Crypto investments

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate debate in general > Crypto investments > Page 2

Page 2 of 10

27-04-2021 04:38
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14458)	James___ wrote: It is people buying coins that increase their value. Nope. Think about it. "People" can't buy coins without "people" selling coins. Does the selling of the coins cause the value to go down? Every transaction involves someone selling coins and someone buying coins. All you can say is that those who are buying the coins are gambling that the value will increase (i.e. the long position) and those who are selling are gambling that the value will decrease (i.e. the short position). Beauty is in the eye of the speculator.
27-04-2021 04:45
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	IBdaMann wrote: James___ wrote: It is people buying coins that increase their value. Nope. Think about it. "People" can't buy coins without "people" selling coins. Does the selling of the coins cause the value to go down? Every transaction involves someone selling coins and someone buying coins. All you can say is that those who are buying the coins are gambling that the value will increase (i.e. the long position) and those who are selling are gambling that the value will decrease (i.e. the short position). Beauty is in the eye of the speculator. Well said Fred. Supply vs. demand. And now I sound like Lucifer on NetFlix.
27-04-2021 16:52
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14458)	James___ wrote: Well said Fred. Supply vs. demand. The law of supply and demand is everything in economics. If someone contradicts this law then he is wrong to the extent that he contradicts this law.
09-05-2021 20:28
Xadoman ★★★★☆ (1035)	I threw in 1000 euros( around 1200dollars) into the bonfire and today I could sell it for 6000 dollars. Just saying. Not too late to jump in , Harvey and James. I am not going to pull out because that is not life changing money. I need at least 100x, prefeably 1000x to pull out. Here is a coin I threw in 150 euros and it went down 3 times. But I still believe into this coin and hold because it has something to do with digital art selling and buying. I think IbdaMann could sell his digital artwork at their platform eventually. https://www.nft-art.finance/ Edited on 09-05-2021 20:37
09-05-2021 23:31
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	IBdaMann wrote: James___ wrote: What most people fail to understand is that it's basically a Ponzi scheme. It's not a Ponzi scheme. A Ponzi scheme is something specific. Those who buy coins are not then paid by other people's purchase of coins. It is simply gambling. If you are familiar with how games and slots work at casinos then you understand how speculating on cryptocurrencies works. James___ wrote: At the same time, probably a great way to launder money from illegal enterprises. Possibly but normally no. The money has to already be laundered in order to buy into a cryptocurrency otherwise the money used to buy coins could just as easily be placed into a bank account. Money laundering most often occurs where cash payments are made, like paying construction crews. Illegally obtained (dirty) cash is used to pay construction workers who build buildings which are then sold and or rented ... and the money used to purchase or rent the buildings is clean, making it laundered at that point. Another great way to launder dirty cash is to own a convenience store by which the owner is expected to make large cash deposits into bank accounts without drawing scrutiny. On a day that business is slow, the owner acts as though business has been exceptional and drops a ton of cash into an account at which point the money is then laundered. I don't think a convenience store would work. There is too much of a paper trail. They have to stock the shelves, and they, and their suppliers keep record. Can't sell more, than what you order. The profit margin is small, they make money off volume sales. Shelves and beer cooler always full, few deliveries, and huge cash deposits, would gain attention. A check cashing place, would be better. Pawn shops, used cars...

10-05-2021 07:40
Xadoman ★★★★☆ (1035)	https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/bonfire Notice the 600% gain in 14 days.
10-05-2021 19:02
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14458)	Xadoman wrote:Notice the 600% gain in 14 days. This type of erratic fluctuation is totally normal for all worthless securities. Bonfire is worth 0.0064% of a penny, down from 0.0074% of a penny just ten minutes ago. Compare this to Bitcoin at $57,431.90. When Bitcoin upticks one penny, it increases by 0.000174% When Bonfire upticks one penny, it skyrockets 1,850% Do you see a bit of a difference? It is much easier to drop money on the roulette table.
10-05-2021 19:02
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14458)	Xadoman wrote:Notice the 600% gain in 14 days. This type of erratic fluctuation is totally normal for all worthless securities. Bonfire is worth 0.0064% of a penny, down from 0.0074% of a penny just ten minutes ago. Compare this to Bitcoin at $57,431.90. When Bitcoin upticks one penny, it increases by 0.000174% When Bonfire upticks one penny, it skyrockets 1,850% Do you see a bit of a difference? It is much easier to drop money on the roulette table.
10-05-2021 19:29
Into the Night★★★★★ (21645)	Xadoman wrote: I guess you missed my facetious illustration of how it is exactly the same as gambling in a casino. Gambling is gambling. Gambling in the casino could be profitable but you have to be genius. No, a genius that is gambling will lose money too. Frankly, I would have my doubts he is a genius. Everyone loses money in a casino, except the casino (and sometimes even them!). The problem isn't the 'smarts'. It isn't the odds. It's the noise floor (the randomness) of the game. It is the limited supply of your dollars to the casino's unlimited supply of chips. You are outgunned, and outsmarted. Xadoman wrote: An average guy will left with empty hands. Everyone that gambles will be left with empty hands. It's only a matter of time. The casino makes a profit off of you and there is nothing you can do about it. Xadoman wrote: Gambling in the bullish cryptomarket does not need great smartness. You only have to hop on the train early and sell if you got your 2x, 3x ect. If you take out your initial investment, then the further game is already on the house s money. You are gambling. You will lose. It is no different than 'you only have to bet early in a poker game, and sell if you got your winning hand, and some other sucker with the 2nd best hand'. Xadoman wrote: Oh, so it's a valid, legitimate get-rich-quick system. Why didn't you just say so in the first place? What else it should be? Void question. Reversal fallacy. Xadoman wrote: I do not understand the technology. I think most people , sheep, do not understand it. Sheep are never going to understand the technology because they lack the intelligence to understand it. So....you are sheep? I do understand crypto currency AND casinos AND the math and the algorithms behind both. Xadoman wrote: For example I bought a rubic s cube a long time ago to fiddle with it just for fun. I tried to solve it but I simply could not solve it even if I tried hard many weeks. I simply gave up and I only fiddle with it just for fun some times but I do not try to solve it anymore. I have read about the guy who spent 26 years to solve the cube and eventually he made it. Quite a fun story about that guy: https://gizmodo.com/man-solves-rubiks-cube-after-26-years-of-trying-weeps-5129307 I cannot tell you what a relief it was to finally solve it,' the 45-year-old from Portchester, Hampshire, said. 'It has driven me mad over the years – it felt like it had taken over my life. I have missed important events to stay in and solve it and I would lie awake at night thinking about it. 'I have had wrist and back problems from spending hours on it but it was all worth it. When I clicked that last bit into place and each face was a solid color, I wept.' As you can see, I do not want to be that guy who spends 26 year to understand the technology of the cryptocurrencies. I simply want to make quick cash out of it. A waste of 26 years of a life. Why did you bring this story up? Xadoman wrote: In Vegas, you can always possibly win on the next hand/spin; not so with a currency that has lost the faith of the market. In casino you always have to throw in more money. A dead coin could rise from the dust. A slot machine could rise from the dust. Your luck in poker may rise from the dust. No, dude. They are the SAME. You are gambliing. Bitcoin today is actually version 2 of Bitcoin. Version 1 is DEAD. It is worthless. It will never rise from anything. Xadoman wrote: and should be why you never gamble your money away on cryptocurrencies. It sounds like you simply find that gambling with cryptocurrencies to be very exciting and you are inviting all of us to join you at that particular casino. Are you seriously telling me that you have not bought anything? Even bitcoin? Are you seriously trying to equate Bitcoin with every product and service on Earth? The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
10-05-2021 19:33
Into the Night★★★★★ (21645)	Xadoman wrote: I am telling you that I have never purchased BITCOIN. I don't gamble. Do you own bitcoin? Read his post YOU quoted again. RQAA. Xadoman wrote: Also ,the number of bitcoins that are ever going to be mined is only 21 million. Imagine if crypto goes mainstream. It already has quite a bit but it is still early. Billions of people suddenly want a piece of the bitcoin. People are going to fight over satoshis( The satoshi is currently the smallest unit of the bitcoin currency recorded on the block chain.[1] It is a one hundred millionth of a single bitcoin (0.00000001 BTC)). Imagine if the next roll of the dice you win. Imagine winning 20 poker hands in a row. People will fight over the pot. Xadoman wrote: Putting money into the bitcoin is basically a no brainer. Rolling the dice is basically a no brainer. Pressing a button a slot machine is basically a no brainer. Xadoman wrote: I myself have only bought very little because( 50euros that has rised already to 70 euros) I wanted to test how to buy on kraken. I need quicker gains therefore I jumped into the shitcoins. Happy gambling! The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
10-05-2021 19:36
Into the Night★★★★★ (21645)	IBdaMann wrote: Xadoman wrote:Today was actually quite a bit of crash in crypto markets. Turns out that our friend Biden wants to tax the hell out of the capital cains. Supposedly the plan is to rise the tax from 20 to 40%. In the United States, it doesn't matter what the President wants anymore than what you want. Congress makes the laws. Yes, Congress is controlled by Democrats and they want to tax all the wealth out of everything until capitalism is destroyed. Enjoy! Unfortunately, we are no longer in the United States. The federal government has fallen. It no longer recognizes the Constitution of the United States nor any State constitution. Anyone in the SODC can make the laws, even the currently installed 'president'. Nothing stops them, except the people of the States of America themselves. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
10-05-2021 19:53
Into the Night★★★★★ (21645)	Xadoman wrote: Yesterday was a big dip in crypto. Perfect time to bought but I had no money to spend because I had already maxed out my credit card. I bought bonfire a couple of days ago for 500, I just holded and watched how the price went down big time while a couple of whales took out hundreds of thousand of dollars. Today the chart is fortunately in green and I am quite hopeful that this coin could 100x from here because the coin is only 6 days old. James and Harvey , are you already in? You can play it safe by taking out the initial investment+ a littlebit of profit when the price goes up 3x and after that the game is already on the house s money. Gambling on a credit card?? You are in serious shit, dude. There are three types of gamblers: Social gamblers, the most common type, gamble for the camaraderie of it. Each such gambler is enjoying a pastime with others that like the same form of recreation. It's a sport to them. They know they will lose, and simply set a size of bank they are willing to gamble with, like paying for the gym or for a pricey show ticket. Professional gamblers, very rare, that actually can make a small profit most of the time (what you call the so-called 'genius' gambler. They make less money than simply working at a McDonald's as a cook. The Addicted Gambler. This type of gambler can't stop. They are literally hooked on their own adrenaline. The excitement of the possibility of winning big is what drives them. They are the ones that max out credit cards to gamble. They eventually sacrifice everything to gamble. Like the drunk that can't stop drinking alcohol, it is destructive. It will destroy you. I have been a casino dealer. I have been a lead dealer, training other dealers. I have seen them all come across my table. I see them all in a typical casino. I have seen them all in commodity, stock, and coin markets. You are an addicted gambler. I realize my warning will be lost on you, but a warning it is, nevertheless. I do not want to see you destroy yourself. I come from the experience of the gambling world and from the world of investing. I come from the watching the shattered lives of those that destroyed themselves, and there is nothing I can do to stop it. I come from watching even dealers pay their employer to work for them, since they are often gamblers themselves. I would save you from that fate, if I could. If you want to conduct transactions in Bitcoin (or any other currency), then obtain it. If you are gambling on a currency (dollar, yen, Bitcoin, or any other currency), you are gambling. If you are gambling on tick, you are an Addicted Gambler. You are in serious trouble. My warning cannot be any stronger. Only you can pull yourself out of this destructive path you have chosen. Money is NOT wealth. It is a means to conduct exchanges of wealth. It is a convenient method of conducting market transactions that is simpler than barter. It doesn't matter if it's dollars, yen, juan, reals, gold, clamshells, digital currency such as Bitcoin, silver, copper, zinc, casino chips, or any other currency. All money is the same thing: 1. A representation of value (you can barter for something with it). 2. A unit of account (you can set a price on something). It is not wealth. It can be used to buy and sell wealth, but it is not wealth in and of itself. To gamble with it is speculating. It is like any other form of gambling. It is gambling...and you are an Addicted Gambler. PLEASE change your attitude about money. It is not to gamble with. You will destroy yourself. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 10-05-2021 19:59
10-05-2021 23:07
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14458)	Into the Night wrote:Gambling on a credit card?? You are in serious shit, dude. You can say that again. Why simply lose all that you have when you can tack on additional debt for the privilege? Into the Night wrote: Money is NOT wealth. It is a means to conduct exchanges of wealth. Money is a normalization of value, providing units of measure. It enables accounting. It facilitates transactions. It elevates an economy above mere bartering because it eliminates the requirement for a coincidence of needs. ... and money is wealth ... in its liquid form. You might have a house worth $10 Million but you can't eat it. You might, for example, take out a loan, i.e. convert the wealth of your home to its liquid form (money) and pay me $2 for a loaf of bread. This is not possible where only bartering is available. The main concepts of money are 1) normalization of value and 2) liquidity. You could convert all of your wealth to money and then convert all of your money to non-liquid assets and then back again. Speculators/gamblers like Xadoman expect to buy-low/sell-high and continually increase wealth ... while completely ignoring the high likelihood that their speculations will not materialize, that they will lose their bets and that they will suffer a huge loss of wealth in the process. One thing to note, we should not confuse "money" with "currency." Currency is simply a particular normalization of wealth in which a particular "community" places a certain amount of faith. Money of a given currency is simply the physical representation of a specific amount of wealth in that particular currency. Currency is not wealth. Money of a given currency is wealth in that currency. If the currency is worthless then the money is worthless as well. If the money holds value then the currency is valuable to some community who places faith in it.
11-05-2021 00:55
Xadoman ★★★★☆ (1035)	I am not addicted at all. This is not comparable to gambling in the casino. I do not get an adenaline flush if I buy some shitcoin.I just see a good opportunity to make some serious money. Most people are sheep and do what they have been told to do. I myself am also a sheep but I know that I am sheep. Therefore I can use this knowledge in my favour. Sheep do not think rationally , they buy the hype. Just think about how easy it is to make sheep to wear the mask and they even continue to wear it even if you tell them that the hole in the filter is 24 times bigger than the virus. You can not change their mind. I know a guy who had the virus. He had almost no symptoms. After the virus he got two jabs of the vaccine and now he wears mask even outside of the building. Can not you see how silly those sheeps are? If you convince them that the crypto has value then they will eventually start to belive it. If they gain some profit then they are already hooked. Those guys carry the smartphone and are constantly checking it. They are addicted to the phone and eventually they are addicted to trading. Can not you see that those guys who carry the smartphone are already predispositioned to be addicted to trading? Also young people watch social media videos how people get rich with trading and they are going to spend their pocket money into the trading. The crypto thing will go mainstream soon. Every sheep wants a part of it. I am quite sure that some of my picked coins could go 1000x and if they do then I could become a millionaire. I am not sure though if I can keep holding if the coin goes 100x. The temptation to cash out could be too strong. PS I have to say that at least for me investing into the crypto has also some therapeutic value. I just feel very warm and cozy thinking about the future if the coin goes 100x or even 1000x. It just makes me feel quite good thinking about the things that I could buy and places I could go. This feeling could last years or even decades if you keep holding the coin. With gambling in the casino it is all over in the same night and most of the time a bitter taste in the mouth from losing all. Edited on 11-05-2021 01:08
11-05-2021 01:47
Xadoman ★★★★☆ (1035)	This is the coin I threw a 1000 into and pretty soon it went down 4 times. I bought at ATH( all time high). But I do not worry too much because I belive it is only a matter of time when the coin goes up again and reaches new ATH. The coin is called Hungry bear. Also, the 1000 was not my own money , I got it from FOX finance which went up 20x. I initially only threw 170 dollars into fox finance. Edited on 11-05-2021 01:48

11-05-2021 02:26
Into the Night★★★★★ (21645)	IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote: Money is NOT wealth. It is a means to conduct exchanges of wealth. Money is a normalization of value, providing units of measure. It enables accounting. It facilitates transactions. It elevates an economy above mere bartering because it eliminates the requirement for a coincidence of needs. ... and money is wealth ... in its liquid form. You might have a house worth $10 Million but you can't eat it. You might, for example, take out a loan, i.e. convert the wealth of your home to its liquid form (money) and pay me $2 for a loaf of bread. This is not possible where only bartering is available. Money is currency. It is not wealth. Getting a loan on a house (which IS wealth is liquidating that wealth for other uses. Holding money is not wealth. It is liquidity. It is simply a way to translate the wealth in your house to another form. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
11-05-2021 02:31
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14458)	Xadoman wrote:I am not addicted at all. What is the first thing all addicts claim? It's no coincidence that it's the very first line of your post. Xadoman wrote:This is not comparable to gambling in the casino. [Addicted gambler throwing his money away at the roulette table]: "This is not comparable to gambling on cryptocurrencies. I do not get an adenaline flush if I bet exclusively on red. I just see a good opportunity to make some serious money. Most people are sheep and do what they have been told to do. I myself am also a sheep but I know that I am sheep. Therefore I can use this knowledge in my favour. Sheep do not think rationally , they buy the hype. Just think about how easy it is to make sheep to wear the mask and they even continue to wear it even if you tell them that the hole in the filter is 24 times bigger than the virus. You can not change their mind. I know a guy who had the virus. He had almost no symptoms. After the virus he got two jabs of the vaccine and now he wears mask even outside of the building. Can not you see how silly those sheeps are? If you convince them that betting odd numbers has value then they will eventually start to belive it. If they gain some profit then they are already hooked. Those guys carry their chips and are constantly counting them. They are addicted to the feel of the chips and eventually they are addicted to betting. Can not you see that those guys who carry the chips are already predispositioned to be addicted to betting? Also young people watch social media videos how people get rich at the tables and they are going to spend their pocket money at the casinos. The betting thing will go mainstream soon. Every sheep wants a part of it. I am quite sure that some of my roulette bets could go 36x and if they do then I could become a millionaire. I am not sure though if I can keep doubling down if my chips are piling up and piling up. The temptation to cash out and to quit while I'm ahead might be too strong and I don't want that to happen." Xadoman wrote:PS I have to say that at least for me gambling on crypto has also some therapeutic value. I just feel very warm and cozy thinking about the future if the coin goes 100x or even 1000x. This is addiction. This is the very definition. You tried to deny it but here you essentially admit to it. Your withdrawal is eased by betting on a cryptocurrency. You couldn't have been any clearer. Xadoman wrote: It just makes me feel [so much better] thinking about the things that I could buy and places I could go. This is how Marxism takes root, by the way. Phase 1. Imagine what I could buy and where I could go! It would be great! Phase 2. I should just be given those things Phase 3. I have a RIGHT to those things. The government OWES them to me. Phase 4. I am a VICTIM! Victimizers are stealing what is rightfully mine! Xadoman wrote:This feeling could last years or even decades if you keep holding the coin. With drugs, you can ride a high for years, even decades, if you keep shooting up as needed. With gambling, the feeling could last years or even decades if you keep "letting it ride." Xadoman wrote: With gambling in the casino it is all over in the same night and most of the time a bitter taste in the mouth from losing all. With gambling on cryptocurrency, it's all over every night until the next day when the downward spiral resumes, most of the time with a bitter taste in the mouth from watching one's life spin out of control.
11-05-2021 02:36
Into the Night★★★★★ (21645)	Xadoman wrote: I am not addicted at all. Yes you are. Badly. Xadoman wrote: This is not comparable to gambling in the casino. Yes it is. Xadoman wrote: I do not get an adenaline flush if I buy some shitcoin. Yes you do. Xadoman wrote: I just see a good opportunity to make some serious money. Because of the adrenaline. Xadoman wrote: Most people are sheep and do what they have been told to do. I myself am also a sheep but I know that I am sheep. Therefore I can use this knowledge in my favour. Sheep do not think rationally , they buy the hype. Paradox. Xadoman wrote: Just think about how easy it is to make sheep to wear the mask and they even continue to wear it even if you tell them that the hole in the filter is 24 times bigger than the virus. You can not change their mind. So you are justifying your gambling as a religion??? Sad. Xadoman wrote: If you convince them that the crypto has value then they will eventually start to belive it. So you are justifying your gambling as a religion. Xadoman wrote: If they gain some profit then they are already hooked. Like any gambler. Xadoman wrote: Those guys carry the smartphone and are constantly checking it. They are addicted to the phone and eventually they are addicted to trading. Can not you see that those guys who carry the smartphone are already predispositioned to be addicted to trading? Also young people watch social media videos how people get rich with trading and they are going to spend their pocket money into the trading. The crypto thing will go mainstream soon. Every sheep wants a part of it. I am quite sure that some of my picked coins could go 1000x and if they do then I could become a millionaire. I am not sure though if I can keep holding if the coin goes 100x. The temptation to cash out could be too strong. Irrelevant. Some play a few hands of blackjack, others play for days, only pausing to sleep (and maybe eat). Xadoman wrote: PS I have to say that at least for me investing into the crypto has also some therapeutic value. You are justifying your adrenaline addiction as 'therapeutic'. Xadoman wrote: I just feel very warm and cozy thinking about the future if the coin goes 100x or even 1000x. It just makes me feel quite good thinking about the things that I could buy and places I could go. This feeling could last years or even decades if you keep holding the coin. No different holding onto the chips from the last blackjack session. Xadoman wrote: With gambling in the casino it is all over in the same night and most of the time a bitter taste in the mouth from losing all. Nope. Some people live it. They are not tourists. Investing in Bitcoin to speculate is no different. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
11-05-2021 03:01
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14458)	Into the Night wrote:Money is currency. Colloquially, yes. A currency is not money. Money is a specific amount of wealth under a particular currency. Take dollars as an example. Dollars is the currency, the normalization of worth and the unit of measure. Then you take a $5 bill. This is money. This represents 5 units (dollars) worth of wealth. It can be exchanged for any other wealth valued at $5 whever the dollars currency is accepted. No, you cannot eat your house. Yes, you can eat bread. You can use a loan vehicle to convert some of the wealth in your home to monetary (liquid) wealth, which you can use to acquire different wealth of equal value, including wealth that you can eat, such as bread. It's all verifiable in the accounting.
11-05-2021 04:12
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	I've always considered crypto as some sort of ponzi/pyramid scam. Most are based on a product/service, which may, may not even exist. The low level investors, are just sold on the opportunity to get in cheap, and huge profits. There are some token return, but not the huge profits, promised. To get to the higher payoff, you have to get other people to buy into the scam. It's still not huge, easy profits, and a lot of work selling the concept to new recruits. The whole time, you really don't know much about the people, actually running the show, the product/service, that's suppose to be generating the huge returns. Those making better returns, with less worth, keep telling you, that small investments, only bring you small returns. You have to keep putting more money in, to reach the higher levels, and higher returns. You follow the advice, of those making the crazy high returns, and let them guide you to 'success'. You will, of course, share that advice, and guidance, with many of the people you initially recruited in at the bottom level. The scam goes on, as long as new people are recruited. People keep re-investing their returns, rather than spending. Eventually, the scam is revealed, or most of the people on top, pull out, before they get caught. Leaving those below their level, with little more than worthless shares. What sort of information do you have access to? Can you pull up how many people, and how many coins each of those people bought? Doesn't really matter, since such a list could easily just be random, computer generated. What exactly do you own? An account, and numbers on a computer screen. Your coins, like anything else, is only worth, as much as somebody else is willing to pay for them. Doesn't matter how many you own, or what you believe they are worth. If nobody wants to buy them, you still only have numbers on a computer. How many coins, only accept cash to purchase? How many, only accept a limited list of other crypto? If you want to buy a different coin, with crypto, but you don't have what's on the list, you have to convert. You pay a fee, you are stuck with the going price, at least twice, before you get to buy into the coin you wanted, and usually lose some in the process. Some will do okay, some will lose more than expected, very few score big. Most will accept the loss, as part of doing business, just the nature of the game. Most, will find that they can't just take their 'winnings', and walk away either, when the reach their goal. They buy that fancy car, a nice home, boat, do all the things they dreamed of... But, they didn't consider taxes, insurance, upkeep, maintenance, repairs. Cost of living goes up, when you move up. The money they walked away with, dries up kind of quick, and need to go back for more.
11-05-2021 04:34
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote:Money is currency. Colloquially, yes. A currency is not money. Money is a specific amount of wealth under a particular currency. Take dollars as an example. Dollars is the currency, the normalization of worth and the unit of measure. Then you take a $5 bill. This is money. This represents 5 units (dollars) worth of wealth. It can be exchanged for any other wealth valued at $5 whever the dollars currency is accepted. No, you cannot eat your house. Yes, you can eat bread. You can use a loan vehicle to convert some of the wealth in your home to monetary (liquid) wealth, which you can use to acquire different wealth of equal value, including wealth that you can eat, such as bread. It's all verifiable in the accounting. And yet your shїt is food butt you don't eat it. Why? After all, there are dung beetles https://animals.sandiegozoo.org/animals/dung-beetle Am getting drunk so it is Kentucky corn whiskey talking. Dung beetles don't like shїt but do enjoy champagne and escargot. Sadly, someone does not understand the basics of trade and commerce. Kind of why coins were minted thousands of years ago. A standard for trade was necessary to allow for the exchange of labor and goods. Otherwise you have China and Russia. p.s., in communist Russia, the joke was; "you pretend to pay us and we pretend to work". That's communism. Then again maybe you guys are this ignorant. Ya'all love Trump and foreign nationals. Edited on 11-05-2021 04:36
11-05-2021 05:48
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14458)	James___ wrote:And yet your shїt is food butt you don't eat it. Why? After all, there are dung beetles Am getting drunk so it is Kentucky corn whiskey talking. You make a lot of sense, James__. It's hard to argue with corn whiskey and dung beetles. If only everyone could clearly articulate a point the way you do, there wouldn't even be a need for the internet. Well done. . Attached image:
11-05-2021 06:03
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	IBdaMann wrote: James___ wrote:And yet your shїt is food butt you don't eat it. Why? After all, there are dung beetles Am getting drunk so it is Kentucky corn whiskey talking. You make a lot of sense, James__. It's hard to argue with corn whiskey and dung beetles. If only everyone could clearly articulate a point the way you do, there wouldn't even be a need for the internet. Well done. . Louisville, Kentucky and Bardstown? You disgusting piece of shїt, Louisville ain't Kentucky. How stupid are you? Bourbon County was 1/3rd of Kentucky as a county because it produced Kentucky corn whiskey. That's what bourbon is. Bourbon is Kentucky corn whiskey. Any fool knows this. What makes it special is the cask it is matured in. How do you not know this? Most casks are made of oak and over the years, its resins and chemistry alter the flavor of the Kentucky corn whiskey. How do you not know this simple fact about how Kentucky's economy developed in the late 1700's to the early 1800's? Are you that stupid? Fayette county where I live is named after Jean La Fayette. https://www.nps.gov/jela/index.htm it's pronounced the same. How do you guys miss this? Are you "real" Americans? You guys must be "real" Americans. Just no other way to explain "I am this stupid". p.s., his name was spelled differently, back to you're an American, right? Please don't tell me you guys are this stupid. You're better than that.......unless you're an American. Then am sorry to hear that. Edited on 11-05-2021 06:07
11-05-2021 06:37
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14458)	James___ wrote:You disgusting piece of shїt, Louisville ain't Kentucky. How stupid are you? Bourbon County was 1/3rd of Kentucky as a county because it produced Kentucky corn whiskey. That's what bourbon is. Bourbon is Kentucky corn whiskey. Any fool knows this. What makes it special is the cask it is matured in. How do you not know this? Most casks are made of oak and over the years, its resins and chemistry alter the flavor of the Kentucky corn whiskey. Your point about the dung beetle is well taken. Your singular focus annunciates your theorem with resilient alacrity. Impressive. James___ wrote: How do you not know this simple fact about how Kentucky's economy developed in the late 1700's to the early 1800's? I guess I slept through the chapter on the dung beetle's contribution to Kentucky's economy. I'm going to have to live the remainder of my days knowing that I alone am to blame for that glaring void in my education. At least I know I can rely on you to keep me on right path. Thanks again. James___ wrote: Are you that stupid? Apparently I am. Attached image: Edited on 11-05-2021 06:38
11-05-2021 16:45
Xadoman ★★★★☆ (1035)	What sort of information do you have access to? Can you pull up how many people, and how many coins each of those people bought? Yes of course. The point of the crypto is that everything is written that has happened. Every transaction in the history is somewhere in the blockchain. For example take a look into this thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/SafeMoon/comments/n9nt19/whale_watch_day_42/ From the comments turns out that the top whale gets around 140000 dollars per day from reflection. I also get reflection but that is minuscule.
11-05-2021 17:27
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	Xadoman wrote: I am not addicted at all. This is the very first thing that all addicts say. The first step to recovery is admitting that you have a problem. If you refuse to admit that you have a problem, then there is no road to recovery for you. You will [1] continue to throw away all of your money until you have none, and then [2] continue to rack up debt on credit cards until you have them all maxed out, and then you will [3] find yourself in a state of bankruptcy. Right now, you are quite deep into #2... I suggest that you stop before you reach #3. Xadoman wrote: This is not comparable to gambling in the casino. Yes, it is. Gambling is gambling is gambling is gambling. Xadoman wrote: I do not get an adenaline flush if I buy some shitcoin.I just see a good opportunity to make some serious money. Most people are sheep and do what they have been told to do. I myself am also a sheep but I know that I am sheep. Therefore I can use this knowledge in my favour. Sheep do not think rationally , they buy the hype. Just think about how easy it is to make sheep to wear the mask and they even continue to wear it even if you tell them that the hole in the filter is 24 times bigger than the virus. You can not change their mind. I know a guy who had the virus. He had almost no symptoms. After the virus he got two jabs of the vaccine and now he wears mask even outside of the building. Can not you see how silly those sheeps are? If you convince them that the crypto has value then they will eventually start to belive it. If they gain some profit then they are already hooked. Those guys carry the smartphone and are constantly checking it. They are addicted to the phone and eventually they are addicted to trading. Can not you see that those guys who carry the smartphone are already predispositioned to be addicted to trading? Also young people watch social media videos how people get rich with trading and they are going to spend their pocket money into the trading. The crypto thing will go mainstream soon. Every sheep wants a part of it. I am quite sure that some of my picked coins could go 1000x and if they do then I could become a millionaire. I am not sure though if I can keep holding if the coin goes 100x. The temptation to cash out could be too strong. Refer to IBdaMann's response to you about this. He said it very well. Xadoman wrote: PS I have to say that at least for me investing into the crypto has also some therapeutic value. I just feel very warm and cozy thinking about the future if the coin goes 100x or even 1000x. IOW, you are addicted. Xadoman wrote: It just makes me feel quite good thinking about the things that I could buy and places I could go. Refer to IBdaMann's response to you about this. He said it very well. Xadoman wrote: This feeling could last years or even decades if you keep holding the coin. Same with any addiction... Xadoman wrote: With gambling in the casino it is all over in the same night and most of the time a bitter taste in the mouth from losing all. ... and that doesn't happen with crypto? ITN is right. You need help before your life completely spirals out of control.
11-05-2021 19:29
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	How much crypto are the Russian hackers asking for the Colonial Pipeline? Wonder if anybody has started a GoFundMe page to help pay the ransom. Any surplus, would of course be donated to my 'favorite' charity... If you fill a crap-sack with dung beetles, would you still need to change it?
11-05-2021 21:59
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14458)	HarveyH55 wrote:If you fill a crap-sack with dung beetles, would you still need to change it? Where will you fit the corn whiskey? I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
11-05-2021 23:04
Into the Night★★★★★ (21645)	IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote:Money is currency. Colloquially, yes. A currency is not money. Money is not wealth. It is a representation of value, and a unit of account. IBdaMann wrote: Money is a specific amount of wealth under a particular currency. No. It is a representation of value. It is not wealth itself. IBdaMann wrote: Take dollars as an example. Dollars is the currency, the normalization of worth and the unit of measure. Correct, but it is not wealth itself. Only the representation of wealth. IBdaMann wrote: Then you take a $5 bill. This is money. This represents 5 units (dollars) worth of wealth. It can be exchanged for any other wealth valued at $5 whever the dollars currency is accepted. Correct. It can be exchanged for wealth, but it is not wealth itself. It is also a unit of account. You can set a price on something. IBdaMann wrote: No, you cannot eat your house. Yes, you can eat bread. You can use a loan vehicle to convert some of the wealth in your home to monetary (liquid) wealth, which you can use to acquire different wealth of equal value, including wealth that you can eat, such as bread. This is nothing more than conversion (using money) from one form of wealth to another. The money itself is not wealth. IBdaMann wrote: It's all verifiable in the accounting. If someone is doing the accounting properly! The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
11-05-2021 23:28
Into the Night★★★★★ (21645)	HarveyH55 wrote: I've always considered crypto as some sort of ponzi/pyramid scam. No, it's actually a currency. You can buy and sell stuff with it. For example, you can rent a room at the D in Las Vegas with it. Like dollars, yen, gold, clamshells, silver, zinc, copper, etc. It's just another currency. You can convert your local currency to Bitcoin and back again (with the appropriate spread like usual, of course). That said, a lot of people are gambling with it. Investing in a currency hoping it will go up in relation to another currency is just speculating (gambling). It doesn't matter if you do it with gold, dollars, yen, Bitcoin, or any other currency. It's a bit like the stock market. If you see some factor that will drive a stock down or up in the future, you can go and make a bet on it. Federal reserve notes are in real trouble. The Fed is there to write the government a rubber check anytime the government needs it. It just creates new money to do so. If the Fed is creating money faster than the rate of wealth being created, you get inflation. If the Fed is creating money slower than the rate of wealth being created, you get deflation. The Fed normally tried to create money by attempting to measure the rate of wealth being created. There is a lag here, of course, so the Fed typically acted to close the barn doors after the horses were already gone. All they can do is act after the fact. Lately, the Fed has been creating a LOT of money with NO corresponding increase in wealth. The have to create literally billions every year just to keep the government afloat. Obviously, this is unsustainable. Faith in the value of the federal reserve note is waning fast. People are already looking around for another currency. Currently, the popular considerations are gold, silver, and Bitcoin. Gold is too valuable for day to day transactions, but that's traditionally the role of silver. That's the currency listed in the Constitution to be used in the United States. That has never been changed in the Constitution. The Federal Reserve, by printing Federal Reserve Notes, is unconstitutional. When FDR stole the gold from the people, what he did was theft, and unconstitutional. He did it by making gold illegal to own. This is the guy that made the Great Depression Great. It is unknown whether gold and silver, or Bitcoin, or something else, will eventually be accepted by the public as 'the currency'. When it happens, it will be sudden. No government can stop that. If and when that happens, the full ramifications of how broke the SODC is will come home to roost. That government will no longer be able to function. Sure, they can try to outlaw Bitcoin or gold again, but people themselves will decide whether to obey such a law. No one can force you to use the so-called 'dollar' (except to pay your taxes, but by then it will be Monopoly money...big deal). This is not the first time this has happened. There are events like this throughout history, where the government designated currency completely failed. Yes. It can happen to us. It IS happening to us. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan

12-05-2021 01:03
Xadoman ★★★★☆ (1035)	Take a look at what happened to that guy when he pulled out too early: https://lookism.net/threads/killing-myself-tonight-goodbye.675554/ Also, take a look at the new Chad coin. I am going to throw around 220 dollars at it. I just sold some firewood to get some money. I am also going to sell two old project cars that I bought around 5 years ago but never had time and money to fix them. Time for them to go. https://www.thechadtoken.com/
12-05-2021 02:15
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14458)	Into the Night wrote:Money is not wealth. It is a representation of value, and a unit of account. Money is wealth, in fact it is a specific amount of wealth under a specific currency. There are ways you can verify this for yourself. 1. First, we follow the logic train for its existence. A. Without a currency, people can only barter. People don't like being restricted to bartering because they can only have transactions involving coincidence of needs. Why? Because wealth is otherwise not liquid and one cannot eat one's house or car, one cannot use one's CD collection to get to work, etc.. B. With a currency, a given community can normalize their wealth into a value of common units of measure. Now, people can convert their wealth to that liquid form, i.e. money. They can take that liquid wealth and exchange it for some other non-liquid wealth. 2. Next, we arrange a test to verify or falsify the wealth value of money. . Take $100 of money. Attempt to exchange it for, say, a digital watch with a price of less than $100 but greater than $30. Note your results. . Take some amount of specifically non-wealth, e.g. trash, a cup of dirt, whatever. and attempt to exchange it for, say, a digital watch with a price of less than $100 but greater than $30. Note the results. **. Repeat the second step several times to get a good feel for how well non-wealth is accepted in exchange for wealth. You might not be surprised when I tell you I already know what your results will be. Money is wealth in its liquid form, made possible by its currency normalizing wealth value. This is why everyone trades wealth in the form of money as opposed to limiting their economy to bartering. I realize that we become socially engineered to think of money as being defined by some account ... but it's the other way around, i.e. accounts exist because we have money in them. All "accounts" are purely imaginary, like a pointer or a label; nothing exists that is an account other than the money that essentially defines it. 3. Check with an accountant. Must all transactions balance with respect to wealth? An exchange of $12 of money for a used book must balance. This can only mean one thing, i.e. that the $12 of money is equivalent to the wealth of one used book. Let me know if I have forgotten anything.
12-05-2021 08:47
Into the Night★★★★★ (21645)	Xadoman wrote: Take a look at what happened to that guy when he pulled out too early: https://lookism.net/threads/killing-myself-tonight-goodbye.675554/ Also, take a look at the new Chad coin. I am going to throw around 220 dollars at it. I just sold some firewood to get some money. I am also going to sell two old project cars that I bought around 5 years ago but never had time and money to fix them. Time for them to go. https://www.thechadtoken.com/ Like the guy on the slot machine just before it hit. Maybe next time YOU will be the guy that walked to early, or too late. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
12-05-2021 08:56
Into the Night★★★★★ (21645)	IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote:Money is not wealth. It is a representation of value, and a unit of account. Money is wealth, in fact it is a specific amount of wealth under a specific currency. There are ways you can verify this for yourself. 1. First, we follow the logic train for its existence. A. Without a currency, people can only barter. People don't like being restricted to bartering because they can only have transactions involving coincidence of needs. Why? Because wealth is otherwise not liquid and one cannot eat one's house or car, one cannot use one's CD collection to get to work, etc.. B. With a currency, a given community can normalize their wealth into a value of common units of measure. Now, people can convert their wealth to that liquid form, i.e. money. They can take that liquid wealth and exchange it for some other non-liquid wealth. No. It is not wealth. It is wealth in transition. It is not wealth in and of itself. IBdaMann wrote: 2. Next, we arrange a test to verify or falsify the wealth value of money. . Take $100 of money. Attempt to exchange it for, say, a digital watch with a price of less than $100 but greater than $30. Note your results. How did you get $100 of money? Did you create wealth to get it? Or did you steal the wealth of another to get it? IBdaMann wrote:* . Take some amount of specifically non-wealth, e.g. trash, a cup of dirt, whatever. and attempt to exchange it for, say, a digital watch with a price of less than $100 but greater than $30. Note the results. A false equivalence fallacy. There is no price in dollars where there is no money. IBdaMann wrote: . Repeat the second step several times to get a good feel for how well non-wealth is accepted in exchange for wealth. Nope. Wealth is exchanged for wealth. Money is just the medium of exchange. It is not wealth in and of itself. Like heat, or like the current in a river, money is the flow of wealth. It is not the wealth itself. IBdaMann wrote:* You might not be surprised when I tell you I already know what your results will be. Money is wealth in its liquid form, made possible by its currency normalizing wealth value. This is why everyone trades wealth in the form of money as opposed to limiting their economy to bartering. No. It is not wealth. It is a medium of exchange. IBdaMann wrote: I realize that we become socially engineered to think of money as being defined by some account ... but it's the other way around, i.e. accounts exist because we have money in them. All "accounts" are purely imaginary, like a pointer or a label; nothing exists that is an account other than the money that essentially defines it. Nope. Accounting exists in barter too. You don't need money for accounting. IBdaMann wrote: 3. Check with an accountant. Must all transactions balance with respect to wealth? An exchange of $12 of money for a used book must balance. This can only mean one thing, i.e. that the $12 of money is equivalent to the wealth of one used book. Both my brother and my father are accountants. IBdaMann wrote: Let me know if I have forgotten anything. You did. You forgot where that $100 in your examples came from and how you got it. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
12-05-2021 13:35
Xadoman ★★★★☆ (1035)	Money is just the medium of exchange. It is not wealth in and of itself. I agree with this. Money is just a piece of paper. This piece of paper has almost no inherent value. The wealth is services and goods.
12-05-2021 17:02
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14458)	Into the Night wrote:No. It is not wealth. It is wealth in transition. It is not wealth in and of itself. I'm afraid that "wealth in transition" doesn't mean anything. You have to go by the accounting. Money is wealth in its liquid form under a given currency. Money is an asset and it is not an account receivable. Into the Night wrote:How did you get $100 of money? In some cases I convert (liquidate) other non-liquid wealth to liquid form (money) and in other cases I exchange my labor for liquid wealth (money). I then exchange my liquid wealth (money) for some other non-liquid wealth that I want/need. We have to go back to the accounting. All transactions must balance in wealth and transactions involving money are no exception. Into the Night wrote:A false equivalence fallacy. There is no price in dollars where there is no money. It is not a false equivalence. People will not exchange wealth for non-wealth. It's part of the supply-demand curve. There is no price where there is no wealth. Conversely, where there is wealth, there is price, by definition under a currency because that's what currency is ... units of measure of wealth. Into the Night wrote: Wealth is exchanged for wealth. Money is just the medium of exchange. That's the definition of wealth. All wealth is a medium of exchange. It's just that when you don't have a currency, you can only barter. When you can convert your wealth into liquid form, i.e. money, you can exchange wealth more liquidly. Into the Night wrote:Accounting exists in barter too. Exactly, because all wealth is a medium of exchange. Money is a liquid medium of exchange. Money is liquid wealth. Really, try exchanging money for goods and services; you'll meet with amazing success. People exchange wealth for wealth, as you noted. People will not exchange wealth for non-wealth, as I noted. All wealth transactions must balance wealthwise in the accounting, e.g. four beaver pelts for forty arrows, $1 for a soda, one old John Denver cassette tape for a used copy of Bored of the Rings, etc ... Into the Night wrote: Both my brother and my father are accountants. ... and I am absolutely certain that they will confirm my statements above. By the way, discussions get me jazzed because they normally lead to discussions on Libertarian politics ... which lead to discussions on Extreme Libertarianism which I always enjoy. I know we can get there. I know we can.
12-05-2021 23:31
Into the Night★★★★★ (21645)	IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote:No. It is not wealth. It is wealth in transition. It is not wealth in and of itself. I'm afraid that "wealth in transition" doesn't mean anything. But it does...else the rest of this post doesn't make sense. You are entering a paradox, dude. Be careful. IBdaMann wrote: You have to go by the accounting. Accounting works with barter or with money as the medium of exchange for barter. IBdaMann wrote: Money is wealth in its liquid form under a given currency. Money is an asset and it is not an account receivable. Nope. Money is not wealth. It can be considered an asset or a liability. In actuality, it is both. IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote:How did you get $100 of money? In some cases I convert (liquidate) other non-liquid wealth to liquid form (money) and in other cases I exchange my labor for liquid wealth (money). I then exchange my liquid wealth (money) for some other non-liquid wealth that I want/need. We have to go back to the accounting. All transactions must balance in wealth and transactions involving money are no exception. Here is the other half of your paradox. You just said that 'wealth in transition' doesn't make any sense. That's what a transaction IS. IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote:A false equivalence fallacy. There is no price in dollars where there is no money. It is not a false equivalence. Yes there is. You tried to established a price, in dollars, of a direct barter transaction, and compare that to a transaction using dollars as the medium of exchange. That is a false equivalence. Barter has no price in dollars. IBdaMann wrote: People will not exchange wealth for non-wealth. They do all the time. See casino. Also see paper and bits. IBdaMann wrote: It's part of the supply-demand curve. Oddly enough, you don't need wealth for supplyl-demand curves. IBdaMann wrote: There is no price where there is no wealth. Yes there is. See destitution. Also see death. IBdaMann wrote: Conversely, where there is wealth, there is price, Nope. A price is not required for wealth. A price is only required if you wish to trade it. It is set by the usual forces of price discovery in the market at the time. IBdaMann wrote: by definition under a currency because that's what currency is ... units of measure of wealth. Not a definition of currency nor money. Neither is wealth. Money is a medium of exchange. It can represent a value, and it is a unit of account. Currency is a unit of money, such as dollars, yen, drachma, marks, euros, Bitcoin, etc. IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote: Wealth is exchanged for wealth. Money is just the medium of exchange. That's the definition of wealth. That is not the definition of wealth. IBdaMann wrote: All wealth is a medium of exchange. WRONG. Wealth need not be exchanged at all. Wealth can exist without trade of any kind. IBdaMann wrote: It's just that when you don't have a currency, you can only barter. By definition. IBdaMann wrote: When you can convert your wealth into liquid form, i.e. money, you can exchange wealth more liquidly. Again, you are talking about the movement of wealth, not the wealth itself. IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote:Accounting exists in barter too. Exactly, because all wealth is a medium of exchange. No. The movement of wealth (trade) is not the wealth itself. IBdaMann wrote: Money is a liquid medium of exchange. No. Money is a medium of exchange. It has no inherent value in and of itself. It's only value is in the trust people have in it. A rectangular piece of paper with a picture of a dead President on it is just a piece of paper with a nice picture on it. The ONLY thing that gives it value at all is the trust that it can be used as a medium of exchange. IBdaMann wrote: Money is liquid wealth. No. Money is a medium of exchange. It is the movement of wealth. IBdaMann wrote: Really, try exchanging money for goods and services; you'll meet with amazing success. People exchange wealth for wealth, as you noted. People will not exchange wealth for non-wealth, as I noted. They do all the time, as I've noted. IBdaMann wrote: All wealth transactions must balance wealthwise in the accounting, e.g. four beaver pelts for forty arrows, $1 for a soda, one old John Denver cassette tape for a used copy of Bored of the Rings, etc ... Accounting is not wealth. Accounting is a logging and crosscheck procedure. IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote: Both my brother and my father are accountants. ... and I am absolutely certain that they will confirm my statements above. They actually disagree with you and agree with me. You don't get to speak for them. I do. They are family, and they have agreed with me on this. IBdaMann wrote: By the way, discussions get me jazzed because they normally lead to discussions on Libertarian politics ... which lead to discussions on Extreme Libertarianism which I always enjoy. I know we can get there. I know we can. Already there! Capitalism requires no government to function. It is the creation of wealth. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
13-05-2021 00:54
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14458)	Into the Night wrote: IBdaMann wrote: I know we can get there. I know we can. Already there! Capitalism requires no government to function. It is the creation of wealth. Ask me how I knew we were going to get there. They are my favorite discussions. Extreme libertarians have the heart in the right place but they get the economics wrong. They have bought into the mistaken notion that fiat money is somehow a liability. This allows them to deny accounting. Where you err is in your definition of wealth. You are clearly omitting things of value. If I can exchange X for goods and or services then I have X-worth of wealth. I don't have to say what X is. It could be money. It could be a Mickey Mantle rookie baseball card, it could be Bitcoin, it could be food. You are correct that wealth need not be traded to be wealth, but if it is, then it is wealth. Bartering is an exchange of wealth. Buying is an exchange of wealth. Money does not have to be backed by anything to be wealth. This is where extreme Libertarians run into their brick wall. Into the Night wrote: Accounting works with barter or with money as the medium of exchange for barter. Correct. If it is exchanged then it is wealth. Let's look at it from a different angle. You say that money is not wealth therefore you should be able to articulate some substantive difference between wealth and money. Your position is that a man with a nothing but unlimited reserves of cash has no wealth. How does he differ from a man with great wealth. Into the Night wrote:Here is the other half of your paradox. You just said that 'wealth in transition' doesn't make any sense. That's what a transaction IS. Nope. An exchange of goods is not a transition of any goods. If I have a stick of spearmint gum and you have a piece of Juicy Fruit, and we agree to swap, neither stick of gum transitions in any way. Into the Night wrote:Yes there is. You tried to established a price, in dollars, of a direct barter transaction, and compare that to a transaction using dollars as the medium of exchange. That is a false equivalence. Barter has no price in dollars. Of course bartering without a currency does not involve dollars. However, if there is a currency then all bartering is reduced to dollar values in the accounting. Feel free to confirm this with your father and brother. If I trade you one horse for two cows, the Net Worth value will have to be computed in the currency in question. The dollar values of the horse and of the cows will be assessed and the resulting difference will be used to modify the Net Worth ... in the currency in question. I promise. Into the Night wrote: IBdaMann wrote:People will not exchange wealth for non-wealth. They do all the time. See casino. Also see paper and bits. We aren't going to agree on this while we hold separate definitions of "wealth." Into the Night wrote: IBdaMann wrote: It's part of the supply-demand curve. Oddly enough, you don't need wealth for supplyl-demand curves. Yes you do. The supply-demand curve pertains to markets, which are exchanges of wealth. It models Price Realization under the currency in question wherever wealth is transacted. If it's not wealth then the Supply-Demand curve does not apply. If the Supply-Demand curve applies then it is wealth. Into the Night wrote:Money is a medium of exchange. That makes it wealth ... very liquid wealth.
13-05-2021 03:41
Into the Night★★★★★ (21645)	IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote: IBdaMann wrote: I know we can get there. I know we can. Already there! Capitalism requires no government to function. It is the creation of wealth. Ask me how I knew we were going to get there. They are my favorite discussions. No need to ask. I already know. Some points you reiterate here in this post. IBdaMann wrote: Extreme libertarians have the heart in the right place but they get the economics wrong. Economics is not a political party. Non-sequitur fallacy. IBdaMann wrote: They have bought into the mistaken notion that fiat money is somehow a liability. Not quite right. Libertarians will often buy into the notion that fiat money is somehow useless as an exchange medium. They tend to veer toward gold and silver as the only form of money. It isn't, of course. It IS, however, the only form of currency the Constitution of the United States authorizes. That has never been amended. IBdaMann wrote: This allows them to deny accounting. Where you err is in your definition of wealth. They do not deny accounting. The only deny the usefulness of a fiat currency as a medium of exchange. Wealth is goods and services. Money is neither. IBdaMann wrote: You are clearly omitting things of value. If I can exchange X for goods and or services then I have X-worth of wealth. I don't have to say what X is. It could be money. It could be a Mickey Mantle rookie baseball card, it could be Bitcoin, it could be food. Not at all. Wealth has value. I do not need to trade it to recognize the value of wealth. IBdaMann wrote: You are correct that wealth need not be traded to be wealth, but if it is, then it is wealth. You are now locked in paradox. Which is it, dude? You can't argue both sides of a paradox. IBdaMann wrote: Bartering is an exchange of wealth. Buying is an exchange of wealth. Quite right. It is not, however, wealth itself. IBdaMann wrote: Money does not have to be backed by anything to be wealth. Money is not wealth regardless of it's 'backing'. It doesn't matter if the money is in gold, silver, clamshells, paper, bits, paper clips, or anything else. IBdaMann wrote: This is where extreme Libertarians run into their brick wall. No. Libertarians run into a brick wall because they somehow figure that fiat currencies are useless as a medium of exchange because they have no 'backing'. They are wrong. Money is backed by trust. Nothing else. It matters not whether it's gold, silver, paper, bits, or anything else. Once trust in a currency is lost, it's value is only in it's base value of paper, gold, silver, etc. as it is used for industrial purposes. For fiat currencies, it's value is only the value of paper (very little) or computer bits (nothing). IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote: Accounting works with barter or with money as the medium of exchange for barter. Correct. If it is exchanged then it is wealth. Argument B of your paradox. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox. That is irrational. IBdaMann wrote: Let's look at it from a different angle. You say that money is not wealth therefore you should be able to articulate some substantive difference between wealth and money. I already have. RQAA. Perhaps you should go back and read my posts again. IBdaMann wrote: Your position is that a man with a nothing but unlimited reserves of cash has no wealth. Not quite. He has a wealth of a pile of paper (assuming paper FRNs). IBdaMann wrote: How does he differ from a man with great wealth. He has a great big pile of paper. That is wealth. If no one trusts it as a currency, that is all he has. Since you describe that he has an unlimited supply of paper, that IS great wealth. Not because it's money, but because it's paper, and people use paper. IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote:Here is the other half of your paradox. You just said that 'wealth in transition' doesn't make any sense. That's what a transaction IS. Nope. An exchange of goods is not a transition of any goods. If I have a stick of spearmint gum and you have a piece of Juicy Fruit, and we agree to swap, neither stick of gum transitions in any way. You are locked in another paradox. Which is it, dude? Either the swap took place or not. Which is it? The swap is a transition. I have a stick of spearmint and you have a stick of Juicy Fruit. Gum sticks have moved across a transaction. IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote:Yes there is. You tried to established a price, in dollars, of a direct barter transaction, and compare that to a transaction using dollars as the medium of exchange. That is a false equivalence. Barter has no price in dollars. Of course bartering without a currency does not involve dollars. Yet you made that comparison. Do you now withdraw that comparison? IBdaMann wrote: However, if there is a currency then all bartering is reduced to dollar values in the accounting. Wups. You walked into a 3rd paradox. Which is it, dude? You seem mighty confused. You now have three paradoxes that you MUST resolve or continue to be irrational: A1) Wealth need not be bought or sold to be wealth. A2) Wealth needs to be bought or sold to be wealth. B1) Example of barter of gum sticks is not a transaction. B2) Example of barter of gum sticks is a transaction. C1) Barter does not use dollars. C2) Barter uses dollars. For each, you MUST choose one and only one argument and utterly reject the other. Arguing both sides of a paradox is irrational. IBdaMann wrote: Feel free to confirm this with your father and brother. No need. I already know. Accounting need not be in dollars, drachma, gold, silver, horses, cows, or any other currency. IBdaMann wrote: If I trade you one horse for two cows, the Net Worth value will have to be computed in the currency in question. The dollar values of the horse and of the cows will be assessed and the resulting difference will be used to modify the Net Worth ... in the currency in question. Nope. The only accounting required is that horses and cows are now owned by someone else. There is no net worth in discussion here. Net worth is simply the difference between what you owe someone else and what you collected from someone else or created yourself. IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote: IBdaMann wrote:People will not exchange wealth for non-wealth. They do all the time. See casino. Also see paper and bits. We aren't going to agree on this while we hold separate definitions of "wealth." You keep shifting the definition of 'wealth'. I have already given a single definition and I have never changed it. IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote: IBdaMann wrote: It's part of the supply-demand curve. Oddly enough, you don't need wealth for supplyl-demand curves. Yes you do. Argument A of your 1st paradox. Which is it, dude? IBdaMann wrote: The supply-demand curve pertains to markets, which are exchanges of wealth. We agree. IBdaMann wrote: It models Price Realization under the currency in question wherever wealth is transacted. IBdaMann wrote: If it's not wealth then the Supply-Demand curve does not apply. If the Supply-Demand curve applies then it is wealth. Argument B of your first paradox. Which is it, dude? IBdaMann wrote: [quote]Into the Night wrote:Money is a medium of exchange. That makes it wealth ... very liquid wealth. Money is not wealth. Very few people use a liquid for money (although it has happened). Liquidity is simply the readiness that wealth can be transacted to someone else, whether an exchange medium (money) is used or not. Yes...that means liquidity can exist in barter as well. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
13-05-2021 09:15
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14458)	Into the Night wrote: You seem mighty confused. You now have three paradoxes that you MUST resolve or continue to be irrational: A1) Wealth need not be bought or sold to be wealth. A2) Wealth needs to be bought or sold to be wealth. B1) Example of barter of gum sticks is not a transaction. B2) Example of barter of gum sticks is a transaction. C1) Barter does not use dollars. C2) Barter uses dollars. You are assigning to me bogus positions that I do not hold. I did not claim A2, B1, or C2. I said that if something is bought or sold that it holds value and is wealth, not that wealth must be bought/sold. I very clearly expressed exchanging sticks of gum as a transaction I very clearly expressed that bartering does not involve money; I did say that the accounting assigns a dollar value to the value of the wealth involved in every transaction because every transaction must balance. You seem to be denying accounting like an extreme Libertarian. All transactions must balance. They absolutely must. Into the Night wrote:Not quite right. Libertarians will often buy into the notion that fiat money is somehow useless as an exchange medium. This is the mantra of the extreme Libertarians, yes. Into the Night wrote:They do not deny accounting. Regular Libertarians thoroughly live by accounting. The extreme Libertarians, however, are clueless about currency and propagate really stupid mistakes. They also discard the supply-demand curve and the rule of law in favor of lawless "might makes right." I have had way too many discussions with extreme Libertarians to think that they can ever be turned from the dark side of the Force. They always start out fine but they veer off the path of economics and into a religious anti-government dogma. I totally get the distrust of government part but seeking to disband the government and usher in anarchy is well over the line for me. That's not economics. That's just lawlessness. It differs not from ANTIFA. Into the Night wrote:Wealth is goods and services. Let me ask you this. How would you classify a strong feeling of satisfaction or peace of mind? Can someone find value in those things? Can there be demand for them? Into the Night wrote:Money is neither. That's what is being debated. You haven't produced a characteristic that applies to wealth that does not apply to money. Into the Night wrote:Money is backed by trust. Nothing else. A currency is backed by trust. Money is just a certain amount of wealth under a given currency. Into the Night wrote: Accounting works with barter or with money as the medium of exchange for barter. You are simply creating a term "medium of exchange" and applying it to money as though that somehow changes money from the wealth that it is to something else. Again, your error is your definition of wealth. You have not articulated any substantive difference that applies to wealth that does not apply to money ... and the reason for that is that money is wealth. Liquid wealth alleviates the need for barter. Money can stand in place of any other form of wealth ... because it is totally liquid (its purpose). Again, you can exchange your liquid wealth for non-liquid wealth while noting that people will not accept non-wealth (trash, dirt, leaves, etc) in exchange for wealth, showing quite clearly that money is wealth and is not non-wealth. Into the Night wrote:I already have. RQAA. Nope. You have not. I'm still waiting on this one. If money is not wealth then there must be some substantive difference ... but the truth is that any characteristic that you can specify for "wealth" also applies to money, exactly as if money is a proper subset of wealth ... which it is. Ergo, any attempts to produce some sort of difference are doomed to be futile. Into the Night wrote: Perhaps you should go back and read my posts again. Because I enjoy your posts I typically read them multiple times. This is also one of my favorite topics. So the good news is that I have gone back and re-read your post several times. Good stuff. We can summarize this subthread to this: 1) You claim that money is not wealth, and you are mistaken because money is wealth in liquid form. Referring to money as a "medium of exchange" or a "value in an account" does not alter the underlying reality of what it is. 2) You can verify this to your own satisfaction by noting that money is a proper subset of wealth and that anything that applies to "wealth" applies to money. 3) You can verify this by noting that all accounting transactions must balance and to accomplish this the value that all wealth has is assigned a value under the currency and balanced. Since money is a proper subset of wealth this applies to money as well. 4) Another thing to consider is that abstract art, rare baseball cards, and other speculative or sentimental objects can have value without utility, are classified as wealth and can be exchanged for goods and/or services in exactly the same way money can. If they are wealth then money has to be wealth as well, and they are wealth. Did I forget anything? Into the Night wrote:He has a great big pile of paper. Securities are paper. Money is cloth (US money is specifically cotton). If you run securities and money through your washing machine, only the money will survive like nothing happened. Lesson: Don't run your bearer bonds through the washing machine. Into the Night wrote:You are locked in another paradox. Which is it, dude? Either the swap took place or not. Which is it? The swap is a transition. I have a stick of spearmint and you have a stick of Juicy Fruit. Gum sticks have moved across a transaction. It appears that you confused the word "transition" for "transaction." The swap was definitely a transaction and neither stick of gum experienced any sort of transition. Into the Night wrote:The only accounting required is... I did not say that any accounting is required, only that if you were to perform accounting on the transaction that it would have to be under some currency (unit of measure of value) and that all wealth will therefore be assessed a value under that currency to ensure the transaction balances. All transactions must balance. Feel free to verify this. The only scenario in which the transaction does not need to balance is when no accounting is occurring. If there is accounting occurring, however, all transactions must balance. Therefore all wealth must be assigned a value under the currency. Into the Night wrote:Net worth is simply the difference between what you owe someone else and what you collected from someone else or created yourself. Colloquially, yes. Regardless of the words used or the language employed, Assets - Liabilities = Net Worth Into the Night wrote: You keep shifting the definition of 'wealth'. My definition of wealth has not changed. Mine is accounting-based and represents what would be put on a balance sheet, with all corresponding assessed values under some currency. Into the Night wrote: I have already given a single definition and I have never changed it. Yes you have, i.e. non-liquid goods and services, arbitrarily contrived to exclude money ... and that is an error. Into the Night wrote:Argument A of your 1st paradox. Which is it, dude? There is no contradiction. The supply-demand curve necessarily involves price realization. Price ... under some currency. It pertains to transactions. It pertains to wealth. Into the Night wrote:We agree. I'm feeling a warm glow. Into the Night wrote:Argument B of your first paradox. Which is it, dude? Help me out. You cited two internally consistent statements as somehow being contradictory. Could you specify your issue here? Into the Night wrote: IBdaMann wrote: That makes it wealth ... very liquid wealth. Money is not wealth. I had just finished explaining how it was. Into the Night wrote:Very few people use a liquid for money (although it has happened). Absolutely they do: Into the Night wrote: Liquidity is simply the readiness that wealth can be transacted to someone else, Yes. Exactly. Wealth's liquidity is its readiness (and flexibility) to be transacted. I totally agree. Into the Night wrote: Yes...that means liquidity can exist in barter as well. Sure. It's just that liquidity of wealth in bartering is so low whereas money is completely liquid, i.e. its purpose.

Page 2 of 10

Join the debate Crypto investments:

Threads	Replies	Last post
Crypto-Climate Watch List	540	09-09-2023 02:41
Tom Brady lost $30 million after FTX crypto collapse. Too bad	3	07-09-2023 15:54
$740M in crypto assets recovered in FTX bankruptcy so far	0	24-11-2022 11:07
Crypto exchanges disintegrating as you read this, FTX is gone bitcoin is down 65% this year	4	17-11-2022 16:19
Everybody Can Obtain The New Trillion Dollar Crypto Coin whitepapers To Become Millionaire Easily	4	06-11-2021 03:55