Yes there are other countries and other currencies besides the US of A, but the point is that the US dollar is and has been the international reserve currency for several decades, and that is why the US dollar was mentioned in the earlier posts as the comparison point, rather than some other currency.

I believe that the other point that is being batted around here in these series of recent posts is that if BTC holds value over time and it is truly deflationary over time, then BTC is going to need some tangible measuring points besides being compared with inflationary  fiat currencies.  As others have inferred, using a basket of goods and services may be a better measure of value over time - though in the immediate future, it seems that we are going to continue to make comparisons to various fiat - even while those various fiat currencies are losing their value at a very rapid rate that is difficult to measure... but may likely become more apparent when it comes to play out that the $80 billion printed every month for years and years is coming home to roost... and when banks stop sitting on those dollars that are piling up in their warehouses.

As long as the attacks don't become personal, we should be fine. 

In this regard, I have certain relatives who really love to talk politics with me, and we really have a lot of disagreements about the roll of government and various applications of libertarianism...   I have a couple of relatives who do NOT talk with each other b/c they do NOT like the way conversations devolve, and frequently, I strive NOT to take the conversation too much into the personal.. but it is all a matter of perspective, and sometimes, each of us may go a little too far.. and have to pull back.

Further, sometimes I get the feeling as if couple of my relatives are trapping me into some kind of lunch or breakfast situation, and then ganging up on me, yet ultimately, we generally are friendly enough about our whole exploration of these issues.  A frequent comment that I make is:  "so you guys have been working (studying) all week in order to figure out some ways to attack my world views with your comments."  One time, my grandma, who is in her late 80s was sitting at the table for breakfast with my sister and my uncle going at me, and pretty soon I said, so you want to throw grandma under the bus in order to achieve dismantling of social security.. etc... etc. .. etc...   Of course, they denied such motives, and we all got a kind of laugh about some of these attempts to apply real world situations to our theories.   

Sometimes, if we are going too far in our conversations, we would just revert to talking about some less controversial topic, and in our case, we may be able to revert to talking about how we expect bitcoin prices to go through the roof and when we expect that to happen.   

And what is really funny (or ironic), is that trolls / FUD spreaders have so much balls as to announce that they are spreading FUD.

Does this mean that yahoo finance just started to list BTC?  or has it been there for a while?

Bitchick:

I largely agree with you; however, there is another dynamic here, that seems to influence the way investors talk about BTC, and that is if you have already experienced a bubble and you were in BTC, then you are going to have a cushion of already being largely in the black.

I started investing in November 2013 at the top of the last bubble, but I had already realized that the previous run up had been pretty intense.. NONETHELESS, I wanted to get in at $1200 b/c I had just learned about some of the fundamentals at that point.. .and surely I have been learning more since but continuing my investment... currently, I am in the black, but just barely... yet I am NOT worried about it and I am continuing to invest in BTC as my fiat comes in....   YET at the same time, I am NOT going balls to the walls with high level investing b/c that is NOT my style, and I like to remain diversified (even though I am going to make less during the next bubble).

Also, I agree with you that currently waiting would NOT be a good idea.. b/c the train is likely going to be leaving and the bits are NOT going to get a whole hell-a-va lot cheaper.... though we may be in the flat for a month or so, but if I were just getting into BTC, I would front load a lot more of my investment currently, as compared to when the price was at $1200 in last November.

good luck with that... maybe I take back my previous comment and we are NOT thinking in the same terms.... but anyhow, you may be able to profit and trade in this current market.  I personally believe thatit is NOT worth the effort.. and better to play long.. and maybe  trade later...

However, if you acquired your BTC at below $266, then maybe it does NOT matter too much to skim off a few profits here and there.. at this price or at $800... either way, it is profits.

You and I may be engaging in a very similar practice. 

I invest in BTC with my spare fiat, yet I keep a reserve of fiat, just in case the price falls further.


However, if you do, as you describe, buy more BTC as the price is going down, then over the last 4-5 months, the price had been going down a lot... therefore, there were a lot of opportunities to buy BTC.

I ran out of some of my disposable fiat that was in my bank accounts and attempting to transfer at various times caused me to lose some opportunities.  Also, some lump sums of fiat did NOT come to me until after the price had gone back up.


So for example this week I had a lump sum of about $25k come in my direction.  I can use about $20k of that to invest in BTC, or I could keep it in fiat or I could invest in something else.  I choose to invest most of it in BTC b/c I believe that BTC prices are going to be going up some more in the near future.. maybe 1 week or could be later on in the year... either way, I am NOT expecting to get at the $20k that was invested into BTC until 1 or 2 years from now.. ... well, in BTC land, one or two years is an eternity, but anyhow, you get the point that my investment is longer-term rather than expecting an immediate turn-around of the investment.

What's the rush, dude?

I am beginning to like you, ErisDiscoria, even in the midst of all of this supposed "major disagreement."   

And, after reading your further comment on the topic, it appears that we any disagreement that we may have is NOT too "major," at least NOT in my conception of the meaning of the term.






As many of us should realize by now, there is NO such thing as "the government," and instead government is a complicated array of societal relationships.  Also, there seems to be a tendency for governments to grow and to develop in all communities, given enough time and enough interaction, a need for community relations are established.. and thus government is established... happens on small scales and happens on large scales, and maybe if a person is living on a self sustainable farm, government may NOT be needed... until you add more people... woops.. here.. government has developed again.. what do you know? 





Government varies, yet frequently it has characteristics that you describe above.  Sometimes those characteristics are comparable among different governments and sometimes they are very varied or subtle.

Maybe government will be abandoned some day?  pretty hypothetical at the moment.






could NOT have said it better myself.  YES!!!   If public and people needs are being served by alternative means, then sometimes it may NOT be necessary to maintain redundancy.  A question may evolve, however, whether some system is redundant or NOT and is ready and truly in need of replacement.

Sometimes i question whether to just let the misinformation slide.... especially, as you say, if the point is one that people are NOT going to get or want to get or are motivated to frame the world within some kind of a simplistic and fantastical framework.

Sometimes the proclamations, in my view, just go too far, and the outrageousness and ridiculousness of such proclamations should NOT be just left without any kind of response.  Accordingly to call the government a ponzi scheme is one of those outrageous and ridiculous comments that cannot just be allowed to go unchecked... ... governments are overwhelmingly vast and have come to dominate a larger and larger role in society and to dominate our public, private and business lives... And, it is NO wonder that a large number of people want to be relieved of some of these governmental pressures, especially when governments are beginning to employ technological means to continue to dominate and to oppress people...

Whether bitcoin is the savior or part of a continuation of oppression is a question that remains yet to be answered and can be part of an ongoing saga... to be determined.. stay tuned....

the same is true when people proclaim bitcoin to be a ponzi scheme... those of us who know enough about bitcoin realize that the statement is ridiculous... even in what seems to be its relative infancy of less than 6 years old, bitcoin has become much more sophisticated and complicated than any kind of meaningful definition of a ponzi scheme... and there are just too many players and developers in bitcoin and too many dynamics for such a simplistic summary of what bitcoin is or is NOT .....   In sum, the proclamation of bitcoin = ponzi scheme, just smacks of an outrageous exaggeration... especially to most anyone that has a fairly decent sense of the many applications and potential reach of bitcoin.

Governments, in their current variations, are much older and much more diverse and much more sophisticated and complicated than bitcoin.  Actually, someday, hopefully, bitcoin will become as complicated as a multitude of governments... that is if bitcoin can handle such a challenge.. b/c it is a major challenge... and either bitcoin or some variation of bitcoin has the potential to take over a vast array of governmental and societal functions.... and those of us who have been studying some of the intricacies of bitcoin have come to these kinds of realizations about various potentialities of bitcoin... and accordingly that bitcoin has much unrealized potential... yet bitcoin cannot take on all of this potentiality at once b/c networks and systems need to be continued to be developed, tried, tested, failed and fixed and built around.  And, hopefully as these systems continue to develop, better interfaces develop and better seamlessness develops and better user interfaces develop in order that the technology of bitcoin is NOT perceived but just happens.

I do NOT necessarily find the question of these kinds of what is a ponzi scheme and what is NOT as being matters of right or wrong b/c in some sense they are products of the perceptions of people, and people are allowed to perceive what they perceive; however, sometimes I believe that it is important to point out the misleading application of certain simplified concepts, even in these kinds of threads where it may NOT be feasible or productive to engage in a comprehensive rebuttal of mischaracterization(s)

Jorge has become like the fat girl that will NOT give up... he hehe..     

Yes, I get the point that calling things or practices something other than what they are can be foolish.. and euphemism can be foolish, and yes there are a lot of foolish contradictions in this world in which we live and the way that various social and governmental systems are set up are also foolish.

Nonetheless, we are NOT going to make a whole heck of a lot of progress in analyzing, understanding and/or fixing the ways of the world by calling the government and its agents and institutions either thieves or a product of a ponzi scheme.  These systems are much more innuendoed than that.

There are good people and well intentioned people carrying out a variety of governmental services, and there are also corrupt and corrupting practices and influences and behaviors within governmental institutions.. but the government has NOT been designed purposefully to engage in thievery nor as a ponzi scheme nor are the various governmental systems something that can be merely abandoned and start anew, believe it or NOT.  Even though some people use the government and its various related institutions for variou kinds of selfish and thievery purposes, it was NOT designed for such (even though there are many flaws)....

AND, yes, hopefully, some day soon good people can find various democracizing purposes for bitcoin to provide positive influences to correct some of these negative and self-serving aspects of government.

My point is that ponzi scheme is NOT appropriate for either.  The government and its money system is much more complicated than some simple operation to rob the money of the poor for the rich, even though those kinds of dynamics that you describe are going on in the government.. NONETHELESS governmental systems remain much more complicated and nuanced as compared to a ponzi scheme which is generally a smaller operation designed smoke and mirrors to deceive.... surely there is some deception that is going on within government systems, as you suggest.. but ponzi scheme is NOT the correct concept and to attempt to simplify the fit into such a narrow definition is to oversimplify the various purposes and services of government....


Don't get me wrong, I am all for reform, and I am all for removing some of the corrupting influences of government and the disruption that bitcoin will be providing to potentially put more power into the hands of the people.

At the same time, I would NOT be so deluded as to believe that the government is going to disappear in some variations of its current form in any time in the very near future... transitions of systems take time... and certainly, we will be witnessing some of bitcoin's effects on various governmental and monetary institutions in the coming years.

CoolStoryBro:  

hehehehehe......    

Even though you are being a little ridiculous with your comment, above, I believe that your comment highlights a decent point.

Accordingly, I would clarify that neither bitcoin nor fiat is a ponzi scheme...

To say that either bitcoin or fiat is a ponzi scheme is to overly simplify and to misapply the concept of ponzi scheme.  Neither fiat nor bitcoin is so simple an arrangement - there are too many factors influencing each.

As time passes, a large majority of people continue to acquire additional fiat, and then the question becomes how that person wishes to store the value of that fiat b/c the opportunity to buy BTC between $450 and $550 has passed and currently is NOT available. 

Accordingly, do we consider $650 to be a good value to store fiat in BTC, or do we believe storing fiat in some other investment vehicle or leaving it in fiat would be preferable? 

Each of us needs to decide for ourselves what is the best storage of that newly acquired fiat. 

Personally in the past several months, I have been putting my newly acquired fiat into BTC b/c currently, I consider BTC prices to be a good value as compared with other ways that I could store/invest that newly acquired fiat.  Keeping it in fiat does NOT seem to be a very prudent approach in my current thinking.

It is possible, that BTC will squeak out another month or two of "price stability;" however, if you think about the recent BTC price situation within the whole scheme of things, BTC prices have been below $700 for about 4 months, and I would call that pretty stable.. and it is possible to experience one or two months of these below $700 prices; however, based on the large amount of development and expansions  in the bitcoin space, it seems to become less and less probably that BTC prices are going to stay below $700 for much longer than that.. and personally, I believe that 2 months is a bit of a stretch to hope for prices to remain below $700.

On the other hand, with any paradigm shifting market, such as bitcoin, there remain explorations and movement into less charted territory that is influenced by the merging of human behavior and politics and momentum and technology... so we can prognosticate in terms of probabilities, while continuing to retain our doubts regarding the exact direction of BTC and/or its prices.

Are you just guessing about the existence of "big buyers," or do you have any kind of meaningful information regarding this?

Additionally, even if you have information about "big buyers," do you have any information about expected activities of "big sellers" that could affect whether the activities of "big buyers" will positively affect BTC prices in the near future (this week)?

Thanks for the link, which caused me to browse through various conditions that seem to exist for creating a Kraken account and some of the fees that may apply.

In fact, it appears that Kraken has NOT established, exactly what fees they will be charging for USA bank account holders to make deposits into their Kraken accounts. 

When initially investigated into establishing various accounts (about 6-7 months ago), I had noticed that various exchanges had fees from 2% to 10% to make deposits into their exchanges from USD accounts, and some money transfer/deposit mechanisms were NOT available to persons in the USA - even though non-USD accounts would frequently have fewer restrictions and/or transfer/deposit costs.

When I refer to Coinbase's fees, I am talking about both transaction fees and deposit fees, b/c Coinbase does NOT really allow traditional trading... so Coinbase only holds customer funds in BTC (NOT in dollars).  Accordingly, the total costs for making any kind of BTC purchase through Coinbase is 1% + $.15.

The Kraken information regarding deposits (https://www.kraken.com/help/faq#deposit-methods) indicates that their policy (and fees) for depositing USD into Kraken accounts is currently in a state of flux.  At this point, I surmise that it is likely that their prior deposit policy was more than 1% for USA dollar customers (likely in the about 5% range), and I would be surprised if their evolving and/or newly establish fees for USD deposits is competitive with Coinbase in the 2% or lower category.  Never say Never, but I would be surprised if USD can be deposited into Kraken accounts for less than 2%..... which would still make Coinbase the most inexpensive means to obtain BTC through dollars at my disposal.

Certainly, there could be other methods to get BTC more cheaply, for me, less than 1%.... for example, if I had a connection with someone who is willing to sell me BTC for less than what it would cost me to obtain those BTC through Coinbase.

Que le paso a Adam?

I believe that they are attempting a certain marketing philosophy to build confidence of the typical USA consumer within compliance of the complicated and frequently contradictory USA regulatory regime... and if they can conquer the USA market, then the company will be stronger to push for global expansion of its business model.   This approach does NOT necessarily seem to be xenophobic in this case - especially when a company is just starting out within a uncertain market.   

On the other hand, whether Circle's business plan is more successful than other potential business plans may be another question all together (and time may reveal the answer to this question)?  You may be correct in what seems to be your implication that a more global business approach may be better in a variety of ways, including the impression that the business creates for its various potential world-wide located customers.