|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
16th December 2017, 03:17 PM | #1081 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
Because fiat FR notes don't fluctuate in value by prodigious amounts, rising and collapsing by huge percentages in short periods. If they did they would be of little use for their main functions, to act as a store of value and as a means of conducting purchases and sales.
Shares sometimes fluctuate madly in times of bubbles, so they are in fact a better comparator. However, shares of viable companies have a fundamental lower value in virtue of their representing ownership of a going concern. Bitcoin doesn't, and it doesn't function as a predictable currency unit, so isn't really an effective form of money. Except for speculation, it seems to have no value at all. |
16th December 2017, 03:37 PM | #1082 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,153
|
Champagne anyone?
|
16th December 2017, 05:19 PM | #1083 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,038
|
They don't fluctuate so much as just lose value constantly, as real wealth is stolen in perpetuity by money issuers. They've certainly fluctuated (down) vs. bitcoin, and virtually any other asset.
Quote:
|
16th December 2017, 09:37 PM | #1084 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 4,801
|
|
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.** |
|
16th December 2017, 10:05 PM | #1085 |
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
|
|
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975 |
|
17th December 2017, 01:50 AM | #1086 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
You must be even smarter than me if you know that the Federal Reserve system is a secret cabal of evil doers stealing our wealth in perpetuity, while Bitcoin has a "value" of €19,110. I think you mean a "price".
If that price suddenly goes down, will the lost "value" have been stolen from innocent citizens by a conspiracy of crooks? You'll need to tell us who they are, because I'm sure you'll have special information unavailable to the ignorant masses about these miscreants who steal "value". Soros? The Rothschilds? |
17th December 2017, 02:55 AM | #1087 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 814
|
I believe you are talking about inflation. One could also call it the "money holding tax". If one regularly spends all they earn and never makes any substantial savings, inflation is practically inconsequential to them, because it is very low on short time scales - quite negligible in fact in comparison to other taxes they have to pay.
If one does make substantial savings and holds them over a longer period of time, yes, it's unwise to hold them as nominal currency, because the savings would lose value over time. But that's hardly a brilliant insight; anyone who knows the first thing about economics will tell you that. Which is also why most people who do have substantial savings don't just keep them in monetary form, but invest them in some way. Since fiat currencies are not (or should not) be used to store value over extended periods of time, it is pointless to compare bitcoin to them in that regard. One should instead compare bitcoin to what people do store value in. One can of course compare bitcoin to fiat currencies in how they work as a currency, in which case bitcoin will come out particularly atrocious. |
17th December 2017, 04:16 AM | #1088 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,038
|
Yes, now that you mention it, I am smarter than you. Also, why did you quote the price in Euros? More evidence.
Quote:
As far as Soros, he's only worth $20 or $30 billion, as I recall, which is a pittance compared to the Rothschilds, who are undoubtedly worth trillions. Soros is merely an agent, much like JP Morgan was in years past. |
17th December 2017, 04:24 AM | #1089 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,038
|
I'm talking about money creation, which is specifically different than "inflation", which is a concocted government index that is hedonically manipulated. The problem with your logic is that it is not only savings which are denominated in depreciating currencies, but also wages themselves. So even if you act to disown fiat currency as quickly as you receive it, unless your employer is willing to renegotiate your wage, or you're lucky enough to be paid in gold or something for which the supply is not infinite, then you will be adversely affected anyway.
Realistically, poor people don't spend everything they earn, and their meager savings represent a larger part of their net worth than wealthy people, so they are hurt proportionally more by the money scam.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
17th December 2017, 05:02 AM | #1090 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
Morgan hid his subservience to the trillionaire Rothschilds, who secretly control the whole world, by adopting notoriously anti Semitic behaviour. I bet the Rothschilds told him to do this, so Jews are responsible for anti semitism too, eh?.
... conditions got worse, not better, for American Jews in the late 19th century, as many social clubs, universities, and resorts began excluding Jews. J. P. Morgan made anti-Semitic comments in his private correspondence. He even made the hyperbolic claim that his bank and Barings were the only ’white’ (that is, non-Jewish) banks in New York (p. 91). In effect, he was questioning the whiteness of the Jews at a time when non-white immigrants could not even become citizens. Pak suggests that rising anti-Semitism led to the marginalization of Kuhn, Loeb and Co. and the entrenchment of Morgan’s privileged position in the financial world. |
17th December 2017, 06:10 AM | #1091 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
Bitcoin is a bubble. I'm no more badmouthing it than I'm badmouthing Railway lines (1845 bubble) or tulips (1637).
Quote:
|
17th December 2017, 06:24 AM | #1092 |
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
|
|
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975 |
|
17th December 2017, 06:34 AM | #1093 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 814
|
This doesn't sound like a particularly revealing insight. The fact that if your employer doesn't give you any raises, your effective wage is decreasing over time, should be common knowledge. Of course you have to renegotiate your wage, not only because of inflation, but also because your work experience should presumably make your market worth increase over time. And if it does, and your employer is not willing to give you a raise, then they are ripping you off, and you should quit and find a better employer. I believe you can get that much wisdom from any basic online article about job and wage negotiation.
My experience with lower income class is exactly opposite. The poor people that I know have no appreciable savings; if anything, they have debts. It's conceivable that my experience is not representative, but in that case I'm only willing to be convinced otherwise by some verifiable statistical evidence to the contrary, not by your claims. I believe you are contradicting yourself. Either these people have savings, or they don't. If they have savings, then they have something to invest (the savings, obviously). If they have nothing to invest, then they have no savings either. Perhaps in a totalitarian country you could find people who do have savings and cannot invest them. Anywhere else, people who have savings but do not have the choice of investing them in anything (housing, education, working tools, children, precious items, cans of food, or anything else), so they are "forced" to keep their savings in currency under their bed, do not exist. Therefore, nothing of those people. Again, you are contradicting yourself. Nobody is "forced" to use money as a store of value for decades (which is the scale where inflation becomes appreciable), and if they genuinely are forced to do that, then by definition they are unable to store their value in anything else, which then of course also includes bitcoin, so bitcoin is of no use to all these imaginary unfortunates. As much as they might wish to buy it, they cannot, because they are forced to store their savings in fiat currency, remember? It definitely doesn't, no. |
17th December 2017, 07:51 AM | #1094 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
|
17th December 2017, 09:23 AM | #1095 |
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
|
|
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975 |
|
17th December 2017, 04:01 PM | #1096 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,038
|
|
17th December 2017, 04:02 PM | #1097 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,038
|
|
17th December 2017, 04:15 PM | #1098 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,038
|
I agree with most of this, except the idea that real wages decreasing over time is "common knowledge". Most people haven't a clue about the money scam. Also, your employer not giving you a raise is not the one ripping you off, the money issuers who are stealing wealth by issuing money are the ones ripping you off. How is this not crystal clear to you?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
17th December 2017, 06:51 PM | #1099 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 814
|
It's clear to me that if my employer pays me less than I'm currently worth on the job market, and refuses to give me a raise, then it's my employer who is ripping me off. This would obviously be true even in a hypothetical case of zero inflation.
If a person lives from paycheck to paycheck, then they are barely affected by inflation, because the money they are paid and the money they spend (before the next paycheck, by definition) has almost the same value. Any value lost to inflation is negligible compared to what such a person pays in sales tax, income tax, and other taxes. What inflation does affect is money that is spent a significant time after it is gained, such as savings. I do agree that wage earners need raises to offset inflation, and should not leave their savings uninvested to avoid their gradual devaluation over time. I wouldn't say that's their biggest problem. Oh. Okay. That's all right. Thanks for trying to help me, though; I do appreciate the sentiment. |
17th December 2017, 10:35 PM | #1100 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,038
|
Sure, but that's obvious, and irrelevant. We're not discussing the difference between your job market value and your wage, we're talking about the perpetual debasement of the unit of account for your wage. Are you trolling?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
17th December 2017, 11:51 PM | #1101 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
Not my point. He's happy because he's on the winning side of a speculative boom, not because the object of his speculation is an effective form of currency. It is a well recognised feature of bubbles that speculators have no interest in any aspect of the object they're speculating in, except its increase in price. They have no interest in anything else. But I was referring to bitcoin's efficiency as a currency. It has serious defects, one of which I pointed to.
Tulips are very pretty. Did the speculators of 1636-37 care about that? No. Tulips aren't an effective currency, are they? Did the speculators worry about that? Not at all. |
18th December 2017, 12:09 AM | #1102 |
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
|
|
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975 |
|
18th December 2017, 12:23 AM | #1103 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
I explained that. "It is a well recognised feature of bubbles that speculators have no interest in any aspect of the object they're speculating in, except its increase in price. They have no interest in anything else." Tulips, shares in railway companies, it doesn't matter. So bitcoin's effectiveness as a currency doesn't matter to them. If Bitcoin is a bubble, as it appears to be, its price will finally crash just like the price of Tulips in 1637. I hope Tippet's friend sells out in time.
Here is an interesting article on that aspect of Bitcoin, from The American Conservative, of all places. |
18th December 2017, 12:35 AM | #1104 |
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
|
|
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975 |
|
18th December 2017, 12:42 AM | #1105 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
These are both bubbles, and they have the common features of bubbles. I would be very surprised if bitcoin's crash was delayed for decades, but the future timetable of bubbles is always unpredictable.
Quote:
|
18th December 2017, 01:05 AM | #1106 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 4,801
|
|
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.** |
|
18th December 2017, 01:17 AM | #1107 |
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
|
Nah. Your quote about speculators doesn't just apply to failed investments. You simply picked the most spectacular failure that you could think of then said "ergo, bitcoin".
I don't know what is meant by a "nouveau currency" but bitcoin falls somewhere in between a pure commodity and a liquid currency. There is absolutely not deception involved whatsoever. |
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975 |
|
18th December 2017, 01:55 AM | #1108 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,038
|
In order to predict a crash, you must know what bitcoin is worth. What is bitcoin worth?
Bitcoin allows people to move value outside of totalitarian/confiscatory government borders. I am certain that is the big reason why it is so popular. It has zero intrinsic value, but neither does your favorite scam the US dollar. It's value is that which is ascribed to it by people who are willing to pay for its utility. Do you see any reason why people will stop valuing bitcoin and the adoption rate will plummet? If not, you probably have no business speculating on crashes. That, plus the fact that since you're not willing to short it, means you're not willing to put your money where your mouth is. |
18th December 2017, 02:05 AM | #1109 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 4,801
|
Ever traded real gold?
I bought some Kruger Rands in South Africa. I traveled to New Zealand with them. No duty and no limit (being a Kiwi citizen). Not considered currency or jewelry. Yes, they see them on the Xray machines. When I got there, I went to the nearest coin exchange. They looked at the coins, looked up the spot price and gave me cash. Easier and more secure than bitcoin. How many refugees in the world used gold and (at earlier times) diamonds to transfer wealth easily. With bitcoin you might have nothing by the time you get to your new country (or a serious increase in wealth if lucky). |
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.** |
|
18th December 2017, 02:38 AM | #1110 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
I have no business speculating on crashes, and I don't, so I don't short anything. The value of Bitcoin is summed up by your friend who you tell us "is worth hundreds of millions now is happy with it whatever you call it." And that sort of bonanza isn't a reflection of its "utility". I hope he gets out in time.
Here is what I predict. The Bitcoin bubble will pop, and you will then tell us it has gone down because it has been sold short by the villains of the Federal Reserve and the Elders of Zion led by the Rothschilds, trying to rob honest investors, and destroy a rival to their worthless fiat dollar. That's the usual CT nuts' explanation when one of their obsessions goes haywire. A plot. |
18th December 2017, 04:19 AM | #1111 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
|
18th December 2017, 04:45 AM | #1112 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 814
|
You said that, I quote, "your employer not giving you a raise is not the one ripping you off", and I pointed out this untruth. You are right in that it was an obvious falsehood, yes.
Then don't go in circles; I'm not making you. I'm not even sure why you say "wrong", when the first half of this is essentially identical to what I've been saying all along. I suspect you just don't like that I don't find it a big deal. I said that yes, constant wages do effectively decrease over time if one doesn't get a raise, and that this is a reason why people need to renegotiate wages. And that it's far from the only reason why people need to renegotiate wages. When I look back over a period of my earnings, they have roughly doubled, whereas inflation over the same period was about 8%. If I hadn't renegotiated my contracts during this time, I would have been a lot worse off, and not because of inflation. I have no idea how Manhattan real estate value expressed in minimum wage hours is relevant to any of this. You can elaborate on it if you want, but I'm not particularly curious to know. My original point, which I will restate here, was that bitcoin ought to be compared to other things that people store value in over long term, because they do not, and should not, do that in currencies, and bitcoin makes a particularly lousy currency. You have since been trying to twist this into a debate of, apparently, some money scam and elite's corruption agenda that you seem to have. While I find it a little charming, I am mostly uninterested in all that. Well why would you think the employers owe the employees a fixed value wage for all eternity? They definitely don't. They can give you raises - or they can give you cuts. They can fire you. Someone else can hire you. Employment is a contract. Inflation is a fact of daily life, as are many other factors that make your work worth more or less over time, often way more significantly than inflation. If you're unhappy with your current contract, renegotiate it, or - if the employer isn't willing - find another employer. That's quite simple. I am completely unconvinced by the ridiculous argument that the employer is fair to act as if inflation didn't exist, and the resulting devaluation of your wage is not his fault. If your nominal wage hasn't changed for 50 years, and you're still being paid the generous $2 an hour you originally negotiated, while everyone else - including your co-workers that were hired last month - are paid $20 an hour, then no, it's not the bankers that are ripping you off; it's the employer. I think you mean 999,999, not 999,999 thousand. |
18th December 2017, 05:26 AM | #1113 |
Orthogonal Vector
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 53,184
|
|
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin |
|
18th December 2017, 09:45 AM | #1114 |
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
|
|
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975 |
|
18th December 2017, 11:07 AM | #1115 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,038
|
I'm so sure you hope he gets out in time, being the caring stranger on the internet that I'm sure you are. At this point, he has "**** you" money, so I doubt whether he needs any well wishing.
Quote:
I am here today telling you that in all probability, the Federal Reserve is already involved in bitcoin on the way up, in order to obtain control over it. When you can monetize anything, you can control anything. Whether you think I'm a "nut" is irrelevant, i will keep on speaking the truth as I understand it. |
18th December 2017, 11:22 AM | #1116 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
He'll need plenty of well wishing if he's still holding Bitcoin when the music stops, but I hope he comes out ahead. If he does, I'm sure you're slandering him by suggesting that wealth will cause him to be contemptuous of other people.
Quote:
|
18th December 2017, 11:27 AM | #1117 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
Delete duplicate post.
|
18th December 2017, 12:06 PM | #1118 |
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
|
Why should we believe that the "music" will stop this time? Because you are such an authority?
Quote:
|
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975 |
|
18th December 2017, 01:10 PM | #1119 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
I am an authority? Moi?? You've not been keeping up with the financial press comments, eh? Admit it.
https://www.theguardian.com/business...-business-live The spot price of bitcoin has also dipped, currently down 1.6% at $18,640 - having hit a new alltime high near $20,000 last night. CME’s launch of bitcoin futures was accompanied by a series of warnings. For example: Denmark’s top central banker said bitcoin was dangerous, and investors shouldn’t blame regulators if they lost their money. A senior Singaporean regulator said bitcoin had no intrinsic value France’s finance minister is pushing for the G20 to debate bitcoin regulation UBS’s chairmen, Axel Weber, said regulators should take a closer look at digital currencies Analysts at ING also put the boot into bitcoin, saying it would eventually become just a ‘niche product’ again. https://www.theguardian.com/business...-business-live Yet the Bitcoin bubble is now screaming too loudly to ignore. And it has revealed flaws about the cryptocurrency that I think will keep it from being more widely embraced as a currency and unit of exchange. http://time.com/money/5066095/bitcoi...e-pop-signals/ Yet 51 out of 53 economists polled last week by the Wall Street Journal say they think Bitcoin is in a bubble. There's plenty more where these came from! |
18th December 2017, 01:32 PM | #1120 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
16 June 2011. Then it was correct and timely. Price peaked in July 2011 at $31, then fell over the rest of the year 2011 to $2. July figure described in History of bitcoinWP as "Top of first bubble, followed by price drop" The present Bitcoin affair is quite a strong example of the bubble phenomenon. It is based on a new and rather obscure technology, which may indeed survive, as tulips and railways and joint stock companies all proceeded to do.
But please be aware of this: these peaks are not expressions of the intrinsic merit of Bitcoin. They are speculative excesses. They may be repeated one or more times, as new speculators are drawn into the market by hucksters, but they will come to an end. The 1929 US stock boom collapsed in March 1929, picked up again in June, when it went crazy; ran out of steam at the beginning of September, but didn't go pop until the last week in October. Picked up a bit in early 1930, and lost its way during the summer of that year. Then the index went down until July 1932, relentlessly. Took the whole economy down with it. I don't think that'll happen this time. Probably won't. |
Thread Tools | |
|
|