This is the dream scenario of the cultists, what they always warned us would happen.
And yet bitcoin is only about half its previous high.
This is the dream scenario of the cultists, what they always warned us would happen.
And yet bitcoin is only about half its previous high
Theo you should form a political party, call it For Everybody in the Audience. When making a speech to the local working man's club wax lyrical about the destruction of their hard earned wealth and next evening when being hosted by IBEC demonise the destruction of their easy earned wealth....that destroys the hard earned wealth of working people.
...or tax wealth through negative interest rates.
Theo you should form a political party, call it For Everybody in the Audience. When making a speech to the local working man's club wax lyrical about the destruction of their hard earned wealth and next evening when being hosted by IBEC demonise the destruction of their easy earned wealth.
I note that it only took 4 posts for the Tecate Principle* to demonstrate itself.
I'll admit I didn't read the links first time round, I have since corrected that (albeit Charlie Weston was mostly behind a paywall). Your use of the word "corruption" inclined me not to take your OP seriously. Humans are frail, that is our condition, the Economist podcast highlights this by covering economic developments over the last century. My sense is that at least in the West the powers that be are doing their best to address these unprecedented developments - this is not Zimbabwe.In any case, you demonstrate an innate capacity to avoid the views, news and articles presented by esteemed and established mainstream media as presented at the top of this thread and instead, revert to narrow pitch of AAM battlegrounds.
My sense is that at least in the West the powers that be are doing their best to address these unprecedented developments - this is not Zimbabwe.
what would I do with my savings if interest rates were -4% p.a. However, I remain of the view that this is a very unlikely development.
The Economist podcast makes this point but the counter point is also made that the authorities could put big penalties on re-entry of the hard cash into the financial system.
I note that markets expect US inflation to be 1.6% p.a. over the next 10 years, meaning real interest rates are about -2%p.a. I can see why that is underpinning a surge in the Gold price.
My central projection would be that over the next 10 years we will indeed see inflation of about 2% p.a. but that the huge interventions will have been slowly unwound - the system will have survived.
You persist in comparing Mugabe's hyperinflationary printing of money to fund his expenditure with the monetization of long term assets which has had no inflationary impact and which is largely judged to have been relatively successful in stabilising the world monetary system. It would be a rabbit hole for me to attempt to correct your misunderstanding of the profound differences here.Having embarked on the same practice (as Zimbabwe) themselves through QE, it is most inconceivable that the US, ECB, UK and Japan...
We're in the realms of speculation here. Despite your "honest wish" for the system to work out well you seem certain that it will all crash and burn. I share that honest wish, but am more confident that things will not turn out nearly as bad as you believe. But even if I was of your conviction there is no way that I would see salvation in bitcoin - maybe Gold.They are doing what they believe is in their best interests, for sure. It does not mean they will succeed in resucitating the monetary system to anything near a transparent, robust, functioning system. I honestly wish them well, but it is my view that everything they are doing is short-term plastering. Long-term, if prevailing economic theory surrounding money printing is anyway accurate, serious damage is being wilfully imposed on global economic affairs by our trusted but 'frail' financial institutions.
the monetization of long term assets which has had no inflationary impact and which is largely judged to have been relatively successful in stabilising the world monetary system.
So long as you maintain this emotive (and inaccurate) 'cultist' narrative, you'll never be able to look at this objectively.This is the dream scenario of the cultists, what they always warned us would happen.
You're cherry picking to support a specific narrative. Bitcoin has put in higher lows in practically every year since its existence. If you want to use price and nothing else as a metric of its success or otherwise, then I would say that's a more equitable starting point.And yet bitcoin is only about half its previous high.
It's not just a generational imbalance. It's also determined by place/position. The Quantitative Easing/'money printer go 'brrrr' monetary policy that you are in favour of brings about greater inequality. That was shown with its use immediately after the last financial crisis. It's been shown again right now. The Cantillon Effect demonstrates that those closest to that free money faucet benefit disproportionately by comparison with the rest of us.It has been commented in this parish before that there is something of a generational imbalance in society. I agree and very low interest rates is helping to correct that imbalance IMHO.
It doesn't surprise me that this triggers you given that it destroys the notion that you put forward i.e. that central banks and governments are infallible. By the way, Zimbabwe is but just one example. The most recent example has been Lebanon where people have had their wealth vapourised before their eyes through central bank mismanagement.I note that it only took 4 posts for the Tecate Principle* to demonstrate itself.
* Tecate Principle: the longer a thread on bitcoin proceeds the probability of Zimbabwe being mentioned approaches 1.
So with that 'fraility', you're effectively saying that people inherently can't be trusted. That's front and centre to the entire debate. Bitcoin as a financial technology has been criticised here - on the basis that there's not much to it technologically. That're quite right to say that. It's just a ledger. Yet despite that, it does something fundamental. It facilitates transparency and it has been designed to be trustless in nature. There's an assumed lack of trust. With that, its monetary policy is pre-programmed and baked in from the get go. Everyone is aware of how it has been pre-programmed. Everyone is aware that no one entity controls it and that it can't be tampered with. Nobody can 'print' more of it, nobody can change interest rates relative to it.Your use of the word "corruption" inclined me not to take your OP seriously. Humans are frail, that is our condition, the Economist podcast highlights this by covering economic developments over the last century.
And this right here is a fundamental mistake on your part. You've got myopic Dougal 'far away' syndrome on this. Zimbabwe is just one example. At any given time there is a list of countries who have mismanaged their sovereign currencies. Lebanon is the most recent example and it's not the banana republic that Zimbabwe is (and nor were there sanctions implicated).My sense is that at least in the West the powers that be are doing their best to address these unprecedented developments - this is not Zimbabwe.
The examples given in Wolfie's links refer to the application of negative interest rates relative to pension funds. Those guys are not going to keep money under the mattress. So...whomever is party to those pension funds is already paying the price for negative interest rates.I was of the view that the ordinary punter is safe from negative interest rates because she can hoard hard cash.
Other way round...gold is on 'a bit of a roll' (up 30% since the start of the year) whereas bitcoin is on a roll (up 55% since the beginning of the year).On the main point of OP it is clear that there could hardly be a more uncertain set of circumstances for the current financial system. No wonder Gold is on a roll. Bitcoin is on a bit of a roll too
You are clinging on to this ideology - that things are just black or white - that it's a zero sum game. I'm sure there are a minority of people that want to tear down the current system in its entirety and throw it out completely. However, nobody has presented here with that argument and it's not the majority view in crypto circles - far from it.because for many the whole rationale for bitcoin is the potential collapse of the financial system - unlikely in my view, but with such unprecedented interventions certainly enough ammunition for the doomsayers.
Cherry picking one pricing snapshot to meet your own narrative. Everyone agreed that the market had overheated and gotten ahead of itself (at that particular point in time) in late 2017. It's not something that's specific to bitcoin/crypto. I'm still the wrong side (price wise) of a house purchase 15 years later - but you wouldn't go round telling people that it's foolish for anyone to buy property on the back of that, would you?The surprise is, as I said, that bitcoin is still only about half of what it was 2 years ago. Hard to see it making the €1m mark predicted by the more enthusiastic cultists.
What is 'your central projection' based on? Hopium? I mean, it may work out that way but we have no earthly way of knowing that. We are in uncharted territory - we've never seen this level of money printing - it's unprecedented. The US has printed off more $ in the month of June than in the first two centuries of the existence of the country.My central projection would be that over the next 10 years we will indeed see inflation of about 2% p.a. but that the huge interventions will have been slowly unwound - the system will have survived.
That's such nonsense and it betrays a complete lack of pragmatism in your weighing up of bitcoin (ergo, the real cultist here is you). People are bailing in en-masse to gold over the past 6 months as a hedge. Of course, it won't be 'untouched' if economies return to something nearing normality.That would leave the price of Gold largely untouched but would herald the drop to zero of bitcoin.
This now or never mantra is nonsense. The current economic backdrop is particularly prescient in the context of bitcoin right now. It's good that people are beginning to question 'what is money' and can we just print it off at will. You speak of unwinding - how does this - US Debt Clock - get unwound?Bitcoin's status as digital gold is not based on its inflation hedge but on a belief by the cultists that the mainstream financial system will crash and burn and bitcoin will rise phoenix like form its ashes. For bitcoin cultists now is the time they have been waiting for - if it doesn't happen now it won't happen.
There is an argument that bitcoin is letting down its proponents, at least any that bought near $20k. Here they are brimful of "I told you so's" - money is being printed for fiscal purposes, government debt is being monetized, even GS has a contrarian view that the US dollar is dead meat. This should be Chucky ar La for bitcoiners and yet they haven't even seen €10k yet.Currently that value is priced in the market at near €10,000 per bitcoin. And given the increasing prevalence of viewpoints pertaining to the fragility of the monetary system, I'd expect it to go a lot higher.
If you are a bitcoin proponent right now, you will have seen further in-roads being made by bitcoin and the broader digital assets space week on week. Its current market price represents a 57% gain for me - I don't think I'd classify myself as 'frustrated'.if I was a bitcoin cultist I would be feeling very frustrated at the moment. With everything apparently in alignment for a Global Zimbabwe Moment, I can only set my sights on €10k when it was nearly twice that a couple of years ago.
There is an argument that you're talking through your prejudiced backside. Why cherrypick an at the peak price and then pick on bitcoin exclusively? What about Celtic Tiger property? What about Oil this year? What about the markets in March? Time and time again, I've heard them rattling on - on CNBC saying that the conventional markets are no more predictable than crypto.There is an argument that bitcoin is letting down its proponents, at least any that bought near $20k.
And bitcoin being up 55% in 2020 isn't enough for you? Yeah, I'm sure they're very very unhappy!Here they are brimful of "I told you so's" - money is being printed for fiscal purposes, government debt is being monetized, even GS has a contrarian view that the US dollar is dead meat. This should be Chucky ar La for bitcoiners and yet they haven't even seen €10k yet.
You might need to escape the echo chamber you currently find yourself in to start with. There are plenty of economists that are either onboard or coming round with regard to the proposition that bitcoin offers. However, from previous discussions, it seems that you narrow that consideration to Keynesian economists so there's unlikely to be any awakening anytime soon.Also what about the dog that isn't barking? As your OP indicates there are certainly big questions over the direction of fiscal/monetary policy and yet I do not hear of any mainstream economists jumping on the good ship bitcoin.
There is an argument that bitcoin is letting down its proponents, at least any that bought near $20k
Maybe that is economics for you - it makes itself up as you go along.
The planned version failed spectacularly and the "make-it-up-as-we-go-along" version has come out on top.
I do not hear of any mainstream economists jumping on the good ship bitcoin.
I do not at all think CBs are infallible, they have admitted to many mistakes. But I do believe that they are the experts and that in the West they are generally on my side. I hope they get it broadly right. Do you?It doesn't surprise me that this triggers you given that it destroys the notion that you put forward i.e. that central banks and governments are infallible.
It relies on one big trust - that some people will continue to value it despite it having no tangible link to something of inherent value. You never seem to think that a problem. If bitcoin was linked to something, anything even copper, I'd be filling my boots with it.It facilitates transparency and it has been designed to be trustless in nature. There's an assumed lack of trust. With that, its monetary policy is pre-programmed and baked in from the get go. Everyone is aware of how it has been pre-programmed. Everyone is aware that no one entity controls it and that it can't be tampered with. Nobody can 'print' more of it, nobody can change interest rates relative to it.
I certainly don't think that and (see above) they have admitted to their mistakes. But so long as their heart in in the right place (my interests) I have to trust them to get it broadly right. Inflation is the guy I fear and he has been put in his box for quite a while now. I still fear him - but a crypto currency linked to hot air will not assuage that fear.It's foolish to think that central bankers closer to home can't make mistakes and get it wrong.
Absolutely.The examples given in Wolfie's links refer to the application of negative interest rates relative to pension funds. Those guys are not going to keep money under the mattress. So...whomever is party to those pension funds is already paying the price for negative interest rates.
I am not sure on this point but is Gold on a long time high against the dollar? Bitcoin certainly isn't. Bitcoin is so volatile it will always have extreme movements.Other way round...gold is on 'a bit of a roll' (up 30% since the start of the year) whereas bitcoin is on a roll (up 55% since the beginning of the year).
Yes that's what I mean by the cultists. I am not sure that AAM is cultist immune. One sees extreme leftie world views often cited by those defending crypto. Not accusing you.You are clinging on to this ideology - that things are just black or white - that it's a zero sum game. I'm sure there are a minority of people that want to tear down the current system in its entirety and throw it out completely.
Your not watching my lips. If bitcoin had a link to some intrinsic value it would at once be a very beneficial thing and a very dangerous thing. I would certainly be having a piece of it in current times.You have never once acknowledged one single positive characteristic of decentralised digital currency.
A bit of that and also a bit of Trustium. Economic/monetary management in the West hasn't done bad by me so far - I hope and trust they will continue to serve my interests.What is 'your central projection' based on? Hopium?
Semantics I think. Bitcoin has a price. That is an incontrovertible fact. Let's just say that I believe that it has no worth or intrinsic value and that will decide its ultimate price/value.Yes, of course. No different to any other investment thst is worth less than the price paid for.
I don't really get this point. I was of the impression that you considered bitcoin to have no, or very little value.
Indeed I do - but the fact remains that bitcoin would never have even been conceived if they (and governments) were getting it right consistently. I believe in giving them one excellent incentive not to screw it up or steal from people - competition. This notion that only one entity can issue money has to go.I do not at all think CBs are infallible, they have admitted to many mistakes. But I do believe that they are the experts and that in the West they are generally on my side. I hope they get it broadly right. Do you?
What you don't seem to understand and/or acknowledge is that the confidence in it comes in the fact that it can't be tampered with. It's pre-programmed and it's transparent in terms of how its set out eg. fixed supply, issuance, etc. That's where it gets its credibility and power.It relies on one big trust - that some people will continue to value it despite it having no tangible link to something of inherent value. You never seem to think that a problem. If bitcoin was linked to something, anything even copper, I'd be filling my boots with it.
You misunderstand the proposition on hand if you continue with the 'hot air' jibe. At best it's double standards as you are quite happy with FIAT which is backed by nothing.But so long as their heart in in the right place (my interests) I have to trust them to get it broadly right. Inflation is the guy I fear and he has been put in his box for quite a while now. I still fear him - but a crypto currency linked to hot air will not assuage that fear.
Bitcoin is up 55% year to date vs. gold's 30%. I think that's pretty clear. As regards volatility - it's been done to death but you know I've provided proof here previously that bitcoin is already going through a process of reduced volatility year-on-year. It's a process that will continue over many years to come.I am not sure on this point but is Gold on a long time high against the dollar? Bitcoin certainly isn't. Bitcoin is so volatile it will always have extreme movements.
You can accuse away - at the end of the day, this is someone's opinion - and everyone is entitled to one. If you are saying that sort of stance has been taken here on AAM - i'm not aware of it.Yes that's what I mean by the cultists. I am not sure that AAM is cultist immune. One sees extreme leftie world views often cited by those defending crypto. Not accusing you.
You've got that far once before - but I still maintain that you have never acknowledged any of its positive characteristics. If you believe there are positive characteristics to it, what are they?Your not watching my lips. If bitcoin had a link to some intrinsic value it would at once be a very beneficial thing and a very dangerous thing. I would certainly be having a piece of it in current times.
I'm quite happy to acknowledge that by and large sovereign money has served society well. However, in one of your posts previously you alluded to the evolution of money. Bitcoin is very much part of that evolution.A bit of that and also a bit of Trustium. Economic/monetary management in the West hasn't done bad by me so far - I hope and trust they will continue to serve my interests.
The industrial use of gold makes up 10%. The other 90% is as a store of value use case. It's not much different - especially as we are moving to utility that the bitcoin network is starting to provide (dApps being built on top of it; other blockchains being secured by it, etc.).Semantics I think. Bitcoin has a price. That is an incontrovertible fact. Let's just say that I believe that it has no worth or intrinsic value and that will decide its ultimate price/value.
You're fixated on the December 2017 peak. Why? And if it reached $20,000 tomorrow, I suppose you'd say that its volatile? It's far, far harder to figure it out this year than any other, but thus far, the build up in price on bitcoin is pretty organic....not some hyped up pump.And yet bitcoin can hardly recover 50% of its "price/value" of just 2 years ago.
And yet bitcoin can hardly recover 50% of its "price/value" of just 2 years ago.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?