Re: Bye bye bitcoin (Split: Morality of Bitcoin vs. Fiat Discussion)

[molecular]

My main issue with bitcoin is the immorality of it. Explained simply: When my government issues new money, those money are used to run schools, build roads, provide health care , etc. So fiat money has some moral basis. When you buy bitcoins, some people get rich from that, nothing else.

Those "money" are not issued. The value is stolen from everyone else.

You are assuming that the government actions are always good for the people. They are not, only for some.

Printing money is theft and therefore fiat money is inherently immoral.

EDIT: just noticed this has been answered about 20 times way better than I just did.

[1714932472]

1714932472

[1714932472]

1714932472

[molecular]

The current block chain is about 12.5GB and it zips down to 8.74GB (a 30% savings).

There are 7B people (1-5 transactions/day buying cigarettes, dinner .. ) ... 1 transaction is about 0.5 kB ...
= looks like when bitcoin will worth $200k/BTC then we will need 20 TB/day

When/if that happens, 20TB will cost a few cents.

bits, not cents.

[Odalv]

The current block chain is about 12.5GB and it zips down to 8.74GB (a 30% savings).

There are 7B people (1-5 transactions/day buying cigarettes, dinner .. ) ... 1 transaction is about 0.5 kB ...
= looks like when bitcoin will worth $200k/BTC then we will need 20 TB/day

yes I know :-) , we will have few layers on top of the bitcoin protocol and no one will have to archive 20 TB/DAY :-)
... but we do not have it today :-)

[User705]

Why do a lot of people keep wanting bitcoin to work for buying small mundane things?  It's wealth storage, security, ease of transfer.  What about current monetary systems makes you want to use bitcoins for coffee.  You will never have your entire life in BTC.  That's silly.  There's investments, real estate ownership, heck even works of art so use bitcoin for what it's good at because it certainly isn't good at buying coffee since you can't trust 0-conf anyways.

[wachtwoord]

When 20TB per day is needed it will probably be possible. Don't try to solve problems that haven't occurred yet. Just-in-time solutions are often best!

[thezerg]

Why do a lot of people keep wanting bitcoin to work for buying small mundane things?  It's wealth storage, security, ease of transfer.  What about current monetary systems makes you want to use bitcoins for coffee.  You will never have your entire life in BTC.  That's silly.  There's investments, real estate ownership, heck even works of art so use bitcoin for what it's good at because it certainly isn't good at buying coffee since you can't trust 0-conf anyways.

We want to access any web page without ads by just pushing 1 satoshi or whatever at the page as part of the http get request.

[wachtwoord]

Printing money is theft and therefore fiat money is inherently immoral.

Printing money is theft and therefore fiat money is inherently immoral.

Printing money is theft and therefore fiat money is inherently immoral.

This cannot be repeated enough. It's the biggest scam on Earth and it's hidden in plain sight!

[johnyj]

From time to time when some one saying bye bye, it is due for a rally

If I have one piece of gold, I can print a note that is backed by this piece of gold, this is not theft. But as long as the note is circulating, I must keep the gold, because it can come back to me anytime to redeem the gold. (And I have to destroy the note after I give out the gold, since now they don't have any value backing them anymore)

If I am going to make a product in future, I can print a note that is backed by this product, this is not theft either. But after the note started to circulate, I must make this product ready in time. Sooner or later the note will come back to me to redeem the product

However, the central bank today issue money without gold or a product in future as backing, they just print lots of notes and use those notes to purchase government bonds and assets, that is pure robbery and extremely immoral

[superresistant]

Printing money is theft and therefore fiat money is inherently immoral.

Printing money is theft and therefore fiat money is inherently immoral.

Printing money is theft and therefore fiat money is inherently immoral.

This cannot be repeated enough. It's the biggest scam on Earth and it's hidden in plain sight!

True

True

True

[qwk]

Printing money is theft and therefore fiat money is inherently immoral.

This cannot be repeated enough. It's the biggest scam on Earth and it's hidden in plain sight!

Repetition does not make a false statement true.
Following your logic, if I buy a TV set and the producer makes just one more unit, you consider that act "theft".

In common usage, theft is the taking of another person's property without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it.

[wachtwoord]

Printing money is theft and therefore fiat money is inherently immoral.

This cannot be repeated enough. It's the biggest scam on Earth and it's hidden in plain sight!

Repetition does not make a false statement true.
Following your logic, if I buy a TV set and the producer makes just one more unit, you consider that act "theft".

In common usage, theft is the taking of another person's property without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it.

For something which represents no value or utility whatsoever besides its scarcity (e.g. fiat money and Bitcoin) making more of it IS theft as it effectively reduces the only benefit it has. This is not true for a tv set which does have utility.

Fiat currency, unbacked by some commodity with utility/value, is the most silly thing ever. A $10 note means the government (Yes the FED is part of your government, whether they agree or not) owes you $10, but the government gets to decide what the actual value of that $10 is because they are the only ones with the power to do so. So they leverage this power by going into debt and devalue the unit ($) to reduce this debt. This is a process they can continue indefinitely and it's one of the biggest taxes around.

Yes, that is theft.

[David Rabahy]

Following your logic, if I buy a TV set and the producer makes just one more unit, you consider that act "theft".

In common usage, theft is the taking of another person's property without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it.

As you obviously know, the difference between a TV set and money is the TV itself *is* the property and money is just a note.  Steal either from me and I consider it wrong.  Producing additional TVs creates no burden on me per se.  Producing additional notes dilutes the value of mine.  This is trivial to understand and it is disingenuous to deny it.

If you play poker with someone and they put a note into the pot indicating they owe the bearer some amount, e.g. 1 of 10 chickens he owns.  If you win the pot then you expect to be able to collect sometime soon.  If enough of these notes end up in circulation then eventually it will exceed the 10 chickens; not everyone can collect and at best someone will get less than one whole live chicken.  Every new note the jerk writes dilutes your original note.  Now you'll make some noise about how the guy could just go get some more chickens to payoff the notes.  Is it stealing?  One wonders how it will go when he stands for final judgment.  Long before that folks will wise up and stop playing poker with him.

[wachtwoord]

The comparison with the guy with the chickens is actually still to rosy. Change the situation a be that he doesn't actually own any chickens and it will resemble the real situation more closely.

[David Rabahy]

The US federal government does have considerable chickens, er, assets and ability to collect more.  It is misrepresentative to imply less.

As we begin to play less poker with their notes, where do we find better ones?

Physical gold is a royal pain to play with; weight, volume, poor divisibility, etc., and besides which gold should be used for what it is best at, jewelry, electronics, etc.

[BitPappa]

What is the goal of starting this thread?

[AU]

My last bitcoin finally sold! It's a relief. Bitcoin is doomed to fail. It has a price, but it has no value. It has made a few people rich, but most people shall loose. A currency? It is only speculation and nothing more. Bitcoin has not and will not become a real medium for exchange. What remains for bitcoin now is the large holders to sell out their coins, but in a tempo that does not crash the 'market'. It will be interesting to see how bitcoin's decline plays out. Good luck, either buying or selling, but if you do the former, you need it most.

someone lost out big time on the swings lol

[Melbustus]

Printing money is theft and therefore fiat money is inherently immoral.

This cannot be repeated enough. It's the biggest scam on Earth and it's hidden in plain sight!

Repetition does not make a false statement true.
Following your logic, if I buy a TV set and the producer makes just one more unit, you consider that act "theft".

The underlying issue (which molecular and wachtwoord probably should've noted explicitly, since you apparently missed it) is that citizens are forced, through threat of prison (ie, violence), to use currency that gets debased. If that were not the case, there wouldn't be anything immoral about it, and it would be analogous to a company, whose stock you own, issuing more shares.

But we're forced to use these currencies through the requirement that we pay taxes in them (and other legal tender laws), so when we get diluted, we lose value/property. This is immoral because we're forced to use such currencies without explicit consent or choice, and the entities forcing us to do so intend to deprive us of the value of that asset through dilution. That they may think they're doing a net-good via said dilution is irrelevant; if someone takes your TV at gunpoint because it's "better for you" to not have a TV, that's still theft.

I'll re-iterate your definition of theft so you can cross-check it against the above:

In common usage, theft is the taking of another person's property without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it.

[wachtwoord]

The US federal government does have considerable chickens, er, assets and ability to collect more.  It is misrepresentative to imply less.

Sure they do! Holding a Dollar note does NOT give me a claim to any of that however

[David Rabahy]

Sure they do! Holding a Dollar note does NOT give me a claim to any of that however

Ah, got it.

[tarmi]

Sure they do! Holding a Dollar note does NOT give me a claim to any of that however

you can say that for bitcoin too.