Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 16972. (Read 26723546 times)

I suppose they could make a machine that checks out the coins/bullion for you. However, I am sure the makers of such machines will charge a pretty penny for said machine or tack on a small "fee" to rent for the use.

Yeah, not to mention that r0ach is only right about metal being non-debt based while it's sitting still.

But just try to move that metal as payment anywhere but to a bubba sitting right next to you, and transaction fees will be required through third party middlemen or services.

And if you don't actually move it for payment (i.e., don't take possession), you introduce counter-party risk and rehypothecation.

So I suppose everyone should then become an expert in examining coins and bullion, to make sure they are not getting counterfeits or debased metals. In the old days, that was what the money changers used to do. They weren't middlemen nor charged usurious fees at all.

The point is you are not REQUIRED to expose yourself to any 3rd party middlemen using metals as a settlement layer like in bitcoin (the miners who demand rent).  The energy input >0 required at all times for bitcoin to exist at all makes it a debt based system in practice.  Metals are not a rent seeking vortex, they exist with no energy input; they're not a debt based system.  You cannot use a debt based system as the base settlement layer.  It's completely absurd to even suggest it.

You could not do this and have this system exist without fees to transact. Not possible.

There is no difference whatsoever in practice between metals and bitcoin in that case.  For instance, for bitcoin to have any market penetration in the upper middle class of the world, you would need around 8 MB blocks, then on-chain transactions would still only be economical for something like transactions of $10k in value.  This means you would have, say $100k in savings and transfer $10k at a time onto a centralized BTC debit card or something.  With metals you would do the exact same thing, move small amounts at a time onto a more centralized system if you need the convenience.  

Do you see now why bitcoin doesn't actually solve any problem whatsoever? lol. It just makes the base settlement layer of your system less sound than precious metals and introduces middlemen where middlemen shouldn't exist. This is why legacy banking shills like Larry Summers and Ben Bernanke support bitcoin, because it allows them to insert themselves as middlemen where you should be immune to them.

Gold backed, nation state issued currency.
Because certainly there was no usury going on when the USD was backed by gold. /s

So how would build a centralized or decentralized system on top of metal without an enormous amount of counter-party risk? How would you guarantee who held what, for whom, and how much? Goldmoney.com is currently already doing it, but you have to fully trust that they secure your metal and will deliver it in full on demand. And that it will never get seized. HUGE counter-party risk.

Personally I prefer Bitcoin due to the fact I can travel with it and not be questioned by customs when I cross boarders. (I travel quite a lot)  Try taking gold bars through customs x-ray and you'll likely have them confiscated. Bitcoin circumnavigates that BS.   I suspect gold shops in Asia will be the first ones to start exchanging XBT.
No doubt gold and silver have their place, just saying, you failed to note the areas where Bitcoin is superior and the reason it exists in the first place.

I will use the same argument bitcoin core uses about block size.  You can create a centralized system on top of a decentralized one, but not vice versa.  Using physical metals as the base unit of account and settlement (Exter's Pyramid) allows you to remove all middlemen and if you would like some other type of convenience, you can then build a centralized system on top of it.  Using bitcoin as the base of unit of account or settlement gives you middlemen right out of the gate already, so it's completely useless as a form of settlement.

r0ach, you're kinda insulting everyone's intelligence here. You know darn well that you cannot transact among hundreds of thousands, millions of employees, employers, goods producers, suppliers, service providers, merchants, shippers, corporations, nations, etc. without a middleman or middle-service/network of some kind. At the speed/throughput needed for the world's current daily transactions (50-100k/second), peer-to-peer / face-to-face metals transactions would be impossible and unworkable.

Metals are great for wealth preservation and face-to-face snail trade, and some industry usage, but nothing more. Or a fall back SHTF face-to-face barter system if the world goes to complete hell. Even in that scenario, the world would eventually rebuild a new world currency (perhaps backed by metals? who knows) but I'm pretty sure that it would be digital moving forward.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

There is no fee.  You're talking about an arb fee for exchanging between a debt based currency system where the USD is unit of account to a different system.  If metals are the unit of account, there is no arb fee and no debt based currency or usury fees either.  If you transfer into bitcoin, you're back into a debt based usury system once again.  Bitcoin does NOT remove the middleman, only physical commodity based currencies like metals do.

You lost on your journey to ZH?

In simple terms, why you should hope cryptocurrency dies and gold and silver defeats them:

All cryptocurrencies are inherently rent seeking usury systems and a pseudo form of debt based currency if you will. The PoW chain does not just magically stay up on it's own, it requires a constant upkeep to exist at all (rent). A peer to peer physical gold or silver transaction can be done with no overhead cost; they're the equivalent of an off-chain transaction with no middleman or monopoly man gouging you with usury fees.  

Cryptocurrency is completely different.  Even if you attempt to do off-chain transactions via something like lightning network, or even in-person transactions with physical bitcoin bearer bonds, the transactions ALWAYS have to be settled on-chain eventually, so you are NEVER escaping the rent seeking usury system.  Since the blockchain is highly scaling constrained, it's like condeming yourself to extreme usury in the end game.  Bitcoin PoW is designed to centralize and the cartels running the mining operations will either be taken over by TPTB who already run the current system, or will just be a recreation of them in practice.

The further you abstract money away from barter, the larger a scam it is.  Only physical commodity based currencies are sound money that remove middlemen while allowing you to escape the debt based, rent seeking usury system.

 I don't know.  It certainly wouldn't be good for storing wealth but it seems like an organic version of Freicoin.  I imagine it would appeal to those who complain about the energy requirements of cryptocurrencies and who might therefore be open to sustainable alternatives.

27/08 or any date at all!!

let me in!!!

Is it too late to give a reason?

My reason is law of 5's

27 = 2 + 7 = 9
07=  0 + 7 = 7
2017 = 2 + 0 + 1 + 7 = 10

9 + 7 + 10 = 26

2 + 6 = 8

8 = 2³

2 + 3 = 5

Simple Law of Fives!

http://discordia.wikia.com/wiki/Law_of_Fives