Topic: Bye bye bitcoin - page 3. (Read 9035 times)

What exchange rate is the baker likely to accept in the future?

Or rather, how much is the baker likely to charge for the loaf?

Nominally the exchange rate has gone up by a factor of 10,000.  So one way simplistic way to look at is the loaf will cost $10,000 USD at that time and if the agreeable exchange rate at that time between our buyer and our baker is indeed $1,000,000 USD/1 BTC then the loaf will still be 0.01 mBTC.

If one had put $1 USD away for a future loaf purchase then they wouldn't even be able to afford hardly a crumb let alone a single slice.  If one had instead put 0.01 BTC away then they would still be able to afford a whole loaf.

But, will the exchange rate and the price of a loaf scale together?  In a world of hyper-inflation of a fiat, are financial systems so disrupted that product pricing becomes unstable?

Buying a loaf of bread with gold is difficult; it's hard to measure such a small amount of gold.  I know, I know, it is trivial to divide Bitcoin into small portions.  But, will our baker be content to accept Bitcoin when his world is in turmoil?  Will his suppliers, the farmer, the miller, etc., be accepting Bitcoin?  If not then by the time our baker can exchange to fiat to purchase the next round of flour, eggs and milk, etc., he might not be able to afford them.

It is the rate of change that cripples us.  Relatively smooth and steady change over long enough periods of time are tolerable.

Everyone with Bitcoin boners watching hour-by-hour for an explosion to huge exchange rates; slow down, relax, enjoy the ride.  Divert a little of the energy/intensity into promoting instead.

and you seriously believe the baker will not be forced to update the agreement all the way to 1 million? goods are priced in fiat, and always will.btc price will always be converted to the "official price".

Unless you think the governments will switch to bitcoin as the official currency, and then the exchange rate would be pointless.

0.01 btc since you and the baker agreed on the 100$/btc exchange....

Say a loaf of bread cost $1 USD today (you might find it on sale); suppose further that you could find a baker or grocer willing to accept Bitcoin as payment for a loaf of bread and even agreed to an exchange rate of $100 USD/1 BTC; the loaf would cost 0.01 BTC (or 10 mBTC if you prefer).

*If* someday in the future, the USD/BTC exchange rate reaches $1,000,000/1 BTC then how much will a loaf of bread cost?

nuh uh! another one bites the dust. Goodbye to the threadstarter.
Can you tell why exactly you are so frustrated?
I felt bad years ago when some traders scammed me because of irreversible transactions but since i just adjusted my behaviour to what happened to me I'm still fine with bitcoin. You can't spend bitcoins you don't have unless you borrow them which is imo one of its biggest features. have faith in mother coin its > fiat already now!

Gee, all i can say is this:
 - Banks were created because we needed to trust somebody to manage our Value. Now, they're not necessary, about to be replaced with peer to peer money.

They - the banks - are going, like cassettes, books and copyright.

We will still have banks to lend us money and give us mortgages and credit, process payments, pay interest, but for sure, they won't get their snouts into our day to day funds like they do today.

bye.
Your attitude is still better than the 10kBTC Pizza buyer.

Every time someone makes a dramatic thread about this feeling the urge to make it public that bitcoin has no value and they're leaving the scene we get a nice rally. Gotta love bitcoin karma at work.

This is good old Darwinian evolution at work. Move along.

Well, there are two sides. People now bet on 17 October 2013 will be in another side. If dollars fails, then gold, silver, crude oil, bitcoin will raise real quick.

I have seen the raising. If fails on 17 October 2013, then more people may like to buy gold, crude oil to save themselves.

Additionally, bitcoin never be able for money laundering as it can be unveiled when there is something broken.

Bye bye More bitcoins to the people that see the value We'll welcome you back in 5 years.

i have few accounts that i don't look into and they all have around 0.5btc. too  low to bother now but it will be fun to see them in few years from now

All it takes is to stash away 1 bitcoin to be a millionaire just in case of the "btc becomes $1,000,000" scenario. Meanwhile you can keep the other 99% or whatever of your purchasing power. I really don't get why people have to "sell every coin".

If governments did all those things only with tax revenue, they wouldn't have debts, would they?
When the government needs more money, it issues more bonds (debt). At the moment, there isn't a large enough existing open market to buy all the debt that needs to be issued, so it is sold directly to the central bank, which issues more currency to match the value of the bonds it has bought.
And my central bank, the Bank of England, is not a cartel of private banks.

Good bye and don't come back crying when it hit $1000.

I don't know where to start tearing that last bit apart.   Since both currencies have zero intrinsic value, your argument seems to base itself the way people use one currency as opposed to the other.  This is like saying a kitchen knife is more immoral than a sword because it is used in more stabbings. Your notions are obviously misdirected.  Bitcoins are a medium of exchange, and as a decentralized medium of exchange it provides a much more fair system than any system controlled by one particular entity.  Currencies controlled by any one entity are subject to corruption and regulations that may favor one group over the next.  It should be clear that a decentralized currency is intrinsically more "fair" than a centralized one.  It goes hand in hand that a system that is more fair would also be considered more moral.  On top of this, when you say "goverment issues new money" to pay for things...  I hope you understand this money comes from somewhere.  It is either created as debt (to be paid by the taxpayer) or it is simply printed in which case the relative value of all current money is slightly less and we all lose a small amount of purchasing power.  So is it your argument that forcefully taking money from one party and giving it to another is more moral than not doing so if it is for something like schools?  Why don't we just create a law mandating that 20% of all income should go to charity, that would be even more "moral" according to your argument.   I'd be happy to continue ripping this argument apart but I've already wasted enough time.

Boy will you be kicking yourself if it goes up to thousands of dollars a coin in your lifetime.  You really should have kept at least one for the "just in case" factor.

As Trace Mayer once said in an interview:
"You don't have to adapt, you can always go extinct"

Buy buy wingding

In the beginning, the US successfully resisted central banks, and even abolished some of the first attempts that were started.  Hopefully, we can once again rid ourselves of them and go back to a sound money standard.  However, the Federal Reserve system has stood for quite some time. Very few people alive were born before the FED, and most don't know it is a private bank.  The name was key in associating it with government.  Even fewer understand the axioms of sound money, and savings has been eroded by debt and inflation.

We can be thankful for inflation also helping those with debt repay it.... So long as wages rise with inflation and interest rates are manageable.  Wages hasn't been a pretty picture, and rates have been rising, even with $85 billion a month being created to prop up mortgage and bond markets.  Tapering needs to happen, but will they be able to let up on the gas pedal without rates rocketing?

If rates rise, the US government's budget problems get worse quickly as interest payments swollow more of the pie.  As taxes are levied, or federal spending cut, dollars will be less plentiful and the USD will gain in value.  If rates get too high and a serious deflationary wave occurs, cash will be king and defaults will be the order of the day as interest on public and private debt sucks up all the "excess liquidity" they have flooded into the system.

Of course, they could always push the pedal harder, and sentiment could be ripe for such a move.  Many are expecting tapering.  It would continue to keep rates low, but would keep the bad bets from being cleared from the system.

The drag of the debt is too much, and only defaulting or inflating away much of the debt can get the economy moving forward.  We'll likely cycle through both as the economy inhales and exhales.