It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Could Something Like Bitcoin Offer Reasonable Redistribution of Wealth?

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 02:19 PM
link   
All right, so this is what I've learned about the digital currencies out there. It seems like if you made one that had a set cap of 1 billion, then for every dollar of value put in by different entities, each coin goes up by a billionth of that value. That means that ANYONE who invested in this would ALWAYS gain on their investments as long as the cap did not go up, as long as governments and bankers did not interfere too much, as long as more and more companies of different sorts integrated a said coin into their economies, the value would increase.

The value would decrease if governments cut off contact with a coin, such as state governments or local governments or federal governments outlawing coins. The value would decrease if companies cut off contact with a coin.

In a way, this represents companies and governments affecting the value of a coin based on how well they agree with the message the coin is representing. Governments could legitimately make certain coins illegal, for example, if the coin was doing something like being used in assassination contracts or child trafficking (or any human trafficking for that matter).

The kinds of transactions happen on the deep web, and leave a trace of what kind of currency is being accepted for that transaction. I am not sure if there would be a way for bitcoin to drop access to people they know are using their currency for illegal activity. But that might seriously become an issue at some point. Bitcoin has already associated itself with criminals, it might be hard to shake that off. But there could be other altcoins that do not tolerate criminal behavior.

But my point is, that is what makes the coin have value. The value is also determined by whether or not more and more resources are being added to the system by all participants - are those participants mining more minerals, enough to cover the costs of operations and have some left over? Remember, the value of everything increases, unless people are destroying each other because they are at war. There is another way the value decreases, and that is if the minerals run dry.

Let's say that it costs money to build and maintain a hospital. Well, if the hospital was paid for by the federal government, who had earned money through taxes, which had been produced through mining metaphorical minerals (such as talent, vespine gas, living accommodations for the population, working vehicles for the population) then people would have enough real-world money to invest in the currency.

So, as long as this is wealth is going up (for example, the more of the population that owns homes, the more value is added because they have more money to spend on other things, the more hospitals that are already constructed ads value because they don't have to be constructed again, just maintained) and as long as governments and companies don't sever their ties with the currency, the value of the currency will rise.

What does this mean? Well, it is kind of like taxes, only taxes on stim-packs. When someone invests their real-world earnings in a coin, for example, if they were paid $700 a month in a developing country, they might be able to buy .0471 bitcoins today. But I think bitcoin's value could drop, because they are associated with criminals. So it would be better to use another altcoin that somehow isn't, or has better processing time, even...

But let's assume it goes up, as it should if all the conditions I already mentioned are in effect - then the person will have a fairly good gain on their money every month. This would encourage saving because there would be a gain on that wealth over time of a fairly reasonable amount. In fact, someone could start doing legal odd jobs as a child or teenager in their youth, and have enough money to start out on their own. This would encourage young people to add talent (at a legal level) to the coin's value, which would also make it increase.

When people die or get older, they do exit the workforce. But they still have time, and they have the expertise to offer advice to others and continue their research even into their old age. They could run their own websites, and do things such as offer subscriptions to content or gain advertising revenue and royalties, or do consulting over the internet so they don't have to leave their home, or nursing home!

And this will maximize wealth, because at the moment, the older generations have no way to integrate talent into the workforce and get paid for it. And maximizing wealth adds value to the coin.

However, what about when those generations die off? Their work did not. Their contributions to science and everything else in between has remained so that the work that is built on top of that becomes worth more in value. That also increases the value of a coin. For example, if someone in the stone age invested in a stone cave with a wooden club, with a reasonable amount of work, they would be able to have made it all the way to a fairly swag modern residence today, had they lived long enough. Maybe WAY more than that, considering their lifespan and the talent they would have added over the years, and the growth of their reputation over that time.

So, what about developing nations? They would be able to produce goods and sell them on the market and any profits that were made would be duplicated by the growth of the coin.

For example, if a country makes $500 billion in GDP, and the coin doubled value in a year, they would have $500 billion bonus dollars, and those bonus dollars would go directly back to the people because they would own coins.

What would the people do with this extra money?

Well, they could donate it to hospitals and schools of their choice, if those schools were willing to accept that particular coin as a payment option. And it would be it would be in their best interest, as long as the trend caught on and was legal. AND it could be mandated that people spend a percentage of their GAINS on fundraisers of their choice. And these would be pretty good gains, and it would be free money, anyway.

But why donate to a local school?? Well, let's say that a school wants some money - but who wants it? The band. So they set up their own fundraising account linked to this digital currency (which always grows). If they do some marketing, they could get donations from parents directly to where it needs to go! And if they save money, they get dividends!

A science teacher could campaign for things that he needs in the classroom, that he currently has to use his own money for! So that teacher could campaign to get school supplies, and even upgrades to the lab (that the school can't afford to upgdare), or whatever.

If it was a public school, maybe some things would be covered by the state. So once again, it depends on where the law falls on this matter.
edit on 03pmWed, 03 Jan 2018 14:20:54 -0600kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)

edit on 03pmWed, 03 Jan 2018 14:27:39 -0600kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)

edit on 03pmWed, 03 Jan 2018 14:38:05 -0600kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

If a doctor needed more supplies, or maybe that doctor needed a secretary (my dad is a doctor, and he works on so much paperwork that he has less time for patients). The doctor could set up a fund for that, and advertise it to his clients, explaining to them how it would allow him to spend more time with them. The clients would be enjoying dividends on their coins, so they would have some extra to donate. This would be like a new tax system, and it would be legalized.

Both public and private institutions could do this.

It might even be fun being able to spend your taxes in places that DIRECTLY impact your quality of life! And it is more effective, too, because the experience of the people using the system allows them to allocate money in a much more efficient way. And it is crowdsourcing - your small input really makes a big enough change to matter in huge ways.
edit on 03pmWed, 03 Jan 2018 14:32:04 -0600kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: darkbake
Yea there's a thing for just that, it's called cash.
Bitcoin is a PYRAMID scheme. Set up and used by money speculators (add crooks in there). Soon and I think very soon their bubble will burst and the big money will be gone and the schmucks will be left carrying the can. People think it's clever to trade in money with Bitcoins assurances that "it's not regulated, it's not taxed, it's free to use, etc." all the requisites for a glorious scam, cos when TSHTF just who do you chase for your money if your the loser.



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 03:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: darkbake

The value would decrease if governments cut off contact with a coin.


People need to learn the difference between "Price" and "Value."

Don't confuse the two things.

You can pay a high "price" for something that has a low "value", and visa versa.

Cryptocurrencies have no value, they only have a "price".



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 04:07 PM
link   
Bitcoin can not by definition be a pyramid scheme because there are a total of 21 million that can ever be in circulation. Fiat is the pyramid scheme, thats why there is a pyramid on the dollar. If you think bitcoin is a pyramid scheme or a bubble you dont quite understand what it is or where it's value comes from.

bitcoins value comes from not having to trust corrupt banking institutions to hold your wealth.

These bankers are lending your money to create wars and terrorism to keep you enslaved.

The value also comes from being able to transport billions of dollars of wealth via a memorized password rather than trains, planes, and armed guards.

Yes bitcoin and the cryptos will help to redistribute wealth.

I fully believe we are about to go into a technological renaissance and will see the first individual trillionaires made.

i think millionaires are the new billionaires, and the people who aren't in crypto now are like the people who didn't understand the internet and thought it was a fad.

There are a lot of crypto scams out there to watch out for though.



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 04:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: AMPTAH

originally posted by: darkbake

The value would decrease if governments cut off contact with a coin.


People need to learn the difference between "Price" and "Value."

Don't confuse the two things.

You can pay a high "price" for something that has a low "value", and visa versa.

Cryptocurrencies have no value, they only have a "price".





Bitcoins "price" will be around 4 million US dollars when people start to realize its true "value"

It will probable take 4 or 5 years though.
edit on 3-1-2018 by booyakasha because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 04:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: booyakasha
Bitcoin can not by definition be a pyramid scheme because there are a total of 21 million that can ever be in circulation.


But, you can "subdivide" the bitcoin 100 million times.

So, you call it bitcoin, but you'll really be trading in satoshi.

Then, nothing is stopping the introduction of
deci-satoshi = 1/10 of a satoshi, or
centi-satoshi = 1/100 of a satoshi, or
milli-satoshi = 1/1000 of a satoshi , or
micro-satoshi = 1/10^6 of a satoshi, or
nano-satoshi = 1/10^9 of a satoshi, or
pico-satoshi = 1/10^12 of a satoshi, or
or femto-satoshi = 1/10^15,

etc...

So fixing the upper limit does nothing to stop the "pyramid" from forming.



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 04:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: booyakasha

Bitcoins "price" will be around 4 million US dollars when people start to realize its true "value"

It will probable take 4 or 5 years though.


Let's put it this way,

when you will pay me $4 million dollars for my 1 Bitcoin, I will gladly sell it to you.

It's a deal.



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: AMPTAH

What if a cryptocurrency did have value instead of just a price?



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 04:42 PM
link   
All of the wild speculator cash is getting pumped into cryptos, creating a stable market for companies of real value.

Just look at the technology companies required for mining, Nvidia etc, they are not getting any of the wild speculation. When the bubble bursts, the real market will say meh and keep chugging along.



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: HummaKavula
a reply to: AMPTAH

What if a cryptocurrency did have value instead of just a price?


Things would be alot different.

One of the signs that something has a value is how fast the price changes.

When there's no value backing something, the price can be anything, fluctuating from moment to moment, as peoples passions and delusions move it this way and that. Nothing moves faster than the imagination.

But, say some crypto was backed by gold or silver, or "weed", or even some nations "fiat currency" which comes with support from the taxing power of that nations government, then we could use the crypto to buy anything we want, instead of just trading in the crypto itself.

"Trading" a currency is supposed to be the "secondary" aspect of money. The "primary" aspect is exchanging that currency for some "goods or services."

Crypto has the "promise" of one day being able to buy things with it, but is mostly just a "speculators" tool right now.

By the way, it's a great speculator's tool. No doubt about it. If you are able to monitor the bitcoin news traffic and "gauge" the public sentiment on the currency, a good psychologist could make a killing buying and selling at the right times, as the crazy cryptos bounce around.

Early stock traders did the same thing, learning to "read the ticker-tape" and gauge peoples sentiments, to forcast the price moves. These stock traders couldn't care less about the "value" of the stocks. They were more interested in trading what people think the price was going to do, and using "cues" from the ticker-tape and watching floor traders emotional expressions, to trade with psychology alone.



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 05:17 PM
link   
a reply to: AMPTAH

My thoughts exactly, that's why I asked the question. It's coming, soon. Crypto backed by hard assets. We are hoping it will be very disruptive.



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 08:32 PM
link   
a reply to: AMPTAH

Right, there will be a pyramid effect. Those who are older and have held investments longer will be better off than the younger ones. Those who get in in the beginning will be richest. But if the currency is connected to enough sources the value will always go up as long as the economy is doing well and more dollars are added to the currency.

Third-world countries connected to the digital currency would increase its value the more they developed. But they would also see a dividend on that growth.

As time goes on, more value should be added to society. More people being born and entering the work force would increase its value, and as I said, if the economy allowed it, old people could still offer web based services. If we go into space, that means more resources tied in to a certain digital currency, with more mining and colonization opportunities.

I guess it is a bit like money. But it is integrated globally, has a fast transaction time, and could be coded to have low fees.

It definitely has to be accepted as a form of payment in more instances. But are people going to really say no in the long run?
edit on 03pmWed, 03 Jan 2018 20:44:46 -0600kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 08:35 PM
link   
a reply to: AMPTAH

Right, the cryptocurrencies will need to be accepted as payment in more cases. I mentioned that in my O.P.



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 04:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: AMPTAH

originally posted by: HummaKavula
a reply to: AMPTAH

What if a cryptocurrency did have value instead of just a price?


Things would be alot different.

But, say some crypto was backed by gold or silver, or "weed", or even some nations "fiat currency" which comes with support from the taxing power of that nations government, then we could use the crypto to buy anything we want, instead of just trading in the crypto itself.



I'm predicting the topic might come up this year in politics.



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 04:45 AM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

LOL,what is really funny they promote this BITcoin as future way to get rich,a new currency to replace old,but.... when price goes up,people sell it for the old currency,kind of a mindless trap here



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 05:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: darkbake
a reply to: AMPTAH

Right, there will be a pyramid effect. Those who are older and have held investments longer will be better off than the younger ones. Those who get in in the beginning will be richest. But if the currency is connected to enough sources the value will always go up as long as the economy is doing well and more dollars are added to the currency.

This answers your original question. No, it's not a redistribution of wealth. The money still goes to those who use their heads and do something. There will always be people who don't have any ambition and will have to do without unless it's given to them.



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 06:02 AM
link   
a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

I guess, but they would be better off than now, able to purchase enough to have a good lifestyle for themselves, the kids, the city funding, etc. as long as their digital currencies value was going up.

People could vote on funding to have a direct impact on where their tax dollars go.
edit on 04amThu, 04 Jan 2018 06:03:08 -0600kbamkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 06:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Oldtimer2

I guess, but if people weren’t going crazy about it, the price would still clime as it gets legitimized by companies and businesses.



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 07:50 AM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

No. Those with large current wealth will quickly come to monopolize it too.




top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join