|
It does sound a grand conspiracy theory, but if banks are behind it, is this the most effective way to attack crptos? I'd say regulations are still the cheaper and most effective option. Banks obviously have their hands on everything and that includes regulators. But the current state of things is that most governments are reluctant to put a blanket ban on btc so it suggests that if there are some "manipulators" it's probably not someone with hands on regulators.
|
|
|
|
|
It's a way to hold something of value, transacted in a trust less, decentralized network. Decentralized and Trust less is key here because what it's aiming to do is take power away from banks. Why you say? Because banks are responsible to some of the most tragic economic crises. And they dont even have to pay for their mistakes because, they're simply too powerful to touch.
|
|
|
|
It's really sad and very disheartening, but it cant be justified to not use bitcoin because of this. The same evil can be traced to fiat. 90% of US bills carry signs of cocaine ( http://edition.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/08/14/cocaine.traces.money/) But that doesnt mean we need to stop using usd. The truth is there are lots of creeps in this world, and we cant stop them by stopping bitcoin. bitcoin isnt the root of the problem. |
|
|
|
I hope you are doing alright. So I'm writing this thread especially for me to get it all out but I hope it will reach to some other people who will find it valued. For the last few years, I got serious about economics and crypto itself, I guess it's my passion. I find everything about money, economics, technologies, companies, crypto and many more very interesting. So I decided to try my luck, to go for this. I acquired a ton of knowledge, I followed the leading personalities in the economics (not necessarily crypto) and learned as much as I can. I spent months of reading because I really enjoyed it. Eventually, no regrets. So what I am trying to say is that I told my self to get into crypto as part of investments and then move to the stocks exchange but crypto as a start. My mistake? I convinced my father to hand my few thousands to invest into cryptocurrencies, and honestly, I wasn't wrong; my actions were. The problem is the huge need for immediate satisfaction so I couldn't really HODL I guess and lost almost all of this. What I am trying to say over here. That, those investments are based on a lot of speculation and knowledge but not only. Sometimes no matter how a product is good, the team is doing great and everything is perfect. Sometimes the market itself isn't perfect. So I'm trying to tell you KNOW YOUR LIMITS. Why so? Due to the high volatility (10% up, 10% down), I got addicted to this and all I wanted is to make 2x. I felt it was so close to me (to be honest if I wouldn't touch my money and just HODL almost no matter at what coin I would at least 3x). So I changed from a coin to a coin was looking for the closest pump, for instant profit I wanted it so hard without noticing I am losing very slowly. The economy is a very complicated thing, I kept watching multiple long videos about the economy to look what I missed. I am just a small letter in the whole bible, so I guess it doesn't matter. People believe they are different, but usually, they are not. Plan a strategy and more than all, be patient and do not let emotions or urges get into your actions. Investments could be very nice but sometimes risky and harmful. Cryptocurrency, for example, brought the good thing, made every single person from his bathroom to invest and become a millionaire; that's a huge great thing but if you don't follow the basic rules it can be fatal. In conclusion, don't put yourself above other traders or investors. Don't fall into the deep water. Actions should be taken very carefully and after a long smart thinking. I wish you the best!  Im so sorry for what happened to you and thank you for sharing! I guess there's no one right economic model for speculation. There's so many factors and the volatility looks more random than anything else. It's easy to say "dont invest more than you're willing to lose" but in reality when you're in a position where confidence backed by earned knowledge, it's easy to forget about risk. I hope things turn out good for though! It's not the end of the world |
|
|
|
|
In a sense yes. Because that's how its being used today. Like Gold. It never had to be a "currency" to succeed. All it needed to do is find a place in society and take power away from the banks. Apparently, it never had to be a currency to do that. Just being "digital gold" is enough.
|
|
|
|
|
This sets a nice precedent for new cases.Plus, the way its recognized in court gives you a feeling of protection against fraud. I guess this is what the first steps to legitimizing btc look like.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin is decentralized so that whoever you are from wherever you are rich or poor, you are free to use bitcoin for any purpose. Bitcoin is freely used for anyone. anywhere
What is your response with this opinion?
Yes but, most things are "free" to use. So i dont think it's a descriptive opinion. Its trust less framework is what makes it extra ordinary. It's what takes its "freedom" an extra mile. And that is also why most institutions right now wont recognize it. But that can chance anytime soon! |
|
|
|
|
It would take an international effort to 'crack' it. As they have to target exchanges and miners from all over the world. Also, currently, there is no incentive to "cracking" it. Governments are reluctant to ban as it could play a crucial role in the future. Killing it too soon could put them at a disadvantageous position.
|
|
|
|
In my opinion, BTC is not a traditional currency like gold and silver because it does not have any use value, so it is not a credit currency. It's basically just one use, money laundering tool. The tool explains why bitcoin prices are spread across the country and abroad. Domestic money is changed into bitcoins and then physical transportation to overseas exchange for foreign currency escapes regulation and the cost of money laundering is lower than before, and the risk is low.
Nobody argues with the fact that Bitcoin can be used as a tool for money laundering. However, it`s capabilities are not limited to this. Anonymity and ease of transactions were created to make people feel more confident when dealing with their finances. Bitcoin also allows you to untie money from the state and gives people the opportunity to dispose of their funds and savings. The fact that Bitcoin is sometimes used "for evil" is not Bitcoin's problem, but the fault of those in whose hands it turns into a money launderer.
Its use is explained by Direwolve. Ultimately that is the underlying value of bitcoin. Its monetary value isnt a made up value but it is supported by its technology. For the next point regarding money laundering, there are so many ways to do it. I doubt bitcoin is even in the top 10 most effective way of doing it because it required a 3rd party exchange. |
|
|
|
|
The video does have a point. The truth is, capitalism is the only system that works. It does create a huge division between the poor and the rich but atleast it tries to create opportunities for the poor to pull themselves up. Unlike other systems like communism and socialsm, where the only thing you can do to pull yourself up is through having political power. What i dont like about the video is "More capitalism = more growth". Whose growth exactly is he pertaining to? It cant be of the poor because more capitalism would just put more money to the rich. it's why people cant afford a living simply by working 8 hours a day. Extreme capitalism is bad as it wipes out the middle class.
|
|
|
|
Found this gem of a lecture by Jeremy Rifkin, Professor at Wharton, Economist --- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX3M8Ka9vUA--- Short Version He argues that we are on the brink of a 3rd Industrial Revolution. But first, what makes an Industrial Revolution? According to him, they occur when 3 new technologies merge together. New Communications, New Power Source, New Transport logistics. When these merge, productivity increases and so does aggregate efficiency, this is what the industrial revolutions are The 1st I.R. (Industrial Revolution) occured when the Telegram, a new power source called coal, and a new transport system (steam engine/Railroads) merged to forever change society as we know it. The 2nd I.R. occured when the telephone/radio/TV, Oil, Cars/trucks/buses once again merged into a new platform of society. The 3rd I.R. will occur once the Internet, renewable energy/smartgrids, new logistics (driverless cars, electric cars) all merge into the Internet of Things my personal highlights (around 30 min in) : "this third industrial revolution platform is designed to be distributed, not centralized. It works best when its collaborative and open and transparent, rather than closed and proprietary." "How do we ensure privacy when everyone is connected?" Lemme know your thoughts, whether you agree, disagree, I know it is a long watch, but I found it worth my time It's true that we left the manufacturing sector behind a long time ago. The future seems to be pointing to the relevance of the information sector. |
|
|
|
In 2018, we are having a lot of issues relating to cryptocurrencies and most of these issues are regulations and governments trying to centralized Bitcoin by establishing control over it.
I am thinking if Bitcoin can actually fight on as we can see from the pricing of recent that Bitcoin has been dropping and it is finding it difficult to recover. How far can Bitcoin go? Has governments using the tools' of regulation to control Bitcoin pricing working for them? Your opinion will be appreciated and if you make a good view about what is happening you will get merit from me. Thanks.
The fight between regulators and bitcoin mostly hasnt been about trying to establish control over it. But it's mostly about trying to protect their own financial system and maybe its people too. The popular oppinion between governments right now is to carefully watch bitcoin and how it grows because killing it too early might put them at an economic disadvantage against other countries who allow it. |
|
|
|
The 1 main difference between gold and BTC is that gold is actually used in the creation of goods which can be bought and sold. The demand for gold is not just speculative, as a good portion of that demand is actually as a raw material. Gold is entrenched in many cultures belief and reward system and this demand underpins it's valuation.
I am not disagreeing with you, I am just pointing out that the gold price has certain fundamental factors affecting the underlying price, which BTC does not.
You are right in saying that gold has a certain value that far exceeds its utility but the same can be said about bitcoin. Bitcoin is a piece of software that solves a problem. That is its underlying value. The problem being, how we keep our money away from centralized institutions. |
|
|
|
|
It does have some similarity to ponzi schemes as its value looks like depends on the number of people participating in it. The biggest difference is that ultimately a ponzi scheme has to real value behind it, while bitcoin has its technology giving it value. A ponzi scheme is just air while btc is a full blown technological disrupt.
It doesnt matter if bitcoin isnt what it's intended to be. It doesn't have to be a "currency" to achieve its purpose that is to change the banking system. Right now, its pointing to become "digital gold" and that is not at all bad. It wont be a currency because it'll be too valuable to trade but that doesnt give it any less power against centralized banks.
|
|
|
|
|
It's far from being used in commercial payments because there are no regulations supporting it. And so far there is no need to do so. There arent too many people using bitcoin so it doesnt make sense for companies to accept it and risk themselves to whatever legal issues. The first step to everything is adoption. That's the only way it's going to get recognized.
|
|
|
|
|
I do understand the situation they're in about the impracticality of a total ban and the impossibility of an effective regulation. It's natural though. The truth is no one knows the role bitcoin will play in the economy. It's impractical to immediately hinder the growth of crypto within the community as if crypto happens to play a huge role in the global economy, they'll be missing out big time.
|
|
|
|
|
This is good news! I'd rather have regulations than a blanket ban as long as regulations are fair and intended to protect the people using it. This is a right step in the right direction as this would promote adoption of the technology. This is only the news about taxation that im happy about.
|
|
|
|
|
Decentralization does not necessarily mean no one owns it. It only means that we all own a part of it. Control will be constantly up for grabs but that doesnt mean it's impossible to fully gain control. I get the rationality and the heart of not letting a single person own 1% of the currency, but the truth is, that's socialism. And we all know socialism doesnt work. Capitalism is not perfect as it creates a huge division between the poor and the wealthy but it's the only system that works for now. Bitcoin alone wont change that. What it could change is the distribution of power between the banks and the people. As we take power from the banks, hopefully they would stop being "too big too fail" and they would start making good decisions knowing that the government will no longer bail them out.
|
|
|
|
|
As long as we're practicing extreme capitalism it will never happened. But who knows how long capitalism will be sustainable? Chances are it bitcoin wont replace banks in the near future, but that doesnt mean bitcoin has failed. As long as bitcoin disrupts the world enough to take some power from banks then bitcoin has already succeeded.
|
|
|
|
What are the incentives to spend your money if it always goes up in value?
Does this not stunt economic growth?
If there was only one currency, and it was deflationary - yes, it would stunt economic growth. But we have loads of world fiat currencies, and about 1500 cryptocurrencies, many of why have mild inflation built into them. Such as Ethereum and Doge. The currency that "wins" on the payment front will likely be a mildly inflationary crypto. The existence of one does not necessarily have to end the other. I completely agree. We started from the gold standard then we abandoned it. Doesnt that tell you that we use what best fits our need? Right now we are moving fast and consuming more than we can produce, but that wont be sustainable forever. One day we are going to have to slow down and a deflationary currency would work better for us. But that doesnt necessarily mean we need to abandon fiat. We have fiat, because it could be used to bail us out of economic disasters, but when used irresponsibly, it causes more disasters. We need both deflationary currency and inflationary currency. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
