@PaulWGrignon Who precisely is productive and trustworthy? I am unable to name even one person or organization. They both are inherently not trustworthy. With Bitcoin there is no need to trust anyone. True, pump and dump was part of Bitcoin's "history" of the past 8 months or so, but what do you mean it's "designed for"? Every system will suffer from suckers. The question is: Can the system cope? Bitcoin has proven that it can.
@rudigerkoch Bitcoin is perception money, undefined, designed for theoretically unlimited volatility based on perceptions and the manipulation of perceptions, as its history to date has demonstrated. It can happen again.
I advocate the original concept of money, from long before coins were invented, which was "a promise of something specific from someone specific", most seeking to stay in business and succeed by having the most reliable credit. That is how we rebuild productivity and trust.
@PaulLWGrignon Sounds like you advocate barter. Your movie didn't convey that message or did I get that wrong? Do you have a link to a document?
Everything is perception. Dollar is, Bitcoin is, Gold is and the promise of Mortlach to deliver me a cask of their Malt once it reaches 40 years maturity has also only the value I give it. A muslim may value Mortlach's promise even negative, if that's possible. There is no such thing as intrinsic value.
1) There's a forth "school" by Silvio Gesell, precisely the Wörgl experiment was about free-money and not mutual credit. What I don't like about Gesell's freigeld is that it's also legal tender controlled centrally by the state. freicoin org
2) What you describe here as credit coin is equivalent to ripple, a mutual credit system completely decentralized that's not limited to small communities. ripple-project org
The demand for legal tender, whether rooted to commodities or not, is created by taxation. This demand for token currency creates value. Establishing a national currency can be done without having any gold or silver whatsoever. Currency can be created and spent to finance government, cycling back via taxes on land and privilege, without fear of inflation. Just a thought.
@etzel33 That is precisely what the movie says. Governments can issue credit against that government's taxes just as producers can issue credit against their own production. The essential point in both cases is that spending must EQUAL earning/taxation. In my proposed system this is automatically enforced.
@PaulLWGrignon that's what I took away from the Money as Debt II series that got me into this whole currency idea. I'm glad you haven't succumbed to the gold bug fever of Mises etc... thanks
Interesting analysis of current problems. I wonder if Bitcoin system could become part of the solution. It is an open-source, fully distributed and decentralized accounting system. Each transaction if cryptographically signed and broadcast worldwide through a robust peer-to-peer network. It already works at this very moment.
@MsBitcoin BitCoin is advanced technology devoted to repeating the two biggest monetary mistakes: 1. money as a single uniform commodity in limited supply and 2. money that is not redeemable for anything from its source.
@PaulLWGrignon: good points. Bitcoin is not based on debt, and is open for everyone to participate in (that is, no central banks), including issuing new coins. Doesn't this address monetary mistakes that are as important or more important than what you listed?
@MsBitcoin BitCoin is "perception money" perfectly designed for "pump and dump" volatility. This is already apparent in its history and was entirely predictable from the start. My proposed system is not based on debt-of-money, anyone who is both productive and trustworthy may issue credits that can only be collected upon by purchasing from or employing them, and there is no central bank.
@PaulLWGrignon I'm beginning to think of the real advantage of bitcoin not as a new currency with all the problems you describe here, but as a means to implement the technology making banks less necessary. Google "triple entry bookkeeping". Your videos actually show an understanding of this, but most people will not see the advantages of it yet. Bitcoin needs to be in circulation for the technology to be "out there". I think of them as "priming the pump" so to speak.
Despite criticisms of storing your money in real physical objects, this is a criticism against building a money system on it.
I still save buying power in physical assets society deems valuable like gold and silver. Because when this debt ponzi scheme collapses, and it increasingly looks like we are on the cliff edge in today's environment, your savings are going to get wiped out with the currency.
I can swap gold and silver into whatever new currency they think up after the collapse.
@AnnoyedDragon The government can also outlaw the ownership of gold and silver as the USA did in 1933. You are already suspected of being a "domestic terrorist" if you buy gold or silver or support Ron Paul.
@PaulLWGrignon The gold standard has been gone for so long, it will be a significant burden for the government to go chasing every teenager with a 9c trinket. Chances are if they wanted to steal people's gold, they'd go after the exchanges and vaults. Not knocking door to door.
They may very well ban gold, but only idiots or those ignorant as to golds purpose would line up to exchange it for paper.
@AnnoyedDragon They could just outlaw exchanging anything for gold. ONLY the government could do so. Gold is INCONVENIENT as a medium of exchange, especially if it is outlawed and can only be spent "underground".
I have no argument with the fact that gold & silver are "valuable".
In fact if we all buy monetary silver and hoard it, it will devastate several industries, because silver is an essential metal in industry.
@PaulLWGrignon Only I haven't argued using gold as a currency. If you look at my original old comment, I talk about saving buying power in physical assets like gold and silver, then swapping it into whatever currency is around after this crisis.
Who cares. You can change the monetary system any damn way you want, and there will still be rich people and poor people. There will be people who work hard to achieve the life they want, and there will be leeches who are always hitting up friends and relatives for a "loan". The will never be a shortage of assholes envious of the results of someone else's talents and productivity, who if they would get up off the fucking couch & stop shooting up heroin might achieve something themselves.
@schlumbucket I am all for new and progressive systems in the world,no matter if it's monetary,scientific,or medical. I honestly feel people are stuck in systems,and progress can be stunned by exterior and interior forces within ourselves. That being said, I agree with your statement 100% in one way or another. Maybe we should change ourselves,and the rest will follow?
@schlumbucket@Hoobziii The majority of poor people in the world work VERY HARD. And they regularly get ripped off by rich people who 'let their money work for them'.
Will there be a Wall Street Exchange for this type of money? Would we have the same speculation and complicated markets trading derivatives of these barter contracts?
if interest is eliminated. and money cease to be a means to store value, all the manipulations you talk about will cease to exist naturally - no one will benefit from them
like i said... you can trade them all you want, you wouldn't get anything out of it, it would be totaly futile a waste of time and nergy to trade money... . when there is no interest, there is no reason to store money it doesn't "grow" by itself - and it has no value in itself, it's just a system of measuring value.
@DCUPtoejuice Of course they will be traded. That is their purpose. It is "money" backed by real value, like gold or silver, just NOT any ONE thing in short supply. Money is worth what it can be redeemed for which is specified by the Issuer's prices.
@DCUPtoejuice Possibly. The difference is that ALL of the "money" is backed by real goods and services from specific suppliers for a limited time. And then these contracts expire if not collected upon. No one can simply conjure new money into existence by promising to pay it back and use that money to manipulate the market.
i think not, it would acyually be even easier if the system uses an important feature of contemporary LETS systems: total transperancy of accounts: every memeber can see every other member's balance and past transactions.
the promise is based on real value created in a transaction, not on a mere loan. it's true that there is still debt but it is simplified and based on reality.
YOU CAN'T "JUST" ELIMINATE FRACTIONAL RESERVE BANKING BECAUSE THAT WOULD ELIMINATE MONEY AND CRASH THE ECONOMY. THERE IS A NEED FOR A NEW ALTERNAIVE MONEY SYSTEM AND S.I.C. IS THE BEST ANSWER
The difference is that it is a promise of something specific from someone specific to be redeemed for the real product or service within a limited time. It is NOT a promise to pay back "money" created as a debt-of-itself.
@DCUPtoejuice Today's bank credit "money" is a promise to pay it back in money and is dependent on the supply of money, which is determined by the general level of borrowing. ie. factors beyond the borrower's control. A shortage of new borrowing can produce a shortage. Self-issued product/service credits are payable in products/services. The Issuer of the credit issues enough credits to absorb its production, independent of what anyone else is doing. Therefore there can never be a shortage.
@PaulWGrignon Who precisely is productive and trustworthy? I am unable to name even one person or organization. They both are inherently not trustworthy. With Bitcoin there is no need to trust anyone. True, pump and dump was part of Bitcoin's "history" of the past 8 months or so, but what do you mean it's "designed for"? Every system will suffer from suckers. The question is: Can the system cope? Bitcoin has proven that it can.
rudigerkoch 4 weeks ago
@rudigerkoch Bitcoin is perception money, undefined, designed for theoretically unlimited volatility based on perceptions and the manipulation of perceptions, as its history to date has demonstrated. It can happen again.
I advocate the original concept of money, from long before coins were invented, which was "a promise of something specific from someone specific", most seeking to stay in business and succeed by having the most reliable credit. That is how we rebuild productivity and trust.
PaulLWGrignon 4 weeks ago
@PaulLWGrignon Sounds like you advocate barter. Your movie didn't convey that message or did I get that wrong? Do you have a link to a document?
Everything is perception. Dollar is, Bitcoin is, Gold is and the promise of Mortlach to deliver me a cask of their Malt once it reaches 40 years maturity has also only the value I give it. A muslim may value Mortlach's promise even negative, if that's possible. There is no such thing as intrinsic value.
rudigerkoch 4 weeks ago
1) There's a forth "school" by Silvio Gesell, precisely the Wörgl experiment was about free-money and not mutual credit. What I don't like about Gesell's freigeld is that it's also legal tender controlled centrally by the state. freicoin org
2) What you describe here as credit coin is equivalent to ripple, a mutual credit system completely decentralized that's not limited to small communities. ripple-project org
timonViejo 1 month ago
The demand for legal tender, whether rooted to commodities or not, is created by taxation. This demand for token currency creates value. Establishing a national currency can be done without having any gold or silver whatsoever. Currency can be created and spent to finance government, cycling back via taxes on land and privilege, without fear of inflation. Just a thought.
etzel33 2 months ago
@etzel33 That is precisely what the movie says. Governments can issue credit against that government's taxes just as producers can issue credit against their own production. The essential point in both cases is that spending must EQUAL earning/taxation. In my proposed system this is automatically enforced.
PaulLWGrignon 2 months ago
@PaulLWGrignon that's what I took away from the Money as Debt II series that got me into this whole currency idea. I'm glad you haven't succumbed to the gold bug fever of Mises etc... thanks
etzel33 2 months ago
Interesting analysis of current problems. I wonder if Bitcoin system could become part of the solution. It is an open-source, fully distributed and decentralized accounting system. Each transaction if cryptographically signed and broadcast worldwide through a robust peer-to-peer network. It already works at this very moment.
MsBitcoin 2 months ago
@MsBitcoin BitCoin is advanced technology devoted to repeating the two biggest monetary mistakes: 1. money as a single uniform commodity in limited supply and 2. money that is not redeemable for anything from its source.
PaulLWGrignon 2 months ago
@PaulLWGrignon: good points. Bitcoin is not based on debt, and is open for everyone to participate in (that is, no central banks), including issuing new coins. Doesn't this address monetary mistakes that are as important or more important than what you listed?
MsBitcoin 2 months ago
@MsBitcoin BitCoin is "perception money" perfectly designed for "pump and dump" volatility. This is already apparent in its history and was entirely predictable from the start. My proposed system is not based on debt-of-money, anyone who is both productive and trustworthy may issue credits that can only be collected upon by purchasing from or employing them, and there is no central bank.
PaulLWGrignon 2 months ago
@PaulLWGrignon I'm beginning to think of the real advantage of bitcoin not as a new currency with all the problems you describe here, but as a means to implement the technology making banks less necessary. Google "triple entry bookkeeping". Your videos actually show an understanding of this, but most people will not see the advantages of it yet. Bitcoin needs to be in circulation for the technology to be "out there". I think of them as "priming the pump" so to speak.
Sumac5 1 month ago
Despite criticisms of storing your money in real physical objects, this is a criticism against building a money system on it.
I still save buying power in physical assets society deems valuable like gold and silver. Because when this debt ponzi scheme collapses, and it increasingly looks like we are on the cliff edge in today's environment, your savings are going to get wiped out with the currency.
I can swap gold and silver into whatever new currency they think up after the collapse.
AnnoyedDragon 3 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon The government can also outlaw the ownership of gold and silver as the USA did in 1933. You are already suspected of being a "domestic terrorist" if you buy gold or silver or support Ron Paul.
PaulLWGrignon 2 months ago
@PaulLWGrignon The gold standard has been gone for so long, it will be a significant burden for the government to go chasing every teenager with a 9c trinket. Chances are if they wanted to steal people's gold, they'd go after the exchanges and vaults. Not knocking door to door.
They may very well ban gold, but only idiots or those ignorant as to golds purpose would line up to exchange it for paper.
AnnoyedDragon 2 months ago
@AnnoyedDragon They could just outlaw exchanging anything for gold. ONLY the government could do so. Gold is INCONVENIENT as a medium of exchange, especially if it is outlawed and can only be spent "underground".
I have no argument with the fact that gold & silver are "valuable".
In fact if we all buy monetary silver and hoard it, it will devastate several industries, because silver is an essential metal in industry.
PaulLWGrignon 2 months ago
@PaulLWGrignon Only I haven't argued using gold as a currency. If you look at my original old comment, I talk about saving buying power in physical assets like gold and silver, then swapping it into whatever currency is around after this crisis.
AnnoyedDragon 2 months ago
@res333 lead by example. Works better than hypocrisy, but the horse won't always drink. We will always be fallen humans
jonescomplete 3 months ago
Comment removed
Hoobziii 3 months ago in playlist Money As Debt 3
Who cares. You can change the monetary system any damn way you want, and there will still be rich people and poor people. There will be people who work hard to achieve the life they want, and there will be leeches who are always hitting up friends and relatives for a "loan". The will never be a shortage of assholes envious of the results of someone else's talents and productivity, who if they would get up off the fucking couch & stop shooting up heroin might achieve something themselves.
schlumbucket 3 months ago
@schlumbucket I am all for new and progressive systems in the world,no matter if it's monetary,scientific,or medical. I honestly feel people are stuck in systems,and progress can be stunned by exterior and interior forces within ourselves. That being said, I agree with your statement 100% in one way or another. Maybe we should change ourselves,and the rest will follow?
res333 3 months ago
@schlumbucket @Hoobziii The majority of poor people in the world work VERY HARD. And they regularly get ripped off by rich people who 'let their money work for them'.
PaulLWGrignon 2 months ago
Will there be a Wall Street Exchange for this type of money? Would we have the same speculation and complicated markets trading derivatives of these barter contracts?
DCUPtoejuice 4 months ago
@DCUPtoejuice
if interest is eliminated. and money cease to be a means to store value, all the manipulations you talk about will cease to exist naturally - no one will benefit from them
ishai10 4 months ago
@ishai10 why would you not assume these credits will traded as well?
DCUPtoejuice 4 months ago
@DCUPtoejuice
like i said... you can trade them all you want, you wouldn't get anything out of it, it would be totaly futile a waste of time and nergy to trade money... . when there is no interest, there is no reason to store money it doesn't "grow" by itself - and it has no value in itself, it's just a system of measuring value.
ishai10 3 months ago
@DCUPtoejuice Of course they will be traded. That is their purpose. It is "money" backed by real value, like gold or silver, just NOT any ONE thing in short supply. Money is worth what it can be redeemed for which is specified by the Issuer's prices.
PaulLWGrignon 2 months ago
@DCUPtoejuice Possibly. The difference is that ALL of the "money" is backed by real goods and services from specific suppliers for a limited time. And then these contracts expire if not collected upon. No one can simply conjure new money into existence by promising to pay it back and use that money to manipulate the market.
PaulLWGrignon 2 months ago
Would it be more difficult to prevent fraud in this type of system?
DCUPtoejuice 4 months ago
@DCUPtoejuice
i think not, it would acyually be even easier if the system uses an important feature of contemporary LETS systems: total transperancy of accounts: every memeber can see every other member's balance and past transactions.
ishai10 3 months ago
How can this be considered debt-free when it is still based on a promise? isn't that just semantics?
DCUPtoejuice 4 months ago
@DCUPtoejuice
the promise is based on real value created in a transaction, not on a mere loan. it's true that there is still debt but it is simplified and based on reality.
ishai10 4 months ago
@ishai10 simply eliminating fractional reserve banking would achieve this.
DCUPtoejuice 4 months ago
@DCUPtoejuice
YOU CAN'T "JUST" ELIMINATE FRACTIONAL RESERVE BANKING BECAUSE THAT WOULD ELIMINATE MONEY AND CRASH THE ECONOMY. THERE IS A NEED FOR A NEW ALTERNAIVE MONEY SYSTEM AND S.I.C. IS THE BEST ANSWER
ishai10 3 months ago
The difference is that it is a promise of something specific from someone specific to be redeemed for the real product or service within a limited time. It is NOT a promise to pay back "money" created as a debt-of-itself.
PaulLWGrignon 3 months ago
@DCUPtoejuice Today's bank credit "money" is a promise to pay it back in money and is dependent on the supply of money, which is determined by the general level of borrowing. ie. factors beyond the borrower's control. A shortage of new borrowing can produce a shortage. Self-issued product/service credits are payable in products/services. The Issuer of the credit issues enough credits to absorb its production, independent of what anyone else is doing. Therefore there can never be a shortage.
PaulLWGrignon 2 months ago
Is the WIR type system illegal in the U.S.?
DCUPtoejuice 4 months ago
WHERE'S PART 2 AND 3!!!
ishai10 4 months ago