Why Bitcoin is ultimately doomed to fail (not today or tomorrow) - page 11.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: anth0ny on January 28, 2014, 07:06:49 AM

In your country do you have to get a letter of attorney to ask someone to explain something to a group of people? If so I'm afraid I can't provide you with such a letter, but maybe you can post your explanation privately to me and that would get around this crazy law?

Are you a group of people? I haven't seen anyone else here asking me to explain what you were asking (since this had been properly expanded on before, and not only by me, lol). How can you then ask on behalf of some group without first providing some "paper" authorizing you to do so?

I don't think it is a proper way to ask for an explanation ("explain us")

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: Lloydie on January 28, 2014, 09:05:17 AM

Don't worry anth0ny, you'll be a millionaire one day and deisek there will continue to be a wage slave. His kids are going to say: "you what? You thought bitcoin was a bubble? Is that why our family is poor?"

It may not be that fun though...

Lloydie

full member

Activity: 140

Merit: 100

Quote from: anth0ny on January 28, 2014, 08:38:07 AM

Quote from: deisik on January 28, 2014, 07:37:29 AM

Quote from: anth0ny on January 28, 2014, 07:06:49 AM

If you don't want to be productive, then just shut up and don't say anything

Uh-oh, you are kind of guest here and now you tell me to shut up, lol.

I'm glad I was able to amuse you.

Don't worry anth0ny, you'll be a millionaire one day and deisek there will continue to be a wage slave. His kids are going to say: "you what? You thought bitcoin was a bubble? Is that why our family is poor?"

anth0ny

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: deisik on January 28, 2014, 07:37:29 AM

Quote from: anth0ny on January 28, 2014, 07:06:49 AM

If you don't want to be productive, then just shut up and don't say anything

Uh-oh, you are kind of guest here and now you tell me to shut up, lol.

I'm glad I was able to amuse you.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: anth0ny on January 28, 2014, 07:06:49 AM

If you don't want to be productive, then just shut up and don't say anything

Uh-oh, you are kind of guest here and now you tell me to shut up, lol. What the fuck is going on here?

anth0ny

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: deisik on January 28, 2014, 01:40:52 AM

Quote from: anth0ny on January 27, 2014, 03:59:49 PM

Quote from: deisik on January 27, 2014, 02:49:43 PM

Quote from: anth0ny on January 27, 2014, 02:36:17 PM

Quote from: deisik on January 27, 2014, 07:36:29 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: deisik on January 27, 2014, 02:05:00 AM

Us? Whom are you speaking for, lol? It has already been explained previously in this thread (and it was not you). I just wanted to hear your understanding, that part you paraphrased from some source is hardly a worthy explanation (emphasized for you)

Why am I raising this question again? Since proper understanding of FRB (MM) excludes sweeping comparison of the former with a Ponzi scheme as you did (even devoid of money printing)

So now you're back to accusing me of plagiarism? I thought we agreed that the explanation I gave was my own.

I thought I had explained the reason why I raised this question again. Just in case you missed that part I added emphasis to the quote of my original post. Your so-called "explanation" doesn't in the least explain the essence of money multiplication...

Actually, I don't care if you copied it from somewhere or wrote yourself, since it still lacks insight

I've already invited you to explain what's wrong with it.

I've never been taught "the essence of money multiplication". In fact, I doubt my professors ever even used the term "money multiplication". Why don't you explain it to us?

But you said yourself that there is little difference, if any, between a Ponzi scheme and FRB (save for money printing indeed). If you don't actually understand how money multiplication works (or how FRB makes it possible, which you so fervently and rabidly talked about recently), how can you pretend that "fractional reserve banking is indistinguishable from a ponzi scheme" (provided we removed money printing from the equation)?

I do understand how money is created through fractional reserve banking.

If you think I'm wrong, please explain how I'm wrong.

I've never heard of "the essence of money multiplication". And judging by a quick google search, neither has anyone else.

But once again, please enlighten us!

On behalf of whom are you speaking? Show me the letter of attorney, lol...

On a more serious note, I'm loath to explain you anything. Everything you ask for had already been answered in this thread (in fact, just before you showed up). If you did properly understand how money is created by banks, you would have never compared it with and equaled it to a Ponzi scheme (with or without money printing), period...

If you don't want to be productive, then just shut up and don't say anything.

As far as the thing about the "letter of attorney", I have no idea what you're talking about. Probably just another example of you not understanding English, but I can't figure out exactly what mistake you're making.

In your country do you have to get a letter of attorney to ask someone to explain something to a group of people? If so I'm afraid I can't provide you with such a letter, but maybe you can post your explanation privately to me and that would get around this crazy law?

How did you manage to tell us what was wrong with what I wrote before I showed up and wrote it, anyway?

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: Erdogan on January 27, 2014, 06:49:01 PM

So how is this discussion going. Getting somewhere?

It seems that bitcoin has been officially outlawed in my country, so if I disappear, you know what it may mean. Getting somewhere, lol...

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

It seems that you, anth0ny, come here not because you need explanations or want to explain something, but to nourish or nurture some psychological quirks you might possibly have. Sorry, I am not the one who can help you with this, neither do I feel any inclination to...

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: anth0ny on January 27, 2014, 03:59:49 PM

Quote from: deisik on January 27, 2014, 02:49:43 PM

Quote from: anth0ny on January 27, 2014, 02:36:17 PM

Quote from: deisik on January 27, 2014, 07:36:29 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: deisik on January 27, 2014, 02:05:00 AM

Us? Whom are you speaking for, lol? It has already been explained previously in this thread (and it was not you). I just wanted to hear your understanding, that part you paraphrased from some source is hardly a worthy explanation (emphasized for you)

Why am I raising this question again? Since proper understanding of FRB (MM) excludes sweeping comparison of the former with a Ponzi scheme as you did (even devoid of money printing)

So now you're back to accusing me of plagiarism? I thought we agreed that the explanation I gave was my own.

I thought I had explained the reason why I raised this question again. Just in case you missed that part I added emphasis to the quote of my original post. Your so-called "explanation" doesn't in the least explain the essence of money multiplication...

Actually, I don't care if you copied it from somewhere or wrote yourself, since it still lacks insight

I've already invited you to explain what's wrong with it.

I've never been taught "the essence of money multiplication". In fact, I doubt my professors ever even used the term "money multiplication". Why don't you explain it to us?

But you said yourself that there is little difference, if any, between a Ponzi scheme and FRB (save for money printing indeed). If you don't actually understand how money multiplication works (or how FRB makes it possible, which you so fervently and rabidly talked about recently), how can you pretend that "fractional reserve banking is indistinguishable from a ponzi scheme" (provided we removed money printing from the equation)?

I do understand how money is created through fractional reserve banking.

If you think I'm wrong, please explain how I'm wrong.

I've never heard of "the essence of money multiplication". And judging by a quick google search, neither has anyone else.

But once again, please enlighten us!

On behalf of whom are you speaking? Show me the letter of attorney, lol...

On a more serious note, I'm loath to explain you anything. Everything you ask for had already been answered in this thread (in fact, just before you showed up). If you did properly understand how money is created by banks, you would have never compared it with and equaled it to a Ponzi scheme (with or without money printing), period...

Erdogan

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1005

So how is this discussion going. Getting somewhere?

anth0ny

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: deisik on January 27, 2014, 02:49:43 PM

Quote from: anth0ny on January 27, 2014, 02:36:17 PM

Quote from: deisik on January 27, 2014, 07:36:29 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: deisik on January 27, 2014, 02:05:00 AM

Us? Whom are you speaking for, lol? It has already been explained previously in this thread (and it was not you). I just wanted to hear your understanding, that part you paraphrased from some source is hardly a worthy explanation (emphasized for you)

Why am I raising this question again? Since proper understanding of FRB (MM) excludes sweeping comparison of the former with a Ponzi scheme as you did (even devoid of money printing)

So now you're back to accusing me of plagiarism? I thought we agreed that the explanation I gave was my own.

I thought I had explained the reason why I raised this question again. Just in case you missed that part I added emphasis to the quote of my original post. Your so-called "explanation" doesn't in the least explain the essence of money multiplication...

Actually, I don't care if you copied it from somewhere or wrote yourself, since it still lacks insight

I've already invited you to explain what's wrong with it.

I've never been taught "the essence of money multiplication". In fact, I doubt my professors ever even used the term "money multiplication". Why don't you explain it to us?

But you said yourself that there is little difference, if any, between a Ponzi scheme and FRB (save for money printing indeed). If you don't actually understand how money multiplication works (or how FRB makes it possible, which you so fervently and rabidly talked about recently), how can you pretend that "fractional reserve banking is indistinguishable from a ponzi scheme" (provided we removed money printing from the equation)?

I do understand how money is created through fractional reserve banking.

If you think I'm wrong, please explain how I'm wrong.

I've never heard of "the essence of money multiplication". And judging by a quick google search, neither has anyone else.

But once again, please enlighten us!

anth0ny

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: deisik on January 27, 2014, 02:53:31 PM

Quote from: anth0ny on January 27, 2014, 02:36:17 PM

In any case, if you don't care whether I copied it from Wikipedia, stop saying I paraphrased it from Wikipedia. I do care about being accused of plagiarism, especially plagiarism of Wikipedia!

But you can see for yourself.

What exactly am I supposed to be seeing? That Wikipedia as well as me assumed a 20% reserve ratio?

I was initially going to use a 10% reserve ratio, which is pretty typical, but I decided to use 20% so as to not confuse 1/10 and 10% and 10 to 1. 1/5 and 20% and 5 to 1 is more clear.

Is there something else with the Wikipedia explanation which is so similar that you think I plagiarized it? The only other similarities I see is that they're both correct explanations. As I said, you can open up just about any US college textbook and find something substantially similar.

Quote from: deisik on January 27, 2014, 02:53:31 PM

Should I refrain from calling things their names?

So you're still accusing me of plagiarism?

I didn't paraphrase my explanation from Wikipedia. The two explanations are similar because they are both correct. Or if you'd prefer, the two explanations are similar because that's the way it's taught here in the US. If you were taught differently, please, enlighten us!

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: anth0ny on January 27, 2014, 02:36:17 PM

In any case, if you don't care whether I copied it from Wikipedia, stop saying I paraphrased it from Wikipedia. I do care about being accused of plagiarism, especially plagiarism of Wikipedia!

But you can see for yourself. Should I refrain from calling things their names?

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: anth0ny on January 27, 2014, 02:36:17 PM

Quote from: deisik on January 27, 2014, 07:36:29 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: deisik on January 27, 2014, 02:05:00 AM

Us? Whom are you speaking for, lol? It has already been explained previously in this thread (and it was not you). I just wanted to hear your understanding, that part you paraphrased from some source is hardly a worthy explanation (emphasized for you)

Why am I raising this question again? Since proper understanding of FRB (MM) excludes sweeping comparison of the former with a Ponzi scheme as you did (even devoid of money printing)

So now you're back to accusing me of plagiarism? I thought we agreed that the explanation I gave was my own.

I thought I had explained the reason why I raised this question again. Just in case you missed that part I added emphasis to the quote of my original post. Your so-called "explanation" doesn't in the least explain the essence of money multiplication...

Actually, I don't care if you copied it from somewhere or wrote yourself, since it still lacks insight

I've already invited you to explain what's wrong with it.

I've never been taught "the essence of money multiplication". In fact, I doubt my professors ever even used the term "money multiplication". Why don't you explain it to us?

But you said yourself that there is little difference, if any, between a Ponzi scheme and FRB (save for money printing indeed). If you don't actually understand how money multiplication works (or how FRB makes it possible, which you so fervently and rabidly talked about recently), how can you pretend that "fractional reserve banking is indistinguishable from a ponzi scheme" (provided we removed money printing from the equation)?

anth0ny

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: deisik on January 27, 2014, 07:36:29 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: deisik on January 27, 2014, 02:05:00 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Oh, you strongly disagree. Then I'll take some time and reconsider.

As far as "what is behind FRB mechanics", why don't you explain it for us?

Us? Whom are you speaking for, lol? It has already been explained previously in this thread (and it was not you). I just wanted to hear your understanding, that part you paraphrased from some source is hardly a worthy explanation (emphasized for you)

Why am I raising this question again? Since proper understanding of FRB (MM) excludes sweeping comparison of the former with a Ponzi scheme as you did (even devoid of money printing)

So now you're back to accusing me of plagiarism? I thought we agreed that the explanation I gave was my own.

I thought I had explained the reason why I raised this question again. Just in case you missed that part I added emphasis to the quote of my original post. Your so-called "explanation" doesn't in the least explain the essence of money multiplication...

Actually, I don't care if you copied it from somewhere or wrote yourself, since it still lacks insight

I've already invited you to explain what's wrong with it.

I've never been taught "the essence of money multiplication". In fact, I doubt my professors ever even used the term "money multiplication". Why don't you explain it to us?

In any case, if you don't care whether I copied it from Wikipedia, stop saying I paraphrased it from Wikipedia. I do care about being accused of plagiarism, especially plagiarism of Wikipedia!

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: deisik on January 27, 2014, 02:05:00 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Oh, you strongly disagree. Then I'll take some time and reconsider.

As far as "what is behind FRB mechanics", why don't you explain it for us?

Us? Whom are you speaking for, lol? It has already been explained previously in this thread (and it was not you). I just wanted to hear your understanding, that part you paraphrased from some source is hardly a worthy explanation (emphasized for you)

Why am I raising this question again? Since proper understanding of FRB (MM) excludes sweeping comparison of the former with a Ponzi scheme as you did (even devoid of money printing)

So now you're back to accusing me of plagiarism? I thought we agreed that the explanation I gave was my own.

I thought I had explained the reason why I raised this question again. Just in case you missed that part I added emphasis to the quote of my original post. Your so-called "explanation" doesn't in the least explain the essence of money multiplication...

Actually, I don't care if you copied it from somewhere or wrote yourself, since it still lacks insight

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: deisik on January 26, 2014, 02:49:19 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Yeah, I think that's pretty much it. Remove the ability to print money from the equation, and fractional reserve banking becomes indistinguishable from a ponzi scheme. (*) I don't think many people would fall for that in today's day and age, even if they did fall for it centuries ago.

I strongly disagree. It is not money printing that makes FRB different from a ponzi scheme. Also, you failed to explain what is behind FRB mechanics, or money multiplication for that matter (as all those people thoughtlessly quoting corresponding sources). Instead you went wild about my grammar (or absence thereof, lol)...

But I didn't forget

Oh, you strongly disagree. Then I'll take some time and reconsider.

As far as "what is behind FRB mechanics", why don't you explain it for us?

Us? Whom are you speaking for, lol? It has already been explained previously in this thread (and it was not you). I just wanted to hear your understanding, that part you paraphrased from some source is hardly a worthy explanation (emphasized for you)

Why am I raising this question again? Since proper understanding of FRB (MM) excludes sweeping comparison of the former with a Ponzi scheme as you did (even devoid of money printing)

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: ?? on ??

Yeah, I think that's pretty much it. Remove the ability to print money from the equation, and fractional reserve banking becomes indistinguishable from a ponzi scheme. (*) I don't think many people would fall for that in today's day and age, even if they did fall for it centuries ago.

I strongly disagree. It is not money printing that makes FRB different from a ponzi scheme. Also, you failed to explain what is behind FRB mechanics, or money multiplication for that matter (as all those people thoughtlessly quoting corresponding sources). Instead you went wild about my grammar (or absence thereof, lol)...

But I didn't forget

Erdogan

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1005

Quote from: practicaldreamer on January 26, 2014, 01:55:52 PM

Quote from: anth0ny on January 26, 2014, 01:13:43 PM

No. As soon as there was a hint of a recession all the banks would get hit with runs on the bank all at once. Without the ability of the federal reserve to put newly created bitcoins into circulation the way it puts newly created dollar bills into circulation, the banks all come crashing down.

Yes - that makes sense to me.

Although it must be said that it probably wouldn't be all the banks that would come crashing down - just those who had been the more avaricious - the ones that remained would come out of it (probably) stronger than before (medium to long term)

That being said I think you make a good point - and one that shows the difference a BTC economy might be able to make.

So what you're saying is that perhaps technically a credit boom would be possible with a BTC economy (BTC derivatives etc) - but when the shit hits the fan there would be no way to sustain the banks that created the problem - because you wouldn't have the option of QE ? After all, they almost didn't manage to keep the banks afloat with QE Shocked

And so FRB would not be something that would likely be undertaken to anything like the wild excesses that have occurred up to today, in a new BTC based economy, if at all ?

You are absoulutely, totally correct.

practicaldreamer

hero member

Activity: 770

Merit: 500

Quote from: anth0ny on January 26, 2014, 01:13:43 PM

No. As soon as there was a hint of a recession all the banks would get hit with runs on the bank all at once. Without the ability of the federal reserve to put newly created bitcoins into circulation the way it puts newly created dollar bills into circulation, the banks all come crashing down.

Yes - that makes sense to me.

Although it must be said that it probably wouldn't be all the banks that would come crashing down - just those who had been the more avaricious - the ones that remained would come out of it (probably) stronger than before (medium to long term)

That being said I think you make a good point - and one that shows the difference a BTC economy might be able to make.

So what you're saying is that perhaps technically a credit boom would be possible with a BTC economy (BTC derivatives etc) - but when the shit hits the fan there would be no way to sustain the banks that created the problem - because you wouldn't have the option of QE ? After all, they almost didn't manage to keep the banks afloat with QE Shocked

And so FRB would not be something that would likely be undertaken to anything like the wild excesses that have occurred up to today, in a new BTC based economy, if at all ?

Topic: Why Bitcoin is ultimately doomed to fail (not today or tomorrow) - page 11. (Read 40867 times)