Hi,
To be honest, I would not be too excited yet. The currency for women is a demurrage currency, whihc means it devalues of you do not spend it. The example I know the best of this was in Worgl, Austria, during the latter part of the Great Depression. From what I know, it was a phenomenal success.
I can understand how you can like p2p currency, and, for sure, a decentralised model is best, but this does not mean it will work. If you look at the full picture of Bitcoin, it is set up a lot like gold. There is a limit of 21 million coins for the world, so if all the world uses it, and ther are always more people, then people get less coins for distribution, but this also means prices will fall. Remember, the coin can't be leveraged, as it is not a fractional currency (I hope). The other major danger is Bitcoin banks will still want to be paid for their services, even in bitcoin, so that means BTC is always taken out of the system, but will be distributed though them at cost. So, it is a debt based system that is designed to fail IMO.
Also, we al need a currency that defaults to people making the most sustainable choice, which means it is not the coin that matters, but what is done with it. So, any currency for trade must be debt-free across the board. Money is not a goal, it is an exchange for goals. The idea is to make the availability of those golas easy for all, not more difficult at a price.
I am desigining a currency that I feel answers lots of problems with currency in general. I call it Timebeats. If you want to read the synopsis, it is available int he description section at https://www.facebook.com/timebeatsglobal. I guess it's radical, bu tnot really. It is also an opt-in currency, as all should be. I design this that it is a no-brainer to take it on.
Let me know what you think.
Topic: An economic view on monetary systems and BITCOIN. (Read 642 times)
Hello everyone...
Im from somewhere in Europe. I was interested in the montery systems since quite a time. The whole thing with banks, debts, interests, loans, etc. just seemed impossible to work to me (and I was right as I found out). The more I learned about our monetary system, the more understood that it is mathematically determined to turn out into to a desaster. The debts keep arise, and they can never be paid back with the money that is already around. The only thing left are the resources of our planet. So the direct equivalent of debt are resources, and therefore exploitation is a direct consequence of debt. But, as we just found out, our resources aren't infinite, and sooner or later there will be a collapse.
When I started looking for alternatives to our monetary system, i heard of a different concept. It was formulated by a women who got the nobel-price in economy, I think. The main thing is the same: money gets distribueted by a central organisation. They hand out money (for example a 100$ bill) but with no interests. Instead, the 100$ bill decreases in value constantly (like 1$ every year), so that you have to spend it in order not to loose 1%. This will keep almost all of the money in permanent circulation. (an extreme circulation!! this must sound like heaven to any economist or wallstreet broker...)
In this system, consuments (the people) have a monthly credit assigned, which decreases in value every month. In order to get a new credit that hasn't lost any value yet, one has to work or produce the equivalent of his ecological/economical costs. Some people may know this monetary system under the name "CO2-Currency", where credits stand for the CO2-emissions that you're "allowed" to produce.
This system is based that there is (authorized by the governement) a constant distribution of new money, which is equivalent by the constant decay of circulating money. Between those points, there wille always be a stream, which forces one to "produce" an equivalent force oppising to it. And on the lowest scale: to get new credits, the equivalent of a persons economical costs has to be produced.
In CO2-Currency economical/ecological costs are the new debts. You may have noticed that economics is about "equivalents" =)
And then... I came across BITCOIN!! A decentralized, cryptographic, anonymous p2p-currency, where the processing power of computers is the equivalent to it's distribution! BITCOIN must be a gift directly from god =)
If there is ever gonna be a money that is compatible with an open libertarian society, free of authorities, then it is BITCOIN. Satoshi Nakamoto is a fucking genius!! (yeah, Wei Dai and Nick Szabo probably too...dont know much about them).
Don't think that I'm an anarcho-capitalist. I guess I am deeply anarchistic in my heart, but when it comes to economy I totally oppose a global free market. Too much power can concentrate in international companys. Global economy cant take place next to a harmonic and sustainable symbiosis with the planet. In my opinion, small local markets in balance with the environment is the only way humanity can continue on this planet. And BITCOIN with it's decentralized nature is the biggest threat to a global economy. Global economy is dependant on a centralized monetary system, and vice versa, a centralized monetary system enables global economy.
A lot of people think that man is evil in the depth of his nature (and other ones think he is good). I think man is neither god nor bad, he is just taking oppurtunitys. If you put man into a system, which is only about profit and individual winning over the rest, you dont have to wonder if this is the result. But imagine what if you put man into system which isn't about the old concepts anymore, but about sustainability instead of profit, and about remaining the balance instead of growth. I really cant understand how we ever thoght that an interest on money or anything else could be a good idea!!
I know that this economic view on BITCOIN that I have written is certainly bungling and amateurish, and completely lacks of economic accuracy (and every statement could be refuted, beside that my english is terrible). But I hope that at least some of you have been amused or inspired by this. And maybe got a small clue about some correlations and basic principles of different monetary systems.
Have a nice time on this planet
Im from somewhere in Europe. I was interested in the montery systems since quite a time. The whole thing with banks, debts, interests, loans, etc. just seemed impossible to work to me (and I was right as I found out). The more I learned about our monetary system, the more understood that it is mathematically determined to turn out into to a desaster. The debts keep arise, and they can never be paid back with the money that is already around. The only thing left are the resources of our planet. So the direct equivalent of debt are resources, and therefore exploitation is a direct consequence of debt. But, as we just found out, our resources aren't infinite, and sooner or later there will be a collapse.
When I started looking for alternatives to our monetary system, i heard of a different concept. It was formulated by a women who got the nobel-price in economy, I think. The main thing is the same: money gets distribueted by a central organisation. They hand out money (for example a 100$ bill) but with no interests. Instead, the 100$ bill decreases in value constantly (like 1$ every year), so that you have to spend it in order not to loose 1%. This will keep almost all of the money in permanent circulation. (an extreme circulation!! this must sound like heaven to any economist or wallstreet broker...)
In this system, consuments (the people) have a monthly credit assigned, which decreases in value every month. In order to get a new credit that hasn't lost any value yet, one has to work or produce the equivalent of his ecological/economical costs. Some people may know this monetary system under the name "CO2-Currency", where credits stand for the CO2-emissions that you're "allowed" to produce.
This system is based that there is (authorized by the governement) a constant distribution of new money, which is equivalent by the constant decay of circulating money. Between those points, there wille always be a stream, which forces one to "produce" an equivalent force oppising to it. And on the lowest scale: to get new credits, the equivalent of a persons economical costs has to be produced.
In CO2-Currency economical/ecological costs are the new debts. You may have noticed that economics is about "equivalents" =)
And then... I came across BITCOIN!! A decentralized, cryptographic, anonymous p2p-currency, where the processing power of computers is the equivalent to it's distribution! BITCOIN must be a gift directly from god =)
If there is ever gonna be a money that is compatible with an open libertarian society, free of authorities, then it is BITCOIN. Satoshi Nakamoto is a fucking genius!! (yeah, Wei Dai and Nick Szabo probably too...dont know much about them).
Don't think that I'm an anarcho-capitalist. I guess I am deeply anarchistic in my heart, but when it comes to economy I totally oppose a global free market. Too much power can concentrate in international companys. Global economy cant take place next to a harmonic and sustainable symbiosis with the planet. In my opinion, small local markets in balance with the environment is the only way humanity can continue on this planet. And BITCOIN with it's decentralized nature is the biggest threat to a global economy. Global economy is dependant on a centralized monetary system, and vice versa, a centralized monetary system enables global economy.
A lot of people think that man is evil in the depth of his nature (and other ones think he is good). I think man is neither god nor bad, he is just taking oppurtunitys. If you put man into a system, which is only about profit and individual winning over the rest, you dont have to wonder if this is the result. But imagine what if you put man into system which isn't about the old concepts anymore, but about sustainability instead of profit, and about remaining the balance instead of growth. I really cant understand how we ever thoght that an interest on money or anything else could be a good idea!!
I know that this economic view on BITCOIN that I have written is certainly bungling and amateurish, and completely lacks of economic accuracy (and every statement could be refuted, beside that my english is terrible). But I hope that at least some of you have been amused or inspired by this. And maybe got a small clue about some correlations and basic principles of different monetary systems.
Have a nice time on this planet
Jump to: