Bitcoin Rally Produces an Inane Comment By Paul Krugman

Via Paul Krugman's fawning echo chamber over at 'Businessinsider' we have become aware that he has recently seen fit to comment on Bitcoin. Krugman's comment consists essentially of the Keynesian nostrum according to which A) currency becoming more valuable is 'bad' and B) 'hoarding' of money is generally 'bad'.

Here is an excerpt from Krugman's Bitcoin epiphany:


So how’s it going? The dollar value of that cybercurrency has fluctuated sharply, but overall it has soared. So buying into Bitcoin has, at least so far, been a good investment.


But does that make the experiment a success? Um, no. What we want from a monetary system isn’t to make people holding money rich; we want it to facilitate transactions and make the economy as a whole rich. And that’s not at all what is happening in Bitcoin.


Bear in mind that dollar prices have been relatively stable over the past few years – yes, some deflation in 2008-2009, then some inflation as commodity prices rebounded, but overall consumer prices are only slightly higher than they were three years ago. What that means is that if you measure prices in Bitcoins, they have plunged; the Bitcoin economy has in effect experienced massive deflation.


And because of that, there has been an incentive to hoard the virtual currency rather than spending it. The actual value of transactions in Bitcoins has fallen rather than rising. In effect, real gross Bitcoin product has fallen sharply.


So to the extent that the experiment tells us anything about monetary regimes, it reinforces the case against anything like a new gold standard – because it shows just how vulnerable such a standard would be to money-hoarding, deflation, and depression.”


 



(emphasis added)

Our first reaction to such abject nonsense would be: apparently Krugman has never bought a computer or a cell phone in his life. According to the theory he espouses above, almost no-one has. After all, there has been a huge 'deflation' in the prices of these things. As we have pointed out recently, in the mid 1980s one could buy a 'super-computer' featuring a 105 MHZ CPU and 128 MB of RAM for $16 million in 1980 money (roughly a cool $53 million in today's money). The 1.2 gb hard drive that came with it, big as a wardrobe, set you back another $270,000 ($885,000 in today's money). Such a device, if you could still buy it, would probably cost $15 today, plus the cost of the housing and the power supply, which would likely exceed the cost of the electronic components markedly.

According to Krugman's theory, the best that could have happened to the economy would have been if such a computer really did set you back by $53 million today. People would positively fall over themselves buying it!

So much for Keynes beliefs on 'deflation' and Krugman's regurgitation of same.

If he makes a point of economic theory, then he is either elucidating a general economic law, or he isn't. There cannot be a 'different set of economic laws for the computer and telecommunications industries', which is why our example thoroughly disproves every word he says above. 

Not surprisingly, the period in US history during which real economic growth was by far the fastest ever and reflected positively on the largest possible number of people was actually a period throughout which the general price level tended to mildly decline. Gold was indeed still money at the time and there was no Federal Reserve yet. This economically blissful period has apparently been edited out of Krugman's personal version of economic history.

In an unhampered free market economy (we can safely assume that such an economy would employ sound money), 'hoarding' could actually never become a problem. People are not interested in holding X amount of money per se, but money representing a certain amount of purchasing power. If gold were used as money and a handful of pathological misers were 'hoarding' it, then the market would quickly adjust the purchasing power of the remaining gold supply, so that it could perform the same functions as before. Money is the only good in the economy that confers no benefit whatsoever to society if its supply increases.

 


 

bitcoin

Bitcoin's wild rally continues … click for better resolution.

 


 

Similarly, the fact that Krugman thinks that the rising exchange value of Bitcoin means that henceforth no-one will actually use it for buying things indicates that the man is utterly naïve and unworldly. Imagine you had bought a few Bitcoins when they were still a lot cheaper. Why would you not spend some of them now that they are buying so much more? The idea simply makes no sense whatsoever. We actually tend to believe that some Bitcoin holders are probably a bit nervous about the rapid ascent of the currency's value and will therefore be inclined to spend some of it while the getting is good.

Also, imagine the hypothetical extreme situation that Bitcoin were the only form of money in existence. Does Krugman really believe that people would stop consuming just because the value of the currency has increased a lot lately? What would people eat? How would they pay for shelter? Would they all forego the new iPhone when it comes to market? By posing such simple common sense questions it should become immediately obvious how bizarre Krugman's claims are. The man is simply full of it and the same goes for his amen corner at Businessinsider and elsewhere, where these absurdities are presented as though they were holy economic writ.

 

Tom Woods Interviews a Bitcoin Expert

There are valid doubts as to whether a money that does not have an embodiment in the physical sense such as is the case with gold would really be considered viable in an unhampered free economy. There can however be no doubt whatsoever that Bitcoin fills a growing need in today's statist fiat money world with its central banking socialism and its steadily growing loss of financial privacy. While we still suspect that governments may try to stomp on the currency by making it illegal one day, the fact is that it can actually not be controlled by governments or anyone else. Indeed, it probably cannot really be prohibited out of existence; although it would theoretically be possible to criminalize its users under some pretext, it would still be impossible to track them.

For those of our readers who want to learn more, below is a very interesting interview with Bitcoin expert Erik Voorhees, conducted by Thomas Woods. One   perfectly logical and valid point made by Mr. Voorhees  is that part of Bitcoin's attraction is its utter lack of counterparty risk – something that cannot even be guaranteed by electronic gold depositories. For instance, the government came down like a ton of bricks on e-gold, which was accused of letting its service be used for money laundering purposes (we are not sure what happened to the gold holdings of legitimate customers there, but it is a good bet that it was a big headache to get one's money back). It should be noted though in this context that a number of similar services like e.g. Gold Money have been very careful to be 100% compliant with the relevant regulations. However, these very regulations obviously mean that financial privacy is lost a priori.

The standard argument against the legitimate wish for financial privacy is that 'if one has nothing to hide one doesn't need it' – which is of course the standard argument dished up every time governments are increasing their spying on the citizenry.  Allegedly it is all for our own good, but it should be blindingly obvious that it is ultimately paving the way for tyranny. It is therefore difficult not to like Bitcoin. The biggest risk to it would probably be a breakdown of the internet infrastructure, but that would be a risk to more than  just Bitcoin, as Mr. Voorhees helpfully points out.


 


 

Thomas Woods talks Bitcoin with Erik Voorhees


 




 
 

Emigrate While You Can... Learn More

 
 

 
 

Dear Readers!

It is that time of the year again – our semi-annual funding drive begins today. Give us a little hand in offsetting the costs of running this blog, as advertising revenue alone is insufficient. You can help us reach our modest funding goal by donating either via paypal or bitcoin. Those of you who have made a ton of money based on some of the things we have said in these pages (we actually made a few good calls lately!), please feel free to up your donations accordingly (we are sorry if you have followed one of our bad calls. This is of course your own fault). Other than that, we can only repeat that donations to this site are apt to secure many benefits. These range from sound sleep, to children including you in their songs, to the potential of obtaining privileges in the afterlife (the latter cannot be guaranteed, but it seems highly likely). As always, we are greatly honored by your readership and hope that our special mixture of entertainment and education is adding a little value to your life!

   

Bitcoin address: 1DRkVzUmkGaz9xAP81us86zzxh5VMEhNke

   
 

8 Responses to “More on Bitcoin”

  • timlucas:

    I have a small objection to bitcoins. I do not understand the necessity to create any new ones. The system allows the gradual expansion of the money supply as computing power is applied to ‘mine’ new coins. Systemically, isn’t this an unecessary waste? If one of the crucial requirements of money is its scarcity, then removing the ability to make more altogether would be a virtue, rather than a problem, and avoid numerous people wasting energy producing new coins.

    The effect of removing the ability to ‘mine’ would be greater deflation i.e. cheaper goods for everyone Mr Krugman and would avoid employing people, equipment, energy in fairly useless tasks. This said, there is a cap at about double the current number of bitcoins, so given the recent price moves, I suspect that they’ll all be produced up to this cap fairly soon now!

    Does anyone know if the ‘mining’ of the coins provides another useful service in the architecture, which would therefore be curtailed at the point at which the cap is reached?

    • mc:

      Yes, ‘mining’ of bitcoins performs other valuable services. “Mining” is really a cryptographic brute-force solve/validate of the math underlying the BitCoin algorithm, and those that mine also help keep the chain of transactions valid. Each transaction is signed with cryptography of sender and receiver, and these signings are validated by other network nodes, which would then mutually validate any newly created coins.

      The creation rate is strictly limited so that no many how many people ‘mine’ BTC, only a certain number can be created in any time period. At this time, it is similar to gold in that that stock is large compared to new production. The ability to make new coins decreases over time until an actual hard limit is reached, and thus the incentive for mining would go decrease/go away. The though is that at this time in the future, the size of the network and incentives for maintaining that web of trust will be great enough for the users to continue based on the utility of the currency, as opposed to this current system where your computing put to work for the network rewards you with some slight benefit.

  • worldend666:

    It’s hard to see what is driving this Bitcoin rally. After all it has appreciated 2500% and there is a decent alternative in gold. Why would anyone risk their nuts buying this hot potato at this point in the game?

    I can only assume it’s one of these 3 alternatives:

    1) People who cannot get their hands on gold who still have some money but worry about losing electronic digits at the bank (Cyprus? Argentina?)

    2) People with huge income who don’t want to bank it and don’t want to store it in cash (Drugs/arms dealers).

    3) The Fed buying massive amounts with the intention of crashing it to teach individuals who don’t trust dollars a lesson.

    Any other ideas?

  • SavvyGuy:

    Excellent piece!

    I totally agree with the one statement above that sums up the fallacy of modern monetary planning: “Money is the only good in the economy that confers no benefit whatsoever to society if its supply increases”.

    Unfortunately, we’re all stuck in fiat monetary regimes worldwide, and a sudden outbreak of monetary wisdom is unlikely to strike anywhere in the near future.

  • rodney:

    A good article. Nonetheless, I notice a tendency to often use the term “central banking socialism”. May I note that this is contradictory; what central banks do is more aptly described as “reverse socialism”: a transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.

  • Seems Krugman has something against people keeping their own property, like any good fascist. As far as the computer example, it would be perfect for Krugman money, from extremely valuable to the point almost no one would even want it today.

  • Keith Weiner:

    Great Piece Pater!

    What Krugman and Keynes miss about hoarding is that there is a difference between hoarding a consumable good like food and hoarding a monetary good. In the case of food, very low stocks are kept. Food is produced in the quantity which is consumed. If all of a sudden some people begin hoarding it, others will starve.

    In the case of the monetary good, hoarding does not cause starvation nor deprivation of any other good such as heating oil, clothing, etc. It causes the interest rate to rise. The monetary good exists in huge quantities if one measures total stocks to flows (inventories divided by annual production). The arbitrage between hoarding and saving (i.e. lending at interest) sets the floor under the interest rate.

    What would Krugman’s answer be? How does he think the interest rate should be set? By wise and powerful central planners…

  • Kreditanstalt:

    Hoarding a problem? Rubbish…

    People only “hoard” stuff – whether it be money (purchasing power) or goods – if they feel that the stuff might become more expensive in the future. In other words, a good in the hand today is at a premium to a possible one in the future. Backwardation!

    If the purchasing power of new money – to be acquired in the future – is expected to be lower than the dollar you have in hand NOW, you hoard dollars. Or gold. Or bitcoins.

Your comment:

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Most read in the last 20 days:

  • TMS-2 fast versionA Date Which Will Live in Infamy
      President Nixon’s Decision to Abandon the Gold Standard Franklin Delano Roosevelt called the Japanese “surprise” attack on the U.S. occupied territory of Hawaii and its naval base Pearl Harbor, “A Date Which Will Live in Infamy.”  Similar words should be used for President Nixon’s draconian decision 45 years ago this month that removed America from the last vestiges of the gold standard.   Nixon points out where numerous evil speculators were suspected to be...
  • Perfect-InvestmentInsanity, Oddities and Dark Clouds in Credit-Land
      Insanity Rules Bond markets are certainly displaying a lot of enthusiasm at the moment – and it doesn't matter which bonds one looks at, as the famous “hunt for yield” continues to obliterate interest returns across the board like a steamroller. Corporate and government debt have been soaring for years, but investor appetite for such debt has evidently grown even more.   The perfect investment for modern times: interest-free risk! Illuustration by Howard...
  • CorporateMediacontrolTrump's Tax Plan, Clinton Corruption and Mainstream Media Propaganda
      Fake Money, Fake Capital OUZILLY, France – Little change in the markets on Monday. We are in the middle of vacation season. Who wants to think too much about the stock market? Not us! Yesterday, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump promised to reform the U.S. tax system.   This should actually even appeal to supporters of Bernie Sanders: the lowest income groups will be completely exempt from income and capital gains taxes under Trump's plan. We expect to hear...
  • mania1The Great Stock Market Swindle
      Short Circuited Feedback Loops Finding and filling gaps in the market is one avenue for entrepreneurial success.  Obviously, the first to tap into an unmet consumer demand can unlock massive profits.  But unless there’s some comparative advantage, competition will quickly commoditize the market and profit margins will decline to just above breakeven.   Example of a “commoditized” market – hard-drive storage costs per GB. This is actually the essence of economic...
  • web-puzzled-man-scratching-head-retro-everett-collection-shutterstock_91956314News from TINA Land
      Distortions and Crazy Ideas We have come across a few articles recently that discuss some of the strategies investors are using or contemplating to use as a result of the market distortions caused by current central bank policies. Readers have no doubt noticed that numerous inter-market correlations seem to have been suspended lately, and that many things are happening that superficially seem to make little sense (e.g. falling junk bond yields while defaults are surging; the yen rising...
  • old friendsAn Old Friend Returns
      A Rare Apparition An old friend suddenly showed up out of the blue yesterday and I’m not talking about a contributor who had washed out and, after years of ‘working for the man’, decided to return for another whack at beating the market. Instead I am delighted to report that I am looking at a bona fide confirmed VIX sell signal which we haven’t seen for ages here.   Hello, old friend. Professor X and Magneto staring each other down in the plastic...
  • tortoiseThe Fabian Society and the Gradual Rise of Statist Socialism
      The “Third Way”   “Stealth, intrigue, subversion, and the deception of never calling socialism by its right name” – George Bernard Shaw   An emblem of the Fabian Society: a wolf in sheep's clothing   The Brexit referendum has revealed the existence of a deep polarization in British politics. Apart from the public faces of the opposing campaigns, there were however also undisclosed parties with a vested interest which few people have heard about. And...
  • Lighthouse in Storm --- Image by © John Lund/CorbisSilver is in a Different World
      The Lighthouse Problem Measured in gold, the price of the dollar hardly budged this week. It fell less than one tenth of a milligram, from 23.29 to 23.20mg. However, in silver terms, it’s a different story. The dollar became more valuable, rising from 1.58 to 1.61 grams.   Who put that bobbing lighthouse there? Image credit: John Lund / Corbis   Most people would say that gold went up $6 and silver went down 43 cents. We wonder, if they were on a sinking boat,...
  • storming the storeRetail Snails
      Second Half Recovery Dented by “Resurgent Consumer” We normally don't comment in real time on individual economic data releases. Generally we believe it makes more sense to occasionally look at a bigger picture overview, once at least some of the inevitable revisions have been made. The update we posted last week (“US Economy, Something is Not Right”) is an example.   Eager consumers storming a store Photo credit: Daniel Acker / Bloomberg   We'll make an...
  • The CongressThe Fed’s “Waterloo” Moment
      Corrupt and Unsustainable James has been a big help. Trying to get him to sleep at night, we have been telling him fantastic and unbelievable bedtime stories – full of grotesque monsters... evil maniacs... and events that couldn’t possibly be true (catch up here and here).   He turned his head until his gaze came to rest on the barred windows of the main building. Finally, he spoke; as far as I was aware these were the first words he had uttered in more than five years....
  • Zimbabwe_$100_trillion_2009_ObverseGood Money and Bad Money
      Confidence Gets a Boost OUZILLY, France – Last week’s U.S. jobs report came in better than expected. Stocks rose to new records. As we laid out recently, a better jobs picture should lead the Fed to raise rates. This should cause canny investors to dump stocks.   Canny investors at work (an old, but good one...) Cartoon via Pension Pulse   But the stock market paid no attention. It follows logic of its own. Headlines told us that last Friday’s report “boosted...
  • 2084759-set-of-pictograms-of-various-consumer-issuesReal vs. Nominal Interest Rates
      Calculation Problem What is the real interest rate? It is the nominal rate minus the inflation rate. This is a problematic idea. Let’s drill deeper into what they mean by inflation.   What to include, and how can it even be added up? Illustration by alekup   You can’t add apples and oranges, or so the old expression claims. However, economists insist that you can average the prices of apples, oranges, oil, rent, and a ski trip at St. Moritz. This is despite...

Austrian Theory and Investment

Support Acting Man

Own physical gold and silver outside a bank

Archive

j9TJzzN

350x200

Realtime Charts

 

Gold in USD:

[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

 


 

Gold in EUR:

[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

 


 

Silver in USD:

[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

 


 

Platinum in USD:

[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

 


 

USD - Index:

[Most Recent USD from www.kitco.com]

 

THE GOLD CARTEL: Government Intervention on Gold, the Mega Bubble in Paper and What This Means for Your Future

 
Buy Silver Now!
 
Buy Gold Now!
 

Oilprice.com