Anyone collecting BitCoins ?

[TonerGuy]

http://bitcoin.org/en/

 

They've gone from $20 to $80 in the last two months... People I know are selling silver to buy Bitcoins...

 

http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/mtgoxUSD#rg60ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zv

 

It is crazy or are BitCoins the new currency ?

[RWB]

"It is crazy..."

 

Actually, the real value movement has been from $0 to $0. Go to the original paper, to see for yourself.

[TonerGuy]

I realize there is no intrinsic value in digital currency, however, there are speculators that are driving up the prices...and people I know are making real money from it.

 

 

[AuMorgan82110-migration]

Sounds like a scam. You give us real money, we give you digital monopoly money that you can only spend with other people playing the game. When the fad ends, whoever is holding the most BitCoins loses. And lets not forget that we are dealing with a software program that is subject to bugs and possible hackers. It may be like someone getting in on the ground floor of Apple, but I wouldn't spend my money on it. Way to big of a gamble.

[RWB]

How can one "drive up the price" on something that has no value? Well...now that I think about it, stupidity is "priceless" in a perverted sort of way.

[coinman_23885]

How can one "drive up the price" on something that has no value? Well...now that I think about it, stupidity is "priceless" in a perverted sort of way.

 

I agree with you 100%.

[TonerGuy]

Silver has fallen $3.50 in the past two months...

 

http://silverprice.org/silver-price-history.html

 

but BitCoins have quadrupled in the same time.... Hmmm.

 

Im not saying this is a great investment... its just a very interesting idea - a world currency that is (for the most part) outside of regulation.

 

Lets face it currency and coins are a dead idea on a global scale. No one wants to go back and use gold and silver to buy things except for the "end-of-the-world zombie apocalypse" types.

 

The Euro Zone is failing. Cyprus is taking money out of people's bank accounts. The same might happen in Spain and Italy shortly.

 

Im not saying its safe but at some point a global digital currency is going to catch on. It probably has to... It use to be gold but that cannot work anymore.

 

Would anyone want to comment on the larger idea of a digital global currency rather then just saying this is a dumb idea ?

[Ducksoup]

I don't think the idea of a digital global currency is too far fetched. How easy would it make traveling to different countries and not having to exchange currencies, or converting dollars to rupee's when you send your cargo container full of goods you manufactured. The other interesting thing to note (and I know a lot of people here aren't bible believers) but something very much like a global currency was predicted in the bible.

[AuMorgan82110-migration]

Global currency would make commerce much easier throughout the world, but there are several flaws. First it would have to be regulated. I would think the last time commerce flowed without regulation we were trading wampum and beads for what we needed. Without regulation and oversight there are bound to be frauds and cheats that will destroy the entire system. Second, everyone wants to have a currency that has some backing, even if it is just a promise of the government. We all know what that is worth. Even with electronic transactions, we still feel that there is value to the numbers that are on the checkout screen of a website, or the availible credit on our credit cards. My final point would be that the Euro is an attempt at a regional currency. This in my opinion is one step away from a global currency. The amount of disagreement taking place between the banks of the Eurozone, the countries of the Eurozone, and the people of the Eurozone, just goes to show how difficult it would be to convince evey bank, country, and citizen of the world to accept and use a single currency.

[BillJones]

Under QE-2 the Federal Reserve is creating "bit coins" and we are now using them. The only difference is that the FED has legal authority behind their "out of thin air" product. The trouble is history tells us that when the money supply gets out of control, massive inflation will be the result.

 

To clarify, I'm not a conservative Neanderthal who wants to shut down the Federal Reserve System. I'm simply opposed to destructive Federal Reserve policies which have a had a history of mistakes. This is one of the times IMO.

 

[TonerGuy]

The one place where a new digital currency would really help is Internet sales...

 

Without a credit card and a processor it is very difficult to do business on the Internet. Thus leaving many on the Internet without the ability to harness a global economy.

 

Imagine if you could sell to those in China or India ? Good-luck finding a credit card process for those countries. And good luck finding Chinese and Indian citizens with a VISA, Mastercard or AMEX.

 

ICANN is basically the regulatory body of the Internet. While BitCoins might not be the answer, what if ICANN could develop a secure and safe digital currency for the world.

 

 

[e1cnr]

Bitcoin is an electronic currency that is nothing more than a electronic pyramid scheme, and not very safe. I agree that it is good for internet sales, especially if you are buying/selling contraband / drugs / all things illegal.

[WoodenJefferson]

[Coindude]

I just watched the 5th Element the other day... I never tire of seeing that movie!

[BLive1972]

I just watched the 5th Element the other day... I never tire of seeing that movie!

 

Anytime As for the bitcoins, no way. I need something with substance.

[mtnstyne]

Unless they become more widely accepted by major retailers they will never escape the idea that they are a scam.

[ComicConnoisseur]

http://bitcoin.org/en/

 

They've gone from $20 to $80 in the last two months... People I know are selling silver to buy Bitcoins...

 

http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/mtgoxUSD#rg60ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zv

 

It is crazy or are BitCoins the new currency ?

 

Is there any difference between BitCoins and

 

BEENZ

 

or

 

Flooz

[TonerGuy]

http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/28/4157796/an-optimistic-theory-of-bitcoin-as-a-hedge-against-the-entire-global

[ComicConnoisseur]

http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/28/4157796/an-optimistic-theory-of-bitcoin-as-a-hedge-against-the-entire-global

It sounds good in theory, just like give peace a chance sounds good in theory,but it will never work because of too many egos of different cultures.

The euro is now questionable, and that is at least regional. This like I say sounds good on paper, but when you add the human element it won`t end good.

[gmarguli]

Silver has fallen $3.50 in the past two months...

 

http://silverprice.org/silver-price-history.html

 

but BitCoins have quadrupled in the same time.... Hmmm.

 

Silver has fallen $3.50 in the past two months...

 

http://silverprice.org/silver-price-history.html

 

but I switched from drinking Coke to Pepsi in the same time.... Hmmm.

[World Colonial]

My understanding is the same one as yours. But this isn't any more of a scam than the global ponzi scheme run by national treasuries and central banks today and for the last 100+ years. It is one of degree and not kind.

 

The main apparent (but not actual) difference is that with Bitcoins, a small number of people are probably going to lose a substantial amount of their "investment" suddenly and (supposedly) without warning. With national currencies, most everyone is losing a small proportion of their wealth over time, so they do not notice it as much or at all. However, over a long enough period of time, these cumulative lossses can still make you poorer or impoverish you. It has happened to many and will even more in the future.

 

I believe that private currencies can work and see no reason they cannot except that no government is going to allow them to succeed. In my opinion, the opinions I have seen on their supposed flaws are not a flaw with the currency itself but with banking and fractional reserve lending.

 

For example, the most common claim I have seen against gold is that there is "not enough" of it. The fact of the matter is that this is irrelevant from a strictly transactional aspect but only if prices are free to adjust both up and down which today they are not.

 

The only reason it actually matters today is because since gold is limited, a gold currency tied to a fixed price does not allow for a supposedly endless and "flexible" credit supply which is what exists now and is supported by the establishment today.

 

If there was a choice, some people (probably most today) would prefer the existing fiat money regime while others would prefer an alternative which could be provided by someone or some organization that would have at least the same stature as any government. (I say this because this is not actually saying much.)

 

Then those who preferred the government option could deal with perpetual inflation, a ponzi scheme and endless bailouts as we have had for the last 100 years. While those who preferred the private option have to navigate through periodic deflations and the inevitable bankruptcies that occured regularly prior to 1913. Under this second option, I also believe that there are additional safeguards (yes, with government regulation if necesary) which could be put in place to reduce (notice I did not say eliminate) the risk of fraud though this would not prevent the currency from losing value..

 

The primary difference that I see between the two is that under the alternative I am describing, the losses would occur more regularly over time and they would fall more on those who actually took the risk instead of someone else as they disproportinately do now. Under the system we have now, most presumably think it is superior because they either do not believe in a "day of reckoning" at all or think that it will at worst be like the 1970's or 2008. They must believe that debts can be piled to the sky with limited or even no economic consequences.

 

As far as I am concerned, this is the "free lunch" theory of economics. I consider 2008 the first of (if necessary) several installments of economic crisis which will ultimately result in a "reset" in the typical person's standard of living (think lower or much lower) for most people everywhere through a combination of depreciating currencies and collapsing asset prices. One way or another, all bad debts and decisions must be paid - by someone. There is no exception to that rule for anyone, no matter what the government, any politician or conventional economist claims.

[ComicConnoisseur]

My understanding is the same one as yours. But this isn't any more of a scam than the global ponzi scheme run by national treasuries and central banks today and for the last 100+ years. It is one of degree and not kind.

 

The main apparent (but not actual) difference is that with Bitcoins, a small number of people are probably going to lose a substantial amount of their "investment" suddenly and (supposedly) without warning. With national currencies, most everyone is losing a small proportion of their wealth over time, so they do not notice it as much or at all. However, over a long enough period of time, these cumulative lossses can still make you poorer or impoverish you. It has happened to many and will even more in the future.

 

I believe that private currencies can work and see no reason they cannot except that no government is going to allow them to succeed. In my opinion, the opinions I have seen on their supposed flaws are not a flaw with the currency itself but with banking and fractional reserve lending.

 

For example, the most common claim I have seen against gold is that there is "not enough" of it. The fact of the matter is that this is irrelevant from a strictly transactional aspect but only if prices are free to adjust both up and down which today they are not.

 

The only reason it actually matters today is because since gold is limited, a gold currency tied to a fixed price does not allow for a supposedly endless and "flexible" credit supply which is what exists now and is supported by the establishment today.

 

If there was a choice, some people (probably most today) would prefer the existing fiat money regime while others would prefer an alternative which could be provided by someone or some organization that would have at least the same stature as any government. (I say this because this is not actually saying much.)

 

Then those who preferred the government option could deal with perpetual inflation, a ponzi scheme and endless bailouts as we have had for the last 100 years. While those who preferred the private option have to navigate through periodic deflations and the inevitable bankruptcies that occured regularly prior to 1913. Under this second option, I also believe that there are additional safeguards (yes, with government regulation if necesary) which could be put in place to reduce (notice I did not say eliminate) the risk of fraud though this would not prevent the currency from losing value..

 

The primary difference that I see between the two is that under the alternative I am describing, the losses would occur more regularly over time and they would fall more on those who actually took the risk instead of someone else as they disproportinately do now. Under the system we have now, most presumably think it is superior because they either do not believe in a "day of reckoning" at all or think that it will at worst be like the 1970's or 2008. They must believe that debts can be piled to the sky with limited or even no economic consequences.

 

As far as I am concerned, this is the "free lunch" theory of economics. I consider 2008 the first of (if necessary) several installments of economic crisis which will ultimately result in a "reset" in the typical person's standard of living (think lower or much lower) for most people everywhere through a combination of depreciating currencies and collapsing asset prices. One way or another, all bad debts and decisions must be paid - by someone. There is no exception to that rule for anyone, no matter what the government, any politician or conventional economist claims.

Good post world colonial!

[Nutmeg Coin]

CNBC had a segment on Bitcoins this afternoon; Zero Hedge had a good article on them too. Now topping $100 per, doubling in less than a month. The concern on the business channel was that bitcoins become vehicles for money laundering and other illegal activity, such as drug dealers. Reminds me of egold and unregulated warehouse banks that eventually got raided by the Feds.

[TonerGuy]

Here's a tax attorney's take on the bitcoin situation...

 

http://www.irsmedic.com/2013/03/28/bitcoin-and-fbar/

[cpm9ball]

Silver has fallen $3.50 in the past two months...

 

http://silverprice.org/silver-price-history.html

 

but BitCoins have quadrupled in the same time.... Hmmm.

 

Silver has fallen $3.50 in the past two months but I switched from drinking Coke to Pepsi in the same time.... Hmmm.

 

Try switching to this..........

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=Bit+photos&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=2eM&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=udJaUeKwHJHY9ATjmIBA&ved=0CDAQsAQ&biw=1680&bih=920#imgrc=ShXimlUejkVy1M%3A%3BeyDaw1ULhkpzoM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Ftrendland.com%252Fwp-content%252Fuploads%252F2008%252F07%252Fbitcopamustache.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Ftrendland.com%252Frefreshingly-brazilian-bit-copa%252F%3B566%3B800

 

 

[AuMorgan82110-migration]

Silver has fallen $3.50 in the past two months...

 

http://silverprice.org/silver-price-history.html

 

but BitCoins have quadrupled in the same time.... Hmmm.

 

Silver has fallen $3.50 in the past two months...

 

http://silverprice.org/silver-price-history.html

 

but I switched from drinking Coke to Pepsi in the same time.... Hmmm.

 

My understanding is that precious metals follow the stock market, only in reverse. As investors run away from falling stocks, the jump on gold and silver as a more stable alternative. When the markets rebound, investors leave the safety of precious metals to ride rising stocks. The buying drives prices up, and the selloffs flood the market and drive the prices down. The graphs show this pretty well. Our rebounding economy is dropping gold and silver prices. Good for someone like me who is more into buying than selling.

 

As far as the rise in BitCoins, all I can guess is speculation is driving the prices.

[World Colonial]

The correlation between metals and the stock market varies over time, as it has with most (or all) other assets. More recently, all or at least practically all assets have been moving inverse to the USD. This was true leading into the 2008 crisis, during it and to my knowledge, mostly until recently when gold and silver hit their last peaks in 2011.

 

What you describe was true or mostly true until about 2003 which is when FRB monetary policy became much looser and has remained that way until now.

 

The long term trend between gold (and silver) and the stock market is down at this point. At the top of the 1960's stock bull market, the DJIA/gold ratio hit around 30. At the peak of the metals market in 1979/1980, the ration was about one. The ratio hit a peak of about 43 (or thereabouts) in November 1999. Now it is about nine. Before this trend ultimates reaches a bottom, I expect the ratio to fall below one and maybe substantially so. I expect it to do so because the prior stock market and still ongoing credit mania dwarfs both 1966 and even 1929.

[Nutmeg Coin]

Some of you are missing the GREAT point of bitcoin; privacy! Less tax burden, peer to peer, no govt envolement. The tax aspect alone is staggering. Not to mention being able to travel worldwide without regulation on how much you can carry or spend. Just be sure to choose your digital wallet carefully, they are big differences. Welcome to the 21st century.

 

If you believe that, boy, do I have a winning promotion for you!

 

http://youdeserveplenty.com/

 

"We're going to give you FREE INSTANT ACCESS to the most powerful program on the Internet today — one that will get you a lot closer to that 3% group (remember, THEY control 97% of the money). We'll show you how YOU can begin receiving thousands of dollars delivered right to your front door WITHIN 48 HOURS! Then, receive thousands of dollars every week with as little as a few hours a day devoted to the program."

 

"Acres of Diamonds"?

[World Colonial]

There is a big difference between what has been described here for Bitcoins and what is supposed to be the actual function of any currency, even a fiat one. And, yes, it is more than just confidence.

 

One of the primary purposes of a currency is to provide a store of value. While fiat currencies provide a poor or very poor long term store of value, Bitcoins does not provide one at all. No one who buys Bitcoins at $80 today (per the OP) can have any confidence that it will not revert to $20 later.

 

What has been described here and what I have read elsewhere more closely resembles the wild fluctuations and speculative trading in penny stocks. What kind of a store of value is that and why should or would anyone choose to use it as a serious replacement for any fiat currency?

 

Even as a proponent of alternatives to fiat money, what I am describing is going to be a problem. There is a lack of liquidity in Bitcoins because the market is very small and puny fund flows in and out of it have a disproportionate impact on its relative price, whether versus fiat currencies or anything else.

 

So yes, but all means enjoy your trading gains. But pretending this is a viable alternative as a real currency is another matter entirely. The bottom line is that Bitcoins is another option for speculative trading.

[mtnstyne]

I went to the store yesterday to pick up some Sam Adams, they wouldn't accept my bitcoins so I had to pay cash...