sgdias (OP)
Member
 Offline
Activity: 86
Merit: 10
|
 |
December 11, 2013, 02:58:15 AM |
|
Let's say the traditional bankers start buying large amounts of bitcoins and they success in keeping almost all of them.
Now... for what purpose they would keep it, to kidnap it, avoid bitcoin flowing and therefore destroy it. Thay way they are rescuing value on the traditional money (dollars, euro, yens, etc) that will continue flowing.
Is there any way this beast named Bitcoin can escape from such situation ?
Like the movie Dune stated... "The spice must flow"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pontiacg5
|
|
December 11, 2013, 02:59:41 AM |
|
There are still miners, so they'd have to keep buying for another 100 something years.
BTC would skyrocket, what was left would be traded in shatoshis.
|
Please DO NOT send me private messages asking for help setting up GPU miners. I will not respond!!!
|
|
|
Impaler
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 826
Merit: 250
CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!
|
|
December 11, 2013, 03:20:43 AM |
|
The exact same thing that happens when early adopters did exactly that, artificial scarcity, rising prices, manipulated markets. Why do people freak out when the word 'Bank' is used when the horrible activity being conducted is already being done by people with even LESS oversight and scruples then a Bank?
|
|
|
|
godislove
Member
Offline
Activity: 74
Merit: 10
Devout Atheist
|
|
December 11, 2013, 03:22:45 AM |
|
They could let a central authority like the euro bank (ECB), world bank, or IMF hold a key to verify certain coins are in a certain separate class, using the "rarely unused" contract and Script features of bitcoin. Then transfer them back and forth between each other with each piece of bitcoin representing whatever value they want, say $1 billion per 0.01 coin tied to a 2010 basket of commodities. The banks are required to have a certain reserve amount of gold or "class 1" assets. So they would buy these things from each other and the cash is freed up for other uses, then they have this class 1 asset they made up out of thin air and extra liquidity from the cash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
pjviitas
|
|
December 11, 2013, 06:31:30 AM |
|
Simple...start using litecoin
|
|
|
|
|
Peter R
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1007
|
|
December 11, 2013, 06:36:08 AM |
|
Let's say the traditional bankers start buying large amounts of bitcoins and they success in keeping almost all of them.
The value would rise dramatically. If bitcoin is to become truly successful on the world's stage, banks will get involved. This is not necessarily a bad thing, and would likely add credibility in the eyes of the public and stability to the exchange rate (albeit at a much higher price level than now). P.S. I consider this co-opting bitcoin rather than kidnapping it. |
|
|
|
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
|
|
December 11, 2013, 06:39:34 AM |
|
Lets destroy this thing by buying it up at insanely marked up prices and make the existing holders the new wealthy elite.
Doesn't really sound like the best plan does it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
4mherewego
|
|
December 11, 2013, 08:05:14 AM |
|
Let's say the traditional bankers start buying large amounts of bitcoins and they success in keeping almost all of them.
Now... for what purpose they would keep it, to kidnap it, avoid bitcoin flowing and therefore destroy it. Thay way they are rescuing value on the traditional money (dollars, euro, yens, etc) that will continue flowing.
Is there any way this beast named Bitcoin can escape from such situation ?
Like the movie Dune stated... "The spice must flow"
So basically they would "kidnap" the bitcoins by buying them and not spend them? What would happen is that they would spend less and everyone else would get to spend more. Win for us, lose for them. Doesn't sound so bad to me... |
|
|
|
|
|
Sindelar1938
|
|
December 11, 2013, 03:17:23 PM |
|
They would have to kidnap satoshi and get him o reveal a material hitherto undiscovered fatal flaw in the protocol Long shot  |
|
|
|
harsh patel
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 2
Merit: 0
|
|
December 11, 2013, 03:22:58 PM |
|
Ideally bankers would try and block money flow into the bitcoin system via banks but they cannot completely stop it...
|
|
|
|
|
|
zolace
|
|
December 11, 2013, 03:26:25 PM |
|
I doubt the banks can afford to buy most of the bitcoins now, maybe if they had done it in the beggining.
|
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ |
|
|
RodeoX
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3066
Merit: 1147
The revolution will be monetized!
|
|
December 11, 2013, 03:30:37 PM |
|
If a bank did buy up all the coins they could, what would they have then? How would it benefit them?
|
|
|
|
|
BitchicksHusband
|
|
December 11, 2013, 07:23:39 PM |
|
I'd cash out a reasonable portion of my stash and be rich. How terrible!
|
1BitcHiCK1iRa6YVY6qDqC6M594RBYLNPo
|
|
|
sgdias (OP)
Member
Offline
Activity: 86
Merit: 10
|
|
December 12, 2013, 06:17:31 PM |
|
If a bank did buy up all the coins they could, what would they have then? How would it benefit them?
Benefit is preventing the regular money loose trust and current international monetary system fail. They just need to Buy all the BTC coins tranfer it to a single wallet and destroy the wallet file (private key). |
|
|
|
|
cr1776
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4032
Merit: 1301
|
|
December 12, 2013, 06:26:00 PM |
|
If a bank did buy up all the coins they could, what would they have then? How would it benefit them?
Benefit is preventing the regular money loose trust and current international monetary system fail. They just need to Buy all the BTC coins tranfer it to a single wallet and destroy the wallet file (private key). They could not buy all the bitcoins, so their plan fails there. If somehow they convinced everyone to sell (impossible, but we'll go with this fanciful scenario again for the 1000th time), they'd be left with worthless bitcoins, everyone else would be left with whatever they bought them for. Then we'd start mining on Bitoin v2.0 with all the mining gear still out there, and the banks would have to repeat the process. |
|
|
|
|
sgdias (OP)
Member
Offline
Activity: 86
Merit: 10
|
|
December 12, 2013, 06:30:42 PM |
|
If a bank did buy up all the coins they could, what would they have then? How would it benefit them?
Benefit is preventing the regular money loose trust and current international monetary system fail. They just need to Buy all the BTC coins tranfer it to a single wallet and destroy the wallet file (private key). They could not buy all the bitcoins, so their plan fails there. If somehow they convinced everyone to sell (impossible, but we'll go with this fanciful scenario again for the 1000th time), they'd be left with worthless bitcoins, everyone else would be left with whatever they bought them for. Then we'd start mining on Bitoin v2.0 with all the mining gear still out there, and the banks would have to repeat the process. Good answer, this is sort of the confirmation I was looking for. |
|
|
|
|
RodeoX
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3066
Merit: 1147
The revolution will be monetized!
|
|
December 12, 2013, 06:41:22 PM |
|
If a bank did buy up all the coins they could, what would they have then? How would it benefit them?
Benefit is preventing the regular money loose trust and current international monetary system fail. They just need to Buy all the BTC coins tranfer it to a single wallet and destroy the wallet file (private key). They could not buy all the bitcoins, so their plan fails there. If somehow they convinced everyone to sell (impossible, but we'll go with this fanciful scenario again for the 1000th time), they'd be left with worthless bitcoins, everyone else would be left with whatever they bought them for. Then we'd start mining on Bitoin v2.0 with all the mining gear still out there, and the banks would have to repeat the process. Good answer, this is sort of the confirmation I was looking for. +1 I would also add that banks do not buy then destroy money. They are only interested in profit. If there is no reasonable chance of profit, it is not a plan they are interested in. How would they face their shareholders and tell them their money was spent throwing away bitcoins? And that they have nothing to show for their efforts except a higher value on the money they wasted. |
|
|
|
|
AnonyMint
|
|
December 12, 2013, 07:07:10 PM |
|
The exact same thing that happens when early adopters did exactly that, artificial scarcity, rising prices, manipulated markets. Why do people freak out when the word 'Bank' is used when the horrible activity being conducted is already being done by people with even LESS oversight and scruples then a Bank?
For example, such as how Baidu probably did on the recent pump & dump & repurchase. Hope you saw the lame excuse in their press release that they didn't know Bitcoin was volatile.  Lets destroy this thing by buying it up at insanely marked up prices and make the existing holders the new wealthy elite.
Doesn't really sound like the best plan does it?
The new wealthy elite just like the brilliant physicist and mathematician Isaac Newton? |
|
|
|
jones31
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
December 12, 2013, 09:50:53 PM |
|
You can't buy something that is not for sale.
If they will try to buy all the bitcoins they will end up paying trilions and at that point bitcoin will be useless , cause nobody can use it anymore since there is only one person holding them all.
Rinse and repeat with next coin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
pbody
|
|
December 12, 2013, 10:38:46 PM |
|
You can't buy something that is not for sale.
If they will try to buy all the bitcoins they will end up paying trilions and at that point bitcoin will be useless , cause nobody can use it anymore since there is only one person holding them all.
Rinse and repeat with next coin.
Interesting point. so there is no point in owning too many bitcoins. Doing so will just be shooting yourself in the foot. The wealth needs to be distributed equally. Unfortunately we have a ton of greedy early adopters who are still holding their coins because they want more than the half mil or mil they already made. This will destroy bitcoin. So it was seemingly designed to prevent this, with the limit on it, and it will eventually collapse when too many people are holding too many coins as the coins will get little use in a such a scenario. Maybe what Im getting here is bitcoin 101? I've I knew more maybe I would have held on to the four thousand bitcoins I had a two years ago. !@#$ |
|
|
|
|
