El Salvador abandons Bitcoin as legal tender

Post by llamaimperative » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 12:52 AM UTC

floydnoel wrote: post #870

adammarples wrote: post #805

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't quite the same. Money that is deflating becomes literally more functionally useful the longer you hold it. Computers stay as functionally useful as you hold them and arguably degrade relative to the software you need to run on them. In your analogy you should be concerned with whether I want to sell my computer (analogous to spending my money). If a computer truly did become more functional with passing ti…

you're technically correct, yes it isn't exactly the same. good job! for an example that is exactly the same, look at the general monetary deflation in the united states during the majority of the 19th century. I know most people won't, so I used a similar example that everyone is familiar with.

Post by floydnoel » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 1:32 AM UTC

llamaimperative wrote: post #871

floydnoel wrote: post #870

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you're technically correct, yes it isn't exactly the same. good job! for an example that is exactly the same, look at the general monetary deflation in the united states during the majority of the 19th century. I know most people won't, so I used a similar example that everyone is familiar with.

Their argument isn't that it's not "exactly the same" (they were being polite), it's that it's functionally the opposite. And when you imagine a variation in which it's functionally the same , your argument clearly falls apart. As far as deflation in the 1800s, are you referring to in 1818 after a credit collapse cratered England's economy and then spread to the US and put it into a recession; or maybe the Panic of 1…

Post by kdmtctl » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 1:45 AM UTC

rsynnott wrote: post #706

redundantly wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

gestures at all of the billionaires

Billionaires do not literally have big rooms full of money, like a common Disney duck-plutocrat. In general, no-one much is holding large amounts of _cash_/cash-equivalent, except to some extent for the likes of insurance companies, who are obliged to do it for risk management reasons.

Post by wqaatwt » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 3:17 AM UTC

loophole27 wrote: post #749

wqaatwt wrote: post #733

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why getting richer and richer becomes something bad when we go crypto? Is that sarcasm? It discourages any type of economic activity. Why would someone invest into or try to start a business when you can become richer by just sitting on your money pile with no risk. Artificially constricting the supply of money in a non static economy is a bad idea. Like the gold standard just much worse.

Because starting a business might still lead to higher returns for you than hoping that your money will be worth more. One thing i’ve always wondered: If something like Bitcoin was the only currency, then it would be like a direct mapping of 21 Million Bitcoin all global economic activity and goods and services. In that case, shouldn’t its price be relatively stable, and might actually even go down sometimes? Like in…

Post by taurknaut » Wed, Feb 05, 2025, 3:36 AM UTC

olalonde wrote: post #743

taurknaut wrote: post #737

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who are they possible gonna offload that bitcoin on to? Their neighbor? That doesn't strike me as a socially acceptable thing to do.

There's a deep and liquid market for Bitcoin - El Salvador isn't even a major holder in the grand scheme of things. I don't see what's socially unacceptable about selling Bitcoin to a willing buyer; it's simply a transaction between two parties, no different from trading foreign currency like USD. There's also no indication that they plan to spend or trade their Bitcoin anytime soon.