Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 1300. (Read 2032274 times)

Yes these are some of the should have essentials you have listened here. The other 3 are: Personal Friends (not the facebook variety), Skills and common sense.

No question cash is king, its a matter of the timeframe you are talking about. The moment the hole in the wall stops spitting out some money and you still can whack some cash on the table you will be king. PM are almost worthless in a crises, they only have significant value once things start to pick up again, then you are king with them. cryptos you use any time u can, the gun when u have to. Skills and common sense all the time, the good friends when in real need (not everything can be brought).

By printing trillions of dollars and giving it to banks, but giving them incentive not to use it by paying interest on it from the Fed to the banks, thereby causing deflation (or just no inflation despite QE-infinity) first, it seems like a gigantic bailout/superbonus to banks, because when deflation hits those trillions will have even more purchasing power (or when inflation doesn't hit those trillions will be worth just as much), which the bankers will get to fully enjoy as they spend the money at full value buy up everything. Since it takes time for the newly issued bank money to ripple through the econoky amd drive prices up, the inflation will only hit like a year or two afterward, when the banks will already own "everything." Jefferson was right? Classic bankster playbook material straight out of the Great Depression (except more ambitious because they now have no gold standard so they can possibly forego deflation entirely in exchange for hyperinflation and bankers owning everything).

The classical strategy would then be to buy gold at the peak of the deflation (or just before the inflation starts - maybe now or soon?) when it'll be cheapest.

However, anticipating this, they might be planning do another gold confiscation as inflation hits. But here Bitcoin comes out of left field... (Not to mention that internationalization and the Internet are big potential monkey wrenches this time; this ain't 1930 anymore, and rehashing the old central banker strategies may not work.)

Wealth is a result of the sum of the whole being more than the sum of the parts. Cooperation in trade and mutual benefit is the base. (We are all co dependent on each other)

To build on Martin Luther Kind "a manipulation in free trade anywhere is a threat to wealth everywhere"

Imbalance exists in:
International trade
Sustainable development
Environmental explosion
Labour  in the free market

All enforced through law and international law.

You can only effectively address sustainability (energy and food security) through investing today.
But it can't come at the expense of the greater good.

A system like Bitcoin functioning within the law will allow a foundation to be built while imbalances are mitigated.

So I can't see a safe way to persevere wealth, but there are arias to invest it to move in the right direction.

Because it is "only me thinking that" I stand to gain the most.

I think those in charge of the printing presses came up with the new definition to make the scam they are pulling less obvious

I'm not talking about prices. I'm talking about the basic principle of inflation and deflation.

Furthermore, to me, the money created but kept in a hypothetical safe, is part of the economy as it can be employed in a heartbeat.

Just think of gold. When it's in the ground it's not part of the market. After I take it out of the ground and put it in a safe it is. Even though I'm not actively trading it I could do so at every time I would choose.

PS: I'm aware any Keynesian would tell me I fail at Economy. I my eyes, Keynesians are completely and utterly insane .

The hyperinflation of prices does not appear until the printed money is actually spent (or unless speculators learn about the printing and start bidding up prices in anticipation of it being spent).

Inflation and hyperinflation is just the effect of supply and demand with regards to currency chasing products and services. There's nothing about printing up a bunch of currency, locking it in a vault that nobody knows about, and telling no one about it, that will magically cause prices to start going up.

But it will move into the real economy... and when it does it won't be pretty.

^ this

And this is a little more stable than Bitcoin at the moment, just waiting for the cashing out to start.

True, QE is propping up housing and retirement funds. (IE the printing is going into a safe)  
If you believe that safe is secure put your money there. I'm not convinced.

To keep your investment value you need to invest in the needs 10-25 years from now.
And those needs are not in the perpetual growth backed economy of today, I'm not 100% convinced it is in PM's either.

Inflation of money supply, deflation of prices 

Although we aren't really seeing "effective" deflation of price, consumer costs are rising significantly yoy, but certainly not at a rate respondent to the amount of money being printed.

So...
Massive inflation of money supply, lesser inflation of prices. Because the money supply in circulation is not actually increasing. The excess is just being held in reserve, also known as the S&P and the derivatives markets 

No way. This scenario is (hyper)inflation.

I don't care he keeps it in a locked shares, the fact is it exists and can be employed without restriction. If I used to own 1% of all outstanding money I would only own 0.5% after the first year followed by 0.25%, 0.125%, 0.062%. Assuming the real economy you own a portion of slows at a slower rate (which it will, 100% is unbeatable by the entire economy on practically any time-scale) your buying power lowers and lowers because the asset you're holding is inflated away.

It could have the short term effects of deflation btw. But who cares, I want long term buying power, not just tomorrow.

Ah you mean Keynesian inflation. Keynesian's don't know what inflation is. If there are 1000 units of something and you create a 1001st, this is inflation whatever happens to the velocity. The only way to deflate would be to reduce the number of outstanding units. Please let me know when they start doing that 


Nearly there, but not in economics

They are inflating fiat ...

I assume you mean fiat? Really? I'm trying to have the least amount of cash possible without taking any unnecessary short term liquidity risks. Have you seen how much they are printing?

I own no PMs btw, because of the difficulties with storing physical PMs (owning paper doesn't appeal to me at all) and I think owning Bitcoin sufficiently fills this portion of my portfolio.

I heard the calculation of $12 per Bitcoin transaction has been computed under the current system, but I only saw a post with that number rather than one with the math.

If so, or if the cost is anywhere near this number, then there is significant subsidization.  To change the equation:

 - Bitcoin coin scale up immensely.  But even at today's load, full nodes are dropping out and not coming on line.  So it is pretty inevitable that this means significant centralization and deprecation of a peer2peer function and it will be pretty difficult to be a 'peer' without a decent footprint and level of capitalization in infrastructure.

 - Mining effort could drop and/or become much more efficient creating a less costly system to operate.

One way or another, people are attached to the system of having their transactions heavily subsidized.  Some are emotionally attached and some are financially attached.

It is ironic indeed that on this forum, I am the guy who wishes to let market forces work and let Bitcoin users shoulder the cost of operation through fees.  No more freeloading!  I'd gladly pay $20 per transaction for a truly distributed 'source-of-truth' with the confidence and resiliency that true 'peer2peer' instills in the solution.  As fraud/theft resistant off-chain solutions develop, I'd use mostly them for day-to-day transactions.

Don't get cocky or your million dollars will vanish as quickly as it arrived.

Based on my electricity costs alone a Bitcoin costs $17.26.
Mainly GPU and 2 USB ASIC's

Capital costs for most GPU miners were absorbed before halving.
And many miners don't actually pay there own electricity.

I'd say that the odds of BTC reaching 30 cents are about a 1000x greater than silver hitting $5.  Assuming a constant $ value of course...and physical silver rather than paper.  All of these scenarios represent system failures of some sort, though in a very healthy economy with a good outlook, many investment opportunities and a lot of confidence in fiscal leadership, I could see PM's drop down to their 90's values.  I don't see this rosy scenario our horizon.  There are a lot of questions about the future of Bitcoin and very likely some new bugs to be discovered (and indeed, introduced) which is why I rank the risk as so much higher.


I think that when one is to emotionally attached to an idea or solution, it is very hard to make sound 'trades' around it.  Of course that can and does work to one's advantage on occasion, but one is no better off than going to a casino in that situation.

Let's not drift into the zone of monetary theory ignorance where we might start to think that the value of a commodity (or quasi-commodity) that is used for either store of value or a currency "should be" very close to the cost to produce it, or is somehow "destined to" return to the price of production.

The cost to mine an ozt of gold or a bitcoin is only part of the equation. There is then utility, faith, familiarity, convention, popularity, and oh yeah, supply and demand,what else - distributor premium, dealer premium, etc. ;-)

Watermelons cost $6.99 a piece here. That doesn't meant they cost $6.50 to grow.  Is the price of a watermelon "destined" to return to $2? I sure hope so.