Author

Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 32882. (Read 26656917 times)

donator
Activity: 2772
Merit: 1019
...
Sure, but the point is that in bitcoin world big money doesn't automatically mean more money, because you can't print and loan bitcoins. That's pretty simple.

You don't think there were tycoons & beggars with gold standard?  We had the silly thing in US 'til the seventies!  As far as lending with Bitcoin, i can talk you through many interesting lending schemes where the total number of bitcoins in circulation is not the ceiling (hint:  when you borrow a million dollars from a bank, do you take it home in a trunk?)

The trick you will have to solve in order to have this paragraph make sense, is how to get someone to accept a fractionally reserve borrowed "~bitcoin" as payment.

Winklevoss to the rescue?
legendary
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1002
Gresham's Lawyer
...
Sure, but the point is that in bitcoin world big money doesn't automatically mean more money, because you can't print and loan bitcoins. That's pretty simple.

You don't think there were tycoons & beggars with gold standard?  We had the silly thing in US 'til the seventies!  As far as lending with Bitcoin, i can talk you through many interesting lending schemes where the total number of bitcoins in circulation is not the ceiling (hint:  when you borrow a million dollars from a bank, do you take it home in a trunk?)

The trick you will have to solve in order to have this paragraph make sense, is how to get someone to accept a fractionally reserve borrowed "~bitcoin" as payment.
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
...
Sure, but the point is that in bitcoin world big money doesn't automatically mean more money, because you can't print and loan bitcoins. That's pretty simple.

You don't think there were tycoons & beggars with gold standard?  We had the silly thing in US 'til the seventies!  As far as lending with Bitcoin, i can talk you through many interesting lending schemes where the total number of bitcoins in circulation is not the ceiling (hint:  when you borrow a million dollars from a bank, do you take it home in a trunk?)



It was 1971 when Nixon separated gold from USD.

What point are you trying to make?

That it's not fair that if job costs you too much you can simple print more money to buy it. That's what kings are doing today. If people don't do what they want, they simple pay more (with printed money). Economy can't work like that. It was a scheme to separate USD from gold, to trick people to slavery for the kings.

Economy not only can, but does work that way.  As others have already pointed out, gold standard has nothing to do with ability to rack up debt.  Further, please explain to me why it is awful for US to have its current national debt -- as a mental exercise.  What would happen if it continued to climb?  Expand.
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
...
Sure, but the point is that in bitcoin world big money doesn't automatically mean more money, because you can't print and loan bitcoins. That's pretty simple.

You don't think there were tycoons & beggars with gold standard?  We had the silly thing in US 'til the seventies!  As far as lending with Bitcoin, i can talk you through many interesting lending schemes where the total number of bitcoins in circulation is not the ceiling (hint:  when you borrow a million dollars from a bank, do you take it home in a trunk?)



It was 1971 when Nixon separated gold from USD.

What point are you trying to make?

That it's not fair that if job costs you too much you can simple print more money to buy it. That's what kings are doing today. If people don't do what they want, they simple pay more (with printed money). Economy can't work like that. It was a scheme to separate USD from gold, to trick people to slavery for the kings.
legendary
Activity: 1442
Merit: 1000
Antifragile
...
Sure, but the point is that in bitcoin world big money doesn't automatically mean more money, because you can't print and loan bitcoins. That's pretty simple.

You don't think there were tycoons & beggars with gold standard?  We had the silly thing in US 'til the seventies!  As far as lending with Bitcoin, i can talk you through many interesting lending schemes where the total number of bitcoins in circulation is not the ceiling (hint:  when you borrow a million dollars from a bank, do you take it home in a trunk?)



It was 1971 when Nixon separated gold from USD.

What point are you trying to make?

LOL - Are you watching what I was going to type? ehehh

legendary
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1057
Marketing manager - GO MP
...
Sure, but the point is that in bitcoin world big money doesn't automatically mean more money, because you can't print and loan bitcoins. That's pretty simple.

You don't think there were tycoons & beggars with gold standard?  We had the silly thing in US 'til the seventies!  As far as lending with Bitcoin, i can talk you through many interesting lending schemes where the total number of bitcoins in circulation is not the ceiling (hint:  when you borrow a million dollars from a bank, do you take it home in a trunk?)



It was 1971 when Nixon separated gold from USD.

Still under the weekly forex volume.
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 501
in defi we trust
...
Sure, but the point is that in bitcoin world big money doesn't automatically mean more money, because you can't print and loan bitcoins. That's pretty simple.

You don't think there were tycoons & beggars with gold standard?  We had the silly thing in US 'til the seventies!  As far as lending with Bitcoin, i can talk you through many interesting lending schemes where the total number of bitcoins in circulation is not the ceiling (hint:  when you borrow a million dollars from a bank, do you take it home in a trunk?)

insert large graph here

It was 1971 when Nixon separated gold from USD.

Do you want to say that a country with a currency backed by gold can't get in debt or go bankrupt?
History has so many examples proving the opposite.

Btw , how many times did Greece failed in the past? =)))
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
...
Sure, but the point is that in bitcoin world big money doesn't automatically mean more money, because you can't print and loan bitcoins. That's pretty simple.

You don't think there were tycoons & beggars with gold standard?  We had the silly thing in US 'til the seventies!  As far as lending with Bitcoin, i can talk you through many interesting lending schemes where the total number of bitcoins in circulation is not the ceiling (hint:  when you borrow a million dollars from a bank, do you take it home in a trunk?)



It was 1971 when Nixon separated gold from USD.

What point are you trying to make?

Edit:  People are easily impressed when numbers are big, charts are red & exponential, and scary words like "debt" & "inflation" are brought into play.  Please understand that when a dollar buys 1/100th as much & your income is x100 bigger, those numbers imply one thing only:  invest, don't hoard.  Everything else stays the same, unless you fixate on numbers.  As far as national debt?  How does it affect you directly? 
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
...
Sure, but the point is that in bitcoin world big money doesn't automatically mean more money, because you can't print and loan bitcoins. That's pretty simple.

You don't think there were tycoons & beggars with gold standard?  We had the silly thing in US 'til the seventies!  As far as lending with Bitcoin, i can talk you through many interesting lending schemes where the total number of bitcoins in circulation is not the ceiling (hint:  when you borrow a million dollars from a bank, do you take it home in a trunk?)



It was 1971 when Nixon separated gold from USD.
legendary
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1057
Marketing manager - GO MP
Protect yourself and hold as little fiat as you can safely get away with.

This ^^

If not Bitcoin then anything inflation proof will do as a way to store money, even things like collecting antiques

We are in a deflationary phase now actually.

You start buying when blood is running in the streets?


I'll buy when I think I can sell for more than 2% profit within 24 hours. (With relative certainty)

The problem is, under those conditions one frequently ends up selling high and buying higher.

So? It still accumulates profit, that's better than the average market participant can say.
legendary
Activity: 1022
Merit: 1000
We could have government, laws and taxes in bitcoin world also. Governments just would be for people not for kings (banksters). If you choose to live here, you will do it by law or otherwise you can move elsewhere. Governments (or countries) would be in more equal position to one another if there would not be kings who globally dictate all governments below them.

EDIT. To make myself more clear, it's about power (money) and how power is divided to people. In this system groups that have power have become too small and in this system this power just keep on rising. This is the biggest bubble in the world which is about to explode with the help of bitcoin.

Is this a variant of the 1% controlling 40% of the wealth argument?  In that case, money = money.  After the initial reshuffling of the deck, the same disparities will begin to emerge if the rules of the game don't change.  Bitcoin already has its millionaires & paupers, and even in this microcosm the spread between the haves & have nots is pretty big.

Sure, but the point is that in bitcoin world big money doesn't automatically mean more money, because you can't print and loan bitcoins. That's pretty simple.

In PPC world it does btw.
legendary
Activity: 1442
Merit: 1000
Antifragile
The governments have made a trap for themselves by bailing out the banks, the banks have them over a barrel and they have no way out now.  If they stop QE and bank bailouts then the banks pull the rug out from under the economy and it collapses.  If they don't stop QE and bailouts then the population become so impoverished, desperate and angry that the result will eventually be a huge angry mob turning up at Parliament to lynch the lot of them.

What the governments should have done was to seize all the assets of the failing banks, jail those responsible and then compensate the people who had money in the banks. That of course would have been quite a blow to the economy but at least the total cost would have been finite, and possible to pay off and recover from eventually.  Instead because the government and the banks are the same thing they chose the route of bailing out the banks, now they're desperately scrabbling for money to fill this bottomless money pit, a task that is impossible.  The way that they've responded to this situation means that whatever they do the economy is now doomed.

I have a feeling that will still happen...

Regarding getting out of fiat. We are not going to collapse real soon (relatively speaking). Silver and Gold at these prices is insurance as is BTC. But having some food and water for you and your family AND neighbors is going to be the smart move if the Shit hits the fan. I just hope these evil leaders don't lead us into another war...

We still have time to let BTC correct for a few months and then move fiat into it... (I hope).

The problem is that this does nothing to address the huge debts that the governments have accumulated and continue to accumulate. We will more than likely see bail-in's in future, and banks being shutdown, but the Gov's (and by extension citizens) are still left holding the overflowing bag they have been forced into carrying thus far. And in the crisis scenario you are talking about, we will end up with economic stagnation. Growth will collapse, The Greatest Depression will be finally revealed to all.

Have you seen the TV series 'Continuum' ? Set partly in a future in which corporations rule the world directly after bailing out countries when their govs collapsed. It is not entirely impossible - pull back the curtain and that is what is already going on. The upcoming cirsis could well provide them with the opportunity to just get rid of the middlemen and appear as saviours. Bringing back all those triliions of offshore dollars and DIRECTLY buying countries, by bailing out the bankrupt govs, rather than just buying political influence. All the while being viewed as 'saviours' by the sheeple.

It is *possible*. The corporate endgame ...
And the first thing they would probably do ... issue a new (digital ?) currency

Like you, I agree that none of this is going to happen overnight (until it does!), but we are not getting out of this without a whole world of pain disproportionately doled out to those who least deserve it.


I should probably have said that I don't have much money and live minimally. If I did have 100's of thousands I would not have all of it in Ferns (fiat).
I wasn't offering a suggestion to correct the problem though. I don't see there being one. We are past the point of no return.

Short  term (say 6 months), what is more that likely to lose more value, the USD or BTC? I'd say BTC and it isn't close. So, I'm just hoping and playing that. Before the USD collapses you will see symptoms all over the world of other monies collapsing first. We are not quite there yet, though when it happens I think it will be quite sudden. We are seeing the early symptoms though and I imagine in the next 6 months there might be an escalation with more EU countries needing money and perhaps another bail in. When that next bail in happens, that will be a tipping point (depending on the country of course.)

Anyway, my idea is to get in BTC and then mostly stay there, maybe use 20% to trade in and out and build a bit.

What you said though is a good warning to take heed. We are all talking about a coming collapse but really don't understand how messy (and needed) it will be. By needed I mean getting those in power out of power.

Thx for the series recommendation, I'll look it up.

IAS
legendary
Activity: 2380
Merit: 1823
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
...
Sure, but the point is that in bitcoin world big money doesn't automatically mean more money, because you can't print and loan bitcoins. That's pretty simple.

You don't think there were tycoons & beggars with gold standard?  We had the silly thing in US 'til the seventies!  As far as lending with Bitcoin, i can talk you through many interesting lending schemes where the total number of bitcoins in circulation is not the ceiling (hint:  when you borrow a million dollars from a bank, do you take it home in a trunk?)
legendary
Activity: 2380
Merit: 1823
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
We could have government, laws and taxes in bitcoin world also. Governments just would be for people not for kings (banksters). If you choose to live here, you will do it by law or otherwise you can move elsewhere. Governments (or countries) would be in more equal position to one another if there would not be kings who globally dictate all governments below them.

EDIT. To make myself more clear, it's about power (money) and how power is divided to people. In this system groups that have power have become too small and in this system this power just keep on rising. This is the biggest bubble in the world which is about to explode with the help of bitcoin.

Is this a variant of the 1% controlling 40% of the wealth argument?  In that case, money = money.  After the initial reshuffling of the deck, the same disparities will begin to emerge if the rules of the game don't change.  Bitcoin already has its millionaires & paupers, and even in this microcosm the spread between the haves & have nots is pretty big.

Sure, but the point is that in bitcoin world big money doesn't automatically mean more money, because you can't print and loan bitcoins. That's pretty simple.
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
...but I still fail to see how bureaucratic system necessarily follows from an increase in urbanization.

Need of coherent infrastructure?   It's not obvious?

In order to fly you need an airplane. Isn't that obvious?


I guess i'm assuming you'll extrapolate along conventional lines.  Are you saying that coherent infrastructure emerges without any guidance, or guided only by "invisible hand"?  If everyone just starts building, we don't need any plans or leaders, that sort of thing?

Edit:  There are many ways to fly -- jumping off bridges, being shot out of cannons or slingshots, making yourself a tail of a giant kite or stepping on a landmine -- is that your point?
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
We could have government, laws and taxes in bitcoin world also. Governments just would be for people not for kings (banksters). If you choose to live here, you will do it by law or otherwise you can move elsewhere. Governments (or countries) would be in more equal position to one another if there would not be kings who globally dictate all governments below them.

EDIT. To make myself more clear, it's about power (money) and how power is divided to people. In this system groups that have power have become too small and in this system this power just keep on rising. This is the biggest bubble in the world which is about to explode with the help of bitcoin.

Is this a variant of the 1% controlling 40% of the wealth argument?  In that case, money = money.  After the initial reshuffling of the deck, the same disparities will begin to emerge if the rules of the game don't change.  Bitcoin already has its millionaires & paupers, and even in this microcosm the spread between the haves & have nots is pretty big.
donator
Activity: 2772
Merit: 1019
...but I still fail to see how bureaucratic system necessarily follows from an increase in urbanization.

Need of coherent infrastructure?   It's not obvious?

In order to fly you need an airplane. Isn't that obvious?
Jump to: