Hiall,

I am thinking about, the forum is rather large and the new post count has to be in thousands per day. Even though I spend most of my waking hours reading and replying to it, I can't keep pace 

Would it make sense to you that we will establish a prize, to be awarded weekly to the most insightful post or quote of a post? I am thinking that we would have maybe 5 categories, like in Nobel prize. The prize would also have to be bigger, to encourage posters. I propose a full bitcoin will be awarded to the winner in each of the categories, weekly. This will soon beat the measly $1,000,000 that the Nobel foundation has to offer. The prize would be held in BTC1 forever, as long as there are donators to the prize fund to keep it alive.

Anyone have feedback concerning the details:
- categories
- how to nominate
- weekly or monthly
- who selects the winners (popular vote after committee selection or the other way round or ?)

I definitely encourage you to pay exactly BTC10 for your Donator tag, can't you see how well it suits me? 

100% positive customer feedback so far. Thank you for all our customers for trusting us! We will update the numbers concerning shipping times shortly on the thread.

+1

And take the time to read and respond to my post also. After all I majored in Economics, which you apparently didn't.

Gold has the nasty habit of going into hiding. It is not available to be purchased when you need it. (Yeah except paper gold of course..)

Over the years I have learnt to trust in Tulving discount. It is the discount (in those golden years, nowadays commonly a premium) of 90% circulated silver over spot silver. If anyone interested, I can teach you how to interpret it. This was one of the most important things I learned when I was new to silver.

It would not be difficult for banks to segregate current account funds, which would also be 100% protected because they are not part of the bank's trading capital. Many nonbank financials (stockbrokers etc) must by law not touch customer's funds at all, except for paying the trades that the customer initiated and their own fees. It would not be unreasonable to pay 0.5-1% for a privilege of having your cash segregated.

After all, I am charging 0.8% for my customers' silver and bitcoin per annum, just for the guarantee that they actually are there.

To reiterate my proposal, all the common people should use these 100% reserve current accounts, which would abolish any and all need for government guarantees. If you want risk, take it consciously. If not, keep your money in current account (or in phys. gold, silver and bitcoin).

The Wise and Benevolent Leader, (who already accounts for 37% of Bitstamp trading volume). LOL

In all probability, sure as hell they can and will. But wait, doesn't that spell hunger..

I am more than prepared to wind down my business altogether, if it doesn't make sense any more. I am already selling my silver stock at a discount (see signature) and keeping the proceeds in bitcoin. If the politicians want that all economic activity grind to standstill, I am the early indicator. In fact I sold out of gold already, and cashed out of euros in the bank. If they force me to abandon cash, the only business that I have left is to trade between silver and bitcoin. And since even that needs to be done clandestinely I am afraid, there will be no business, and I can start collecting dole and move to Thailand.

My company's closing of gold operations was the 3rd most read article in Helsingin Sanomat the biggest Finnish newspaper, last Wednesday.

I have not yet purchased my first house. Also started my current business in 2003 without outside financing. I have to admit that the first company of mine back in 2001 had external stock and bond financing, and also underwent liquidation 2 years after I was ousted. That was the biggest single reason for my no-credit stance, which has worked incredibly well ever since thank you.

All trade also is not about credit, it is about discounting.

Excerpt: "Thus the discount rate is determined by the condition of the consumer goods market, and not by the availability of savings. It reflects the propensity to consume (with apologies to Keynes). There is no loan involved in discounting, so the rate of interest is irrelevant. Tradesmen processing semi-finished goods hardly ever pay cash for supplies to their suppliers. The prices they are quoted are not cash prices. They are “90 days net”. The credit is part of the deal: you need not even ask for it. On the rare occasion when you don’t need the credit you pre-pay your bill, having applied the discount to its face value." (emphasis original)

Strictly, Professor Fekete is saying that credit is vital, but it need not involve anyone lending. And this is the way how the world worked during its so far most glorious years between 1871-1913.

If banks needed any government insurance umbrella for the people to trust in them, I would drastically lower the threshold.

EUR 100,000 is an insane amount of money to be put in a bank anyway, for most it equals more than a year's consumption. I would derive the risk-free limit as 2 months well-to-do net salary of EUR 4,000 and then some, EUR 10,000 per person MAX. The people have no need for greater bank balances, and the companies that would have this need, can take care of their own business and manage risk efficiently as that's their job. I would exempt companies totally. Also non-residents of the bank's homeland have no share in paying for this, so no insurance for them is necessary.

This coverage should therefore be strictly per person, not per person per bank. One person is entitled to €10,000 government bailout if his bank/s fail/s. If this limit is tapped, it would only replenish by an annual rate of €1,000.

My ideology is that banks do not need protection of any kind, it just leads to more and more moral hazard and keeps people in lull etc. BUT if something is needed, this is the reasonable maximum I would expect as a depositor and demand as a taxpayer.

Oh yes, and the insurance would be tapped only after the bank goes BANKrupt and all others lose out.

+1.

Last week this 6-hour slot scored +6.7%. Now the same would be about $82.69  

1:28 to go...

Thanks! It is all going to cold wallet etcetc, and I'm not the biggest fish in the pond. But I already have the experience of gov knocking on my door and confiscating my golds. The making noise in this forum is actually my insurance against further government aggression. If I am silenced, I hope you direct the hell against the ones responsible.

Lol you little fish, fulfilling my prediction prematurely  

BS turning bullish, pointing towards $80 or more in 1-2 hours!

Yawning at the willingness of some to sell for 2-3 $ discount in Mt.Gox.

That, coupled with selling to the lonely bids immediately afterwards..

.. buys you about 1 hour extra time before we break $80. It has been done in every other market already so not a big deal.

This is called moral hazard, and the fact that this shit is going to blow up on all of the Finns' and Germans' face, is the very reason why I took my last EUR 30,000 out of the bank today (see pic). Now they can try to "tax" me bruahaha.

I mean the "advantage" is miscalculated to the downside. As long as gold is underperforming fiat, the difference is even more striking. If gold overperforms, then it is less than what you're leading us to believe. But this is your thread, do what you may.

It was me. I started buying yesterday with $130k war chest that cleared 15:52 GMT. The chart ends with my buying of the wall at $80 this morning.

I am not an experienced trader, meaning that I have 15 years of experience but I don't daytrade and generally seldom sell. Never sold a bitcoin. Despite the fact that the market went from a 2-dollar discount to 2-dollar premium compared to Mt.Gox during the spree, I think I did reasonably well. After all, if my math is right, I was a counterparty in 37% of all the trades during the period.

Bitstamp bearish, expected price (midpoint between BTC300 bid/ask volume) in 1-2 hours: $81.

MtGox seems to be stuck at $79.

Despite the gloom setup, I expect a definitive all-time-high in 2 hours.

I am basing this prediction on my new 4-week trading data of six-hour intervals. Tuesday, 12-18 GMT has seen solid gains of 5.4% and 6.9% in the last two weeks. It is the 3rd best performing 6-hour slot of all the 28. The reason is probably the timing of incoming funds and traders online.

Since we started at $77.5, I can expect with confidence that we break through the "wall" at $80 and go to $80.5-$82 range before the sun sets here. There seems to be about equal probability (1/3) to end up in that range, or go above or stay below.

Sane and rational people are investing everything they can afford to lose in bitcoin right now.