this is interesting.
to get a domino effect going to the downside in equities, we need bond defaults of some kind. could energy be it?:
Energy companies, the fastest-growing segment of the high-yield bond market in recent years, account for nearly 18% of all outstanding high-yield bonds, up from 9% in 2009, according to J.P. Morgan.
http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/12/01/falling-oil-prices-could-lead-to-massive-junk-bond-defaults/
Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 647. (Read 2032266 times)
Now it doesn't take long anymore. Everything is set for a new bigger rise in bitcoin price.
yep. the bulls are trying to sneak out the door.
Now it doesn't take long anymore. Everything is set for a new bigger rise in bitcoin price.
brilliant recovery overnight in the futures market to save the gold plunge. i'm actually excited that i will have another chance to short at a higher top as this recent plunge seemed too premature to me to reset ZSL and DZZ. this rebound could take gold all the way back up to 1300 where i will consider resetting. in the meantime, have fun!:
Is Bitcoin the Future?
by John Mauldin
of Mauldin Economics
While I think that Bitcoin as currently configured has limitations, the technology of the blockchain is one of the most potentially revolutionary developments of the last century. I think we evolve to Bitcoin 2.0 or 3.0, using the same blockchain technology, but with a way to make the new currency a truly stable medium of information that can be easily exchanged for goods and services.
Why not create a currency that is backed by a number of commodities, with gold perhaps as the backbone? Why even limit ourselves to commodities? Bitcoin as currently configured could be part of the basket. Anything that can be represented in a digital form and has a reasonably stable long-term value could be considered.
...
by John Mauldin
of Mauldin Economics
While I think that Bitcoin as currently configured has limitations, the technology of the blockchain is one of the most potentially revolutionary developments of the last century. I think we evolve to Bitcoin 2.0 or 3.0, using the same blockchain technology, but with a way to make the new currency a truly stable medium of information that can be easily exchanged for goods and services.
Why not create a currency that is backed by a number of commodities, with gold perhaps as the backbone? Why even limit ourselves to commodities? Bitcoin as currently configured could be part of the basket. Anything that can be represented in a digital form and has a reasonably stable long-term value could be considered.
...
I feel as though I'm watching my own learning curve for bitcoin play out in ultra slow motion as I continue to read articles such as this. John Mauldin has understood blockchain technology as a decentralized ledger for recording transactions (time-stamp server). What he's missed is that half the benefit of using the blockchain as money is lost if these transactions represent claims on real assets (commodity-backed tokens) rather than the transfer of the asset itself (bitcoin).
It's quite interesting. He uses the word "information" in an unusual way, like he half-gets the money-as-memory concept:
"a way to make the new currency a truly stable medium of information that can be easily exchanged for goods and services"
yet then proposes to back this "information" with a basket of commodities. Can he not see that "backing" reintroduces centralization and counter-party risk, clouding the pure form of information that bitcoin already is?
I've always been a fan of Cypherdoc's quote "the blockchain may only be applicable to money," not that I think it's necessarily true, but that it reminds us of the huge gap in trust and complexity between using the blockchain as money and using it as some sort of generalized notary system. The thing is, we've largely solved the former problem and that's a vastly more important problem than the latter.
Bitcoin is the Blockchain's native unit--the two cannot be separated.
Now I almost miss talking about Side Chains.
LOLed so hard
So the guy want to back Bitcoin with gold and he thinks Satoshi's views of economics was limited... What a moron.
Yes, crazy, but at least they smell the potential of the blockchain.
i went through the entire story he/they wrote. it is a brilliant example of how bitcoin crawls into everyones head that is giving it a chance. those guys are very open about their learning experience and i think this is valuable information.
I've read one of Mauldins books and used to sub to his email newsletter. But like most, he's misunderstanding Bitcoin. And Worth Wray was doing so well.
He, and so many others, are going to be living examples of the greatest wealth transfer in human history.
He, and so many others, are going to be living examples of the greatest wealth transfer in human history.
Now I almost miss talking about Side Chains.
The financial parasites and the charlatans who serve them are getting desperate.
Glorious Bitcoin shall triumph scientifically, Comrade Dog!
So the guy want to back Bitcoin with gold and he thinks Satoshi's views of economics was limited... What a moron.
Yes, crazy, but at least they smell the potential of the blockchain.
Is Bitcoin the Future?
by John Mauldin
of Mauldin Economics
While I think that Bitcoin as currently configured has limitations, the technology of the blockchain is one of the most potentially revolutionary developments of the last century. I think we evolve to Bitcoin 2.0 or 3.0, using the same blockchain technology, but with a way to make the new currency a truly stable medium of information that can be easily exchanged for goods and services.
Why not create a currency that is backed by a number of commodities, with gold perhaps as the backbone? Why even limit ourselves to commodities? Bitcoin as currently configured could be part of the basket. Anything that can be represented in a digital form and has a reasonably stable long-term value could be considered.
(..)
The Bitcoin blockchain technology allows for the most secure electronic transactions ever devised. Its adoption and acceptance seem inevitable to me. It will be used to validate everything we purchase: stocks, homes, investments, airplane tickets, etc. It will be a far cheaper and much more secure way to validate your ownership of anything, from your home to your stocks.
The blockchain will form the basis for the perfect medium of information exchange (at least as perfect as we humans can create), which in turn will be the basis for whatever electronic medium of financial exchange we evolve in the future. The market (that would be you and me) will move to whatever new medium serves our purposes best.
Satoshi, as technologically brilliant as he (or she or they) was, was limited in his understanding of economic exchange. He was trying to create electronic gold. To some degree, he was confusing technology with money. He was trying to overcome the flaws of our current monetary system (a very laudable goal, I might add) but limited himself to thinking within the box in which the current monetary system placed him.
The next generation of Bitcoin developers are going to crawl out of that box and create whole new realms of possibilities. Once you realize that money is just information, and all you need to do is to provide the most stable mechanism of the transfer of information, you turn thinking about money on its head.
http://www.advisorperspectives.com/commentaries/mauldin_120114.php
So the guy want to back Bitcoin with gold and he thinks Satoshi's views of economics was limited... What a moron.by John Mauldin
of Mauldin Economics
While I think that Bitcoin as currently configured has limitations, the technology of the blockchain is one of the most potentially revolutionary developments of the last century. I think we evolve to Bitcoin 2.0 or 3.0, using the same blockchain technology, but with a way to make the new currency a truly stable medium of information that can be easily exchanged for goods and services.
Why not create a currency that is backed by a number of commodities, with gold perhaps as the backbone? Why even limit ourselves to commodities? Bitcoin as currently configured could be part of the basket. Anything that can be represented in a digital form and has a reasonably stable long-term value could be considered.
(..)
The Bitcoin blockchain technology allows for the most secure electronic transactions ever devised. Its adoption and acceptance seem inevitable to me. It will be used to validate everything we purchase: stocks, homes, investments, airplane tickets, etc. It will be a far cheaper and much more secure way to validate your ownership of anything, from your home to your stocks.
The blockchain will form the basis for the perfect medium of information exchange (at least as perfect as we humans can create), which in turn will be the basis for whatever electronic medium of financial exchange we evolve in the future. The market (that would be you and me) will move to whatever new medium serves our purposes best.
Satoshi, as technologically brilliant as he (or she or they) was, was limited in his understanding of economic exchange. He was trying to create electronic gold. To some degree, he was confusing technology with money. He was trying to overcome the flaws of our current monetary system (a very laudable goal, I might add) but limited himself to thinking within the box in which the current monetary system placed him.
The next generation of Bitcoin developers are going to crawl out of that box and create whole new realms of possibilities. Once you realize that money is just information, and all you need to do is to provide the most stable mechanism of the transfer of information, you turn thinking about money on its head.
http://www.advisorperspectives.com/commentaries/mauldin_120114.php
Why not create a currency that is backed by a number of commodities, with gold perhaps as the backbone? Why even limit ourselves to commodities? Bitcoin as currently configured could be part of the basket. Anything that can be represented in a digital form and has a reasonably stable long-term value could be considered.
And then he suggest Satoshi was "limited in his understanding of economic exchange"....
Is Bitcoin the Future?
by John Mauldin
of Mauldin Economics
It should be Maudlin Economics. He's probably crying himself to tears over thinking he missed the boat with Bitcoin.by John Mauldin
of Mauldin Economics
Quote
Satoshi, as technologically brilliant as he (or she or they) was, was limited in his understanding of economic exchange. He was trying to create electronic gold. To some degree, he was confusing technology with money. He was trying to overcome the flaws of our current monetary system (a very laudable goal, I might add) but limited himself to thinking within the box in which the current monetary system placed him.
What box is he talking about? Satoshi knew very well about Modern Money Mechanics. 
The financial parasites and the charlatans who serve them are getting desperate.
Is Bitcoin the Future?
by John Mauldin
of Mauldin Economics
While I think that Bitcoin as currently configured has limitations, the technology of the blockchain is one of the most potentially revolutionary developments of the last century. I think we evolve to Bitcoin 2.0 or 3.0, using the same blockchain technology, but with a way to make the new currency a truly stable medium of information that can be easily exchanged for goods and services.
Why not create a currency that is backed by a number of commodities, with gold perhaps as the backbone? Why even limit ourselves to commodities? Bitcoin as currently configured could be part of the basket. Anything that can be represented in a digital form and has a reasonably stable long-term value could be considered.
(..)
The Bitcoin blockchain technology allows for the most secure electronic transactions ever devised. Its adoption and acceptance seem inevitable to me. It will be used to validate everything we purchase: stocks, homes, investments, airplane tickets, etc. It will be a far cheaper and much more secure way to validate your ownership of anything, from your home to your stocks.
The blockchain will form the basis for the perfect medium of information exchange (at least as perfect as we humans can create), which in turn will be the basis for whatever electronic medium of financial exchange we evolve in the future. The market (that would be you and me) will move to whatever new medium serves our purposes best.
Satoshi, as technologically brilliant as he (or she or they) was, was limited in his understanding of economic exchange. He was trying to create electronic gold. To some degree, he was confusing technology with money. He was trying to overcome the flaws of our current monetary system (a very laudable goal, I might add) but limited himself to thinking within the box in which the current monetary system placed him.
The next generation of Bitcoin developers are going to crawl out of that box and create whole new realms of possibilities. Once you realize that money is just information, and all you need to do is to provide the most stable mechanism of the transfer of information, you turn thinking about money on its head.
http://www.advisorperspectives.com/commentaries/mauldin_120114.php
by John Mauldin
of Mauldin Economics
While I think that Bitcoin as currently configured has limitations, the technology of the blockchain is one of the most potentially revolutionary developments of the last century. I think we evolve to Bitcoin 2.0 or 3.0, using the same blockchain technology, but with a way to make the new currency a truly stable medium of information that can be easily exchanged for goods and services.
Why not create a currency that is backed by a number of commodities, with gold perhaps as the backbone? Why even limit ourselves to commodities? Bitcoin as currently configured could be part of the basket. Anything that can be represented in a digital form and has a reasonably stable long-term value could be considered.
(..)
The Bitcoin blockchain technology allows for the most secure electronic transactions ever devised. Its adoption and acceptance seem inevitable to me. It will be used to validate everything we purchase: stocks, homes, investments, airplane tickets, etc. It will be a far cheaper and much more secure way to validate your ownership of anything, from your home to your stocks.
The blockchain will form the basis for the perfect medium of information exchange (at least as perfect as we humans can create), which in turn will be the basis for whatever electronic medium of financial exchange we evolve in the future. The market (that would be you and me) will move to whatever new medium serves our purposes best.
Satoshi, as technologically brilliant as he (or she or they) was, was limited in his understanding of economic exchange. He was trying to create electronic gold. To some degree, he was confusing technology with money. He was trying to overcome the flaws of our current monetary system (a very laudable goal, I might add) but limited himself to thinking within the box in which the current monetary system placed him.
The next generation of Bitcoin developers are going to crawl out of that box and create whole new realms of possibilities. Once you realize that money is just information, and all you need to do is to provide the most stable mechanism of the transfer of information, you turn thinking about money on its head.
http://www.advisorperspectives.com/commentaries/mauldin_120114.php
Oil, ruble down, Bitcoin up?
Swiss gold referendum clearly shows that modern people's financial judgement has already been heavily affected by the central banks education effort
Also with each effort, new efficiencies are found. Many of the Saudi fields are <$5 so it can go a lot lower if economies slow.
Another unintended consequence is that the falling energy prices may slow (and mask) some inflationary effects allowing this to creep up on the wizards behind the curtains of the Central Banks.
Another unintended consequence is that the falling energy prices may slow (and mask) some inflationary effects allowing this to creep up on the wizards behind the curtains of the Central Banks.
Five dollars - not any more - they need money to spread around. 20 K princes with families, every public service free, and no taxes. It has become a welfare state. They need cash flow.
Here is some other details on some of the no-longer-profitable US sites (some well over US$130):
http://www.bloomberg.com/infographics/2014-11-19/shale-profits-at-risk.html
Lowest cost of production is in Saudi Arabia due to it being so close to the surface.
The operating cost (stripping out capital expenditure) of extracting a barrel in Saudi Arabia has been estimated to be around $1-$2, and the total cost (including capital expenditure) $4-$6 a barrel.
Even with such low costs, for the oil Saudi Arabia exports to the USA, the USA makes more on taxes levied on US citizens from that oil than Saudi Arabia makes in selling it to the USA.
Back in 2005, I swallowed Matt Simmons Twilight in the Desert, hook, line, and sinker. What a mistake.
About the same time i started buying gold and silver.
Also with each effort, new efficiencies are found. Many of the Saudi fields are <$5 so it can go a lot lower if economies slow.
Another unintended consequence is that the falling energy prices may slow (and mask) some inflationary effects allowing this to creep up on the wizards behind the curtains of the Central Banks.
Another unintended consequence is that the falling energy prices may slow (and mask) some inflationary effects allowing this to creep up on the wizards behind the curtains of the Central Banks.
Five dollars - not any more - they need money to spread around. 20 K princes with families, every public service free, and no taxes. It has become a welfare state. They need cash flow.
Here is some other details on some of the no-longer-profitable US sites (some well over US$130):
http://www.bloomberg.com/infographics/2014-11-19/shale-profits-at-risk.html
Lowest cost of production is in Saudi Arabia due to it being so close to the surface.
The operating cost (stripping out capital expenditure) of extracting a barrel in Saudi Arabia has been estimated to be around $1-$2, and the total cost (including capital expenditure) $4-$6 a barrel.
Even with such low costs, for the oil Saudi Arabia exports to the USA, the USA makes more on taxes levied on US citizens from that oil than Saudi Arabia makes in selling it to the USA.
Jump to: