At least if the coins time reset after each transfer that would be more reasonable. But I know someone who would hate to put time record on the network.
Check out the older papers on perpetualCoin (I don’t have the links, but google has 
) and Paul Grignon’s videos (the original Money is debt guy). It’s a valid approach, but different. I think there is merit for sure, but it’s too much for us at the moment, but who knows what will develop. In any case there were many economists around the world introduced to the idea by Paul and he really groks this stuff very well.
The idea was holding back the oil of the economy came at a cost, but was balanced with a separate coin for savings and investments allowing this to happen. In addition the basic idea wasy you could as a company create coins and borrow against future costs etc. all a bit too much for a forum reply, but I think you will find that whole process and email exchanges (that went on for many many months) will be enlightening and show many of the ways it can work.
Plus Paul is a really decent guy and years ago got involved, so when we launch he will be back I am sure with lots of really deep insights into the whole matter.
4 Likes
@jreighley The currency that is the most stable goes a long way toward providing a business the greatest degree of security and freedom. Both hostile speculation and get-rich-quick are tied to volatility. Minimizing volatility is at the heart of a security approach to currency and that’s been my impression of what the SAFE group has been aiming for.
Perish-ability does seem like something that could be phased in later to help increase stability. We already have long experience with the psychological equivalent. Coin is less perishable than cash and cash less perishable than card. We have more direct experience with the concept through options and life estates. But at launch it could seem like terminator seed. The time to phase it in might be after SAFE a dominant store of value. Phasing it in would create a premium on non perishable SAFE coins, but those coins too could be retired eventually. Adding the feature to existing SAFE coins as opposed to retiring them might seem like a hack. Maybe the perish-ability timer would get reset after every trade with a delay?
Quite frankly I don’t think second guessing how safecoin or any cryptocurrency functions makes much sense. If people don’t like it or want to change it then they can fork it. If people wanted a perishable version of bitcoin they could have forked the code and made one. Same will be true of safecoin. BUT again if people DON’T want the perishable nature then they can just sell the coin for something that isn’t or again fork it. So the trait only has value if people want it and more importantly WANT to use it. I’d also like to add that safecoin itself isn’t just a cryptocurrency but a storage medium so making it perishable could be dangerous to data retention.
2 Likes
A couple more articles on deflation:
I think these two pretty much debunk any concerns about non-debt based currency deflation.
BTW, the discussion months ago on subdividing safecoin, IMO, ended up with David saying he was in favor (paraphrasing) of creating new coins. As an example, and not necessarily David’s words, we could create milli-safecoin with a value each of 1/1000th of a safecoin. In this manner we don’t have to deal with decimal places within safecoin itself. I think there were multiple reasons given for this. Effectively though, you could trade 10.094 safecoin by trading 10 safecoin and 94milliSafecoin. If deflation makes milliSafecoin too valuable, then we create microSafecoin, 1/1000th the value of milliSafecoin, etc.
7 Likes
Kind of like the idea behind dollars, cents, millrays, halfpence and so forth.
2 Likes
That’s right! Before the experts (Fed) started managing it for the benefit of the People.
6 Likes
how are the currencies and sub-currencies get counted by the banks who emits them? i mean if they emit 100 dolars and 100 cents, they count as 101 dollars or 100 dollars and 100 cents?
It seems like banks would lose a lot of their importance. They would not be able to play their accustomed fractional reserve function in money and debt creation. No more king makers.
If SAFE is to beat the dollar it will need to be more stable. The dollar is stable because of its circulation status, its reserve status, because of fed manipulation, and because of US military occupations, current percieved US economic and military strength and because of the currated petrol dollar addiction. It is weak because it is tied to a casino Ponzi scheme rigged stock market that is hollowing out every aspect of the US economy and infrastructure and driving unsustainable levels inequity and displacement.
SAFE will become commonplace because computers and cell phones are commonplace. Internet is commonplace. Whereever there is tech so to will there be SAFE. And THAT is what will make SAFE “stable.”
4 Likes
The dollar is not stable at all. It has lost 99.5 percent of the value in just 102 years.
5 Likes
The dollar has been stable relative to other currencies. Especially since 70 inflation has been part of a way to scam wages and skim the difference for the idle class.
1 Like
Jeez that’s basically over night! Lol
I don’t think I understand this comment
I heard they’re pretty evil
There was a reason why we had two dollar bill.
3 Likes
A lot more than 3 dollars. $300 maybe? One of the official reasons for an inflationary basis is to encourage investment so the capital doesnt rot and to provide credit to address depreciation and to allow people to take risks while they are still young and have the energy. But its far from a perfect system. Perishability mechanisms might beat the paradox of thrift without inflation. Another is as a hedge against deflation. Deflation sounds good but historically its had nasty consequences and the worst kind of cures. In a deflationary environment business becomes much harder mechanically and psychologically. A good performance wont necessarily keep you afloat. Despite the claimes that its all coming from a perverse fiat debt based perspective, deflation will likely always feel paradoxical. We want predictability.
Debt based money isn’t necessarily all that counterintuitive. You buy a car from me and I give you an IOU or dollar bill. Think of a check. You can then trade my IOU for another car by signing over the check. The next person can do the same on down the line until some chooses not to trade it but instead cashes it instead. They will be the last endorser. This will work unless an issuer writes FDO “for deposit only” in the endorsement area, We dont use this draft system much anymore. But such a check in circulation is much like a dollar. We can still buy gold with the dollar but with fiat there is no metal money we could finally redeem for the bill and the state is the original issuer.
The fractional reserve system and inflation have a similar practical logic. And when a currency unit runs out of headroom the next higher denomination comes into circulation. The alegations against the Fed come from claims (if Ive got this right) that its friends get first whack at new issuances which gives them an insurmountable advantage, also that it engineers the business cycle and so forth and so on.
No. Not 300 dollars. You are blown out of proportion.
The highest dollar value is 4 dollars, and it was in mid 1800s.
2 Likes
Warren I can’t believe you’re actually defending the banksters…
4 Likes
The banksters are starting to feel rear view mirror to me. Headline to day pointed out that stocks, oil and markets are dependent on what China does with its interest rates. We did what we could with a patch work system. It seems like we are on the edge of a thought out system.