Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Search

  • Re: What Bitcoin is

    [quote user="Smiling Dave"] Bitcoin widely used implies there is no free market at work, by Mises regression theorem, which states that in a free market bitcoin will never ever be widely used. [/quote] The regression theorem states no such thing.
    Posted to General (Forum) by Peter Šurda on Sat, Oct 6 2012
  • Re: What Bitcoin is

    [quote user="Clayton"] So, if a) Bitcoins are imposed on the developed world by government and then b) the developed world implodes on itself and regresses to the dark ages, then you could have an unbacked, extremely low-value currency continuing in use despite the absence of government enforcement. But wait, in order to have Bitcoins, you
    Posted to General (Forum) by Peter Šurda on Sat, Oct 6 2012
  • Re: What Bitcoin is

    [quote user="Clayton"] Not in Austrian monetary theory. How many times do we have to go around this? [/quote] You are in error. Read Menger's On The Origins of Money if you do not believe me. Menger describes much better than Mises what factors influence demand for a medium of exchange and how to detect whether goods are liquid (or "saleable"
    Posted to General (Forum) by Peter Šurda on Sat, Oct 6 2012
  • Re: What Bitcoin is

    Clayton, the transaction volume of Bitcoin has been increasing, and will probably soon start to reach the level of countries with underdeveloped banking. Futhermore, you still ignore that many people do not use Bitcoin merely to prove Mises wrong, but from a purely rational perspective, as it decreases their transaction costs.
    Posted to General (Forum) by Peter Šurda on Fri, Oct 5 2012
  • Re: What Bitcoin is

    Clayton, the criteria you mention, "liquidity, durability, scarcity, commodity use (expectation of future valuation), etc", are merely a factor that influences transaction costs. Furthermore, if people do have a choice other than the legal tender, they normally shift to the most liquid fiat currencies (dollar, euro, swiss franc, or the money
    Posted to General (Forum) by Peter Šurda on Fri, Oct 5 2012
  • Re: What Bitcoin is

    Smiling Dave, just another example of unprofessionalism. Even though I explicitly said that Rothbard does not use the term liquidity, you object that he really does not. And the main point, as usually, you do not get. Rothbard wrote that even if you abolish legal tender laws, people would not switch to gold and would continue to use the fiat dollar
    Posted to General (Forum) by Peter Šurda on Fri, Oct 5 2012
  • Re: What Bitcoin is

    [quote user="Clayton"] But this premise entails extensive government control of the economy because Bitcoin is an unbacked money. [/quote] Your argument is incorrect. People choose their medium of exchange based on transaction costs, not on "backing". And the transaction costs are almost always determined by liquidity. This is why
    Posted to General (Forum) by Peter Šurda on Fri, Oct 5 2012
  • Re: Bitcoins *prove* Mengerian account of money creation?

    Anenome, money is only the most liquid medium of exchange. Bitcoin does not fulfill this criterion (yet). But that's not a big issue. There are media of exchange that are not money, i.e. are less liquid. See Theory of Money and Credit, Chapter 17 Section 17: http://mises.org/humanaction/chap17sec17.asp .
    Posted to Economics Questions (Forum) by Peter Šurda on Thu, Oct 4 2012
  • Re: Bitcoins *prove* Mengerian account of money creation?

    nirgrahamUK , you're halfway through. The problem is twofold, a potential medium of exchange needs a starting price and liquidity . Starting price alone is not enough. See this wonderful lecture by Walter Block: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2690Fy0sM8 . Let me quote from it: But the point is, you see, ten Rothbards, if I really had ten Rothbards
    Posted to Economics Questions (Forum) by Peter Šurda on Thu, Oct 4 2012
  • Re: Bitcoins *prove* Mengerian account of money creation?

    The main problem with Smiling Dave's arguments is the methodological absurdity which becomes apparent when you attempt to explicitly formulate his implied, unwritten and unsaid, conclusion. Smiling Dave's full argument is this: Bitcoin does not conform to the regression theorem, therefore it does not exist .
    Posted to Economics Questions (Forum) by Peter Šurda on Thu, Oct 4 2012
Page 7 of 27 (269 items) « First ... < Previous 5 6 7 8 9 Next > ... Last » | More Search Options