Topic: Bitcoin spending (Read 2364 times)

I did, i did

That is a truly disturbing statement. I think you meant segue.

I'm not an Obama basher -- i admire his first campaign, actually.  A lesson was learned from Goebbels, who revolutionised the world of advertising, showing that bold, simple images with bold, meaningless words are so full of win!
Edit: segway for clarity

Hard lols, and you'd be right to throw the rest of the establishment in with them, like Obama the constitutional attorney (I would find it impossible to maintain decorum saying some of the stuff he gets away with)

You've missed the "not the ones that matter" part.  The rich are still rich & alive, need i say more?
in alternative: I'm not even sure if the people you've listed believe a word of what they're saying.  I have a sneaking suspicion that i'm being trolled by them, that they are the the paragon of deadpan comedy, never breaking character, never spoiling the act with lame "/sarcasm" tags.  Think of Kafka's "The Hunger Artist," or the Grand Inquisitor from The Brothers Karamazov -- that sort of dedication.

@crumbs: yes, I was hoping someone would point out that the circumstances I described are not terribly far removed from present-day state of affairs. It was a bit of a leading question, really!

OT, I think it all depends on the size of your BTC stash, and the price range you bought in at. I made my most significant investment in late 2011, so I'm fairly comfortable toying with it in the way I described a few posts back. I can fully see how those that bought in during 2012 or 2013 might not be so keen to experiment with their investment, lol. Just bear in mind the fairly wise prediction of our own Gavin Andressen: that there could be as many as 5 major Bitcoin price bubbles throughout the course of it's life. Buy low, sell high....

"The greedy never yell "Let them eat cake!"  At least not the ones that matter. "

I'm a close observer of American politics and I see the "let them eat cake" attitude all the time.

O'REILLY: "Reagan was not a confrontational guy, didn't like confrontation, much rather be your pal ... doesn't want to get involved with the really nasty stuff, the tough stuff, and that's what racial politics is -- nasty and tough. ... It's hard to do it because you gotta look people in the eye and tell 'em they're irresponsible and lazy. And who's gonna wanna do that? Because that's what poverty is, ladies and gentlemen. In this country, you can succeed if you get educated and work hard. Period. Period. I mean I know people from Haiti, from the Ukraine from eh, -- we got callers all day long on The Factor. From Romania. You come here, you get educated, you work hard, you'll make a buck. You get addicted, you don't know anything, you'll be poor. But Reagan did not want to confront the issue. And that's the truth about it."

And:

 "And that exploded during the Clinton years, with all the R&D that companies invested in the 80s you had the technological revolution where a lot of people made a lot of money. But not the poor people who are ill-educated or addicted. They didn't make any money because they never will make any money because you can't compete in that circumstance. You cannot compete if you are addicted and ill-educated. All right."

http://mediamatters.org/research/2004/06/16/oreilly-irresponsible-and-lazy-thats-what-pover/131278

Sean Hannity had his, shall we call it, let them eat beans thesis:

    "I don't believe people are going to bed hungry. ... For, instance I have friends of mine who eat rice and beans all the time. Beans protein, rice. Inexpensive. You can make a big pot of this for a week for negligible amounts of money and you can feed your whole family.

    Look, you should have vegetables and fruit in there as well, but if you need to survive you can survive off it. It's not ideal but you could get some cheap meat and throw in there as well for protein. There are ways to live really, really cheaply."

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2012/04/sean-hannitys-poor-friends-eat-rice-and-beans.html

As for Limbaugh:

"And in many cases, speaking bluntly, the people that don't do well only have themselves to blame. And those who have no control over themselves are the ones we help.

Limbaugh's dismissiveness is nothing new. In August 2009, he told a caller concerned about the cost of treating his broken wrist: "Well, you shouldn't have broken your wrist." In February 2010, Limbaugh suggested the uninsured eat applesauce if they couldn't afford dentures. He also advised people to pay for their doctor visits in cash instead of using insurance.

The American right yell let them eat cake (or beans,or applesauce as the case may be) all the time.

Sorry for the OT, just wanted to make it clear that greed (enlightened self-interest) is smarter than its simpleminded caricature.  The greedy never yell "Let them eat cake!"  At least not the ones that matter.  The ones that matter donate cakes, along with "Get better soon & join us!" cards.  They fund charities & feed the starving children of Somalia, they know very well how to keep the villagers from sharpening their pitchforks

I've enjoyed the discussion but I'd like people to revisit the original topic. Who's in it for themselves and hoards, who believes in it and spends a few coin?

Depends how rational you're being. Under what circumstances would it be rational to become so economically dominant over others that you're surrounded by nothing but starving paupers?  

I don't know, I'm not from the US. I don't have any experience buying Bitcoins there.
You are right that bitcoin.de doesn't accept non-europeans.
My point simply was that I am comfortable with the effort to rebuy the coins here, so not everybody feels like you.

But I also have to say that buying stuff is not the main reason I'm interested in Bitcoin.
It's more the potential it has - getting rich on the one hand (->speculation), being a security against the possibility of high inflation of the Euro on the other hand.

The process of buying coins or using your coins will most likely be easier in the future, I know it can be troublesome for some (like in the UK).

I'll be honest, i mostly got out at 105 & haven't caught the first or the recent (mini) rally, so i'm mostly on the sidelines, feeling like Bitcoin is just trolling me.  I simply can't make heads or tails of what's going on -- nothing adds up.  Over all?  I would have made more $$ flipping burgers  

I'll be honest, i'm interested in Bitcoin for selfish reasons -- i'm trying to feather my own nest.  Sometimes it just feels that many here have turned Bitcoin into a holy cause, with heaven and earth behind them, cheering them on as they fight a holy war against fiat.  It's a curious thing, making everything that's counterintuitive about money & economics glaringly obvious & impossible to avoid -- that's a win as far as i'm concerned.

And, of course, i've enjoyed talking to you too, so thanks for the replies.

I take it your a day trader crumbs. Sounds like it. How's that going, supposing I'm right in my observation?

Are you suggesting that i *haven't* bought at the lowest rate i could have?  For large trades, i don't mind jumping through a few hoops.  It is not, unfortunately, something i'm willing to do each time i order something on the net.  That's my point.  Was a pain in the ass once, don't want to relive the experience.


As i said, i don't even know how to get my dollars on bitcoin.de.  Regardless, the transaction is nothing like what you've described -- bitcoin.de is not selling me bitcoins, they're simply the middleman.


Please understand that i'm not bashing bitcoin.de -- they seem fine, though they don't deal in dollar (if they do, i haven't figured out how i would fund my account -- the site seems eurocentric).  Of course small convenient transactions will cost more than bulk buys.  The thing is, your claim of .5% markup & couple of mins. is ... i can't get it to work.


But the BTC i own is all bought & paid for, no need to account for fees.  Anything over the price i've originally paid for it is a straight loss to me.


In the end, what counts is how much i have to pay for the privilege of using my bitcoins.  I can see that it's much more than a few minutes & .5%.  

A case in point:  I have credit & debit cards in my wallet.  I'm a US citizen, currently in US.  Please tell me how i can effortlessly buy bitcoins. (by that i mean no more than, let's be fair, x10 times as long as buying something with $.

"I was being sincere.  I do not want *anyone* to go broke."

Yeah I know. I was being sincere when I said it was nice that you would say that. It is.

"Grieving change" - yup. Since 2008 and the devastating credit crunch there is indeed much to grieve.

"Let's look at inflation rates while US dollar was *on* the gold standard."

Thats fine I'm not an advocate of the gold standard. I'm aware that the dollar, along with the pound lost 90% of thier value over the 20th century. The pound lost 25% of its value in 2008. That's why I want an alternative monetary system like bitcoin available to me.

Its not true that savers were universally reviled. If we are using adages are evidence:

"A penny saved is a penny earned" Benjamin Franklin

"Waste not want not"

Save a penny, spend a pound.

No man's credit is ever as good as his money.
Edgar Watson Howe

Save for a rainy day.

He who does not economize will have to agonize"-Confusius

Debt is the worst poverty. (Thomas Fuller)


"You say "rational self interest," i say greed.  Why quibble over words if they mean the same?"

Just making the point that there is a reason why people are driven to take risks in the prevailing climate. Its not just some emotion.

"But that's happening already!  You simply wish for this competition to take place on more favorable terms for Bitcoin.  I don't blame you -- i do too.  The market is deciding, i'm betting with some and against other traders on the outcome of the fight, and on the results of every round."

I really hope so but bitcoin won't be a real alternative unless people spend their coin to stimulate the real bitcoin economy which is what this thread is about. The big irony is that I'm actually arguing for greater bitcoin spending while you seem to be more of the side of saving (or is that evil hoarding). That's pretty ironic given the rest of our exchange.

I've enjoyed it though.

If you're grieving change, I guess...  Let us be clear, though -- saving is only a virtue when contrasted with *wasting*, money hoarders were universally reviled, never admired, and the old saw "you gotta spend money to make money" always rang true.  No one ever got rich by hoarding money.  Don't believe me?  Let's look at inflation rates while US dollar was *on* the gold standard.  Here:


Inflation is inflation, gold standard is gold standard, let's not pretend one is the other's evil twin.

Unless we wish to account for those rich enough to never have to work, each consumer is also a producer.  Those are two sides of the same coin.  Can't produce?  Can't consume.


Please see chart above ^^^
 

I was being sincere.  I do not want *anyone* to go broke.
 

You say "rational self interest," i say greed.  Why quibble over words if they mean the same?
 

But that's happening already!  You simply wish for this competition to take place on more favorable terms for Bitcoin.  I don't blame you -- i do too.  The market is deciding, i'm betting with some and against other traders on the outcome of the fight, and on the results of every round.


Peace.

Well, you base it on the cheapest price on the overall market and everything else is a markup. The prices on BTC-E are very low, because it's a pain to get money into there.
As far as I know most merchants base their price of Gox, so if you buy cheaper than on Gox you are good to go (and I was able to do that most of the times on bitcoin.de).
the 0.5% seller markup is already included in the price you see on bitcoin.de, just the other 0.5% are subtracted later on.

Using other payment systems also have hidden markups, we don't get anywhere by just comparing some fees here and there.
In the end what counts is at what rate the merchant accepts Bitcoins (->aka if you have to pay more than that due to getting the Bitcoins or due to a higher price in comparison with buying the stuff with fiat) and if it's simple enough to regain the coins.

I follow everyone else's common sense pretty much; more inclined to buy stuff when the exchange rate is on the up. But with one big difference: when the price is going down, I still buy small ticket items too. I prefer it as an alternative to selling the BTC for fiat, why not sell for something valuable!

"I'm not sure if i'm reading you correctly, but it seems that you're mistakenly lumping currencies together with investment tools.  Money is not an investment tool.  It was never intended for hoarding -- that's one of the reasons deflationary economy is considered a "bad thing."  I hope i'm preaching to the chorus when i say that "saving" is *the opposite* of investing.  Investing is *spending*.  "Use it or lose it," that's how money is meant to work.  Not "use it or put it under your mattress."

1) Traditionally one could save or "hoard" money. Paper money was backed by gold, in the United States this was even the case until the 1970s. Until 1971 the dollar was convertible with gold and this curbed potential excesses of monetary policy and meant that the dollar was a currency worth saving with. The benefits of saving money were many, one of the most pressing being provision for old age. Saving is a traditional virtue and its a shame to see it being denigrated as "hoarding". Saving is a traditional method of improving one's station in life, safeguarding against hard times, moving from the working to middle class, and providing a comfortable life in old age. R.I.P saving, I guess.

2) Not everyone considers deflation a bad thing. Its a good thing for the prudent and for consumers.

"I hope i'm preaching to the chorus when i say that "saving" is *the opposite* of investing.  Investing is *spending*.  "Use it or lose it," that's how money is meant to work.  Not "use it or put it under your mattress."

Actually no. I made the point that today you have to invest in order to "save"; that traditional saving is worthless and therefore you must speculate to preserve any wealth that you have which is denominated in fiat currency. Also; "that's how money is supposed to work"? Since 1971 maybe. For thousands of year previously, one function of money was supposed to be as a store of value.

"Let me get this out of the way first: i hope everything works out for you, and i hope you've considered conventional investment strategies & rejected them."

Thanks, that's quite nice. Things aren't working out that well in most areas of my life but don't fear; I'm no fool when it comes to investing. Conventional strategies? I lost quite a bit on equities if that is what you mean. I'm increasingly turning to hard assets like bullion, bitcoin and fine wine for reasons to do with monetary policy on which I have already dilated.

"Human greed?  Love for easy money?  Slow news days?  Take your pick."

Nope, reason. Rational self interest drives people to riskier investments, regardless of their natural appetite for risk, in sheer desperation to protect their hard earned wealth from an iniquitous monetary policy. That's why when in Britain the National Savings and Investments released an issue of inflation linked certificates the public went mad for them and they had to be withdrawn before they could hope to meet demand.

We are not just talking about what bitcoin is but what it might be. I bought into it and hold it as an investment but I do want it to become more. I want competition in the currency. I want central banks to have to compete with bitcoin and let the market decide what they want to use. I want to use a currency that can't be endlessly inflated and devalued. To make this happen, I need to get over my aversion to spending and contribute something to the real bitcoin economy, on whose shoulders that vision rests. That is what this thread is about.

Peace.