Bitcoin Forum
December 09, 2016, 02:02:42 AM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 [78] 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1806731 times)
silverbox
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910


View Profile
May 23, 2012, 12:11:15 AM
 #1541


I believe the topic was international settlements.  The problems with paper in this area have been addressed.

Settle up every few weeks with cargo jets.  *shrug*  In WW2 they used boats filled with gold and silver, but its the modern age, jets will work just as well..

Since that time energy costs, and the size of economies accross the globe have skyrocketed. It's not the same anymore.

Now, if you really want to scale back to WW2 levels of global development...

So kick up the value of gold to match the worldwide economy/developement level...  Its just a means to keep score, if that much weight of gold is required to settle up for smaller transactions obviously the value of gold is too low..  Oh wait we have.. gold is 1600 an ounce now, not 30.. Wink


Corrected for inflation, fuel costs twice what they were back then. And U.S. international trade is now about 50 times what it was back then. So we're talking about a multiple of 100 times the cost of doing business that way compared to say, 1938.

So then gold is obviously radically undervalued..  160,000 per ounce please..

1481248962
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481248962

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481248962
Reply with quote  #2

1481248962
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
miscreanity
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
May 23, 2012, 12:12:40 AM
 #1542

Corrected for inflation, fuel costs twice what they were back then. And U.S. international trade is now about 50 times what it was back then. So we're talking about a multiple of 100 times the cost of doing business that way compared to say, 1938.

What about increased carrying capacity, range, and fuel efficiency?
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


View Profile
May 23, 2012, 12:15:14 AM
 #1543


how likely is it for the Internet to go down?  wasn't it designed to withstand a nuclear war?


To the extent that it would not support a reliable Bitcoin network operating at scale and under attack by the owners of significant chunks of the global network infrastructure...it's almost a certainty.


cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 23, 2012, 12:16:39 AM
 #1544


how likely is it for the Internet to go down?  wasn't it designed to withstand a nuclear war?


To the extent that it would not support a reliable Bitcoin network operating at scale and under attack by the owners of significant chunks of the global network infrastructure...it's almost a certainty.



no way.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


View Profile
May 23, 2012, 12:17:10 AM
 #1545


how likely is it for the Internet to go down?  wasn't it designed to withstand a nuclear war?


To the extent that it would not support a reliable Bitcoin network operating at scale and under attack by the owners of significant chunks of the global network infrastructure...it's almost a certainty.


no way.

Watch and learn then.


miscreanity
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
May 23, 2012, 12:17:26 AM
 #1546

how likely is it for the Internet to go down?  wasn't it designed to withstand a nuclear war?

a gold layer adds too much complexity, ironically.

It isn't likely, but the possibility remains - localized disruptions are more likely. The financial system is too crucial to modern life to leave to chance.

Seatbelts are annoying, cumbersome, and can cause more harm than help if used improperly. But in a rollover accident, you'll be glad you weren't ejected and crushed or dismembered.
silverbox
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910


View Profile
May 23, 2012, 12:18:13 AM
 #1547


how likely is it for the Internet to go down?  wasn't it designed to withstand a nuclear war?


To the extent that it would not support a reliable Bitcoin network operating at scale and under attack by the owners of significant chunks of the global network infrastructure...it's almost a certainty.


no way.

Watch and learn then.



Woot Tvbcof is gonna take down the internets!! Wink

Edit: Bask in my newfound HERONESS
miscreanity
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
May 23, 2012, 12:20:10 AM
 #1548

how likely is it for the Internet to go down?  wasn't it designed to withstand a nuclear war?
To the extent that it would not support a reliable Bitcoin network operating at scale and under attack by the owners of significant chunks of the global network infrastructure...it's almost a certainty.
no way.
Watch and learn then.

The damage need not come from physical sources.

BLACK DETH OF TEH INTERWEBZ!!
miscreanity
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
May 23, 2012, 12:21:57 AM
 #1549

So then gold is obviously radically undervalued..  160,000 per ounce please..

Us phyzzz holders can only hope. Please hold the war, famine, and roving gangs Smiley
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 23, 2012, 12:29:12 AM
 #1550


how likely is it for the Internet to go down?  wasn't it designed to withstand a nuclear war?


To the extent that it would not support a reliable Bitcoin network operating at scale and under attack by the owners of significant chunks of the global network infrastructure...it's almost a certainty.


no way.

Watch and learn then.



Woot Tvbcof is gonna take down the internets!! Wink

Edit: Bask in my newfound HERONESS


LOL!  how many decades has it been up and running w/o a takedown?  and everyone thinks i'm cocky... Cheesy

sorry tvbcof; you're a troll. Wink
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


View Profile
May 23, 2012, 12:30:16 AM
 #1551


how likely is it for the Internet to go down?  wasn't it designed to withstand a nuclear war?


To the extent that it would not support a reliable Bitcoin network operating at scale and under attack by the owners of significant chunks of the global network infrastructure...it's almost a certainty.


no way.

Watch and learn then.


Woot Tvbcof is gonna take down the internets!! Wink

LOL!  how many decades has it been up and running w/o a takedown?  and everyone thinks i'm cocky. Cheesy

Smiley  I didn't say I was an owner of a significant chunk of the global network infrastructure.  It's more than I have some sense of the layout coupled with some intuition about these sorts of things complements of my vocation.

But if you want to lay a big bet on my being wrong, I can't stop you...  Chances are we'll never find out for other reasons (though they would be equally good at souring your bet unfortunately.)


bitcool
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1441

Live and enjoy experiments


View Profile
May 23, 2012, 12:34:17 AM
 #1552


AFAIK, Nixon abandoning gold standard in 1971 was neither because we couldn't move gold fast enough,  nor because gold centralizing didn't work.

i disagree.  the US trading partners took the word of the US Treasury/Fed that theirs/ours gold reserves were actually present in Fort Knox (centralized).  the trading partners left them there b/c it was too inconvenient/heavy to be moving around the world on a daily basis. 

eventually the French got suspicious and called us on it.  what did we do?  DEFAULT.
I disagree with your disagreement  Wink The abandonment of the gold standard was redemption issue -- i.e. excessive printing --  not a centralization problem.  French moving their gold back was just an failed attempt on gold suppression scheme: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Gold_Pool

Leaving gold with Fed has always been more of a political gesture than logistic issue, even today much of the Germany and Chinese gold are still left with NY Fed, you think because it's too heavy?


I still don't understand why you need to move gold around on a daily basis -- gold/silver certificates work just fine, as long as there's convertibility.
miscreanity
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
May 23, 2012, 12:44:26 AM
 #1553

I disagree with your disagreement  Wink The abandonment of the gold standard was redemption issue -- i.e. excessive printing --  not a centralization problem.  French moving their gold back was just an failed attempt on gold suppression scheme: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Gold_Pool

Leaving gold with Fed has always been more of a political gesture than logistic issue, even today much of the Germany and Chinese gold are still left with NY Fed, you think because it's too heavy?

The big gold cube might fall to the center of the earth because it's so heavy. Like the missing pyramids. You don't know about them? That's 'cause they sunk!

I still don't understand why you need to move gold around on a daily basis -- gold/silver certificates work just fine, as long as there's convertibility.

Yup. The dollar is a claim on the nation's accumulated wealth, held mainly in the form of gold. Without convertibility, you may as well have bought shares of a company that the company refuses to recognize.
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526


View Profile
May 23, 2012, 01:01:53 AM
 #1554

Markets sometimes follow rumors more than reality... Should your cost of doing business really be exposed to a 10% rise if someone plants a few false seeds in the media?  Sure, it's no worse than the current situation, I'm just saying Bitcoin would be superior and thus eventually it will win out as long as the internet and globalized trading continue.

10% rise?? wtf it doesn't cost $2000 to airmail 1 lb... 

Again, I'm speaking about countries, not civilians.  One pound ain't gonna cut it for international settlements.  It will be sent in a military plane with a fighter escort.  Not cheap.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
12jh3odyAAaR2XedPKZNCR4X4sebuotQzN
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


View Profile
May 23, 2012, 01:02:36 AM
 #1555

General Comment: Thanks, cypherdoc, for reminding me to do an update via your edit above.
As projected, the USDX ratchets back and forth while gold ratchets up.  It's easily predicted by fundamentals...no subscription required.

Another Score:  5/22/12
          year ago    now       delta mult
BTC     6.30         5.09       + 0.81
Gold    1512         1560      + 1.03

--------------------------
ref (for future updates):
http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/mtgoxUSD#czsg2011-05-08zeg2011-05-08ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zv  (change date)
http://www.kitco.com/charts/livegold.html  (hist cgi at bottom)
mult=now/year_ago

day           ya-btc  btc  mult    ya-Au  Au    mult
2012-05-22  6.30  5.09  0.81    1512  1560  1.03
2012-05-21  5.90  5.10  0.86    1514  1590  1.05
2012-05-18  7.50  5.12  0.68    1497  1592  1.06    
2012-05-17  7.80  5.09  0.65    1480  1574  1.06            
2012-05-16  7.40  5.09  0.69    1495  1533  1.03
2012-05-15  6.80  5.03  0.74    1492  1545  1.04
2012-05-14  8.50  5.00  0.59    1495  1555  1.04
2012-05-12  5.40  4.95  0.92    1505  1580  1.05
2012-05-11  5.00  4.95  0.99    1505  1580  1.05
2012-05-10  3.82  4.90  1.28    1510  1593  1.05
2012-05-09  3.75  5.03  1.34    1510  1590  1.05
2012-05-08  3.64  5.03  1.38    1497  1605  1.07

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 23, 2012, 01:07:59 AM
 #1556


AFAIK, Nixon abandoning gold standard in 1971 was neither because we couldn't move gold fast enough,  nor because gold centralizing didn't work.

i disagree.  the US trading partners took the word of the US Treasury/Fed that theirs/ours gold reserves were actually present in Fort Knox (centralized).  the trading partners left them there b/c it was too inconvenient/heavy to be moving around the world on a daily basis. 

eventually the French got suspicious and called us on it.  what did we do?  DEFAULT.
I disagree with your disagreement  Wink The abandonment of the gold standard was redemption issue -- i.e. excessive printing --  not a centralization problem.  French moving their gold back was just an failed attempt on gold suppression scheme: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Gold_Pool

Leaving gold with Fed has always been more of a political gesture than logistic issue, even today much of the Germany and Chinese gold are still left with NY Fed, you think because it's too heavy?


I still don't understand why you need to move gold around on a daily basis -- gold/silver certificates work just fine, as long as there's convertibility.


it was both.  the US excessively printed but we were able to get away with it b/c we were the centralized custodian of everyone's gold (only we could count it realtime). we were able to get away with years of inflation throughout the 1960's to fund the Vietnam war.  over time other countries caught on to what we were doing but probably didn't want to bother with coming to get their gold b/c it IS too heavy.

finally, France couldn't take it any longer and demanded their gold when the excesses could no longer be ignored.  then we defaulted.

this is why Bitcoin would be so superior.  with a keystroke the BOP could be settled nightly.
silverbox
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910


View Profile
May 23, 2012, 01:09:51 AM
 #1557

Markets sometimes follow rumors more than reality... Should your cost of doing business really be exposed to a 10% rise if someone plants a few false seeds in the media?  Sure, it's no worse than the current situation, I'm just saying Bitcoin would be superior and thus eventually it will win out as long as the internet and globalized trading continue.

10% rise?? wtf it doesn't cost $2000 to airmail 1 lb... 

Again, I'm speaking about countries, not civilians.  One pound ain't gonna cut it for international settlements.  It will be sent in a military plane with a fighter escort.  Not cheap.

A 747 filled with gold?  Thats like 100 tons.  4.5 billion USD or thereabouts in gold  About 500,000 USD for a international flight.  Say another 500k USD for the fighter escort.  4500 million usd in gold  1 million usd to move it..

Thats .022 %   NOT 10%

Again your 10% number is crazy high.

Try doing a lil math before you start spouting off about 10% fee..
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526


View Profile
May 23, 2012, 01:19:05 AM
 #1558

Markets sometimes follow rumors more than reality... Should your cost of doing business really be exposed to a 10% rise if someone plants a few false seeds in the media?  Sure, it's no worse than the current situation, I'm just saying Bitcoin would be superior and thus eventually it will win out as long as the internet and globalized trading continue.

10% rise?? wtf it doesn't cost $2000 to airmail 1 lb...  

Again, I'm speaking about countries, not civilians.  One pound ain't gonna cut it for international settlements.  It will be sent in a military plane with a fighter escort.  Not cheap.

A 747 filled with gold?  Thats like 100 tons.  4.5 billion USD or thereabouts in gold  About 500,000 USD for a international flight.  Say another 500k USD for the fighter escort.  4500 million usd in gold  1 million usd to move it..

Thats .022 %   NOT 10%

Again your 10% number is crazy high.

Try doing a lil math before you start spouting off about 10% fee..

You're right.  It's still damn inconvenient compared to bitcoin.  Sorry I was lazy and didn't feel like looking up 10 different figures to do the math.  I can see it has upset you.  Hey everyone, keep in mind I'm sometimes lazy and pull numbers out of my ass.  Please don't believe anything I say without verifying it first.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
12jh3odyAAaR2XedPKZNCR4X4sebuotQzN
silverbox
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910


View Profile
May 23, 2012, 02:34:11 AM
 #1559

Markets sometimes follow rumors more than reality... Should your cost of doing business really be exposed to a 10% rise if someone plants a few false seeds in the media?  Sure, it's no worse than the current situation, I'm just saying Bitcoin would be superior and thus eventually it will win out as long as the internet and globalized trading continue.

10% rise?? wtf it doesn't cost $2000 to airmail 1 lb... 

Again, I'm speaking about countries, not civilians.  One pound ain't gonna cut it for international settlements.  It will be sent in a military plane with a fighter escort.  Not cheap.

A 747 filled with gold?  Thats like 100 tons.  4.5 billion USD or thereabouts in gold  About 500,000 USD for a international flight.  Say another 500k USD for the fighter escort.  4500 million usd in gold  1 million usd to move it..

Thats .022 %   NOT 10%

Again your 10% number is crazy high.

Try doing a lil math before you start spouting off about 10% fee..

You're right.  It's still damn inconvenient compared to bitcoin.  Sorry I was lazy and didn't feel like looking up 10 different figures to do the math.  I can see it has upset you.  Hey everyone, keep in mind I'm sometimes lazy and pull numbers out of my ass.  Please don't believe anything I say without verifying it first.

lol, Great reply Wink.  Sure gold isn't as convienent as bitcoin, but its unlikley a hacker will make off with your gold in the middle of the night in a few microseconds...

Wouldn't it be fun to pull up in a 747 full of gold to someone who claimed you couldn't pay because of spurious media stories... Way more satisifying then a few clicks to send the BTC Wink.  Check out my 100 tons of gold bitches!!!
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526


View Profile
May 23, 2012, 02:38:39 AM
 #1560

Additionally, if there is a war going on there would be significant risk of loss.... I had that in mind.  10% is still probably a bit high, but imagine shooting one of those from the sky.  Melt it and reform the bars, and you're golden Wink.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
12jh3odyAAaR2XedPKZNCR4X4sebuotQzN
Pages: « 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 [78] 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 ... 1560 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!