Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The US Treasury has been doing that, and they devalued the Dollar in recent years. When a tech-savy individual does it, it's punishable crime called Counterfitting.
Also, no matter how tech-savy they are, there are safegaurds that are capable of differenciating counterfit from real currency. Not to give tips or anything, but if somebody wants to print money out, it's best to print smaller notes, no larger than $5 bills, and avoid depositing huge sums into an account, in fact it's best to keep them as Cash On Hand and spend them as needed to avoid being caught, or at least hope he or she doesn't get caught.
He's not printing, but rather using the computer to put funds in a foreign account then transfer the foreign currency to dollars.
Well this is basically how I made my money. I started a bank in Barbados, and I loaned myself $5,000,000 as an unsecured loan. I then declared the bank insolvent due to borrower default, closed the doors and went home. I do it every few years whenever I run low.
Well this is basically how I made my money. I started a bank in Barbados, and I loaned myself $5,000,000 as an unsecured loan. I then declared the bank insolvent due to borrower default, closed the doors and went home. I do it every few years whenever I run low.
First post. Thought there were enough economically knowledgeable folks here to give this question a shot that I've been wondering about.
Hopefully I'll be able to contribute to the forum beyond this post and create good discussion.
So here goes...
Considering that most money these days are just numbers on a server somewhere, I'm wondering how hard it would be for a savvy individual to just create his own u.s. dollars in a bank account?
Follow me. Suppose this person incorporates a business in, say, the Isle of Man. If we go to the Society for Interbank Funds Transfer's website we can find that an obscure company like COUTTS AND CO (MANX) LIMITED (whoever that is) has a Swift Code...meaning (I think) that they could have access to send financial transfers through swift.
Consider further that u.s. dollars outside of United States Jurisdiction ("Eurodollars" as they're called) are not really known as they aren't regulated in the same way the United States money supply is...
Why is not feasible for some guy to come along and Swift transfer $1 million to a U.S. bank account that he "created" on a computer server somewhere on the Isle of Man? It'd be enough to make him rich but hardly a drop in the bucket when it comes to the amount of money that is transferred through swift.
Well this is basically how I made my money. I started a bank in Barbados, and I loaned myself $5,000,000 as an unsecured loan. I then declared the bank insolvent due to borrower default, closed the doors and went home. I do it every few years whenever I run low.
I know that you are kidding because the bank has to have on its books $5,000,000 to loan out in the first place. Now if you were to slice and dice a bunch of loans (All made to yourself) and sell them to unsuspecting fools then default then you mint have a chance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dub dub II
lol, thoughts?
I think you need to streamline your process.
What you need to do is to set up a central bank. Start your own country then set up a central bank then you can print as much money as you want. But the trick is to buy debt interments in the US with it as that will finance your trade surplus. That trade surplus is where the money is. I bet it doesn't have to be real.
Ultimately people should be creating their own money. Money is simply a technology that serves a purpose in society. Typically the traits that make good money are 1) being a medium of exchange 2) being a unit of account 3) durability 4) fungibility 5) difficult to counterfeit and 6) being a store of value. If people can come up with new and innovative technologies that have these traits, then that's probably a good thing. If money is good, people will choose to use it. If it is not good, people will reject it. Unfortunately in our society there is a monopoly of bad money being maintained with the barrel of a gun.
As far as bitcoin, it is a medium of exchange, unit of account, fungilble, and presently difficult to counterfeit. It's still too new to know if it is a store of value and I don't think it could be called durable. On the surface the concept of bitcoin seems logical but to me there is a big red flag and a fundamental flaw:
The big red flag is that the early adopters of bitcoin saw enormous returns on their efforts of bitcoin mining. The system is fundamentally designed to make it so that the people who come into the currency later do not see the same level of value as its inventor and early adopters. This is a characteristic of a classic Ponzi scheme. I'm not sure if bitcoin is intended to be such, but because it has this characteristic it is very possible that it could turn out that way.
The fundamental flaw of bitcoin is that it's encryption scheme can theoretically be broken through quantum computing and Shor's algorithm. Very few knowledgeable people in the bitcoin community dispute this fact. Their response is typically that a) quantum computers on the scale necessary to crack encryption do not exist and b) if they did, there could be a bitcoin "banking holiday" while a new encryption scheme is implemented. It's worthy of note that mainstream banking and currency are vulnerable in the same way since they too are electronic and rely on encryption that can be broken with Shor's algorithm, but I think that could be the precise reason that this technology is not available outside of the government.
Quantum computing is very high up on the priority list for the 3-letter agencies of the United States. Roughly 10 years ago, bleeding edge scientists funded by the U.S. intelligence community wrote:
"The future ability of quantum computers might be a decade or two away, their future ability to
break public-key cryptography has important implications for the encryption of highly sensitive
information today. For these applications, we must already design new public-key
cryptosystems and one-way functions that are immune to quantum cryptanalysis." http://qist.lanl.gov/pdfs/qc_roadmap.pdf (page 186)
Since we are about to enter the time-frame in which the intelligence community predicted this technology could be available, it is important to consider when deciding if you want to use bitcoin as money or currency or both. A lot of people use bitcoin because it is outside of the banking system and can't easily be influenced by governments and financial institutions. The existence of quantum computers would drastically change this dynamic. As far as the "banking holiday" goes, I think that the bit coin system would never come back online in the same form because there would be such a crisis of confidence that only the die-hard believers would remain.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
