- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
5
Posted on 3/10/14 at 11:11 am to htownjeep
quote:
"Bitcoin isn't a currency," he said. "It is (by the way) a Ponzi game and a conduit for criminal/illegal activities. And it isn't safe given hacking of it."
You're going to make a couple peoples' heads explode with this bit.
Posted on 3/10/14 at 3:24 pm to htownjeep
Roubini isn't Austrian, so he doesn't know anything about economics.
Posted on 3/10/14 at 3:47 pm to htownjeep
Federal Reserve Notes are a ponzi scheme.
Posted on 3/10/14 at 6:48 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
Federal Reserve Notes are a ponzi scheme.
boom.
Posted on 3/10/14 at 7:00 pm to Sleeping Tiger
How much did you contribute to the Federal Reserve Note Ponzi scheme? Who got to cash out early?
Posted on 3/10/14 at 7:16 pm to Poodlebrain
He's going to say the Treasury.
Posted on 3/10/14 at 7:44 pm to brucevilanch
quote:You've obviously not followed MoSleepingGrayTigerBack's posts. (Yes, he is in his second incarnation for screen names.)
He's going to say the Treasury.
What you predicted he would say, he is not clever enough to come up with anything close to that.
Posted on 3/10/14 at 7:58 pm to LSURussian
I've seen the "federal reserve is ponzi scheme" propaganda on a couple of shady precious metal wholesaler websites.
Posted on 3/11/14 at 8:16 am to brucevilanch
What is the Treasury? Or should I ask "who is the Treasury?" since I presume the Treasury is acting for someone's personal benefit.
Posted on 3/11/14 at 9:19 am to htownjeep
Can anyone explain why the U.S. Treasury debt system is not a "Ponzi scheme". Then we can compare and contrast that to the economics of crypto currency.
Posted on 3/11/14 at 9:23 am to plex
How is it? answered by how is it not. Compelling stuff. You've swayed me.
Posted on 3/11/14 at 9:32 am to LSURussian
quote:
You've obviously not followed MoSleepingGrayTigerBack's posts. (Yes, he is in his second incarnation for screen names.)
I was wondering when I'd see him over here
Posted on 3/11/14 at 9:34 am to LNCHBOX
In all seriousness, neither one fits the classical definition of a Ponzi scheme.
Everyone here saying that a digital public account/unit of exchange is a Ponzi scheme is revealing their fundamental misunderstanding of the term.
Everyone here saying that a digital public account/unit of exchange is a Ponzi scheme is revealing their fundamental misunderstanding of the term.
Posted on 3/11/14 at 9:38 am to plex
quote:
Everyone here saying that a digital public account/unit of exchange is a Ponzi scheme is revealing their fundamental misunderstanding of the term.
I don't think anyone here is claiming that it fits the typical ponzi scheme setup, just that it is along those lines of fraud.
Certain individuals mined and are sitting on coins that they had access to prior to anyone else. They are relying on the other sheep to drive the cost up, so that they can cash out. They didn't obtain these coins by the means that everyone else has to.
Posted on 3/11/14 at 9:48 am to plex
quote:
Everyone here saying that a digital public account/unit of exchange is a Ponzi scheme is revealing their fundamental misunderstanding of the term.
No, we are not. Noted economist Nouriel Roubini is saying that. Please show us your credentials that trump his.
Posted on 3/11/14 at 10:32 am to htownjeep
quote:
I don't think anyone here is claiming that it fits the typical ponzi scheme setup, just that it is along those lines of fraud.
Certain individuals mined and are sitting on coins that they had access to prior to anyone else. They are relying on the other sheep to drive the cost up, so that they can cash out. They didn't obtain these coins by the means that everyone else has to.
That's reasonable. I agree with all but the last couple sentences of this.
quote:
No, we are not. Noted economist Nouriel Roubini is saying that. Please show us your credentials that trump his.
First of all, I realize that Roubini has had an illustrious career with many of the world's largest financial institutions. That said, this is a case of him posting content on twitter that the media will carry. He's just trying to drum up media attention.
Additionally, I'm not sure what credentials are required of a person to understand a Ponzi scheme. One of his twitter posts that you're referencing proves that he doesn't understand Ponzi schemes, and the other post is totally irrelevant to the discussion.
Posting from phone. Sorry for the rambling and any autocorrect mistakes.
Posted on 3/11/14 at 10:48 am to plex
quote:
One of his twitter posts that you're referencing proves that he doesn't understand Ponzi schemes
More idiots?
Posted on 3/11/14 at 10:58 am to plex
quote:What was your previous screen name on TigerDroppings?
plex
Posted on 3/11/14 at 11:10 am to Lsut81
quote:I'm not ready to call Bitcoins a Ponzi scheme. I view Bitcoins as collectible items that have no value except what other collectors are willing to pay for them. As such, the early collectors were motivated to increase the number of collectors to drive up demand and correspondingly the price of Bitcoins. The number of new collectors was increasing very slowly until a criminal element adopted it as a medium of exchange on a semi-organized black market. Transactions on the black market became the predominant use of Bitcoins. The perceived secrecy of Bitcoins created by criminal use and unpopular monetary policies by some governments made Bitcoins attractive to those seeking to avoid the effects of those policies created an even larger pool of collectors.
I don't think anyone here is claiming that it fits the typical ponzi scheme setup, just that it is along those lines of fraud.
The fact that the early collectors benefitted from the introduction of the criminal element has caused observers to conclude the early collectors had bad intent. I'm not sure their intent was bad. I believe the introduction of the criminal element was an unintended consequence that was simply their good fortune.
It is sort of ironic that the criminal class that was instrumental to the rise in demand for Bitcoins is also responsible for suppressing demand due to their exploiting unwary collectors.
Page 1 of 9
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News