Well, Fellow Reckoner, it’s been something of a sad week for proponents of Bitcoin…
Would-be buyers of the fringy cyber experiment have had to watch as the price of their beloved currency shot to within (as of this writing) a few cents shy of $35 per coin. No buyer wants to see that kind of action…unless they are also an “already boughter.”
In other words, current owners and maybe-one-day sellers are sitting fairly pretty. Since the beginning of January, the bitcoin price in dollars has rocketed roughly 270%. Not a bad move for those who spent the past couple of months “hoarding.” (The correct word, let it be on the record, is “saving.”) And not bad for a currency that suffers the ignominy of existing without the indispensable aid of a central bank.
To be sure, true believers will still be scooping the controversial coins up for what they surely see today as a bargain. As we remarked in this space earlier in the week…
“Speculation about the potential value of a single coin varies widely [in the bitcoin community]. We’ve heard wide-eyed forecasts running into the many thousands of dollars. That’s why enthusiasts are scrambling to build their stash now, before the price rockets….Get rich or die mining, as they say.”
Of course, as we all know, the Bitcoin crowd is really just a of cabal of dissidents, brimming with lunatics who would trust the free market to its own devices, without the tireless vigilance and service of the government. (“But who would build the…?”) What might happen if these malcontents were to gain traction, with their silly little ideas about “liberty this” and “freedom that”?
Imagine for a moment, Fellow Reckoner, a scenario in which the value of a currency was determined by the people who actually use it, and not by some all-knowing, all-powerful demigod on a Federal Reserve board. What might happen to central banks as they exist today?
Imagine that fees and charges more or less disappeared, so that opening a digital wallet was as easy as setting up an email account, and sending and receiving payments as simple as firing off a text message. What might happen to banks and financial institutions that today shower their loyal customers in myriad penalties and fees?
Imagine that bureaucratic red tape vanished into the ether, so that anyone with a sound idea and the gumption to see it through could enter the self-regulating ecosystem of service providers without need of state license or permit? What would happen to that friendly monopoly of mega banks steadfastly committed to fragilizing the global financial system…not to mention the chubby-mitted congress of politicians diligently taking bribes from them on our behalf?
Imagine that transactions of the currency were virtually anonymous, so that individuals could conduct their daily business, buying and selling goods and services, in cryptographically-ensured security and privacy. What might happen to the lifeblood of The State when it is unable to easily invade the privacy of its citizens in order to track and steal their money for them?
No! Let us imagine no more! We must put a stop to this. We must rage against these margin-traipsing ne’er-do-wells. And we must sully the name of their wretched cyber currency initiative.
And finally, we must hope the bitcoin price falls back through the floor…so a better buyer again we can be.
Joel BowmanThe Daily Reckoning’s Editor at LargeTwitter: https://twitter.com/JoelBowman
Joel Bowman is a contributor to The Daily Reckoning. After completing his degree in media communications and journalism in his home country of Australia, Joel moved to Baltimore to join the Agora Financial team. His keen interest in travel and macroeconomics first took him to New York where he regularly reported from Wall Street, and he now writes from and lives all over the world.
I wonder how often you write about things you clearly did zero research on and have no grasp of. I could summarize this whole article in one sentence: “I don’t know what’s going on and I don’t like it!”
I encourage you to find a new line of work.
It reads to me like satire. Is Joel in favor or against the idea of BitCoin and Free Markets? I was thinking the former.
Pretty sure it was written in sarcasm.
I read it as very good satire. Its almost like hes half-sarcastically half wittingly suggesting another drop in the bitcoin at the end of the article, to once again rebuild & strengthen its legitimacy even more so(with less of a drug pushing base? which is becoming less prevalent), like it did in 2011 when people lost confidence in the coin and it plummeted and then software designers and what not seemed to come out with much more secure wallet systems, exchange systems, It all seems very developmental still, but the bitcoin ATM is what’s really exciting me right now. obviously that would/will take time to adopt/harness a reliable community around it who dispense necessary goods, but its so simple and works flawlessly, While rendering central banking obsolete at the same time. Wow!
Dammit. That’s what I get for speed reading
So everyone should boycott bitcoins because you didn’t buy any before the bubble?
Thought I would include a suggestion, at the end of any article written in a satirical vein, could you indicate the intent of the article (i.e. Above was a satire) just for those that don’t get it
Love your angle of attack. I was looking for a reason not to be a cheerleader for Bitcoin, and I’m glad you didn’t give me one. Thanks for the reassurance!
Buy LiteCoin – it’s where bitcoin was 2 years ago – nice and cheap
I totally agree with Joel. Why should anybody try to promote something as stupid as bitcoin, backed by nothing and nobody, when we have financial experts both at the Fed and in government to lead us.
Or you could just buy some Litecoin which is priced where Bitcoin was in 2010.
ignorance truely is bliss. troglodytes. lol!!
Seems Joel is comfortable with who runs the monetary systems. Bitcoin is for the Gentials of the world and for all others who have had enough with the corruption of the IMF,Bilderebergs, Rothchilds, and the Rockefellers of the world.
Like it or not, size does matter. But contrary to a popular saying, bigger is not always better. Especially when it comes to the size of the state. Marc Faber explains why a world of smaller states might function better than one dominated by excessively large "superpowers." Read on...
Pope Francis recently warned people to beware the "tyranny" of capitalism. Hmmm... Would that be true capitalism and trust in free enterprise? Or the crony capitalism we're currently saddled with? Bill Bonner explains why, even though capitalism is easily corrupted by the capitalists, that doesn't necessarily mean it is a bum creed. Read on...
Let's face it... Gold and silver have had a crappy year. That's actually putting it mildly. In reality, they're on the shortlist for "worst performing assets of the year." But as Greg Guenthner explains, that distinction doesn't plague all precious metals. And that good fortune could carry on through 2014. Read on...
2013 has been one heck of a year for stocks. But with a just a few weeks left in the year, can that momentum continue? Byron King thinks so, and sees 5 opportunities to be thankful for as 2013 comes to a close... and that could carry on into next year. Read on...
Income inequality in the U.S. has reached epic proportions. So much so that "1%" is no longer just a simple fraction. Now it's now much more than that, used as a pejorative symbol of excessive wealth and the greed of the American upper class. Marc Faber explains why this is unfair, especially as regards U.S. tax laws. Read on...