Hmm... is it time to crash BTC exchange rates yet?

[BTConomist]

finite currencies will always have a hoarding phenomena
 

Pretty much all types of currencies have that phenomena (as a store of value function)... I'm just trying to point out that there are two types of hoarding: "hoarding by money users" and "hoarding by central banks" (the issuers of that money). The former serves as a confirmation that a store of value function is present and working well within a currency, the latter destroys all three functions of money. Now, you seem to be in favor of the latter... What gives?

[jml]

finite currencies will always have a hoarding phenomena
 

Pretty much all types of currencies have that phenomena

You have overseen one type of currency which is infinite and that is time!

... I'm just trying to point out that there are two types of hoarding: "hoarding by money users" and "hoarding by central banks" (the issuers of that money). The former serves as a confirmation that a store of value function is present and working well within a currency, the latter destroys all three functions of money...

I am not in favour of central bank policies nor support any form of centralised monetary issuer as the beneficiaries are the elite few. Just to be clear that as a miner like anyone else who is a bitcoin user:

1) I am one of many btc miners - no centralization here, its distributed, hence everyone gets an equal share of the pie!
2) Every person has the right to earn the bitcoins that are rightfully theirs  just as they have spent their own time and money on equipment.
3) Every person have the right to either SPEND or SAVE their bitcoins and see fit how to recoup losses on equipment purchased.

Now, you seem to be in favor of the latter... What gives?

Where have I said that I am in favour of centralised banking?

[BTConomist]

We're obviously both blindfolded, touching an elephant and describing entirely different animals.

You might be right. Or perhaps there is the concept of yin-yang at play here? Either way, it's important that the miners look beyond the debit card use of bitcoin. Let's put it this way, does a debit card or a business that issues it (Mt.Gox et al.) gets to make a profit? (An please, remember, everything I have been saying so far is to be interpreted strictly as hints; it's up to each individual to do their own hacking around the hints.)

Most transactions cover millions of "rows" at a time.  (e.g., a 0.123 BTC payment covers 12.300,000 "rows").

So even if 99.9% of those rows are locked up with no activity, there are plenty of rows remaining with which commerce can occur...

For those who are not yet paralyzed by the GOLD 2.0 bug, spend some time contemplating about the above two lines (thanks Stephen for summarizing it so neatly), then look at 1) the market cap, 2) the average volume of bitcoins being traded at Mt.Gox et al., 3) the average bitcoins sent per hour, and finally, look at 4) the total number of mined bitcoins. And if you are among the lucky few bitcoin miners who suddenly get the aha moment from this little brainstorming exercise, please take advantage of the receding bid orders.

[TheGovernedSelf]

Spend all of my BTC on drugs, cam-girls, and satoshi dice?
...OR...
Save my BTC for 10 years and build a large company and/or build an apartment complex(or 2).

Decisions, decisions...

[NewLiberty]

Unfortunately this is what happens with a currency that has a limited amount of units. If btc was limitless, then there would be no need for hoarding and thus its value would plummet as there would be btc in abundance. As an example, communities in the US are starting to use time as a unit of currency which is itself limitless in supply, thus eliminating the need to hoard. See www.themoneyfix.org

Time is limitless only if you are immortal.

[jml]

Unfortunately this is what happens with a currency that has a limited amount of units. If btc was limitless, then there would be no need for hoarding and thus its value would plummet as there would be btc in abundance. As an example, communities in the US are starting to use time as a unit of currency which is itself limitless in supply, thus eliminating the need to hoard. See www.themoneyfix.org

Time is limitless only if you are immortal.

So what is your point?

The idea between a fiat and a community currency (if you bothered to watch the documentary it discusses about the use of River hours named after the community it is used in) is that fiat money is itself limited by the supply that is being produced and thus would encourage hoarding. Time is a currency that anyone can give to the community (obviously within the life expectancy of the person) and there is no reason to hoard this type of currency as it is limitless. Therefore, people within the community contribute to their local economy when there is a need which brings to the opposite end which are wage slaves which is what you see nowadays people working to make ends meet.

Which do you prefer? Being a slave your entire life or work only when you need to?

[ashaw596]

So I think hoarding and speculating is ok for BTC.... until the speculators get spooked. The problem is that they could artificially inflate the price and then suddenly decide to sell when the price drops a little. This would increase supply and cause the price to further lower and cause a chain reaction (Like when the price dropped from 250 to 100?). The problem isn't that people are quick to buy its that the same people are quick to sell.

[NewLiberty]

Like i said, the best we can do is to simply offer more services for bitcoin. I'm working on new game i will be selling for bitcoin only (and i am paying for everything using bitcoin where possible). And guess what. I am going to HOARD them. Get over it.

Seems like the opposite of hoarding to me, seems like you are participating in the bitcoin economy.

[NewLiberty]

Unfortunately this is what happens with a currency that has a limited amount of units. If btc was limitless, then there would be no need for hoarding and thus its value would plummet as there would be btc in abundance. As an example, communities in the US are starting to use time as a unit of currency which is itself limitless in supply, thus eliminating the need to hoard. See www.themoneyfix.org

Time is limitless only if you are immortal.

So what is your point?

The idea between a fiat and a community currency (if you bothered to watch the documentary it discusses about the use of River hours named after the community it is used in) is that fiat money is itself limited by the supply that is being produced and thus would encourage hoarding. Time is a currency that anyone can give to the community (obviously within the life expectancy of the person) and there is no reason to hoard this type of currency as it is limitless. Therefore, people within the community contribute to their local economy when there is a need which brings to the opposite end which are wage slaves which is what you see nowadays people working to make ends meet.

Which do you prefer? Being a slave your entire life or work only when you need to?

You are engaging in some interesting rhetoric and it is difficult to see if you are agreeing or not.

If you equate work with slavery (which I don't, the difference is coercion vs freedom to contract) and the hours of your life are the currency of the land, then everyone would be participating in a slave economy.  Take a look at what policy goals you are looking to achieve with the currency in play.  The same incentives for hoarding exist whether you pay someone in gold or in hours.  Money in its simplest form is the means used to convince someone to do something that they would not do for free.
Bad money in circulation drives good money into hoards.

 

[jml]

Unfortunately this is what happens with a currency that has a limited amount of units. If btc was limitless, then there would be no need for hoarding and thus its value would plummet as there would be btc in abundance. As an example, communities in the US are starting to use time as a unit of currency which is itself limitless in supply, thus eliminating the need to hoard. See www.themoneyfix.org

Time is limitless only if you are immortal.

So what is your point?

The idea between a fiat and a community currency (if you bothered to watch the documentary it discusses about the use of River hours named after the community it is used in) is that fiat money is itself limited by the supply that is being produced and thus would encourage hoarding. Time is a currency that anyone can give to the community (obviously within the life expectancy of the person) and there is no reason to hoard this type of currency as it is limitless. Therefore, people within the community contribute to their local economy when there is a need which brings to the opposite end which are wage slaves which is what you see nowadays people working to make ends meet.

Which do you prefer? Being a slave your entire life or work only when you need to?

You are engaging in some interesting rhetoric and it is difficult to see if you are agreeing or not.

If you equate work with slavery (which I don't, the difference is coercion vs freedom to contract) and the hours of your life are the currency of the land, then everyone would be participating in a slave economy.  Take a look at what policy goals you are looking to achieve with the currency in play.  The same incentives for hoarding exist whether you pay someone in gold or in hours.  Money in its simplest form is the means used to convince someone to do something that they would not do for free.
Bad money in circulation drives good money into hoards.

 

If you want to know my stance on fiat money, I am against it. I would like to live in a world where central banks have no power to control currency flows and impose tax levies on its people on the currency issued via loans and debt. This is the reason why I am trying to convince people to use bitcoins because I have faith in a crypto-currency that is controlled by the people and not the few elites. I will mention several themes which I believe it to be connected with the rise of bitcoins.

In terms of slavery, I do not equate work with slavery and I will define the aforementioned as "wage slavery" and not "work slavery" - both are different in context and I am looking at the former. The wage slavers would be required to do any job to make ends meet whilst someone who is trained and works in a profession HE LIKES, would earn enough to live comfortably. My definition of wage slavery thus is someone who can not elect his chosen job and engages in a routine, monotonous work. This is what you refer to coercion vs freedom to contract. If I wanted to work in my profession, it would be the latter, other wise, it would be the former.

In our working life, people are already participating in a hierarchy economy where CEO's earn more than 600% of salary in comparison with other peers since the 80's. This is the grossest example of hoarding I have seen- 1% vs the 99%. Look at how Carlos Slim got his wealth from the telecommunications industry and how Indian entrepreneurs are hoarding $3 billion worth in profit over night. If you examine how an average person spends his day, it would be 8 hours working, 8 hours sleeping and 8 hours playing (1/3 of a 24 hour period for each activity). In lower classes, there is a disparity in these figures where people are not able to spend more play time than work time or even sleep.

You state Gresham's law - "Bad money in circulation drives good money into hoards". Silver is an example of a face value metal that has risen in value in comparison to its face value due to its applications in industry and its limited supply. With Bitcoins, because of it's market volatility, people desire to make a profit because there is distrust with the fiat currency as it is constantly devalued and prefer to use bitcoins as a safe haven investment (like gold or silver). The people from PIIGS have been rumoured to sell euros and instead buy bitcoins because of what is happening in the "euro rescue package bubble " - compare this with the real estate bubble that caused Lehman brothers to crash in 2008.

To reverse this behaviour, the value of bitcoins would either have to be devalued, lose confidence, or have an unlimited supply of coins in circulation to make people spend.

[BTConomist]

I would like to live in a world where central banks have no power to control currency flows and impose tax levies on its people on the currency issued via loans and debt.

Well, I have to warn you, with BTC as a currency you will get to keep all of those things (except for the debt part).

This is the reason why I am trying to convince people to use bitcoins because I have faith in a crypto-currency that is controlled by the people and not the few elites.

Could you please define what you mean by control?
I may have another surprise for you when it comes to bitcoin.

[jml]

I would like to live in a world where central banks have no power to control currency flows and impose tax levies on its people on the currency issued via loans and debt.

Well, I have to warn you, with BTC as a currency you will get to keep all of those things (except for the debt part).

This is the reason why I am trying to convince people to use bitcoins because I have faith in a crypto-currency that is controlled by the people and not the few elites.

Well, I have to warn you, with BTC as a currency you will get to keep all of those things (except for the debt part).

That is the problem when bitcoin is backed by fiat which it should not be the case as it's value will be determined by a debt ridden fiat currency.

Could you please define what you mean by control?
I may have another surprise for you when it comes to bitcoin.

Control as in private banking taking control of issuing currency via loans. In bitcoins, the control is passed on to those who produce the hashing power. I already took a surprise at how money is made (via debt, loans and added interest) and I would not be surprised if bitcoins would be headed that way as exchanges pop up.

[kodo]

I speculate its going to shoot up again to new heights before another painful crash way to the bottom 

[BTConomist]

I speculate its going to shoot up again to new heights before another painful crash way to the bottom 

Very unlikely to shoot up again, especially as I'm slowly beginning to provide eye openers, here and there (still in a hint form though). The third link can be especially useful for the GOLD 2.0 fanatics.

[NewLiberty]

That is the problem when bitcoin is backed by fiat which it should not be the case as it's value will be determined by a debt ridden fiat currency.

Thank you for clarifying.  It looks like we do agree on much, though we may have a different degree and scope of concern.
(I don't much care about wage disparity, for example, provided it is engaged in though voluntary negotiation)

In point of fact, am even looking to "back" Bitcoin with silver by accepting Bitcoin in trade for silver.    I just have to convert enough Bitcoin to fiat in order to pay the taxes, (which are minimal as I don't keep much on the trade in order to increase quantity).

[TheGovernedSelf]

So I think hoarding and speculating is ok for BTC.... until the speculators get spooked. The problem is that they could artificially inflate the price and then suddenly decide to sell when the price drops a little. This would increase supply and cause the price to further lower and cause a chain reaction (Like when the price dropped from 250 to 100?). The problem isn't that people are quick to buy its that the same people are quick to sell.

No we aren't. Isn't this exactly what people are complaining about? NOT selling?

Your masters (early adopters/programmers) know exactly what they're doing. Relax. 

[wrenchmonkey]

So I think hoarding and speculating is ok for BTC.... until the speculators get spooked. The problem is that they could artificially inflate the price and then suddenly decide to sell when the price drops a little. This would increase supply and cause the price to further lower and cause a chain reaction (Like when the price dropped from 250 to 100?). The problem isn't that people are quick to buy its that the same people are quick to sell.

No we aren't. Isn't this exactly what people are complaining about? NOT selling?

Your masters (early adopters/programmers) know exactly what they're doing. Relax. 

I think he was saying that they're quick to sell when the value is on the quick decline. Somebody holding a large amount isn't inclined to sell when it goes from $125-$133 in a week, but they'll sell like it's going out of style when it drops from $250 to $120 in a week (further driving the decline).

[jml]

That is the problem when bitcoin is backed by fiat which it should not be the case as it's value will be determined by a debt ridden fiat currency.

In point of fact, am even looking to "back" Bitcoin with silver by accepting Bitcoin in trade for silver.    I just have to convert enough Bitcoin to fiat in order to pay the taxes, (which are minimal as I don't keep much on the trade in order to increase quantity).

This is what I believe should be done in the exchanges; that is to allow the person to trade either gold, silver or other precious metal (platinum or palladium).

[therustytrombone]

I speculate its going to shoot up again to new heights before another painful crash way to the bottom 

Very unlikely to shoot up again, especially as I'm slowly beginning to provide eye openers, here and there (still in a hint form though). The third link can be especially useful for the GOLD 2.0 fanatics.

Those are not eye-openers.  Your rhetoric sounds like someone on investorhub.com forums panicking about their short position and bashing the hell out of a stock.   

[BitcoinAshley]

I speculate its going to shoot up again to new heights before another painful crash way to the bottom 

Very unlikely to shoot up again, especially as I'm slowly beginning to provide eye openers, here and there (still in a hint form though). The third link can be especially useful for the GOLD 2.0 fanatics.

Those are not eye-openers.  Your rhetoric sounds like someone on investorhub.com forums panicking about their short position and bashing the hell out of a stock.   

+1 you hit the nail right on the head. I don't know what this "BTConomist" guy's deal is, but he's certainly not much of an economist