The Future of Money?

[deisik]

A lot of country are get in mainstream of use digital currency and leave paper money. People are angry with a lot of government member who doing corruption of tax. So I think people will leave paper money and start to use gold or digital money.

Whether the people like it or not the government will continue to have its way because without government there we are calling for anarchy.  The fact that people dont trust government with taxes and so they will switch to other forms of currency wont work because its either government finds its way to get its taxes from that new source by making laws to cover it or if that is not possible, government will ban everything all together and force people back to the initial position with adequate punishment in the case of disobedience. Either way, government still wins...

So do you think.government trace out now? Where anonymous here and government surely will get a hard time to cath us and make us pay some taxes for our ventures here since we doesnt give any details to anyone, and from the startnofnusing bitcoins i didn't really sue by them and force me to pay those fucking taxes, and thats one of the reason why i dont believe government well win on searching people in this crypto industry.

Why would they want to track you down if you are only a small fish? That would be prohibitively expensive for them to go after every bitcoiner out there. If you are a big fish, you will be easy to catch once you want to spend your bitcoins big time, since you would have to convert them to some fiat currency. And with heaps of fiat in your bank account you will be caught as fast as a cat catches mice...

The only way to not get caught in this case is to avoid fiat completely

[jondeen707]

Not sure if it's brought up in this thread, but it may be that most governments are playing around with the bitcoin/blockchain technology just to get an idea of where the future of money is heading. I may as well be wrong about that.

[goldcoinminer]

Not sure if it's brought up in this thread, but it may be that most governments are playing around with the bitcoin/blockchain technology just to get an idea of where the future of money is heading. I may as well be wrong about that.

We will know in the future, if the government will create theirs and they will have the similar system as bitcoin it does not guarantee that people will adopt, they are still centralized and people wants decentralized to have full freedom and privacy of their money.

[gabmen]

Not sure if it's brought up in this thread, but it may be that most governments are playing around with the bitcoin/blockchain technology just to get an idea of where the future of money is heading. I may as well be wrong about that.

We will know in the future, if the government will create theirs and they will have the similar system as bitcoin it does not guarantee that people will adopt, they are still centralized and people wants decentralized to have full freedom and privacy of their money.

Not really sure but i think if there is such a plan there should be hints that we would notice by now. They may be monitoring crypto but i think for now thats as far as it goes

[bitkilo]

Not sure if it's brought up in this thread, but it may be that most governments are playing around with the bitcoin/blockchain technology just to get an idea of where the future of money is heading. I may as well be wrong about that.

They have been looking into it from the start and the latest report to come out shows them not doing to well at keeping up : http://www.coindesk.com/irs-overhaul-bitcoin-tax-strategy/

[n0ne]

Not sure if it's brought up in this thread, but it may be that most governments are playing around with the bitcoin/blockchain technology just to get an idea of where the future of money is heading. I may as well be wrong about that.

We will know in the future, if the government will create theirs and they will have the similar system as bitcoin it does not guarantee that people will adopt, they are still centralized and people wants decentralized to have full freedom and privacy of their money.

When years pass countries will start creating their own digital currency based upon the blockchain technology. When countries have their own currencies it cannot be used universally similar to bitcoin. On this base bitcoin will be moving on the rising side and won't fall of these generation of new coins.

[Positid]

Not sure if it's brought up in this thread, but it may be that most governments are playing around with the bitcoin/blockchain technology just to get an idea of where the future of money is heading. I may as well be wrong about that.

We will know in the future, if the government will create theirs and they will have the similar system as bitcoin it does not guarantee that people will adopt, they are still centralized and people wants decentralized to have full freedom and privacy of their money.

When years pass countries will start creating their own digital currency based upon the blockchain technology. When countries have their own currencies it cannot be used universally similar to bitcoin. On this base bitcoin will be moving on the rising side and won't fall of these generation of new coins.

How can they do that, bitcoin is decentralized and a country has it's government which I am certain want to have control to monitor the transaction, they are the eyes of the people to protect the lives and future of the people. I guess it will never happen with the same platform with bitcoin.

[raven7886]

When years pass countries will start creating their own digital currency based upon the blockchain technology. When countries have their own currencies it cannot be used universally similar to bitcoin. On this base bitcoin will be moving on the rising side and won't fall of these generation of new coins.

Yes, there will not be any point on having a country specific crypto currency instead of bitcoins. It will not solve the need of having an universal payment system across borders.

Even after having country specific crypto currencies, people/countries might need an universal payment system like what we are having right now as USD or gold (a medium of exchange).

It means what is the need to have two crypto currencies when only one will solve all the requirements, that one will be bitcoin payment system for sure.

[freedomgo]

When years pass countries will start creating their own digital currency based upon the blockchain technology. When countries have their own currencies it cannot be used universally similar to bitcoin. On this base bitcoin will be moving on the rising side and won't fall of these generation of new coins.

Yes, there will not be any point on having a country specific crypto currency instead of bitcoins. It will not solve the need of having an universal payment system across borders.

Even after having country specific crypto currencies, people/countries might need an universal payment system like what we are having right now as USD or gold (a medium of exchange).

It means what is the need to have two crypto currencies when only one will solve all the requirements, that one will be bitcoin payment system for sure.

True that bitcoin can be a universal online currency but that will have to pass to the process to be able to attract people for adoption. It has not been regulated yet and maybe we should look on that first on how to treat that.

[deisik]

When years pass countries will start creating their own digital currency based upon the blockchain technology. When countries have their own currencies it cannot be used universally similar to bitcoin. On this base bitcoin will be moving on the rising side and won't fall of these generation of new coins.

Yes, there will not be any point on having a country specific crypto currency instead of bitcoins. It will not solve the need of having an universal payment system across borders.

Even after having country specific crypto currencies, people/countries might need an universal payment system like what we are having right now as USD or gold (a medium of exchange).

It means what is the need to have two crypto currencies when only one will solve all the requirements, that one will be bitcoin payment system for sure.

True that bitcoin can be a universal online currency but that will have to pass to the process to be able to attract people for adoption. It has not been regulated yet and maybe we should look on that first on how to treat that.

But how could regulations possibly help Bitcoin in this regard really?

When you make a wrong payment through a wire transfer or by some payment system like Visa, MasterCard or PayPay, the offending transaction gets declined after some period of time (a few days usually) with the funds returning to your account. In the worst case scenario, you can at least demand to revert the transaction. This is obviously not the case with Bitcoin since Bitcoin transactions are irreversible, even if you send bitcoins to a non-existent address. Apart from that, stealing bitcoins would lead to a loss in absolutely the same way irrespective from whom they got stolen, from individuals or banks

[iamTom123]

The idea of central bank controlled cryptocoins has been around for a while. I fail to see that these coins pose any serious risk for the valuation of Bitcoin or precious metals and I don't think such a concept will be successful.

The reason for this is pretty simple: Even if such a coin is constructed under the umbrella of the IMF it still doesn't represent a real valuable asset, because it is subject to political influence. There are also many questions regarding its creation. For example how should the coin be mined - should every country mine its own stash or will there be fixed quotas allocated to each country? How would all countries of the IMF even be able to form a consensus?

An IMF coin will never constitute a real asset like gold or Bitcoin, because it's not functioning as a incorruptible natural resource. Instead an IMF coin would be some kind of "meta-fiat" used as backing for fiat.

ya.ya.yo!

I fully agree with this. When it is subject to the control and influence of a certain big institution, then can be a big problem as it is not offering what a decentralized cryptocurrency can offer. This is a central idea behind the success of Bitcoin and if you pulled it down then you have nothing at the end of the tunnel.

[danherbias07]

The idea of central bank controlled cryptocoins has been around for a while. I fail to see that these coins pose any serious risk for the valuation of Bitcoin or precious metals and I don't think such a concept will be successful.

The reason for this is pretty simple: Even if such a coin is constructed under the umbrella of the IMF it still doesn't represent a real valuable asset, because it is subject to political influence. There are also many questions regarding its creation. For example how should the coin be mined - should every country mine its own stash or will there be fixed quotas allocated to each country? How would all countries of the IMF even be able to form a consensus?

An IMF coin will never constitute a real asset like gold or Bitcoin, because it's not functioning as a incorruptible natural resource. Instead an IMF coin would be some kind of "meta-fiat" used as backing for fiat.

ya.ya.yo!

I fully agree with this. When it is subject to the control and influence of a certain big institution, then can be a big problem as it is not offering what a decentralized cryptocurrency can offer. This is a central idea behind the success of Bitcoin and if you pulled it down then you have nothing at the end of the tunnel.

Satisfying thoughts which is true. Problem is if something is owned by someone there is a big possibility that someone could stain it. Even the owner itself could make evil works when he sees a big profit in it. That is why many are trying so hard to make an altcoin. A lot of money is into it unlike bitcoin.

[funkenstein]

True that bitcoin can be a universal online currency but that will have to pass to the process to be able to attract people for adoption. It has not been regulated yet and maybe we should look on that first on how to treat that.

Not been regulated yet??  It's the most regulated type of currency in the world by a huge margin.  Every money creation event and every transaction are public and audited by everyone.  Regulations specify EXACTLY how much can be created, and when.  Imagine trying to get fiat mongers to submit to this kind of regulation.  Lol, right? 

[deisik]

True that bitcoin can be a universal online currency but that will have to pass to the process to be able to attract people for adoption. It has not been regulated yet and maybe we should look on that first on how to treat that.

Not been regulated yet??  It's the most regulated type of currency in the world by a huge margin.  Every money creation event and every transaction are public and audited by everyone.  Regulations specify EXACTLY how much can be created, and when.  Imagine trying to get fiat mongers to submit to this kind of regulation.  Lol, right? 

And this is exactly the reason why Bitcoin may not be suitable for real economy as an ultimate means of exchange

Since in real economy money should be created (and destroyed as well) based on the needs of the economy, and not according to some set in stone algorithm. I don't mean to say that fiat is ideal, but in exactly this respect it beats Bitcoin hands down. Whoever is going to challenge this point (and I guess there will be a lot of such), think first what is the primary function of money. And once you get to it, you may come to understand as well that the amount of money to fulfill this function in the most optimal way depends on the size of the economy, which is not fixed and may expand as easily as contract

[arseaboy]

The idea of central bank controlled cryptocoins has been around for a while. I fail to see that these coins pose any serious risk for the valuation of Bitcoin or precious metals and I don't think such a concept will be successful.

The reason for this is pretty simple: Even if such a coin is constructed under the umbrella of the IMF it still doesn't represent a real valuable asset, because it is subject to political influence. There are also many questions regarding its creation. For example how should the coin be mined - should every country mine its own stash or will there be fixed quotas allocated to each country? How would all countries of the IMF even be able to form a consensus?

An IMF coin will never constitute a real asset like gold or Bitcoin, because it's not functioning as a incorruptible natural resource. Instead an IMF coin would be some kind of "meta-fiat" used as backing for fiat.

ya.ya.yo!

I fully agree with this. When it is subject to the control and influence of a certain big institution, then can be a big problem as it is not offering what a decentralized cryptocurrency can offer. This is a central idea behind the success of Bitcoin and if you pulled it down then you have nothing at the end of the tunnel.

Satisfying thoughts which is true. Problem is if something is owned by someone there is a big possibility that someone could stain it. Even the owner itself could make evil works when he sees a big profit in it. That is why many are trying so hard to make an altcoin. A lot of money is into it unlike bitcoin.

Indeed mate.. and hopefully this would not happen in bitcoin community to get a full controlled by a certain institution like government or any private sectors because if it does definitely there would be a lot of changes for us and there would also some activities that can be more beneficial for them.

[BobK71]

Since in real economy money should be created (and destroyed as well) based on the needs of the economy, and not according to some set in stone algorithm. I don't mean to say that fiat is ideal, but in exactly this respect it beats Bitcoin hands down. Whoever is going to challenge this point (and I guess there will be a lot of such), think first what is the primary function of money. And once you get to it, you may come to understand as well that the amount of money to fulfill this function in the most optimal way depends on the size of the economy, which is not fixed and may expand as easily as contract

This is a familiar point made by the global elites.

No doubt, money (and/or debt, and/or other financial assets) needs to be created to suit economic needs.  The question is who determines how much to create.  Is it the free capital markets, or the elites by central planning at the core of the system?

Almost all major human problems in modern history can probably be traced, ultimately, to distorted capital markets due to the incentives for the elites to create money and/or debt to benefit themselves and prop them up with state power.

Bitcoin might have a hard limit, but the amount of debt payable in Bitcoin is not limited.  This was essentially what funded the Italian Renaissance -- debt against physical gold and silver.

[GregH37]

When years pass countries will start creating their own digital currency based upon the blockchain technology. When countries have their own currencies it cannot be used universally similar to bitcoin. On this base bitcoin will be moving on the rising side and won't fall of these generation of new coins.

Yes, there will not be any point on having a country specific crypto currency instead of bitcoins. It will not solve the need of having an universal payment system across borders.

Even after having country specific crypto currencies, people/countries might need an universal payment system like what we are having right now as USD or gold (a medium of exchange).

It means what is the need to have two crypto currencies when only one will solve all the requirements, that one will be bitcoin payment system for sure.

True that bitcoin can be a universal online currency but that will have to pass to the process to be able to attract people for adoption. It has not been regulated yet and maybe we should look on that first on how to treat that.

Yes agree with you. Hope that very soon bitcoin is going to become legal currency when all the countries of the world will accept bitcoin. As we can see that now the number of bitcoin users is increasing on regular basis, and hope that the will put pressure on the governments to consider bitcoin as legal currency.

[Caladonian]

When years pass countries will start creating their own digital currency based upon the blockchain technology. When countries have their own currencies it cannot be used universally similar to bitcoin. On this base bitcoin will be moving on the rising side and won't fall of these generation of new coins.

Yes, there will not be any point on having a country specific crypto currency instead of bitcoins. It will not solve the need of having an universal payment system across borders.

Even after having country specific crypto currencies, people/countries might need an universal payment system like what we are having right now as USD or gold (a medium of exchange).

It means what is the need to have two crypto currencies when only one will solve all the requirements, that one will be bitcoin payment system for sure.

True that bitcoin can be a universal online currency but that will have to pass to the process to be able to attract people for adoption. It has not been regulated yet and maybe we should look on that first on how to treat that.

Yes agree with you. Hope that very soon bitcoin is going to become legal currency when all the countries of the world will accept bitcoin. As we can see that now the number of bitcoin users is increasing on regular basis, and hope that the will put pressure on the governments to consider bitcoin as legal currency.

it can mate but for sure government won't allow that they don't have any  control  so if ever that this can be use locally i guess it will have some restrictions and limitation as we still wants that this coin will still anonymous and not been controlled by anyone. for sure paper money will still there in anyhow.

[diodio5]

Not sure if it's brought up in this thread, but it may be that most governments are playing around with the bitcoin/blockchain technology just to get an idea of where the future of money is heading. I may as well be wrong about that.

We will know in the future, if the government will create theirs and they will have the similar system as bitcoin it does not guarantee that people will adopt, they are still centralized and people wants decentralized to have full freedom and privacy of their money.

I think of course it will be done by the government, seeing the success of bitcoin, they would make a similar digital currency bitcoin, but they will not be able to make decentralization

[Positid]

Not sure if it's brought up in this thread, but it may be that most governments are playing around with the bitcoin/blockchain technology just to get an idea of where the future of money is heading. I may as well be wrong about that.

We will know in the future, if the government will create theirs and they will have the similar system as bitcoin it does not guarantee that people will adopt, they are still centralized and people wants decentralized to have full freedom and privacy of their money.

I think of course it will be done by the government, seeing the success of bitcoin, they would make a similar digital currency bitcoin, but they will not be able to make decentralization

That's understood already as they are government and they want to control things. Therefore, even though they will create a bitcoin like technology we will still be stronger here due to that big hindrance which is centralization.