Comment: Pointing you towards real

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I explained to you very (see in situ)

Pointing you towards real

Pointing you towards real world events is not giving a reason or giving evidence? That's the entire reason I keep pointing to other alternative currencies. To provide a real world example that what you say cannot be true. Real world examples work even better as proof than mere theories or reasoning.

If that is your opinion, we can stop discussing, because we won't find a common ground from where to start. Analyzing real world examples and making a theory out of it, is exactly what the Keynesians do.

However, this never works in economics. There are too much variables that are impossible to know. You always have to start from the individual and his personal subjective valuation.

And I'll try to explain this before I get accused again of making claims without trying to back it up: Suppose you have a coin worth 10 us dollars and that confidence in this coin is relatively high. After one month the relative value rises to 50 dollars. Now assume that it doesn't reach this price level in a straight line, but that the line goes in a zig zag JAGGED manner (=high volatility). You have two strategies that you can employ. You can buy the coin at 10 us dollars and you only sell it when it reaches 50 dollars. Your profit will be 40 dollars with this method. OR you buy the coin at 10 dollars, sell it when it reaches the highest peak of a jagged edge and then rebuy the coin at the lowest peak of a jagged edge, rinse and repeat till it reaches 50 dollars. If you employ this second method, you make MORE profit than 40 dollars.

Look, this is exactly what I was talking about all the time. The people you mention are buying Bitcoins because they want to make a profit and not because they want to store their value.
If there are only a few people who buy Bitcoins because they want to store value, then the whole thing is one big bubble and not a real currency. If this is the case, the price will go up until there are no more buyers and then it will go down through the floor.

Because having a different exchange value essentially makes it a different currency. It's like how adding euros to your dollar supply won't devalue the dollar. Because they are different currencies. To add to the BC supply, an alternate cryptocurrency must be seen as being COMPLETELY EQUAVALENT to BC, which includes the exchange value. If it has one slight difference, you won't be able to prevent people from treating it as a different object. If it's a different object, it won't be able to be regarded as being part of the BC supply. This is fairly obvious.

Again upside down logic...
It's not the price that makes a currency a different one, the price is different because it is another currency. The individuals value the currency differently and this is what makes the price.

What you say about the Dollar and Euro is wrong. If I buy Euros instead of Dollars, the price of Euros will rise slightly while the price of Dollars falls a bit. I could go 50% each for example.
Making the assumption that people will always have the same trust into the Dollar and the Euro (which is true for Bitcoin and Litecoin, because again, where is the difference?), you could drive the value of the Dollar down by printing Euros. Of course, in reality this won't work, but only because the trust wouldn't be the same.

And don't say again that the difference is the price. The price is irrelevant if you want to store your value. Or don't you buy silver because it is cheaper than gold?
The only thing you care is whether the currency keeps the value.

Simply talk with people you trust that actually studied finance and economics. Go to a teacher or a professor.

To the Keynesian fool around the corner?
Do you even know Austrian Economics? I studied Mises and Hayek and I can assure you, they would tell you the same.