PAT Kane’s article on crypto-currencies like Bitcoin (The National, September 16, 2017) reflects the increasing inflation of a bubble and the worrying inability to separate a possibly useful technology (Blockchain) from a building hysteria using that technology. It will end in more than tears.
Most of the stories, like this article, talk about other people doubling or tripling or quadrupling their “money” in a short space of time. What you don’t hear is about those who jumped into the scheme at its peak who are now sitting on significant losses.
The tulip bubble in 17th-century Holland saw values soar to more than the average annual salary and more than the price of a house before crashing. It was a classic bubble driven by greed and emotion. When the JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon told investors at a conference last week this was a fraud worse than tulip bulbs he was probably right, because when the bubble burst at least you had some flowers in your garden. Does it also have the smell of the Darien scheme about it? Although that at least was based on a genuine economic venture, albeit one that was poorly thought through and sabotaged by the Westminster government of the time and arguably was a prime mover in the Union of 1707.
When people stop questioning the fundamental value on which an asset is based and instead “invest” on the basis of their emotions and on what they see as an easy path to riches achieved by somebody else, you have the essential definition of a bubble. The bottom line is that this is an unregulated and un-policed market and subject to not only the whims and emotions of those participating but also to government action. Last week China banned crypto-currency exchanges, for example.
I would be very concerned if somebody read this article and saw some validation in crypto-currencies without thoroughly understanding that there is no underlying fundamental value and that, while some may do well, like always in a pyramid scheme the risk of loss is significant.
David Cairns
Finavon
THE highly disturbing allegations of brutality against children in the “care” of nuns at Smyllum Park, Lanark, have recently been augmented by the discovery of a mass grave believed to contain the remains of up to 400 children who died there.
The scandal shares many features with the events at Tuam, Ireland – not least the unwillingness of relevant institutions to carry out thorough enquiries until decades later, and the struggles of survivors to be listened to.
Last week, the Catholic Church in Scotland released a statement which said “any suggestion that the deaths of some children were caused by anything other than natural causes should be investigated to the fullest extent possible”. It beggars belief the Church has not previously carried out their own investigation into the practices at Smyllum Park during the decades between its closure and the present day.
While the reaction of the Catholic Church is sadly predictable, the public expect a far higher standard of response from Police Scotland and the Procurator Fiscal. However, in a joint statement dated September 12 they said: “Based on the information currently available, there is no evidence to suggest a crime has been committed or that any deaths require to be investigated, although this will be kept under review”.
Given that the Church has repeatedly been shown to turn a blind eye to the past abuses within its own organisation, why should the public believe the religious orders, and who’s to say that their records do not exist?
Charlie Lynch
Secretary, Scottish Secular Society
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here