SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Bitcoin just ended its worst-performing month in seven years in terms of month-over-month price declines. While this is comparing rate of fall and not absolute values, the world of economics is run on rate.
The world’s largest cryptocurrency began November at an average price across exchanges of $6,341, but as of 0:00 UTC on December 1 is trading at just $3,964, according to CoinDesk’s Bitcoin Price Index.
As it stands, the near $2,400 drop in bitcoin’s price has created a -37.4 percent monthly performance, which is its worst on record since August 2011, when it fell from roughly $8 to $4.80 to print a -40 percent monthly loss.
This may have some good impact for PC gamers:
Bitcoin miners hit hard by the cryptocurrency’s crash may be throwing in the towel.
The Bitcoin network’s hash rate, one way of gauging the computing power dedicated to mining the digital currency, dropped about 24 percent from an all-time high at the end of August through Nov. 24, according to Blockchain.com. While the decline may have partially resulted from miners switching to other cryptocurrencies, JPMorgan Chase & Co. says some in the industry are losing money after Bitcoin’s price tumbled.
A big miner shakeout could be bad news for chipmakers including Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. and Nvidia Corp. who supply the industry, along with mining-rig designers like Bitmain Technologies Ltd. that are pursuing initial public offerings.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday December 03 2018, @09:25PM (2 children)
That's obviously false. A slave had considerable net worth [measuringworth.com]. It was just owned by the slave's owner.
As for the "working-class person" of the Gilded Age, what exactly was supposed to make their value negative to themselves or others? Debt? That has to be borrowed against something and used for something.
It's worth noting that "net worth" which ignores future income is a silly notion for comparing peoples' wealth. There's too many people out who aren't interested in and/or competent in building up net wealth. When one chooses to be poor, that's a terrible reason to call them a slave.
Nor did the Federal Reserve have anything to do with making people's net worth turn out positive. It was never their job.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday December 03 2018, @10:30PM (1 child)
You are obviously using a different definition of net worth than I am. Net worth is assets you own minus debts you owe, and by your own admission slaves had no assets at all to their name. That would be like saying "I have no money in the bank, no home, and no car, and a payday loan, but my company's CEO has a big house so I'm really rich!"
Post-slavery, a lot of former slaves ended up as sharecroppers, and still owned very little if anything, and were constantly in debt to their landlords who were in many cases their former masters.
Yes, debt. Most farmers were in debt up to and beyond their eyeballs, borrowed against the future value of their crops, to pay for land, seeds, equipment, etc in addition to bare survival. Miners were in debt up to and beyond their eyeballs borrowing against their future work for the company to pay for housing, food, and other basics. Urban factory workers often owed money to landlords and retailers beyond their ability to pay for it, again borrowed against their future earnings and the fact that the landlords couldn't find a new more reliable tenant and/or kick them out just yet.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday December 04 2018, @02:31AM
Slaves aren't the only people in the world. I already mentioned the slave owner.
Notice that "future" shows up after "borrowed/borrowing". Remember my talk about "future income"?