You Know Whats f**king Sad?

[teodor87]

First of all, the need to create Bitcoins. But even more than that-bitcoins are tied to the USD. And do you know HOW MANY people are buying silver/gold instead of taking their "paper". Cause thats what it is-paper. Even change will be soon. Mr GreenJew (no offense) just stays posted all day making as much money as he wants. The reason things 99% of the time are raised in  price is because of inflation-GreenJew got excited and printed a bunch more.
Basically, the USD is backed by...not even the US (its not Federal)paper?
Now, we've stepped back in time to when the Silver Standard existed.
We are almost literally repeating historical economics that did not work out so well.
God help us.

In fact it's not the paper that's the problem. It's electronic currency.
You may not realize it, but most of the currency we use today is not existent. For instance.

Lets say that you have 50000$ in your bank account. It does not mean that you have a box, containing 50000 in the bank's branch. It means that you have 50000 electronic units into the bank server, that you could convert to money if you like.

It's not a problem if you actually have the money. But if it is borrowed from a bank, then it is a big problem.

That is why it is easier to use a credit card. The payments are faster, because the money DO NOT EXIST until the moment you pay them back to the bank. Transactions are purely electronic between servers of financial institutions, that's why payments are swift. Physical money and precious metals are transferred at annual rate.

Debit cards, on the other hand, contain money, which have already been printed, which is the reason of the higher security measures, and actual money have to be transferred between banks every week.

And if you ask me - bitcoin will never be as secure as paper money or gold (being most secure), because you can never be sure if we will have internet forever.
Gold, however is eternal and it will not disappear from the universe long after we are all dead.

Paper money are legal-tender, but until there is society they will have some value.

And honestly - most of us here, although not a lot will say it, would prefer paper cash rather than bitcoins.

[1714910414]

1714910414

[1714910414]

1714910414

[1714910414]

1714910414

[1714910414]

1714910414

[odolvlobo]

I'd also like to add that BTC are very similar to the NORFED Liberty Dollar. Look it up. It involves-when something costs $1-buying it with $1 worth of silver. And, this is the way our country used to be.
Bottomline: It is simply a mathematical equation; there will be a day that w/fiat currency and constant inflation, money will be worth only what its printed on.

While Nuthouse's goal of creating a silver-backed currency may have seemed admirable, he really botched it when he devalued the Liberty Dollar from 10 LD per oz. of silver to 20 LD per oz. I think that wasn't really his goal at all and I don't think the two are similar.

As for the day when money is not worth what it is printed on, that day has already arrived:  in 1965, when the amount of silver was reduced in coins, and now with face values of pennies and nickels lower than the melt values.

edit: replaced the $ with LD. I didn't mean USD.

[westkybitcoins]

I'd also like to add that BTC are very similar to the NORFED Liberty Dollar. Look it up. It involves-when something costs $1-buying it with $1 worth of silver. And, this is the way our country used to be.
Bottomline: It is simply a mathematical equation; there will be a day that w/fiat currency and constant inflation, money will be worth only what its printed on.

While Nuthouse's goal of creating a silver-backed currency may have seemed admirable, he really botched it when he devalued the Liberty Dollar from $10 per oz. of silver to $20 per oz. I think that wasn't really his goal at all and I don't think the two are similar.

As for the day when money is not worth what it is printed on, that day has already arrived:  in 1965, when the amount of silver was reduced in coins, and now with face values of pennies and nickels lower than the melt values.

Sorry, but I've got to jump on this one....

In what possible way was the Liberty Dollar revaluation a devaluation?

For the holders of LDs? No, they actually increased their purchasing power in $$$ terms. And in objective terms, they still held the same amount of silver.

For the recipients of LDs? How, when what became devalued was the USD, and NORFED just reprinted an accurate number on the rounds? Are you suggesting people should have kept spending one-ounce rounds of silver for $10 each once the spot price of silver shot past that?

The Liberty Dollar had issues... but the revaluation wasn't one of them. It was actually a pretty reasonable way to keep the currency functional in light of a depreciating USD.

[odolvlobo]

I'd also like to add that BTC are very similar to the NORFED Liberty Dollar. Look it up. It involves-when something costs $1-buying it with $1 worth of silver. And, this is the way our country used to be.
Bottomline: It is simply a mathematical equation; there will be a day that w/fiat currency and constant inflation, money will be worth only what its printed on.

While Nuthouse's goal of creating a silver-backed currency may have seemed admirable, he really botched it when he devalued the Liberty Dollar from $10 per oz. of silver to $20 per oz. I think that wasn't really his goal at all and I don't think the two are similar.

As for the day when money is not worth what it is printed on, that day has already arrived:  in 1965, when the amount of silver was reduced in coins, and now with face values of pennies and nickels lower than the melt values.

In what possible way was the Liberty Dollar revaluation a devaluation?
For the holders of LDs? No, they actually increased their purchasing power in $$$ terms. And in objective terms, they still held the same amount of silver.
For the recipients of LDs? How, when what became devalued was the USD, and NORFED just reprinted an accurate number on the rounds? Are you suggesting people should have kept spending one-ounce rounds of silver for $10 each once the spot price of silver shot past that?
The Liberty Dollar had issues... but the revaluation wasn't one of them. It was actually a pretty reasonable way to keep the currency functional in light of a depreciating USD.

You have it backwards (or you misinterpreted my statement, or my understanding is incorrect).

Originally, each Liberty Dollar could be exchanged for 1/10th oz of silver. In 2005, the Liberty Dollar was devalued to 1/20th of an oz.

Wasn't the Liberty Dollar supposed to be a silver-backed currency? I thought it was. Maybe that's not true.

[myrkul]

Wasn't the Liberty Dollar supposed to be a silver-backed currency? I thought it was. Maybe that's not true.

Your understanding is flawed. The liberty dollar wasn't a silver-backed currency, it was a silver currency. They were rounds, stamped with an approximate dollar price. The revaluation simply was a change of dies to stamp the same size rounds with a higher dollar value.

[memvola]

And by "tied to the dollar" I meant we assess btc at their USD value that day. Its not like we think of them in units of gold or something.

I guess I am one of the few that are on the contrary. Maybe most people trade BTC with USD too often. I trade it very rarely with other currencies, and when I buy things, I usually think about the exchange in various ways depending on the context.

[odolvlobo]

Wasn't the Liberty Dollar supposed to be a silver-backed currency? I thought it was. Maybe that's not true.

Your understanding is flawed. The liberty dollar wasn't a silver-backed currency, it was a silver currency. They were rounds, stamped with an approximate dollar price. The revaluation simply was a change of dies to stamp the same size rounds with a higher dollar value.

Thanks for the clarification. I didn't realize that Liberty Dollars were denominated in USD. That makes them a whole lot less interesting.

[myrkul]

Wasn't the Liberty Dollar supposed to be a silver-backed currency? I thought it was. Maybe that's not true.

Your understanding is flawed. The liberty dollar wasn't a silver-backed currency, it was a silver currency. They were rounds, stamped with an approximate dollar price. The revaluation simply was a change of dies to stamp the same size rounds with a higher dollar value.

Thanks for the clarification. I didn't realize that Liberty Dollars were denominated in USD. That makes them a whole lot less interesting.

Not to the treasury agents, it didn't. In fact, that's what they got him for.

[johnniewalker]

Sorry to be a smart-ass but in a way NORFED and the Liberty Dollar was silver backed currency.You did have to redeem your Liberty notes for silver at the warehouse (BTW I'm not arguing that its a silver-backed currency, it isn't-or wasn't)

[myrkul]

Sorry to be a smart-ass but in a way NORFED and the Liberty Dollar was silver backed currency.You did have to redeem your Liberty notes for silver at the warehouse (BTW I'm not arguing that its a silver-backed currency, it isn't-or wasn't)

I was not aware there were notes circulated. I thought it was just the coins. Yes, the deposit receipts could have been considered a silver-backed currency. (Still not affected by the revaluation, since it still represented a fixed amount of silver.) It should be noted that if he hadn't put the word "Dollar" in there anywhere, most likely nobody would have cared.

His problem was that he made it look too much like the US's monopoly money.

[MoonShadow]

Sorry to be a smart-ass but in a way NORFED and the Liberty Dollar was silver backed currency.You did have to redeem your Liberty notes for silver at the warehouse (BTW I'm not arguing that its a silver-backed currency, it isn't-or wasn't)

I was not aware there were notes circulated. I thought it was just the coins. Yes, the deposit receipts could have been considered a silver-backed currency. (Still not affected by the revaluation, since it still represented a fixed amount of silver.) It should be noted that if he hadn't put the word "Dollar" in there anywhere, most likely nobody would have cared.

His problem was that he made it look too much like the US's monopoly money.

His problem was that the PTB were able to convince a jury that he made it look too much like US currency, not that it actually did.  They were able to convince 12 ignorant people that the term "dollar" wasn't generic, and that alone would then imply that it was an attempt to 'counterfit'.  I just think it's sad that, in our modern world, it was so easy to randomly find 12 people that ignorant.  That wouldn't have been true even 100 years ago.  The average illiterate farmer from Kansas knew that the term "dollar" referred to a silver coin of particular weight.  For that matter, there was an ongoing public debate about the virtues (and vices) of the bi-metallic standard, and the book The Wizard of OZ was written as a farce to make fun of it. (Originally, Dorthy wore silver shoes to walk on a gold brick road)