Economy Bitcoin/Crypto is imploding

Rob Battisti said:
The fact that you understand jackshit about what you’re talking about is comical.

You don’t understand how crypto fees would be less? I can see that. Mostly because you don’t even have a basic understanding of the space.
Click to expand...

Even if customers overlooked the loss of basic banking services, it would be trivial for banks to reduce their transactions fees as ledger systems are trivial in comparison to distributed transaction crypto systems. Banks charge the trivial amounts for transactions because they can, not that is the cost for them to carry out a ledger transaction.
 
Prefect said:
Even if customers overlooked the loss of basic banking services, it would be trivial for banks to reduce their transactions fees as ledger systems are trivial in comparison to distributed transaction crypto systems. Banks charge the trivial amounts for transactions because they can, not that is the cost for them to carry out a ledger transaction.
Click to expand...
SMH

Yes let’s keep justifying the 60 billion people have to pay to send money every year. A trivial 60 billion.

Maybe moving to a bankless trustless system would be… idk? Beneficial to the people?
 
By all means, be on the sides of the banks because you’re so verifiably stupid to understand there is a better way.
 
Rob Battisti said:
SMH

Yes let’s keep justifying the 60 billion people have to pay to send money every year.

Maybe moving to a bankless trustless system would be… idk? Beneficial to the people?
Click to expand...

That is what the market bears, not the actual cost associated with a bank transaction.
 
Right now BTC is so institutionalized that it tracks the stock market. While the volatility is still there beyond trad markets, it has become minimal over the last couple years and will continue to be minimal so long as it's mainstream now.

Right now BTC is a leading indicator when it comes to stock market movement since investors seem to cut ties with risk on assets first, before dumping stock. So a drop to $85k is actually pretty tame by crypto standards these days. If you start seeing real sustained losses over a couple month period of time, you may as well pepper your angus because all of the tech stocks you're holding are probably next. BTC dropping even 50 percent at this point, will point to a more serious issue with the economy. Esp since AI stocks are massively overvalued right now.
 
Prefect said:
The market isnt bearing their charges? Sure seems like it.
Click to expand...

Insinuating that it’s not a 99% reduction in fees to the individual by going over to an L1 like Solana or Algorand or Lightning Network on Bitcoin is ridiculous.
 
Rob Battisti said:
Insinuating that it’s not a 99% reduction in fees to the individual by going over to an L1 like Solana or Algorand or Lightning Network on Bitcoin is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Bank's charge per transaction is set by the market, not their cost. Crypto cost per transaction will always be greater than ledger costs. Banks will never price themselves out of being the main facilitator of transactions.
 
Rob Battisti said:
SMH

Yes let’s keep justifying the 60 billion people have to pay to send money every year. A trivial 60 billion.

Maybe moving to a bankless trustless system would be… idk? Beneficial to the people?
Click to expand...
Source for 60 billion of transfer fees, and the volume associated with those transfers
 
Prefect said:
Bank's charge per transaction is set by the market, not their cost. Crypto cost per transaction will always be greater than ledger costs. Banks will never price themselves out of being the main facilitator of transactions.
Click to expand...
You really are absolutely stupid. Idk why I’m even talking to you.

Banks and MTOs set the fees. 6.4% roughly.

Sending over an L1 like Solana, Algorand or Bitcoin Lightning Network would be essentially free.

The cost for a transaction on these layers are essentially free. To say they cost more is the most ignorant thing I’ve heard you say so far and that’s saying a lot.
 
High fees persist because users lack alternatives, not because banks are operating at the lowest sustainable price. When real alternatives appear their pricing power collapses.

Banks cannot settle internationally at anything close to crypto costs because they rely on:
  • correspondent banks
  • FX desks
  • compliance layers
  • multiple ledgers
  • reconciliation
  • settlement delays
  • capital reserve requirements
Incumbents lose market share all the time when they fail to match the price-performance ratio of new technology. Banks absolutely can price themselves out of the market. They have in many industries.

Not only is crypto faster but it’s more reliable and instantly settles and is essentially free.
 
TeTe said:
Right now BTC is so institutionalized that it tracks the stock market. While the volatility is still there beyond trad markets, it has become minimal over the last couple years and will continue to be minimal so long as it's mainstream now.

Right now BTC is a leading indicator when it comes to stock market movement since investors seem to cut ties with risk on assets first, before dumping stock. So a drop to $85k is actually pretty tame by crypto standards these days. If you start seeing real sustained losses over a couple month period of time, you may as well pepper your angus because all of the tech stocks you're holding are probably next. BTC dropping even 50 percent at this point, will point to a more serious issue with the economy. Esp since AI stocks are massively overvalued right now.
Click to expand...

Pepper your Angus?
 
Rob Battisti said:
You really are absolutely stupid. Idk why I’m even talking to you.

Banks and MTOs set the fees. 6.4% roughly.

Sending over an L1 like Solana, Algorand or Bitcoin Lightning Network would be essentially free.

The cost for a transaction on these layers are essentially free. To say they cost more is the most ignorant thing I’ve heard you say so far and that’s saying a lot.
Click to expand...

You being self selective for your argument by selecting 6.4% for something like paypal, which is not really competitive with anything. That isn't anything remote to what businesses would use for regular transactions. You are not including the fact you are going to get hit with currency exchange rate type charges to going into and out of crypto from standard currencies. 17 years in no one is using crypto as a currency so you always are exchanging back and forth with standard currencies.
 
Rob Battisti said:
High fees persist because users lack alternatives, not because banks are operating at the lowest sustainable price. When real alternatives appear their pricing power collapses.

Banks cannot settle internationally at anything close to crypto costs because they rely on:
  • correspondent banks
  • FX desks
  • compliance layers
  • multiple ledgers
  • reconciliation
  • settlement delays
  • capital reserve requirements
Incumbents lose market share all the time when they fail to match the price-performance ratio of new technology. Banks absolutely can price themselves out of the market. They have in many industries.

Not only is crypto faster but it’s more reliable and instantly settles and is essentially free.
Click to expand...

Hypothetically, if crypto could pressure on transaction cost, it isn't like banks aren't going to lower their fees to maintain their ability to be the facilitator of transactions. Many of the things that banks provide are services, which businesses would want. If someone wanted stripped down no service banking, banks could provide that cheaper with their ledger system than some internationally distributed computing network that can't handle real-world transaction volumes.
 
Prefect said:
You being self selective for your argument by selecting 6.4% for something like paypal, which is not really competitive with anything. That isn't anything remote to what businesses would use for regular transactions. You are not including the fact you are going to get hit with currency exchange rate type charges to going into and out of crypto from standard currencies. 17 years in no one is using crypto as a currency so you always are exchanging back and forth with standard currencies.
Click to expand...
I’m not being selective with anything, shitface. You’re denying the remittance amount?
Prefect said:
Hypothetically, if crypto could pressure on transaction cost, it isn't like banks aren't going to lower their fees to maintain their ability to be the facilitator of transactions. Many of the things that banks provide are services, which businesses would want. If someone wanted stripped down no service banking, banks could provide that cheaper with their ledger system than some internationally distributed computing network that can't handle real-world transaction volumes.
Click to expand...
banks cannot provide it cheaper — that’s the whole point!

I’m tired of arguing with a completely ignorant person.

Good day.
 
I'll just continue to DCAing and not giving a fuck. This "crash" is pretty tame compared to other ones. U.S. government alone is 38 trillion dollars in debt that inflation needs to go some where and it goes into assets. People may be able to manipulate the price of btc but they cant make more of it.

I like the idea that there may be an alternate currency/store of value that no government can create more of and I happily risk some of my wealth to invest in a potential solution to governments inflating its peoples currency while the rest of you sit back with your butt cheeks open letting governments and banks rape you via inflation and fees.
 
Rob Battisti said:
I’m not being selective with anything, shitface. You’re denying the remittance amount?

banks cannot provide it cheaper — that’s the whole point!

I’m tired of arguing with a completely ignorant person.

Good day.
Click to expand...

Banks provide far more services than no service crypto. They also use a ledger system that validates transactions in a way that is many times more efficient than a global computer network that needs to solve sudokus to confirm a single payment. The remittance amount is not nearly as high as you claim in most cases. Anyone can validate that. The amount is set by banks and by what the market will bear. It is not a reflection of the physical cost of facilitating an international transfer.

When a credit card charges a merchant 2.5 percent, that does not mean it cost them 2.5 percent to process it. It is simply a price point where the merchant gets a service and the credit card company makes money. You keep treating the charge for a service as if it is the cost of providing that service. They are not the same thing. It does not remotely cost 2.5 percent for a credit card company to run a transaction. The incremental cost of processing one more transaction is near zero because the global network is already built and they process a massive number of transactions. Crypto is not solving a problem that hasn't been solved and solved better. The only gripe maybe the current amount charged for the service, not the service itself. That is why in my opinion why we are 17 years into crypto and there is nearly no adoption of it being used as currency.
 
Last edited:
Prefect said:
Banks provide far more services than no service crypto. They also use a ledger system that validates transactions in a way that is many times more efficient than a global computer network that needs to solve sudokus to confirm a single payment. The remittance amount is not nearly as high as you claim in most cases. Anyone can validate that. The amount is set by banks and by what the market will bear. It is not a reflection of the physical cost of facilitating an international transfer.

When a credit card charges a merchant 2.5 percent, that does not mean it cost them 2.5 percent to process it. It is simply a price point where the merchant gets a service and the credit card company makes money. You keep treating the charge for a service as if it is the cost of providing that service. They are not the same thing. It does not remotely cost 2.5 percent for a credit card company to run a transaction. The incremental cost of processing one more transaction is near zero because the global network is already built and they process a massive number of transactions. Crypto is not solving a problem that hasn't been solved and solved better. The only gripe maybe the current amount charged for the service, not the service itself. That is why in my opinion why we are 17 years into crypto and there is nearly no adoption of it being used as currency.
Click to expand...
Banks validate transactions better? No.

Anyone can validate that. Just not you, right?

What the markets bear… until something better came along.

Thats the whole point, dipshit. The banks charge the money when crypto platforms can do it for free in a trustless environment! YOU WON’T NEED THE MIDDLE MAN.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,152
Messages
58,262,560
Members
175,984
Latest member
Omar Ahmed Lotfy

Share this page

Back
Top