Topic: Can you answer a couple of questions to a potential bitcoin buyer? - page 3. (Read 1704 times)

What happened, Antithesis? Do we now choose whose mouth we want to shut? You respond only to what's interesting you, in this case franky, who, as always, keeps writing walls of text until he's proved right. Consider re-checking these:

The translation takes the cake.

Translation: 
"Tools of subjugation and oppression are valuable to those in power.  Everyone should be grateful for the opportunity to march to the beat of the Bankster's drums.  It's downright unconscionable that any of you should want to adopt a system which cannot be used to control the masses in the same way fiat can."   

If that's your idea of "value", you can keep it, thanks. 

Also, have you now abandoned all effort to maintain the pretense that you're interested in purchasing Bitcoin?  I get the sense that you're possibly not a fan of personal freedom and would happily attempt to talk people out of choosing it wherever you might be able to.  Fortunately, you're not very convincing.

It seems that you are so obsessed with bitcoin that you deny basic reality. Fiat money has purpose of settling debt to the banks given that all fiat is someone's loan. All paper fiat is debt owed to central banks by the commercial banks All digital fiat is debt owed to commercial banks  by individuals and companies. In the same time, all paper fiat is debt owed to holders by the central banks. And all digital fiat is debt owed to holders by commercial banks. If you don't believe me, check the accounting books of the commercial and central banks. So, fiat holders are debt owners. Their ownership is valuable because it has the ability to redeem the debt of the banks, individuals and companies. You don't need new investors to bring it the value to the holders. They already own value. In bitcoin system, without new investors all you have is numbers and an enormous spending of electricity to maintain the system where the only thing people can do is send each other these numbers. So, stop denying reality and spreading misinformation.

So we're just glossing over the part where it's not actually possible for everyone to repay their loans?  Bankruptcy is a necessary piece of the puzzle in fiat, because the system would cease to function and collapse if a certain percent of people didn't go bankrupt.  That's not an issue in our new economy.

And there is no "requirement" for new users to enter Bitcoin.  That's misinformation.  Bitcoin would continue to function perfectly adequately in the hypothetical scenario that no new users invested from this day forward.

If you can't make any honest arguments, perhaps it's because the system you're trying to defend is as corrupt as you are? 

um no
you are not getting any bonus. deal, freebie, extra, or service.. you are PAYING someone. no matter what the currency is no matter if the the person selling you a service took out a loan or not. the service you are buying is the same, whether the service provider had a loan or not. you buying a service has nothing to do with loans


if you think people only work to pay off loans. where all employment and services are to cater to debt. then guess what. i am afraid to tell you that there are many many people that do not even take out loans. the reason they work or offer services has nothing to do with loans.
also those getting loans are not giving someone on demand a free service.

loans do not give bank notes value.

a person taking a loan out, is getting money created from nothing but the loan might buy them 100% of goods. if they spend it that day. but then they have to work 140% over time to repay the bank(including tax(20%) and interest(X%/year for X years))
so his 100% spend on day one costs him 140% later.. thus that 100% on day one is worth less value due to later cost, compared to if he just worked and saved up to get 100% without a loan.

loans cause inflation meaning if you wanted your lawn cut by a debtless gardener and a indebted gardener. the indebted gardener would charge you 140% as oppose to 100%. so a loan doesnt give you something. it actually costs you more. meaning you lose something.
if you offerd both gardeners $10. the one without debt will cut your grass for 1 hour. where as the indebt gardener would cut it for 43 minutes and want another $4 if you want a full hours gardening done for you.

also you as a separate person that is not part of a loan contract gets nothing from the loan when you hold a bank note.
and over tine because of inflation the value of your bank note depreciates too(you can buy 4 loaves of bread today but 3 loaves if you held onto the bank note untill 2030)

for the multitude of times. YOU DONT and YOU ARE NOT  "getting stuff from a borrower"
there is no contract between a person getting a loan and you as a bank note holder
there is no benefit, freebie, something you get from someone else having a loan

And what did people do before the introduction of such system? Weren't they developing mediums of exchange?

I am getting services from a guy that has loan. He provides me services, I pay him in bank notes and he uses them for his loan repayments. That's the purpose of fiat currency system: investing in debt ownership and getting stuff from the borrowers so they can settle their monetary debt to the banks and non-monerary debt to fiat currency holders. So, there's no need for new investors to enter into the system. The borrowers, the banks and the holders are the only three necessary party for the system operation. In bitcoin, without new investors the operation of the system boils down to an infinite loop of nonsensical activity where miners are spending a ton of electricity to maintain a network where people send each other numbers.

you have the things wrong here.

EG say you are a holder of a bank note.
every minute of each day some borrower somewhere is rapaying a BANK

but what are you getting? what have you gained in that minute, in that day, month, year.?. NOTHING
there is no:
"the borrowers, who are part of the system, would via loan repayments simply return the holders the things they can live off of,"
for people holding a bank note.

people live off things like bread.. you get no bread from a borrower or a bank
each year the purchasing power of a bank note becomes less, not more

having a bank note from 2008 means you could have went to a retailer and traded your bank note for 5 loaves, but now, trading with a retailer you will only get 4 loaves.

the loan thing, you obsess but dont understand, has not gained you anything.
because its a contract between the loanee and the bank.

the loanee is 'borrowing(taking with promise to give back) the banks created value. not a previous bank note holding person
because there is no contract between a loanee and a person holding a bank note

as for saying bitcoin can only be bought by new investors. you are wrong
i can accumilate coin without others. its called mining. i dont need constant "new investors" to exist to use bitcoin or to trade bitcoin. theres a term you are ignoring called circulation. where current people holding can swap value with each other. and do so in many ways. its not just "buying" or "investing" its not to do with market exchange investing.

you can offer labour, goods, services, ingame artifacts, plane tickets, traintickets, coffee, you name it.

"You shouldn't buy it" is not a valid answer for someone who sells it. It's a logical contradiction to say for e g. "you shouldn't buy my iPhone", but in the same time selling that iPhone on the market. I guess that in the past you were selling your bitcoin, so if someone would have ask you the question, saying "you shouldn't buy it" is not a valid response.

Why do I keep repeating the same arguments incessantly? For two reasons:

A)"Repetitio est mater studiorum"
B) Because people like franky1 are keep repeating the same misinformation, especially about banking system.

Finally, saying that bitcoin bears no resemblance to an email system is like saying that vehicles bear no resemblance to airplanes. Of course, they don't, but they do the same thing: carry people or goods from one place to another. Likewise, both bitcoin system and email system carry data from one person to another. Bitcoin system is capable to carry only numbers, so it's basically a primitive email system.

You are wrong, agan. If we take all the people that are holding bank notes and spend time working to get banknotes and assume that from now on, no new investor enters the system,  the borrowers, who are part of the system, would via loan repayments simply return the holders the things they can live off of, and the system would cease to exist. In the bitcoin system, such things can be brought only by new investors. So, without them, all you would have is an infinite loop of nonsensical activity where miners are spending a ton of electricity to maintain a primitive email system where people send each other numbers.

funny part is
take all the people that are holding bank notes and spend time working to get banknotes and assume that from now on no person enters fiat by buying bank notes.

well then people are now holding colourful toilet paper (zimbabwe dollar)

..
here is the thing though.
before people had a market place to "invest" in bitcoin. people were using bitcoin.
mining happened for 2 years before there was a proper investment market.
people were sharing coin with each other. and using it.

heck. if you just let a few people want to use it for spending. people will. Laszlo in 2010 got pizza for bitcoin, yep before there was an "investment" exchange way of getting bitcoin, people found value in it and utility.
alpaca socks, bitcoin cupcakes.
in the first month of january there were a few people mining, buy mid 2009 there were a few dozen buy the end of 2009 there were many many dozens of people mining and using it.

so if you think that bitcoin is just "investing" to hold. your again ignoring the utility

If "Why should I buy it?" is a valid question, then, "You shouldn't buy it" is also a valid answer. Whether you like it or don't like it is up to you. Keep in mind, though, that doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results is the definition of insanity.

---

I already said that a few days ago. Why do you keep repeating the same arguments incessantly? This discussion seems to be going round and round.

---

There is no point in trivializing something you don't understand. You may easily come to wrong conclusions when you use your ignorance as an argument. Bitcoin bears absolutely no resemblance to an email system and there is no point in comparing them. Read the Bitcoin whitepaper if you are interested in understanding its technical aspect.

I've concluded that sometimes in life, you don't have to convince people. You just have to let them say whatever they please. Those who have formed a biased opinion towards a phenomenon are dead ducks. However, it's quite annoying when I observe their willingness to make others stop due to their conservative behavior.

I get that you may trust the banking system, but when you want to prove that such innovation is completely meaningless and make every person who uses it look crazy, that says a lot. Fortunately, no one takes this topic seriously. I tried my best. I'd advice franky to stop talking as there's no point; you're just wasting your time.

Take all the people that are currently holding bitcoin and spend the electricity to mine it and assume that from now on no person enters the system by investing funds. What all those holders and miners can do with all the beautiful features of bitcoin, with their payment protocols, network, etc. Well, they can send each other numbers. That's all. And off of numbers non of them can live. Every group of people can create such a system for sending numbers. It's nothing more but a primitive email-like system. So, the so-called "bitcoin value" is nothing but funds that are brought it by new investors. The funds these investors put into the pockets of existing bitcoin holders is what is called "bitcoin value". And this is a nonsense of a highe order. Value in some financial system is the capital or debt inside that system that the investors are becoming the owners of. From this capital or debt the investors can profit without new investor entering the system. In bitcoin system you hold numbers and own nothing. So, like I've already said, bitcoin is nothing but a ponzi-like scheme for funds redistribution. Given holders own neither capital nor debt, bitcoin is neither currency nor asset. It's neither money nor commodity. It's just a faith based scheme for sending numbers and redistributing what is already there.

in 2009. without a market price. without a economic value. people still thought bitcoin was worthy(feature and benefits).
they were willing to use their time and electric to use bitcoin.

people were developing it and transacting between each other.
the economic value increased the more people seen the features and benefits. even before there was an economic value.

by the way you are not forced to buy 1btc at $40k
you can if you wanted acquire 0.001 btc $40

no one is forcing you to hand over $40k in a lump
unlike shares where you can only buy whole shares. or stocks only in certain size allocations.

you can still use bitcoin even without paying $40k lump

with bitcoin you are not forced into a system which treats its users badly by devaluing it.
(fiat does force people to use fiat, where the value does devalue)

a ponzi scheme is just a scam where a central party takes money in, makes promises of small interest payments  and tries to avoid people escaping.
a ponzi scheme pretends to offer you interest but reality is you lose value.. fiat is a legally accepted ponzi.
bitcoin is the opposite. its not a ponzi. it hedges against the fiat game

there is no central money stash. no manager.

bitcoin does not offer interest payments. it does not force people to stay in, it does not restrict value movement out.
you are not forced to only move out of bitcoin via a central party
people use bitcoin because it has many features fiat does not offer.

---

your whole premiss is the false assumption where you think something cannot have values(utility) unless it has value(price)
where in your mind. if government did not force that $7.50 was the minimum value for 1 hours labour(min wage laws) then no one would use dollar

yet bitcoin had values(utility) before it had value(price) and also that value(price) increases with many factors that different people find as their reasons to use and value bitcoin, without force or limitation

So you're still ranting on about bitcoin now that you have proved my point that without other people voluntarily entering into the bitcoin system, your bitcoin and all of its features are completely worthless. So, other people's inputs into the system is what has value, not bitcoin. Bitcoin is just a modern, that is, digital means for generating returns for earlier investors with funds taken from later investors. The scheme is global and it lasts longer than the previous ones. That's bitcoin in a nutshell. A good old ponzi-like scheme masked as a currency.

You may quit but the op keep on posting and will stand on his vague arguments.  I tried to convenience him earlier but all my efforts went in vain because he is not willing to understand anything and he is not willing to accept any other point of view other than his own.

Unfortunately topic has become so prolonged without any property conclusion.

YOU were the one that only wanted to know about just a few features that can still happen 'without the need of other people'

and i explained those few features and how they had certain level of value.. obviously if you expand out the other features you want to ignore. you might start seeing the other things that add to the combination of value

like i said there is more to it then that, there is a combination of a multitude of features and utility
because all currencies work if other people are involved. you know, you need someone to spend,swap,pay, transfer with.. ofcourse bitcoin is no different and works better the more that use it.. thats how currencies work.
and a good currency is one that not just is mass adopted. but also one that offers lots of feature that make people happy to use it.. WITHOUT FORCE

bitcoin is more then a currency.
there is bitcoin ("btc") the currency
there is bitcoin ("BITCOIN") the payment protocol
there is bitcoin ("Bitcoin") the brand of the network

but here is the thing BITCOIN does not need other people to co-sign my btc over. i can be the sole signee and only i can move btc assigned to me. so that has value to me.

the valuation of my btc within Bitcoin is also based on my acquisition cost of 2012 ($6/btc) meaning if i was wanting to sell all my btc. (i have enough) i could pull down the market price substantially and still be making a profit.
but i dont want to sell my btc below certain levels i decided by myself. and no one if forcing me into a price/value decision

other people like miners in germany or those that bought at the market ATH of $69k have higher acquisition costs so they wont want to sell at a loss. they are happy to buy at $40k because their other methods of acquiring btc are high right now

EG miners in china 2020 and in kazahkstan 2022 are mining cheaper than the market price, so their acquisition costs are less then the market price so becasue they have costs to pay like electricity, they are happy to sell at $40k.
where as it costs ~$43k+ to mine in america. so some are mining to acquire coin to hoard, hedging against inflation due to Bitcoins deflationary nature. and some are buying because its easier to buy than mine and cheaper right now.

some mine for long term hoarding, even at a premium because they want to protect the network. but the network does not rely on any single person to centrally decide on all things Bitcoin.
Bitcoin can run if there were 1 people mining 5 people mining or 1.5million people mining.
the more that mine the better and more secure the network is. and people are willing to pay for that security compared to a silly crappy altcoin you might rip off where only you are mining with your cell phone

we all have our reasons not to sell too cheap, and those reasons are independant of each other.

fiat on the other hand does force people into accepting bank notes at a value. and pretends to protect people but refuses to invoke those protections when banks fail. banks would rather make people lose value for the bank note they hold,

the market price is not some random number displayed on a market. its made up of lots of independent decisions happening.
it only looks random because randomness is the ignorance of wanting to learn, inability to know all the variables that culminate to get the value.. (your problem)

---

if you could mine gold in your back yard for nothing more then $2 of cost. you could make alot of profit and if you could hoard enough gold you could affect the gold market rate.
if everyone could mine that cheap everyone could sell for cheap and that would affect the market rate where people eventually are seeing the market with a $2-$5 value window based on the other features and benefits

gold would not remain at $900-$2k window if everyone could mine it for $2

the reason gold is at over $900, and btc is at over $35k is because a alot of independent reasons of alot of choices. based on actual decisions. of lots of factors including cost. its not randomness(well for you it is, because you refuse to understand the variables involves)

Consensus is still faith, and not capital. It's like in ponzi schemes. When people voluntarily invest into the scheme there's a consensus by definition. But there no capital off of which current investors (holders) can return their funds. They have only faith that new investors will voluntarily enter the scheme and bring in the funds.

There's no point to continue this further as you lack understanding of what's consensus while you're abusing vocabulary at the same time. I quit.

I am not deciding what's irrational and what's not, the logical syllogisms do that.

To not care about small inflation is not irrational because costs of maintaining physical assets are much higher. Also assets like vehicles are worth less with time. What is really irrational is to replace a system where someone is liable to give you things you can live off of and where this liability is secured with physical assets, for a system where you have only faith that unknown people will voluntarily give you such things.

Regarding the last point. It is irrelevant what is consensus of people. That's just something that is going on in their minds. What is relevant are things people can live off of.