Quote from: kkaspar on February 18, 2014, 05:06:31 PM

In the interest of saving forum space, I'll fit all the replies in one post.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus link=topic=178336.msg5214663#msg5214663

hahaha, kkapser's a blowhard ... he's not writing 1000 lines of anything except pure unadulterated FUD.

1) every communist regime known has had rampant monetary inflation

2) the most prosperous nation and period known in economic history is the free market capitalism under the deflationary gold standard period of the 1800's in USA.

I can see that the the level of intelligence of the poster is in perfect correlation with the ability to spell my name..

1) Hyperinflation is as bad as hyperdeflation. Both are unstable forms of financial planning that will mess up the economy. While most of the communism countries suffered from hyperinflation, then hyperdeflation is the inevitable outcome of bitcoin.

2) Where the hell do you get this stuff?
Post-Revolutionary USA had economic growth first because of the success of cotton plantations and slavery, and after that, the industrial war nature of the civil war stimulated urbanization and building of railroads, all of this gave a boost to the economy.
Finance was a big mess in 1800s USA with series of failed banking acts and attempts to create a solid currency.

Quote from: Erdogan link=topic=178336.msg5214791#msg5214791

and consumption is made possible by production.

This is nonsense, every trade have two parties, that include you selling your work-hours.
Inflationary means the seller will quickly turn his new money into something of real value. Deflationary means that the buyer will quickly sell more to recoup his money. None of these forces have more weight than the other.

It doesn't work like that. Consumption creates production and not vice versa.
When Jack feels hunger, then Jack has to work before Jack can consume the food to satisfy his hunger.

Need for consumption always dictates the need of production. There is no need of production without the need of consumption.
So one does have more weigh then another.

Quote from: JayJuanGee link=topic=178336.msg5214816#msg5214816

surely I also believe in personal responsibility.. but there are also social systems that screw certain people... NOT everyone has an equal chance, contrary to the lore.

Well, thats life that everyone won't have an equal chance. The same thing is already set by nature, with some born weaker, shorter or with less intellectual potential. Life isn't fair and it sucks.
Communism actually had a goal to make things fair to everyone. It failed because it was unnatural and only created more problems then it solved.

Quote from: JayJuanGee link=topic=178336.msg5214816#msg5214816

NO HATING>>>>>> but You seem to be talking out of your ass to some extent about a prediction that everyone will be poorer.... You are trying to extrapolate some simple dynamics and paint a simple picture.... I just DONT buy it, but it does NOT seem to be worth arguing about.

I'm not inventing the wheel here with saying that inflation is more effective in aspect of economic strength. Academics who are a lot smarter on the subject then me and you have disputed the same subject and still the answer has emerged that controlled and stable inflation is the best way to go when considering economic strength.
But remember, with bitcoin we are not talking about controlled and stable deflation. We are talking about uncontrollable hyperdeflation.

Quote from: JayJuanGee link=topic=178336.msg5214816#msg5214816

You are leaving a lot of holes in your scenario... but there is some truth to the fact that the big guns may have a lot of money to throw against bitcoin and to develop competition... so that will be interesting to see how that plays out... and how many people die because of this battle.

Your description of their planning their entrance strategy is a bit off base, though... b/c probably they are just a bit overwhelmed and confused and do NOT really know what to do about BTC.

When you'll find holes in my scenario then point them out and I'm happy to dispute or to agree with you.
My speculation about what are the "big boys" doing is far fetched I agree. It's solely based on assumption on what I would do if I were in their shoes. Assumptions like this have mostly served me right.

Quote from: 600watt on February 18, 2014, 08:45:29 AM

nonsense. when a person wants to use the bitcoin protocol, he or she can just do so. it´s free. (almost) no fees. if i decide to buy some sneakers and pay with bitcoin, well yes, i have to take some of my money and convert it into bitcoin. but that money is just the price of the sneaker - not the price for bitcoin. i don´t have to pay a premium because i use bitcoin. it´s free.

Nah, it's not free. Service companies similar to bitpay, who take care of the conversion, have to pay the early adoptors for the privilege to use the "protocol". Everyone who has to hold their value in bitcoin have to pay tribute to the early adopters.
This is the pyramid scheme part that attracts those big herds of people who wish to get rich quick without doing any work. This hyperdeflation part is good for attracting simple minded folks with promises of easy riches, but it makes bitcoin useless as an serious financial tool.
The enthusiasts make it sound like they are all about financial liberty, while actually they are just hoping for wealth redistribution. They don't want to change the world in a way that there won't be a class of wealthy elite people who only enjoy luxury without doing much work. They even want to increase this mentality and only change the people who are at the top, so they themselves can be there.

Quote from: 600watt on February 18, 2014, 08:45:29 AM

don´t be bitter. be thankful you did find out about it. you are an early adopter. join us & be happy. Wink

It's too hard to lie to myself and pretend that all is fine. I'm not very good at comforting myself with false hopes made out of pretty illusions. I would be happy and calm if I would truly see that this will work. But I can't, no matter how much I try, I still see the ugly truth.

Quote from: windjc on February 18, 2014, 09:23:11 AM

LOL. The concept of group dynamics and open source and first mover advantage is completely lost on this guy. He's got a lot of learning to do.

First mover advantage is the only thing that bitcoin has. The only reason why it's more expensive then the tens of other altcoins that have been created from the same source.
Rest doesn't mean much tho, because the development in bitcoin source is very slow and it's actually crippled by core properties like work-of-proof mining and 10 minute transaction times. You can only better the GUI and fix some bugs while you can't develop the core properties that actually need development the most.

Quote from: Wekkel on February 18, 2014, 01:01:41 PM

Perhaps it seems that way but wealth can be stored in other means than cash. It does not neccessarily increase my consumption. Whether people 'save' in production should be a free choice to make, not a forced one.

And you can freely save up by buying necessary goods that hold value. Inflation doesn't stop you for doing that. Inflation only pushes you towards using your money on something, not just sitting on money.
Production isn't forced, but it's favored because it does increase it's countries economic strength. And economic strength is the thing that decides the survival of the fittest in the modern world.
Controlled and stable deflation system could also be used like the an stable and controlled inflation system. But the first country will always have less production then the last one.
But with bitcoin we are not talking about controlled and stable deflation, we are talking about inevitable uncontrollable hyperdeflation. And hyperdeflation is just as bad as hyperinflation, because the instability creates a lot of problems that will slow down the economy.

Quote from: Richy_T on February 18, 2014, 01:53:25 PM

Broken window fallacy. Don't just know it, understand it. Then you might understand why production and consumption are not worthy goals in and of themselves.

Broken window fallacy isn't exactly an outcome of an strong and growing economy, but it is caused by the corrupt public sector that I talked about.
When world leaders decide to wage wars to stimulate the economy, then the economy is not to be blamed here. You could also start huge scientific projects with goals to colonize other planets or discover new ways to extract energy. This would stimulate the economy just as well as starting wars.
But people are to blame here who elect weak and corrupt politicians who act on the orders of warmongers, not on recommendations of top scientists. To make it short, broken window fallacy is cased by the lack of proper vision.

I hope I didn't miss anyone..

In the interest of saving forum space, I'll just point you in the general direction of reason and logic. Since you post here, you must have access to the internetz. Did you see what I did here? Reason and logic trumps ignorance, always.