Debt and Crypto?

[WaffleMaster]

I was wondering what everybody's thoughts were on issuing debt based on cryptocurrency. Debt is an extremely important factor for economies to grow. In a simple example, very few people would actually be able to purchase a house without debt. If you can't purchase large cost items like cars and houses, to name a few, the economy will literally collapse. Not to mention that transportation would become a very big problem. There's more examples to be made for starting businesses and many more but I won't discuss that in my original post.

Cryptocurrency is not inherently a debt instrument and cannot simply be "printed" or issued past its limit. I know a lot of people here feel that banks should die and banks are evil, but realistically I don't see how an economy can survive without debt instruments and issuers. If Bitcoin does replace all currency, does this mean that banks will collapse, or issue their own cryptocurrency to 'lend coins' to people who would like to make a big purchase and pay it off over time? Would it even be possible to pay interest back on a large scale if a coin has a finite supply? If there is 21 million Bitcoin in debt lent out and circulating, how could there possibly be a way to collect more than that by the bank. Would multiple cryptocurrencies solve a problem like that, or would it mean that the debt just gets pushed off onto some other coin and then also onto another infinitely?

I love Bitcoin and all this technology, however I have not theorized a way in which it can completely rework debt instruments and the institutions that supply them. IE: Banks.

Would love to have a discussion going on this topic. I have pretty limited economic logic!

[pereira4]

I always saw Bitcoin like a gold alternative but better, since you can carry it and move it around without being stopped and put to prison on every border if you tried to escape your collapsing government.

As far as debt goes, technically it's possible via payment channels. Just like on Poloniex people ask for coins to get loans, you put them there and they pay you back with an interest, but done right, decentralized with payment channels. I think the lightning network will make it possible to make passive income by decentralized loans. Of course im not sure how that would work in practice since there must be some kind of collateral but we'll see.

What has caused the massive collapses has been uncontrollable debt, they print too much money, and the debt never stops growing, at some point it becomes a bit of a joke. Having a finite supply doesn't mean there isn't people out there willing to put their bitcoins somewhere so people can get loans. There could be not enough offer for people wanting to get loans tho, this is all very difficult for me to theorize since I don't know how it would work in practice.

In any case, other cryptos could be delivered for that, the challenge is how to do it in a decentralized way.

[hase0278]

I was wondering what everybody's thoughts were on issuing debt based on cryptocurrency. Debt is an extremely important factor for economies to grow. In a simple example, very few people would actually be able to purchase a house without debt. If you can't purchase large cost items like cars and houses, to name a few, the economy will literally collapse. Not to mention that transportation would become a very big problem. There's more examples to be made for starting businesses and many more but I won't discuss that in my original post.

Cryptocurrency is not inherently a debt instrument and cannot simply be "printed" or issued past its limit. I know a lot of people here feel that banks should die and banks are evil, but realistically I don't see how an economy can survive without debt instruments and issuers. If Bitcoin does replace all currency, does this mean that banks will collapse, or issue their own cryptocurrency to 'lend coins' to people who would like to make a big purchase and pay it off over time? Would it even be possible to pay interest back on a large scale if a coin has a finite supply? If there is 21 million Bitcoin in debt lent out and circulating, how could there possibly be a way to collect more than that by the bank. Would multiple cryptocurrencies solve a problem like that, or would it mean that the debt just gets pushed off onto some other coin and then also onto another infinitely?

I love Bitcoin and all this technology, however I have not theorized a way in which it can completely rework debt instruments and the institutions that supply them. IE: Banks.

Would love to have a discussion going on this topic. I have pretty limited economic logic!

About the debt problem people can use it to pay interest on a large scale using the satoshi as unit. If 1 satoshi is equals to 1$, It would be possible to pay large scale interest using btc and lending is not an issue because it can also be done using btc. Another roundabout solution to this problem is the creation of a new coin dedicated to it, but the coin itself might not be decentralized.

[richardsNY]

I see debt as a poison that slowly but surely has become a tool that allows the upper layer to suppress the lower class of the society. We're living in a system that's purely based on debt, and build up with debt. Central banks keep printing money like it's nothing, just to keep the economy going. People are able to take out loans and mortgages that don't represent their own financial capabilities, which basically means that financial institutions are willingly putting people into debt. I am anti any form of debt, and handle the main principle being that if you don't have the money for it, don't buy it.

Technically there are certain ways to allow whatever entity to issue certain crypto tokens endlessly, just like central banks are able to print money, but that doesn't change anything from the fact that you're not improving anything. The only thing you're doing is relocate the problem and give it a different name. Nah, debt in whatever form of shape is poison.

[Similificator]

I was wondering what everybody's thoughts were on issuing debt based on cryptocurrency. Debt is an extremely important factor for economies to grow. In a simple example, very few people would actually be able to purchase a house without debt. If you can't purchase large cost items like cars and houses, to name a few, the economy will literally collapse. Not to mention that transportation would become a very big problem. There's more examples to be made for starting businesses and many more but I won't discuss that in my original post.

Cryptocurrency is not inherently a debt instrument and cannot simply be "printed" or issued past its limit. I know a lot of people here feel that banks should die and banks are evil, but realistically I don't see how an economy can survive without debt instruments and issuers. If Bitcoin does replace all currency, does this mean that banks will collapse, or issue their own cryptocurrency to 'lend coins' to people who would like to make a big purchase and pay it off over time? Would it even be possible to pay interest back on a large scale if a coin has a finite supply? If there is 21 million Bitcoin in debt lent out and circulating, how could there possibly be a way to collect more than that by the bank. Would multiple cryptocurrencies solve a problem like that, or would it mean that the debt just gets pushed off onto some other coin and then also onto another infinitely?

I love Bitcoin and all this technology, however I have not theorized a way in which it can completely rework debt instruments and the institutions that supply them. IE: Banks.

Would love to have a discussion going on this topic. I have pretty limited economic logic!

You know what op, people who are hating on banks and want it to be gone are either hypocrites or delusional. I have said this because we clearly cannot survive as an economy without the banks that most of the people here wants to be gone immediately. These type of people mostly think only of what they think will be a good thing to happen without even thinking about what will be the consequences because they are either close minded people or just too lazy to find out more about how things are connected with each other. Don't get me wrong, I too hate the banks and the way they force into us the overly outdated monetary system we currently have today. Clearly, they still really hate the idea that they cannot control and benefit from the existence of crypto currencies. But even stating so, I wouldn't want them to be gone just yet(not till issues that the cryptos are currently experiencing are already taken cared of).

Great post by the way op, you deserve a merit so imma give you one.

[FrueGreads]

I understand what you are saying and I do agree with you, but I don't think bitcoin or any other crypto will ever shut down banks entirely. Maybe our economy will change considerably in the future, but I think that debt will always be a part of it, because of the points you've made. I don't see crypto as a replacement for fiat, and I think countries will always have their own currencies. That doesn't mean that bitcoin can exist as well, and facilitate international transactions, act as a safe store of value, where your economies will be safe even if your country faces problems, because BTC will not lose it's value (just like gold). It will have the advantage of being easy to spend, and store, and this is one key point that favors BTC over gold. It's also a lot less centralized, and easy to acquire than gold. So basically I think people will still use fiat, but will now have another option to keep their economies safe, and to transact money with other persons, but people will always use fiat as well, or some other thing that is issued and controlled by a country.

[shursight]

I always saw Bitcoin like a gold alternative but better, since you can carry it and move it around without being stopped and put to prison on every border if you tried to escape your collapsing government.

An "alternative"?

So you are saying that at one point, bitcoin will end with all this fake debt that all the countries are having right now? Well.. You clearly do not understand the concept of Debt.

[Byatt]

Most of the banks, multi purpose cooperative, lending company, government program that let owed people like house and lot, vehicles, business capital, etc. helped and gave an opportunity to get what they want or they dreamed of.  Some of them are maybe good but some of them will stuck on you to pay back forever like the house and lot which double or triples the original price.  It sucks paying those bills for the rest of your life.  And now if we talk about crypto if you are a wise investor you have to learn though many strategy how you can minimize the lifestyle you may have.  Invest and pull out the profit and its up to you to decide the rest.  

[BitHodler]

Bitcoin should stimulate actual ownership of assets, not enhance debt in any way, and I am glad that it doesn't. It's obvious that banks aren't going anywhere, but that doesn't mean we should be supportive of them.

In the same way, we shouldn't be supportive of debt as stimulating factor allowing the economy to grow on valse hope and unlimited value creation. I like the difference in thinking that Bitcoin brought to the world.

I also like the fact that you can do whatever you want as person. If you think that the current way of growing an economy is the way to move forward and sustainable in the very long term, then you're free to think so.

I am however differentiating myself by following a different path, away from what I believe isn't right.

[odolvlobo]

I was wondering what everybody's thoughts were on issuing debt based on cryptocurrency. Debt is an extremely important factor for economies to grow. In a simple example, very few people would actually be able to purchase a house without debt. If you can't purchase large cost items like cars and houses, to name a few, the economy will literally collapse. Not to mention that transportation would become a very big problem. There's more examples to be made for starting businesses and many more but I won't discuss that in my original post.

Cryptocurrency is not inherently a debt instrument and cannot simply be "printed" or issued past its limit. I know a lot of people here feel that banks should die and banks are evil, but realistically I don't see how an economy can survive without debt instruments and issuers. If Bitcoin does replace all currency, does this mean that banks will collapse, or issue their own cryptocurrency to 'lend coins' to people who would like to make a big purchase and pay it off over time? Would it even be possible to pay interest back on a large scale if a coin has a finite supply? If there is 21 million Bitcoin in debt lent out and circulating, how could there possibly be a way to collect more than that by the bank. Would multiple cryptocurrencies solve a problem like that, or would it mean that the debt just gets pushed off onto some other coin and then also onto another infinitely?

There is no reason why bitcoins cannot be loaned. I have loaned bitcoins to people. It doesn't seem impossible to me.

The argument that "if all 21 million bitcoins were loaned, it would not be possible to pay interest" doesn't make sense because the loaned bitcoins are not consumed or locked down and loans and interest are repaid over time.

Also, some people believe that it is impossible to have fractional reserve banking with Bitcoin, but I don't see why not. I fully expect to see FRB with bitcoins in the future.

[Hydrogen]

The "debt is good" argument fuels state run wealth distribution programs which give undue privilege to the wealthy at the expense of poor to middle class income bracket taxpayers. The european union and united states being trillions in debt is largely due to taxpayer wealth being redistributed to elitist institutions like northrop grumman under a guise of "serving the public good"(example F-35 with massive, uncontrolled, cost overruns / extremely bloated cost). Large corporations like google have many of their operations subsidized by the state and receive unfair tax cuts which prevent small businesses from being competitive in the same markets. "Debt is good" as it allows one percenters to shovel a greater proportion of poor to middle class wealth into their own pockets.

"Debt is good" also empowers high risk investments which caused the 2008 economic crisis. Repealing glass steagall which separated investment banking from commercial banking led to a less stable economy.

Another issue with "debt is good" involves it being an oversimplification in absolutist terms. Of course looking at the USA being $21 trillion in debt, I don't think anyone would say that's an example of debt being a good thing. So of course, while debt might benefit the economy and elevate living standards under some circumstances, it doesn't justify the extreme commitment to rampant and uncontrolled consumerism which defines the "debt is good" perspective.

Crypto currently isn't a good framework for loans. It lacks the creditchex, identity confirming, background check and debt collection infrastructure which banks and loan institutions rely upon to make running their business viable.

[alia]

Crypto is already seen as a bubble and "not real money" by large sections of society. Allowing "debt tokens" to be printed, and watching the default rates inevitably skyrocket, would only further reduce legitimacy in crypto. The debt token would be associated with BTC/ETH and such. This is a very, very bad idea. As they say, only invest what you're willing to lose - a debt token would encourage the exact opposite.

[Mometaskers]

Forgive my limited economic knowledge but isn't bitcoin simply just like gold? Even if there is a limited amount of it in circulation, isn't it the value that is being lent out and the value increases as the economy expands? So say, the entire world has switched to bitcoin, isn't it unlikely to have all that BTC21M in debt?

I see debt as a poison that slowly but surely has become a tool that allows the upper layer to suppress the lower class of the society. We're living in a system that's purely based on debt, and build up with debt. Central banks keep printing money like it's nothing, just to keep the economy going. People are able to take out loans and mortgages that don't represent their own financial capabilities, which basically means that financial institutions are willingly putting people into debt. I am anti any form of debt, and handle the main principle being that if you don't have the money for it, don't buy it.

Technically there are certain ways to allow whatever entity to issue certain crypto tokens endlessly, just like central banks are able to print money, but that doesn't change anything from the fact that you're not improving anything. The only thing you're doing is relocate the problem and give it a different name. Nah, debt in whatever form of shape is poison.

We have a saying in our family that debt is only bad if it's bad debt, basically anything that don't make a profit. It's impossible to fund everything on your own and if people are to lend you money, they're going to ask for something in return, whether that be interest or shares (if you are building a company). Even investors in crowdfunding would ask for something extra to make it worth the risk.

[Jlimao28]

I cannot imagine an economy without debt.
In a narrow scale, debt used by individual when there is a financial problem. Loans survive individual and sometimes, we loan because we have to buy something in a rush.
In a large scale, the debt is used when there is financial crisis. Usually, if there is a catastrophic event happened in a state or country. It is also used of the country to increase the future growth of the economy.
Yet there is an advantage in debt, we don't deny that too much debt of an individual or the whole economy make is bad. High debts will lead to a great crash of an economy. It may not also make the economic development of a country but it might goes to inflation and citizens will suffer much of it.
In conclusion, debt may be a boon and bane to the economy. It may upon the uses of debt and how it will be return. In my case, I prefer to have loans when I will invest in something but I will invest with assurance that I will pay  my debt. It is hard to take risk when you did not know what will be the result.

[alyssa85]

Cryptocurrency is not inherently a debt instrument and cannot simply be "printed" or issued past its limit.

Debt doesn't depend on printing - it depends on fractional reserve lending.

And of course you can lend without fractional reserves if you want - just lend what you have deposited, rather than a multiple of deposits as in the banking system.

[jaysabi]

I always saw Bitcoin like a gold alternative but better, since you can carry it and move it around without being stopped and put to prison on every border if you tried to escape your collapsing government.

As far as debt goes, technically it's possible via payment channels. Just like on Poloniex people ask for coins to get loans, you put them there and they pay you back with an interest, but done right, decentralized with payment channels. I think the lightning network will make it possible to make passive income by decentralized loans. Of course im not sure how that would work in practice since there must be some kind of collateral but we'll see.

What has caused the massive collapses has been uncontrollable debt, they print too much money, and the debt never stops growing, at some point it becomes a bit of a joke. Having a finite supply doesn't mean there isn't people out there willing to put their bitcoins somewhere so people can get loans. There could be not enough offer for people wanting to get loans tho, this is all very difficult for me to theorize since I don't know how it would work in practice.

In any case, other cryptos could be delivered for that, the challenge is how to do it in a decentralized way.

Gold wasn't a suitable currency instrument either, which is why the whole world has abandoned gold-based currency. It limits economic growth because it can't be produced at will. Currency (money) is just a representation of value that exists in the world (value = goods/services) so the worth of money is how much money exists divided by how much value exists. When value increases faster than the money supply, you have deflation (money increasing in value) and when the money supply increases faster than value, you have inflation (money decreasing in value). The trick is to marry the currency growth rate and economic expansion so money stays mostly stable, and this is the job of the Fed. It cannot be accomplished with a decentralized, uncontrollable currency, which is why crypto is never going to replace fiat.

Economic growth depends on taking stored value (savings) and loaning it to someone who will create something new of value to repay the debt with interest. This is sustainable because the new thing of value increases the overall amount of value in the world, which did not exist previously, and justifies the increase of the money supply (the loan). A crypto-based system would inhibit this, and inhibit economic growth, because the money supply cannot be increased.

[Dudeperfect]

I appreciate the concept but this is too early to execute such kind of plans in my opinion. On the other hand, we must take into the consideration of the failed models like BTCJAM. Although it was a peer to peer lending site, their execution went wrong and since BTC is in the early stage, I am sceptical about the capacity of the implementation such concept even through the fork. However, if we can build something like this in the future then it will definitely be a path-breaking milestone for us.

[HereNow]

I am currently a little bit in debt to buy Cryptos.

Now as far as your question, Bitcoin will coexist with banks, it will not elimante them. As you said banks are needed for loans.

[odolvlobo]

Currency (money) is just a representation of value that exists in the world (value = goods/services) so the worth of money is how much money exists divided by how much value exists.

This seems so wrong that I can't believe anything else that you wrote. Basically, you are saying that there is money sitting around somewhere that represents the value of the house I bought. That can't be true.

[BillCoin]

Totally agree with you, some people think that all the banks do is to take your money and bitcoin is the angel, but people forgets that banks and regulation protect the crowd, with all the scams happen within the bitcoin network it would be impossible for it to receive a massive adoption without regulation, because innocent people will just lose their money.
I believe that it is going to be hard to maintanain a successful economy without part-reserve banks, and that's one of the reasons I believe it's going to be a disaster if bitcoin replaces fiat completely.