1. #2201
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Cæli View Post
    I am not denying the issues that inequality can cause. Is your point that a fixed supply currency system would increase poverty for some because some other very selfish people would hoard much more? If workers are paid in a currency that is never devalued, and they decide to save, then I don't see how those workers would get poorer. That's literally the only thing I'm interested in in this system : workers and poor people receiving money not having their potential savings devalued. And I doubt any rational person would object to that.
    The currency will always get devalued, and you specifically pointed to the process; decimalizing and using fractional amounts. Under a fixed-supply monetary system with a growing population and economy, there will be more and more demand for currency, meaning the value of that currency skyrockets, meaning that you will not be paid the same amount. Employers will immediately tie all future contracts to adjust automatically with deflation, so that when the value of a "coin" doubles, your salary drops by half. We already do the reverse with cost-of-living raises baked into contracts, and that's where doing so isn't in the financial interests of corporations; if we add that financial incentive (as you intentionally do), they'll have every reason to require such clauses.

    If your salary was 500 "coins" a month, just to make up a number for the sake of comparison, then when the value of that coin doubles, you're not suddenly taking home a coin worth twice as much, you're taking home half as many coins, for the same value representation. And unless you've been able to secure savings, you can't ever grow that income. And as has already been pointed out, half or more workers literally can't put away savings, so your system is doing nothing but benefiting the wealthy, who can afford to hoard coins.

    There is no practical way for the lower-income workers to benefit from this. At all. Because you're targeting a completely irrelevant factor and doing nothing about the actual cause of exploitation.

    The wage issue is a big problem and it has to be fixed, yes. And I'm not advocating for using bitcoin right now, I'm saying that if such a system is adopted and the currency is actually stable, people's savings wouldn't get devalued by some people creating more money.
    Which is not currently a problem. Savings in savings accounts generally roughly keep pace with inflation, and savings accounts aren't meant for long-term savings in the first place. CDs and such are better and guaranteed options. Inflation's generally around 2%, give or take, in a managed fiat-currency economy. At my current bank (RBC), CDs are about a 4% return rate. That requires you "lock in" your money for a set period, from 6 months to 5 years, and there's penalties for withdrawal, but it's a common form of retirement plan; you keep cycling CDs around and live off the interest. Workers are already able to save money and generate wealth over time by doing so.

    The problem is that so many workers don't have enough liquidity to save in the first place, and changing the currency will do absolutely fuck-all to help correct that, and I have no idea why you think it even could.

    Workers being able to save without having it devalued isn't "working against workers".
    You're arguing that we change the system so the wealthy's savings can balloon in value with no risk and no need for investment into the economy, without providing any means that would allow workers to tap into the same systems, because so many of those workers already can't afford to save and nothing about your proposal change that.

    So, regardless of your intent, what you're proposing is anti-worker. It's like throwing gasoline on a burning house and proclaiming that you're "just trying to put the fire out". Yeah, well, you're not.

    I'm not talking about salaries, I'm talking about savings.
    Which immediately means you're discarding the needs of the poorest half of workers, give or take. That's why I'm pointing out your position is dehumanizing and unfair to workers.

    In your example the life savings of the grandparents would go to their children, assuming they had anything to give to them. Inflation does have an impact on those savings. The children would receive less than they could have if there were no inflation of the money supply. And that stolen wealth hasn't been lost for everyone. To be clear when I mention inflation I mean "monetary inflation". The cantillon effect does support the fact that people close to money creation benefit at the expense of those who have their savings devalued. Which is the big problem I have with inflation.
    The Cantillon Effect does not support your entirely baseless claim that this leads to generational decline. Because, again, salaries are re-adjusted every few years. The Cantillon Effect covers how rapidly things diverge between such adjustments, but each salary renegotiation resets that clock, because the new salary is established based on current dollar values.

    And by the way, all in all it doesn't seem that your intentions are different than mine; it just seems we disagree on the cause (hence the solution). I'm still open to hearing about your solutions to fix the problems we're having.
    Nope. This is a thread about bitcoin, not about socialist market reform. We don't have to take your argument on faith until we have another argument to put it up against; your argument stands or fails on its own. And in this case, it fails. Completely. Because you have not tied any of these dots together.

    The Cantillon Effect can't lead to generational decline.
    Inflation doesn't harm savings, as savings have wealth-increasing measures designed specifically to offset inflation or overcome it. In the narrow example of "cash money stuffed into a mattress", it impacts that kind of savings, but it should, because it gets that cash back into the economy, where it can contribute to that economy, whereas stuffing it into a mattress excludes it from economic action. Savings accounts don't do the same thing because the bank is using those funds constantly.

    Your savings in the bank are insured in terms of supply, not in terms of value.
    If you mean that they're measured in dollars, that's how everything's measured. That's literally the point of a currency.

    Some unlucky people have their national currency devalued. If you're on the dollar and the dollar becomes worthless, you can be insured 250k, if you received that after your currency was devalued and the funds lost, who cares. States cannot guarantee the value of their currencies that's why some national currencies go to zero in terms of value.
    And? Same can happen to cryptocurrencies. Way more easily, because there's literally nothing backing those currencies.

    See above for the "fractionalized" subject.
    "A core function of fiat currency is not to allow those who "get dollars early" to be able to leverage those into near endless wealth simply by virtue of that money existing." > That's too bad because that's exactly what happens.
    It's also exactly how all cryptocurrencies work. Which you consistently ignore.


  2. #2202
    I unironically love that crypto regulations are coming NOW after a bunch of crypto exchanges turned out to be fraud. The crypto ppl cant hide now that we know their intentions

  3. #2203
    Quote Originally Posted by NED funded View Post
    I unironically love that crypto regulations are coming NOW after a bunch of crypto exchanges turned out to be fraud. The crypto ppl cant hide now that we know their intentions
    They just gonna monopolize who can scam. Example: GME stock where they froze the game when the house wasn't winning.

  4. #2204
    Quote Originally Posted by Cæli View Post
    To be honest I don't know what point you want to make. We're not talking about changing some exchange rates, we're talking about adding a decimal. Those who have 0.01 "unobtanium" still have that 0.01 after.
    I'll reiterate my point, which is a fact: there will be in the end a fixed supply of bitcoins. if you add a "decimal", or the ability to "divide" it into smaller units, there is no existing supply increased. 0.01 is always 0.01. otherwise if that was increasing the supply, that means you could have 21000001 bitcoins at some point. which is not the case.
    And if I really want to be precise, I can also say that currently you cannot add decimals to the base layer, because that would require a protocol update, but that is possible in theory if need be.
    Problem with this is when you add new people to that system, they will ALWAYS be at a disadvantage as they will never be able to earn the same amount or more then the people that were already in the system. That is one of the biggest problems with deflationary currencies. Instead of deflating the currency, you have to devalue property.

    Problem with deflating property is businesses will NEVER go for that as they still have to pay workers to do their jobs. Workers themselves will not work for less and less resources. Go up to the average worker and say "Instead of making 0.1 coin this year, you are going to make 0.08 coins next year.". See what a worker will say to you if you go try that.

    Go up to a homeowner and tell them that their house now is worth less than it was when they bought it. "Oh, you bought your house back 10 years ago for 3 BTC, well, it will now be worth 1.5 BTC".

    Funny thing is, while a few people will use it as a currency, the vast majority will never adopt it because they don't like to see themselves making LESS(and yes, it is less). When you add a decimal point, you are literally fractionalizing it to a lesser value.

    Again see above reply. You add zeros, 0.1 doesn't turn 0.01, that's not how bitcoin works if that's what you believed. 0.1 turns into 0.10, that's what it means to add a decimal. Nothing is diluted here. That includes the fruit of the labor of the workers.
    Stating 0.1 and stating 0.10 is the exact same thing. If someone new comes into the system, and you only have 0.1 BTC, are you going to pay them 0.1 BTC or less for work? What happens if someone else comes into the system? With a finite supply of something, the more people that are added to the economy, the smaller the value for each person there can be. Either the value of the currency has to decrease or the value of property has to decrease in any economic system. Traditional systems want currency to devalue as it is FAR easier to change how much currency in the system to adjust for prices of property then it is to adjust the prices of property the a currency that is fixed. Property values will always decrease in a fixed currency system.

    I am not denying the issues that inequality can cause. Is your point that a fixed supply currency system would increase poverty for some because some other very selfish people would hoard much more? If workers are paid in a currency that is never devalued, and they decide to save, then I don't see how those workers would get poorer. That's literally the only thing I'm interested in in this system : workers and poor people receiving money not having their potential savings devalued. And I doubt any rational person would object to that.

    I am not blaming people who struggle. I keep telling you that in our world, some people have benefited too much, which is why some other people are now struggling financially.

    The wage issue is a big problem and it has to be fixed, yes. And I'm not advocating for using bitcoin right now, I'm saying that if such a system is adopted and the currency is actually stable, people's savings wouldn't get devalued by some people creating more money.

    Workers being able to save without having it devalued isn't "working against workers".
    Problem is that it is working against workers as the moment they have to spend anything, they will NEVER earn back what they spent as they will always earn less in total currency in a fixed currency system.

    At the heart of it all is that virtually nobody is using BTC as a currency. And they never will. The reason why that is, and that goes for other people who promote BTC in this thread, is that they base the value of it in dollars. They only see it as an investment, not as a currency. CURRENCIES AREN'T AND NEVER WILL BE INVESTMENT TOOLS. Currencies are meant to make buying and selling of goods and services easier as it is easier to have a common thing instead of having to figure out what a service will cost someone is whatever property they have like under a bartering system. Look at when BTC dropped. A lot of those people who bought BTC were upset at it's value dropping. That is what people who invest in it. They only want to see the number go up so they can cash out.

    The moment a currency becomes an investment, it loses its ability to be used as a currency. Currencies have always been meant to be freely flowing and used to facilitate trade.

    People who have BTC think it cannot ever be worthless just need to look at all of the currencies that have been through the ages that were in fixed amounts that are basically worthless today. Just because something is finite doesn't mean it has any value. Tulip Mania comes to mind on this. Salt used to be what they paid ancient people in some societies with as payment for services.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by mbit2 View Post
    They just gonna monopolize who can scam. Example: GME stock where they froze the game when the house wasn't winning.
    No, it is because of the fact that people were being scammed. The people being scammed are the ones wanting the exchanges to be regulated. They want the ability to reclaim funds from a scammer which cannot happen at this moment. Why do you think that the ones who are running the exchanges are starting to get arrested?

  5. #2205
    The Unstoppable Force Belize's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Gen-OT College of Shitposting
    Posts
    21,922
    Quote Originally Posted by mbit2 View Post
    They just gonna monopolize who can scam. Example: GME stock where they froze the game when the house wasn't winning.
    Honestly, realizing that crypto is a scam, but getting upset that someone else is doing the scamming perfectly articulates crypto better than I ever could.

  6. #2206
    Quote Originally Posted by mbit2 View Post
    They just gonna monopolize who can scam. Example: GME stock where they froze the game when the house wasn't winning.
    I mean I genuinely believe in crypto as a tool to fight government overreach. For example like how the Canadian government froze the bank accounts of people they disagreed with a bogus emergency act. Its not that right now tho, its a tool for people to do fraud.

  7. #2207
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,909
    Quote Originally Posted by NED funded View Post
    I mean I genuinely believe in crypto as a tool to fight government overreach. For example like how the Canadian government froze the bank accounts of people they disagreed with a bogus emergency act.
    Right, you can shove that pro-terrorist horseshit back up where it came from. Literally the same level of intentionally malicious and dishonest garbage as people claiming January 6 was a "peaceful protest".


  8. #2208
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Right, you can shove that pro-terrorist horseshit back up where it came from. Literally the same level of intentionally malicious and dishonest garbage as people claiming January 6 was a "peaceful protest".
    Nah bro, jan 6 was an attempted coup. The truck protestors were idiots, but their protest was legitimate even if you think they are the second coming of Hitler or whatever. Blocking roads is not terrorism even if you think they are racist, fascist, etc.

    Banking is a basic necessity in our current society and people trying to weaponize it as a tool to punish those they disagree with or hold onto power in destroyed economies is inhumane. Canada, Argentina, Venezuela and many more cases are why I support crypto, it's a tool to fight back against injustice.

  9. #2209
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,909
    Quote Originally Posted by NED funded View Post
    Nah bro, jan 6 was an attempted coup. The truck protestors were idiots, but their protest was legitimate even if you think they are the second coming of Hitler or whatever.
    It categorically was not. It was a violent attack on the security of the capital. I live here. You have literally no idea what you're talking about, and you're acting as an apologist for terrorists; people who tried to seize the capital through physical force and issuing demands of the government to stop them, fundamentally blackmail.

    Blocking roads is not terrorism even if you think they are racist, fascist, etc.
    When you're doing so in the nation's capital to issue demands of the federal government, yeah, it is. The literal definition of terrorism.

    Banking is a basic necessity in our current society and people trying to weaponize it as a tool to punish those they disagree with or hold onto power in destroyed economies is inhumane. Canada, Argentina, Venezuela and many more cases are why I support crypto, it's a tool to fight back against injustice.
    Combined with your support for the trucker convoy, it's clear you don't care about "injustice" at all.

    Particularly as the only "protest" element to the Convoy was openly anti-vaxxer bullshit. Assholes who couldn't accept mask mandates because fuck you, and that's the end of their arguments.

    Plus, bringing it up with regards to Canada, whose banking system is one of the best-regulated in the world, is absolutely ridiculous.


  10. #2210
    Quote Originally Posted by NED funded View Post
    I mean I genuinely believe in crypto as a tool to fight government overreach. For example like how the Canadian government froze the bank accounts of people they disagreed with a bogus emergency act. Its not that right now tho, its a tool for people to do fraud.
    You can only have both or neither. If you allow free use then naturally scammers will flock. If you allow gov control for safety you get gov abusing their control when it suits them.
    Danger is the price of freedom.

  11. #2211
    Quote Originally Posted by mbit2 View Post
    You can only have both or neither. If you allow free use then naturally scammers will flock. If you allow gov control for safety you get gov abusing their control when it suits them.
    Danger is the price of freedom.
    And THIS is really what crypto is about - it's basically this nebulous thing that lets everyone believe it will solve whatever problem they care most about, while ignoring that it can't solve all those problems at once.

  12. #2212
    Quote Originally Posted by SpaghettiMonk View Post
    And THIS is really what crypto is about - it's basically this nebulous thing that lets everyone believe it will solve whatever problem they care most about, while ignoring that it can't solve all those problems at once.
    I think nebulous is only insofar true as public has as usual no clue so opportunists used the hype to shill their crappy products even if it wasn't really fitting. Its like "the cloud" was used to market any product. As usual nobody is telling them exactly what it is since people in the know are a minority.

    As for the former problem there is a simple solution: You want safety you pay an expert to do the dangerous job for you. People get electricians to switch light bulbs but think its smart to stick their hand into crypto without a clue. You can always diy but then you also carry the responsibility to know how.

  13. #2213
    Quote Originally Posted by NED funded View Post
    I mean I genuinely believe in crypto as a tool to fight government overreach. For example like how the Canadian government froze the bank accounts of people they disagreed with a bogus emergency act. Its not that right now tho, its a tool for people to do fraud.
    The very idea of crypto as an alternative monetary system doesn't make any sense and is inherently contradictory. To have a functioning currency system you need borrowing and lending to happen through banks. That means you need a place for people to put money where it can be lent out and used. This breaks the whole idea of crypto because you don't have access to the exact bitcoin that you deposit in an institution like this. You deposit a bitcoin, they lend it out, if you need it back they give you whatever one they have on hand - meaning you are utterly dependent on them, you don't keep the hash code for the coin you had.

    Crypto seems to rest on the idea that everyone just sits on their cash and doesn't lend it. If they do lend it, then the advantage of crypto - that only you have the hash code - is immediately lost, because you're giving up control of that hash code to whatever bank like institution you're depositing it in, or else you're lending directly to random people which is a whole other headache. And the whole economy runs on lending.

  14. #2214
    The Unstoppable Force Belize's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Gen-OT College of Shitposting
    Posts
    21,922
    In the face of SVB imploding and cryptobros gloating that their system wouldn't have this happen, regulators close one of Crypto's biggest lender, Signature Bank, while Silvergate announces liquidation of its assets.

    These were essentially the two biggest banks in Crypto. Womp womp.

  15. #2215
    Banned Strawberry's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Sweden/Yugoslavia
    Posts
    3,752
    Quote Originally Posted by Belize View Post
    In the face of SVB imploding and cryptobros gloating that their system wouldn't have this happen, regulators close one of Crypto's biggest lender, Signature Bank, while Silvergate announces liquidation of its assets.

    These were essentially the two biggest banks in Crypto. Womp womp.
    Meanwhile Bitcoin and Ethereum up 8.5% in the last 24h.

  16. #2216
    Immortal hellhamster's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Thessaloniki, Greece
    Posts
    7,031
    Quote Originally Posted by Belize View Post
    In the face of SVB imploding and cryptobros gloating that their system wouldn't have this happen, regulators close one of Crypto's biggest lender, Signature Bank, while Silvergate announces liquidation of its assets.

    These were essentially the two biggest banks in Crypto. Womp womp.
    Literally who?

    I only see investors losing trust in banks and parking money in crypto.

  17. #2217
    The Unstoppable Force Belize's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Gen-OT College of Shitposting
    Posts
    21,922
    Quote Originally Posted by hellhamster View Post
    Literally who?

    I only see investors losing trust in banks and parking money in crypto.
    Daily reminder that crypto startups need capital to get off the ground. Magic beans don't generate instant value out of thin air, despite all the wishful thinking.

    Just because *you* don't know who they are doesn't mean that they're nobodies. It just means you're on the other end of the magic bean scheme.

    Unless, of course, you're advocating for rich techbros to be the only ones to be able to afford to start up new crypto platforms, at which point lol.

  18. #2218
    Quote Originally Posted by Strawberry View Post
    Meanwhile Bitcoin and Ethereum up 8.5% in the last 24h.
    This is good.
    Federal Reserve will increase more interest rate to fight crypto.

    If crypto is dead, Federal Reserve will do QE again.
    The only reason Federal Reserve stops doing QE is because bitcoin will replace US dollar if QE lasts forever.
    Last edited by xenogear3; 2023-03-13 at 02:23 PM.

  19. #2219
    Immortal hellhamster's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Thessaloniki, Greece
    Posts
    7,031
    Quote Originally Posted by xenogear3 View Post
    This is good.
    Federal Reserve will increase more interest rate to fight crypto.

    If crypto is dead, Federal Reserve will do QE again.
    The only reason Federal Reserve stops doing QE is because bitcoin will replace US dollar if QE lasts forever.
    Wut? What does crypto have to do with QE?

  20. #2220
    I'm mystified how bitcoin still has value. I mean, you're betting that crypto becomes the currency solution of the future, which has all the obvious flaws already mentioned in the thread, but you're also betting that bitcoin is the crypto that's gonna win the coin wars.

    If it becomes obvious that crypto is better than fiat (which to me is incredibly unlikely) - it seems most obvious to me that big financial institutions will invent their own cryptocurrency and push that out - no way they will let bitcoin, and current bitcoin holders, win out in that scenario.

    It's obviously not hard to create one - there are 9,000 outstanding in this ridiculous industry - so why would anyone use a dinosaur like Bitcoin? In the unlikely event that crypto wins, it seems likely to me that Bitcoin is the AOL or Netscape than that it becomes Google.
    Last edited by SpaghettiMonk; 2023-03-14 at 09:32 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •