41–50 of 124 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ...no sense at all to use Bitcoins to purchase legal items in the vast majority of countries I'm speechless.
Bitcoins can't be used to extinguish the tax obligations that arise from legal sales.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wrote a 30+ words comment, but to make it shorter: * The nature of BitCoin could make it from an asset worth 350 USD to 0 USD overnight. * Gold has been there for centuries. I won't even comment on the asteroid thing.
> I won't even comment on the asteroid thing. Because you can't refute it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but no one will spend a non-inflationary currency when he can spend an inflationary one.
It is really a sad state of things that people misunderstand deflation. They have this idea that no one will spend, but it doesn't stand any scrutiny, really. Please read these articles, we made a real effort here to explain why deflation wouldn't be a bad thing: http://blog.oleganza.com/post/66215430631/deflationary-spira... http://snitko.ru/blog/the-beauty-of-deflation.html
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wrote a 30+ words comment, but to make it shorter: * The nature of BitCoin could make it from an asset worth 350 USD to 0 USD overnight. * Gold has been there for centuries. I won't even comment on the asteroid thing.
> I won't even comment on the asteroid thing. Because you can't refute it?
It's a complete irrelevance unless you're specifically talking about 100+ years in the future.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but no one will spend a non-inflationary currency when he can spend an inflationary one.
Yes, and that's why I agree that bitcoin is "digital gold", rather than the Holy Grail of ecommerce. But that doesn't make peercoin a good idea. If I want to spend I have credit card and a paypal account, I don't need whatevercoin to help me with that.
My initial point stands though: As a currency BTC is/has failed. As an asset might work, but I don't know for how long.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is really a sad state of things that people misunderstand deflation. They have this idea that no one will spend, but it doesn't stand any scrutiny, really. Please read these articles, we made a real effort here to explain why deflation wouldn't be a bad thing: http://blog.oleganza.com/post/66215430631/deflationary-spira... http://snitko.ru/blog/the-beauty-of-deflation.html
And did you convince anyone?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> considering there is no sense at all to use Bitcoins to purchase legal items in the vast majority of countries. This is quite asinine. I assume you've never tried to purchase an item in country A from merchant A' accepting currency A'', while you are in country B using bank B' with an account denominated in B''. The hurdles, generally, are numerous and diverse. Any lack of hurdles is quite exceptional, and complete…
Right, because rather than copping the automatic forex charge that most cards do for you, it is easier to open an account on coinbase, make a bank transfer that converts your USD into bitcoin (at a frozen rate mind you, that could either double or halve in value in a matter of weeks), and then transact in bitcoin? Not sure I'm following. All of the rampant downvoting on this thread and blinkered discussion regarding…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And did you convince anyone?
It is up to you to decide whether you are convinced or not. If you have any logical counter-arguments, then great, I would be willing to listen to them, discuss them and change my mind about deflation. However, simply saying "it doesn't work this way" and "it's more complicated than that" is not a way to argue and seek truth.
The primary service provided by a currency is facilitating the exchange of goods. Being inflationary is imperative for the population to use it. It is true that currencies are forced upon population by governments (or any form of governance) and it's true that anyone would rather be holding an asset that will not lose value over time compared to one that will.
Inflation is an indirect motive to spend money today and not hoard.
Now the above is the generally accepted truth in micro-economics and social theory, so I'm not feeling any heat proving the dominant view on this. It's how our world uses currencies actually.
All in all, to me makes sense: a currency SHOULD lose a small (1% or 0.5%) amount of purchasing power over time, to boost commerce/spending and so on. It's an indirect way but works. Until we find another way, I think we are stuck with it.
Bitcoin in my view, will never be a largely used currency because it does not have this imperative characteristic any currency should have. So people would rather spend dollars (as a user already said about PPCoin for example..) or any other inflationary currency instead of spending an asset.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gold is inflationary. There's infinite amount of that on asteroids and other planets. Bitcoin is totally an asset. It will probably have far wider usage than currency.
I wrote a 30+ words comment, but to make it shorter: * The nature of BitCoin could make it from an asset worth 350 USD to 0 USD overnight. * Gold has been there for centuries. I won't even comment on the asteroid thing.
But like startup customers, bitcoin users exist and eventually the new product takes over.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is up to you to decide whether you are convinced or not. If you have any logical counter-arguments, then great, I would be willing to listen to them, discuss them and change my mind about deflation. However, simply saying "it doesn't work this way" and "it's more complicated than that" is not a way to argue and seek truth.
My argument is about currencies not inflation or deflation. The primary service provided by a currency is facilitating the exchange of goods. Being inflationary is imperative for the population to use it. It is true that currencies are forced upon population by governments (or any form of governance) and it's true that anyone would rather be holding an asset that will not lose value over time compared to one that wil…