Won`t the central bankers still win in the end?

[Pizzalover420]

It will be a central banker with all the bitcoin in the end. They will buy the biggest mining farm and collect all coins through network fees.
Even by holding bitcoin we still lose to the central bankers in the end when we make a transaction they will collect the fees.

Whether it`s 100k USD a coin or 1billion USD a coin, it`s no skin of their back, just pressing a extra few 0`s into the computer when they make fiat.

Bitcoin does not free us from $lavery. It runs off the fumes of fiat.

How we beat them is to make everyone the currency creators, distribute supply 1 hour coin an hour or 1 second coin a second to unique addresses created from a human HWID, iris, fingerprint or heartbeat. That way when the central bankers buy the supply, everyone wins. Sure we don`t beat them, but if you can`t beat them, join them.

[Pizzalover420]

Why do we put up with these central bankers and politicians? They should of been hung the second they created fiat.

[ChrisPop]

It doesn't work like this. First of all if any central bank gets involved in mining cryptocurrencies the price would skyrocket in a very short time. By "skyrocket" I mean getting into the higher six figures or even passing $1M/unit. Even if they get ahold of the majority of crypto miners, most of the BTC has already been mined and to harvest a significant amount of total supply of bitcoins solely from the network fees will take an extremely long time. PLUS, they would have to HODL the accumulated supply if they want to control it.

You see.. Bitcoin has been designed to give power to the people. Banks cannot control the network unless they bring a lot of "collateral benefits" to it, if you know what I mean.

[kryptqnick]

Central banks are not a united global superpower. They compete with one another all the time, so they won't make a consolidated move on Bitcoin. Moreover, banks usually think of Bitcoin as a foe, so even if they support Blockchain, they usually want their own centralized coin instead of adopting Bitcoin. Moreover, to actually control Bitcoin mining or own a very decent amount that could allow manipulating the price requires too many resources. We can't even calculate it precisely because if they try to buy a lot, the price will keep rising and every next step will be more difficult. And banks are not going to waste resources on an attempt to take over Bitcoin because it would be devastating for them. So Bitcoin does remain independent enough, decentralized enough. However, banks do win in a sense that the vast majority uses fiat and does not plan switch to Bitcoin.

[Reatim]

Bitcoin are almost been mined meaning even if they Buy all the Mining farm yet there are only small amount they will owned unless they will purchase directly In exchange.and yeah they Might gain In transaction fees but eventually With Lightning network and other help in future ,they won't hold the Fees on that average.

How we beat them is to make everyone the currency creators, distribute supply 1 hour coin an hour or 1 second coin a second to unique addresses created from a human HWID, iris, fingerprint or heartbeat. That way when the central bankers buy the supply, everyone wins. Sure we don`t beat them, but if you can`t beat them, join them.

Very Futuristic , And if you are referring Central bank buying all the coins ,then why not start now when the value is cheaper? and start accumulating so in 10 years they might have it all.
But there is no action right? because Central bank still Don't Believe and Give sympathy to the Crypto.

But Your points are valid ,Looking for more James Bond Posts.

[Pizzalover420]

It doesn't work like this. First of all if any central bank gets involved in mining cryptocurrencies the price would skyrocket in a very short time. By "skyrocket" I mean getting into the higher six figures or even passing $1M/unit. Even if they get ahold of the majority of crypto miners, most of the BTC has already been mined and to harvest a significant amount of total supply of bitcoins solely from the network fees will take an extremely long time. PLUS, they would have to HODL the accumulated supply if they want to control it.

You see.. Bitcoin has been designed to give power to the people. Banks cannot control the network unless they bring a lot of "collateral benefits" to it, if you know what I mean.

It gives power to people with fiat AKA central bankers, not power to the people.

Coins are bought with fiat, Electricity is bought with fiat, Miners are bought with fiat, Fiat wins.

[NeuroticFish]

How we beat them is to make everyone the currency creators, distribute supply 1 hour coin an hour or 1 second coin a second to unique addresses

If everybody owns it for free, it becomes basically worthless and pointless. Unlike fiat, here's nobody telling that 1 BTC will still have value if that would happen.

The current direction is tricky, but it's up to you and me to decide how much to buy or sell.
The current direction may allow Bitcoin get into the position you could buy anything for Bitcoin directly. At that point the price would matter only if you invested and kept the coins. Else you'll be able to work for Bitcoin and buy goods for Bitcoin, like you do for fiat now. Bitcoin is meant to set you free from the current banking system, not from working for a living.

[ChrisPop]

It gives power to people with fiat AKA central bankers, not power to the people.

Coins are bought with fiat, Electricity is bought with fiat, Miners are bought with fiat, Fiat wins.

Central banks might have different functions in the economy if they when they start acquiring Bitcoin. From accumulating BTC to then distributing it to the general population (replacing fiat) is just a small step.
I think we can all feel how fragile the fiat currencies (especially the US dollar) are right now. Recently I've seen that in the past year the Feds printed 20% of the dollars in circulation. Insane statistic... If it takes that much to stimulate the economy we're in for a rough ride, maybe the paradigm shift we need to switch to a better system (*Bitcoin)

[enhu]

Making BTC ilegal is too late I guess so they just have to do something else. But buying mining farms seem too much, when they could just use a government backed exchanges. People will normally trust it and take their BTC, paypal already started doing so.

But just to buy the idea, its a good thing there are platforms that allows us to do it so that each of us can create our own token. There are several platforms actually and with just a click you can already have your own token. 

[Wysi]

This was expected to take place when we have forgotten the basics of bitcoin and using it just as a mere investment liek any other stock trading. The purpose for creation of Bitcoin has long being replaced by investment opportunity and central banks will do everything to ensure they are they one who gets the profit at the end. Buying mining farms is just the beginning.

[oktana]

How we beat them is to make everyone the currency creators, distribute supply 1 hour coin an hour or 1 second coin a second to unique addresses created from a human HWID, iris, fingerprint or heartbeat. That way when the central bankers buy the supply, everyone wins.

How can you say this? If everyone is given $1 million, doesn't it occur to you that $ will become useless because everyone has it and with no one to value it. This is why airdrops have always lead to the down charts of a coin. What you said above is obviously not an option, it'll lead Bitcoin to a big time hell.

[wxa7115]

It doesn't work like this. First of all if any central bank gets involved in mining cryptocurrencies the price would skyrocket in a very short time. By "skyrocket" I mean getting into the higher six figures or even passing $1M/unit. Even if they get ahold of the majority of crypto miners, most of the BTC has already been mined and to harvest a significant amount of total supply of bitcoins solely from the network fees will take an extremely long time. PLUS, they would have to HODL the accumulated supply if they want to control it.

You see.. Bitcoin has been designed to give power to the people. Banks cannot control the network unless they bring a lot of "collateral benefits" to it, if you know what I mean.

They can still get control of the majority of the supply by just buying it, and while this means that the price of bitcoin will skyrocket what does it matter to those that can print as much money as they want? For a long time I have thought the way they will try to take over bitcoin will be in a way similar to what happened to gold.

First they will get all the bitcoin they can by either buying it or by allowing you to deposit your coins in a bank account, then they seize it and begin to back their currencies with bitcoin, only to finally abandon the bitcoin standard some decades in the future.

[pixie85]

It will be a central banker with all the bitcoin in the end. They will buy the biggest mining farm and collect all coins through network fees.
Even by holding bitcoin we still lose to the central bankers in the end when we make a transaction they will collect the fees.

What's with all this doom talk? So according to you every banker thinks only about destroying bitcoin and buying mining farms. That's not how business works.

When you see something that can be useful and that people like you try to compete with it or add it to your own portfolio. You can spend millions of dollars trying to destroy it but nobody is going to give you back those money. You'll be trying to destroy a tree by covering it in dollar bills and burning them. Pretty dumb.

[jademaxsuy]

I like that idea that if you can't beat them then join them. This is why we need to get low in cryptocurrency for we know all of our funds in crypto space are just temporary and will end up converting fiat as soon as we needed the funds especially for medical needs. There is no assurance that we can really beat the central banks and the fiat system since the majority in our society are utilizing the system compared to digital currency.

[mrquackquack]

If you want to buy into the "central banks" winning then there you go. There are probably people still that don't know there is a thing called a computer out there and most certainly anything relating with Bitcoin. Think about this, if you take away the central banks, the government, so on and so forth then what?

[roadrunnerjaiv2025]

You have a point there. But that's a lot of work for a single investment product. I mean, central banks can buy all the gold, silver, and copper in the world to control that trade market but they don't do it because it makes no sense from an economic point of view. The role of central banks is to ensure economic and financial stability. They conduct monetary policy to achieve low and stable inflation. Bitcoin is no longer just a small, insignificant currency. It already has an immense effect on the global economy because many consumers are depending on it. It is now part of the system that the central banks are trying to stabilize (so, yeah, they surely have bitcoins in their arsenal just like the rest of us, but not too many to trigger financial setbacks that they have to fix in the end). If they suddenly decide to own every coin, that will definitely upset the balance that they are trying so hard to maintain.  

[Twinkledoe]

If you want to buy into the "central banks" winning then there you go. There are probably people still that don't know there is a thing called a computer out there and most certainly anything relating with Bitcoin. Think about this, if you take away the central banks, the government, so on and so forth then what?

Yeah, it's true. We do need central banks, government. They are like the permanent fixtures in our lives. But we can opt to some alternatives like crypto. It is still on you how you will manage your portfolio. Not all people are crypto users, the fact is, only small population up until now. So saying that central banks are winning, because they are really are. Now, it is up to you how you will manage your financial aspect.

[Wexnident]

Even if central banks controlled the mining farms now, it'd take a long time for them to even accumulate Bitcoin to an amount that could possibly control the market, not to mention that they may even incur heavy losses by then. Not only that, this isn't even a guaranteed notion that they'd be able to take hold of the Bitcoin system if they did this, Bitcoin is a decentralized system itself, after all, there's a high chance that all their effort would only be wasted.

It gives power to people with fiat AKA central bankers, not power to the people.

Coins are bought with fiat, Electricity is bought with fiat, Miners are bought with fiat, Fiat wins.

It never was an issue of what buys what though. Fiat are in the end, a medium commonly accepted by the public due to being recognized by the public government, but that doesn't mean that it's the best option. Look at how investors buy land, gold, and other safe assets, why don't they let their money stay as Fiat if it gives them power no? Fiat is just used so one can measure the financial power of others.

[pooya87]

Coins are bought with fiat, Electricity is bought with fiat, Miners are bought with fiat, Fiat wins.

Fiat is converted to bitcoin.
We do these conversions every day, we take something useless and convert it to something useful. For example dirty useless oil is converted into useful gasoline that you put in your car.

Well that's highly unlikely right now, rumors that they'll be using XRP to replace dollar that's why many people has seen the CEO of XRP alongside with them during interviews.

There is a difference between news, rumor and bullshit pumpers use to fool people into buying some shitcoin. The XRP thing was always the last one. No bank would ever use a centralized shitcoin that is in full control of another company that they can not control themselves. The only involvement of the banks with XRP was to get the technology and make their own centralized shitcoin which they control.

[Pizzalover420]

How can you say this? If everyone is given $1 million, doesn't it occur to you that $ will become useless because everyone has it and with no one to value it. This is why airdrops have always lead to the down charts of a coin. What you said above is obviously not an option, it'll lead Bitcoin to a big time hell.

A can of tuna was $2, $1 was $1.

Trump printed $10.5 trillion. 1/3rd the current debt.

A can of tuna is still $2, $1 is still $1.