If your argument is that Bitcoin is used more yes that is true and Bitcoin as a medium of transnational transactions might find a place but using Bitcoin as a currency especially a reserve currency is a problem. Yes gold is an asset and was used as currency for much of history but it was dropped because using something like precious metals made it difficult for reserve currencies to deal with economic downturns. Specifically deflation which was a major problem during the Great Depression. It's precisely that Bitcoin isn't controlled by central banks why it is unlikely that it will be widely adopted as a currency. Also even if it is adopted the speculative swings in it are very problematic. Speculation in currency remains a major problem for many Asian currencies and again because Bitcoin isn't controlled by regulatory authorities means there is little to be done from speculative swings.
First to note, gold has primarily been used as a reserve currency for much of its history. It has always been to difficult to use it as a general use circulated currency for reasons that have been talked about frequently. But that is here nor there. Fiat is a tool to hold wealth. If one does not have any wealth (which is the majority of the global population), then fiat tends to keep them poor due to QE and other abuse by central banks. For example, in the last 6 months, having a mortgage (debt) was one of the best assets to have on your book. If you're a renter, you're fked, even if true minimum wage is between $10.00 on the low and $15.00 on the high. The US has plundered the global wealth to keep the wealth concentrated primarily in this country, which then flows straight to the elusive .1%ers.... all thanks to the massive USD debt flooding all markets. The world absolutely needs a reserve solution that can not be easily manipulated by a few. I do not believe Bitcoin will become become the global currency. I do not participate in these conversations as they tend to lack basic understanding (myself included) of all things macro. Yes, it will absolutely become a reserve asset of some form. One that anyone can hold that has an internet connection. As Bitcoin absorbs more productivity (whether this is from the insane power usage, costly mining equipment, investors and institutions pouring more investments resources into BTC instead of other assets), the volatility will settle. Bitcoin will absorb productivity from those who are victim to the highest volatility; For example countries like Venezuela and many third world nations. If you can't see the basic value of the Lightning Network (Layer 2) to a gifted programmer in Venezuela or N. Korea who can't receive remittances from wealthy countries for their work, then you are likely not able to see the true value in a completely decentralized network. This allows the software developer to compete in a global economy that would instead get whittled away by greedy third parties, transferring this productivity from overabundant nations and corporations flowing it into communities that are otherwise lacking. A traditional binary 1/0 TCP/IP TX has absolutely no value until its compiled into a meaningful result. In other words, I can steal productivity by spamming 1/0's across the TCP/IP network; Constantly spam via emails, text, phone calls and DDOS attacks. With Layer 3 Bitcoin (theoretical idea), I can TX using milli satoshi across a new protocol using personal decentralized nodes. Instead of transferring what we view as 1/0's, you transmit using millisats across the two parties. The constant flow of bits is the actual communication layer. For example, A telephone conversation you have is actually being encoded and decoded using millisats. If someone wants to call you up and waste your time trying to sell you an extended car warranty, then you select the option for the parent (caller/initiate of communication) to forfeit all of the millibits that get transferred during the call. If someone really wants to reach you, then they raise the ante until you choose to accept. What I am trying to convey is the ideas of this tech are near endless. THe lightening idea 5 years ago was a mockery to the casual observer, now all the payment channels are getting in on the game. Limiting Bitcoin to just a currency is akin to saying the use of smoke signals with morris code is high tech communication. Entropy has been leading us to a global economy since the birth of humanity. Its only a matter of time before we are govern by ideas instead of boundaries.
Agree. I don't think people should be so tied up in thinking of it as currency. That's not even close to being the right mental model here. I can't get my head around what is right though but I feel if we just think in terms of currency, it will be quite limited with the established successful governments fearful of it taking hold if they view it as potentially replacing the current systems and nothing else.
The republicans put a bunch of money on the credit card and now they don't want to pay the bill. The Republicans are not allowing government to intervene and save a failing social economic structure in a time when it is appropriate to do so. In other words, Republicans suck, also Manchin and Sinema
Just so I am understanding This is about removing the governmental middleman in the commerce system ? I have concerns about unregulated or "self regulated" systems I live in the ideal that it will eventually be regulated by and unregulated entity . . .aka the monopoly/oligarchy at the top will regulate it and answer to no one but themselves . . .and there is little to no change possibilities there I don't know the whole of everything but I am trying to understand. I been thinking of basically getting about 100$ worth and see what it do . . . .LOL Rocket River
Hope it is true So Many americans consider themselves temporarily embarrassed millionaires. The "IF I WAS IN THAT BRACKET I WOULD NOT WANT TO PAY" Mentality is so prevalent among people who will NEVER EVER EVER be in that bracket They will stomp for it at their peril Rocket River
Bitcoiners come in many different flavors. Yes, there are those who would like to completely remove government, however that seems very unpractical. There is no one person or groups that run and/or own bitcoin. Manipulating Bitcoin is very difficult and usually not very profitable. When we see these big swings, its usually due to the network shaking out bad actors...those who over leverage themselves trying to game the system. There are no circuit breakers to protect the greedy. I learned a long time ago trying to trade bitcoin is very tedious. It rewards those who hold and punishes those who think they can make a buck. If you want to gamble and speculate, go play with the shitcoins. Personally I have no issue with those who gamble and speculate. I have yet to find someone who has nailed what Bitcoin really is. If anything, Bitcoin is the Honeybadger. If you dont like it, dont buy it. Bitcoin DGAF.
If you aren't willing to hold it for three years or more, don't bother. Otherwise you will just panic sell. People get rich by doing uncommon things for uncommonly long periods of time. Like buying and holding bitcoin. Conviction to hold comes from knowledge and understanding (and price appreciation of course). If you want knowledge, DM me.
I will admit you appear to know much more about this than I ma and am not familiar with a lot of what you mention here. From what I can make out it does sound like there are some very interesting possibilities to using Bitcoin as an international transfer medium. Even with all of that there still are basic problems with the use of something like Bitcoin as a currency especially a reserve currency. The basic problem here is that the appeal of Bitcoin as something beyond the control of central banks is precisely why it would be problematic. Through much of both US and World economic history both the inflexibility of currencies to meet crisis has led to problems such as deflation. As noted this isn't problem any of us have seen in our lifetimes but was one of the problems that made the Depression worse. Also currency speculation still reeks havoc on many countries even to this day. A lot of this problems were solved with fiat currency. Understand there are many problems with fiat currencies but switching to something that while isn't under the control of central banks but is backed by nothing more than speculation presents many other problems. I will back off being so dismissive of Bitcoin but I don't think it can or should be so revolutionary as to replace fiat currencies.
Yeah, so disunifying to actually call out the Repubs for their 40 year at least tactic of running up huge deficits when they have control of the federal government through huge tax cuts for the wealthy and huge non competitive "defense" spending and then suddenly so concerned with budget deficits when the Democrats regain power.
I dont recall if I mentioned this to you, but Bitcoiners comes a very broad gradient. @Commodore got me hooked on a Bitcoin clubhouse chat. Sometimes there are some great mind-provoking conversations. Other times, the toxicity is unbearable. I personally do not think fiat can or should be 100% replaced. That said, I do believe a single decentralized global currency for EVERYONE to use is a gift to humanity. Fiat currency's common theme *seems* to keep the wealth tied to those who own and maintain it; In other words, it does very little to promote growth in 3rd world countries or those drowning in poverty. Personally I believe the ability for everyone to have access to wealth equality is more important than say, Elon Musk, becoming the wealthiest guy in the world. I have a strong distain for grifters like Warren Buffet. Also note reserve currency and currency can switch depending on context. For some nations, USD is a currency (USA & El Salvador). For other nations, USD is used as a reserve currency. More and more countries are using USD as a common currency instead of a reserve currency. This will not be a viable solution over the long term. Currencies need to be regional as does economies. NAFTA in spirit was a good idea but we can obviously see it was abused.
This will be settled. . . not unlike the Scarlett Johanson and Disney thing It was never in doubt . .. only question of the numbers Rocket River
Again the problem is just viewing fiat currency as a way of keeping wealth. It certainly does help people with established wealth do so but it also helps economies deal with crisis. Just in the last 20 years we've had several crisis where we needed to expand the money supply such as in 2009 and just recently during the COVID-19 crisis. The problem with a non fiat currency is the inflexibility of the money supply and in deflationary crisis it ends up being those who have the least that get hurt more because there is no way of getting money to them. This is a situation that is happening in Afghanistan now. Because of the failure of the banking and international investment system there they are running out of money so even though people there have goods and resources that could be bought and sold most Afghanis have no access to currency to do so. I can see that argument that yes Bitcoin could be used to get the Afghanis resources the problem is that to use Bitcoin would take much greater infrastructure than they have so Bitcoins are practically useless to most Afghanis even accepting they have inherent value. On the other hand flying in USD can be used right away and in many disasters that aid often takes the form of literally bringing in hard cash. This has been done even here in the US following a disaster. Also regarding the idea that Bitcoin will mean that the few can't control wealth I have very hard time buying that. Consider that when gold was the primary exchange of wealth there was plenty of disparity of wealth. The idea behind Bitcoin is that everyone has access to it beyond Central and large multinational banks. That might be true but that doesn't mean that those with already can't just buy up a lot of Bitcoin and hoard that wealth. Also given how much resources it takes to mine Bitcoin it already favors parties who have a lot of resources to begin with. It is very hard to imagine most Afghanis and Haitians being able to mine Bitcoins to create wealth. In fact Bitcoin being international and beyond the control of central banks mean that small countries not only will lose control of their money supply but will have little control over the movement of goods and services of value through their countries through the tools of taxations and tariffs. Those "grifters" that you worry about seem most likely to benefit from widespread use of Bitcoin. As we see with the Pandora papers the ultra wealthy benefit the most from the easy movement of capital. From what you've described here it sounds like Bitcoin makes that movement much easier.
