A way to lessen inequality in Bitcoin - page 3.

cr1776

legendary

Activity: 4228

Merit: 1313

Quote from: jinni on January 01, 2014, 08:11:24 PM

Making such a fund will make bitcoin gain legitimacy as everyone has a stake. Once you have 70BTC every human can have a stake in Bitcoin. At least on paper until the fingerprint reading equipment thing is sorted out. It would be in every Bitcoiners best interest to donate a portion of their holdings to such a fund.

Edit: in fact every Bitcoin-holder would benefit from giving away Bitcoin until it hits a sweet spot of potential increase in BTC price and BTC-percentage given away.

If you mean each person will have 70 btc, you may want to check the math. :-)

Ibian

legendary

Activity: 2268

Merit: 1278

Fucking commies.

There is this saying, maybe some of you know it. Goes something like this: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Give a man a fishing rod, and he will trade it for a fish! This is because man is lazy and will always have his hand out as long as there are hand-outs. Charity spreads weakness, it does not cure it.

jinni

sr. member

Activity: 255

Merit: 250

Quote from: jinni on January 01, 2014, 08:11:24 PM

Making such a fund will make bitcoin gain legitimacy as everyone has a stake. Once you have 70BTC every human can have a stake in Bitcoin. At least on paper until the fingerprint reading equipment thing is sorted out. It would be in every Bitcoiners best interest to donate a portion of their holdings to such a fund.

Edit: in fact every Bitcoin-holder would benefit from giving away Bitcoin until it hits a sweet spot of potential increase in BTC price and BTC-percentage given away.

By simply giving away to everyone Bitcoin you could buy the support for Bitcoin from the entire world population.

jinni

sr. member

Activity: 255

Merit: 250

Making such a fund will make bitcoin gain legitimacy as everyone has a stake. Once you have 70BTC every human can have a stake in Bitcoin. At least on paper until the fingerprint reading equipment thing is sorted out. It would be in every Bitcoiners best interest to donate a portion of their holdings to such a fund.

Edit: in fact every Bitcoin-holder would benefit from giving away Bitcoin until it hits a sweet spot of potential increase in BTC price and BTC-percentage given away.

cr1776

legendary

Activity: 4228

Merit: 1313

Quote from: Carlton Banks on January 01, 2014, 07:35:43 PM

I've said this elsewhere already, but if the transition to cryptocurrency is anything but smooth (and that's a seriously optimistic scenario), then there will be alot of people who end up losing all their saved money, even their pocket change, because no-one will sell them cryptocurrency in exchange for it. That number could be higher than we'd all be comfortable with, so there's got to be some contingency for how bad that kind of situation could be.

Put another way, when currencies in a fractional reserve system collapse, only the quickest will get any money out in time. What fraction of those quickest will get their money into hard currency before the real value becomes zero? Troubling to think how many people could be left with nothing. I will not be happy with that situation.

Good point. I am not sure if it would be a slow collapse or extremely fast. Or if the currency and bit coin will coexist. Often I lean towards coexistence for a long time.

However if it happened quickly, it would be terrible for people who lose it all.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3080

I've said this elsewhere already, but if the transition to cryptocurrency is anything but smooth (and that's a seriously optimistic scenario), then there will be alot of people who end up losing all their saved money, even their pocket change, because no-one will sell them cryptocurrency in exchange for it. That number could be higher than we'd all be comfortable with, so there's got to be some contingency for how bad that kind of situation could be.

Put another way, when currencies in a fractional reserve system collapse, only the quickest will get any money out in time. What fraction of those quickest will get their money into hard currency before the real value becomes zero? Troubling to think how many people could be left with nothing. I will not be happy with that situation.

cr1776

legendary

Activity: 4228

Merit: 1313

Quote from: Carlton Banks on January 01, 2014, 07:01:46 PM

While I'm keen on totally brutal free-market principles, they do produce their real-world problems. I think having a full on cultural revolution (where people don't get encouraged to believe that learning is a weakness, most importantly) will solve the problem in the long term, but before that can come about, there's going to be a lot of unfortunate people roaming the streets (hell, there already are).

Some kind of voluntary scheme is sensible, if only to make it safe and comfortable to walk around your neighbourhood. I don't like the idea of being surrounded by beggars and muggers everywhere I go, even if that's what the free market serves up for us.

I agree with you. Charity is always a good thing.

It is important to remember that it isn't charity if it is at the point of a gun and it isn't charity if it is someone else's money. :-).

jinni

sr. member

Activity: 255

Merit: 250

Such a fund would also give everyone a stake in Bitcoin's success.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3080

While I'm keen on totally brutal free-market principles, they do produce their real-world problems. I think having a full on cultural revolution (where people don't get encouraged to believe that learning is a weakness, most importantly) will solve the problem in the long term, but before that can come about, there's going to be a lot of unfortunate people roaming the streets (hell, there already are).

Some kind of voluntary scheme is sensible, if only to make it safe and comfortable to walk around your neighbourhood. I don't like the idea of being surrounded by beggars and muggers everywhere I go, even if that's what the free market serves up for us.

jinni

sr. member

Activity: 255

Merit: 250

Quote from: Catswold on January 01, 2014, 06:36:09 PM

Like all such . . . umm . . . questionable suggestions, this one shows very little real understanding of human nature.

Go ahead, do precisely that distribute them equally among all the people of the world . . . everything is rosy and all will have money . . . within 6 months, the bulk of those bitcoins will again be in the hands of the minority once more. Out of the hands of the ignorant and non-productive and back into the hands of industrious investors and businessmen.

Nobody set out to cause wealth to be distributed unevenly, it is a simple manifestation of human nature that some will prosper while others don't. Can't change it, can't social engineer it, it simply is. There will always be poor and there will always be wealthy. It's the natural order of things.

I'm not setting out to destroy all wealth inequality. One could have a small opt-out automatic donation on for example .01% of all transactions that goes the wallet that spreads it to everyone. So it is voluntary, but you are given a suggestion to donate a little. Which in time will be worth a lot. A basic income is suggested by many and among others Milton Friedmann liked the idea, it's clean and simple. And with Bitcoin even cleaner and simpler.

As for Bitcoin being back in the hands of a few isn't a problem with the idea, in fact it means that those wealthy who give will get the money back. So maybe they could keep giving and keep getting back instead of hording only.

Catswold

sr. member

Activity: 518

Merit: 251

Like all such . . . umm . . . questionable suggestions, this one shows very little real understanding of human nature.

Go ahead, do precisely that distribute them equally among all the people of the world . . . everything is rosy and all will have money . . . within 6 months, the bulk of those bitcoins will again be in the hands of the minority once more. Out of the hands of the ignorant and non-productive and back into the hands of industrious investors and businessmen.

Nobody set out to cause wealth to be distributed unevenly, it is a simple manifestation of human nature that some will prosper while others don't. Can't change it, can't social engineer it, it simply is. There will always be poor and there will always be wealthy. It's the natural order of things.

jinni

sr. member

Activity: 255

Merit: 250

One could create a donation-based basic income for everyone.

One sets up a fund. Basically a wallet. People donate to that wallet and one creates one wallet for each person in the world and distribute the btc evenly to all those wallets and it is possible for every single human to claim one by giving their fingerprint which is then stored cryptographically (so that one can see that the fingerprints are different but not how they look like) publicly and decentralized so that the same fingerprint cannot claim a wallet twice. With 7bn people 70btc would be enough to give every human one satoshi. The fund can be created before one develops the technology and slowly accumulate.

And just increasing the amount of people using Bitcoin will increase the value Bitcoin has. If you don't want the money or don't want to give your fingerprint don't claim the wallet. Under inflation, giving people money becomes more expensive, under a deflationary regime giving people money becomes cheap, because some day that satoshi is going to be worth a dollar.

In Bitcoin-terms it would be like a faucet but where you don't have to do anything for it to accumulate.

Topic: A way to lessen inequality in Bitcoin - page 3. (Read 2773 times)