It is currently Sat Feb 16, 2019 8:47 am

All times are UTC+01:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 123 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 2:32 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant-Colonel
Lieutenant-Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 12:00 pm
Posts: 19808
Holyman wrote:

There is no widely accepted currency in our World that is backed by any kind of commodity these days SG.


The point still remains though. Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in general have no backing of anything. There's inherently no reason why they're worth anything.


Holyman wrote:
As for “Regulatory Backing”…

The only widely-accepted and enforced “Regulation” regarding monetary currencies that I can think of… Is the one about it being illegal to make counterfeit currency.

Other than that, I’m not sure what you might mean by “Regulatory Backing”..?


Regulatory backing is related functions of currencies. Not just enforcing counterfeit currency laws. For example, the Federal Reserve has some regulatory ability over the money supply in the US, what financial institutions can and cannot do and what happens if they call on emergency reserves too often too deeply. (This despite the Federal Reserve being incapable of issuing new currency itself directly.)

Holyman wrote:

Exactly that.

An important point (perhaps the most important!) to understand about Bitcoin (and the other Block-Chain Currencies that are currently proliferating), is that it is (or at least was) primarily intended to fulfil two of the three main functions of Money in our World:

Those three functions are:

1)      A medium of exchange

2)      A Unit of Account

3)      A Store of Value...

It is the first two functions that Bitcoin/Block-Chain primarily aims to fulfil in our Brave New Digital World.


And they are rapidly becoming seen as failing at that notion owing to its extreme volatility and its reputation for association with how shall we say less than desirable elements of global society.

It may technically remain a Unit of Account and a Medium of Exchange, but it's one that's untrustworthy, unstable, and frankly illogical.

Holyman wrote:
the idea of Bitcoin was to create a genuinely International Currency that could and would be free of political influence and turbulence.


And boy howdy did that fail hard. More and more countries are using their political influence against it and it's created so much turbulence for itself it makes historical cases of Funny Money (for example the Brazilian Real long ago) look outright stable.

Holyman wrote:
Perhaps in time, when the concept of Bitcoin (and “Money” generally) is more widely understood, or more likely, when the 21 Million limit has been reached, the commodity price of Bitcoin will stabilise. If, in fact, the “custodians” of Bitcoin do stick to their founding intention to limit the amount of Bitcoin in circulation to 21 Million, there is every reason to anticipate that it will settle at a fixed price that will never change, since there will be no further changes in the supply of Bitcoin. At that point, Bitcoin *WILL* be able to be reliably used as a “Store of Value”…

But not just yet!


And it will then run into the problem of lacking control over the money supply. For someone to get more Bitcoins, someone else must reduce theirs. The system never "grows" unlike in government controlled currencies. There can be no creation of more wealth, more activity, more supply, once all those 21 million are "tapped out" and in the wild, they're in the hands of those who hold them and nothing more, no loans, no stimulus packages, no nothing, you must take from one to give it to another. And as we've seen with the Euro in the last decade following a not very dissimilar model, such systems do not lead to robust economies or political stability/reliability.


Holyman wrote:

But there may only be “21 million gold coins” on Planet Earth…


Maybe if they're the size of Land Rovers or larger...

It's believed we have not yet mined more than 10% of the Earth's total mass of gold, most of which we might never reach owing to its deposition in the Earth's mantle and core.

Holyman wrote:
And until such times as Humankind discovers a solid gold planet out there in the Universe, *AND* figures out a way of transporting it back to Earth… It is only the gold present and accessible here on Earth that is relevant.


There's gold on the Moon, and Mars, and asteroids. We have the technology to capture asteroids and bring them to Earth orbit for mining. (I'm well aware that at present day such an endeavor would require a number of years to bring to fruition, not just building the rockets and facilities for mining but also finding a proper candidate asteroid, designing a flight plan and installing the stuff needed on the asteroid itself and then "towing" or rather steering it towards here, all of which would take time.)

Holyman wrote:
Until the latter half of the 20th Century, with the rise in its use as a conductor in electronic circuits, gold never really had any Utility Value. Gold was (still is) useful for decoration and jewellery of course, but in themselves, decoration and jewellery had little or no Social Utility.


Gold has been used for many things, gold plating and finishes were highly resistant to corrosion, one of the early reasons why it became valuable in the first place (even if people then didn't know why). In addition its relative softness made it easy to shape into things that didn't need to be load-bearing such as the caps over wagon wheels.

Yes most of such utilitarian purposes were done by wealthy/military/nobility and the like over the course of civilization as a means of flaunting wealth and/or power as well as showing off gold's relative rarity. In addition, gold led to coin and since it doesn't rust or rot away unlike paper and silver, it was stable for that purpose.

Yes only in the last 100 or so years has gold moved in utility beyond such things or become available for such things on a wide scale but practical applications of gold have existed for as long as we've dug it out of the rocks.

Holyman wrote:
You can’t use gold to make weapons, or build anything purposeful with it, because it is too soft.


You can make tableware with it. (Famously, it was used more commonly than aluminum for this purpose once upon a time, then the mid-19th century happened...) As well as cookware (gold has a higher melting point than most folks cook at). It's been used as an anti-corrosion measure via plating and finishes. It's been used in dentistry.

There are many purposeful uses for gold beyond jewelry, coins and computer circuitry. Some alternatives for the same thing are cheaper yes, but you can still do it.

Holyman wrote:
It is also much more scarce than iron (and therefore steel), so why would you bother?


Once upon a time, gold was more common than iron, mainly because we didn't know how to separate iron from ores very well, how to find and mine those ores and how to work it into shape or into alloys. (A big reason for alleged mythical, mystical and magical properties of iron in very old stories.) Steel for example, has been known how to be made for over 2000 years but it was only in the last 200 that we devised methods to make it common (or better).

Holyman wrote:
Gold’s use as monetary currency (and later, as a convertible backing to paper currency) came quite late in the day, in historical terms. It was preceded primarily by silver, which was more easily obtained in Europe and Asia; and prior to that, by agricultural commodities that had a far greater Utility Value.


Gold has been used as currency since at least the time of Ancient China and Ancient Rome. If not earlier.

_________________
Ill sell ya the rope with which you shall hang yourself.
Capitalism for the Win.

PCNC and PBF live in death!


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 5:57 pm 
Offline
Holyman
Holyman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:00 pm
Posts: 16571
Location: Earth
SomeGuy wrote:
Holyman wrote:
There is no widely accepted currency in our World that is backed by any kind of commodity these days SG.


The point still remains though. Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in general have no backing of anything. There's inherently no reason why they're worth anything.


Quite correct.

But that is true of *ALL* currencies, “crypto-“ or otherwise: they have no inherent value at all.

Because they are not supposed or intended to have any inherent value: they are very intentionally not meant to be worth the paper they are printed on.

The only reason *ANY* currency has any worth, is because both parties to the transaction being carried out with that currency both agree that it has worth.


SomeGuy wrote:
Holyman wrote:
As for “Regulatory Backing”…

The only widely-accepted and enforced “Regulation” regarding monetary currencies that I can think of… Is the one about it being illegal to make counterfeit currency.


Regulatory backing is related functions of currencies. Not just enforcing counterfeit currency laws. For example, the Federal Reserve has some regulatory ability over the money supply in the US, what financial institutions can and cannot do and what happens if they call on emergency reserves too often too deeply. (This despite the Federal Reserve being incapable of issuing new currency itself directly.)


Ah, I see.

Well, banks are certainly regulated to one degree or another (…), by both the Federal Reserve and the Securities and Exchange Commission(s) in the U.S. But it is the banks’ activities and conduct that is regulated, not the currency itself.

The Federal Reserve Banks of the United States are non-Governmental bodies. That is: Federal Reserve Banks (despite the name..!) are not a part of the Federal Government.

Therefore, unlike an actual Federal Government Agency or Commission, the Federal Reserve Banks are not in a position to issue enforceable mandates or edicts. The role of the Fed is to try and keep the U.S. Banking System from going off the rails (a task it performs to a greater or lesser degree of success, depending on your perspective).

But this has nothing to do with regulating the actual U.S. Dollar.

I am not sure how you would go about regulating a currency…

SomeGuy wrote:
Holyman wrote:
An important point (perhaps the most important!) to understand about Bitcoin (and the other Block-Chain Currencies that are currently proliferating), is that it is (or at least was) primarily intended to fulfil two of the three main functions of Money in our World:

Those three functions are:

1) A medium of exchange

2) A Unit of Account

3) A Store of Value...

It is the first two functions that Bitcoin/Block-Chain primarily aims to fulfil in our Brave New Digital World.


And they are rapidly becoming seen as failing at that notion owing to its extreme volatility and its reputation for association with how shall we say less than desirable elements of global society.

It may technically remain a Unit of Account and a Medium of Exchange, but it's one that's untrustworthy, unstable, and frankly illogical.


Umm… Not quite.

The volatility and price instability of Bitcoin as a commodity has no bearing on its function as a Medium of Exchange or Unit of Account: only on its function as a Store of Value.

But more on that point in a second…

SomeGuy wrote:
Holyman wrote:
The idea of Bitcoin was to create a genuinely International Currency that could and would be free of political influence and turbulence.


And boy howdy did that fail hard. More and more countries are using their political influence against it and it's created so much turbulence for itself it makes historical cases of Funny Money (for example the Brazilian Real long ago) look outright stable.


Again… Not really.

That’s an important point you make there SG: countries are using their political influence *AGAINST* Bitcoin…

…Because they recognise the threat that Block-Chain currencies pose to nations’ fiat currencies.

There is certainly a “War” going on at the moment, with Block-Chain currencies as the Insurgency, and National fiat currencies fighting a rear-guard action.

Consider a different measure of the progress of that “War” to just looking at the price volatility of just one of those Block-Chain currencies:

Look instead at the increasing proliferation of *MANY* Block-Chain currencies… There seems to be a new one announced on a daily basis.

Consider also the fact that privately-owned Global Banks, not restrained by any particular National Allegiance, are rapidly developing their own Block-Chain Proofs-of-Concept experiments, because of all the advantages to transaction services Block-Chain provides:

http://treasurytoday.com/2017/09/the-ri ... ain-tttech

Sure, if you want to focus solely on the Rise-and-Fall of Bitcoin (a single Block-Chain currency brand), then you would be forgiven for thinking that one decentralised proto-currency cannot possibly stand-up to the Leviathan it is up against.

But if you take time to look at all the other “insurgent groups” (other Block-Chain currencies, in this case) that are making progress whilst the World obsesses about Bitcoin…

…You might come to a different conclusion.

SomeGuy wrote:
Holyman wrote:
Perhaps in time, when the concept of Bitcoin (and “Money” generally) is more widely understood, or more likely, when the 21 Million limit has been reached, the commodity price of Bitcoin will stabilise.


And it will then run into the problem of lacking control over the money supply.


There will be no problems with lack of control, because there will be nothing to control.

Money Supply with fiat currencies is always a problem, *BECAUSE* they are not backed by any commodity with convertibility. Since a Central Bank can supply as much fiat money as it wants to (because it creates that money out of thin air), it *DOES* need to carefully control how much it creates.

But once the 21 Million Bitcoin mark has been reached: that’s it. No more Money Supply worries!


SomeGuy wrote:
For someone to get more Bitcoins, someone else must reduce theirs. The system never "grows" unlike in government controlled currencies.


That is because with Government controlled currencies, for someone to get more Dollars, there is no requirement that anyone else must reduce the amount of Dollars they have. The Government just asks its Central Bank to increase the amount of Dollars in circulation.

SomeGuy wrote:
There can be no creation of more wealth, more activity, more supply, once all those 21 million are "tapped out" and in the wild, they're in the hands of those who hold them and nothing more, no loans, no stimulus packages, no nothing, you must take from one to give it to another.


OK. We’re getting to the heart of the issue here.

Let’s get Wealth out of the way first:

Wealth is Relative.

If you possessed one billion U.S. dollars right now, you would be wealthy, because not many other people possess one billion U.S. dollars. But if every other American also possessed one billion U.S. dollars: you would *NOT* be wealthy.

Right: Value then.

Economic Activity has Value.

The labour you are able to personally supply has Value. Your car has Value as a utility. The home you live in has Value.

When a corporation uses its valuable productive capacity to add Value to a raw material by converting it into a manufactured good that has Value: there is Value being created all along the Supply Chain.

Money has no Value.

Money exists purely to act as a medium by which Value can be exchanged.

Money is an auxiliary mechanism that is used to ease and “lubricate” Economic Activity.

At most: Money is just a way of “Keeping Score” between participants in an Economic System.

Let’s say that you have that Billion Dollars again.

That’s great news for you, because there aren’t many things in the World that you might value possession of, which cannot be exchanged for U.S. Dollars.

But what if everyone suddenly stopped accepting U.S. Dollars?

You still have your Billion Dollars, but now you cannot exchange either a one or all of those Dollars for anything that you would value possession of.

The same would apply to Bitcoin.

*IF* - and it is not inconceivable – one person managed to acquire every last one of the 21 million Bitcoins that will be created, those Bitcoins would immediately become worthless.

Because unless the creators, suppliers and consumers of Value are willing to accept Bitcoins as payment, those Bitcoins won’t be worth the paper they are not printed on.

The *ONLY* Utility Value that Bitcoins have, is their ability to be used to buy and sell goods and services of Value. If one or a small group of people manage to acquire all or the vast majority of Bitcoins, and choose to stockpile them rather than spend them, Bitcoin’s Utility Value would disappear, because there wouldn’t be enough left in circulation to fulfil the purpose that gives Bitcoin its Utility Value.

And simply: all of the other non-Bitcoin holding actors in the Economy would just create an alternative currency with which to continue lubricating their Economic Activity.

But I would say that I think the Inventors and promoters of Bitcoin have thought this through.

As and when the 21 Million Bitcoins have all been mined, any need to increase the number of Bitcoin units necessary to keep pace with increased Economic Activity will be met with…

Fractionalisation.

That is:

If you think $20,000 is a bit of a high price for a single Bitcoin: wait until a single Bitcoin is worth $1 million!

Let’s say that the total GDP of the World is $21 trillion (that’ll help make the maths easier…).

And let’s say that is the U.S. Dollar denomination of the total Economic Value of the World (it isn’t, because I’m not including Fixed Assets…).

That means that for all that Economic Activity to be “lubricated”, $21 trillion of currency is required to enable the Value created by that activity to be exchanged. Anything less than $21 trillion in circulation would stifle Economic Activity, because there wouldn’t be enough Exchange Media to facilitate Value Exchange.

Now let’s turn that 21 trillion dollars into 21 million Bitcoins, with each Bitcoin being worth $1 million.

Nothing has changed. Economic Activity and Value Exchange can still be “lubricated” by those Bitcoins, just as it was with the Dollars.

But… Since by far and away the majority of Value Exchanges will be for less than 1 Bitcoin / $1 million… It will be a simple question of those Low-Value Exchanges being carried out with *FRACTIONS* of a Bitcoin.

And because Bitcoin is a Digital Currency, it can be *INFINITELY* fractionalised, in a way that a U.S. Dollar really can’t be. The lowest commonly accepted fraction of a U.S. Dollar is, I believe 1/100th of a Dollar, or a “Cent”, as I believe you call them.

It really isn’t important how fractionalised a Digital Currency becomes, or how many colloquial names (like “nickel”, “dime”, “farthing” &c.) are christened to describe those various fractions. Just so long as the Currency continues to serve its purpose as a Medium of Exchange.

I’ll leave it that for now, because the discussion on the Utility Value of gold, and its facility use for anything other than decoration and a means to display wealth, is really a different topic.

…And I’ve gone on long enough, and I’m supposed to be making my way to a social event on the other side of the City!!

:!! :-O p@:>

_________________
Image

"Never trust what you believe. Trust only what you understand." - Me, 2018


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2018 11:12 am 
Offline
Major General
Major General
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 12:00 pm
Posts: 32389
Bitcoin mining to consume 0.5% of world's energy by end of 2018.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-styl ... 53981.html

What the actual fuck?

_________________
barcelona wrote:
Pics of Someguy naked wrapped in bacon........


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2018 2:27 am 
Offline
Lieutenant-Colonel
Lieutenant-Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 12:00 pm
Posts: 17951
Location: teh internet
Shitcoin is now worth about a quarter of what it was worth a year ago.

https://www.ccn.com/14-billion-wiped-ou ... -in-value/


The value is all fake... sure there is an upper limit to coins produced but it means nothing as people keep making spin-offs. It’s all just a sort of Ponzi scheme to me, with an element of serious risky gambling for everyone except the creators of the coin.

I have a friend who made literally millions, but I don’t know if he sold in time.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2018 2:35 am 
Offline
Lieutenant-Colonel
Lieutenant-Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 12:00 pm
Posts: 17951
Location: teh internet
Alaskan Viking wrote:
Holyman wrote:
Or just wait until Bitcoin hits its 21 million limit...

Then you'll be able to pick-up top-end GFX cards for a dime-a-dozen.

B-)


I suspect that many of the major Bitcoin farming operations will just switch over to Etherium, or one of the other new block-chain currencies.


This is exactly what’s been happening! Start up a new one, convince a few people it has a future, sell before it crashes... rinse and repeat.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2018 7:02 am 
Offline
Major General
Major General
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 12:00 pm
Posts: 32389
PBFMullethunter wrote:
I have a friend who made literally millions, but I don’t know if he sold in time.


Why don't you know? How much of a friend is this guy really?

_________________
barcelona wrote:
Pics of Someguy naked wrapped in bacon........


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2018 7:08 am 
Offline
Lieutenant-Colonel
Lieutenant-Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 12:00 pm
Posts: 17951
Location: teh internet
Slacks wrote:
PBFMullethunter wrote:
I have a friend who made literally millions, but I don’t know if he sold in time.


Why don't you know? How much of a friend is this guy really?


Not enough, apparently.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2018 1:01 pm 
Offline
Holyman
Holyman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:00 pm
Posts: 16571
Location: Earth
Block-chain currencies were never intended to be a tradeable commodity.

Block-chain progenitors and purists will assert that in order for the technology to achieve its goal, its exchange-value must remain as close to static and stable as possible, in order for it to be used as a “Store of Value”.

Keeping the exchange-value of Block-chain currencies volatile, is the *ONLY* way that Governments anxious to protect the integrity of their fiat currencies can defend against the threat Block-chain poses to their tax and tariff regimes.

>&8~

_________________
Image

"Never trust what you believe. Trust only what you understand." - Me, 2018


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2018 4:23 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant-Colonel
Lieutenant-Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 12:00 pm
Posts: 17951
Location: teh internet
Holyman wrote:
Block-chain currencies were never intended to be a tradeable commodity.

Block-chain progenitors and purists will assert that in order for the technology to achieve its goal, its exchange-value must remain as close to static and stable as possible, in order for it to be used as a “Store of Value”.

Keeping the exchange-value of Block-chain currencies volatile, is the *ONLY* way that Governments anxious to protect the integrity of their fiat currencies can defend against the threat Block-chain poses to their tax and tariff regimes.

>&8~


And what is their role in this (keeping currencies volatile)? I thought crypto had nothing to do with national governments.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2018 4:55 pm 
Offline
First Lieutenant
First Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:00 pm
Posts: 11725
Location: NORTH QUEENSLAND
bitcoin is great for buying drugs. you even have a middleman who will hold it and take the risk for the few days it might take you to withdraw it too. Be careful though, this shit is...

phpBB [video]

_________________
Alaskan Viking wrote:
Trump is going to lose to Hillary in a landslide, he is literally the only candidate who could have lost to her, we will have 4-8 more years of lefty insanity, possible lose the congress, and have a liberal dominated supreme court for a generation.

And I fucking blame you fuckwits who voted for Trump in the primary, classic low information voter.

We need pull taxes, to cull the opinions of DINDU's and inbred Trump supporters. >>::$


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Wed Nov 21, 2018 3:54 pm 
Offline
Holyman
Holyman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:00 pm
Posts: 16571
Location: Earth
PBFMullethunter wrote:
Holyman wrote:
Block-chain currencies were never intended to be a tradeable commodity.

Block-chain progenitors and purists will assert that in order for the technology to achieve its goal, its exchange-value must remain as close to static and stable as possible, in order for it to be used as a “Store of Value”.

Keeping the exchange-value of Block-chain currencies volatile, is the *ONLY* way that Governments anxious to protect the integrity of their fiat currencies can defend against the threat Block-chain poses to their tax and tariff regimes.


And what is their role in this (keeping currencies volatile)? I thought crypto had nothing to do with national governments.


Sitting comfortably?

OK.

National Governments with their own Central Bank (the U.S., Canada, U.K., Australia – to name a few), and quasi-Federal Super-States with a shared Central Bank (umm… The Eurozone/ECB) all create their own money.

Out of thin air.

(I know I’ve explained that at length, on more than one occasion around here, so unless there is a specific request for me to explain it again (I’ve probably explained it already in this thread actually… But can’t be arsed to check…), I’ll move on.)

Critically then: it is this facility to create money out of nothing that gives National (/Quasi-Federal) Governments their power.

*ALL* of their power.

Just look at the disempowered Greek, Portuguese, Italian, Irish and Spanish “National” (for the time being…) Governments, and their inability to respond *INDEPENDENTLY* to the successive financial crises of the last decade-and-a-half.

The United States of America has taken this basis of power to its furthest extreme, ever since it coerced the major economies of the World (with Russia and China notably excepted) to sign-up to the Bretton Woods System in the closing phases of World War Two.

Ensuring that most of the World’s major commodities (especially oil…) would and could only be traded internationally using the U.S. Dollar, conferred a *MAJOR* Economic advantage on the U.S.

By 1944, the U.S. was in a position of Economic dominance that was unparalleled in Human History. Completely untouched by the devastation of nations, cities and economies that had shattered Europe and Asia, and in receipt of all the cash that the formerly dominant economies of Great Britain, France and the Soviet Union had to pay for the “Help” that the U.S. supplied during WWII…

…There was nothing to prevent the U.S. from dictating Economic terms to Western Europe, Canada, Australia and Japan.

Indeed, when it seemed especially advantageous to the U.S. to halve (West!) Germany’s WWII Reparation Debts… There was nothing that Nations desperately needing those reparation repayments could do to oppose it.

The U.S. was busy rebuilding the West-German Economy in order to use that Semi-Nation as a Forward Operating Base abutting the Evil (/Communist) Eastern Bloc. Why would the U.S. be ploughing billions of dollars of Marshall Plan funds into West Germany, only for those dollars to be funnelled out to those nations devastated by the War Germany started?

So how exactly did the U.S. exercise and maintain its Economic dominance with the Bretton Woods System?

Well, thanks to the “Lend-Lease” arrangements the U.S. had pursued with its “Allies” during World War Two, by the end of it, the U.S. Government owned/controlled two-thirds of the World’s gold.

This because Lend-Lease payments were made in gold bullion… Obviously.

Nobody has ever accused USAmericans of being stupid when it comes to Materialism… And with Nazi bombs devastating the Economic and Social fabrics of Europe and Asia, there was no way that the U.S. was going to accept the U.K.’s, France’s and the Soviet Union’s fiat currencies in exchange for the War Materiel it supplied.

Because if the “assistance” supplied didn’t get the job done, then any Sterling, Franc and Rouble notes used to purchase U.S. supplies, wouldn’t have been worth the paper they were printed on.

*ONLY* gold was acceptable currency.

OK.

So because the U.S. was in possession of two-thirds of the World’s gold bullion by 1944, it was able to demand its (still current) “Allies” acquiesce to the U.S.’s “Bretton Woods System”. And whilst the War was still underway, those “Allies” had no alternative but to complying with the demand.

(Though the Soviet Union eventually told the U.S. to “Get Lost!”, shortly after WWII concluded…)

Alright. So with the “Bretton Woods System” in place, only the U.S. Dollar retained “convertibility [to gold]” status. All other participant currencies could only be converted to U.S. Dollars.

This gave the United States the ability to use money it could freely print, to stipulate and control pricing on all key commodities (especially oil…), and the bulk of its trade with participating nations.

And what this *REALLY* meant was that the U.S. could keep (effectively) “writing checks” that would never be cashed, for as long as Foreign Treasuries continued to stockpile those “checks” in their Reserves.

Right up until 1971, when having pissed away all its gold on successive Imperial Adventures (not least of all in South-East Asia), President Nixon had no option but to unilaterally declare and end to the “Bretton Woods System”, and the U.S. Dollar became just another fiat currency.

Right then.

So after 1971, pretty much the Whole World (certainly any parts of the World that counted), was now running on money backed solely by Government fiat. Individual currencies were now only worth what those Governments were perceived to be worth.

International payments were still by and large settled using U.S. Dollars, because… Well… What else could be used? Especially as physical currencies (including large-denomination “Bearer Bonds”) were being used less and less, in favour of digital currency transactions. (You can’t attach a gold bullion bar to an Email…)

But whilst certain fiat currencies became less-and-less useful for Foreign Trade, they still remained the source of National Government’s fundamental Economic power, because of something Jesus said a couple of thousand years ago:

Quote:
”Show me the coin used for the tax.”

And they bought him a denarius.

Then he said to them, “Whose head is this, and whose title?”

They answered, “The Emperor’s.”

Then he said to them, “Give therefore to the Emperor the things that are the Emperor’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”

- Matthew 22: 19-21 (NRSV)

Simply then:

Governments can *ONLY* levy and raise taxes on their own (fiat) currencies.

The U.S. Government won’t accept Sterling or Euros as tax payments; nor will the U.K. Government accept U.S. Dollars as payment for domestic taxation.

The most that any National Government can ever attempt to do, is implement ”Capital Controls” as residency-based measures, to try and regulate flows into and out of that Nation’s ”Capital Account”.

OK?

So now here we are at the whole point of this response:

Given all the above, what effect do you imagine it would have on National fiat currencies, if consumers and businesses alike start using Block-Chain currencies instead of National currencies?

Governments cannot tax transactions carried out using Block-Chain.

Governments have no oversight on Block-Chain holdings and transactions.

What happens to a Government’s tax revenues, if its Citizens all start using Block-Chain currencies as a medium with which to exchange value?

Block-Chain currencies are terrifying the life out of Government Economists and Central Bankers.

But I’ll raise the Threat Level even further:

Governments are not overly-concerned by consumers using a massively-increasing variety of Block-Chain currencies. Particularly as for the Time being, those consumers are looking to “Get Rich Quick”, by trading those Block-Chain currencies as commodities in and of themselves.

Those consumers are still heavily invested in the Exchange-Rate between their Block-Chain currency of choice, and National fiat currencies. And since any Central Bank can “print” however much of its own currency it feels like doing, Domestic Treasuries can buy and sell huge volumes of Block-Chain “commodities”, as, when and why-so-ever it feels like doing so.

(And the main “Why” would be to keep the price of the Block-Chain currencies volatile, thereby attacking their ability to be used as a ”Store of Value”.)

The greater threat is posed by…

Banks.

Consider what might happen if a major Global bank (let’s use Citibank, for ease of alliteration…) created its own Block-Chain currency: “CitiCoin”.

To begin with, the bank may “award” its customers “CitiCoins” in the same way airlines “reward” customers with “Air Miles” (or other institutions use schemes like ”Nectar Points”).

Just as those airlines retain total control over the use (and value) of their “Air Miles”, the bank retains complete control over its “CitiCoin” “Economy” (what the “coins” can be exchanged for).

Credit Card companies like American Express already do this, only they use their own “Points” scheme, rather than “AmEx-Coin” (for the time being…).

“Points” I build up when Holywoman trashes my AmEx card, are always presented to me as “redeemable” when I purchase something from Amazon, for example.

OK. Now move forward to the point where holders of “CitiCoin” are allowed to spend those coins with each other.

A supplier who banks with Citibank might very easily allow other CitiCoin holders to spend/redeem their CitiCoin holdings in exchange for whatever goods or services the supplier is offering.

A’ight.

Now elevate that to the situation where all and every supplier and customer in a specific and entire Supply-Chain banks with Citibank.

What is there to prevent the entire End-to-End transactional flow through that Supply-Chain being conducted in CitiCoin?

It would certainly eliminate Foreign Exchange fees for International Supply Chains. And it would also eliminate Government oversight and any ability to levy taxation and/or tariffs on those transactions.

And *THAT* is why National Governments are terrified by Block-Chain technology, and why they are doing their best to maintain the perception of Block-Chain currencies as inherently volatile commodities…

…Rather than viable alternatives to Nationally-issued fiat currencies.

Still sitting comfortably?

:-?

_________________
Image

"Never trust what you believe. Trust only what you understand." - Me, 2018


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Thu Nov 22, 2018 9:50 am 
Offline
Holyman
Holyman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:00 pm
Posts: 16571
Location: Earth
See Also:

phpBB [video]


Can't say I agree entirely with some of his Economic framing, but in terms of a more accessible (at least than my posts...) introduction/overview of Money... It's pretty good.

Plus: there's a whole section on Jewish Money-Lenders that Barca may or may not enjoy.

:-bd

_________________
Image

"Never trust what you believe. Trust only what you understand." - Me, 2018


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 5:29 am 
Offline
Lieutenant-Colonel
Lieutenant-Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 12:00 pm
Posts: 17951
Location: teh internet
Block-chain is inherently volatile because it is unregulated and most of the people involved in it at present are gamblers and crooks (or honest fools who will forever be behind the curve).

Look what most if these “currencies” did at the end of 2017, massive spike, now a massive plunge back to where it was before. Why? Because shady fuckers are manipulating it in similar ways people manipulate the stock market - by simultaneously buying and selling a whole shitload of shit to attract attention, organizing FUD campaigns, and 11,000 other ways to force the “value” up or down. The big difference is that with stocks, people actually face consequences when they’re caught, whereas with Shitcoin they don’t.

Also, the whole electricity wastage thing. It’s madness.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 11:47 am 
Offline
Holyman
Holyman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:00 pm
Posts: 16571
Location: Earth
PBFMullethunter wrote:
Block-chain is inherently volatile because it is unregulated and most of the people involved in it at present are gamblers and crooks (or honest fools who will forever be behind the curve).

Look what most if these “currencies” did at the end of 2017, massive spike, now a massive plunge back to where it was before. Why? Because shady fuckers are manipulating it in similar ways people manipulate the stock market - by simultaneously buying and selling a whole shitload of shit to attract attention, organizing FUD campaigns, and 11,000 other ways to force the “value” up or down. The big difference is that with stocks, people actually face consequences when they’re caught, whereas with Shitcoin they don’t.

Also, the whole electricity wastage thing. It’s madness.


For the most part, I agree completely (especially about the electricity wastage madness).

The part I significantly disagree with, is your statement “…that with stocks, people actually face consequences when they’re caught…”.

No they don’t. Not very often. Hardly at all in fact.

The vast majority of stock trading malfeasance is carried out by Financial Institutions that have more or less fire-proof political protection. It’s only when an individual trader goes *WAY* off the Reservation, threatening to expose the whole rotten shit-show for the parasitic influence on our lives it is… That an occasional “lamb” has to be sacrificed to appease the pitchfork-wielders.

Other than that, the Finance institution will just print some money to pay whatever “fine” is demanded; and write it off as a “Cost of Doing Business”.

There are more “white-collar” crimes (the actual breaking of actual laws) committed every week in the City of London, than there are crimes of all other types committed in the UK in a year.

Moving on…

The key benefit of Blockchain Technology is the “distributed” or “peer-to-peer” nature of the “ledger” that records transactions. This means that transactions between two parties can be recorded permanently, verifiably and without risk of alteration.

Which clamps down on precisely the kind of shenanigans you are bemoaning Mullet.

What is happening with Public Blockchain Currencies at the moment, isn’t very different to what happened in 17th Century Holland with ”Tulip Mania”, or in 18th Century Britain with the ”South Sea Bubble”, or perhaps most closely, with the Scottish Darien Company.

Simply: in times of financial hardship (like what the World has been going through since 2008…), people are always on the look-out for a “Get Rich Quick” scheme.

Beats me why they don’t just go to the horse races, or a casino. They’d have just as much chance of “getting rich quick” – i.e. almost none – as with these other schemes (including “crypto-currencies”); but at least they will have had a nice day out.

I wouldn’t touch Bitcoin, Ethereum, or any of the other publically-traded “crypto-currencies” with a barge pole.

But I can definitely see the benefit of using Blockchain technology to eliminate money from the Human Experience (more of which later, when I jump into the Midnight’s Crucible..!).

And since money is very definitely the root of *ALL* of Humanity’s problems at the moment, I’d say figuring out how to eliminate money is something we should all be focusing on.

:!!

_________________
Image

"Never trust what you believe. Trust only what you understand." - Me, 2018


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2018 12:48 am 
Offline
Lieutenant-Colonel
Lieutenant-Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 12:00 pm
Posts: 17951
Location: teh internet
Shitcoin’s epic plunge continues

>*^*<

At this rate, it should be completely worthless by the end of next year. Which would be curious timing, so close to the election and all.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Thu Dec 13, 2018 12:15 pm 
Offline
Holyman
Holyman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:00 pm
Posts: 16571
Location: Earth
DECEMBER 12, 2018

Democratizing Money

by ADRIAN KUZMINSKI


The Green New Deal has been in the air lately. In a recent piece on this website, Rob Urie writes that the Green New Deal is “the last, best hope for environmental and social resolution outside of rapid dissolution toward dystopian hell.”

Quite a claim. Let’s take a closer look.

The Green New Deal, first articulated by the Green Party but now supported by many progressive Democrats, calls for “real financial reform” to address the twin problems of climate change and economic insecurity.

Included are some of the standard proposals we regularly hear, such as restoring the Glass-Steagell Act (separating commercial and investment banking), breaking up the big banks, ending bank bailouts, reducing debt burdens, regulating derivatives, and taxing bank bonuses.

These are serious proposals, and would likely provide some relief, but they are partial measures subject to rollback and evasion–just the kind of incremental strategy that has failed for decades.

But the “real financial reform” the Green New Deal calls for goes a lot further. It promises genuine radical change with two new proposals: One is to “democratize monetary policy to bring about public control of the money supply and credit creation,” and the other is to “support the formation of federal, state, and municipal public owned banks that function as non-profit utilities.”

First, some background. Most people don’t realize that the government does not issue money; the private banking system does, by issuing loans at interest. The last time the government issued money in any quantity was during the Civil War, when so-called greenbacks were printed by the Treasury department to pay for the war. Greenbacks were not debt, but direct currency printed to give government contractors money for the goods and services provided, which they then spent into the general economy, stimulating commerce.

Greenbacks were very successful; issued responsibly, only as needed, they made it possible to finance the war without onerous debt or inflation. After the war, however, private banks fought hard to eliminate greenbacks, and finally succeeded. They did not want their near-monopoly over the issuance of money undermined by public control of the monetary system. Today, well over a century later, how money is issued is again an in question.

Let’s be clear. Private banks create money by issuing loans to individuals and companies; their profit comes from charging interest and, if necessary, foreclosing on the assets of delinquent debtors. It’s essentially a private tax for a public service.
Why banks should charge interest for creating money to loan out is a mystery. It’s not that banks are lending out money they have on deposit. They have to keep a small reserve, it’s true, but something like 90 percent of loans are simply creation out of nothing. You want a mortgage from the bank and, once they approve you, they enter–magically!–the amount you need on your account. Then they charge you as much interest as they can for something that should be a public service offered on a non-profit basis.

Borrowing works for borrowers as long as they can make more profit on borrowed money than the interest that must be paid on it. Since the 1970s, however, and especially since the 2008 crisis, return on investment has lagged behind borrowing, with government, corporate, and individual debt levels now higher than ever and harder to sustain.

When the 2008 financial crisis hit, the federal government and the Federal Reserve bailed out private banks and some corporations (like GM) to the tune of trillions of dollars in taxpayer backed debt, mostly by purchasing their non-performing (worthless) assets. That got large investors off the hook, while leaving individuals and small businesses in the dust–crushed by debt and foreclosed mortgages.

The Green New Deal aims to neutralize the private banking system by which–good times or bad–the rich seem to get richer, while everybody else gets left behind. By issuing its own currency, the government would not longer have to borrow through private banks in order to spend what is necessary. It could directly purchase goods and services (infrastructure, health care, free education, transition to renewables) by issuing ‘greenbacks,’ whose value would be sustained by the public benefits they would bring.

It’s true that greenbacks were a fiat currency–issued by command of the government and backed only by faith in the government–like the assignatsof the French revolution, or the continentals of the American revolution, not to mention the marks of the Weimar republic. That these other fiat currencies notoriously collapsed in inflationary waves, wiping out any value, should give us pause.

The greenbacks, however, worked because issuance was kept proportionate to the goods and services received in turn. That was intentional; it was a deliberate ethical act, on somebody’s part, not the product of some invisible hand. The Green New Deal’s currency ideas, if implemented, are going to be no better than those in charge of managing them.

To make a fiat currency work we may need something like an Ethical New Deal to clarify the principles behind any Green New Deal. Who should issue money? Who should get it? Why? This is a discussion that’s just beginning.

The other leg of the Green New Deal’s financial reform–establishing non-profit, public banks–would provide credit to ordinary people at zero or nominal interest for vital, long-term personal investments: housing, education, or starting a small business. It’s not enough for the government to issue currency. Government contractors would be the main beneficiaries, but they are not representative of the society as a whole, and should not have privileged access to money.

Money in fairness must somehow be made available to the general public as well, and zero-interest public lending would do the trick. Banks should be public utilities, it would seem, not profit-making enterprises. Imagine being able to borrow on decent collateral the resources you need to improve your life, without having to pay back a fortune in interest.

Sound too good to be true? Maybe, but without some similar rearrangement of our monetary system, financial advantage will continue to lay with the investor class, increasing the economic insecurity of everyone else. Too many people will continue to be denied access to capital except on the onerous terms offered by the current financial system, leaving them heavily indebted if not bankrupt, for the foreseeable future.

Adrian Kuzminski is a scholar, writer and citizen activist who has written a wide variety of books on economics, politics, and democracy.

_________________
Image

"Never trust what you believe. Trust only what you understand." - Me, 2018


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 6:26 am 
Offline
Lieutenant-Colonel
Lieutenant-Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 12:00 pm
Posts: 17951
Location: teh internet
12 months of misery


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 6:29 am 
Offline
Lieutenant-Colonel
Lieutenant-Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 12:00 pm
Posts: 17951
Location: teh internet
:-O

Image


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 6:38 am 
Offline
Lieutenant-Colonel
Lieutenant-Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 12:00 pm
Posts: 17951
Location: teh internet
Attention all shitcoin believers:

You got fucking played! :))


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2018 4:35 pm 
Offline
First Lieutenant
First Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:00 pm
Posts: 11725
Location: NORTH QUEENSLAND
I cant remember if i already mentioned this on the thread, but I was using btc to buy meth (to take orally to use when I ran through my dex script; they have the same effect) when btc was $6 a coin. I did a rough calculation once a while back, and if I'd just kept all the btc I bought to buy meth instead of buying meth (and it wasn't a huge sum in dollars; maybe 10k worth over like 5 years) I'd be sitting on like 10 mil now. rofl

_________________
Alaskan Viking wrote:
Trump is going to lose to Hillary in a landslide, he is literally the only candidate who could have lost to her, we will have 4-8 more years of lefty insanity, possible lose the congress, and have a liberal dominated supreme court for a generation.

And I fucking blame you fuckwits who voted for Trump in the primary, classic low information voter.

We need pull taxes, to cull the opinions of DINDU's and inbred Trump supporters. >>::$


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2018 4:36 pm 
Offline
First Lieutenant
First Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:00 pm
Posts: 11725
Location: NORTH QUEENSLAND
That said, I was always, and still am, far too smart to ever see it as more than a simple currency. Albeit one that is extremely useful for the black market. Only fucking retards trade and speculate

_________________
Alaskan Viking wrote:
Trump is going to lose to Hillary in a landslide, he is literally the only candidate who could have lost to her, we will have 4-8 more years of lefty insanity, possible lose the congress, and have a liberal dominated supreme court for a generation.

And I fucking blame you fuckwits who voted for Trump in the primary, classic low information voter.

We need pull taxes, to cull the opinions of DINDU's and inbred Trump supporters. >>::$


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2018 4:42 pm 
Offline
First Lieutenant
First Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:00 pm
Posts: 11725
Location: NORTH QUEENSLAND
it's what, 3.5k a coin now? back during the first great bubble, it went up to 600 bucks a coin and that was seen as absolutely insane and pretty much busted all over red rover. it's fucking hilarious

_________________
Alaskan Viking wrote:
Trump is going to lose to Hillary in a landslide, he is literally the only candidate who could have lost to her, we will have 4-8 more years of lefty insanity, possible lose the congress, and have a liberal dominated supreme court for a generation.

And I fucking blame you fuckwits who voted for Trump in the primary, classic low information voter.

We need pull taxes, to cull the opinions of DINDU's and inbred Trump supporters. >>::$


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2018 4:58 am 
Offline
Lieutenant-Colonel
Lieutenant-Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 12:00 pm
Posts: 17951
Location: teh internet
Teen Shitcoin millionaire proclaims Shitcoin “dead”

smart kid


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2018 5:07 am 
Offline
Colonel
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 9:42 am
Posts: 24513
PBFMullethunter wrote:




I smell Jew. ;)

_________________
Empir immoto


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Bitcoin
PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:35 am 
Offline
Lieutenant-Colonel
Lieutenant-Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 12:00 pm
Posts: 17951
Location: teh internet
Gotta admit, I’m tempted to just throw $200 at it and see what happens.

:))


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 123 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next

All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited