Bitcoin banned in Russia?
translate.googleusercontent.com
translate.googleusercontent.com
http://www.coindesk.com/russian-prosecutors-office-btc-e-inv...
Like what? Being tied to a deflationary currency? Being unable to influence their own monetary supply? Tying the buying power of its citizens to the computational ability to hash numbers really quickly?
Seriously, what benefits possibly favor this approach over creation of an e-currency that the central bank has control over?
I'm not sure how those two things are related. Mining is an entirely optional activity for users of Bitcoin, and indeed, the vast majority of users never have nor ever will mine.
In nations where cryptocurrencies aren't outlawed, they will prosper, and those governments will have to figure out how to manage an economy with a popular deflationary currency.
Yes.
> Individuals choose currencies with stable supplies to maintain the value of their wealth.
Individuals are far wiser to invest the majority of their wealth instead of keeping it bundled up in any commodity that has no inherent value. This includes bitcoins, dollars, yen, tulips, pog caps, and gold. Arguably gold has more inherent value than anything else on that list, but again tying capital up in nonproductive activities (commodities) is not only a poor investment, it makes no larger economic sense.
> In nations where cryptocurrencies aren't outlawed, they will prosper, and those governments will have to figure out how to manage an economy with a popular deflationary currency.
This is an argument advanced without any support. Not all cryptocurrencies are deflationary. And no proof is offered that deflationary currency has any advantages whatsoever. Only hand-wavy "citizens prefer stable supply" is advanced, and I'd argue that the majority of citizens that know what they're doing prefer to invest in productive activities anyway.
A widely adopted currency with a fixed supply will slowly increase in value as the demand to perform transactions in that currency increases. The whole point of central bank currencies is to make sure the value slowly decreases over time. Sure, it's good for the economy, but individuals don't make choices based on what's good for the economy. They look out for number one.
"Not all cryptocurrencies are deflationary."
Inflationary cryptocurrencies will not succeed. Imagine there was no dominant currency in your country today. You gave goods or services to someone, and in return, they give you a choice of payment in two currencies: one with an increasing supply and one with a fixed supply. Which would you choose?
Other things being equal you choose the fixed supply, but other things are rarely equal. For one thing, why aren't they going to price in the expected future change in value?
One benefit, out of a multitude, is the removal of the centralized control of the banks. Done correctly, decentralized control is predictable, transparent, and trustworthy.
I'm not saying that Bitcoin is the answer, but that there are awesome reasons why an ambitious country should give its citizens their economic rights.
In other words, they'd have to know that giving up control would be good for them long-term, and they'd have to want good things for themselves.
I know, I know, this time it's different.
The way that currencies collapse is by people losing faith in them en masse. Either something will happen to make people lose faith in Bitcoin, or it will continue to be adopted and it's value will increase.
It sounds absurd because the upside potential for Bitcoin is absurd. It could also be worth zero one day. Time will tell.
BTW, "To the moon" comments are designed to inspire and raise interest. It's called marketing.
And how well did that turn out for the people who invested in it? The dot com bubble is perhaps the perfect example to demonstrate that even something with real potential can still suffer a speculative bubble.
Pretty damn well... no?
I think it would be far more likely for a country to invest in their own digital currency: DollarCoin, SterlingCoin, EuroCoin, YuanCoin, etc.
Whether this would be through mining, or simply transaction verification, could be interesting (and desirable simply to close one loophole cash has - it is extremely hard to trace, therefore some transactions remain untaxed). When monetary policy changes, a change in the specification is deployed. CountryCoins would likely be fungible with physical cash (of that country).
Once they've all been mined there will be 21 million Bitcoins (and assume none have been lost)
There are approximately $10.5 trillion US dollars in the world (http://money.howstuffworks.com/how-much-money-is-in-the-worl...)
10,500,000,000,000 USD / 21,000,000 BTC = $500,000 per Bitcoin
As opposed to what, a fiat currency like the ruble?
This link, which you maybe shouldn't click, because who knows what's going on here, [http://www.genproc.gov.ru/smi/news/genproc/news-86432/] indicates that it should be in the news section. But when I go there directly, I can't find it.
Has anyone been able to even verify the authenticity of the original announcement, let alone interpret what it means? If so, can you share where on the official website you found it?
Thanks.
We, the startupers, of course, like to make money, too, but we know it is not easy, it's actually a lot of work, skills, and luck, and money is almost never top priority - it's just a nice added bonus, a reward if we do good! We want to change the world, but not to change the world so that we get rich from the hoarded coins!
I do like the innovation that Bitcoin brought, I like that it brought the attention to some of the problems it's claiming to solve (almost many are false promises - like micropayments), but I don't think it can be sustained for much longer!