Me thinks the more universally trusted big parties start using Bitcoin and Etherium the more mainstream and stable these coins get. Tesla, Visa, Apple... why not? What other big parties are already behind those crypto coins?
Absolutely stupid idea. The reason why people have faith in national currencies is because there is a bank standing behind it, obligated to honour it; - the Federal Reserve for the US Dollar, the Bank of England for Sterling, etc. If Apple were to launch a crypto currency, or be closely associated with one, then people would believe rightly or wrongly that Apple would be liable for any losses they might incur from holding it. It could end up being be a public relations disaster for Apple, or worse, it could deliver a severe financial blow to the company.
Considering that the US Federal Reserve has presided over a greater than 98% loss in value of the dollar, is your confidence in central banks really that well placed? Additionally, it’s historically flawed. Not every national currency has a central bank. The US Federal Reserve, which is actually a private bank that the US Congress unlawfully delegated their treasury duties to in 1913, is the second central bank in US history. Most of US history there was no central bank.
I don't see how Bitcoin is in any way compatible with Apple's environmental commitments. It's a gross misuse of the planet's resources.
Cryptocurrency can be implemented without mining. Mining is one method of having decentralized transaction verification trustworthy. Apple's can be centralized or use a different verification method.
What's interesting is the market volume of Tether is higher than Bitcoin. The following article suggests it's being used to inflate the value of Bitcoin:
Coins like Tether can have unlimited supply and you can buy Bitcoin with Tether. If you owned a cryptocurrency that had an unlimited supply, there would be nothing stopping the people who made it from creating $100 trillion coins and buying up all the Bitcoins for an inflated value.
Cryptocurrencies are like IOUs. Apple already has an equivalent in the form of iTunes vouchers. Scammers use these, the following channel shows how they do it but they annoy them by redeeming the cards (40:00):
Apple could allow people to buy credits/coins for the same value in fiat currency e.g $15 = 1500 Coins. Then in a store, someone can accept 500 Coins and Apple can redeem those for fiat currency. The coins just have to be uniquely created by Apple and the transaction process has to avoid duplication. Someone can't have 500 Coins on their phone, copy them to another device and spend them twice.
I don't know if the practical value of it would be worth doing in addition to Pay. It would open them up more to scams but it does allow for easier international payments as it doesn't need the banking service to approve the international transaction and they can't add on their currency exchange fees. The amount of times most people do international transactions is going to be very small though.
The problem with analysts/investors is they just see graphs going up in different places and think everyone should follow the things with those kind of growth rates but Apple wouldn't do crypto in the same way that causes that growth. If they artificially inflated the value of their coins, they'd get shut down. Decentralized crypto can't be shut down so they can get away with doing this.
The U.S. dollar remains the base, the defacto, currency for the world.
It used to (until Richard Nixon) be backed by gold (although by that time its ties to gold were pretty shaky)
Now, it is based on the "Full Faith and Credit of the United States" -- which just piled up a $4 Trillion deficit.
Meanwhile, most of U.S. influence and power in the world is based on
1) An overwhelming military that is being funded with borrowed money
2) A financial system (including the world's default currency) that the world trusts and relies on.
So, what happens, when the world no longer cares what a dollar is worth because it has already moved on to a different currency?
Is there any difference to the U.S. if the world makes the remnimbi the defacto currency or BitCoin?
I keep waiting for the U.S. treasury and Fed to weigh in on this -- but they seem to be blissfully sitting back waiting to see what will happen
No, the US dollar is backed by agreements by multiple oil producers to only accept dollars for crude, hence the term petrodollars.
The “full faith and credit” of the US dollar is undermined by a private central bank that has presided over a 98+% loss of value of the dollar since its inception in 1913 (which violates the US Constitution which does not give Congress the power to delegate their monetary duties to an outside agency) and by a government that owes more than its entire M1 money supply.
The U.S. dollar remains the base, the defacto, currency for the world.
It used to (until Richard Nixon) be backed by gold (although by that time its ties to gold were pretty shaky)
Now, it is based on the "Full Faith and Credit of the United States" -- which just piled up a $4 Trillion deficit.
Meanwhile, most of U.S. influence and power in the world is based on
1) An overwhelming military that is being funded with borrowed money
2) A financial system (including the world's default currency) that the world trusts and relies on.
So, what happens, when the world no longer cares what a dollar is worth because it has already moved on to a different currency?
Is there any difference to the U.S. if the world makes the remnimbi the defacto currency or BitCoin?
I keep waiting for the U.S. treasury and Fed to weigh in on this -- but they seem to be blissfully sitting back waiting to see what will happen
No, the US dollar is backed by agreements by multiple oil producers to only accept dollars for crude, hence the term petrodollars.
The “full faith and credit” of the US dollar is undermined by a private central bank that has presided over a 98+% loss of value of the dollar since its inception in 1913 (which violates the US Constitution which does not give Congress the power to delegate their monetary duties to an outside agency) and by a government that owes more than its entire M1 money supply.
The U.S. dollar is indeed on shaky ground. However, most other major currencies have their own limitations and achilles’ heels that prevent them from being perceived as safer investments. So, we’re kind of doomed if we all choose to stick with Government backed currencies. Cryptocurrencies might offer a more palatable and stable solution. But governments and other vested private interests will be wary of them for a long time.
Digital currencies are likely a fad where they are not being used for illegal maneuvers. To what degree they are legit - who knows. And they are going to come under way more scrutiny as time goes on for illegal use. I think it wise to steer clear until there is a clear path on how this grift plays out.
Bitcoin Criminals Set to Spend $1 Billion on Dark Web This Year
The idea that any of these things are actually "currencies" is laughable. One of the main purposes of currency is to provide a stable value for commerce. Bitcoin and all the others are a form of commodity, not currency.
Absolutely stupid idea. The reason why people have faith in national currencies is because there is a bank standing behind it, obligated to honour it; - the Federal Reserve for the US Dollar, the Bank of England for Sterling, etc. If Apple were to launch a crypto currency, or be closely associated with one, then people would believe rightly or wrongly that Apple would be liable for any losses they might incur from holding it. It could end up being be a public relations disaster for Apple, or worse, it could deliver a severe financial blow to the company.
Considering that the US Federal Reserve has presided over a greater than 98% loss in value of the dollar, is your confidence in central banks really that well placed? Additionally, it’s historically flawed. Not every national currency has a central bank. The US Federal Reserve, which is actually a private bank that the US Congress unlawfully delegated their treasury duties to in 1913, is the second central bank in US history. Most of US history there was no central bank.
Do you have even a shred of evidence that the Federal Reserve caused "over a greater than 98% loss in value of the dollar"?
The "loss of value" is a combination of the deterioration of American industry combined with inflation -- which is primarily controlled by congress, not the Fed. The Fed can only influence banking and associated interest rates.
Are you also aware that the Fed was created as the result of a series of run away financial disasters in the U.S. and has since, smoothed out those catastrophes? Or, are you only aware that Fed stepped in to bail us out of the 2008 crash and in the process made the economies of both Obama and Chump look good (but it's making Obama look good that got today's Fed haters all riled up). But, it's not just Obama haters who hate the Fed: it's also crazy Libertarians whose ideology tells them: Let it crash and burn to the ground then just rebuild from the ashes. No thanks.
The U.S. dollar remains the base, the defacto, currency for the world.
It used to (until Richard Nixon) be backed by gold (although by that time its ties to gold were pretty shaky)
Now, it is based on the "Full Faith and Credit of the United States" -- which just piled up a $4 Trillion deficit.
Meanwhile, most of U.S. influence and power in the world is based on
1) An overwhelming military that is being funded with borrowed money
2) A financial system (including the world's default currency) that the world trusts and relies on.
So, what happens, when the world no longer cares what a dollar is worth because it has already moved on to a different currency?
Is there any difference to the U.S. if the world makes the remnimbi the defacto currency or BitCoin?
I keep waiting for the U.S. treasury and Fed to weigh in on this -- but they seem to be blissfully sitting back waiting to see what will happen
No, the US dollar is backed by agreements by multiple oil producers to only accept dollars for crude, hence the term petrodollars.
The “full faith and credit” of the US dollar is undermined by a private central bank that has presided over a 98+% loss of value of the dollar since its inception in 1913 (which violates the US Constitution which does not give Congress the power to delegate their monetary duties to an outside agency) and by a government that owes more than its entire M1 money supply.
NO, the fact that oil is transacted in dollars is not because "the US dollar is backed by agreements by multiple oil producers".
Rather, oil is transacted in dollars because the dollars is trusted as the world's base currency .
... Going to BitCoin would tear down that house that we live in. Not a good a idea.
I addressed the Fed Hating nonsense about the Fed causing a 98% loss in value of the dollar in a separate post.
Mostly both claims simply show how easily people are deceived.
The U.S. dollar remains the base, the defacto, currency for the world.
It used to (until Richard Nixon) be backed by gold (although by that time its ties to gold were pretty shaky)
Now, it is based on the "Full Faith and Credit of the United States" -- which just piled up a $4 Trillion deficit.
Meanwhile, most of U.S. influence and power in the world is based on
1) An overwhelming military that is being funded with borrowed money
2) A financial system (including the world's default currency) that the world trusts and relies on.
So, what happens, when the world no longer cares what a dollar is worth because it has already moved on to a different currency?
Is there any difference to the U.S. if the world makes the remnimbi the defacto currency or BitCoin?
I keep waiting for the U.S. treasury and Fed to weigh in on this -- but they seem to be blissfully sitting back waiting to see what will happen
No, the US dollar is backed by agreements by multiple oil producers to only accept dollars for crude, hence the term petrodollars.
The “full faith and credit” of the US dollar is undermined by a private central bank that has presided over a 98+% loss of value of the dollar since its inception in 1913 (which violates the US Constitution which does not give Congress the power to delegate their monetary duties to an outside agency) and by a government that owes more than its entire M1 money supply.
The U.S. dollar is indeed on shaky ground. However, most other major currencies have their own limitations and achilles’ heels that prevent them from being perceived as safer investments. So, we’re kind of doomed if we all choose to stick with Government backed currencies. Cryptocurrencies might offer a more palatable and stable solution. But governments and other vested private interests will be wary of them for a long time.
It might "offer a more palatable and stable solution"
Or, it might be simply jumping from the frying pan into the fire.
I want to here what a wide range of experts say about that. Mostly, so far, its only speculators and gamblers looking to make money from it rather than establishing a stable base for trade.
I don't see how Bitcoin is in any way compatible with Apple's environmental commitments. It's a gross misuse of the planet's resources.
Cryptocurrency can be implemented without mining. Mining is one method of having decentralized transaction verification trustworthy. Apple's can be centralized or use a different verification method.
What's interesting is the market volume of Tether is higher than Bitcoin. The following article suggests it's being used to inflate the value of Bitcoin:
Coins like Tether can have unlimited supply and you can buy Bitcoin with Tether. If you owned a cryptocurrency that had an unlimited supply, there would be nothing stopping the people who made it from creating $100 trillion coins and buying up all the Bitcoins for an inflated value.
Cryptocurrencies are like IOUs. Apple already has an equivalent in the form of iTunes vouchers. Scammers use these, the following channel shows how they do it but they annoy them by redeeming the cards (40:00):
Apple could allow people to buy credits/coins for the same value in fiat currency e.g $15 = 1500 Coins. Then in a store, someone can accept 500 Coins and Apple can redeem those for fiat currency. The coins just have to be uniquely created by Apple and the transaction process has to avoid duplication. Someone can't have 500 Coins on their phone, copy them to another device and spend them twice.
I don't know if the practical value of it would be worth doing in addition to Pay. It would open them up more to scams but it does allow for easier international payments as it doesn't need the banking service to approve the international transaction and they can't add on their currency exchange fees. The amount of times most people do international transactions is going to be very small though.
The problem with analysts/investors is they just see graphs going up in different places and think everyone should follow the things with those kind of growth rates but Apple wouldn't do crypto in the same way that causes that growth. If they artificially inflated the value of their coins, they'd get shut down. Decentralized crypto can't be shut down so they can get away with doing this.
Actually, the market cap of tether (29B) is nowhere near bitcoin (860B). Tether is just one of many tools used to accumulate crypto. Often, people buy tether to get into exchanges, to then buy crypto. More often, people dump crypto into tether when they want to be out of their crypto, so they can buy back in after a dip (a very good strategy btw). Tether may not be transparent, but even if Tether is eliminated, it'll have minimal impact on bitcoin, and people will just use some other stable coin (which many already do).
For an explanation of this, check out (around the 17 min mark for tether, although other bitcoin FUD is addressed here as well)
The Apple coin suggestion you're making would be much more efficient if Apple developed this using a crypto blockchain. Another, likely minor benefit, is that Apple would also be able to list their crypto on other exchanges for people who believe Apple is a good investment. This may be particularly beneficial to Apple since AAPL stock trades very 'rationally,' somehow not benefitting from the hype machine that has other tech companies trading at insane PE ratios, despite Apple's proven record of being a profit generating goliath. It would be a very egalitarian way for Apple to allow its customers to invest in them directly, rather than be at the mercy of the whims of analysts and hedge funds.
Absolutely stupid idea. The reason why people have faith in national currencies is because there is a bank standing behind it, obligated to honour it; - the Federal Reserve for the US Dollar, the Bank of England for Sterling, etc. If Apple were to launch a crypto currency, or be closely associated with one, then people would believe rightly or wrongly that Apple would be liable for any losses they might incur from holding it. It could end up being be a public relations disaster for Apple, or worse, it could deliver a severe financial blow to the company.
Considering that the US Federal Reserve has presided over a greater than 98% loss in value of the dollar, is your confidence in central banks really that well placed? Additionally, it’s historically flawed. Not every national currency has a central bank. The US Federal Reserve, which is actually a private bank that the US Congress unlawfully delegated their treasury duties to in 1913, is the second central bank in US history. Most of US history there was no central bank.
Do you have even a shred of evidence that the Federal Reserve caused "over a greater than 98% loss in value of the dollar"?
The "loss of value" is a combination of the deterioration of American industry combined with inflation -- which is primarily controlled by congress, not the Fed. The Fed can only influence banking and associated interest rates.
Are you also aware that the Fed was created as the result of a series of run away financial disasters in the U.S. and has since, smoothed out those catastrophes? Or, are you only aware that Fed stepped in to bail us out of the 2008 crash and in the process made the economies of both Obama and Chump look good (but it's making Obama look good that got today's Fed haters all riled up). But, it's not just Obama haters who hate the Fed: it's also crazy Libertarians whose ideology tells them: Let it crash and burn to the ground then just rebuild from the ashes. No thanks.
Huh? Are you actually defending the fed?? It looks like your political ideology is blinding you again. The fed 'bailed us out' of the financial crisis? You mean how they ratcheted up the deficit in order to bail out Wall Street and other corporations? I hope you can realize that by doing so, they propped up irresponsible and unsustainable business at the expense of the rest of the population, while devaluing the dollar. The rich got richer, while the rest of us are burdened with the 'tax' of inflation. This is well understood.
The same thing is happening now, thanks to the Fed, which is buying up corporate bonds like crazy, which, again, props up corporations, and the stock market, while the rest of the economy not only flounders, but is again burdened by further devaluation of the dollar through inflation. I'd suggest looking up the Cantillion Effect. Given your interest in politics, I would suggest looking into which political party is the biggest benefactor of Wall Street contributions. I'll give you a hint, the current treasury secretary has gotten millions of dollars in speaking fees alone from Wall Street in recent years. Open your eyes, my friend.
The U.S. dollar remains the base, the defacto, currency for the world.
It used to (until Richard Nixon) be backed by gold (although by that time its ties to gold were pretty shaky)
Now, it is based on the "Full Faith and Credit of the United States" -- which just piled up a $4 Trillion deficit.
Meanwhile, most of U.S. influence and power in the world is based on
1) An overwhelming military that is being funded with borrowed money
2) A financial system (including the world's default currency) that the world trusts and relies on.
So, what happens, when the world no longer cares what a dollar is worth because it has already moved on to a different currency?
Is there any difference to the U.S. if the world makes the remnimbi the defacto currency or BitCoin?
I keep waiting for the U.S. treasury and Fed to weigh in on this -- but they seem to be blissfully sitting back waiting to see what will happen
No, the US dollar is backed by agreements by multiple oil producers to only accept dollars for crude, hence the term petrodollars.
The “full faith and credit” of the US dollar is undermined by a private central bank that has presided over a 98+% loss of value of the dollar since its inception in 1913 (which violates the US Constitution which does not give Congress the power to delegate their monetary duties to an outside agency) and by a government that owes more than its entire M1 money supply.
The U.S. dollar is indeed on shaky ground. However, most other major currencies have their own limitations and achilles’ heels that prevent them from being perceived as safer investments. So, we’re kind of doomed if we all choose to stick with Government backed currencies. Cryptocurrencies might offer a more palatable and stable solution. But governments and other vested private interests will be wary of them for a long time.
It might "offer a more palatable and stable solution"
Or, it might be simply jumping from the frying pan into the fire.
I want to here what a wide range of experts say about that. Mostly, so far, its only speculators and gamblers looking to make money from it rather than establishing a stable base for trade.
It is entirely possible that a general move to cryptocurrencies might be a jump from the frying pan into the fire. And I agree, current cryptocurrency offerings leave much to be desired, particularly Bitcoin.
Nevertheless, we see a clear need and desire on the part of many for such currencies. Those seeking anonymity in order to conduct criminal activities should be stopped in their tracks. But the speed of cryptocurrency transactions across borders is a positive attribute not available to the general public with government backed currencies. And it is rent-seeking banks which profit handsomely on each transaction.
Part of me wishes that Apple would enter this space to fill the void. But it’s fraught with danger from Apple‘s perspective. Then again, to those who take the biggest risks go the spoils.
Lastly, it would be another huge value add for Apple to create its own cryptocurrency, where it can provide incentives for customers and facilitate micro transactions within the Apple ecosystem.
But why? What is the value add to Apple, and to its customers? Being cool to do isn't enough -- Apple says "No" to thousands of cool ideas.
Comments
Their job is to literately push crap like this in hope of moving the share price a few cents at a reliable time.
The coin value can also be tied to fiat currency. Tether for example is a stablecoin ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stablecoin ):
https://coinmarketcap.com
What's interesting is the market volume of Tether is higher than Bitcoin. The following article suggests it's being used to inflate the value of Bitcoin:
https://jacoboracle.medium.com/backed-by-nothing-how-tether-created-the-largest-market-bubble-and-fraud-scheme-in-history-6b9595c26442
Coins like Tether can have unlimited supply and you can buy Bitcoin with Tether. If you owned a cryptocurrency that had an unlimited supply, there would be nothing stopping the people who made it from creating $100 trillion coins and buying up all the Bitcoins for an inflated value.
Cryptocurrencies are like IOUs. Apple already has an equivalent in the form of iTunes vouchers. Scammers use these, the following channel shows how they do it but they annoy them by redeeming the cards (40:00):
Apple could allow people to buy credits/coins for the same value in fiat currency e.g $15 = 1500 Coins. Then in a store, someone can accept 500 Coins and Apple can redeem those for fiat currency. The coins just have to be uniquely created by Apple and the transaction process has to avoid duplication. Someone can't have 500 Coins on their phone, copy them to another device and spend them twice.
I don't know if the practical value of it would be worth doing in addition to Pay. It would open them up more to scams but it does allow for easier international payments as it doesn't need the banking service to approve the international transaction and they can't add on their currency exchange fees. The amount of times most people do international transactions is going to be very small though.
The problem with analysts/investors is they just see graphs going up in different places and think everyone should follow the things with those kind of growth rates but Apple wouldn't do crypto in the same way that causes that growth. If they artificially inflated the value of their coins, they'd get shut down. Decentralized crypto can't be shut down so they can get away with doing this.
The “full faith and credit” of the US dollar is undermined by a private central bank that has presided over a 98+% loss of value of the dollar since its inception in 1913 (which violates the US Constitution which does not give Congress the power to delegate their monetary duties to an outside agency) and by a government that owes more than its entire M1 money supply.
Bitcoin Criminals Set to Spend $1 Billion on Dark Web This Year
The Illicit World of Bitcoin and the Dark Web
For an explanation of this, check out
The Apple coin suggestion you're making would be much more efficient if Apple developed this using a crypto blockchain. Another, likely minor benefit, is that Apple would also be able to list their crypto on other exchanges for people who believe Apple is a good investment. This may be particularly beneficial to Apple since AAPL stock trades very 'rationally,' somehow not benefitting from the hype machine that has other tech companies trading at insane PE ratios, despite Apple's proven record of being a profit generating goliath. It would be a very egalitarian way for Apple to allow its customers to invest in them directly, rather than be at the mercy of the whims of analysts and hedge funds.
Huh? Are you actually defending the fed?? It looks like your political ideology is blinding you again. The fed 'bailed us out' of the financial crisis? You mean how they ratcheted up the deficit in order to bail out Wall Street and other corporations? I hope you can realize that by doing so, they propped up irresponsible and unsustainable business at the expense of the rest of the population, while devaluing the dollar. The rich got richer, while the rest of us are burdened with the 'tax' of inflation. This is well understood.
The same thing is happening now, thanks to the Fed, which is buying up corporate bonds like crazy, which, again, props up corporations, and the stock market, while the rest of the economy not only flounders, but is again burdened by further devaluation of the dollar through inflation. I'd suggest looking up the Cantillion Effect. Given your interest in politics, I would suggest looking into which political party is the biggest benefactor of Wall Street contributions. I'll give you a hint, the current treasury secretary has gotten millions of dollars in speaking fees alone from Wall Street in recent years. Open your eyes, my friend.
Nevertheless, we see a clear need and desire on the part of many for such currencies. Those seeking anonymity in order to conduct criminal activities should be stopped in their tracks. But the speed of cryptocurrency transactions across borders is a positive attribute not available to the general public with government backed currencies. And it is rent-seeking banks which profit handsomely on each transaction.
Part of me wishes that Apple would enter this space to fill the void. But it’s fraught with danger from Apple‘s perspective. Then again, to those who take the biggest risks go the spoils.