Pages:
Author

Topic: Why Bitcoin is a better choice as a currency for Americans than gold (Read 3570 times)

NRF
sr. member
Activity: 279
Merit: 250
Geez..are there still people who think we're running out of oil?

This kind of statement always makes me smile, it seems that there are people who believe there is a conspiracy behind everything.  I will answer your question with a question.

Geez..are there people who think there is some secret government plot that is breading dinosaurs and then sticking them in the ground to make more oil?  Roll Eyes
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1003
Sorry OP, but the American Dream is over...

No digital currency in this planet is going to save the largest consumer of natural resources from a catastrophe. The whole USA infrastructure is based on fossil fuel. When shortages start to happen, no gold or Bitcoin is going to replace the energy necessary to obtain the essential goods of living.

Prepare yourself for hard labour. That is going to be your local currency.

http://youtu.be/cJ-J91SwP8w

Geez..are there still people who think we're running out of oil?
legendary
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1012
Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.
Try trading with any size, and your example becomes useless.
We're in the imaginary world where Bitcoins are useful as a real currency. You are, of course, correct in the real world where Bitcoins are not yet even remotely close to being usable as a real currency due to, among other things, the inability to acquire realistic quantities in reasonable timeframes.
full member
Activity: 209
Merit: 100
So, at the moment, it would benefit all Americans to start pushing Bitcoin as a viable currency and start pushing that 40% higher before other countries catch on and tip the scale in their favor. And at current prices, that would not be very difficult to do.

Say you hold $40 worth of Bitcoins today and they go up to $1,000. You've made $960 over that time period. You got $1,000 at the end since you have $1,000 worth of Bitcoins. But you gave up $40 today, since you could have sold them for $40.

Say you have no Bitcoins today. You buy $40 worth of them. They go up to $1,000. You've also made $960. You got $1,000 at the end. But you gave up $40 today, since you used them to buy the Bitcoins.

So it basically makes no difference who holds them today.


Try trading with any size, and your example becomes useless.
legendary
Activity: 1264
Merit: 1008
+1 what evoorhees said.

Also nobody has pointed out yet in this thread the real problems with the gold standard of money:

Either:

1) You are using physical specie, requiring purity and weight measurement on a regular basis.  This is a real pain or will require huge investment in the right machinery.    INCONVENIENT

or:

2) You are using paper "representing gold" (or stamped metal) and are never sure the issuer has the gold or paper is not counterfeit, or the stamped gold has not been shaved or "coined" or otherwise doctored in a value reducing manner.  GAPING SECURITY HOLE

Not to mention:

3) Uncontrolled and unknown inflation or money supply shocks are possible

And lets not forget:

4) Can be difficult to hide from enterprising neighborhood entrepeneurs / government thugs / annunaki rebel forces

5) Au dice would be a lot slower




sr. member
Activity: 382
Merit: 253
Gold has never been a common every day currency, the coins would be too small. Gold has always been rich persons money where a small coin could hire 10 men for a days work. I don't think gold and bitcoins will ever be in competition as currencies due to this.
See Shire Silver for the counterargument to gold not being usable in everyday trade.

I think bitcoins and Shire Silver complement each other nicely. Bitcoins are great for Internet and other electronic transactions, while Shire Silver fulfills the need for in-person anonymous transactions.

I agree that silver makes a fine everyday currency. Up until the recent century it had been the case for millennia. Of course this was entirely possible due to inexpensive coining sponsored major governments. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_silver for a bit of history on the importance of cheap mintage.

Any silver currency that has a high premium over intrinsic value will have great resistance becoming an accepted currency. Even if you enforce a higher value to justify a premium then http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham%27s_law comes into play.

Did you visit the link I posted? Its to a gold product, not silver. Shire Silver is a brand.

Also, there's no such thing as intrinsic value. The cards are worth more than spot price because of the added values like putting the metal into a more usable form suitable for everyday trade. But of course, what it will trade for is up to the market, just like with bitcoins (which also have no intrinsic value but trade as the market determines.)

Yes, when governments create the money, as in coining silver, they sometimes do it "for free". But the actual price of the coining is in the power it gives the government. Money is a product, and like any product it needs to make a profit of some sort for its producer. I would rather have that profit be readily observed and quantifiable as part of the price of the money than as an invisible lever of power wielded behind closed doors.

And Gresham's Law only applies when government forces people to accept bad money. Bitcoin (and others) will outcompete even government monopoly money and put an end to legal tender laws that enable Gresham.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
Gold has never been a common every day currency, the coins would be too small. Gold has always been rich persons money where a small coin could hire 10 men for a days work. I don't think gold and bitcoins will ever be in competition as currencies due to this.
See Shire Silver for the counterargument to gold not being usable in everyday trade.

I think bitcoins and Shire Silver complement each other nicely. Bitcoins are great for Internet and other electronic transactions, while Shire Silver fulfills the need for in-person anonymous transactions.

I agree that silver makes a fine everyday currency. Up until the recent century it had been the case for millennia. Of course this was entirely possible due to inexpensive coining sponsored major governments. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_silver for a bit of history on the importance of cheap mintage.

Any silver currency that has a high premium over intrinsic value will have great resistance becoming an accepted currency. Even if you enforce a higher value to justify a premium then http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham%27s_law comes into play.
legendary
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1010
OP thanks! i didnt learn a thing abt btc but I did learn why the rest of the world thinks we're idiots and assholes...
legendary
Activity: 1316
Merit: 1005
In tons of gold, the United States holds 8,133 out of a total 30,623 with the closest holder being Germany with 3,396. That is 26.5% of the world's gold controlled by the United States. (according to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_reserve)

Those numbers refer to the government reserves don't they? As far a the citizens go Americans have much less gold than people in Europe do. This is mostly due the outlawing of gold trade for several decades in the 20th century.

AFAIK, yes. Estimates of above-ground gold are around 170,000 tons, of which the ~30 level is held by governments and supranational organizations.
sr. member
Activity: 382
Merit: 253
While bitcoins are nice gold has the advantage of being able to be sold almost anywhere. Any pawn shop, jewellery store, coin store or private collector will give you fair value for gold. The gold market is orders of magnitude larger than the bitcoin market.
For now. The bitcoin market is growing rapidly though.

Gold has never been a common every day currency, the coins would be too small. Gold has always been rich persons money where a small coin could hire 10 men for a days work. I don't think gold and bitcoins will ever be in competition as currencies due to this.
See Shire Silver for the counterargument to gold not being usable in everyday trade.

I think bitcoins and Shire Silver complement each other nicely. Bitcoins are great for Internet and other electronic transactions, while Shire Silver fulfills the need for in-person anonymous transactions.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
If the whole world were to change their currency tomorrow and had the choice between gold or Bitcoin, Americans would be well served if Bitcoin was chosen. The reason being, we are richer in Bitcoin compared to the rest of the world than we are in gold compared to the rest of the world.

In tons of gold, the United States holds 8,133 out of a total 30,623 with the closest holder being Germany with 3,396. That is 26.5% of the world's gold controlled by the United States. (according to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_reserve)


Those numbers refer to the government reserves don't they? As far a the citizens go Americans have much less gold than people in Europe do. This is mostly due the outlawing of gold trade for several decades in the 20th century.

While bitcoins are nice gold has the advantage of being able to be sold almost anywhere. Any pawn shop, jewellery store, coin store or private collector will give you fair value for gold. The gold market is orders of magnitude larger than the bitcoin market.

Gold has never been a common every day currency, the coins would be too small. Gold has always been rich persons money where a small coin could hire 10 men for a days work. I don't think gold and bitcoins will ever be in competition as currencies due to this.

Just my little contrarian argument.
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
A D&T Public Service Announcement for the reading impaired:

Quote
The US has a lot of problems but lack of fossil fuels isn't one of them. 

This has been a D&T Public Service Announcement for the reading impaired
vip
Activity: 756
Merit: 504
When shortages happen your grandkids likely will already be dead.  The US has the largest reserves of coal and with shale gas has upward of 100+ year supply.  Most of that is unexplored so it could be easily triple that.   

But wait you say we don't have enough oil?  Well we haven't done any real exploring of either cost if 30+ years so we really don't know how much oil we have.  Still there isn't anything magical about oil.  If the price of oil and thus gasoline ends up being significantly higher per unit of energy compared to nat gas expect to see nat gas cars hitting the road.

The US has a lot of problems but lack of fossil fuels isn't one of them. 


You are still dreaming the failed America dream...

 Undecided

I am sorry for you.
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
When shortages happen your grandkids likely will already be dead.  The US has the largest reserves of coal and with shale gas has upward of 100+ year supply.  Most of that is unexplored so it could be easily triple that.   

But wait you say we don't have enough oil?  Well we haven't done any real exploring of either cost if 30+ years so we really don't know how much oil we have.  Still there isn't anything magical about oil.  If the price of oil and thus gasoline ends up being significantly higher per unit of energy compared to nat gas expect to see nat gas cars hitting the road.

The US has a lot of problems but lack of fossil fuels isn't one of them. 
vip
Activity: 756
Merit: 504
Sorry OP, but the American Dream is over...

No digital currency in this planet is going to save the largest consumer of natural resources from a catastrophe. The whole USA infrastructure is based on fossil fuel. When shortages start to happen, no gold or Bitcoin is going to replace the energy necessary to obtain the essential goods of living.

Prepare yourself for hard labour. That is going to be your local currency.

http://youtu.be/cJ-J91SwP8w
legendary
Activity: 2506
Merit: 1010
Even without switching over tomorrow, the eventuality of Bitcoin becoming a dominant world currency presents the challenge to all nations to get a larger piece of the pie before other countries catch on and get priced out of existence.

That really is less a factor than it would seem.

Here''s an example:

Why we need Bitcoins for international transactions
 - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/why-we-need-bitcoins-for-international-transactions-98988

In that example, no matter which currency (either USD or JPY) you were holding a certain percent got siphoned off to the banks.

The casino doesn't care if it is Susie or Bob who wins at the table, the house gets their money either way.   Having to go through banks is the same thing.

So with bitcoin simply being a financial system that can be used at a cost that is at least an order of magnitude less than the existing ones is what will allow value to be retained rather than it being transferred to the money changers.
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
(:firstbits => "1mantis")
So are you saying to buy bitcoin over gold?
legendary
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1012
Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.
So, at the moment, it would benefit all Americans to start pushing Bitcoin as a viable currency and start pushing that 40% higher before other countries catch on and tip the scale in their favor. And at current prices, that would not be very difficult to do.

Say you hold $40 worth of Bitcoins today and they go up to $1,000. You've made $960 over that time period. You got $1,000 at the end since you have $1,000 worth of Bitcoins. But you gave up $40 today, since you could have sold them for $40.

Say you have no Bitcoins today. You buy $40 worth of them. They go up to $1,000. You've also made $960. You got $1,000 at the end. But you gave up $40 today, since you used them to buy the Bitcoins.

So it basically makes no difference who holds them today.
sr. member
Activity: 382
Merit: 253
I looked into this initially merely because it was an argument used against pushing for a return to the gold standard as a currency many years ago because "The US doesn't produce gold as quickly as other countries so going back to the gold standard would be worse than staying with the dollar."

As DAT pointed out, the balance of payments will push capital flows toward essentially the same distribution as exists now. There is an excellent, albeit lengthy explanation by FOFOA entitled It's the Flow, Stupid, and it's follow-up Flow Addendum.

What it boils down to is that gold can act as a store of value and a medium of exchange or a metric of value - but not all three in perpetuity. Fiat can function as a medium of exchange and a metric of value, but not a lasting store of value. No form of money has ever been able to act as all three at once. The limiting factor for gold is its physical manifestation. This is explained best by the Triffin dilemma.

Bitcoin, by being entirely abstract yet functioning almost exactly as gold does, is capable of satisfying that issue entirely because it is infinitely divisible (in theory) - in other words, Bitcoin can act in all three capacities simultaneously. The Triffin dilemma would be solved, and a unified currency finally possible.


Having only read the Triffin wiki page, it seems to only apply to government currencies. A gold standard would be unworkable, but a gold currency that was unrestrained by politicians should work.
NRF
sr. member
Activity: 279
Merit: 250
we would hold over 40% of the world's wealth.

And over 15,813,740,000,000 of the world debt too  Roll Eyes .

If we are going to start to weigh positives without the negatives though..  Us New Zealanders have over 40% of the world penguins!  Even better we have 99% of the Kiwi's!!!!!! 

All bow to the supremacy of our flightless avians.
Pages:
Jump to: