|
Post by Gerard on Dec 1, 2013 2:06:21 GMT -5
"Bitcoin is a decentralized crypto-currency that puts the power in the hands of the people and takes it away from the banks and government."
Can it be true? Am I one of the people? (I do have hands, if that helps.) How would I use it to buy a computer or a week-end in Pyong-Yang? Should there be an "s" after "government"?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2013 4:27:41 GMT -5
Good morning, Sydney! I trust that all is well with you this weekend. ' The Sunday Times' leads this December with some editorial comment on Bitcoin: gone, a fortune in pints, drugs and space trips. ' The Sunday Times' thunders that despite having few real-world uses, the online currency has soared in value. Bad news for the British man who threw away an old hard drive containing £5m-worth! But good news for Sydney, who might, some day, be able to spend a bitcoin on a weekend in Pyong-Yang, by when there may ultimately be no 's' after government! ' The Financial Times' also leads this weekend with some editorial comment on banking on Bitcoin: virtual currencies could rival banknotes, but not bankers. If a small city state had adopted Bitcoin as its national currency, it would now be in the grip of deflation as foreign speculators siphoned away its supply of the virtual currency. Money would be scarce, and prices would fall dramatically. Authorities might try to lift prices but they would lack one of their most powerful tools. Central bankers can create money at will, by printing notes or creating deposits. Bitcoin is based on digital tokens, which are generated at an unalterable rate by cryptographic algorithms running on the computers of volunteers, making it impossible to match supply to demand. This is an improbable fantasy. But Bitcoin’s undulating value makes it unsuitable for all but the most limited purposes. Speculators are the keenest acquirers of the currency. For some, it is a way of stashing wealth where authorities cannot find it. Others want to make purchases without leaving an obvious trace. Silk Road, the online contraband emporium that was closed by authorities last month, was one of the few businesses to insist on payment in Bitcoin. But many prices were pegged to the dollar; the virtual money served merely as a way of disguising the flow of hard currency. The salmon pink newspaper concludes thus: I propose some toast: to the first, the second and ' The Third! Three cheers from kleines c, Big C and the legendary bb (Sunday morning breakfast coffee)!
|
|
|
Post by Gerard on Dec 5, 2013 4:46:58 GMT -5
. . . Speculators are the keenest acquirers of the currency. . . . An interesting note here: markmaunder.com/2013/12/05/banks-declaring-war-on-bitcoin/But since he - Mr. Maunder - "plays guitar in a rock band" (whatever that might be) his advice is certainly not to be trusted. May I suggest that not virtual money but virtual virtual money could be the way?
|
|
|
Post by ahinton on Dec 5, 2013 10:07:21 GMT -5
. . . Speculators are the keenest acquirers of the currency. . . . An interesting note here: markmaunder.com/2013/12/05/banks-declaring-war-on-bitcoin/But since he - Mr. Maunder - "plays guitar in a rock band" (whatever that might be) his advice is certainly not to be trusted. May I suggest that not virtual money but virtual virtual money could be the way? You may indeed, just as the likelihood that anyone in authority in such matters will take the slightest notice of such suggestions in the foreseeable future may be accordingly dismissed out of hand.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2013 11:47:33 GMT -5
On the contrary, ahinton, all money is virtual money anyway, in the specific sense that it is only worth what it can be exchanged for! For example, £100,000 (a hundred thousand British pounds sterling) is barely enough to buy a property in London these days, and in the most sought after parts of London, you can add a nought or three! Of course, if you choose to borrow that money from a bank in the form of a mortgage, the odds are that most of it will be created for the purpose of the transaction. If you exchange such virtual money for something, then that is, in a sense, what the money is worth. So virtual money has always been the way of the world! Only what you have exchanged it for is real, although how real is a good question? I do not ultimately know! According to the former Governor of the Bank of England, Lord King of Lothbury, it is not so much the love of money that is the root of all evil. BBC - A History of the World in 100 objects - Ming banknoteSo money is virtual, ahinton, because we have to trust the issuer of the money that it is worth something! Without trust, our virtual money is worthless!
|
|
|
Post by ahinton on Dec 5, 2013 13:56:57 GMT -5
On the contrary, ahinton, all money is virtual money anyway, in the specific sense that it is only worth what it can be exchanged for! I would not say that this is "on the contrary" but it is true insofar as it goes; the same, however, can be said for anything and everything for the purchase or hire of which money is paid. I recall, for example, in Sotheby's in London, a cluthc of leters from Sibleius fetched little more than £100 but a scrap of paper with Schubert's handwriting on it sold for in excess of £60K. For example, £100,000 (a hundred thousand British pounds sterling) is barely enough to buy a property in London these days In the more expensive parts of that city, you'd be lucky to get the front steps and entrance door for that! If you exchange such virtual money for something, then that is, in a sense, what the money is worth. So virtual money has always been the way of the world! Only what you have exchanged it for is real, although how real is a good question? I do not ultimately know! Bitcoin is thus no different - it's just another form of currency. I'm not convinced, however, that "virtual" is a term that I'd use for any of it, even though, as you say, everything for which it's used is only worth the amount of it that each individual is prepared to shell out for it. According to the former Governor of the Bank of England, Lord King of Lothbury, it is not so much the love of money that is the root of all evil. A much earlier one is credited with the phrase "never apologise - never explain". Of course you couldn't (at least if you had any sense) - but why might you expect or be expected to? Evil may be claimed as the root of all money; the flowers can be nice, though!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2013 14:25:36 GMT -5
If I may address your final question directly, ahinton: " ... but why might you expect or be expected to?" Expediency! I expect and am expected to trust (anyone's) money in order to trade. If I do not, a transaction is most unlikely to take place.
|
|