Economics are worried it will work and prove something they believe is wrong. Ignorance is bliss. Many economists believe you need to keep creating money and the more money the better. This would dent that argument. I would think economics want to embrace it and see what happens with this experiment. I only hope we get to see what happens and it doesn't get ruined by something like a 51% attack...
It's laughable to watch these naysayers sit in their ivory towers and predict the downfall of bitcoin. There are going to be alot of people eating crow six months from now. 
Topic: Why are economists so afraid of Bitcoin? - page 3. (Read 5318 times)
In a bitcoin world the only diffrence is that he wouldnt have a job
This may be true, and if it is it highlights the source of the problem. If “he” is unemployed, and is capable of contributing to society but is prohibited because he can’t find a Job, (people with capital are reluctant to put it to work for “valid” economic reasons) or “he” can’t get hold of the means of production because people who own the means – the land and tools are reluctant to share.
The Neoclassical economic model is to create debt with interest (treasury bonds) to encourage and benefit those with capital to lend to those who manage the economy so they can create money to lend, to be paid back with interest and taxes so those who have the means, can partake in the economy.
The simplified problem above and its proposed solution is what led Marx to ridicule capitalism. Although Marx had insights as worthy as Keynes as and Hayek, he undermined entrepreneurship and innovation to the determent of his ideas.
The problem is a meme of Human rights, sustainable rights do not infringe on each others rights. except for the right of property provided by god. A claim to have a right to god given property, denies all otter human that right, and thus should come with some responsibility.
And as long as we construct economic systems to preserve that meme, they will fail, Marx, Keynes as and Hayek, all saw the benefits and perils of right to god given property, Mark sort to eradicate it, Hayek sort to strengthen it, and Keynes sort to manage it with tax and a welfare state.
Untested to date is Hayek’s approach your comment above suggests we will all wind up unemployed, I bet we won’t all wind up unemployed but we will test the limits of the meme of private property and what responsibilities are fair and emerge with a sustainable system.
No ones "afraid" of bitcoin. There's your answer.
I’m afraid to sell, I think I hang in the wrong circles, and they never tell me when or why I should buy just encourage and justify why to sell.
No ones "afraid" of bitcoin. There's your answer.
I’m afraid to sell, I think I hang in the wrong circles, and they never tell me when or why I should buy just encourage and justify why to sell.
lol I guess I'm the same way. I think many are in the same boat too
No ones "afraid" of bitcoin. There's your answer.
I’m afraid to sell, I think I hang in the wrong circles, and they never tell me when or why I should buy just encourage and justify why to sell.
No ones "afraid" of bitcoin. There's your answer.
Many economists believe you need to keep creating money and the more money the better.
I'm not exactly sure that's the viewpoint of most economists, that simply creates inflationary pressures and screws over the consumer in general. As to OP, I personally don't feel economists are afraid of BTC as much as they are wary of it considering the fact that it's a new experiment of which the likes have never been seen in the past; nothing with this kind of idea has made it so far. Plus it's hard to theorise about it considering much of the value is speculation unrelated to actual real-world factors.
I would add that the entire economic "profession" is entirely theoretical. I'll provide examples:
The econometric models assumes entirely rational decision makers. This is not true in reality.
Neo classical economics assumes debt does not matter. Actually, debt does matter in fractional reserve banking. It brings forward future money to present day spending. Credit adds to the money supply in the short term.
Ben Bernanke blames the failure of regulation for the GFC, citing predatory lending. In reality, bank debt levels were too high not only at Lehman but at all the investment banks.
The Fed Reserve does not believe in free markets because they are manipulating long term interest rates to spur artificial credit growth. Central banks all over the world are suppressing long term borrowing costs, which artificially increases asset prices. This widens the gap between the rich and poor.
A fast food worker can work a whole day and not earn as much as a rich person sitting on their bums earning capital gains on their assets in one hour.
This is the real world that we live in. This is the red pill.
You say you are greek but actually you are a republican. Like it or not bitcoin world is here and there is nothing you can do to stop it.
Its about time fat greek republicans get real jobs.
Many economists believe you need to keep creating money and the more money the better.
I'm not exactly sure that's the viewpoint of most economists, that simply creates inflationary pressures and screws over the consumer in general. As to OP, I personally don't feel economists are afraid of BTC as much as they are wary of it considering the fact that it's a new experiment of which the likes have never been seen in the past; nothing with this kind of idea has made it so far. Plus it's hard to theorise about it considering much of the value is speculation unrelated to actual real-world factors.
I would add that the entire economic "profession" is entirely theoretical. I'll provide examples:
The econometric models assumes entirely rational decision makers. This is not true in reality.
Neo classical economics assumes debt does not matter. Actually, debt does matter in fractional reserve banking. It brings forward future money to present day spending. Credit adds to the money supply in the short term.
Ben Bernanke blames the failure of regulation for the GFC, citing predatory lending. In reality, bank debt levels were too high not only at Lehman but at all the investment banks.
The Fed Reserve does not believe in free markets because they are manipulating long term interest rates to spur artificial credit growth. Central banks all over the world are suppressing long term borrowing costs, which artificially increases asset prices. This widens the gap between the rich and poor.
A fast food worker can work a whole day and not earn as much as a rich person sitting on their bums earning capital gains on their assets in one hour.
This is the real world that we live in. This is the red pill.
Its like the economists have gone on a witch hunt against Bitcoin!
Whats their problem?
It's really quite simple.Whats their problem?
Those who are afraid of bitcoin are spineless liberals who despise grassroots movements by the people.
They believe in government solutions. Bitcoin contradicts their ideology.
+1.
Too many people don't even think about what "liberal" even means (as a principle). "Liberals" in the US have a very limited sense of actually espousing liberal values (amusingly, very much in itself the opposite of the definition of the word "liberal")
If anyone spends long enough watching or reading Russia Today, they'll notice the European versions of the Libertarians in Britain and France. Apparently, "Libertarian" is characterised by being an ultra-nationalist, borderline or overt racist, pseudo fascist and not forgetting corporate capitalist. Hard right in a Hitler way.
Strange, eh? You identify with being a Liberal in the US, and you end up being statist authoritarian. You want to be a Libertarian in Europe, and you end up with Ultra-Right mega-racist parties to choose from. Why can't we sign up to politics that the label describes?
Many economists believe you need to keep creating money and the more money the better.
I'm not exactly sure that's the viewpoint of most economists, that simply creates inflationary pressures and screws over the consumer in general. As to OP, I personally don't feel economists are afraid of BTC as much as they are wary of it considering the fact that it's a new experiment of which the likes have never been seen in the past; nothing with this kind of idea has made it so far. Plus it's hard to theorise about it considering much of the value is speculation unrelated to actual real-world factors.
I would add that the entire economic "profession" is entirely theoretical. I'll provide examples:
The econometric models assumes entirely rational decision makers. This is not true in reality.
Neo classical economics assumes debt does not matter. Actually, debt does matter in fractional reserve banking. It brings forward future money to present day spending. Credit adds to the money supply in the short term.
Ben Bernanke blames the failure of regulation for the GFC, citing predatory lending. In reality, bank debt levels were too high not only at Lehman but at all the investment banks.
The Fed Reserve does not believe in free markets because they are manipulating long term interest rates to spur artificial credit growth. Central banks all over the world are suppressing long term borrowing costs, which artificially increases asset prices. This widens the gap between the rich and poor.
A fast food worker can work a whole day and not earn as much as a rich person sitting on their bums earning capital gains on their assets in one hour.
This is the real world that we live in. This is the red pill.
Many economists believe you need to keep creating money and the more money the better.
I'm not exactly sure that's the viewpoint of most economists, that simply creates inflationary pressures and screws over the consumer in general. As to OP, I personally don't feel economists are afraid of BTC as much as they are wary of it considering the fact that it's a new experiment of which the likes have never been seen in the past; nothing with this kind of idea has made it so far. Plus it's hard to theorise about it considering much of the value is speculation unrelated to actual real-world factors.
Its like the economists have gone on a witch hunt against Bitcoin!
Whats their problem?
It's really quite simple.Whats their problem?
Those who are afraid of bitcoin are spineless liberals who despise grassroots movements by the people.
They believe in government solutions. Bitcoin contradicts their ideology.
we are not against the design, we are against the initial conditions, when you understan that, maybe you get over your prejudice
And again we say to you who are them: don't use bitcoins. Problem fixed. End of story.
Its like the economists have gone on a witch hunt against Bitcoin!
Whats their problem?
It's really quite simple.Whats their problem?
Those who are afraid of bitcoin are spineless liberals who despise grassroots movements by the people.
They believe in government solutions. Bitcoin contradicts their ideology.
we are not against the design, we are against the initial conditions, when you understan that, maybe you get over your prejudice
And again we say to you who are them: don't use bitcoins. Problem fixed. End of story.
Its like the economists have gone on a witch hunt against Bitcoin!
Whats their problem?
It's really quite simple.Whats their problem?
Those who are afraid of bitcoin are spineless liberals who despise grassroots movements by the people.
They believe in government solutions. Bitcoin contradicts their ideology.
we are not against the design, we are against the initial conditions, when you understan that, maybe you get over your prejudice
And again we say to you who are them: don't use bitcoins. Problem fixed. End of story.
Economics are worried it will work and prove something they believe is wrong. Ignorance is bliss. Many economists believe you need to keep creating money and the more money the better. This would dent that argument. I would think economics want to embrace it and see what happens with this experiment. I only hope we get to see what happens and it doesn't get ruined by something like a 51% attack...
Its like the economists have gone on a witch hunt against Bitcoin!
Whats their problem?
It's really quite simple.Whats their problem?
Those who are afraid of bitcoin are spineless liberals who despise grassroots movements by the people.
They believe in government solutions. Bitcoin contradicts their ideology.
we are not against the design, we are against the initial conditions, when you understan that, maybe you get over your prejudice
And again we say to you who are them: don't use bitcoins. Problem fixed. End of story.
Having an economics degree sadly does not mean you understand economics.
And having a doctorate in physics does not mean you understand physics... A bit over a hundred years ago, an awful lot of mainstream physicists rejected Einstein's Theory of Relativity too (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_theory_of_relativity for details). Their reasons were numerous yet we all know he was vindicated within a handful of decades. The analogy isn't perfect as Bitcoin isn't a new economic theory, but it definitely threatens to expose the theories of Keynes as fundamentally flawed which apparently makes a lot of closed-minded economists uncomfortable.
bitcoin did 'nt exist at the times of keyens or austrians. That's why it does not fit in those frameworks. But:
"If the Treasury were to fill old bottles with banknotes, bury them at suitable depths in disused coalmines which are then filled up to the surface with town rubbish, and leave it to private enterprise on well-tried principles of laissez-faire to dig the notes up again (the right to do so being obtained, of course, by tendering for leases of the note-bearing territory), there need be no more unemployment and, with the help of the repercussions, the real income of the community, and its capital wealth also, would probably become a good deal greater than it actually is. " http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/k/keynes/john_maynard/k44g/chapter10.html
WAIT! why the need of a Treasaury to fill the bottles?
Keynes would absolutely agree to coin minining, expecially of litecoins.
Its like the economists have gone on a witch hunt against Bitcoin!
Whats their problem?
It's really quite simple.Whats their problem?
Those who are afraid of bitcoin are spineless liberals who despise grassroots movements by the people.
They believe in government solutions. Bitcoin contradicts their ideology.
we are not against the design, we are against the initial conditions, when you understan that, maybe you get over your prejudice
Its like the economists have gone on a witch hunt against Bitcoin!
Whats their problem?
It's really quite simple.Whats their problem?
Those who are afraid of bitcoin are spineless liberals who despise grassroots movements by the people.
They believe in government solutions. Bitcoin contradicts their ideology.
Its like the economists have gone on a witch hunt against Bitcoin!
Whats their problem?
It's really quite simple.Whats their problem?
Those who are afraid of bitcoin are spineless liberals who despise grassroots movements by the people.
They believe in government solutions. Bitcoin contradicts their ideology.
we are not against the design, we are against the initial conditions, when you understan that, maybe you get over your prejudice
Jump to: