Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[NewLiberty]

My prediction:  NY will go surprisingly easy and their policies will foster more mainstream use of native Bitcoin.

The underlying reason for such a policy will be that the more mainstream use there is, the more effective black-listing/white-listing and forced declarations will be when (not if) they chose to mandate it as an element of licensing and probably eventually for general use.

Please forgive me, but is this not just a bit naive in that it discounts the influence of the corporations for whom Bitcoin presents a challenge to their profit model?  Bitcoin is (at least) a disruptive technology that drives away the cost and friction of financial transactions.  NY is heavy with corporations that make all their wealth from creating and managing that friction.  Some of these even build skyscrapers.

Do we imagine that these companies are not the driving influence for the anti-innovation pro-centralization regulation efforts there and that instead it is government doing this "on its own"?  The heads of government institutions in charge of dealing with Bitcoin, when asked by the US Senate "What new laws do you need?" answered "None, Sir.  We are doing quite well with the existing laws."

The regulations are not for the benefit of government.  The origin is anti-competitive.

Connect the dots, draw the timelines.  Here are a few of them:

Nov '13:
http://www.coindesk.com/senate-bitcoin-hearing-legitimacy-challenges-virtual-currencies/

April '14
http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/business-a-lobbying/204733-mastercard-lobbying-on-bitcoin

July '14
http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/07/17/ny-financial-regulator-releases-draft-of-bitlicense-for-bitcoin-businesses/

“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” - Sun Tsu

[1713577095]

1713577095

[1713577095]

1713577095

[brg444]

My prediction:  NY will go surprisingly easy and their policies will foster more mainstream use of native Bitcoin.

The underlying reason for such a policy will be that the more mainstream use there is, the more effective black-listing/white-listing and forced declarations will be when (not if) they chose to mandate it as an element of licensing and probably eventually for general use.

Please forgive me, but is this not just a bit naive in that it discounts the influence of the corporations for whom Bitcoin presents a challenge to their profit model?  Bitcoin is (at least) a disruptive technology that drives away the cost and friction of financial transactions.  NY is heavy with corporations that make all their wealth from creating and managing that friction.  Some of these even build skyscrapers.

Do we imagine that these companies are not the driving influence for the anti-innovation pro-centralization regulation efforts there and that instead it is government doing this "on its own"?  The heads of government institutions in charge of dealing with Bitcoin, when asked by the US Senate "What new laws do you need?" answered "None, Sir.  We are doing quite well with the existing laws."

The regulations are not for the benefit of government.  The origin is anti-competitive.

Connect the dots, draw the timelines.  Here are a few of them:

Nov '13:
http://www.coindesk.com/senate-bitcoin-hearing-legitimacy-challenges-virtual-currencies/

April '14
http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/business-a-lobbying/204733-mastercard-lobbying-on-bitcoin

July '14
http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/07/17/ny-financial-regulator-releases-draft-of-bitlicense-for-bitcoin-businesses/

“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” - Sun Tsu

I think rocks suggestion is more reasonable.

The first proposition was a slap to the face with such over-reaching regulations that whatever would be put in effect in the revised draft would seem "softer". It is much easier to reign in firms with a softer stance and then slowly but surely tighten the reins.

If they go along with the outrageous models suggested in the first draft then most Bitcoin companies will simply forbid NY users from accessing their service and ignore the regulations. If that happens then Lawsky & his team will find themselves in all sort of legal shitstorm for infringing all kind of NY state customer protection laws. This will simply result in encouraging use of "dark" markets and unregulated exchanges which is certainly not "desirable" from the point of view of the regulators.

[cypherdoc]

looks good:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2pp4fk/key_points_of_bitlicense_announcement_by_ben/

[tvbcof]

looks good:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2pp4fk/key_points_of_bitlicense_announcement_by_ben/

Qualitatively just about what I predicted.  Imagine that.

I like #7's 'slash' record keeping down to 7 years.  That kind of boxes the timeframe within which the next shoe will drop I'd say, though I'd expected it within half that time.  Depends on how fast native Bitcoin can be brought to the street, and whether Gavin can get his exponential growth stuff in place.

[rocks]

The problem that a free society is so effective that it grows government and in steps the saviors who now promise to solve all your problems.
5% turns into 10%. More problems arise and so it needs to grow even more to help you solve your new problems. 5% is soon 50% and the choke hold is now so strong it grows itself into death.

My guess is that the only sustainable amount of government is 0%

The government gaining access to a free guaranteed funding mechanism 100 years ago is what enabled 2-3% to become 50%.

Take away that free guaranteed funding mechanism and it's quite likely that 50% will approach near zero again. It is no coincidence that the modern massive government & social services model of western governments came into being after they broke gold and established fiat money. It is important to remember that the modern era is a historic anomaly, most of history has existed under much smaller governments than we have today.

[cypherdoc]

We believe that the weakness in U.S. equity and debt markets stems from a more fundamental problem than concerns about future growth, namely that investors are once again starting to seriously question the disclosure from the largest banks and investment houses regarding their credit exposure to highly leveraged borrowers. This concern is evidenced by weakness in the equity market valuations of lenders with exposure to the oil sector as well as the recent changes in the relative position of spreads in the U.S.bond markets.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-12-18/outlook-2015-deflation-remains-dominant-theme

Deflation.  yep.

all good for Bitcoin.

[rocks]

The Swiss National Bank (SNB) is imposing an interest rate of –0.25% on sight deposit account balances at the SNB, with the aim of taking the three-month Libor into negative territory. It is thus expanding the target range for the three-month Libor to –0.75% to 0.25% and extending it to its usual width of 1 percentage point. Negative interest will be levied on balances exceeding a given exemption threshold.

http://www.snb.ch/en/mmr/reference/pre_20141218/source/pre_20141218.en.pdf

This is in response to capital flight from Russia with the collapsing currency.

Now imagine if that capital flight one day starts to direct itself into bitcoin (or gold) instead of to another fiat currency as is the norm today.

[cypherdoc]

The Swiss National Bank (SNB) is imposing an interest rate of –0.25% on sight deposit account balances at the SNB, with the aim of taking the three-month Libor into negative territory. It is thus expanding the target range for the three-month Libor to –0.75% to 0.25% and extending it to its usual width of 1 percentage point. Negative interest will be levied on balances exceeding a given exemption threshold.

http://www.snb.ch/en/mmr/reference/pre_20141218/source/pre_20141218.en.pdf

This is in response to capital flight from Russia with the collapsing currency.

Now imagine if that capital flight one day starts to direct itself into bitcoin (or gold) instead of to another fiat currency as is the norm today.

i believe it's only for accts over $10M.

but yeah, nowhere good to flee.  except...

[cypherdoc]

looks good:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2pp4fk/key_points_of_bitlicense_announcement_by_ben/

convenient place for a double bottom.

[Hunyadi]

looks good:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2pp4fk/key_points_of_bitlicense_announcement_by_ben/

convenient place for a double bottom.

Very convenient  (quote from the Wall Observer)

12/29/2014

[rocks]

i believe it's only for accts over $10M.

That is how it starts. It is essentially a wealth tax, which is unconstitutional in the US but I'm sure SCOTUS will somehow find a way around that by saying this mechanism is not a wealth "tax" per-say but a bank fee (after all individuals don't HAVE to keep $10M in a bank, you could keep that as cash under your mattress. Ignore that fact that every police department in the country would use asset seizure to confiscate that amount of money held outside of the banking system)

but yeah, nowhere good to flee.  except...

Reminds me of this meme. Walking away is the power of withdrawing consent.

[Torque]

Now imagine if that capital flight one day starts to direct itself into bitcoin (or gold) instead of to another fiat currency as is the norm today.

Yesterday's sell off in bitcoin occurred right when the Russian ruble started to tank.  Coincidence?  I don't think so.  If I were a "Power that Be", and I wanted to discourage a mass flight from the ruble to bitcoin, I would accumulate BTC and then time my dump precisely with the plummeting ruble.  This would be easy while the bitcoin market is still miniscule.

[cypherdoc]

+420 on the Dow.  wow, somebody's happy about something!

i'm staying clear of that thing.

[molecular]

The question I suppose is how much communism is too much? 15%, 30%, clearly 100% is fatal, and anything more than 50% is probably also terminally toxic.

How much cancer is terminal?

Are just a few couple metastatic cells ok?

maybe related joke:

"What's the difference between a minarchist and an anarchist?"

"About 6 months"

[msin]

+420 on the Dow.  wow, somebody's happy about something!

i'm staying clear of that thing.

Most people made a bundle from the Fortune 50 this year, including myself. Bitcoin was my worse performer, however I believe now is the absolutely best time to invest in crypto.  Bitcoin tends to dwell in the doldrums for a while, shaking people's beliefs and weeding out the weak, then skyrocket. 

[cypherdoc]

+420 on the Dow.  wow, somebody's happy about something!

i'm staying clear of that thing.

Most people made a bundle from the Fortune 50 this year, including myself. Bitcoin was my worse performer, however I believe now is the absolutely best time to invest in crypto.  Bitcoin tends to dwell in the doldrums for a while, shaking people's beliefs and weeding out the weak, then skyrocket. 

yes, they are called cycles.  and the Dow and Bitcoin stand at opposite ends of their cycles.

[msin]

+420 on the Dow.  wow, somebody's happy about something!

i'm staying clear of that thing.

Most people made a bundle from the Fortune 50 this year, including myself. Bitcoin was my worse performer, however I believe now is the absolutely best time to invest in crypto.  Bitcoin tends to dwell in the doldrums for a while, shaking people's beliefs and weeding out the weak, then skyrocket.  

yes, they are called cycles.  and the Dow and Bitcoin stand at opposite ends of their cycles.

Yep, can't argue with that, however I think many people have a misconception that they are mutually inclusive.

[cakebet]

And as the U.S. has seen, government is so effective that it can hold the entire system hostage until demands of the companies it is supposed to regulate are met.

There is a growing body of evidence that bigger government means slower growth of real GDP. Once the level of total government spending as a percentage of GDP reaches a tipping point, estimated to be from 15 percent to 25 percent of GDP, additional expansion crowds out private productive investment and slows economic growth. When government overreaches, economic freedom is diminished and private exchange opportunities are lost — that is, the range of choices open to individuals is restricted.

This is hardly a revelation, most of the communist economic experiements of the last century have demonstrated this is abundance (well total lack of abundance). The question I suppose is how much communism is too much? 15%, 30%, clearly 100% is fatal, and anything more than 50% is probably also terminally toxic. Optimally operating economies seem to have around 5-10% govt. share of GDP but it also depends on strong justice and legal systems for protection of individual freedoms.

The problem that a free society is so effective that it grows government and in steps the saviors who now promise to solve all your problems.
5% turns into 10%. More problems arise and so it needs to grow even more to help you solve your new problems. 5% is soon 50% and the choke hold is now so strong it grows itself into death.

My guess is that the only sustainable amount of government is 0%

[smoothie]

i believe it's only for accts over $10M.

That is how it starts. It is essentially a wealth tax, which is unconstitutional in the US but I'm sure SCOTUS will somehow find a way around that by saying this mechanism is not a wealth "tax" per-say but a bank fee (after all individuals don't HAVE to keep $10M in a bank, you could keep that as cash under your mattress. Ignore that fact that every police department in the country would use asset seizure to confiscate that amount of money held outside of the banking system)

but yeah, nowhere good to flee.  except...

Reminds me of this meme. Walking away is the power of withdrawing consent.

Love this meme!. Thank you for sharing!

[marcus_of_augustus]

The Swiss National Bank (SNB) is imposing an interest rate of –0.25% on sight deposit account balances at the SNB, with the aim of taking the three-month Libor into negative territory. It is thus expanding the target range for the three-month Libor to –0.75% to 0.25% and extending it to its usual width of 1 percentage point. Negative interest will be levied on balances exceeding a given exemption threshold.

http://www.snb.ch/en/mmr/reference/pre_20141218/source/pre_20141218.en.pdf

This is in response to capital flight from Russia with the collapsing currency.

Now imagine if that capital flight one day starts to direct itself into bitcoin (or gold) instead of to another fiat currency as is the norm today.

Just think of all the fiat currencies today, only very few desire or could handle a large influx of new capital (well maybe the Ruble right now). Their managers actively discourage it by slashing interest rates, even into negative as the SNB are so terrified of having a 'strong currency'. They all know that if there is ever a strong preferable currency it would become 'THE ONE'.

Enter bitcoin, a global electronic currency that welcomes and encourages the prospect of appreciation in value. Wonder what happens next?