Bitcoin

The only differences between BTC and national currencies is the other fiat currencies are not subject to the wild swings of speculators continually redefining underlying value, and it's not in general use as an exchange medium. When the USD goes up a dime people international wholesalers start adjusting their prices. If the price of an automobile went up 10% overnight sales would drop like a rock. If they went down 10% overnight the dealers would stop selling cars and the bankers would call their floor plan loans. I bought seeds in Australian dollars and they were shipped from Indonesia. I bought a CD from England in £ and didn't have any idea of what the exchange rate was in either case. One my end I see my cost, and on the other end they enter their price. I did all that with my MasterCard which did all the exchanging in one felled swoop without problem. I expect that all the rest of the world operates very similarly. I will pay my MC with retirement income from a couple sources that are monthly electronic transfers. Once a month my wife stops at the bank to get some paper money for incidentals. Something above 90% of my transactions are electronic. So, tell me again what BTC does that I haven't been doing for 15 years? If anyone thinks that the transactions are hidden from their own government, I got big news for you. BTC is one giant Ponzi scheme and sooner or later it will use up the last One Greater Fool.

There is a phenomenon in a new business wherein, as long as sales are increasing margins are ignored, all is well and nobody looks closely at the internal numbers. When things flatten out, people start studying the details and the sky starts falling. As long as people think the value being harvested by computers doesn't belong in the particular individual national currencies it has been created in, the end is near. Too late to exit gracefully for a whole bunch of "investors". Barings Bank redux on a grand scale.
 
The allure of Bitcoin is that it's neither issued nor controlled by any government organization. The idea is that no matter what happens with other currencies, Bitcoin is a hedge against economic politics. Not an awful idea if you're looking at a way to maintain global economic stability.

Now, try as it seems they might to do so, economics will always boil down to availability of services and resources, and there's no way to separate from those completely. So until Bitcoin is adopted by the common consumer, it won't be a practical method of ensuring market stability, and that adoption won't happen until there's an analog to cash.
 
How can you have stability based upon...air? Or, maybe the opinions of random people? We have government because society needs to have a common set of rules and principles and methods of dealing with each other so we don't leave intercourse to the individuals making it up as they go along. That has a name: anarchy. The problem with government is the people who would govern us are less than perfect. We don't really have oversight because the overseers are less than perfect, too. Originally, elected office holders did it part time with no retirement benefits. They couldn't stay in government too long or they would starve in old age. But the governors changed the rules, surprise, surprise. Now they go to Washington (or pick an office), have a modest salary and have households in two cities, and retire rich. How is that possible? Term limits was built into the system and it was pushed aside. The only answer is for the coming Martial Law to re-install term limits with no exceptions.
 
I love the idea of Bitcoin and it has taught me a lot in paper trading which is trading with fake money but with real time and of course stocks , bonds , cryptocurrency, and more . Over the last 3 years I had learned a lot from what pandemics do to the stock market , and way much more . People like warren buffet say it’s only for criminals because Bitcoin prices negatively impact him
 
The thing to remember is that ALL currencies are based upon air. People argue that at one time there was a gold/silver standard backing it, but even they have little actual intrinsic value. You can't eat them, can't clothe yourself against the elements effectively with them, can't effectively build with them. They're only large scale practical value is as superconductors in modern electronics. Currency, in any form, is only a temporary stand-in for actual resources. Essentially, it's an easier way to quantify the value of your onions versus my potatoes when compared to the hassle of tracking the value of onions in terms of their relative value in potatoes, carrots, celery, tomatoes, etc. All money is is a metric for the value of resources.

The issuer of any currency generally has the ability to take actions considering the currency's creation and issuance to artificially affect value. Here in the states I've heard estimates that as many as 60% of USD printed in the nation's history have been rolled out this past year in response to the pandemic. In that sort of environment, the U.S. dollar will soon be so devalued that cryptocurrencies will look like a great option to many. Because it's issuers are in the form of thousands of digital mines all over the world with no central control, and there's no government body backing it, it's value is subject only to its usage and demand.

Those are fickle standards for value, to be sure, and on your political statements, well you're not wrong. But like with everything else, globalization is coming like it or not. I mean that as a statement of reality, not a political belief. If a globalized currency looks like Bitcoin, then it is what it is. It's a question of how that new currency moves from acceptance by investor elites to the common consumer, and history does not favor the idea of as-above-so-below when it comes to economics, at least not in a timely sense.
 
Globalization is a thousand years distant, it doesn't work for a plethora of reasons, EU being a great example. There has to be a government of the people, for and by the people to be close enough to the thinking of the people to be satisfactory. The USA is as close, -and as distant as it is possible to unite people. The fact that it is falling apart in front of our eyes illustrates why Mexico and Canada could never join the Union. Proximity is not enough. Mexicans don't speak the same language and Canadians don't even like us Yanks. The USA grew from very small populations in states into what they are now. If the same union were to be proposed today, we would form two separate countries, maybe more.

Currencies have to reflect the value of goods and services produced in the place of issue. Milton Friedman said that inflation is 100% caused by monetization of debt. We are in for 1970's inflation and not too far in our future because almost all of this government spending is in excess of the total value of the goods and services being produce. Holding cash is suicide, assets need to be of a type that will keep up with inflation. None of this is new information. There is no controlling authority or rules for that matter guiding BTC. They stopped using gold for a variety of reasons, but at some point there just isn't enough of the metal to match the value created by the economies of the world. BTC is fool's gold just like other fiat currencies, but without all the proper oversight of issuing government agencies.:oops:
 
All the concerns you just listed are precisely why I feel the current pushes for the form of globalization proposed by so many are folly. Globalization CANNOT happen without simultaneous downsizing of governments and their reach. Structural stability cannot be built from the top down, only from the base up. Stability and security in the lowest levels of the population are required for the nation as whole to have them as well. That means that separating the basic, common consumer or producer from the monetary market will inevitably lead to economic disaster. Wall Street stability does not translate to Main Street stability. In the end, again, you cannot separate the monetization method from the resources it symbolizes. Though I am a little more optimistic about your thousand year mark. One hundred isn't impossible, albeit not without great upheaval.

But my whole point on currencies is that their value is based on perception. If the people agree- however informally- to use this particular metric, then it must be considered a legitimate metric. They perceive it to be so, and so they use it as such.

I guess, overall, I'm saying the key notion to keep in mind is evolution. Societies evolve, and as they do so do their economies, including currency. If society deems that BTC need more oversight, then it will happen. It's just a matter of when, and whether or not we should trust those overseers, as you've alluded to before. Yet, at the end of the day, as some in church circles are fond of telling me, there will come a day when you have a gold brick in one hand, and a cat in the other. The cat will be worth more. You can eat a cat.
 
The thing to remember is that ALL currencies are based upon air.
Not exactly. It is based on the reputation of the government that issues it - the stability and credibility of their central bank and monetary policy.

Bitcoin has no reputation. In fact, it has a negative reputation, with thousands of people getting scammed, and with it being an exchange of choice for organized criminal activity. Doesn't mean that people can't make money trading it, just like people made a lot of money pumping and dumping Gamestop stock over the last few weeks.

It will be interesting to see how it will be regulated. Yellon has already indicated she is going to. As far as being able to buy cars with bitcoin... I'll believe it when they allow you to walk into a dealership and buy a car with a brick of hashish. Hey, if you look at Oregon - it could happen :)
 
The only thing that you can give a poor man to make him prosper is an even playing field when young: education, training and most important civilizing so he can be trusted to be a contributing member interacting with society. Then, it's up to him to give back by being self-sustaining. Too bad the education system doesn't work anymore. Everyone should work and be paid according to what they deliver in value. That means that some jobs will pay very little and those people will not be self-sustaining to the point where they can live apart, much less provide for others. Traditionally, they stayed with their family until they could stand alone. That, or live jointly in a rooming house or similar situation. Over time they proved to be worth more and were paid more. The minimum wage needs to be zero for the masses as it is for rich people who will work for nothing as an intern in several fields that have very lofty positions for those who have paid their dues, and those internships are hard to come by. With a minimum wage the only jobs that exist are those where any body can generate enough value to support that wage and a surplus for the provider of the job. It makes expensive machinery into sound purchases, -they don't call in sick on Mondays and Fridays and work for less than minimum wage. A lot of little jobs could exist, which would free more valuable labor to create more value. Kids used to start as sweepers and coffee runners and could move up after high school because they had acquired "shop skills": showing up on time ready to work smoothly with a mixture of people. They learned a business from the bottom up. Young people today wouldn't be familiar with the term now, thanks to artificially high wages. This is social progress?

The whole endeavor of the social sciences has contaminated society to the point where we can't have any real exchange of views about anything to do with what people are entitled to or who is responsible for outcomes. There are now more labels for other people than kinds of people. We can't have dialogues exchanging facts as we see them. Differences fester instead of being resolved. We are heading into a situation where a minority is seeking to dominate the majority and that always backs the majority into a corner where the only way out is over the dead body of the weakest group. Big tech has a multiplier effect in social discourse and has decided to choke off permission to speak for a large body of the public. It won't end well.

Big government only gets bigger and more permanent. The USA is now the longest lasting democracy in the history of the world. (In spite of being a republic, not a democracy) Think about that: only 230 years in 7,000+ years of "civilization. Not an impressive number and in these foreboding times...

We are all Special Interests. Some have more ability to guard their positions better than others and usually do so at the expense of the others. It is unlikely to change for the better without an irresistible force interceding. Being able to see a storm coming isn't like being able to control the weather. BTC exists because people don't trust their own currencies, but there is no one in charge of it, no one person or entity to blame if something bad happens. I find that very suspicious, and unappealing.
 
The only thing that you can give a poor man to make him prosper is an even playing field when young: education, training and most important civilizing so he can be trusted to be a contributing member interacting with society. Then, it's up to him to give back by being self-sustaining. Too bad the education system doesn't work anymore. Everyone should work and be paid according to what they deliver in value. That means that some jobs will pay very little and those people will not be self-sustaining to the point where they can live apart, much less provide for others. Traditionally, they stayed with their family until they could stand alone. That, or live jointly in a rooming house or similar situation. Over time they proved to be worth more and were paid more. The minimum wage needs to be zero for the masses as it is for rich people who will work for nothing as an intern in several fields that have very lofty positions for those who have paid their dues, and those internships are hard to come by. With a minimum wage the only jobs that exist are those where any body can generate enough value to support that wage and a surplus for the provider of the job. It makes expensive machinery into sound purchases, -they don't call in sick on Mondays and Fridays and work for less than minimum wage. A lot of little jobs could exist, which would free more valuable labor to create more value. Kids used to start as sweepers and coffee runners and could move up after high school because they had acquired "shop skills": showing up on time ready to work smoothly with a mixture of people. They learned a business from the bottom up. Young people today wouldn't be familiar with the term now, thanks to artificially high wages. This is social progress?

The whole endeavor of the social sciences has contaminated society to the point where we can't have any real exchange of views about anything to do with what people are entitled to or who is responsible for outcomes. There are now more labels for other people than kinds of people. We can't have dialogues exchanging facts as we see them. Differences fester instead of being resolved. We are heading into a situation where a minority is seeking to dominate the majority and that always backs the majority into a corner where the only way out is over the dead body of the weakest group. Big tech has a multiplier effect in social discourse and has decided to choke off permission to speak for a large body of the public. It won't end well.

Big government only gets bigger and more permanent. The USA is now the longest lasting democracy in the history of the world. (In spite of being a republic, not a democracy) Think about that: only 230 years in 7,000+ years of "civilization. Not an impressive number and in these foreboding times...

We are all Special Interests. Some have more ability to guard their positions better than others and usually do so at the expense of the others. It is unlikely to change for the better without an irresistible force interceding. Being able to see a storm coming isn't like being able to control the weather. BTC exists because people don't trust their own currencies, but there is no one in charge of it, no one person or entity to blame if something bad happens. I find that very suspicious, and unappealing.
What a load of baloney.

None of what you write here reflects what is seen around the world. Societies that implement strong social structures over the whole line of society have less crime, longer life expectancies and better education. A system where everyone is left to fight for themselves is only good for the top 1%, and works out very poorly for the bottom half.
 
View attachment 353279

Quite some ponzi scheme.
Won't be the first time Elon slips up. Here's no longer Chairman of the Board of Tesla for a reason.

I love the guy, and I love how he thinks outside the box and how he is upsetting numerous entrenched business segments. However taking $1.5 B of public Tesla cash and buying bitcoin with it? If he loses even $50 million, there are going to be class action lawsuits demanding even more oversight of the company he founded. Someone needs to remind him - he's supposed to be using that cash to build a car company.
 
Won't be the first time Elon slips up. Here's no longer Chairman of the Board of Tesla for a reason.

I love the guy, and I love how he thinks outside the box and how he is upsetting numerous entrenched business segments. However taking $1.5 B of public Tesla cash and buying bitcoin with it? If he loses even $50 million, there are going to be class action lawsuits demanding even more oversight of the company he founded. Someone needs to remind him - he's supposed to be using that cash to build a car company.
I’m really not trying to be annoying here but Elon musk never founded Tesla
 
Really? Please tell.
From my knowledge and just a quick google to make sure I’m correct that Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning founded tesla in 2003. The company struggled a lot . The first car the roadster had problems . The company struggled so much that they kept switching owners every year or so . Then when Elon musk became owner he had a plan then saved the company from bankruptcy. He barley stayed the owner and made it happen . Then I believe from my head that in 2009 Tesla almost have bankrupt again. But Elon musk did made Spacex
 
From my knowledge and just a quick google to make sure I’m correct that Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning founded tesla in 2003. The company struggled a lot . The first car the roadster had problems . The company struggled so much that they kept switching owners every year or so . Then when Elon musk became owner he had a plan then saved the company from bankruptcy. He barley stayed the owner and made it happen . Then I believe from my head that in 2009 Tesla almost have bankrupt again. But Elon musk did made Spacex
You are factually correct, but Elon Musk led their Series A financing round in early 2004, at which point he became the Chairman of the Board, well before the production of the roadster. Tarpenning and Eberhard were still involved in running the company until early 2008, at which point they were both shown the door.

I think if you ask anyone, Tesla was a concept and tech company from inception through the production of the roadster, until they released the model S in 2012. They did not have a profitable quarter until 2013, and even now are barely break-even if you don't count pollution credits. Their first profitable year was 2020.
 
he's supposed to be using that cash to build a car company.
I think he is playing to the vision of high-tech dreamers a little with these actions. Or he is such a strong believer in BTC that in his mind, this money will double, after which he can start selling cars based on BTC payments without too much risk in BTC valuations. But year. It is a bit of a special move for a non-financial compagny to do.
 
Good time for buying.
I was up 300% last week. Today, not that much anymore. So I'm getting more cryptos, because now seems the best time.
 
Back
Top Bottom