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

Texas moves to create gold-backed digital currency

kitco.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–106 of 106 posts

Re: Texas moves to create gold-backed digital currency

#101

Post by hakfoo »

lamp987 wrote: post #43
hakfoo wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect there are three flavours of gold bugs: 1) Wealthy + Paranoid + Stupid. They'd rather keep their money in sovereigns under their mattress, than put it into any sort of productive economic activity. On a long term, especially in the US, you could pretty much throw darts and build a portfolio that competes with, or beats, inflation. 2) Conspirational: "fiat currency is a grand scheme to undermine our savings f…

"fiat currency is a grand scheme to undermine our savings" imagine writing this as ironic mockery during an ongoing inflation crisis.

The operative portion was the other half of the sentence.

It's never a "they're targeting a number that they believe in good faith will maximize economic activity on a national level", it's always "devaluing my existing holdings gives $boogeyman_ethnic_or_political_group an advantage" like you're somehow prohibited from investing.

Re: Texas moves to create gold-backed digital currency

#102

Post by throw0101b »

bheadmaster wrote: post #70
throw0101b wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so that there's no way to actually save money in the long-term. Besides equities? Besides TIPS? * https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/tips.asp Do you literally keep bills under your mattress or buried in your backyard? There's your problem.

> Do you literally keep bills under your mattress or buried in your backyard? There's your problem. No, there's not my problem. The problem is that the government keeps printing money, so my bills under my mattress or buried in my backyard keep dropping in value. The fact that there are securities that are literally called "Inflation-Protected" as an antidote to that only serves as a proof of the original problem. >…

> The problem is that the government keeps printing money […]

Except that it doesn't. Money is created by private banks through credit (loan, mortgage) creation:

* https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/quarterly-bulletin/2014/q1/m...

* https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/explainers/how-is-money-crea...

> […] so my bills under my mattress or buried in my backyard keep dropping in value.

Yes, this is a feature: the discouragement of the non-productive uses of capital and hoarding à la Scrooge McDuck.

> No, you can invest money.

Most people actually save and do not invest:

* https://www.pragcap.com/saving-is-not-the-key-to-financial-s...

Re: Texas moves to create gold-backed digital currency

#103

Post by rayiner »

nobody9999 wrote: post #89
rayiner wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

>Why should we be forced in this country of 300 million people to agree on everything? It's more like 340,000,000 and no one is forcing anyone to agree about anything . There are many things about which I disagree with my neighbors/friends/family/local, state and Federal governments, but I feel no no need to justify such disagreements to them (or anyone else, for that matter), nor are their choices/ideas impinging on…

People have to agree on certain basic values to workable operate the kind of sweeping federal government we have.

Re: Texas moves to create gold-backed digital currency

#104

Post by vintagedave »

yardie wrote: post #36

In 2006/2007 I was paid for a project in e-gold[0]. Another currency backed by gold bullion. I never saw the gold, never touched it, but was assured it was there, really. The whole thing went tits up because it was a scam. Being in Texas and not Panama I guess this is slightly less scammy. But I suspect the people who want to hold gold will simply buy gold. And skip the questionably middleman. [0] https://en.wikipedi…

The Wikipedia article* makes it sound fairly legit, and that it collapsed because it didn't verify members well and so was used for illegal purposes. But not because it was a scam. It reads that it was widely used, and the article _implies_ it was genuinely backed by gold.

Do you have more insight here? I'd never heard of E-gold before today.

[*] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-gold

Re: Texas moves to create gold-backed digital currency

#105

Post by bheadmaster »

throw0101b wrote: post #102
bheadmaster wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you literally keep bills under your mattress or buried in your backyard? There's your problem. No, there's not my problem. The problem is that the government keeps printing money, so my bills under my mattress or buried in my backyard keep dropping in value. The fact that there are securities that are literally called "Inflation-Protected" as an antidote to that only serves as a proof of the original problem. >…

> The problem is that the government keeps printing money […] Except that it doesn't. Money is created by private banks through credit (loan, mortgage) creation: * https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/quarterly-bulletin/2014/q1/m... * https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/explainers/how-is-money-crea... > […] so my bills under my mattress or buried in my backyard keep dropping in value. Yes, this is a feature: the discouragemen…

> Yes, this is a feature: the discouragement of the non-productive uses of capital and hoarding à la Scrooge McDuck.

I sincerely doubt that "disouragement of the non-productive uses of capital" is the main reason for inflation. Linear tax on having money would do much better. Besides, except for a pathological example where scarcity of money causes deflation, why would it matter if someone is hoarding money?

If they're saving for something that costs e.g. 10 years wage, "hoarding" money is the only way they'd ever save that much. But with constant inflation, it's basically impossible - the only way to "save" money for something that expensive is to take a loan... Which again seems to lead back into banks' pockets. Who actually hoard money.

The game seems rigged, and all "explanations" for inflation just sound like bad lies given by Wall Street brokers high on coke.

Re: Texas moves to create gold-backed digital currency

#106

Post by nobody9999 »

rayiner wrote: post #103
nobody9999 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why should we be forced in this country of 300 million people to agree on everything? It's more like 340,000,000 and no one is forcing anyone to agree about anything . There are many things about which I disagree with my neighbors/friends/family/local, state and Federal governments, but I feel no no need to justify such disagreements to them (or anyone else, for that matter), nor are their choices/ideas impinging on…

People have to agree on certain basic values to workable operate the kind of sweeping federal government we have.

>People have to agree on certain basic values to workable operate the kind of sweeping federal government we have.

Sorry for the late reply.

Absolutely. Things like the rule of law (which is mostly the case in the US, with certain really frustrating exceptions -- we should all be treated equally under that law), free and fair elections (there are significant issues there -- especially with gerrymandering and the politicization of the officials who run elections -- e.g., state Secretaries of State) which, we mostly have.

I'd add well-regulated capitalism/market economy, which is something of an issue (the sewer of filthy lucre in our political system is the primary culprit in causing problems) here.

Freedom (although not unlimited, but pretty expansive) of expression and thought are also important.

Most everything else should be left to individuals and communities.

While the US system certainly has some significant issues, that's not because (IMNSHO) we (the collective 'we', in the vast majority) agree on the above.

The enormous amounts of money in our political system is the biggest issue, with gerrymandering and the (often codified into law in the several states) hegemony of the two-party system not far behind.

So no. Americans as a population are mostly in agreement about important things, making compromise possible. But the hegemony of the two-party system creates perverse incentives to demonize the other party and eschew cooperation for fear of alienating the constituencies the parties have riled up by "othering" their fellow Americans.

Publicly funded, non-partisan elections, along with regular geometric shapes for congressional districts would go a long way to fix those problems.

Post reply on HN