Mandatory Bitcoin purchasing, to be performed by each state

[odolvlobo]

I propose a purchasing agreement, which mandates every state in the World to buy a certain amount of Bitcoin every year. The amount will be coupled to the country's respective GDP and could be something along the lines of 0.001%-0.01% of it. The states have to hold on to their purchased coins for a given amount of time until they can invest them again.

What kind of benefit are you expecting from this?

[ensurance982]

Well, of course this would have to be done by the UN assembly or something. And of course this is unrealistic as of now, but hey... isn't it interesting to speculate about those things?

If we're going to ask UN, we might as well ask them to make Esperanto the official second language for every country. That would be nice, in my opinion.

I think it would already suffice to use English as a common language. That way less people would have to switch and a lot of people are already at least somewhat familiar with it!

[R2D221]

Well, of course this would have to be done by the UN assembly or something. And of course this is unrealistic as of now, but hey... isn't it interesting to speculate about those things?

If we're going to ask UN, we might as well ask them to make Esperanto the official second language for every country. That would be nice, in my opinion.

I think it would already suffice to use English as a common language. That way less people would have to switch and a lot of people are already at least somewhat familiar with it!

It also already suffices to use the US Dollar as a common currency, for the same reasons you state.

[ensurance982]

I propose a purchasing agreement, which mandates every state in the World to buy a certain amount of Bitcoin every year. The amount will be coupled to the country's respective GDP and could be something along the lines of 0.001%-0.01% of it. The states have to hold on to their purchased coins for a given amount of time until they can invest them again.

What kind of benefit are you expecting from this?

Isn't it obvious? Bitcoin would profit greatly from this. The adoption and value would skyrocket. It would immediately gain legitimacy around the world. Also, the smaller countries could benefit from the Bitcoin price skyrocketing.

[ensurance982]

Well, of course this would have to be done by the UN assembly or something. And of course this is unrealistic as of now, but hey... isn't it interesting to speculate about those things?

If we're going to ask UN, we might as well ask them to make Esperanto the official second language for every country. That would be nice, in my opinion.

I think it would already suffice to use English as a common language. That way less people would have to switch and a lot of people are already at least somewhat familiar with it!

It also already suffices to use the US Dollar as a common currency, for the same reasons you state.

You can't. The US Dollar is still controlled by the United States. They could just go ahead and decide to issue 10x the current amount of USD if they wanted to. With Bitcoin no sovereign state can do these kind of things!

[AtheistAKASaneBrain]

I propose a purchasing agreement, which mandates every state in the World to buy a certain amount of Bitcoin every year. The amount will be coupled to the country's respective GDP and could be something along the lines of 0.001%-0.01% of it. The states have to hold on to their purchased coins for a given amount of time until they can invest them again.

Which other rules and what conditions and timeframes for selling off the coins do you suggest should be implemented?

This would be like having a coordinated pump group divided by countries. Pretty far fetched in my opinion, it's already enough to coordinate small amounts of people.

[byt411]

I propose a purchasing agreement, which mandates every state in the World to buy a certain amount of Bitcoin every year. The amount will be coupled to the country's respective GDP and could be something along the lines of 0.001%-0.01% of it. The states have to hold on to their purchased coins for a given amount of time until they can invest them again.

What kind of benefit are you expecting from this?

Isn't it obvious? Bitcoin would profit greatly from this. The adoption and value would skyrocket. It would immediately gain legitimacy around the world. Also, the smaller countries could benefit from the Bitcoin price skyrocketing.

Why would adoption skyrocket? Why would it gain legitimacy around the world? It would only be viewed as an investment product, not a currency.
Seriously, have you even thought about it at all?

[R2D221]

Well, of course this would have to be done by the UN assembly or something. And of course this is unrealistic as of now, but hey... isn't it interesting to speculate about those things?

If we're going to ask UN, we might as well ask them to make Esperanto the official second language for every country. That would be nice, in my opinion.

I think it would already suffice to use English as a common language. That way less people would have to switch and a lot of people are already at least somewhat familiar with it!

It also already suffices to use the US Dollar as a common currency, for the same reasons you state.

You can't. The US Dollar is still controlled by the United States. They could just go ahead and decide to issue 10x the current amount of USD if they wanted to. With Bitcoin no sovereign state can do these kind of things!

Now you understand why I use Esperanto, it also is independent from any country.

[maku]

Rather than "forcing" anyone to do anything, we should just focus on making Bitcoin even bigger and better.  The better it works and the more people who adopt it, the more useful it becomes.  If it's a desirable commodity, there will be no need to mandate anything.  Before we know it, governments will want to store some of their wealth in it.  Assuming we don't do anything to screw it up, that is.

Thi is the correct and the only way we we - as bitcoin community can act. We can't impose anything on anyone but we can make bitcoin so good and desirable that government or basically everyone would like to have a share of this wealth. But I think we need to wait for this to happen a little more unfortunately..

[tokeweed]

I propose a purchasing agreement, which mandates every state in the World to buy a certain amount of Bitcoin every year. The amount will be coupled to the country's respective GDP and could be something along the lines of 0.001%-0.01% of it. The states have to hold on to their purchased coins for a given amount of time until they can invest them again.

Which other rules and what conditions and timeframes for selling off the coins do you suggest should be implemented?

And what's in it for the state?  What if their counter proposal is to outlaw mining, making it only them are allowed to mine and support the network. 

[byt411]

I propose a purchasing agreement, which mandates every state in the World to buy a certain amount of Bitcoin every year. The amount will be coupled to the country's respective GDP and could be something along the lines of 0.001%-0.01% of it. The states have to hold on to their purchased coins for a given amount of time until they can invest them again.

Which other rules and what conditions and timeframes for selling off the coins do you suggest should be implemented?

And what's in it for the state?  What if their counter proposal is to outlaw mining, making it only them are allowed to mine and support the network. 

Well, people would then disregard the blocks mined by the states and treat them as a fork. People would go back to mining with their CPUs, and all the blocks mined by the state wouldn't be considered as the main branch.

[odolvlobo]

I propose a purchasing agreement, which mandates every state in the World to buy a certain amount of Bitcoin every year. The amount will be coupled to the country's respective GDP and could be something along the lines of 0.001%-0.01% of it. The states have to hold on to their purchased coins for a given amount of time until they can invest them again.

What kind of benefit are you expecting from this?

Isn't it obvious? Bitcoin would profit greatly from this. The adoption and value would skyrocket. It would immediately gain legitimacy around the world. Also, the smaller countries could benefit from the Bitcoin price skyrocketing.

There is no benefit to Bitcoin from an increasing value. Whether a bitcoin is worth $100 or $100,000, it still functions exactly the same.

Furthermore, the value would remain high only as long as the bitcoins are not spent. If countries bought bitcoins every year, the price would certainly go up -- until they decided to spend them, and then it would fall by just as much. In order for the price to rise permanently, the countries would have to never spend them, and then they receive no benefit from holding them. What you are really proposing is for countries to destroy bitcoins in order to subsidize you and other holders of bitcoins.

Countries buying bitcoins will have no effect on the adoption of bitcoins. Have you heard of Special Drawing Rights? It is a form of currency that countries buy and hold. I don't see any adoption of SDRs as a result of countries buying them.

Finally, smaller countries would only benefit because the larger countries are subsidizing them.

[Amph]

I propose a purchasing agreement, which mandates every state in the World to buy a certain amount of Bitcoin every year. The amount will be coupled to the country's respective GDP and could be something along the lines of 0.001%-0.01% of it. The states have to hold on to their purchased coins for a given amount of time until they can invest them again.

What kind of benefit are you expecting from this?

Isn't it obvious? Bitcoin would profit greatly from this. The adoption and value would skyrocket. It would immediately gain legitimacy around the world. Also, the smaller countries could benefit from the Bitcoin price skyrocketing.

There is no benefit to Bitcoin from an increasing value. Whether a bitcoin is worth $100 or $100,000, it still functions exactly the same.

Furthermore, the value would remain high only as long as the bitcoins are not spent. If countries bought bitcoins every year, the price would certainly go up -- until they decided to spend them, and then it would fall by just as much. In order for the price to rise permanently, the countries would have to never spend them, and then they receive no benefit from holding them. What you are really proposing is for countries to destroy bitcoins in order to subsidize you and other holders of bitcoins.

Countries buying bitcoins will have no effect on the adoption of bitcoins. Have you heard of Special Drawing Rights? It is a form of currency that countries buy and hold. I don't see any adoption of SDRs as a result of countries buying them.

Finally, smaller countries would only benefit because the larger countries are subsidizing them.

this is true only if all country decide to spend them at the same time, the probability of this is very low, so while some might spend them the other will keep buying, mantaining the price at the same level at least, with small correction toward rising

also "There is no benefit to Bitcoin from an increasing value", not really agree with this, with a better value bitcoin can maintain a better purchasing power, this allow who have a low btc amount to buy more things(helping poor in this way)

[ensurance982]

Well, of course this would have to be done by the UN assembly or something. And of course this is unrealistic as of now, but hey... isn't it interesting to speculate about those things?

If we're going to ask UN, we might as well ask them to make Esperanto the official second language for every country. That would be nice, in my opinion.

I think it would already suffice to use English as a common language. That way less people would have to switch and a lot of people are already at least somewhat familiar with it!

It also already suffices to use the US Dollar as a common currency, for the same reasons you state.

You can't. The US Dollar is still controlled by the United States. They could just go ahead and decide to issue 10x the current amount of USD if they wanted to. With Bitcoin no sovereign state can do these kind of things!

Now you understand why I use Esperanto, it also is independent from any country.

Yeah, well it's still influenced a lot by many 'regular' languages. But you have to look at the practicability of the whole world switching to Esperanto. But kudos to Zamenhof for pulling this off.
Oh, and why not Klingon?

[Lauda]

Isn't it obvious? Bitcoin would profit greatly from this. The adoption and value would skyrocket. It would immediately gain legitimacy around the world. Also, the smaller countries could benefit from the Bitcoin price skyrocketing.

There is no benefit to Bitcoin from an increasing value. Whether a bitcoin is worth $100 or $100,000, it still functions exactly the same.

Furthermore, the value would remain high only as long as the bitcoins are not spent. If countries bought bitcoins every year, the price would certainly go up -- until they decided to spend them, and then it would fall by just as much. In order for the price to rise permanently, the countries would have to never spend them, and then they receive no benefit from holding them. What you are really proposing is for countries to destroy bitcoins in order to subsidize you and other holders of bitcoins.

Countries buying bitcoins will have no effect on the adoption of bitcoins. Have you heard of Special Drawing Rights? It is a form of currency that countries buy and hold. I don't see any adoption of SDRs as a result of countries buying them.

Finally, smaller countries would only benefit because the larger countries are subsidizing them.

I've been saying this around the forum for quite some time now. We should not be focused on the price so much.
It does not matter at all. Adoption and merchants do. Actually it is much easier to use Bitcoin with the current price than it would be if at $1000. I guess we should enjoy these days as they might not last much longer.

[odolvlobo]

...
Furthermore, the value would remain high only as long as the bitcoins are not spent. If countries bought bitcoins every year, the price would certainly go up -- until they decided to spend them, and then it would fall by just as much.

this is true only if all country decide to spend them at the same time, the probability of this is very low, so while some might spend them the other will keep buying, mantaining the price at the same level at least, with small correction toward rising

If countries buy bitcoins that they can't spend, then they are effectively burning them in order to subsidize other bitcoin holders.

also "There is no benefit to Bitcoin from an increasing value", not really agree with this, with a better value bitcoin can maintain a better purchasing power, this allow who have a low btc amount to buy more things(helping poor in this wayW

Don't forget that if the price goes up, then it also costs more to obtain them. That doesn't help poor people.

Anyway, in proposing that countries buy and hold bitcoins simply to increase the price, you are asking for people to subsidize you and other bitcoin holders. Is that what you really want? A subsidy?

The real value of Bitcoin is in its ability to improve the lives of the people that use it and not the people that hold it. If you are doing nothing but holding bitcoins and hoping for the value to rise so that you can cash out, then you are helping nobody.

[yayayo]

I've been saying this around the forum for quite some time now. We should not be focused on the price so much.
It does not matter at all. Adoption and merchants do. Actually it is much easier to use Bitcoin with the current price than it would be if at $1000. I guess we should enjoy these days as they might not last much longer.

Exactly. And countries will adopt Bitcoin when there's some benefit to do so.

There's no reason to mandate / force countries to buy Bitcoin. The free market will take care of that.

ya.ya.yo!

[Q7]

I propose a purchasing agreement, which mandates every state in the World to buy a certain amount of Bitcoin every year. The amount will be coupled to the country's respective GDP and could be something along the lines of 0.001%-0.01% of it. The states have to hold on to their purchased coins for a given amount of time until they can invest them again.

Which other rules and what conditions and timeframes for selling off the coins do you suggest should be implemented?

Before we even talk about the rules and conditions, how we are going to supposedly make it mandatory for each country in the world to adopt bitcoin in the first place? If they fail to see its potential, then so be it. I'm sure citizens have seen that and have voluntarily adopt bitcoin on their own.

[tokeweed]

I propose a purchasing agreement, which mandates every state in the World to buy a certain amount of Bitcoin every year. The amount will be coupled to the country's respective GDP and could be something along the lines of 0.001%-0.01% of it. The states have to hold on to their purchased coins for a given amount of time until they can invest them again.

Which other rules and what conditions and timeframes for selling off the coins do you suggest should be implemented?

And what's in it for the state?  What if their counter proposal is to outlaw mining, making it only them are allowed to mine and support the network. 

Well, people would then disregard the blocks mined by the states and treat them as a fork. People would go back to mining with their CPUs, and all the blocks mined by the state wouldn't be considered as the main branch.

Awesome idea.  Ok let's do this!

[Amph]

...
Furthermore, the value would remain high only as long as the bitcoins are not spent. If countries bought bitcoins every year, the price would certainly go up -- until they decided to spend them, and then it would fall by just as much.

this is true only if all country decide to spend them at the same time, the probability of this is very low, so while some might spend them the other will keep buying, mantaining the price at the same level at least, with small correction toward rising

If countries buy bitcoins that they can't spend, then they are effectively burning them in order to subsidize other bitcoin holders.

also "There is no benefit to Bitcoin from an increasing value", not really agree with this, with a better value bitcoin can maintain a better purchasing power, this allow who have a low btc amount to buy more things(helping poor in this wayW

Don't forget that if the price goes up, then it also costs more to obtain them. That doesn't help poor people.

Anyway, in proposing that countries buy and hold bitcoins simply to increase the price, you are asking for people to subsidize you and other bitcoin holders. Is that what you really want? A subsidy?

The real value of Bitcoin is in its ability to improve the lives of the people that use it and not the people that hold it. If you are doing nothing but holding bitcoins and hoping for the value to rise so that you can cash out, then you are helping nobody.

1-this is true only if they don't buy before the price rise

2-i agree with this, but some holding is recommended besides what btc is for, one should also think about his economic condition, we can't spend every penny we get

3-well you are helpinh yourself, it's not like we are living to always help someone else, there must be a little healthy egoism