|
ugh damn i guess somwthing happened and it is just sunday.
big move tommorow
|
|
|
|
topic, thanks for answering.
- we want the flow of bitcoin , we want more and more people to try bitcoin , more new people means the better future for bitcoin , Many people here are not buying bitcoins but want to try it we this forum provides a mechanism to them to get some fractions so that they can try it for free and believe that yes bitcoin is NextGen . -Sites are Advertising here and paying to their advertisers for advertising them , This forum is getting Traffic of unique IPs , and we want all this as we are bitcoin enthusiast. all fine with me except the stuff with spamming bullshit for 1-10 cent per spam post. there are a lot more possibilities to aquire btc without fiat then a sig-campaign. pretty sure most of the ppl doin this are kids or have no jobs and are sitting the whole day at home. |
|
|
|
|
topic, thanks for answering.
post with sig-campaigns are often really bad - although usually they are still just barely on topic so they dont get deleted.
|
|
|
|
Doesnt that mean that international trade with yuan will become much easier?
Wont that be bad for bitcoin in the long run (or atleast less demand from chinese)?
The fact written at the main post have nothing to do with your guesses. International trade will not depend from yuan. Will have the same structure except the countries which have privileged collaboration and commercial activity with China. Maybe this action will affect in some way their national monetary policies. Then, the action written at main post have nothing to do (at all) with bitcoin. Bitcoin has its followers which will not abandon it because yuan was entered at the basket of money that will be considered by IMF in their world monetary policies or in their other financial products. IMF and yuan have nothing to do (at least for the moment) with the market of bitcoin and with everything has to do with it. Bitcoin is yet nothing as an actor compared to this kind of actions which have to do with world monetary policies and not with very small legal markets as it is in this time the market of bitcoin. As for the simple Chinese nothing will change with this action. Have not to do at all with their everyday life. And even less with their actions regarding bitcoin. So who mine bitcoin will continue to do this, who buy bitcoin will continue to do this, who change bitcoin will continue to do this and who use bitcoin to buy several things at the market will continue to do this. Naturally if they will continue to have desire to do such actions. And will be not the fact written at the main post which will affect in some way such their actions. what? the biggest btc demand comes from china how does cny have nothing to do with btc? also i said int. trade with yuan will get easier because there wont be need of an intermediary to settle stuff. china is one of the biggest export nations you thing everyday chinese wont notice if their currency will devalued? i kinda think you have no clue what you are talking about *edit @sig-campaign: please stop farming your sig campaigns with useless bs ._. |
|
|
|
OP is a wannabe economic expert who needs to earn 10 cent per post. We gotta believe his words that he cant backup with arguments and facts.  You are hero member and dont even know why bitcoin has intrinsic value. For gods sake delete your account. |
|
|
|
|
Doesnt that mean that international trade with yuan will become much easier?
Wont that be bad for bitcoin in the long run (or atleast less demand from chinese)?
|
|
|
|
Read the link to understand the concept.
If you refer to the Wiki article, I read it long ago, I want to hear your understanding of this concept, how you see it. Look, at first you make mention of it here (as the best monetary system out there), no problem, and then you decline from explaining why it is so? What are your arguments supporting your claims really? You are a idiotic hypocrite. You did the same shit as the guy who you blame. (Page 2) Go away clown Im much impressed. Maybe care to explain me your wikipedia economics with your own words?  |
|
|
|
Brauchen wir jetzt nen deustches sub für ponzi und pyramiden spiele oder was? Scheint hier mode zu werden :/ |
|
|
|
Read the link to understand the concept.
If you refer to the Wiki article, I read it long ago, I want to hear your understanding of this concept, how you see it. Look, at first you make mention of it here (as the best monetary system out there), no problem, and then you decline from explaining why it is so? What are your arguments supporting your claims really? You are a idiotic hypocrite. You did the same shit as the guy who you blame. (Page 2) |
|
|
|
this is wrong, because when the currency is appreciating the cost of raw materials is going down.
there arent less profits either.
in absolute numbers the final cost is less but through appreciation your buying power is the same.
hoarding raw materials happens - but not at the magnitude you are describing.
(in the end it is also another form of price speculaton)
supply and demand will lead to a equillibrium, it is not possible to hoard forever(=0 demand).
Simply put, you don't understand what you are talking about. Then again this is not a place for discussing such things, but you can go and discuss the question in this thread. Most likely that all your arguments you can ever think of have already been brought forth there (so you'd better read first)... I strongly recommend against raising the issue of deflation vs inflation here Please provide proof and dont show me a 22 page thread where the answer might be or not. What proof should I provide? At first you say that "the cost of raw materials is going down" and right after that you claim that "your buying power is the same". Is this not enough to prove that you don't know what you are talking about? Go and read finally that thread carefully (it has all the answers) How about you carefully read what i wrote? 1. Money appreciates 2. Raw material cost down 3. final price of product goes down What should change in the buying power?? Cherry picking at its best or full choo choo retardness. |
|
|
|
people in general fail to look at the bigger picture, and are instead only look at the big events related to an idea that is the determining factor for their opinion on their matter. a nice comparison: how many people doe from smoking every year? a quick google search shows its in the millions, annually. so why arent we paying more attention to that? because nothing "big" happens from smoking. theres no explosions, gunshots, whatever. just cancer. compare that to a hypothetical airplane that had an engine malfunction and crashed, resulting in the flashy death of maybe 100 people. suddenly, x manufacturer of those engines are literally the harbinger of death on earth.
Not only that. There is a lot of propaganda going on in the mainstream media, against the nuclear energy. If we thoroughly investigate about the groups which are indulging in these propaganda campaigns, then it will become clear that many of them are funded by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and other nations which are opposed to green energy. oil and all that, makes sense. that aside, this is happening: http://inhabitat.com/worlds-largest-nuclear-fusion-reactor-set-to-go-online-later-this-month/after 19 years of construction, the W7-X fusion reactor is set to be powered on later this month. although this reactor wont be meant to be a reliable and sustainable source of energy, it will be testing a new design that will surpass the current limitations of nuclear fusion reactors. if this test proves successful in proving the theories behind the device, we should be looking at drastic changes in nuclear reactor design over the next 3 - 4 decades to make a model that will provide clean, consistent energy. It is possible that we will see fusion reactors a lot faster. http://news.mit.edu/2015/small-modular-efficient-fusion-plant-0810Lockheed&martin are also saying something similiar. |
|
|
|
Please stop googling your wisdom on wikipedia please.
Explain to me how a icbm works and how it should be able to hit a moving target at water in wartimes.
Why do you think they developed asbm's for this job?
Please explain it to someone like me that has no clue about modern (naval) warfare.
You see, before the us lets one of it carrier downed by a nuclear strike they already would have started a first strike for sure.
You are right, ICBM are against big stationary targets and not against manouvering relative small (compared to a city) ships, so using those things against carriers would be wasting valuable resources, however the Chinese DF-21D and DF-26 anti ship ballistic missiles were designed for tracking and knocking out carriers. The only defense against those missiles would be taking out the supporting satellite systems. Exactly. Countermeasures would be trying to destroy or jam the guidance systems of the asbm. The paper i linked on page 1 discussed in one part chinas ability for c4isr which enables the asbm's to hit their target. That seems to be the weakpoint of the chinese. ( im in no way a expert for asbm's - but this seems to be the main problem ) |
|
|
|
this is wrong, because when the currency is appreciating the cost of raw materials is going down.
there arent less profits either.
in absolute numbers the final cost is less but through appreciation your buying power is the same.
hoarding raw materials happens - but not at the magnitude you are describing.
(in the end it is also another form of price speculaton)
supply and demand will lead to a equillibrium, it is not possible to hoard forever(=0 demand).
Simply put, you don't understand what you are talking about. Then again this is not a place for discussing such things, but you can go and discuss the question in this thread. Most likely that all your arguments you can ever think of have already been brought forth there (so you'd better read first)... I strongly recommend against raising the issue of deflation vs inflation here Please provide proof and dont show me a 22 page thread where the answer might be or not. Ture, bitcoin will benefit the savers, however, everyone can be a saver, not only central bank. It will indeed encourage saving, but as observed during recent years, when bitcoin price rose, people spent them more, because they were richer, so deflation is not a problem for the same reason that inflation is not a problem either
What did they actually spend them on, I'm sorry? Personally, I converted my bitcoins to fiat and got done with that. Did they buy any goods en masse? I remember some poor wretch having sold his home for bitcoins (meaning someone did actually buy something real for crypto), when the price was almost at the top... People felt very sorry for him, though People also felt very jealousy for those bought a lot at $5, like Winklevoss twins  You spend bitcoin by first convert to fiat money and then buy goods, just like when you are traveling in Japan, your dollar/euro can not buy anything there, you have to first exchange to Japanese Yen and then spend Then Bitcoin is not money, but just a speculative asset. Like many others out there. Or a Ponzi, since it neither functions as a currency (a medium of exchange) nor has any value of its own (yeah, I know nothing has value of its own)... That, simply put, sums it up Funny that the lawmakers are saying the exact opposite. ( in the eu btc is money) U seem to ignore that bitcoin is just 6 years old. |
|
|
|
the missile would never hit the carrier.
a carrier is always on tour in a battlegroup which consist of missiles cruisers, warships, destroyers, frigates and submarines and their main goal is to defend the carrier.
such a battlegroup has water and air superiority in a range of around 500+ km. You don't even know the basics of modern warfare. Suppose the Russians launch an ICBM (either the SS-18 Satan or the SS-23 Spider) against an American aircraft carrier. How these missiles cruisers, warships, destroyers, frigates, submarines.etc are going to shoot it down? Right now there is no Ameircan anti-ICBM missile capable of shooting down a Russian ballistic missile. Please stop googling your wisdom on wikipedia please. Explain to me how a icbm works and how it should be able to hit a moving target at water in wartimes. Why do you think they developed asbm's for this job? Please explain it to someone like me that has no clue about modern (naval) warfare. You see, before the us lets one of it carrier downed by a nuclear strike they already would have started a first strike for sure. |
|
|
|
...
something like this happens quite often if it is a aip submarine attacking.
there are a lot of nato exercises where such things happened and also the us navy leased a aip submarine from norway to exactly train against it.
so far it seems that the us navy has a lot of trouble against aip submarines.
The US Navy leased a Gotland class submarine from Sweden, for 2 years, then built a full size simulator of it and did the lightweight torpedo Mk54 BUG update. Thanks for correction. @carrier battlegroup I still didnt find any military paper ( us or not) that states something like that. There is no easy and safe method to down a carrier. If im wrong please provide information. |
|
|
|
what did jorge do to get a perma there? o.O |
|
|
|
Take a break from Pentagon/presstitute lah lah land fantasies and do some reading on Chinese anti-ship missile DF-21 and hypersonic missiles in general. Again, there´s a reason why missiles are missing from that propaganda in the OP.
can you please explain how the system works and what advantages it has and if there are possible counter measures? As for wonderland defence; in 2006 a Song class Chinese sub surfaced just two miles from a U.S. Aircraft carrier, right amongst the carrier group. And it´s anybody´s guess the number of such instances we don´t hear about. If it was war, that carrier is stone dead.
didnt i just talk about AIP submarines? the song class is not the newest model but still a high quality aip diesel submarine. (chinese have even better submarines) seems not that im the shill for some wonderland here. something like this happens quite often if it is a aip submarine attacking. there are a lot of nato exercises where such things happened and also the us navy leased a aip submarine from norway to exactly train against it. so far it seems that the us navy has a lot of trouble against aip submarines. |
|
|
|
If I'm not mistaken 1 or 2 more should be finished soon right? Indigenous, not just refitted. Don't know what their role will be though.
I think the PLAN is currently constructing an aircraft carrier, and it might be entering the service by 2018 or 2019. That said, aircraft carriers are obsolete now. A single ballistic missile (costing $10 million or $20 million) can destroy an entire aircraft carrier, which can cost as much as $5 billion to build. That is the reason why the Russians are not building any of them. the missile would never hit the carrier. a carrier is always on tour in a battlegroup which consist of missiles cruisers, warships, destroyers, frigates and submarines and their main goal is to defend the carrier. such a battlegroup has water and air superiority in a range of around 500+ km. the only thing i know of which could possibly down a carrier in a battlegroup are the latest state of the art aip submarines like the german U212 or U-216 @russian carrier they dont only cost billions to build but also hundreds of millions per year to maintain. it is just too expensive for russia. |
|
|
|
If the economy expands, more goods are being produced overall, but given the limited money supply, it leads to currency appreciation (more goods chasing less money) which allows the savers to become richer for doing virtually nothing (by being able to buy more with their stash). It essentially means that producers are sharing (socializing) their profits with do-littles...
I didn't quite understand what you meant by "monetary system which is backed up with something intrinsically useless"
I think that is true, but I would imagine that producers would be changing their prices in order to make sure their production remains profitable for them They won't be able to do this since their prices are determined on market terms, i.e. through the balance of demand and supply. If the currency is appreciating, raw materials actually end up more expensive to you, since your profits are diminished when you sell finished goods for less price (due to currency appreciation)... I have explained it many times already how exactly an appreciating currency hurts producers up to a point they begin suffering losses and stop production this is wrong, because when the currency is appreciating the cost of raw materials is going down. there arent less profits either. in absolute numbers the final cost is less but through appreciation your buying power is the same. hoarding raw materials happens - but not at the magnitude you are describing. (in the end it is also another form of price speculaton) supply and demand will lead to a equillibrium, it is not possible to hoard forever(=0 demand). also you might want to look at scarcity theory - i think it is very interesting and closely related to bitcoin and other economic processes. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
