Bitcoin skyrockets above $7,000 for first time ever

[snoop1130]

Bitcoin skyrockets above $7,000 for first time ever

Reuters Staff

 

Bitcoins are seen in this illustration picture taken September 27, 2017. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration

 

LONDON (Reuters) - Digital currency bitcoin rocketed above $7,000 for the first time ever on Thursday, after a more than sevenfold increase in its value since the start of the year.

 

Bitcoin has seen eye-watering gains in recent months and has more than doubled in value in the past seven weeks alone BTC=BTSP. It hit as high as $7,066.44 on the Luxembourg-based Bitstamp exchange on Thursday.

 

The latest rally was driven by news earlier this week that the world’s largest derivatives exchange operator CME Group (CME.O) is to launch bitcoin futures.

 

The price move takes bitcoin’s aggregate value, or “market cap” -- its price multiplied by the number of bitcoins released into circulation -- to more than $117 billion, according to industry website Coinmarketcap.

 

The aggregate value of all cryptocurrencies is now at a record high of over $190 billion, the website said.

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-11-2

[z42]

Very happy to be on board this train.. Bankers the world over have had a monopoly on financial affairs for too long now, they've screwed up more times than ever could be acceptable, and the fees they charge for computerized transactions and services are the epitome of greed.

 

Bitcoin is the future, and it looks a lot brighter. The technology of some of the crypto blockchains is incredible and will be a huge deal in future as governments will simply have no option but to ride with it once more and more people see it and become familiar with it.

[taipeir]

Very happy to be on board this train.. Bankers the world over have had a monopoly on financial affairs for too long now, they've screwed up more times than ever could be acceptable, and the fees they charge for computerized transactions and services are the epitome of greed.  

Bitcoin is the future, and it looks a lot brighter. The technology of some of the crypto blockchains is incredible and will be a huge deal in future as governments will simply have no option but to ride with it once more and more people see it and become familiar with it.

 

You wouldn't be so enthusiastic if you got on the train before the last stop and it crashed. 

Its all about the value shooting up, speculative frenzy. That's the exciting bit.

 

I don't understand the nerd speak about breaking governmentt control blah blah.

 

Why is it so much better for people to use cryotocurrency but not cash?

 

Its all money and it's all going to be taxes and regulated.

 

 

But hey it's a wild ride enjoy !

Enjoy the new paradigm speech with bulging pockets and easy money while it lasts.

 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

[z42]

3 hours ago, taipeir said:

You wouldn't be so enthusiastic if you got on the train before the last stop and it crashed. 

Its all about the value shooting up, speculative frenzy. That's the exciting bit.

 

I don't understand the nerd speak about breaking governmentt control blah blah.

 

Why is it so much better for people to use cryotocurrency but not cash?

 

Its all money and it's all going to be taxes and regulated.

 

 

But hey it's a wild ride enjoy !

Enjoy the new paradigm speech with bulging pockets and easy money while it lasts.

 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

Basically Bitcoin is a medium for sending money without the need of a 3rd party intermediary (ie a bank).

 

All transactions are stored within the blockchain data (a digital ledger if you will). 

The reason for the high price is that all bitcoins have been mined already.. No more will be created, hence the more people begin to use, the greater the demand to use, the more valuable the bitcoin blockchain becomes.

 

Some of the other coins perform various important functions such as instantaeous international currency exchanges, more secured cloud storage, or tokens for online gaming etc.

 

Governments will have to criminalize internet usage to shut it down. And the bankers' reputation for being a large contributor to current economic woes won't be tolerated much longer either.

Banks themselves will adopt blockchain technology sooner rather than later as the customer will soon have a clear choice about service to use and what fee structure to follow.

 

Oh and i would be very disappointed if it all went down in flames.. But i would get over it

 

[taipeir]

Basically Bitcoin is a medium for sending money without the need of a 3rd party intermediary (ie a bank).

 

All transactions are stored within the blockchain data (a digital ledger if you will). 

The reason for the high price is that all bitcoins have been mined already.. No more will be created, hence the more people begin to use, the greater the demand to use, the more valuable the bitcoin blockchain becomes.

 

Some of the other coins perform various important functions such as instantaeous international currency exchanges, more secured cloud storage, or tokens for online gaming etc.

 

Governments will have to criminalize internet usage to shut it down. And the bankers' reputation for being a large contributor to current economic woes won't be tolerated much longer either.

Banks themselves will adopt blockchain technology sooner rather than later as the customer will soon have a clear choice about service to use and what fee structure to follow.

 

Oh and i would be very disappointed if it all went down in flames.. But i would get over it

 

The value of Bitcoin has gone up due to speculation and money laundering, not due to its use as a trading tool.

 

Interestingly you say it's a means of transaction, some say it's a store or money but its so volatile almost no business can use it as such. Originally it was promoted as a transactional currency but it's actually almost useless for that in reality.

 

I know some cryotocurrencies will prosper and some block chain ledgers but I don't see anything very interesting about it nor how it so called breaks government control. Its not a miracle drug or helping peoole get ahead.

 

The internet was supposed to do break government control look at it now.

 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

[AJBangkok]

9 hours ago, z42 said:

Basically Bitcoin is a medium for sending money without the need of a 3rd party intermediary (ie a bank).

 

All transactions are stored within the blockchain data (a digital ledger if you will). 

The reason for the high price is that all bitcoins have been mined already.. No more will be created, hence the more people begin to use, the greater the demand to use, the more valuable the bitcoin blockchain becomes.

 

Some of the other coins perform various important functions such as instantaeous international currency exchanges, more secured cloud storage, or tokens for online gaming etc.

 

Governments will have to criminalize internet usage to shut it down. And the bankers' reputation for being a large contributor to current economic woes won't be tolerated much longer either.

Banks themselves will adopt blockchain technology sooner rather than later as the customer will soon have a clear choice about service to use and what fee structure to follow.

 

Oh and i would be very disappointed if it all went down in flames.. But i would get over it

 

Blockchain is probably the most important technological development of this century to date. Blockchain technology has the potential to create productivity gains across the business similar to what email did in the 90’s. Blockchain is a digital ledger It’s not money.

 

Bitcoin is the pioneer of blockchain utility but it’s never going to become the replacement for money. All the bitcoin in existence is valued at around $100 billion. To put that in perspective is worth around 11% of Apple. If you took the entire market capitalization of all the crypto currencies in existence they would be worth less than 50% of Apple. Apple is a single stock.

 

Try running global commerce for a day using a medium that is worth less than $500 billion.

 

Crypto currienies are a minuscule portion of the global economy but the hype around them is beginning to register with global central banks. Just barely. In a recent symposium in Berlin the chair of the Bundesbank said the way to combat crypto currencies is for central banks to develop their own digital currencies. The European Central Bank and the US Fed have also made similar comments. It won’t be difficult to deal with the problem when they decide to get around to it. 

 

Crypto currencies are tiny and offer no threat to fiat currency at the moment so it’s not a priority to deal with them other than dealing with their utility to finance black market activity, terrorism and avoid taxes . When governments do set up their own digital currencies ( which they will do ) then “private currencies “ will suffer a massive price drop and many will just fade away or their blockchain utility be retasked for another application. 

 

With how tiny the crypto currency universe is I think is possible to double or even triple from here on speculation but it won’t last and when it crashes it will crash hard.  So enjoy the ride while you can but take profit along the way and be prepared to get out fast.

[OzyInThailand]

To Any body who can help,

 

I am at the very beginnings of my Crypto Currency trading experience, although I have read and tried my best to understand how to trade Crpto. Is there anybody here in Pattaya that offers assistance, be it a course or training, by this I mean physically in person, not by notes passed because I am truly chasing my own tail, thinking I have done the right thing but finding out later, not so....

 

Please pass on any info that may be available......

[taipeir]

'Blockchain is probably the most important technological development of this century to date. Blockchain technology has the potential to create productivity gains across the business similar to what email did in the 90’s. Blockchain is a digital ledger It’s not money.'

 

Block chain is a type of automated accounting. Its definitely very interesting and will have some uses.

 

But it's absolutely ridiculous to claim it's the most important tech development of this century.

 

Protein drugs, cell therapy, gene editing, quantum computing, private space launches, artificial intelligence, electric cars, smartphones ....these are all way more important and influential.

 

 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jonmarleesco]

What goes up, must... The only question is: how rapidly? 

[AJBangkok]

Not wanting to be glib but Everything that you mentioned above blockchain could compliment the process, infrastructure, supply chain or verification off. It could help the manufacturing be more efficient, cheaper and faster, reduce time to market. 

 

Seriously read up on it and then make a decision on the technological impact it could have.

 

Blockchain isn’t about crypto currency. That’s a sideshow, its the utility of the process that is a game changer.

[Skeptic7]

“The question is I do not understand where the backing of bitcoin is coming from,” says Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve. “You have to really stretch your imagination to infer what the intrinsic value of bitcoin is. I haven’t been able to do it.”

 

Me neither...

[AJBangkok]

41 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

“The question is I do not understand where the backing of bitcoin is coming from,” says Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve. “You have to really stretch your imagination to infer what the intrinsic value of bitcoin is. I haven’t been able to do it.”

 

Me neither...

It’s not that hard . Value is a combination of scarcity, utility and transferability. So in the case of bitcoin ; 

 

scarcity - the amount of bitcoin is limited 

utility - ability as a medium to finance black market activities, terrorism, and avoid taxation 

transferability - almost anonymous, almost instantaneous, no banking system needed 

 

the market Says that’s worth $7,000 per bitcoin

 

The caveat is that sneaky old Greenspan uses the word “intrinsic” and it’s pretty much impossible to apply that to a public algorithm that’s been mined out. 

[Skeptic7]

48 minutes ago, AJBangkok said:

It’s not that hard . Value is a combination of scarcity, utility and transferability. So in the case if bitcoin ; 

 

scarcity - the amount of bitcoin is limited 

utility - ability as a medium to finance black market activities, terrorism, and avoid taxation 

transferability - almost anonymous, almost instantaneous, no banking system needed 

 

the market Says that’s worth $7,000 per bitcoin

 

The caveat is that sneaky old Greenspan uses the word “intrinsic” and it’s pretty much impossible to apply that to a public algorithm that’s been mined out. 

But backed by whom or what? Perception? While mind boggling as to the the current value, it's not difficult to understand how the price rises. Like any other commodity, which it is. Add frenzy, greed, ignorance and in the infamous words of 'that sneaky old Greenspan'...irrational exuberance.

 

China has been the first to ban Bitcoin exchanges. Others could follow. It's not Bitcoin or the idea of virtual currencies that I'm questioning. It's the extremely lofty level of it's valuation. Brings to mind the Tulips of Holland a few centuries back. And at least when that crashed, people still had pretty flowers to show for it! 

[AJBangkok]

I’m actually in your corner on this one. There is always going to be some kind of “ tulips of holland “ investment bubbling away on the fringes of the market when there is too much money chasing too few stocks. Crypto currencies are the latest incarnation of just that. 

 

Governments can can crush them whenever they choose by legislation and issuing their own digital currency. Right now with a total crypto currency market cap of 400 billion it’s just so tiny in the bigger scheme of things for them to bother about. That’s why I say the party isn’t over yet, they could double or triple from here before imploding. But I do think they will implode it’s just a matter of time. 

 

If you have a chance take a look at of HR3364 a bill passed  by congress called  “countering Americas adversaries through sanctions act. Page 51 section 8. It’s an earmark that allows the investigation, monitoring and collection of data on crypto currency. It’s fairly innocuous but it has many of the crypto currency community up in arms concerned that it’s the first step by government to reign them in.

 

What you make of it is up to you but it’s big a step in the wrong direction for cryptocurencies and the government isn’t going to stop there.  It’s going to creep further and further into the crypto currency universe and screw it all up. If you think the government will opt for peaceful coexistence with something they cannot control then think again. It’s not going to happen. 

 

If anyone thinks the governments won’t let cryptos collapse then consider that we are taking about an asset class less than 50% of the size of Apple a single stock, and with 6 billion people on the plant maybe 0.01% have even heard of bitcoin and probably less than 1% of them actually own some. The governments won’t give a sh@t about letting them go to zero, in fact they’ll probably do whatever they can to help then get there faster.

[davidst01]

Ive just sold my bitcoin and have taken profits. 

 

I speculate that in a few weeks the bitcoin price will take a huge dive downwards due to the SegWit2x hard fork. The man with cash ready on the exchange will buy back in at cheap prices....  Maybe bitcoin cash will be the new victor. 

[ExpatOilWorker]

I have (maybe wrongly) heard that the blockchain is so big now that it is impractical to use Bitcoin for general purchases, like a pizza or a cup of coffee. Also that each transaction takes ever more and more energy to process,

Is any of this true?

 

From a quick Google search, the blockchain is now 165 GB and at least doubling every year.

[Skeptic7]

20 minutes ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

I have (maybe wrongly) heard that the blockchain is so big now that it is impractical to use Bitcoin for general purchases, like a pizza or a cup of coffee. Also that each transaction takes ever more and more energy to process,

Is any of this true?

 

From a quick Google search, the blockchain is now 165 GB and at least doubling every year.

Not practical or convenient at all in NYC, it seems. Plus, the premiums to use it are ridiculous. Here's an entertaining vid from CNBC on practicality of living on Bitcoin (for a week). 

 

https://www.cnbc.com/video/2017/06/13/how-practical-is-it-to-live-on-bitcoin-in-2017-we-tried-it-for-a-week.html

[taipeir]

I have (maybe wrongly) heard that the blockchain is so big now that it is impractical to use Bitcoin for general purchases, like a pizza or a cup of coffee. Also that each transaction takes ever more and more energy to process,

Is any of this true?

 

From a quick Google search, the blockchain is now 165 GB and at least doubling every year.

As I alluded to earlier it's actually a terrible currency because it can only handle a small number of transactions per second.

That's its real weakpoint.

 

It and bitcoin cash can't scale.

https://www.quora.com/How-many-transactions-per-second-will-the-new-Bitcoin-Cash-BCC-cryptocurrency-be-able-to-handle

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

[twig]

On 11/3/2017 at 8:01 AM, Skeptic7 said:

But backed by whom or what? Perception? While mind boggling as to the the current value, it's not difficult to understand how the price rises. Like any other commodity, which it is. Add frenzy, greed, ignorance and in the infamous words of 'that sneaky old Greenspan'...irrational exuberance.

 

China has been the first to ban Bitcoin exchanges. Others could follow. It's not Bitcoin or the idea of virtual currencies that I'm questioning. It's the extremely lofty level of it's valuation. Brings to mind the Tulips of Holland a few centuries back. And at least when that crashed, people still had pretty flowers to show for it! 

Since you admit Bitcoin is a commodity, by whom or what is any commodity backed? By whom or what is gold backed?

If gold is backed by its utility, so is Bitcoin or any other commodity.

Any Bitcoin use named so far obviously has utility to those using it, even if its "speculation and money laundering".

 

"Speculation" is really just price discovery in any market.

"Money laundering" is just an lol nonsense term to me, used for political reasons...

 

As for its fiat valuation, it's simply a matter of supply and demand, even if it's pure speculation. Gold is 4x in fiat what it was just 17 years ago, and it's a multi-trillion market, which has thousands of years history. If you look at its chart since 1971, an argument can be made that it's extremely volatile in fiat terms.

 

You can't use gold or silver as transactional currency, and it's no longer used as money, but ain't no one giving those away for free either.

 

The tulipmania of Holland is a myth. It didn't happen the way it's usually told at all:

https://youtu.be/3Z7olnxoKrw?t=1h30m20s

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/there-never-was-real-tulip-fever-180964915/

 

[twig]

20 hours ago, taipeir said:

As I alluded to earlier it's actually a terrible currency because it can only handle a small number of transactions per second.

That's its real weakpoint.

 

It and bitcoin cash can't scale.

https://www.quora.com/How-many-transactions-per-second-will-the-new-Bitcoin-Cash-BCC-cryptocurrency-be-able-to-handle

 

What Bitcoin is showing now is that it's really not yet needed as a currency in order to have value, the same way precious metals are no longer useful as a currency, yet retain value.

 

Bitcoin capacity is a "real weakpoint" only as long as it's not needed as currency. In reality, the transaction capacity is being addressed for the future, IF/WHEN Bitcoin will be needed as currency. It's being done through a technology called "payment channels".

 

For the lay people, this is a good overview of Bitcoin's scaling weak points:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXLZSgf4b8Q

 

[Skeptic7]

2 hours ago, twig said:

Since you admit Bitcoin is a commodity, by whom or what is any commodity backed? By whom or what is gold backed?

If gold is backed by its utility, so is Bitcoin or any other commodity.

Any Bitcoin use named so far obviously has utility to those using it, even if its "speculation and money laundering".

 

"Speculation" is really just price discovery in any market.

"Money laundering" is just an lol nonsense term to me, used for political reasons...

 

As for its fiat valuation, it's simply a matter of supply and demand, even if it's pure speculation. Gold is 4x in fiat what it was just 17 years ago, and it's a multi-trillion market, which has thousands of years history. If you look at its chart since 1971, an argument can be made that it's extremely volatile in fiat terms.

 

You can't use gold or silver as transactional currency, and it's no longer used as money, but ain't no one giving those away for free either.

 

The tulipmania of Holland is a myth. It didn't happen the way it's usually told at all:

https://youtu.be/3Z7olnxoKrw?t=1h30m20s

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/there-never-was-real-tulip-fever-180964915/

 

Agreed that gold is speculative and mostly perceived value. To compare gold with Bitcoin is fair in a few ways...a stretch in others. Gold has withstood the test of time, whereas that remains to be seen with Bitcoin/digital currencies. And It's not only Bitcoin. There are now hundreds of digital currencies. There is only 1 gold and it is unique in many ways. Future geo-political actions like China recently banning Bitcoin exchanges are certainly possible by other governments.  

 

My point is not that Bitcoin (and other digital currencies) are not viable or useful, but rather...is Bitcoin realistically worth it's present value? Do not think it is going away, but do expect Bitcoin to settle down to a more realistic valuation. Too far, too fast. 

 

Time will tell.

[twig]

37 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

Agreed that gold is speculative and mostly perceived value. To compare gold with Bitcoin is fair in a few ways...a stretch in others. Gold has withstood the test of time, whereas that remains to be seen with Bitcoin/digital currencies. And It's not only Bitcoin. There are now hundreds of digital currencies. There is only 1 gold and it is unique in many ways. Future geo-political actions like China recently banning Bitcoin exchanges are certainly possible by other governments.  

 

My point is not that Bitcoin (and other digital currencies) are not viable or useful, but rather...is Bitcoin realistically worth it's present value? Do not think it is going away, but do expect Bitcoin to settle down to a more realistic valuation. Too far, too fast.

All value is speculative and perceived: it's subjective. For thousands of years before gold was used as money, and even in modern era, it was not used for much in primitive human societies.

 

Bitcoin is also unique in many ways among what many call "shitcoins". None of the ones I've seen can do anything useful that Bitcoin couldn't do, IF it were really useful or currently in demand. They are just elaborately packaged pump-and-dumps to the ignorant by their founders.

 

And gold was unique only by convention. There was always silver, then platinum, palladium, rhodium.

Now there are "strategic" rare earth metals that are irreplaceably unique, even compared to gold.

You can buy investment lots of "strategic" metals, which most folks have never even heard of:

https://www.smhag.com/?lang=en

A modern jet engine you regularly hire for example, would be impossible without some of them. That's really unique.

 

Most governments ban a number of things and activities, which only increases their value. After the China ban, Bitcoin seems destined to join their ranks.

Governments actually subsidize Bitcoin's use in illegal activities, by making it difficult to use PayPal, for example for those same activities.

If one could use PayPal to easily buy illegal drugs on the Internet, no one would use Bitcoin for that.

And given their track record, I'm sure the government gangs will double down on subsidizing Bitcoin's use in illegal activities.

 

Regarding " Bitcoin realistically worth it's present value", the OP and similar hype article are real misleading.

Let's go back to gold:

The smallest commonly quoted and tradeable amount of gold is a gram, which is currently 40 bucks.

https://goldprice.org/

The smallest theoretically tradeable Bitcoin subunit is a satoshi. Each Bitcoin contains 100,000,000 satoshis.

At current 7500 USD per Bitcoin, each satoshi is only 0.000075 USD. Does that seem unrealistically bubbly?

 

So, discussing whether it's "realistically worth it's present value" by USD/Bitcoin rate is like debating whether 40000 USD per kilogram of gold is realistic vs. the 40 USD per gram of gold.

 

 

[twig]

On 11/2/2017 at 11:24 PM, AJBangkok said:

Blockchain is probably the most important technological development of this century to date. Blockchain technology has the potential to create productivity gains across the business similar to what email did in the 90’s. Blockchain is a digital ledger It’s not money.

 

Bitcoin is the pioneer of blockchain utility but it’s never going to become the replacement for money. All the bitcoin in existence is valued at around $100 billion. To put that in perspective is worth around 11% of Apple. If you took the entire market capitalization of all the crypto currencies in existence they would be worth less than 50% of Apple. Apple is a single stock.

 

Try running global commerce for a day using a medium that is worth less than $500 billion.

 

Crypto currienies are a minuscule portion of the global economy but the hype around them is beginning to register with global central banks. Just barely. In a recent symposium in Berlin the chair of the Bundesbank said the way to combat crypto currencies is for central banks to develop their own digital currencies. The European Central Bank and the US Fed have also made similar comments. It won’t be difficult to deal with the problem when they decide to get around to it. 

 

Crypto currencies are tiny and offer no threat to fiat currency at the moment so it’s not a priority to deal with them other than dealing with their utility to finance black market activity, terrorism and avoid taxes . When governments do set up their own digital currencies ( which they will do ) then “private currencies “ will suffer a massive price drop and many will just fade away or their blockchain utility be retasked for another application. 

 

With how tiny the crypto currency universe is I think is possible to double or even triple from here on speculation but it won’t last and when it crashes it will crash hard.  So enjoy the ride while you can but take profit along the way and be prepared to get out fast.

There are too many FUDdy assertions to debate in this one. So, i'll have to limit this reply to one - this issue of "Blockchain is probably the most important technological development of this century to date".

 

All except Bitcoin's use of the blockchain are really just self-serving hype to pump-and-dump a coin to get fiat or Bitcoin. This has been discussed ad nauseam since the earliest days on BitcoinTalk.org and too many other places.

In the recent ICO era, I think this is the most comprehensive and realistic view of "the blockchain" I've heard:

https://youtu.be/SMEOKDVXlUo

And I think this guy is being generous to 99.99% of blockchain uses today.

[twig]

On 11/2/2017 at 11:24 PM, AJBangkok said:

Bitcoin is the pioneer of blockchain utility but it’s never going to become the replacement for money. All the bitcoin in existence is valued at around $100 billion. To put that in perspective is worth around 11% of Apple. If you took the entire market capitalization of all the crypto currencies in existence they would be worth less than 50% of Apple. Apple is a single stock.

 

Try running global commerce for a day using a medium that is worth less than $500 billion.

 

Since I have some time, your next cluster FUD points is also noteworthy and debatable.

It's been years since a US federal court has ruled that "It is clear that Bitcoin can be used as money." in SEC vs. Shavers:

https://ia800904.us.archive.org/35/items/gov.uscourts.txed.146063/gov.uscourts.txed.146063.23.0.pdf

 

So, while it's not currently used as money, it's just your opinion that it can't be a "replacement" for government fiat money. It certainly can be.

 

If you're just going to take a current snapshot, then just 6 years ago, all the bitcoins in existence at the time were valued at around 15 MILLION USD ( 2 USD/Bitcoin, 7.5 million bitcoins total.) And back then, the critics were celebrating Bitcoin's complete demise and predicting that it "will go down hard" to its "intrinsic value" of zero...

https://blockchain.info/charts/total-bitcoins?timespan=all

https://blockchain.info/charts/market-cap?timespan=all

So, if it could go from 15 million USD to 120 Billion USD in 6 years, it would also be pure conjecture that it could not go to several Trillion USD in the next 6 years.

 

So the comparison to Apple is a moot point, because the value of anything is dynamic, not to mention that of an entity made to be difficult to control centrally.

 

Right now, there is no need to run  "global commerce for a day using a medium that is worth less than $500 billion", but doesn't mean that you couldn't in the future, as its market "worth" increases.

 

You certainly could run all of the "Systeme D" commerce on it even now, especially IF it's Bitcoin's best use case.

The Systeme D economy is about 10 Trillion USD by itself:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_D

 

IF Bitcoin were to take even a third of that Systeme D action, its fiat valuation would go into 6 figures USD.

No need for "mass adoption", which I think has already happened.

Certainly no need for what I best heard described as "dumbass adoption", which is yet to come.

 

 

[twig]

On 11/2/2017 at 11:24 PM, AJBangkok said:

Crypto currienies are a minuscule portion of the global economy but the hype around them is beginning to register with global central banks. Just barely. In a recent symposium in Berlin the chair of the Bundesbank said the way to combat crypto currencies is for central banks to develop their own digital currencies. The European Central Bank and the US Fed have also made similar comments. It won’t be difficult to deal with the problem when they decide to get around to it. 

Bitcoin began to register with global central banks years ago:

https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/other/virtualcurrencyschemes201210en.pdf

 

The earliest "me too" bank digital currency I remember during the Bitcoin era was the Canadian MintChip. Here is how that lead balloon went over:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MintChip

 

What Bundesbank and other central banks have said about developing " their own digital currencies" is just smoke-and-mirrors rhetoric for the ignorant sheeple, which are the majority of the population even in developed countries. Even in the US, for example, many sheeple still believe that the USD is somehow "backed by gold".

 

Those who know how modern fiat works, know that most of it has been "digital currency" for decades:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MBCURRCIR

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2

Most of the fiat currency today exists only inside financial databases.

 

The central banks have not even completely dealt with the problem of counterfeit currency. You can still run across fakes even among modern USD notes.

So, whether for them it "won’t be difficult to deal with the problem" of cryptocurrencies is pure  conjecture, because their own government gang overlords can't allow them to deflate or even disinflate their fiat currencies the way Bitcoin is scheduled to do.

They have to continue to expand their money supply to pay for "unfunded liabilities", which will only get worse, even without hyperinflation:

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

 

What's more, the central bank of central banks director has conceded that cryptocurrencies may disrupt the financial status quo, and perhaps  should not be prevented from doing that:
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/13/bitcoin-get-serious-about-digital-currency-imf-christine-lagarde-says.html
https://www.cnbc.com/video/2017/10/06/imf-director-christine-lagarde-bitcoin-is-too-expensive-for-me-at-the-moment.html

 

[twig]

On 11/2/2017 at 11:24 PM, AJBangkok said:

Crypto currencies are tiny and offer no threat to fiat currency at the moment so it’s not a priority to deal with them other than dealing with their utility to finance black market activity, terrorism and avoid taxes . When governments do set up their own digital currencies ( which they will do ) then “private currencies “ will suffer a massive price drop and many will just fade away or their blockchain utility be retasked for another application. 

 

With how tiny the crypto currency universe is I think is possible to double or even triple from here on speculation but it won’t last and when it crashes it will crash hard.  So enjoy the ride while you can but take profit along the way and be prepared to get out fast.

It's clear from Legarde's statments above that cryptocurrencies are a priority for central banks, and not just in terms of illicit activities.

"Black market activity" (aka Free Market Activity) is powered by government fiat currencies in every country to the tune of at least 10 Trillion USD that Systeme D is estimated to be.

 

So has non-state "terrorism" been successfully financed with government fiat - including through the banking system - for as long as there has been non-state terrorism.
The Hawala system is also far better for that than cryptocurrencies are, and used extensively.

 

The US Internal Revenue Service estimates that just the American taxpayers evade about 458 Billion USD in taxes per year:
http://fortune.com/2016/04/29/tax-evasion-cost/

They've been doing that completely without cryptocurrencies, through a myriad of methods.

 

So, the government gangs worldwide have trouble dealing with the use of their own currencies in illicit activities.
How would they be able to avoid trouble in dealing with the "utility" of cryptocurrencies in the above, especially when so many cryptocurrencies have been designed to conceal financial activity?

 

As mentioned previously, governments "set up their own digital currencies" decades ago.
All they will do by eliminating paper fiat is subsidize the push of the illicit activities using paper fiat into cryptocurrencies, some of which are far less transparent than Bitcoin.

 

However, Bitcoin is also planning to "go dark" with the privacy protocols for both its blockchain and payment-channel layers:
https://youtu.be/BPNs9EVxWrA?t=34m3s
https://elementsproject.org/elements/confidential-transactions/

 

Bitcoin in particular is not a "private currency". It's far more public than for example the USD issued by a consortium of US commercial banks, who are members of the "Federal" Reserve System, which is widely known NOT to be federal.
And it conceals much of its internal data, even when ordered to disclose it by the US government legislators.

So, no one outside the FED even knows how far or close the USD is from " a massive price drop".

 

Given all that, what you say Bitcoin and its shitcoin entourage "will suffer" when the governments "get around to it" doesn't even logically follow on many levels and from so many historical precedents.

So, your predictions and advice about what "won't last" and how "it will crash hard" are just pure FUD and conjecture.
We've seen that about Bitcoin since it wasn't even worth 1 USD, and can be said about anything, including "real" assets.

 

Professor Bitcorn is the most famous example:
https://themerkle.com/top-4-worst-bitcoin-price-predictions/
 

[AJBangkok]

That’s quite a stream of consciousness and there may be an original argument in amongst the CNBC talking heads links but unfortunately it’s such a mish mash of thoughts that it’s hard to find. ( and honestly not even worth looking for as it’s such a jumble of thoughts)

 

Thankfully the gem below appeared early in your meandering giving us a warning that it wasn’t to be taken seriously. 

 

“So, while it's not currently used as money, it's just your opinion that it can't be a "replacement" for government fiat money. It certainly can be.

 

So please enlighten us how you can maintain monetary stability particularly the value of money in reference to its domestic purchasing power. How do you set a minimum wage? Does your bus fare change every day ? What’s the 20 year interest rate on my home loan? How do you forcast future earnings to value a business?  I don’t even want to start to get into how government can issue bonds etc etc .

 

BTW just to let you know a “private currency” is a currency not issued or backed by a government. Public currencies are issued by governments. It’s like the terminology used when the government sells off an asset or business owned by the government it’s called a privatization. ( even though technically it’s sold to the public in a ....wait for it ... public offering ) It’s a little confusing. Kinda like  Public services are things usually provided by governments to the general public and private services are or could be provided to the public by private companies. So as there is no government involvement or ownership in bitcoin it’s called a private currency. ( even though the public uses it ) . Still confused?

 

Just a second point,  of course my prediction of what will happen to bitcoin in the future is pure conjecture. But so is yours because as neither of us have seen the future any predictions will always be pure conjecture. Unless you have a superpower and have really seen the future.

 

 

[taipeir]

That’s quite a stream of consciousness and there may be an original argument in amongst the CNBC talking heads links but unfortunately it’s such a mish mash of thoughts that it’s hard to find. ( and honestly not even worth looking for as it’s such a jumble of thoughts)
 
Thankfully the gem below appeared early in your meandering giving us a warning that it wasn’t to be taken seriously. 
 
“So, while it's not currently used as money, it's just your opinion that it can't be a "replacement" for government fiat money. It certainly can be.
 
So please enlighten us how you can maintain monetary stability particularly the value of money in reference to its domestic purchasing power. How do you set a minimum wage? Does your bus fare change every day ? What’s the 20 year interest rate on my home loan? How do you forcast future earnings to value a business?  I don’t even want to start to get into how government can issue bonds etc etc .
 
BTW just to let you know a “private currency” is a currency not issued or backed by a government. Public currencies are issued by governments. It’s like when the government sells off an asset or business owned by the government it’s called a privatization. ( even though technically it’s sold to the public in a ....wait for it ... public offering ) It’s a little confusing. Kinda like  Public services are things usually provided by governments to the general public and private services are or could be provided to the public by private companies. So as there is no government involvement or ownership in bitcoin it’s called a private currency. ( even though the public uses it ) . Still confused?
 
Just a second point,  of course my prediction of what will happen to bitcoin in the future is pure conjecture. But so is yours because as neither of us have seen the future any predictions will always be pure conjecture. Unless you have a superpower and have really seen the future.
 
 

The real reasons Bitcoin value has soared.

First mover advantage, scarcity , ease of moving across borders and masses of media attention align with the newest meme on the block (block chain ).

Although already mentioned that's its not that famous amongst the peasants it certainly is very famous amongst the young Technorati and the Chinese.

So it has plenty of very well cashed up people who would like to gamble, move money around easily or just buy into the newest internet paradigm.

Its amaxing that it has , even now, been a complete failure at what it was originally promoted to do ...Act as a stable easily transacted digital currency.

Instead it has morphed into something else with a value beyond many of the wildest dreams.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

[twig]

19 hours ago, AJBangkok said:

“So, while it's not currently used as money, it's just your opinion that it can't be a "replacement" for government fiat money. It certainly can be.

 

So please enlighten us how you can maintain monetary stability particularly the value of money in reference to its domestic purchasing power. How do you set a minimum wage? Does your bus fare change every day ? What’s the 20 year interest rate on my home loan? How do you forcast future earnings to value a business?  I don’t even want to start to get into how government can issue bonds etc etc .

 

BTW just to let you know a “private currency” is a currency not issued or backed by a government. Public currencies are issued by governments. It’s like the terminology used when the government sells off an asset or business owned by the government it’s called a privatization. ( even though technically it’s sold to the public in a ....wait for it ... public offering ) It’s a little confusing. Kinda like  Public services are things usually provided by governments to the general public and private services are or could be provided to the public by private companies. So as there is no government involvement or ownership in bitcoin it’s called a private currency. ( even though the public uses it ) . Still confused?

 

The way you would accomplish what you assert to be impossible with Bitcoin is by accepting it as the unit of account.

Even if fiat remains the unit of account, but is backed by Bitcoin the way it was by gold, all of the above is possible.

 

Government gangs would likely not want that for the same reasons they abandoned gold-backed currencies.

That doesn't change the fact that it's possible to use Bitcoin as money the same way gold was once used as money - both directly and through gold-backed fiat.

 

When gold and silver were both money and currency, were they private or public currency?

 

Whatever type of currency Bitcoin is, it's not private currency, because its method of issuance is more similar to that of gold than for example eGold, Liberty Dollar, Ithaca Hours, or even "instamined" cryptocurrencies, such as Ripple.

 

By your definition, even the US Dollar is not a public currency, because it is not issued by the US government.

If a currency can only be public or private with nothing in between, the USD is a private currency, because it's literally created into existence by commercial banks.

 

So Bitcoin is neither, the same way gold and silver were.
It seems to be a new category of currencies without a concise name yet.

[twig]

20 hours ago, AJBangkok said:

Thankfully the gem below appeared early in your meandering giving us a warning that it wasn’t to be taken seriously. 

 

“So, while it's not currently used as money, it's just your opinion that it can't be a "replacement" for government fiat money. It certainly can be.

...

Just a second point,  of course my prediction of what will happen to bitcoin in the future is pure conjecture. But so is yours because as neither of us have seen the future any predictions will always be pure conjecture. Unless you have a superpower and have really seen the future.

 

 

Furthermore, that Bitcoin can be used as a replacement for government fiat money is not only my assertion.

I simply quoted from the ruling of a US federal court, in a 2013 landmark case involving Bitcoin: US Securities and Exchange Commission vs. Trendon Shavers and Bitcoin Savings and Trust.

https://ia800904.us.archive.org/35/items/gov.uscourts.txed.146063/gov.uscourts.txed.146063.23.0.pdf

 

On page 3:

"It is clear that Bitcoin can be used as money. It can be used to purchase goods or services, and as Shavers stated, used to pay for individual

living expenses. The only limitation of Bitcoin is that it is limited to those places that accept it as currency. However, it can also be exchanged for conventional currencies, such as the U.S. dollar, Euro, Yen, and Yuan. Therefore, Bitcoin is a currency or form of money, and investors wishing to invest in BTCST provided an investment of money."

 

This is one example of the main difference in our modes of conjecture; I've provided a number of links to support my logic and conjecture from my stream of experience in fin-tech.

You have yet to provide a single external source to support your assertions.

 

I'll let our peers here decide which one of us has actually been "meandering" through a "mish-mash" of our "stream of consciousness".