Economist in r/bitcoins explains why other economists are ...

Why Bitcoin Is Here To Stay

Bitcoin is here to stay. Detractors will be proven wrong, no matter how many Nobel-prizes they won.
There's enough detractors. "It is a bubble" (Jamie Dimon, Alan Greenspan, Robert Shiller). "It offers people places to hide" (Jack Lew), "Bitcoin is Evil" (Paul Krugman), "it's too volatile"....
To be sure, some of these detractors are undoubtly very smart, but still it seems that they Just Don't Get It.
And that's what I don't get. It is crystal clear that bitcoin is not just a fancy technology, but a new paradigm that will change the world.
For starters, for the first time in human history, it is possible to store wealth such that it is private and secure. In other words, bitcoin offers the possibility to store wealth such that it can not be stolen or confiscated. This on its very own is an important raison d'etre for bitcoin. Plus that you can transfer value as easily as sending an e-mail, without needing anyones permission, at virtually no cost and without having to trust or rely on a third party. This is unprecedented in human history. This has enormous utility, as Wikileaks can attest.
Ultimately, bitcoin is the enemy of every government in the world. I find it unsurprising that its inventor choses to remain anonymous for the time being.
It is strangely amusing to see Jack Lew brushing off bitcoin as "offering a place to hide" and at the same time calling for a raise of the US debt ceiling. It can be disturbing to see Nobel laureates trolling bitcoin. And that is just the start of it.
What will happen next, is a full-on attack on bitcoin by governments worldwide, under the guise of money laundering, terrorism, drugs, child porn, organ trading, you name it. I also expect the US government to become a lot less welcoming to bitcoin rather sooner than later.
What can they do? Well, for instance, the US could declare it to be illegal for businesses to accept bitcoin as a payment. Obviously this will cause the value of bitcoin to plummet.
But, to paraphrase Jamie Dimon, that will not "be the end of it". For starters, such draconic measure will raise a lot of hard questions, because then just as well outlaw cash payments. But that's not even the point.
Because - you might as well outlaw bad weather. It is pointless. Bitcoin is designed to be fully resilient against governmental hostility. And it better be. It must be resilient, and it is, making it unstoppable, just as free speech is unstoppable. There is no way the government can prevent from two people meeting up and exchanging bitcoin and cash or goods. There is no way a government can force to keep wealth in a way that it can be confiscated. And that is what governments historically do: confiscate wealth, through inflation, through confiscation, through force.
Governments are important, but unfortunately: power corrupts. Bitcoin has the ability to give back many of the powers of government to the people. This is also a history-first. In the future, it will force governments to serve the community. Bitcoin has the potential for people to tolerate governments, instead of the current situation in which governments are endured.
Perhaps you find that the last paragraph sounds too far-fetched. It is not. Perhaps bitcoin will be not bitcoin but a different, improved crypto-currency. That's very unlikely, but most importantly - even if bitcoin would be replaced by a superior crypto-currency, this story would remain exactly the same except for the word 'bitcoin'.
What I want to achieve with this post is to give some historical perspective. There is a large group of people either dismissing bitcoin as a fad, or even be hostile. This is fully understandable, because it is not that easy grasp the potential, or to have an opinion differing from that of various Nobelprize laureates.
To bitcoin adopters I'd like this to say if you allow me. Be patient and try to explain the concept to people who are critical towards bitcoin. Don't attack them when they understandably dismiss bitcoin. Don't troll them back when they troll you. Defend bitcoin on its merits, that's plenty enough. Stick to facts.
What must be avoided is polarisation between those who have bitcoin and those who don't. Right now such polarisation doesn't matter much. But it must be avoided. There is no point in rubbing in that the other person is stupid because you bought bitcoin for a tenth of the current price. All it will do is create envy and hostility. Instead, explain why bitcoin might be useful, on its merits.
submitted by trilli0nn to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Why Bitcoin Checks All the Boxes of a Bubble Economist Paul Krugman Discusses China Currency Manipulation Bitcoin is just another Fiat says economist -- Why I don't think so Bitcoin Investing Lessons & The Real Impact of Blockchain - BTC & Cryptocurrency News URGENT: Bitcoin % FALLING! Thinking About SELLING For ...

A big reason why is that even these believers still saw Bitcoin more as Monopoly money than an imminently valuable currency of the future. “Part of me misses the shady days of 2011 when it was all still fun money that no one really took seriously,” White says. “It was all wild hijinks and governments and banks didn’t care about it.” Schwartz J. D. (2008), Alternative Currencies Grow in Popularity, Time, retrieved: Smart E. (2015), Top 10 countries in which Bitcoin is banned, retrieved: Weisenthal J. (2011), Paul Krugman Explains Why Bitcoin Is A Stupid Currency,, retrieved: Zetter K. (2009), Bullion and Bandits: The Improbable Rise and ... Paul Krugman Explains Why Bitcoin Is A Stupid Currency September 29, 2014 – 23:06 Paul Krugman is in the mood to talk about alternative currencies. He then followed that up with a piece on the only currency more controversial than gold: Bitcoins,the digital money that has a cult following in the corners of the internet. Bitcoin explained: Its history, why is it so valuable, and will the bubble burst? With one bitcoin worth $10,000, 2017 has seen this cryptocurrency go stratospheric. But what exactly is it? Bitcoin has been around since 2009, but cryptocurrencies as in, a digital currency that operates outside of a central bank have s In the Wild Stupid West of cryptocurrencies, this rule is not always respected, and it’s why Bitcoin, Dogecoin, and other altcoins suffer such devastating failures so often. (Moreover, even though the grifted Dogetipbot users could have a claim in court when Wow Such Business goes formally bankrupt, cryptocurrency exists in a largely unexplored legal limbo, so good luck to them getting a ...

[index] [35001] [23973] [42449] [29143] [31100] [35101] [30311] [33590] [14597] [19415]

Why Bitcoin Checks All the Boxes of a Bubble

This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue Queue Paul Krugman, a Nobel prize winning economist, discusses the impact of China's ongoing currency manipulation at a March 12 EPI forum in Washington, DC. Business Insider CEO Henry Blodget discusses the meteoric rise of bitcoin. He references a recent research note published by former Merrill Lynch chief investment strategist Richard Bernstein, who ... Paul Krugman Explains Why Cutting Taxes for the Wealthy Doesn’t Work - Duration: 5 ... Bitcoin vs Gold vs Fiat Money - Duration: 13:23. Marko - WhiteBoard Finance 15,290 views. 13:23 . A Skeptic ... November 19, 2014 Here Are 5 Big Things Paul Krugman Says He Got Wrong Over The Years