Quote from: ponzinomics reloaded on November 12, 2014, 03:08:59 AM

This is getting interesting. Well, I have actually just scratched the surface.

Quote from: sidhujag on November 11, 2014, 09:51:28 PM

Feeling like another annonymint thread with hidden agendas to me.. anyone else feel it?

you do not need hidden agendas when you have a (hidden) whole body of knowledge as arguments. I came to cryptos as a last opportunity to find a truth market, as I have verified myself that the other 99% is scam. I got disappointed about the no rational strategical arguments behind cryptos (in the functional domain). I have elaborated a rationale exposing why I think is a fake market and I wanted to know how you defend it. Who am I and what I am doing now I told from the first message. No point to repeat, I think. But, if you want hidden agendas, maybe you will find quite a few this weekend in Brisbane.

And, by the way, lets suppose now that I would have any hidden agenda (which I have not). Are you afraid of using rational arguments to defend any position? I think yours is a wrong concern, no matter what is my agenda. Happy to answer any other question.

Quote from: sidhujag on November 11, 2014, 09:57:07 PM

This is all bs.. velocity of money is the only key driver yes i agree but the way u jumped to conclusions no... gold standard went off cause velocity could not keep up effectively. Bitcoin and cryptos dont have that problem with cost of hw decreasing and network speeds increasing faster than the network affect.

Gold standard was lost because Nixon wanted to fund Vietnam war. Same reason that the Federal Reserve was created in 1913, funding a war.

Regarding velocity was not in the core argument. Sorry if I mislead you, it just was a clarification. I agree that one of the beauties of cryptos is that they allow a flexible money supply. But this is again no my claim. I think is better if you re-read and come with another counterargument. I think you misunderstood.

Quote from: turvarya on November 11, 2014, 10:15:18 PM

Are you really putting some stereotypes into that argument? Making fake data. So, you can quantify something for the sake of your argument.

puf, I suppose you are a female. Well, the direct answer to your question is no. Regarding the fake data, I do not know if we need to discuss that, in current society, there are more emotional people than rational, and that emotional people is (generally) collectivist. No sure if it is issue for this thread. This is enough for my last point. If you want to discuss about sex battle maybe we should open another thread. For me is unclear to what point I should answer you.

sorry if I am not really extending my arguments because your replies does not address mines rationally, IMHO. If someone thinks I have not responded I will be happy in extending. I am afraid we have an emotions/reason debate here and it could take the whole space of the board (and probably would be beyond the board's topics). But again happy to extend.

Why did the US need to fund wars? Velocity of money (lack thereof) is the real reason why gold standard was abolished... not funding the war which was the indirect reason in 1971 to overturn the law... France demanded 191 million in gold but instead of running through the reserves they just left Bretton Woods instead. It was too deflationary (ala Japan's lost decade) and gov't couldn't issue any more debt to spur economy.. more people with static supply lead to a view that the economy wasn't growing or would slow without doing something about it.

I urge you to read between the lines... you're misunderstandings are leading to further assumptions that are probably affecting your political/philosophical views. Check out http://www.peakprosperity.com/crashcourse it shouldn't take too long.