Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[LittleDigger]

"The story of the destruction of the German mark during the hyper-inflation of Weimar Germany from 1919 to its horrific peak in November 1923 is usually dismissed as a bizarre anomaly in the economic history of the twentieth century. But no episode better illustrates the dire consequences of unsound money or makes a more devastating, real-life case against fiat-currency: where there is no restraint, monetary death will follow.

“It matters little that the causes of the Weimar inflation are in many ways unrepeatable; that political conditions are different, or that it is almost inconceivable that financial chaos would ever again be allowed to develop so far,” wrote British historian and MP Adam Fergusson in his 1975 classic, When Money Dies. “The question to be asked — the danger to be recognized — is how inflation, however caused, affects a nation.”

The US Federal Reserve of 2014 is not the Reichsbank of 1914. Yet today’s policy mindset is dangerously reminiscent of the attitudes that helped to excacerbate the economic downfall of inter-war Germany. These include: the unrestrained financing of budget deficits under war and post-war conditions; the unaccountable creation of the money supply by a central bank; the creation of undisciplined credit linked to this expansion of the money supply; the aggressive inflating of asset values; the discounting of short-term treasury bills and notes in practically unlimited amounts; rapid currency depreciation, and a ratio of federal debt to GDP over 100 percent."

http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/27637/

Seems like my "Goldmark" has more in common with USD, than Bitcoin, Lambie

[DeadCoin]

Myth #7: We’ll end up just like Weimar Germany or Zimbabwe.
Reality: Hyperinflation in both countries was caused by circumstances far different than ours.

The minute you challenge the assumption that the government should not spend when it has a large deficit, out comes the charge that we’ll get some horrible hyperinflationary outcome like Weimar Germany or Zimbabwe.

Yes, once the economy gets to full employment, then extra government deficit spending can start driving up prices. But what happened in Weimar Germany was very different. During that time, the government was forced to pay extremely large war reparations in foreign currencies which it didn’t have. So it had to aggressively sell its own currency and buy the foreign currency in the financial markets. This relentless selling continuously drove down the value of its currency, causing prices of goods and services to go ever higher in what became one of the most famous inflations of all time. By 1919, the German budget deficit was equal to half of GDP, and by 1921, war reparation payments represented one third of government spending. And guess what? On the very day that government stopped paying the war reparations and selling its own currency to buy foreign currency, the hyperinflation stopped.

In Zimbabwe, the situation is also very different from ours. There, the conditions for hyperinflation were caused by the destruction of nearly half of the country’s domestic food production via misguided land reforms, plus a civil war which eliminated much of the economy’s productive manufacturing capacity. In response to food shortages, the Bank of Zimbabwe used valuable foreign exchange reserves to buy imported food, leading to a lack of foreign currency to purchase essential raw materials. Manufacturing output collapsed, but the government used much of the remaining foreign exchange to dole out political favors, rather than adding to the country’s productive capacity. The end result was inflation and then hyperinflation.

In the US, hyperinflation will not be an issue if the government spends while it has a large deficit because with high unemployment and unused yet functioning factories all across the country, there is plenty of room to cut taxes and/or increase spending to get us to full employment. This is true no matter what the size of the federal deficit. Ultimately, inflation (and then hyperinflation) is about competing distributive claims over real resources, such as oil, gas, water, etc. A “sustainable” fiscal policy, especially with respect to hyperinflationary risks, then, is really about both the establishment of full employment and the implementation of well-crafted policies which deal with the constraints created by, for example, depleting natural resources.

~Marshall Auerback, Senior Fellow at the Roosevelt Institute and Rob Parenteau, sole proprietor of MacroStrategy Edge

MYTH #8: Government spending increases interest rates and ‘crowds out’ valuable private sector investment.
Reality: Banks can lend essentially without limit, and the Fed can hit any interest rate target it chooses.

Ask an economist what determines the interest rate, and she’ll probably mutter something about supply and demand or “market forces.” Ask the same economist what determines the level of saving and investment, and the answer probably won’t change very much. This is because most economists were trained using textbooks that have not been rewritten since the United States went off the gold standard after WWII.

Back then, we had a monetary system that really did limit the growth of the money supply, and too much government spending really could force rates higher and crowd out other forms of spending. It is all based on something economists know as Loanable Funds Theory, which describes a market in which there is some limited pool of savings available to satisfy the demand for credit. Thus, deficit spending required the government to compete (with private borrowers) for a portion of these limited resources. Because the capacity to lend was constrained under the gold standard, the added competition could drive borrowing costs (i.e. the interest rate) higher.

Decades later, the monetary system looks completely different. But economists continue to treat governments as if they are the users of the currency (as opposed to the issuers) and to treat banks as passive money lenders — there simply to broker deals between savers and borrowers. In truth, banks can lend essentially without limit, regardless of what the federal government is doing, and the Federal Reserve can hit any interest rate target it chooses.

~Stephanie Kelton, Associate Professor, University of Missouri-Kansas City, Missouri



Here is more about the subject:
http://my.firedoglake.com/selise/tag/stephanie-kelton/


Here interesting video in short if you don't have time to read much:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGen5o6vAmw

[ssmc2]

For shits and giggles let's say tomorrow we get 2 announcements, one that the Bitlicense is ready (and it looks good), and the other that the ETF is officially approved. Speculate on the madness that ensues. 

[ChartBuddy]

Bitfinex

Bitstamp

Explanation

[criptix]

For shits and giggles let's say tomorrow we get 2 announcements, one that the Bitlicense is ready (and it looks good), and the other that the ETF is officially approved. Speculate on the madness that ensues. 

3 words:

epic short sqeeze

[ssmc2]

For shits and giggles let's say tomorrow we get 2 announcements, one that the Bitlicense is ready (and it looks good), and the other that the ETF is officially approved. Speculate on the madness that ensues. 

3 words:

epic short sqeeze

It would be beautiful.

[Eamorr]

What is going on??? Why is the market so dead?

[NotLambchop]

For shits and giggles let's say tomorrow we get 2 announcements, one that the Bitlicense is ready (and it looks good), and the other that the ETF is officially approved. Speculate on the madness that ensues. 

3 words:

epic short sqeeze

It would be beautiful.

Keep dreaming, bulls.  It's about the only thing you can still afford

[Afrikoin]

Myth #7: We’ll end up just like Weimar Germany or Zimbabwe.
Reality: Hyperinflation in both countries was caused by circumstances far different than ours.

The minute you challenge the assumption that the government should not spend when it has a large deficit, out comes the charge that we’ll get some horrible hyperinflationary outcome like Weimar Germany or Zimbabwe.

Yes, once the economy gets to full employment, then extra government deficit spending can start driving up prices. But what happened in Weimar Germany was very different. During that time, the government was forced to pay extremely large war reparations in foreign currencies which it didn’t have. So it had to aggressively sell its own currency and buy the foreign currency in the financial markets. This relentless selling continuously drove down the value of its currency, causing prices of goods and services to go ever higher in what became one of the most famous inflations of all time. By 1919, the German budget deficit was equal to half of GDP, and by 1921, war reparation payments represented one third of government spending. And guess what? On the very day that government stopped paying the war reparations and selling its own currency to buy foreign currency, the hyperinflation stopped.

In Zimbabwe, the situation is also very different from ours. There, the conditions for hyperinflation were caused by the destruction of nearly half of the country’s domestic food production via misguided land reforms, plus a civil war which eliminated much of the economy’s productive manufacturing capacity. In response to food shortages, the Bank of Zimbabwe used valuable foreign exchange reserves to buy imported food, leading to a lack of foreign currency to purchase essential raw materials. Manufacturing output collapsed, but the government used much of the remaining foreign exchange to dole out political favors, rather than adding to the country’s productive capacity. The end result was inflation and then hyperinflation.

In the US, hyperinflation will not be an issue if the government spends while it has a large deficit because with high unemployment and unused yet functioning factories all across the country, there is plenty of room to cut taxes and/or increase spending to get us to full employment. This is true no matter what the size of the federal deficit. Ultimately, inflation (and then hyperinflation) is about competing distributive claims over real resources, such as oil, gas, water, etc. A “sustainable” fiscal policy, especially with respect to hyperinflationary risks, then, is really about both the establishment of full employment and the implementation of well-crafted policies which deal with the constraints created by, for example, depleting natural resources.

~Marshall Auerback, Senior Fellow at the Roosevelt Institute and Rob Parenteau, sole proprietor of MacroStrategy Edge

MYTH #8: Government spending increases interest rates and ‘crowds out’ valuable private sector investment.
Reality: Banks can lend essentially without limit, and the Fed can hit any interest rate target it chooses.

Ask an economist what determines the interest rate, and she’ll probably mutter something about supply and demand or “market forces.” Ask the same economist what determines the level of saving and investment, and the answer probably won’t change very much. This is because most economists were trained using textbooks that have not been rewritten since the United States went off the gold standard after WWII.

Back then, we had a monetary system that really did limit the growth of the money supply, and too much government spending really could force rates higher and crowd out other forms of spending. It is all based on something economists know as Loanable Funds Theory, which describes a market in which there is some limited pool of savings available to satisfy the demand for credit. Thus, deficit spending required the government to compete (with private borrowers) for a portion of these limited resources. Because the capacity to lend was constrained under the gold standard, the added competition could drive borrowing costs (i.e. the interest rate) higher.

Decades later, the monetary system looks completely different. But economists continue to treat governments as if they are the users of the currency (as opposed to the issuers) and to treat banks as passive money lenders — there simply to broker deals between savers and borrowers. In truth, banks can lend essentially without limit, regardless of what the federal government is doing, and the Federal Reserve can hit any interest rate target it chooses.

~Stephanie Kelton, Associate Professor, University of Missouri-Kansas City, Missouri



Here is more about the subject:
http://my.firedoglake.com/selise/tag/stephanie-kelton/


Here interesting video in short if you don't have time to read much:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGen5o6vAmw

Thank you for this.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

For shits and giggles let's say tomorrow we get 2 announcements, one that the Bitlicense is ready (and it looks good), and the other that the ETF is officially approved. Speculate on the madness that ensues. 

3 words:

epic short sqeeze

It would be beautiful.

Keep dreaming, bulls.  It's about the only thing you can still afford

When that $30K coin action hits it will be lambo city all over again. Look out

[ParabellumLite]

For shits and giggles let's say tomorrow we get 2 announcements, one that the Bitlicense is ready (and it looks good), and the other that the ETF is officially approved. Speculate on the madness that ensues. 

3 words:

epic short sqeeze

It would be beautiful.

Keep dreaming, bulls.  It's about the only thing you can still afford

Pretty accurate Lamb.

[Chef Ramsay]

For shits and giggles let's say tomorrow we get 2 announcements, one that the Bitlicense is ready (and it looks good), and the other that the ETF is officially approved. Speculate on the madness that ensues. 

Trauma that even the emergency room at Lenox Hill Hospital on the Upper East Side of Manhattan couldn't even handle properly. Then, moons, rocket, trains, you name it!  

[ssmc2]

There's a great quote: "The three grand essentials of happiness are: Something to do, someone to love, and something to hope for." Sadly, you trolls have zero out of the three. I believe it is why you are so bitter and spiteful.  

[Afrikoin]

Myth #7: We’ll end up just like Weimar Germany or Zimbabwe.
Reality: Hyperinflation in both countries was caused by circumstances far different than ours.

The minute you challenge the assumption that the government should not spend when it has a large deficit, out comes the charge that we’ll get some horrible hyperinflationary outcome like Weimar Germany or Zimbabwe.

Yes, once the economy gets to full employment, then extra government deficit spending can start driving up prices. But what happened in Weimar Germany was very different. During that time, the government was forced to pay extremely large war reparations in foreign currencies which it didn’t have. So it had to aggressively sell its own currency and buy the foreign currency in the financial markets. This relentless selling continuously drove down the value of its currency, causing prices of goods and services to go ever higher in what became one of the most famous inflations of all time. By 1919, the German budget deficit was equal to half of GDP, and by 1921, war reparation payments represented one third of government spending. And guess what? On the very day that government stopped paying the war reparations and selling its own currency to buy foreign currency, the hyperinflation stopped.

In Zimbabwe, the situation is also very different from ours. There, the conditions for hyperinflation were caused by the destruction of nearly half of the country’s domestic food production via misguided land reforms, plus a civil war which eliminated much of the economy’s productive manufacturing capacity. In response to food shortages, the Bank of Zimbabwe used valuable foreign exchange reserves to buy imported food, leading to a lack of foreign currency to purchase essential raw materials. Manufacturing output collapsed, but the government used much of the remaining foreign exchange to dole out political favors, rather than adding to the country’s productive capacity. The end result was inflation and then hyperinflation.

In the US, hyperinflation will not be an issue if the government spends while it has a large deficit because with high unemployment and unused yet functioning factories all across the country, there is plenty of room to cut taxes and/or increase spending to get us to full employment. This is true no matter what the size of the federal deficit. Ultimately, inflation (and then hyperinflation) is about competing distributive claims over real resources, such as oil, gas, water, etc. A “sustainable” fiscal policy, especially with respect to hyperinflationary risks, then, is really about both the establishment of full employment and the implementation of well-crafted policies which deal with the constraints created by, for example, depleting natural resources.

~Marshall Auerback, Senior Fellow at the Roosevelt Institute and Rob Parenteau, sole proprietor of MacroStrategy Edge

MYTH #8: Government spending increases interest rates and ‘crowds out’ valuable private sector investment.
Reality: Banks can lend essentially without limit, and the Fed can hit any interest rate target it chooses.

Ask an economist what determines the interest rate, and she’ll probably mutter something about supply and demand or “market forces.” Ask the same economist what determines the level of saving and investment, and the answer probably won’t change very much. This is because most economists were trained using textbooks that have not been rewritten since the United States went off the gold standard after WWII.

Back then, we had a monetary system that really did limit the growth of the money supply, and too much government spending really could force rates higher and crowd out other forms of spending. It is all based on something economists know as Loanable Funds Theory, which describes a market in which there is some limited pool of savings available to satisfy the demand for credit. Thus, deficit spending required the government to compete (with private borrowers) for a portion of these limited resources. Because the capacity to lend was constrained under the gold standard, the added competition could drive borrowing costs (i.e. the interest rate) higher.

Decades later, the monetary system looks completely different. But economists continue to treat governments as if they are the users of the currency (as opposed to the issuers) and to treat banks as passive money lenders — there simply to broker deals between savers and borrowers. In truth, banks can lend essentially without limit, regardless of what the federal government is doing, and the Federal Reserve can hit any interest rate target it chooses.

~Stephanie Kelton, Associate Professor, University of Missouri-Kansas City, Missouri



Here is more about the subject:
http://my.firedoglake.com/selise/tag/stephanie-kelton/


Here interesting video in short if you don't have time to read much:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGen5o6vAmw

What if this new ''circumstance" is an interconnected global economy with alternative assets classes (like bitcoin). Arguably, a calamitous event today could easily go viral causing a similar cascading effect Re: Germany/Zimbabwe. There is so much going on in the world today, i could see some events lining up for a perfect storm (some time in future)

[N12]

When you play the game of Bitcoin, you either buy or die.

[NotLambchop]

...
What if this new ''circumstance" is an interconnected global economy with alternative assets classes (like bitcoin). Arguably, a calamitous event today could easily go viral causing a similar cascading effect Re: Germany/Zimbabwe. There is so much going on in the world today, i could see some events lining up for a perfect storm (some time in future)

The US dollar failing means shit has *really* hit the fan.  Until such time (cue third rider carrying scales etc.), I'm fairly comfortable knowing that my interests are defended by the awesome military might of My America!



FUCK YEAH!

[ShroomsKit]

What about our longterm trendlines? Have the bulls found a new trendline bears can break, after we now have broken all posted trendline of the last 14 months?

We need a new goal.

go break it and I will call you my personal jesus!

Amazing how no matter what the price does you people always seem to come up with a trend line. What does that tell you?

[N12]

Oh, Shroomsy is back. Just in case, for those who don't know this particular maniac yet:

I will leave this place soon. Bitcoin is dead, it's only down from here and i sold everything i got quite a while ago so there is nothing for me here anymore.
I tried to help the few delusional bulls who just won't give up but they don't appreciate my warnings very much. Ah well, your money. I don't care really.
I'll come back every 50 dollar drop for some entertainment. So long and thanks for buying my coins at 400. Poor schmucks.

Good luck with your pump and dump coin.

I feel sorry for all the idiots who sold at these ridiculous prices and i will laugh at all the bears who will get caught in trap after trap the coming weeks.

The only winners are the holders (like me) and the people who pick up the last cheap coins while they can.

We're going up and it's confirmed!

None at the moment. Not sure if i will buy back again.  I invest in other things now.

[Rampion]

Wow: I just realized shroomsy turned ultra-bear. Fascinating.

If history repeats then we have a very strong "buy" indicator here.

[ParabellumLite]

Wow: I just realized shroomsy turned ultra-bear. Fascinating.

If history repeats then we have a very strong "buy" indicator here.

Uhuh, if history repeats. Shroomsy his trolling aside: history has surely repeated itself in completely false predictions and bottoms that have been called over and over again. I said one month ago that it will reach 50 bucks ish (maybe a bit more though, but not much) within 6 months and so far I'm surely sticking with it.

I already see exactly the same patterns appearing as I've seen so many times before. We will probably slowly grind down until another sudden dump takes place. Daytraders will laugh at the fools that bought at the top, as usual.