The great thing with bitcoin is that you can increase your winning chance by let your monthly spending pass through bitcoin, thus make it automatically more valuable Suppose that you bought $2000 bitcoin, and your monthly spending is also $2000, let those spending pass through bitcoin (e.g. first buy bitcoin and then spend at a company that accept bitcoin payment), will generate an effect of reducing $2000 worth of coins on market for a period and raise its value during the process An easy way to make bitcoin worth millions of dollarshow will it reduce the amount of bitcoin on the market as payment processors instantly convert everything to usd. the $2000 worth of bitcoin will "flow" back into the market again in a quick fashion. It will reduce the bitcoins on market during a period when bitcoin is on the move from one wallet to another, until they were sold back to exchanges. The longer the move, the longer those coins will disappear from exchanges (You buy 1 bitcoin, spend it the day after, it will disappear from exchanges for 24 hours) If there are millions of people moving 1 coin around all the time, then millions of coins will disappear from exchanges. Of course you need large amount of fiat money to move those millions of bitcoins, thus spending from millions of users have the biggest effect The most difficult question when it comes to adoption: Why should I first purchase bitcoin and then spend it? The answer is: It can make rest of your bitcoin worth a lot more. So it seems you do get some valid motivation for buy-and-spend bitcoins |
|
|
|
The real worry is satoshi being not small enough  |
|
|
|
they are based on probability in fact, they don't really predict anything , it's more of a talk about the "movement"/trend Buy and hold is much much more useful, especially for bitcoin, no amount of TA can defeat a long term buy and hold strategy what if bitcoin die, or stay at bad value indefinitely? I'd rather worry about fiat money die before that. Now when interest rate is going negative, it is not faraway from a mass drop in fiat money's confidence, and when that fear spread out quickly, fiat money will lose most of its value in a very short time Fiat money and bond are all created out of thin air, the value of these things are even more intangible than bitcoin, if they can hold its value, bitcoin will definitely too |
|
|
|
|
Negative rate proves that banks do not care about making profit by customer deposit, but focus on printing money and loan them out. Don't know how long this business will continue, but it will take many years before people escape fiat money at large scale
|
|
|
|
You simply call them "Top 1000" I think "miner" or "farmer" are hard core names |
|
|
|
The great thing with bitcoin is that you can increase your winning chance by let your monthly spending pass through bitcoin, thus make it automatically more valuable Suppose that you bought $2000 bitcoin, and your monthly spending is also $2000, let those spending pass through bitcoin (e.g. first buy bitcoin and then spend at a company that accept bitcoin payment), will generate an effect of reducing $2000 worth of coins on market for a period and raise its value during the process An easy way to make bitcoin worth millions of dollars |
|
|
|
|
If alien come to earth, they will be shocked by the fact that human on earth will starve just because money printer is not working
|
|
|
|
I really think it would be a bigger problem for bitcoin if it were more widely known that there are so many addresses with more than 10k BTC that have never spent or transferred a Satoshi out of them ever.
In the alt coin world, people generally stay clear of coins with poor distribution, because it means that the earliest adopters are getting rich from it, and can also collapse the price at will. I think the general public would feel the same about Bitcoin.
A large part of gold are hold at banks for decades without moving, maybe will never move again, does not affect gold's price. As long as they do not appear on market, they just like non-existing Suppose that you have 1 million ounce of gold, dumping them in the market will just crash the price and destroy your wealth, so you might just spend 1000 ounce maximum and hold rest of them, it doesn't hurt to hold billions of dollars worth of gold  And stay away from bitcoin just because early adopters has gained large amount of them just sounds strange. Early adopters can only cash out ONCE, once it is done, they are redistributed forever, not like fiat money, banks cash out fiat money everyday, forever |
|
|
|
|
I think crisis could first start from some small countries on Forex market, and then followed by a currency war between major nations, and then the shock spread into domestic market, to reduce the people's trust in fiat money. But at the same time people must have alternative currency to move into if fiat money is losing traction, it will take some years
|
|
|
|
Buy and hold is much much more useful, especially for bitcoin, no amount of TA can defeat a long term buy and hold strategy |
|
|
|
So what triggers spending those reserves? It must be something... that is the point of a reserve. That is when high inflation hits.
Suppose that you are a bank, you drove a credit bubble by loaning out 1 million dollar again and again and get 5 million dollars worth of mortgage backed securities, and then housing bubble crashed, you took the chance to sell those securities to FED in exchange for real money 5 million dollars Now you have 5x more money than before, will you release them to market and trigger a large hyper inflation and destroy your money's value? Of course not, you will let them trickle down to the whole society as slow as possible The reason that there is no hyperinflation is because banks controls those money, hyperinflation only happens when majority of people receive those money. If you keep majority of people poor, there will be no hyperinflation. Bankers can buy some castle or yacht or build some underwater hotel, but that won't increase the income of majority of people, so no inflation The monetary base is kept in that so called reserve by the bank at the moment. As you mentioned , they will let the money trickle down to the whole society as slow as possible. So the ppl eventually will receive the printed money in hands. So I believe the inflation is not reflected in reality yet, but just the matter of sooner or later. I am afraid this time people might never receive those printed money, since most of them is used to purchase the debt, and a debt will be paid back by almost equal amount of interest cost over decades, for each dollar they earn, they must pay 1 dollar interest, no money left But you should know that the institution or banks receive the money, they will try to find ways to spread out the money and get as much return as possible. So the money will eventually come to the ppl and inflate the price of every things. True, people are still waiting for these money to flow to them, while banks have no better place to invest but lock those money permanently at FED and receive interest on them. Only when banks start to spend their interest income, people will get some money to earn, that will be years later If an alien come to earth, he must be shocked by the fact that human on earth will starve just because some printer is not working |
|
|
|
|
There is one thing for sure: There will not be a large increase in mining efficiency like we have experienced during CPU to GPU and GPU to ASIC technology shifting. That might indicate that any future value increase will be more gradual and slow, following the slow increase in ASIC efficiency, wider adoption and reward halving every 4 years
If there is a way to make cheap quantum miner, then we would have another jump in mining efficiency, but that is highly unlikely in any foreseeable future
|
|
|
|
However, this consensus is built over generations, and based on gold standard originally. So it will stay as long as there are no dramatic change in fiat money's value/acceptance
so you are saying that this is not likely going to change within 10 or so years? what i do know for sure is that they earn billions with their current system and are not willing to give up even a few % of it unless they can they can change without losing the option to make solid profits. This consensus is not so easy to change as long as majority of people follow their government. Even a hyperinflation currency like Zimbabwe dollar can hold its position for decades before it finally broke Only hyperinflation will destroy a currency, in deflation, people desperately want more currency, which helps banks to produce more money for themselves. Bankers all know that, so they do it carefully, they'd rather see the rest of the people getting no money instead of lending out too much money and destroy that concensus People could also abandon it if majority of people agreed that it is a scam, however that is going to take years, and before that they must adopt other alternative payment method like gold or bitcoin People won't abandon it easily, also because many people's income received is in the forms of fiat money (Originated from large bank loans). If their income changed to other forms, then it is possible to totally leave fiat money alone, only purchase some when paying tax Most possibly bitcoin will be mainly used as a store of value and anti-inflation tool, slowly increasing merchant acceptance, and if there are some currency crisis, it will shine and get more attention |
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DwYo21LTK4Here's a 3 min video on measures/symbols and compares money vs. wealth, by (IMO) an incredible philosopher by the name of Alan Watts. I'm not sure what the forum rules are around posting videos - there is an ad on the video unfortunately, but I'm not affiliated with the uploader. It's just a clip from a much longer lecture which you can search for. Anyways, he is great at questioning basic assumptions that normally go unquestioned as we grow up and become conditioned to our particular society. Money is one of those basic assumptions, that even though it's one of the most important things to understand in today's world, the average population a) doesn't have a very good understanding of it and b) accepts that level of ignorance and doesn't feel the need to learn. I live in Toronto, and through elementary school, high school there is very little in terms of learning about the monetary system and money. I went to what is considered a top business school in the country and specialized in Finance, and still other than learning about financial/economic theories and concepts, there wasn't much in terms of learning about money or the monetary system. That was skipped as an assumption that everyone already understands it. The learning unfortunately, comes outside of the education system (at least from my experience), with personal interest and research. I'm interested to know whether anyone here has learned anything about money, monetary policy, central banks, the history of fiat money, and maybe the history of American currency over time and the different systems they had in place, how they changed from being backed by gold, partially backed by gold, not backed by anything, etc.? It seems important to know for anyone that uses money, which is everyone. True, those theories about money are always correct under a monopole monetary system, because people have no other choice but believe whatever they say, and they can always find an explanation for what happened and what they plan to do. But now we have a totally different monetary system built on bitcoin, we can try and see if those theories are correct |
|
|
|
|
Central bank guarantee nothing, they don't provide any backing for fiat money. They used to provide gold in exchange for fiat money, but that is history, now fiat money is only backed by a consensus of merchants, if no one accept it in exchange for goods/services/valuables, then it worth nothing
However, this consensus is built over generations, and based on gold standard originally. So it will stay as long as there are no dramatic change in fiat money's value/acceptance
|
|
|
|
The only thing that could crash this system is US people start to lose the confidence of USD and refuse to accept them, and I don't see how is that possible. In people's mind, USD is money, no reason to refuse money. Even if they read that "the biggest scam in the history of mankind"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFDe5kUUyT0 and know the truth, they would still not change their opinion that USD is money, since their income is dependent on it That's what I meant by dropping the US dollar from the international trade between countries (other than the US) and switching to regional currencies instead. China and Russia are already going that route, so you, in a way, are a bit late with your fears... I mean US people, other countries hold a lots of USD reserve, if they abandon it, they lost many years of work, not a wise idea Why would they necessarily abandon it? They would ultimately send their dollars to where they originated from, that is, back to the USA, trying to buy few goods which the latter sells (I mean the last holders of dollars when you won't be able to buy with them anything internationally in the end). But since the US has a large trade deficit (which is covered by debt), this would inevitably cause a panic sell of the US dollars leading to the devaluation of the US dollar... And chickens finally came home to roost Indeed, if they all decided to abandon USD, there will be a large amount of excessive USD out there, but even USD is mass inflated, it still holds better trust than many other countries' currency |
|
|
|
You say that most of the people had been robbed off of their wealth long before the bubble burst, but this alone would immediately cause the instantaneous collapse of the bubble (right after people had lost their wealth), since the bubble can only exist as long as new money is flowing in it, and in ever increasing amounts at that.
The bubble only collapse when people find out that their wealth on paper start to drop, and they rush to sell it. As long as that paper wealth is rising or keep flat, people will just hold into it or buy more, thus the sell pressure on market is not enough to trigger a downfall, however those who drove the bubble has already cashed out long before the crash, because they know in advance, when they stop injecting more credit into the market, the bubble will burst inevitably How can they buy more if by that time they had long been stripped of their wealth (as you said earlier)? Also, if they had been robbed off of their wealth, wouldn't it be natural that they would try to cash out immediately, thus causing the bubble to pop? Your arguments lack a proper timing between events (namely, complete stripping of wealth and bubble collapse), thereby rendering you whole point dubious (that withdrawing of all fiat from an economy won't stall or crash it)... Suppose that you have used 90% of money to bought stock at $500, and you use the rest to buy them at $600, then it rise to $800 and you anticipate it will rise to $2000, then you have exchanged all of your money to some paper which trades at $800, so you feel you are richer. When price start to fall, you panic sell, the price will immediately drop back to $400 since there is almost no buyer. In fact, sell it or not sell it, your money has already been lost, it is just a matter of taking a large loss or a small loss. The wealth shifting by assets bubble takes years, but when it is finally done, people will realize it in a couple of weeks |
|
|
|
Wealth is not money
This is the common statement trying to hide the truth. Money is wealth, and it is the most liquid form of wealth, because it can exchange any kind of wealth at any time, anywhere (Domestically) Those who claim that money is not wealth are usually banks, since they don't want others to be suspicious about the fact that they create wealth by just writing numbers and printing. If money is not wealth, then their money creation seems not a big deal Do you really believe that "it can exchange any kind of wealth at any time, anywhere"? It is certainly a far cry from reality. Say, you have a home (where you live and which you love for its uniqueness), and someone suggests you sell it, and gives a higher price than the average on the market for that type of house at that. Would you sell it? There are a lot of things that can be bought and sold, but which people may not want to sell for whatever reason and whatever money... And I don't even say about things that are commonly considered as wealth of top quality, but simply not for sale (in fact, being more valuable than money itself) What you talked about is price. Let's raise the price to 100 times of your house's worth, wouldn't you sell your existing house and move to a better new house? The reason that you don't sell your house is because the market price does not indicate its true value, when the price is higher than its value, it will get sold. Value is a subjective measure, the reason that you don't sell your house is because the price is not high enough to reach your valuation, not because money is not wealth. If money is not wealth, donate all your money, since you don't lose any wealth  |
|
|
|
What OP suggested is similar to Euro, a single currency across boarder, and you see how much trouble it has now In fact, the Euro, as a currency, is behaving amazingly well. Those in trouble are STATES, not the money itself. That's what I mean, you can't have countries with different political interest using the same monetary policy, an easy monetary policy will stimulate the hard working nation but crash the leisure seeking nation, but both a way of living and different view of life: In the long run we are all dead, some people will enjoy the life while others will work hard until they die |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
