Yeh, figured you wouldnt understand. You have little/no knowledge of currency history or the workings of economics, that is what is starting to make me discount the underlying theories of BTC completely. No sound future contingencies or appreciation of the past 5000 years of what happens to fiat currency or the technicalities of its workings. If you divide up the pie, yes, there is the same amount of pie. My contention is that the pie can be divided INFINITELY. Why not just move the decimal .0000000000000000000000? or maybe
.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000.
Then there are so many BTC that they devalue based on supply demand curve. Have you not watched whats happening to the dollar? Read the zimbabwe story, and you will probably start to get it, but my feeling is that you dont want to get it. Keynesians hear no see no speak no evil... Keynesian economics can be controlled by central planners for a certain amount of time. But eventually it still goes belly up. This currency has no central regulation, other than adding more 0's. In summary this currency modus operandi ends in complete collapse.
Meh.
Dude, if you're going to spout elitist snobbery, at least be correct. You sound like a 12 year old that just found his father's macro-economics textbook.
Let's get some things straight. The bitcoin decimal cannot be moved by infinite places to the right, there are only 8 decimal places. However, even if there were infinite decimal places, and Bitcoin kept moving the decimal over to the right, that is not inflation - it's pie cutting. So don't bring up Zimbabwe like you're the only magical person who's heard they have an inflation problem. The location of the decimal point is a notational issue, it doesn't change the quantity of money. Or thinking about it another way, it does change the quantity of "money" but it does so equally to all people instantly (rendering it meaningless apart from the notational difference). All accounts rise in perfect proportion. All prices rise in perfect proportion. In this way, the increased quantity of money is meaningless, and is vastly different from a Zimbabwe type situation, where money is printed in one location, but not instantly notated across all accounts and prices in the economy. See the difference? Fiat money printing is economically disruptive because it devalues the units of currency already in circulation and does so asymmetrically. Adding zeroes to bitcoin does not devalue the currency because all accounts and prices rise in perfect proportion, instantly. When Bernanke prints, your bank account doesn't increase. When Bitcoin changes the decimal, you bank account does. Big big difference.
And don't ask rediculous questions like "have you not watched whats happening to the dollar?" Why do you think we are all so excited about Bitcoin? We're actually getting out of the dollar, and I hope you are as well. You think I care about cryptography? I'm here because the monetary economic concepts of Bitcoin are, as far as I can tell, sound, and it's very exciting.
In summary this "currency modus operandi" (nice vocab there
) is the complete opposite of a central bank/fiat system. The "central regulation" that you desire is the algorithm itself, and it's at the behest of no individual. That's a good thing.
) Can't we just say 1BTC = 1,000Oros or whatever? (Ora = Golden in Esperanto) Just choose a name, and we are done. Just make sure the gui text label matches the source code!
