Bitcoin Central Is Now Licensed To Operate As A Bank
- Thread starter tainted
- Start date
Bitcoin itself is not anonymous:
An Analysis of Anonymity in the Bitcoin System: Bitcoin is not Anonymous
If a few individuals can do this, imagine what a government or a corporate research department with a few million can do?
Bitcoin is not money qua money.
People will realize this when the value hits zero, as it inevitably must.
I do find it very frustrating that people who don't understand economics are very attracted to this "currency", particularly since many are libertarians or anarchists.
But that is why I constantly say that every anarcho-libertarian MUST understand basic economics. It's not enough to be against the state, you have to understand how markets work or you're likely to get sucked into poor ideas like this.
People will realize this when the value hits zero, as it inevitably must.
I do find it very frustrating that people who don't understand economics are very attracted to this "currency", particularly since many are libertarians or anarchists.
But that is why I constantly say that every anarcho-libertarian MUST understand basic economics. It's not enough to be against the state, you have to understand how markets work or you're likely to get sucked into poor ideas like this.
Guerilla I'm curious to get your view, how is BTC any worse than any other fiat? At least BTC is not (as) vulnerable to stupid politicians and greedy bankers, the dollar has lost 96% of its value through printing/inflation since creation.....owning gold and hard assets is best for long term wealth preservation, but most people need a way to interact with the legacy banking system for bills / online payments etc, this seems as good as any....?
Why go fiat at all?
I'll give you one reason very few people look at.
In order for fiat money to work, it needs the "fiat" component. Legal tender laws.
Bitcoin doesn't have that. As money, it's no different than local scrip (Google it). Local scrip is a cute idea, but it can never be money because it isn't ubiquitous.
(as)? THE USG is not going to make USD illegal. They could make BTC illegal.
And? You're lecturing someone who spent a fair amount of time studying money.
Why not use Swiss francs?
Peter Schiff has gold denominated bank accounts now.
These are just arbitrary digital coupons. You can't exchange them outside a digital system. They have no physical manifestation. They are an abstraction.
I have debated a lot of Bitcoin fans, and I get how fanatical people become about this stuff. They really want it to be the answer, or at least, an answer, but only a fool would take his real wealth and convert it to BTC, or hold BTC as a reserve. If you really want to use BTC, purchase it to make another purchase that you will complete in the near term.
Go look at any BTC price chart over the last 2 years. Scary stuff.
I don't think anyone is planning on rushing out and converting all their money into BTC, it just enables them to do business that they wouldn't/shouldn't/couldn't do with traditional currency. Do you think that this will help stabilize bitcoin prices? You're right about the price charts, the fluctuation is very scary.
Also, how do bitcoins differ from other fiat currency in terms of being easily manipulated by greedy banksters (1%'ers)? Wouldn't the people who've been mining BTC since day 1 have that same power?
Prices are information. They aren't meant to be stable. In a well functioning market, they should be predictable (up, down or constant).
You're on a website of people who are either 1%ers or aspire to be 1%ers.
The entire notion of the 1% is populist nonsense.
Your problem isn't bankers. The problem is that you live in a system where people believe that it is ok for government to control money. But without government control of money, you can't have government.
So are you willing to give up government?
Guerilla, your stance on money is a controversial one even among libertarians. I've attented a seminar with the head economist of a local internet investment bank - a hardcore libertarian/austrian - and he advocated free currency, not neccesarily gold or silver backed money.
But maybe you define money different than currency? Because gold is in the end, just as arbitrary as fiat, only it has slightly more uses. I understand the 'well tested, historial use' argument, however, it is not convincing, since technology has made many things obsolete. I don't remember anything in econ classes about money only being gold either.
I actually do believe that Bitcoins in some form will greatly help destroy the old nationstates. It may be 10 or 20 years away, but it is inevitable that users of the internet economy adopts a currency which matches their anonymity and desire for freedom from government intervention.
But maybe you define money different than currency? Because gold is in the end, just as arbitrary as fiat, only it has slightly more uses. I understand the 'well tested, historial use' argument, however, it is not convincing, since technology has made many things obsolete. I don't remember anything in econ classes about money only being gold either.
I actually do believe that Bitcoins in some form will greatly help destroy the old nationstates. It may be 10 or 20 years away, but it is inevitable that users of the internet economy adopts a currency which matches their anonymity and desire for freedom from government intervention.
^this
Gold is just as arbitrary as any other type of currency. You can easily make a paper currency that doesn't inflate if that is your goal. In fact during the times when there was a gold standard we had massive inflation at times. Gold value is far from stable.
But I will say I'd personally like to stay away from currencies that can be completely annihilated with 1 or 2 EMPs. Did you know a single nuke detonated at the right height above the U.S. would create an EMP that would destroy all electronics in half the U.S.? That's some scary shit.
Hmm.. but most USD is likely in digital form as well. I guess if EMPs happen it would likely wipe out all of our bank accounts. Considering that fact some physical USD and Gold sound like a great option.
I have never been afraid of controversy.
I am ok with whatever the market wants to use as money.
Currency from current (flow, stream)
No.
I haven't mentioned gold in this thread. It's not an argument about being well tested or historical.
You should try to read up on Mises' regression theorem. It offers an explanation for the emergence of metal standard money.
The only thing that ends nation states is when people stop believing in them. They are abstractions. Mass delusion.
The problem is US, not the government.
As Voltaire once said,
"As long as people believe in absurdities they will continue to commit atrocities"