You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Proof of Stake Coins as (almost) free way to multiply your holdings.
increasing your money for free means you are taking resources from those who do real labor to create them.
increasing your money for free means you are taking resources from those who do real labor to create them.
It is not free, because the holder is staking, and that is the "real labor" according to pos guidelines. Hence the "(almost)" in the title.
no its not. Having money isn't labor, that's stupid.
Stupid is, as stupid does.
Why the mentioning of money? The author didn't mention that term or word you are referring to. How are you defining that word? The word "money" is abstract and has biblical origins directly synonymous with "gods" whom your profile name claims to deny. What money is, or is not, is irrelevant to this article.
Once again, it's not free because; ACCORDING TO PROOF OF STAKE GUIDELINES aka the system set forth by the authors of the token requires a computer to be functioning and ready to complete and verify a circuit. If you don't like the rules then don't play the game.
My intention is not to insult or say that you are wrong; or to defend pos tokens. It is, however, to question the terms and presuppositions this article seems to have attached to it with some.
capital, sorry just trying to use terms you people understand lmao
Think of it like an investment or like a savings account at a bank. You deposit a bunch of money and over time, it grows. That's the basic concept of POS coins.
The more you buy, the bigger the investment and hence more money in your pocket. When you buy more, it raises the price of the coin and therefore those early adopters get a higher ROI. So on and so forth.
resources have to come from somewhere. That extra money comes from the labor of the workers
It's a similar concept with nodes on other POS coins as well. Those who manage the nodes, are investing money on servers and get a share of the profits
have you ever heard of the labor theory of value?
So I did some research and as it turns out, money on steemit doesn't come out of thin air. There are those who actually manage the nodes (and get a certain percentage of the block rewards) so technically speaking, you could consider them the miners who are managing this blockchain..... Hope that makes sense....
I don't get what workers you're talking about over here. If by workers you mean those who manage the nodes then yes. They have volunteered for this and get paid for it with a certain percentage of each block's rewards. They are also investing their time, energy and money and we can be considered the employees of this firm where we produce content and get paid for our work
This post received a 1.5% upvote from @randowhale thanks to @arthestically! For more information, click here!
it's somewhat like if you were to lend your money to someone, they use it to make profits and give you a % of the profits. You can't access those funds without losing your stake from there on in, you deserve to get rewarded for that.
"you deserve to get rewarded for that."
so you deserve what somebody produces because they do not have the resources to take stuff from others themselves? So let me guess, you support hitler? You support the system that causes 20 million to die a year from poverty in the name of fairness?
That escalated quickly. You know that Steemit relies on staking right? The algorithm is somewhat more democratic since it is delgated proof of stake, but the whales still hold enormous power and can decide who gets to stake. There are other algorithms out there that we can debate the merits of, but why are we talking about Hitler?
"somewhat more democratic"
as democratic as a guy with a gun saying he is right commanding others because he has a better weapon
Why are you supporting Steemit with your time and energy if you fundamentally oppose the system that underpins it? Are you going to call Dan a fascist next? You act like you have all the answers and the rest of us are lucky to have your insights to set us straight. Remind you of anyone?
"Why are you supporting Steemit with your time and energy if you fundamentally oppose the system that underpins it? "
"why do you work for a labor camp for hitler. Food and water? I don't care you are supporting hitler"
"Why do you work for your feudal lord if you hate the system so much? Be glad for the rags he gives you"
"Are you going to call Dan a fascist next? "
Hitler was supported by the vast majority of business owners in germany. Profit margins are profit margins
I fundamentally disagree with every system under capitalism. The entire system is build on slavery. You can not escape it, so the only option if you oppose slavery is to use the system to end itself.
"but why are we talking about Hitler?"
ruling class is ruling class, dictator is dictator. I am showing you how your procapitalist propaganda applies to capitalists people don't like too
I'm confused...... are you referring to Hitler as a capitalist that "people don't like too"?
If so, history 101: Hitler was a Nazi, which is a German abbreviation for Nationalsozialists, or National Socialist. Socialism is almost the exact opposite of capitalism, let alone Nationalism.
Just to clarify.
actually hitler privatised all national industry and give it away to the ruling class. National socialism is just capitalism by another name.
here is a nice video on the topic
"That escalated quickly. "
no. I am telling you the effects your preferred system is having today. If you think it escalated quickly you were deluding yourself.
quite interesting! So you don't believe in savings? how do you explain savings?
saving =collection of labor surpluses.
as labour has value=money
saving =collection of values(money)
if there is no incentive to hold values(staking) then wouldn't the value itself lose value
and money would be just a paper?
savings is keeping value you created for the future. Investment on the other hand is taking resources from others (profit) without doing labor yourself. In other words it is slavery.
"if there is no incentive to hold values(staking) then wouldn't the value itself lose value"
true value how much socially necessary labor it takes to create an object. I don't care about the price of stupid coins.
"and money would be just a paper?"
That's all it is right now, we just pretend it has value.
If you don't care about the price of stupid coins, then why are you entering a discussion on an article about cryptocurrencies?
I read all of your comments and wonder if you just want to argue.
"Investment on the other hand is taking resources from others (profit) without doing labor yourself. In other words it is slavery."
Incorrect. Investment is risking capital. The terms of how investors are rewarded for taking that risk is measured as rate of return or ROI. A person or entity holding a significant stake in crypto is taking a risk. PoS ensures that people participating in the system have a proven stake in the system this ensures that the actions they take will be in the best interest of the system.
Debt is a form of bondage (slavery if you prefer) it is a contract to repay what was borrowed with interest to account for risk and opportunity costs that the investor bears.
"Incorrect. Investment is risking capital"
on average capitalism must make profit, or it will literally collapse. So its like saying a casino risks all their money because they are gambling.
"PoS ensures that people participating in the system have a proven stake in the system this ensures that the actions they take will be in the best interest of the system."
Is upvotig yourself the best interest of the system?
also I really don't care how currency is used, I'm talking about capital.
"Debt is a form of bondage (slavery if you prefer) it is a contract to repay what was borrowed with interest to account for risk and opportunity costs that the investor bears."
When a person has no choice in life but to borrow money, college, a house, a car, or even food can put him into that position. It is mass slavery and there is no way to justify it.
"Is upvotig yourself the best interest of the system?"
I am new here and have no idea how upvoting works. I will say that the incentive of people participating in a system need to aligned with the best interest of that system or that system can not be trusted. That is as true for a crypto-currency as it is for the voting system of a representative republic.
"When a person has no choice in life but to borrow money, college, a house, a car, or even food can put him into that position. It is mass slavery and there is no way to justify it."
So everyone is entitled to a house they didn't build, a car they didn't pay for and food they didn't grow just because they were born? That is a very childish and ignorant view. There is no incentive for anyone to INVEST their time (yes time is an investment) to produce any of those things unless there is a direct benefit to them. Stop with the nonsense.
There is no capitalism today, it's oligarchy, socialism and fascism paraded around as capitalism. IT IS A LIE.
Everyone should be angry; we've been cheated, lied to and enslaved. Plantations and slave owners are gone but the US has become the plantation with globalist slave owners. Our lives and the lives of our children have been sold to globalists and banks who rob everyone through inflation and deflation all while creating war and division between countries, races and religions.
"So everyone is entitled to a house they didn't build, a car they didn't pay for and food they didn't grow just because they were born? "
so every business owner is entitled to the products they didn't build and the profit they didn't make?
Would not that all be an utopian fantasy....have not we gone too far already?
is it not accepted values in our current interpretation of free market democracy?
( you may question the integrity of free market)
That
We are constantly manufactured to be competative and greedy, furthermore, being greedy is encouraged,as a result,casino definately florish, Overconsumption lead to overproduction that generates even more debt, more debt= more necessities - more necessities bring up more invention. And we are constantly competing in the name of individul freedom.
greed and debt are the foundation that generate our necessities & creativity.
Quantitative easing , print money out of thin air, currency devalue, crypto arise ...we definately evolving regardless...i guess crypto is the best answer to mould conventional model of free market into more accepted method.
Main point: staking is necessary to preserve our current acceptance of free market values, incentives are the rule of the game... cryptos are here to survive and cant affort to be radical altogether.
"greed and debt are the foundation that generate our necessities & creativity." wrong
in a free market the only thing that's free is the market.
DNR pos coin earn free dnr by joining slack https://steemit.com/cryptocurrency/@rajankc/denarius-cryptocurrency-check-out-the-new-video
http://anticapitalismfaq.com/
@leesmoketree I recommend that you enter https://goo.gl/d4ZFjk you will get 50 free WCX Tokens and 15% if you want to invest, this currency is now in the PRE-ICO stage and is the best time to invest!
Not if the 'money' isn't backed by 'real labor'! However, I see your point with interest bearing money, this is an endemic problem in our present currency! If you're interested I designed a new currency that addresses this issue along with 'depressions', wealth inequality, basic income, all in new currency!
Challenging the Old Money Gods (Including Bitcoin)! A New Crypto-Currency for a New Society!
Interesting story you got there rieki. What's your end goal? to replace old money?
Follow me @Yehey
Thank you.
look my post about waves is leasing coin
https://steemit.com/cryptocurrency/@superpako/waves-plataform-and-lease-cryptocurrency
Well, to redesignate money to its place as a medium of exchange, and not an all-powerful store of value. It's what's driving our conversion of our world into money. While we're at it we can design a money that suits a lot more of our collective needs as well... So essentially yes, replace old money...
value is backed in real labor and money is a measure of value
Only if the value of money was derived that way, but it in reality, it isn't.
Money is a store of value m8. You need something to measure value in to trade objects effectively
Money as a store of value is the opposite as money as a medium of exchange (trade objects effectively). They are opposing forces, and one of the main drivers of capitalism...
There are at least 9 other highly viable forms of capital as stores of value, outside of money.
"Money as a store of value is the opposite as money as a medium of exchange "
last I checked to be a good medium of exchange it has to be considered a measurement of value
Measurement != store.
You can measure and exchange value with money (in fact that was the main purpose of money, to begin with) it wasn't until later (with gold, etc) that money evolved to being a store of value... It evolved further to be able to seek economic rents (interest) of that value as well. All of these are in addition to, the medium of exchange. They are separate functions, not inherent.
"A store of value is the function of an asset that can be saved, retrieved and exchanged at a later time, and be predictably useful when retrieved."
"The most common store of value in modern times has been money, currency, or a commodity like a precious metal, cryptocurrency or financial capital. The point of any store of value is risk management due to a stable demand for the underlying asset. Money is one of the best stores of value because of its liquidity, that is, it can easily be exchanged for other goods and services.[1] An individual's wealth is the total of all stores of value including both monetary and nonmonetary assets.[2]"
Time = money - which is your labour; I get what you are saying - how to apportion value to something you can't see or touch? That's why I think the cryptos that retain value will be the ones that do something tangible.....provide a service, etc. and have differentiation.....Ripple is being investigated for adoption by the banking sector; Dash is an Apple pick; Lisk provides a service and enables the functionality of further cryptos, etc. Ultimately, cryptos that survive will have to have functionality, otherwise why bother?? And I get what you are saying about the measure - that's why I think eventually, crypto might resurrect the gold standard as a measure of value....as opposed to the value of a service....Bitcoin is valuable for what it allows - the digital exchange, but also the brand has established trust.
what? That makes no sense.
Labor is the only real measure of value is what I'm saying.
From my economics text book (coauthored by Ben Bernanke):
"Store of Value
As a store of value, money is a way of holding wealth. An extreme example is a miser who keeps his life's savings in cash under his mattress. But even someone who spends his cash wages 15 minutes after is using money as a store of value for that short period.
In most cases only money functions as a medium of exchange or a unit of account, but any asset-for example, stocks, bonds, or real estate- can be a store of value. AS these other types of assets normally pay the holder a higher return than money does, why do people use more as a store of value? The answer is that money's usefulness as a medium of exchange makes it worthwhile to hold, even though its return is relatively low."
Value is set by the price people are willing to pay for a product and not by the amount of work done or hours worked.
No. The labor theory of value is better, because that measures what it takes to produce an object. The true value of an object lies in the amount of socially necessary labor it takes to create it.
You are thinking of the price, not the value.
This explains it well:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/wage-labour/
" designed a new currency that addresses this issue"
wow you designed a currency called the destruction of capitalism?
Well, ya... I mean, that is the point... Destruction, however, is not my goal. Building a vastly superior alternative to capitalism is. Being such a dominant force in our world transitions don't happen all at once, this is designed to transition away to a new model, it's built right into it...
ah yes I forgot that the rich people are fine with a peaceful economic transition away from capitalism and won't just stop it at all costs, including through the use of violence. I totally forgot that mass murders of millions and millions of these anti-captialists never happened. I totally forgot what happened when chile elected a socialist. I guess it is possible
For sure, some people are in a different position and feel the use of violence is best suited to meet their needs. It may very well be, I'm not the one to say. However, you are correct, I am not in that position. In fact economically speaking I would have a lot to lose by fully implementing the system I propose. But, that's just economic loss, on near every other qualitative measure for joy and happiness I would gain. Which is why I chose a transition. I don't have to resort to violence because I'm designing a new life without the need to do so. I am fortunate to have that ability, and this design can help others who aren't so fortunate a financial position as well. I spent 6 years in the military carrying out violence, it is not something I wish to ever do again.
Further, I'm against capitalism just as much as I'm against state run socialism or any form of communism we've seen employed. In fact it would be fair to say there hasn't been a single system implemented in living memory (at least in our dominant culture) that I would ever wish to be a part of. So, by advocating against capitalism I'm not by default advocating for any other typical system...
' I spent 6 years in the military carrying out violence,"
there is a difference. The violence you carried out was mainly against people who had done nothing wrong, as the tool of the rich. There are two ways to stop the military. Asking politely and destroying it. How many people do you think begged for their lives before a military killed them and their families? How many people do you think never even had a chance to because of drone strikes?
You could not stop hitler by asking nicely. The economy of Chile could not change to the peaceful will of the majority. Same in Venezuela today.
https://espressostalinist.com/u-s-imperialism-page/
Do you know how many millions of peaceful communists, anarchists, mutualists, and socialists where slaughtered by governments? This was all done to keep capitalism in place. Do you know how many unions were broken up by killing? 20 million or so die of poverty a year, and I'm sure the majority would prevent that peacefully if it could, but that hasn't happened yet and it never will.
"For sure, some people are in a different position and feel the use of violence is best suited to meet their needs."
let me guess, you think asking politely would stop hitler?
I'm not interested in stopping Hitler... I would be more interested in speaking with his army and demonstrating to them a better life that could be lived so they didn't carry on with his orders. That is where my efforts are best spent. It you feel like your efforts are best spent in violence. Then, by all means, carry on. Sounds like we have different approaches to solving our problems. There is by no means a one-size-fits-all solution here.
" Sounds like we have different approaches to solving our problems."
no, I just understand somebody who keeps slaves through violence won't peacefully let them go.
next time somebody murders a small child in front of you, by all means ask them nicely to stop. I'm sure they will think about it while killing the next one.
"demonstrating to them a better life that could be lived so they didn't carry on with his orders"
uhhhhh
they purged the party of people like that. They killed them without a second thought.
Further, I chose to create a life that, to me, seemed pragmatic and obtainable. Which is why It's a transition. Because that can, and is, something that creates a solution immediately while striving towards larger goals. People have been seeking the demise of capitalism for the last century at least. How well did they do?
All money in crypto was invested by people who worked for it. Some do well some lose it all, making money off of other's labor isn't even a factor...
"All money in crypto was invested by people who worked for it."
wrong actually. Profit can't exist without taking others resources through force. The majority of money that has gone into bitcoin is from the capitalist class or the labor aristocrat.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/wage-labour/
That book explains it well
"making money off of other's labor isn't even a factor"
its just moving around money. As the price of the market increases more people invest. Once it goes mainstream they will be profiting off of the work of the majority without doing any themselves. Mining is an example of this. Currently you are making money off of investors who hope to do just that.
Staking needs computer and electricity, to pay for computer and electricity you need to labor to pay for it!
Yes you do, but not necessarily your labor. You could easily make enough from staking to pay for the electricity. The labor then comes from those paying for the coins, which more often then not comes from another type of investor. One that invests in capital. This profit from capital directly comes from the worker. If not it still comes from a worker who paid for the coin with his own labor, unlike you who paid for it in electricity bought through others labor.
If you do not make enough staking to pay for all of the electricity you are considered petit bourgeoisie. (I guess you are losing money but it still is capital, oh well)
Well I can't get anything from staking until I purchase some with my own labor as you said here:
"...it still comes from a worker who paid for the coin with his own labor..."
It's not that those workers give me free coins and then I stake on top of it.
Also how much staking do you think coins like Peercoin gives? its 1% yearly, so for example if you have 100 coins in your wallet and you have it open all the time you're getting 1 coin in one year which in usd amounts to $2. do you think that pays for my electricity in one year?
"Well I can't get anything from staking until I purchase some with my own labor as you said here:"
or the majority of your money could have come from capital investment, which is where the profit made on crypto comes from ultimately. So it doesn't matter if you originally bought it with your own money, its like saying you bought a slave with your own money so you deserve what it produces.
"Also how much staking do you think coins like Peercoin gives? its 1% yearly, so for example if you have 100 coins in your wallet and you have it open all the time you're getting 1 coin in one year which in usd amounts to $2. do you think that pays for my electricity in one year?"
Then that makes you a petit bourgeoisie, I already explained that.
The reason it isn't profitable is because you can't put enough of your own labor to reach that point. Try stealing somebody elses, any competitive business can't survive without it.
(The one in a million person able to scrap together enough to enter the territory of the free ride through life will be very lucky. Making it look like its possible gives everyone hope, which causes them to work harder, giving the rich a bigger profit and a lower likeliness of a revolt.)
"It's not that those workers give me free coins and then I stake on top of it."
Yes fine whatever you can believe that, but just because you have resources doesn't mean you deserve other peoples resources.
You didn't answer my questions! then you just want to argue for the sake of it.
And not everything is labor...the real money is earth resources
the only way to access resources is through labor. Labor is needed to do literally anything, it is the only thing tied to everything we do.
The real value of an object is how much socially necessary labor it takes to obtain it.
more on that here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value
what happens when hypothetically everything is done by robots and the generations after generations over thousands years who made us to this point (that everything is done by robots) are all dead and there's no way to reward them?
that's called post scarcity. The thing is, their labor (if needed at all at that point) will create massive amounts of resources. Millions of times more than today. Unlike capitalism they will not be dependant on the owners of the robots for a job, and can live freely without needing to do any labor (instead of the starving which would happen under capitalism).
This is the ultimate goal of socialism. Capitalism puts it off because they know the starving workers will revolt.
"what happens when hypothetically everything is done by robots and the generations after generations over thousands years who made us to this point (that everything is done by robots) are all dead and there's no way to reward them?"
I think you are assuming the people who built the machines that automate stuff will be paid all that it produces. Nobody can consume that much and as shown in the soviet union and many other instances, people invent to invent not for money. The inventor may get extra resources of course, nobody is barred from giving.
That actually outlines my understanding of the difference between Proudhonian and more leftist economic thought. Although both mutualist-anarchists and marxists do agree on the destruction of private property.
what do you think about SolarCoin? you get coins if you create 1MW of electricity.
I don't care. This electricity is most likely created through solar panels that were manufactured by others' labor for profit for a member of the ruling class. Again, you are buying the means of production and claiming profits for yourself. This will then compound, giving you even more access to the labor of others allowing you to increase your power exponentially until you have a monopoly or are crushed.
So what are you proposing? Should we go back to farm and each of us produce our own foods? Or should I create my own solar panel because some people maybe are being taking advantage of in the society? Things are so complicated and intertwined in this world that no one can't easily say: "Yes that's the correct way to do this". We know at least one thing that the system of paper and fiat money that invented by bankers is a form of slavery. That's why crypto-currencies finally came into play. But things take times to get fairly distributed and that get reset to a new system.
Or we could just abolish private property, the thing that allows an owner to steal resources from the worker and allow people to freely labor on the means of production
"That's why crypto-currencies finally came into play. But things take times to get fairly distributed and that get reset to a new system."
There is no difference lmao. I don't care about who controls the money, the problem is who controls the means of production. You could use sticks as money, but as long as you must work for the ruling class and get most of what you get taken away, or starve. It is not a free or fair system.
On top of that capitalism always leads towards centralization and monoply. Read imperialism the highest stage of capitalism, it has many statistics and examples
@anarchyhasnogods I recommend that you enter https://goo.gl/d4ZFjk you will get 50 free WCX Tokens and 15% if you want to invest, this currency is now in the PRE-ICO stage and is the best time to invest!
can you not