Usury is when the state uses the peoples' assets and keeps them ignorant about how to access their own value.
Could you expand more on that, namely, what you mean by accessing the value of assets? I don't get it
Topic: The economic model behind Bitcoin is flawed - page 11. (Read 14062 times)
Could you expand more on that, namely, what you mean by accessing the value of assets? I don't get it
Usury is when the state uses the peoples' assets and keeps them ignorant about how to access their own value.
The problem with current economic system is that it is "system of debt". I system of debt one of the two parties is always the slave. Is is an architecture of money where you have no control.
An architecture of money where every interaction is mediated by a third party that has absolute control over your money.
Bitcoin is fundamentally different because in bitcoin system, you don't own anyone anything, and no one owes you anything.
You can learn more from this awesome video: Documentary: The Bitcoin Gospel - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zKuoqZLyKg&feature=youtu.be&t=224
An architecture of money where every interaction is mediated by a third party that has absolute control over your money.
Bitcoin is fundamentally different because in bitcoin system, you don't own anyone anything, and no one owes you anything.
You can learn more from this awesome video: Documentary: The Bitcoin Gospel - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zKuoqZLyKg&feature=youtu.be&t=224
The Fed is the source of credit. Credit is no different from faith (credibility), so the Fed has created a monetary religion that controls the barter economy. Fortunately, anyone can barter with bitcoin or any other commodity without the need to participate in a deceptive religion.
Some people are able to live solely off of bitcoins, by never touching fiat. That just proves how effective it is. There are a lot of workarounds in the bitcoin ecosystem for every problem one may face.
Further, I don't think it proves anything per se. If the seller of goods immediately converts the proceeds into fiat, how would it change the matters? What is the difference between the buyer converting bitcoins into fiat before the purchase or the seller doing the same right after?
I think this is all six of one and half a dozen of the other, wow
So you classify something as a meas of exchange you need to be able to buy a car with it? Some people are able to live solely off of bitcoins, by never touching fiat. That just proves how effective it is. There are a lot of workarounds in the bitcoin ecosystem for every problem one may face.
Not at all. First of all, I meant a commercial scale of trades. Cars are like that (large scale production). And then almost everyone has an idea of what a car is and how much it costs, lol
I just want to see things in their real pristine light, stripped of all hype and bullshit, wtf
I have already explained it earlier. The Bitcoin economic model is based on the concept of money as a store of value. But without functioning as a means of payment (i.e. mediating trade in goods), it cannot reach the goal of being money, since the function of preserving value is secondary to this primary function. But given that it has no value of its own (like gold, homes, etc), it is technically no more than a kind of Ponzi...
I have specifically emphasized that its model is economically decrepit and obsolete, but that part you decided to omit
However Rai stone stones were used as a viable payment on the island of yap, If they achieved to make that happen, then why should bitcoin be worse off doing the same thing? I myself bough a steam game recently with bitcoins. Functions I have specifically emphasized that its model is economically decrepit and obsolete, but that part you decided to omit
And so what? I don't quite understand what you are trying to say. I guess there should be nothing either wrong or bad if Bitcoin did the same thing (i.e. became a means of payment). The main issue is it doesn't, and it cannot be called money until it does (on a commercial scale). A copy of a game you pay for with Bitcoin costs the developer nothing (the game is already there)...
Try to buy a new car from a car-maker for Bitcoin
Soon.
Published on January 30, 2014. How soon exactly?
Quote
Last year [that is, 2013], Lamborghini Newport Beach promised to accept bitcoins, but it later emerged that the dealership required buyers to convert their bitcoins into dollars – which doesn't exactly qualify as a bitcoin deal. Now, however, it is offering its vehicles through Eggify
Yes, it doesn't qualify as a bitcoin deal, lol
I have already explained it earlier. The Bitcoin economic model is based on the concept of money as a store of value. But without functioning as a means of payment (i.e. mediating trade in goods), it cannot reach the goal of being money, since the function of preserving value is secondary to this primary function. But given that it has no value of its own (like gold, homes, etc), it is technically no more than a kind of Ponzi...
I have specifically emphasized that its model is economically decrepit and obsolete, but that part you decided to omit
However Rai stone stones were used as a viable payment on the island of yap, If they achieved to make that happen, then why should bitcoin be worse off doing the same thing? I myself bough a steam game recently with bitcoins. Functions I have specifically emphasized that its model is economically decrepit and obsolete, but that part you decided to omit
And so what? I don't quite understand what you are trying to say. I guess there should be nothing either wrong or bad if Bitcoin did the same thing (i.e. became a means of payment). The main issue is it doesn't, and it cannot be called money until it does (on a commercial scale). A copy of a game you pay for with Bitcoin costs the developer nothing (the game is already there)...
Try to buy a new car from a car-maker for Bitcoin
Soon.
Published on January 30, 2014. How soon exactly?
Quote
Last year [that is, 2013], Lamborghini Newport Beach promised to accept bitcoins, but it later emerged that the dealership required buyers to convert their bitcoins into dollars – which doesn't exactly qualify as a bitcoin deal
I concur, it doesn't quite qualify as a bitcoin deal, lol
Quote
Now, however, it is offering its vehicles through Eggify
I tried to follow the link but it's dead, though
I have already explained it earlier. The Bitcoin economic model is based on the concept of money as a store of value. But without functioning as a means of payment (i.e. mediating trade in goods), it cannot reach the goal of being money, since the function of preserving value is secondary to this primary function. But given that it has no value of its own (like gold, homes, etc), it is technically no more than a kind of Ponzi...
I have specifically emphasized that its model is economically decrepit and obsolete, but that part you decided to omit
However Rai stone stones were used as a viable payment on the island of yap, If they achieved to make that happen, then why should bitcoin be worse off doing the same thing? I myself bough a steam game recently with bitcoins. Functions I have specifically emphasized that its model is economically decrepit and obsolete, but that part you decided to omit
And so what? I don't quite understand what you are trying to say. I guess there should be nothing either wrong or bad if Bitcoin did the same thing (i.e. became a means of payment). The main issue is it doesn't, and it cannot be called money until it does (on a commercial scale). A copy of a game you pay for with Bitcoin costs the developer nothing (the game is already there)...
Try to buy a new car from a car-maker for Bitcoin
Soon.
I have already explained it earlier. The Bitcoin economic model is based on the concept of money as a store of value. But without functioning as a means of payment (i.e. mediating trade in goods), it cannot reach the goal of being money, since the function of preserving value is secondary to this primary function. But given that it has no value of its own (like gold, homes, etc), it is technically no more than a kind of Ponzi...
I have specifically emphasized that its model is economically decrepit and obsolete, but that part you decided to omit
However Rai stone stones were used as a viable payment on the island of yap, If they achieved to make that happen, then why should bitcoin be worse off doing the same thing? I myself bough a steam game recently with bitcoins. Functions I have specifically emphasized that its model is economically decrepit and obsolete, but that part you decided to omit
And so what? I don't quite understand what you are trying to say. I guess there should be nothing either wrong or bad if Bitcoin did the same thing, i.e. became a means of payment like Rai stones or Cypraea shells. The main issue is it doesn't, and it cannot be called money until it does (on a commercial scale). A copy of a game you pay for with Bitcoin costs the developer nothing (the game is already there)...
Try to buy a new car from a car-maker for Bitcoin
However bitcoin truly isn't perfect, but what is? You could nitpick about anything and everything, the only thing bitcoin is in my opinion a better and superior alternative to fiat.
As I stated in my opening post, the Bitcoin economic (monetary) model itself is flawed. Fiat money is damaged heavily by people who use and abuse it, but as a model it is still superior to that of Bitcoin and closer in its application to the abstract idea, or concept, of money as such. In fact, the Bitcoin monetary model is anachronistic economically...
It is not a step ahead, it is two steps back actually
I have already explained it earlier. The Bitcoin economic model is based on the concept of money as a store of value. But without functioning as a means of payment (i.e. mediating trade in goods), it cannot reach the goal of being money, since the function of preserving value is secondary to this primary function. But given that it has no value of its own (like gold, homes, etc), it is technically no more than a kind of Ponzi...
I have specifically emphasized that its model is economically decrepit and obsolete, but that part you decided to omit
However we need to change the consensus about the store of value, by making it more lucrative to merchants and consumers, which will most likely happen in the future. I'd just give it more time.
OP is a wannabe economic expert who needs to earn 10 cent per post.
We gotta believe his words that he cant backup with arguments and facts.
You are hero member and dont even know why bitcoin has intrinsic value.
For gods sake delete your account.
We gotta believe his words that he cant backup with arguments and facts.
You are hero member and dont even know why bitcoin has intrinsic value.
For gods sake delete your account.
The problem with current economic system is that it is "system of debt". I system of debt one of the two parties is always the slave. Is is an architecture of money where you have no control.
An architecture of money where every interaction is mediated by a third party that has absolute control over your money.
Bitcoin is fundamentally different because in bitcoin system, you don't own anyone anything, and no one owes you anything
An architecture of money where every interaction is mediated by a third party that has absolute control over your money.
Bitcoin is fundamentally different because in bitcoin system, you don't own anyone anything, and no one owes you anything
Okay, I have a coin, say a quarter (25 cents). Whom do I owe exactly and what? Who is a slave of whom?
The problem with current economic system is that it is "system of debt". I system of debt one of the two parties is always the slave. Is is an architecture of money where you have no control.
An architecture of money where every interaction is mediated by a third party that has absolute control over your money.
Bitcoin is fundamentally different because in bitcoin system, you don't own anyone anything, and no one owes you anything.
You can learn more from this awesome video: Documentary: The Bitcoin Gospel - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zKuoqZLyKg&feature=youtu.be&t=224
An architecture of money where every interaction is mediated by a third party that has absolute control over your money.
Bitcoin is fundamentally different because in bitcoin system, you don't own anyone anything, and no one owes you anything.
You can learn more from this awesome video: Documentary: The Bitcoin Gospel - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zKuoqZLyKg&feature=youtu.be&t=224
I mean it removes all boundaries we currently have with money and our banking system.(a bit exaggerated, but that's the idea) Our current monetary system took at least several hundred years to evolve, with each passing year the fundamental goals of this system get forgotten, Intentionally or not
What boundaries does it remove if it doesn't function as money in the first place, i.e. doesn't remove its most important boundary so far? It is like saying that being able to SMS anyone (who has a cell phone at least) "removes all boundaries we currently have with money and our banking system". This statement makes no sense, until we somehow start using SMSes as a means of payment...
Though, most likely, it is impossible altogether, and that problem would be its prior "boundary"
However bitcoin truly isn't perfect, but what is? You could nitpick about anything and everything, the only thing bitcoin is in my opinion a better and superior alternative to fiat.
As I stated in my opening post, the Bitcoin economic (monetary) model itself is flawed. Fiat money is damaged heavily by people who use and abuse it, but as a model it is still superior to that of Bitcoin and closer in its application to the abstract idea, or concept, of money as such. In fact, the Bitcoin monetary model is anachronistic economically...
It is not a step ahead, it is two steps back actually
I have already explained it earlier. The Bitcoin economic model is based on the concept of money as a store of value. But without functioning as a means of payment (i.e. mediating trade in goods), it cannot reach the goal of being money, since the function of preserving value is secondary to this primary function. But given that it has no value of its own (like gold, homes, etc), it is technically no more than a kind of Ponzi...
I have specifically emphasized that its model is economically decrepit and obsolete, but that part you decided to omit
However bitcoin truly isn't perfect, but what is? You could nitpick about anything and everything, the only thing bitcoin is in my opinion a better and superior alternative to fiat.
As I stated in my opening post, the Bitcoin economic (monetary) model itself is flawed. Fiat money is damaged heavily by people who use and abuse it, but as a model it is still superior to that of Bitcoin and closer in its application to the abstract idea, or concept, of money as such. In fact, the Bitcoin monetary model is anachronistic economically...
It is not a step ahead, it is two steps back actually
I mean it removes all boundaries we currently have with money and our banking system.(a bit exaggerated, but that's the idea) Our current monetary system took at least several hundred years to evolve, with each passing year the fundamental goals of this system get forgotten, Intentionally or not.
We're in a point in time where pretty much every investment option could go to shit with the collapse of any of the big currencies. After you take away gold and silver from the equation, you're left with pretty much nothing. Like you said you could run a store but if state doesn't like you you're fucked.
However bitcoin is pretty hard to shut down, even when there's war raging on. I mean you'd need to shut down the entire electrical system for that to happen.
Money That Rots - Freicoin & Demurrage
Sylvio Gesell's idea from a hundred years ago has been tested with success, then it was shut down by the Austrian government. One modern rendition of the idea is Freicoin based on Bitcoin, but with demurrage (i.e. rotting). Its one of the most compelling ideas ever in economics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWQbN40XypI
Sylvio Gesell's idea from a hundred years ago has been tested with success, then it was shut down by the Austrian government. One modern rendition of the idea is Freicoin based on Bitcoin, but with demurrage (i.e. rotting). Its one of the most compelling ideas ever in economics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWQbN40XypI
Demurrage means depreciation of money over time at an arbitrarily set fixed rate (just like Bitcoin is set to appreciate by halving). You can do exactly the same by just printing more money. I can't possibly conceive how the former can be better than the latter, since in the case of printing more money you are, at least, free to choose how much more to print...
Did I miss anything of substance?
However bitcoin truly isn't perfect, but what is? You could nitpick about anything and everything, the only thing bitcoin is in my opinion a better and superior alternative to fiat.
As I stated in my opening post, the Bitcoin economic (monetary) model itself is flawed. Fiat money is damaged heavily by people who use and abuse it, but as a model it is still superior to that of Bitcoin and closer in its application to the abstract idea, or concept, of money as such. In fact, the Bitcoin monetary model is anachronistic economically...
It is not a step ahead, it is two steps back actually
Money That Rots - Freicoin & Demurrage
Sylvio Gesell's idea from a hundred years ago has been tested with success, then it was shut down by the Austrian government. One modern rendition of the idea is Freicoin based on Bitcoin, but with demurrage (i.e. rotting). Its one of the most compelling ideas ever in economics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWQbN40XypI
Sylvio Gesell's idea from a hundred years ago has been tested with success, then it was shut down by the Austrian government. One modern rendition of the idea is Freicoin based on Bitcoin, but with demurrage (i.e. rotting). Its one of the most compelling ideas ever in economics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWQbN40XypI
Second (and it is an entirely separate issue), even if you store your wealth in anything (Bitcoin included) but fiat, or even turn your wealth into capital to work as an investment (your own personal enterprise), you still have the same state behind your back, which could strip you of your wealth (or your life, for the record) just as easily as it could strip money of its value (in fact, even more easily, for your own personal insignificance, wtf)...
Ultimately, it all boils down to whether you trust (lol) the state you happen to live in
Ultimately, it all boils down to whether you trust (lol) the state you happen to live in
Jump to: