- Causation doesn’t equal correlation. Someone yesterday posted a link to some private blockchain toolkit. I could use it to create a private currency, trade it with my family members and then a year later claim this or that.
- Inflation is increase in the supply of a currency. Prices can remain unchanged and there still can be inflation.
There is a distinction between inflation in terms of increasing the money supply and inflation in terms of buying power. But I’m a total amateur when it comes to economics, so it’s only my take on inflation when looking at it from a practical point of view.
on the other hand inflation takes from the rich … proportionally to their wealth … so it is “a fair tax” …robin hood of the taxes 
… it just doesn’t give back something to the poor ones 
- It´s not true that it is intransparent. Bitcoin´s money supply inflation is much more transparent than most tax systems (highly complex, many exclusions/subventions)
- Inflation is very different to taxing, because it´s a redistribution from old hoarders to new earners. In the current monetary system the issuer are banks and there is not way to become a new owner for Joes and Janes. In this case, your point absolutely makes sense. However in the case of a algorithmic inflation it is plainly a discentive to store value - and that can be considered positive. As I said, depending on the intent that can be considered counter-productive, but to me money is a tool and not a good, so productive use is more important to me than enabling hoarding.
- I think that is a one-sided perspective. Yes, inflation is redistribution - definitely. However, Money itself is redistribution: The value of money is created by (the work of) everyone(!) who uses and accepts a particular currency. If you purchase a currency and hide it under your bed it is not the money that is working for you: the people who - unlike you - keep using it are doing the work for you. Providing liquidity is part of the economic mechanisms that create value and just storing means profiting from the work while having no expenses. Demurrage is one approach to deal with that.
1 Like
Well…it gives back to the one´s who are actively engaged in earning the currency and takes from those who hoard, isn´t it? It´s not about being rich - it´s about lazily piling up tokens to store value while others actively contribute to the network/financial infrastructure.
1 Like
haha I was slightly afraid I’d open pandoras box with this statement 
hmhmmmm - i’ll have to think about it a little bit (and talk to my lawyer) before i say anything more
1 Like
Some good points there.
I would argue that bitcoin is an emerging currency without historic precedent and by sheer luck (or maybe inspired by gold) it’s supply rises slowly and probably (the key point) slower than the value of goods and services traded in it.
It’s true even bitcoin is now inflationary. I don’t think it would matter if it’s inflation rate was slower (0%). But BTC won’t stay inflationary and considering it’s the first significant virtual currency it’s pretty well designed.
True, but everlasting inflation neither have to be a problem. I mean the point is, there can be both: currencies with demurrage and currencies where the maximum number is fixed. We don’t have to strive for the one perfect solution.
One could also imagine a mechanism by which farmers could vote publicly on inflation (or not). To me that would be the smoothest solution since general disagreement could spare the hassle of forking…
1 Like
Bitcoin isn’t inflationary in the same way that fiat is. The Bitcoin network is minting a finite amount of currency and the total (final) amount is already priced in by investors & supporters. Fiat is unlimited and there is no means for the people who hold it to determine it’s value as it’s being constantly manipulated.
NOOOOO!!! Please, never voting…people will vote themselves anything if that’s allowed. Only a fixed algorithm can be trusted. Let the best experts figure this out and lock it in … if it fails, the experts can fork and start over - this is honest evolution. I sincerely hope we can avoid much of the politics that bitcoin is already suffering through.
8 Likes
Let me rephrase that:
NOOOOO!!! Please, never free will…people will do anything if that’s allowed. Only a fixed algorithm can be trusted.
You fail to realise that people can an will vote without a given mechanism (by contributing to the system or contributing to a fork) - the difference is that this solution is much less dynamic - that’s it
No, I don’t fail to realize that at all – a fork is my preferred mechanism. Diversity is preferable over coerced unity. Voting is a form of minority oppression - this creates dissension, anger malcontent…all the lovelies we have today with our ancient form of government.
2 Likes
Right…if you need a majority to make changes, then this is obviously a form of minority oppression. Totally makes sense.
You do realize the difference between representational and direct democracy, don´t you?
P.S.: My rephrasing of your logic is accurate. Apparently you don´t like free will either. Let the computer decide…
This has slid off topic. You know what to do! 
1 Like
Free will IS off topic, but discussing built in inflation regulated by votes?
Check what this guys did at Xaurum, they have profitable inflation, a win - win situation. [🚀][ANN][Aurum Project] 💠 Xᴀᴜʀᴜᴍ 💠 ▲1 XAUR = 0.000426686186 g gold▲ Because creation of new safe coins are bad for everyone. Who would hold btc if just one man had the power to increase the maximum number to 100 mil
1 Like
Dividing safec’s beyond 8 decimal places ? Most people find it annoying or hardly can handle a handful of decimal places ; I’d say let’s keep it simple and most useful and convenient .
Deflation will keep the initial period of adoption & implementation interesting enough for those who believe in the project , and as demand rises and the value increases , more people will be driven towards the project : early adopters shall benefit … 
1 Like
WoW has gold, silver, and copper coins 
100 copper = 1 silver
100 silver = 1 gold
And that pretty much covers all of peoples needs.
Maybe have 100 SafeBits = 1 SafeCent, and 100 SafeCents = 1 SafeCoin? Separate but exchangeable parallel currencies?
2 Likes
WoW does not have a currency, is a limited sandbox with limited market, and does not have goods and services that require micro, nano and smaller transactions. Assuming this token and its simplification of division could serve a real digital economy is a mistake because it makes one huge (bad) assumption: that all transactions can be expressed in some multiple of “copper”. Yet copper may be orders of magnitude to big to serve the needs some (large important) sectors of the digital economy, so those sectors will be excluded from using your token.
You really want nothing less than a proper currency, and to do that it must fulfil all the functions of a unit of account. As the link says, it “is vitally important in the modern economy and serves several important functions.”
2 Likes
Then you don’t understand the core of Bitcoin, 21 million / 64 quadrillion satoshis.
It is there for a reason! One for security, and other is to prevent the float number.
Edited: Misread what you said, didn’t see the byond wording.
Dividing safec’s beyond 8 decimal places
If we divide beyond 8, then it has to be 16. Eitherway, I don’t see this will happen anytime in foreseeable future.
3 Likes
Well the point is, make SafeNanos, SafeQuarks, SafeIttyBittyBits lol IDK but you should get the point of the msg tho
1 Like