As BTC are not consumed for direct use value (like gold or any other commodity) there is no risk of a deflation caused by an sudden increase of direct use value of the commodity.
The same pertains to pure fiat (not backed by anything). Actually, that was one of the reasons it came into existence and got universal acceptance (exclusion of externalities, such as finding a gold asteroid, for example). The correlation isn't as strong as it used to be when fiat was backed by gold, but I think that fiat is still essentially backed by the production capacity and assets of a country. That's more of an abstract concept, but the strength of a currency is generally based on the strength its country's economy, factoring in things like amount of debt, the ability to repay debt, trust in the country/currency, etc. Fiat like USD doesn't need to be backed by anything. Its legal tender so by law you have to pay your taxes in fiat. Its the only acceptable form of payment. The amount of taxes are correlated to GDP so you are correct. The price (compared to other currencies) fluctuate on economics Because its mandated that people have to pay taxes w fiat, the demand is always there. This guaranteed demand is what makes USD stable. As long as US economy is stable The US dollar is backed by the US economy. |
|
|
|
Probably - Scottish (and Northern Irish) notes seem to me to be, in effect, IOUs for Bank of England notes. My understanding was that "legal tender" applied to debts, so if I have a meal in a restaurant and settle up afterwards - the restaurant can't refuse my payment if I offer legal tender (obviously restaurants in Scotland are more concerned with receiving payment in any form than with the legal niceties  ). I don't know at what point my Council Tax obligations become a "debt" - when I've paid in cash I've been paying in advance - but it's certainly a duty or obligation (or, at least, regarded as such by our city fathers...) But what if it is made known to you before you take a meal that the restaurant won't accept what is "legal tender" there, will you be able to insist on paying the "debt" with it alluding to its being a legal tender? I honestly don't know - it's never happened to me! I think businesses tend to be pragmatic - money's money, so as long as they can check it's not counterfeit then they're usually willing to accept it. The problem tends to be the other way round, using Scottish notes in England - though even that I've not found to be much of a problem recently. A restaurant, or any other business is not able to decline to accept any form of legal tender, at least in the US. Businesses may accept additional forms of payment as well, however if they are in the US then they must accept US dollars. |
|
|
|
I think the FED uses the term "sequestered". They are expanding the money supply, but basically only banks get access to it.
The banks get the expanded money supply that is supplied by the Fed. The hope is that banks will increase lending so that more people will borrow money, stimulating the economy. Then why in the name of Timothy Geithner do they bribe the banks to deposit the funds in the Fed rather than releasing them out into the economy If you are asking about Geithner. What he did was use the Fed to finance JP Morgans acquisition of Bear Stearns, AIG bailout, and TARP. He wanted to avoid a stock market crash I thought you were talking about QE in the op The name Timmothy Geithner was merely placed there for emphasis. My question, without the unnecessary exclamation, was "Then why do they bribe the banks to deposit the funds in the Fed rather than releasing them out into the economy." The simple answer is they're not allowed to. Congress has to do that via deficit spending This is not true, the fed has tried to encourage banks to "release" the funds into the economy via new loans however there are simply not enough demand for quality loans out there so banks deposit their excess funds that they are unable to lend in the fed to make a small amount of interest. Our deficit is funded by our trade deficit (by other countries like china) and by QE |
|
|
|
Bitcoin will be a heck of inflationary for the next 5 years as is.
it's interesting that many people think short-term (what the price in fiat USD will be next month, next year at most), but at the same time look many years ahead to a far-away cap of 21 million, forgetting that Bitcoin has a double-digit yearly inflation right now and will continue to have it for the next 5 years. The brain conveniently suggests ideas to believe that they can be most comfortable with.
This is true bitcoin is very inflationary For a few more halvings at least https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supplyBitcoin is technically inflationary while the block subsidies are still in place. However it will often act in a deflationary way as holders of bitcoin generally expect it's value to rise in the future. I would rather say that up to the present moment, bitcoin is neither deflationary nor inflationary (if we don't take price swings as a criterion for telling between them). In practice, now it behaves more like a purely speculative tool (which it is, at least presently). Bitcoin would be considered to be inflationary as more bitcoin are created every day. I read somewhere thatbitcoin inflates at 6% until all coins are mined. Don't know if its correct Not exactly, and your 6% figure is much too high. The amount of new coins mined per day via the block subsidy is fixed 3,600 BTC per day, however the total amount of coins in circulation will increase every day, so the inflation rate, as a percentage will shrink as the number of new coins, as a percentage of total coins decreases. The inflation rate will also drop by 50% every time the block subsidy is halved. |
|
|
|
Realcoin have the potential to become payment currency in the US. Price stability is important to both merchant and consumer.
Yeah no. Real coin will be shunned by most of the "Coin" community, seeing as it is a filthy way of riding off the crypto idea. As the the general populace... We must educate them. Now. Price stability means nothing. It's because some companies want to take it and possibly hold it for bigger profits in the future, or they're taking the risk and just accepting Bitcoin for what it is. Realcoin actually disgusts me. It's a scheme, and it's just like using a credit card or debit card at a location. We can defeat it by saying that it's just like your credit card but with more and longer complex steps. That would be enough to have people ever away from it. And then they beg it to Bitcoin as well as the USD, if I read it correctly. So if USD thanks, "Oh nope! Our value is backed by Bitcoin!" (In which case, if realcoin does become popularised, would be great for the BTC price. We own the gold of the future!) But I have serious doubts about realcoin... I wanna see the code, since there might be "unprecedented security flaws" and it might "just happens to be possible to find the IP of an address". You can find the IP address of a specific address for pretty much all crypto coins, including bitcoin, it is just that it is very difficult to do so. Bitcoin and the larger altcoins are more difficult today because of the many types of wallets that do not act as a full node. Realcoin will never be successful because it's network will never be able to be secured. Like bitcoin TX fees for realcoin will not be enough to give miners enough of an incentive to mine at first, however block subsidies will obviously not be given as the coins are backed by dollars and block subsidies would mean that someone would need to pay dollars to secure the blockchain |
|
|
|
Does anyone have any kind of proof that a police investigation is actually being conducted in Japan?
There was some well-sourced press coverage a while back to the effect that they were. But I don't think there's anything in the public domain to tell us how hard they're trying, whether they've given up, or what theories they been working on, ie whether they're just writing up the official Gox claim about a theft or whether they're coming down hard on Karpeles etc. I would doubt that the police have the technological capacity to even know where to begin when investigating this type of potential crime. |
|
|
|
|
It appears that your account is overdrawn. Overdrafts are generally considered as being unauthorized loans and are very risky for the bank. If your account was often overdrawn then this may be the reason for the account closure.
|
|
|
|
Today I noticed that PB Mining has put a statement on their contract purchase page stating that they are no longer selling contracts to Canadian residents. Keep in mind that PB Mining also states on their website that they are a "trusted business in Saskatchewan Canada". I would then like to ask a question of PB Mining users: "How do you feel about the fact that PB Mining might now not be able to do business in it's home country?"
By continuing to buy contracts through their site you must agree that you are not a Canadian resident, until they are able to clear up the legal issues of selling mining contracts to Canadian residents.
Canada has become a legal gray area for bit coin. The intentionally vague regulatory statement was designed to have a chilling affect on the bit coin economy there. With just-dice shut down and now this it appears to be working. I agree. I think that this has more to do with the fact that the regulatory environment in Canada is questionable and less to do with the solvency of PB mining. With that being said I am still a big opponent of cloud based mining as it centralizes mining and makes it difficult to change pools. |
|
|
|
No I think OP has a good point for the "average joe". Guys, yes, we can all get bitcoin if we want it but think about your parents, your friends, who don't know anything about bitcoin. They need to be able to buy it with linking their bank account to some online site, and it needs to be 100 percent legit and them do it with a click of the finger. It is a bit of a hassle to use local bitcoins even IMHO.
Why can't they all simply use a bitcoin ATM? We are somewhat limited as to where you can use a ATM like this but the number of locations are expanding. |
|
|
|
I have no personal interest in this matter; but, in general, when a company begins to stall on many of its customers, it is a waste of time to continue talking to them. It depends on your country, but you either go to a small claims court directly, or hire a lawyer who will notify them of your intention to sue if they do not deliver the goods/refund immediately; and then sue them right away if they don't.
WHY they failed to fulfill your order is totally irrelevant, you do not have to be "understanding". They are a business, so dealing with them should be strictly business.
In this case there is already a class action going on, so there is no need to think about that.
Also, do not waste your dream energy by dreaming of a takeover of the company by some miraculous management that would get your money faster or better than a lawsuit would. If the company cannot right itself under the pressure of lawsuits, it cannot be saved by a takeover. If a lawsuit cannot get your money back, a reborn company will not give it to you, either. That goes for MtGOX too, by the way.
EDIT: Also, when a company gets to the point of stalling on many of its customers, they stop caring for bad press in the internet or the media. Look at MtGOX. The most one can do through those means is warn other people before they send more money to the company.
From the BFL website: Pre-Order Terms: This is a pre-order. 28nm ASIC bitcoin mining products are shipped according to placement in the order queue, and delivery may take 3 months or more after order. All sales are final. From the Checkout page on the BFL website: accept the terms of the sale outlined on the product page and understand that all sales are final. This is a pre-order. Production and delivery of my order may take 3 months or more. Please note the "or more" part of the terms. As much as I dislike BFL and think that it is a horrible idea to pay for preorders as BFL's customers do, it appears that they are at least somewhat covered by not giving a hard upper bound timeframe as to when the machines will be ready and delivered. |
|
|
|
Considering the similarities between gold and Bitcoin, many expect Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies to take some of the market share of gold and other precious metals due to its superiority in ease of transport and a more convenient means of transfer. This new rush of gold companies into Bitcoin seems to validate these views. Leading to more professional companies taking over less secure, less organized, and worse managed bitcoin companies that dominated the early years of Bitcoin, paving the way for institutional and retail investors, as well as enticing further the ordinary man, to invest in Bitcoin. Most important and enlightening part of the article. Bring on the ETFs, the Gold Bugs, companies offering discounts for using Bitcoin and whatever else = market cap going^ I strongly agree! If bitcoin can take any meaningful amount of market share away from gold then it's price will go up, creating more interest in bitcoin, causing more merchants to wish to accept bitcoin, causing more people to start using bitcoin to purchase things. |
|
|
|
but one can partially hide their money through bitcoin. An article lately that i've encounter was about bitcoin and divorce.  Done carefully and properly, one could theoreticially hide ALL of one's bitcoin income from the prying eyes of government. The same is true with fiat. However is this something that is really necessary to have to do? |
|
|
|
Capitalism itself has no moral standpoint...
Yeah, this. How can freedom to compete in an open market, where you're not allowed to hurt people and steal people's stuff, be immoral? The moral of capitalism is that of human rights including right to one self and ones things, non-initiation of force in violence to those rights, the rule of law, cooperation in the form of voluntary exchange. That is right on. There is no reason to force people to give up what they have worked for to give it to people who are less skilled. Right. And the immorality of the redistribution state is that the voters, not themselfves willing to take others' value by force in violation of human rights, contract the leaders to contract the taxmen who contract the police to take it. Not understanding how the free market economy works to the best for all, they blind themselves to the reality what is going on, and consider themselves virtous in taking from the rich to give to the poor. Which, after corruption and cronyism is included in the formula, in fact result in the state taking from the poor and give to the rich, destroying the productive capacity of the population in the course. Inconscient moral self sanctimoniousness - I point my finger. There are simply a lot of voters and liberal politicians that think with a robinhood mentality. |
|
|
|
All other coins are a scam, stop wasting time and money
Hodl bitcoin
It's shocking to hear idiots think litecoin is diversification, if something happens to bitcoin, litecoin sure as hell will be gone first
I don't think that LTC will be the first alt coins to disappear, but I would certainly say that it is not a good investment. It does not give any real new value that bitcoin does not give. |
|
|
|
Given how mining work for bitcoin, I do not think the price will stable.
It has to keep going up so miners can have "profit" in either profit or transaction fee.
Well, it can still go up and be relatively stable as well. Generally speaking if something is rising in price at a rapid rate it will not be considered stable. Well it could be rising in price relative to the USD but still stable relative to gold and oil. I.e. the USD is going down instead of bitcoin going up. The Dollar is simply too stable for this to be a possibility. A change of 1% in the value of the dollar is considered to be extreme. It is unusual for bitcoin to not trade in a range of at least 5% in any given day. |
|
|
|
I went through bitsolo.net FAQ. They say they have found ZERO Bitcoin blocks until now.
They're merge-mining Namecoin and have found ONE Namecoin block.
They found one the other day: https://twitter.com/BitSolo1 I did some research and it was paid to the btc address that supposedly hit the block. Gave me enough confidence to point about 210gh at it for the next 2 or 3 days. the issue isn't so much that the found block was paid it is more that the chances of your miner finding a block are so low that you are essentially wasting money on electricity its called gambling and I'm in on the note that a block was paid out! Yes it would be gambling and yes it has been determined that some solo mining pools have paid out, but your chances are so small that it is just not realistic to believe that you could "win" (find a block) |
|
|
|
jesus christ
did someone actually say "they could use BTC...but keep a ledger" ?
like.............. and what every few weeks someone does the transactions ?
and did another tard actually say "the prisioners could pre-mine some special jail coin" ?
like.... on a GPU they brought in some how.. connected to there secret rig.. ?
I think that your post alone, proves, beyond a reasonable doubt that any crypto coins would not be appropriate for a jail setting. |
|
|
|
look at Monero if you want a fair chance at mining something that is better than Bitcoin in many levels but does not come to replace it. I never said people should stop mining. My point is that he says there are too many, and we have more coming.
I can't help but think that you are taking this quote out of context. What does it mean to have 'too many' miners? Apart from the fact that it causes each such miner to reap less bitcoin, I see no downside. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. No systemic issue from 'too many' miners. You really cannot have "too many" miners as the more miners you have, the more decentralized bitcoin will become. If anything there are too few miners, as there are few miners who control a lot of the network hashrate. price has not raised accordingly, a lot more people are mining BTC since 6 months ago and the price still -40% This means that it is simply less profitable to mine bitcoin then it was 6 months ago. All that mining really is a bet that the price of bitcoin will rise faster then the difficulty. |
|
|
|
A stock market crash right now wouldn't affect too much bitcoin. There's still not enough infrastructure/awareness to allow stock traders to quickly move to cryptos.
However, if it happens in a year or so, the scenario might be completely different and cause a major buy in into btc.
Yes, there needs to be an easy way to sell stocks and buy bitcoin (or a proxy thereof) on the same platform. If/when a bitcoin ETF becomes tradable, it will then be possible for average investors to buy into bitcoin easily. The ETF will also likely increase public awareness of bitcoin, causing more people to adopt bitcoin. So it's set. We need that market crash to come after the Winklevoss eft comes to light. Hurry up guys!  I would argue that public adoption would increase regardless of a market crash once the ETF starts trading. |
|
|
|
It's true that too many divisions can be confusing.
But we need something between satoshis and bitcoins.
Why do we need something between satoshis and bitcoins? What is so bad about looking to the right of the decimal 6 places and counting 6 zeros? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
