If bitcoin ever goes mainstream

[Nathonas]

If Bitcoin does continue to be integrated into the world economy...then I don't think this process is going to be as volatile or dangerous as you think. The conversion of people to cryptocurriencies like Bitcoin is going to take place at a steady pace. So it's not like one day you will wake up, and find that your dollars are worth 10 times less. It will be a gradual process where people will continuously siphon more and more fiat into Bitcoin or other cryptos, slowly leaving fiat behind, until it is no longer needed. It won't *ruin* fiat holders because they will have already converted to Bitcoin by that point. Yes, the distribution of wealth will have changed a lot, but it's not like the Koch brothers will wake up one day and find out they've become bums.

[jonald_fyookball]

but it's not like the Koch brothers will wake up one day and find out they've become bums.

That would be funny.  Like the duke bros. in trading places. 

[picolo]

If Bitcoin does continue to be integrated into the world economy...then I don't think this process is going to be as volatile or dangerous as you think. The conversion of people to cryptocurriencies like Bitcoin is going to take place at a steady pace. So it's not like one day you will wake up, and find that your dollars are worth 10 times less. It will be a gradual process where people will continuously siphon more and more fiat into Bitcoin or other cryptos, slowly leaving fiat behind, until it is no longer needed. It won't *ruin* fiat holders because they will have already converted to Bitcoin by that point. Yes, the distribution of wealth will have changed a lot, but it's not like the Koch brothers will wake up one day and find out they've become bums.

Koch brothers believe in true money

The process may go fast and brutally when the world understand that so many dollars are going to be created

[Trading]

Power never disappear it just shift from some hands to others. I don't like power, including political power, but I dislike even more private power.

Without government, armed bands would take not half of what you have, but probably much more.

Some think they could organize and resist. Those organized groups would probably be very oppressive to their members, especially new members. And their resistance would endure only until faced with a stronger band. Anarchism promises insecurity, economic and trade collapse, end of scientific development, etc. It's that the situation we see in failed states. Somalia is the perfect example.

We could keep the State, but give large powers to small communities, like in Switzerland. There people assemble and rule their matters directly together, including social support, health care, decide regulations on social life, etc. So, basically, our neighbors would have a lot of power over us. Spying and controlling other people's life is a way of living there. No, thank you, I prefer an abstract, distant, power.

[jonald_fyookball]

Power never disappear it just shift from some hands to others. I don't like power, including political power, but I dislike even more private power.

Without government, armed bands would take not half of what you have, but probably much more.

Some think they could organize and resist. Those organized groups would probably be very oppressive to their members, especially new members. And their resistance would endure only until faced with a stronger band. Anarchism promises insecurity, economic and trade collapse, end of scientific development, etc. It's that the situation we see in failed states. Somalia is the perfect example.

Good explanation of why anarchy simply doesn't work... and those that think it can are naively idealistic, IMO.  The founding fathers of America did their best to create a system of checks and balances which, for a long time, served to forestall the centralization of power.  Their errors and oversights could be corrected to form a better system based on objective justice and the rule of law.

[jbreher]

Power never disappear it just shift from some hands to others. I don't like power, including political power, but I dislike even more private power.

Private power is not accompanied by the unfounded belief of the masses that the powerful's edicts are legitimate.

Without government, armed bands would take not half of what you have, but probably much more.

Maybe, maybe not. Armed bands may do such to some. Or they may not. Or the armed bands might meet their demise. Under our current system of social order, I am guaranteed confiscation of half my productivity. Plus, there is that entire messy business of being forced to comply to my overlord's irrational edicts.

Let us not forget that it takes a government to perform genocide. More than 100 Million killed in the 20th century alone.

Some think they could organize and resist. Those organized groups would probably be very oppressive to their members, especially new members.

"probably". In other words, you're just pulling assertions outta your ass.

Anarchism promises insecurity,

Government promises insecurity. Anarchy promises nothing - other than that one is free to live life on their own terms.

economic and trade collapse, end of scientific development, etc.

Absolute twaddle. Governments today serve to _impede_ free trade. Scientific development? Riight. We'll suddenly all become incapable of thinking advanced thoughts because the government is not there to force us to think thusly. </sarcasm>

It's that the situation we see in failed states. Somalia is the perfect example.

Always amuses me when statists whip this one out. Well, I guess it's the sharpest knife you've got. Fact of the matter is that Somalia is making improvements in nearly every quality-of-life issue at rates far exceeding their neighbors.

We could keep the State, but give large powers to small communities, like in Switzerland. There people assemble and rule their matters directly together, including social support, health care, decide regulations on social life, etc. So, basically, our neighbors would have a lot of power over us. Spying and controlling other people's life is a way of living there. No, thank you, I prefer an abstract, distant, power.

I don't know where you live. Can I assume USA? For the record, I am American. And I find the fact that the NSA is spying on all my communications an exercise in neither distant nor abstract power. For only one example of thousands.

[Ron~Popeil]

Power never disappear it just shift from some hands to others. I don't like power, including political power, but I dislike even more private power.

Without government, armed bands would take not half of what you have, but probably much more.

Some think they could organize and resist. Those organized groups would probably be very oppressive to their members, especially new members. And their resistance would endure only until faced with a stronger band. Anarchism promises insecurity, economic and trade collapse, end of scientific development, etc. It's that the situation we see in failed states. Somalia is the perfect example.

We could keep the State, but give large powers to small communities, like in Switzerland. There people assemble and rule their matters directly together, including social support, health care, decide regulations on social life, etc. So, basically, our neighbors would have a lot of power over us. Spying and controlling other people's life is a way of living there. No, thank you, I prefer an abstract, distant, power.

We both come from different ends of an underlying paradigm. I believe that the vast majority of people by nature are good and decent creatures. You seem to believe that we are all savages and that only bureaucratic power stands between us and worldwide mayhem.  

[xephireusMMX]

We want so badly for bitcoin to be accepted in stores and such, but has anyone thought of this before? What's going to happen once everyone is using bitcoin?

Technically Bitcoin is not ready for such number of transactions, but good news is number of transactions does increase much slower than Bitcoin price, so a lot of time to work on this issue (hopefully).

[Ron~Popeil]

We want so badly for bitcoin to be accepted in stores and such, but has anyone thought of this before? What's going to happen once everyone is using bitcoin?

Technically Bitcoin is not ready for such number of transactions, but good news is number of transactions does increase much slower than Bitcoin price, so a lot of time to work on this issue (hopefully).

Yep. There are a few technological issues to overcome. Luckily there are some incredibly smart people working on them as we speak.

[Nathonas]

Power never disappear it just shift from some hands to others. I don't like power, including political power, but I dislike even more private power.

Without government, armed bands would take not half of what you have, but probably much more.

Some think they could organize and resist. Those organized groups would probably be very oppressive to their members, especially new members. And their resistance would endure only until faced with a stronger band. Anarchism promises insecurity, economic and trade collapse, end of scientific development, etc. It's that the situation we see in failed states. Somalia is the perfect example.

We could keep the State, but give large powers to small communities, like in Switzerland. There people assemble and rule their matters directly together, including social support, health care, decide regulations on social life, etc. So, basically, our neighbors would have a lot of power over us. Spying and controlling other people's life is a way of living there. No, thank you, I prefer an abstract, distant, power.

This is kind of going off topic but...anarchy does work,but on the small scale. Like a small community of a few hundreds or thousand, because you don't have enough bad apples to fuck everyone else over. But yes when we try to live in societies of millions of people, anarchy isn't very effective. In the end, we will always choose to enter what is called the social contract and give up some of our rights so that society has some semblance of order and basic equality.

[Ron~Popeil]

Power never disappear it just shift from some hands to others. I don't like power, including political power, but I dislike even more private power.

Without government, armed bands would take not half of what you have, but probably much more.

Some think they could organize and resist. Those organized groups would probably be very oppressive to their members, especially new members. And their resistance would endure only until faced with a stronger band. Anarchism promises insecurity, economic and trade collapse, end of scientific development, etc. It's that the situation we see in failed states. Somalia is the perfect example.

We could keep the State, but give large powers to small communities, like in Switzerland. There people assemble and rule their matters directly together, including social support, health care, decide regulations on social life, etc. So, basically, our neighbors would have a lot of power over us. Spying and controlling other people's life is a way of living there. No, thank you, I prefer an abstract, distant, power.

This is kind of going off topic but...anarchy does work,but on the small scale. Like a small community of a few hundreds or thousand, because you don't have enough bad apples to fuck everyone else over. But yes when we try to live in societies of millions of people, anarchy isn't very effective. In the end, we will always choose to enter what is called the social contract and give up some of our rights so that society has some semblance of order and basic equality.

It makes opting out really tough as well. I live in a town of 2500 and could easily move if I didn't like the way they did things. It is a lot tougher and expensive to leave the US if I wanted to do so. 

[Trading]

Power never disappear it just shift from some hands to others. I don't like power, including political power, but I dislike even more private power.

Without government, armed bands would take not half of what you have, but probably much more.

Some think they could organize and resist. Those organized groups would probably be very oppressive to their members, especially new members. And their resistance would endure only until faced with a stronger band. Anarchism promises insecurity, economic and trade collapse, end of scientific development, etc. It's that the situation we see in failed states. Somalia is the perfect example.

We could keep the State, but give large powers to small communities, like in Switzerland. There people assemble and rule their matters directly together, including social support, health care, decide regulations on social life, etc. So, basically, our neighbors would have a lot of power over us. Spying and controlling other people's life is a way of living there. No, thank you, I prefer an abstract, distant, power.

We both come from different ends of an underlying paradigm. I believe that the vast majority of people by nature are good and decent creatures. You seem to believe that we are all savages and that only bureaucratic power stands between us and worldwide mayhem.  

We don't have to believe everyone is bad or even that the majority isn't very good (this majority lived happily for thousands of years with slavery, in Rome went to the Coliseum to watch people being slew, studies show that the majority of us can still torture under orders to do it, etc.) to predict a world of chaos. 20% mean and armed are enough.

[unexecuted]

Problem is that when Bitcoin gets too big, we'll have no say in big decisions. You'll literally see the UN general assembly decide Bitcoin's way forward.

[JypsiCreme]

If bitcoin goes mainstream will it continue to reflect our interests? We aren't a big group.

[picolo]

Problem is that when Bitcoin gets too big, we'll have no say in big decisions. You'll literally see the UN general assembly decide Bitcoin's way forward.

You don't really directly have a say right now and if it becomes mainstream we will be very wealthy so we will be better off than now

[tspacepilot]

I think your predictions are a little on the extreme side.  While I suppose that a strong btc economy could destroy companies like paypal and weaken companies like visa/mastercard, it's hard to imagine all currencies everywhere folding in the face of the One True Currency.  bitcoin provides some measure of anonymity and a huge measure of convenience for a lot of types of transactions but fiat currencies backed by armies and armies are still going to be seen as a "gold standard" (pardon the pun) for the foreseeable future, imho.

[knircky]

It's inevitable (that Bitcoin will go mainstream), but fiat isn't going anywhere any time soon.  Plenty of time for people to divest.  I know I'd keep some USD in a USD side chain.

I think this is logically flawed. Because:

If bitcoin becomes mainstream:

1)  i.e. a few hundred million users than the value of bitcoin must go up tremendously.

3) the value of bitcoin must come at the cost of fiat. In other words the value of the USD must come down significantly for bitcoin to go mainsteam

4) when fiat goes down while btc goes up, people will stop using fiat and use more btc. Because BTC is good for the individual people will more and more move to bitcoin.

5) at this point fiat money must collapse (its value) which increases this cycle. There is a tipping point (mathematical concept) at which point this may go over rather quickly.

I do not believe it is possible for fiat or bitcoin to exist side by side.

Right now we are not anywhere near a growth point that can enable this however as there is no real need for bitcoin today. the nr of transactions is pretty stable this year and usage is not going up much. bitcoin needs a killer app, something you can only do with bitcoin. at this point bitcoin is something weird and new for folks with a tech fetish or establishment haters.

[knircky]

It's going to be fine, quit worrying.

Early adopters will get a boost and most others won't. So what.
Also I don't think people will accept fractional reserve bitcoin.
The opposite will happen.  They will demand provable full solvency.

The distribution of wealth with bitcoin today is far worse than it is with fiat. It would be interesting to see how bitcoin would behave in this sense (wealth distribution) in the future when bitcoin is has a marketcap of a few trillion and ultimately 20-100 trillion.

This might be an issue if the wealth is highly concentrated and more so than we have it today.

Think about satoshi. He might be more powerful than any US person if bitcoin would be just a small %age of world currency.


I agree with you that fractional reserve make no sense and loans will not exist with bitcoin. It makes no sense for either party to do loans if there is deflation. If you get a longterm loan with bitcoin you will never get out of it and if you loan out the money u will never see it again. Its bad for both parties. If bitcoin is mainstream there cannot be credit any more (long term) instead there will be investments. We are already seeing this today.

[Ron~Popeil]

It's going to be fine, quit worrying.

Early adopters will get a boost and most others won't. So what.
Also I don't think people will accept fractional reserve bitcoin.
The opposite will happen.  They will demand provable full solvency.

The distribution of wealth with bitcoin today is far worse than it is with fiat. It would be interesting to see how bitcoin would behave in this sense (wealth distribution) in the future when bitcoin is has a marketcap of a few trillion and ultimately 20-100 trillion.

This might be an issue if the wealth is highly concentrated and more so than we have it today.

Think about satoshi. He might be more powerful than any US person if bitcoin would be just a small %age of world currency.


I agree with you that fractional reserve make no sense and loans will not exist with bitcoin. It makes no sense for either party to do loans if there is deflation. If you get a longterm loan with bitcoin you will never get out of it and if you loan out the money u will never see it again. Its bad for both parties. If bitcoin is mainstream there cannot be credit any more (long term) instead there will be investments. We are already seeing this today.

Debt is a form of slavery. It will be great to see it die a slow death.

[NEM minnow]

It will be a slow process and people will have time to adjust.  Cash didn't ruin gold, checks didn't ruin cash and credit cards didn't ruin checks, though there was a lot of displacement.  Bitcoin is a more radical technology for sure, but the trend is similar.  It will be a fairly smooth transition.