This subject is becoming much deeper that I have the time to go into. I agree with many of the thoughts you offer with the exception that we have a great monetary system. For this to be a great monetary system, the paper would need to have a standard of some kind and right now there is no standard. All historical fiat currency to my knowledge have failed and I believe ours will too.
The "no incentive left for us to work" has more to do with out taxation system which is tied to our monetary system. To me it is simply, the harder someone works the more they lose through progressive taxation to pay for the poor money management of our government.
I appreciate the conversation.

"Paying suppliers more or raising prices simply transfers money for money between the payers and creates no additional value"
Correct. Fluctuations in currency values do not create or destroy value. All the value is in the goods and services we provide for each other. The medium of exchange is not very important.

I understand your allusion to open-market operations, but I don't get where you're going with it. I think you're against the gov't having such a large deficit; I am too. Even if we had a surplus, though, I'd support free-market operations with outstanding Treasuries.

The "no incentive left for us to work" because you think monetary policy is too loose is either hyperbole or melodrama. Lots of people go out and serve other people in exchange for dollars, pesos, pounds, euros, etc, and they do an amazing job and turn that money into factories, web services, and buildings that act as a space for more value creation. The fact that it now takes 20 Mexican pesos to buy a pound instead of 5, as it did 20 years ago, does not stop people from using pesos as a medium of exchange. All the value is in serving one another's needs in fair exchanges.

Paying suppliers more or raising prices simply transfers money for money between the payers and creates no additional value. The bigger problem is the money the fed is dumping into the system. Look to where that is going and you will find the answer to the wealth transfer. And who will pay for it. The producers of course because they are to only ones that pay every debt. But many of us are now just trying to produce as little as we can to get by. There is no incentive left for us to work long & hard to have it stolen by our government to pay for their abuses.

I can understand it not working and that making you raise prices and pay your suppliers more. That can be inconvenient. How is that a wealth transfer from producers to a few cronies?

If the power went out around the world tomorrow, the dollar would be as non-existent as bitcoin. Sure there would be lots of paper floating around, but its value will be demoted to TP in a SHTF scenario.
In a collapse situation, tangible assets would be the only store of value: food, guns, medical supplies, silver, gold and other precious metals, tools, petro, seeds, and a big roll of 'Federal Reserve Notes' packed in with the Charmin. Then of course, the most valuable non-tangible asset one would want is a sharp mind.

But that is not happening. There is a massive transfer of wealth to a few cronies with the low end of the food chain receiving enough to keep them quiet and most of us producers getting the squeeze. That is why I cannot accept your analogy.

The amount of goods and services in the economy will increase commensurate with the money supply, if the central banks do their job.

And if it's illegal to own, then how will you use it? The government didn't just seize it, they set its value in paper money and that rate remained unchanged for almost 40 years.

But I can bury the gold in the back yard and there are still a few ways to buy it without records to the feds.

No argument there. They're taking our dollars by taxation now.

But isn't that just a game? Interest rates have been very low for a long time and they really cannot go lower. So much money has been dumped into the system to stimulate the economy, which has not worked and sooner or later it is all going to show as inflation or they will need to remove it which will create deflation. Neither are good for growth. The accountant in me does not see how we do not end like Venezuela.

It keeps inflation low and stable and maintains interest rates that are stable and slightly higher than inflation. In short, it's pretty good about taking away the punch bowl just as the party's getting started. If you find you're able to raise prices at a fast rate, I suggest you're providing more value-- not that it's hidden inflation. If it is hidden inflation, it doesn't cost that much to update your prices in Quickbooks or on menus or whatever you use.

It preserves wealth until the government confiscates it as it did in the 30's.

They might need to be able to identify potential enemy combatants by examining the number guns and bibles you buy.
Or, determine your political leaning by what Pandora tunes you listen to.
I question the security of the transactions of Bitcoin. I'll accept that the wallets are secure, but, I think the transactions are discoverable. If they weren't, I doubt highly the US gov, or others would allow BC to continue to exist. Excluding the current suicide as evidence that they don't want it to exist.

Terrifying coincidence?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QTtXqDjN...

Want to survive? Invest in lead. Gold doesn't mean much when your government can take it from your unarmed home. Ammunition of a wide variety will become the barter currency if things start to fall apart.

If the technology has that many applications then a lot of money is at stake. Interesting info. Thank you.

I was listening to a radio program early this AM "Free Talk Live." Anyway, they had a guest on that was talking about the Bitcoin technology and its applications outside the realm of currency. One useful application included using the Blockchain as a trusted 3rd party - the idea being that it could act as the broker between buyers and sellers (such as in the case of an escrow company as it relates to real estate transactions). The implementation of the Blockchain would involve authentication of all the parties in the transaction and "release of the funds" when all funds / transfer elements were in proper order, so-to-speak. This would eliminate much of the time and cost in bringing traditional escrow companies into the mix for closing transactions - it would hurt their business, if you will. The guest then spoke on the subject of having legal entities (such as wills) encoded along with logic that represents the legal processing that takes place in the context of the administration of a will. I may be a bit off on the exact context / content of what the guest was sharing -- but what I got out of it is that the Bitcoin / Blockchain technology and its derivatives, will have a serious impact on the financial inflows of traditional institutions and practices. In any case, perhaps these sundry 'coincidental' deaths are part of a plan to either derail or slow down the implementation of these technologies.

the govt wants to know everything. every transaction you make. they still can't trace cash under certain monetary amounts and it's none of their damned business where I spend my cash.

"...easily tracked"
On a scale of 1- 10, 10 being untrackable, where to you put "easily" that allows you to sleep at night? :-)

Gold is likely a piss-poor "investment" anytime. A hedge is different.
Gold preserves wealth. And will restore commerce in a SHTF scenario aftermath.
BC can only restore commerce if computers are brought back online, and merchants can trade in them electronically.

Its all conjecture at this point but something is going on.

Many toxins are extremely difficult to find and are effective in low doses. The only way to discover them is to suspect them and hope that the evidence is recent enough to be able to discern the effects. I wonder if someone has found a really good toxin (I have only a layman's knowledge) and is methodically putting it to use.

Jan

Have to wonder. Will we ever know? Is something being hushed up? Did they see something they shouldn't have?