|
vuduchyld (OP)
|
 |
July 04, 2014, 03:08:53 PM |
|
Oh, yeah...great thoughts, BTCTrader71!
|
|
|
|
|
|
BTCtrader71
|
|
July 04, 2014, 03:14:45 PM
Last edit: July 04, 2014, 04:18:39 PM by BTCtrader71 |
|
The mumsy and dadsy comment was directed toward total global wealth distribution, which I consider haphazard and capricious--and potentially explosive and dangerous.
The bitcoin / libertarian / Ron Paul / anarcho-capitalist crowd and the politically left-leaning / occupy Wall Street crowd have more in common than either might think. It would be in everyone's best interest to focus more on how they agree, and focus less on how they disagree. The former crowd emphasizes the evils of concentration of power; the latter emphasizes the evils of concentration of wealth. The distinction is not as clear-cut as we sometimes make it out to be. |
BTC: 14oTcy1DNEXbcYjzPBpRWV11ZafWxNP8EU
|
|
|
|
InwardContour
|
|
July 05, 2014, 03:08:29 AM |
|
Keep in mind that when the price eventually hits 6 or 7 digits there will be no more "cashing out", because bitcoin will be money. Walmart will pay its suppliers in bitcoin and they will both pay their wage slaves in bitcoin who will buy things in bitcoin. The fabled stability that a certain group of degenerates dream of. Non-issue.
I would doubt that bitcoin will ever be the only/primary currency in the US. I would think that small and medium sized businesses may pay suppliers in bitcoin and some larger ones may as well but all commerce will not be done exclusively in bitcoin. The US government is one of the biggest consumers and biggest employers and it would likely never pay their contractors and employees in bitcoin |
|
|
|
|
Ibian
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 2268
Merit: 1278
|
|
July 05, 2014, 07:10:23 AM |
|
Keep in mind that when the price eventually hits 6 or 7 digits there will be no more "cashing out", because bitcoin will be money. Walmart will pay its suppliers in bitcoin and they will both pay their wage slaves in bitcoin who will buy things in bitcoin. The fabled stability that a certain group of degenerates dream of. Non-issue.
I would doubt that bitcoin will ever be the only/primary currency in the US. I would think that small and medium sized businesses may pay suppliers in bitcoin and some larger ones may as well but all commerce will not be done exclusively in bitcoin. The US government is one of the biggest consumers and biggest employers and it would likely never pay their contractors and employees in bitcoin It's cheaper and faster and easier for international payments to be done in bitcoin than fiat. It's the really big ones that have the most incentive to do it, and they are also the ones that pay the least tax. Only thing people would NEED dollars for is taxes, and the US has a low tax rate. |
Look inside yourself, and you will see that you are the bubble.
|
|
|
Febo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2744
Merit: 1288
|
|
July 05, 2014, 11:21:16 AM |
|
That 50 people own 1/3 of Bitcoins, just made Bitcoin less popular and have lover price as could have. Most of this 50 people got this coins cheap and fro them they have little real value. It is one of reasons, some alt coin might catch Bitcoin in future, where ownership will be more decentralized, people will pay real value for coins and will widely spread it all over the world.
|
|
|
|
|
leezay
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 363
Merit: 100
SWISSREALCOIN - FIRST REAL ESTATE CRYPTO TOKEN
|
|
July 05, 2014, 06:24:14 PM |
|
Don't forget all the flash crashed happen this year is due to whale liquidating their position.
|
|
|
|
piramida
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1010
Borsche
|
|
July 05, 2014, 06:58:03 PM |
|
It is one of reasons, some alt coin might catch Bitcoin in future, where ownership will be more decentralized
Yeah, but not until someone creates a HippieCoin where every person on earth has one and they can't trade it or send it, or otherwise create inequality. That would be a happy world right, and it will be sure to takeover bitcoin and everything else because it's so equally distributed and peaceful and good. |
i am satoshi
|
|
|
|
InwardContour
|
|
July 05, 2014, 07:09:40 PM |
|
Keep in mind that when the price eventually hits 6 or 7 digits there will be no more "cashing out", because bitcoin will be money. Walmart will pay its suppliers in bitcoin and they will both pay their wage slaves in bitcoin who will buy things in bitcoin. The fabled stability that a certain group of degenerates dream of. Non-issue.
I would doubt that bitcoin will ever be the only/primary currency in the US. I would think that small and medium sized businesses may pay suppliers in bitcoin and some larger ones may as well but all commerce will not be done exclusively in bitcoin. The US government is one of the biggest consumers and biggest employers and it would likely never pay their contractors and employees in bitcoin It's cheaper and faster and easier for international payments to be done in bitcoin than fiat. It's the really big ones that have the most incentive to do it, and they are also the ones that pay the least tax. Only thing people would NEED dollars for is taxes, and the US has a low tax rate. It is generally cheaper to use bitcoin then it is to transact fiat payments at the consumer level. It gets more complicated at the commercial level as corporations need to have the ability to "reverse" a transaction in the event of a mistake for example. Another problem with commercial international payments is the issue of being able to prove who funds were sent to. There are a couple of ways around this second issue but not so much with the first issue. The reason why I would not be as encouraged with consumers using bitcoin for international payments is because the potential market for this is very small. There are very few transactions that go directly overseas in the US, it is probably more common in Europe but the Euro should make this just as efficient as sending a payment domestically |
|
|
|
|
|
elebit
|
|
July 05, 2014, 10:50:26 PM |
|
Interesting, in several ways.
First, I have not seen these numbers. But numbers on Bitcoin ownership do get thrown around quite frequently. They have so far always been completely fabricated. That may not mean that they are wrong, but they are unscientific and unrealiable and you should not make decisions based on them.
(Most numbers come from assumptions on how to map wallets to cryptographic addresses, something that the pseudonymity of Bitcoin does not easily let you do. The only analysis that will come close to correctness would be a statistical analysis of Bitcoin users, and even when it would come with a high uncertainty. The telling factor of such analysis is to tell you exactly what this uncertainty is and why.)
Second, given the pretty much standard description of Bitcoin as a global currency for the Internet with no fixed ties to neither nation states nor their currencies, why would you expect its ownership distribution to be different from gold, silver or dollars? It is a free floating currency in a capitalistic day and age, and if you can't buy it freely because of distribution limits how could you possibly use it as a currency?
About the numbers again, how could you bootstrap a currency out of thin air and not have the value be zero from the start? From the beginning you can not buy anything with it and therefore it does not have value in the economic sense. As the value accrues the distribution will change as early adopters are bought out. But we can never expect a free floating currency to deviate much from the ownership distribution of other currencies. We are still in the speculative phase of Bitcoin, most of the value is still speculation that it may find more use in the future as it gets easier to use and new products are invented. So it is not unreasonable that a large part (and I would say 90% is entirely reasonable) was held just in the hope for it to gain in value. So far that has worked out pretty well.
Will Bitcoins be widely used in the future? Nobody knows for certain (or the price would be even higher). Will it be used for commerce or to store value? Will the deflation cause trade to stop as some people seem to believe? Nobody knows. But I think we have a pretty good grasp of the current use and value, and it surprises me that you and your friend seemingly expected something very different.
|
|
|
|
|
aminorex
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1030
Sine secretum non libertas
|
|
July 05, 2014, 11:41:15 PM |
|
Will Bitcoins be widely used in the future? Nobody knows for certain (or the price would be even higher).
Certainty is not binary. That is why some of us will gain disproportionately. Our certainty is greater. re the OP: Coase's theorem suggests that distribution will approach optimality over time. The defector in the dilemma, in this case, is not the dumper, but the hoarder. |
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Give a man a Poisson distribution and he eats at random times independent of one another, at a constant known rate.
|
|
|
|
okthen
|
|
July 06, 2014, 01:14:28 AM |
|
Will Bitcoins be widely used in the future? Nobody knows for certain (or the price would be even higher).
Certainty is not binary. That is why some of us will gain disproportionately. Our certainty is greater. Then it's not really called certainty. You're either certain or not. Some will gain more than other because they see the odds as favorable/believe in cryptocurrency/ have money to risk. |
|
|
|
|
|
4mherewego
|
|
July 06, 2014, 04:52:45 AM |
|
As those with bitcoins use them they will own less. If they don't use them, then they are basically nulled. Compare this with fiat where those with a lot can print more at will. The first system starts unequal but equals out over time. The other system also starts uneven and remains uneven. Which system do you prefer?
|
|
|
|
|
|
