Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 07:25:21 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: :  (Read 11493 times)
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 12:17:15 AM
 #41

I think we're not going to move from a growth-based economy to a 'stable' economy, but rather from a product-heavy economy to a service-heavy economy. This will better facilitate the 'endless growth' that seems so desirable.

So.... less fast cars, more hookers.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
12jh3odyAAaR2XedPKZNCR4X4sebuotQzN
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481354721
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481354721

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481354721
Reply with quote  #2

1481354721
Report to moderator
1481354721
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481354721

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481354721
Reply with quote  #2

1481354721
Report to moderator
mav
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 12:40:13 AM
 #42

Well, it certainly doesn't happen through charging $200 for a $20 manicure... That kind of growth happens through medical advances, through feeding more people with food that does not make them sick, and through giving workers tools to help them be more productive. None of those things happen without considerable investment in education and research. But it all still requires inputs in the form of natural resources, which have unavoidable energy costs. All of those activities require energy inputs. And seeking efficiency in energy and resource use is an important key to getting more economic growth from those same inputs, in whatever form that takes, but that is not what we are doing. And it is not something that we will do to the extent we need to unless there is no other alternative. The story of growth has been one of exploiting natural and human resources, and as long as it is cheaper to fill dumps and dig up coal that is what we will do.

But, despite this, it does seem like eternal growth is possible if you do the things you suggest such as investment in education, efficiency etc (which I forgot to implicitly state myself and agree with). Without increases in efficiency then growth will of course consume too many resources no matter where that growth happens. As you suggest, growth isn't just about consumption, it's also about reducing the consumption and changing to non-resource consumption, yet whenever growth is mentioned in an economic sense it's about 'doing more with more' not about 'doing the same with less', but they're both still forms of growth.

It depends if there is an assumption that to provide better service requires more energy. Right now, I think it does, but with the right attention, it's possible to provide better service with equal or less energy than before, which would facilitate eternal growth. As you say, we are certainly not heading this way by way of policy, but perhaps we'll figure it out ourselves before too long...

As for charging more for the same service ($200 for a $20 manicure), that's not really 'growth of the economy' that's just growth of the monetary system. There's a very distinct difference between the value of something and the cost of something. I'm talking about eternal growth in the value of an economy, regardless of the relative cost associated. I imagine people generally consider growth to be reflected in 'the awesomeness of sports cars' rather than 'the cost of sports cars' (substitute 'features' with 'awesomeness' and 'family car' for 'sports car' if it pleases you more)

It all depends how you define growth, which I have not yet seen a reasonable definition in this thread.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 02:08:38 AM
 #43

To clarify. 'Post Growth' does not mean that there is no economic growth. 'Post Growth' means that growth is not mandatory, It means that economies can be free to expand or contract according to what makes sense, without breaking...

To me it means increasing pressure for re-distribution of wealth.  This pressure is quite moderated in a growing system by letting some of the excess trickle down.  Absent that things could become quite ugly.

Gold and 'the one true crypto-currency' both fail miserably in such an environment.  Both for the masses, and most likely for those who managed to win (or be born with) all the chips since they are in constant danger of ending up on meat-hooks in the town square and it will come to pass on occasion (absent and unfortunate de-population event.)

Giving the majority an option to freely select a currency solution which happens to be working for them strikes me as a pretty good solution in that the 1% either has to make it work for everyone, or everyone selects a different solution and the 1% join the 99%.  I'm all about the freedom to choose.


tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 02:58:43 AM
 #44

To clarify. 'Post Growth' does not mean that there is no economic growth. 'Post Growth' means that growth is not mandatory, It means that economies can be free to expand or contract according to what makes sense, without breaking...

To me it means increasing pressure for re-distribution of wealth.  This pressure is quite moderated in a growing system by letting some of the excess trickle down.  Absent that things could become quite ugly.

Gold and 'the one true crypto-currency' both fail miserably in such an environment.  Both for the masses, and most likely for those who managed to win (or be born with) all the chips since they are in constant danger of ending up on meat-hooks in the town square and it will come to pass on occasion (absent and unfortunate de-population event.)

Giving the majority an option to freely select a currency solution which happens to be working for them strikes me as a pretty good solution in that the 1% either has to make it work for everyone, or everyone selects a different solution and the 1% join the 99%.  I'm all about the freedom to choose.


But we have redistribution of wealth now. It's called 'trickle up economics' and it's more of a torrent than a trickle. And it is exactly due to not having a choice of currency, as all currencies are part of the debt based money system. Through swaps all the big credit markets are connected... And all roads lead to Rome. Truly local community currencies have the ability to effectively decouple a local economy from the rest of that system to allow it to operate on its own terms.

But it does not follow that Post Growth leads to re-distribution of wealth. Although I think it makes income mobility more possible because it frees people from the rigid structures of a tiered, debt-based, mandatory growth economic system.

The mechanism leading to re-distribution (downward) would be the that the 'pressure' I talked about would build to the point that it is more difficult to retain and there would be explosive failures.  In a growing system everyone can 'have more.'  In a static or shrinking system this is not possible.  It may be that the 'haves' would be willing to 'have less' in the interest of self preservation, but history doesn't argue for this.  The haves are at least as prone to the old tragedy-of-the-(not-so)-commons as any other group.

I personally am totally down with the 'local community currency' idea.  Accounting has always been an issue with such things (as have laws) and this is one reason why crypto-accounting systems hold such a draw for me.


miscreanity
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 05:04:47 AM
 #45

Gold and 'the one true crypto-currency' both fail miserably in such an environment.  Both for the masses, and most likely for those who managed to win (or be born with) all the chips since they are in constant danger of ending up on meat-hooks in the town square and it will come to pass on occasion (absent and unfortunate de-population event.)

With a stable supply and a stable environment, gold does phenomenally well as money. The same applies to crypto-currencies, especially static-supply variants like Bitcoin that can do well in both growth and post-growth economies. In a relatively static growth system, it would be very difficult for wealth disparities to arise, and any disruptions would spread quickly until they become normalized.

But it does not follow that Post Growth leads to re-distribution of wealth. Although I think it makes income mobility more possible because it frees people from the rigid structures of a tiered, debt-based, mandatory growth economic system.

Yes. Although redistribution may be more likely to occur in a market-force capacity because of that increased mobility.

For a while it looked like China might be the growth engine to help preserve the system, but now those hopes are fading. So now we can look to Sub Saharan Africa, but it will take a while to get that engine running... Even so, that is the last gasp. Africa is all the room we have left to turn this ship around.

Growth potential is still effectively unlimited.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 05:54:35 AM
 #46

Credit markets are a great example of trying to have your caek and eat it too. They are also a great example of tiered markets. Where everyone does not have the same opportunity to participate in the same markets. A few people have access to all markets and most people have access to only a few markets. It is not just that the very wealthy have more, it is that they have greater access to markets. So there is a huge problem when the yield curve flattens, it makes those markets more similar and the relative advantage moves to the hands of fewer and fewer people. There doesn't have to be much of a spread but to preserve the advantage for the top tier money there has to be some difference.

I've never been totally comfortable with my grasp of money markets and yield curves and such, in part because I've never played around with them.  But I understand what you are saying here and it makes a lot of sense.  And sucks.  Someone made the point that what we moving fairly rapidly into is a 1% vs. a .01% world, and whoever it was was probably right.  Throw some trinkets (new cars, big screen TV's, etc) at the 99% and they'll stay mostly content.  It doesn't even take that in most of the world outside of the West.  But in a non-growth environment I don't think that there will be enough excess to even allow for trinkets.  Bulltet-proof boot?  Ya, probably.  Cost of doing business.

For a while it looked like China might be the growth engine to help preserve the system, but now those hopes are fading. So now we can look to Sub Saharan Africa, but it will take a while to get that engine running... Even so, that is the last gasp. Africa is all the room we have left to turn this ship around.

I never figured that the Chinese would be happy to slave away making tennis shoes for me forever even if it were the key to unlimited status quo.  Even if the fruits of their labor were more evenly spread about the globe it never struck me as a likely perpetual motion machine to keep the globe in blissful abundance.

As for Africa, I am guessing that the competitive gang-rape can (and will) render her quite repulsive within a timeframe measured in years.

As I have said before, I believe that at some level it all gets back to very basic thermodynamics in the end.  Measuring energy input and distributing it over a population.  And again, I suspect that the results of us humans running out of energy will be a startling mirror of bacteria running out of nutrients in a petri dish.  Environmental contamination, warfare, and death for all but those individuals who have some sort of an advantage or an extraordinary level of luck.  I suspect we'll see this type of misery before we figure out nuclear fusion.


Fuzzy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560



View Profile
June 07, 2012, 11:49:09 AM
 #47


Growth potential is still effectively unlimited.

Yeah, and we could potentially build a Dyson Sphere and engineer humanity as a race of midgets that can survive on 300 Calories a day...

go on...
silverbox
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 04:34:57 PM
 #48

I'm just putting this out there.

There will be no direct QE from the Fed, but it will be done through the back door of inflating currencies other than the USD. Because, their aim is not to create a net inflation for the USD, but for all the world's currencies as a whole. The net effect will be the world chasing after USD.

Do I think gold and BTC will keep pace with the USD? Yes I do.

If I am correct we will continue to see an erosion of USD as a percent of BTC trading volume. Currently 74% as reported by Bitcoincharts. And a concomitant reduction of Gox's market share as it is largely driven by USD volume, currently 61%. 

The Fed did not ease.

USD Share 73%
Gox Share 60%

The Fed didn't have a meeting...
silverbox
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 05:00:07 PM
 #49

I'm just putting this out there.

There will be no direct QE from the Fed, but it will be done through the back door of inflating currencies other than the USD. Because, their aim is not to create a net inflation for the USD, but for all the world's currencies as a whole. The net effect will be the world chasing after USD.

Do I think gold and BTC will keep pace with the USD? Yes I do.

If I am correct we will continue to see an erosion of USD as a percent of BTC trading volume. Currently 74% as reported by Bitcoincharts. And a concomitant reduction of Gox's market share as it is largely driven by USD volume, currently 61%. 

The Fed did not ease.

USD Share 73%
Gox Share 60%

The Fed didn't have a meeting...

The Fed doesn't have to have a meeting to send out signals...

uh ok you said "The Fed did not ease."  You didn't say, the Fed sent signals today..

Of course they didn't ease today..  You can say that everyday, but the only day it's relevant is when they have a meeting.. The next one is June 19-20..
silverbox
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 05:46:55 PM
 #50

I'm just putting this out there.

There will be no direct QE from the Fed, but it will be done through the back door of inflating currencies other than the USD. Because, their aim is not to create a net inflation for the USD, but for all the world's currencies as a whole. The net effect will be the world chasing after USD.

Do I think gold and BTC will keep pace with the USD? Yes I do.

If I am correct we will continue to see an erosion of USD as a percent of BTC trading volume. Currently 74% as reported by Bitcoincharts. And a concomitant reduction of Gox's market share as it is largely driven by USD volume, currently 61%. 

The Fed did not ease.

USD Share 73%
Gox Share 60%

The Fed didn't have a meeting...

The Fed doesn't have to have a meeting to send out signals...

uh ok you said "The Fed did not ease."  You didn't say, the Fed sent signals today..

Of course they didn't ease today..  You can say that everyday, but the only day it's relevant is when they have a meeting.. The next one is June 19-20..

That's the way it really works though. Please forgive my imprecise language. Everyone seemed so certain that a direct QE3 is going to happen. The Bernank effectively neutralized that signal. Fed QE3 is not going to happen...

Since he neutralized the signal PMs dropped. DXY went up. The world is chasing USD, which is exactly what I would expect to happen.

Lol, So its just not possible that on June19-20 they ease anyways, even thu the Bernake didn't address it today..  Or they ease the meeting after that, or the meeting after that.. 

The Fed WILL ease!  The Fed will raise rates!  The Fed will lower rates!   Thats what the Fed does..
Raize
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1375


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 05:53:38 PM
 #51

China just dropped rates 25 basis points, so this theory might have some legs. I don't know how they are extending the pressure on other countries to do this, though.

OrganofCorti's Neighbourhood Pool Watch - The most informative website on blockchain health
silverbox
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 06:03:17 PM
 #52


Lol, So its just not possible that on June19-20 they ease anyways, even thu the Bernake didn't address it today..  Or they ease the meeting after that, or the meeting after that.. 

The Fed WILL ease!  The Fed will raise rates!  The Fed will lower rates!   Thats what the Fed does..

My pronouncement is for the immediately tradeable future. Should I see things differently you may see a thread entitled "The Fed will ease". But that is not where we are now.

Fact of the matter is, the Fed has little or no dry powder. The more that other CBs ease without the Fed having to do so gives them more room to move. They will allow this to happen by sitting on their hands...

Define immediately..  3 Fed meetings??  next week?  I can unequivocally say that the Fed will in fact not ease next week Wink.
silverbox
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910


View Profile
June 07, 2012, 06:12:42 PM
 #53


Lol, So its just not possible that on June19-20 they ease anyways, even thu the Bernake didn't address it today..  Or they ease the meeting after that, or the meeting after that.. 

The Fed WILL ease!  The Fed will raise rates!  The Fed will lower rates!   Thats what the Fed does..

My pronouncement is for the immediately tradeable future. Should I see things differently you may see a thread entitled "The Fed will ease". But that is not where we are now.

Fact of the matter is, the Fed has little or no dry powder. The more that other CBs ease without the Fed having to do so gives them more room to move. They will allow this to happen by sitting on their hands...

Define immediately..  3 Fed meetings??  next week?  I can unequivocally say that the Fed will in fact not ease next week Wink.

Until conditions change. This is an assessment of current conditions, not dogma...

Lol, I predict that you will never take a shit again..  Well.. until conditions change..
silverbox
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910


View Profile
June 20, 2012, 06:06:24 PM
 #54

Aaaaand—the Fed basically sits on its hands...

The Fed will leave QE to other CBs.

Naw they extended twist and pretty much said any more bad news and we will QE next meeting.  Like there won't be bad news.  QE for sure next meeting.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 20, 2012, 06:44:16 PM
 #55

Aaaaand—the Fed basically sits on its hands...

The Fed will leave QE to other CBs.

Naw they extended twist and pretty much said any more bad news and we will QE next meeting.  Like there won't be bad news.  QE for sure next meeting.

it won't matter.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 20, 2012, 06:55:48 PM
 #56

Aaaaand—the Fed basically sits on its hands...

The Fed will leave QE to other CBs.

Naw they extended twist and pretty much said any more bad news and we will QE next meeting.  Like there won't be bad news.  QE for sure next meeting.

"extended twist"

lol

the acronyms and cheesy sound bites have gotten ABSURD.
miscreanity
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
June 21, 2012, 02:10:18 AM
 #57

The Fed will leave QE to other CBs.

Heavily funded by the Fed via the IMF and swaps and other routes, of course.
sadpandatech
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504



View Profile
June 21, 2012, 07:54:06 AM
 #58

The Fed will leave QE to other CBs.

Heavily funded by the Fed via the IMF and swaps and other routes, of course.

Of course. And the Fed can basically force their hand by doing nothing at this point.

Fed sitting on hands have any influence on the upcoming Eurobonds? ouch
http://www.thelocal.fr/3581/20120621/
http://video.ft.com/v/1698049499001/Eurobonds-are-the-answer
etc, etc.

If you're not excited by the idea of being an early adopter 'now', then you should come back in three or four years and either tell us "Told you it'd never work!" or join what should, by then, be a much more stable and easier-to-use system. - GA
It is being worked on by smart people. -DamienBlack
sadpandatech
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504



View Profile
June 21, 2012, 11:48:11 AM
 #59

I love the way the media keeps trying to make what bernanke said to mean what they would like it to mean.

I.E.,
Media; Bernanke have said that, "We will persue whatever is neccesary to prevent economic hardship and can still use QE if needed."

Bernanke; We have reinstated operation twist (BIG FAT COMMA HERE), through THIS we are using all neccesary options."


Forgive me for I know that is not the exact quote. Buttt, I do know that he said exactly, "operation twist, through THIS........." before he made any mention what so ever about the fact that QE option still exists. Yep, it sure does, it always will. But there was no indication of him having any intention of using it now or when the twist reinstatement expires.

The media wants so bad to make it sound as if the fed is actively considering QE... oh well, that's why we don't get our info from the news. We actually read, listen and evaluate what is written, said and there to examine.


forgive my ramble and poor grammar. Been a long day already. ;p

If you're not excited by the idea of being an early adopter 'now', then you should come back in three or four years and either tell us "Told you it'd never work!" or join what should, by then, be a much more stable and easier-to-use system. - GA
It is being worked on by smart people. -DamienBlack
finway
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714


View Profile
June 21, 2012, 02:11:47 PM
 #60

Is more OT kinda ease ?

Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 »  All
  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!