Economic Devastation

[thaaanos]

Now I see, so the interest rate increase and all those loan mongering whatever are just a way to own more shit right? before a collapse?

Yes.

They come out the winners no matter what happens. The bankers are always hedged.


If the economy goes on: They give out more loans (out of thin air) and get leveraged interest payments

If the economy collapses: They confiscate the assets from those that cant pay the debt, because they lost their jobs, and now the bank have real assets, which they can give in rent to the same person they stole from just so that he doesnt get in the street.


The same with bitcoin:  If bitcoin never goes mainstream (which I doubt) they will remain the elite

If bitcoin goes mainstream: They will quickly buy up bitcoin with their fictitious paper, and still remain the elite.



They will remain the elite.

Not so!

answer =
Public infrastructure on account managing and payment system + Banks only get to broker investment between credit seekers and investors (Do their real job: *risk assesment* ).
Have faith banks will not escape uberization, they are about to be disrupted ie P2P Lending

[1714784291]

1714784291

[1714784291]

1714784291

[1714784291]

1714784291

[1714784291]

1714784291

[RealBitcoin]

Not so!

answer =
Public infrastructure on account managing and payment system + Banks only get to broker investment between credit seekers and investors (Do their real job: *risk assesment* ).
Have faith banks will not escape uberization, they are about to be disrupted ie P2P Lending

Well they have an enormous advantage, they can lend you at lower rate because they just counterfeit the money.

If people were to lend their own capital then they will offer it at higher rates, making them uncompetitive.

Until people use fiat garbage, banks will have the upper hand, and the sheeps dont realize that fiat money is the root of evil.

[sidhujag]

In a capitalist environmemt, a business would find a need and fill it for a "cut".. Thr startup costs are too high to own entire inventory and tools so as a business they have to decide what the right amount of leverage is required or desired based on the profit margins of their product. Once the business grows you start to take middle men out or leave it based on how agile you want your process to be. Leasing increases flexibility while decreasing some profits but may let you pivot quicker going fwd. the banks are there because they have capability to leverage the heck out of the central bank and provide desired liquidity to businesses.. The banks have the most lucrative form of business models since it is fairly low risk high reward but it is a boys club and thats probably why they enjoy these benefits

This is not capitalism, because nobody , but the elite have capital.

This is debtism.  Global bank debt slaverism? Corporate oligopolism?

No it is because you can capitalize on a new idea if you wish, you dont need the bank but of you meed money they are there. The fact that they are a boys club is the problem we are trying to remove not with your fixed idea that everyone becomes a slave if they use a bank

[RealBitcoin]

In a capitalist environmemt, a business would find a need and fill it for a "cut".. Thr startup costs are too high to own entire inventory and tools so as a business they have to decide what the right amount of leverage is required or desired based on the profit margins of their product. Once the business grows you start to take middle men out or leave it based on how agile you want your process to be. Leasing increases flexibility while decreasing some profits but may let you pivot quicker going fwd. the banks are there because they have capability to leverage the heck out of the central bank and provide desired liquidity to businesses.. The banks have the most lucrative form of business models since it is fairly low risk high reward but it is a boys club and thats probably why they enjoy these benefits

This is not capitalism, because nobody , but the elite have capital.

This is debtism.  Global bank debt slaverism? Corporate oligopolism?

No it is because you can capitalize on a new idea if you wish, you dont need the bank but of you meed money they are there. The fact that they are a boys club is the problem we are trying to remove not with your fixed idea that everyone becomes a slave if they use a bank

But the chance of opportunity is practially 0 in this debtism society.

In capitalism everyone starts off equally, and if they need capital, they can raise it through some sort of funding.


Try raising now money to your business. The amount of regulation will kill it, that is why decentralized crowdfunding like NXT or others have been summoned into existence, to restore real capitalism, not this monstruous government-banker romance.

[TPTB_need_war]

Holy Grail of crypto design has been achieved. I have slayed Satoshi.

Forward we lurch to the Knowledge Age... here we go... come along for the ride...

[thaaanos]

Not so!

answer =
Public infrastructure on account managing and payment system + Banks only get to broker investment between credit seekers and investors (Do their real job: *risk assesment* ).
Have faith banks will not escape uberization, they are about to be disrupted ie P2P Lending

Well they have an enormous advantage, they can lend you at lower rate because they just counterfeit the money.

If people were to lend their own capital then they will offer it at higher rates, making them uncompetitive.

Until people use fiat garbage, banks will have the upper hand, and the sheeps dont realize that fiat money is the root of evil.

Not so imho p2plending can give better rates for both invstor and creditor as it cuts the middleman

[sidhujag]

In a capitalist environmemt, a business would find a need and fill it for a "cut".. Thr startup costs are too high to own entire inventory and tools so as a business they have to decide what the right amount of leverage is required or desired based on the profit margins of their product. Once the business grows you start to take middle men out or leave it based on how agile you want your process to be. Leasing increases flexibility while decreasing some profits but may let you pivot quicker going fwd. the banks are there because they have capability to leverage the heck out of the central bank and provide desired liquidity to businesses.. The banks have the most lucrative form of business models since it is fairly low risk high reward but it is a boys club and thats probably why they enjoy these benefits

This is not capitalism, because nobody , but the elite have capital.

This is debtism.  Global bank debt slaverism? Corporate oligopolism?

No it is because you can capitalize on a new idea if you wish, you dont need the bank but of you meed money they are there. The fact that they are a boys club is the problem we are trying to remove not with your fixed idea that everyone becomes a slave if they use a bank

But the chance of opportunity is practially 0 in this debtism society.

In capitalism everyone starts off equally, and if they need capital, they can raise it through some sort of funding.


Try raising now money to your business. The amount of regulation will kill it, that is why decentralized crowdfunding like NXT or others have been summoned into existence, to restore real capitalism, not this monstruous government-banker romance.

Are you saying that there are no new companies being formed today or new construction jobs being created through banks because of "debtism"? You couldn't be farther off from the truth. Chance of opportunity is EQUAL for everyone but every opportunity benefits the boys club, the only thing that needs to change is the boys club. Regulation is there to avoid scams and business malpractice, that is another subject.

Once you have good credit you can actually leverage banks for very minimal fees so your margins get better as your business/relationship grows.

A prediction market can replace the credit beaureu and a p2p lending system can replace bank liquidity with better discovery mechanisms for interest on liquidity..however I feel if this is done we'll have huge tax increases as the boys club fights back.

[RealBitcoin]

Not so!

answer =
Public infrastructure on account managing and payment system + Banks only get to broker investment between credit seekers and investors (Do their real job: *risk assesment* ).
Have faith banks will not escape uberization, they are about to be disrupted ie P2P Lending

Well they have an enormous advantage, they can lend you at lower rate because they just counterfeit the money.

If people were to lend their own capital then they will offer it at higher rates, making them uncompetitive.

Until people use fiat garbage, banks will have the upper hand, and the sheeps dont realize that fiat money is the root of evil.

Not so imho p2plending can give better rates for both invstor and creditor as it cuts the middleman

In the banking loan system there is no middleman, as the bank treats depositors money as his own asset. Plus if he can leverage it by printing money out of thin air and give x100 as more out in loans than they have on books is what happens.

P2P lending is only good for liquidity and fast loans, but the banking system will still be here for larger loans: business ,housing, car ,etc...

[RealBitcoin]

Are you saying that there are no new companies being formed today or new construction jobs being created through banks because of "debtism"? You couldn't be farther off from the truth.

No, but in a capitalist society there would be hardly need for "companies", there would only be voluntary people interacting with eachother. The term company is pretty communistic, as its central command and control isnt it?

Chance of opportunity is EQUAL for everyone but every opportunity benefits the boys club, the only thing that needs to change is the boys club. Regulation is there to avoid scams and business malpractice, that is another subject.

Is that so? Then why are small businesses taxed more than large ones? Why are small businesses harassed because they forgot to pay some taxes, while big giants get away with paying 0.1% taxes only. Small businesses harassed with eco regulations, while big oil companies just dump the oil in the ocean...

Regulation is there to have another excuse to ripoff people, regulation is the scam, and with blockchain tech, it wont be needed anymore

Once you have good credit you can actually leverage banks for very minimal fees so your margins get better as your business/relationship grows.

Few banks keep credit scores, or atleast where I live, because they just print the money out of this air, they hardly care about defaults

A prediction market can replace the credit beaureu and a p2p lending system can replace bank liquidity with better discovery mechanisms for interest on liquidity..however I feel if this is done we'll have huge tax increases as the boys club fights back.

Possibly, p2p lending in a decentralized way can be very helpful, and yes it will help interest rate discovery.

As you may have forgot we have communist central banks dictating interest, there is hardly any PD at the moment.

[STT]

Leasing is more expensive then ownership....

It seems to me banks own everything, and everybody else is just leasing/borrowing from them ,including medium & large businesses too ,even governments.

Banks dont own it either because their basic operating model is to only have ten percent of whatever money they are loaning out.   A bank is nothing without its backers, like we saw in the big melt down that if that short term credit walks away then you're a man all alone in the world very fast with no friends these banks are nobody.
   Banks arent really owners in my view, more operators like everyone else.

The old family owned model is much rarer today.   Its more franchised operations with everything considered nationally, money flows all around.  Im not all against that because trading is the modern world and quite often a profitable wealthy way forward, its efficient basically.   Its not personal though, there is little special thought in a typical franchise and thats why we have words like contagion because all this money will depart as relentlessly as a tide goes out.
  It'll maroon the unpopular circumstances, who have no capital of their own, the ghost town factor where incredibly a working town can become zero almost unbelievably fast.    I imagine the tide flows to China or whoever actually has capital, I dont even know they are rich either

[bhokor]

The banks are not the deep problem, it is about who controls the banks, who controls the productions mediums, money gets value because you can get things with it, and is the seller who says what is money and what is not

[sidhujag]

Are you saying that there are no new companies being formed today or new construction jobs being created through banks because of "debtism"? You couldn't be farther off from the truth.

No, but in a capitalist society there would be hardly need for "companies", there would only be voluntary people interacting with eachother. The term company is pretty communistic, as its central command and control isnt it?

Chance of opportunity is EQUAL for everyone but every opportunity benefits the boys club, the only thing that needs to change is the boys club. Regulation is there to avoid scams and business malpractice, that is another subject.

Is that so? Then why are small businesses taxed more than large ones? Why are small businesses harassed because they forgot to pay some taxes, while big giants get away with paying 0.1% taxes only. Small businesses harassed with eco regulations, while big oil companies just dump the oil in the ocean...

Regulation is there to have another excuse to ripoff people, regulation is the scam, and with blockchain tech, it wont be needed anymore

Once you have good credit you can actually leverage banks for very minimal fees so your margins get better as your business/relationship grows.

Few banks keep credit scores, or atleast where I live, because they just print the money out of this air, they hardly care about defaults

A prediction market can replace the credit beaureu and a p2p lending system can replace bank liquidity with better discovery mechanisms for interest on liquidity..however I feel if this is done we'll have huge tax increases as the boys club fights back.

Possibly, p2p lending in a decentralized way can be very helpful, and yes it will help interest rate discovery.

As you may have forgot we have communist central banks dictating interest, there is hardly any PD at the moment.

Banks dont care for defaults, they print money? Lol another wild claim coming out from you.. Hard to take you seriously when you say such stupid things.

I recommend some finance courses to get you up to speed on how the world works.. Hard to know the solution when you dont understand the problem.

Chris martenson has a good ebook to checkout its pretty short and highly educational.

[thaaanos]

The banks are not the deep problem, it is about who controls the banks, who controls the productions mediums, money gets value because you can get things with it, and is the seller who says what is money and what is not

The problem is as always the "Privilege"  to quote Hagbard Celine

(1) With banks the privilege of having the backing of the state , and   
(2) With "friends" having the privileged access to funding ie large loans without collateral, early loans in the business cycle.

But I think that the 2nd is the most damaging and creates the need for the 1st

[sidhujag]

The banks are not the deep problem, it is about who controls the banks, who controls the productions mediums, money gets value because you can get things with it, and is the seller who says what is money and what is not

The problem is as always the "Privilege"  to quote Hagbard Celine

(1) With banks the privilege of having the backing of the state , and   
(2) With "friends" having the privileged access to funding ie large loans without collateral, early loans in the business cycle.

But I think that the 2nd is the most damaging and creates the need for the 1st

You got it.. The govt trusts them to make good decisions for everyone and the banks inr eturn get favourable rates to make money, that and im sure they are family/buddies who share a piece of the free wealth.

[CoinCube]

The banks are not the deep problem, it is about who controls the banks, who controls the productions mediums, money gets value because you can get things with it, and is the seller who says what is money and what is not

The problem is as always the "Privilege"  to quote Hagbard Celine

(1) With banks the privilege of having the backing of the state , and  
(2) With "friends" having the privileged access to funding ie large loans without collateral, early loans in the business cycle.

But I think that the 2nd is the most damaging and creates the need for the 1st

You got it.. The govt trusts them to make good decisions for everyone and the banks inr eturn get favourable rates to make money, that and im sure they are family/buddies who share a piece of the free wealth.

Thus the solution is to remove from government the power of currency creation (via the development of superior competitors) and force it to eventually live only through taxation? Without this power banks would be forced to raise capital through legitimate means (investors and depositors) rather then just borrow newly created fiat from the FED. Governments would be likewise be unable to realistically backstop banks. When there is limited free wealth to go around the share that can go to "friends" would plummet.

[sidhujag]

The banks are not the deep problem, it is about who controls the banks, who controls the productions mediums, money gets value because you can get things with it, and is the seller who says what is money and what is not

The problem is as always the "Privilege"  to quote Hagbard Celine

(1) With banks the privilege of having the backing of the state , and  
(2) With "friends" having the privileged access to funding ie large loans without collateral, early loans in the business cycle.

But I think that the 2nd is the most damaging and creates the need for the 1st

You got it.. The govt trusts them to make good decisions for everyone and the banks inr eturn get favourable rates to make money, that and im sure they are family/buddies who share a piece of the free wealth.

Thus the solution is to remove from government the power of currency creation (via the development of superior competitors) and force it to eventually live only through taxation? Without this power banks would be forced to raise capital through legitimate means (investors and depositors) rather then just borrow newly created fiat from the FED. Governments would be likewise be unable to realistically backstop banks. When there is limited free wealth to go around the share that can go to "friends" would plummet.

Thats the million dollar question.. Inflation targetting is the best we had before bitcoin, and if bitcoin classifies closer to what nash termed ideal money then yea it will win themarket over due to increases in efficiency by moving out the middlemen who tend to be dishonest

[CoinCube]

Yes.

They come out the winners no matter what happens. The bankers are always hedged.

If the economy goes on: They give out more loans (out of thin air) and get leveraged interest payments

If the economy collapses: They confiscate the assets from those that cant pay the debt, because they lost their jobs, and now the bank have real assets, which they can give in rent to the same person they stole from just so that he doesnt get in the street.


The same with bitcoin:  If bitcoin never goes mainstream (which I doubt) they will remain the elite

If bitcoin goes mainstream: They will quickly buy up bitcoin with their fictitious paper, and still remain the elite.



They will remain the elite.

Not so!

answer =
Public infrastructure on account managing and payment system + Banks only get to broker investment between credit seekers and investors (Do their real job: *risk assesment* ).
Have faith banks will not escape uberization, they are about to be disrupted ie P2P Lending

In an economy where a decentralized cryptocurrency became dominant the current economic elite would only be able to buy a powerful opening position. To maintain elite status thereafter would require those individuals to compete and produce. Otherwise their share of the pie would shrink progressively every time they consumed and/or choose to reproduce beyond replacement levels.

This is drastically different from the economic situation of today which allows connected individual to essentially debase the money supply on demand (at very little cost) and buy up or corner economic opportunity while having the government bail them out (further debasing the money supply) in the event of investment error.

P2P lending can only only dominate once it becomes cost competitive. That necessitates the end of fiat currency. I got an offer to refinance my student loans the other day at 2.3% variable with payments over 5 years. I have a great job and good credit. However, the reality is that only someone with access to FED funding would probably be willing to make a loan like this. A bank can borrow at 0.36% (current federal funds rate) make a loan to me at 2.3% and pocket the spread. P2P cannot match that because they do not have access to easy funds at 0.36%  
 

[CoinCube]

Thus the solution is to remove from government the power of currency creation (via the development of superior competitors) and force it to eventually live only through taxation? Without this power banks would be forced to raise capital through legitimate means (investors and depositors) rather then just borrow newly created fiat from the FED. Governments would be likewise be unable to realistically backstop banks. When there is limited free wealth to go around the share that can go to "friends" would plummet.

Thats the million dollar question.. Inflation targetting is the best we had before bitcoin, and if bitcoin classifies closer to what nash termed ideal money then yea it will win themarket over due to increases in efficiency by moving out the middlemen who tend to be dishonest

Can you expand on the nash concept of ideal money. I am unfamiliar with his theory.

The wikipedia page is not helpful.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_money

It says only
"In John Nash’s lecture he mentioned "Good money’,is money that is expected to maintain its value over time. ‘Bad money’ is expected to lose value over time, as under conditions of inflation"
and
"John Nash mentioned in his lecture that Euro might become an ideal money in the future, because Euro is used in a large range of places and has a good stability"

Stating that ideal money is money that maintains value over time forces you to define "value" and address why money that maintains "value" is superior to money that increases or declines over time.

[RealBitcoin]

Can you expand on the nash concept of ideal money. I am unfamiliar with his theory.

The wikipedia page is not helpful.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_money

It says only
"In John Nash’s lecture he mentioned "Good money’,is money that is expected to maintain its value over time. ‘Bad money’ is expected to lose value over time, as under conditions of inflation"
and
"John Nash mentioned in his lecture that Euro might become an ideal money in the future, because Euro is used in a large range of places and has a good stability"

Stating that ideal money is money that maintains value over time forces you to define "value" and address why money that maintains "value" is superior to money that increases or declines over time.

However this is a dual system.    revenue vs debt -> if the revenue increases due to new opportunities and lack of inflation, then the interest rate can increase on that debt too.

While with fiat the banks have the upper hand that they can loan at 0.36%, and pocket the spread, if fiat goes away (by people not using it) then the decentralized world will have big interest rates 6-10%, but the income will be so big that people can easily pay this.

Therefore yes its a free market, if the economy is strong, due to decentralization, then interest rates can easily go up.

[sidhujag]

Thus the solution is to remove from government the power of currency creation (via the development of superior competitors) and force it to eventually live only through taxation? Without this power banks would be forced to raise capital through legitimate means (investors and depositors) rather then just borrow newly created fiat from the FED. Governments would be likewise be unable to realistically backstop banks. When there is limited free wealth to go around the share that can go to "friends" would plummet.

Thats the million dollar question.. Inflation targetting is the best we had before bitcoin, and if bitcoin classifies closer to what nash termed ideal money then yea it will win themarket over due to increases in efficiency by moving out the middlemen who tend to be dishonest

Can you expand on the nash concept of ideal money. I am unfamiliar with his theory.

The wikipedia page is not helpful.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_money

It says only
"In John Nash’s lecture he mentioned "Good money’,is money that is expected to maintain its value over time. ‘Bad money’ is expected to lose value over time, as under conditions of inflation"
and
"John Nash mentioned in his lecture that Euro might become an ideal money in the future, because Euro is used in a large range of places and has a good stability"

Stating that ideal money is money that maintains value over time forces you to define "value" and address why money that maintains "value" is superior to money that increases or declines over time.

http://sites.stat.psu.edu/~babu/nash/money.pdf

asymptotically ideal is what I believe he refers to as something like bitcoin. Note we will never have perfect money, where inflation is tied to a real economic indicator that is easily auditable and one that cant be tampered with, but bitcoins falls under the curve closer to infinity than inflation targetted currencies today.

Notable quote which would make sense to most here :
"money should have the function of a standard of measurement and thus that it should become comparable to the watt"
Btw i believe nash was satoshi.