Live data from Hacker News

Bitcoin vs. Ben Bernanke

online.wsj.com

41–50 of 94 posts

Re: Bitcoin vs. Ben Bernanke

#41
post #36

I have yet to see it being pointed out that none of the encryption in use for these cryptocurrencies will necessarily remain extremely hard to break for long. A good question is: what if bitcoin or something alike does effectively gain traction and one day a math breakthrough (or a computational tech one) make the crypto weak? How much wealth will be destroyed then? Who would you turn to for help? Our system is not p…

Stealing is wealth transfer, not wealth destruction.

And it wouldn't be anonymous, so it could be investigated and relatiated.

The same argument applies to bank robberies.

Re: Bitcoin vs. Ben Bernanke

#42
post #36

I have yet to see it being pointed out that none of the encryption in use for these cryptocurrencies will necessarily remain extremely hard to break for long. A good question is: what if bitcoin or something alike does effectively gain traction and one day a math breakthrough (or a computational tech one) make the crypto weak? How much wealth will be destroyed then? Who would you turn to for help? Our system is not p…

Stealing is wealth transfer, not wealth destruction.

And it wouldn't be anonymous, so it could be investigated and relatiated.

The same argument applies to bank robberies.

Re: Bitcoin vs. Ben Bernanke

#43
post #36

I have yet to see it being pointed out that none of the encryption in use for these cryptocurrencies will necessarily remain extremely hard to break for long. A good question is: what if bitcoin or something alike does effectively gain traction and one day a math breakthrough (or a computational tech one) make the crypto weak? How much wealth will be destroyed then? Who would you turn to for help? Our system is not p…

Stealing is wealth transfer, not wealth destruction.

And it wouldn't be anonymous, so it could be investigated and relatiated.

The same argument applies to bank robberies.

Re: Bitcoin vs. Ben Bernanke

#44
post #40

The terrifying part of his job is that almost all of the current Bitcoin services now use the same software, so that "any change to the core code has potentially disastrous impact. If everybody rolls out a new version and there's some problem with it, the whole Bitcoin payment network could grind to a halt." This is the part that has always scared me.

This already happened in he 0.8 fork

I know, but it's not going to be as easy to fix if it happens on a massive scale, i.e. when everyone's using it.

Re: Bitcoin vs. Ben Bernanke

#45
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rant much? I wanted to actually learn something from your post but it reads like a madman wrote it. I own exactly zero bitcoins, but following the market since 2011 has proven that it is getting easier to use and more prevalent. People will be putting down bitcoin as a serious entity even after PayPal is accepting them.

Have you atudied economics? The OP reads like someone who has and is utterly incredulous at the statements being made by Bitcoin's proponents. In fairness, the gentleman interviewed in this article insisted it was all an experiment. But the WSJ editorial board has a long time habit of being very non-mainstream and almost Austrian with its economic views, so this interview was likely intended to play into a political…

I really don't get why people who call themselves 'mainstream' economists can't see or choose not to acknowledge the issues the Austrians bring up. It strikes me as quite odd. Not everything the Austrian school preaches is correct, but they do have some valid points that I would expect most smart people to understand.

To bring up just a few big ones:

Printing money and low interest rate policy of the Fed influences many things other than the simplistic lower interest rate=more spending=more growth formula commonly preached.

1) it hurts people with savings. A good example is all the retirees who have saved their whole life and now can't survive on the 1% returns their savings are generating. The Fed is supposedly helping people and business who want to borrow and can do so at low interest rates.. but that does not trickle back to pensioners who should be earning more on their capital if they were not competing with the Fed.

2) monetary expansion stimulates the economy unequally across industries and geographic regions. In the models of the academic economic departments, monetary expansion may apply equally to an economy as a whole.. In the real world short run it is a transfer of wealth from one group (wage earners, people who hold cash or low yield bonds) to another group (banks, government contractors, rich people with lots of land and stocks). Some people benefit from low interest rates and new money, but many people are hurt by those same policies.

There are quite a few other issues that Austrians seems to be correct on, but these seem to be two of the most obvious to me.

Re: Bitcoin vs. Ben Bernanke

#46
post #39
post #5

I'll admit that the WSJ here is not as laughably bad as some quotations from their infamous op-eds had led me to believe. Maybe I was too harsh with them. They seem to do the balance thing, or more correctly here, the common sense and economics thing, at least passably well. Either way, there are some real pieces of work here, misconceptions about economics that were dispelled before, again and again. You're going to…

WSJ is a mediocre paper. WSJ OpEd is editorially a separate paper, and famously insane.

famously insane according to who? The founding mantra of the editorial board:

"We are united by the mantra 'free markets and free people', the principles, if you will, marked in the watershed year of 1776 by Thomas Jefferson's Declaration of Independence and Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations. So over the past century and into the next, the Journal stands for free trade and sound money; against confiscatory taxation and the ukases of kings and other collectivists; and for individual autonomy against dictators, bullies and even the tempers of momentary majorities. If these principles sound unexceptionable in theory, applying them to current issues is often unfashionable and controversial."

What is insane about advocating free markets and sound money?

Re: Bitcoin vs. Ben Bernanke

#47
post #5

I'll admit that the WSJ here is not as laughably bad as some quotations from their infamous op-eds had led me to believe. Maybe I was too harsh with them. They seem to do the balance thing, or more correctly here, the common sense and economics thing, at least passably well. Either way, there are some real pieces of work here, misconceptions about economics that were dispelled before, again and again. You're going to…

Regarding your point about the lending vs borrowing: The use of the word "encouraged" makes sense to me. If people are "encouraged" to lend vs borrow, that means they will have more desire to lend vs borrow. This has an important effect on the supply vs. demand equation. Supply of loans, ie. people willing to borrow, goes down and the demand, ie. people willing to pay money now for interest later, goes up, causing pr…

A deflationary currency doesn't encourage people to lend, it encourages them to save.

If currency is deflating at a low, constant rate (say, 2-3%, comparable to the normal rate of inflation), then the interest rate -- in real terms -- must be strictly higher than this. A 0% loan with 2% deflation the equivalent of a 2% real interest rate. But no one will ever lend money in this situation. You take on risk, but have no reward. So the rate of deflation is the minimum real interest rate of any loan in a deflationary currency.

In an inflationary currency, people will lend out money at even a negative real rate of interest and effectively lose money on an investment because the alternative is losing even more money by holding cash. If inflation is 2%, you will consider lending out money at 1% interest (if that is your only choice) because getting 99 cents back on your dollar by investing is better than getting 98 cents back on your dollar by holding cash.

Hence, an inflationary currency encourages both lending and borrowing: lenders lose less real money than holding cash, borrowers pay back less real money than they borrow. A deflationary currency encourages neither: lenders would prefer to hold cash, because it's safer and has decent returns, and borrowers have even higher real interest rates.

Re: Bitcoin vs. Ben Bernanke

#48
post #46
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WSJ is a mediocre paper. WSJ OpEd is editorially a separate paper, and famously insane.

famously insane according to who? The founding mantra of the editorial board: "We are united by the mantra 'free markets and free people', the principles, if you will, marked in the watershed year of 1776 by Thomas Jefferson's Declaration of Independence and Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations. So over the past century and into the next, the Journal stands for free trade and sound money; against confiscatory taxation and…

Despite their professed editorial line, in practice they're much more conservative than libertarian. For example, they are strong supporters of the War on Terror, both in terms of an interventionist foreign policy and ramping up domestic security measures. They also lean towards some support for Christian and social conservatism, though that part is weaker.

On politics, they are pretty openly partisan in a pro-GOP direction. Take a look at the recent headlines of their Political Diary, for example: http://online.wsj.com/public/page/political-diary.html

More problematically from my perspective, their opinion pages are notoriously loose with facts. It's one thing to argue a position, and another to just produce propaganda. For example, here is an exceedingly unsatisfactory treatment of what the Bible says about capitalism and prosperity (an interesting and somewhat complex issue, because the Bible has many things to say about it, which this piece ignores): http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020380650457717...

Re: Bitcoin vs. Ben Bernanke

#49

Interesting point: "And for those who wish to avoid both inflation and deflation, what about a digital currency programmed to maintain stable prices, avoiding mischief by central bankers as well as the possibility of deflation?" My gut is that this is not possible. Enforcing stable prices requires constant data about price levels, and with decentralized markets there doesn't seem to be an accurate way to get that dat…

I wonder if that part is crowdsourceable, somehow... basically, tie the transaction volume/demand/etc. to its worth.

Re: Bitcoin vs. Ben Bernanke

#50
post #36

I have yet to see it being pointed out that none of the encryption in use for these cryptocurrencies will necessarily remain extremely hard to break for long. A good question is: what if bitcoin or something alike does effectively gain traction and one day a math breakthrough (or a computational tech one) make the crypto weak? How much wealth will be destroyed then? Who would you turn to for help? Our system is not p…

Bitcoin will be the least of one's worries should strong crypto, in general, get broken through some computing breakthrough.
Post reply on HN