SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
It all started with a random tweet that compares Chuck E. Cheese tokens and Bitcoin. The mouse-in-chief (or whoever controls its account) decided to join the fray with a bitter tweet that eventually went semi-viral.
[...] Multiple arguments went into play — from the BTC price that recently breached $10,000 once again to coin's 24/7 availability (Chuck E. Cheese cannot relate).
[...] It's not exactly clear what Chuck E. Cheese was trying to achieve with this tweet, but it definitely got what it desperately needed — media attention.
Multiple outlets, including the Wall Street Journal, have already covered what can be considered one of the strangest Bitcoin debates you will ever see on Twitter.
https://u.today/chuck-e-cheese-mouse-gets-roasted-by-cryptocurrency-enthusiasts
The tweet that started it all:
Ryan Hoover
@rrhoover
Chuck E Cheese tokens are cool and all but I'd rather earn Bitcoin
(Score: 1) by sensei_moreh on Sunday July 07 2019, @12:54AM (1 child)
It works for any non-zero rate of interest, positive or negative
Geology - It's not rocket science; it's rock science
(Score: 2) by Rupert Pupnick on Sunday July 07 2019, @12:58PM
Thank you sensei and AC. The geometric series on which the mortgage formula is based doesn’t work for r=0, but does work for all other values positive and negative. I picked an interest rate of 6% because that makes r=.005, and did some arithmetic, and here’s what I got:
For a 30 year mortgage on $100,000 of principal at +6% the monthly payment is $628.
For a 30 year mortgage on $100,000 of principal at 0% the monthly payment is $312.50.
For a 30 year mortgage on $100,000 of principal at -6% the monthly payment is $125.
Note for this last case the bank only receives a total repayment of only 40k on the original 100k loan.
I understand that negative interest rates tend to only emerge in a deflationary economy, but isn’t this still giving money away? Is it because 40k is worth more in 30 years in some sense than 100k now? 30 years is a long time to be making that sort of a bet. I know the negative interest rates quoted in the article were much lower in magnitude, but would a bank really do this?