Who ACTUALLY knows what they're talking about here?

[meowmeowbrowncow]

Examples of strawmen arguments include mischaracterizing the argument, Deflation in Bitcoin isn't bad because deflation is inherently good" as "Deflation in Bitcoin isn't bad because of some special characteristic of Bitcoin."

That's a different kind of argument, and not what I was talking about. Asserting that deflation in currency is inherently good is a general assertion, and it's something that can be debated on its own evidence. We can look at how deflation has affected currencies in the past. What I was saying was that IF we look at how deflation affects currencies in the past, and IF deflation appears to negatively affect the economy that uses those currencies, one can't just dismiss the argument by saying "those examples don't apply to Bitcoins because bitcoins are different."

Yep, deflation, it's presence during certain times, and it's implications is a unique argument with merit.  It is not a diversion.


There was a US Congressman sponsored money seminar in DC where historians asserted that US deflationary periods had nothing to do with...guess what....deflation.

But, if one were to ask the typical academia economist they would mark history as being riddled with deflationary events due to poor money supply management.


It's highly debatable.

[rayt5]

Examples of strawmen arguments include mischaracterizing the argument, Deflation in Bitcoin isn't bad because deflation is inherently good" as "Deflation in Bitcoin isn't bad because of some special characteristic of Bitcoin."

That's a different kind of argument, and not what I was talking about. Asserting that deflation in currency is inherently good is a general assertion, and it's something that can be debated on its own evidence. We can look at how deflation has affected currencies in the past. What I was saying was that IF we look at how deflation affects currencies in the past, and IF deflation appears to negatively affect the economy that uses those currencies, one can't just dismiss the argument by saying "those examples don't apply to Bitcoins because bitcoins are different."

Yep, deflation, it's presence during certain times, and it's implications is a unique argument with merit.  It is not a diversion.


There was a US Congressman sponsored money seminar in DC where historians asserted that US deflationary periods had nothing to do with...guess what....deflation.

But, if one were to ask the typical academia economist they would mark history as being riddled with deflationary events due to poor money supply management.


It's highly debatable.

That's very interesting. I'd never heard that before.

I can certainly see the argument that deflation is good for a currency as having merit. I'm not sure I agree with it... but I don't think I know enough to be certain one way or another. We'll probably be able to find out soon because of Bitcoins. 

What bothers me is when people lay out an argument for why they think deflation is bad, using history and macroeconomics, and people dismiss the argument because "Deflation will affect Bitcoins differently" or "These charts are meaningless because Hayek something something". Arguing that it only appears to be deflation causing bad things, or that the role of deflation is misunderstood, I think is a much better argument.

[glendall]

[waves hands]

Me...I know what I'm talking about...

I'm a sandwich expert...

[Spendulus]

I would just be curious of what kind of credentials you have.

I started buying bitcoins when they were at about $3.

Dude...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FucbvoFFy0

[justusranvier]

[waves hands]

Me...I know what I'm talking about...

I'm a sandwich expert...

There is an art to the business of making sandwiches which it is given to few ever to find the time to explore in depth. It is a simple task, but the opportunities for satisfaction are many and profound.

[Adrian-x]

Unfortunately, the only real way to know anything for sure about a controversial topic is to study it yourself.

I would advise you to be skeptical of people that say things like "Bitcoin doesn't apply to these economic arguments, because it's different." A lot of these people are exhibiting special pleading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_pleading. From the article, examples of this logical fallacy include:

• unexplained claims of exemption from principles commonly thought relevant to the subject matter
• claims to data that are inherently unverifiable, perhaps because too remote or impossible to define clearly
• appeals to "common knowledge" that bypass supporting data
• assertion that the opponent lacks the qualifications necessary to comprehend a point of view
• assertion that nobody has the qualifications necessary to comprehend a point of view

Examples of this fallacy on this forum include: "There is no bubble, because Bitcoin is different", "Deflation in Bitcoin isn't bad, because Bitcoin is different than other previous currencies", or "X criticism doesn't apply to Bitcoin, because Bitcoin is different."

It doesn't mean what they're saying isn't true, but the reason will almost never be because "Bitcoin is different," and when it is, if they can't explain why Bitcoin does not belong in a certain category of things that an argument puts it in other than the fact that it's new or unique or people just don't understand it, then it's probably safe to dismiss their argument.

+1

[Spendulus]

Examples of strawmen arguments include mischaracterizing the argument, Deflation in Bitcoin isn't bad because deflation is inherently good" as "Deflation in Bitcoin isn't bad because of some special characteristic of Bitcoin."

That's a different kind of argument, and not what I was talking about. Asserting that deflation in currency is inherently good is a general assertion, and it's something that can be debated on its own evidence. We can look at how deflation has affected currencies in the past. What I was saying was that IF we look at how deflation affects currencies in the past, and IF deflation appears to negatively affect the economy that uses those currencies, one can't just dismiss the argument by saying "those examples don't apply to Bitcoins because bitcoins are different."

Yep, deflation, it's presence during certain times, and it's implications is a unique argument with merit.  It is not a diversion.


There was a US Congressman sponsored money seminar in DC where historians asserted that US deflationary periods had nothing to do with...guess what....deflation.

But, if one were to ask the typical academia economist they would mark history as being riddled with deflationary events due to poor money supply management.


It's highly debatable.

That's very interesting. I'd never heard that before.

I can certainly see the argument that deflation is good for a currency as having merit. I'm not sure I agree with it... but I don't think I know enough to be certain one way or another. We'll probably be able to find out soon because of Bitcoins. 

What bothers me is when people lay out an argument for why they think deflation is bad, using history and macroeconomics, and people dismiss the argument because "Deflation will affect Bitcoins differently" or "These charts are meaningless because Hayek something something". Arguing that it only appears to be deflation causing bad things, or that the role of deflation is misunderstood, I think is a much better argument.

This is a general issue, and I think it would be better to try to phrase it specificially in terms of something like...

Is a near term scenario where in the major developed countries, and particularly in the US, the little guy has a choice of currencies, the national currency and a deflationary currency, the bitcoin, good or bad for (that country, the world as a whole, the little guy, etc....)?

Hayek - "Choice in Currencies"
http://mises.org/document/3983

I believe the answer is obvious, but that's just me...

[solomon]

No one. This is uncharted territory

[ByTeCee]

This is a good wall chart on logical fallacies.


https://s3.amazonaws.com/yourlogicalfallacyis/pdf/LogicalFallaciesInfographic_A2.pdf

[Wuji]

If you claim to have credentials in understanding virtual currency than what would you have studied?  Second life or World of Warcraft?  Bitcoin is a whole new world and let's face it, as a speculation vehicle the price is dependent on faith and news right now.  People still aren't able to predict weather and they have more to work with than Bitcoin speculators do.

[Peleus]

You don't need to have credentials to post the only true statement with regards to bitcoins future.....

No one knows what's going to happen

[Ls777]

If you claim to have credentials in understanding virtual currency than what would you have studied?  Second life or World of Warcraft?  Bitcoin is a whole new world and let's face it, as a speculation vehicle the price is dependent on faith and news right now.  People still aren't able to predict weather and they have more to work with than Bitcoin speculators do.

TF2 unusuals

not really the same, but games can have ridiculous virtual economies sometimes

[Spendulus]

No one. This is uncharted territory

Many have gone into uncharted territory in history.

They simply charted it.

[RenegadeMind]

Credentials are meaningless.  Paul Krugman, for example, has a Nobel prize in economics, but knows nothing about how a free-market economy leads to prosperity.  He's been drinking too much of that Keynesian Kool-Aid.  If you're unsure about how to "connect the dots", just dig for answers and think things through logically.  The light bulb will eventually come on.

Hahahaah~!

+1

I can't stand that shilly douche...

[NedKLee]

I doubt that there's anyone on the forum that has ALL the answers, but I think there are enough people here, willing to share their part of the answer to keep me coming back to benefit from their wisdom.

Then again, I do believe the answers is 42, for what it's worth.

[Zaih]

DEFINITELY not me 

[Merralea]

I'm sure this thread will soon be full of lies and slander (or is it libel?), but I generally make the assumption that:

• 50% have no formal training and generally don't know what the foolishness they're talking about,
• 25% have no formal training, but have made enough of a hobby of it to know quite a bit,
• 20% have taken one or two intro Economics classes and know enough to pass for formally educated if no one's looking too closely (hi there!)
• 2.5% have taken one or two intro classes that went in one ear and out the other, yet think they are infallible, and
• 2.5% have some kind of degree or significant experience.

Qualification: all of these are wrong.

[Jobe7]

I doubt that there's anyone on the forum that has ALL the answers, but I think there are enough people here, willing to share their part of the answer to keep me coming back to benefit from their wisdom.

Then again, I do believe the answers is 42, for what it's worth.

Dammit, you beat me to it!

Now the OP only needs to find the correct question ...

----------------------------------

There's many things to learn about Bitcoin, to me it covers political, economical, coding, freedom, a way out of debt prison (for the world), and more ..

So it really depends on what subject you're looking for answers in. As others have mentioned, its generally a good idea to browse in the forum areas that interest you, read threads, find comments that seem sensible, then research what they're saying. Rinse and repeat until you start finding trust in people.

Keep in mind that there's probably plenty of people who do know quite a lot about btc and its environment, but they've explained themselves numerous times and cba anymore (I'm in the generally cba anymore category).

[Spendulus]

This is a good wall chart on logical fallacies.


https://s3.amazonaws.com/yourlogicalfallacyis/pdf/LogicalFallaciesInfographic_A2.pdf

Indeed it is good.  But I must be skeptical.  Those guys - Plato - Aristole - and Socrates?

They didn't have CREDENTIALS.

They didn't graduate from an ACCREDITED UNIVERSITY WITH A DOCTORATE.

hehehehehee....

[Evo]

I think you'd be better off trusting people on their post count, rather than their credentials. Good luck finding credentials, because more people try to keep anonymous on forum sites. You could read what people that own bit coin related businesses have to say, if you look around. But, in all honesty, I think that credentials are meaningless, and just about everyone's opinion is constructive and meaningful.