4 ms·

Like it or not blockhains are here to stay. Nobody is going to run behind VCs looking for elite money in 20 years from now. Isnt it obvious? Blockhains are goin

Like it or not blockhains are here to stay. Nobody is going to run behind VCs looking for elite money in 20 years from now. Isnt it obvious? Blockhains are going to redistribute the wealth from the wealthy elite few to the masses. More and more wealth is being generated from nowhere. Just because there are some spammy ICOs now doesn't mean it's the end of the blockhain and ICO. This is going to be another rare instance in which hacker news is going to be wrong like Dropbox incident. Mark my words.

lucasmullens 8y ago
How would blockchains redistribute wealth away from the wealthy?
- ENGNR 8y ago
  Securities deregulation. On the one hand, investors deserve protections. On the other, has the regulation gone too far by design, locking out the middle class it used to serve so well. Why do companies wait until most of the value is already realized before they IPO these days Crypto could be Uber for securities, ignoring the regulator and using technology to self regulate, or by operating out of countries with lighter regulation
  - empath75 8y ago
    This is one of the most naive, starry-eyed posts I’ve ever seen here. If you deregulate securities you’re just going to see a whole bunch of senior citizens fleeced by high tech boiler rooms.
    - ENGNR 8y ago
      Geez sorry for outlining both sides of an argument in response to a question, hivemind downvotes are strong today
      - DonHopkins 8y ago
        It's ironic how the crowds of pro-crypto-currency shills so predictably whine and throw around the word "hivemind" in response to thinking people reacting rationally in response to their mindless greedy knee-jerk decentralized marketing of fraudulent pump-and-dump schemes.
        ENGNR 8y ago
        I don't even own any ICO tokens let alone shill them : D The emotional response here is fantastic, it reminds me of this essay http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html
  - zackmorris 8y ago
    This is a fallacy. Generally regulations tend to protect consumers or vulnerable groups from harm. The recent global trend towards deregulation and austerity moves in the opposite direction of social democratic movements in Germany, Scandinavian countries and much of the EU. The end result being more of a wild west free for all that results in something more like the Gilded Age of the 19th century than a well-optimized free market like imagined on the Jetsons. That said, there are certainly cases where financial market regulations have hurt the middle class. For example, a pattern day trader rule was imposed in February 2001 which required a $25,000 minimum balance to trade on margin: http://www.finra.org/investors/day-trading-margin-requirements-know-rules http://www.finra.org/investors/day-trading-margin-requiremen... More about trading on margin (in the most basic sense - potentially doubling your gains but wiping you out if your total stock holdings equal what you borrowed, triggering a margin call): https://www.investopedia.com/university/margin/ https://www.investopedia.com/university/margin/ The pattern day trader rule was introduced after the dot bomb with several stated goals like protecting inexperienced investors or limiting volatility. But it was really yet another tactic to keep the most lucrative forms of trading in the hands of wealthy/institutional investors and leave the masses in the slow lane of trading with their own money. It's extremely important to know the nuances of regulations and their unintended consequences. But instead we only generally hear about deregulation from politicians, because they know that insiders (their base and lobbyists) will always win over the masses in a fully deregulated economy. P.S. I didn't downvote you, because the sentiment you expressed is widespread and needs to be addressed
    - vkou 8y ago
      > But it was really yet another tactic to keep the most lucrative forms of trading in the hands of wealthy/institutional investors and leave the masses in the slow lane of trading with their own money. Accounted for risk, the most lucrative form of trading is buying a Vanguard index fund, and sitting on it for 30 years. Discounting risk, the most lucrative form of trading is flying to Vegas, and putting all your money on red.
    - fru2013 8y ago
      >For example, a pattern day trader rule was imposed in February 2001 which required a $25,000 minimum balance to trade on margin. Technically, Accounts with less than $25k can trade on margin, they just can't make four or more day-trade in a five day period.
  - airstrike 8y ago
    > Securities deregulation. Do you know anything at all about the year 1929?
distances 8y ago
As so often with blockchain topics, I have hard time reading if comments are satire or not. I'm assuming this was satirical?
themagician 8y ago
Right now the redistribution seems to be going from average people to snake oil salesmen.
RIMR 8y ago
Spoken like someone with zero understanding of economics.
s73v3r_ 8y ago
"Blockhains are going to redistribute the wealth from the wealthy elite few to the masses." There is exactly nothing in blockchain that guarantees this will happen, or even makes it a likely outcome.

lucasmullens 8y ago

How would blockchains redistribute wealth away from the wealthy?

ENGNR 8y ago
Securities deregulation. On the one hand, investors deserve protections. On the other, has the regulation gone too far by design, locking out the middle class it used to serve so well. Why do companies wait until most of the value is already realized before they IPO these days Crypto could be Uber for securities, ignoring the regulator and using technology to self regulate, or by operating out of countries with lighter regulation
- empath75 8y ago
  This is one of the most naive, starry-eyed posts I’ve ever seen here. If you deregulate securities you’re just going to see a whole bunch of senior citizens fleeced by high tech boiler rooms.
  - ENGNR 8y ago
    Geez sorry for outlining both sides of an argument in response to a question, hivemind downvotes are strong today
    - DonHopkins 8y ago
      It's ironic how the crowds of pro-crypto-currency shills so predictably whine and throw around the word "hivemind" in response to thinking people reacting rationally in response to their mindless greedy knee-jerk decentralized marketing of fraudulent pump-and-dump schemes.
      - ENGNR 8y ago
        I don't even own any ICO tokens let alone shill them : D The emotional response here is fantastic, it reminds me of this essay http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html
- zackmorris 8y ago
  This is a fallacy. Generally regulations tend to protect consumers or vulnerable groups from harm. The recent global trend towards deregulation and austerity moves in the opposite direction of social democratic movements in Germany, Scandinavian countries and much of the EU. The end result being more of a wild west free for all that results in something more like the Gilded Age of the 19th century than a well-optimized free market like imagined on the Jetsons. That said, there are certainly cases where financial market regulations have hurt the middle class. For example, a pattern day trader rule was imposed in February 2001 which required a $25,000 minimum balance to trade on margin: http://www.finra.org/investors/day-trading-margin-requirements-know-rules http://www.finra.org/investors/day-trading-margin-requiremen... More about trading on margin (in the most basic sense - potentially doubling your gains but wiping you out if your total stock holdings equal what you borrowed, triggering a margin call): https://www.investopedia.com/university/margin/ https://www.investopedia.com/university/margin/ The pattern day trader rule was introduced after the dot bomb with several stated goals like protecting inexperienced investors or limiting volatility. But it was really yet another tactic to keep the most lucrative forms of trading in the hands of wealthy/institutional investors and leave the masses in the slow lane of trading with their own money. It's extremely important to know the nuances of regulations and their unintended consequences. But instead we only generally hear about deregulation from politicians, because they know that insiders (their base and lobbyists) will always win over the masses in a fully deregulated economy. P.S. I didn't downvote you, because the sentiment you expressed is widespread and needs to be addressed
  - vkou 8y ago
    > But it was really yet another tactic to keep the most lucrative forms of trading in the hands of wealthy/institutional investors and leave the masses in the slow lane of trading with their own money. Accounted for risk, the most lucrative form of trading is buying a Vanguard index fund, and sitting on it for 30 years. Discounting risk, the most lucrative form of trading is flying to Vegas, and putting all your money on red.
  - fru2013 8y ago
    >For example, a pattern day trader rule was imposed in February 2001 which required a $25,000 minimum balance to trade on margin. Technically, Accounts with less than $25k can trade on margin, they just can't make four or more day-trade in a five day period.
- airstrike 8y ago
  > Securities deregulation. Do you know anything at all about the year 1929?

distances 8y ago

As so often with blockchain topics, I have hard time reading if comments are satire or not. I'm assuming this was satirical?

themagician 8y ago

Right now the redistribution seems to be going from average people to snake oil salesmen.

RIMR 8y ago

Spoken like someone with zero understanding of economics.

s73v3r_ 8y ago

"Blockhains are going to redistribute the wealth from the wealthy elite few to the masses." There is exactly nothing in blockchain that guarantees this will happen, or even makes it a likely outcome.