Topic: Is Bitcoin good for the economy? - page 7. (Read 1063 times)
I don't get the main point of this but bitcoin is indeed good for the economy if it's being used in a proper way. Having Bitcoin circulating in an economy is good enough but it's a subjective answer depending on the person if they find bitcoin useful. For me Bitcoin is useful and it's a good contribution to the economy. I also agree that Bitcoin have meet some criteria for it to be considered as a currency but one thing I've noticed is the statement about Bitcoin being hard to earn. If you will think of it, bitcoin isn't that hard to earn. You just need to invest or work for it and it's the same for paper money. But if you look on the other side, both bitcoin and paper money are hard to earn. You can't just gain it without putting efforts. However in general, Bitcoin itself isn't hard to acquire if you want to.
About 'hard to earn' I think it is something that might be wrong because bitcoin has become easy to earn in the current era because with its continued growth of course the ease to earn bitcoin can be proven now, the government in this case has indeed become an important part because with the regulations that he has made at least nowadays many countries have legalized bitcoin, so that bitcoin is good for the country's economic growth because bitcoin is very useful to be owned and used for transaction and investment purposes.
I believe there could be a space carved up for bitcoin, we could make the economy work with bitcoin helping close the gap as well.
Bitcoin is a technological improvement on what we already have right now, centralized currencies are giving only few people some power and we do not want that, nobody really wants that, however with bitcoin everyone has the power or at least we say it like that yet when you think about it if world powers get together they could completely destroy bitcoin as well.
If China and USA alone just decided to ruin bitcoin they have enough money and power to just spend billions of dollars into research and then attack bitcoin together in a coordinated way to destroy it, they may make some people very very rich along the way but at least they could destroy it. So, we have to learn to coexist or the future doesn't look bright.
Bitcoin is a technological improvement on what we already have right now, centralized currencies are giving only few people some power and we do not want that, nobody really wants that, however with bitcoin everyone has the power or at least we say it like that yet when you think about it if world powers get together they could completely destroy bitcoin as well.
If China and USA alone just decided to ruin bitcoin they have enough money and power to just spend billions of dollars into research and then attack bitcoin together in a coordinated way to destroy it, they may make some people very very rich along the way but at least they could destroy it. So, we have to learn to coexist or the future doesn't look bright.
It isn't only in the hands those big anti-Bitcoin bodies to destroy BTC but those bigger wallets. Did you ever think what will happen when the day comes and Satoshi ever decides to dump all his BTC? Worst nightmare, eh?!? But that's not gonna happen because he loves BTC, same way everyone holding BTC and not dumping it have some specific reasons why they are not yet out of the game. Bitcoin is not just good for the economy, but it should also become a part of economics and should be taught as a subject that how something too small, became large to such an extent that even the destroyers are not willing to destroy it because they are reaping the real benefits of Bitcoins - that's the power of Satoshi's fantastic creation.
I believe there could be a space carved up for bitcoin, we could make the economy work with bitcoin helping close the gap as well.
Bitcoin is a technological improvement on what we already have right now, centralized currencies are giving only few people some power and we do not want that, nobody really wants that, however with bitcoin everyone has the power or at least we say it like that yet when you think about it if world powers get together they could completely destroy bitcoin as well.
If China and USA alone just decided to ruin bitcoin they have enough money and power to just spend billions of dollars into research and then attack bitcoin together in a coordinated way to destroy it, they may make some people very very rich along the way but at least they could destroy it. So, we have to learn to coexist or the future doesn't look bright.
Bitcoin is a technological improvement on what we already have right now, centralized currencies are giving only few people some power and we do not want that, nobody really wants that, however with bitcoin everyone has the power or at least we say it like that yet when you think about it if world powers get together they could completely destroy bitcoin as well.
If China and USA alone just decided to ruin bitcoin they have enough money and power to just spend billions of dollars into research and then attack bitcoin together in a coordinated way to destroy it, they may make some people very very rich along the way but at least they could destroy it. So, we have to learn to coexist or the future doesn't look bright.
Bitcoins have three useful qualities in a currency, according to The Economist in January 2015: they are "hard to earn, limited in supply and easy to verify". Economists define money as a store of value, a medium of exchange and a unit of account, and agree that bitcoin has some way to go to meet all these criteria.
Yes bitcoin has a long way run in order to meet those criteria which is those three, but the fact that bitcoin has the criteria of hard to earn in which it is very hard to earn 1 bitcoin because the value of it is kind of high and we also know that bitcoin is only have a limited supply meaning there is only a few of bitcoin that is revolving all over the world the thing is, bitcoin and other cryptocurrency are almost there we just need to wait in order to see what it can do to the economy of a country. And because of that we can say that bitcoin is really good for the economic growth of a said country.
Bitcoins have three useful qualities in a currency, according to The Economist in January 2015: they are "hard to earn, limited in supply and easy to verify". Economists define money as a store of value, a medium of exchange and a unit of account, and agree that bitcoin has some way to go to meet all these criteria.
Yes bitcoin has a long way run in order to meet those criteria which is those three, but the fact that bitcoin has the criteria of hard to earn in which it is very hard to earn 1 bitcoin because the value of it is kind of high and we also know that bitcoin is only have a limited supply meaning there is only a few of bitcoin that is revolving all over the world the thing is, bitcoin and other cryptocurrency are almost there we just need to wait in order to see what it can do to the economy of a country. And because of that we can say that bitcoin is really good for the economic growth of a said country. 
Bitcoins have three useful qualities in a currency, according to The Economist in January 2015: they are "hard to earn, limited in supply and easy to verify". Economists define money as a store of value, a medium of exchange and a unit of account, and agree that bitcoin has some way to go to meet all these criteria
A unit of account is the primary function of money
Conceptually, money itself can be defined as a dimensionless (i.e. with no physical measure assigned to it like length, weight, time, etc) valuation system. Then such functions as a store of value and a medium of exchange emerge when we are dealing with the instantiation of this system in its particular form (e.g. fiat money). In other words, they are derivative functions that come about as soon as money takes a concrete form
But while Bitcoin can be used as money, we still can't consider it a full-fledged currency in and of itself for the simple reason it lacks the property of being used as a unit of account in real life. Till now, it is no more than a payment system and a proxy medium (token) for such currencies as the US dollar, Euro or whatever. And this is its current economic role, good or otherwise
definitely yes,cryptocurrency is a secure easy and cost effective way to perform payment which is providing by a modern technologies,the process is suitable for trading and investing digitally because of their potential investment programs,i guess the economy were grow by gathering information from a multiple networks which is considered as a legit and authentic profit way to earn secondary income
Bitcoins have three useful qualities in a currency, according to The Economist in January 2015: they are "hard to earn, limited in supply and easy to verify". Economists define money as a store of value, a medium of exchange and a unit of account, and agree that bitcoin has some way to go to meet all these criteria.
Making money depends on individuals,if one knows how to earn money then its easy for them to acquire bitcoin in matter of minutes so it all depends on their skills.And its easy to transfer as well,some say not every corner of this world has internet access so bitcoin is not the right thing to be accepted as currency.But to be honest before 10 years we now uses internet for everything and still getting adopted by people from remote corners so in few years internet availability won't be a problem.Then the important one storage of value, which might lacks in bitcoin because its highly volatile but every currency in this sector broken their promise with inflation climb up every year.
who is that economist and why only on the year 2015 ? what about older than that year and newer than that year ? .btc is not hard to earn but its easily obtainable . limited supply yes 100 percent correct but easy to verify ? no i dont think so . but i agree on the other three uses of bitcoin mentioned above . bitcoin is useful so yes it is good for the economy but depends also on the country because some are against with this bitcoin . why they cant wake up and accept the truth that bitcoin is good .
maybe according to the OP when in 2015 the price of bitcoin was still very cheap and he was late to buy bitcoin and doubted the supply of bitcoin which was already valid was only 21 million pieces of bitcoin with high demand that could make the price very expensive.well I am a little doubtful about good bitcoin for the world economy because in my opinion when the price has become expensive and when it is very difficult to get bitcoin then the price will be expensive and shipping costs will also increase so that it will make people think when they want to make transactions using bitcoin.
Bitcoins have three useful qualities in a currency, according to The Economist in January 2015: they are "hard to earn, limited in supply and easy to verify". Economists define money as a store of value, a medium of exchange and a unit of account, and agree that bitcoin has some way to go to meet all these criteria.
Isn't it if limited supply will cause scarcity, I mean there must be a condition where some people lose their bitcoin. as far as I know in terms of the economy of bitcoin it's not very good and has different things than fiat. in the government economy there are also specific things that govern the amount of money and the economic conditions of the government.I do not know about the quote and the source of the quote that you share it.
Making Bitcoin Made Easy I do not think they're "hard to earn Bitcoin will have an impression on the economy of the country through digital currency and blockchain it'll depend entirely thereon on the country and therefore the government. There are many countries where crypto doesn't support therein case if the govt of that country supports it then the terminated Bitcoin economy is sweet.
Bitcoins have three useful qualities in a currency, according to The Economist in January 2015: they are "hard to earn, limited in supply and easy to verify". Economists define money as a store of value, a medium of exchange and a unit of account, and agree that bitcoin has some way to go to meet all these criteria.
Still boils down as to how people are going to used their bitcoin, do they want it to become a store of value? Or when merchants started to accepting Bitcoin as payment scheme, will people going to used it?
So this kind of arguments/counter arguments are moot in my opinion, as Bitcoin or crypto are really challenging the way old economic systems are being viewed upon, IMHO.
Lets just go down to the basics of how economy works for a country. If Bitcoin as some kind of payment for their citizens to earn in exchange for their service, jobs, or business then it will definitely help an economy of a country. The influx of money entering the country alone means that their country is having a portion of the limited supply of Bitcoin the government also doesn't need to print out more of their fiat currency as Bitcoin can also be used as money. As long as that country's citizens are earning from Bitcoin directly or indirectly it safe to say that Bitcoin is helping a country's economy grow.
Bitcoins have three useful qualities in a currency, according to The Economist in January 2015: they are "hard to earn, limited in supply and easy to verify". Economists define money as a store of value, a medium of exchange and a unit of account, and agree that bitcoin has some way to go to meet all these criteria.
Its not hard to earn if you already have the knowledge about bitcoin, imagine buying this one in just a minute and use it for your future financial transactions. Bitcoin is good for the economy if you’re an investor but if you are on the side of the government then you’ll not allow bitcoin to enter in a major market. The limited supply of bitcoin makes it more unique and expensive crypto as of now.
who is that economist and why only on the year 2015 ? what about older than that year and newer than that year ? .btc is not hard to earn but its easily obtainable . limited supply yes 100 percent correct but easy to verify ? no i dont think so . but i agree on the other three uses of bitcoin mentioned above . bitcoin is useful so yes it is good for the economy but depends also on the country because some are against with this bitcoin . why they cant wake up and accept the truth that bitcoin is good .
When you are disturbing the rich and elevating the poor there will always be some troubles. Just to give an example when the world workers went on a strike for 8 hour days for example (which doesn't apply everywhere even today) we have seen what could potentially happen, companies didn't profited and they started to adjust in a way before the strike that if workers didn't worked 10 hours a day they would lose money and close shop, hell a lot of them actually bankrupted and went away as well.
However what happened? In many of the free world people are working 8 hours nowadays (or 9 at most, otherwise if you work more, your company does something illegal) and in the end they adjusted and now they are all fine with the 8 hours thing. Bitcoin is like that, it will level the playing field for the rich and the poor, rich will do everything they can but eventually we will prevail.
However what happened? In many of the free world people are working 8 hours nowadays (or 9 at most, otherwise if you work more, your company does something illegal) and in the end they adjusted and now they are all fine with the 8 hours thing. Bitcoin is like that, it will level the playing field for the rich and the poor, rich will do everything they can but eventually we will prevail.
Of course, Bitcoin is good for the economy.
It gives the opportunity to people who do not have high salaries to work from their home and get paid in higher rates, eliminating inequalities between countries and regions of people who leave on different places.
It gives the opportunity to people who do not have high salaries to work from their home and get paid in higher rates, eliminating inequalities between countries and regions of people who leave on different places.
Do you have the correct source for this quote? I would like see it.
Just Google "the magic of mining" and an article from The Economist will pop up.They were talking about mining, and from the previous sentences, i believe they were referring to how hard it is to get the block reward (25BTC in 2015) since it's pretty much a "race" between those with a lot of resources (mining equipment).
Yes @tomahawk9 exactly, in this article they are referring "hard to earn bitcoin" is by mining and their block rewards, we all know that mining requires a lot of equipments which requires a good amount of investment.
Bitcoins have three useful qualities in a currency, according to The Economist in January 2015: they are "hard to earn, limited in supply and easy to verify". Economists define money as a store of value, a medium of exchange and a unit of account, and agree that bitcoin has some way to go to meet all these criteria.
I cannot understand the reason behind the article of The Economist claiming that Bitcoin is a good currency because of its being hard to earn. A currency that is good should be easy to earn. Otherwise, the majority of the people would have a really hard time getting that which is very basic for them to be able to buy their needs daily. I would say Bitcoin is now hard to earn because its value is ever increasing in terms of USD. However, that increase in value will also mean its purchasing power is also increasing, provided the price of goods and services are not inflating at an equal pace.
The rest I agree. Instead of easy to verify, however, it should be verifiable at an instant.
Yes @Darker45 i read this post on wikipedia, but i didn't satisfied with this "hard to earn", I think they are referring hard to earned, block rewards by mining,
Jump to: