On 12/23/2013 12:46 PM, Jason Resch wrote:



On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 2:12 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:

    On 12/23/2013 9:07 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
    Crypto-currencies, like cryptography, can surely help to save the freedom of
    privacy and privateness.

    Crypto-currencies does not need to be a pyramidal con, like Quentin 
suspects. They
    just allowed to create new independent banks which can do their work 
"honestly" or
    not.
    "honestly" is not moral here, but it means that it is attempted, at the 
least, to
    not base economy on lies (which often happens to keep jobs despite they 
became
    obsolete).

    Money is both the most wonderful economical tool and the most horrible life 
goal.

    When money is used honestly, every one (good willing enough) win and is 
enriched.
    But the longer the play, the bigger the liars can win, so "those who make 
money the
    main goal" crack, and corrupt the system, which at that moment become 
pyramidal.
    It is basically a confusion between meaning and use, or goal and tool.

    Today, a part of the economy relies on lies, so it is more the actual bank 
system
    which seems to lead us (partially) to a pyramid.
    The existence of crypto-money can help by providing different competing 
economies,
    and can help in making transition (and awakening from the lies) more smooth.

    I don't see it as any different than gold or silver. Banks used to have 
reserves of
    gold or silver and they issued their own script money that was redeemable 
in gold or
    silver.  BUT they always loaned much more script than they had gold or 
silver.  They
    relied, quite reasonably, on the fact that in any given time interval, only 
few
    people would want to redeem their script in gold or silver.

    Now you may say this is "lying", but so long as not done to excess, it 
makes for
    good economics.  Consider and extreme example: Suppose the 'banker' has no 
gold or
    silver at all but he's prepared to loan script anyway. Someone comes to him 
and
    wants to borrow $1000 to build a bridge over small river near the town.  
The banker
    loans him the script.  He pays for material and labor, which he can do 
because
    people believe the script is backed by gold.  The bridge gets built and so 
farmers
    can come to town much more quickly, productivity is improved and the town 
thrives,
    so more people deposit money in the bank and the banker can actually buy 
some gold
    to back up his script.  "Artificially" increasing the money supply can be 
very
    useful; but just as with all kinds of interactions it depends a lot on 
trust.  If
    nobody trusts anybody else, as now so many people automatically distrust 
their
    government, then the economy is dragged down.

    http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/21/in-no-one-we-trust/?_r=0

    Brent



One difference I see is that with crypto-currencies intermediaries are not required for either, 1. safe keeping, or 2. transfers. If they are never held by intermediaries then they have nothing to loan out.

The point of my example is that you don't HAVE to have anything to loan out. Banks loaned out the value of gold without having the gold (having only a small part of it).

As for security I'm not sure; can't you lose your bitcoins?

Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to