Ohh Found some good stuff here: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/03/creditcard-surcharges-lawsuit-idUSL1N0HT18B20131003"Even beyond the informational content of surcharges, sellers' inability to effectively inform consumers of the true costs of credit has the effect of artificially subsidizing credit at the expense of cash, increasing overall credit-card usage and consumer debt," "The card industry wants to perpetuate the myth that using a credit card is free, or priceless. But the cost is baked into the price of all the goods and services we buy." argued that the state law protected shoppers by enabling them to rely on advertised prices, rather than be surprised at checkout with surcharges. tl;dr blah blah blah creditcards companies should get tons of $$$ because we're afraid that dumb people can't grasp the concept of paying 3% more if they want to pay with their credit card Most consumers prefer to use CC because of cash back incentives and an easy way to itemize their spending record. By surcharging it'll just irritate the majority of consumers. Seems like only the small shops care about this. The big shops like Target rather just have one price Ok i can buy the argument that Creditcards are more convenient than cash, and creditcard companies are willing to provide that convenience for a certain fee of course. And they hate for you to know that you're actually paying a 2-3% fee, instead why not give you a 0.5%bonus points and make you feel smart like you're actually making money while at the same time lobby to pass the law that prohibits merchants to directly pass that fee to you and instead just cost average their fees on people who don't even use that "convenience" That's how the world works. I didnt like it when they banned indoor smoking. But that's what the majority wants |
|
|
|
Ohh Found some good stuff here: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/03/creditcard-surcharges-lawsuit-idUSL1N0HT18B20131003"Even beyond the informational content of surcharges, sellers' inability to effectively inform consumers of the true costs of credit has the effect of artificially subsidizing credit at the expense of cash, increasing overall credit-card usage and consumer debt," "The card industry wants to perpetuate the myth that using a credit card is free, or priceless. But the cost is baked into the price of all the goods and services we buy." argued that the state law protected shoppers by enabling them to rely on advertised prices, rather than be surprised at checkout with surcharges. tl;dr blah blah blah creditcards companies should get tons of $$$ because we're afraid that dumb people can't grasp the concept of paying 3% more if they want to pay with their credit card Most consumers prefer to use CC because of cash back incentives and an easy way to itemize their spending record. By surcharging it'll just irritate the majority of consumers. Seems like only the small shops care about this. The big shops like Target rather just have one price |
|
|
|
Because consumers don't like it and they're the voters |
|
|
|
The main problem with bitcoin is the non-elasticity of the monetary supply, which means that it's monetary base it's capped. 21 million, and no more, which is not a good monetary policy.
BTC supply is 100% known and predictable. Predictability allows for stability, which is what markets need to function properly. It's better to have a small inflation, than to have bubbles and crashes every single year
The giant boom-bust cycles we see in modern economies seem to occur about every 8 years or so, and are very difficult to predict. When a vehicle like BTC cycles more frequently it allows business to more reliably anticipate market fluctuations. And you know this because.....err....we just witnessed the price drop like 80% in a year. Yep, 100% known and predictable |
|
|
|
 For reference What about 95% of other business that don't do this? |
|
|
|
Most credit cards and banks cover for unauthorized losses, which BTC does not have this insurance.
But they pass this cost of fraud onto the consumer, effectively raising the price of everything you buy. BTC insurance could become a fairly large industry. Citation please? People here say that a lot but I've never seen any proof that fraud is a line in COGS I assume the merchants are subsidising that in the fees they pay. Mainly is the " interchange fee" the Visa and MC and AMex, Disc pays to the middle merchant banks to promote their cards,which includes interest 2-3% and per transaction fees. Yes merchants pay a cc fee. But any proof they pass this onto consumer? I think they just eat it in their margin. I know my business did The intermediary bank and association pays for it. But the "interchange" association will reimburse some of the loss to the final merchant if they used rules like i.d. verification and physical swipe of transaction them from the buyer, online sales are much higher risk than physical location, therefore the higher interest and swipe charges for online merchants. Thank you. I also think the claim that bitcoin is cheaper than CC is bogus. Cost per transaction is all time low and it's still around $8-9. A year ago it was almost $80 per transaction https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transactionWhat does this "cost per transaction" mean? The price of 0.0001 BTC? The Btcpay or coinbase fee? I think maybe mining cost / transaction count? Then it has nothing to do with the merchants or customer. "Cost per Transaction A chart showing miners revenue divided by the number of transactions." Build in process to distribute decentralized currency taken as a transaction cost, i guess when someone is on the mission to disproof something facts don't matter The only reason the cost went down is because the price went down. When price is was higher it was way more expensive than CC. Somebody has to pay for that. It's not low cost as many claim Huh what are you talking about? Do explain why i as a consumer or a merchants care how much miners are getting? If you pay a merchant directly with Bitcoin the transaction fee goes to miner. So who pays for that? If the merchant pays for it what incentive do they have over CC? The whole argument that merchant have incentive to choose Bitcoin over CC and pass the savings to consumer has no legs |
|
|
|
Most credit cards and banks cover for unauthorized losses, which BTC does not have this insurance.
But they pass this cost of fraud onto the consumer, effectively raising the price of everything you buy. BTC insurance could become a fairly large industry. Citation please? People here say that a lot but I've never seen any proof that fraud is a line in COGS I assume the merchants are subsidising that in the fees they pay. Mainly is the " interchange fee" the Visa and MC and AMex, Disc pays to the middle merchant banks to promote their cards,which includes interest 2-3% and per transaction fees. Yes merchants pay a cc fee. But any proof they pass this onto consumer? I think they just eat it in their margin. I know my business did The intermediary bank and association pays for it. But the "interchange" association will reimburse some of the loss to the final merchant if they used rules like i.d. verification and physical swipe of transaction them from the buyer, online sales are much higher risk than physical location, therefore the higher interest and swipe charges for online merchants. Thank you. I also think the claim that bitcoin is cheaper than CC is bogus. Cost per transaction is all time low and it's still around $8-9. A year ago it was almost $80 per transaction https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transactionWhat does this "cost per transaction" mean? The price of 0.0001 BTC? The Btcpay or coinbase fee? I think maybe mining cost / transaction count? Then it has nothing to do with the merchants or customer. "Cost per Transaction A chart showing miners revenue divided by the number of transactions." Build in process to distribute decentralized currency taken as a transaction cost, i guess when someone is on the mission to disproof something facts don't matter The only reason the cost went down is because the price went down. When price is was higher it was way more expensive than CC. Somebody has to pay for that. It's not low cost as many claim |
|
|
|
Most credit cards and banks cover for unauthorized losses, which BTC does not have this insurance.
But they pass this cost of fraud onto the consumer, effectively raising the price of everything you buy. BTC insurance could become a fairly large industry. Citation please? People here say that a lot but I've never seen any proof that fraud is a line in COGS Trolling? In US gas stations in some states list prices in cash and credit card. Credit card fraud costs millions each year, doesn't take a genius to realize that someone is paying for that, guess who that someone is  Wow Only one example without citation. They don't do that in my state or any states from NY to VA. By your idiotic logic, I can claim that merchants are passing all their costs to the consumer including rents and payroll insurance, etc.. Try broadening your horizons and getting at least out of your state for starters. Yes they do that's basic business. Covering from their margins lol and where do those margins come from? Ok ok have it your way credit cards cover fraud from their margins, which they get by charging the retailer, who pays it from their margins which they get by charging customers. That's why retailers charge higher fee for credit card use (err give discount when you DON'T use CC) where allowed heres one of the first google results http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/17/business/merchants-consider-credit-card-surcharges-or-cash-discounts.html?_r=0 i didn't really read the whole thing don't have time to entertain every troll Did you even read the article you linked? |
|
|
|
Most credit cards and banks cover for unauthorized losses, which BTC does not have this insurance.
But they pass this cost of fraud onto the consumer, effectively raising the price of everything you buy. BTC insurance could become a fairly large industry. Citation please? People here say that a lot but I've never seen any proof that fraud is a line in COGS I assume the merchants are subsidising that in the fees they pay. Mainly is the " interchange fee" the Visa and MC and AMex, Disc pays to the middle merchant banks to promote their cards,which includes interest 2-3% and per transaction fees. Yes merchants pay a cc fee. But any proof they pass this onto consumer? I think they just eat it in their margin. I know my business did The intermediary bank and association pays for it. But the "interchange" association will reimburse some of the loss to the final merchant if they used rules like i.d. verification and physical swipe of transaction them from the buyer, online sales are much higher risk than physical location, therefore the higher interest and swipe charges for online merchants. Thank you. I also think the claim that bitcoin is cheaper than CC is bogus. Cost per transaction is all time low and it's still around $8-9. A year ago it was almost $80 per transaction https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transactionOn top of that there's the 9% inflation from block rewards |
|
|
|
Most credit cards and banks cover for unauthorized losses, which BTC does not have this insurance.
But they pass this cost of fraud onto the consumer, effectively raising the price of everything you buy. BTC insurance could become a fairly large industry. Citation please? People here say that a lot but I've never seen any proof that fraud is a line in COGS I assume the merchants are subsidising that in the fees they pay. Mainly is the " interchange fee" the Visa and MC and AMex, Disc pays to the middle merchant banks to promote their cards,which includes interest 2-3% and per transaction fees. Yes merchants pay a cc fee. But any proof they pass this onto consumer? I think they just eat it in their margin. I know my business did |
|
|
|
Most credit cards and banks cover for unauthorized losses, which BTC does not have this insurance.
But they pass this cost of fraud onto the consumer, effectively raising the price of everything you buy. BTC insurance could become a fairly large industry. Citation please? People here say that a lot but I've never seen any proof that fraud is a line in COGS Trolling? In US gas stations in some states list prices in cash and credit card. Credit card fraud costs millions each year, doesn't take a genius to realize that someone is paying for that, guess who that someone is Wow Only one example without citation. They don't do that in my state or any states from NY to VA. By your idiotic logic, I can claim that merchants are passing all their costs to the consumer including rents and payroll insurance, etc.. |
|
|
|
They have been trying to do this since 2012 and still haven't moved further along. Why would it change this year? The hoops to jump through are many, and the actual info (let alone positive info) are few and far between. It could happen, but don't base 20% of your annual prediction on this yet unknown.
Another thing, there is no proof that they will ever buy another Bitcoin for the fund. The net inflow would be to the ETF with the possibility of a bit of overflow into the actual underlying asset. I'm sure they will want to recoup some of their costs incurred over the last 2+ years, trying to make this a reality.
Given they are still 10x up on their initial investment of 100,000 coins I don't think costs are a major problem. I thought their buy in price is around $200? Not a chance! They did most of their buying between $5 and $15. @inca, this is true, so maybe I'm wrong about them needing to recoup, but it doesn't change any of the rest of my statement. They announced they owned $11M worth when the price was $266 then it crashed to $120. That's about coins 92K coins valued at the $120 price. How many coins are they rumored to have? |
|
|
|
Most credit cards and banks cover for unauthorized losses, which BTC does not have this insurance.
But they pass this cost of fraud onto the consumer, effectively raising the price of everything you buy. BTC insurance could become a fairly large industry. Citation please? People here say that a lot but I've never seen any proof that fraud is a line in COGS |
|
|
|
looks like market manipulation, remember someone is buying the sells
Bagholders |
|
|
|
Someone still has to tell me why history should repeat itself now that price is 100X higher than what it was at the end of the 2011 bear market. Because Bitcoin is the perfect exploit of the squirrel in man. Its utility beyond that is secondary. I mean, look at how gold is hoarded. Underground vaults stacked with bars, what utility do they possibly hold? Anyway, if history repeats it will be 35X.  Bitcoin has no utility if its price goes to 0. It will just be another random byte of data floating in cyberspace. Conversely, even if gold goes to 0, it has industrial uses in electrical components and heat conduction. Same with silver. So not sure where that comparison stems. A few thousands lines of code in Facebook is worth billions. Its also just another "random byte of data floating in cyberspace" right? Idiot like you should really stop talking about " bytes and bits" and start learning about value vs price. Facebook is company with revenues. Before you start calling people idiot look in the mirror |
|
|
|
|
I'm glad you brought up in inelasticty flaw. Your analysis in the OP is spot on. Unfortunately, Nobody here sees that because they're all speculators. To them the cap limit is the pump used to sell the bitcoins. "Hard limit means I can be in the 1%"
Their greed will doom them to losing it all because they can't think of external factors.
However, I think your proposal of an "AI central bank" is lacking in foresight about the political realities. Notice even in this crappy forum they all talk about politics when someone brings up economics
|
|
|
|
They have been trying to do this since 2012 and still haven't moved further along. Why would it change this year? The hoops to jump through are many, and the actual info (let alone positive info) are few and far between. It could happen, but don't base 20% of your annual prediction on this yet unknown.
Another thing, there is no proof that they will ever buy another Bitcoin for the fund. The net inflow would be to the ETF with the possibility of a bit of overflow into the actual underlying asset. I'm sure they will want to recoup some of their costs incurred over the last 2+ years, trying to make this a reality.
Given they are still 10x up on their initial investment of 100,000 coins I don't think costs are a major problem. I thought their buy in price is around $200? |
|
|
|
|
I think you should investigate the 2 main philosophical factions of money chartalism vs metallism.
Austrians fall into the metallism camp. In the chartalist camp you have people like Marx, Keynes, Say, Mill, Smith, all of MMT and post Keynesians
I think Austrians would say no crypto can work because it's not backed any commodities. Chartalists would say crypto can't work unless by authority of state to accept for tax payments
|
|
|
|
|
What people don't get is that once the bubble pops like let's say bitcoin goes below 100. It might take 10 or more years to turn to this level. Thats what happened to some tech stocks like MSFT and YHOO and Japanese real estate bubble
|
|
|
|
|
Like clockwork Saturday night the price drops. LOL
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
