maxdancona
 
  1  
Sat 13 Apr, 2013 09:34 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I am curious if you think the purpose of bitcoin... to have a currency that isn't controlled by governments... is a valid goal.

Privacy is the most appealing part of bitcoin to me. That I can spend money in an untraceable way is a good thing to me.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sat 13 Apr, 2013 10:08 pm
@maxdancona,
If privacy is your "thing" over and beyond how the bitcoin currency can fluctuate without any rhyme nor reason, that's your bag. Many have invested in gold, but that's not my bag. Who's right and who's wrong is in the eye of the beholder.
BillRM
 
  -1  
Sat 13 Apr, 2013 10:37 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Let see one nice thing is that there is no way of ever having more then 22 millions bits coins so no one can turn on the printing presses and devalue bitcoins.

As far as it large fluctuations in value that tend to be normal for any new currency and will decrease in time however as you can not increased the currency supply beyond the build in limit of 22 millions coins it value will tend to go up not down over time.

There is a need and a desire for what bitcoin can offer over normal governments control world currencies so I do not see it going away.

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sat 13 Apr, 2013 10:53 pm
@BillRM,
Time will be the judge.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  2  
Sun 14 Apr, 2013 04:29 am
@gollum,
I find the whole idea of BitCoin very interesting, and I can't wait to see how it all plays out.

I love the way BitCoins are generated (by mathematical solutions), and the "mining" process that has arisen to find them.
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Sun 14 Apr, 2013 09:25 am
@rosborne979,
Mathematical solutions will invariably miss out on some important variables.
That's because economics is an art, and not science. Nobody in this world knows how the world's economy will play out just a few years ahead of us, and none knows what will happen in the long term. Nobody.

Economics is always in flux; it's impossible to control what happens.
BillRM
 
  1  
Sun 14 Apr, 2013 11:08 am
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
hat's because economics is an art, and not science. Nobody in this world knows how the world's economy will play out just a few years ahead of us, and none knows what will happen in the long term. Nobody.


Sorry he was not talking about mathematical modeling of the economic but how bitcoins are produce using mathematics functions.

Not one and the same thing.
gollum
 
  1  
Sun 14 Apr, 2013 11:09 am
@BillRM,
When the U.S. was only a few years old, coins were minted and had value based upon their silver content.

I believe paper money was issued by individual banks. Each such dollar was a liability of its issuing bank.
BillRM
 
  0  
Sun 14 Apr, 2013 12:25 pm
@gollum,

Quote:
When the U.S. was only a few years old, coins were minted and had value based upon their silver content.


At least during the revolution and for some time afterward the congress paid the military and it suppliers with paper money/IOU and the term not worth a Continental came into being.

For years after the war speculators would offer a few percents of their face value in hard money that was either gold coins or back by gold.

Congress then make this continental money good at face value but it was not for the most part the people who earn it with their blood that in the end benefit from that occurring.

See below.

Quote:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_American_currency

After the American Revolutionary War began in 1775, the Continental Congress began issuing paper money known as Continental currency, or Continentals. Continental currency was denominated in dollars from 1/6 of a dollar to $80, including many odd denominations in between. During the Revolution, Congress issued $241,552,780 in Continental currency.[9]

Continental currency depreciated badly during the war, giving rise to the famous phrase "not worth a continental".[10] A primary problem was that monetary policy was not coordinated between Congress and the states, which continued to issue bills of credit.[11] "Some think that the rebel bills depreciated because people lost confidence in them or because they were not backed by tangible assets," writes financial historian Robert E. Wright. "Not so. There were simply too many of them."[12] Congress and the states lacked the will or the means to retire the bills from circulation through taxation or the sale of bonds.[13]

Another problem was that the British successfully waged economic warfare by counterfeiting Continentals on a large scale. Benjamin Franklin later wrote:

The artists they employed performed so well that immense quantities of these counterfeits which issued from the British government in New York, were circulated among the inhabitants of all the states, before the fraud was detected. This operated significantly in depreciating the whole mass....[14]

By the end of 1778, Continentals retained from 1/5 to 1/7 of their face value. By 1780, the bills were worth 1/40th of face value. Congress attempted to reform the currency by removing the old bills from circulation and issuing new ones, without success. By May 1781, Continentals had become so worthless that they ceased to circulate as money. Franklin noted that the depreciation of the currency had, in effect, acted as a tax to pay for the war.[15] In the 1790s, after the ratification of the United States Constitution, Continentals could be exchanged for treasury bonds at 1% of face value.[16]

After the collapse of Continental currency, Congress appointed Robert Morris to be Superintendent of Finance of the United States. Morris advocated the creation of the first financial institution chartered by the United States, the Bank of North America, in 1782. The bank was funded in part by specie loaned to the United States by France. Morris helped finance the final stages of the war by issuing notes in his name, backed by his own money. The Bank of North America also issued notes convertible into specie.[17]

The painful experience of the runaway inflation and collapse of the Continental dollar prompted[citation needed] the delegates to the Constitutional Convention to include the gold and silver clause into the United States Constitution so that the individual states could not issue bills of credit, or "make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts."[18] This restriction of bills of credit was extended to the Federal Government, as the power to "emit bills" from the Articles of Confederation was abolished, leaving Congress with the power "to borrow money on credit."[19][20]
See also



0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  3  
Sun 14 Apr, 2013 01:52 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:
Mathematical solutions will invariably miss out on some important variables. That's because economics is an art, and not science. Nobody in this world knows how the world's economy will play out just a few years ahead of us, and none knows what will happen in the long term.
I wasn't talking about the mathematics of economics. It's clear from your posts that you don't know anything about BitCoin. And I hate to say it, but it's hard to take the rest of what you say seriously when you speak so authoritatively about something it's clear you don't understand.

BitCoin is one of the more interesting currencies to come along in a long time. My crystal ball is no better than anyone else's when it comes to predicting financial markets, but I do know something interesting when I see it. And if you're really interested in economics, then I think you're missing out if you don't learn about BitCoin more thoroughly before dismissing it's possible future.
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Sun 14 Apr, 2013 02:57 pm
@rosborne979,
Disagree; currency has everything to do with economics. Like 100%.
That's Econ 101.

FYI, facts about economics and what you "like" has no bearing on the world of currencies. Bitcoins are strictly speculation and nothing else. Whether you like it or not doesn't make Bitcoins any more or less valuable; it's the marketplace that determines value.

That's also Econ 101.
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Sun 14 Apr, 2013 03:30 pm
@rosborne979,
Oh, BTW, I never asked anyone on a2k to take me "seriously."
If you disagree with what I post, say what the disagreement is, and stop your ad hominems. It only makes your case look weak.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Sun 14 Apr, 2013 04:18 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Disagree; currency has everything to do with economics. Like 100%.
That's Econ 101.


You are not connecting to what Roeborne979 is statings for some strange reason and I can only suggest you re-read the posts in question as your comments does not related to those postings or to any position taken in those postings.
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Sun 14 Apr, 2013 04:30 pm
@BillRM,
If I'm not "connecting," please cut and paste and show me?

I'll repeat,
Quote:
If you disagree with what I post, say what the disagreement is, and stop your ad hominems. It only makes your case look weak.


The best you can do is give me a thumb's down? LOL You're a ****'g loser.
BillRM
 
  0  
Sun 14 Apr, 2013 05:48 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
The best you can do is give me a thumb's down? LOL You're a ****'g loser.


??????????????????????????????????????????????????
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sun 14 Apr, 2013 06:02 pm
@BillRM,
What; can't answer my question? You are a loser. What is ??????? is supposed to mean?
BillRM
 
  1  
Sun 14 Apr, 2013 06:39 pm
@cicerone imposter,
The ?????? down mean a numbers of things such as why the hell do you think I gave you a thumb down and why the hell are you getting so bend out of shape.

You are also not anywhere near on target in your replies to the subjects/comments of the last few of rosborne posts and once more you might wish to re-read his posts instead of assuming he is taking positions that I do not see him taking.
cicerone imposter
 
  -1  
Sun 14 Apr, 2013 07:00 pm
@BillRM,
I don't need to reread anything! CLUE; you don't control me.
You still haven't explained why my opinions don't apply.

You are clueless, and don't even know what you are talking about. If you do, you'll be able to challenge what I said by explaining why. You can't.
BillRM
 
  1  
Sun 14 Apr, 2013 07:20 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
You are clueless, and don't even know what you are talking about. If you do, you'll be able to challenge what I said by explaining why. You can't.


Shaking my head as I had not taken any positions on how valid your positions happen to be just that those positions seems to have zero to do with the subjects/contents of Rosborne postings you had been replying to

That is why, I suggested you re-read his postings as your replies to his postings once more seems to not relate to his comments in his postings that you are replying to.

At this point I had done my best to explain the problem to you as I has seen it and if you are happy with being off target with your reply comments so be it.

cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Sun 14 Apr, 2013 08:35 pm
@BillRM,
Show me how my opinions have zero connection to the subject?

You made the claim, now show me?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Bitcoin will ban - Discussion by jamil10
Bitcoin- What Is It? How do You Use It? - Question by Phoenix32890
Bitcoin - Question by gollum
pc storage because of btc - Question by martinopsal1
Physical Bitcoin - Question by gollum
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Bitcoin
  3. » Page 2
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/17/2019 at 01:02:40