Max Keiser Report on Bitcoins! 4/7/2012

[wachtwoord]

I agree with every word of the above post.

[1714897740]

1714897740

[1714897740]

1714897740

[1714897740]

1714897740

[evoorhees]

More and more scientific evidence seems to show us that cooperation tends to get one a better life than cut-throat
competition. 

Free market competition is not "cut-throat." Nobody's throat is cut. Market competition, in fact, is nothing but unrestricted cooperation. Because not every relationship/arrangement makes sense to cooperate on (ie - no reason for you to fly to my house to help me organize my bookshelf right now), it leads to clusters of cooperating agents (like companies) who then compete for scarce resources such as time, food, and bitcoins.

Thus, an open market place is pure unadulterated cooperation - it is the natural limit and expression of cooperation among individuals, and competition necessarily results from this spontaneous cooperation. So long as nobody's throat is actually being cut, it should be regarded as the proper way for elegant and productive beings to interact socially.

[molecular]

When I said greed is good and that greed without bad consequences is the problem I meant that greed is a healthy and even a required impulse to drive progress, innovation and ultimately growth in the marketplace which benefits all of it's participants and that the cause of problems that arise in the marketplace when it's trying to progress, innovate and grow is the artificially removed risks of a loss.

As long as you have greed coupled with the risk of loss those two forces balance each other out and are healthy and required if your goal is to have the marketplace grow productively.


Oh and I agree there is no objective good or bad outside of trying to reach a specific objective goal.

I think I understand what you mean by "greed is good" and I agree to the extent that greed can greatly motivate people and doing selfish things can include be altruistic.

Now I have another problem: the growth paradigm.

To get back on topic, listen to what Bauwen says in the discussed video:

Imagine you're a martian and you come to this planet and you see this race of humans actually destroying the biosphere. And the reason they do this is because the believe the system is based on the idea that we have infinite material resources. And this is just not true. So becauase of compound interest and other features which mean we have to grow all the time and this creates this compound exponential growth. And the planet can no longer carry it, so this is the real crisis of our system.

you say "growth in the marketplace which benefits all of it's participants". I'm not so sure. What kind of growth is it? Does any growth create benefit?

Here's an example: I talked to a friend last night, he works in engineering and these guys are currently investing thousands of EUR into chaning a certain part of some machinery they sell, a part that is screwed onto some other part of the machine. What's the change? Well, they change it so that it breaks when you screw it off for maintenance so that the customer has to buy that part again.

That's driven by greed. Does it imply growth? Hell yea: more money is moved, more parts sold, GDP increases. Does it benefit all participants (or even just: is the sum of all participants' benefits positive): hell no! More natural resources are used, more work is expended, the uptime of the product is reduced and the maintenance cost increased.

So here we have a case of "growth" not being beneficial for the whole of society. War is another such case.

So no, greed is not necessarily good.

[hazek]

you say "growth in the marketplace which benefits all of it's participants". I'm not so sure. What kind of growth is it? Does any growth create benefit?

If some participants suffer because of growth then by definition that's not growth that benefits all. Growth that destroys the environment for certain participants would file under that category. If those participants do not have the ability to defend themselves which would mean that the greed fueling this growth lacks the risk of defense by those people which would then cause loses for the business destroying the environment then that is the problem I mentioned.

Here's an example: I talked to a friend last night, he works in engineering and these guys are currently investing thousands of EUR into chaning a certain part of some machinery they sell, a part that is screwed onto some other part of the machine. What's the change? Well, they change it so that it breaks when you screw it off for maintenance so that the customer has to buy that part again.

That's driven by greed. Does it imply growth? Hell yea: more money is moved, more parts sold, GDP increases. Does it benefit all participants (or even just: is the sum of all participants' benefits positive): hell no! More natural resources are used, more work is expended, the uptime of the product is reduced and the maintenance cost increased.

So here we have a case of "growth" not being beneficial for the whole of society. War is another such case.

Again, is the risk of loses because the customers of this firm can defend themselves by either demanding refunds for a faulty product via their contract or giving this business a bad review and taking their money someplace else present? If it isn't then that is the cause for this problem.

So no, greed is not necessarily good.

I never said it was.

[apetersson]

More Bitcoin Evangelism by Max:
During the "Exorcism of Blythe Masters"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wlmry45eI3g#t=4008s

[molecular]

More Bitcoin Evangelism by Max:
During the "Exorcism of Blythe Masters"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wlmry45eI3g#t=4008s

nice to hear someone from the audience mention to max that bitcoin is not only a sort of "online western union", but also a money.

Weird to see him answer something like "well, that's another aspect of it, the value moves up and down", the f..ck!?! And next he mentions Stacy is up 60% on bitcoin, lol. Store of value, Max?

[cypherdoc]

More Bitcoin Evangelism by Max:
During the "Exorcism of Blythe Masters"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wlmry45eI3g#t=4008s

nice to hear someone from the audience mention to max that bitcoin is not only a sort of "online western union", but also a money.

Weird to see him answer something like "well, that's another aspect of it, the value moves up and down", the f..ck!?! And next he mentions Stacy is up 60% on bitcoin, lol. Store of value, Max?

yes, i would have thought Max understood Bitcoin a little better than he does.  

it's not backed by Cryptology, its backed by the network and all that entails.

[apetersson]

the word "backed" is misunderstood most of the time..

a gold standard currency.. backed by gold. is gold backed by anything?

a fiat currency.. is it backed by nothing? no, it is backed by trust from the users, the obligation to pay taxes in it and sometimes soldiers firing at you if you sell your wares (f.ex. oil) for anything else.

so bitcoins are not only backed by trust from the bitcoin community, but also by the open source software, the cryptography behind it, the infrastructure and the utility function as a means of exchange (unlike gold).

[beckspace]

nice to hear someone from the audience mention to max that bitcoin is not only a sort of "online western union", but also a money.

Like Evoorhees said: "Bitcoin is two things: it is a digital currency unit and it is the global payment network.

Keiser is only emphasizing the second aspect.

[herzmeister]

yup, Keiser has "emphasized" this many times. Maybe because he has gold sponsors too. 

[molecular]

nice to hear someone from the audience mention to max that bitcoin is not only a sort of "online western union", but also a money.

Like Evoorhees said: "Bitcoin is two things: it is a digital currency unit and it is the global payment network.

Keiser is only emphasizing the second aspect.

I can't imagine he doesn't understand the money aspect of bitcoin. After all, he's got Stacy . Also earlier last year he said bitcoin was the "currency of the resistance". Come on, he's getting it quite allright, I'd say.

Question remains: why does he downplay the money (currency sounds politically motivated and tied to a nationstate somehow, so I use "money" instead) aspect. I'm thinking maybe he's not done buying yet. He's talking about silver bullets in his "blythe standup" referenced a couple posts up, maybe he'll talk about "digital crypto bullets" once he decides he's acquired enough bitcoin.

He's in the camp with bit-pay, who strongly emphasize the payment system aspect, too. They're trying to get one million new users this year, maybe it really is the better way to go marketing-wise and there just aren't enough average joe with the understanding of the need of good money yet and they can be "sold" more easily that way?

Ideas?

[benjamindees]

I'm sure it has more to do with thinking of alternative "currency" or "money" as "illegal terrorism" since that's what the US government has tried to make it out as.

[wachtwoord]

Did anyone say free beer? 

[BitPay Business Solutions]

You can buy beer with bitcoins at Whiskey Dicks in Orlando!  At current prices it's 0.4 BTC for a beer, not free, but good enough. I will be there tonight.

[molecular]

Question remains: why does he downplay the money (currency sounds politically motivated and tied to a nationstate somehow, so I use "money" instead) aspect. I'm thinking maybe he's not done buying yet. He's talking about silver bullets in his "blythe standup" referenced a couple posts up, maybe he'll talk about "digital crypto bullets" once he decides he's acquired enough bitcoin.

He's in the camp with bit-pay, who strongly emphasize the payment system aspect, too. They're trying to get one million new users this year, maybe it really is the better way to go marketing-wise and there just aren't enough average joe with the understanding of the need of good money yet and they can be "sold" more easily that way?

Ideas?

I'd say it's marketing, and I think you nailed it with there being not enough average Joes who can understand money. What do most people associate with terms like "money" and "currency"? They'll probably think: banks! Financial crisis! Loan repayments! Credit card debt! Income tax!  ... What about "payment system"?: Ebay! Cool toys! Gadgets! Paypal! Amazon! New book DVD in the mail! Yay!

I suppose if we could capture this hypothetical "Joe ADHD-is-my-middle-name Average" specimen and handcuff them to a chair, in theory we could make them learn the error of their ways, but it's just not going to happen. Besides, they might faint from unusually high frontal cortex activity. Perhaps it's cynicism, but how does one re-educate an entire society about money, just so that they can understand Bitcoin? It seems so much easier to just go with the "free beer!" tactic.

oh, but it's simple: let fiat hyperinflation ensue and Joe will understand.