BitCoin
-
jschell wrote:
No idea what that statement is supposed to mean.
Which part did you have trouble with? I'll gladly explain :)
jschell wrote:
The Euro, like every other first world nation currency has a specific government agency tasked with keeping it stable.
No, the ECB is not a government agency; our government here is Dutch, not European. There is no European law, no European passport, no European army.
jschell wrote:
What? Reasonable inflation which occurs in first world nations is expected and required.
CPI might sound like it is in a reasonable range, but it still cuts your savings in a few years. Monetary inflation (M3) is a lot more than CPI. I'm not going to explain the difference between those forms of inflation, as I can safely assume you already know everything about them :)
jschell wrote:
Deflation or no inflation would negatively impact the economies.
Strange, we had posters in school that claimed the opposite - google, and you'll find them too. The idea that I am going to stop eating and save my money for a year because bread will be cheaper by that time is academic nonsense.
jschell wrote:
And if you are referring to hyper inflation that doesn't happen in first world nations. Or at least not in ones that remain a first world nation.
Of course, the Americans are multitudes more intelligent and financially enlightened than the Germans. :rolleyes:
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
No, the ECB is not a government agency; our government here is Dutch, not European
The ECB is not private and it is not a charity. So pick what ever word you find suitable to define it. Doesn't alter the reality that it is used to facilitate stabilization but the independent governments of the EU also do that.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
The idea that I am going to stop eating and save my money for a year because bread will be cheaper by that time is academic nonsense.
Since I didn't say anything all even remotely related to that I will ignore it.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Of course, the Americans are multitudes more intelligent and financially enlightened than the Germans.
You are claiming that the Germans are seeking to encourage hyper inflation? Or are you claiming that Germany has no inflation? That certainly is not true. It does and has had a nominal inflation rate for a long time. Historic inflation Germany – historic CPI inflation Germany[^]
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
No, the ECB is not a government agency; our government here is Dutch, not European
The ECB is not private and it is not a charity. So pick what ever word you find suitable to define it. Doesn't alter the reality that it is used to facilitate stabilization but the independent governments of the EU also do that.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
The idea that I am going to stop eating and save my money for a year because bread will be cheaper by that time is academic nonsense.
Since I didn't say anything all even remotely related to that I will ignore it.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Of course, the Americans are multitudes more intelligent and financially enlightened than the Germans.
You are claiming that the Germans are seeking to encourage hyper inflation? Or are you claiming that Germany has no inflation? That certainly is not true. It does and has had a nominal inflation rate for a long time. Historic inflation Germany – historic CPI inflation Germany[^]
jschell wrote:
The ECB is not private and it is not a charity. So pick what ever word you find suitable to define it.
"Bad idea" would be descriptive enough.
jschell wrote:
You are claiming that the Germans are seeking to encourage hyper inflation?
No, just implying that you're too intelligent to make the same mistake.
jschell wrote:
It does and has had a nominal inflation rate for a long time.
A targetted loss, before they handed inflation-targets to the ECB. With the Germans being part of the Euro-currency, their inflation is now equal to that of Spain and Italy - because according to some people, they're all alike :D
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
jschell wrote:
The ECB is not private and it is not a charity. So pick what ever word you find suitable to define it.
"Bad idea" would be descriptive enough.
jschell wrote:
You are claiming that the Germans are seeking to encourage hyper inflation?
No, just implying that you're too intelligent to make the same mistake.
jschell wrote:
It does and has had a nominal inflation rate for a long time.
A targetted loss, before they handed inflation-targets to the ECB. With the Germans being part of the Euro-currency, their inflation is now equal to that of Spain and Italy - because according to some people, they're all alike :D
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
"Bad idea" would be descriptive enough.
Irrelevant. My point remains that there is a specific group whose goal is to insure the stability of the Euro.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
No, just implying that you're too intelligent to make the same mistake.
Same mistake as what? Understanding that a moderate amount of inflation is natural and expected in a thriving economy? I do not see a mistake in that and nationality has nothing to do with it.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
their inflation is now equal to that of Spain and Italy - because according to some people, they're all alike
Which appears to having nothing to do with what is being discussed.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
"Bad idea" would be descriptive enough.
Irrelevant. My point remains that there is a specific group whose goal is to insure the stability of the Euro.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
No, just implying that you're too intelligent to make the same mistake.
Same mistake as what? Understanding that a moderate amount of inflation is natural and expected in a thriving economy? I do not see a mistake in that and nationality has nothing to do with it.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
their inflation is now equal to that of Spain and Italy - because according to some people, they're all alike
Which appears to having nothing to do with what is being discussed.
jschell wrote:
Same mistake as what?
"Whom", and the Germans. A question which happens to be answered by the pricing of our topic.
jschell wrote:
Understanding that a moderate amount of inflation is natural and expected in a thriving economy? I do not see a mistake in that and nationality has nothing to do with it.
Nothing natural about it, and nothing natural about the 2% target.
jschell wrote:
Which appears to having nothing to do with what is being discussed.
Do I really need to explain that the German inflation is linked to the Euro? :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
jschell wrote:
Same mistake as what?
"Whom", and the Germans. A question which happens to be answered by the pricing of our topic.
jschell wrote:
Understanding that a moderate amount of inflation is natural and expected in a thriving economy? I do not see a mistake in that and nationality has nothing to do with it.
Nothing natural about it, and nothing natural about the 2% target.
jschell wrote:
Which appears to having nothing to do with what is being discussed.
Do I really need to explain that the German inflation is linked to the Euro? :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Nothing natural about it, and nothing natural about the 2% target.
I did not make any claim that goals were being realistically maintained nor even that target goals were appropriate.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Do I really need to explain that the German inflation is linked to the Euro?
Apparently I need to explain that this sub-thread started with my point that national currencies are not as volatile and crypto currencies. And that includes the Euro.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Nothing natural about it, and nothing natural about the 2% target.
I did not make any claim that goals were being realistically maintained nor even that target goals were appropriate.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Do I really need to explain that the German inflation is linked to the Euro?
Apparently I need to explain that this sub-thread started with my point that national currencies are not as volatile and crypto currencies. And that includes the Euro.
jschell wrote:
I did not make any claim that goals were being realistically maintained nor even that target goals were appropriate.
No, but it does imply you prefer your currency (aka, saved labour) to depreciate.
jschell wrote:
Apparently I need to explain that this sub-thread started with my point that national currencies are not as volatile and crypto currencies.
Volatility to the upside. Yes, people would be shocked if they found out that their money keeps growing in value - imagine the horror :D
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
jschell wrote:
I did not make any claim that goals were being realistically maintained nor even that target goals were appropriate.
No, but it does imply you prefer your currency (aka, saved labour) to depreciate.
jschell wrote:
Apparently I need to explain that this sub-thread started with my point that national currencies are not as volatile and crypto currencies.
Volatility to the upside. Yes, people would be shocked if they found out that their money keeps growing in value - imagine the horror :D
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Volatility to the upside. Yes, people would be shocked if they found out that their money keeps growing in value - imagine the horror
I suggest that you put all of your money, investments, retirement and even checking account into crypt currencies then so you can guarantee the high life for yourself.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Volatility to the upside. Yes, people would be shocked if they found out that their money keeps growing in value - imagine the horror
I suggest that you put all of your money, investments, retirement and even checking account into crypt currencies then so you can guarantee the high life for yourself.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
I'm not, but the "volatile" argument is a bit nonsensical in that respect
Your previous point was that it was a good investment. Thus as an investment that should be the way that you go. My point was and is that at a currency it is too volatile as a replacement for anything. It lacks the controls that modern currencies must have (and lack of controls are proven in history to be a problem.) And that has nothing to do with it being suitable or not as an investment.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
I'm not, but the "volatile" argument is a bit nonsensical in that respect
Your previous point was that it was a good investment. Thus as an investment that should be the way that you go. My point was and is that at a currency it is too volatile as a replacement for anything. It lacks the controls that modern currencies must have (and lack of controls are proven in history to be a problem.) And that has nothing to do with it being suitable or not as an investment.
jschell wrote:
Your previous point was that it was a good investment. Thus as an investment that should be the way that you go.
I have no spare to invest :)
jschell wrote:
It lacks the controls that modern currencies must have
The price-movement is mostly based on not having that control. It is market-driven, not controlled by a government or a bank. How is some bureaucrat having "controls" going to improve on that situation? :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
jschell wrote:
Your previous point was that it was a good investment. Thus as an investment that should be the way that you go.
I have no spare to invest :)
jschell wrote:
It lacks the controls that modern currencies must have
The price-movement is mostly based on not having that control. It is market-driven, not controlled by a government or a bank. How is some bureaucrat having "controls" going to improve on that situation? :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
The price-movement is mostly based on not having that control. It is market-driven, not controlled by a government or a bank.
Presumably my previous statements did not make it clear that I understand that.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
How is some bureaucrat having "controls" going to improve on that situation?
Because it keeps the volatility low. When I pick up a loaf of bread off the shelf and it says $2 it doesn't help me nor the market if the currency volatility increases that price to $4 by the time I get to the checkout. Much less if I can't even get to my money when I get to the checkout. A major vulnerability has frozen hundreds of millions of dollars of Ethereum | TechCrunch[^]
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
The price-movement is mostly based on not having that control. It is market-driven, not controlled by a government or a bank.
Presumably my previous statements did not make it clear that I understand that.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
How is some bureaucrat having "controls" going to improve on that situation?
Because it keeps the volatility low. When I pick up a loaf of bread off the shelf and it says $2 it doesn't help me nor the market if the currency volatility increases that price to $4 by the time I get to the checkout. Much less if I can't even get to my money when I get to the checkout. A major vulnerability has frozen hundreds of millions of dollars of Ethereum | TechCrunch[^]
jschell wrote:
Because it keeps the volatility low. When I pick up a loaf of bread off the shelf and it says $2 it doesn't help me nor the market if the currency volatility increases that price to $4 by the time I get to the checkout.
You wouldn't complain if the price is $1, and neither would the grocer if that means that the value of his cash-register doubles. You yammer about volatility, but only for the currency that is appreciating, and claiming that the depreciating currencies would be better :D
jschell wrote:
A major vulnerability has frozen hundreds of millions of dollars of Ethereum | TechCrunch[^]
Aren't you glad a decent argument came along, eh? :D Yes, one takes that risk with technology.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
jschell wrote:
Because it keeps the volatility low. When I pick up a loaf of bread off the shelf and it says $2 it doesn't help me nor the market if the currency volatility increases that price to $4 by the time I get to the checkout.
You wouldn't complain if the price is $1, and neither would the grocer if that means that the value of his cash-register doubles. You yammer about volatility, but only for the currency that is appreciating, and claiming that the depreciating currencies would be better :D
jschell wrote:
A major vulnerability has frozen hundreds of millions of dollars of Ethereum | TechCrunch[^]
Aren't you glad a decent argument came along, eh? :D Yes, one takes that risk with technology.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
You wouldn't complain if the price is $1, and neither would the grocer if that means that the value of his cash-register doubles
How is that relevant to my example?
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
and claiming that the depreciating currencies would be better
Wrong. I did not say that. I am rather certain that I specifically said that wasn't true in other posts.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Yes, one takes that risk with technology.
And my point in this long thread is that in terms of my personal life and in every historical economy analysis that I have seen no one wants nor considers that sort volatility a good thing in currency. The risk and the volatility are problems.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
You wouldn't complain if the price is $1, and neither would the grocer if that means that the value of his cash-register doubles
How is that relevant to my example?
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
and claiming that the depreciating currencies would be better
Wrong. I did not say that. I am rather certain that I specifically said that wasn't true in other posts.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Yes, one takes that risk with technology.
And my point in this long thread is that in terms of my personal life and in every historical economy analysis that I have seen no one wants nor considers that sort volatility a good thing in currency. The risk and the volatility are problems.
jschell wrote:
How is that relevant to my example?
It explains how it is nonsense :)
jschell wrote:
Wrong. I did not say that. I am rather certain that I specifically said that wasn't true in other posts.
Yes, you did - the (upward) volatility of BC is bad, and so, the alternative being only depreciating (inflating) fiat..
jschell wrote:
And my point in this long thread is that in terms of my personal life and in every historical economy analysis that I have seen no one wants nor considers that sort volatility a good thing in currency.
You want to paint it "volatile" - that is not the same. The silver-price is volatile as it is unpredictable and varies wildly. BC is not volatile, it is in a rally - while all other fiat-currencies are racing to the bottom.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
jschell wrote:
How is that relevant to my example?
It explains how it is nonsense :)
jschell wrote:
Wrong. I did not say that. I am rather certain that I specifically said that wasn't true in other posts.
Yes, you did - the (upward) volatility of BC is bad, and so, the alternative being only depreciating (inflating) fiat..
jschell wrote:
And my point in this long thread is that in terms of my personal life and in every historical economy analysis that I have seen no one wants nor considers that sort volatility a good thing in currency.
You want to paint it "volatile" - that is not the same. The silver-price is volatile as it is unpredictable and varies wildly. BC is not volatile, it is in a rally - while all other fiat-currencies are racing to the bottom.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Yes, you did - the (upward) volatility of BC is bad, and so, the alternative being only depreciating (inflating) fiat..
I did not. I said, again repeating what I said.... Drastic up or down turns is currency is bad. Period. No increases or modest down turns in currency is considered not ideal. Especially if it continues. Modest increases in currency is considered the ideal. This is not to say exactly what value 'modest' represents.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
You want to paint it "volatile" - that is not the same. The silver-price is volatile as it is unpredictable and varies wildly. BC is not volatile, it is in a rally - while all other fiat-currencies are racing to the bottom.
If you are unclear what it means when I say volatile then I suggest you read up. [^] [^] ...and many others.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Yes, you did - the (upward) volatility of BC is bad, and so, the alternative being only depreciating (inflating) fiat..
I did not. I said, again repeating what I said.... Drastic up or down turns is currency is bad. Period. No increases or modest down turns in currency is considered not ideal. Especially if it continues. Modest increases in currency is considered the ideal. This is not to say exactly what value 'modest' represents.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
You want to paint it "volatile" - that is not the same. The silver-price is volatile as it is unpredictable and varies wildly. BC is not volatile, it is in a rally - while all other fiat-currencies are racing to the bottom.
If you are unclear what it means when I say volatile then I suggest you read up. [^] [^] ...and many others.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Drastic up does not seem so bad if you're the one holding it. You keep painting that as volatility
A drastic uptake in a national currency IS bad. If an Venezuelan oil tanker is about to off load a supply of oil to Syria and the payment is supposed to be in US dollars and the dollar goes up 1000% just before offload occurs exactly how much is going to be paid? Syria does not want to pay the original amount because they are now, in real terms, paying ten times as much. But Venezuelan does not want to take a 10% payment because, as a payment, they were expecting the buying power that the original payment represented. Those sort of tends extend throughout the entire economy. They impact supply lines, worker compensation, service costs, etc. Even worse if it drops 2000% the next day. That means that no one is willing to make long term plans. That is exactly what happens with hyperinflation. It isn't that devaluation is occurring with hyperinflation but rather the uncertainty. If the inflation rate was guaranteed to be 10% a week, then they can deal with that. But when they have no idea what it will be a week much less than a month then economy crashes because expenditures can only be initiated on an immediate basis.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Drastic up does not seem so bad if you're the one holding it. You keep painting that as volatility
A drastic uptake in a national currency IS bad. If an Venezuelan oil tanker is about to off load a supply of oil to Syria and the payment is supposed to be in US dollars and the dollar goes up 1000% just before offload occurs exactly how much is going to be paid? Syria does not want to pay the original amount because they are now, in real terms, paying ten times as much. But Venezuelan does not want to take a 10% payment because, as a payment, they were expecting the buying power that the original payment represented. Those sort of tends extend throughout the entire economy. They impact supply lines, worker compensation, service costs, etc. Even worse if it drops 2000% the next day. That means that no one is willing to make long term plans. That is exactly what happens with hyperinflation. It isn't that devaluation is occurring with hyperinflation but rather the uncertainty. If the inflation rate was guaranteed to be 10% a week, then they can deal with that. But when they have no idea what it will be a week much less than a month then economy crashes because expenditures can only be initiated on an immediate basis.
jschell wrote:
Even worse if it drops 2000% the next day.
Yes, something that all fiat currencies do in the end. All of the fiat-currencies in the history of mankind have always reached their intrinsic value. BC has not yet had such a loss; might be due to the fact that the appreciation is not caused by fluctuations between currencies, but because it is gaining market - demand is growing, and there are not enough BC available to satisfy demand. The more people use it, the more demand will rise; that is somewhat different from volatility - that is what we have in the fiat Euro, it reacts to any political European article, every Brexit-headline, and any rumours from Super Mario.
jschell wrote:
That means that no one is willing to make long term plans. That is exactly what happens with hyperinflation.
That would only be if people would try to get rid of the currency and flood the market with it. BC aren't flooding the market - but the Central Banks are flooding the world with fiat-currencies. Simple and basic economics :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
jschell wrote:
Even worse if it drops 2000% the next day.
Yes, something that all fiat currencies do in the end. All of the fiat-currencies in the history of mankind have always reached their intrinsic value. BC has not yet had such a loss; might be due to the fact that the appreciation is not caused by fluctuations between currencies, but because it is gaining market - demand is growing, and there are not enough BC available to satisfy demand. The more people use it, the more demand will rise; that is somewhat different from volatility - that is what we have in the fiat Euro, it reacts to any political European article, every Brexit-headline, and any rumours from Super Mario.
jschell wrote:
That means that no one is willing to make long term plans. That is exactly what happens with hyperinflation.
That would only be if people would try to get rid of the currency and flood the market with it. BC aren't flooding the market - but the Central Banks are flooding the world with fiat-currencies. Simple and basic economics :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Yes, something that all fiat currencies do in the end. All of the fiat-currencies in the history of mankind have always reached their intrinsic value
"fiat currencies" have no intrinsic value. If you are trying to claim they all have already reached zero then that is not true. And none of that addresses my point on volatility at the effect of that on day to day basis of a national economy.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
That would only be if people would try to get rid of the currency and flood the market with it
Incorrect. If BC is is drastically going up day to day then it would have a serious impact on day to day economics of a nation. And BC has done exactly that. Doesn't matter if it flatlines in a week or a month. What matters is the serious consequences when it is rapidly rising or falling.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Yes, something that all fiat currencies do in the end. All of the fiat-currencies in the history of mankind have always reached their intrinsic value
"fiat currencies" have no intrinsic value. If you are trying to claim they all have already reached zero then that is not true. And none of that addresses my point on volatility at the effect of that on day to day basis of a national economy.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
That would only be if people would try to get rid of the currency and flood the market with it
Incorrect. If BC is is drastically going up day to day then it would have a serious impact on day to day economics of a nation. And BC has done exactly that. Doesn't matter if it flatlines in a week or a month. What matters is the serious consequences when it is rapidly rising or falling.
jschell wrote:
"fiat currencies" have no intrinsic value. If you are trying to claim they all have already reached zero then that is not true.
Not "already". Read the same sentence again :)
jschell wrote:
And none of that addresses my point on volatility at the effect of that on day to day basis of a national economy.
Because volatility it is not. Price does not change due to heavy changes in (geo)politics, economics - price is slowly climbing because acceptance (and hence marketshare) is slowly climbing.
jschell wrote:
What matters is the serious consequences when it is rapidly rising or falling.
That's what I said about Apple :D
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]