Bitcoin Forum
December 04, 2016, 06:02:19 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Wealth is unlimited.  (Read 9480 times)
IlbiStarz
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224


View Profile
July 06, 2011, 08:55:27 AM
 #81

Except for one minor problem.  Energy is not free and unlimited for us with our current technologies.  If we had limitless power, sure, absolutely.  Time of scarcity is over.

Until then, you are simply wrong.

Sure, it's scarce but with enough improvement we can get by with a fraction of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale




Energy consumption has been increasing exponentially since the dawn of man.

This is due to miners. LOL.

It's better to be pissed off, than to be pissed on.
BTC : 1UgM1rqL9mFtH4PHF8TgvAaceymaKmhmP         LTC : LgCGw2WrRphr94RYS1qXHj2PUuYrTap4vk
FC : 6jc9PEmqxpMSxydfepHtshE4f2jMom1dAJ
1480831339
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480831339

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480831339
Reply with quote  #2

1480831339
Report to moderator
1480831339
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480831339

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480831339
Reply with quote  #2

1480831339
Report to moderator
1480831339
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480831339

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480831339
Reply with quote  #2

1480831339
Report to moderator
Bitcoin addresses contain a checksum, so it is very unlikely that mistyping an address will cause you to lose money.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480831339
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480831339

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480831339
Reply with quote  #2

1480831339
Report to moderator
Aristotle
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56



View Profile
July 06, 2011, 09:41:22 AM
 #82

Remember that just 600 years ago the world was flat and mankind could not grasp the fact that the world was a spherical object. The laws of gravity, thermodynamics, and relativity have only been adopted very recently in terms of mankind's total existence. Their validity is only as good as mankind's current understanding. 75 years ago we did not know that if you break an atom a tremendous amount of energy would be released imagine what we might know in another 75 years

Past performance is not a guarantee of future results.

Brother, can you spare a Bitcoin? 18Xe5KqJhmgw5cTjosek2YwnqzG6tDWKNU
david4dev
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile WWW
July 06, 2011, 09:59:06 AM
 #83

Can someone please define wealth? Then it would be more clear whether wealth is limited or not.

Wallet Manager | 1NPxP8LMt22gjK5unW8W2gB9ruqyvytkpt
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 06, 2011, 10:12:44 AM
 #84

Here's the relevant one:

Economics :
a.all things that have a monetary or exchange value.
b.anything that has utility and is capable of being appropriated or exchanged.

Also: the state of being rich; prosperity; affluence: persons of wealth and standing.

Personally, I think Atlas should have set the pipe down, on this one. Scarcity is the foundation of economics.

The second definition is unlimited, because "the state of being rich" is subjective.
The first one, not so much.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
jgraham
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 140


<Pretentious and poorly thought out latin phrase>


View Profile
July 06, 2011, 03:33:18 PM
 #85

There are limits but we aren't limited by them.

lol
They say you can't move matter faster than the speed of light. However, you can move the space around an object as fast as you like.

    ^
    ^
    ^

Quote
There no coherent logic here. None.
It's actually a widely acclaimed possibility. We don't know shit about the universe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light
In what sense is space "moved" and in what sense is that FTL travel?

Or is it....

Quote from: atlas
I am ignorant.  I have an opinion but nothing behind it.

I'm rather good with Linux.  If you're having problems with your mining rig I'll help you out remotely for 0.05.  You can also propose a flat-rate for some particular task.  PM me for details.
westkybitcoins
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980

Firstbits: Compromised. Thanks, Android!


View Profile
July 06, 2011, 05:09:43 PM
 #86

One of my first introductions to economics was a book called "Unlimited Wealth" by Paul Zane Pilzer. Don't know that I'd call the guy the best economist ever, but the book was eye-opening, and helped spark an interest in the subject.

So when Atlas started this thread, I was pretty sure I knew where he was coming from. But I'm amazed at how quickly people started taking the title literally and began arguing the laws of thermodynamics. (Although I admit, Atlas stretching things to the point of discussing workarounds to the speed of light isn't helping much.)

I don't think it's difficult to see how humanity's wealth, reasonably defined*, can, given time, be increased with no limit that is relevant to us. The fact that only X pounds of a material exist on the planet doesn't condemn us to only be able to produce Y units of good from that material. Yes, things may happen that way, but a cap of Y units isn't a necessity. A simple shift in production methods may reduce waste and increase the number of units by 50%. A newly-engineered unit design may allow the units to be produced with a lighter structure (less material), doubling the number available. A future additive may even increase the unit's power for negligible cost and effort, so that one new unit can function as well as 4 old ones, for yet another effective increase in production, and a total effective production of 12Y units rather than Y. It is the intelligence and creativity of mankind that is the true limiting factor to humanity's wealth, far more than the material we see around us.

Those who disagree with this, and really think we can't continually increase wealth, somewhat confuse me. I have to wonder why those folks haven't simply jumped into politics to just grab as much power and wealth as they can for themselves and their descendants, and to loot and pillage as much as is socially acceptable. Because if the pie really is limited, then, pfft! Why not? If someone must be "the sucker", why let it be you?


*A reasonable definition would not be one that states wealth is simply a measure of the mass of physical material one owns. I would hope a little thought could show how one could have less of some substance, yet still be objectively wealthier than someone with more of it.

Bitcoin is the ultimate freedom test. It tells you who is giving lip service and who genuinely believes in it.
...
...
In the future, books that summarize the history of money will have a line that says, “and then came bitcoin.” It is the economic singularity. And we are living in it now. - Ryan Dickherber
...
...
ATTENTION BFL MINING NEWBS: Just got your Jalapenos in? Wondering how to get the most value for the least hassle? Give BitMinter a try! It's a smaller pool with a fair & low-fee payment method, lots of statistical feedback, and it's easier than EasyMiner! (Yes, we want your hashing power, but seriously, it IS the easiest pool to use! Sign up in seconds to try it!)
...
...
The idea that deflation causes hoarding (to any problematic degree) is a lie used to justify theft of value from your savings.
david4dev
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile WWW
July 06, 2011, 06:39:25 PM
 #87

So I think most of us are actually agreeing here without realising it  Grin .

Wealth, if defined as a physical measure is limited because our natural resources are limited.

If it is defined more loosely as a definition of well being, it is not limited.

Wallet Manager | 1NPxP8LMt22gjK5unW8W2gB9ruqyvytkpt
Joise
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 30


View Profile
July 06, 2011, 11:09:19 PM
 #88

Except for one minor problem.  Energy is not free and unlimited for us with our current technologies.  If we had limitless power, sure, absolutely.  Time of scarcity is over.

Until then, you are simply wrong.


This is stupid. We never run out of resources in a free market system. Why? The price system prevents that. What happens is when supply gets low, prices start to go up, and people use less of it. What happens when oil supply becomes low? Alternative energy sources start to become viable.

That's as wrong as saying that in a free market system, there can't be famine.

What's dangerous with energy in general and oil reserves in particular is that the time needed to adapt may be MUCH shorter than the life span of such things as houses, cars, motorways and so on. We are pretty much bounded to a fossile-driven economy with a base that could largely disappear within a decade.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_Oil

http://europe.theoildrum.com/


So, no.  The next time energy prices spike, you're not going to see people rolling up their sleeves to make anything more efficient.  You're going to see wars and people dying.  You're going to see a forced drop in consumption and living standards.  In fact you're probably going to see this pretty soon actually, since absolutely nothing has been done to "increase efficiency" since the last time energy prices spiked, except for a bunch of taxpayer theft and subsidized waste.

That's true also. We had an energy price spike in 2009. At the same time there was a collapse of the american mortgage market. This can surely attributed to the fact that the whole american economy is debt-driven.

But there is another fact: The higher prices for gasoline becomes, the less money have people to spend for paying mortgage and other goods. The further away the houses are from workplaces, the more pronounced is this effect.

Actually, prices for houses fell much more for the ones far away from the urban centres. One can surely say that the spike in energy prices has contributed to the financial crisis.

There's another point: Oil production requires immense amounts of capital and is bound to cheap credit.
Oil production did not rise in the last five years, in spite of rising global demand.

You can think of the current industrial system as a kind of organism. It lives from cheap oil, but it is also required to sustain oil production. It may be capable to adapt, but not quickly.

If you take a lion and the choke its common carotid artery, you don't get a lion adapted to less oxygen in the blood. You get a dead lion, assumed you survive the fight.

ronwan
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 25


21 Million is enough.


View Profile
July 07, 2011, 04:15:23 AM
 #89

Except for one minor problem.  Energy is not free and unlimited for us with our current technologies.  If we had limitless power, sure, absolutely.  Time of scarcity is over.

Until then, you are simply wrong.


This is stupid. We never run out of resources in a free market system. Why? The price system prevents that. What happens is when supply gets low, prices start to go up, and people use less of it. What happens when oil supply becomes low? Alternative energy sources start to become viable.

Pretty much right on, I would recommend checking out the late economist Julian Simon on YouTube, he and others have found that the worlds is the opposite as you may think.  The more resources we use the more resources we get.  When Whale oil for lamps got scarce the switch to Kerosene opened of the door for gasoline, cars, plastics. Scarcity causes natural conservation and the search for alternatives, which in turn causes innovations and a rising standard of living.

Not as good as gold, BETTER.
EconomicOracle
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 71

I can predict the future! Bitcoin will success!!!!


View Profile
July 10, 2011, 05:54:01 AM
 #90

I agree with every single post in this thread.

GOOOOOOOOOOO BITCOINS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Edit: Oops. Just fixed a typo. It should be GO (like GO TEAM!) and not GOOB
Edit2: Just checked the dictionary and goob is not a word
david4dev
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile WWW
July 10, 2011, 11:04:35 AM
 #91

I agree with every single post in this thread.

No you don't.  Grin

Wallet Manager | 1NPxP8LMt22gjK5unW8W2gB9ruqyvytkpt
muad_dib
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


View Profile
July 10, 2011, 12:07:10 PM
 #92

Discussing such topics on the internet it is very difficult, as it requires a much higher understanding of economics than what the average internet user has.

Also a statement like: "Wealth is unlimited" is very bold. I would rephrase it as "Is wealth unlimited?"

This is a question which the average businessman doesn't bother with, as it seems pointless. In fact it is not originated by businessmen but by theologists. This question arise from different interpretation of the Bible.

Back in the XV century if you were a catholic, your answer to this question were NO. For you wealth is limited and you must take all actions to get in possession of it. Wealth which is most appreciated in the form of gold.

This ultimately lead to a good thing, the discovery of the Americas, and a bad thing, the spoilage of all the available gold, by any mean necessary. This destroyed the spanish superpower, as it driven inflation to the sky, ruining the economy.


Instead if you were a British Christian, your answer were YES. For you wealth is unlimited and we need to find new ways to extract it from existing goods. This ultimately lead to the industrial revolution, paid with the death of too many, but driving the human being in a new era.



Since Catholics lost the medieval economy war, now the word follow mostly the british christian line of thought, especially in the US.

billyjoeallen
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 966


Hide your women


View Profile WWW
July 10, 2011, 02:11:38 PM
 #93

Can someone please define wealth? Then it would be more clear whether wealth is limited or not.

Wealth is resources (natural or otherwise) in a form fit for human use.

insert coin here:
1Ctd7Na8qE7btyueEshAJF5C7ZqFWH11Wc

Open an exchange account at CampBX: options, lowest commissions, and best security
https://campbx.com/register.php?r=0Y7YxohTV0B
Fakeman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154



View Profile
July 10, 2011, 04:33:39 PM
 #94

Wealth is a pretty open-ended concept so sure it's unlimited in certain senses, but that doesn't mean for example that an unlimited number of people can live comfortably on earth at the same time. But yeah, there's no limit to how much (subjective) value you can add to a starting material with the right equipment and expertise. That value can be fleeting though, your $10,000 carbon fiber bicycle or $1M/kg wonder drug basically become worthless if burned in a fire. Or, especially in the absence of patent protections, the resale value of those things could be greatly diminished without their destruction if someone comes along and produces something that works just as well or better for 1/10 or 1/100 of the price you paid. Neither the bicycle nor the wonder drug is really intended to store long-term value though necessarily, so it should be no particular surprise if they don't.

16wEsax3GGvJmjiXCMQUWeHdgyDG5DXa2W
Confucius
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 46


Confucius says... Our Bitcoin movement is historic


View Profile
July 11, 2011, 02:17:02 AM
 #95

What about when we reach The Singularity? When technology advances at an exponentially infinite speed that it moves too fast for humans (without genetic modification) to comprehend.
Indeed, this would be a time where there would be more than enough abundance for every being to potentially be as wealthy as the next - No pie, unlimited wealth.

As stated, wealth is subjective.

Humans simply do not understand enough of the universe to conclude what is limited and what is not.
Imagine if you will, parallel universes. Or just about any other theorized possibilities, that work in our favor.  
The more we know, the more we realize how much we don't know

Literally, entire novels could/have(?) been written by philosophers on the subject of wealth.

Bitcoin - the easiest way to give babes monetary compliments from across the globe
Aristotle
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56



View Profile
July 11, 2011, 06:41:18 AM
 #96

What about when we reach The Singularity?

See I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream.  Well, only if you want to read a good sci-fi short-story.

We have just as much as a chance of reaching "The Singularity" as we have of reaching another Dark Age, IMO.  We don't know enough about parallel universes, extra dimensions, AI, etc. to know what is, and isn't possible yet.  I just prefer to take the most pessimistic stance, so I'm not disappointed Smiley

Brother, can you spare a Bitcoin? 18Xe5KqJhmgw5cTjosek2YwnqzG6tDWKNU
whenhowwho
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 96



View Profile
July 11, 2011, 07:04:34 AM
 #97

hmm now we need a socrates and a plato. Sorry couldnt resist

1HUy7T9SyNLTJCVX3p8KzftApYdWgcsRqD
Fakeman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154



View Profile
July 11, 2011, 02:52:05 PM
 #98

The original topic is a bit dull because nobody really seems to disagree with it. It's like arguing that happiness is unlimited, sure it is but so what? How about this, a lot of economic activity is centered around the destruction of wealth. Cars are constantly damaged and destroyed in collisions (not to mention the associated medical costs), household items are designed to fail so they will be discarded and replaced, and electronic devices rapidly become obsolete and are discarded before they break in many cases. The result is not lasting wealth, but a population with huge debts surrounded by a lot of garbage.

16wEsax3GGvJmjiXCMQUWeHdgyDG5DXa2W
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 11, 2011, 05:39:35 PM
 #99

household items are designed to fail so they will be discarded and replaced, and electronic devices rapidly become obsolete and are discarded before they break in many cases. The result is not lasting wealth, but a population with huge debts surrounded by a lot of garbage.

Car accidents are just that: Accidents. If you know a way to prevent accidents before they happen, get to work, you'll be rich in no time.

As to the rest, I have household appliances I've had for years. Some, I've never had to replace. Also, have you considered how much more it might cost to create equipment that never breaks down? Electronics are becoming obsolete because technology is advancing. So, either you are advocating a reduction in progress, or that we should stop overengineering our computers so much. (so they break down sooner)

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Fakeman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154



View Profile
July 11, 2011, 07:09:51 PM
 #100

household items are designed to fail so they will be discarded and replaced, and electronic devices rapidly become obsolete and are discarded before they break in many cases. The result is not lasting wealth, but a population with huge debts surrounded by a lot of garbage.

Car accidents are just that: Accidents. If you know a way to prevent accidents before they happen, get to work, you'll be rich in no time.

As to the rest, I have household appliances I've had for years. Some, I've never had to replace. Also, have you considered how much more it might cost to create equipment that never breaks down? Electronics are becoming obsolete because technology is advancing. So, either you are advocating a reduction in progress, or that we should stop overengineering our computers so much. (so they break down sooner)
I don't believe I've argued for either of those things. I've only given some examples where certain economic activities appear to depend on the destruction of wealth to some degree. My 10 year old Thinkpad has a working screen, keyboard and power supply etc, why can't I just swap out the motherboard like I would with a desktop computer and continue to use the parts that work just fine? It's not that it would cost the manufacturer more to use a modular design (in fact the opposite is probably true), but if they did I wouldn't have to buy a whole computer to get something current. If you know of some exception to this among laptop manufacturers I'm all ears.

The keypad on your microwave breaks so you can either pay a ridiculously inflated price for a replacement part thanks to a proprietary design, or just buy a new microwave even though the other parts of your old one probably work fine. Oddly though your $5 TV remote never seems to have that problem in spite of frequent use and extremely low manufacturing costs. Some things really are just designed to fail and it's not always because making something durable would cost more.

16wEsax3GGvJmjiXCMQUWeHdgyDG5DXa2W
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!