71–80 of 405 posts
If a poor or middle class person sits on the cash he has, he's "saving". If a wealthy person sits on the cash he has, he's "hoarding".
Regardless of the topic at hand, let's be consistent enough in our terms to think and discuss the issues fairly and clearly without all the pejorative terms. If we have to resort to name-calling, we might not have a very good point.
If you want to understand just how difficult managing cryptographic material is for the technically illiterate, look no further than Xapo. It's not "Bitcoin" that Xapo stores, but private keys. In underground bunkers. This no doubt gives some people a warm fuzzy. But Bitcoin's history is littered with the wreckage of companies that took it on themselves to store private keys on behalf of others. I don't know when Xap…
The same is true of Coinbase. Somehow they've been fine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "Looks like in the future people hoard currency instead of spending and investing it then. That ought to be interesting." That sounds like the current to me. Too much is locked up (in too few hands) instead of doing what currency should do. That is, reduce the friction of trade (i.e., goods, skills, etc.) Currency is a lubricant. It's no surprise things are drying up.
What group is hoarding currency? With interest rates and the global economy roaring low we've had an explosion of investing in the past few years. I don't know of one group of people that would benefit from holding cash in the present environment
Look at Warren Buffer, one of the best investors in the world and he has hundred billion dollars just sitting around as he sees no good investment opportunities.
Apple & other companies are hoarding money as well, much faster than they can spend it or invest. Instead they are buying back there shares because what else to do with all that cash.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What do you mean, what inflation?
Bitcoin has no inflation, there are only a given number of total bitcoins in existence, which many (myself included) would argue makes it a poor currency.
I have always question who says this. What makes you think deflation would be bad?
My conspiracy is that governments require inflation to print themselves out of bad policy. Without government abilities to do this, the government performs poorly. Common citizens do not lose 2-4% of their income in inflation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who is hoarding currency on a notable scale? Why would they at the very least not invest in short-term bonds/mmfs
It used to be called "savings".
So now we have 0.01% interest 'savings' accounts! They are just as liquid as our checking accounts.
>the global currency of the future, that they need to buy some, and that he’s the man to safeguard it. Looks like in the future people hoard currency instead of spending and investing it then. That ought to be interesting. It also demonstrates the costs associated with non-reversible transactions, these vaults aren't storing gold ingots or priceless artifacts, just private keys. Banks around the world don't need to w…
That's because - and everyone but the uninformed or idealists know this - it's an investment product. It's simply not suitable as a currency, because one, inflation / instability, and two, it can only do what, a dozen transactions a second, if that? That's not nearly enough to become a viable currency.
Investment is where you find something producing value in the real world and then buy and hold a piece of that. You're expecting a long stream of returns from the value being produced. Speculation is where you are making a bet on price movements in a way where economic productivity is irrelevant.
When people buy and sell commodities and currencies, they're speculating. They don't care about utility. There's no economic value being created, so one's investment doesn't grow during the time you hold, say, gold. Instead, it's a zero-sum activity: considering all participants together, wins and losses are equal. (Well, technically, losses are larger than wins, because there are always overhead costs.)
Bitcoin is easy to mistake for an investment, because it's meant to be deflationary. (It was even easier to mistake for one during the period where it only went up.) But I don't think holding Bitcoin means you own a slice of an economically productive asset. I think it's just a bet that the commodity price will go up, in the same way you bet if you buy gold or euros.
[1] Warren Buffett has talked about this distinction a lot, over the years. E..g: http://www.businessinsider.com/warren-buffett-investors-vers...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's because - and everyone but the uninformed or idealists know this - it's an investment product. It's simply not suitable as a currency, because one, inflation / instability, and two, it can only do what, a dozen transactions a second, if that? That's not nearly enough to become a viable currency.
Speak for yourself. I use bitcoin all the time for payments. Peer to peer using coinbase(email) for free and instant to friends. Shift card for free and instant at merchants. Bitcoin is beyond blockchain, companies have built products to trade BTC instantly, free, using the infrastructure already existing. The transaction time 'problem' doesnt really exist if you are into crypto, you know how to use it. And I dont tr…
Fiat has ushered in an absolutely amazing period of global growth that has made us unbelievably wealthy. But there is inflation, so why not go with the thing that has no history?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> in the future people hoard currency People hoard(ed) currency in the past and present as well
Who is hoarding currency on a notable scale? Why would they at the very least not invest in short-term bonds/mmfs
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What group is hoarding currency? With interest rates and the global economy roaring low we've had an explosion of investing in the past few years. I don't know of one group of people that would benefit from holding cash in the present environment
All first world governments?