The Biggest Scam In The History Of Mankind

[freetoroam]

If I found a gold bar how can it make me rich? If I am surrounded by so many people how can this gold bar make me any money? How can this make me go beyond someone in riches. Money theirfore has to be illusional and created for evil purposes.

evil purposes? jeeze, I used some money to buy some milk the other day, tell me whats evil about that?

[Almagest]

evil purposes? jeeze, I used some money to buy some milk the other day, tell me whats evil about that?

Cow slavery was used to produce it.

[freetoroam]

Cow slavery was used to produce it.

Cow slavery to produce goats milk? tell me more.

[Phaeton80]

Money is a tool, and like any tool, it can be used for 'good' - or 'evil'.

This thread is not about money being evil, or cow slavery.

Please, keep it on topic.

[Space Commander Travis]

Money is a tool to make bartering simpler. It eliminates finding someone that wants to directly exchange what I need for what they need.

That's the whole purpose of what it's for, or what it should be for. Where it become not sensible is surely the way that entire economies are set up as industries with the sole aim of generating it. Then surely it has just the opposite effect to it being useful as a means of exchange, since it can only reduce its value to the point of meaninglessness.

[Space Commander Travis]

I wonder, could the UN propose a ban on GIFs as well as Lolpics, which I've recommended previously, in their next general meeting? Or the NWO or whoever is in charge.

[Eluus]

One word, Bitcoin.

[Phaeton80]

You wish.

[david icke is right]

That's easy; the gold bar may or may not make you rich based on what people are willing at that point in time to pay for gold. The idea of gold as money is now only that it is a commodity. I see nothing evil in all that.

How can gold be money when the private banks no longer use gold? Well unless you're using it of course and so you must be the only one.

[Eluus]

Money, should represent 'real' intrinsical value, resources, commodities like gold and silver. Not including Human resources, and certainly not including debt.

Intrinsic Value is philosophical BS. Nothing has "intrinsic value". All assets are valued by how much other people are willing to pay for it.

[DONTEATUS]

WEll Its no problem then ! The only scam is the Most people dont research there own security and Future well being !

[calaf]

I thought the biggest scandal was the hegemonistic plans of shape shifting reptilian lackeys of the Lemurian imperialists planning to pollute our glaciers with the blood of the baby tuna.

You too?

[Phaeton80]

[/background][/size][/font][/color]

Intrinsic Value is philosophical BS. Nothing has "intrinsic value". All assets are valued by how much other people are willing to pay for it.

Actual Value

The actual value of a commodity is a measure that is related to the cost that it takes to produce it and sell it for a profit. For example, when a product is manufactured and sold without any brand names or promises, the actual value is the amount that it would go for in the open market. The actual value is what the product is actually worth without any expectations from the customer or the seller.

Perceived Value

The perceived value is very different from the actual value of a product / commodity. The perceived value is what a customer believes the product is worth. This perception is formed by the opinions of the market and by the benefits that the customer expects to receive if he makes a purchase. The product may be sold for much more than what it cost to manufacture because of the perception of the customer. In some cases, the perception of the value may be less than what the actual value of the product is.

Intrinsic Value: The market value of the constituent metal within a coin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrinsic_value_%28numismatics%29

Lets completely ignore the main issue here and bicker about terminology why not..

[Eluus]

Replying to the parts that are relevant.

Intrinsic Value: The market value of the constituent metal within a coin.

http://en.wikipedia....e_(numismatics)

I'm going to use Gold as an example since you quoted from numismatics.

Why do you think Gold had little to no value to Native Americans?

When there is no other person willing to pay for your gold, it's not worth more than a brick. Value is determined by supply and demand(i.e. how much another person is willing to pay for it). The rest is BS.

Lets completely ignore the main issue here and bicker about terminology why not..

I agree the current financial system is a ponzi scheme, no doubt.

Enter Bitcoin. All you need is an Internet connection. No central banks no authority no slavery thourgh endless money printing.

[Phaeton80]

Lets just leave the semantic / theoretical discussion, I think you know very well what was meant. Gold and silver have always had a relative high value throughout the history of Western society, this is not going to change any time soon.

Bills of printed paper, not so much.

With your mention of Bitcoin, you mean this concept is going to be the next form of 'money', and at that time would be an even larger scam?

Bitcoin itself - at this moment - pales in comparison to the victims resulting from a fall of the dollar / discarding of the petrodollar.

[Eluus]

Lets just leave the semantic / theoretical discussion, I think you know very well what was meant. Gold and silver have always had a relative high value throughout the history of Western society, this is not going to change any time soon.

Bills of printed paper, not so much.

With your mention of Bitcoin, you mean this concept is going to be the next form of 'money', and at that time would be an even larger scam?

Bitcoin itself - at this moment - pales in comparison to the victims resulting from a fall of the dollar / discarding of the petrodollar.

Bitcoin has an open source code. If there was a scam it would be easily detected in Bitcoin's early stages.

If you take the time to learn how Bitcoin works you'll see that Bitcoin is a viable solution. Especially if one is looking for protection when the petrodollar falls. Wouldn't hurt to hold some physical Gold as well.

[Phaeton80]

That would be one of the most plausible scenario's to get cash out of circulation. Which, in my opinion, would be a bad thing.

We should revert to the original design. The way money was meant to be. Tangible, valuable, exchangable and durable.

[Eluus]

That would be one of the most plausible scenario's to get cash out of circulation. Which, in my opinion, would be a bad thing.

We should revert to the original design. The way money was meant to be. Tangible, valuable, exchangable and durable.

Bitcoin has all that properties except being tangible. Why does it have to be tangible though?

[freetoroam]

I wonder, could the UN propose a ban on GIFs as well as Lolpics, which I've recommended previously, in their next general meeting? Or the NWO or whoever is in charge.

General meeting? they have them on here?

Tell me when the next one is and I will be there.........waiting for you to put your hand up:

[Dark_Grey]

Bitcoin has all that properties except being tangible. Why does it have to be tangible though?

This is true. Cash is slowly becoming obsolete as most transactions are done digitally. On Bitcoin, even if it fails (which I suspect it will,) it's the concept that is valuable. Bitcoin shows there's a demand, however small, for a new currency. Something else will come along to replace it, and that something might make just a little more headway. On a long enough timeline, this whole financial system will need to be revamped or replaced altogether. Even if that doesn't happen, eventually we will replace oil with a cheaper, cleaner substitute. The petrodollar is doomed, one way or another.

[Phaeton80]

Bitcoin has all that properties except being tangible. Why does it have to be tangible though?

It needs to be a physical substance to be able to exercise a certain level of control over it as an individual, independent of third parties. When money ceases to be tangible, it is open for centralised control. Both factors, intangibility and centralised control, in turn opens the 'new system' up for excessive levels of manipulation. Value in relation to available quantity would be volatile, inflation and deflation of the market would be even easier to do given money is nothing more than binary code. All checks and balances, which would be present in a gold / silver coin system, are completely absent . Our / the US's present system approaches that situation. A Bitcoin- like system would be the epitaph on the grave of what money is supposed to be. It would make money a 'one stop shop' control/ manipulation mechanism, instead of a mere vehicle to facilitate individual bartering, wealth and prosperity.

This in addtition ofcourse - and you wont like this Im afraid - to the fact intangible assets do not hold any 'physical' value, because it simply does not exist. One would also be unable to use these non existent monetary assets outside of 'the system'.

The mentioned level of control (decentralised physical ownership) over monetary assets is essential for the freedom and sovereignty of the individual citizen. This is why it is being undermined, it would not be illogical to expect the next financial collapse would act as a catalyst to massage people into wanting, even demanding a one world valuta - which will be or swiftly evolve into a digital one. To which Bitcoin would be a very interesting trial, prototype.

[Eluus]

It needs to be a physical substance to be able to exercise a certain level of control over it as an individual, independent of third parties. When money ceases to be tangible, it is open for centralised control. Both factors, intangibility and centralised control, in turn opens the 'new system' up for excessive levels of manipulation. Value in relation to available quantity would be volatile, inflation and deflation of the market would be even easier to do given money is nothing more than binary code. All checks and balances, which would be present in a gold / silver coin system, are completely absent . Our / the US's present system approaches that situation. A Bitcoin- like system would be the epitaph on the grave of what money is supposed to be. It would make money a 'one stop shop' control/ manipulation mechanism, instead of a mere vehicle to facilitate individual bartering, wealth and prosperity.

Couldn't be more wrong.

Currency with Finite Supply

Bitcoins are created each time a user discovers a new block. The rate of block creation is approximately constant over time: 6 per hour. The number of Bitcoins generated per block is set to decrease geometrically, with a 50% reduction every 4 years. The result is that the number of Bitcoins in existence will never exceed 21 million^[1]. This algorithm was chosen because it approximates the rate at which commodities like gold are mined. Users who use their computers to perform calculations to try and discover a block are thus called Miners.

https://en.bitcoin.i...Currency_Supply

However the supply of a physical substance i.e. Gold or Silver could increase in many ways. A rich new mine on Earth could be discovered, a gold rich asteroid could hit the Earth or technology may allow us to mine in space in the future.

You can't limit the supply of a physical asset like you can with Bitcoin. Also, you hold a lot more control with your Bitcoin wallet than you can with any physical substance or fiat money. Recently the owner of the leading online black market Silk Road (aka. the eBay for drugs) was captured by FBI. The Feds are unable to hack into the owner's (DPR) walled which contains 600,000 Bitcoins (115 million $ as of now). http://www.extremetech.com/computing/168139-fbi-unable-to-seize-600000-bitcoins-from-silk-road-operator

This in addtition ofcourse - and you wont like this Im afraid - to the fact intangible assets do not hold any 'physical' value, because it simply does not exist. One would also be unable to use these non existent monetary assets outside of 'the system'.

Your physical substances (or any asset for that matter), wouldn't hold any value if the market didn't think it was valuable.

It's not up to me or you liking it or not - Market already decided Bitcoins hold value (1 BTC = 200 US$ as of now) and this is what matters really.

The mentioned level of control (decentralised physical ownership) over monetary assets is essential for the freedom and sovereignty of the individual citizen. This is why it is being undermined, it would not be illogical to expect the next financial collapse would act as a catalyst to massage people into wanting, even demanding a one world valuta - which will be or swiftly evolve into a digital one. To which Bitcoin would be a very interesting trial, prototype.

Agreed. However all your concerns so far including the above are well addressed by Bitcoin.

Please check https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Myths

Edited October 23, 2013 by Eluus

[Phaeton80]

"Couldnt be more wrong.." Thats a very erm.. lets use 'confident', definite conclusion.

Some of the logic you seem to be defending / adhering to:

- a piece of code cannot be hacked, rehashed or is somehow not subject to any given form of digital mal- use / manipulation all code is subject to (in addition; 'offensive hacking techniques do not precede the defensive, reactive variant');

- its structurally available and doesnt 'exist' by virtue of internet access or availability of an electric grid;

- an asset that does not exist is preferable over an asset that does;

- a cashless society would be a good thing;

- a binary product dependent on the system it exists in - forcing you to use and be part of such a system - is superior to a tangible asset which is independent of that same / any system.

Your point about the loss of value of tangible commodities when 'the market' doesnt see it as valuable goes for all commodities, including Bitcoin. A non argument. The point is, especially in the case of a system like Bitcoin,

there is nothing to back up the perceived value. With tangible commodities, there is. Especially with gold, silver and other precious metals.

Look, you just put your 'money' in virtual assets, Ill put mine on tangible assets like physical gold, silver and other - real - commodities. If you want to passionately promote Bitcoin like you are doing here, why not start a threat?

[Eluus]

"Couldnt be more wrong.." Thats a very erm.. lets use 'confident', definite conclusion.

Some of the logic you seem to be defending / adhering to:

- a piece of code cannot be hacked, rehashed or is somehow not subject to any given form of digital mal- use / manipulation all code is subject to (in addition; 'offensive hacking techniques do not precede the defensive, reactive variant');

Fair enough. I'll admit there is a chance that it could be hacked in the future, if not possible with today's methods because it didn't get hacked so far. But yeah there is an odd chance that it could be hacked. However hacking Bitcoin as a lot harder than to hack the payment/banking systems in the world. You see even the FBI can't hack a single Bitcoin wallet. It would take them trillions of years just to get a %1 possibility to correctly guess the Key to the wallet if they used all the computing power in the world today.

- its structurally available and doesnt 'exist' by virtue of internet access or availability of an electric grid;

- an asset that does not exist is preferable over an asset that does;

- a cashless society would be a good thing;

- a binary product dependent on the system it exists in - forcing you to use and be part of such a system - is superior to a tangible asset which is independent of that same / any system.

- Without Internet access/electricity you can't spend your Bitcoins however once the electricity and Internet access is available again then you'll still have your Bitcoins.

- Just because something is not physical doesn't mean it doesn't "exist". Silk Road owner still owns his Bitcoins because of this property of Bitcoin. Had he stored his wealth in Gold or Silver, FBI would've already spent all of it.

- There is nothing you can't do with Bitcoin that you can do with cash (given that there's electricity and Internet)

- Yes it is in many ways superior if you take the time to learn how it works

Your point about the loss of value of tangible commodities when 'the market' doesnt see it as valuable goes for all commodities, including Bitcoin. A non argument. The point is, especially in the case of a system like Bitcoin,

there is nothing to back up the perceived value. With tangible commodities, there is. Especially with gold, silver and other precious metals.

Yes exactly. However, the non argument is yours. There is no other value other than the market value to back any commodity, tangible or not. You keep missing the point and argue that there is something other than the market that backs up the value of precious metals when there is not.

Look, you just put your 'money' in virtual assets, Ill put mine on tangible assets like physical gold, silver and other - real - commodities. If you want to passionately promote Bitcoin like you are doing here, why not start a threat?

I like the video you posted and I absolutely agree with it. I don't see what else can be said about the situation without unnecessarily complicating it.

I love the idea and the design of Bitcoin but the reason I am talking about it here is because I think Bitcoin is a viable solution to this FED ponzi scheme. However if you feel I am derailing the thread we can go on in private and I won't post about Bitcoin any further. I have already made my point anyway.

[Phaeton80]

Any private key can be hacked, period. Only a matter of time. This will be sooner rather than later, I would wager.

https://bitcointalk....?topic=256421.0

Bitcoins can, and will be tracked / traced.

Bitcoins represent the exact system we have all been warned about. Cashless, digital and global. The pitfalls are evident. You seem to agree with the obvious risks for the sovereignty of the individual - seeing the game being played to engineer people into calling for a global (digital) currency - yet turn around and passionately defend the BC concept. This seems illogical to me.

Have you realized the hype that is involved with the Bitcoin system? The high levels of promotion being done in favor of it. The theatrical qualities of it all.. Bankers supposedly agaist BC, grassroots movements in favor.

Try to find one negative article on BCs using, say, google; I think youll find it quite a feat. The first three pages entail very little lest content like 'Bitcoin Myths debunked', etc.

The most logical viable solution against the FED ponzi scheme is avid prosecution of those that have created the present situation and revert back to the original design.

Simply roll back the changes made by this criminal element that has made it possible for them to manifest their criminal activities and install safeguards so it will not happen again.

What would (in my opinion) be illogical, and very unwise to do, is to accept a potentially worse system just to get rid of the undesirable situation that has been created by those who coincidentally actually want us to go cashless and digital.

This is the usual M.O.; to create a situation that would make the public react in such a way as to accept a desired change. Thesis, antithesis, synthesis. Perception management, social engineering, Im sure youre familiar with this.

Would you at least agree with that notion, that those who are the creators of this present ponzi scheme would want and are striving for a cashless, digital global currency?

Edited October 23, 2013 by Phaeton80