Best
212 Comments
Post
  • #4
    !
    I'm not sold on Bitcoin yet, but this article has actually gone a long way to that end - mainly by pointing out how it takes power of money out of the government's hands. I think if it can be stable and reliable, that's a very worthy consideration.
  • #49
    !
    My only concern is that it is digital and as long as there scammers out there with IQ's the size of a galaxy, I am going to worry about losing all that I own by doing business on the porous internet. Other than that, I'd love to see the current worthless money replaced.
  • #56
    !
    Well im not sold on it and this article didn't do anything for me. He uses ridiculous comparisos ( stone fei on an island with tiny population which doesn't operate that way any longer ) makes false statements ( bitcoin is trusted.. yes but some but not by many )( bitcoin is stable .. no .. no its not )
    I hate the thought of agreeing with Krugman but in this case I do.
  • #77
    !
    I trust most Governments more then i trust an anonymous provider of funds. If I didn't trust my government I'd prefer being paid in commodities. Pay attention to the extreme swings in value that Bitcoins have.
  • #78
    !
    @Ryunkin Hardly worthless. I Used US $ to buy a new car in Nov. I have no problem buying food, fuel, cloths, Christmas presents and taxes with the my $
  • R Load more replies

  • #6
    !
    Gold is good. Bitcoin, probably not - but these federal reserve guys, they already messed up our money, why should we trust them on monetary matters?
  • #19
    !
    Why do you think we went off the gold and then the silver standard. Bitcoin is just a minor threat. They are both digitized. Maybe I missed that in the article.
  • R Load more replies

  • #133
    !
    @Frosty45 Incorrect and outdated. Greenspan hasn't been a libertarian for a very long time. And Krugman actually started out as more of one, when he was a proponent of free trade, the analytical work that won him a Nobel Prize. Since then they have both been bubble boys bought and paid for, Krugman by his old employer ENRON and Greenspan by the Federal Reserve.
  • #166
    !
    Greenspan is no longer as pure as he was because he found out that unregulated capital isn't self regulating and that those leaders of finance where well infiltrated with greed. A Geologist pointed out to me that ENRON & most Oil Corps are run on a very small % of profit margin, hire specialists in their field, pay CEO's a good but not a record level salary & make their profits off of volume.

    They seldom agree with each other so apparently either they aren't bought or bought by very different people.
  • #62
    !
    Dollars have value because the most powerful nation in human history says so. Bitcoins have value because...why?
  • #134
    !
    No it's based on consumers and the information and evaluations they have in a competitive market. Bitcoin is only one of many possible digital currencies (and they are only one of many possibly free market currencies). When people are free to save and trade with the money they prefer, they choose they money that behaves the way they would like it to.

    Government money is just a tool governments use to steal purchasing power through inflation.
  • #10
    !
    Amen. Considering we have had 80 Billion a month printed out of thin air....just to prop up the Dow for the 1%.

    This next crash....is going to be a big one. But sadly, it won't happen until someone says "no more printing money"
  • #11
    !
    @drpeeper - that's the thing, fiat paper currency backed by governments do nothing but help governments suck money out of the people. Open sourced banking is the way to go, because there is only so much currency created you eventually will never have inflation or deflation but a very stable currency, which leads to stable markets and economies. Crypto-currency will be just like the banking revolution. Give it time.
  • #63
    !
    @kirbstomp1

    Well before the use of bitcoins can become widespread, there has to be more information on them. As you pointed out the number of bitcoins is finite. Would there be enough of them to allow the economies of the world to function?
  • R Load more replies

  • #2
    !
    One can digitally transfer dollars and other currencies either directly or through a third party such as Paypal. To me the Bitcoin is just unnecessary and redundant.
  • #26
    !
    You are missing the point.

    I have waiting on a PayPal transfer to be approved for two weeks now, and that is due to where it is going to. Purchasing international domains turned out to be more of a headache than expected.

    Bitcoin, and other digital currencies, have a few significant advantages.

    One: They can be transferred INSTANTLY. I have ordered many things online with Bitcoin. Generally, I hit "send", and instantly I get confirmation of payment received. I know that PayPal acts like it does the same, but it actually can take quite a while for international transfers.

    Two: The fees are very low. PayPal (or debit, wire, etc) charges up to 3%+~$0.30. While customers rarely see these fees directly, they are having an effect on the base price. Merchants must increase cost to offset these fees.

    Three: Charge back fraud is horribly rampant, and once again forces merchants to raise prices to offset the unavoidable losses they will incur from chargebacks. Of course, this does put the risk of fraud on the customer, but their are systems being developed to counteract that. Lex Cryptographia is one example.

    Four: Rather than a government controlling the currency, and thus leaving it open to manipulation based on the whims of a few, the currency is produced based on open source software, which defines the parameters clearly.
  • #29
    !
    @Dynamic

    Sorry, on the point about fees I left off the difference with Bitcoin. It's fees are the equivalent of around $0.05-$0.10 for any amount, and that isn't even required (though, if it isn't paid, it can delay confirmation
  • #37
    !
    @Dynamic

    I don't doubt that there are advantages to having a currency that isn't tied to any one country. Right now I don't trust those setting the value. Nor do I trust that Bitcoins will exist in the future.
  • #39
    !
    @Thunderchicken

    Bitcoin doesn't have to exist in the future. At least, not in its current form. It can be the first step, and still keep its value.

    I wouldn't be surprised to see Bitcoin 2.0 being created within the Ethereum network once it is going. It would be quite easy to add features that have been developed in altcoins, give mining the ability to do more than process transactions \ build the blockchain, and allow original Bitcoins to be converted to Bitcoin 2.0 through a proof-of-burn, in the same way that Counterparty was recently built on top of the block chain.

    So no, I don't expect that Bitcoin (or at least, Bitcoin 1.0) will be the last step in this revolution. That is irrelevant in regard to my choice to invest in it, or invest in other cryptocurrencies.
  • #41
    !
    @Dynamic

    Right now I see Bitcoins as investing in a very limited usage item. I expect some people to be left holding the bag when the next thing comes around.

    In investing the only time I want to be the first to the party is if I'm throwing it. I've been burned by a couple of IPOs.
  • R Load more replies

  • #24
    !
    They only acknowledge Bitcoin because they are scared of it taking away the power of the federal reserve.

    "You are a den of vipers and thieves. I have determined to rout you out and, by the Eternal, I will rout you out!"
    -attributed to president Jackson( but who the hell cares who said it, cause it's right on either way!"
  • #23
    !
    Right now, I don't know enough about Bitcoins to say much. I will say, however, that if they are competitive with fiat money they must have some redeeming qualities.

    1. How are they acquired?
    2. Who takes them as a medium of exchange?
    3. Can they be converted to fiat money?
    4. I've heard that the number of bitcoins are finite. Can additional ones be created?
    5. What are they based on?
    6. What causes their fluctuation in value?

    I'm not above looking at a new financial system. Considering the dangers of fiat currency it's long overdue. I'm just not ready to make up my mind yet about bitcoins.
  • #90
    !
    $25,000 of them bought me the car I wanted. Pays my taxes, Buys my groceries, invests in the stock market, pays my medicare bills, I Amazon takes them & sends me books I want in exchange.
  • #191
    !
    @Frosty45 And you can't go to the corner store with bit coins to get something as simple as milk. In their current for it is very limited. What I'm constantly surprised about is that the anti-Fed crusaders are all about replacing our current fiat system with... another fiat system... seems odd to me.
  • #17
    !
    And we don't have digitized money? Based upon what? Not worth the paper it is printed on. Our money, btw, has Federal Reserve on the top. And that is what we are to trust? Seems that the monopolists don't want anyone else making monopoly money.
  • #55
    !
    I often refer to the power behind the throne. I have based that on the Golden Rule, he who makes the gold makes the rules. This issue concerning bitcoin points to the reason that i harp on the fact that voting in a fraudulent democracy is the same as not voting at all. The guys who make our gold are the power behind the throne and everyone, including the president, the Supreme Court, and Congress dance to their tune. Whether i trust the digital money concept or not, I'm not willing to put my meager fortune in to prove however. But that's just me, I don't trust anyone.
  • #57
    !
    @Ryunkin Good advice on the Wizard and not trusting him. The digitized money is not traceable. Ah, money laundering. And the gold, as it turns out is fool's gold anyway. Know your customer. And congress doesn't worry about a balanced budget because it doesn't matter. We think of our personal budget and might blanch at what they do. They play by different rules. The money really doesn't exist anyway, except in digital form.
  • #60
    !
    Congress doesn't worry about anything that their masters, the Federal Reserve, tells them not to worry about. Congressional oversight of the Fed is mere show to prove that voting actually counts. I hate to say it, but everything that's political in the United States is an elaborate show to prove to the still unconquered world that handing over their countries to the New World Order and "democracy" is the right way to go.
  • #92
    !
    @Ryunkin Now I think voting still counts when people bother with it. The Fed controls only the currency and it's not just one person's opinion. Do you know WHO creates Bitcoins? Perhaps it's tied to the Heroin or Meth market.
  • R Load more replies

  • #195
    !
    Bartered yes. Silver half-dollars and quarters and dimes? No. Would be worth more for different items. Gold. Not for groceries. Scotch, with groceries. Bitcoin, online.
  • #202
    !
    @AceLuby Try in Alaska. There they have people who barter gold for supplies. There are others in rural areas who also trade food for food. Or in some cases bartering food for moonshine.
  • #193
    !
    What we should really be asking is, why is this a necessarily bad thing? Imports become more expensive, exports become cheaper, things made here would stay relatively the same... Could be the boost we need to make things here again making our products more competitive, price-wise, to the cheap imports. Just food for thought, playing devil's advocate...
  • #42
    !
    This one is easier to answer then most. Bitcoin and its successors frees us from the pernicious actions of the FED. It is getting accepted at more places. It is being replaced by a better digital currency, and although it may fluctuate it is unlikely to become worthless like the dollar is doing.
    Krugman in his scholarly pursuits may have been a great genius. But there are two Paul Krugman's. The second one is Paul the Political Hack. In that role he is only a clever writer. But his writing is frequently counter to his economic genius.
  • #97
    !
    @Frosty45 And where did I say Krugman had anything to do with the Fed. NOPLACE. I think English must by your third language. Someday you may understand a full sentence. The 'debate' was In Math We Trust: A Reply to Krugman's and Greenspan's Bitcoin Bashing.
    Did you understand that much?
    My comment about the Fed was 'Bitcoin and its successors frees us from the pernicious actions of the FED'. Nothing about Krugman in that sentence.
    See, it is not hard. It should not be impossible for you to separate the two ideas. Try.
  • #104
    !
    YEs mein herr. Bitcoin leaves you in the hands of anonymous. I not afraid of the Fed like you are. Had the Fed not sat on their hands in 1929 we might not have been able to talk about the great depression.
  • #108
    !
    @Frosty45 That fact alone should be reason for you to fear the Fed. The great depression was caused by a few things. First was the Smoot-Hawley act which stopped world trade cold. The second was the mere existence of the Fed and the power it yielded in a way that was stupid.
    Today we are living the specter of another Fed led disaster. The creation of trillions of dollars out of thin air is a debasement of currency. A study of history will show that has always led to the collapse of an empire. Rome is a great example. Eventually Rome would not even accept its own currency as payment for taxes.
  • #155
    !
    World trade was a problem, so was the dust bowl, so was stupid stock sales on margin. indeed the fed yield & did nothing. Hoover thought doing nothing was a plan. Even GWB realized doing nothing isn't a plan.

    It's an age old under grad game playing Rome comparisons. Actually History never repeats it self. Each time there are variations and only the superficial try that to confuse Rome of 1500 years ago with today.
  • R Load more replies

  • #30
    !
    No. Not at this time, but I'm interested to see where it will go. I agree that at some point our current system of endlessly printing paper money will indeed hit a brick wall.
  • #43
    !
    they have the answer ,they are just waiting for the excuse to implement cashless society is the end goal thats why all of a sudden target and other big markets have had their credit card problems.,,,now they want to use the chip,but that will soon be compromised by theft or other means,reckon the only solution is to implant the chip under the skin..yep o more cheating the irs,your bank account is instantly under control as is anything you buy or sell
  • #28
    !
    You can not like it all you want.. I've made quite a lot of cash on bitcoin.. its just another form of a investment that works on how you like math..." HAHAHA HAHAHA"
  • #12
    !
    It's as good as printed paper they call money. It's all about what others think is real and has value. It's like gold. It's a metal that others have deemed to have value. To me, it's just another metal. Same as diamonds, or other precious stones. To me, I'd rather have things of real value. Food, clothing, shelter, things to help me get the previous.
  • R Load more comments...
Post