Topic: Ideas for more efficient distribution of money? - page 3. (Read 13269 times)

Realize that A comes before B. B is the goal, where at which time A cashes out without ponzi crash, because B supplies demand. This is accomplished by raising transactions to a very high level early with PC mining.

So you want both a currency that has the hallmark feature of not being concerned with exchange rate and a currency that has investment appeal?  Are you sure you aren't mixing up currency as a unit of exchange and wealth/savings/investments as saved capital surplus?

Ok then, what about the inference from your own logic showing that fiat can't be ponzi which I wrote in one of my posts that you successfully ignored?

"Talk is cheap, show me the code"-- Linus Torvalds.

Sorry I did not write that. The only point I wrote in this thread was fiat is ponzi because it is based on the people's confidence (consent) to be governed.

What me? You wrote a post answering me and someone else, you quoted this sentence "Whereas in a Ponzi scheme no real component in the underlying "asset" is present..." from my previous post, saying in reply that "fractional reserve banking is also a Ponzi scheme because banks create credit out of nothing and if there is a bank-run the system would crash"...

It seems that I remember what you wrote better than you yourself do!

And you? You remember what you claim was written obviously since you are accusing me?

So now you come up with memory lapses... Splendid!

I hope you will realize that is not a logical retort.

When I present an argument, it doesn't mean I have to write every implied fact which you don't realize. I can't read your mind as to what misassumptions the reader has.

If you are asserting that inertia in the system and they did not leave because they did not have another job offer are mutually exclusive, then that is illogical.

It is fairly simple to understand. Hyperinflation doesn't go to infinity

1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000..................

in the blink of an eye. Real humans have to deal with real limitations on how fast they can transact to dump money they don't trust.

Losing trust in the system doesn't mean everyone can instantly find a way to survive outside the system.

And now you say there is some inertia in the system. Before that, you said they might not have had another job offer... What will your next dodge be?

If I deleted something quickly, it might have meant I realized it was incorrect. I really don't remember writing what you claim.

When I delete my own posts, they don't go to my PM, so there is no way for me to check your claim. I would have been willing to explain what I was thinking and why I deleted if I could find the post you are referring to.

Do you remember any of what I allegedly wrote?

I remember, yesterday you posted a message in reply to one of my posts regarding a Ponzi scheme where you stated some sheer nonsense about fractional reserve banking being a Ponzi (which was along the line of the discussion then). And just as I wanted to submit my reply and hit the Post button, your post suddenly disappeared!

Clever and true. But it doesn't matter because per my prior post on this page, the government exists to make sure the masses are contented with the redistribution (whether they are 1984 zombies or not is another issue, which you also explained they get accustomed to).

Unfortunately are the occasional megadeaths that occur along the way with that paradigm.

Edit: Also Bitcoin has no intrinsic value either, so actually not as clever as I initially thought.

Hmm... how many % are actually short fiat (mortgages, credit cards)?

It may be that 100% of fiat is concentrated to 0.1% of people, if we really dig deeper into numbers.

Mathematically myopic mistake.

BTC are not distributed to even 1 / 1000 of all those who have fiat.

Why do butt hurt Bitards always assume I am jealous or crying? When I am getting ready to kick your ass, it doesn't mean I am jealous or weak, it means I see low hanging fruit.

BTC are less concentrated than fiat !

Do you research instead of being jealous and crying !

Expounded in our microcosm:


That is why large hoarders must be diluted by perpetual debasement. Otherwise they would enslave humanity in their vested interest. Society fights back, which is why government is compelled to redistribute. But government is captured by the elite. What a racket! All because we don't have a technology to dilute decentralized.

But we do! We just are not using it!

Note 5% per year is a very small tax to a fast growing smaller enterprise, yet it is naturally limiting the size of large holdings, because very large capital can do nearly nothing but lend at prevailing usury rates.

P.S. If you become rich, forget about growing your wealth. Invest (risk) it on venture capitalism. You will always have enough to eat. In fact, you will probably become as wealthy as King Solomon both materially, in compassion, and in wisdom. I wish this on you.

Actually wasn't it more like the masses held some barter commodities and they traded these for more efficient (i.e. fungible, divisible) forms of medium-of-exchange, which ended up being fractionally debased (e.g. shaving coins) by intermediaries or fractional reserves by private banks, which ended up in failures, which caused larger protection (against failure, ahem) rackets to form, which is what we today call government and central banks.

That is why I wrote upthread that the fundamental issue is the power vacuum that society needs debased money (to continually flow from the usury hoarders back to the producers). Either the government provides this, or we decentralize the mechanism. In the former case, the government will slowly turn the people into 1984 zombies as I believe it is the top-down outcome. Thus not resilient and towards failure of the human race, e.g. Ted Turner's Georgia Guidestones goal.

P.S. I often hear the story of natives trading their land for a mirror to a European colonist or mestizo offspring. In my opinion, analogously (expected gains from) Bitcoin is the mirror and our collective freedom is the land.

Ted Turner what a hypocrite. He has I think 5 kids, yet he thinks from now on we should only be allowed 1 or 2. He thinks Buffalo are more important than the diversity of human knowledge, which can only grow exponentially by growing the population exponentially. Like most elite, he is socially and macro-economically insane, although rational on business profit. He got warped by his money or something and fell in love with the Buffalo or something. And now thinks he is smarter than nature and wants to enforce his warped priorities on the entire freaking world.

The idea of competition between nations is amusing to me, since all are dependent on the dollar. The tail doesn't wag the dog.

Fiat is centralizing, and the top dog wags the puppies. Until China leaves fiat (which ain't gonna happen by choice of the controllers of China), the overall game hasn't changed just moving some pieces around the board.

China's (and East Asia in general) controllers want to run their economies as top-down, productive businesses (seeks to increase the productivity of the people), whereas the West is run as a non-productive, rent seeking collective (discourages the productivity of the people). I postulate that this at least partially derives from the innate submissive/cooperative (at least on the face of it) culture of the Asian. Or for at least as long as they are export economies with trade surpluses and small government share of GDP, instead of consuming economies with trade deficits and government with majority share of GDP.

They will free up the Yuan FX rate, because they have no other pathway towards future business growth, since they exhausted the state-owned enterprises model of top-down export and fixed capital investment growth at the suppression of the consumer (home) share of the GDP, e.g. suppressing imports and international purchasing power of the Yuan. I believe they calculate that they can ramp up the consumer sector while stagnating the aforementioned sector by 2020 (as stated in recent news) so as to avoid implosion. I think they will partially fail to contain a slump due to global contagion coming which will severely impact their export sector, and the high level of NPL debt that has to be absorbed. China will come out of that severe slump as a fledgling consumer giant.

But they are not giving up central bank control.

Consider relative size.

Crypto-currencies are a small fast moving thing that could disrupt their slow moving thing. The taipans can't play in our tiny market and we can't play in the huge slower growth one (of centralized control).

There was a hypothetical question in my PM which is basically am I going to put all my effort in one altcoin. And my answer is I would support and help any coin that I feel has promise in stopping the bad outcomes I fear. I might even use gains I achieved by investing in one coin to fund development on and invest in other coin. Any one who produces good stuff, I am in. I am trying to incite more quality competition. Systems that have a single point of failure are not resilient, e.g. one crypto-currency for the world.

http://unheresy.com/Information%20Is%20Alive.html#Knowledge_Anneals