3 ms·
You know how much I'm justified to spend to protect myself from loosing 2% of my money in one year, due to the central bank adding 2% to the money supply? If m
by freech 9y ago
You know how much I'm justified to spend to protect myself from loosing 2% of my money in one year, due to the central bank adding 2% to the money supply?
If my time horizon is 1 year?
That's right: 2%
If my time horizon is x years?
-0.98^x + 1
15$ in transaction fees is nothing.
Also, props for the title, which mentions the money sent as if that were relevant for the transaction fee, as if the transaction were a percentage of that.
- ramblerman 9y agoFor a lot of people Bitcoin was what was going to disrupt the online payments market, removing the monopoly of the credit cards. Ridiculous transaction fees and slow payments don't help that goal. The digital gold narrative is newer and perhaps more powerful but I wouldn't call the transaction fees irrelevant.
- CyberDildonics 9y ago> The digital gold narrative is newer and perhaps more powerful but I wouldn't call the transaction fees irrelevant. The digital gold narrative comes from the blockstream|core|/r/bitcoin narrative that is desperate to keep the block size limit from expanding because their entire business plan is based around it. Anyone with common sense can see that a currency without fluid transactions is not very valuable, but with the constant and excessive censorship on /r/bitcoin and bitcoin talk some people have bought into thinking this somehow makes sense.
- alexasmyths 9y agoIf you keep all your income in cash under your bed, well that's what will happen. If you keep that much cash ... and simply put it in a long-term savings account, you'll earn just about enough to offset the actual inflation rate which is near zero. But since you won't keep any huge amounts in cash, it's all moot, isn't it?