment on them vis a vis Weiner Republic, US 1970s inflation, Spain 1950s, more recently, Argentina. The simple generalizations I noted are all reasonable. Oh, regarding "good analogy"...I guess what I was trying to say is that a "good analogy" might be one that was understandable by a stupid person, or something like that...not something highly refined and subtle. There's an opposite argument, of the following type (which I sort of like): " Did you hear the joke about the airplane?""Nope." "Oh...I guess it flew right over your head."And going down this road, we can in fact generate entire strata of dialects full of innuendo, jokes and insults which people right in the conversation do not understand, Cockney slang for example. |
|
|
|
Shh! You're interfering with our ability to blame boogeymen!
But... but... but... market efficiency  Is why Inebriati always win. |
|
|
|
The government is NOT REASONABLY allowed to renege on this promise as it is a fundamental part of the binding contract between the parties. If the government does so, it means it's current shape and form does not respect contracts.
The government has the right to repudiate its debts. The political fallout of doing so is what keeps this right in check. In a practical sense, here is what happens. If the public trust in the governments to follow thru on the "100k insurance plan" is viewed skeptically, money moves. It always moves to safe havens. It does not have to be a specific critical event that causes the loss of trust, it could be any of a number of things. For the interests of power mongers, it is far safer for a government to print money than seize bank accounts, in my opinion. Since then the problem is that the nations using the Euro cannot print, then the Euro cannot keep pace with the US printing and nations using Euro can only go for debt. Does this mean the Euro will necessarily collapse? |
|
|
|
just an innocent question, why fuck would sovereign state store its national treasure in another sovereign state's vaults, anybody?
the fed's vaults are not a "sovereign" state. the fed is a private corporation. that lends money to the US I actually disagree with the theory that Fannie May, Freddie Mac, the Fed, etc, etc, ad nauseum, are "separate from the US". They are so created to create the appearance of distance between entities, yes. ANYWAY, interesting question. Suppose Germany were to sell some of the gold in the FED vault - auction it on the market. What price would they get? LOL... |
|
|
|
"To say Bitcoin is deflationary is akin to saying a married woman is sterile. No, she’s not, the balance of new life is created by married women."
Not the best written analogy i've read, lol..
What's wrong with it? There may not be anything wrong with an analogy that is not clear except that it isn't clear, and that's important, since an analogy should clarify the cause and effect relationships, not further confuse them. I also did not see the analogy. |
|
|
|
Atm Bitcoin is inflationary due to the new coins mined.
But in the long run Bitcoin is deflationary by the amount of coins lost.
The article uses, as do you, a meaning of inflationary based on percent new coins added, but that isn't correct. Inflation could also occur with fewer coins, with higher monetary velocity, or it could NOT OCCUR, with more coins, but with usage increasing at a similar rate as new coins. There is also the "latent inflation", which is existent but yet to be realized in price levels on the street, and this is typically seen when governments start printing money like crazy. I suppose there could be some similar thing with bitcoins. |
|
|
|
Plenty of big companies have died through history, just as new corporations grow and flourish, not to sound like the Lion King but it's the corporate 'Circle of Life'. Changing technology and consumer behaviour causes both.
Regarding Western Union and any other money transfer business, these are the businesses that absolutely face the most threat from BTC. However two things need to happen before it's an issue:
1. The recipients need to be able to spend the BTC directly on goods and services (like food and rent) in predominantly third-world countries, or not get charged fortunes in converting back to Fiat.
2. BTC needs to be more stable. Unless entire economies are denominated in BTC (which will NEVER happen) then exchange rates matter and there's no point sending someone 100USD in BTC to find it's 95USD by the time they convert it back because it's value has moved.
No, the bitcoin does not need to be 'more stable'. Not if the alternative is WU at 30% fees. High instability does not present more risk than certain loss of 30%. |
|
|
|
While I am inspired by your enthusiasm, I think that you are assuming people like the Winklevii twins actually believe in BTC. Even if they claimed to, i still wouldn't know it for a fact. Their economic profile points towards them merely attempting to hoard and turn a huge profit. Even if they did(and others), what does this mean?
Like you, I also believe that the rich nerds of the world, (i.e. silicon valley money and talent) are who is going to truly catapult BTC into the mainstream. ....
I disagree, I tend to think that one or two or three more financial crises like the recent Cyprus boondoogle, paralleled with a rise in volume of trading and price of bitcoin, would firmly establish it as a safe haven. That's far more powerful than the elite of the nerds. Ask a simple question: Can hyperinflation occur in a country if the bitcoin option is available? If the answer is no, then you have evidence of a major change in outcomes for countries and people under severe financial stress with imminent collapse. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
