Financial topics

[aeden]

They are not even to the recognition stage of the problems.

[aeden]

As it was said today.
I don’t know what a SPAC is, but I get the message: invest in woke, go broke.

As noted.
We are utilizing three percent on eco systems.
The future was yesterday.
I will confirm the three percent inputs since yea its new month already.
As we noted Doctor Greyscale is another pair trade as such.
Yea we pay capital gains since they got like napalm and mercenarys and Bernie ubi bros half wits
to pay for.

This budget just turned millions to lower than chattel from the already plantation debasement proles.

thread: New Perspectives in Political Economy the academic journal of CEVRO Institute (School of Legal and Social Studies)
Tue Feb 25, 2020 9:55 am march sweeps
thread: sogo salem l8ter green cloud
Malachi 4:4

Hayek:
This brings me to the crucial issue. Unlike the position that exists in the physical sciences, in economics and other disciplines that deal with essentially complex phenomena, the aspects of the events to be accounted for about which we can get quantitative data are necessarily limited and may not include the important ones. While in the physical sciences it is generally assumed, probably with good reason, that any important factor which determines the observed events will itself be directly observable and measurable, in the study of such complex phenomena as the market, which depend on the actions of many individuals, all the circumstances which will determine the outcome of a process, for reasons which I shall explain later, will hardly ever be fully known or measurable. And while in the physical sciences the investigator will be able to measure what, on the basis of a prima facie theory, he thinks important, in the social sciences often that is treated as important which happens to be accessible to measurement. This is sometimes carried to the point where it is demanded that our theories must be formulated in such terms that they refer only to measurable magnitudes.

[aeden]

Shapiro went easy on the soft wall enclosures cult today for the current invasion.
The White Zombie went full rule number five with Neanderthal.
It was special with his precious going we will circle back and stuff.
Theme song for our demshevik cult buds.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0E0ynyIUsg

https://gdxforum.com/forum/search.php?k ... sf=msgonly

[aeden]

Another who understands actual data H.
As we noted adapt.
They will not.
As it was put clearly.

You're dealing with a religion, not science, and you and I are heretics...and will no doubt be dealt with appropriately.
I'll give you an example: 3 years ago I had a conversation with a retired PhD biology professor, and I asked him what he thought about the 100 scientists -actual reputable university professors from around the world and a couple of Nobel winners in there to boot, who had signed a letter voicing skepticism of global warming to the head of the UN -Moon of Korea. He said, "They're all assholes."
Right there I knew that science had absolutely nothing to do with any of this AGW/Global Warming/Climate Change BS...total religion and belief system...complete crap.

Another actual guy who grows stuff like normal people.
We have made changes in our crop insurance the last couple of years because of their info and it has paid off.
Winter freeze of our soft red winter wheat and winter barley in 2020 cut our yields by 60%.
Cold and wet weather has plague the east coast US since last fall.
Prevented planting acres during planting season last fall produces zero bushels per acre.

To bad these demsheviks are so damned stupid.
Yea, we understand data fragility cults.
The models are suggesting the trend and the propaganda locusts are simply insane.

[John]

** 03-Mar-2021 World View: Fiat currency

> Again, you create imaginary people in your mind and attack their
> (supposedly) weak argument. That's not what we say.

> You still haven't explained "underlying, core value". Why? Because
> you can't. Does fiat have an underlying, "core" value? Why isn't
> it a bubble (ha, it's not bigger than BTC, unreal how foolish this
> sentiment is)? Does gold? Open your mind, use your
> reason. Anything you claim about BTC can be said about any other
> device or entity in the world, there is no exception - except food
> drink and shelter, all perishable things that have their own
> frailties even, otherwise. How many times do I have to state this
> FACT?

Use your common sense. The US dollar has been around for 250 years.
It's the world's reserve currency. There are probably hundreds of millions,
perhaps billions, of people who hold US dollars in some amount.

By contrast, bitcoin has been around for 15 years. There are probably
no more than a few thousand people who hold any bitcoin money. Your common
sense should tell you that the US dollar is much stronger than bitcoin.

You would point to blockchain as the difference. Well, if all it took
to make a crypto currency stronger than the US dollar was to use blockchain,
then all those hundreds of other crypto currencies would also be stronger
than the dollar. But they're not.

You really don't know what the "fiat currency" concept is all about.

The whole "fiat currency" concept has been obsolete for a century. It
meant something in the 1800s, when banks issued paper currency equal
to the value of the gold in their vaults. Someone who had, say, $35
in currency could walk into a bank and demand an ounce of gold in
exchange. If that was impossible, you would call it a "fiat"
currency.

But that's the wrong concept. The right concept is "exchangeability."
In the old days, I could take $35 and exchange it for an ounce of
gold, and I can't do that anymore. But so what? I can exchange it
for all kinds of other things (including gold).

If I have $1 million in dollars, and I want to convert them to pounds
sterling, I could go to any bank and make that conversion. Or, I
could use those $1 million in dollars to purchase a farm in Scotland,
a painting in Poland, a cargo ship in China, and so forth. In fact, I
could even use those dollars to buy gold.

You ask: "Does [dollar currency] have an underlying, "core" value?"

The answer is yes, it does. There are dollar-denominated assets
around the world -- real estate, bonds, stocks, works of art, ships,
trucks, etc., etc. -- totalling hundreds of trillions and probably
several quadrillions of dollars in value. The sum total of those
quadrillions of dollars in dollar-denominated assets represents the
"core value" of the dollar currency.

Bitcoin has nothing like that. If you have a $1 million in bitcoin,
then there's very little you can do with it. There is little
"exchangeability."

In practical terms, it means this: In the midst of a financial crisis,
almost anyone will accept US dollars to provide products or services.
By contrast, almost nobody will accept bitcoin.

This situation could change. If bitcoin survives, then there will be
more and more bitcoin-denominated assets each year, each decade, each
century. Maybe bitcoin will become the world's reserve currency.
Maybe, if you're still around 250 years from now, then you'll be able
to say, "Look! The bitcoin currency is now finally stronger than the
US dollar! I was right!!" And hopefully your computer overlords will
agree with you.

[Higgenbotham]

Higgie, what do you think are the unfixable flaws in Bitcoin/Lightning?

There are many that I've started to discuss.

This time I'll start with the first one and add a bit of detail. In an initial discussion of bitcoin, I had pointed out that it is structured as and trades as an asset, not a currency. Asset based currencies work well in an agricultural age economy (in other words, a commodity based economy) but not so well in an industrial or information age economy. Therefore, if asset based currencies are used in an industrial age economy, the necessary components of more advanced currency systems that allow for the functioning of an industrial and information age economy aren't there. So that's the first fundamental flaw of Bitcoin. Bitcoin could be used as part of a much more complex industrial or information age currency system, but all of the other necessary components to that are missing. We talked about some of that years ago. Those missing components really needed to be rolled out with Bitcoin. Bitcoin could have theoretically been used as a component of present day monetary systems, for example, as central bank reserves if the other flaws in Bitcoin had been fixed before it was rolled out.

I've cobbled together the pieces of our discussion from 2010 that are relevant to this issue:

But I think we have to take this a step at a time. The process of private market debt deflation is likely to be a very long one and during that process our institutions will undergo changes that will likely make it impossible to hyperinflate. The mechanism by which that happens, my guess anyway, is that state (as in US states such as Texas, etc.) or private forms of money will be introduced and compete side by side with Federal Reserve Notes.

Generally speakng, the large currency blocks such as the EU and the US are running into trouble partly because one centralized economic policy and currency cannot fit the needs of a highly diverse area. At the same time, the new technologies make it feasible to create and administer alternative currencies that meet the needs of particular geographic areas. I don't think it'll be too long before the lighbulb goes on inside some desperate state government that this is the solution to their problem. Once that happens, the floodgates will (can is probably the better word here) open and the revolution will (can) be in full swing. As long as that alternative exists, it seems to me that a coup in the traditional sense can be headed off through this means.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162- ... 03544.html

Somebody is beginning to think in this direction, but it doesn't seem that gold and silver coins would be the right solution. One of the Strauss and Howe scenarios was that a governor would lay claim to Federal tax monies (page 272). My guess is this is very likely, along with a plan to establish an alternative digital fiat currency that would promise to be strictly limited in terms of inflation and tailored to the needs of the particular state instead of the crooks on Wall Street.

Longer term, my guess is there will be local economic zones with their own currencies, possibly regional currencies, national currencies, and a world reserve currency. I believe every local economic zone will have a balance of trade accounted for in their own currency and the currencies between local zones and on each geographic level will be electronically interchangeable. I believe Central Banking will be abolished and the parameters like interest rates, money supply, etc., will be set by the free market or by intelligent machines where there is no market.

I mostly think that international trade will not be done in a single fiat dollar any more (US or other). It is just not fair that one country can print up paper and buy supertankers full of oil or goods from China while other countries have to produce real stuff to get money. So I expect trade will be cleared in gold/silver, but there is some chance that a patchwork of bilateral currency agreements, or something else, could work.

Somewhere in this forum I laid out my vision of how I think the future worldwide monetary system will work. I think the main feature will be that a balance of trade will be required around small economic units or zones, where the units or zones have their own currency and are required to be productive. I think it will be a time of great experimention. Many units or zones will fail and be absorbed into successful models. There will probably be a worldwide currency, but it won't be "owned" by any certain geographic area. Central banking will be abolished and the currency system will be run by markets and intelligent computers.

I agree there will be at least partial sovereign debt defaults. My guess has been that during this fourth turning the US will break apart into loosely associated pieces that will eventually have their own currencies. There will still be a weak central government and possibly a national currency, but there won't need to be a national currency. I'm guessing national currencies wil just decline in importance over time as better systems take over that are more compatible with the new technologies. That's just one of a range of possibilities though.

I don't think the government can just replace the dollar with another currency and have solved the problem. If the budget is not balanced the new currency is still headed for hyperinflation. Balancing the budget is just not an easy thing.

I don't think so either. Once there is a partial bond market default, then the credit rating of the US is shot. What I think will happen at that point is the states will say, "Hey, if Washington wasn't pissing all the tax money away that we send them and we could get our hands on it, we could balance OUR state budget. In fact, we could issue OUR own currency and an honest one at that." And it's true. Now I don't know if that means the Federal government can somehow realize the danger and get its act together for a few years at that point, or whether a few states will go ahead with that, or whether there will be a civil war. That's too hard to predict, but I'm guessing that the ultimate outcome will be as I previously posted, that eventually the Feds will take a smaller role. Any new currency will have to be accompanied by political and structural change to make it acceptable.

I think Russia and China now understand that having countries near them peg to their currency and use their currency for central bank reserves would let them play the fun game the US has of printing money and getting real things. Assuming the dollar does crash, I don't think Russia and China will be able to pull off the trick. Everyone will understand how the trick works at that point. The US will be poor without the money printing trick so it will become obvious where their wealth came from.

I don't think so either. That's one reason I think the future monetary system outlined in the above post is ultimately what is most likely. Some version of, "If you don't work, you don't eat." "If you don't produce something of value to export, you don't import." And that could apply to very small units or zones within countries. Basically it means the end of the welfare state as we know it.

To summarize the above, the missing components to an information age currency system would be:

1. Political and structural changes that are compatible with an intelligent currency system. There would ideally be self-contained economic zones with their own local currencies tailored to the unique needs of that zone. For example, the interest rate in one zone might need to be different than in another zone to establish some sort of equilibrium. Currently, as mentioned, Europe (especially) is under one currency with one exchange rate and interest rate that doesn't serve the economic interests of the various areas of the continent. The same is true for the US to a lesser extent. Bitcoin doesn't solve that, but electronic currencies and computers can certainly work toward solving that in the future. Neither does a currency for each country in Europe or each state in the US, as those areas don't necessarily correspond to the optimal economic boundaries, but it's a step in the right direction.

2. The currencies would not be regulated by the equivalent of Federal Reserve decisions on interest rates or repo operations, but by intelligent computers. intelligent computers can replicate and improve on Federal Reserve decision making processes by automating them, adjusting them automatically as needed (not just a few times per year, in other words), and taking the human error and politics out of them. Bitcoin doesn't solve that, but again, electronic currencies and artificial intelligence can certainly work toward solving that in the future.

3. Layers of currencies that serve local, regional, national (perhaps), and world reserve currency purposes to optimally regulate the economic system. Local currencies would be used for everyday purchases, regional currencies for trade outside designated economic zones and world reserve currency for reserves. My guess is that a local electronic currency for a modern artificial intelligence based local economy might serve 30,000 people or so.


Since writing some of these ideas in 2010, I think a window of opportunity was missed. instead of the above happening on any near term time line the world will collapse into a dark age. Bitcoin will actually help bring about that process of collapse and is not the answer at all. Bitcoin is sort of like the crude steam engine that the Romans invented. They didn't go headlong into an industrial revolution but instead collapsed and the industrial revolution happened 14 centuries later. From the ashes, an intelligent currency system will eventually emerge from the ground up. My guess is that it will take about 10 centuries for it to happen, no less than 3 or 4.

[richard5za]

Higgie, what do you think are the unfixable flaws in Bitcoin/Lightning?

There are many that I've started to discuss.


To summarize the above, the missing components to an information age currency system would be:

1. Political and structural changes that are compatible with an intelligent currency system. There would ideally be self-contained economic zones with their own local currencies tailored to the unique needs of that zone. For example, the interest rate in one zone might need to be different than in another zone to establish some sort of equilibrium. Currently, as mentioned, Europe (especially) is under one currency with one exchange rate and interest rate that doesn't serve the economic interests of the various areas of the continent. The same is true for the US to a lesser extent. Bitcoin doesn't solve that, but electronic currencies and computers can certainly work toward solving that in the future. Neither does a currency for each country in Europe or each state in the US, as those areas don't necessarily correspond to the optimal economic boundaries, but it's a step in the right direction.

2. The currencies would not be regulated by the equivalent of Federal Reserve decisions on interest rates or repo operations, but by intelligent computers. intelligent computers can replicate and improve on Federal Reserve decision making processes by automating them, adjusting them automatically as needed (not just a few times per year, in other words), and taking the human error and politics out of them. Bitcoin doesn't solve that, but again, electronic currencies and artificial intelligence can certainly work toward solving that in the future.

3. Layers of currencies that serve local, regional, national (perhaps), and world reserve currency purposes to optimally regulate the economic system. Local currencies would be used for everyday purchases, regional currencies for trade outside designated economic zones and world reserve currency for reserves. My guess is that a local electronic currency for a modern artificial intelligence based local economy might serve 30,000 people or so.


Since writing some of these ideas in 2010, I think a window of opportunity was missed. instead of the above happening on any near term time line the world will collapse into a dark age. Bitcoin will actually help bring about that process of collapse and is not the answer at all. Bitcoin is sort of like the crude steam engine that the Romans invented. They didn't go headlong into an industrial revolution but instead collapsed and the industrial revolution happened 14 centuries later. From the ashes, an intelligent currency system will eventually emerge from the ground up. My guess is that it will take about 10 centuries for it to happen, no less than 3 or 4.

I agree.
But as you say the compatible political structures puts the authorities in control to a lesser or greater extent. I personally think that there is a great future for digital currencies at some point but it won't be Bitcoin

[Higgenbotham]

Some of what I'm saying above with regard to currencies and economics is similar to what Butler is saying with regard to politics. The issue with politics that I see, though, is that the economic system has created real disparities among the population. It's a divide and conquer system that pits groups against each other in what is supposed to be a politically united territory. This is done on purpose by the elites to keep control of the population and skim off wealth for their benefit. There really is scarcity in the red states and it's not because the people who live in them are deplorables. Calling them deplorables is just a dog whistle. People shouldn't be falling for that but they are. There is real suffering happening out there. You can't fix the political system until you fix the economic system and nobody is making any serious attempt to fix it. I'm talking about how to fix it.

[Higgenbotham]

** 03-Mar-2021 World View: Fiat currency

In practical terms, it means this: In the midst of a financial crisis,
almost anyone will accept US dollars to provide products or services.
By contrast, almost nobody will accept bitcoin.

The other part of that is the debt. Any debt contract like a mortgage in the US is written to require that it be paid in dollars. Also, there are many debt contracts worldwide that stipulate the same. Within the US, there are the legal tender laws (for all debts, public and private).

[spottybrowncow]

There really is scarcity in the red states and it's not because the people who live in them are deplorables.

Are you saying scarcity is ONLY present in red states, not blue?