Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin Is a ‘Ponzi Game’

blogs.wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 103 posts

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin Is a ‘Ponzi Game’

#81

Post by joepie91_ »

Aqueous wrote: post #73
pessimizer wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>that said roubini is completely wrong about btc, just like krugman, and both need to change their thinking about what constitutes a currency. Care to explain why, or is this just your self-affirmation mantra?

No need to be snarky. BitCoin is clearly already being used as a currency - it is being used in exchange for goods and services as a form of liquidity. This means it is a store of value, it is a medium of exchange, and while it isn't yet a unit of account - as others have said here, this seems to just be a matter of adoption. Of course things aare priced in dollar when the dollar remains the world reserve currency. T…

> At the very least the definition of currency ought to change to something like: "A currency possesses at least 3 out of 5 of these qualities.

Actually, if you look at the definition of "currency" from various sources, you'll come across stuff like this:

"1. Money in any form when in actual use as a medium of exchange, especially circulating paper money."

(http://www.thefreedictionary.com/currency)

... and for "money":

"1. A medium that can be exchanged for goods and services and is used as a measure of their values on the market, including among its forms a commodity such as gold, an officially issued coin or note, or a deposit in a checking account or other readily liquefiable account."

(http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Money)

The problem doesn't seem to be that the definition is incorrect; the problem seems to be that people assume their own definition based on what they're used to, rather than adhering to something you'd find in a dictionary - commonly the motivation appears to be using "it's not a currency" as a (fallacious) reason to express their dislike of something like Bitcoin.

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin Is a ‘Ponzi Game’

#82

Post by shawabawa3 »

alextgordon wrote: post #29
pkrumins wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will be worth nothing.

Nothing? I'm prepared to buy as many bitcoins as I can @ $1.

Sure, that's because currently they're worth ~$600.

I'm a big fan of bitcoin, but even I can see that they could potentially become worthless. However, the odds of that are incredibly small (it would need either a breakthrough in cryptography or a critical bug to be discovered)

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin Is a ‘Ponzi Game’

#83

Post by joepie91_ »

Aqueous wrote: post #77
joepie91_ wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "at times like this i wish the supporters of bitcoin hadn't wedded themselves so thoroughly to libertarian ideology." "Bitcoin supporters" are not a homogenous group.

Exactly, as evidenced by individuals such as myself. But there is a hardcore contingent of libertarians who are turning this into a crusade against govt regulation, and I, as a BitCoin supporter myself, do not want to be painted by that brush. It makes it easier to attack politically, when we should be discussing BitCoin with technological concerns and on its technological merits so that people aren't blinded by poli…

Then a good start would probably be to not generalize "Bitcoin supporters" yourself :)

On a more serious note, there might be a group of 'supporters' who are 'libertarians', but the reality is that their existence or notoriety really don't matter all that much.

If somebody seeks to generalize to discredit Bitcoin, then they will do so anyway - whether it's one libertarian or a million, and whether they're 'hardcore' or hardly noticeable.

As long as these people do not try to take an "official spokesperson" type of position with their personal ideology, they can be safely ignored if you do not agree with their point of view.

That's the beautiful thing about Bitcoin: it exists, whether you want it or not... and what somebody elses political views are does not change whether it exists or how it works :)

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin Is a ‘Ponzi Game’

#84

Post by hnnewguy »

grej wrote: post #15

And in other news, global debt now exceeds $100 Trillion dollars - up 40% over the last 7 years: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-09/global-debt-exceeds... . Which is the bigger Ponzi?

>And in other news, global debt now exceeds $100 Trillion dollars

So, what are global assets worth, then? Why only talk about one side of the ledger? Debt doesn't exist in a vacuum.

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin Is a ‘Ponzi Game’

#85

Post by JohnTHaller »

splintercell wrote: post #79
baudehlo wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

| It's false that bitcoin isn't a means of payment. People DO use it as payment. But places that accept bitcoin aren't holding on to it. They transfer immediately to local currency (because their suppliers can't be paid in bitcoin). So currently* bitcoin is more a means of money transfer than it is a currency in itself. * This might eventually change if suppliers are willing to accept bitcoin too.

> They transfer immediately to local currency (because their suppliers can't be paid in bitcoin). That is correct, but the question which arises, why are companies introducing this level of complexity for no reason? Why are people hell bent on paying for goods through bitcoins? Yes its true that currently its a means of money transfer but there is no reason why companies won't just start holding bitcoins. There is no…

Well, except for that whole thing about there being no secure place to store bitcoins as they come in. You can store them with a third party, but that often ends badly (Flexcoin, Mt Gox, Poloniex, etc). You can store them yourself, but having your money be stolen by a simple server breach is not an attractive prospect for a company, whether startup or established. It wouldn't be quite so bad if there were any regulation or legal structure or any way to get your bitcoins back when they are stolen, but there isn't.

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin Is a ‘Ponzi Game’

#86

Post by hnnewguy »

shawabawa3 wrote: post #66
skywhopper wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ponzi's not really the right word for either thing. The huge growth of debt is a sign that inflation has been too low for too long in too many places. As long as the ECB and the Fed treat 2% as scary-high inflation, paying back debt becomes far more difficult. To start solving the debt problem, the central banks should start targetting 4-5% inflation for a decade or so, and allow it to go a little above the target, r…

> To start solving the debt problem, the central banks should start targetting 4-5% inflation for a decade or so, Wouldn't that just cause lenders to increase their interest rates? > Deflationary regimes favor hoarding, make it impossible to invest, Most sound investments yield returns way above inflation, and they would also yield returns way above deflation > and ultimately benefit only the wealthy Unlike the curre…

>Wouldn't that just cause lenders to increase their interest rates?

Yes it would. Only unexpected inflation will affect debt repayment rates (in theory).

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin Is a ‘Ponzi Game’

#87

Post by rglullis »

omegaham wrote: post #54

One problem that I think is salient about Bitcoin is that it's just not that useful . It's supposed to be a currency, but no one's actually using it for currency. They're just gambling on it, hoping to take advantage of other people's mistakes to make their own money. It's a zero-sum game, and it's destructive. People are just playing around with the electronic version of Monopoly money. The driving force behind curr…

Whenever I see comments like yours, I remember the story about the Microsoft execs that thought that "They can't make money with Internet search. Once people find they want on the directories like Yahoo, they will just bookmark the pages they are interested."

For fuck's sake: yes, the United States has a stable government and can guarantee the relative stability of the USD. But the world is not just the US.

We keep talking about how technology makes us more mobile, or digital nomads. I lived in 3 different continents in the past 5 years. My assets are not tied to Bitcoin, but the best way I found to transfer money between countries was by using BTC as an intermediary.

What do you think it's likely to happen faster: to have a monetary/transaction system that is more efficient than governments, or to have governments globally becoming stable? The Euro has been stable in terms of prices, but it has not shown yet that it is resilient enough. Who can be sure that Greece will still be using the euro 3 years from now? 5 years from now? What happens when Germany gets tired of bailing the fat cats on PIIGS?

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin Is a ‘Ponzi Game’

#88

Post by joepie91_ »

baudehlo wrote: post #70
vijayboyapati wrote: post #42

- It's false that bitcoin isn't a means of payment. People DO use it as payment. - It's false that it's not a medium of savings. It has reservation demand which is the only reason it has a price. It does not matter that it has "no assets in it", whatever that confused statement means. The dollar also no longer has any asset backing. The medium of savings role exists while people perceive there is value in holding a m…

| It's false that bitcoin isn't a means of payment. People DO use it as payment. But places that accept bitcoin aren't holding on to it. They transfer immediately to local currency (because their suppliers can't be paid in bitcoin). So currently* bitcoin is more a means of money transfer than it is a currency in itself. * This might eventually change if suppliers are willing to accept bitcoin too.

Many exchange directly to local currency. Not all do.

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin Is a ‘Ponzi Game’

#89

Post by Aqueous »

joepie91_ wrote: post #83
Aqueous wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, as evidenced by individuals such as myself. But there is a hardcore contingent of libertarians who are turning this into a crusade against govt regulation, and I, as a BitCoin supporter myself, do not want to be painted by that brush. It makes it easier to attack politically, when we should be discussing BitCoin with technological concerns and on its technological merits so that people aren't blinded by poli…

Then a good start would probably be to not generalize "Bitcoin supporters" yourself :) On a more serious note, there might be a group of 'supporters' who are 'libertarians', but the reality is that their existence or notoriety really don't matter all that much. If somebody seeks to generalize to discredit Bitcoin, then they will do so anyway - whether it's one libertarian or a million, and whether they're 'hardcore'…

I guess the problem is I seem to be seriously outnumbered by the libertarian contingent, who seem to be the most vocal, outspoken about it. If I knew of more "liberal-tarian" supporters of BitCoin I would be more hesitant to generalize.

It is true that BitCoin can survive on its technological underpinnings alone. But I think we should change the way we are conversing about it so that we don't immediately make enemies of a large group that has an ideological stake in the govt being the only authority for any and all currency.

I think this becomes a real danger when we begin to legislate on something. The nature of politics is that it frequently conceals the truth. Otherwise intelligent people are completely unable to see the best qualities of something if they feel it goes against their political ideology.

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin Is a ‘Ponzi Game’

#90

Post by yummyfajitas »

craigyk wrote: post #26
yummyfajitas wrote: post #21

Roubini isn't laying out the full argument. Bitcoin has low value as a means of exchange currently , but that may change in the future. If speculators are correct that it may go up in the future, it is in their best interest to bid the price up now and collect money in the future. That would make BTC not a speculative bubble, but merely an asset that speculators have properly valued. If you want to argue BTC is or is…

who cares about your fancy pants arguments when it doesn't even pass the smell test? It has a lot of strikes against it: 1) deflationary 2) slow 3) energy hungry

Sorry that Macro 101 is "fancy pants". You do realize that something failing the "smell test" is just a reason to investigate further, not a reason to go with one's gut feelings over rational reasoning, right?
Post reply on HN