BitCoin

Quote: Boney526

I would go into why that description is wrong, but I'll just leave it alone..

No doubt. There's a lot of that in this thread. A lot
of finger pointing and no explanations. I understand..

Forbes agrees with me:

'Bitcoins Are Digital Collectibles, Not Real Money'

http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoodhill/2013/04/11/bitcoins-are-digital-collectibles-not-real-money/

I don't think you actually understand why it is people cite things.

Quote: EvenBob

Louis Woodhill agrees with me:

'Bitcoins Are Digital Collectibles, Not Real Money'

http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoodhill/2013/04/11/bitcoins-are-digital-collectibles-not-real-money/

FYP

Recognize that people who are knowledgeable on these subjects disagree, just as with many other subjects like this.

But if you want to make a claim and IF your goal is to have a discussion about it - then give solid reasoning, and don't just link articles without explaining your opinion.

If your goal is just to post for posting sake, then fine.

Quote: 24Bingo

I don't think you actually understand why it is people cite things.

I cite things because they bolster my point.
Why do you cite things?

MtGox is down again, $98 was the last price.

I cite things to acknowledge that the ideas I cite, which must be defended on their own merits, are not my own. Sometimes the defense of the ideas is implied, if the matter is sufficiently objective and the author of sufficient standing, but that's separate from the primary purpose, just like a casino's functions of providing a venue and fading bets are two functions even when performed by the same action.

In short, to think citations exist to bolster you is exactly backwards: they exist to tether you.

Quote: 24Bingo

In short, to think citations exist to bolster you is exactly backwards: they exist to tether you.

They tether you, maybe, not me. I have an opinion
and search for others to bolster that opinion. If you
get tethered to the opinions of others, that's your
problem, don't thrust it on me.

Quote: EvenBob

Forbes agrees with me:

'Bitcoins Are Digital Collectibles, Not Real Money'

http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoodhill/2013/04/11/bitcoins-are-digital-collectibles-not-real-money/

So is physical gold and silver and it's a pretty good way to get people not to invest in them. When they sit with a computer which controls the world as we know it( the fed), anything is possible with the power to create money. I don't see how anyone can ever beat them, unless they defeat themselves.

Canada is circulating roughly 50 banknotes per capita right now, adding up to slightly over $1700 per capita . As most people know they are trying to modernize their currency. The best known effort is switching from paper to polymer banknotes. The next effort is eliminating the penny. A third effort is to make it possible to conduct electronic transactions that are untraceable (more like exchanging banknotes and coins then paying for things by credit card). This last effort is usually promoted as a way to eliminate small cash transactions and the accompanying difficulty in making change, and helping to minimize the motivation for burglary and theft and all the accompanying risk to people and expenses associated with guarding cash drawers.

I think the recent bitcoin fascination would inspire some people who are in charge of national currencies.

But, as we know there is that once you figure out how to easily pay for a candy bar or a bag of groceries electronically leaving no permanent record, you can probably figure out how to move large amounts of cash electronically with no record. Canada could get into the business that USA has been in since WWII, creating large amounts of cash for people around the world to use discreetly and anonymously for whatever purpose they choose (honest or dishonest).

Notes per capita as of 2011 for Canada
6.6 $5
3.5 $10
24.5 $20
5.5 $50
9.0 $100

Such a move means that transporting money becomes much easier if it does't involve physically moving banknotes. It is easier for honest and dishonest purposes alike, But it is also very profitable for the United States as it involves exporting something without all the cost of manufacturing something. While currency is technically a liability, if no one ever collects on the liability, it behaves more like profit.

While most of these questions could ostensibly be asked about the US dollar, any major move in that direction would have a larger impact on the world finance system. I think the question is more appropriate concerning the Canadian or Australian dollar which would be a significant change in the use of currency, but not a global changing paradigm.

Quote: EvenBob

They tether you, maybe, not me. I have an opinion
and search for others to bolster that opinion. If you
get tethered to the opinions of others, that's your
problem, don't thrust it on me.

I tried to decide between half a dozen snarky responses to this paragraph before realizing I didn't need one. Does anyone not see what's wrong with this picture?