[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance

View post   
File: 300 KB, 1536x1018, Bitcoin-Silver.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
184629 No.184629 [Reply] [Original]

Give me a compelling argument that deflation is a non-issue for Bitcoin

>> No.184644

Bitcoin is dead. Dogecoin is the future.

>> No.184647

>>184644
same question

Let's tackle a very basic issue. People would be more inclined to save rather than spend in a deflating model since their money would be worth more over time.

>> No.184658

Posted this in another thread; reposting for posterity.

>inflationary currencies encourage spending - better for the economy
>deflationary currencies encourage fedoras on 4chan to hold onto their money in the hopes they can once again turn it back in fiat and become mad rich, but since half the people missed the boat/train they have to shill constantly EVERY.FUCKING.WHERE to explain why it is the future, ignoring the obvious downsides and talk about how secure bitcoin is despite the fact your life savings can be wiped out with a .jpg

It's really not that hard to understand

>> No.184667

>>184629
I agree with you there.

But you need to understand that BTC rose so much in popularity because of that deflation.
Deflation makes BTC a potentially very profitable commodity, from a pure cpeculation standpoint. This is what attracted people.

The most important trait of an internet currency is its convenience. If the easiest way to purchase a product is by using BTC, then it becomes attractive.
So far it has failed to become more convenient than USD, as result it is used as a payment method mostly by enthusiasts, who either have already invested in it, do it out of ideological principle.

BTC does not attract currency users. BTC attracts investors. There is hope good enough infrastructure will arise eventually, but what we have now is not as convenient, neither as secure as the more traditional payment methods.

>> No.184680

>>184667
>BTC attracts investors
btc attracts traders, not investors.

>> No.184694

>>184658
>>inflationary currencies encourage spending - better for the economy
[citation needed]

>> No.184696

>>184694
wth it's public knowledge

>> No.184702

>>184694
>[citation needed]
hahahaha fuck you're stupid.

>> No.184705

>>184696
well, then I probably didn't go to class the day they explained that

why is spending better for the economy?

>> No.184713

>>184705
Because if you hold onto the money you lose purchasing power?

>I remember when I could buy a carton of eggs for 5 cents, Jimmy
>no one cares grandpa

>> No.184721

>>184713
>why is spending better for the economy?
read the question again and see if what you responded has anything to do with said question.

>> No.184723

Its a non-issue because bitcoin will never amount to anything.

>> No.184736

>>184721
Oh sorry I was giving your question more credit than it deserved, because I didn't think you were seriously asking if people spending money and buying products, which requires people to be employed to sell you those products, manufacture those products, provide support for those products etc etc etc

Even more retarded than I thought.

>> No.184741

>>184736
A kid breaking a window makes people spend money to fix said window, gives employment to glass producers, etc.

Is that good for the economy?

>> No.184745

>>184705
>>184741

Just don't respond to this retard. Let him be an idiot.

>> No.184754

>>184745
He is just making you guys look like dumb asses as you try to act like you know anything about economics.

>> No.184755
File: 57 KB, 525x250, WonderfulStimulus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
184755

>>184745
>>184736
I think I'm starting to understand.

We need spending to create wealth! a good earthquake would give us all the spending that we need to improve the economy. Imagine all the work that would be necessary.

>> No.184763

>>184754
>making you guys look like dumb asses

I don't think so. At least, not to smart people. Others' opinion I don't really care.

>> No.184776
File: 1.48 MB, 1800x1200, cash.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
184776

Because the price of goods will never be measured in Bitcoin.

>inb4 b-b-but Bitcoin will replace fiat
No, it won't. Ever.

>> No.184847
File: 324 KB, 512x512, Sa5YobP.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
184847

Our fiat currencies (USD, EUR, etc) are constantly deflating against electronic goods and yet people still buy laptops and smartphones.

It's not like everybody is waiting infinitely for the price of Laptops to go down. Everybody buys at a certain point and still a Laptop which costs 1000$ today could be probably bought for a lot less next year.

>> No.184848

haha get

>> No.184854

>>184847

Is that actually supposed to be a point for something? Currency going up in value and old goods going down in value are two different things.

>> No.184860

>>184647
Dogecoin doesn't have deflation. It has inflation(google, it was in news).

It caused massive butthurt of bitcoiners who cried how developers fucked up initial investors.

Personally I think BTC will die because of deflation.

>> No.184868

>>184629

Bitcoin is actually inflationary

the monetary base is expanding

>> No.184871

>>184667
> If the easiest way to purchase a product is by using BTC, then it becomes attractive.

But it's not easiest way. Not by a long shot.

You don't even imagine how I would like to pay for hentai games with bitcoins due its pseudo-anonymity, but dlsite/getchu don't accept bitcoins, so now government and bank are aware that I fap to some weird shit.

>> No.184892

>>184854
>Is that actually supposed to be a point for something?
It proves a point.

People say that because you can buy more stuff with the same amount of bitcoins over time, that you will not buy those things, and wait instead.

His point is that today, electronics such as smartphones and laptops keep going down in price and yet people still buy them constantly.

Prices going down over time != people stop buying stuff.

>> No.184891

>>184868
It will do so up to a predefined limit. At that point, new coins will not happen. In fact, it's assumed that some of those coins will be lost and that the money supply would shrink as a result.

>> No.184899

>>184868
>monetary base

so it's still tied to fiat?

>> No.184903

>>184629
Price instability is the issue here, not deflation. The fixation on deflation in modern economics is a bias by governments that tend to be in debt and control the supply of money.

Technically deflation is a source of price instability, but it is not the whole issue.

>>184647
During times of inflation can't people put money in the bank and earn interest? Doesn't the purchasing power of their cash increase just the same as it would during deflation? So why don't all consumers put all their money in the bank and leave it there?

This argument is mathematically irrelevant and not the issue. Again the real issue is price instability, the inefficiency that deflation/inflation causes when people are making transactions.

Eventually some impulsive buyers will think "I don't care if my dollar is 5% more valuable next year, I want it now!", this trickle of sales will prompt traders to reduce prices at a lower rate, other people will see deflation drop to 3% and think "looks like prices are settling at a new level, there is no point saving anymore", there will be a rush as people spend their saved money on goods and services. Eventually this will result in inflation as everyone blows their savings before prices rise any further, at which point people will suddenly stop spending as much and businesses that got into debt to increase production during the boom will have tons of goods they can't shift, causing a drop in prices and deflation. Prices go up and down like a yoyo, not just consumer goods but industrial goods and services, businesses and consumers keep making errors in judgment about what they need, what they can afford and so forth.

I'm not against the government, the most practical course of action for a central bank is to try and achieve low levels of inflation without resulting in deflation which most governments seem to accomplish.

>> No.184906

>>184899
Bitcoins are fiat money. If you want to distinguish, use the terms cryptocurrency and government fiat.

>> No.184908

>>184868
>Bitcoin is actually inflationary

There's an ultimate cap to the number of Bitcoins that will exist.

>>184892
>prices going down over time != people stop buying stuff

People do buy LESS stuff though and the problem is exacerbated. Deflation lowering overall economic activity isn't exactly a controversial subject. Having a low level of inflation is desirable in a currency.

>> No.184921

>>184908
>People do buy LESS stuff though and the problem is exacerbated.
Even if they buy less stuff. Why is that a problem? see here:
>>184694


>Having a low level of inflation is desirable in a currency.
why is that? I thought that the period of most rapid economic growth in the USA prices were going down, until 1913.

>> No.184959

>>184847
It's investment that's really impacted by deflation. Nobody will be inclined to spend if their money grows by itself. You're encouraged to spend with inflation, otherwise, since your money just loses purchasing power.

>> No.184960

>>184921
>Having a low level of inflation is desirable in a currency.
If your money is constantly getting worthless slowly, it makes sense to spend your money rather than hoard it. You can buy more things now for your money and inflation means you buy fewer things for your money later. The problem with this idea is that people make two big mistakes with this form of money:
1. People don't understand that inflationary money is no longer valuable so it's foolish to save and hold onto this money.
2. People spend their money on things that take money away from their pocket rather than spending it on things that put money into their pocket.

I.E. Don't save inflationary money, spend it in money making schemes.

>> No.185032

>>184959
the return of the project just has to be higher than the rate of deflation.
If deflation is 2%, then all projects with ROI >2% make sense.

>> No.185058

>>185032
Here's several issues for a commercial entity:

1) your goods lose value the longer they stay on the shelves
2) even if you pay your employees the same amount the following year, they're really be earning more
3) people aren't really willing to buy since they'd rather have their money grow

>> No.185062

>>184629
It's not a world reserve currency.

/thread

>> No.185080

>>185062
>Reply
no but peercoin can be

>> No.185099

>>185058
1. Not a problem. All electronic chains and dealers of perishable goods have this issue.
2. Just reduce their salary. Not a problem, since everybody is doing it and they can buy more than before.
3. see >>184847

>> No.185107

Giant hurdle that prevents deflationary Bitcoin from ever being adopted: debt.

With inflationary currency, debt actually goes down over time ($17 trillion tomorrow is worth less than $17 trillion today). The opposite is true with deflationary currency. The global economy would collapse.

>> No.185117

>>185107

annnd no,

it called interest.

inflationary currencies force you to loan at interest and so the debt always increased

>> No.185124

Man I really want to buy this car, but my $8000 will be worth $8080 in a year. Better hang on :(

>> No.185128

>>185099
1. It's further amplified by the loss of the currency value.
2. No idea how this'll go
3. See >>184959

>> No.185133

>>185128
>1. It's further amplified by the falling value

fixed

>> No.185146

>>185117

Yes though. Governments pay very low interest rates. The deflation in Bitcoin would easily outweigh the interest gained in USD.

>> No.185147

I have an example.

In my class there is a /fit/bro who wanted to order some /fit/bro stuff from a website. Since it was a US website they only accepted credit card, BUT there was a saving factor, they accepted bitcoin. My /fit/bro didn't have a creditcard so turned some of his dosh into bitcoin and immediately bought his /fit/bro stuff.

It worked great.

>> No.185158

>>185147
Yeah. That's because that merchant still saw value in BTC. If deflation really breaks it, nobody's gonna want BTC anymore.

>> No.185168

>>185158
Are you talking about monetary deflation or price deflation?

>> No.185175

>>185158

It's more likely that the merchant set prices in USD and took the equivalent value in BTC. They then immediately converted it back to USD. Most retailers who accept BTC do this.

>> No.185738

>>184694
John Maynard Keynes

>> No.187457

>>185168
Monetary

>>185175
It's more expensive to buy stuff that way. You also have to buy BTC for more and they will sell it for less.

>> No.187460

>>187457
this is OP, my ID seems to have changed

>> No.187497

>>187457
>it's more expensive to buy stuff that way

More expensive than staying with just BTC, but it protects you against volatility.

No major merchant is ever going to tie prices to BTC, and it's possible that the total transaction cost could still be lower than typical credit card fees (e.g. you might convert from USD to BTC for 1% and BTC to USD for 1% instead of paying 2.5% for credit card processing).

>> No.187551

>>187497

>implying tigerdirect and overstock aren't major merchants

>> No.187565

>>187551
>implying tigerdirect and overstock tie prices to BTC

They do exactly what I said they do. Prices are in USD and they convert BTC to USD as soon as they get them.

>> No.187657
File: 2.28 MB, 320x240, yuy54y55y.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
187657

>>187565

>implying that's what I already said

>> No.187683

>>187657

What are you talking about?

I said "No major merchant is ever going to tie prices to BTC"

You said "Implying tigerdirect and overstock aren't major merchants"

I never said major merchants wouldn't accept BTC, I said they'd never tie prices to BTC. Your comment is either pointless or wrong.

>> No.187701

I'm not even going to bother reading this thread.

Let me guess a dash of herp derp, spending is what grows the economy

herp derp saving is bad

herp derp savings doesn't start the virtuous cycle of economic growth, spending does


LOL

>> No.187705

>>187683

Why does that even matter though? The reason it is tied to USD is because it is not a stable currency, yet.

When the dollar actually tanks BTC will reference gold or some sort of petro dollar.

Problem?

>> No.187716

>>187705

No problem. You can live in fantasy land if you want to.

>> No.187725

>things get cheaper because fuck the government
>deflation is no long an issue

>> No.187727

>>187716
Have fun when when the velocity of money increases and cash is trash mentality sweeps the land

>> No.187734

>>187727

I will. You have fun when BTC completely crashes and becomes worthless.

>> No.187749

>>187734
do you really believe it can go to zero?

you see no value in a decentralized public ledger?

OK

>> No.187759

>>187749

Correct.

>> No.187762

>>187759
You are a retard.

>> No.187765

>>187749

Both can be mutually exclusive, son.

>> No.187771

>>187762

That hurts my feelings. It really does.

>> No.187796

>>185175
That works now because BTC still has value. Like I said, if deflation crashes the price, who'll take BTC, even for the convenience of the transactions? It has no value. BTW, I'm saying this in response to >>185147 problem.

>> No.187812

>>187796

Why is deflation going to crash the price? And if it doesn't go to zero, it still has value..

You have to explain to me how it goes to zero - as in nobody in the whole world wants a bitcoin.

>> No.187833

>>184644
When I read anything like this now,I automatically assume it is a troll thing rather than shilling.

>> No.187834

>>187812

Okay, it'll probably never go to actual zero as long as the system is in place, but it can become essentially worthless if only a handful of people will accept them.

Even the USD wouldn't go to actual zero if the U.S. government and economy were to suddenly vanish overnight.

>> No.187843

>>187834
Without the government US dollars are worthless. If the government were to disappear overnight people would probably still spend them, but only out of habit not because of any sense of value.

>> No.187860

>>184647
Computers and cellphones are both products that quickly deflate over time. People still buy those products when they are brand new. Why would any other product be much different?

>> No.187856

>>187843

Any currency is only worth what people are willing to exchange for it.

(Also U.S. notes and coins have slight value as paper and metal)

>> No.187875

>>187812
If monetary deflation really is a breaker for BTC as a currency and causes people to abandon BTC, BTC prices will crash, obviously.

>You have to explain to me how it goes to zero - as in nobody in the whole world wants a bitcoin.

Simple. Mass migration/abandonment. Like I said, if deflation is a sufficient cause, we can have the same migration analogous to the migration of people from Digg to Twitter and myspace to Facebook or abandonment of the platform, completely.

>> No.187892

>>187860
because it's a necessity. like I said here >>184959, deflation really impacts investment. but, likewise, you'll be sure to find that people will change their spending habits when their money grows by itself.

>> No.187935

It's probably for reasons not dissimilar to why it isn't an issue for fixed assets like gold or silver. There's finite amounts of precious metal on Earth, yet these materials still retain their value despite people around the world knowing that there will come a day when all the gold and silver will have been mined. I'm not going to sit here and pretend like I fully understand the implications of that statement because I'm not an economics major, but some sort of intrinsic value (in this case, anonymity, security, and being a currency without borders or conversion barriers if traded directly for goods) will prevent it from becoming irrelevant to the public. It won't ever replace fiat currency entirely, but I think it's a little short sighted to assume that it's doomed just because it's a fixed asset.

>> No.187955

>>187875
but why is deflation bad in a currency? because people will never spend it? That's the idea?

I won't eat this week, I'll eat next week and get more food for muh money

the reality is, our economy needs deflation, we need to stop buying consumer goods. We need to under-consume and SAVE and invest

>> No.187961

>>187955
>deflation is good for investment
10/10

>> No.187968

>>187955

>>187892

>the reality is, our economy needs deflation, we need to stop buying consumer goods. We need to under-consume and SAVE and invest

Don't give me your hippie bs

>> No.187977

>>187968

You understand that when you save money in a bank, banks lend it out right?

You understand that saving IS investing, right?

>> No.187991

Let me summarize the argument

>deflationary can't work because the price will always go up

>therefore the price will go down

wat?

>> No.187985

>>187935

Deflation is an issue for gold and silver though. That's one of the reasons we stopped using them to back money.

>> No.187987

>>187977
yes I do

>> No.187997

>>187977

People won't want to borrow money though. The value of the principle will increase over time.

>> No.188003

>>187997
>principal

>> No.188081

>>187997
dude they will be earning in the same currency they are borrowing

if you mean their will be less consumer loans and more entrepreneurial loans, you are right. good.

>> No.188101

>>187985
No, they stopped using metal backed currencies because they realized they could fund endless wars with money backed only by force.

>> No.188110

>Betting your shekels on bitcoins

Why you do this?

>> No.188117

>>187991
>wat?
Wow, its almose like you cant fucking understand what you are reading at all.

The value of the currency goes up. As result, the prices in that currency go down.


I can understand the fucks who say deflation would not affect investment activity much. I disagree, but i understand. You, on the other hand, just went full retard.

>> No.188123
File: 17 KB, 294x294, oh-boy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
188123

>>188101

That's why every other country stopped using metals too, right? Surely it had nothing to do with stabilizing the troubled economies at the time.

>>187991
It helps if you think of deflation as the opposite of inflation (since most of us are more familiar with inflation). When currency inflates, the value of the currency goes down and the price of goods goes up. Deflation does the opposite.

>> No.188125

>>188110
I'm not really, I am just participating in the BTC economy.

I am slowly converting BTC to protoshares, counterparty, ethereum, ripple

yeah and I always have some BTC around so I will benefit from any price appreciation

If the price goes down, I don't cry, I just buy

>> No.188131

>>188123
i am not having trouble understanding deflation, I am having trouble understanding why it is bad

>> No.188140

>>188131

It lowers overall economic output and can lead to a depression if it goes unchecked. If you want to learn about it in detail there are plenty of online resources you can use.

Keep in mind that high levels of inflation are bad too, but most people think that low levels of inflation actually helps to grow the economy.

>> No.188188

>>188140
>It lowers overall economic output
It lowers overall mal-investment - fixxed

>> No.188198

>>188188

No, the way I wrote it was right.

>> No.188201

>>188198
If economic output is increased, so is malinvestment. Both statements are correct, just not the way >>188188 intended.

>> No.188208

>>188201
But you don't just want to focus on economic output

We are dealing with scarce resources here, we should use them wisely. Even if that means *gasp* saving them up

>> No.188234

How anonymous is BTC anyway?

Is no information available? Or can the size of the trade be seen, but you don't know to which accounts?

>> No.188245

>>188234
The amount transferred, the originating address, and the destination address are publicly viewable in the blockchain.

You can generate as many addresses as you want for one wallet, though, and it is very difficult to tie an address to a person's identity except in obvious cases, like the wallet the FBI sent all the Silk Road coins to.

>> No.188246
File: 910 KB, 250x188, 1388639445264.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
188246

>there are people in this thread who are seriously are saying that people not spending money and circulating wealth -instead hording it / saving it - is good for the economy

A new low for the cryptoshills

>> No.188253

>>188246
I think it's just a couple anons learning basic economic theory, and a couple more who have never had to explain basic economic theory. Very little shilling; what would be the point?

>> No.188254

>>188234
Every transaction is publicly available to view, and if you know an address you can check its balance. The thing is that no personally identifiable information has to be used to set up an address. If you obstruficate your IP no one knows who owns the address, and you can use services like CoinJoin in order to mask the sending address.

>> No.188260

>>188246
Yes, because debt and overspending is so good, right?

>> No.188266

>>184629

The only reason deflation is an issue is because it hurts creditors and makes lending trickier. No one is borrowing bitcoins, faggot.

>> No.188265

>>188246

It's true. Invested money does more for the economy than your "circular flow" none sense.

Investments improve technology. Increasing the amount of money people spend at KFC is not really beneficial to the economy.

>> No.188268

>>188253

I haven't seen much shilling in this thread, but there could be some post-purchase rationalization at work.

>> No.188269

>>188253
If you saw the sticky a few days ago there were a couple of very obvious shills, one of which who was arguing that consumer protection laws were not really needed because bitcoin was soooooooo secure.

Literally *ANY* edge they can try and weasel out of people over fiat is a huge victory in their eyes. It makes you question how much of a stake they hold in it (or how much they have already lost)

>> No.188271

>>188260
>>188246

I Am Not An Economist (obviously), but wouldn't an ideal currency be one where the addition of new coins/notes/whatever perfectly tracks the growth of the economy, leading to perfect price stability?

Inflation is useful to governments in order to encourage spending and decrease the value of their debts, but as a store of value and a means of exchange, you'd want perfect stability, right?

>> No.188273

>>188266
BitshareX

>> No.188284

>>188246
because earthquakes and floods don't happen, therefore we don't need to save any of our resources

We will always better of constantly being out of resources, because if something bad happens it will create jobs because we will be up shit creek and lots of work to do digging out

>> No.188289

>>188269
If you take the right precautions with your wallet no one but yourself can spend your bitcoins. Chargebacks are necessary because of how insecure credit cards are. If the only way someone can steal your bitcoins is to bruteforce your wallet file what is the purpose of a chargeback?

>>188271
This assumes that prices for things will increase over time. Without government regulations and intellectual property laws there would be increased competition, thus lowering prices over time. Government backed currency provides to guarantee of stability, just ask anyone in Argentina or similar nations.

>> No.188294

>>188260
Who said we should go into debt and over spend? I'm saying you should buy a couch if you want a couch, so the people who make the couch get paid for making the couch, and the shipping company who delivered that couch to the store gets paid, and the loggers who cut down the trees for that wood get paid... Etc.

>>188265
Now you are going into R&D, not investing. Investing is putting money into something because you believe public perception of that things value you put money into will increase, so you can then sell it later for more money than you put in.

Putting money into developing new products is typically a free market thing. A company, such as apple, puts tons of money into trying to develop a new product... in the hopes that PEOPLE WILL BUY IT. If absolutely *zero* people bought the first iPhone, you may not have seen the cellphone revolution we have had the past half decade - tablet computers and touch screen phones were around way before the iPad but no one bought it, so many companies dropped the idea and didn't develop them further.

The only time technological advancement happens aside from private profit is from government military spending.

You not buying a couch because you want to invest in BTC really does not help the economy.

>> No.188303

>>188269
I think a lot of people were trying to counter the anons who came into that thread to shit all over people who held cryptos. Extremes drive others to extremes.

I have a good amount of value in cryptos right now, but I'm not under the illusion that they're going to replace national fiats ever. Bitcoin's value is as a means of efficiently transferring wealth across national borders, and secondarily as a speculative investment. Deflation in Bitcoin makes it attractive for speculators, which in turn ensures that it has value for its primary purpose of wealth exchange. Because each coin is divisible, and the number of decimal points can be increased with a software update, the value of Bitcoin is irrelevant to its primary purpose, with the exception that a higher value (more deflation) makes it profitable for speculators to establish infrastructure, which increases its efficiency for transfer.

Bitcoin was made to do what Wells Fargo, Western Union, and SEPA/bank wires currently do, but to do it faster and cheaper. It does this well right now, provided there is an exchange operating in your country.

>> No.188302

>>188294
>You not buying a couch because you want to invest in BTC really does not help the economy.
It does if he uses those saved bitcoins to start a business.

>> No.188310

>>188294
problem is that i see couches on the street everyday. maybe we should make better couches that last longer

then you won't have to replace it as fast, and that non-couch purchase only freed up your capital

But you still have a couch

And there isn't on on the curb either

double win, triple win 'cause you smoke a lil weed

>> No.188316

>>188271
I'm not either. It is basic economics to know the difference the effects of a deflationary vs inflationary currency are... But a perfectly stable one starts getting into that territory of a million different "what if" scenarios. You may have more companies invest in your country because your currency is stable and won't depreciate... but you also won't have countries investing because your currency is suddenly a better value. The Canadian economy hurts the stronger our dollar is compared to the US.

>>188284
You are arguing a completely different point irrelevant to this thread.

>>188289
Actually credit cards are very secure, and typically if a card is compromised the banks have ways of knowing.

Chargebacks are typically more so for fraud. A business doesn't get charged back if they have their ducks in a row and can prove it. The company said they shipped out your product but can't say when, provide you a tracking number, and it never arrives? Chargeback.

Your BTC wallet can be compromised by a trojan, which I'm sure as a BTC advocate you have read this as a possibility. The difference is that once your wallet is compromised no one can stop it. Your money is gone.

>> No.188317

>>188310
>I was going to buy a couch
>But I got high

>> No.188322

>>188316
As long as your wallet is encrypted with a strong password and you have backed it up, by the time they are able to bruteforce it you could have transferred the bitcoins to another wallet.

>> No.188325

>>188302
How is he starting a business if he never spends the money on paying for merchandise, paying rent on his retail location, buying merchandise, buying a point of sale, buying signage, buying the services of a web developer / graphic design artist - and instead chooses to keep "investing" his money.

This is literally the argument going on in this thread - keeping your money is better than spending it at all. This is why it's retarded.

>> No.188330

>>188322
>download trojan.exe
>you type in your password to buy something
>trojan instantly also sends your 19 BTC you have in your wallet at the same time to trojanmakers wallet
>You are now out 19 BTC

How do you get it back?

>> No.188334

>>188325
You have to make a decision at some point. You can't just save your money indefinitely. Computers and cellphones get more powerful for relatively the same price or less each year, yet people still buy computers instead of just waiting for the next upgrade.

>>188330
Don't download trojan.exe.

>> No.188340

>>188325
Bitcoin is deflationary, yet many people who mined Bitcoin have sold their Bitcoins to buy more mining equipment to get more Bitcoins. This is because they have determined that they can make more money by buying hardware and performing work than by letting their Bitcoins sit in a wallet. Regardless of the value/virtue or lack thereof in mining Bitcoin, they still put money into the economy. This is why AMD graphics cards sell for twice their MSRP these days.

>> No.188347

>>188325

because you put your money in a bank and they pay you interest.

the bank loans the money to an entrepreneur


I guess I am beating a dead horsey

>> No.188352

>>188334
>why buy cellphones/computer/television if you can wait until next year to buy one cheaper?
Because I need a cell phone, computer, or television now.

>don't downlod trojan.exe
I'm sure if you could choose whether or not to install the virus that will take all your money I doubt anyone would do it.

Just because people are stupid doesn't mean you should be okay with an economic system that allows cut throats, con artists, scammers, and criminals to profit off people without issue.

>> No.188351

>>188334
yes and this is the other response, either way

banks or no banks,

if you are your own bank, of course you could make a loan yourself.

>> No.188358

>>188352
If people lose their money through downloading trojans and other malware, someone will come up with a solution that circumvents these like the Trezor hardware wallet. People innovate to find solutions to problems. Adding an insecure transaction method like chargebacks to a payment system is not innovation.

>> No.188359

>>188340
>This is why AMD graphics cards sell for twice their MSRP these days.
Wasn't someone arguing about how "investing" was supposed to drive innovation and decrease prices though? D:

I don't see how GPU's being more expensive helps anyone but the miners

>cue that article that talks about how Sony/Microsoft are in trouble because the piss and the bone now cost more money to make because of Bitcoin

>> No.188363

>>188358
>consumer protection laws
>insecure

Holy fuck it's you isn't it? Why haven't you called me Bloomburg yet?

>> No.188364

Bitcoin outsources the unit of account. Totally unaffected by the only negative aspects of deflation: sticky prices.

>> No.188368

>>188347
But doesn't that entrepreneur have to then spend money he was loaned to start his business? Or would some people in this thread then suggest he should reinvest that cash.

>> No.188375

>>188363
Consumer protection laws make it more difficult to operate a business. If you accept Bitcoin you know every bitcoin you receive is yours to do with how you want, not some credit card company.

>> No.188376

>>188352
Security is the biggest problem facing Bitcoin. It has an image problem - because it can be transferred over the Internet, people see it as an abstract instrument, like a credit card, rather than being mostly analogous to cash in your wallet. Those same people also don't understand computer security. Until the Bitcoin Foundation finds a fix or users find education, people will continue to do the crypto equivalent of walking down a dark alley in the ghetto with a wad of $100 bills in their hand. It's not insurmountable, but it is a challenge. The simplest solution would be to have actual trustworthy Bitcoin banks, but then that would nullify some of the advantages of Bitcoin.

>>188359
You could see GPU prices as a localized demonstration of inflation vs. deflation. As the value of Bitcoin goes up, the value of dollars to buy things that Bitcoin holders want goes down.

>> No.188383

>>188376
Blockchain.info is the closest thing to a legacy bank that doesn't break the security of Bitcoin.

>> No.188391

>>188368
no I am not arguing to not spend,

I don't care what you do

I am not even making any price predictions

My only claim is that deflation isn't bad

and a general but not absurd level of bitcoin bullishness

Also, I argued against bitcoin for a long time, mainly around the issue of intrinsic value. I don't think its ever to late to purchase a bitcoin, I am glad I did. I have also spent a lot of them.

I am just generally optimistic, but not to the point that I won't eat food or buy a couch or whatever I could be suspected of putting off - though I probably am putting off superfluous expenditures because I am generally bullish on the bitcoin economy

>> No.188394

>>188391
I just reread that and I said the same words twice 'cause I got high

>> No.188397

>>188375
Have you run a business? Do you know how the chargeback process works on both ends?

>>188376
The main issue is, and I will say it again, is the general population is absolutely fucking stupid. This is why companies spend millions on customer service / support services to help clear up issues customers are experiencing with their product - even if the instructions are in plain black and white.

The benefit is that because people are stupid they don't foresee these issues when getting involved initially. This is why I think you saw a lot of people learn a very valuable lesson from GOX, many of which who are probably not returning to the crypto scene any time soon.

Once you start adding that regulation, overhead, etc some of the main appeals of Bitcoin (no fees) instantly vanish. One Anon suggested a private business you could buy insurance that would cover your wallet being hacked. Even if this idea was feasible, the average consumer would be turned off seeing all these up front fees to "secure your bitcoins!"

If you look at how the entire credit card scheme is manufactured it's a good experiment in human psychology - try and find all the ways as to how it's meant to hide safety features up front or encourage you to spend.

Many credit card issuers in some countries fought the chip and pin because it would potentially slow down transactions and discourage people from spending. As it was right now you would swipe, sign, and go.

>> No.188409

>>188391
Well let us take an extreme example of inflation vs deflation:

Lets say you have 1,000 dollars, and your rate of inflation is 50%. You want to buy a television, a used car, and a cell phone - each at 500 dollars. If you buy it now, you can buy two of those things. If you wait until next year everything is now worth 1000 dollars. With a deflationary currency, if you wait until next year you can now buy all three.

It's an absurd number, and to be quite honest if the rate of deflation with BTC was similar to the typical rate of inflation of a currency it wouldn't matter. The percentiles are too negligible. A gallon of milk for me costs the same as it did 10 years ago - bread has gone up slightly, etc.

Bitcoin is just too volatile in value. Everyone is banking on it's adoption because if it becomes popular it WILL deflate and at an exponential rate. People will invest in Bitcoin not as a currency but because they want to turn 10,000 dollars into 20,000 dollars in three years.

This is why deflation is bad. Arguably with BTC if it was just violently inflationary it would be just as bad. This is why it's a volatile commodity.

>> No.188411

>>188397
My hope is that the people who got involved with cryptos and lost, or came close to losing, money due to poor computer security then begin to actually care about it. Then we might see a knock-on effect of reduced spam and fewer botnets, as people's money, not just their annoyance, depends on proper computer security.

Of course, that depends on Bitcoin being a stronger force than the stupidity of the average person, which is a pretty risky bet.

>> No.188418

BTC was primarily used by drug dealers to sell/buy drugs on silk road, since BTC was able to keep their anonimity and make them untraceable BTC saw a very profilic use among a relatively small userbase.

However know that everbody wants on the BTC bandwagon since silk road went to shit, theres way too many users for BTC's deflating model. In some years, if people keep using BTC's theyll be making exchange for satoshis, which will be ridiculous.

>> No.188425

>>188411
I doubt it would have that effect. Computers, banking information, personal identities... These are all compromised, all the time. We have had some reduction in spam in some form or another as laws have been passed to combat it.

I don't think we will see a reduction in the vulnerability of our computers unless operating systems become so fragmented that you may not be vulnerable to a virus you were exposed to: for example downloading an Apple iPhone virus while running on Android, or running Linux (period lololololol) - or the free market answers the call and some company like Norton wants to crush competition and makes the most potent, cost effective anti-virus software in the world - typical business theory would suggest this might also not be a case as some vulnerability is appealing to these companies so you are encouraged to buy again and again

The Mt. Gox and other exchange scandals? People just blame Gox - and they are right to. It was Gox's fault. Some just blame Bitcoin. No one is seeking a solution, they just got off that boat and won't come back.

>> No.188435

Geez, this is still going?

If you don't believe that deflation has problems, just check how the economy cycled back when we were on the gold standard. It's not a theory, the experiment has been done and we know what happens.

>> No.188466

>>188435
That is the effect of a deflationary currency as a national currency, which Bitcoin will never be.

To say that deflation is bad for Bitcoin is like saying that deflation is bad for gold.

>> No.188476

>>188466

I agree. I said so waaaay up there >>184776

This entire discussion is assuming that we'd be replacing USD with BTC or backing USD with BTC or something along those lines.

>> No.188484

>>188466
Well Greece is currently in a lot of trouble because they use the Euro. The currency didn't adapt to their economic conditions and it dug them a hole they can't climb out of.

>> No.188509

Buttcoin is deflationary because it will go to ZERO

AHAHAHA USELESS
HAHAHHAHAHHHAH

>MUH BUTTCOIN/DOGECOIN/SHILLCOIN/ZKYLONCOIN

>> No.188514

>>188509

All you faggots don't own Crypto

You Niggaz are jelly

>> No.188556

>>188484
The Euro didn't fabricate financial reports and take out a bunch of loans it couldn't afford so it could bribe Greek voters with make-work government jobs. That was the Greek government.

In the aftermath, yes, they can't inflate away their debt, so they're reliant on assistance from Germany. Really a financial union doesn't make sense without a more unified political system.

>> No.188583

>>187935
>I'm not going to sit here and pretend like I fully understand the implications of that statement because I'm not an economics major

Don't worry, no one in this thread is.

>> No.188599

>>184629

You guys love throwing around the buzzword "deflation" in BTC conversations like you are so fucking smart. No, you are not.

Example of deflation as a problem in the US:

Our money supply has deflated to the point that a car costs $10. How can you ever purchase a 2 liter Pepsi? Even a penny would be way too much to pay.....OMG DEFLATION STRIKES AGAIN!!!

Example of deflation in Bitcoin:

All the drug dealers got their bitcoins confiscated so now there is only one bitcoin in the world. No problem butt lick, we'll divide it out to 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 zeros and call one of those a XBTC. Now everyone in the world can use that one bitcoin

Isn't technology great? No, you are just fanny flustered that you didn't buy into bitcoin when they were two cents.

>> No.188606

>>188599

This nigga dun figured it out.

All you grampafags don't realize...the less coins in circulation = less supply = increased demand = increased pricing. It's like fucking rare numismatics, except you don't have to store it in a fireproof safe like a paranoid yosemite sam hickfag.

Would you fuckin ancient fossils get something else to gripe about? Like...something you actually have experience with and understand, perhaps?

>> No.188618

>>188606
>argues that decreasing purchasing value helps the economy
>says other people don't have any experience or understand things

Right.

>> No.188638

>>188618

I am the anon he was replying to, and I want to thank him for supporting my explanation but he's totally fucking wrong.

Deflation does increase the real value of money so he is right in that regard, but that's not what I said. I said to re-denominate it so that a few bitcoins can server an entire economy and therefore offset any decrease in the supply to PREVENT it from affecting the price either way.

Generally, uneducated fanny flustered people who want to criticize bitcoin confuse two terms, neither of which they know anything about: Deflation is not disinflation.

>> No.188677

>>188638
I don't think anyone is arguing that the Bitcoin supply is a problem that will prevent it from actually being used. Even if it did you could simply add more decimal places - you would only have to redo the denominations if you wanted to be really crazy, but you could easily make it a client side visibility thing. Instead of just changing it across the board that 1 BTC = 1 million XBTC you would just make it display those decimal places as it's own terminology. You can say 5 dollars is 500 cents, or vice versa. You would use the terminology that is most convenient for whatever your purchases are at.

You could have something like 1,000 bits = one bitcoin, and the wallet would display it on the GUI as such. For all the math it would still be 0.0001 BTC

The issue that I will echo again is the fact the deflation does discourage people from using it as a currency. It's really an undeniable fact. People have put their money into it as an investment, hoping their 500 dollars will be 700 dollars the next day. The only time people will spend the money is if they want to "cash out", or in the rare cases of people using their "profits" to try and make more profits, which is in a way just more investing in a different way (such as mining rigs)

I see very few people keeping their money in BTC and then not feeling obligated to keep their money if BTC has a very healthy and consistent deflation rate. Think of it as the same way how people are reluctant to take money out of their investment portfolio or their high interest savings accounts - once they take that money out it is no longer making them money.

If the deflation rate was insignificant it wouldn't have an utterly wide spread detrimental effect... But think of it in a different light: A hundred years ago 10,000 dollars was the equivalent of a quarter of a million dollars - 50 years ago it was today equivalent of 75000 dollars. If you just hold onto money it loses value every day.

>> No.188691

>>188677

If you had a deflationary currency where the common man would say "Well gee, if I put away this 10,000 dollars by the time I retire I'll have 75,000 dollars!" it would encourage him to squirrel it away in his hidey hole. With inflation that 10,000 dollar bill could have been a pretty decent house, and now it's a car.

Granted it's overly simplified economics and there are endless implications of a deflationary currency... but this is 4chan. No one here can talk intelligently about this shit so might as well discuss it at dunce tier.

>> No.188703

>>188691
>but this is 4chan. No one here can talk intelligently about this shit so might as well discuss it at dunce tier.


Goddamn that was succinct.

/4chan

>> No.191833

bump

>> No.193569

If anything, deflation was a good thing for bitcoin. "Muh economy" folks seem to be just parroting other people's opinon without much thinking. What's the point of using a currency that would devaluate from start? Assume inflation is "good for the economy", then what good it will do when there's no economy to speak of? Cryptocoins weren't and still aren't close to being something as widely accepted as fiat, as legal tender. There's few places to spend your money, if you have some you're likely stuck with it and there's no way to hedge against it slowly rotting away. What would be the point of buying it in the first place?

>> No.193581
File: 231 KB, 700x700, 1237085825518.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
193581

>>184629
limited supply works fine for tf2 earbuds

>> No.193584

>>184629
Deflation is precisely what is needed for peer to peer currency today. Deflation promotes saving and curbs reckless spending and debt-fueled purchases. Its an ingredient for a responsible, rational economy.

>> No.193597

How about you clarify why should it be an issue for BTC?

>> No.193637

Bitcoin only deflates to any significant degree when the userbase expands, so basically until it reaches common usage (if that even happens at all) it'll be cursed with terrible growing pains

>> No.193765

>>193597
Conventional economics takes it as granted that a small amount of inflation is necessary for an economy to function properly. They fail to take account that outside of a government controlled economy prices would fall to keep pace with market expansion.

>> No.193882

Deflation is GOOD for the economy.

The gilded age had MASSIVE deflation, wage increases, price decreases.

>> No.193886

>>184705
>why is spending better for the economy?
They're fucking lying to you, we have massive inflation the past 10 years and it's been a distaste.

Fuck these fascistr cunts.

>> No.193942

>>193597
Because it's widely known that deflation isn't good for fiat? Also, read the thread

>> No.193952

>>193942
Good news! Bitcoin isn't fiat!

>> No.193960

>>193952
so how is it immune to deflation?

>> No.193992
File: 141 KB, 786x1319, 1353374303091.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
193992

>>185738
>keynes
Kill yourself.

>> No.193995

>>188246
>>there are people in this thread who are seriously are saying that people not spending money and circulating wealth -instead hording it / saving it - is good for the economy

Uh, empirical evidence disagrees with you.

>> No.194010

>someone bumped this thread when everything that needs to be said has been said already

>>193960
Because it doesn't matter. As long as wages are paid in USD and the price of goods are in USD, the value of BTC doesn't really matter.

>> No.194075

>>194010
Wages are paid and goods are bought in many different currencies, including BTC. Mainly it's just people who work for the bitcoin foundation who get paid in BTC, but it still counts

>> No.194091

>>184658

Wait, 25 btc are mined every 10 minutes. The only reason there is deflation is because more people are speculating on it all the time. Once usage peaks, there should be some inflation due to increasing supply.

>> No.194106

>>194091

The increased supply will always be constant until the max limit is hit, then there are no more bitcoins.

>> No.194123

>>194075

I'm talking about the U.S. economy here. We've already talked about this, but all major retailers price and pay in USD. If they accept BTC, they just take however much will equate to the USD price.

Say I'm selling Product X for 500 USD and you want to pay in BTC in these scenarios:
a) 1 BTC is trading for 1000 USD
b) 1 BTC is trading for 250 USD

For (a), I can just ask for 0.5 BTC and for (b) I can just ask for 2 BTC. I then immediately turn around and exchange to 500 USD in either case. The value of BTC wouldn't matter to me at all.

>> No.194145

>>194123
>I then immediately turn around and exchange to 500 USD in either case
And where do you do that? I don't know of any bitcoin exchange where you can deposit or withdraw national currencies instantly with acceptable fees

>> No.194165

>>194106

The total number available keeps increasing though. The max 21m won't be hit until next century.

>> No.194170

>>194145

You don't actually have to withdraw the funds instantly, you just lock in a sell order immediately to fix the price.

>> No.194174

>>184647

With deflation, you can still lend money, but you would charge negative interest!

>> No.194213

>>194174
Why bother lending in the first place then? Just hoard it and you'll have the same return plus whatever you would have paid as "negative interest"

>> No.194238

>>187860
bitcoin is no product
its supposed to be a currency
currencies with deflation however dont work because deflation encourages keeping it while a currency wants to be spend
money that no one gives is dead

>> No.194271

>>194238
>money that no one gives is dead
Right if nobody gives it then the currency is worthless. But then if it's worthless then how the fuck is it deflating? Somebody must be spending in order for the price increase to continue

>> No.194291

>>194271
it first deflates, the more it deflates the more people hold the more hold the more deflates and then it bursts eventually or stalls out as no one uses it anymore. you can not get it because its too expensive and you wont spend it because tomorrow it might be more expensive. thats poison for a currency and economy based on it

>> No.194350

>>194291
But again, holding on to money is inherently pointless. The people who do have it must spend something, and they'll pay as much as it takes to do so. The problem is this concentrates wealth in the hands of people who held onto their money for a long time, and all they have to do is sit in the wings and wait for the economy to be their bitch

>> No.194368

>>194350
>The problem is this concentrates wealth in the hands of people who held onto their money for a long time
Uh yeah, which allows them to invest large amounts of money into the economy.

See rockefeller, carnegie, vanderbilt etc etc.

They basically made america from the ground up.

Massive savings and then investment from this savings is what we need.

Even if they don't invest it at all it still helps everyone by making the value of the currency increase, thus making prices go down, so capital goods and consumer goods are worth less.

>> No.194414

>>194368
>They basically made america from the ground up.
You mean they controlled america. Did they do a better job than a more distributed investor base would have done? That seems very unlikely

>> No.194422

>>194414
>You mean they controlled america.
No, without them there would be no america as we know it.
We would still be living on farms in shit poverty.

Deal with it.

>Did they do a better job than a more distributed investor base would have done?
The results disagree with you.
It was the greatest increase in human living standards in all human history.

>> No.194452

>>194422
>the results disagree with you

You mean the multiple depressions that strangled the economy?

>> No.194477

Deflation means that it will only go up in value. Deflation is only a problem where infinitely small denominations aren't possible. Tomorrow, the protocol could be updated to make it possible to divide bitcoins down to 32 decimal places. And then, they can expand it even smaller. You can always give smaller and smaller denominations of bitcoin, so having one bitcoin worth millions isn't an issue.
What possible reason could there be for expanding the pool of money? Actually, this is an issue: you need to stop thinking of Bitcoin as a currency. It's not. Cryptocurrency is a misnomer. It's a commodity. Like gold. You barter it, you don't buy things with it.

>> No.194478
File: 119 KB, 627x479, 1382918648008.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
194478

>>194452
>multiple depressions

>greatest increase in human living standards in human history
>greatest increases in economic growth
>greatest increases in wage rates
>greatest decreases in prices

>HORRIBLE DEPRESSIONS!!!!!!!!

You just can't win can you.

Oh and those "recessions" were either overblown keynesian idiocy or were caused by the state in the first place.

Here's a list of every "recession" during that period and a detailed explanation for them all.

http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Panics

>> No.194485

>>184705
If everyone holds onto their money, it becomes worthless.

>> No.194490

>>194091
The supply of bitcoin will only continue to inflate while there are blocks to mine, though.

>> No.194494

>>184694

It is better because it forces everyone invest their savings and get the highest returns possible to hedge against inflation.

>> No.194551

>>194485
And if it's worthless then people will stop holding onto it. The problem solves itself

>> No.194571
File: 194 KB, 800x600, FREE MARKET SPACE.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
194571

Deflation fuck yeah

>> No.194582

>>194478
>greatest increase in human living standards in human history
>greatest increases in economic growth
>greatest increases in wage rates
>greatest decreases in prices

There's no reason whatsoever to believe any of these statistics are linked to what you want them to be linked to. A shitload of things changed in the 20th century, and most of them had nothing to do with how the economy is managed

>> No.194597

Well , what about this guys:
Let's pretend that 50% of the used bitcoins are going to a reserve or some random 4chan user trying to hold a couple bitcoins.
Then basically in the short term half of the coins are gone. And thereby demand will be higher than the supply most likely.
So won't short/medium term bitcoin hold for a bit?
ofc that shit is going to crash hard long term , investors will start selling all they have in couple years since they will get disappointed with the bitcoin performance

>> No.194599

>>194582
>There's no reason whatsoever to believe any of these statistics are linked to what you want them to be linked to

Keynesians believe that deflation will result in a deflationary spiral or whatever.
Not only did a DS not happen at all, but we had this ginormous level of economic growth.
It only happened when we were actually on a system of repetitively free banking and a gold and silver standard.

>A shitload of things changed in the 20th century
Which were the result of what I mentioned.

>how the economy is managed
How the economy is managed dictates these other things, without a solid economic foundation these other things are pretty much impossible.

We NEED sound money and a deflationary economy now so we can lift everyone out of poverty and have things like completely robotic vertical farms that get the price of food down to zero.

>> No.194606

I have a feeling that the effects on an economy that are generally attributed to deflation are more another case of regime uncertainty. If a statist economy is experiencing deflation and you don't know what the government is going to do wouldn't you hoard your money more than you might need to?

>> No.194658

>>194213

This is how the lender would make money.

e.g. 11 B is worth $1000 today, I lend you 11B,

In one year, the $1000 is worth 10B, but I want you to pay back 10.5B, which is worth $1050. I make a profit of $50. The interest in bitcoin was (10.5 - 11)/11 = -4.55%

>> No.194668

>>194551
thank god someone said it so simply,

I was starting to rage a little

>> No.194676 [DELETED] 

>>194658
this is what econ majors actually think


top kek

>> No.194680

>>194490
That's not quite how it works. So long as people are still using bitcoins new blocks will have to be mined, but there is a limit set for 21 million bitcoins to ever exist. After that number is reached miners will receive only transaction fees.

>> No.194682

>>194658
this is what econ majors actually beleive

top chuckle fratboy

>> No.196910

>>194680
I didn't mean blocks, sorry. I meant you can only have 21,000,000 sets of 25BTC mined.

>> No.197614

You can't lend a deflationary currency, or rather you'd be insane to lend a deflationary currency.

No lending? No modern economy.

Welcome to the dark ages. Fire up your cow and plough, we have seed to sew.

>> No.197622

>>194658

Are you fucking retarded?

You lent out 11BTC and in a year you get back 10.5BTC...

You'd have been better off not lending you complete retard. You'd be 0.5BTC better off.

Foreign currency mortgages have proven time and time again that deflation and lending don't mix.

>> No.197635

>>197614


Yeah...no.

Take a look at the bitcoinforum lending subsection. People seek 4 week loans with 5-10% interest due at completion. You don't seem to understand that deflation is EXACTLY the thing that keeps driving this product, as it's so difficult to obtain that the fiends chase it like crack rock.

>> No.197645
File: 136 KB, 233x262, baller.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
197645

the whole idea of bitcoin is ridiculous

think about it this way, you give the world 100 gold coins. eventually, one holder has it all. it cannot be never used as real currency because there are limited amount of them

that is not an issue with a dollar or euro because you simply print more money and give more debt

>> No.197767

>>197645

The fuck are you talking about nigger. The price of buttcoin is so high that theoretically it's impossible for anyone outside of possibly the sultan of brunei to own more than 2 percent of the stake, assuming he's out of his fucking mind and wants to dump $80 mill on a volatile crypto currency. Hell, even the winklevoss faggots only own a little less than 1%, and they got in way fucking early when it was dirt cheap.

Nice oversimplified encyclopedia dramatica example, though.

>> No.197784

>>197645
You're right, which is why modern money systems use inflationary currencies instead of deflationary. It's a lot easier to control.

>> No.197825

>>197767
Really? how much money you think central banks around the world are willing to create in order to get bitcoin off the market. FED already printed a couple of trillions, whats stopping them from printing another couple?

>> No.197871

>>197825

>implying the fed will waste time printing more monopoly money just to buy out buttcoins, when all the fudsters claim it's already a hopeless, sinking ship that won't self sustain and crumble under the effects of scamniggers and tyranny

Okay.

By the way, it appears you're already unaware that the fed holds a shitton of buttcoins from the silkroad seizure. Yeah...that totally crashed the market. Totally.

>> No.197932

>>197784
lol bitcoin is infinitely divisible, if higher precision is needed it would immediately be implemented

>> No.197958
File: 21 KB, 520x370, Wahlroos_25624a.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
197958

>>197767
i dont think you know what you are talking about.

there are currently 12 000 000 bitcoins circulating. that means even w. buffet could afford to buy 4x the amount of circulating coins lol. but i wasn't meaning that someone would be interested to buy the shit... nobody is that stupid.

again, deflating currency wont work at all. the whole idea is so wrong in so many ways.

>> No.197957

>>197635

>4 week loans

Proves absolutely fuck all. See how many people would be willing to take out a mortgage using Bitcoin.

Take out mortgage of 800BTC @ $600 per BTC.

Agree to pay it back in 35 years time.

Lets say a modest deflation of 3% per year for bitcoins.

By year 34 a bitcoin will be worth $1,661.

You will now have to pay back the 800 BTC which would now be worth $1,328,800.

Plus whatever interest rate the lender asked for.

The house cost you $480,000 worth of Bitcoins 35 years ago..

So yeah, lending/borrowing a deflationary currency makes no fucking economic sense. Only complete fucking retards would do it, so it doesn't surprise me that bitcoiners are doing it on some kind of small scale.

It would never work in reality and with business minded people.

>> No.197975

https://blockchain.info/charts/total-bitcoins

Looks really bad to me

>> No.197979

>>197957
account for inflation before taking out the loan then

>> No.197986

>>197957
*deflation

shit, it still makes no sense

>> No.197987

>>197932
>bitcoin is infinitely divisible
no it is not

>> No.197993
File: 8 KB, 282x179, retard.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
197993

>>197979
>>197986

>> No.197991

>>197932

but that's wrong

>> No.197999

Bitcoiners have an embarrassingly low understanding of basic economic principles.

>> No.198944

Out of curiosity, how many BTCs did Gox lose?

>> No.199868

>>197999
Implying most of them is not completely made up to make current economic models appear reasonable...

>> No.199879

>>197999

Well... I took econ 101 in college.

Anyway, I support the bitcoin mainly because I know how to make money off of it. Then again, I dont even try to fake I know shit about economics, but I do know how to make money off of the bitcoin market.

>> No.199949

>>198944
750 k approximately, they probably still have some of this amount but seems that even the recent machinations haven't saved them from "BTC bankruptcy"...

>> No.199957

>>199879
You probably know well enough. Your attitude is far better than of those claiming they know shit despite their utter lack of reflection of their knowledge.

>> No.200116
File: 6 KB, 80x80, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
200116

After reading this thread in its entirety I have come to the conclusion that bitcoin is flawless.

There is a lot of FUD about why deflation can't work, but it all ties to a different era and absolutely no technology.

Bitcoin, the invention, as an open public ledger fits quite reasonably at a $11 B market cap, and I would advise the fossils in this thread to stop looking at bitcoin as paper fiat 2.0

>bitcoin is a protocol and a technical achievement relative to the first internet

Also some anecdotal evidence regarding Warren Buffet hypothetically buying all the bitcoins...

>by the time he spent his first billion the price would skyrocket so fucking hard he would actually be bankrupting himself by pumping bitcoin without a long term strategy

>> No.200138

>>184629
Bitcoin becomes a commoditie now ;c

>> No.200170

So just how much will bitcoin deflate once it reaches it's maximum adoption levels anyway? If everyone looks after what they have then surely there should be no deflation

>> No.200476

>>188691

Pete you still don't get it

>> No.200901

>>199949
Did it get stolen or is it out of the economy?

>> No.200907

>>200116
OK, so what's your answer to the lending problem >>194658

>> No.200940

>>194551
People will sell once it starts to devalue but it will valuate perpetually. There's just no escape. It's perpetually lost and cannot be replaced.

>> No.200945

Deflation isn't an issue because exchanges essentially perform fractional reserve banking, basically printing coins and increasing the amount