RE: I Got Flagged Three Times Yesterday. Did You?
The account he was talking about is "dimimp." It was in his latest post from the god account. You can read the post here. https://steemit.com/@god/god-is-now-back-on-steem
You can also read his post on why he turned his back on Christianity here. I haven't read it yet, I just noticed the link on my second glance at the first post. So I have no comments on it at this time. https://steemit.com/philosophy/@dan/why-i-gave-up-christianity
Even if he was just protecting it from trolls, I think he should have just left it alone. Seems a bit sacrilegious to me. Although his brother is religious, so maybe he just likes messing with his brother's head. Or at least trying to.
Regarding knowledge about the system:
I got a lot of that from a commentversation I had with tcpolymath. He explained it well. I can't remember where he posted it, so you might just ask him if you're curious.
I think I've ran across enough posts about turning their backs on Christianity or religion in general, so I'll probably pass on that one. Anyone who might feel the need to actively mess with someone else's beliefs, regardless of what they are, is not a good person in my book.
I really don't go around questioning the nonbelief of atheists. I'm not sure why they need to go out of their way to bash. You don't like a post, downvote it. There's no need to get belligerent. It's not like we're going to break into a proof of the existence of God using the scientific method or whatever other acceptable standard there may be.
I'll try to get to the other post, though. It's always good to know what platform masterminds are doing.
I still haven't read it so I can't say that it's worth your time because I don't know. Unless you had a personal relationship with the guy, it probably wouldn't be meaningful.
Scientific method on Steemit?! Ha. There's only a 0.82% better chance of that happening on here than there is on facebook. And I did the math on that... which coincidentally was 50% of that 0.82%. So things aren't looking good. Ha ha. I cracked myself up.
They are the minds who are our masters on here, so the designation is fitting. There's a lot here that they control, or at least influence heavily and hold the keys to change.
So, I've had this short exchange with someone here about Bitcoin vs. STEEM. I was telling them that I thought STEEM was a more stable coin than say Bitcoin because the value didn't fluctuate nearly as much as Bitcoin did.
After that they sent a reply that included three paragraphs, starting with this one. I want to know what you think:
Now, in my head, that's not making any sense. As a business owner, I think I would be looking at the overall cost to produce something versus what I want to get for it, and if I were considering crypto, I'd rather something that went up or down within a $0.10-$0.40 range rather than something that did in at least a $100-$500 range.
Next, they added this:
I don't know how volatile you can consider the US dollar regardless of what the Fed is doing, and especially if the Fed is holding the value somehow.
What I don't get is after telling me how stable Bitcoin is, they tell me the dollar is less stable, and that stable is relative. Well, yeah, but Bitcoin going up or down $1,000 doesn't seem stable to me.
Last paragraph:
So, first of all, STEEM hasn't been up to $10, ever. I think it was $8 something in January when it took off. SBD has been to $14 or thereabouts. So to use the $10 argument is kind of iffy to begin with. However, if it did happen, yes the business owner could have an issue.
There is a greater likelihood though, based on cost amount and profit margin, that STEEM would not have as many issues as Bitcoin simply because the USD is not that big of a swing. If it's bouncing between $1 and $2, isn't that better than bouncing between $6000 and $7000?
It seems that you're both trying to talk about different things, but are using the same words for it. I think a better way to frame the discussion would be using the word "predictable."
Steem might fluctuate by $0.10, but it normally stays within that range. Yes, comparatively (by percentages), Bitcoin might be more stable in terms of less percentage change, but Steem will sit in the same range for a long time. As long as a business owner can price in that fluctuation, they'll be ok.
The whole reason that SBD was created was to be a stable coin that was pegged to $1 so that we could get businesses using Steem for their transactions. If they knew they could have something that was going to be worth the same tomorrow as it is today, then they would be confident in using it. As it is, no one really wants it for anything other than using it to buy votes or exchange for Steem.
If you're investing and trying to get short-term profits, you're better off getting Steem because bouncing between $1 - $2 gives you a chance to double your money. If you went with Bitcoin bouncing between $6,000 and $7,000 you only have a chance to make a 16.67% return.
It really depends on what you're trying to accomplish. It's hard to say what is the right answer though because things are always changing. I would say if you're looking for it to be the same, or close to the same in value, look for something that is "predictable" not "stable."
Well, predictable works for me. Whatever is best to describe a situation where a $0.40 swing in STEEM is better than a $1000 swing in Bitcoin. Obviously the moment we're no longer talking in fiat, we can start relating to what each are doing against each other. But as long as the outside world is still dealing predominantly in dollars, there's just no way that $0.40 jump or drop in price is going to be worse than $1000 drop.
When we're talking about business, it's the dollar amount or fiat amount that matters. If we're talking about investments or ROI, then the percentage of gain or loss is going to be important.
So, I feel like I was using my words correctly. :)
What your conversation partner might have been getting at is this: You can lose more money by investing $7,000 in Steem at $1.50 and see it drop to $1.10 than you would be investing $7,000 in Bitcoin and seeing it drop to $6,000.
For Steem, it's a 26% drop in value which would cost you $1,866 (if you sold).
For Bitcoin, it's a 14% drop in value which would cost you $1,000 (if you sold).
I think I get what you're saying. I have one stock that I bought 10 shares of. I don't even remember why. I saw it drop from $1.00 to $0.50. That means if I were to sell it today, it would be a $5.00 loss. I really don't care. At the same time, I could have a stock that tripled in price. But if I bought say 10 shares at $1.00 each (for consistency), then I would still only have a $20 profit. It's not nothing, but it's not going to pay the bills. So the actual dollar amount does matter.
The real issue that I think we should be talking about is that in the USA a majority of the transactions are conducted in US Dollars. They also need to be able to pay their bills and can't wait around for a currency to go back up in price. Therefore, businesses need a cryptocurrency that is stable or fixed in its price.
That's why SBD was so important for Steem. It was created to be a stable coin that would allow businesses to accept it in exchange for goods and/or services and the business would know that the value of that cryptocurrency would be the same tomorrow as it is today. They don't want to gamble and hope that it goes up. They want to know they'll be able to sell and use that money to pay their bills.
That's my two cents. Find a currency that's stable or fixed so you can have predictability of outcome and then businesses will be much more likely to start using it. Hopefully there's one that gets some mass adoption before the crypto Dollar. Otherwise, that thing will just take over.
Do you see a crypto dollar happening, though? I've read about people talking about any of a number of countries creating their own versions of cryptocurrencies, but I'm not sure the appeal for the governments. They're not going to want to decentralize, and it's not like the crypto, yet anyway, is competing that much with their own currencies, simply because they can't be used everywhere fiat can be used. If you already control the currency, aren't you already basically ahead of the game?
And for that matter, the money is already digitized. We don't really use cash or coin for our purchases, at least not regularly. Okay, I'll just say I don't and most people I know don't.
I think the main issue about the conversation is that "my conversation partner" was combining both investments and business together and saying it was all the same thing.
If I have something that costs $1.42 and I sell it for 1 STEEM (that's what it's trading at right now), then I'm okay. If it drops to $1.22, as long as my margin is still good, then selling it for 1 STEEM still works. If STEEM goes up 20 cents, I'm still okay, for the most part.
If I sell something for a one tenth of a bitcoin ($740) and it goes down $1,000 then I've just sold it at $640. Again depends on my margin, but I'm probably thinking more about changing the price every day because it's still a larger fluctuation at a tenth of the cost.
So, anyway, I thought the conversation was taking one topic and arguing it with another. I do appreciate all your input. You have a better way of explaining things in a way that I can understand. :)
Short answer: Yes.
Long answer: Yes, absolutely.
Expanded answer: Yes, the government already controls the money supply (well, the Fed does, but that's another story), but they wouldn't mind having even more control. If the currency is entirely digital, and if it can be tracked completely, then they can know where every dollar is going, and if you make a transaction, or earn money from something, they could tax you on it right away. They could even take it from your wallet without your permission. A government crypto currency would be the antithesis of decentralized. It would be more centralized than we've ever seen. Yes, governments want crypto currency, and the USA will introduce one.
Note: Just my opinion. Do your own research.
Regarding businesses and crypto:
The point is that businesses need to know how much money they'll be getting. Most can't just be accepting less money than the sale price. It's not good business. Most companies would have a difficult time absorbing a 14% drop in their revenue on sales. It might be ok one time, but if it happens repeatedly, it can be difficult to survive. Certain industries have less wiggle room than others.
Back to Costco: I believe they operate on something as low as a 14% margin. I could be wrong, but at one point I believe it was that low. Granted, they make most of their profit from selling the memberships, but if a company isn't selling memberships, they need that margin to stay whole. (unless they're liquidating something to free up space for merchandise that's moving).
Am I on track here at all?