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

[Richy_T]

[...]Bitcoin has a limited supply. The money will disperse over the long run (rich people spend and invest, borrowers default). [...]

I can't see the logic here offhand, but, presuming that's true, does it then follow that those looking to accumulate more bitcoins than Average Joe are backing the wrong horse?  Are you saying that non-inflationary currencies encourage spending?

I think having to live a life encourages spending. Definitely a good time to be accumulating bitcoins in my book. I'm not speculating right now but if I were, I'd be aiming to have more bitcoins at the end of the month than at the beginning, whatever my strategy.

[Richy_T]

The money will disperse over the long run

Bitcoin HAVE TO or it's doomed. simple as that.

There's a caveat to that though. Not necessarily. Consider diamonds. de Beers has a stockpile that's enough to supply the world diamond market for three years. Yet starry eyed young men are still coaxed to spend several months salary on what, at heart, are some quite useless rocks due to a tradition that was invented by... de Beers' advertising agency.

So despite what I've said before and though I still think it's better for Bitcoin to be more widely held and spread, there's still a good chance that it would succeed if not.

[mrbrt]

So yes it can be done.   Is it good for "Bitcoin"?

It may be. There's an awful lot of bitcoins owned by relatively few early adopters. If Bitcoin is to succeed, a large chunk of those bitcoins need to be extracted from those early adopters and spread amongst the general population.

It seems these early adopters have had a pretty good understanding of where the future is going. I for one would be happy to see these kinds of people get incredibly, filthy rich, so they can invest in awesome new businesses and technologies. Now that would make a change away from the current status quo, where the financial system only benefits parasites and sociopaths.

IMO most Bitcoiners are the most sociopathic people there are.
It takes a *special* attitude to strive after a system where economic status is derived only by a unchangeable, unchallengeable, non-physical ledger.   

What is most troubling is the widespread belief that human nature is malleable; that somehow once people who have adopted bitcoin get to run the show that it will be any different. I am the first person to complain about the excesses of the current establishment and the widespread systemic problems in nearly every aspect of western (global?) society. However, putting a different group of humans in charge will not drastically change the outcome. History is not linear and despite popular belief, human nature does not progress. 'Science and Technology are cumulative, ethics and politics are recurring dilemmas' (John Gray).  This type of thinking isn't exclusive to users of bitcoin, but, unsurprisingly, there seems to be a particularly large contingent of believers in the impending utopia, borne from technological progress.

Bit off topic, but I typically get carried away once I get on my soapbox.

[kickinyou]

If i say its not a tripple down ,its not going to happen thats my luck ! Im all out .

[crumbs]

[...]Bitcoin has a limited supply. The money will disperse over the long run (rich people spend and invest, borrowers default). [...]

I can't see the logic here offhand, but, presuming that's true, does it then follow that those looking to accumulate more bitcoins than Average Joe are backing the wrong horse?  Are you saying that non-inflationary currencies encourage spending?

I think having to live a life encourages spending. Definitely a good time to be accumulating bitcoins in my book. I'm not speculating right now but if I were, I'd be aiming to have more bitcoins at the end of the month than at the beginning, whatever my strategy.

I'm not talking about spending as in the bare necessities like hookers & blow, i meant spending which could be avoided -- lending for profit, investing, "spending money to make money," the boring stuff.  I simply don't see how molecular believes that Bitcoin is bound to disperse wealth. (Bitcoin:  Champion of the poor.)  If anything, once you discount extremes (one person owns every bitcoin), nothing encourages spending like inflation

[Spaceman_Spiff]

What is most troubling is the widespread belief that human nature is malleable; that somehow once people who have adopted bitcoin get to run the show that it will be any different. I am the first person to complain about the excesses of the current establishment and the widespread systemic problems in nearly every aspect of western (global?) society. However, putting a different group of humans in charge will not drastically change the outcome. History is not linear and despite popular belief, human nature does not progress. 'Science and Technology are cumulative, ethics and politics are recurring dilemmas' (John Gray).  This type of thinking isn't exclusive to users of bitcoin, but, unsurprisingly, there seems to be a particularly large contingent of believers in the impending utopia, borne from technological progress.

Bit off topic, but I typically get carried away once I get on my soapbox.

I think you have some excellent points, but it is important to note that we are not just putting 'different people' in charge, we are changing the framework by which money creation and financial transactions occur.  I believe changing a framework càn have profound consequences.

By the way, theoretically, I would say that human nature does evolve, just very very very slowly, and only after certain "evolutionary incentives" change.

[Spaceman_Spiff]

I'm not talking about spending as in the bare necessities like hookers & blow, i meant spending which could be avoided -- lending for profit, investing, "spending money to make money," the boring stuff.  I simply don't see how molecular believes that Bitcoin is bound to disperse wealth. (Bitcoin:  Champion of the poor.)  If anything, once you discount extremes (one person owns every bitcoin), nothing encourages spending like inflation

I believe the reasoning is that it would remove unfair advantages and wealth distribution to big banks (special loan conditions, cantillon effect etc.), plus the fact that middle-class families tend to have a larger percentage of their savings in inflation-sensitive fiat, whereas rich people can more easily diversify in the housing market, etc. .

[Its About Sharing]

I really think this chart is key. Lower highs and lower lows have not really been broken since the April 24th rise. (There is one slight cross from the beginning of May and early June, but just a few dollars off.) The lower highs have thus far been consistently lower, just eying it around $10 each time.

I'd say the $97 - $100 area is key. If we can rally above that then we have broken the lower high downtrend. But as of now and as long as we stay below around the $100 area (technically our last lower high was around $110) we are still in a downtrend.

What do you TA guys think of the lower high and lower low consistency in your experience? I understand BTC is a different animal.

[Richy_T]

nothing encourages spending like inflation

Why do you want to encourage spending? Need to destroy some of that huge amount of cash you've printed up and given to your banker friends by getting the people they lend it to to feed it into some bubble or other?

[Richy_T]

I think you have some excellent points, but it is important to note that we are not just putting 'different people' in charge,

We won't even be putting different people in charge. We'll just be removing an option they use to exploit the people they're "in charge" of.

[Spaceman_Spiff]

nothing encourages spending like inflation

Why do you want to encourage spending?

Because the faster we use up our natural resources and pollute the planet, the better?

[dexX7]

90 is a hard resistance, but I'd say, 90 can be broken soon and somewhere between 78-82 might be the last chance to buy low, if at all.




IAS: I think it was you who responded to the bitcoin.de and Fidor Bank deal. It's even better. This is first direct banking cooperation in the European Bitcoin sector (or worldwide?) and not only in Germany. Just imagine.. a full blown Bitcoin exchange, backed up by Germany's bank standard. Fast conversation between EUR and BTC, no more waiting time to deposit or withdrawal. The ultimate dream would be a debit card which can be refilled with Bitcoin.. but let's see, how things turn out.

[crumbs]

I'm not talking about spending as in the bare necessities like hookers & blow, i meant spending which could be avoided -- lending for profit, investing, "spending money to make money," the boring stuff.  I simply don't see how molecular believes that Bitcoin is bound to disperse wealth. (Bitcoin:  Champion of the poor.)  If anything, once you discount extremes (one person owns every bitcoin), nothing encourages spending like inflation

I believe the reasoning is that it would remove unfair advantages and wealth distribution to big banks (special loan conditions, cantillon effect etc.), plus the fact that middle-class families tend to have a larger percentage of their savings in inflation-sensitive fiat, whereas rich people can more easily diversify in the housing market, etc. .

If it wasn't for days like yesterday on MtGox, i'd have to dig deeper for proof of the opposite.  But, in all seriousness, while the rich have a definite edge in finance [ ], the advantage only grows with deflationary currency [textbook stuff here].  BTW, my question was much shallower & simpler:  If wealth tends to disperse in Bitcoin economy, and I'm looking to get rich (be a node of wealth concentration), it seems to follow that backing Bitcoin is not in my best interest.  I think.

[crumbs]

nothing encourages spending like inflation

Why do you want to encourage spending? Need to destroy some of that huge amount of cash you've printed up and given to your banker friends by getting the people they lend it to to feed it into some bubble or other?

I don't want to do any such thing -- my question was directed at molecular's claim that bitcoins trend to flow from higher to lower concentrations -- from the hands of the rich to the hands of the poor.  Take it up with him

Edit:  can't have dispersion without something flowing, can't distribute BTC without spending

[Its About Sharing]

IAS: I think it was you who responded to the bitcoin.de and Fidor Bank deal. It's even better. This is first direct banking cooperation in the European Bitcoin sector (or worldwide?) and not only in Germany. Just imagine.. a full blown Bitcoin exchange, backed up by Germany's bank standard. Fast conversation between EUR and BTC, no more waiting time to deposit or withdrawal. The ultimate dream would be a debit card which can be refilled with Bitcoin.. but let's see, how things turn out.

Yes, it was me. Do you know when people can start using the bank? I haven't seen that anywhere. I imagine this will affect Bitstamp (depending on the interface) as the banking system, as bad as it is, is pretty sound in Germany and I think many people using Bitstamp, have the Slovanian bank they use in the back of their minds.

[crumbs]

nothing encourages spending like inflation

Why do you want to encourage spending?

Because the faster we use up our natural resources and pollute the planet, the better?

Spending money is identical to spending resources?  Oy vey.

[Spaceman_Spiff]

nothing encourages spending like inflation

Why do you want to encourage spending?

Because the faster we use up our natural resources and pollute the planet, the better?

Spending money is identical to spending resources?  Oy vey.

Are you saying there is no correlation there?

[dexX7]

Yes, it was me. Do you know when people can start using the bank? I haven't seen that anywhere. I imagine this will affect Bitstamp (depending on the interface) as the banking system, as bad as it is, is pretty sound in Germany and I think many people using Bitstamp, have the Slovanian bank they use in the back of their minds.

Sorry, no. I only have the same information as you from bitcoin.de (in English, in German). I didn't do my homework on Fidor Bank also, but I noticed them because of their wide social media marketing some time ago.

Though I emailed Fidor Bank on sunday and asked about Bitcoin. This was without knowing about the bitcoin.de deal and I ask companies regularly about their opinion about Bitcoin. This is what I received:

Sehr geehrter Herr dexX7,

vielen Dank für Ihre E-Mail und Ihren Vorschlag.

Wir beobachten das Phänomen Bitcoin sehr interessiert. Zum aktuellen Zeitpunkt evaluieren wir, inwieweit eine Aufnahme in das Angebot erfolgen könnte.  Es ist also nicht ausgeschlossen, dass es  irgendwann Bitcoins bei Fidor geben könnte. Wir sind dran...

Dear Mr. dexX7,

thanks for your email and your suggestion.

We are watching the phenomena Bitcoin with much interest. At the moment we evaluate how an integration into our product portfolio could be done. It is therefore not ruled out that there will be Bitcoins at Fidor someday. We are on it...

[Spaceman_Spiff]

IAS: I think it was you who responded to the bitcoin.de and Fidor Bank deal. It's even better. This is first direct banking cooperation in the European Bitcoin sector (or worldwide?) and not only in Germany. Just imagine.. a full blown Bitcoin exchange, backed up by Germany's bank standard. Fast conversation between EUR and BTC, no more waiting time to deposit or withdrawal. The ultimate dream would be a debit card which can be refilled with Bitcoin.. but let's see, how things turn out.

Bitcoin-central had a deal with a european bank too, no?  Or is this arrangement of a different kind?

[crumbs]

nothing encourages spending like inflation

Why do you want to encourage spending?

Because the faster we use up our natural resources and pollute the planet, the better?

Spending money is identical to spending resources?  Oy vey.

Are you saying there is no correlation there?

You're joking?  I can guarantee that earth's finite resources are not depleted when you pay for gold or my fine whores.  Or milk, or stocks, or other currencies, or art, or digital goods or pretty much anything short of commodities which you intend to destroy.