Ben Bernanke on bubbles, bitcoin, and why he’s not a ...

TIL Someone created an 'Assassination Market' using Bitcoins as the payment method. The price to hit Ben Bernanke was the equivalent of $75,000.

TIL Someone created an 'Assassination Market' using Bitcoins as the payment method. The price to hit Ben Bernanke was the equivalent of $75,000. submitted by The_1st_Doctor to todayilearned [link] [comments]

Someone created an 'Assassination Market' using Bitcoins as the payment method. The price to hit Ben Bernanke was the equivalent of $75,000.

Someone created an 'Assassination Market' using Bitcoins as the payment method. The price to hit Ben Bernanke was the equivalent of $75,000. submitted by MrsSippy to conspiracy [link] [comments]

[uncensored-r/Bitcoin] Bitcoin prices over 1Y vs Ben Bernanke's chart of a bubble

The following post by pbwarren2001 is being replicated because the post has been silently greylisted.
The original post can be found(in censored form) at this link:
np.reddit.com/ Bitcoin/comments/7rj0c0
The original post's content was as follows:
https://imgur.com/qVXMITy
submitted by censorship_notifier to noncensored_bitcoin [link] [comments]

TIL Someone created an 'Assassination Market' using Bitcoins as the payment method. The price to hit Ben Bernanke was the equivalent of $75,000. - todayilearned

TIL Someone created an 'Assassination Market' using Bitcoins as the payment method. The price to hit Ben Bernanke was the equivalent of $75,000. - todayilearned submitted by Know_Your_Shit to knowyourshit [link] [comments]

TIL Someone created an 'Assassination Market' using Bitcoins as the payment method. The price to hit Ben Bernanke was the equivalent of $75,000.

TIL Someone created an 'Assassination Market' using Bitcoins as the payment method. The price to hit Ben Bernanke was the equivalent of $75,000. submitted by unremovable to unremovable [link] [comments]

Someone created an 'Assassination Market' using Bitcoins as the payment method. The price to hit Ben Bernanke was the equivalent of $75,000.

source link: Someone created an 'Assassination Market' using Bitcoins as the payment method. The price to hit Ben Bernanke was the equivalent of $75,000.
poster: MrsSippy, original conspiracy link
Discourse level: 100%
Shills: 0%
submitted by conspirobot to conspiro [link] [comments]

Complete Guide to All r/neoliberal Flair Personalities [J-L]

Please see the first post [A-I] for more info about this post. Unfortunately, post character limit is 40k, so I will have to break this into multiple posts linked here:

[A-I]

[J-L]

[M-P]

[Q-Z]


James Heckman
1944 – Present Born: United States Resides: United States
· Professor in Economics at the University of Chicago. Professor at the Harris Graduate School of Public Policy Studies. Director of the Center for the Economics of Human Development (CEHD). Co-Director of Human Capital and Economic Opportunity (HCEO) Global Working Group. Heckman is also a Professor of Law at ‘the Law School’, a senior research fellow at the American Bar Foundation, and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research.
· In 2000, Heckman shared the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences with Daniel McFadden, for his pioneering work in econometrics and microeconomics.
· As of February 2019 (according to RePEc), he is the next most influential economist in the world behind Daniel McFadden.
· Heckman has received numerous awards for his work, including the John Bates Clark Medal of the American Economic Association in 1983, the 2005 and 2007 Dennis Aigner Award for Applied Econometrics from the Journal of Econometrics, the 2005 Jacob Mincer Award for Lifetime Achievement in Labor Economics, the 2005 Ulysses Medal from the University College Dublin, the 2007 Theodore W. Schultz Award from the American Agricultural Economics Association, the Gold Medal of the President of the Italian Republic awarded by the International Scientific Committee of the Pio Manzú Centre in 2008, the Distinguished Contributions to Public Policy for Children Award from the Society for Research in Child Development in 2009, the 2014 Frisch Medal from the Econometric Society, the 2014 Spirit of Erikson Award from the Erikson Institute, and the 2016 Dan David Prize for Combating Poverty from Tel Aviv University.
“The best way to improve the American workforce in the 21st century is to invest in early childhood education, to ensure that even the most disadvantaged children have the opportunity to succeed alongside their more advantaged peers”

Janet Yellen
1945 – Present Born: United States Resides: United States
· Successor to Ben Bernanke, serving as the Chair of the Federal Reserve from 2014 to 2018, and as Vice Chair from 2010 to 2014, following her position as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. Yellen was also Chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers under President Bill Clinton.
· Yellen is a Keynesian economist and advocates the use of monetary policy in stabilizing economic activity over the business cycle. She believes in the modern version of the Phillips curve, which originally was an observation about an inverse relationship between unemployment and inflation. In her 2010 nomination hearing for Vice Chair of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, Yellen said, “The modern version of the Phillips curve model—relating movements in inflation to the degree of slack in the economy—has solid theoretical and empirical support.”
· Yellen is married to George Akerlof, another notable economist, Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences laureate, professor at Georgetown University and the University of California, Berkeley..
· In 2014, Yellen was named by Forbes as the second most powerful woman in the world. She was the highest ranking American on the list. In October 2015, Bloomberg Markets ranked her first in their annual list of the 50 most influential economists and policymakers. In October 2015, Sovereign Wealth Fund Institute ranked Yellen #1 in the Public Investor 100 list. In October 2010, she received the Adam Smith Award from the National Association for Business Economics (NABE).
“In the long run, outsourcing is another form of trade that benefits the U.S. economy by giving us cheaper ways to do things.”
“I'm just opposed to a pure inflation-only mandate in which the only thing a central bank cares about is inflation and not unemployment.”

Jared Polis
1975 – Present Born: United States Resides: United States
· 43rd governor of Colorado since January 2019. Polis served on the Colorado State Board of Education from 2001 to 2007 and was the United States Representative for Colorado's 2nd congressional district from 2009 to 2019.
· Polis is the first openly gay person and second openly LGBT person (after Kate Brown of Oregon) to be elected governor in the United States.
· In 2000 Polis founded the Jared Polis Foundation, whose mission is to “create opportunities for success by supporting educators, increasing access to technology, and strengthening our community.” Polis has also founded two charter schools.
· Polis was named Outstanding Philanthropist for the 2006 National Philanthropy Day in Colorado. He has received many awards, including the Boulder Daily Camera's 2007 Pacesetter Award in Education; the Kauffman Foundation Community Award; the Denver consul general of Mexico “Ohtli”; the Martin Luther King Jr. Colorado Humanitarian Award; and the Anti-Defamation League's inaugural Boulder Community Builder Award.
“Having alternative currencies is great, right, because, historically, government's had a monopoly on currency. At the end of the day, why should only politicians—either directly or indirectly—control the currency? We can reduce transaction cost, provide an alternative, and—look, I don't know whether it'll be Bitcoin or not—but I think the concept of digital currencies is here to stay, and the fact that a politician would write to try to ban them in their infancy is just the wrong way to go about it. Let the market determine whether there's any value there or not.”

Jeff Bezos
1964 – Present Born: United States Resides: United States
· Best known as the founder, CEO, and president of Amazon, Bezos is an American internet and aerospace entrepreneur, media proprietor, and investor. The first centi-billionaire on the Forbes wealth index, Bezos was named the “richest man in modern history” after his net worth increased to $150 billion in July 2018. In September 2018, Forbes described him as “far richer than anyone else on the planet” as he added $1.8 billion to his net worth when Amazon became the second company in history to reach a market cap of $1 trillion.
· Bezos supported the electoral campaigns of U.S. senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, two Democratic U.S. senators from Washington. He has also supported U.S. representative John Conyers, as well as Patrick Leahy and Spencer Abraham, U.S. senators serving on committees dealing with Internet-related issues.
· Bezos has supported the legalization of same-sex marriage, and in 2012 contributed $2.5 million to a group supporting a yes vote on Washington Referendum 74, which affirmed same-sex marriage.
· After the 2016 presidential election, Bezos was invited to join Donald Trump's Defense Innovation Advisory Board, an advisory council to improve the technology used by the Defense Department. Bezos declined the offer without further comment.
· In September 2018, Business Insider reported that Bezos was the only one of the top five billionaires in the world who had not signed the Giving Pledge, an initiative created by Bill Gates and Warren Buffett that encourage wealthy people to give away their wealth.
“Percentage margins don't matter. What matters always is dollar margins: the actual dollar amount. Companies are valued not on their percentage margins, but on how many dollars they actually make, and a multiple of that.”
“We have the resources to build room for a trillion humans in this solar system, and when we have a trillion humans, we'll have a thousand Einsteins and a thousand Mozarts. It will be a way more interesting place to live.”

Jens Weidmann
1968 – Present Born: Germany Resides: Germany
· German economist and president of the Deutsche Bundesbank. Chairman of the Board of the Bank for International Settlements. From 1997 to 1999, Weidmann worked at the International Monetary Fund. In 2006, he began serving as Head of Division IV (Economic and Financial Policy) in the Federal Chancellery. He was the chief negotiator of the Federal Republic of Germany for both the summits of the G8 and the G20. He was given the 2016 Medal for Extraordinary Merits for Bavaria in a United Europe.
· Weidmann was involved in a series of major decisions in response to the financial crisis in Germany and Europe: preventing the meltdown of the bank Hypo Real Estate, guaranteeing German deposits and implementing a rescue programme for the banking system, piecing together two fiscal-stimulus programmes, and setting up the Greek bail-out package and the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF).
· In a 2011 speech, Weidmann criticized the errors and “many years of wrong developments” of the European Monetary Union (EMU) peripheral states, particularly the wasted opportunity represented by their “disproportionate investment in private home-building, high government spending or private consumption”. In May, 2012, Weidmann's stance was characterized by US economist and columnist Paul Krugman as amounting to wanting to destroy the Euro. In 2016, Weidmann dismissed deflation in light of the European Central Bank's current stimulus program, pointing out the healthy condition of the German economy and that the euro area is not that bad off.
“I share the concerns regarding monetary policy that is too loose for too long. … As you know I have concerns about granting emergency liquidity on account of the fact that the banks are not doing everything to improve their liquidity situation.”

Jerome Powell
1953 – Present Born: United States Resides: United States
· Current Chair of the Federal Reserve, nominated by Trump. Powell has faced substantial and repeated criticism from Trump after his confirmation. The Senate Banking Committee approved Powell's nomination in a 22–1 vote, with Senator Elizabeth Warren casting the lone dissenting vote.
· Powell briefly served as Under Secretary of the Treasury for Domestic Finance under George H. W. Bush in 1992. He has served as a member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors since 2012. He is the first Chair of the Federal Reserve since 1987 not to hold a Ph.D. degree in Economics.
· Powell has described the Fed's role as nonpartisan and apolitical. Trump has criticized Powell for not massively lowering federal interest rates and instituting quantitative easing.
· The Bloomberg Intelligence Fed Spectrometer rated Powell as neutral (not dove nor hawk). Powell has been a skeptic of round 3 of quantitative easing, initiated in 2012, although he did vote in favor of implementation.
· Powell stated that higher capital and liquidity requirements and stress tests have made the financial system safer and must be preserved. However, he also stated that the Volcker Rule should be re-written to exclude smaller banks. Powell supports ample amounts of private capital to support housing finance activities.
“The Fed's organization reflects a long-standing desire in American history to ensure that power over our nation's monetary policy and financial system is not concentrated in a few hands, whether in Washington or in high finance or in any single group or constituency.”

John Cochrane
1957 – Present Born: United States Resides: United States
· Senior Fellow of the Hoover Institution at Stanford University and economist, specializing in financial economics and macroeconomics.
· The central idea of Cochrane's research is that macroeconomics and finance should be linked, and a comprehensive theory needs to explain both 1.) how, given the observed prices and financial returns, households and firms decide on consumption, investment, and financing; and 2.) how, in equilibrium, prices and financial returns are determined by households and firms decisions.
· Cochrane is the author of ‘Asset Pricing,’ a widely used textbook in graduate courses on asset pricing. According to his own words, the organizing principle of the book is that everything can be traced back to specializations of a single equation: the basic pricing equation. Cochrane received the TIAA-CREF Institute Paul A. Samuelson Award for this book.
“Regulators and politicians aren’t nitwits. The libertarian argument that regulation is so dumb — which it surely is — misses the point that it is enacted by really smart people. The fact that the regulatory state is an ideal tool for the entrenchment of political power was surely not missed by its architects.”

John Keynes (John Maynard Keynes, 1st Baron Keynes)
1883 – 1946 Born: England Died: England
· British economist, whose ideas fundamentally changed the theory and practice of macroeconomics and the economic policies of governments. Originally trained in mathematics, he built on and greatly refined earlier work on the causes of business cycles, and was one of the most influential economists of the 20th century. Widely considered the founder of modern macroeconomics, his ideas are the basis for the school of thought known as Keynesian economics, and its various offshoots. Keynes was a lifelong member of the Liberal Party, which until the 1920s had been one of the two main political parties in the United Kingdom.
· During the 1930s Great Depression, Keynes challenged the ideas of neoclassical economics that held that free markets would, in the short to medium term, automatically provide full employment, as long as workers were flexible in their wage demands. He argued that aggregate demand (total spending in the economy) determined the overall level of economic activity, and that inadequate aggregate demand could lead to prolonged periods of high unemployment. Keynes advocated the use of fiscal and monetary policies to mitigate the adverse effects of economic recessions and depressions.
· Keynes's influence started to wane in the 1970s, his ideas challenged by those who disputed the ability of government to favorably regulate the business cycle with fiscal policy. However, the advent of the global financial crisis of 2007–2008 sparked a resurgence in Keynesian thought. Keynesian economics provided the theoretical underpinning for economic policies undertaken in response to the crisis by President Barack Obama of the United States, Prime Minister Gordon Brown of the United Kingdom, and other heads of governments.
· Keynes was vice-chairman of the Marie Stopes Society which provided birth control education and campaigned against job discrimination against women and unequal pay. He was an outspoken critic of laws against homosexuality. Keynes thought that the pursuit of money for its own sake was a pathological condition, and that the proper aim of work is to provide leisure. He wanted shorter working hours and longer holidays for all. Keynes was ultimately a successful investor, building up a private fortune.
“How can I accept the Communist doctrine, which sets up as its bible, above and beyond criticism, an obsolete textbook which I know not only to be scientifically erroneous but without interest or application to the modern world? How can I adopt a creed which, preferring the mud to the fish, exalts the boorish proletariat above the bourgeoisie and the intelligentsia, who with all their faults, are the quality of life and surely carry the seeds of all human achievement? Even if we need a religion, how can we find it in the turbid rubbish of the red bookshop? It is hard for an educated, decent, intelligent son of Western Europe to find his ideals here, unless he has first suffered some strange and horrid process of conversion which has changed all his values.”

John Locke
1632 – 1704 Born: England Died: England
· Known as the “Father of Liberalism,” Locke was an English philosopher and physician, widely regarded as one of the most influential of Enlightenment thinkers. His work greatly affected the development of epistemology and political philosophy. His writings influenced Voltaire and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, many Scottish Enlightenment thinkers, as well as the American revolutionaries. His contributions to classical republicanism and liberal theory are reflected in the United States Declaration of Independence.
· Locke's political theory was founded on social contract theory. Social contract arguments typically posit that individuals have consented, either explicitly or tacitly, to surrender some of their freedoms and submit to the authority (of the ruler, or to the decision of a majority) in exchange for protection of their remaining rights or maintenance of the social order.
· Locke advocated for governmental separation of powers and believed that revolution is not only a right but an obligation in some circumstances. Locke was vehemently opposed to slavery, calling it “vile and miserable … directly opposite to the generous Temper and Courage of our Nation.”
· Locke uses the word “property” in both broad and narrow senses. In a broad sense, it covers a wide range of human interests and aspirations; more narrowly, it refers to material goods. He argues that property is a natural right and it is derived from labour aand that the individual ownership of goods and property is justified by the labour exerted to produce those goods
· According to Locke, unused property is wasteful and an offence against nature, but, with the introduction of “durable” goods, men could exchange their excessive perishable goods for goods that would last longer and thus not offend the natural law. In his view, the introduction of money marks the culmination of this process, making possible the unlimited accumulation of property without causing waste through spoilage.
“The power of the legislative, being derived from the people by a positive voluntary grant and institution, can be no other than what that positive grant conveyed, which being only to make laws, and not to make legislators, the legislative can have no power to transfer their authority of making laws, and place it in other hands.”
“No man in civil society can be exempted from the laws of it: for if any man may do what he thinks fit, and there be no appeal on earth, for redress or security against any harm he shall do; I ask, whether he be not perfectly still in the state of nature, and so can be no part or member of that civil society; unless any one will say, the state of nature and civil society are one and the same thing, which I have never yet found any one so great a patron of anarchy as to affirm.”

John Mill (John Stuart Mill a.k.a. J. S. Mill)
1806 – 1873 Born: England Died: France
· John Stuart Mill was arguably the most influential English speaking philosopher of the nineteenth century. He was a naturalist, a utilitarian, and a liberal, whose work explores the consequences of a thoroughgoing empiricist outlook. In doing so, he sought to combine the best of eighteenth-century Enlightenment thinking with newly emerging currents of nineteenth-century Romantic and historical philosophy. His most important works include System of Logic (1843), On Liberty (1859), Utilitarianism (1861) and An Examination of Sir William Hamilton’s Philosophy (1865).
· Mill's conception of liberty justified the freedom of the individual in opposition to unlimited state and social control. A member of the Liberal Party and author of the early feminist work The Subjection of Women (in which he also condemned slavery), he was also the second Member of Parliament to call for women's suffrage after Henry Hunt in 1832.
· Mill, an employee for the British East India Company from 1823 to 1858, argued in support of what he called a “benevolent despotism” with regard to the colonies. Mill argued that “To suppose that the same international customs, and the same rules of international morality, can obtain between one civilized nation and another, and between civilized nations and barbarians, is a grave error. ... To characterize any conduct whatever towards a barbarous people as a violation of the law of nations, only shows that he who so speaks has never considered the subject.”
· John Stuart Mill believed in the philosophy of Utilitarianism, which he described as the principle that holds “that actions are right in the proportion as they tend to promote happiness [intended pleasure, and the absence of pain], wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness [pain, and the privation of pleasure].” Mill asserts that even when we value virtues for selfish reasons we are in fact cherishing them as a part of our happiness.
· Mill's early economic philosophy was one of free markets. However, he accepted interventions in the economy, such as a tax on alcohol, if there were sufficient utilitarian grounds. Mill originally believed that “equality of taxation” meant “equality of sacrifice” and that progressive taxation penalized those who worked harder and saved more. Given an equal tax rate regardless of income, Mill agreed that inheritance should be taxed.
· His main objection of socialism was on that of what he saw its destruction of competition. According to Mill, a socialist society would only be attainable through the provision of basic education for all, promoting economic democracy instead of capitalism, in the manner of substituting capitalist businesses with worker cooperatives.
· Mill's major work on political democracy defends two fundamental principles at slight odds with each other: extensive participation by citizens and enlightened competence of rulers. He believed that the incompetence of the masses could eventually be overcome if they were given a chance to take part in politics, especially at the local level.
· Mill is one of the few political philosophers ever to serve in government as an elected official. In his three years in Parliament, he was more willing to compromise than the “radical” principles expressed in his writing would lead one to expect.
“He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion... Nor is it enough that he should hear the opinions of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them...he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.”
“The only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it. Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily, or mental or spiritual. Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest.”

John Rawls
1921 – 2002 Born: United States Died: United States
· Liberal American moral and political philosopher who received both the Schock Prize for Logic and Philosophy and the National Humanities Medal in 1999, the latter presented by President Bill Clinton, who acclaimed Rawls for having “helped a whole generation of learned Americans revive their faith in democracy itself.” He is frequently cited by the courts of law in the United States and Canada.
· Rawls's most discussed work is his theory of a just liberal society, called justice as fairness. Rawls first wrote about this theory in his book A Theory of Justice. Rawls spoke much about the desire for a well-ordered society; a society of free and equal persons cooperating on fair terms of social cooperation.
· Rawls’s most important principle (the Liberty Principal) states that every individual has an equal right to basic liberties. Rawls believes that “personal property” constitutes a basic liberty, but an absolute right to unlimited private property is not.
· Rawls's argument for his principles of social justice uses a thought experiment called the “original position”, in which people select what kind of society they would choose to live under if they did not know which social position they would personally occupy.
“Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is of systems of thought. A theory however elegant and economical must be rejected or revised if it is untrue; likewise laws and institutions no matter how efficient and well-arranged must be reformed or abolished if they are unjust. Each person possesses an inviolability founded on justice that even the welfare of society as a whole cannot override. For this reason justice denies that the loss of freedom for some is made right by a greater good shared by others. It does not allow that the sacrifices imposed on a few are outweighed by the larger sum of advantages enjoyed by many. Therefore in a just society the liberties of equal citizenship are taken as settled; the rights secured by justice are not subject to political bargaining or to the calculus of social interests.”

Joseph Nye
1937 – Present Born: United States Resides: United States
· American political scientist and co-founder of the international relations theory of neoliberalism (a theory concerned first and foremost with absolute gains rather than relative gains to other states), developed in the 1977 book Power and Interdependence. He is noted for his notion of “smart power” (“the ability to combine hard and soft power into a successful strategy”), which became a popular phrase with the Clinton and Obama Administrations.
· Secretary of State John Kerry appointed Nye to the Foreign Affairs Policy Board in 2014. In 2014, Nye was awarded the Order of the Rising Sun, Gold and Silver Star in recognition of his “contribution to the development of studies on Japan-U.S. security and to the promotion of the mutual understanding between Japan and the United States.”
· From 1977 to 1979, Nye was Deputy to the Undersecretary of State for Security Assistance, Science, and Technology and chaired the National Security Council Group on Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons. In recognition of his service, he was awarded the State Department's Distinguished Honor Award in 1979. In 1993 and 1994, he was Chairman of the National Intelligence Council, which coordinates intelligence estimates for the President, and was awarded the Intelligence Community's Distinguished Service Medal. In the Clinton Administration from 1994 to 1995, Nye served as Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, and was awarded the Department's Distinguished Service Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster. Nye was considered by many to be the preferred choice for National Security Advisor in the 2004 presidential campaign of John Kerry.
· Nye has been a member of the Harvard faculty since 1964. He is a fellow of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences and a foreign fellow of The British Academy. Nye is also a member of the American Academy of Diplomacy. The 2011 TRIP survey of over 1700 international relations scholars ranks Joe Nye as the sixth most influential scholar in the field of international relations in the past twenty years. He was also ranked as most influential in American foreign policy. In 2011, Foreign Policy magazine named him to its list of top global thinkers. In September 2014, Foreign Policy reported that the international relations scholars and policymakers both ranked Nye as one of the most influential scholars.
“When you can get others to admire your ideals and to want what you want, you do not have to spend as much on sticks and carrots to move them in your direction. Seduction is always more effective than coercion, and many values like democracy, human rights, and individual opportunities are deeply seductive.”

Karl Popper
1902 – 1994 Born: Austria-Hungary Died: England
· Karl Popper is generally regarded as one of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century. He was a self-professed critical-rationalist, a dedicated opponent of all forms of scepticism, conventionalism, and relativism in science and in human affairs generally and a committed advocate and staunch defender of the ‘Open Society’.
· In ‘The Open Society and Its Enemies’ and ‘The Poverty of Historicism’, Popper developed a critique of historicism and a defense of the “Open Society”. Popper considered historicism to be the theory that history develops inexorably and necessarily according to knowable general laws towards a determinate end. He argued that this view is the principal theoretical presupposition underpinning most forms of authoritarianism and totalitarianism. He argued that historicism is founded upon mistaken assumptions regarding the nature of scientific law and prediction. Since the growth of human knowledge is a causal factor in the evolution of human history, and since “no society can predict, scientifically, its own future states of knowledge”, it follows, he argued, that there can be no predictive science of human history. For Popper, metaphysical and historical indeterminism go hand in hand.
· Popper is known for his vigorous defense of liberal democracy and the principles of social criticism that he believed made a flourishing open society possible. His political philosophy embraced ideas from major democratic political ideologies, including socialism/social democracy, libertarianism/classical liberalism and conservatism, and attempted to reconcile them.
“Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.”

Lawrence Summers
1954 – Present Born: United States Resides: United States
· American economist, former Vice President of Development Economics and Chief Economist of the World Bank, senior U.S. Treasury Department official throughout President Clinton's administration, Treasury Secretary 1999–2001, and former director of the National Economic Council for President Obama (2009–2010). Summers served as the 27th President of Harvard University from 2001 to 2006. Current professor and director of the Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government.
· As a researcher, Summers has made important contributions in many areas of economics, primarily public finance, labor economics, financial economics, and macroeconomics. Summers has also worked in international economics, economic demography, economic history and development economics.[ He received the John Bates Clark Medal in 1993 from the American Economic Association. In 1987, he was the first social scientist to win the Alan T. Waterman Award from the National Science Foundation. Summers is also a member of the National Academy of Sciences.
· In 1983, at age 28, Summers became one of the youngest tenured professors in Harvard's history. In 2006, Summers resigned as Harvard's president in the wake of a no-confidence vote by Harvard faculty. Summers viewed his beliefs on why science and engineering had an under-representation of women to be a large part in the vote, saying, “There is a great deal of absurd political correctness. Now, I'm somebody who believes very strongly in diversity, who resists racism in all of its many incarnations, who thinks that there is a great deal that's unjust in American society that needs to be combated, but it seems to be that there is a kind of creeping totalitarianism in terms of what kind of ideas are acceptable and are debatable on college campuses.”
· As the World Bank's Vice President of Development Economics and Chief Economist, Summers played a role in designing strategies to aid developing countries, worked on the bank's loan committee, guided the bank's research and statistics operations, and guided external training programs. The World Bank's official site reports that Summer's research included an “influential” report that demonstrated a very high return from investments in educating girls in developing nations. According to The Economist, Summers was “often at the centre of heated debates” about economic policy, to an extent exceptional for the history of the World Bank in recent decades.
· In 1999 Summers endorsed the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act which removed the separation between investment and commercial banks. In February 2009, Summers quoted John Maynard Keynes, saying “When circumstances change, I change my opinion”, reflecting both on the failures of Wall Street deregulation and his new leadership role in the government bailout.
submitted by learnactreform to neoliberal [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Critic Peter Schiff Wins a Bet for a Gold Coin About Interest Rates - He Predicted Correctly 7 Months Into Future

TL;DR: Schiff won a bet made January 20, 2019 about interest rates which were lowered today for the first time since 2008.
Video Proof: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZFWL4FLic4
Many have seen the name Peter Schiff crop up around cryptocurrency forums, mostly related to his steadfast belief crypto can't work. People may wonder why he's important. The title is the reason.
While most here would disagree with Peter Schiff on Bitcoin, many (like myself) completely agree with him on other things, like politics, economics, and central banks and their policies. What just happened today demonstrates, in impressive fashion, why people like Schiff (economic adviser to Ron Paul's 2008 presidential campaign) command respect.
What Happened
The U.S. Federal Reserve embarked on unprecedented monetary policy in response to the Great Recession of 2008, lowering interest rates and pumping money into the system to avert a further drop in economic activity. The head of the Fed at the time, Ben Bernanke, gave no indication he saw the collapse coming in contrast to people like Peter Schiff (and others like Mike Maloney) who warned a large economic problem was coming soon. In other words, Peter went against mainstream beliefs at the time.
Peter just won a bet today doing the same thing. Making today's news is the announcement the Federal Reserve will cut interest rates. It's significant for two reasons. First, it's the first time this has happened since 2008, over ten years ago! Second, as recently as the beginning of the year not only did nobody expect the Fed to cut rates in 2019, they expected the opposite, rate hikes and more than one hike. Peter's bet was the equivalent of betting on a horse given the worst odds in a race, but ending up winning.
Additionally, Peter gave his thoughts about gold prices. At that time in January gold was at about $1,280 per ounce. The panelist Peter bet against said he believed gold would go down in the coming months to around $1,000. Peter, however, said he thought that it was a slim likelihood gold would go back down to $1,000 and even slim it would go below $1,200. He was right again. Today gold is just over $1,400 per ounce.
Follow Peter Schiff here: https://www.youtube.com/useSchiffReport
submitted by cryptos4pz to btc [link] [comments]

The Case for XRP in 2018

Cryptocurrencies have grown exponentially not only in price this past year but also in public awareness and popular attention. The novel feeling to an emerging financial and technological market is reminiscent of the rise of the Internet with its innovative potential. In turn, a heightened collective societal awareness of this new innovative potential has led to a change in the nature of the market dynamics of cryptocurrencies. As Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle posits, “The observation of a phenomenon changes the phenomena itself.” The observation of thousands of young millennials, and now middle-aged investors, will only accelerate the rise of cryptocurrencies as times goes on.
Today, we are seeing the real-world effects of a newfound intrigue into cryptocurrencies. This new interest is causing a narrowing of the divergence between truth and fiction over accurate knowledge about cryptocurrencies. The force drawing this gap narrower each day is an increased dissemination of truthful information that has generated legions of individual investors into new cryptocurrency markets; in particular, Ripple’s XRP.
As the public expands its understanding of Ripple’s XRP, the capital inflow from both individual and institutional investors combined will likely grow to levels that will exponentially grow the liquidity of XRP and, as a byproduct, its price.
Here, in this report, I will provide an overview and analysis of Ripple’s XRP and the implications Q4 2017 and the year 2018 and beyond hold for the future of XRP and its price.
THE CONCEPT: WHAT IS XRP?
XRP is the digital asset used by Ripple to offer financial institutions an option for liquidity to conduct cross-border payments. It is predominantly used for Ripple’s solution for the minimization of liquidity costs. In contrast to most other cryptocurrencies, XRP’s application here features a real-world applicability that extends to real-world transactions. It is used for the xRapid solution provided by Ripple, and is the only one of the three solutions Ripple offers (The others are xCurrent and xVia) that employs the use of XRP.
THE RATIONALE: WHY XRP?
There is a myriad of factors that distinguish XRP from other cryptocurrencies and establish it as a forerunner to what may become the dominant cryptocurrencies in the years that lie ahead.
Cost: Comparatively, XRP has the lowest cost per transaction at $0.0004. In contrast, BCH is $0.26, LTC is $0.37, DASH is $0.64, ETH is $0.96, and BTC is $28.23.
Scalability: XRP can handle over 1,500 transactions per second whereas BCH can handle 24 per second, LTC can handle 56 per second, DASH can handle 10 per second, ETH can handle 16 per second, and BTC can handle 24 per second.
Speed: XRP can conduct transactions at a rate of 3 seconds per transaction, BCH at a rate of 58 minutes per transaction, LTC at 17 minutes per transaction, DASH at 15 minutes per transaction, ETH at 2 minutes per transaction, and BTC 1 hour and 6 minutes per transaction.
XRP’s availability is ever-expanding. It is currently available on over 50 exchanges including Bitstamp, Bithumb, Bittrex, Binance, Bitfinex, Kraken, and Poloniex. The volume of XRP availability is, in addition, in an expansionary phase. The primary location of exchange volume is concentrated in Asia; in particular, South Korea. However, as mainstream media attention increases, so will American interest as well. There already have been tell-tale signs indicative in news outlets that have covered Ripple recently in the wake of XRP’s rise in CNBC, Bloomberg, Forbes, Investopedia, and Yahoo Finance.
Simply consider the mania generated by the media attention to Bitcoin. Repetitive news stories featured on CNBC, Bloomberg, CNN, CBS, and other mainstream media news outlets. Countless articles disparaging it as a bubble and hailing it as a force that could deconstruct the financial apparatus governed by the Federal Reserve and other central banks. Now, consider the results of media attention directed towards the substantive information behind XRP. Once news segments and articles are shown and written that illustrate the comparative superiority of XRP to other cryptocurrencies, then the viewers and readers will likely flock to XRP in pursuit of acquiring a tried, tested, and proven cryptocurrency with real-world usage.
In turn, a virtuous circle intensifying capital inflow to XRP is predictable and probably to occur. We can expect FOMO to rise and a number of oscillations up and down for the price to unfold. Nevertheless, the price of XRP is bound to not only remain but rather accelerate its demonstrated upwards price trajectory pushing us to new heights.
Additionally, if the collective fear among cryptocurrency investors materializes, that is, if new regulations are imposed on our activities, then Ripple is stand to likely gain. Dr. Nassim Nicholas Taleb, a scholar and risk analyst writes about a concept called “Antifragility.” Antifragility is a term used to describe things that gain from disorder. Considering Ripple’s ties to financial institutions and regulators, it wouldn’t be too far-off to speculate that XRP is positioned to gain if such a black swan event were to occur.
FURTHER REASONS TO ADVANCE THE CASE FOR XRP:
Financial institutions, renown investors, and accomplished financiers have already taken notice of XRP. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has advocated on Ripple’s behalf. Zoe Cruz, former president for institutional securities and wealth management at Morgan Stanley and former global head of fixed income, commodities, and foreign exchange has joined Ripple’s Board of Directors. She has been named to Forbes list of Most Powerful Women for three years straight.
Perhaps most notably, a consortium of 61 banks – organized by SBI Ripple Asia – will be adopting Ripple’s technology to settle transactions between its members with the eventual goal of applying XRP to usage. Mr. Yoshitaka Kitao, the CEO, Executive Chairman, and President has publicly stated, “Forget about bitcoin, we’re all in on XRP!” In fact, SBI has already confirmed that XRP will be put in usage in Spring 2018. If successful, expect the price to reflect it.
Moreover, TechCrunch Founder Michael Arrington has, as of November 2017, announced a $100 million XRP hedge fund. His efforts have already raised $50 million which will engender a ripple effect of new large net-worth individual and institutional investors. The entity will be called Arrington XRP Capital and new information about its activities are set to be released in the months that lie ahead.
Also, David Schwartz, Ripple’s Chief Cryptographer, has said that there are two major “household” companies (Not financial institutions) that will be announced in Q4. This is likely to provide a substantial boon to XRP.
Finally, the Chief Technology Officer of Ripple, Stefan Thomas, has said that in 2018 there will be a “big push on XRP.” For years, Ripple has kept a relative silence in expressing the superiority of XRP. 2018 will be different. 2018 is bound to be Ripple’s year. I expect the price to rise as high as $10 and as low as $4.
At any rate, this report only scratches the surface of Ripple and XRP’s potential. For far more nuanced and in-depth analysis and information, I suggest reading from Ripple firsthand at www.ripple.com and perusing the best blog on XRP itself at https://xrphodor.wordpress.com/
To the moon, we go.
SOURCE: https://cellardoorway.com/2017/12/24/the-case-for-ripples-xrp-a-brief-overview/
submitted by OttoVonBismarck- to Ripple [link] [comments]

Three potential catalysts

Introduction and disclaimer

Everyone else does a bit of pontificating on here, so I'm going to have my turn! Please feel free to correct me if I have made any mistakes. And, of course, do challenge the ideas if you think I'm wrong. I hope these thoughts can spark some friendly debate.

Three Catalysts?

Browse this sub and if you can get past the endless shitposts about 'lambos' and 'the mooooon' and 'should I buy now?' and 'how high can it go?' and 'what does market cap mean?' and 'what's the easiest way to buy XRP using Tuvaluan dollars?' and 'can somebody help me to tie my shoelaces?' and so on, you will start to see posts about three possible near-term catalysts.

1. SWELL

Ripple Labs is holding a big conference (called SWELL) in October. It is taking place on the same days and in the same city as Swift's SIBOS conference. The keynote speakers at SWELL will be:

2. THE LOCKUP

Ripple Labs holds about 62 billion XRP. The company has pledged to put 55 billion XRP into a cryptographically secured escrow account. The account will hold 55 contracts of 1 billion XRP each, with one contract expiring on the first day of every month from months 0 to 54. As each contract expires, the 1 billion XRP will become available for Ripple to 'use' (which likely means sell to financial institutions). Whatever is not used at the end of each month will be put back into escrow and become available to Ripple 54 months later.

3. XRP ADOPTION

Ripple sells software that helps banks to lower costs related to overseas remittances. Ripple is working with over 90 banks globally, some 30 pilots have been run, and more than 10 banks are moving into commercial use. Ripple also sells XRP. This asset is intended to be used as a 'bridge currency' in conjunction with the Ripple software. Banks who use it can practically double their cost savings. As far as we know, banks are not using it in any great volume yet.

Why does XRP's price fluctuate?

Well, why does any cryptocurrency's price fluctuate? Two reasons: speculation and demand.

What about these catalysts, then?

So what impact will the abovementioned (potential) catalysts have on the price of XRP?

SWELL

A lot of folks on here are very excited about SWELL. And I can't really blame them. The conference looks awesome. If you haven't checked out the agenda, you really should. It looks like a top-notch event. But what does it mean for the price of XRP? Well, it might cause a short-term spike if the day traders get as excited about this as the true-believers are. But once that price spikes, you can expect these guys to take profit and the price to correct accordingly. All the way? 50% retreat? I couldn't tell you. Which is why I'm no day trader. SWELL might also get some investors excited. People new to the crypto space will hear about XRP for the first time and their imaginations might be fired the same way ours have been. This could give the price a sustainable boost. "To the moon?" you ask. Don't ask. It's a stupid question and you're stupid for asking, ya stupid-face. "But CuriousZerper, I heard Ripple may use the conference to announce that SBI is going live with XRP!" I've read this, too, but it doesn't make much sense. Tech companies don't use conferences to announce that they have new customers or that they their customers are using their products. They use conferences to showcase their products, to generate publicity, and to win new customers. I'm not saying some kind of SBI-related announcement is out of the question, I'm just saying it seems unlikely to me.

THE LOCKUP

Ripple holds the lion's share of XRP. The company uses it to incentivize market makers. There is a fear among people who "regurgitate FUD" (hat-tip to sjoelkatz for the phraseology!) that Ripple Labs might just dump this onto the market to make a quick buck. This is known as overhang risk. But dumping XRP would be suicidal for Ripple. The company's surest way to vast profits is to do everything in its power to make XRP the global currency of choice. At that time, every single zerp it owns will be worth that much more. So what does the lockup mean for the price of XRP? Well, materially, the lockup doesn't really do anything to impact supply. Ripple Labs in May said that it "has sold on average 300 million XRP per month for the past 18 months." So when the escrow takes place and Ripple has 1 billion XRP available for sale every month, this is still FAR MORE than it is currently selling. The escrow serves one purpose: to instill confidence. It will not limit supply, but it may convince some who are on the fence to get off that fence and jump into the pool. (The water's great; come on in!)

XRP ADOPTION

I'll cut to the chase: this is where my hopes lie. The true, long-term, sustainable appreciation in the price XRP will come when the demand is there. Not demand from individuals who have a couple of grand to throw at the coin, but demand from financial institutions (and perhaps non-financial firms, too) who want to hold $50m worth, $200m worth, perhaps even $1b worth. If there are only 100b XRP in existence (and slightly less given that some portion is destroyed with every transaction), each token needs to be worth a hell of a lot more than $0.20 if hundreds or thousands of banks and companies want to transact with it.

Conclusion

So, each of these three potential catalysts might do something for the price, but it is XRP ADOPTION that will have the long-lasting impact. And the stupidity of phrases like "rockets to the moon" overlooks that the adoption may just take place gradually. To borrow the lexical idiocy I have been railing against, the rocket may be halfway to the moon before anybody realizes it has blasted off!
tl;dr SWELL and the escrow may each create a little momentum, but the key to any meaningful appreciation is the widespread adoption of XRP by corporate actors.
submitted by CuriousZerper to Ripple [link] [comments]

Three catalysts for XRP?

Introduction and disclaimer

Hello cryptophiles! I posted essentially the same thing on the /ripple subreddit yesteday and someone suggested you ladies and gents might like to read it, too. Sorry if you've already seen this.
The following ideas are mine. They are the synthesis of lots and lots of reading over the past 5 months or so. Please feel free to correct me if I have made any mistakes. And, of course, do challenge the ideas if you think I'm wrong.

Three Catalysts?

Browse the /ripple sub and if you can get past the endless shitposts about 'lambos' and 'the mooooon' and 'should I buy now?' and 'how high can it go?' and 'what does market cap mean?' and 'what's the easiest way to buy XRP using Tuvaluan dollars?' and 'can somebody help me to tie my shoelaces?' and so on, you will start to see posts about three possible near-term catalysts.

1. SWELL

Ripple Labs is holding a big conference (called SWELL) in October. It is taking place on the same days and in the same city as Swift's SIBOS conference. The keynote speakers at SWELL will be:
  • 1) Dr Ben Bernanke, former chairman of the Federal Reserve; and
  • 2) Sir Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web.

2. THE LOCKUP

Ripple Labs holds about 62 billion XRP. The company has pledged to put 55 billion XRP into a cryptographically secured escrow account. The account will hold 55 contracts of 1 billion XRP each, with one contract expiring on the first day of every month from months 0 to 54. As each contract expires, the 1 billion XRP will become available for Ripple to 'use' (which likely means sell to financial institutions). Whatever is not used at the end of each month will be put back into escrow and become available to Ripple 54 months later.

3. XRP ADOPTION

Ripple sells software that helps banks to lower costs related to overseas remittances. Ripple is working with over 90 banks globally, some 30 pilots have been run, and more than 10 banks are moving into commercial use. Ripple also sells XRP. This asset is intended to be used as a 'bridge currency' in conjunction with the Ripple software. Banks who use it can practically double their cost savings. As far as we know, banks are not using it in any great volume yet.

Why does XRP's price fluctuate?

Well, why does any cryptocurrency's price fluctuate? Two reasons: speculation and demand.
  • Speculation: Traders like to guess which way the price is going to head and they buy and sell the currency to try to make short-term trading gains. Investors are trying something similar, albeit from a longer-term perspective. They think the price will rise over the long term, so they buy the asset. This very process of buying and selling is what causes the price to move.
  • Demand: Believe it or not, but some people actually use cryptocurrencies! Some drug dealers use Monero to make untraceable payments. Some people pay for goods and services with Bitcoin. Some financial institutions use XRP for overseas remittances. Hell, I use XRP to send money to family members who are overseas.

What about these catalysts, then?

So what impact will the abovementioned (potential) catalysts have on the price of XRP?

SWELL

A lot of folks over at /ripple are very excited about SWELL. And I can't really blame them. The conference looks awesome. If you haven't checked out the agenda, you really should. It looks like a top-notch event. But what does it mean for the price of XRP? Well, it might cause a short-term spike if the day traders get as excited about this as the true-believers are. But once that price spikes, you can expect these guys to take profit and the price to correct accordingly. All the way? A 50% retreat? I couldn't tell you. Which is why I'm no day trader. SWELL might also get some investors excited. People new to the crypto space will hear about XRP for the first time and their imaginations might be fired the same way ours have been. This could give the price a sustainable boost. "To the moon?" you ask. Don't ask. It's a stupid question and you're stupid for asking, ya stupid-face. "But CuriousZerper, I heard Ripple may use the conference to announce that SBI is going live with XRP!" I've read this, too, but it doesn't make much sense. Tech companies don't use conferences to announce that they have new customers or that they their customers are using their products. They use conferences to showcase their products, to generate publicity, and to win new customers. I'm not saying some kind of SBI-related announcement is out of the question, I'm just saying it seems unlikely to me.

THE LOCKUP

Ripple holds the lion's share of XRP. The company uses it to incentivize market makers. There is a fear among people who "regurgitate FUD" that Ripple Labs might just dump this onto the market to make a quick buck. This is known as overhang risk. But dumping XRP would be suicidal for Ripple. The company's surest way to vast profits is to do everything in its power to make XRP the global currency of choice. At that time, every single zerp it owns will be worth that much more. So what does the lockup mean for the price of XRP? Well, materially, the lockup doesn't really do anything to impact supply. Ripple Labs in May said that it "has sold on average 300 million XRP per month for the past 18 months." So when the escrow takes place and Ripple has 1 billion XRP available for sale every month, this is still FAR MORE than it is currently selling. The escrow serves one purpose: to instill confidence. It will not limit supply, but it may convince some who are on the fence to get off that fence and jump into the pool. (The water's great; come on in!)

XRP ADOPTION

I'll cut to the chase: this is where my hopes lie. True, long-term, sustainable appreciation in the price XRP will come when the demand is there. Not demand from individuals who have a couple of grand to throw at the coin, but demand from financial institutions (and perhaps non-financial firms, too) who want to hold $50m worth, $200m worth, perhaps even $1b worth. If there are only 100 billion XRP in existence (and slightly less given that some portion is destroyed with every transaction), each token needs to be worth a hell of a lot more than $0.20 if hundreds or thousands of banks and companies want to transact with it.

Conclusion

So, each of these three potential catalysts might do something for the price, but it is XRP ADOPTION that will have the long-lasting impact. And the stupidity of phrases like "rockets to the moon" overlooks that adoption may just take place gradually. To borrow the lexical idiocy I have been railing against, the rocket may be halfway to the moon before anybody realizes it has blasted off!
tl;dr SWELL and the escrow may each create a little momentum for XRP, but the key to any meaningful appreciation is the widespread adoption of the asset by corporate actors.
submitted by CuriousZerper to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Jeff G Throwing the hammer down today on devlist

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 10:33:18 -0700 From: Jeff Garzik [email protected] To: Pieter Wuille [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core and hard forks Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev < [email protected]> wrote:
Some people have called the prospect of limited block space and the development of a fee market a change in policy compared to the past. I respectfully disagree with that. Bitcoin Core is not running the Bitcoin economy, and its developers have no authority to set its rules. Change in economics is always happening, and should be expected. Worse, intervening in consensus changes would make the ecosystem more dependent on the group taking that decision, not less.
This completely ignores reality, what users have experienced for the past ~6 years.
"Change in economics is always happening" does not begin to approach the scale of the change.
For the entirety of bitcoin's history, absent long blocks and traffic bursts, fee pressure has been largely absent.
Moving to a new economic policy where fee pressure is consistently present is radically different from what users, markets, and software have experienced and lived.
Analysis such as [1][2] and more shows that users will hit a "painful" "wall" and market disruption will occur - eventually settling to a new equilibrium after a period of chaos - when blocks are consistently full.
[1] http://hashingit.com/analysis/34-bitcoin-traffic-bulletin [2] http://gavinandresen.ninja/why-increasing-the-max-block-size-is-urgent
First, users & market are forced through this period of chaos by "let a fee market develop" as the whole market changes to a radically different economic policy, once the network has never seen before.
Next, when blocks are consistently full, the past consensus was that block size limit will be increased eventually. What happens at that point?
Answer - Users & market are forced through a second period of chaos and disruption as the fee market is rebooted again by changing the block size limit.
The average user hears a lot of noise on both sides of the block size debate, and really has no idea that the new "let a fee market develop" Bitcoin Core policy is going to raise fees on them.
It is clear that - "let the fee market develop, Right Now" has not been thought through - Users are not prepared for a brand new economic policy - Users are unaware that a brand new economic policy will be foisted upon them
So to point out what I consider obvious: if Bitcoin requires central control over its rules by a group of developers, it is completely uninteresting to me. Consensus changes should be done using consensus, and the default in case of controversy is no change.
False.
All that has to do be done to change bitcoin to a new economic policy - not seen in the entire 6 year history of bitcoin - is to stonewall work on block size.
Closing size increase PRs and failing to participate in planning for a block size increase accomplishes your stated goal of changing bitcoin to a new economic policy.
"no [code] change"... changes bitcoin to a brand new economic policy, picking economic winners & losers. Some businesses will be priced out of bitcoin, etc.
Stonewalling size increase changes is just as much as a Ben Bernanke/FOMC move as increasing the hard limit by hard fork.
My personal opinion is that we - as a community - should indeed let a fee market develop, and rather sooner than later, and that "kicking the can down the road" is an incredibly dangerous precedent: if we are willing to go through the risk of a hard fork because of a fear of change of economics, then I believe that community is not ready to deal with change at all. And some change is inevitable, at any block size. Again, this does not mean the block size needs to be fixed forever, but its intent should be growing with the evolution of technology, not a panic reaction because a fear of change.
But I am not in any position to force this view. I only hope that people don't think a fear of economic change is reason to give up consensus.
Actually you are.
When size increase progress gets frozen out of Bitcoin Core, that just increases the chances that progress must be made through a contentious hard fork.
Further, it increases the market disruption users will experience, as described above.
Think about the users. Please.
submitted by themattt to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Why I'm dumping hundreds of thousands of EUR into BTC instead of stocks, gold, bank deposits or cash

I've been reading up on bitcoin heavily since the wake-up call that was the cyprus banking crises in march 2013. Up to that point I had most of my financial assets in bank deposits, 5% in physical gold, and less than 5% in cash in eur, although we have our own brand of toilet paper: lev (bgn) tied to a fixed exchange rate to eur since 1997 (1 eur = ~ 2BGN). during 1997 bulgaria was going through a huge currency crises with 1 USD reaching 3000 BGN, state pensions going down to $5-10 monthly, salaries of teachers and doctors $20-30 and general mayhem for the 8mil. population at that time as the State was stealing whatever foreign paper currency (usd, deuthche marks mostly) through manipulation of the currency exchange. Since then there has been a currency board established, erasing three zeros from the exchange rate and a newly designed paper money we are still using. The hyperinflation was like a jubilee for all debt holders and a menace for everyone that had savings in local money and not quick enough to convert into other assets. People could by real estate back then for less than $2000-3000 that now easily cost $50-60k!
17 years later, almost a generation later, into 2014 and another crises is looming ahead as we just had 3th (first investment bank) and 4th largest (bulgarian corporate bank) banks going through bank runs, with the 4th totally frozen since june 20th and the 3rd receiving billions in liquidity to contain the run on deposits. Both banks are among the few left among the 30 operating banks with bulgarian owners which are perceived as highly corrupt. Corporate bank had 6.5bil (3.25bil eur) in assets and has been closed for all its clients as more than 4.5bil are supposedly "missing" through suspicious credits to an inner circle of businesses associated with local party mafia rulers and the bank owners themselves - outright criminal ponzi that was backed by the State, as it had deposited money from large energy companies in Corporate bank to keep its capital requirements within the legal threshold. Now the party rulers are pondering the "idea" of covering all deposits through issuing bonds for all citizens to pay through taxes, even those above 100k eur supposedly protected by law, as to "save" it turns out a lot of deputies in the parliament, prosecutors, judges, famous artists, and the general ruling "elite" who have been collecting 8-9% annual interest for the last 10 years through deposits with maturity every 4 months! From here on I expect things are going to deteriorate badly and with an accelerating force as the local rulers seem to be bent over on raping the country financially for saving their own ass, which is to be expected worldwide as centralization always breeds corruption.
After the cyprus bank crises, I started dumping bigger chunks of bank money for larger amounts of gold bullion at once, as a hedge against all the political stupidity that seems inevitable when shtf, guaranteed to happen in the current financial system worldwide. Then the news started gaining steam about the rise of BTC during april and it was the first time I started putting hours a day in reading on the subject of what this fuss about BTC was all about. Few days later I was hooked to BTC like on the hardest drugs available on the market! Still, did not buy any, but started spreading the gospel that is the decentralized nature of crypto to all my friends and through heavy spam on facebook. It took me 2 months before I pumped up my partners to accept BTC in the online businesses that I am a cofounder of, with 3 in the Top 100 by daily traffic and 1 in Top 10 in online commerce by revenue. We were the first major sites in BG (june 2013) to accept BTC and doing some excessive marketing on behalf of BTC through huge onsite ads, special rates for btc payments, special badges ala foursquare for btc users, special and highly attractive subscription packages only available for btc, allowing users with site credits to convert them into btc, putting out blog posts on the subject, giving away bonuses to our employees only in btc and so on. Since accepting BTC we have never converted them back into paper money and keep 100% which turned out to be highly profitable, as we have made 5x the amount just by speculating on the rising price of BTC in contrast to any paper money. We are now going to promote BTC further by giving away BTC to our users for certain tasks and promotions. All of my partners are now invested in btc, buying in btc, building an atm, and very acceptive of whatever initiative that we could put out to further spread btc among our 2.5mil. registered combined user base in a country of 4.5mil. total internet users :-)
Yet, it took me another 4 months in octover 2013 to start buying BTC with my own saved-up money, as I felt highly confident of where I believe BTC is headed, especially after the run on the price thanks to the unlikely culprit ben bernanke's speech in the congress hearing. Ever since then I've been accumulating BTC first by slowly to feel confident of all the security needed to be exercised towards btc long term holdings, then almost daily and now dumping ever larger amounts of fiat paper into btc until I reach a threshold of no more than 25-30% of my assets to be converted into BTC. I've been buying through all the price ups and downs since 10.2013 and am resolved to hold hard for the future no matter the monthly fluctuations. I see BTC as even a greater hedge during turmoil than gold, as BTC can not be stopped by any capital controls, which indians are learning the hard way since their rulers imposed heavy duties on import/export on gold since march 2013.
I'm confident that bitcoin can weather the storms coming its way being upgradable, needing truly global democratic consensus, being deflationary in an ever more inflationary brands of toilet papers, easy to protect from state actors that look up for miniscule reasons to confiscate or put levy on personal wealth, easy to transport and live by on its own as daily more exchanges and businesses are opening up worldwide, gaining more confidence as a store of value and alternative to bank deposits which are easy pray to bank criminality or the unpredictable market forces that can obliterate depositors relying on 3rd party wealth preservation, the best form of payment for the huge knowledge-based economy and workers worldwide that can finally become totally mobile thanks to internet and decentralized money, accelerating remittance opportunities, great store of value in times of ever increasing state authoritarianism under the weight of sovereign debt explosion and rising social promises that need to be backed by real assets and especially people who are ever more mobile and hard to tax to death as internet+bitcoin turns the planet in a highly competitive marketplace for tax-purposes as to what the different offerings of state rulers are. Looking what is heating in the middle east, west vs russia, currency debasement of the world reserve currency worse than during times of world wars, it's not hard to predict than btc has not way to go but up, even if the nsa tries their best to subvert it, the People will find a way to fix it!
submitted by srebrin to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Greg Maxwell has now publicly confessed that he is engaging in deliberate market manipulation to artificially suppress Bitcoin adoption and price. He could be doing this so that he and his associates can continue to accumulate while the price is still low (1 BTC = $570, ie 1 USD can buy 1750 "bits")

https://archive.is/55VtA#selection-301.128-301.394
Greg Maxwell: If you imagine that everyone in the world would wake up tomorrow and know in their heart of hearts that bitcoin would be the true reserve currency of the world, then this would not be good news. The result would be war. People would fight over the supply of bitcoin.
The above statement is a surprisingly revealing admission by Gregory Maxwell (self-appointed dictator of Bitcoin monetary policy CTO of Blockstream, and architect of the Core stalling scaling road-map signed by 57 devs and wannabe devs).
It is quoted from the transcript of the invite-only, semi-transparent (manually transcribed, not recorded) Fed meeting private meeting between Core/Blockstream devs and Chinese miners, held in Silicon Valley on July 30-31, 2016.
There is only one way that a trader (or a regulator!) would interpret the above statement by Gregory Maxwell nullc, where he (perhaps inadvertently but) openly admits that he is trying to prevent a free market where "people would fight over the supply of bitcoin".
Greg's statement constitutes a clear and damning admission of attempted market manipulation, as typically used for activities such as insider trading, and front-running - which are illegal in regulated markets.
Greg Maxwell has now publicly admitted that he is attempting to artificially suppress Bitcoin adoption and price, in the short term.
Maybe he is doing this so that he and his associates can continue to accumulate while the price is still low (1 BTC = $570, ie 1 USD can buy 1750 "bits" - where 1 BTC = 1'000'000 "bits").
Or maybe Greg - and his buddy Adam Back, President of Blockstream - could simply be doing this for any number of reasons related to their ignorance of how economics and politics actually work with open-source currencies.
Either way, this kind of centralized market manipulation is outrageous.
It should not be tolerated in any market in a publicly traded asset - whether regulated or unregulated.
By the way, as we all know, the total supply of Bitcoin is 21 million BTC, or 21 trillion "bits" - which is similar to total money supply for many other measures of currency or wealth (ie, in the tens of trillions of units).
And as we also know, many measures of total world currency or wealth are also in this same range: around 10s of trillions of units (ie: dollars, etc.).
This suggests that (for people who, in Greg's words, already "know in their heart of hearts that bitcoin would be the true reserve currency of the world"), the current price of 1 USD = 1750 "bits" (market-manipulated by Greg Maxwell) is ridiculously low - ie, it's a "steal".
So, people who are currently "short" on bitcoin (ie, they want to buy more), might be thankful for Greg Maxwell's market manipulation - where he is exploiting his position as self-appointed dictator of Bitcoin Blockstream CTO, to engage in central planning in order to manipulate the market, by artificially suppressing Bitcoin adoption and price a while longer (by forcing his "tiny-blocks" approach on everyone: the notorious 1 MB "max blocksize") - simply because he can and he wants to.
Meanwhile, in a regulated market, this sort of blatant centralized "insider influence" on a publicly traded asset class or currency would be illegal.
The only reason Blockstream is able to get away with this kind of crime bullshit is because Bitcoin is unregulated - and the only people who can stop them at this point is us: the Bitcoin community.
For the record, I believe the following:
  • Government interference with Bitcoin would be wrong.
  • Market manipulation of Bitcoin, by artificially suppressing adoption and price, as practiced by Greg Maxwell, is also wrong.
  • The Bitcoin community can and should regulate itself - by letting the free market determine things like what code to run, what "max blocksize" (if any) to adopt - which will in turn naturally determine Bitcoin adoption and price.
So, this public admission of market manipulation by Greg Maxwell constitutes yet another reason why the community should reject his attempt to become some kind of self-appointed dictator for Bitcoin.
Specifically, we can and should use other code (not developed by Greg Maxwell and his minions at Core/Blockstream) which does not impose an artificial 1 MB "max blocksize" - which repeated studies have shown is far below the blocksize supported by our current technology (which would be up to up to 4 MB according to the Cornell study - or even 20 MB, using u/Peter__R's proposed "Xthin" approach).
For additional background, below are 3 previous posts from last week, regarding Core/Blockstream's centralized, behind-the-scenes manipulation of Bitcoin adoption and price:
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4vfkpthe_fedfomc_holds_meetings_to_decide_on_money/
The Fed/FOMC holds meetings to decide on money supply. Core/Blockstream & Chinese miners now hold meetings to decide on money velocity. Both are centralized decision-making. Both are the wrong approach.
Having a "max blocksize" effectively imposes a "maximum money velocity" for Bitcoin - needless central economic planning at its worst.
We should not be waiting for insider information from Ben Bernanke or Janet Yellen or some creepy scammer named u/btcdrak or some economically clueless kid like u/maaku7 in order to determine how our financial system operates.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4vgwe7/so_on_the_expiration_date_of_the_hk_stalling/
So, on the expiration date of the HK stalling / non-scaling non-agreement, Viacoin scammer u/btcdrak calls a meeting with no customer-facing businesses invited (just Chinese miners & Core/Blockstream), and no solutions/agreements allowed, and no transparency (just a transcript from u/kanzure). WTF!?
Bitcoin's so-called "governance" is being hijacked by some anonymous scammer named u/btcdrak who created a shitcoin called Viacoin and who's a subcontractor for Blockstream - calling yet another last-minute stalling / non-scaling meeting on the expiration date of Core/Blockstream's previous last-minute stalling / non-scaling non-agreement - and this non-scaling meeting is invite-only for Chinese miners and Core/Blockstream (with no actual Bitcoin businesses invited) - and economic idiot u/maaku7 who also brought us yet another shitcoin called Freicoin is now telling us that no actual solutions will be provided because no actual agreements will be allowed - and this invite-only no-industry no-solutions / no-agreements non-event will be manually transcribed by some guy named u/kanzure who hates u/Peter__R (note: u/Peter__R gave us actual solutions like Bitcoin Unlimited and massive on-chain scaling via XThin) - and as usual this invite-only non-scaling no-solutions / no-agreements no-industry invite-only non-event is being paid for by some fantasy fiat finance firm AXA whose CEO is head of the Bilderberg Group which will go bankrupt if Bitcoin succeeds. What the fuck?!?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4vl65n/remember_when_bitcoin_was_to_be_ruled_by_math_not/
Remember when Bitcoin was to be ruled by "math not men"? Whether you support bigger or smaller blocks, and whether you're "short" Bitcoin (you want the price to go down, so you can buy), or "long" (you want the price to go up, so you can sell) - you should still support decentralized governance.
...
The potential for manipulation
In the past, I've communicated with several experienced old-time traders and consultants from Wall Street regarding Bitcoin.
And many of them say they won't touch Bitcoin with a ten-foot pole because it's quite obvious to them that (in the absence of regulation), a new asset class like Bitcoin is horribly vulnerable to all sorts of behind-the-scenes manipulation.
They've seen it all before. They know all the ins and outs of how people with "insider information" can rig the market - and they can already see plenty of warning signs and alarm bells showing how easy it would be to pull off this kind of market manipulation in Bitcoin.
...
A handful of insiders can easily manipulate this "max blocksize" number - deciding whether and when and how it will get changed, and how much, and how often - so they could potentially manipulate the price - depending on their own personal preferences.
...
Is there a solution?
As you can see from all of the above, the main problem facing Bitcoin right now is centralized governance.
Of course, code inevitably does have to be (centrally) written by someone.
But there are things we can do right now to minimize the amount of centralized intervention in Bitcoin's code and governance.
Whenever possible, we can and should favor code which requires a minimum of centralized interference.
Core/Blockstream have basically spent the past year or two tying themselves up in knots, and disrupting the community and the market - and maybe even suppressing the price - due to their stubborn, selfish, destructive refusal to provide parameterized code where the market can set certain values on its own - most notably, the "maximum blocksize".
Meanwhile, code such as Bitcoin Unlimited (and also Bitcoin Classic, once it adopts BitPay's Adaptive Blocksize Limit) puts the "governance" for things like "max blocksize" back where it belongs - in the hands of the users, in the marketplace.
Using more-parameterized code is an obvious technique known by anyone who has taken a "Programming 101" course.
Everyone knows that parameterized code is the easiest way to let the market set some parameters - avoiding the dangers of having these parameters set behind closed doors by a centralized cartel of powerful people.
We can and should all work together to make this a reality again - by adopting more-parameterized code such as Bitcoin Unlimited or Bitcoin Classic.
This will allow us to realize the original promise of Bitcoin - where "The Users and the Market Decide - Not Central Planners."
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

What if cryptocurrency was originally a Federal Reserve experiment?

So I saw a FOIA request to the NSA about bitcoin the other day. Perhaps a more appropriate recipient would have been the Fed. Here's my story on how it would have gone down.
Back in 2009, some bright spark at the Fed went to then Chairman Ben Bernanke and told him about the wonders of Austrian economics and how terrible it was that the US left the gold standard - that Austrian economics would fix the country's economic woes. Ben, a dyed-in-the-wool Keynesian, scoffed at the lad and told him that currency backed by a deflationary asset, or even a deflationary currency itself, would invariable fail. It would lead to even more of the inequality that the Occupy Wall Streeters, audible due to some protest outside, were protesting. Forget the 1% - it would be more like the 0.001% and the rest would be serfs.
The young central banker - still with his newly minted MBA - still didn't get it, and secretly, even Ben thought that it would be interesting to see an Austrian economic experiment in action. And the root would be to start with a currency that would be finite in supply, like the barbarous relic those Austrians praised so much. But how to do it? To make any public attribution to the Fed for dabbling in such fringe economic theory would be a disaster, and make him an even worse joke amongst his buddies at the next BIS meeting - they were already calling him "helicopter Ben", after all.
No, it would need to be secret. The Fed, as a non-government entity, didn't really operate classification systems in the same way as the federal government. So Ben told his protégé to adopt a fictitious identity instead, and put together a whitepaper outlining the functions of a new digital currency. The founder's name would be Satoshi Nakamoto - after all, wasn't everything futuristic out of Japan nowadays? - and the currency's name would be Bitcoin.
It would have everything Mises would have dreamed of. It would be decentralised, it would have limited supply, and anyone could be their own bank instead of relying on those wicked banks that made up the Fed. It would also be highly anonymous, because Austrian economists and liberatarianism were pretty much entwined and besides, if it failed in a public way, he didn't want it leading back to him.
"Let use see", thought Bernanke, "if such a things takes off, and if the public accepts it."
Uptake was slow initially, and predictably, the new coin was primarily used for drug trafficking, sex crimes, and other detestable behaviour on the dark web. Reminded of the arguments he was using to eliminate cash, Bernanke was pleased.
Around two years into the project, Satoshi, working from the bowels of the Federal Building at 20th Street and Constitutional Avenue, alerted his boss that one of the fellow developers in the Bitcoin project - Gavin Andreson - was going to give a talk at the CIA. "Shit," thought Bernanke. Whilst the project itself had cost the Fed virtually nothing, and so wouldn't appear on any public balance sheets he had to present to either the public or Congress, having the CIA, or worse, the NSA, get wind of the project and being able to finger the Fed for conducting economic games with public cash - or even selling unregistered securities - would risk either public exposure, potentially costing him the chairmanship, or blackmail material, perhaps for some off-the-book funds they needed for their operations.
"Shut it down." Ben instructed.
Satoshi explained that allow he could withdraw from the project, he could not "shut down" Bitcoin itself. It was running on too many nodes now, and the price was rising on specialist exchanges that had been set up. Some website that apparently was previously used for trading Magic the Gathering cards, could you believe it. What a joke.
The Fed chairman sighed, and then glanced at the Bitcoin wallet Satoshi had brought up on the computer for him. One million BTC, just shy of 5% of the total supply. He could just sell it all and kill the market dead, but he decided to leave it. After all, the experiment wasn't necessarily over. What would happen if we did surrender everything to market forces? he wondered - though he anticipated the outcome - a massive pump and dump similar to dotcom stocks, beanie babies, tulips, the South Sea bubble, junk bonds, and many more besides.
He decided to bury the seed key on a golden plate amongst the gold bullion below the NY Fed. After all, Bitcoin was deflationary. If it was digital gold, as a new breed of anarcho-capitalists were telling everyone on the internet, surely it deserved to be stored here?
And that was the end of the Fed's involvement. They still wait, they still watch, mining comedy GODL along with buttcoin from underneath a portrait of John Maynard Keynes.
submitted by Modja to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

Why is it wise to invest in Dogecoin?

I have been involved in Bitcoin and later on, other cryptocurrencies since early 2011, so I think I have a cosiderable understanding of the market of some cryptocoins, so these are merely my opinions and predictions of the future expectations of investing in Doge, so everything I say may turn out to be untrue.
Ever since the evolution of Bitcoin, interest in virtual currencies has increased rather exponentially. Nonetheless, since Ben Bernanke's comments on the possible long terms promise of cryptos, Bitcoin has invited gamblers and speculators from all corners of the internet and the price of Bitcoin topped up to around 900$ less than a year ago.
I believe that Dogecoin has a different prospective from that of Bitcoin and although Doge seems to be only second to Bitcoin in popularity among crypto users, the stability of its price and its low price has serves Doge well to qualify to be a solid virtual "currency".
Here are the reasons why I believe that investing in Dogecoin can pay out in a year or two:
Your comments are Welcome!
submitted by Cryptofortune to dogecoin [link] [comments]

Subreddit Stats: AskEconomics top posts from 2016-12-11 to 2017-12-10 16:42 PDT

Period: 363.79 days
Submissions Comments
Total 1000 9010
Rate (per day) 2.75 24.68
Unique Redditors 765 1500
Combined Score 9038 28269

Top Submitters' Top Submissions

  1. 75 points, 11 submissions: Ask_Everything
    1. How did Ireland become SO WEALTHY in spite of being hit by the Great Recession so hard? (10 points, 4 comments)
    2. Peru's economy grew by 7.8% per year since 2009. Is this due to quinoa exports? (8 points, 4 comments)
    3. Why can't employers hire 16% more employees and pay ALL of their employees 14% less in aggregare? This would make the unemployment rate 0% without adding to employer costs. (8 points, 10 comments)
    4. In the USA, an we have employee owned businesses like Bob’s Red Mill. Is there a model that allows a business to be municipal owned or partly owned by the municipality? (7 points, 3 comments)
    5. What are the best leading indicators for the economy or the stock market? (7 points, 11 comments)
    6. EITC VS Higher Minimum Wage for poverty reduction and reducing income inequality (6 points, 9 comments)
    7. How would implementing a $15/hour minimum wage NOT contribute to inflation across the board (thus negating its effect)? (6 points, 13 comments)
    8. In Communist USSR, (1) was the Gini Coefficient = ~0? (2) If everyone earned about the same amount, then was there poverty? (3) What were some economic triumphs of Communism? (6 points, 12 comments)
    9. India and China had equal Per Capita GDP (PPP) in '89. Why are all economic predictions of India so much more pessimistic about India than for China? (6 points, 4 comments)
    10. Why is there a black market for USD in developing countries? (6 points, 4 comments)
  2. 62 points, 6 submissions: VanGod21
    1. How much money could be collected with pigouvian and land/natural resource taxes in the United States? (21 points, 3 comments)
    2. Is income inequality an externality? (17 points, 16 comments)
    3. Why do private companies get the patent on drugs funded by the government? (9 points, 2 comments)
    4. Would cutting the corporate tax increase investment? (6 points, 4 comments)
    5. When is it better for the government to borrow money for spending rather than pay with taxes? (5 points, 5 comments)
    6. What are the biggest externalities in the United States? (4 points, 4 comments)
  3. 61 points, 6 submissions: BainCapitalist
    1. ACA replacement bill is out. Any changes from the original talking points that were released? (17 points, 1 comment)
    2. Examples of 'good' infrastructure plans? (12 points, 2 comments)
    3. Applications of blockchain technology? (9 points, 4 comments)
    4. Articles/ books on wartime economics? (8 points, 3 comments)
    5. Can I have a breakdown on all the major theories on the emergence of money? (8 points, 17 comments)
    6. Question about X-Tax (7 points, 6 comments)
  4. 54 points, 5 submissions: benjaminikuta
    1. Millennials are earning 20% less than boomers did at the same age in life... (19 points, 8 comments)
    2. Does marketing make society better off, or is it rent seeking? (12 points, 3 comments)
    3. The Interstate Commerce Act of 1887 regulated the railroads, forced consistent cargo rates and eliminated price discrimination between long and short haul fares. Would it be fair to describe the law as enforcing a kind of "rail neutrality"? What was the impact of the law? (8 points, 1 comment)
    4. What if instead of a ban on plastic grocery bags, there was just an extreme tax? (8 points, 20 comments)
    5. What are some examples of natural monopolies that exist or would exist without government intervention? (7 points, 25 comments)
  5. 54 points, 3 submissions: Alethean
    1. If major countries go to war, what happens to their debt obligations? (30 points, 3 comments)
    2. Does the world have a contingency plan for a Chinese recession or financial crisis? (15 points, 11 comments)
    3. Is there much risk of contagion or a reduction in aggregate demand if/when bitcoin collapses? (9 points, 4 comments)
  6. 52 points, 3 submissions: Municipal_Man
    1. What are the most profound ideas of economics in the last 20 years? (35 points, 53 comments)
    2. Where can I find the Debt of a city and the GDP of a city? (10 points, 4 comments)
    3. What are the DISADVANTAGES of the EITC? (7 points, 3 comments)
  7. 48 points, 6 submissions: zangerinus
    1. net neutrality: good or bad? (13 points, 25 comments)
    2. In the 50's a single person in the US with a decent job requiring little or even no education could provide a comfortable home, education for their children, etc etc by themselves. Why were they paid so much or why hasn't that pay transitioned to 2017? (9 points, 9 comments)
    3. Best behavioral economics textbook? (7 points, 5 comments)
    4. Will US debt be a problem in the future? (7 points, 13 comments)
    5. Books/sources on Public Choice theory? (6 points, 2 comments)
    6. How to help third world countries? Why is foreign aid controversial among economists? (6 points, 10 comments)
  8. 48 points, 4 submissions: dewarr
    1. If the USSR was so ineffecient, how was it such a superpower? (21 points, 24 comments)
    2. Is Schrumpeter's "Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy" remotely approachable for a relative layperson? (11 points, 5 comments)
    3. Good history of economics textbook? (9 points, 5 comments)
    4. Does the concept of economic utility stem from ethical utiliarianism? (7 points, 6 comments)
  9. 46 points, 5 submissions: jomdo
    1. Does the U.S. have a different definition than the rest of the world, in regards to what exactly "Middle Class" is? (13 points, 14 comments)
    2. What are some fictional books that appears to have a realistic running economy- looking for books where one would later go back and say, "Hey maybe this happened because of ----" (10 points, 0 comments)
    3. What are some economic indicators of corruption? (9 points, 7 comments)
    4. Does anyone have a source that compares the income of every nation's lowest quintile? (8 points, 0 comments)
    5. How is it that there are modern nations with more income inequality than the Roman Empire (based on a study published by Cambridge) (6 points, 12 comments)
  10. 43 points, 5 submissions: neoliberalQuestions
    1. Is unilateral free trade as beneficial as bi/multilateral free trade agreements? Are there greater costs to it compared with other free trade arrangements? [x-post from /AskSocialScience] (11 points, 5 comments)
    2. How much contribution does healthcare make to health outcomes in the US compared with other factors like lifestyle, diet, environment, etc.? How does the US's mix of factors compare to those of other developed countries? (10 points, 2 comments)
    3. In the US, certain localities have short-run reduced employment prospects due to positive productivity shocks (automation, trade, etc.). What frictions/market failures prevent workers in these places from retraining themselves and moving away? (10 points, 6 comments)
    4. Is market power as little a problem (and anti-trust as ineffective at promoting consumer welfare) as depicted in this Econtalk podcast with Don Bourdreaux? (7 points, 10 comments)
    5. How might relatively low income localities mitigate the effects of a high national minimum wage? (5 points, 9 comments)
  11. 40 points, 4 submissions: CarltonFrater
    1. Am I crazy for wanting to be an economist? (13 points, 13 comments)
    2. Would a Masters Degree in Economics be a good choice for me? (11 points, 14 comments)
    3. Will Automation Lead to Drastic Unemployment and a Depression as some Speculate? (10 points, 14 comments)
    4. What is the relation between government spending as a percentage of GDP? (6 points, 1 comment)
  12. 37 points, 5 submissions: MTGTCG
    1. Which country has the best policies and institutions in place for economic growth? (11 points, 6 comments)
    2. What problems do mainstream economists have with libertarian beliefs? (9 points, 9 comments)
    3. Foreign Aid to the 3rd World (6 points, 4 comments)
    4. Intellectual Property, is it needed? (6 points, 2 comments)
    5. What is the best way to design the tax system if the goal is GDP growth? (5 points, 24 comments)
  13. 36 points, 4 submissions: Semaug
    1. What sort of impacts will Trump's proposed tariffs have on the economy? (13 points, 6 comments)
    2. Did economists see the 2008 recession coming? (10 points, 5 comments)
    3. What percentage of Venezuela's economy is run by the state(SOEs)? (7 points, 4 comments)
    4. Does the US spend a disproportionate amount on drug R&D compared to other countries? If so, is this related to the lack of price control? (6 points, 1 comment)
  14. 36 points, 4 submissions: rishijoesanu
    1. How do economists price carbon? (12 points, 14 comments)
    2. Can someone ELI5 Amartya Sen's Liberal Paradox? (10 points, 5 comments)
    3. Does automation cause Job loss in the long run? Thoughts on the new Kurzgesagt video? (9 points, 34 comments)
    4. What aspects of Ray Dalio's video "How The Economic Machine Works" is wrong or oversimplified? (5 points, 0 comments)
  15. 35 points, 5 submissions: remarkablecereal
    1. If people find a cheap way to make near unlimited amounts of gold, would the money backed by gold become worthless? (11 points, 10 comments)
    2. Is the "robot" revolution different this time? (7 points, 1 comment)
    3. When misers hoard wealth, can the market pretend it doesn't exist? (6 points, 11 comments)
    4. Why is war expensive? (6 points, 22 comments)
    5. Why is labour cheaper in developing countries? (5 points, 6 comments)
  16. 35 points, 2 submissions: Jyan
    1. Why tax brackets, rather than a smooth increase? (22 points, 8 comments)
    2. Judea Pearl wrote that "men were more qualified than equally paid women", in contrast to the usual statement on gender inequality. Is anyone aware of a citation? (13 points, 1 comment)
  17. 35 points, 2 submissions: Paul_2
    1. Is "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell reliable? (25 points, 3 comments)
    2. What is the standard of proof in economics? (10 points, 10 comments)
  18. 35 points, 1 submission: PM_ME_MESSY_BUNS
    1. /memenomics posts aside, is Ben Bernanke really a hero? Did the Fed save us from something much worse during the recession? How bad would it have been if the Fed acted as poorly and lamely as it did before/during the Great Depression? (35 points, 5 comments)
  19. 33 points, 2 submissions: johnfrance
    1. Most important books or papers in economics published since 2000? (27 points, 5 comments)
    2. Looking for good secondary literature on Ricardo, and JS Mill? (6 points, 2 comments)
  20. 33 points, 1 submission: papermarioguy02
    1. What parts of Friedman's "The Role of Monetary Policy" are now part of the economic consensus? (33 points, 1 comment)

Top Commenters

  1. zzzzz94 (2400 points, 299 comments)
  2. RobThorpe (1525 points, 515 comments)
  3. MrDannyOcean (1401 points, 185 comments)
  4. he3-1 (599 points, 65 comments)
  5. riggorous (534 points, 178 comments)
  6. generated_regressor (487 points, 131 comments)
  7. Petros557 (450 points, 112 comments)
  8. Integralds (432 points, 59 comments)
  9. ZerexTheCool (407 points, 99 comments)
  10. whyrat (394 points, 116 comments)
  11. Randy_Newman1502 (385 points, 80 comments)
  12. Cutlasss (369 points, 79 comments)
  13. isntanywhere (349 points, 93 comments)
  14. Cross_Keynesian (347 points, 59 comments)
  15. King_Freedom (339 points, 109 comments)
  16. themcattacker (321 points, 115 comments)
  17. IDontGiveAFuckDude (269 points, 78 comments)
  18. Greenhorn24 (266 points, 91 comments)
  19. jmo10 (240 points, 72 comments)
  20. panick21 (227 points, 108 comments)
  21. say_wot_again (203 points, 36 comments)
  22. bon_pain (174 points, 49 comments)
  23. UpsideVII (164 points, 37 comments)
  24. gorbachev (164 points, 27 comments)
  25. VodkaHaze (153 points, 33 comments)
  26. Yankee9204 (151 points, 33 comments)
  27. Hypers0nic (146 points, 33 comments)
  28. adam7684 (131 points, 21 comments)
  29. Philosopher013 (128 points, 38 comments)
  30. FinancialEconomist (127 points, 26 comments)
  31. loaengineer0 (123 points, 26 comments)
  32. neoliberalQuestions (121 points, 33 comments)
  33. Cystee (115 points, 33 comments)
  34. a_s_h_e_n (110 points, 31 comments)
  35. Frexican (106 points, 25 comments)
  36. ManWithAMasterplan (106 points, 18 comments)
  37. brberg (103 points, 22 comments)
  38. MiltonFriedom (102 points, 32 comments)
  39. Rimshotsgalore (100 points, 31 comments)
  40. HeFlipYa (97 points, 33 comments)
  41. VineFynn (96 points, 18 comments)
  42. electrodraco (94 points, 10 comments)
  43. MrCava (90 points, 26 comments)
  44. WikiTextBot (86 points, 50 comments)
  45. wumbotarian (86 points, 16 comments)
  46. Holophonist (85 points, 13 comments)
  47. MaesterMagoo (79 points, 26 comments)
  48. FatBabyGiraffe (77 points, 19 comments)
  49. badbooksaintbad (76 points, 17 comments)
  50. econ_learner (76 points, 15 comments)

Top Submissions

  1. Is there even one economist in here that thinks Trump's protectionist agenda will result in welfare gains for the American people? by deleted (38 points, 39 comments)
  2. What are the most profound ideas of economics in the last 20 years? by Municipal_Man (35 points, 53 comments)
  3. /memenomics posts aside, is Ben Bernanke really a hero? Did the Fed save us from something much worse during the recession? How bad would it have been if the Fed acted as poorly and lamely as it did before/during the Great Depression? by PM_ME_MESSY_BUNS (35 points, 5 comments)
  4. What parts of Friedman's "The Role of Monetary Policy" are now part of the economic consensus? by papermarioguy02 (33 points, 1 comment)
  5. Maybe a dumb question but, If we're so good at producing efficiently why can't more people live in a single income? by thebshwckr (30 points, 33 comments)
  6. My friend recently published this - help me prank him by gosick (30 points, 11 comments)
  7. If major countries go to war, what happens to their debt obligations? by Alethean (30 points, 3 comments)
  8. What programming language should an Economist learn? by MrEconomist206 (29 points, 61 comments)
  9. What is it really like to be an economist? by ListenAndObserve (28 points, 5 comments)
  10. Why does Marxism seem to be so much more prevalent in philosophical circles than in economic ones? by Oedium (27 points, 36 comments)

Top Comments

  1. 85 points: zzzzz94's comment in Can anyone explain why Austrian Economics is so unpopular?
  2. 67 points: say_wot_again's comment in Who hates Milton Friedman most?
  3. 45 points: he3-1's comment in Why does Marxism seem to be so much more prevalent in philosophical circles than in economic ones?
  4. 41 points: MrDannyOcean's comment in What is an economists opinion on Libertarianism?
  5. 39 points: he3-1's comment in How can I learn enough about economics to make informed voting decisions?
  6. 39 points: zzzzz94's comment in Where did the $15 minimum wage come from?
  7. 38 points: ManWithAMasterplan's comment in What are the strongest arguments against free college?
  8. 37 points: MrDannyOcean's comment in My friend recently published this - help me prank him
  9. 37 points: ZerexTheCool's comment in Is the field of economics separable from capitalism?
  10. 35 points: MrDannyOcean's comment in Maybe a dumb question but, If we're so good at producing efficiently why can't more people live in a single income?
Generated with BBoe's Subreddit Stats (Donate)
submitted by subreddit_stats to subreddit_stats [link] [comments]

Bitcoin does not need a fees market.

I am tired of reading a whole lot of theoretical nonsense about a fee market for Bitcoin. It is economic gobbldegook. Some people are saying that capitalism and price discovery only work in a market situation. This is rubbish. Imagine the following conversation -
At the bank. Question, how much to send $100 to Australia. Answer, well it depends on how busy the network is. If we are busy it will cost you more if we are not busy then it will cost you less. You name an amount and we will see if it works.
At the hairdresser. Question, how much for a haircut. Answer, well $20 is usually enough but just a minute while I see if someone wants to pay more, if they do you will have to pay more too or wait.
At Western Union. Question, how much do you charge to send $50 to my impoverished friend in The Philippines. Answer, well if lots of people want to send $50 to the Philippines it will cost you a bit more. You have to guess and if it doesn't work, just pay a bit more and eventually it will work.
At the lawyers office. Question, how much do you charge to notarize this statement. Answer sometimes $10 and sometime $15. If you want to be sure then pay me $20 or if you want to save money pay me $5 but if you pay $5 I might not do it till next week or maybe I just won't do it at all.
At the Credit Card office. What are your fees on each transaction. Answer. That's up to you but if you don't pay enough we won't accept your transaction. Question, well how much is enough. Answer, I don't know it depends on how busy we are.
Clearly in all the cases above a fees market is not practical. What happens is the business sets a fee that enables them to make a profit, yet remain competitive and declares it up front. Any other approach would not be accepted by the vast majority of people.
I agree eventually Bitcoin fees will have to rise to keep the network secure. Trying to establish a fees market, particularly while the mining rewards are so high seems like a waste of time and energy. As mining rewards reduce, fees should rise by voluntary consensus of the providers (miners) to a level that is sufficient to keep the market secure.
When I first used Bitcoin the consensus was that the fee should be 0.001. Later this changed to 0.0001. There was no market to decide this consensus, just common sense as the value of bitcoin increased. Now my wallet tells me that 0.0001 fee will be included or if I want a higher priority then I can choose 0.0002. Great simple to understand and easy to execute.
If miners decide they need 0.05 to make it worth their while then they should say so. I can then decide to use bitcoin or swift or credit cards or whatever.
There is already a very efficient bitcoin market and that is the one that decides what the price of a bitcoin is. In the same way as the stock market decides what the price of a stock is. However my stockbroker charges a published fee to do the transaction. He is not stupid enough to try and establish a secondary market for his own fees. If he did, I would find a new stockbroker.
I am a firm believer that Economics is at best a soft science and at worst a load of cow faeces. I tend to the cow faeces end of the spectrum. The world economy has been totally screwed up by Economists with models that are never accurate and do not reflect reality. Chief screw ups being Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen.
Let's not let people like that screw up bitcoin.
submitted by PattayaPete to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Top Threats to Bitcoin

Anyone who has ever read the prospectus of a large tech company knows that the founders, venture capitalists and their lawyers like to talk about potential risks that could adversely affect the share price. Come, friends, let us be like they and warn our friends and families about the potential risks of Bitcoin investing.
... !?!?!?
submitted by ifitDuckslikeaQuack to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

Elliott Wave analyst's thoughts on Bitcoin

(NB: typos mine; crappy OCR software. If anyone wants to see the Eliott Wave he's discussing and I'll make it available.)
Bitcoin Bubble or Bitcoin Breakthrough? How about both?
by Elliott Prechter
December 20, 2013 in the Elliott Wave Theorist
EWT discussed Bitcoin for the first time in August 2010, when the currency traded at six cents. As far as we know, EWI was the first financial publisher to discuss it. Bitcoin was unknown to the general public and off private investors’ radar. Even the earliest adopters did not take it as seriously as they should have. The most notable example of this is the man who paid 10,000 BTC for a pizza. This pizza purchase is now famous (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=l37.0), and many continue to track its price in USD terms via the “Bitcoin Pizza Index," which recently hit an all-time high of over S12 million.
Fast forward to today, and the currency is regularly featured in financial news and social media. Bitcoin Magazine has become popular, Congress is holding hearings on the currency, Germany has defined its role in finance, China is ruling on its legality, and the business world is adopting it. The most prominent business to embrace Bitcoin is Virgin Galactic, one of the many creations of billionaire Richard Branson (http://www.cnbc.com/id/101220710).
EWT readers were prepared for all this. When Bitcoin was still in the shadows, the August 2012 issue said,
Presuming bitcoin succeeds as the world’s best currency-and I believe it will-it should rise many more multiples in value over the years. -EWT, August 2012
The big question on the minds of investors is not what Bitcoin has achieved, but should they buy Bitcoins now? It’s amusing that so many people ignored Bitcoin upon hearing about it in 20 1 0, but now that its price has gone up 20,000 times, they want to invest. Notwithstanding the currency’s potential, this shift in attitude is a signal saying now is not the time to buy. Let’s look at four areas of evidence:
1) Optimism is off the charts. Past issues of The Elliott Wave Financial Forecast discussed people selling their homes and borrowing money to invest in Bitcoins. That was near the peak of wave Now the desire to buy has grown even more extreme. Bloggers are calling for Bitcoin to reach S1 million. . .soon. One young investor borrowed a million dollars from his father and without his knowledge invested it in Bitcoin (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=359228.0). The other day I walked into a convenience store wearing a Bitcoin T-shirt, and the owner asked me if he should invest now. I felt like I was living in 1929.
2) Investors have recently been rushing to buy a rash of 95 (at last count; see https://bitcointalk. org/index.php?topic=l34179.0) new clones of Bitcoin that have recently emerged: Litecoin, Namecoin, Zerocoin, BBQCoin, PPcoin, PrimeCoin, NovaCoin, FeatherCoin, TerraCoin, Devcoin, Megacoin, Mincoin, DigitalCoin, Anoncoin, Worldcoin, Freicoin, IxCoin... and more. (That they are clones is obvious from the lack of imagination in naming.) This rush of clones is reminiscent of the South Sea bubble of 1720 and the dot-com mania of 1999, when shares of zero-profit, copycat companies (and even fake ones) sold like hotcakes. Virtually every week now, the Bitcoin code is forked into a new coin that investors bid up. lt’s as if buyers feel the world will run out of cryptocurrency, which in fact is infinitely and freely duplicable.
3) The Elliott wave pattern from Bitcoin’s inception shows five waves up. The December ll Short Term Update noted that a major top was potentially in place: The peak [in Bitcoin] came 10 days after U.S. officials, ranging from an assistant attorney general with the Department of Justice to Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, “spoke approvingly of the potential of virtual currencies." So, here again, the government is getting on board at the very tail end ofa long rise. Since we posted that comment, Bitcoin has fallen an additional 40%, bringing it down nearly 60% from its all-time high.
Will this prove to be just another brief, sharp correction or something larger? Take a look at the completed impulse pattern shown in Figure 3. The structure begins very near the inception of the currency three-plus years ago, when it was selling for a penny. Notice that wave @ is a triangle (see text, p.49), which typically comes in the fourth-wave position. Wave a thrust, carried to the all-time high of S 1242 on November 29. The reversal from that point should mark the start of the largest bear market to date in the currency. This forecast is in tune with the anticipated bear market in the broader stock averages, which have strongly correlated with Bitcoin’s pattern.
The chart is in log scale to show the returns one would have achieved in each impulse leg of the pattern. Wave Q) achieved a stunning 3 19ox gain. Wave ® achieved 59.3% (a Fibonacci 3/5) of the gain of wave Q). Wave ® (measured from the low of wave @) achieved 39.3% (a Fibonacci 2/5) of the gain of wave (D and 66.3% (a Fibonacci 2/3) of the gain of wave Therefore, while each upward move has been large, each successive wave has been decelerating in log terms relative to past waves, in each case by a Fibonacci multiple. Also notice that Bitcoin trades more like a commodity than a stock, with its blow-off tops and extended fifih waves. Most of the gain since early 20 12 has been within (5) of ® and the final wave all of which is probable retracement territory.
4) Most people involved in this mania seem oblivious to Bitcoin’s fundamentals. In my experience, raising these issues publicly earns scorn for spreading “FUD.” But there is a good reason-now widely ignored-that Bitcoin is beta software. Our August 2010 piece explained how Bitcoin operates, but it’s worth revisiting some details to understand just how out-of-touch investor expectations are with the reality of Bitcoin technology. Specifically, let's examine the limitations of Bitcoin’s blockchain.
The blockchain is the heart of Bitcoin. In its simplest form, the blockchain is a public ledger of all transactions that happen in the Bitcoin network. Each block is composed of individual records that track the ownership of each coin. The transactions “fit” together cryptographically. A block is created about once every 10 minutes by the network. Each block is then cryptographically linked to the previous blocks in the chain, forming a history of all transactions that-to Bitcoin’s credit-cannot be forged. To the extent that Bitcoin currency is real, it could be said that the blockchain is the Bitcoin currency.
Yet the core problem with the blockchain is that it grows over time and must be shared by every fiill Bitcoin node. Today it is nearing 13 GB in size. Now, 13 GB doesn't sound too large, but at the current rates of exponential growth the blockchain is projected to become over a terabyte in size in just three years. What's more, the amount of accompanying data required to handle just a fraction of Visa-level traffic would overwhelm even the fastest Internet connections. This technical hurdle makes the “Bitcoin is going to a million” commentary seem premature.
The hope for Bitcoin’s future lies in its open-source nature, allowing it to be improved, and Moore’s Law. Moore’s Law is colloquially used to signify the exponential increases in computer-hardware efficiency over time, including network capacity. But Moore’s law-which calls for a doubling of computer speed every two years-has hit a snag in recent years: the rate of improvement in performance has dramatically slowed, causing many experts to call for the end of the operation of Moore’s law. (For the record, Moore’s Law was never intended to refer to computer hardware performance, but the media have confused the term to the point where it is now generally used in this context. Originally, it was intended to refer to the increase in the number of transistors that are packed into microchips.)
The past four years have been an exciting ride for Bitcoin. But the evidence says the Bitcoin bull market is done for now. It would be best to put Bitcoin out of your mind for the duration of the deflationary wave that is curling toward the financial world. Due to the psychology surrounding Bitcoin, as well as its correlation with the stock indices, it is too risky to buy now. Due to its open-source nature, however, Bitcoin’s infrastructure should continue to improve over the years.
For the long run, I agree with Roger Ver, the CEO of memory dealers and one of Bitcoin’s earliest adopters, who recently said, “It is just getting started." But one could have said that about the U.S. stock market in 1966. It would have been visionary only if you were patient and willing to hold through a very deep valley. Our position is that Bitcoin will never again sell for 6 cents, as it did when EWT first wrote it up. But there will be another time to buy it for relative peanuts alongside stocks, real-estate, gold and silver. When the time comes, no one will be interested.
Elliott Prechter's primary task at EWI is working on EWA VES, our in-house artificial intelligence softwarefor analyzing Elliott waves.
submitted by Indy_Pendant to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Why bitcoin is showing downward price-pressure?

My theory:
It should be perfectly reasonable to expect that bitcoin, as a supply-controlled crypto-currency, should begin to respond to the same price pressures that other hard-assets face.
For instance, the price of gold has absolutely tumbled lately some 43% with the announcement and expectation that the Fed will begin easing quantitative easing (QE) soon (as Ben Bernanke gets ready to retire his position). The dollar will face inflation expectations whenever the Fed is printing money to buy bonds or w/e.
Why does that put price-pressure on gold or bitcoin? Because gold and bitcoin are both hedging assets expected to hold their value in an environment where the dollar is inflating. Thus, when people expect inflation, demand for inflation-hedges goes up. And when inflation expectations go down, so does demand for inflation-hedge assets, like gold, like bitcoin.
The announcement that the Fed will soon stop or slow printing money reduces inflationary expectations and therefore reduces the value of inflationary hedges like gold or bitcoin because while supply of both gold and bitcoin are essentially static, price changes when demand changes.
Now unlike gold, which has really only that one ability--value store--bitcoin has a compelling value proposition: lower transaction costs, something gold cannot match.
Bitcoin is simply cheaper and more convenient for distance and online transactions than any currency in the world, gold included.
So while the article linked above cites expectations of gold to continue at $1,000 / ounce till 2017, personally I'm still bullish on bitcoin, and 2017 will be a big year for bitcoin as the block-reward halving takes place.
submitted by Anenome5 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin achievements

Explanation
All achievements listed below are permanent upon accomplishment and stack. Achievements earned years ago are still valid today.
Mining achievements
Solo miner
Mined a valid block all by yourself.
CPU miner
Earned at least 1 BTC using just your CPU to mine.
Creative miner
Built your own custom mining rig composed of graphics cards.
Lazy miner
Earned at least 1 BTC in dividend from investment in mining stocks.
Virtuous miner
Earned at least 1 BTC by mining in a pool that processes transactions with below standard transaction fees, thus helping out people whose transactions would otherwise get stuck.
Price stabilizer achievements
Silk road stabilizer
Bought when the price dropped during the Silk road crash.
Fork fighter
Bought during the 11/12 march 2013 blockchain fork.
Ponzi plunge protector
Bought during the August 2012 pirateat40 Ponzi scheme collapse associated price crash.
Holder
Helped preserve the value of Bitcoin by not selling any Bitcoin in the six month period following the 266 dollar peak. Only valid for people who actually had any Bitcoin before the peak.
Superholder
Helped preserve the value of Bitcoin by not selling any Bitcoin in the six month period following the 2011 peak. Only valid for people who actually had any Bitcoin before the peak.
Popularizer achievements
Mother Theresa
Gave away at least 1 BTC in donations and tips, expecting nothing in return.
Shopaholic
Spend at least 1 BTC on items not directly Bitcoin related.
Businessman
Sold at least 1 BTC worth of items not directly Bitcoin related using Bitcoin.
Spreading the seed
Sold at least 1 BTC through local Bitcoins.
Bitcoin hoarder achievements
Bitcoin hoarder achievements are permanent upon achievement, even if you later let go of your Bitcoin.
Club Bitcoin
Own at least 1 BTC.
Fabulous Five
Own at least 5 BTC.
Interested investor
Own at least 100 dollar worth of Bitcoin.
Serious speculator
Own at least 1000 dollar worth of Bitcoin.
I did it for the children
Invest at least 10.000 dollar in Bitcoin, on behalf of other people.
Number of achievements unlocked
0 - You are literally Ben Bernanke.
1 - You may be new.
2 - You have a serious interest in Bitcoin.
3 - You have a serious interest in Bitcoin, and probably a serious stake in its success as well.
4 - You have a serious interest and stake in Bitcoin, and are likely partly responsible for its success.
5 - You have helped make Bitcoin the success it is today.
6-9 - You are likely a developer, early adapter or institutional investor.
10+ - You are literally Satoshi Nakamoto.
submitted by rational to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Financial News - YouTube The Whole US Economy Freezes⚠️ Terrible Collapse - America Has A New Problem Bernanke 2012 - Vote!, Silver And Gold Bam Time!!! Rep. Paul on the Cause of Price Inflation Bitcoin Price Prediction 2018 and Quotes from World Leaders

Back then, Bell lacked the digital tools to make his gambit a reality, but today we have the deep web and Bitcoin. And now, a $75,000 price on Ben Bernanke’s head. Speaking to Quartz, former Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke said that Bitcoin "has some serious problems." Bitcoin's value peaked at $1,147.25 on December 4 and crashed to a low of $177.28 just a few ... Bitcoin broke $1,000 last week after Fed chief Ben Bernanke told Congress that virtual currencies “may have long-term promise.” Bitcoin is, of course, the most famous virtual currency. Former Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke offered both muted praise and criticism when discussing bitcoin in a new interview, suggesting that government oversight of blockchain transactions ... Former Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke Believes Bitcoin Unlikely to Succeed. Ben Bernanke, the former Chairman of the Federal Reserve, made his views against Bitcoin clear at a conference organized by Ripple in Toronto.. Echoing the views of J.P. Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon, Bernanke feels that the decentralized nature of Bitcoin, which puts it outside government control, will trigger its downfall.

[index] [30381] [9778] [25025] [29337] [342] [8229] [23060] [32431] [28739] [1763]

Financial News - YouTube

Ben Bernanke Doesn't Understand Gold by Arcadia Economics. 0:09. ... Bitcoin Price Intentionally Crushed By Trump Administration by Arcadia Economics. 23:58. Peter Schiff - The Fed's Exit Plan is ... Bitcoin Price Prediction and Quotes from World Leaders # ... Llew Claasen, Brian Armstrong, Dan Kaminsky, Chris Dixon, Peter Thiel, Ben Bernanke, Wences Casares, Rick Falkvinge, Paul Graham, Paul ... Dan Morehead Pantera Capital Live : Bitcoin Halving, BTC Updates, Pantera Capital invests Dan Morehead 12,616 watching Live now Chamath Palihapitiya Live: Bitcoin Halving, BTC Updates, Price and ... Rep. Ron Paul statement on the cause of price inflation. ... Ron Paul Hits Ben Bernanke at Hearing, ... Live Bitcoin Trading DeriBot on Deribit DeriBot Backup 178 watching. Ben Bernenke is good for silver and gold, vote Bernanke 2012!! Silver nears $32 and gold nears $1700 again... is the Silver BULL back?!?! - Silver: Bullish 30.50 ++

#