Post
Topic
Board Bitcoin Discussion
Re: What is the 'purpose' and 'nature' of Bitcoin? Some questions.
by
HugoStone
on 23/11/2016, 20:35:54 UTC
But Bitcoin does solve problems. Just because the masses are not yet aware of these solutions, does not invalidate them. The masses are ignorant of orbital spin angular momentum, but application of this subatomic phenomenon is already solving a myriad of everyday problems for everyday people.

First of all - thanks for your reply and for taking the time and trouble to go into detail. I'm not saying that Bitcoin doesn't solve problems, only that the problems it does solve are not necessarily the same problems that people see in money.

1) Known low rate of inflation (money creation)

Yeah, and I don't disagree with you. I know how inflation works, and with respect to you I wasn't asking for an explanation of how it works. Not having a dig, just saying.

You may want to ask a Zimbabwean or a Venezuelan if a money with a low fixed algorithmic inflation rate might be something he/she might be interested in.

I've referred to both countries on another thread and I'm still scratching my head. Under the circumstances, you would think that citizens of these countries would be desperately searching for alternatives - anything to avoid the need to exchange a wheelbarrow full of worthless fiat in return for a loaf of bread. It's not happening though, is it?

2) No central party of control. I've said this above, and you seem to acknowledge the point. Unlike fiat money, your bitcoin is yours to use as you wish. There is no other party in control of how you may spend it. Or even if you have access to it at all. This means that you can send value to unfavored groups (e.g., Wikileaks). This also means that it cannot be confiscated by the violence of the state.

I've never disagreed with this. However, people will not see this as a 'benefit' per se unless they have already experienced this violence first hand. In other words, I don't think this is right at the top of people's priority list when they think about money. To offer an analogy, it's a bit like asking people if preparing for the possibility of inter-racial violence is top of their list of concerns in relation to how they interact with people. If you're Jewish or a citizen of Rwanda then you might conceivably answer 'yes' to this, but it falls outside the boundaries of most people's experience - and therefore their concerns. To be absolutely clear - I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just trying to look at it from the perspective of the man or woman on the street with no personal experience of state confiscation.

You might want to ask a Cypriot if an unconfiscatable money might be of some interest. Or, for a more recent example, an Indian, who in a land where cash transactions are the overwhelming majority of commerce, has just had its two most prominent monetary notes decreed to be no longer valid.

Again, I don't disagree with you. People need an alternative. Let me put it this way though. Say you're a middle-aged Cypriot taxi driver and the entire nation suddenly switches to Bitcoin. Now imagine you're the same Cypriot taxi driver and, six months later, Uber suddenly introduces a fleet of driver-less taxis and you're suddenly in the impossible position of competing with a machine. You find yourself unemployed. Maybe you can drive a bus instead? Except they've gone driver-less too. Maybe you can work in one of the Bitcoin-related financial services organisations that will have sprung up to replace the banking industry? Chances are they'll be online/virtual too so probably not. You're just an 'ordinary' bloke so what do you do?

I mentioned a technological revolution. Just what do we do in the light of this? Create a bunch of fictional jobs out of thin air and have them suck resources out of businesses? Maybe the state can invent these jobs and suck resources out of taxpayers instead? What exactly do we do and how does Bitcoin address these kind of issues? To repeat - I'm not saying that Bitcoin has no benefits, only that it doesn't tackle the issues I'm talking about. Specifically:

1. More and more people fighting for fewer and fewer full-time and/or permanent jobs
2. More and more people working two or three low paid jobs just to make ends meet
2. Better standards of healthcare and greater longevity
3. A massive pensions and savings hole with nothing to fill the gap

You seem to be laboring under the misconception that any given thing must slice, dice, and even make julienne fries in order to be successful. No technology needs to be everything to everybody in order to take off. Especially at start.

No, I'm just asking the questions that everyone else seems to be avoiding.

HS