Any sense getting into forex because the end of fiat is on the horizon?

piezoe said:
Then why bother to begin?, at least until you decide where to. If my statements, not arguments, just statements, are as badly flawed as you say, then everyone will see it and there is no need for you to go out of your way to explain the obvious. :D
More...
You have a point, many aren't able to see it. So lets just start with the first premise that money is just a ledger. Its only use is to keep track of what we all owe to each other. Do you agree with this?
 
NoahA said:
Its interesting to me how so many people can see the current problems in the world, but not understand how the way that money is done today is where the problem is.

I kind of wonder how much the government has to steal from you, how badly hurt you need to be by inflation, how much of your freedom you will give to the government, before you realize that maybe the problem is the government control over money.

I also notice that nobody is willing to explain how money isn't just a ledger. They have no problem saying how horrible Bitcoin is, but can't come up with a definition of money and can't disprove how Bitcoin isn't a better form of it.
More...

Democracy is an illusion as long as the government controls the money. Look at some of the sentences for petty tax evasion...it's ridiculous. In my city they can actually auction your house off for delinquent property tax or even an unpaid city utility bill...and at no burden to get anywhere near market value. The whole system is corrupt and we are pawns. I mean they don't auction your car off for unpaid parking tickets but they think it's justified to auction off somebody's home.
 
Last edited:
piezoe said:
Bitcoin, which began as a tool to carry out money transactions that were difficult if not impossible to trace has morphed into a gambling medium. There is nothing behind it other than supply and demand. And the demand now comes mostly from perceived riches. If the perception fades, so too will demand. It is that simple. You have Bingo and you have Bitcoin; the risk to reward ratio is similar for both.

You can buy things with both bitcoin and sovereign, fiat money, and you can gamble with both. But these are about the only similarities. Fiat money trades relative to other fiat money, according to supply and demand, but it doesn't float entirely free on open markets because issuing governments may intervene in markets to stabilize their fiat issue as they deem desirable.

Fiat money is here to stay as it is by far the most practical and flexible of all sovereign money's yet devised. Basing a sovereign money on a rare commodity is a ridiculous idea bound to fail. The only reason it worked in the past is that people* hadn't realized how utterly ridiculous commodity based money really is. Once the absurdity and non-sustainability of commodity-based money was recognized it quickly disappeared in favor of much more sensible fiat money.

Fiat money ultimately takes its value from the issuer's authority to tax**, the issuing nation's productivity, the amount of fiat in circulation and the public's perception of these factors. Reserve, fiat money also derives stability from large pools of reserve-currency-denominated assets in the hands of non-issuers.

These highly desirable features are absent from crypto currencies. This is the reason that any nation foolish enough to adopt a crypto currency as a national unit of account will very quickly revert back to the use of either their own or another nations sovereign fiat currency. No nation, however, will adopt another nation's fiat currency unless circumstances force it to do so. ***
_____________________
*Some of course did recognize the absurdity of basing a national currency on a particular commodity, but their arguments were unpersuasive until crisis, easily enough predicted, forced recognition.
**This is the critical factor that must be present, because no country that issues its own fiat currency will accept any other currency in payment of taxes.
***In the EU monetary Union we have an example of what were independent countries voluntarily giving up absolute sovereignty over the currency they use in favor of joint sovereignty among several States and without adopting a universal Euro Bond. (Germany has consistently opposed the Euro bond.) Thus the States of the Euro monetary union have accepted an incomplete union by voluntarily ceding control of their currency to a collective without a common bond. This has caused no end of difficulties for the union, and may ultimately cause its dissolution. Many of these problems can be traced back to long held anachronistic beliefs about money that no longer make sense.
More...


Tons wrong here, but let’s just start with the premise that everyone is served well by their fiat currency. This is objectively not true at all. In fact, it’s the opposite.

Sure people in the US and the UK and to a lesser extent Europe and Japan are probably perfectly fine with their fiat currencies, and aren’t the wiser. But what about all the people, and it’s not a trivial amount of them, that live in a place where their fiat currency is deppreciating rapidly. I’m talking triple digits or high double digits per year. They literally are getting poorer by the second by just holding their national currency. now think about all the people, many of which are the same people, that live in dictatorships what countries with capital controls, and other unpleasant things. Many of these countries have little semblance of property rights and the government can just take your property at will. bitcoin essentially solves all of those problems for these people, and in one fell swoop, and that’s not even it’s only used case. You gotta open your eyes a little more.
 
GlobalMacro90 said:
Tons wrong here, but let’s just start with the premise that everyone is served well by their fiat currency. This is objectively not true at all. In fact, it’s the opposite.

Sure people in the US and the UK and to a lesser extent Europe and Japan are probably perfectly fine with their fiat currencies, and aren’t the wiser. But what about all the people, and it’s not a trivial amount of them, that live in a place where their fiat currency is deppreciating rapidly. I’m talking triple digits or high double digits per year. They literally are getting poorer by the second by just holding their national currency. now think about all the people, many of which are the same people, that live in dictatorships what countries with capital controls, and other unpleasant things. Many of these countries have little semblance of property rights and the government can just take your property at will. bitcoin essentially solves all of those problems for these people, and in one fell swoop, and that’s not even it’s only used case. You gotta open your eyes a little more.
More...
Well then you have an easy answer for these "problem countries" Just encourage them to go ahead and adopt Bitcoin as their national currency. Problem solved. Your a genius! :rolleyes:
 
piezoe said:
Well then you have an easy answer for these "problem countries" Just encourage them to go ahead and adopt Bitcoin as their national currency. Problem solved. Your a genius! :rolleyes:
More...

I am not saying it should be their national currency. In fact, I really don’t view bitcoin as much of a currency at all at this point maybe one day.

I am saying it’s at least an option for them to opt out when they have no other option otherwise. Do you deny this?
 
GlobalMacro90 said:
I am not saying it should be their national currency. In fact, I really don’t view bitcoin as much of a currency at all at this point maybe one day.

I am saying it’s at least an option for them to opt out when they have no other option otherwise. Do you deny this?
More...
You'll be pleased to know that Professor Randall Wray* agrees with you and goes a bit further beyond your "not much of a currency" all the way to "not a currency at all". That's because all true currencies, including fiat, are liabilities of the issuer. (I.O.U.s in other words).

See Wray's comments here:


The best option for countries experiencing too much inflation would certainly not be to try and adopt bitcoin as the country's unit of account.
________________________
*Wray, a Minsky protege, is a well known economist. His 1998 monograph entitled "Understanding Modern Money" along with Warren Mosler's 1995 "Soft Currency Economics" are considered seminal works in what is now being referred to as Modern Money Theory.
 
piezoe said:
Bitcoin, which began as a tool to carry out money transactions that were difficult if not impossible to trace has morphed into a gambling medium. There is nothing behind it other than supply and demand. And the demand now comes mostly from perceived riches. If the perception fades, so too will demand. It is that simple. You have Bingo and you have Bitcoin; the risk to reward ratio is similar for both.

You can buy things with both bitcoin and sovereign, fiat money, and you can gamble with both. But these are about the only similarities. Fiat money trades relative to other fiat money, according to supply and demand, but it doesn't float entirely free on open markets because issuing governments may intervene in markets to stabilize their fiat issue as they deem desirable.

Fiat money is here to stay as it is by far the most practical and flexible of all sovereign money's yet devised. Basing a sovereign money on a rare commodity is a ridiculous idea bound to fail. The only reason it worked in the past is that people* hadn't realized how utterly ridiculous commodity based money really is. Once the absurdity and non-sustainability of commodity-based money was recognized it quickly disappeared in favor of much more sensible fiat money.

Fiat money ultimately takes its value from the issuer's authority to tax**, the issuing nation's productivity, the amount of fiat in circulation and the public's perception of these factors. Reserve, fiat money also derives stability from large pools of reserve-currency-denominated assets in the hands of non-issuers.

These highly desirable features are absent from crypto currencies. This is the reason that any nation foolish enough to adopt a crypto currency as a national unit of account will very quickly revert back to the use of either their own or another nations sovereign fiat currency. No nation, however, will adopt another nation's fiat currency unless circumstances force it to do so. ***
_____________________
*Some of course did recognize the absurdity of basing a national currency on a particular commodity, but their arguments were unpersuasive until crisis, easily enough predicted, forced recognition.
**This is the critical factor that must be present, because no country that issues its own fiat currency will accept any other currency in payment of taxes.
***In the EU monetary Union we have an example of what were independent countries voluntarily giving up absolute sovereignty over the currency they use in favor of joint sovereignty among several States and without adopting a universal Euro Bond. (Germany has consistently opposed the Euro bond.) Thus the States of the Euro monetary union have accepted an incomplete union by voluntarily ceding control of their currency to a collective without a common bond. This has caused no end of difficulties for the union, and may ultimately cause its dissolution. Many of these problems can be traced back to long held anachronistic beliefs about money that no longer make sense.
More...

Taking Lindy Effect into consideration, how long will crypto have to thrive before you change your opinion to -> it is more than likely here to stay?
 
piezoe said:
You'll be pleased to know that Professor Randall Wray* agrees with you and goes a bit further beyond your "not much of a currency" all the way to "not a currency at all". That's because all true currencies, including fiat, are liabilities of the issuer. (I.O.U.s in other words).

See Wray's comments here:


The best option for countries experiencing too much inflation would certainly not be to try and adopt bitcoin as the country's unit of account.
________________________
*Wray, a Minsky protege, is a well known economist. His 1998 monograph entitled "Understanding Modern Money" along with Warren Mosler's 1995 "Soft Currency Economics" are considered seminal works in what is now being referred to as Modern Money Theory.
More...

so some MMT guy also doesn’t think bitcoin should be a national currency at this point is your life, just like I said? Cool
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top