I really don't understand all this mess about currency wars. I know that the basic idea is that if a nation currency is too strong, it's bad for its industries because it gives them a competitive disadvantage on international markets.
But to me this just doesn't make sense. How can someone complain that something is "too cheap" ? If someone makes very cheap stuffs, I won't complain : I'll just buy it. I'll even stop producing and I will borrow money if I need to. If a money is really "too" cheap, then it's an arbitrage opportunity and one just has to buy it.
The problem is that social-democracies and all its regulations stop the market prices from adjusting downwards. If you had a free market it would have a strong currency. If, for example, some country tried to devaluate their currency to decrease the real wages of their workers and make them poorer to allow the exports of their industries to be more competitive, the free market nation would react by lowering prices and wages, and if the workers refuse to accept because they can find better options, then the industry would have the option of trying to automate the task or accept the gift of the foreign country and use their labor as cheap labor, while the free market country workers are doing better payed jobs. But since social-democracies and their endless regulations dont allow for prices (including wages) to adjust downwards, this process can not happen. And the only option left is to counteract also devaluating through inflation, which on top of making anyone earning a wage poorer, discoordinates the market and produces bubbles. Social-democracies are mercantilists economically. Its a loose-loose situation for everybody, but its the only way the elite have to destroy the debt while keeping the system in place. Its so stupid that in the XXI century we are still following the same mercantilist policies as the XVII century monarquies its mind blowing. |
|
|
|
|
Deflation does not stop investment.
There is empirical evidence of this, for example, the USA during the XIX century.
Its just inflationist propaganda.
|
|
|
|
Hello to ALL! How do I start?
Just download the client and connect to the rest of the network. Or even better start accepting bitcoins in your business (if you have one) or encourage business to accept bitcoins. And welcome to the forums. |
|
|
|
|
I agree with the ones that say that use will determine it, but I like" XBC".
|
|
|
|
I agree this is too longterm.
what about DJI below 10,000 ( close or intraday ) before 12/31/2010.
100BTC
This is a complete different bet. I can see this happening, specially depending on the Fed actions. If QE2 happens in the November FOMC meeting as almost everybody is expecting and it is big enough, the DOW will remain over 10.000, but if the Fed leaves QE2 for later or it is percieved as too small then it could happen. Big parts of the economy are now driven by monetary policy rather than market forces. Its sad. |
|
|
|
Hugolp and Babylon,
reading the above, I'd like to bet exclusively with you. How can we set up this in a stable way?
As Babylon said we need someone to hold the bitcoins or at least a part of them until the bet can be resolved. |
|
|
|
Im my opinion you will be massively wrong.
The DOW will also crash in nominal terms.
Below 1000 points between 2014-2016
Lets bet. 1000 bitcoins that the DOW does not touch 1000 points before 2016. Deal? kiba what you are working on could come handy now. |
|
|
|
Sort of what the DJIA will look like next month except in reverse.  The Dow will go down in term of gold, but in term of dollars it will rally. Bernanke is there to make sure it happens. |
|
|
|
If you borrowed and bought stocks I don't think that would be saving, but surely it would be investing. The lender is doing the saving. Intermediaries don't change that there is just as much saving at the beginning of the chain as there is investing at the end. That's a good point. One person could invest without saving by borrowing, but somewhere, someone had to do the saving. This would be true without the central bank. In the present system this is not true, since credit is created through inflation. |
|
|
|
|
The "funny" part is that the Fed argued that if Ron Paul's Audit the Fed bill passed it would politicize the Fed and it would led to inflation...
The bill did not pass and now they are creating inflation on their own.
Professional liers.
|
|
|
|
in the eyes of the IMF at least, the best way to ensure the stability of the international monetary system (post crisis) is actually by launching a global currency. Izabella Kaminska notes. And that, the IMF says, is largely because sovereigns as they stand cannot be trusted to redistribute surplus reserves, or battle their deficits, themselves. So the IMF thinks governments can not manage the currencies responsably (which I happen to agree) but then the solution is to give control to the IMF itself. Yeah, right. |
|
|
|
|
The IMF is not worried about currency being used for political purposes. They are just worried if currencies are not used for their political purposes.
|
|
|
|
Did they attempt to sabotage their own movement or something?
I think they are trying to push their agenda by jokingly introduce extreme ideas, so the real ideas they try to pass dont seem so horrendous. You know, like when you want to get 10 so you ask for 15. |
|
|
|
|
World domination.
And he has promise me Ill be the second in charge. Muhahahahahaaaaa!!!!
|
|
|
|
If the Fed wants to buy every bitcoin in existance let them. Then start a new bitcoin network. If the Fed keeps buying bitcoin you can retire rich after some years.  |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is a P2P computer program. It is not a currency, a dessert topping, or a floorwax.
The dollar is a piece of paper with funny drawings. It is not a currency, a dessert topping, or a floorwax. Gold is a metal. It is not a currency, a dessert topping or a floorwax. |
|
|
|
European here (Canada born... but nobody is perfect  ) |
|
|
|
I was watching http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PO_kjoKkhv8&feature=channel and it mentioned "free market currency." I searched for phrase "free market currency" at this site and didn't see any results. Perhaps this thread can be used to discuss it further. Does Bitcoin have potential to establish use as a free market currency? It already is. |
|
|
|
My concern isn't really fairness, it's stability. I buy about $20 worth of BTC each month, but I spend most of them straight away. What is keeping me from buying $1000 worth of BTC is my concern with the problems I mentioned. As a way of transferring money Bitcoin is great, as a way of saving money it is still too risky for my tastes. To succeed as a currency it must be good at both. Mmm... Are you sure your dollars dont depreciate quicker than bitcoins? Dollars are worthless to create. Also, thinking that holding dollars is less risky than bitcoins might be a bit naive. |
|
|
|
|
Someone should work on making the GPU code open. That is the best way to stop this.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
