Topic: Distribution of bitcoin wealth by owner - page 22. (Read 153446 times)

Erm, they have been inflating like crazy in 2012 at least. Not sure about 2013, do you have any data?

I think all central banks love inflation. It's their foundation.

A Harvard Business School case paper on economic history of 20th century Germany claims that Wiemar Republic was printing money like crazy, because the guy in charge of the central bank had too little power, and too many people and organizations pushing him into doing it. He would essentially be assassinated if he refused to inflate. The massive inflation that resulted from that weak government was what got people to fote for an extremely strong government, in hopes that it would resist influence and prevent inflation. That jews owned many banks and ended up making out like bandits simply from the massive inflation itself (not stealing, but in the same way how a mortgage owner would make out like a bandit on a 4% mortgage loan if inflation shot up to %50), kinda made the jews an extremely disliked group, too.
Moral of the story that Germany learns was: Inflation causes Hitlers. It's why Germany, and the European Central Bank, are so extremely resistant to inflation, and are willing to let countries collapse or do forced seisures, than inflate the Euro.

What did you say? Using the examples of printing money and the (every time) failure outcomes is not a valid argument?  

(Risto I didn't take the thread off on the tangent of LawsThatAreTriviallyNotLaws)

Edit: I have to remember that most people blame everything on him being a megalomaniac, as if an entire country could be controlled by a megalomaniac without some economic incentive driving them to turn to him. It was the Socialists in the Wiemar Republic that destroyed the economy of Germany so much, that the society was ripe for a megalomaniac to offer them free money and a perfect society. Oh then I need to remember that most people blame that rise of Socialists and economic hardship on the war reparations. But why was there war in Europe at that time? Because of economic failure of Socialism with the death of cottage industry due to mass production factories as the Second Industrial Revolution kicked in.

He's right, though. Bringing up Nazi Germany neither automatically validates nor automatically invalidates an argument.

Edit: also I have an error above. Replace market CAP with market PRICE. Then the following makes more sense.

Here is the chart again.

We can suspect much of the increase may be speculative trading transactions, due to higher price. Although we can't be sure with the small float, on the other hand if one was buying in size they might want to obscure it with many smaller transactions.

I suppose it was recently I read that SatoshiDice was 57% of all transactions.

Although we can't establish a mathematical relationship that says transactions much increase as fast as price to indicate a lowering of concentration, I was instead thinking that when transitioning from a speculative investment to currency, we would expect to see market PRICE growing slower than transactions. Because a stable price relative to commerce is key feature of a currency (especially since Bitcoin doesn't have any other real feature, just delusion* about features it really doesn't have).

So I believe you are correct to call me out. And the statement I would make instead is that it appears that Bitcoin is still in speculative mode and not yet transitioning to currency mode.

And again, the link above contains my (and other respected Austrian economists') thesis that it is impossible for a coin that is primary owned for speculation to shift to a currency without a crash first in price.

I would now like to say this is going to happen to any crypto-currency, because there is no way to grow interest in such without a speculative investment.

Notwithstanding that, I believe it is possible to design an altcoin which has less maniac* speculation and more significant currency adoption along the way, leading to a much less significant collapse in price when it stabilizes to a currency. I think this important, because if Bitcoin reaches the level of bubble I expect, the crash could wipe out so many people that electronic currency might be handed by society to the government to regulate and own, i.e. fiat.

* Bitcoiners, "only 21 million coins, it is going to $1 million, never sell any coin, we will be the new wealthy and rule the world". Etc..

That mania means we will get the reverse mania emotions on the bubble pop. I would prefer to have a more rational speculative rise, based on more sound technical design and a more sound reasons for being a currency. Specially Bitcoin has absolutely no anonymous future. It has no future whatsoever funded by transaction fees. Etc.. I have covered this in detail in recent posts. Just read my archive.

Well was this true or false? He apparently did invest though how seriously is open to debate.

Please explain. I do not see why that is necessarily so.

Even not clearly stated; you fulfill this law by well... just mention it?   I didn't know it existed though. Such a black hole this internet thing

6 is two lines followed by 4 spaces, not just 2 lines. Google is your friend www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUvdknVO73Y

This whole thing is getting really off topic. Feel free to clean up older posts.

Putting nonsense in a law doesn't make it (a meaningful) one. Noise. The point is about the outcome of collectivism. Hitler is one of many fine examples in Europe. Would you prefer Rome?

P.S. I wasn't defending the USA. I said all westerners.

Just off-topic ramblings. Thankfully this is an auto-moderated thread, so please proceed

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

It started here:


It cascaded to my thought experiment about corrupted exchanges, collusion with government (the socialism), and the enslavement of humanity outcome.

I think I interjected a chart showing how transactions are not increasing as fast as price and market cap, thus pointing towards concentration.

Concentration of ownership implies the necessity to collude with the government, because Bitcoin can't succeed on its own without deconcentration of ownership.

Any way, I have no problem if you delete posts. I can copy mine to other threads if you do. I don't think it is intelligible if you delete some rebuttals and not the posts being rebutted.

What are the implications of these, to the distribution of bitcoin wealth to holders of different sizes of holdings?

You don't understand economics.

Private debt means an elevated level of commerce and thus tax payments pumped up by debt. When the debt write-down comes (which hasn't been allowed yet), then the government debts will skyrocket.

Also the interest rates have been held artificially low (see a devastating chart) by the central banks. This is just allowing the aggregate debts and misallocation of capital and human lives to increase. When the interest rates go back up to normal levels, the debts of the governments are going to skyrocket in a runaway spiral to apocalypse.

Everyone in power knows this. They are planning to confiscate all private wealth to pay for the write-down. Merkel lied to get elect, then immediately after federalized the German banks to the EU. It is going to be an all-for-one-and-one-for-all collapse. Everyone will pay their "fair share", hahaha. Stupid socialists deserve it.

You have no where to hide. Certainly not Bitcoin.

You will pay dearly for having lived in that debt-based, state-sponsored socialism.

P.S. it ironic how Europeans comfort themselves with notions of how their governments are less rapacious. Hilter's government was also so caring in the beginning while it was printing money for universal health care. You all never learn your lesson about collectivism and always come back for sloppy seconds, thirds, fourths, ...

Sorry but NO - most of "our" countries debt is PRIVATE debt, this is the main problem, and it's completely unrelated to "state sponsored education" - the public debt of Germany or even Spain or Portugal is roughly the same as in the US, the problem are the fucking banks who go in debt to finance mortgages that fuel the housing bubbles and the households that go in debt for the most stupid and innecessary things (a new car, a new TV, new furniture, etc.).

The big difference between Europe's governments debt and US government debt is that Government money in Europe is mostly spent in public services and not in criminal wars.

Ya think so eh? Look in the mirror buddy.


Why I am not surprised that many Europeans don't realize that "state-sponsored" is why your countries have 300+% total debt-to-GDP ratios. This is hidden in cash and off-balance sheet  accounting. Even Germany when viewed with correct accrual, accepted standards, and actuarial accounting (taking into account their banks' exposure and the contagion effects thereof) is at that grotesque level of debt.

Granted some of the problem in the USA is cultural (6 hours of TV and video games per day is one) and multicultural.

P.S. One thing I heard which I like about the system in Belgium at least, is one can choose a trade school instead of high school. That is very wise as it allows students to not waste their time if they aren't interested in a college-prep trajectory.

LOL, what a staggering amount of ignorance.

So: for you "the west" = THE USA, and only the USA? France, UK, Germany, Italy, Scandinavia, are not the West in your book?

You do know that the only country in the world where people is deeply in debt even *before* having their first job (because of absurd student loans) is the US - right???

Europeans don't go in debt to go to College - most universities are state-sponsored/owned, and thus education is free or almost free. And we use to consider western and central Europe "the west" too.

Happy we are in partial agreement. I think you may be viewing this from the perspective of a teacher (a person dedicated to success of his/her students) wanting something that is generally impossible to achieve. Let me explain.

I have observed that in Asia and Latin America, education is the #1 priority. Whereas, in the west it only is if someone can get a huge student loan and live off it.

So I think the cause of what you lament is socialism and the debt bubble. Westerners aren't motivated. Why should they be. They are fattened up well by debt.

Just wait. It will implode then they will need to compete again.

As a professor, you are fighting against the lure of cookies (debt).

P.S. I also love great teachers such as the one you described. Yet now I've found I want it even faster than that. I don't often want to slow down for a video even.

I very much agree with your opinion. But you must understand too, that for every coin there are two sides. I was talking from the side of the professor; not the student. In modern classes we have about 4-10% (depends of the country, system and other factors) of students that actually comply with the current educational system; they excel, and prosper. That leaves us with about 90-96% of the rest who (socialistically) may graduate from high school but remain "Phenomenal illiterate".

Let me make this clear:
By "phenomenal illiterate" we mean that a person who reads a simple pharmaceutical prescription is UNABLE to follow properly its order! In some countries around the (educated) world this percentage is ENORMOUS and (IMHO) unacceptable! People like you (and me) may as well graduate and go further to higher levels of education - even become educators themselves; but that's because YOU (and I) WANTED to. The system has boldly failed to incorporate with the many; people like you (and me) are (sadly) scarce minorities.

Yes; the internet fulfills a great addition and it's a great accelerator. The thing is that even though universities have uploaded their classes online, the main question is FOR WHOM? One must be WILLING to get in the process. Most people only read the headlines out of a newspaper or a website and this is because the current educational system has forced them to hate reading (or if you prefer; didn't do the proper things so they like it).

Bottom line: College & University education. We produce fools with degrees. Michio Kaku has once said it in a TEDx speech and I couldn't agree more. I want to change this while I'm at it. I want to be the crazy one (hint: signature on the left), among the other "logical" partners and colleagues that think "IT CANNOT BE DONE" - Well... "I CAN CHANGE IT". To do so I must comply with the one and only truth; and this is it:

The educational system is a bust; this is MY fault. Student's have nothing (or next to nothing) to do with it.