A party that is struggling with illegal funds is campaigning for less registration. A rogue who thinks evil. I'm surprised that the CDU didn't switch its black accounts to BTC a long time ago.
But let's get to the point. Of course the proposal is not bad, but do the other parties have anything against BTC? At first it sounds as if the other parties have something against it and, of course, they are shooting against the central banks and the euro for no reason. I simply assume that they have zero interest in BTC but want to fish for cheap votes. Central banks and the ability to generate money are intrinsically important for a competitive economy. Why was China able to expand so brutally? Because they invested on credit and the tactic is working. This would not have been possible with BTC alone.
I also see the ambivalent desired role of BTC as problematic. If it is a currency, then there should be no holding period. If it is an object of speculation, then the holding period should apply, but then it is not a currency and not relevant for the state.
But let's get to the point. Of course the proposal is not bad, but do the other parties have anything against BTC? At first it sounds as if the other parties have something against it and, of course, they are shooting against the central banks and the euro for no reason. I simply assume that they have zero interest in BTC but want to fish for cheap votes. Central banks and the ability to generate money are intrinsically important for a competitive economy. Why was China able to expand so brutally? Because they invested on credit and the tactic is working. This would not have been possible with BTC alone.
I also see the ambivalent desired role of BTC as problematic. If it is a currency, then there should be no holding period. If it is an object of speculation, then the holding period should apply, but then it is not a currency and not relevant for the state.
•
33
•
@devnerd_daddy if you want to imply that BTC is only good for illegal activities, I can tell you that Bitcoin is used much less for illegal purposes in percentage terms than the euro or dollar.
Yes, some other parties have something against BTC. Among others, the CDU/CSU, which introduced a great proposal last year: https://getqu.in/kVA3ic/
I also think that the AfD is purely on a mission to win over voters. They will probably have learned from Trump. He has no idea about BTC either, but wants to be the "crypto president". In terms of regulation, Trump has nevertheless brought about some positive developments in the USA.
The question is not always what is good for the state or the collective. Of course it's great for states to print money.
The question is what is good for the individual. Is it great if your own purchasing power is devalued year after year? Is it great that you are virtually forced to speculate in order to transport your purchasing power into the future? Is it good that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer? I don't think so :)
Bitcoin is a counter-design and it is there for everyone. You just have to use it for yourself.
Yes, some other parties have something against BTC. Among others, the CDU/CSU, which introduced a great proposal last year: https://getqu.in/kVA3ic/
I also think that the AfD is purely on a mission to win over voters. They will probably have learned from Trump. He has no idea about BTC either, but wants to be the "crypto president". In terms of regulation, Trump has nevertheless brought about some positive developments in the USA.
The question is not always what is good for the state or the collective. Of course it's great for states to print money.
The question is what is good for the individual. Is it great if your own purchasing power is devalued year after year? Is it great that you are virtually forced to speculate in order to transport your purchasing power into the future? Is it good that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer? I don't think so :)
Bitcoin is a counter-design and it is there for everyone. You just have to use it for yourself.
••
@stefan_21 No, don't get me wrong. I was joking about the illegal activities because the AfD, together with the CDU, are the masters of financial cover-ups.
Of course, losing purchasing power is not nice, but a state that is not flexible while the rest of the world is has lost out in the competition. Used correctly, however, this is not a multiplier for the rich-poor gap. A system without money multiplication only works if everyone abides by the same rules. A bit like communism, which only works if everyone behaves fairly 😄
Of course, losing purchasing power is not nice, but a state that is not flexible while the rest of the world is has lost out in the competition. Used correctly, however, this is not a multiplier for the rich-poor gap. A system without money multiplication only works if everyone abides by the same rules. A bit like communism, which only works if everyone behaves fairly 😄
•
11
•@devnerd_daddy A state that is not flexible must be efficient and resourceful. If the easy way does not exist, the honest way must be found and a state would either have to make savings elsewhere, become more efficient or raise taxes in order to implement projects. Alternatively, in a Bitcoin world, you could go into debt - but at much higher interest rates and, accordingly, an investment would only be made if it is worth the risk.
Hard money can act like a fitness program for the state and the economy.
A freer market would be the result and saving would be worthwhile for the state & citizens, leading to a more prosperous society.
Of course, it becomes difficult when a state relies entirely on Bitcoin and everyone else around it on fiat currencies. If Bitcoin continues to gain in value compared to the other currencies, exports and thus economic output will naturally decline (although the market would theoretically regulate this again over time).
Accordingly, Bitcoin is not a top-down money for me. I don't think it works if a state decides from above that citizens have to use BTC as a means of payment from now on. I think Bitcoin needs to develop from the bottom up. People have to recognize the properties of Bitcoin and use them for themselves. Accordingly, I believe that Bitcoin and fiat will simply coexist for a very long time. I don't have the imagination for a pure BTC world. If at all, I don't think we'll live to see it :)
Oh yes, and about the rich-poor divide: Theoretically, if it were used correctly, no. At least not that much. However, everything that can be exploited will be exploited. And that is exactly what is happening auch🤷♂️ central banks are not apolitical, nor do they have currency stability as their sole objective.
And the creation of credit money is fundamentally unfair. The more assets I have, the better conditions and higher loan amounts I get. Then new money is created and I can use it to buy X. I can use it to buy X property, for example, and thus tighten the market, causing prices to rise. And it is precisely this asset price inflation through credit money creation that also contributes to the rich-poor gap on a large scale.
Hard money can act like a fitness program for the state and the economy.
A freer market would be the result and saving would be worthwhile for the state & citizens, leading to a more prosperous society.
Of course, it becomes difficult when a state relies entirely on Bitcoin and everyone else around it on fiat currencies. If Bitcoin continues to gain in value compared to the other currencies, exports and thus economic output will naturally decline (although the market would theoretically regulate this again over time).
Accordingly, Bitcoin is not a top-down money for me. I don't think it works if a state decides from above that citizens have to use BTC as a means of payment from now on. I think Bitcoin needs to develop from the bottom up. People have to recognize the properties of Bitcoin and use them for themselves. Accordingly, I believe that Bitcoin and fiat will simply coexist for a very long time. I don't have the imagination for a pure BTC world. If at all, I don't think we'll live to see it :)
Oh yes, and about the rich-poor divide: Theoretically, if it were used correctly, no. At least not that much. However, everything that can be exploited will be exploited. And that is exactly what is happening auch🤷♂️ central banks are not apolitical, nor do they have currency stability as their sole objective.
And the creation of credit money is fundamentally unfair. The more assets I have, the better conditions and higher loan amounts I get. Then new money is created and I can use it to buy X. I can use it to buy X property, for example, and thus tighten the market, causing prices to rise. And it is precisely this asset price inflation through credit money creation that also contributes to the rich-poor gap on a large scale.
•
11
•