Oh, it looks like the pointless inflammatory BitMagic has graced us with his presence again, and he still doesn't know what he's talking about.
Case in point: "You pay even more fees to buy 40k BTC (close to $12,000, not including inflation/deflation losses)." What sort of an idiot would use an exchange where they pay 7.5% ($12k/$160k at $4/btc) to exchange bitcoins? And even if he meant 0.75%, he's still way off: Mt. Gox drops the percentage to 0.2% at those volumes, so the fee would actually be $320. Also, there's #bitcoin_otc, where trades of arbitrary size can be done without any exchange fee whatsoever - obviously he's a n00b that doesn't know that exchanges are relatively new to bitcoin. Of course, the web of trust might not be extended to someone with his complete lack of social skills - I certainly wouldn't trade with anyone that acted like him.
Welcome back, old_engineer! I know you just love it when I have something to say that makes you look stupid. Indeed, I dropped a decimal (40k BTC * $5 = $200,000 * 0.6% = $1,200). Fortunately for me, your omissions make me look even better. Fuck fees, obviously. You wouldn't have anything to say about the truth of the matter, because you'd rather poke at arithmetic mistakes than face the reality:
insurance.
I certainly do know that exchanges are relatively new to bitcoin, but don't expect anybody but an idiot to be holding 40k coins after the last 3 months, nor idiotic enough to buy a piece of property with it in the first place. Lol, insert early adopters / the manipulator / globalist conspiracy here.
I promise you, old_engineer, I wouldn't accept your bitcoins even as a tip; because I know better than to own a failing commodity.
I think the entire idea is preposterous at this point. I just wanted to point out that with some extra steps involved, people could make it work.
Riiiiiiiight, we were arguing that if you didn't use bitcoins, it would be possible to buy a house with bitcoins.
Don't play dumb, you know what we were discussing: a property sale
in bitcoins, and why it could never happen. Also we were arguing about you saying that the existence of taxes deny private ownership, which you ignored for good reason. It's lolbertarian garbage along the lines of constitutionalist arguments I have lovingly debunked.
As a relatively new follower of the BTC fiasco (jumped in June, but kept my life plan
out of it), I can say without a doubt that it has been plagued from the start by ideologues like you and old_engineer, pumping your fists screaming up uP UP, while nodding sagely at all the anti-speculation chatter, and patting each other the back for a job well done as your investments and libertarian dreams circle the drain. I love a good experiment, even a failing one, which is why I'm really here. I guess I just underestimated the degree to which you would deny obvious criticisms on nothing but faith and banal pedestals.
I was referring to the names I see on this board. You are right, no significant new money has been infused into Bitcoin to offset the flood of mined coins being cashed out constantly. But lets be honest, everyone here knows that Bitcoin as a speculative tool was doomed. The only folks I imagine left here are those who fueled by some ideological imperative (Evorhees, for example) and those who just want to see the final Chapter in the drama, before Bitcoin returns to the obscure crypto-geek toy it was back in May.
Here you are, ladies and gentlemen. One more voice of reason for the doomed hopeful.