Topic: If the banksters and governments held 90% of the Bitcoin supply, what now? - page 2. (Read 1208 times)
November 27, 2020, 11:21:53 AM
It goes without saying that such incidents are unlikely to happen in the future. Because the demand for Bitcoin is increasing day by day all over the world and more and more people are getting involved in it which has caused Bitcoin to spread among people all over the world. In this case, if the government and banksters have 90 percent of bitcoin, the value of bitcoin will increase significantly. On the other hand, if the government and the banksters have 90 percent bitcoin, the demand for it from the general public will increase manifold.
November 27, 2020, 11:13:03 AM
Bumping the topic. I believe it has become more and more relevant, and dangerous, that as instutions are buying more and more Bitcoins and placing it under centralized custody, like PayPal, it could lead to a point when the custodians could start censoring us.
I think one of the best ways to prevent this from happening is to build a mechanism within the Bitcoin Network to control the supply/price. This could mean increasing the total supply from current 21 million to may be 30million. The additional 9million could then be distributed and locked safely using multi-sig/smart-contract and governed by a decentralized community. The community could help prevent the extreme price volatility by keeping the price fluctuate moderately while remaining deflationary long-term.
* You could alternatively (or in combination with the above) reward people to lock and hold/stake their Bitcoins for certain period of time(esp when Bitcoin is bearish) and the bitcoins maybe unlock when Bitcoin becomes bullish. Once their bitcoins are locked, they could be rewarded in tokens or something... Reward automatically increases when Bitcoin price is going down to encourage more people to hold and decreases when Bitcoin is going up to encourage some selling
November 27, 2020, 10:41:45 AM
It isn't a problem for gold, so why would it be a problem for Bitcoin
November 27, 2020, 10:00:17 AM
It's plain and simple, people will not trust Bitcoin anymore knowing that it wasn't decentralized as banksters and the government will just manipulate it. But that is somehow impossible to happen. Why? Since Satoshi created Bitcoin completely decentralized and he remained anonymous to make sure that there will be no entity to be subject and responsible other than the people who use Bitcoin. These people are now those who are in total control of the outcome in the future as they decide how to use Bitcoin either to hold it or not, use it in good ways, and exercise their freedom with it. In addition, exchanges are built with fairness in such a way that exchanges only provide Bitcoin based on their protocol. This means that if governments want to acquire most of the Bitcoin, they need to buy it completely and that's impossible.
November 27, 2020, 09:38:59 AM
that doesnt solve miner paradox. Check yearly miner rewards. Capped supply is a clever-well tought ticking dynamite..Satoshi is very clever.
November 27, 2020, 08:40:16 AM
<..SNIP..>
There is only 1.5 million coins left to mine..Miner capitulation soon maybe.
<..SNIP..>
If deep state banking globalist cartel gain custodial control of 95% as part of strategic BTC reserve holdings, an motion for BIP shall be introduced by reason of necessity to subdivide each satoshi into smaller units, There is only 1.5 million coins left to mine..Miner capitulation soon maybe.
<..SNIP..>
like "mili satoshi" or perhpas "MicroSatoshi" are required to address divisibility to address real world micro-transactions issues, possibly due to successful activation of advanced side/off-chain solutions like graftroot or taproot.
Applying modern monetary theory so long the "velocity" of BTC as unit of account in real world circulation increases linearly or perhaps at a sub-quadratic growth, it will cause scarcity and this would cause rises in BTC valuation.
Due to the hard money nature of BTC, this effect can be difficult to contain.
Considering there are 328,000,000,000,000 yuan in total monetary supply, once unit of account reaches
100 million yuan per BTC it would require aggregate utxo private key holding to reach 3,280,000 BTC, which gave raise to question of practicality at such reserve amount. As such it posses an practical issue even at a national level.
This maybe the very reason why Satoshi have left those coinbase utxo's untouched.
November 27, 2020, 07:15:06 AM
How much can it be decentralized if a few early ones mined %70 of bitcoin..appr 15 million coins in 1.5 years..i dont understand. And they just hodl,no adoption growing for payments, no MOE..
There is only 1.5 million coins left to mine..Miner capitulation soon maybe.
And i dont trust those bankers,wallstreet guys shilling..When they FUD at 2013 bitcoin below 300,500 usd they were buying, now they promoto agrresively. Are they trustable?
November 27, 2020, 06:07:08 AM
what now? BTC is "De Fecto" begin centralized.
Thus Satashi's original vision in his white paper "decentralized peer-to-peer cash system" remains "De Jure" as it is a thing of the past, technically.
Thus Satashi's original vision in his white paper "decentralized peer-to-peer cash system" remains "De Jure" as it is a thing of the past, technically.
November 27, 2020, 06:05:07 AM
That's what we can observe now, I don't understand why there is so much excitement about getting instututional giants and bankers into bitcoin. Better adoption, more money from institutional investors flowing in etc.yes it's all happening now but is it really good?
Will everybody be happy to know that PayPal, Grayscale, Square, some Wall street banks and few greedy hedge funds control the rest of the supply and price?
Big question if the project failing or not, it's not clear yet but there are some worrysome signs.
Will everybody be happy to know that PayPal, Grayscale, Square, some Wall street banks and few greedy hedge funds control the rest of the supply and price?
Big question if the project failing or not, it's not clear yet but there are some worrysome signs.
I believe we should be worried more about a large percentage of the supply is controlled by custodians, or services like PayPal becoming THE custodians, removing the sovereign store of value feature, and majority of usage of Bitcoin, as a medium of exchange, would be through them.
November 27, 2020, 04:36:46 AM
That's what we can observe now, I don't understand why there is so much excitement about getting instututional giants and bankers into bitcoin. Better adoption, more money from institutional investors flowing in etc.yes it's all happening now but is it really good? Will everybody be happy to know that PayPal, Grayscale, Square, some Wall street banks and few greedy hedge funds control the rest of the supply and price?
Big question if the project failing or not, it's not clear yet but there are some worrysome signs.
Big question if the project failing or not, it's not clear yet but there are some worrysome signs.
Would it be fair enough to assume that the project has failed, or failing?
90% of Bitcoin being held by an oligarchy of the elite, a cartel of banks, and by governments working together might turn Bitcoin into their "playground".
90% of Bitcoin being held by an oligarchy of the elite, a cartel of banks, and by governments working together might turn Bitcoin into their "playground".
November 27, 2020, 03:56:37 AM
Bumping the topic. I believe it has become more and more relevant, and dangerous, that as instutions are buying more and more Bitcoins and placing it under centralized custody, like PayPal, it could lead to a point when the custodians could start censoring us.
December 16, 2018, 11:02:33 PM
Who has money, he runs the game, that's how it works. In this harsh bear market, many average joes left the market and sold those holding to those elites.
December 16, 2018, 09:47:15 PM
If the government and banks hold 90% of bitcoin then the volatility of bitcoin will become static and the value will not rise for a long time. The market forces of demand and supply determine that price of bitcoin. The government will have to spend billions or trillions of dollars to buy that amount of bitcoin so its cheaper for them to ban than to undergo such an expensive venture
I agree with your opinion, the government must spend very large funds to be able to master bitcoin, so it is not productive. It is better to regulate or ban bitcoin in the country, where there must be benefits that can be obtained by the government in the short and long term. December 12, 2018, 12:17:23 PM
This is the worst thing that can happen to bitcoin, if 90% of bitcoin is owned by banksters and Government then manipulation is not far fetch in the ecosystem.
December 12, 2018, 12:07:11 PM
I do not think it will ever happen. Because no one can control crypto currency. Because of this, Bitcoin has not been able to adopt some countries. Therefore, we should not think much about this.
December 12, 2018, 09:31:14 AM
If the government and banks hold 90% of bitcoin then the volatility of bitcoin will become static and the value will not rise for a long time. The market forces of demand and supply determine that price of bitcoin. The government will have to spend billions or trillions of dollars to buy that amount of bitcoin so its cheaper for them to ban than to undergo such an expensive venture
There's 2 scenarios:1. They keep the BTC in cold storage. This essentially removes 90% from the markets. With such little float, it would be incredibly simple to pump and dump bitcoin, unless it's priced at $100,000 and above
2. They do actively keep BTC in government trading accounts. This would allow any government official to conduct insider trading and enrich themselves in a day
Thankfully both scenarios are highly unlikely, governments are allergic to bitcoin
December 12, 2018, 09:27:54 AM
Smart government is the one who accepts and regulates cryptocurrency and I'm sure they don't see cryptocurrency as a commodity like oil that must be monopolized, at least that way it will indirectly only result in losses, even to the bank, it also requires management while the human resources are few, so they allow the market or encourage their domestic market to move in a field that covers this.
November 14, 2018, 05:52:26 AM
It is highly impossible for this to happen even though this is their primary aim before they accept crypto. If this happens, they will continue to manipulate their economies as they are doing with their fiats. They won't have total control over the economy if they accept crypto.
November 14, 2018, 05:45:32 AM
If the government and banks hold 90% of bitcoin then the volatility of bitcoin will become static and the value will not rise for a long time. The market forces of demand and supply determine that price of bitcoin. The government will have to spend billions or trillions of dollars to buy that amount of bitcoin so its cheaper for them to ban than to undergo such an expensive venture
Governments and banks fortunately do not hold 90% or even 50% of the crypto currencies. If you say that they hold 90% of the bitcoins, they would have stopped ordinary people from using it and keep the banking system in place forever.
Why would they? Btc is a great tool to rip off people that don't pay taxes and also rip off hidden money. So btc is quite a smart move if designed by authorities. The original purpose of btc is bright, but what do we have now?
November 14, 2018, 05:11:32 AM
If the government and banks hold 90% of bitcoin then the volatility of bitcoin will become static and the value will not rise for a long time. The market forces of demand and supply determine that price of bitcoin. The government will have to spend billions or trillions of dollars to buy that amount of bitcoin so its cheaper for them to ban than to undergo such an expensive venture
Governments and banks fortunately do not hold 90% or even 50% of the crypto currencies. If you say that they hold 90% of the bitcoins, they would have stopped ordinary people from using it and keep the banking system in place forever.
Jump to: