The American Debt Ceiling

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
1

In April or May 2015 the American government will once again reach its debt ceiling. In 2013 the government was closed down for three months when it hit the debt ceiling. Everything I read or hear about the up coming debt ceiling seems to point in the direction of doom!

According to the CIAs Prophecy Project (it predicted the 2008 crash) America could be heading for a 25 year depression. Such an event would of course have a ripple effect to say the least.

Does the American government have a plan. If they do, is it a plan the world can live with. Radicals think this event may be used to start a new world order, with one currency. I do not however believe the ultra rich are going stand by and watch all their stolen money devalue. The big question is just how ugly is it going to get.

2

I’ve been watching the Fed’s talking points on a potential interest rate increase. That is the crucial point IMO, not the date it is implemented, but the date on which they set a date and share it with the media. Yellen said “a few more cycles” last time she spoke on the issue. That puts us into Q2 2015.

If the markets remain calm, we may be OK. I’m personally betting on a crash, but since I’m not a retiree living on interest and dividends, it won’t matter to me much.

The thing that scares me is how many people are convinced the economy is about to take off. I was talking to my dad over Xmas and he was parroting some Kiplinger report about how without having to pay for wars everything is going to go up. No mention at all of printed money, the bond market, and how the US is going to be able to meet it’s obligations.

Also, that +5% GDP figure people are applauding is due to mainly Obamacare, which will turn out to be a net drain on the economy.

Scary times for sure, and it demonstrates the short sightedness of Congress, who could have dealt with this issue a long time ago but instead they wait until it may blow up catastrophically. This sets me into rage mode every time I think of it. China is planning their country on 30 year cycles, while our “leaders” are looking 2-4 years ahead at most. It’s one of the benefits of “tyrannical” government, which works the best when you have competent leadership.

I also think they didn’t prosecute any bankers as that ripple could potentially have triggered another meltdown with no other options remaining to deal with it outside of IMF SDR printing. That would kill the EU the US and leave our “enemies” with no other option but to implement a new financial system under the control of other interests, which I also believe is what we won in the Cold War.

3

[quote]theuofh wrote:
our “leaders” are looking 2-4 years ahead at most. [/quote]

looking ahead at how to get re-elected, not how to help the citizens of the country they work for, or do we work for them…?

4

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]theuofh wrote:
our “leaders” are looking 2-4 years ahead at most. [/quote]

looking ahead at how to get re-elected, not how to help the citizens of the country they work for, or do we work for them…? [/quote]

Think of them as appointed Managers. They work for the same people as we do.

5

Interest rates need to go up. There will be some growing pains associated with that process, but the longer we are on this QE bullshit, the bigger the potential crisis gets. When rates go up, people will begin to see that the “recovery” has all been the FED propping up the market.

6

Project Prophecy Safe Havens:

7

[quote]streamline wrote:
Does the American government have a plan.[/quote]
Print, baby, print!

[quote]
Radicals think this event may be used to start a new world order, with one currency. I do not however believe the ultra rich are going stand by and watch all their stolen money devalue. The big question is just how ugly is it going to get.[/quote]

A One-World currency will never happen. There are already people working on technological solutions to the fiat currency problem.

Have hope.

8

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

A One-World currency will never happen. There are already people working on technological solutions to the fiat currency problem.

[/quote]

Yeah, like what, Bitcoin?

As long as the world uses currency based on nothing anyway, why the fuck not?

9

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

A One-World currency will never happen. There are already people working on technological solutions to the fiat currency problem.

[/quote]

Yeah, like what, Bitcoin?

As long as the world uses currency based on nothing anyway, why the fuck not?[/quote]

What do you propose? Bitcoin isn’t all that different from gold in theory, despite some practical limitations.

10

[quote]theuofh wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

A One-World currency will never happen. There are already people working on technological solutions to the fiat currency problem.

[/quote]

Yeah, like what, Bitcoin?

As long as the world uses currency based on nothing anyway, why the fuck not?[/quote]

What do you propose? Bitcoin isn’t all that different from gold in theory, despite some practical limitations.
[/quote]

Yes, Bitcoin is a lot like gold, except that gold is a finite, tangible commodity, whereas Bitcoin is neither finite, tangible, nor a commodity.

EDIT: actually, I don’t know enough about Bitcoin to have a fully-formed opinion about it. But it seems that any medium of exchange that both buyer and seller agree to use should be allowed in the transaction, whether it be gold, silver, crude oil, pork bellies, plutonium, emeralds or Bitcoins. As opposed to “fiat currency”, which would have no value whatsoever without a government insisting that it does, or “legal tender” which a seller must by law accept in a transaction as payment for a debt, though it is indeed worthless paper.

A story is told of the Aztecs who were hoodwinked by the Spanish conquistadores. It became known that the Aztecs were fascinated the Spaniards’ mirrors, so the Spanish promptly returned to their ships, found every last mirror they could lay hands on, and smashed them to bits, exchanging the shards of shiny glass for valuable commodities like gold and silver and corn and meat.

Pretty silly, right? I mean, who would exchange their wealth for worthless shards of broken glass?

11

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

A One-World currency will never happen. There are already people working on technological solutions to the fiat currency problem.

[/quote]

Yeah, like what, Bitcoin?

As long as the world uses currency based on nothing anyway, why the fuck not?[/quote]

I am not sure if that was a rhetorical question but Bitcoin is not “based on nothing”. Bitcoin sits on top of the “blockchain” which is a distributed network that cryptographically ensures ownership and thus prevents double spending. The blockchain is what gives Bitcoin its value.

Bitcoin may not be the end-all, be-all but the technology is a game changer. There are already copy-cats trying to compete with it.

I don’t think people would ever accept the idea of one world currency as long as it is subject to manipulation - if this were not the case they would not hedge with precious metals, etc. The problem of the past though is how to compete with fiat in such a way as to make central banking irrelevant. This is the breakthrough of the blockchain and cryptographically ensured networks in general.

12

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]theuofh wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

A One-World currency will never happen. There are already people working on technological solutions to the fiat currency problem.

[/quote]

Yeah, like what, Bitcoin?

As long as the world uses currency based on nothing anyway, why the fuck not?[/quote]

What do you propose? Bitcoin isn’t all that different from gold in theory, despite some practical limitations.
[/quote]

Yes, Bitcoin is a lot like gold, except that gold is a finite, tangible commodity, whereas Bitcoin is neither finite, tangible, nor a commodity.
[/quote]

Bitcoin is finite. There will only ever exist 21 million BTC. These BTC can be further divided 100,000,000 times - a unit known as 1 Satoshi.

Bitcoin is “mined” which is the term given to those running a bitcoin node with impossible to break cryptography. The nodes that solve the hash first are awarded bitcoin and that is how new bitcoin comes into circulation. When 21 million bitcoin have been mined the “miners” will be awarded transaction fees instead of creating new coins.

The mining algorithm copies a theoretical “gold supply” curve where the quantity mined diminishes as time passes until it has all been mined. All coins will be minded by 2140.

13

Your perception of bitcoin is off, it is finite and a commodity, however not as tangible.

Bitcoins are just a series of numbers with certain mathematical properties. For all practical purposes there are a finite amount of them, and like gold they must be mined. Mining bitcoins is running an algorithm to find the series of numbers that has the required properties. Just like with gold after you’ve gotten all the easy stuff you need more investment and technology to extract the harder stuff. For bitcoins this is faster computers and not mining equipment.

You still have inflation with either, and you’d probaby have more inflation with gold than bitcoins given the rate at which each can be produced.

You were right in that bitcoins are not tangible and two people could know the same code i.e. bitcoin and you’d need a registrar to determine who owns that bitcoin. This certainly leads to some issues. However it has some benefits, one being anonymity can be more easily retained in a bitcoin transaction as opposed to having physically trade tangibles.

14

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

A One-World currency will never happen. There are already people working on technological solutions to the fiat currency problem.

[/quote]

Yeah, like what, Bitcoin?

As long as the world uses currency based on nothing anyway, why the fuck not?[/quote]

I am not sure if that was a rhetorical question but Bitcoin is not “based on nothing”. Bitcoin sits on top of the “blockchain” which is a distributed network that cryptographically ensures ownership and thus prevents double spending. The blockchain is what gives Bitcoin its value.

Bitcoin may not be the end-all, be-all but the technology is a game changer. There are already copy-cats trying to compete with it.

I don’t think people would ever accept the idea of one world currency as long as it is subject to manipulation - if this were not the case they would not hedge with precious metals, etc. The problem of the past though is how to compete with fiat in such a way as to make central banking irrelevant. This is the breakthrough of the blockchain and cryptographically ensured networks in general.[/quote]

Okay, I admitted my incomplete knowledge of the Bitcoin paradigm a couple posts after that one, but I still fail to see how an electronic cipher…even an encrypted electronic cipher that has been encrypted to ensure that nobody can own it or spend it but you, is “valuable”, except inasmuch as somebody else believes that it is. As long as I can find someone willing to believe that my electronic ciphers stored on an encrypted computer network are worth a pound of beef or a bushel of beans, great.

But if the network goes down…

Nah, I think I’ll stick to gold and silver and ammunition and chocolate and cigarettes and condoms and whiskey and toilet paper. So much simpler. :slight_smile:

15

[quote]theuofh wrote:
You still have inflation with either, and you’d probaby have more inflation with gold than bitcoins given the rate at which each can be produced.

You were right in that bitcoins are not tangible and two people could know the same code i.e. bitcoin and you’d need a registrar to determine who owns that bitcoin. This certainly leads to some issues. However it has some benefits, one being anonymity can be more easily retained in a bitcoin transaction as opposed to having physically trade tangibles. [/quote]

Bitcoin is actually deflationary with time because it is entirely predictable how much will come into existence and when.

The blockchain ensures who owns what and it is not entirely anonymous. It is possible to trace transactions and link them to other wallets.

The problem of two people claiming to own some BTC is mitigated by the fact only one person can spend it - though I suspect with such a large number set it would be very hard to guess which wallets had money and which do not. It’s something on the order of 10^256 permutations.

16

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

Bitcoin is actually deflationary with time because it is entirely predictable how much will come into existence and when.

[/quote]

Right you’d have more inflation with gold than BTC.

Also, if you think BTC growth is entirely predictable, you should go work for the Fed. You’d fit right in.

17

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

A One-World currency will never happen. There are already people working on technological solutions to the fiat currency problem.

[/quote]

Yeah, like what, Bitcoin?

As long as the world uses currency based on nothing anyway, why the fuck not?[/quote]

I am not sure if that was a rhetorical question but Bitcoin is not “based on nothing”. Bitcoin sits on top of the “blockchain” which is a distributed network that cryptographically ensures ownership and thus prevents double spending. The blockchain is what gives Bitcoin its value.

Bitcoin may not be the end-all, be-all but the technology is a game changer. There are already copy-cats trying to compete with it.

I don’t think people would ever accept the idea of one world currency as long as it is subject to manipulation - if this were not the case they would not hedge with precious metals, etc. The problem of the past though is how to compete with fiat in such a way as to make central banking irrelevant. This is the breakthrough of the blockchain and cryptographically ensured networks in general.[/quote]

Okay, I admitted my incomplete knowledge of the Bitcoin paradigm a couple posts after that one, but I still fail to see how an electronic cipher…even an encrypted electronic cipher that has been encrypted to ensure that nobody can own it or spend it but you, is “valuable”, except inasmuch as somebody else believes that it is. As long as I can find someone willing to believe that my electronic ciphers stored on an encrypted computer network are worth a pound of beef or a bushel of beans, great.

But if the network goes down…

Nah, I think I’ll stick to gold and silver and ammunition and chocolate and cigarettes and condoms and whiskey and toilet paper. So much simpler. :slight_smile:
[/quote]

You’re correct to hedge with gold but try taking it with you when you have to flee the Fatherland.

The genius of the blockchain is that it is distributed and therefore everyone who runs a node is aware of who owns what and what was spent when. Think of it as an encrypted ledger being shared between nodes. This means a person with mal-intent cannot forge bitcoins without the other nodes being aware of it. It could be possible to fake transactions but only if a node has greater than 50% processing power in the network.

Like the internet in general, bitcoin gets its integrity from the fact that not a single person owns it. Taking the network down would require taking down every single node.

18

[quote]theuofh wrote:
Also, if you think BTC growth is entirely predictable, you should go work for the Fed. You’d fit right in.
[/quote]

The quantity is predictable.

Ironically, I work for a bank.

edited

19

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]theuofh wrote:
Also, if you think BTC growth is entirely predictable, you should go work for the Fed. You’d fit right in.
[/quote]

The quantity is predictable.

https://blockchain.info/charts/total-bitcoins[/quote]

The chart showed “the historical total number of bitcoins which have been mined”

20

Interesting take on bitcoin