Bitcoin Forum
September 22, 2019, 09:23:12 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 [All]
  Print  
Author Topic: Peter Schiff on Bitcoin  (Read 38424 times)
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 02, 2013, 12:38:46 AM
Last edit: October 19, 2014, 04:07:09 PM by joae1975
#1

From, "The Peter Schiff Show."  He doesn't discuss BTC often but I thought I would start compiling clips from his shows and post them as they appear.  It's been discussed on the show many times in the past but I have no idea when.  I never thought to compile it.  But I will from here on.  Peter does not think bitcoin has any intrinsic value.  He doesn't believe in it because you can't hold it and use it for anything else like gold/silver can.  But he does believe in the principle and idea governing it.

April 31, 2013.  Discussing Liberty Reserve and bitcoin.
http://db.tt/eZQSGXNa

Enjoy.

Looking in the archives, found this interview with Erik Voorhees by Guest host Tom Woods on March 8, 2013.
http://db.tt/mOmyDEb2

From June 20, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTr_hTC90oQ - part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUxyr7cI0Zw - part 2

From June 21, 2011
http://youtu.be/QoopVDjXydE

Europac newsletter June, 2013
See article, "The Bitcoin Phoenix."
By: Andrew Schiff (sounds very bullish on BTC)
http://www.europac.net/research_analysis/newsletters/global_investor_newsletter_june_2013

June 25th, 2013 Peter Schiff show: - Peter is still skeptical...(~1:50 into audio)
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/pa_20130625kusg_low_01.mp3

July 2nd, 2013 Peter Schiff show: Peter talks about the Winkle twins and their new BTC ETF, funny at end.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/BTC%20Winkle%20and%20Peter.mp3

Oct. 4th, 20134 Peter talks about the Silk Road seizure
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/pa_20131004jghf_low.mp3

Nov 1st, 2013 Peter gives his bitcoin bubble speech.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/Peter%20Schiff.bitcoin.11.1.13.mp3

Nov 13, 2013 Peter is at the Money Show in New Orleans.  He opens his show talking about bitcoin.  I just put the whole show up.  Talk continues with callers at 1:13:20.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/PeterShiffShow.btc.11.13.13.mp3

Added 11/13/13
http://youtu.be/0VrB1Ae3xqs

Nov 14, 2013 Today's show had the best caller challenge yet.  But he waits until the end of the show and they have no time.  Please listen to the end.  He goes on an amusing tangent about Janet Yellen then back to bitcoin.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/Peter.Schiff.bitcoin.11.14.13.mp3

Nov 15, 2013  I cut this show up.  Two callers here.  The first is anti-BTC, 2nd is pro-BTC.  The first tries to say the media promotes BTC, LOL!  I'm not sure what media he's listening to.  Judge for yourself.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/Peter.Schiff.11.15.13.bitcoin.mp3

Nov. 18th, 2013  Two segments cut here.  First is Peter talking about it.  Second he's talking to a caller.  
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/Peter.Schiff.bitcoin.11.18.13.mp3

Nov. 19th, 2013  Peter describes why gold is real money and bitcoin is a ponzi scheme...in Peter Schiff fashion.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/Peter.Schiff.bitcoin.11.19.13.mp3

Peter made a Bitcoin vs. Gold Video today 11/21/13
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0L7SOPDOvvI

Nov. 22nd, 2013.  Peter talks about the news that Virgin Galactic is accepting bitcoin as payment for trips to outer space.  He has audio clips of Richard Branson.  Also takes calls on bitcoin.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/Peter.Schiff.bitcoin.11.22.13.mp3

Nov. 24th, 2013
Peter Schiff and Erik Voorhees
http://youtu.be/IaBREg5rzlI

Nov. 25th, 2013
Peter Schiff debates Stefan Molyneux
http://youtu.be/mFcTJAQ7zc4

Dec. 2nd, 2013
Peter debates with Erik Voorhees
http://youtu.be/7mUn-d8R98k

Dec. 11th, 2013
Eric Voorhees talks with Tom Woods on his show.  
Eric was The Tom Woods show Dec 11th too.
http://www.schiffradio.com/pg/jsp/verticals/archive.jsp?dispid=310&pid=63335

Jan. 10th, 2014
Peter on Overstock.com
https://app.box.com/s/g10742faolbkeq07ih6g

Jan. 27th, 2014
Peter talks about Charlie Shrem and bitcoin taxes
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/PeterSchiff.bitcoin.1.27.14.mp3

Feb. 10th, 2014
Another anti-bitcoin rant.  Talks about Mt. Gox bug and how newcomers may be turned off during bust cycles.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/Peter.Schiff.bitcoin.2.10.2014.mp3

Feb. 13th, 2014
Peter talks about some technical support levels of bitcoin, etc.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/Peter.Schiff.bitcoin.2.13.2014.mp3

Feb. 14th, 2014
Peter talks about btc prices on Mt. Gox vs Bitstamp.  He admittedly doesn't understand why they're different.  He takes some calls on it.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/Peter.Schiff.bitcoin.2.14.2014.mp3

Feb. 20th, 21st, & 25th, 2014
Mt. Gox and Peter...
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/Peter.Schiff.bitcoin.2.20.2014.mp3
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/Peter.Schiff.bitcoin.2.21.2014.mp3
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/Peter.Schiff.bitcoin.2.25.2014.mp3

Feb. 28th, 2014
Peter talks about the closing of Mt. Gox.  Plus a caller at the end.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/Peter.Schiff.bitcoin.2.28.2014.mp3

July 24th, 2014
Naomi Brockwell, aka "BitcoinGirl", is on Peter's show.  Nothing new.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/NaomiBrockwell_072414.mp3

Sept 20th, 2014
Peter talking bitcoin on his new podcast:
http://youtu.be/lMfoFlJhcck?t=1h5m45s

Added Oct. 19th 2014
Since Peter started doing his weekly podcasts he's talked about bitcoin a few times.  On his YouTube video descriptions are links to when he talks about it.

Podcast #5 @ 30:49
http://youtu.be/nYiyQl7O6HI

Podcast #6 @ 45:00
http://youtu.be/Ob8stmxfbFg

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
1569144192
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1569144192

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1569144192
Reply with quote  #2

1569144192
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1569144192
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1569144192

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1569144192
Reply with quote  #2

1569144192
Report to moderator
1569144192
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1569144192

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1569144192
Reply with quote  #2

1569144192
Report to moderator
1569144192
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1569144192

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1569144192
Reply with quote  #2

1569144192
Report to moderator
canadense
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 11
Merit: 0



View Profile WWW
June 04, 2013, 03:29:36 AM
#2

Bitcoins have value, but it is a USE value determined by market forces; he is correct in asserting that the value of bitcoin is NOT intrinsic since the digital substance of the blockchains has no other use than as a medium of exchange and store of value. Were bitcoin to cease being used as money it would have no INTRINSIC value outside of this function, and in this respect it differs from gold and silver which do have substantial intrinsic value.
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1001


View Profile
June 04, 2013, 04:18:16 AM
#3

Bitcoins have value, but it is a USE value determined by market forces; he is correct in asserting that the value of bitcoin is NOT intrinsic since the digital substance of the blockchains has no other use than as a medium of exchange and store of value. Were bitcoin to cease being used as money it would have no INTRINSIC value outside of this function, and in this respect it differs from gold and silver which do have substantial intrinsic value.


The vast majority of the valuations of gold and silver is from their usefulness as a store of value (this is the only monetary aspect they do well).  Consumptive uses are a very small percentage of their value.  However, talking about how the value of something changes if it magically losses it's moneyness seems kind of pointless.  By what mechanism would Bitcoin suddenly no longer be money?

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
12jh3odyAAaR2XedPKZNCR4X4sebuotQzN
Lethn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
June 04, 2013, 08:24:02 AM
#4

Speaking as someone who is a learning JEWELLER notme I can tell you these guys are right Cheesy metals have all sorts of properties like heating points and conductivity, you'll find gold in small amounts on many of the electronics you use and silver is used in dentistry and other places too because of how soft but strong the metal is. Bitcoin has been designed very well and I can't think of much better features to add for it but it only does one thing, if you tried to use it for anything else, it just wouldn't work. You couldn't use Bitcoins for industry and you couldn't even really use them for recreation, they've been specifically designed for the task of being a currency.

Bitcoins do the job of being a currency extremely well but that's the only thing they can do, I think if Bitcoin were introduced in an age where everyone was using Gold/Silver for currency like the old days then it would mostly be ignored save for the convenience of doing international transactions.
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1001


View Profile
June 04, 2013, 08:48:29 AM
#5

Speaking as someone who is a learning JEWELLER notme I can tell you these guys are right Cheesy metals have all sorts of properties like heating points and conductivity, you'll find gold in small amounts on many of the electronics you use and silver is used in dentistry and other places too because of how soft but strong the metal is. Bitcoin has been designed very well and I can't think of much better features to add for it but it only does one thing, if you tried to use it for anything else, it just wouldn't work. You couldn't use Bitcoins for industry and you couldn't even really use them for recreation, they've been specifically designed for the task of being a currency.

Bitcoins do the job of being a currency extremely well but that's the only thing they can do, I think if Bitcoin were introduced in an age where everyone was using Gold/Silver for currency like the old days then it would mostly be ignored save for the convenience of doing international transactions.

Yes, there are consumptive uses, particularly for silver.  However, they are a small part.

See the cart here: http://www.gold.org/investment/statistics/demand_and_supply_statistics/
If you exclude investments and jewelry (which I consider nonconsumptive) only 11% of gold demand is for consumption.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
12jh3odyAAaR2XedPKZNCR4X4sebuotQzN
jag2k2
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 62
Merit: 10


View Profile
June 04, 2013, 11:41:45 AM
#6

I bought some gold recently and as I held it in my hand I thought to myself "How do I REALLY know this hasn't been counterfeited, or filled with tungsten or something like that?"

Bitcoin cannot be counterfeited.  That has intrinsic value.
Bitcoin can be stored somewhere secure AND somewhere that is convenient to access.  That has intrinsic value.
Bitcoin can be easily divided down to make a smaller transaction.  That has intrinsic value.

One day I hope I can throw away all my gold because bitcoin made it worthless.

I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs. - Thomas Jefferson
Lethn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
June 04, 2013, 11:49:57 AM
#7

jag2k2 you could take it to an assay office or something and have it evaluated if you're unsure, but this is why I acknowledge Bitcoin, even though it's really been designed for one thing it does what it's designed for extremely well without help.
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1001


View Profile
June 04, 2013, 02:24:10 PM
#8

jag2k2 you could take it to an assay office or something and have it evaluated if you're unsure, but this is why I acknowledge Bitcoin, even though it's really been designed for one thing it does what it's designed for extremely well without help.

Right.  Bitcoin was designed to be money.  Gold and silver was not.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
12jh3odyAAaR2XedPKZNCR4X4sebuotQzN
jdbtracker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728
Merit: 500


Minimum Effort/Maximum effect


View Profile
June 04, 2013, 03:35:21 PM
#9

I got a question to counter this.

What is the intrinsic value of fiat money? It is made of paper, some coins of different metals, but most of it is digital.

If you think my efforts are worth something; I'll keep on keeping on.
I don't believe in IQ, only in Determination.
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1001


View Profile
June 04, 2013, 03:38:22 PM
#10

I got a question to counter this.

What is the intrinsic value of fiat money? It is made of paper, some coins of different metals, but most of it is digital.

The M16.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
12jh3odyAAaR2XedPKZNCR4X4sebuotQzN
puffpuffpass
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70
Merit: 10


I'm nobody.


View Profile
June 04, 2013, 05:03:57 PM
#11

peter schiff is an idiot who has been pumping precious metals and is heavily invested in them. I knew about him before bitcoin and I would have told you the exact same thing, because it's obvious. end of discussion.

I have a bitcoin address that anyone can send BTC too, so I'm going to post it
on my sig because I think someone is going to randomly give me their BTC:
1D37qouguK5rNh1mSZDocgVCvA2rxsAgLp Roll Eyes
NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1001


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
June 04, 2013, 06:34:02 PM
#12

Bitcoins have value, but it is a USE value determined by market forces; he is correct in asserting that the value of bitcoin is NOT intrinsic since the digital substance of the blockchains has no other use than as a medium of exchange and store of value. Were bitcoin to cease being used as money it would have no INTRINSIC value outside of this function, and in this respect it differs from gold and silver which do have substantial intrinsic value.


The vast majority of the valuations of gold and silver is from their usefulness as a store of value (this is the only monetary aspect they do well).  Consumptive uses are a very small percentage of their value.  However, talking about how the value of something changes if it magically losses it's moneyness seems kind of pointless.  By what mechanism would Bitcoin suddenly no longer be money?

Suddenly?
1) Cryptography shown to be vulnerable.
2) Technical innovation by bitcoin haters.

Less Sudden
3) persistent 51% attacks
4) Persistent legal attacks with cooperation of network providers.

Fairly slowly
5) People decide that it is more trouble than its worth.
6) Something we haven't thought of yet.

Personally, I think these are not highly likely but still they are a greater than zero chance.
Much depends on the growth of legitimate use, which is why, like Amagi, am backing the Bitcoins with precious metals, gold and silver. 
Physical may always be better for physical transactions, CryptoCurrency has the clear advantage for online transactions.

FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
humanitee
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 501


First 100% Liquid Stablecoin Backed by Gold


View Profile
June 04, 2013, 10:51:47 PM
#13

peter schiff is an idiot who has been pumping precious metals and is heavily invested in them. I knew about him before bitcoin and I would have told you the exact same thing, because it's obvious. end of discussion.

Worthless troll is worthless.

His mortgage bankers speech will forever be one of my favorite financial speeches.

wamatt
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 85
Merit: 10


View Profile
June 05, 2013, 12:43:32 AM
#14

Bitcoin cannot be counterfeited.  That has intrinsic value.
Bitcoin can be stored somewhere secure AND somewhere that is convenient to access.  That has intrinsic value.
Bitcoin can be easily divided down to make a smaller transaction.  That has intrinsic value.

Those properties could be said of some now defunct cryptocurrencies too.

Or I could invent some digital bits that have those properties too. There is an infinite supply of those bits and encoding schemes, hence that does not add intrinsic value outside of a store-value ledger.
jag2k2
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 62
Merit: 10


View Profile
June 05, 2013, 01:50:10 AM
#15

Quote
Quote from: jag2k2 on June 04, 2013, 11:41:45 AM
Bitcoin cannot be counterfeited.  That has intrinsic value.
Bitcoin can be stored somewhere secure AND somewhere that is convenient to access.  That has intrinsic value.
Bitcoin can be easily divided down to make a smaller transaction.  That has intrinsic value.

Those properties could be said of some now defunct cryptocurrencies too.

Or I could invent some digital bits that have those properties too. There is an infinite supply of those bits and encoding schemes, hence that does not add intrinsic value outside of a store-value ledger.

Those defunct cryptocurrencies had intrinsic value as well.  If you are wondering why bitcoins have more value than other cryptocurrencies well that is a different question.

I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs. - Thomas Jefferson
NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1001


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
June 05, 2013, 04:41:20 AM
#16

Quote
Quote from: jag2k2 on June 04, 2013, 11:41:45 AM
Bitcoin cannot be counterfeited.  That has intrinsic value.
Bitcoin can be stored somewhere secure AND somewhere that is convenient to access.  That has intrinsic value.
Bitcoin can be easily divided down to make a smaller transaction.  That has intrinsic value.

Those properties could be said of some now defunct cryptocurrencies too.

Or I could invent some digital bits that have those properties too. There is an infinite supply of those bits and encoding schemes, hence that does not add intrinsic value outside of a store-value ledger.

Those defunct cryptocurrencies had intrinsic value as well.  If you are wondering why bitcoins have more value than other cryptocurrencies well that is a different question.

Perhaps distinguishing between utility value and intrinsic value might serve us. 
Can any software have value that is intrinsic or must all its value be use based?
For value to be intrinsic, it ought come from the thing itself.

FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
Seth Otterstad
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 328
Merit: 250



View Profile
June 05, 2013, 05:00:56 AM
#17

The predictions of mainstream economists are pretty bad, but they look like geniuses compared to famous Perma-Bears like Schiff and Prechter who lose money even when they are right.  Peter Schiff reportedly lost some investors 40-70% during 2008.  There are plenty of bears who made billions in 2008 betting against the housing bubble, and you should listen to them instead.  Austrian Robert Prechter's newsletter has the worst track record of anyone on Wall St over 30 years.  These people are salesmen who pitch simplistic ideas that are easy to understand and play to people's fear.  Following their advice is a good way to lose money.
/rant

http://www.businessinsider.com/2009/1/peter-schiffs-clients-got-hosed-this-year-too
http://avaresearch.com/avanew/articles/713/The-Embarrassing-Track-Record-of-Robert-Prechter-Part-1.html
http://avaresearch.com/avanew/articles/302/Peter-Schiff-Wrong-on-the-Economy-Wrong-on-Healthcare-Part-1.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oJCOlwZUic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2D3J8Jq9hw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUbhAbqKjOo

Seth Otterstad's Blog          @SethOtterstad on twitter          Seth on google+
wamatt
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 85
Merit: 10


View Profile
June 05, 2013, 10:14:41 AM
#18

Quote
Quote from: jag2k2 on June 04, 2013, 11:41:45 AM
Bitcoin cannot be counterfeited.  That has intrinsic value.
Bitcoin can be stored somewhere secure AND somewhere that is convenient to access.  That has intrinsic value.
Bitcoin can be easily divided down to make a smaller transaction.  That has intrinsic value.
Quote from: wamatt
Those properties could be said of some now defunct cryptocurrencies too.

Or I could invent some digital bits that have those properties too. There is an infinite supply of those bits and encoding schemes, hence that does not add intrinsic value outside of a store-value ledger.

Those defunct cryptocurrencies had intrinsic value as well.  If you are wondering why bitcoins have more value than other cryptocurrencies well that is a different question.

You say "had intrinsic value". Well, I respectfully do not agree once again. Intrinsic value means something inseparable from the whole or part of the property of that thing. So the private keys of "ReplicaCoin (tm)" still exist, yet they possess no value today, hence it's not intrinsic to those bits of data themselves.

The value, if any, was transient, and derived from its speculative use as a potential currency.
jag2k2
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 62
Merit: 10


View Profile
June 05, 2013, 08:17:30 PM
#19

Quote
You say "had intrinsic value". Well, I respectfully do not agree once again. Intrinsic value means something inseparable from the whole or part of the property of that thing. So the private keys of "ReplicaCoin (tm)" still exist, yet they possess no value today, hence it's not intrinsic to those bits of data themselves.

The value, if any, was transient, and derived from its speculative use as a potential currency.

Would you argue then that gold has intrinsic value?  Wheat has intrinsic value which satisfies our natural need for hunger, it isn't very good though as a currency.  I think Gold and Bitcoin have similar values that make them good currencies and currencies satisfy an intrinsic (or natural) need that humanity has to trade things.  If people decided not to use gold as a currency then its value would plummet as well.

I would argue yes Gold has intrinsic value which satisfies humanity's natural or intrinsic need to trade.  Bitcoin (or any cryptocurrency for that matter) satisfies the same need.  Fiat money satisfies that need (albeit poorly).  Silver and Platinum and copper and other metals live side by side with gold because they offer something unique that gold doesn't.  Bitcoin was first and no competing cryptocurrency has offered anything substantially better thus far. 

I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs. - Thomas Jefferson
painlord2k
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 451
Merit: 250


View Profile
June 05, 2013, 09:47:40 PM
#20

There is no something like "intrinsic value".
Nothing ha intrinsic value.
There is "personal use value", the value you give to something for the personal use you do or could do without need anyone else.

The industrial use value of gold is pretty low (this can be proved because people pay to acquire gold and put in in vaults and very few use it in industrial applications where it is consumed or it would not have a supply/consumption ratio so high).


NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1001


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
June 05, 2013, 11:20:58 PM
Last edit: June 06, 2013, 06:49:56 PM by NewLiberty
#21

There is quite a bit reclaimed gold as well from industrial uses.
Those old computer components have a bit here and there.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/6-lbs-5-oz-of-computer-scrap-for-gold-recovery-/300915675630

I suppose a pure utilitarian philosopher could suggest that the only values that exist are use values and that nothing is intrinsic, but those folks are pretty rare these days.

FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
painlord2k
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 451
Merit: 250


View Profile
June 06, 2013, 06:45:04 PM
#22

There is the "indirect exchange value" and liquid assets like gold, silver and bitcoin are used for this.
They are needed because you need to obtain things from people uninterested in your goods and services.
The more resellable, liquid, etc. commodity is useful for indirect exchange and they are considered money or quasi-money.
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 13, 2013, 04:23:06 PM
#23

I got a question to counter this.

What is the intrinsic value of fiat money? It is made of paper, some coins of different metals, but most of it is digital.
You can wipe your butt with paper dollars (will hurt tho), burn it as fuel for a fire, make paper airplanes, snort cocaine, melt down coins into bullets, throw coins as weapons, use them in chance games (heads/tales), etc.  That would be intrinsic value.  Gold/silver have many industrial applications, they're scarce, can't be created without blowing up a star, and are divisible.  The problem Peter has with bitcoin is it only serves one purpose and you can't hold them in your hand.  He's old school, but he'll come around when the market proves itself. 

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
xavier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 260
Merit: 250


View Profile
June 14, 2013, 08:05:04 PM
#24

The predictions of mainstream economists are pretty bad, but they look like geniuses compared to famous Perma-Bears like Schiff and Prechter who lose money even when they are right.  Peter Schiff reportedly lost some investors 40-70% during 2008.  There are plenty of bears who made billions in 2008 betting against the housing bubble, and you should listen to them instead.  Austrian Robert Prechter's newsletter has the worst track record of anyone on Wall St over 30 years.  These people are salesmen who pitch simplistic ideas that are easy to understand and play to people's fear.  Following their advice is a good way to lose money.
/rant

http://www.businessinsider.com/2009/1/peter-schiffs-clients-got-hosed-this-year-too
http://avaresearch.com/avanew/articles/713/The-Embarrassing-Track-Record-of-Robert-Prechter-Part-1.html
http://avaresearch.com/avanew/articles/302/Peter-Schiff-Wrong-on-the-Economy-Wrong-on-Healthcare-Part-1.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oJCOlwZUic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2D3J8Jq9hw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUbhAbqKjOo

I see where you're coming from. Actually i agree with Peter Schiff on the current economic situation and what will eventually happen. The difficult thing is, how long it will take. Schiff Recommends buying gold. However if you had followed this advice from the beginning of the year, you'd be underwater. It could conceivabley take a long time for these economic predictions to play out. In the mean time, you could be loosing money.
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 14, 2013, 09:52:01 PM
Last edit: June 15, 2013, 02:11:27 PM by joae1975
#25

Right, The current Fed induced high our markets feel is temporary.  Its the same as the instant gradification felt by a gambler or drug user.  Its temporary.  To truly profit from the current clinate you must be patient and let things play out. Peter supports the fundamentals for the long haul.  The only obstacles Peter's philosophy faces is government regulation and market restrictions.  He cannot predict the stupid decisions politicians make.  He does have a few small connections, like Rand Paul who listens to Peters views.

On another note.  Does anyone know about the legitimacy of these gold for bitcoin companies?  Like http://www.coinabul.com ?

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
painlord2k
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 451
Merit: 250


View Profile
June 15, 2013, 01:36:10 AM
#26

I see where you're coming from. Actually i agree with Peter Schiff on the current economic situation and what will eventually happen. The difficult thing is, how long it will take. Schiff Recommends buying gold. However if you had followed this advice from the beginning of the year, you'd be underwater. It could conceivabley take a long time for these economic predictions to play out. In the mean time, you could be loosing money.

The point to own physical gold is not to gain, but as insurance in case of economic collapse.
The "wealth transfer" is a side effect of it, because if you do not lose when all are losing, you are becoming wealthier compared to them.
And after the tempest is past, you are able to convert gold in productive assets (houses, shares of companies, land and so on).
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 15, 2013, 05:58:49 AM
#27

^
Right, you maintain your purchasing power as the dollar loses value.  1 oz of gold always has and always will buy 1 good suit.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1001


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
June 15, 2013, 01:46:17 PM
#28

On another note.  Does anyone know about the legitimacy of these gold for bitcoin companies?  Like http://www.coinabul.com/?

Coinabul are good folks.
My prices are better, but coinabul provide a much better retail experience.

FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 15, 2013, 02:57:47 PM
#29

On another note.  Does anyone know about the legitimacy of these gold for bitcoin companies?  Like http://www.coinabul.com/?

Coinabul are good folks.
My prices are better, but coinabul provide a much better retail experience.
If I may ask here, what's your typical markup over spot for a Perth Mint 1oz bar?  Coinabul around 8% for 1 oz bars.  http://www.amagimetals.com/ is ~3%, WOW!  Love the John Galt and Ron Paul coins, HAHA!

edit:  I could buy some gold, max out my credit cards and disappear hehe!

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
xavier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 260
Merit: 250


View Profile
June 17, 2013, 09:20:53 AM
#30

I see where you're coming from. Actually i agree with Peter Schiff on the current economic situation and what will eventually happen. The difficult thing is, how long it will take. Schiff Recommends buying gold. However if you had followed this advice from the beginning of the year, you'd be underwater. It could conceivabley take a long time for these economic predictions to play out. In the mean time, you could be loosing money.

The point to own physical gold is not to gain, but as insurance in case of economic collapse.
The "wealth transfer" is a side effect of it, because if you do not lose when all are losing, you are becoming wealthier compared to them.
And after the tempest is past, you are able to convert gold in productive assets (houses, shares of companies, land and so on).


I will write some stuff to reply to this,.

What is the point of investing? To increase the value of your assets, right? It's a money making exercise (and hopefully not money loosing). Buying gold is an investment therefore u are looking to make money.

Also, when the tempest is past, it is a bad time to convert , I guess u mean sell , your gold because everybody else will be doing the Same. To be successful in investing u need to be ahead of everybody else . You need to be different, but also to be right when others are wrong . So the best time to sell would be when everybody is buying .

There is no such thing as insurance in investing. Investing is about making bets on the future. It is about predicting the future basically. It's also about avoiding doing stupid things and loosing your savings.

/rant
junglist.massive
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 761
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 17, 2013, 10:06:06 AM
#31

interesting
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 17, 2013, 12:25:00 PM
#32

I have to agree with Xavier here on this.  Gold is not an investment.  It's a hedge against inflation.  And so is bitcoin imho.  Gold is a store of wealth.  When the tempest comes to pass, everybody and their mother is going to try to buy gold at the same time.  And its going to Skyrocket.  Similar to Bitcoin and Cyprus.  Only the real fat lady has yet to sing her song.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
tabnloz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 961
Merit: 1000


View Profile
June 17, 2013, 04:51:58 PM
#33

I see where you're coming from. Actually i agree with Peter Schiff on the current economic situation and what will eventually happen. The difficult thing is, how long it will take. Schiff Recommends buying gold. However if you had followed this advice from the beginning of the year, you'd be underwater. It could conceivabley take a long time for these economic predictions to play out. In the mean time, you could be loosing money.

The point to own physical gold is not to gain, but as insurance in case of economic collapse.
The "wealth transfer" is a side effect of it, because if you do not lose when all are losing, you are becoming wealthier compared to them.
And after the tempest is past, you are able to convert gold in productive assets (houses, shares of companies, land and so on).


I will write some stuff to reply to this,.

What is the point of investing? To increase the value of your assets, right? It's a money making exercise (and hopefully not money loosing). Buying gold is an investment therefore u are looking to make money.

Also, when the tempest is past, it is a bad time to convert , I guess u mean sell , your gold because everybody else will be doing the Same. To be successful in investing u need to be ahead of everybody else . You need to be different, but also to be right when others are wrong . So the best time to sell would be when everybody is buying .

There is no such thing as insurance in investing. Investing is about making bets on the future. It is about predicting the future basically. It's also about avoiding doing stupid things and loosing your savings.

/rant

At some stage people come to believe there is too much risk in investing in traditional markets. We see that now with currency & monetary manipulation. People are on the stocks and RE express but it is increasingly seen as fragile. Gold is then a hedge for part of your wealth, but the timing is difficult. Ideally the end game is to escape fiat death. It becomes as much a way of not losing in times of chaos as storing wealth. This is a big shift in mindset.

Operatr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798
Merit: 1000


www.DonateMedia.org


View Profile WWW
June 17, 2013, 06:03:55 PM
#34

Gold has an intrinsic value because it:

Is rarer than most metals (if Gold were plentiful and Iron was rare, we would be hedging with Iron instead)

Takes a lot of time and energy to mine


Bitcoin is modeled after this.

They have integrated rarity

They take a lot of time and energy to "mine"



Usually I like what Schiff has to say, but I don't think he is quite right on this one. Like most firmly stuck in Fiat world they don't quite seem to get the concept completely but feel at home talking about it anyway as some kind of curiosity but not "real money", whatever the hell that means.

Liberty Reserve was a sloppy enterprise and got what it deserved

Seth Otterstad
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 328
Merit: 250



View Profile
June 17, 2013, 10:31:09 PM
#35

Economic disaster /= everyone tries to buy gold.  The gold price dropped during the 2008 crash along with everything else.  Gold is also a terrible inflation hedge.  The 1980's saw periods of double digit inflation, during which the gold price was falling.  The US is only 21% of the world's economic activity, so it makes little sense to think that this globally traded commodity is going to reflect the policy of a single government.

There are WAY better ways to profit if you think a crash or hyperinflation is coming than just buying gold.  People like Kyle Bass became billionaires in 2008 betting against the housing bubble.  Peter Schiff was not one of them.  You can safely ignore anything he has to say because he makes his money by selling gold.

Obviously gold performs better in the very long run (>20 years) than something that targets an inflation rate of 2-3% with periods of double digit inflation in the 1980's.  In the long run, fiat currency is the worst investment around.  It goes to zero by design.  To think this matters, you have to ignore the fact that no one "invests" in USD.  People invest in productive assets like stocks.  Not only do stock prices beat inflation, they get a dividend every year.

BTW, Schiff only recommends 15-20% gold in portfolio, or at least he did a couple years ago.

Aspiring gold bugs should read this: http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=2562

Here is some more stuff:
http://online.barrons.com/article/SB50001424052748704372504578289922761002366.html#articleTabs_article%3D1
http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2012-12-07/hidden-dangers-gold

Seth Otterstad's Blog          @SethOtterstad on twitter          Seth on google+
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 17, 2013, 10:40:15 PM
#36

Gold dropped in '08 because the dollar didn't drop. People still had faith in the dollar.   But that sentiment is slowly changing.  I notice customers at work, through conversation, we look for the rare silver dimes/quarters.  Then again this libro girl I'm kinda dating has no clue.  She gets mad when I try to explain it all to her.

Anyway I live how we're all preaching to the choir here.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1001


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
June 18, 2013, 10:19:23 AM
#37

On another note.  Does anyone know about the legitimacy of these gold for bitcoin companies?  Like http://www.coinabul.com/?

Coinabul are good folks.
My prices are better, but coinabul provide a much better retail experience.
If I may ask here, what's your typical markup over spot for a Perth Mint 1oz bar?  Coinabul around 8% for 1 oz bars.  http://www.amagimetals.com/ is ~3%, WOW!  Love the John Galt and Ron Paul coins, HAHA!

edit:  I could buy some gold, max out my credit cards and disappear hehe!

Thus my point about their superior retail experience.  We don't take credit, but we do take Bitcoin, and other non-reversible transactions.

FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 18, 2013, 03:52:08 PM
#38

Links added on first post.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
Raize
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1417
Merit: 1008


View Profile
June 18, 2013, 06:09:05 PM
#39

"Intrinsic value" is a misnomer, intentionally designed to mislead people. The only legitimate use of the term is in futures/options trading as there is a "present value".

Case in point, answer these three questions:
1) What is the intrinsic value of water?
2) What is the intrinsic value of water if you are lost in a desert?
3) What is the intrinsic value of water if you are drowning?

One's answer will always be different for all three cases, indicating there is no such thing as "objective value". In the case of #2, the average person may be willing to lose a limb to avoid dying of thirst. In the case of #3, the average person may be willing to lose a limb to see enough water removed that they could obtain another breath.

Value is always "subjective", no matter what adjectives are added to it. To argue there is some inherent property of an entity that provides an objective value to it, is to purposely mislead people.

Bitcoin is money (or can be used as such) because it is like gold and other precious metals. They are all scarce, which gives them *some* value, even if it's not always a stable one. Even fiat money has scarcity, regardless of inflation, it is not infinite, even if some might be trying to make it infinite even today.

There's an old saying that goes: "Money is a matter of functions four: a medium, a measure, a standard, a store."

Gold and other precious metals have problems with the second of these: measure (AKA unit of account).

A good unit of account has to be divisible, fungible, and countable.

Precious metals meet the fungible and countable requirements, but have struggled over the years with meeting divisibility. After all, suppose you were to do work that is the equivalent of 5.1 grams of gold. The individual you did the work for reaches into their pocket and gives you 6 grams and asks for .9 of a gram in change. How do you provide it?

Bitcoin solves the divisibility problem of scare goods, while still meeting all the other requirements of money.

So if you wanted to say there was any sort of "objective value" of Bitcoin, it would be the following: Bitcoin is a medium, a measure (divisible, fungible, & countable), a standard, and a store.

From there you can argue whether or not it fits these attributes better than fiat money, but it almost certainly meets these attributes at least as well as precious metals.

OrganofCorti's Neighbourhood Pool Watch - The most informative website on blockchain health
xxjs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280
Merit: 250


View Profile
June 18, 2013, 11:27:38 PM
#40

"Intrinsic value" is a misnomer, intentionally designed to mislead people. The only legitimate use of the term is in futures/options trading as there is a "present value".

Case in point, answer these three questions:
1) What is the intrinsic value of water?
2) What is the intrinsic value of water if you are lost in a desert?
3) What is the intrinsic value of water if you are drowning?

One's answer will always be different for all three cases, indicating there is no such thing as "objective value". In the case of #2, the average person may be willing to lose a limb to avoid dying of thirst. In the case of #3, the average person may be willing to lose a limb to see enough water removed that they could obtain another breath.

Value is always "subjective", no matter what adjectives are added to it. To argue there is some inherent property of an entity that provides an objective value to it, is to purposely mislead people.

Bitcoin is money (or can be used as such) because it is like gold and other precious metals. They are all scarce, which gives them *some* value, even if it's not always a stable one. Even fiat money has scarcity, regardless of inflation, it is not infinite, even if some might be trying to make it infinite even today.

There's an old saying that goes: "Money is a matter of functions four: a medium, a measure, a standard, a store."

Gold and other precious metals have problems with the second of these: measure (AKA unit of account).

A good unit of account has to be divisible, fungible, and countable.

Precious metals meet the fungible and countable requirements, but have struggled over the years with meeting divisibility. After all, suppose you were to do work that is the equivalent of 5.1 grams of gold. The individual you did the work for reaches into their pocket and gives you 6 grams and asks for .9 of a gram in change. How do you provide it?

Bitcoin solves the divisibility problem of scare goods, while still meeting all the other requirements of money.

So if you wanted to say there was any sort of "objective value" of Bitcoin, it would be the following: Bitcoin is a medium, a measure (divisible, fungible, & countable), a standard, and a store.

From there you can argue whether or not it fits these attributes better than fiat money, but it almost certainly meets these attributes at least as well as precious metals.

I agree with most of what you say here, except your description of "intrinsic" as "objective". Intrinsic value, when used in the money domain, means the value that is not echange value. It is not objective by any means, it is defined by supply and demand as everything else.

Imagine that gold is unsellable as a used item, like an opened bag of potato chips. What is the value? You could make things out of it, use it in electronics and so on. A piece of jewelry is nice, but the wearer (and everybody else) is also conscient of its exhange value, so lets take that out. I would say that it is worth far less than the current gold price, driving its use up and the mining down. This is the intrinsic value (intrinsic used in the money domain).

Money is the stuff that is used for indirect exhange. Gold, silver, fiat, bitcoin. The quality of a sort of money is decided by its traits like fungibility, scarcity, divisibility and some others. In fact, the best money has no intrinsic value. Gold having intrinsic value means that its use as money displaces its use in electronics. Imagine food being money - saving would make somebody hungry.  Anything can aquire some moneyness, or exchange value, especially in times of hyperinflation or when use of the best money is restricted.

If you don't like the word "intrinsic", which, outside of the money domain, means inherent, fundamental or genuine, use either "direct use-value" or "value apart from its exchange value"

Present value is the value calculated using some future value and some interest rate.
xxjs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280
Merit: 250


View Profile
June 18, 2013, 11:34:03 PM
#41

btw, saving bitcoins does not make anybody hungry. The effect of saving bitcoin is that it drives the value up, prompting others to spend or buy capital goods.
NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1001


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
June 19, 2013, 05:04:03 AM
#42


"Intrinsic value" is a misnomer, intentionally designed to mislead people. The only legitimate use of the term is in futures/options trading as there is a "present value".

Case in point, answer these three questions:
1) What is the intrinsic value of water?
2) What is the intrinsic value of water if you are lost in a desert?
3) What is the intrinsic value of water if you are drowning?


Σ(N * (% of time N applies))

If everything had the same value to everyone else at all times there would be no trade.

How does any of this refute the notion of things having intrinsic value when it seems to  indicate the opposite?

FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
painlord2k
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 451
Merit: 250


View Profile
June 19, 2013, 05:20:00 PM
#43


"Intrinsic value" is a misnomer, intentionally designed to mislead people. The only legitimate use of the term is in futures/options trading as there is a "present value".

Case in point, answer these three questions:
1) What is the intrinsic value of water?
2) What is the intrinsic value of water if you are lost in a desert?
3) What is the intrinsic value of water if you are drowning?


Σ(N * (% of time N applies))

If everything had the same value to everyone else at all times there would be no trade.

How does any of this refute the notion of things having intrinsic value when it seems to  indicate the opposite?

Please compute the example above and give us the solution.
The explain why  it so.

There is no something "intrinsic value" and using fuzzy words cause just fuzzy thinking.
Substitute "intrinsic value" with "direct use value".
Direct use value is the value of gold (for example) when it started to be used as a mean of indirect exchange (like many others).
There is nothing "intrinsic" in "direct use value", because the subjective value change with the quantity available and its direct uses.
NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1001


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
June 20, 2013, 12:44:30 AM
#44


"Intrinsic value" is a misnomer, intentionally designed to mislead people. The only legitimate use of the term is in futures/options trading as there is a "present value".

Case in point, answer these three questions:
1) What is the intrinsic value of water?
2) What is the intrinsic value of water if you are lost in a desert?
3) What is the intrinsic value of water if you are drowning?


Σ(N * (% of time N applies))

If everything had the same value to everyone else at all times there would be no trade.

How does any of this refute the notion of things having intrinsic value when it seems to  indicate the opposite?

Please compute the example above and give us the solution.
The explain why  it so.

There is no something "intrinsic value" and using fuzzy words cause just fuzzy thinking.
Substitute "intrinsic value" with "direct use value".
Direct use value is the value of gold (for example) when it started to be used as a mean of indirect exchange (like many others).
There is nothing "intrinsic" in "direct use value", because the subjective value change with the quantity available and its direct uses.

Certainly true.  Nothing has value without someone valuing it, so there is no "intrinsic" value, it is semantic slight of hand.
It is elementary to philosophy of perception.

Though when we climb out of the ivory tower and enter the town, there are things that have value without a law giving it value enforced by a state, and there are things that do not.  The things that do, we have adopted the convention of calling that value, intrinsic.  

So sure, it is not strictly true, in that water has no value unless there is something to value it, but it also does not rely on a legal tender law to get that value, or being useful for paying a tax to a government.

One of the core requirements of bitcoin was that it not have a value as something other than "money".  This way it does not compete with a market for its use as money.  It is designed to have no intrinsic value or backing, other than what we the people choose to back it with.

I back it with gold and silver, others with their time, everyone that uses it for trade backs it with something.

I will leave the computation and explanation to the reader as an exercise.
Stuff has had the value people give it, over time, each in their own situation.

FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 22, 2013, 04:29:04 AM
#45

I know it's not Peter Schiff, but Erik Voorhees was on the Gold Money podcasts last Wed.

http://www.goldmoney.com/podcast/erik-voorhees-financial-independence-through-gold-and-bitcoin.html

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 26, 2013, 04:26:42 AM
#46

New links added to initial post.  An article by Andrew Schiff and the "bitcoin" word reared its little head on Tues.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
SilentSonicBoom
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 250



View Profile WWW
June 26, 2013, 06:20:48 AM
#47

New links added to initial post.  An article by Andrew Schiff and the "bitcoin" word reared its little head on Tues.

Thanks for the updates. Schiff is big on precious metals, speaking of which the price has been manipulated sharply lower as of late.


joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 26, 2013, 06:27:54 AM
#48

New links added to initial post.  An article by Andrew Schiff and the "bitcoin" word reared its little head on Tues.

Thanks for the updates. Schiff is big on precious metals, speaking of which the price has been manipulated sharply lower as of late.

Hells yeah!  The laws of supply/demand, aka common sense, say gold is going to skyrocket. When gold gets so low that mining companies can't produce it at a profit, supply diminishes.  But demand is the same or higher, do naturally the price will go up.  It's a no brainer.  Good stuff! Price could go lower too. Maybe 1100.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
Seth Otterstad
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 328
Merit: 250



View Profile
June 26, 2013, 07:52:59 PM
#49

New links added to initial post.  An article by Andrew Schiff and the "bitcoin" word reared its little head on Tues.

Thanks for the updates. Schiff is big on precious metals, speaking of which the price has been manipulated sharply lower as of late.

Hells yeah!  The laws of supply/demand, aka common sense, say gold is going to skyrocket. When gold gets so low that mining companies can't produce it at a profit, supply diminishes.  But demand is the same or higher, do naturally the price will go up.  It's a no brainer.  Good stuff! Price could go lower too. Maybe 1100.

Don't be ridiculous.  Saying gold demand is always the same or higher is like saying the demand for bitcoin is always the same or higher while the price was going down from $30 to $2.  Almost the entire market cap of gold and bitcoin is speculative and monetary value.

Also, the price of gold is capped because there is $150t worth of it that is recoverable on the ocean floor using technology that is not cost effective at current price levels.

I would highly recommend quitting listening to the Schiff if you are getting these ideas from him.

Seth Otterstad's Blog          @SethOtterstad on twitter          Seth on google+
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 26, 2013, 09:17:20 PM
#50

New links added to initial post.  An article by Andrew Schiff and the "bitcoin" word reared its little head on Tues.

Thanks for the updates. Schiff is big on precious metals, speaking of which the price has been manipulated sharply lower as of late.

Hells yeah!  The laws of supply/demand, aka common sense, say gold is going to skyrocket. When gold gets so low that mining companies can't produce it at a profit, supply diminishes.  But demand is the same or higher, do naturally the price will go up.  It's a no brainer.  Good stuff! Price could go lower too. Maybe 1100.

Don't be ridiculous.  Saying gold demand is always the same or higher is like saying the demand for bitcoin is always the same or higher while the price was going down from $30 to $2.  Almost the entire market cap of gold and bitcoin is speculative and monetary value.

Also, the price of gold is capped because there is $150t worth of it that is recoverable on the ocean floor using technology that is not cost effective at current price levels.

I would highly recommend quitting listening to the Schiff if you are getting these ideas from him.
Yeah, and there's infinite gold in space too, that should drive the price to the floor.  The transformers are going to come with quantum technology and produce fake bitcoins that are valid.  Ocean mining is the future, yes, and that's bullish for gold. It will require more capital and drive the price up.  You can't compare gold with bitcoin when talking about current supply/demand economics.  Bitcoin is too new, too volatile.  Gold is predictable...in the long run.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
Seth Otterstad
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 328
Merit: 250



View Profile
June 26, 2013, 10:21:38 PM
#51

New links added to initial post.  An article by Andrew Schiff and the "bitcoin" word reared its little head on Tues.

Thanks for the updates. Schiff is big on precious metals, speaking of which the price has been manipulated sharply lower as of late.

Hells yeah!  The laws of supply/demand, aka common sense, say gold is going to skyrocket. When gold gets so low that mining companies can't produce it at a profit, supply diminishes.  But demand is the same or higher, do naturally the price will go up.  It's a no brainer.  Good stuff! Price could go lower too. Maybe 1100.

Don't be ridiculous.  Saying gold demand is always the same or higher is like saying the demand for bitcoin is always the same or higher while the price was going down from $30 to $2.  Almost the entire market cap of gold and bitcoin is speculative and monetary value.

Also, the price of gold is capped because there is $150t worth of it that is recoverable on the ocean floor using technology that is not cost effective at current price levels.

I would highly recommend quitting listening to the Schiff if you are getting these ideas from him.
Yeah, and there's infinite gold in space too, that should drive the price to the floor.  The transformers are going to come with quantum technology and produce fake bitcoins that are valid.  Ocean mining is the future, yes, and that's bullish for gold. It will require more capital and drive the price up.  You can't compare gold with bitcoin when talking about current supply/demand economics.  Bitcoin is too new, too volatile.  Gold is predictable...in the long run.

So I am to understand that you think the demand for gold was constant while it was losing value for the 2 decades prior to the turn of the century, and that the demand was also still constant during the price increase of this last decade?

Seth Otterstad's Blog          @SethOtterstad on twitter          Seth on google+
NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1001


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
June 26, 2013, 10:52:41 PM
#52

New links added to initial post.  An article by Andrew Schiff and the "bitcoin" word reared its little head on Tues.

Thanks for the updates. Schiff is big on precious metals, speaking of which the price has been manipulated sharply lower as of late.

Hells yeah!  The laws of supply/demand, aka common sense, say gold is going to skyrocket. When gold gets so low that mining companies can't produce it at a profit, supply diminishes.  But demand is the same or higher, do naturally the price will go up.  It's a no brainer.  Good stuff! Price could go lower too. Maybe 1100.

Don't be ridiculous.  Saying gold demand is always the same or higher is like saying the demand for bitcoin is always the same or higher while the price was going down from $30 to $2.  Almost the entire market cap of gold and bitcoin is speculative and monetary value.

Also, the price of gold is capped because there is $150t worth of it that is recoverable on the ocean floor using technology that is not cost effective at current price levels.

I would highly recommend quitting listening to the Schiff if you are getting these ideas from him.
Yeah, and there's infinite gold in space too, that should drive the price to the floor.  The transformers are going to come with quantum technology and produce fake bitcoins that are valid.  Ocean mining is the future, yes, and that's bullish for gold. It will require more capital and drive the price up.  You can't compare gold with bitcoin when talking about current supply/demand economics.  Bitcoin is too new, too volatile.  Gold is predictable...in the long run.

So I am to understand that you think the demand for gold was constant while it was losing value for the 2 decades prior to the turn of the century, and that the demand was also still constant during the price increase of this last decade?

Consumer demand has been pretty constant, but that is a very tiny fraction of the demand.  Almost the entire market is central banks.

FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 27, 2013, 03:52:00 PM
#53

Consumer demand has been pretty constant, but that is a very tiny fraction of the demand.  Almost the entire market is central banks.
Right, people are not selling their physical gold.  All the selling is in the futures, derivative, and ETF markets etc.  All of the "dumb" money is getting out of gold.  More smart buyers are buying more physical (me.) Tongue

Soon, smart countries will be buying more physical gold, i.e. China.  Once the price gets low enough, it will slingshot back to the old highs and beyond.  So the demand is still the same, if not higher, within the physical market.  Gold is going to go up so fast when the s*it storm comes.  Those who sold in the recent correction will probably stay out and not rebuy, that's how fast it's going to move.  imho

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
mobile
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 400
Merit: 250


the sun is shining, but the ice is still slippery


View Profile
June 27, 2013, 04:46:54 PM
#54

Im all for, buying up gold & precious metals. Solid investment. But I sure hope you all have a means to secure your armory.  Whether it is a vault, hidden vault and/or weaponry. I am not a doomsday guy by any means but just a thought as I was reading through....

1MoBi1eNbqh8QMuvtZjYzQGV8NEckJJYcT rep|GnuPG <3 CLAM <3
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 27, 2013, 05:47:04 PM
#55

Im all for, buying up gold & precious metals. Solid investment. But I sure hope you all have a means to secure your armory.  Whether it is a vault, hidden vault and/or weaponry. I am not a doomsday guy by any means but just a thought as I was reading through....
hidden and locked up. Not even in the same country some if it

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1001


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
June 27, 2013, 06:05:36 PM
#56

Consumer demand has been pretty constant, but that is a very tiny fraction of the demand.  Almost the entire market is central banks.
Right, people are not selling their physical gold.  All the selling is in the futures, derivative, and ETF markets etc.  All of the "dumb" money is getting out of gold.  More smart buyers are buying more physical (me.) Tongue

Soon, smart countries will be buying more physical gold, i.e. China.  Once the price gets low enough, it will slingshot back to the old highs and beyond.  So the demand is still the same, if not higher, within the physical market.  Gold is going to go up so fast when the s*it storm comes.  Those who sold in the recent correction will probably stay out and not rebuy, that's how fast it's going to move.  imho

China has been scooping up retail gold.  A lot of it.  The Chinese new generation very much like the bling factor, and nothing has the bling factor like gold.



Also Chinese government is encouraging it.  They have removed the tax on gold panda coins this year.
http://numismaster.com/ta/numis/Article.jsp?ArticleId=26693

India did last year
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304363104577389443337247370.html
but raised it again this year.

China is one of the top miners, and exports almost none of it.

FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
xxjs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280
Merit: 250


View Profile
June 27, 2013, 11:50:10 PM
#57

Peter Schiff has written some good books, but what he is probably missing:

Debt money is unstable because the lender has to trust the loaner. If trust generally disappears, the money also disappears.

On the other hand, the central bank can regulate the wider money supply easily by changing the banks' reserve requirements.

As long as bonds are trusted, the government can loan money indefinitely, and also continually expand the loans forever. A government lives for ever.

Continualy increasing loans has the same effect as printing money. The effect of printing money is more resources to the government and their friends, including voting cattle.

The printing moves resources from the rest of the world to USA. As other money system tanks, and rising economies partially wants to use USD, the user base increases and also the value of the USD increases.

In sum, this can lead to price deflation in the area where dollar is used.

This might be countered, as it is always easy for a central bank to take down the value of its money unit.

In short, there can be heavy deflation before the onset of hyperinflation. This Schiff does not take into account.

It is a possibility. With heavy regulation from a single person who only reads the data, but never depend on fundamental principles, anything can happen. It is an extraordinarily extraordinar situation.




MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
June 28, 2013, 12:06:35 AM
#58


In short, there can be heavy deflation before the onset of hyperinflation. This Schiff does not take into account.


This is, almost word for word, Mish's complaint with Schiff and other hyperinflationists today.

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2011/05/hyperinflation-nonsense-in-multiple.html
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2012/08/reader-questions-on-hyperinflation.html

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
xxjs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280
Merit: 250


View Profile
June 28, 2013, 02:24:12 PM
#59

Yes, it was buried in there.
NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1001


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
June 29, 2013, 02:51:17 PM
#60

Hyperinflation is dire tragedy on a massive scale.
High inflation is bad enough without raising the boogeyman of hyperinflation.

FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 02, 2013, 02:43:37 PM
Last edit: July 04, 2013, 05:41:36 AM by joae1975
#61

Peter is talking about the Winklevoss twins and Bitcoins right now.  Will post audio later.

Edit:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/BTC%20Winkle%20and%20Peter.mp3

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 04, 2013, 05:43:07 AM
#62

new audio link posted

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
Lethn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
July 04, 2013, 02:31:57 PM
#63

Ahhh, Peter Schiff Cheesy Always gives people a slap in the face with reality.
usahero
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 250


View Profile
July 04, 2013, 09:01:32 PM
Last edit: July 04, 2013, 09:31:56 PM by usahero
#64

I'm surprised Peter Schiff still has so many followers, considering there was no hyperinflation in 2012 or 2013, no 5000 or 10000$ gold that he predicted, .. Actually gold and silver both lost a lot of value compared to FIAT, so I don't see him as anything else but a paid p&d troll for hyping up gold price.

I can see that he has many devoted followers, and guys, I don't want to argue. I expressed my opinion and I think people should not listen to him, at least not believe him on his words. He is just another cult leader type of guy. ...

And his father is in prison for tax evasion strategies that do not work in reality :pp




Just to clarify... I have not listened to him in more than 1 year now. Maybe I should listen to him about bitcoin..
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1120
Merit: 1003



View Profile
July 04, 2013, 09:11:33 PM
#65

Nice to hear Peter pointing out how galactically stupid a BTC ETF is.

My guess is these Winklevoss freaks are part of some inbred bloodline and have been so pampered their whole lives they have no idea just how stupid they really are.

I'm grumpy!!
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 05, 2013, 12:21:32 AM
Last edit: July 20, 2013, 05:03:57 AM by joae1975
#66

I'm surprised Peter Schiff still has so many followers, considering there was no hyperinflation in 2012 or 2013, no 5000 or 10000$ gold that he predicted, .. Actually gold and silver both lost a lot of value compared to FIAT, so I don't see him as anything else but a paid p&d troll for hyping up gold price.

I can see that he has many devoted followers, and guys, I don't want to argue. I expressed my opinion and I think people should not listen to him, at least not believe him on his words. He is just another cult leader type of guy. ...

And his father is in prison for tax evasion strategies that do not work in reality :pp




Just to clarify... I have not listened to him in more than 1 year now. Maybe I should listen to him about bitcoin..
Remember how people were persecuted for saying the earth is round?  Well it's kind of like that.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 20, 2013, 05:05:13 AM
#67

I heard a listener's question today, "Do you think "crypto-currencies" (like BitCoin) will be generally accepted as a method of payment in the future?"

I'm not going to post the audio.  He basically says, "I don't know," then promotes his gold credit card company.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
Lethn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
July 20, 2013, 08:45:14 AM
#68

Quote
I'm surprised Peter Schiff still has so many followers, considering there was no hyperinflation in 2012 or 2013, no 5000 or 10000$ gold that he predicted, .. Actually gold and silver both lost a lot of value compared to FIAT, so I don't see him as anything else but a paid p&d troll for hyping up gold price.  

It's true, I think he did get a bit ahead of himself on this one, the problem is that he was trying to predict an exact price movement and that's extremely difficult to do, he's been entirely right about what has been happening in general though, but I think even he underestimated just how far the central banks are willing to go to keep their system running.
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
July 20, 2013, 07:58:17 PM
#69

Quote
I'm surprised Peter Schiff still has so many followers, considering there was no hyperinflation in 2012 or 2013, no 5000 or 10000$ gold that he predicted, .. Actually gold and silver both lost a lot of value compared to FIAT, so I don't see him as anything else but a paid p&d troll for hyping up gold price.  

It's true, I think he did get a bit ahead of himself on this one, the problem is that he was trying to predict an exact price movement and that's extremely difficult to do, he's been entirely right about what has been happening in general though, but I think even he underestimated just how far the central banks are willing to go to keep their system running.

Well, Schiff is predominately an Austrian economist, but they don't always see things the same way either.  I've been following the predictions and blogs of both him & Mish for many years, approaching a decade now.  While Schiff has had some misses, Mish has been a freaking oracle.  I know for a fact that Mish has been aware of bitcoin for a number of years, because I pointed it out to him myself, but his first impression was just like mine, very skeptical.  I don't believe that he has ever commented on bitcoin.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 20, 2013, 10:54:48 PM
#70

Mish is on the latest Gold Money podcast and he talks about bitcoin towards the end.  He's just like Peter.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
101111
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 526
Merit: 500


View Profile
July 22, 2013, 12:51:15 PM
#71

Schiff is part of the problem he espouses. He talks (quite entertainingly) about productive capitalism etc yet he himself operates in the finance sector skimming margins from financial products.
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
July 23, 2013, 02:50:57 AM
#72

Mish is on the latest Gold Money podcast and he talks about bitcoin towards the end.  He's just like Peter.

Mish is a complete fraud.

Go search the siliconinvestor archives.  You will find posts where he talks about how hard he has to work as an engineer and what a scam it is to be an investment advisor.  That rapidly develops to him creating his own investment company.  You do the math.

He's a fraud because he's honest about it?  Rich Mayberry is pretty darn honest about it also, investing (and advising same) is a crapload easier than teaching middle schoolers economics.  Why the hell do you think that Schiff does it?  Moral obligations?

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 28, 2013, 01:52:34 AM
#73

Bitcoin mentioned on today's show. Will post more later.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 28, 2013, 02:11:59 PM
#74

Bitcoin mentioned on today's show. Will post more later.
Okay, I listened to it.  It's an interview with Scott Cleland.  It's a pretty interesting interview if you'd like to listen.  They talk about how google controls everything, they mention Snowden a little, and net neutrality.  They talk about bitcoin in the last 2 minutes.  It's pretty pathetic.  He calls it an "app."  So retarded.  Peter didn't really challenge it.  I think Peter needs to have a real bitcoin expert on his show.  Who could be on his show that really knows about it and can speak in terms of Austrian economics?

Link here:  Is 20:30 long, skip to 19:00 for bitcoin discussion.  Warning: Really lame!
ScottCleland_082713.mp3

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1001


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
August 28, 2013, 02:52:34 PM
#75

Bitcoin mentioned on today's show. Will post more later.
Okay, I listened to it.  It's an interview with Scott Cleland.  It's a pretty interesting interview if you'd like to listen.  They talk about how google controls everything, they mention Snowden a little, and net neutrality.  They talk about bitcoin in the last 2 minutes.  It's pretty pathetic.  He calls it an "app."  So retarded.  Peter didn't really challenge it.  I think Peter needs to have a real bitcoin expert on his show.  Who could be on his show that really knows about it and can speak in terms of Austrian economics?

Link here:  Is 20:30 long, skip to 19:00 for bitcoin discussion.  Warning: Really lame!
ScottCleland_082713.mp3

Truly horrible lies and misleading.
"Currency is legal tender" - wrong
"Its a scam" - wrong
"Its a ponzi scheme" - wrong


That said, it is an art to "dumb it down" for mainstream without introducing inaccuracies or making their eyes glaze over by using unfamiliar terms of art, or explaining things that they don't need to know.

There are wallet apps, but to say Bitcoin is an app is wrong.... BUT... For the general population, it may be ok for them to think of it that way if that is the main way they use it daily.  All this behind-the-scenes stuff is not going to help them, all they really care about is that it is better money.  They need the benefits, not the features, and not the specifications. 
For them...
It is money that can let them buy things less expensively and more privately, carry more on hand safely without fear of theft, inflation-proof, etc. 

The average person is not prone to bring their world philosophy into their shopping trip and we don't have to expect that of them.  So long as they get what they want, which may be "an app that works like a coupon for discounts on everything". Smiley  The philosophy just happens as a result of making it that easy, making it better than the alternatives.  We each have a role to play in that.

FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
October 09, 2013, 08:10:18 PM
#76

Okay, it's been a while, but last Friday, Oct. 4th (the 100th anniversary of the US income tax) Peter talked about the Silk Road seizure and bitcoin.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/pa_20131004jghf_low.mp3

Also, later this week (thurs/fri) on The Tom Woods Show (new.)  He's going to be interviewing Erik Voorhees.
Check here:  http://www.schiffradio.com/f/Tom-Woods
I'll also try and post audio too.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
painlord2k
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 451
Merit: 250


View Profile
October 11, 2013, 07:27:33 AM
#77

@ joae1975
Thanks for the clip(s).
Interesting.
Doraemon2013
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 24
Merit: 0



View Profile
October 11, 2013, 09:02:00 AM
#78

In the year -400 (more or less) Aristoteles defined the characteristics that should have money, durable, portable, divisible, intrinsically value, scarce, difficult to falsify. Fiat currency does not meet them and it is a very bad money. Gold meet those criteria but its obsolete and not practical. Bitcoin meet Aristoteles criteria much better. Franklin Roosevelt stole the gold but he could not have stolen bitcoins.

Gold has been used during thousands of years that is why some people like Peter Schiff or Mike Maloney are very stubborn and do not accept new technologies, bitcoin is a big threat to them and do not want to accept this change.
At the end of world war I british invented the tank and it was a threat to the cavalry because it would replace it. The members of cavalry said that tanks were a shit, not practical and could not replace the cavalry which existed for thousands of year. When world war II started the german tanks won very very easily the polish cavalry. Bitcoin will do the same that did the tank.
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
October 11, 2013, 12:44:49 PM
#79

In the year -400 (more or less) Aristoteles defined the characteristics that should have money, durable, portable, divisible, intrinsically value, scarce, difficult to falsify. Fiat currency does not meet them and it is a very bad money. Gold meet those criteria but its obsolete and not practical. Bitcoin meet Aristoteles criteria much better. Franklin Roosevelt stole the gold but he could not have stolen bitcoins.

Gold has been used during thousands of years that is why some people like Peter Schiff or Mike Maloney are very stubborn and do not accept new technologies, bitcoin is a big threat to them and do not want to accept this change.
At the end of world war I british invented the tank and it was a threat to the cavalry because it would replace it. The members of cavalry said that tanks were a shit, not practical and could not replace the cavalry which existed for thousands of year. When world war II started the german tanks won very very easily the polish cavalry. Bitcoin will do the same that did the tank.
I believe you and I understand what your saying.  But bitcoin is only good for one thing.  Au/Ag have industrial purposes.  I think that's the difference.  They have a very long history.  So until bitcoin can prove itself through history, people will remain skeptical.

tweet Tom Woods today

Talking to @ErikVoorhees later this week about the future of Bitcoin after Silk Road. Got any good questions? #tlot

https://twitter.com/thomasewoods/status/387944160944087040

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
October 12, 2013, 12:04:07 AM
#80

I just listened to the Tom Woods interview with Eric Voorhees and you didn't miss anything.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
Seth Otterstad
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 328
Merit: 250



View Profile
October 12, 2013, 05:03:11 PM
#81

I finally convinced an Austrian friend to dump some of his silver and buy bitcoin with it.  He found out that EuroPacific capital charges 3% to cash out of his silver position.  Yes, that's right.  Peter Schiff's company charges THREE PERCENT to get out of a position.  Of course he is never going to promote bitcoin when he can rape people that hard by plugging metals.

Seth Otterstad's Blog          @SethOtterstad on twitter          Seth on google+
nobbynobbynoob
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 1000


Annuit cptis humanae libertas


View Profile WWW
October 12, 2013, 05:07:06 PM
#82

I finally convinced an Austrian friend to dump some of his silver and buy bitcoin with it.  He found out that EuroPacific capital charges 3% to cash out of his silver position.  Yes, that's right.  Peter Schiff's company charges THREE PERCENT to get out of a position.  Of course he is never going to promote bitcoin when he can rape people that hard by plugging metals.

Buying bitcoin is probably a good investment. But I'd be dumping fiat long before dumping PMs.

IMO buying PMs should be for the long term, one should own physical gold or silver in the hand, and do so because one wants the gold or silver. For short-term speculation there are better tools to play with.

Earn Free Bitcoins!   Earn bitcoin via BitcoinGet
BTC tip: 1PKkvuwC24Vqjv9odigXs1QVzE66jEJqmb (if <200 BTC, please donate to charity)
LTC tip: LRqXaNdF79QHvhPpS5AZdEJZnLiNnAkJvq (if <Ł0,05, please donate to charity)
foggyb
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1000


View Profile
October 12, 2013, 06:16:37 PM
#83

I finally convinced an Austrian friend to dump some of his silver and buy bitcoin with it.  He found out that EuroPacific capital charges 3% to cash out of his silver position.  Yes, that's right.  Peter Schiff's company charges THREE PERCENT to get out of a position.  Of course he is never going to promote bitcoin when he can rape people that hard by plugging metals.

Why dump silver now, its only going up. It has to. Bad advice, especially with that 3% haircut. I'd try my best to find other assets to unload.
foggyb
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1000


View Profile
October 12, 2013, 06:20:09 PM
#84

peter schiff is an idiot who has been pumping precious metals and is heavily invested in them. I knew about him before bitcoin and I would have told you the exact same thing, because it's obvious. end of discussion.

Worthless troll is worthless.

His mortgage bankers speech will forever be one of my favorite financial speeches.

Agreed. I respect what Peter Schiff says about precious metals and bitcoin. If you don't understand bitcoin, DO NOT buy it as an investment.
Seth Otterstad
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 328
Merit: 250



View Profile
October 12, 2013, 07:50:56 PM
#85

I finally convinced an Austrian friend to dump some of his silver and buy bitcoin with it.  He found out that EuroPacific capital charges 3% to cash out of his silver position.  Yes, that's right.  Peter Schiff's company charges THREE PERCENT to get out of a position.  Of course he is never going to promote bitcoin when he can rape people that hard by plugging metals.

Why dump silver now, its only going up. It has to. Bad advice, especially with that 3% haircut. I'd try my best to find other assets to unload.

Well if foggyb says there is 100% chance silver is going to go up now, how can anyone think differently?

The 3% fee is a sunk cost.  The 3% will have to be paid at some point, so it doesn't matter if it is paid now, and does not affect a buying or selling decision.  He could have dumped the silver, lost the 3%, bought 1000oz silver bars for the spot price, and been in basically the same position but with much easier options to liquidate it without waiting around for a check in the mail.

Seth Otterstad's Blog          @SethOtterstad on twitter          Seth on google+
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
October 13, 2013, 12:17:23 AM
#86

I finally convinced an Austrian friend to dump some of his silver and buy bitcoin with it.  He found out that EuroPacific capital charges 3% to cash out of his silver position.  Yes, that's right.  Peter Schiff's company charges THREE PERCENT to get out of a position.  Of course he is never going to promote bitcoin when he can rape people that hard by plugging metals.
I bought silver/gold from europac and they told me there's 0 fee to liquidate gold and silver is 0.65 cents per oz.  That equates to ~3% at current price. 

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
Keldel
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 166
Merit: 100



View Profile
October 13, 2013, 11:59:48 AM
#87

I like Peter Schiff, but he's not a super human. He admits himself, that he's just a normal person making simple observations about the economy. It's not that Peter Schiff is super smart, it's that mainstream economists are totally lost.

Peter Schiff doesn't understand bitcoin, and therefore he doesn't trust it. That is OK! If everyone trusted bitcoin, the world would already be different and it would be too late to profit from the wealth transfer. Take the thinking from Peter Schiff, not his conclusions. Apply that to bitcoin together with the knowledge you have. The result is a no-brainer at all Smiley

btctraderr
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 120
Merit: 100


View Profile
October 13, 2013, 05:57:52 PM
#88

Peter's great, but he doesn't understand bitcoin or any of the technicalities behind it and why it's so great. He has a vested interest in promoting his metals business and that's all well and good. I think hes a great advocate for libertarians and is right on most things, he just needs to stick to what he knows.
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
November 02, 2013, 01:14:49 PM
#89

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/Peter%20Schiff.bitcoin.11.1.13.mp3

Another Peter Schiff bitcoin bubble speech.  I don't think he understands it.  He's a free market guy.  The bitcoin economy is full of free market forces.  I wish someone would call him on this point.  I'd do it but I suck at articulating my thoughts on the spot.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 02, 2013, 10:39:03 PM
Last edit: November 02, 2013, 10:54:26 PM by MoonShadow
#90

Although I'll agree that Peter doesn't understand Bitcoin, I'll also say that he doesn't really need to understand bitcoin to make a reasonable assessment of speculation risk.  In this clip, he remains skeptical of bitcoins, and thinks that they have many halmarks of a bubble.  That's quite true from a traditional investment perspective.  Perhaps traditional investment perspectives don't apply (yet) to Bitcoin.  Who am I to disagree?  Anyone rational will go through all these same stages of distrust, although many of us proceeded much faster through the darkness than Peter has been.  I, for one, had real trouble believing that it was anything more than a scam in the early days; I just couldn't shake that idea that it could work.  And so I kept coming back and re-reading the white paper until it all 'clicked'.  I can now honestly claim that I understand how bitcoin functions, on a low/process level as well as a macro-economic level, better than 95%+ of the membership of this forum.  One day it will 'click' for Peter as well, along with the rest of humanity.  The vast majority of people will not know, nor need to know, how Bitcoin actually does what it claims to do; eventually they will just trust that it does it, in the same way that the public generally 'trusts' that the central banks know what they are doing and have much to lose by screwing it up.  (This is the real source of the "faith and credit" of the average Joe, the belief that the rich guys running the game have more to lose than Joe does if things go sideways; bitcoin will not alter the root source of the public trust either, most will simply start to trust bitcoin because they can see more and more big players who have much to lose puting their faith into it)

In short, Peter's distrust is rational at his own stage; and therefore warning callers (asking for his opinion) against bitcoin investing is also rational.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
November 03, 2013, 09:06:18 AM
#91

At the same time I think Peter has a vested interest in not supporting bitcoin.  It steals customers from his gold silver business.  I've personally invested thousands into bitcoin where I would normally buy gold silver from Peter.  I don't think you can use the analogy of people blindly trusting central bankers the same as they trust bitcoin.  I think a better analogy would be trusting gold because of the chemistry that backs gold.  I.e.  It's molecular weight, atomic mass, etc.  Bitcoin's trust is within the realm of mathematics and gold with physics.  Central banking is all emotion, human, and full of error.  Understandably bitcoin was created by a human and physics have been created by humans, but they serve as boundaries for bitcoin & gold whereas central banking has no boundaries.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
bitcoin carpenter
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554
Merit: 1001


View Profile
November 03, 2013, 04:11:02 PM
#92

Saying bitcoins have no intrinsic value is like saying that freighters or trains have no value because they only transport the goods.
On that note gold and silver is more like the trucking industry vs the freight


 
 
           ▄████▄
         ▄████████▄
       ▄████████████▄
     ▄████████████████▄
    ████████████████████      ▄█▄                 ▄███▄                 ▄███▄                 ▄████████████████▀   ▄██████████

  ▄▄▄▀█████▀▄▄▄▄▀█████▀▄▄▄     ▀██▄             ▄██▀ ▀██▄             ▄██▀ ▀██▄             ▄██▀                   ██
▄█████▄▀▀▀▄██████▄▀▀▀▄█████▄     ▀██▄         ▄██▀     ▀██▄         ▄██▀     ▀██▄         ▄██▀        ▄█▄          ▀██████████████▄
████████████████████████████       ▀██▄     ▄██▀         ▀██▄     ▄██▀         ▀██▄     ▄██▀          ▀█▀                        ██
 ▀████████████████████████▀          ▀██▄ ▄██▀             ▀██▄ ▄██▀     ▄█▄     ▀██▄ ▄██▀                                       ██
   ▀████████████████████▀              ▀███▀                 ▀███▀       ▀█▀       ▀███▀      ▄███████████████████████████████████▀
     ▀████████████████▀
       ▀████████████▀
         ▀████████▀
           ▀████▀
║║


║║
.
.

║║
██
║║
.
.

║║
██
║║
.
║║


║║
smoothie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 1018


LEALANA Monero Physical Silver Coins


View Profile
November 03, 2013, 10:02:06 PM
#93

Peter Schiff is speaking on what he doesn't understanding. He is speculating on what people are or aren't doing with bitcoin.

If two people agree that bitcoin has a price it has a price. He is not addressing the actual use of evading government intervention into one's finances when it comes to border control and banking and how those tools control the populace in a financial means.

Gold and silver can be confiscated at the border(s). Bitcoin is able to go around this.




███████████████████████████████████████

            ,╓p@@███████@╗╖,           
        ,p████████████████████N,       
      d█████████████████████████b     
    d██████████████████████████████   
  ,█████████████████████████████████, 
 ,█████  ╙████████████████████╨  █████y
 ██████    `████████████████`    ██████
║██████       ███████████`      ███████
███████         ╩██████         ███████
███████    ▐▄     ██╩     a▌    ███████
╢██████    ▐▓█▄          ▄█▓▌    ███████
 ██████    ▐▓▓▓▓▌,     ▄█▓▓▓▌    ██████─
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓█,,▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
    ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓─  
     ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓╩    
        ▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀       
           ▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀`          
                                    
███████████████████████████████████████

. ★☆ WWW.LEALANA.COM        My PGP fingerprint is A764D833.                  History of Monero development Visualization ★☆ .
LEALANA  PHYSICAL MONERO COINS 999 FINE SILVER.
 
smoothie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 1018


LEALANA Monero Physical Silver Coins


View Profile
November 03, 2013, 10:08:07 PM
#94

From, "The Peter Schiff Show."  He doesn't discuss BTC often but I thought I would start compiling clips from his shows and post them as they appear.  It's been discussed on the show many times in the past but I have no idea when.  I never thought to compile it.  But I will from here on.  Peter does not think bitcoin has any intrinsic value.  He doesn't believe in it because you can't hold it and use it for anything else like gold/silver can.  But he does believe in the principle and idea governing it.

April 31, 2013.  Discussing Liberty Reserve and bitcoin.
http://db.tt/eZQSGXNa

Enjoy.

Looking in the archives, found this interview with Erik Voorhees by Guest host Tom Woods on March 8, 2013.
http://db.tt/mOmyDEb2

From June 20, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTr_hTC90oQ - part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUxyr7cI0Zw - part 2

From June 21, 2011
http://youtu.be/QoopVDjXydE

Europac newsletter June, 2013
See article, "The Bitcoin Phoenix."
By: Andrew Schiff (sounds very bullish on BTC)
http://www.europac.net/research_analysis/newsletters/global_investor_newsletter_june_2013

June 25th, 2013 Peter Schiff show: - Peter is still skeptical...(~1:50 into audio)
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/pa_20130625kusg_low_01.mp3

July 2nd, 2013 Peter Schiff show: Peter talks about the Winkle twins and their new BTC ETF, funny at end.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/BTC%20Winkle%20and%20Peter.mp3

Oct. 4th, Peter talks about the Silk Road seizure
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/pa_20131004jghf_low.mp3

Nov 1st, Peter gives his bitcoin bubble speech.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/Peter%20Schiff.bitcoin.11.1.13.mp3

Just because you can't hold it doesn't mean it isn't viable.

Math is not tangible yet we believe in it. Bitcoin is based on math.

███████████████████████████████████████

            ,╓p@@███████@╗╖,           
        ,p████████████████████N,       
      d█████████████████████████b     
    d██████████████████████████████   
  ,█████████████████████████████████, 
 ,█████  ╙████████████████████╨  █████y
 ██████    `████████████████`    ██████
║██████       ███████████`      ███████
███████         ╩██████         ███████
███████    ▐▄     ██╩     a▌    ███████
╢██████    ▐▓█▄          ▄█▓▌    ███████
 ██████    ▐▓▓▓▓▌,     ▄█▓▓▓▌    ██████─
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓█,,▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
    ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓─  
     ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓╩    
        ▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀       
           ▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀`          
                                    
███████████████████████████████████████

. ★☆ WWW.LEALANA.COM        My PGP fingerprint is A764D833.                  History of Monero development Visualization ★☆ .
LEALANA  PHYSICAL MONERO COINS 999 FINE SILVER.
 
BldSwtTrs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 971
Merit: 1002


View Profile
November 03, 2013, 10:12:13 PM
#95

Saying bitcoins have no intrinsic value is like saying that freighters or trains have no value because they only transport the goods.
On that note gold and silver is more like the trucking industry vs the freight
Saying bitcoin has no intrinsic value reveals how poorly he understands the most important concept in economics.

Nothing has intrinsic value, value is subjective. Goldbugs who criticizes the lack of intrinsic value of bitcoin are borderline retards.
smoothie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 1018


LEALANA Monero Physical Silver Coins


View Profile
November 03, 2013, 10:14:36 PM
#96

I finally convinced an Austrian friend to dump some of his silver and buy bitcoin with it.  He found out that EuroPacific capital charges 3% to cash out of his silver position.  Yes, that's right.  Peter Schiff's company charges THREE PERCENT to get out of a position.  Of course he is never going to promote bitcoin when he can rape people that hard by plugging metals.

This ^.

Peter does spout truth but the ultimate truth is that everyone will think in their best interests.

Peter missed the boat (so far) and doesn't really understand what "intrinsic" value bitcoin adds as a medium of exchange (not money as he so eloquently likes to claim Bitcoin is trying to be).

Bitcoin adds legitimacy to the currency in circulation. You can't really have tungesten filled bitcoins as you can have with gold and silver etc.

Bitcoin isn't better than gold necessarily. But it fills a demand for something that Gold and other PMs can't fill. The distance and speed issue with exchanging gold and silver etc bitcoin fills is what makes Bitcoin have "intrinsic" value or just value.

Of course Peter misses all of this. He only really looks at the possible bubble portion of the price mechanism of bit coin which is not that important. The price is in FIAT government created toilet paper which is meaningless really (in the end game).

███████████████████████████████████████

            ,╓p@@███████@╗╖,           
        ,p████████████████████N,       
      d█████████████████████████b     
    d██████████████████████████████   
  ,█████████████████████████████████, 
 ,█████  ╙████████████████████╨  █████y
 ██████    `████████████████`    ██████
║██████       ███████████`      ███████
███████         ╩██████         ███████
███████    ▐▄     ██╩     a▌    ███████
╢██████    ▐▓█▄          ▄█▓▌    ███████
 ██████    ▐▓▓▓▓▌,     ▄█▓▓▓▌    ██████─
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓█,,▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
    ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓─  
     ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓╩    
        ▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀       
           ▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀`          
                                    
███████████████████████████████████████

. ★☆ WWW.LEALANA.COM        My PGP fingerprint is A764D833.                  History of Monero development Visualization ★☆ .
LEALANA  PHYSICAL MONERO COINS 999 FINE SILVER.
 
Seth Otterstad
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 328
Merit: 250



View Profile
November 04, 2013, 04:57:50 AM
#97

We already had the intrinsic value argument back on page one of this thread.  If you think Peter is spouting nonsense about intrinsic value, consider that this might be a clue that he doesn't know what he's talking about in quite a few areas.  How much longer do you want to wait for him to be "right"?  The way he phrases his predictions, he will certainly be right one day and the dollar will go to zero, but that is just useless information without a time-frame, and he is losing his clients tons of money by getting his timing off by decades.  While he is sitting around talking about how bad the US economy is, the Dow is up 134% since the bottom in '08, and US companies are outperforming Europe, emerging markets, and the entire world.  If you still think he is "right" after watching these videos....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4h_mEK91FWs
http://www.businessinsider.com/2009/1/peter-schiffs-clients-got-hosed-this-year-too
http://avaresearch.com/avanew/articles/713/The-Embarrassing-Track-Record-of-Robert-Prechter-Part-1.html
http://avaresearch.com/avanew/articles/302/Peter-Schiff-Wrong-on-the-Economy-Wrong-on-Healthcare-Part-1.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBNbdqp0-TI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUbhAbqKjOo
http://www.youtube.com/user/AntiSchiff

You will learn a lot more by firing up the intro to economics course on Khan Academy:
https://www.khanacademy.org/economics-finance-domain/macroeconomics/gdp-topic/econ-intro-in-macro-tutorial/v/introduction-to-economics

Seth Otterstad's Blog          @SethOtterstad on twitter          Seth on google+
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1120
Merit: 1003



View Profile
November 04, 2013, 03:36:04 PM
#98

I think Peter, like Chris Duane, is just trying to talk down bitcoin to help his precious metal sales. A lot of the money that is buying cryptocoins would be buying gold and silver if bitcoin never existed.

I'm grumpy!!
Pumpkin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 151
Merit: 100


View Profile
November 04, 2013, 10:45:38 PM
#99

1. Take the Peter Schiff's logic when he talks about the economy, US dollar and precious metals as future money.
2. Apply that to your knowledge of bitcoin.
3. Arrive at the conclusion that bitcoin is a screaming buy. If you don't see it yet, go to (1).
4. Huh
5. Profit.
noob2001
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 574
Merit: 501


View Profile WWW
November 06, 2013, 12:08:49 PM
Last edit: November 06, 2013, 12:56:44 PM by noob2001

How can Schiff who has been right about so many things, be so unable to comprehend bitcoin?

BldSwtTrs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 971
Merit: 1002


View Profile
November 06, 2013, 12:54:53 PM

How can Schiff who's been right about so many things, be so unable to comprehend bitcoin?
He is wrong about a lot of things too. For example when the first QE was announced he kept saying that interests will surge.

He was wrong about hyperinflation too. And when inflation didn't come he said that he was right but nobody can see it because CPI number is false.

It seems Austrian economists nowadays don't understand money multiplier and don't have ever heard about what happened in Japan this last 20 years.
Seth Otterstad
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 328
Merit: 250



View Profile
November 06, 2013, 04:51:34 PM

How can Schiff who has been right about so many things, be so unable to comprehend bitcoin?
He's wrong a lot more often than he's right.  Everyone would be better served listening to someone else who knows what he's talking about.  This should be very obvious to bitcoiners.

Quote
12 Ways Schiff Was Wrong in 2008
Wrong about hyperinflation
Wrong about the dollar
Wrong about commodities except for gold
Wrong about foreign currencies except for the Yen
Wrong about foreign equities
Wrong in timing
Wrong in risk management
Wrong in buy and hold thesis
Wrong on decoupling
Wrong on China
Wrong on US treasuries
Wrong on interest rates, both foreign and domestic

That's a lot of things to be wrong about, especially given all the "Peter Schiff Was Right" videos floating around everywhere. The one thing he was right about was the collapse of US equities and no part of his investment strategy sought to make a gain from that prediction.
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/01/peter-schiff-was-wrong.html

Seth Otterstad's Blog          @SethOtterstad on twitter          Seth on google+
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 06, 2013, 10:33:33 PM

How can Schiff who's been right about so many things, be so unable to comprehend bitcoin?
He is wrong about a lot of things too. For example when the first QE was announced he kept saying that interests will surge.

He was wrong about hyperinflation too. And when inflation didn't come he said that he was right but nobody can see it because CPI number is false.


What the right answer here is really depends upon how one defines inflation.  Most people think of price inflation, particularly at the supermarket.  True inflation is the expansion of the monetary supply relative to the user base.  We have undoubtedly had that, but the CPI does not now, and long has not, considered the costs of food stocks or energy into it's caluculations; however it does (sort of) include a calculated value of housing.  So while the actual pump costs of a gallon of gasoline has risen by more than 50% in the past 6 years, the real estate market is still way below the peak value in 2007.  The real estate market crash "destroyed" a lot of credit availability (i.e. money supply for many consumers) and has overwelmed the inflationary policies of the US Federal Reserve in the meantime.  So, in reality, the CPI number published by the government fails to represent the amount of monetary expansion during that time.  This cannot continue forever, however, and eventually we will get our inflationary period.  I still doubt it would be "hyperinflationary" because hyperinflationary destruction of a currency is a vicious cycle of the loss of public trust in a currency, almost always triggered by a political event (war, invasion, revolt, revolution, etc.) and not a fiscal policy event.

Quote

It seems Austrian economists nowadays don't understand money multiplier and don't have ever heard about what happened in Japan this last 20 years.

Austrian economists understand the money multiplyer theories just fine, they are just bullshit.  The government like to claim this stuff to justify it's own entitilement programs, but consider this...

If the "money multiplyer" of food stamp program funds really was $1.73 of economic "benefit" (defined how, exactly? It's never said) for every $1 of aid, and that multiplier is both consitant across time and consistant across a range of largesss (two things left up to the public to assume although this is never actually stated), then it would be easy to permantly avoid recessions by simply dialing up or down the monthly food stamp benefits in order to match the largess to the target level of economic growth.  It would be an immoral action to do anything else.  The fact that this is not happening, and never really has (it has been tried, so we know it doesn't really work) is proof enough that multiplyer theory is false.  All of the multiplyers presented in the media are the calculated results of past events, not current economic conditions.  If past events really provided significant insight to future economic trends, then "ideal" stock prices would be easy enough to caluculate for just about everyone, and any significant diversion from that expectation would be newsworthy, offering a huge profit opprotunity for the quick.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
Seth Otterstad
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 328
Merit: 250



View Profile
November 07, 2013, 12:57:25 AM

No matter how you cut it, inflation is low.  If you want to use the stupid niche definition of inflation as an expansion of the money supply, it is still low.  The Fed has printed 3t into a USD money supply of 30t.  10% inflation OVER FIVE YEARS.  2% per year.  If you want to use the standard inflation definition, it is low too.  You can't make a big deal out of how highly volatile gas prices are going up fast when they are STILL WAY BELOW 2008 PRICES.

Inflation-bugs typically forget the things which go up slow (or fall) and only notice the volatile stuff like gas and food when they are on an upswing.  I just went down to Wal-Mart and bought 10 pairs of high quality crew socks for $8.50.  I haven't seen a price that low EVER IN MY LIFE.  10-15 years ago they were always over $1/pair.  Clothing has been deflationary for decades due to the move to Chinese (and more recently LatAm) manufacturing, but you'll never hear that from Peter Schiff.  When the US becomes the world's #1 oil producer in 2020 and a net exporter in 2030, causing the price of your gas and food to plummet, are you going to estimate inflation being negative?  Here's a blog post that explains why inflation is 2%, and not 7-10% like you'll hear from Peter Schiff:

Lazy Inflation Estimates Will Cost You Money

Seth Otterstad's Blog          @SethOtterstad on twitter          Seth on google+
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 07, 2013, 05:16:54 AM

No matter how you cut it, inflation is low.  If you want to use the stupid niche definition of inflation as an expansion of the money supply, it is still low.  The Fed has printed 3t into a USD money supply of 30t.  10% inflation OVER FIVE YEARS.  2% per year.  If you want to use the standard inflation definition, it is low too.  You can't make a big deal out of how highly volatile gas prices are going up fast when they are STILL WAY BELOW 2008 PRICES.

Inflation-bugs typically forget the things which go up slow (or fall) and only notice the volatile stuff like gas and food when they are on an upswing.  I just went down to Wal-Mart and bought 10 pairs of high quality crew socks for $8.50.  I haven't seen a price that low EVER IN MY LIFE.  10-15 years ago they were always over $1/pair.  Clothing has been deflationary for decades due to the move to Chinese (and more recently LatAm) manufacturing, but you'll never hear that from Peter Schiff.  When the US becomes the world's #1 oil producer in 2020 and a net exporter in 2030, causing the price of your gas and food to plummet, are you going to estimate inflation being negative?  Here's a blog post that explains why inflation is 2%, and not 7-10% like you'll hear from Peter Schiff:

Lazy Inflation Estimates Will Cost You Money

Granted, I was cherry picking, but monetary expansion is not low.  It's closer to 4.5%.  You miss this because you assume that the federal reserve is the only institution in the nation that creates currency, which is not so.  The Fed is the only institution that has a mission statement and supporting legal structure to create new currency at will.  The entire fractional reserve banking system is designed to distribute the creation of new money across the many member banks.  They do so every time they create a new loan, and that loan is repaid.

Yet, you are cherry picking your examples also.  $8.50 for a ten pack of tube socks is high to me, I'm used to getting them for about $6.50.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
Seth Otterstad
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 328
Merit: 250



View Profile
November 07, 2013, 06:26:17 AM

I don't have a huge problem with 4.5% inflation estimates.  It's these guys like Schiff running around saying inflation is "north of 10%" that get me pissed off.

I just cherry-picked to illustrate that it can support either side.  The better way to do an inflation estimate is to make a weighted spreadsheet of your estimates based on this chart.  With 41% of it weighted to housing, which inflates very slowly, it is really hard to get it to show a real high inflation figure.


Seth Otterstad's Blog          @SethOtterstad on twitter          Seth on google+
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 07, 2013, 01:56:12 PM

I don't have a huge problem with 4.5% inflation estimates.  It's these guys like Schiff running around saying inflation is "north of 10%" that get me pissed off.

I just cherry-picked to illustrate that it can support either side.  The better way to do an inflation estimate is to make a weighted spreadsheet of your estimates based on this chart.  With 41% of it weighted to housing, which inflates very slowly, it is really hard to get it to show a real high inflation figure.



You do know that pie chart is a lie, don't you?

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
Seth Otterstad
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 328
Merit: 250



View Profile
November 07, 2013, 05:27:16 PM

Come up with your own pie chart then.  It is not going to look that different.  There is no way around the fact that a huge percentage of the average American's income goes to housing, and a tiny percent goes to the stuff that inflates super fast that Schiff likes to constantly talk about, like college tuition.

I am interested to see your pie chart if you make one, as long as it has data to back up the changes.

Seth Otterstad's Blog          @SethOtterstad on twitter          Seth on google+
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
November 07, 2013, 05:29:18 PM

Regarding the claims that Peter has been wrong.  Peter's predictions are based upon a long term view.  He looks far into the future.  To say he's wrong is premature.  I believe he is right about the USD etc.  I compare Peter to Galileo.  Galileo was persecuted and highly ridiculed for his idea that the earth revolves around the sun.  Peter's ridiculed for his predictions as well, the difference being, Peter is not being arrested and jailed.  Peter uses "economic physics" to make his predictions.  His ideas are based upon math/physics.  The USD will crash, it's not a matter of if, it's when.

Regarding bitcoin, Peter has a hard time understanding/recognising it.  I'd like to explain it to him like this:

A new "precious metal" has been discovered using new technology.  This "precious metal" has unique properties unlike any other.  It can only be viewed using this new technology and can only be created with this new technology.  The intrinsic value of this new "precious metal" only visible using this new technology.  etc. etc.

Peter argues that gold/silver have stood the test of time and have always been real money.  But what he has a hard time wrapping his head around is how a new technology can create a new form of real money.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
Seth Otterstad
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 328
Merit: 250



View Profile
November 07, 2013, 06:16:25 PM
Last edit: November 07, 2013, 07:55:16 PM by Seth Otterstad

Investors have to have a time-frame to make any money at investing.  Saying "the US dollar will go to zero" is like saying "the sun is going to burn out".  No one will disagree with you if you give an infinite time-frame for it to happen.  The dollar is SUPPOSED to go to zero eventually.  Continuing to listen to Peter Schiff because "he'll be right eventually" will cause you to lose a lot of money.  How long will Schiff listeners keep listening to his bearish rants while ignoring 134% stock market heaters and 10,000% bitcoin price increases?  Just listen to someone else.  Find someone who knows when to be bearish and bullish on various assets, instead of a permabear who might lose for 100 years before he makes money.  Even better, watch an economics course on Khan Academy for free.

Seth Otterstad's Blog          @SethOtterstad on twitter          Seth on google+
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
November 07, 2013, 08:35:47 PM

Investors have to have a time-frame to make any money at investing.  Saying "the US dollar will go to zero" is like saying "the sun is going to burn out".  No one will disagree with you if you give an infinite time-frame for it to happen.  The dollar is SUPPOSED to go to zero eventually.  Continuing to listen to Peter Schiff because "he'll be right eventually" will cause you to lose a lot of money.  How long will Schiff listeners keep listening to his bearish rants while ignoring 134% stock market heaters and 10,000% bitcoin price increases?  Just listen to someone else.  Even better, watch an economics course on Khan Academy for free.
Yeah the sun will burn out in a billion years.  But USD is gonna crash in our life time, very soon.  It's not gonna go to zero. Right now USD index is ~80.  It'll prob drop to ~50 in a matter of days when it happens, or lower.  

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
Seth Otterstad
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 328
Merit: 250



View Profile
November 07, 2013, 09:33:09 PM

Well at least now you added a time-frame.  But betting on something happening "in our lifetime" is still lol.  Shorting the dollar because you think it might crash in 60 years is dumb.  Austrians like Schiff don't make useful predictions in reasonable time-frames, because if they say something like "the dollar will crash within 5 years" or put any sort of reasonable time-frame on their estimates like all good analysts do, they look like even bigger idiots.  The fact that people still listen to him when he says "I don't know when it's going to happen, but IT'S GONNA HAPPEN" blows my mind, although it does appear to me that some listeners are starting to think something is wrong with the gloom-and-doom theory now that US companies are crushing the world just 5 years after the crash.

Seth Otterstad's Blog          @SethOtterstad on twitter          Seth on google+
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
November 08, 2013, 01:08:31 AM

Well at least now you added a time-frame.  But betting on something happening "in our lifetime" is still lol.  Shorting the dollar because you think it might crash in 60 years is dumb.  Austrians like Schiff don't make useful predictions in reasonable time-frames, because if they say something like "the dollar will crash within 5 years" or put any sort of reasonable time-frame on their estimates like all good analysts do, they look like even bigger idiots.  The fact that people still listen to him when he says "I don't know when it's going to happen, but IT'S GONNA HAPPEN" blows my mind, although it does appear to me that some listeners are starting to think something is wrong with the gloom-and-doom theory now that US companies are crushing the world just 5 years after the crash.
They're crushing it because of the Fed stimulus/QE.  There's no other reason.  There are more Americans on welfare than Americans working a full time job.  There's no way it's sustainable.  It will happen before Obama leaves office.  That I'm sure of.  I think O is counting on it.  I think he'll usher in Martial Law, declare a national emergency, and try to remain president.  But that's just my own crazy theory.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 08, 2013, 05:11:02 AM

Come up with your own pie chart then.  It is not going to look that different.  There is no way around the fact that a huge percentage of the average American's income goes to housing, and a tiny percent goes to the stuff that inflates super fast that Schiff likes to constantly talk about, like college tuition.

I am interested to see your pie chart if you make one, as long as it has data to back up the changes.

The percentages are not the lie, how they are included into the total calculation is.  Housing prices are not included at all, only "owner's equivalent rent" (i.e. an assumed to be calculatable amount of rent that the owner would be charging himself, if he was renting from himself.  Only a nutter could believe that this BS is based upon any reality, it's only an organized guess).  That's one example, as each catergory is factored in differently.  Food isn't factored in directly either, there is an assumption of a change of buying habits, with the net effect of suppressing the significance of food on the CPI.  For example; as the cost of beef goes up, there is an assumption that those who would have bought steak, are now buying ground beef, those who were buying ground beef, are now buying chicken.  This is bs on it's face.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
Seth Otterstad
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 328
Merit: 250



View Profile
November 08, 2013, 05:44:56 AM
Last edit: November 08, 2013, 06:09:01 AM by Seth Otterstad

Come up with your own pie chart then.  It is not going to look that different.  There is no way around the fact that a huge percentage of the average American's income goes to housing, and a tiny percent goes to the stuff that inflates super fast that Schiff likes to constantly talk about, like college tuition.

I am interested to see your pie chart if you make one, as long as it has data to back up the changes.

The percentages are not the lie, how they are included into the total calculation is.  Housing prices are not included at all, only "owner's equivalent rent" (i.e. an assumed to be calculatable amount of rent that the owner would be charging himself, if he was renting from himself.  Only a nutter could believe that this BS is based upon any reality, it's only an organized guess).  That's one example, as each catergory is factored in differently.  Food isn't factored in directly either, there is an assumption of a change of buying habits, with the net effect of suppressing the significance of food on the CPI.  For example; as the cost of beef goes up, there is an assumption that those who would have bought steak, are now buying ground beef, those who were buying ground beef, are now buying chicken.  This is bs on it's face.

If you go ahead and make a spreadsheet with your own data, you will see it is low.  I kinda doubt you would want to use housing prices instead of rent, since that would cause your estimate to show massive deflation for the last five years instead of inflation, but go ahead.  You can factor in all the huge food price increases you want over the last decade and it won't change anything.

Seth Otterstad's Blog          @SethOtterstad on twitter          Seth on google+
Seth Otterstad
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 328
Merit: 250



View Profile
November 08, 2013, 06:04:19 AM

Well at least now you added a time-frame.  But betting on something happening "in our lifetime" is still lol.  Shorting the dollar because you think it might crash in 60 years is dumb.  Austrians like Schiff don't make useful predictions in reasonable time-frames, because if they say something like "the dollar will crash within 5 years" or put any sort of reasonable time-frame on their estimates like all good analysts do, they look like even bigger idiots.  The fact that people still listen to him when he says "I don't know when it's going to happen, but IT'S GONNA HAPPEN" blows my mind, although it does appear to me that some listeners are starting to think something is wrong with the gloom-and-doom theory now that US companies are crushing the world just 5 years after the crash.
They're crushing it because of the Fed stimulus/QE.  There's no other reason.  There are more Americans on welfare than Americans working a full time job.  There's no way it's sustainable.  It will happen before Obama leaves office.  That I'm sure of.  I think O is counting on it.  I think he'll usher in Martial Law, declare a national emergency, and try to remain president.  But that's just my own crazy theory.
There you have it, folks.  Apple, Exxon, Wal-Mart, Google, and Microsoft rule the world SOLELY DUE TO QE.  Might want to leave out the 3-year time frame or you have a really high chance of looking like an idiot as Peter Schiff does in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nv-Q9NxKWKI
"I think sometime in 2011, if we make it out of 2011 maybe 2012, that we're going to have a crisis.... Interest rates are going to rise sharply in the US."

I can imagine the doomsday crowd ten years from now, when the DOW crashes from 75,000 to 45,000 saying "SEE WE WERE RIGHT ALL ALONG!"  Please get educated and quit listening to idiots to spare the rest of us.

Seth Otterstad's Blog          @SethOtterstad on twitter          Seth on google+
maurya78
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 500


View Profile
November 08, 2013, 07:04:03 AM

Out of curiosity, what is gold's intrinsic value?

Naval Ravikant put $200/ounce out there on a tech crunch disrupt video I saw

Does that sound about right?

Odrec
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112
Merit: 10


View Profile
November 08, 2013, 12:05:55 PM

Value is in many ways symbolic. Bitcoin just takes that symbolism to the extreme but if bitcoin is not real so aren't dollars or yens or any other currency except if we go back to trade with gold exclusively but that won't happen and even then the value of gold is after all symbolic, it's a tacit consensus basically.

2_Thumbs_Up
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 323
Merit: 250


View Profile
November 08, 2013, 12:34:00 PM

Well at least now you added a time-frame.  But betting on something happening "in our lifetime" is still lol.  Shorting the dollar because you think it might crash in 60 years is dumb.

Schiff is not shorting the dollar. He is mainly investing in high-yielding stocks in other countries he believe will be coming out of top after a dollar collapse. That doesn't mean he is losing money every year the dollar doesn't collapse.

As far as I know, the only thing Schiff ever shorted was the sub-prime bubble. But I admit I don't follow him as close as I used to do.
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 08, 2013, 08:08:31 PM

Out of curiosity, what is gold's intrinsic value?

Zero.

The only reason that economists use the term 'intrinsic value' with regard to commodity based hard currencies is because there isn't really a better term in English.  It shouldn't be taken as a literal statement that gold or silver have value because of their scientific properties.  Gold and silver are valued by humans because of their particular scientific properties, but to what degree any particular person values those properties depends mostly upon what their own experiences and needs might be.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
Seth Otterstad
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 328
Merit: 250



View Profile
November 08, 2013, 08:37:46 PM

Well at least now you added a time-frame.  But betting on something happening "in our lifetime" is still lol.  Shorting the dollar because you think it might crash in 60 years is dumb.

Schiff is not shorting the dollar. He is mainly investing in high-yielding stocks in other countries he believe will be coming out of top after a dollar collapse. That doesn't mean he is losing money every year the dollar doesn't collapse.

As far as I know, the only thing Schiff ever shorted was the sub-prime bubble. But I admit I don't follow him as close as I used to do.
You're techincally correct.  He's not literally borrowing dollars and selling them short. 

His thesis in 2008 revolved around 4 thing:

Quote
US Equity Markets Will Crash.
US Dollar Will Go To Zero (Hyperinflation).
Decoupling (The rest of the world would be immune to a US slowdown.
Buy foreign equities and commodities and hold them with no exit strategy.

He was right about 1, wrong about 3, and lost huge.  His idea that the rest of the world would decouple and be immune to a US slowdown was wrong.  When the US gets in trouble, the rest of the world gets in more trouble.  The US does 20% of the world's manufacturing with only 4% of the world's population.  Find someone else to follow who isn't constantly wrong.
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/01/peter-schiff-was-wrong.html

Seth Otterstad's Blog          @SethOtterstad on twitter          Seth on google+
Pumpkin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 151
Merit: 100


View Profile
November 12, 2013, 09:36:09 PM

2013-11-12 on CNBC. "Bitcoin isn't gold 2.0 it's tulip mania 2.0"
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101192216

Also mentioning how bitcoin is infinite because it's divisible. However, gold is also divisible and here's him advertising it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cNwaA5sNr8

I lost all respect for him. He's either stupid to talk about something he doesn't understand or he is lying.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1044


View Profile
November 12, 2013, 10:14:23 PM
Last edit: November 12, 2013, 10:28:05 PM by tvbcof

Peter 'failed loser' Schiff again:

  http://www.cnbc.com/id/101192216

edit:  Oops.  Didn't see the above.  Sorry.  Anyway, one has to wonder if Schiff has lost his customers more with his bets on the Euro or by talking them out of taking a BTC position an order of two of magnitude ago.


bitrider
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 233
Merit: 100


View Profile
November 13, 2013, 03:58:14 AM
Last edit: November 13, 2013, 10:53:28 PM by bitrider

Investors have to have a time-frame to make any money at investing.  Saying "the US dollar will go to zero" is like saying "the sun is going to burn out".  No one will disagree with you if you give an infinite time-frame for it to happen.  The dollar is SUPPOSED to go to zero eventually.  Continuing to listen to Peter Schiff because "he'll be right eventually" will cause you to lose a lot of money.  How long will Schiff listeners keep listening to his bearish rants while ignoring 134% stock market heaters and 10,000% bitcoin price increases?  Just listen to someone else.  Find someone who knows when to be bearish and bullish on various assets, instead of a permabear who might lose for 100 years before he makes money.  Even better, watch an economics course on Khan Academy for free.

+1 Exactly. Well said. And Schiff is not alone. He is just one of many. There are plenty gurus who claim they are still right about their predictions, "but it just has not happened yet". That kind of advice is worse than useless. It makes me think about the "end of the world" folks who predict the rapture on some date, and then when it does not come, they argue that they were still right, but slightly premature on the date.  No different. And just as profitable for their followers.  Wink

joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
November 13, 2013, 09:38:22 PM
Last edit: November 13, 2013, 10:33:33 PM by joae1975

Nov 13, 2013 Peter is at the Money Show in New Orleans.  He opens his show talking about bitcoin.  I just put the whole show up.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/PeterShiffShow.btc.11.13.13.mp3

Edit: Talk continues with callers at 1:13:20.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 14, 2013, 01:34:48 AM

Well, that radio show completely undermines my own faith in Peter.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
November 14, 2013, 01:48:43 AM

http://youtu.be/0VrB1Ae3xqs

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 14, 2013, 02:18:05 AM


That's not what I'm talking about at all.  On that point, Peter is correct.  Bitcoin is not gold, but nor is it fiat.  It's something altogether new and different from either, that is designed to do the best job of either. 

What I'm talking about is Peter's talk about intrinsic value.  Not only is gold's "intrinsic value" such a small part of it's market value as to be practically irrelevent, he argues that bitcoin's don't have an intrinsic value economicly.  I can easily prove that they do.  The only kind of intrinsic value of anything, is how useful it is to the marketplace. While gold does have physical properties that are useful to industry, and silver has chemical properties useful to both industry and medicine; neither of these 'intrinsic' uses have value to the market to compete with their monetary uses, because the market will always be looking for methods of achieving the same ends using cheaper inputs.  A great example is the use of silver in antibacterial products; while it works great and has been well known to medicine for over a century, silver is not often used in medicine except in the most dire of applications, wherein our modern anti-bacterial sciences fail us too regularly.  I.E. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus Aureus  While bitcoins have no physical properties to exploit, they were designed to significantly uncut the market costs of the transfer of value over distances.  This 'feature' alone provides bitcoin's "intrinsic value", even if it's next least expensive competitor in kind is what most determines what that "intrinsic value" should actually be.  Neither Visa nor Western-Union have the power to undercut Bitcoin in this market, without first becoming Bitcoin themselves.

And that is not even considering the "intrinsic value" of blockchain enforcible digital contracts, should they ever become common.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1044


View Profile
November 14, 2013, 03:31:44 AM


Man, Peter sound but-hurt.  I almost feel a little sorry for him.

The guy at least gets that 'one Bitcoin' is just a matter of setting a decimal point so he beats about 90% of people, but that's definitely a 'thinnest kid at fat camp' sort of a thing.  He has yet to put a little arithmetic into the problem though.

Yo, Pete:  Try this:

  Fiat: backed by law.
  Gold: backed by physics.
  Bitcoin: backed by mathematics.

Gold and Bitcoin are very similar when compared to fiat.

BTW, it is true that Bitcoin has all kinds of potential failure modes.  Any smart person will have a plan to diversify and stay diversified as we ride.  The trouble is that you clearly have no clue about what any of the failure modes are.  You should shut up about it and watch from the sidelines until you do or you will keep sounding like a jackass...mainly because you are being a jackass.


dmartig
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 97
Merit: 10


View Profile
November 14, 2013, 04:35:54 AM

I got a question to counter this.

What is the intrinsic value of fiat money? It is made of paper, some coins of different metals, but most of it is digital.

the intrinsic value of fiat currency is the btu's you can extract when you burn it. (that is about 3-5% of our currency supply. the rest is just pixels on a screen. btw fiat is not money . money is defined by the US constitution as specie of gold and silver.
there have been over 3000 fiat currencies that have gone the way of the dodo
dmartig
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 97
Merit: 10


View Profile
November 14, 2013, 04:37:20 AM

peter schiff is a smart guy but he is comparing apples to oranges when he compares bitcoin to gold. no one uses gold as money anymore.
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 14, 2013, 05:08:14 AM

peter schiff is a smart guy but he is comparing apples to oranges when he compares bitcoin to gold. no one uses gold as money anymore.

While that's a cute little retort, it's not actually true.  A great many people, both wealthy and otherwise, do use gold as money, or at least as a "store of value".  http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article43069.html

And India is far from the only group to continue to value gold for it's monetary properties.  The "western" nations are fairly unique in the total abandonment of hard currency principles in favor of ever increasing abstractions.  While the average, middle classs American adult has near zero experience with gold or silver coins, that's not true for the average, middle class Chinese adult or the average middle class South American adult.  There is a high, and perhaps even deserved, trust in the US federal reserver note as well as the Euro.  That trust can turn in an instant.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
November 14, 2013, 07:19:17 AM

So who here (btc community) will step up and call his radio show and debate his position on bitcoin?  I can't do it, I suck.  I get it but I'll choke up on the air.  Who can best debate Peter?  Max Keiser?  Peter was just on Max's show in London.
http://youtu.be/MNXmL771mBA
 I'm sure Max would return the favor.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
4mherewego
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 220
Merit: 100



View Profile
November 14, 2013, 07:21:58 AM

So who here (btc community) will step up and call his radio show and debate his position on bitcoin?  I can't do it, I suck.  I get it but I'll choke up on the air.  Who can best debate Peter?  Max Keiser?  Peter was just on Max's show in London.  I'm sure Max would return the favor.

Maybe this guy:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1qkqjr/peter_schiff_has_requested_a_bitcoiner_to_debate/cddt2c5
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
November 14, 2013, 09:14:46 AM

So who here (btc community) will step up and call his radio show and debate his position on bitcoin?  I can't do it, I suck.  I get it but I'll choke up on the air.  Who can best debate Peter?  Max Keiser?  Peter was just on Max's show in London.  I'm sure Max would return the favor.

Maybe this guy:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1qkqjr/peter_schiff_has_requested_a_bitcoiner_to_debate/cddt2c5
Awesome! Eric Voorhees has been on the Peter Schiff Show.  This is going to be good.  I forwarded the link to Peter. He's responded to my messages (or his rep) before so I know he gets them.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
November 14, 2013, 03:31:51 PM

People are calling Peter's show on bitcoin today.  I'll post later.  I'm really curious what Peter will say when he gets his "ah huh" moment.

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
Zarathustra
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 14, 2013, 05:04:19 PM


Man, Peter sound but-hurt.  I almost feel a little sorry for him.

The guy at least gets that 'one Bitcoin' is just a matter of setting a decimal point so he beats about 90% of people, but that's definitely a 'thinnest kid at fat camp' sort of a thing.  He has yet to put a little arithmetic into the problem though.

Yo, Pete:  Try this:

  Fiat: backed by law.
  Gold: backed by physics.
  Bitcoin: backed by mathematics.

Gold and Bitcoin are very similar when compared to fiat.


You can choose as money what you want. It was always valued in debt and debt is backed by the law of the state mafia.
No state: no debt. No debt: no value of FIAT/Gold/Bitcoin.
420
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500



View Profile
November 15, 2013, 12:46:54 AM

So who here (btc community) will step up and call his radio show and debate his position on bitcoin?  I can't do it, I suck.  I get it but I'll choke up on the air.  Who can best debate Peter?  Max Keiser?  Peter was just on Max's show in London.  I'm sure Max would return the favor.

Maybe this guy:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1qkqjr/peter_schiff_has_requested_a_bitcoiner_to_debate/cddt2c5

Peter Schiff debated Trace Mayer already, or had the chance, video:
http://fmtblog.com/?p=12141

Donations: 1JVhKjUKSjBd7fPXQJsBs5P3Yphk38AqPr - TIPS
the hacks, the hacks, secure your bits!
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1044


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 01:10:07 AM


Man, Peter sound but-hurt.  I almost feel a little sorry for him.

The guy at least gets that 'one Bitcoin' is just a matter of setting a decimal point so he beats about 90% of people, but that's definitely a 'thinnest kid at fat camp' sort of a thing.  He has yet to put a little arithmetic into the problem though.

Yo, Pete:  Try this:

  Fiat: backed by law.
  Gold: backed by physics.
  Bitcoin: backed by mathematics.

Gold and Bitcoin are very similar when compared to fiat.


You can choose as money what you want. It was always valued in debt and debt is backed by the law of the state mafia.
No state: no debt. No debt: no value of FIAT/Gold/Bitcoin.


Actually, this (misconception) points out very clearly why Bitcoin/Gold are on the same side opposite modern day fiat.

Modern day fiat monetary systems are almost all 'debt based'.  The currency is actually created by someone going into debt and extinguished by someone going out of debt through one means or another.  The paradox is that if there were not debt, there would be no money.  This explains, among other things, why pretty much everyone and every corporate and government is in debt.

Bitcoin and PM's (physically held) are not created this way.  They have no 'counter-party'.  Nobody can default and make the holder lose their value.


joae1975
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707
Merit: 500



View Profile
November 15, 2013, 01:52:36 AM

Today's show had the best caller challenge yet.  But he waits until the end of the show and they have no time.  Please listen to the end.  He goes on an amusing tangent about Janet Yellen then back to bitcoin.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/Peter.Schiff.bitcoin.11.14.13.mp3

1CTRG2ozX9ugneLeGjwDWDSNimpghTdLJm
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 15, 2013, 04:54:48 AM

Today's show had the best caller challenge yet.  But he waits until the end of the show and they have no time.  Please listen to the end.  He goes on an amusing tangent about Janet Yellen then back to bitcoin.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/Peter.Schiff.bitcoin.11.14.13.mp3

The bitcoin defenders are poor in understanding here, particularly the first one, but Peter does make some good points here.  Gold cannot go to a use value of zero, while it's possible that Bitcoins can.  Granted, if gold were to drop to it's 'intrinsic value' it would be somewhat comparable to the value of lead, maybe slightly more due to much lower toxicity, but close.  Considering that refined lead is under a dollar a pound right now, that would represent something on the order of a 99.99% loss in value.  "You didn't lose everything, you've still got .01% of your life savings!  Don't Jump!"

While it's possible for bitcoins to go to zero, the only way that happens now is if there is some tragic & unfixable flaw discovered in the protocol that gives Bitcoin it's 'intrinsic value' to start with.  Again, possible; but the tragic and unfixable flaws with using electronic precious metal deposit receipts as an online trade currency are, if not altogether obvious, already demonstrated by the folding of both Egold.com and the persecution of the Liberty Dollar.  Governments will not suffer any competitor to exist if they can help it, but they can't help it with Bitcoin.

That last caller seemed to know his stuff, but was cut off by Peter before he could actually finish the argument.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
420
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500



View Profile
November 15, 2013, 06:22:27 AM

Nov 13, 2013 Peter is at the Money Show in New Orleans.  He opens his show talking about bitcoin.  I just put the whole show up.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/PeterShiffShow.btc.11.13.13.mp3

Edit: Talk continues with callers at 1:13:20.

goody goody

Donations: 1JVhKjUKSjBd7fPXQJsBs5P3Yphk38AqPr - TIPS
the hacks, the hacks, secure your bits!
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 06:27:43 AM
Last edit: November 15, 2013, 07:05:22 AM by AnonyMint

Bitcoin has been designed very well and I can't think of much better features to add for it

Strongly disagree. Mining was designed to be cartelized. Coin rewards diminish asymptotically towards 0 (1/2 of all coins to be issued were in first 4 years) thus the masses can never get into this coin, because wealthy don't spend rather they accumulate more by investing. Mining can't be done with the PCs that the masses already own.

Bitcoin is the dystopian outcome if it succeeds to suck in $trillions of market cap around the $1,000,000 price point. I think don't think it will get that far. The logical conclusion is there can't be possibly be only one. There must arise competition.

So in that sense, Peter Schiff is correct. The coin supply will not remain limited at Bitcoin's dystopian choice. Competition will debase Bitcoin and add more supply via liquid exchanges between coins. This can't happen with physical gold and silver, yet these have disadvantages when used in trade over distance especially.

While it's possible for bitcoins to go to zero, the only way that happens now is if there is some tragic & unfixable flaw discovered in the protocol that gives Bitcoin it's 'intrinsic value' to start with.

Yes I found that flaw. Can't be fixed because of the vested interests in Bitcoin and the uber critical need to maintain consensus to keep the exponential price trend intact.

Bitcoin will not go to zero tomorrow (or possibly ever) and the exponential price trend will continue for a while.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
smoothie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 1018


LEALANA Monero Physical Silver Coins


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 03:03:30 PM

Today's show had the best caller challenge yet.  But he waits until the end of the show and they have no time.  Please listen to the end.  He goes on an amusing tangent about Janet Yellen then back to bitcoin.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21580995/Peter.Schiff.bitcoin.11.14.13.mp3

The bitcoin defenders are poor in understanding here, particularly the first one, but Peter does make some good points here.  Gold cannot go to a use value of zero, while it's possible that Bitcoins can.  Granted, if gold were to drop to it's 'intrinsic value' it would be somewhat comparable to the value of lead, maybe slightly more due to much lower toxicity, but close.  Considering that refined lead is under a dollar a pound right now, that would represent something on the order of a 99.99% loss in value.  "You didn't lose everything, you've still got .01% of your life savings!  Don't Jump!"

While it's possible for bitcoins to go to zero, the only way that happens now is if there is some tragic & unfixable flaw discovered in the protocol that gives Bitcoin it's 'intrinsic value' to start with.  Again, possible; but the tragic and unfixable flaws with using electronic precious metal deposit receipts as an online trade currency are, if not altogether obvious, already demonstrated by the folding of both Egold.com and the persecution of the Liberty Dollar.  Governments will not suffer any competitor to exist if they can help it, but they can't help it with Bitcoin.

That last caller seemed to know his stuff, but was cut off by Peter before he could actually finish the argument.

Prove it. There are some scenario's where gold would become of no use (say a global catastrophic event that wipes out most of the population and technology sending us back to the cave man days, basically).


███████████████████████████████████████

            ,╓p@@███████@╗╖,           
        ,p████████████████████N,       
      d█████████████████████████b     
    d██████████████████████████████   
  ,█████████████████████████████████, 
 ,█████  ╙████████████████████╨  █████y
 ██████    `████████████████`    ██████
║██████       ███████████`      ███████
███████         ╩██████         ███████
███████    ▐▄     ██╩     a▌    ███████
╢██████    ▐▓█▄          ▄█▓▌    ███████
 ██████    ▐▓▓▓▓▌,     ▄█▓▓▓▌    ██████─
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓█,,▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
    ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓─  
     ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓╩    
        ▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀       
           ▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀`          
                                    
███████████████████████████████████████

. ★☆ WWW.LEALANA.COM        My PGP fingerprint is A764D833.                  History of Monero development Visualization ★☆ .
LEALANA  PHYSICAL MONERO COINS 999 FINE SILVER.
 
smoothie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 1018


LEALANA Monero Physical Silver Coins


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 03:04:57 PM

So who here (btc community) will step up and call his radio show and debate his position on bitcoin?  I can't do it, I suck.  I get it but I'll choke up on the air.  Who can best debate Peter?  Max Keiser?  Peter was just on Max's show in London.
http://youtu.be/MNXmL771mBA
 I'm sure Max would return the favor.

Max would rip Peter to shreds on the topic of bitcoin.

Trace Mayer already did.  Cheesy

███████████████████████████████████████

            ,╓p@@███████@╗╖,           
        ,p████████████████████N,       
      d█████████████████████████b     
    d██████████████████████████████   
  ,█████████████████████████████████, 
 ,█████  ╙████████████████████╨  █████y
 ██████    `████████████████`    ██████
║██████       ███████████`      ███████
███████         ╩██████         ███████
███████    ▐▄     ██╩     a▌    ███████
╢██████    ▐▓█▄          ▄█▓▌    ███████
 ██████    ▐▓▓▓▓▌,     ▄█▓▓▓▌    ██████─
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓█,,▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
    ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓─  
     ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓╩    
        ▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀       
           ▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀`          
                                    
███████████████████████████████████████

. ★☆ WWW.LEALANA.COM        My PGP fingerprint is A764D833.                  History of Monero development Visualization ★☆ .
LEALANA  PHYSICAL MONERO COINS 999 FINE SILVER.
 
smoothie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 1018


LEALANA Monero Physical Silver Coins


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 03:05:41 PM

peter schiff is a smart guy but he is comparing apples to oranges when he compares bitcoin to gold. no one uses gold as money anymore.


It is because he has special interests for his business and his customers which most of it is Precious Metals related.

███████████████████████████████████████

            ,╓p@@███████@╗╖,           
        ,p████████████████████N,       
      d█████████████████████████b     
    d██████████████████████████████   
  ,█████████████████████████████████, 
 ,█████  ╙████████████████████╨  █████y
 ██████    `████████████████`    ██████
║██████       ███████████`      ███████
███████         ╩██████         ███████
███████    ▐▄     ██╩     a▌    ███████
╢██████    ▐▓█▄          ▄█▓▌    ███████
 ██████    ▐▓▓▓▓▌,     ▄█▓▓▓▌    ██████─
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓█,,▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
    ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓─  
     ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓╩    
        ▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀       
           ▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀`          
                                    
███████████████████████████████████████

. ★☆ WWW.LEALANA.COM        My PGP fingerprint is A764D833.                  History of Monero development Visualization ★☆ .
LEALANA  PHYSICAL MONERO COINS 999 FINE SILVER.
 
smoothie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 1018


LEALANA Monero Physical Silver Coins


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 03:07:57 PM


That's not what I'm talking about at all.  On that point, Peter is correct.  Bitcoin is not gold, but nor is it fiat.  It's something altogether new and different from either, that is designed to do the best job of either. 

What I'm talking about is Peter's talk about intrinsic value.  Not only is gold's "intrinsic value" such a small part of it's market value as to be practically irrelevent, he argues that bitcoin's don't have an intrinsic value economicly.  I can easily prove that they do.  The only kind of intrinsic value of anything, is how useful it is to the marketplace. While gold does have physical properties that are useful to industry, and silver has chemical properties useful to both industry and medicine; neither of these 'intrinsic' uses have value to the market to compete with their monetary uses, because the market will always be looking for methods of achieving the same ends using cheaper inputs.  A great example is the use of silver in antibacterial products; while it works great and has been well known to medicine for over a century, silver is not often used in medicine except in the most dire of applications, wherein our modern anti-bacterial sciences fail us too regularly.  I.E. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus Aureus  While bitcoins have no physical properties to exploit, they were designed to significantly uncut the market costs of the transfer of value over distances.  This 'feature' alone provides bitcoin's "intrinsic value", even if it's next least expensive competitor in kind is what most determines what that "intrinsic value" should actually be.  Neither Visa nor Western-Union have the power to undercut Bitcoin in this market, without first becoming Bitcoin themselves.

And that is not even considering the "intrinsic value" of blockchain enforcible digital contracts, should they ever become common.

Peter has claimed bitcoin is fiat on many occasions. This proves wither he has no clue what he is talking about or he is trying to recoup the credibility he lost on ALL of his "bitcoin is going to crash and people will lose money" claims.

███████████████████████████████████████

            ,╓p@@███████@╗╖,           
        ,p████████████████████N,       
      d█████████████████████████b     
    d██████████████████████████████   
  ,█████████████████████████████████, 
 ,█████  ╙████████████████████╨  █████y
 ██████    `████████████████`    ██████
║██████       ███████████`      ███████
███████         ╩██████         ███████
███████    ▐▄     ██╩     a▌    ███████
╢██████    ▐▓█▄          ▄█▓▌    ███████
 ██████    ▐▓▓▓▓▌,     ▄█▓▓▓▌    ██████─
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓█,,▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
    ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓─  
     ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓╩    
        ▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀       
           ▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀`          
                                    
███████████████████████████████████████

. ★☆ WWW.LEALANA.COM        My PGP fingerprint is A764D833.                  History of Monero development Visualization ★☆ .
LEALANA  PHYSICAL MONERO COINS 999 FINE SILVER.
 
Pumpkin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 151
Merit: 100


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 04:29:03 PM

I'm listening to Peter Schiff's radio shows (http://www.schiffradio.com/).

He understands that bitcoin is complex. There are people want to explain it to him and his audience, yet he does not give them time on purpose. That's how he wins. By giving 1-2 minutes to explain bitcoin. We all know it's not possible.

Very disappointing. If bitcoin catches on, he will have lost his audience millions of USD just because he's butthurt about his gold investments.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1044


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 06:40:33 PM

I'm listening to Peter Schiff's radio shows (http://www.schiffradio.com/).

He understands that bitcoin is complex. There are people want to explain it to him and his audience, yet he does not give them time on purpose. That's how he wins. By giving 1-2 minutes to explain bitcoin. We all know it's not possible.

Very disappointing. If bitcoin catches on, he will have lost his audience millions of USD just because he's butthurt about his gold investments.

I've yet to hear him 'win' at all.  To people who have some technical grasp, or even a grasp of generic logic for that matter, most of his points are rather absurd.

If he 'wins', it's in a obtuse loudmouth bully kind of way popularize by the mainstream media.  Many mouth-breather types may well come away with the impression that he has 'won', but who cares?  It's their loss.  That's why such people typically do not have nice things.

Schiff's show seems to be a cut-out of Fox news with idiotic sound effect and the like.  I can only visualize some fat fuck listening from his trailer house in between rounds of substance abuse and wife-beating.


AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 07:06:23 PM

Peter has claimed bitcoin is fiat on many occasions. This proves wither he has no clue what he is talking about or he is trying to recoup the credibility he lost on ALL of his "bitcoin is going to crash and people will lose money" claims.

I wonder if he realizes why he is correct? I doubt it (he probably thinks Bitcoin's decentralized technology can be stopped with regulation alone, which is unlikely)

After 2033 (<1%) and 2040 (<0.2%), then coin rewards for Bitcoin diminish asymptotically towards 0. Thus there is no funding for miners, if a cartel of miners does the well-known "transactions withholding attack".

In other words, Amazon.com supplies a downloadable or online client (that merchants all over the web adopt because Amazon pays them to) and Amazon might even juice up the offer with 0% tx fees (to entice more transactions to them), then they do not forward these transactions to other independent miners who are not part of their cartel. Thus those other miners do not get sufficient funding to pay their electricity and hardware amortization costs.

This is just one way that Bitcoin can be taken over by cartels. And actually Satoshi wrote about this and thought this was fine. And the core devs know this too and think it is fine.

There a new attack released this month. Read that linked post, I am not against Bitcoin, I may even buy some.

So once Bitcoin is in the hands of cartels, then the government can regulate the cartels. So then they can easily change the protocol to anything they want.

If you believe in the theory that network effects are insurmountable, then it would be too late at that time to launch an altcoin (or fork Bitcoin) to compete.

Sorry to bust your fantasy bubble about Bitcoin. Better to be knowledgeable and realistic. Bitcoin is a great advance, but it is not yet perfected and the core devs will refuse any such necessary changes.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 15, 2013, 07:33:34 PM

Peter has claimed bitcoin is fiat on many occasions. This proves wither he has no clue what he is talking about or he is trying to recoup the credibility he lost on ALL of his "bitcoin is going to crash and people will lose money" claims.

No, it just shows his bias.  Since it's not gold, and to him that is a bad thing, then bitcoin is substandard.  Calling it fiat is a shortcut to his audience.  He knows it's not fiat, really.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
Jandur
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 9
Merit: 0


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 07:37:05 PM

Can someone just please respond to him by stating gold is infinitely divisible? Has anyone tried that with him?
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 15, 2013, 07:47:30 PM

Prove it. There are some scenario's where gold would become of no use (say a global catastrophic event that wipes out most of the population and technology sending us back to the cave man days, basically).


Yes, there are some astronomicly unlikely disaster scenarios that gold would not be of any use.  Neither would anything else be, for that matter.  Returning to a gold standard without any central banking or fractional reserve lending is vastly more likely, however.  No matter how advanced a society we become, and no matter how successful Bitcoin (or other cryptocurrency) ever becomes, gold & silver will have a value.  Peter's point is that, in the absence of that modern industrial society, wherein trustless transfer of value over distances no longer has it's own use value, that it's possible that Bitcoin will not have an another use value.  

Even then, if the human species has not been wiped out, I can think of several non-monetary uses for gold.  If you lived 500 years ago (assuming gold had no monetary value) what would you do with it?  That exact scenario played out with platinum, since it was so uncommon that the Spanish had no experience or understanding of it, they used it as if it was common scrap metal.  They made cannons and ship ballasts out of it.  If I were to survive a complete breakdown of modern industrial society, and lived anywhere near the ocean, the first thing that I'd be trying to get is a boat.  And gold plating would not only make a wonderful external ballast, but since it cannot corrode it would also make a great hull skin to protect a wooden hull from rot and barnacles.  Anyone with a seaworthy boat can scratch a living from the sea today, as the somewhat famous boat peoples of asia have well proven.  Athough it'd be wise to keep one's distance from the island of Japan.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1044


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 07:49:55 PM

Can someone just please respond to him by stating gold is infinitely divisible? Has anyone tried that with him?

Gold is NOT infinitely divisible:

  Molar mass of Au = 196.96655 g/mol

It is true both that:

 - Bitcoin is much less divisible that Au.

 - Bitcoin could be more divisible than Au with some coding changes.

---

But the whole argument of divisibility is silly and stupid and exposes a complete lack of understanding about much of anything.

Schiff's point is that a portion of Bitcoin is worthless because Bitcoin itself is worthless and zero divided by anything is still zero.  I'm starting to re-balance, and my bank account paints a starkly different picture that what Schiff is asserting.  I intend to re-balance into PM's in fact. 

Bitcoin and PM's have a remarkable level of potential symbiosis for someone who is not a closed-minded and ignorant doofus.


MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 15, 2013, 07:51:55 PM

Can someone just please respond to him by stating gold is infinitely divisible? Has anyone tried that with him?

Yes, the second bitcoin caller on that link tried it, but Peter just talked over him and wouldn't let him finish that point; declaring that it's not true and/or not the same.  Which, of course, is bullshit on Peter's part.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 08:19:24 PM

Can someone just please respond to him by stating gold is infinitely divisible? Has anyone tried that with him?

Yes, the second bitcoin caller on that link tried it, but Peter just talked over him and wouldn't let him finish that point; declaring that it's not true and/or not the same.  Which, of course, is bullshit on Peter's part.

You are conflating divisibility with mass.

No one can create 84 million new mass units of physical gold out-of-thin-air, but Litecoin did w.r.t. to Bitcoin.

There is a liquid exchange between LTC and BTC. Thus LTC expanded the money supply. Only a fraction so far, because the value of LTC is so low relative to BTC. I read today that at least one person is just waiting for the hashrate of the LTC network to reach critical mass (to be sure the network is secure) before buying in.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
BlackBison
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252
Merit: 250



View Profile
November 15, 2013, 08:30:49 PM

Can someone just please respond to him by stating gold is infinitely divisible? Has anyone tried that with him?

Yes, the second bitcoin caller on that link tried it, but Peter just talked over him and wouldn't let him finish that point; declaring that it's not true and/or not the same.  Which, of course, is bullshit on Peter's part.

No one can create 84 million new units of gold, but Litecoin did w.r.t. to Bitcoin.


Yes that diluted the overall share of bitcoin in the cryptocurrency 'sector' from say 100% to 99%, but so what. Better a smaller share of a larger pie right?

Any valuable technology sector has multiple actors in it, not just one monopoly. Alts like ltc provide redundancy in case of a catastrophe or an alternative if bitcoin becomes idealogically unsound to some people causing large divides in the community (see the heated debate about Mike Hearn and blacklisting).

Anyone who thinks that the bitcoin community will remain totally in agreement in the future is simply either an idiot or protecting their btc holdings with their fanatically closed minded preaching (a la Goldbugs).

'Just fork bitcoin instead' I hear you cry. That isn't going to work as well. Too much confusion. Also you might get a new power struggle etc with the forking teams. Better to have competing alts in parallel the whole time. Ltc and its highly competent dev team (or someone else) can snap at Bitcoins heels continuously 'keeping them in line' and doing a good honest job.


AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 08:54:14 PM

BlackBison our logic is the same on all your points. Thanks.

Yes we are aware of the issue with coin taint and the bizarre solution proposed by Google (ahem I mean Mike Hearn who only works for Google):

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=330230.msg3593844#msg3593844

I was entirely unfair above. Mike Hearn adamantly claims Google does not influence what he does with his "20% time", i.e. you probably know Google employees get one day a week to do what ever they want.

I think the most salient point is diversification. Monolithic anything is Antifragile:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=330230.msg3595067#msg3595067
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=180798.msg3594370#msg3594370

Decentralized competition is where we are headed (I hope). And very much agreed that separate entities can compete whereas trying to compete within a centralized consensus requirement is not competition.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
Singlebyte
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 854
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 15, 2013, 08:56:03 PM

Funny thing is, while Peter bashes bitcoin on his talk show thousands of new people are introduced to BTC.  These listeners will do their own research and come to conclusions on their own.  I see a lot of BTC converts just from his show!    More news the better.......
Zarathustra
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 15, 2013, 09:39:51 PM


Actually, this (misconception) points out very clearly why Bitcoin/Gold are on the same side opposite modern day fiat.

Modern day fiat monetary systems are almost all 'debt based'.  The currency is actually created by someone going into debt and extinguished by someone going out of debt through one means or another.  The paradox is that if there were not debt, there would be no money.  This explains, among other things, why pretty much everyone and every corporate and government is in debt.


Money has always been debt based. The state mafia indebted the people from the very beginning with a tax (debt ex nihilo).
To pay this debt you had to produce more than a stateless, selfsufficient community, and that enforces the nationalized people (society) to borrow more and more.
The state mafia itself is also indebted from the very beginning. The henchmen get a promise by the state mafia to be paid with the money they have to collect.
Debt is always the base of the money, wheter it is backed by metal, grain or any other property, which is the case today. Private debt is backed by private property.
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 15, 2013, 09:50:47 PM


Actually, this (misconception) points out very clearly why Bitcoin/Gold are on the same side opposite modern day fiat.

Modern day fiat monetary systems are almost all 'debt based'.  The currency is actually created by someone going into debt and extinguished by someone going out of debt through one means or another.  The paradox is that if there were not debt, there would be no money.  This explains, among other things, why pretty much everyone and every corporate and government is in debt.


Money has always been debt based. The state mafia indebted the people from the very beginning with a tax (debt ex nihilo).

This is a falsehood. 

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 09:56:58 PM
Last edit: November 15, 2013, 10:37:07 PM by AnonyMint


Actually, this (misconception) points out very clearly why Bitcoin/Gold are on the same side opposite modern day fiat.

Modern day fiat monetary systems are almost all 'debt based'.  The currency is actually created by someone going into debt and extinguished by someone going out of debt through one means or another.  The paradox is that if there were not debt, there would be no money.  This explains, among other things, why pretty much everyone and every corporate and government is in debt.


Money has always been debt based. The state mafia indebted the people from the very beginning with a tax (debt ex nihilo).
To pay this debt you had to produce more than a stateless, selfsufficient community, and that enforces the nationalized people (society) to borrow more and more.
The state mafia itself is also indebted from the very beginning. The henchmen get a promise by the state mafia to be paid with the money they have to collect.
Debt is always the base of the money, wheter it is backed by metal, grain or any other property, which is the case today. Private debt is backed by private property.

And that will never change. But there is a very important distinction.

When the base money (that the debt or fractional receipts are based on) can't be created by a power center, then the debt write-downs (defaults and bank runs) are more frequent and self-liquidating. This is what we had in the 1800s. When the free market is allowed to run, the downturns only last about 2 years, e.g. the 1919 depression that no one remembers. Whereas when government tries to stop the write-down, then it drags on for decades, e.g. 1929 to 1946. And 2007 - 2024.

With a central bank that can create base money out-of-thin-air (or authorize banks to do it by lowering reserve ratios), they can just prevent write-downs for decades until we reach for example now 550% total debt-to-GDP in the UK we are facing now. Then the implosions are horrific as what is coming to the world after 2016. Find the link to that debt data for all countries in the following post I wrote:

http://blog.mpettis.com/2013/10/hidden-debt-must-still-be-repayed/#comment-3179

So decentralized crypto-currencies have the potential to bring us back to a more sane system as what we had in the 1800s. But realize society doesn't like the frequent mini-depressions and recessions of the 1800s. Humans want everything safe and guaranteed without volatility and risk.

This is a falsehood.  

Ignore this guy. I read his posts upthread and he is suffering the goldbug delusion. I don't have time to correct all his wrong thinking.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 15, 2013, 10:14:03 PM

This is a falsehood.  

Ignore this guy. I read his posts upthread and he is suffering the goldbug delusion. I don't have time to correct all his wrong thinking.

Dude, you don't even know who you're talking about.  I'm no goldbug, for one.  It's a falsehood that is easily provable.  Money predates nation-states, it's only the advent of nation-states that has permitted debt based money.  Credit is something a bit different.  Gold & Silver (not a gold standard paper currency) are two monies that have no counterparty risk, there are others also.  When you pay with gold, real gold coins and not warehouse receipts, the debt is immediately settled.  Without counterparty risk, debt based currencies cannot exist.  With regard to modern fiat currencies, the counterparty is the government that issues the currency.  I.E., "The full faith and credit of the United States..." (or, in the case of Britian, the Crown)

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 10:17:58 PM
Last edit: November 15, 2013, 10:32:31 PM by AnonyMint

This is a falsehood.  

Ignore this guy. I read his posts upthread and he is suffering the goldbug delusion. I don't have time to correct all his wrong thinking.

All goldbugs, please educate yourself and here and here also.

I was once a goldbug, sigh.  Embarrassed

That doesn't mean I don't use gold and silver as an asset when they are undervalued.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 10:28:10 PM

This is a falsehood.  

Ignore this guy. I read his posts upthread and he is suffering the goldbug delusion. I don't have time to correct all his wrong thinking.

All goldbugs, please educate yourself and here and here also.

I was once a goldbug, sigh.  Embarrassed

Here is a very relevant point against the selfishness of goldbugs and the coin supply design of Bitcoin:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=323988.msg3582346#msg3582346

98% of humanity won't have any bitcoins when it enters a bubble and this is a problem, since these are already the laggards, and by buying at the bubble, they make their situation worse, not better. Any thoughts?

The only potential solution I see is an altcoin which distributes coins continuously to CPU-only miners (while not diluting capitalists too rapidly since the coin is appreciating orders-of-magnitude faster than the small coin rewards). This will also raise the transaction rate (velocity of money), because the bottom 97% have a wealth distribution based on using money as cash, not as a store-of-value:

http://physics.umd.edu/~yakovenk/papers/PhysicaA-299-213-2001.pdf


The above is referring to Bitcoin's Dystopian Future.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 10:31:04 PM

This is a falsehood.  

Ignore this guy. I read his posts upthread and he is suffering the goldbug delusion. I don't have time to correct all his wrong thinking.

Dude, you don't even know who you're talking about.  I'm no goldbug, for one.  It's a falsehood that is easily provable.  Money predates nation-states, it's only the advent of nation-states that has permitted debt based money.  Credit is something a bit different.  Gold & Silver (not a gold standard paper currency) are two monies that have no counterparty risk, there are others also.  When you pay with gold, real gold coins and not warehouse receipts, the debt is immediately settled.  Without counterparty risk, debt based currencies cannot exist.  With regard to modern fiat currencies, the counterparty is the government that issues the currency.  I.E., "The full faith and credit of the United States..." (or, in the case of Britian, the Crown)

Credit has existed since the time of Mesopotamia. Martin Armstrong has images of clay tablet credit contracts on his blog to prove it.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 15, 2013, 10:35:31 PM

This is a falsehood.  

Ignore this guy. I read his posts upthread and he is suffering the goldbug delusion. I don't have time to correct all his wrong thinking.

Dude, you don't even know who you're talking about.  I'm no goldbug, for one.  It's a falsehood that is easily provable.  Money predates nation-states, it's only the advent of nation-states that has permitted debt based money.  Credit is something a bit different.  Gold & Silver (not a gold standard paper currency) are two monies that have no counterparty risk, there are others also.  When you pay with gold, real gold coins and not warehouse receipts, the debt is immediately settled.  Without counterparty risk, debt based currencies cannot exist.  With regard to modern fiat currencies, the counterparty is the government that issues the currency.  I.E., "The full faith and credit of the United States..." (or, in the case of Britian, the Crown)

Credit has existed since the time of Mesopotamia. Martin Armstrong has images of clay tablet credit contracts on his blog to prove it.

Credit, yes.  Debt based currencies, no.  The difference is not trivial.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 10:41:07 PM
Last edit: November 15, 2013, 10:55:56 PM by AnonyMint

This is a falsehood.  

Ignore this guy. I read his posts upthread and he is suffering the goldbug delusion. I don't have time to correct all his wrong thinking.

Dude, you don't even know who you're talking about.  I'm no goldbug, for one.  It's a falsehood that is easily provable.  Money predates nation-states, it's only the advent of nation-states that has permitted debt based money.  Credit is something a bit different.  Gold & Silver (not a gold standard paper currency) are two monies that have no counterparty risk, there are others also.  When you pay with gold, real gold coins and not warehouse receipts, the debt is immediately settled.  Without counterparty risk, debt based currencies cannot exist.  With regard to modern fiat currencies, the counterparty is the government that issues the currency.  I.E., "The full faith and credit of the United States..." (or, in the case of Britian, the Crown)

Credit has existed since the time of Mesopotamia. Martin Armstrong has images of clay tablet credit contracts on his blog to prove it.

Credit, yes.  Debt based currencies, no.  The difference is not trivial.

In those cases, either the base money was a fractional receipt or it was a fractional purity.

Never has there been a non-fractional, hard assets currency. Never. Not even in the Byzantine Empire as some think.

Because humans require debt.

Try outlawing debt, you will enter another 600 year Dark Age and feudalism

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 15, 2013, 10:53:45 PM

Quote
Quote
Credit has existed since the time of Mesopotamia. Martin Armstrong has images of clay tablet credit contracts on his blog to prove it.

Credit, yes.  Debt based currencies, no.  The difference is not trivial.

Either the base money was a fractional receipt or it was a fractional purity.

Never has there been a non-fractional, hard assets currency. Never. Not even in the Byzantine Empire as some think.


Yes, there has been.  Regression theory requires it, and takes it as a given.  Evidence of same isn't even a requirement.  Or are you contesting the regression theory?

Quote

Because humans require debt.


Prove it.

Quote

Try outlawing debt, you will enter another 600 year Dark Age and feudalism


Maybe, but irrelevent.  Commerce often requires debt, even if momentary in nature.  That does not imply that commecre requires a debt based currency.  Think about what it is that you are really advocating here.  If you owe fiat to anyone, you owe a debt; but when you pay for it in fiat, you're paying for it by transfering debt to another party.  You are never actually settling the debt.  Yes, modern fiat currencies work this way, and they will continue to work so long as the public continues to trust that the issuing government will continue to exist & continue to honor it's own debts.  (which is one reason that an outright & open default on foregn debts is never acceptable to an idebted nation)  This does not conclude that all mediums of exchange are, themselves, a debt of another party.  Physical gold rounds, silver bullion, trade barter in canned goods and bullets, etc. is not the exchange of a debt unless you're the creditor.  All that is required for you to see the difference between a two party consumer debt and that of a debt based currency system is to reason it out a bit.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 11:05:04 PM
Last edit: November 15, 2013, 11:25:26 PM by AnonyMint

Debt and debasement (in various forms of regimes ranging from debt-issued fiat as we have now to fractional reserves of gold in the 1800s to fractional purity of coins in Rome) have always been required and will always be required, because otherwise dumbass wanna-be elite capitalists (e.g. gold fever "goldbugs" greed) go create a ButtCon that puts 98% of the coins (of the world's wealth if ButtCon becomes ubiquitous which thus it won't) in 2% of the hands.

And the 2% doesn't spend, they invest to gain more coins.

So the 98% has no choice but to accept debt to survive.

Then the base money is debased to accommodate the required money supply expansion to accommodate the interest on the debt.

Note due to the Quantity Theory of Money, M x V = P x Q ≈ GDP, increases in monetary velocity substitute for money supply increases until the downturn and drop in velocity by -50% as we have since 2007.

Debt is required because there is a tension between the incentives of capitalists and the masses. Neither is wrong, this tension exists as the way nature works. The masses gain their limited wealth via using the currency for spending. The capitalists gain their outsized wealth by saving and investing. See the research paper I linked upthread.

This is why you must have debt and regular debasement to keep this ying and yang tension in balance. Nature is composed of relativity waves, not linear nor constant nor absolute frame of reference. You need to understand the nature of the universe, what it is fundamentally composed of.

http://unheresy.com/The%20Universe.html (my blog)

The key improvement we can hope for is to prevent a power center from manipulating the base money supply curve. And thus have more frequent write-downs of debt, to avoid those horrific implosions like the one coming for us after 2016.

The decentralized nature of Bitcoin is excellent. The chosen coin supply curve is idiotic and cruel, because it stops expanding and thus is static with a small percent of the world accumulating all wealth. It will not work out well, if we have only Bitcoin. Thus there is no way Bitcoin will be the only one. There are several scenarios that are possible:

1. Altcoins emerge and rectify the problem
2. Bitcoin reaches the dystopian outcome alone, thus society goes to war against Bitcoin.
3. Bitcoin never captures any where near all the world's wealth.

And some of the permutations of partial outcomes of the above.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 15, 2013, 11:15:28 PM

Debt and debasement (in various forms of regimes ranging from debt-issued fiat as we have now to fractional reserves of gold in the 1800s to fractional purity of coins in Rome) have always been required and will always be required, because otherwise dumbass wanna-be elite capitalists (e.g. gold fever "goldbugs" greed) go create a ButtCon that puts 98% of the coins (of the world's wealth if ButtCon becomes ubiquitous which thus it won't) in 2% of the hands.

And the 2% doesn't spend, they invest to gain more coins.

So the 98% has no choice but to accept debt to survive.

Then the base money is debased to accommodate the required money supply expansion to accommodate the interest on the debt.

Note due to the Quantity Theory of Money, M x V = P x Q ≈ GDP, increases in monetary velocity substitute for money supply increases until the downturn and drop in velocity by -50% as we have since 2007.

Debt is required because there is a tension between the incentives of capitalists and the masses. Neither is wrong, this tension exists as the way nature works. See the research paper I linked upthread.

This is not an argument.  Whatever you think, or feel, is correct is not an argument.  It's bullshit.  This sounds like the distorted (and wrong) economic education that marxists try to tell me about whenever I'm forced by circumstances to interact with them.

BTW, you really have misunderstood the meaning behind the Quantity Theory.  Changes in velocity do not support your position that debasement is an economic requirement, it contradicts it.  The very notable fact that velocity of money is able to change in response to the demand for money implies that hard currencies are more flexible in practice than is often touted by academtic economists.  You metioned that you live in England, perhaps you do or have attended Cambridge?  Or, perhaps, like to echo the bullshit of someone who has for strangers on the Internet?

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 11:21:07 PM

Debt and debasement (in various forms of regimes ranging from debt-issued fiat as we have now to fractional reserves of gold in the 1800s to fractional purity of coins in Rome) have always been required and will always be required, because otherwise dumbass wanna-be elite capitalists (e.g. gold fever "goldbugs" greed) go create a ButtCon that puts 98% of the coins (of the world's wealth if ButtCon becomes ubiquitous which thus it won't) in 2% of the hands.

And the 2% doesn't spend, they invest to gain more coins.

So the 98% has no choice but to accept debt to survive.

Then the base money is debased to accommodate the required money supply expansion to accommodate the interest on the debt.

Note due to the Quantity Theory of Money, M x V = P x Q ≈ GDP, increases in monetary velocity substitute for money supply increases until the downturn and drop in velocity by -50% as we have since 2007.

Debt is required because there is a tension between the incentives of capitalists and the masses. Neither is wrong, this tension exists as the way nature works. See the research paper I linked upthread.

This is not an argument.  Whatever you think, or feel, is correct is not an argument.  It's bullshit.  This sounds like the distorted (and wrong) economic education that marxists try to tell me about whenever I'm forced by circumstances to interact with them.

Your inability to comprehend is not a rebuttal.

BTW, you really have misunderstood the meaning behind the Quantity Theory.  Changes in velocity do not support your position that debasement is an economic requirement, it contradicts it.

That demonstrates you did not comprehend what I wrote. I wrote that velocity can increase as a substitute for debasement. But remember velocity eventually has to decline when the economy does. So it does not absolve the necessity of debasement.

You metioned that you live in England, perhaps you do or have attended Cambridge?  Or, perhaps, like to echo the bullshit of someone who has for strangers on the Internet?

I never wrote I live in England and I don't. I live in a backwater, third world country. You apparently have low comprehension skills. I did write the UK has a total debt-to-GDP ratio of 550%. And many other countries have near that level too.

Dude I used to be a goldbug and believed that shit. At one time I owned 18,000oz of silver. I even minted 15,000 rounds of 1oz silver coins from 1000oz bars. Don't you want to learn from what I figured out over the years?

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 15, 2013, 11:36:38 PM

Debt and debasement (in various forms of regimes ranging from debt-issued fiat as we have now to fractional reserves of gold in the 1800s to fractional purity of coins in Rome) have always been required and will always be required, because otherwise dumbass wanna-be elite capitalists (e.g. gold fever "goldbugs" greed) go create a ButtCon that puts 98% of the coins (of the world's wealth if ButtCon becomes ubiquitous which thus it won't) in 2% of the hands.

And the 2% doesn't spend, they invest to gain more coins.

So the 98% has no choice but to accept debt to survive.

Then the base money is debased to accommodate the required money supply expansion to accommodate the interest on the debt.

Note due to the Quantity Theory of Money, M x V = P x Q ≈ GDP, increases in monetary velocity substitute for money supply increases until the downturn and drop in velocity by -50% as we have since 2007.

Debt is required because there is a tension between the incentives of capitalists and the masses. Neither is wrong, this tension exists as the way nature works. See the research paper I linked upthread.

This is not an argument.  Whatever you think, or feel, is correct is not an argument.  It's bullshit.  This sounds like the distorted (and wrong) economic education that marxists try to tell me about whenever I'm forced by circumstances to interact with them.

Your inability to comprehend is not a rebuttal.


I wasn't trying to rebut a non-argument.  You may continue to live your life believing that anyone who disagrees with your bullshit doesn't comprehend.  You have my permission.  However, you are far from the smartst person in this room.  I'm one of the nicer lot here, and eventually you're going to hit one of the not-nice and have your virtual arse handed to you in public.  I don't have the time or inclination, and suspect that you'd just bail if I should try, but I will enjoy that day.

Quote

BTW, you really have misunderstood the meaning behind the Quantity Theory.  Changes in velocity do not support your position that debasement is an economic requirement, it contradicts it.

That demonstrates you did not comprehend what I wrote. I wrote that velocity can increase as a substitute for debasement. But remember velocity eventually has to decline when the economy does. So it does not absolve the necessity of debasement.


By your own logic, it doesn't need to resolve anything.  Like all thinkgs, demand for money comes in waves, and recedes the same way.  We call it the business cycle.  Debasement is not required, although it is often beneficial for certain parties.

Quote
You metioned that you live in England, perhaps you do or have attended Cambridge?  Or, perhaps, like to echo the bullshit of someone who has for strangers on the Internet?

I never mentioned I lived in England. You have low comprehension skills. I did write the UK has a total debt-to-GDP ratio of 550%. And many other countries have near that level too.

And I quote...

"With a central bank that can create base money out-of-thin-air (or authorize banks to do it by lowering reserve ratios), they can just prevent write-downs for decades until we reach for example now 550% total debt-to-GDP in the UK we are facing now"

Considering that I live in teh US, I'm not "facing" anything that happens in the UK.  By including yourself (by way of the "we" above) in that group, you betray that either you identify with Britons, or you have a poor understanding of English grammer rules with regard to context.  I don't believe that I'm the one with poor comprehension skills, but at least one of us has poor communication skills.  I'm dyslexic, so that's my excuse.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


View Profile
November 15, 2013, 11:47:36 PM
Last edit: November 16, 2013, 12:03:51 AM by AnonyMint

BTW, you really have misunderstood the meaning behind the Quantity Theory.  Changes in velocity do not support your position that debasement is an economic requirement, it contradicts it.

That demonstrates you did not comprehend what I wrote. I wrote that velocity can increase as a substitute for debasement. But remember velocity eventually has to decline when the economy does. So it does not absolve the necessity of debasement.

By your own logic, it doesn't need to resolve anything.  Like all thinkgs, demand for money comes in waves, and recedes the same way.  We call it the business cycle.  Debasement is not required, although it is often beneficial for certain parties.

You apparently did not read the links I provided. I told you I don't have time to repeat all the past discussion I had already at those links.

Those links PROVE why debt requires debasement. Essentially it is because if 97% use debt, then the money supply (or temporarily the velocity but then it must decline eventually which then requires the central bank to step in and debase) has to increase by the prevalent rate of interest. That is mathematically unarguable. The lenders are protected against default by the central banks, which was my point after all, of what we can actually improve upon.

Indeed removing the ability to print the base money out-of-thin air, could attempt to force all defaults on lenders. But if you go for that with strict 0% debasement, you will find that society hates you and will spite you because the debt will never expand enough and defaults will be so frequent as to keep the economy in a Dark Age. There has to be some acceptance and forgiveness and flexibility, otherwise with a static money supply the most successful capitalists just can accumulate larger and larger percentage of the money supply until they own it all. And this will just drive the capitalists to buy off the government to force a fiat. You've got to have your base money at least somewhat close to the trendline debasement rate need for the waves to revolve around, otherwise you end up with war.

In proof-of-work, without debasement, you end up with a transactions withholding attack and cartelization of the mining, thus you lose the decentralization and back at fiat again.

Hard money people see the world as flat and absolute. They are not realistic.

You metioned that you live in England, perhaps you do or have attended Cambridge?  Or, perhaps, like to echo the bullshit of someone who has for strangers on the Internet?

I never mentioned I lived in England. You have low comprehension skills. I did write the UK has a total debt-to-GDP ratio of 550%. And many other countries have near that level too.

And I quote...

"With a central bank that can create base money out-of-thin-air (or authorize banks to do it by lowering reserve ratios), they can just prevent write-downs for decades until we reach for example now 550% total debt-to-GDP in the UK we are facing now"

Considering that I live in teh US, I'm not "facing" anything that happens in the UK.

And again you did not read the link I provided which (contains a link which) shows all the countries in the world have a similar level of debt. Thus we are all facing the same outcome. I mentioned that. I guess you also didn't read the "for example" above.

Sorry I don't have time to reorganize a whitepaper every time I get into a debate with another hard money fanatic.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 16, 2013, 12:05:00 AM

BTW, you really have misunderstood the meaning behind the Quantity Theory.  Changes in velocity do not support your position that debasement is an economic requirement, it contradicts it.

That demonstrates you did not comprehend what I wrote. I wrote that velocity can increase as a substitute for debasement. But remember velocity eventually has to decline when the economy does. So it does not absolve the necessity of debasement.

By your own logic, it doesn't need to resolve anything.  Like all thinkgs, demand for money comes in waves, and recedes the same way.  We call it the business cycle.  Debasement is not required, although it is often beneficial for certain parties.

You apparently did not read the links I provided. I told you I don't have time to repeat all the past discussion I had already at those links.


I care not at all about your past bullshit.

Quote

Those links PROVE why debt requires debasement.


Bullshit.  You can't prove anything.  If you had any education in the dismal field, you would know this much.

Quote
Essentially it is because if 97% use debt, then the money supply (or the velocity) has to increase by the prevalent rate of interest. That is mathematically unarguable. The lenders are protected against default by the central banks, which was my point after all, of what we can actually improve upon.


I agree that the above highlighted part is mathmaticly correct.  However, your unstated premise is that the average inflation rate is the only variable force on the demand for money.  This is not supportable, and is easily disproven.  For example, bankruptcy is a countervailing force.  Anohter unstated premise youseem to have is that, because this effect is evident under the current fiat currency systems (i.e. central bankng, farctional reserve) that it must always have been this way or cannot be any other way under a different monetary system.  While it's possible that that second statement is still true, it's still unsupportable.  Just because it's true in every case that you (or I) could be aware of does not condlucde that it must be true under any system.

You would have already failed my class.

Quote
You metioned that you live in England, perhaps you do or have attended Cambridge?  Or, perhaps, like to echo the bullshit of someone who has for strangers on the Internet?

I never mentioned I lived in England. You have low comprehension skills. I did write the UK has a total debt-to-GDP ratio of 550%. And many other countries have near that level too.

And I quote...

"With a central bank that can create base money out-of-thin-air (or authorize banks to do it by lowering reserve ratios), they can just prevent write-downs for decades until we reach for example now 550% total debt-to-GDP in the UK we are facing now"

Considering that I live in teh US, I'm not "facing" anything that happens in the UK.

And again you did not read the link I provided which (contains a link which) shows all the countries in the world have a similar level of debt. Thus we are all facing the same outcome.

Again, no we are not.  It's actually impossible for all nations to face the same outcome even if allnations have similar issues (which they don't).  Once the first major nation defaults, the situation on the international stage has changed, and the next must fail in another manner.  The cascade probably makes it worse for the late nations, so the best time to default is early.  Iceland has proven this already, as they don't really have any lingering effects of telling Euopean banks to poiund sand.

I notice, also, that you really never did say why you identify with Britons in particular.  From whom do you draw your economic education & understanding?


Quote
Sorry I don't have time to reorganize a whitepaper every time I get into a debate with another hard money fanatic.

Again, I'm not a hard money fanatic.  I would assume that a fanatic would actually own some, at least a little.  I don't own any.  However, I do understand the difference between a debt owed betweeen contracting parties and a debt based currency.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


View Profile
November 16, 2013, 12:07:44 AM

Realize that the money supply is always accumulating to the capitalists.

Thus our big opportunity with crypto-currencies was to get the wealth distributed back out to the people with a decentralized control over the coin supply. But not in a socialist method of distribution of course, as that would be counter-productive.

Bitcoin fucked up both aspects of the design.

1. It puts roughly 98% of the coins in 2% of the hands.

2. It ends debasement, so the mining and thus the control over the coin supply ends up in a cartel.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 16, 2013, 12:15:08 AM

Realize that the money supply is always accumulating to the capitalists.

Thus our big opportunity with crypto-currencies was to get the wealth distributed back out to the people with a decentralized control over the coin supply. But not in a socialist method of distribution of course, as that would be counter-productive.


More neo-marxist, monetarist bullshit.  Just because you can imagine it, does not make it so.  It's actually impossible for the money supply to always accumulate to any group.  Eventually the distribution must drop below a functional level for a medium of exchange, at which point a free market chooses something else less scarce to be the new medium of exchange.  This crap has Cambridge written all over it, it's somewhat suprising that the UK is still a first world nation. 

Quote
Bitcoin fucked up both aspects of the design.

1. It puts 98% of the coins in 2% of the hands.


Citations?  Fail.

Quote

2. It ends debasement, so the mining and thus the control over the coin supply ends up in a cartel.

Show your work, child.  How do you arrive at this conclusion?  Make sure that you explain how such a cartel could maintain loyalty among it's ranks when mining services are distributable with relatively low cost of market entry.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


View Profile
November 16, 2013, 12:34:58 AM
Last edit: November 16, 2013, 12:47:23 AM by AnonyMint

I care not at all about your past bullshit.

If you won't read cited references, we can't have a meaningful discussion. I am not going to repeat everything for you. You are not worth it to me.

Quote
Those links PROVE why debt requires debasement.

Bullshit.  You can't prove anything.

Sigh. You have not refuted.

Quote
Essentially it is because if 97% use debt, then the money supply (or the velocity) has to increase by the prevalent rate of interest. That is mathematically unarguable. The lenders are protected against default by the central banks, which was my point after all, of what we can actually improve upon.

I agree that the above highlighted part is mathmaticly correct.  However, your unstated premise is that the average inflation rate is the only variable force on the demand for money.

That is not my premise and not even a possible unstated mathematical relationship to my premise.

Feel free to attempt to write down an equation. I will be waiting.


For example, bankruptcy is a countervailing force.

Do you always fail to read? I wrote that central banks prevent defaults, which is the main improvement we can make with a decentralized currency.

Anohter unstated premise youseem to have is that, because this effect is evident under the current fiat currency systems (i.e. central bankng, farctional reserve) that it must always have been this way or cannot be any other way under a different monetary system.  While it's possible that that second statement is still true, it's still unsupportable.  Just because it's true in every case that you (or I) could be aware of does not condlucde that it must be true under any system.

I attempted to distill the information content of that and ended up with the empty set.

You would have already failed my class.

hahaha. I wouldn't waste my time if you were the "teacher".


Quote
You metioned that you live in England, perhaps you do or have attended Cambridge?  Or, perhaps, like to echo the bullshit of someone who has for strangers on the Internet?

I never mentioned I lived in England. You have low comprehension skills. I did write the UK has a total debt-to-GDP ratio of 550%. And many other countries have near that level too.

And I quote...

"With a central bank that can create base money out-of-thin-air (or authorize banks to do it by lowering reserve ratios), they can just prevent write-downs for decades until we reach for example now 550% total debt-to-GDP in the UK we are facing now"

Considering that I live in teh US, I'm not "facing" anything that happens in the UK.

And again you did not read the link I provided which (contains a link which) shows all the countries in the world have a similar level of debt. Thus we are all facing the same outcome.

Again, no we are not.  It's actually impossible for all nations to face the same outcome even if allnations have similar issues (which they don't).  Once the first major nation defaults, the situation on the international stage has changed, and the next must fail in another manner.  The cascade probably makes it worse for the late nations, so the best time to default is early.  Iceland has proven this already, as they don't really have any lingering effects of telling Euopean banks to poiund sand.

It is always best to default sooner (but not every week! see point below), as you stop the further misallocation of capital.

All nations are in the same boat in terms of contagion effects, because global trade will implode and all nations are reliant on it. The USA is the least reliant, and has even become energy independent recently.

But the USA is facing the worst regime in terms of tracking down all wealth with the NSA and confiscating anything that tries to move abroad, e.g. with the FATCA. Europeans currently are not taxed when they are abroad nor on capital gains whereas the Americans are (I am a US citizen too), thus if that remains, they can go take advantage of all the opportunities the coming global implosion will create, but Americans will be locked inside.

I do understand the difference between a debt owed betweeen contracting parties and a debt based currency.

I was not referring to the political differences in monetary systems. Loaning the base fiat from the Fed to the Treasury, and the creation of money as debt by the banks due to fractional reserves is basically a political issue of how the power center is structured.

I was talking about the fractional nature of ALL money systems, whether which form they take (in various forms of regimes ranging from debt-issued fiat as we have now to fractional reserves of gold in the 1800s to fractional purity of coins in Rome).

I am getting more fundamental to the root of the nature of money, which is that it has to be compatible with debt regardless of which political form it takes.

If we set the debasement of money at 0%, then it means the capitalists can accumulate the total money supply faster. There has to be a   balance between the 2% and 98%.

And the benefit we can get with a decentralized currency is that the control over the debasement can't be centralized and manipulated. But if we set the debasement to 0%, then the mining isn't funded (tx fees don't work due to transaction withholding attack), thus the decentralized benefit is lost.

You are thinking it doesn't matter if the money is debased, because the credit contracts can fall where they may in terms of success or bankruptcy. But you forget that people demand insurance. And then they demand the government to backstop the insurance.

A 0% debasement means the money velocity has to be exponential in order to keep up with the issuance of debt and thus demand for money, thus the debt expansions and collapses are too frequent, perhaps on the order of a couple of years or months or even weeks.

So then the public will of course demand to debase that money by demanding the government backstop and stop those too frequent corrections.

So for 3 reasons above, the debasement needs to be higher.

Since the 1800s, the data is that the debasment has averaged 5%. And the incomes have risen 5%. The 98% did not lose from debasment.

They lose from the power centers taking control of the government.

So the debasement rate has to be designed with the 3 factors I mentioned above in mind.

See sir, I am just thinking at a much higher and deeper level than you are.  Tongue

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


View Profile
November 16, 2013, 12:40:24 AM

It's actually impossible for the money supply to always accumulate to any group.  Eventually the distribution must drop below a functional level for a medium of exchange, at which point a free market chooses something else less scarce to be the new medium of exchange.

Indeed that is my point. If you don't design Bitcoin to be distributive in supply and thus a medium-of-exchange, it will fail.

Bitcoin fucked up both aspects of the design.

1. It puts 98% of the coins in 2% of the hands.


Citations?  Fail.

2. It ends debasement, so the mining and thus the control over the coin supply ends up in a cartel.

Show your work, child.  How do you arrive at this conclusion?  Make sure that you explain how such a cartel could maintain loyalty among it's ranks when mining services are distributable with relatively low cost of market entry.

I have cited both and explained them both ad nauseum in the past few days. Just click my name and read the past few pages of my posts.

I don't have any time nor desire to repeat it ALL again for you. If you are not interested to know the truth, then go on your blissful ignorance way.

This ends here.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 16, 2013, 12:49:18 AM

It's actually impossible for the money supply to always accumulate to any group.  Eventually the distribution must drop below a functional level for a medium of exchange, at which point a free market chooses something else less scarce to be the new medium of exchange.

Indeed that is my point. If you don't design Bitcoin to be distributive in supply and thus a medium-of-exchange, it will fail.


I take it that you really don't know how bitcoin actually works, do you?

Quote
This ends here.

I'm surprised this lasted this long.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


View Profile
November 16, 2013, 12:56:48 AM

It's actually impossible for the money supply to always accumulate to any group.  Eventually the distribution must drop below a functional level for a medium of exchange, at which point a free market chooses something else less scarce to be the new medium of exchange.

Indeed that is my point. If you don't design Bitcoin to be distributive in supply and thus a medium-of-exchange, it will fail.


I take it that you really don't know how bitcoin actually works, do you?

Haha. You don't know who I am. Very funny. That is like telling the President he has never run the country. Wait I will get an embarrassing link for you.

I will grant you this. Money is not always a debt, but that is just semantic weasel words, because it is always compatible with debt. Hard money that presumes that money and debt are orthogonal (as you claim) has never been a reality. I've presented the logic upthread. You have not refuted it.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


View Profile
November 16, 2013, 01:04:03 AM

Professor MoonShadow, read this and weep.

98% of humanity won't have any bitcoins when it enters a bubble and this is a problem, since these are already the laggards, and by buying at the bubble, they make their situation worse, not better. Any thoughts?

Have you seen dukong's bitcoin ranking search? http://btc.ondn.net/search

The current blockchain holdings by address yield this distribution ....

Code:
Balance        Rank
1 BTC       195,629
10 BTC       91,885
100 BTC      10,128
1,000 BTC     1,127
10,000 BTC       95
100,000 BTC       3

Total     2,062,380



Bitcoin fucked up both aspects of the design.

1. It puts 98% of the coins in 2% of the hands.


Citations?  Fail.


It's actually impossible for the money supply to always accumulate to any group.  Eventually the distribution must drop below a functional level for a medium of exchange, at which point a free market chooses something else less scarce to be the new medium of exchange.

Indeed that is my point. If you don't design Bitcoin to be distributive in supply and thus a medium-of-exchange, it will fail.


I take it that you really don't know how bitcoin actually works, do you?

Haha. You don't know who I am. Very funny. That is like telling the President he has never run the country. Wait I will get an embarrassing link for you.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000



View Profile
November 16, 2013, 01:04:19 AM

It's actually impossible for the money supply to always accumulate to any group.  Eventually the distribution must drop below a functional level for a medium of exchange, at which point a free market chooses something else less scarce to be the new medium of exchange.

Indeed that is my point. If you don't design Bitcoin to be distributive in supply and thus a medium-of-exchange, it will fail.


I take it that you really don't know how bitcoin actually works, do you?

Haha. You don't know who I am. Very funny. That is like telling the President he has never run the country. Wait I will get an embarrassing link for you.


Oh, this is going to be fun...

Quote

I will grant you this. Money is not always a debt, but that is just semantic weasel words, because it is always compatible with debt. Hard money that presumes that money and debt are orthogonal (as you claim) has never been a reality.


I've made no such claim.

Quote

 I've presented the logic upthread. You have not refuted it.

I don't have to, really.  You're here trying to argue (prove) a negative.  It can never happen.  I don't have to disprove your premise, your premise is false on it's face.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence coop