Thank you
Thank you
Where’s that quoted text from? I can’t find it on the linked wikipedia page.
Alternative for outdoor enthousiasts https://github.com/andreynovikov/trekarta
One party’s debt is another party’s asset.
So yes, cancelling a debt looks the same as stealing cash in the issuing party’s bookkeeping.
Ah yes, there’s no turnkey, pay 5USD, tinc provider.
From a users point of view, it’s like wireguard, without the star configuration and manual ip config and routing.
That’s not the goal. But if taxes and regulations make me so, I’ll assume they know what’s best for me
Every year they try to make it harder to smoke tobacco.
Might as well start smoking weed instead.
Something like tinc? (1)
“Gambling thus requires three elements to be present: consideration (an amount wagered), risk (chance), and a prize.”
That definition encompasses everything we do in life. From crossing the road, to buying a fridge, to falling in love.
Isn’t it possible with a VAT-like system, where a collecting agency returns the collected money to the central bank?
Imagine being a business where you have to manually input, document and pay the daily changing VAT to the government.
This actually doesn’t seem too bad. Most points of sale are digital.
Imagine having to pay 1.00023 dollars
Instead of changing it daily, only change it monthly/quarterly/… when the accumulated change is large enough to make a one dollar change on a 100dollar purchase? Isn’t the decision to change the interest fork currently only made after gathering macro-economic indicators anyways?
I understand that insantly changing the transaction cost has an even faster reaction. But monthly might be good enough?
Futures are still technically gambling. (…) There’s always a chance that the underlying asset radically changes in value between the contract and execution dates.
Sure, I agree. But in the same technicallity; purchasing or selling anything is technically gambling, there’s a chance that it will devalue or increase in value over time. You could’ve bought (or sold) earlier (or later). (Electricity market, again, being an interesting exception, as the product is destroyed as soon as it’s created. One could say the true value is never discovered, as it’s only sold as futures).
The MBS market basically directly lead to the '08 crisis, as you certainly know.
The fundamental problem that lead to the '08 crisis was incorrectly priced mortgages, and risk of repayment/devaluation. Even if the morgages were held by the original issuers, the same outcome would’ve occured.
It wasn’t the derivative market that was the problem.
An example of a derivative, that I can’t think of any reason for existing, other than increasing risk, are leveraged ETPs. I’d call those as close to pure gambling of any derivatives I know of.
Group with most weapons takes all, then infighting begins?
Not exactly a direct answer to your question, but on my local 2nd hand website are a lot of pokemon cards for sale for cheap.
I guess they’re from collectors that buy a lot of packs in order to find the rare ones. Then sell the rest at loss.
“The history of money, is the history of war” is how I was thought.
Almost every major change to the monitary system, came as a result of war.
Don’t put all your eggs in one basket. Spread your treasure over multiple watchman, each holding only a part. Keep a public reputation system for each watchman. Make the loss of reputation more costly than the total of treasure they could steal.
(like fluctuating transaction fees) whose effects can be a lot more immediate. However, they require all money to be electronic.
Isn’t that achievable by VAT? No need for electronic money.
A derivative != gambling what the other 20% will do.
A common derivative is a “future”.
Pre-ordering a videogame is a future contract. It’s a way for game publishers to finance the development of the game.
Sometimes futures are the only way to trade a product: all electricity is sold under a future contract. This refers to producers and consumers agreeing “tommorow 11am to 12am, I will consume (for the one party), and produce (for the producing party), 10MW of power”. It is a simple necessity to trade electricity as a future contract, as electricity isn’t easily stored, and the grid needs to be balanced (production ~= consumption) at all times. Here, the future contract is used as a method of coordination.
It can come from issueing new currency. The cost of that is inflation.
That’s what I’m wonder about mostly. This statement doesn’t occur in the wikipedia page, and seems unsubstantiated. A human or LLM hallucination.