4 ms·

Iran and Venezuela would disagree, or any country the US government has banned from the international banking network. The fact that one country can unilaterall

Iran and Venezuela would disagree, or any country the US government has banned from the international banking network. The fact that one country can unilaterally block bank transfers between third parties solidifies the need for non-politically centralized banking.

arcticbull 6y ago
Because allowing the transfers enriched those in power, helping keep the leadership in place and the people down. For the record this is something you can vote on and change, because it’s a group decision. Unlike all those poor scammers who keep getting blacklisted from exchanges and such. Secondarily, crypto is no panacea here. You can’t solve the initial distribution problem. How do you decide which individual gets how many coins to start? If you ignore that issue, and if you can only trade within the country the total amount of crypto and the total amount of local currency remains the same meaning the total net welfare has not improved. If you can trade outside the country a myriad better options exist. Crypto doesn’t help here either, it just purports to through magic of the blockchain. What’s necessary isn’t magic beans that live in computers but for the locals to rise up and overthrow their local governments and institute proper monetary and fiscal policy. Concrete example: why don’t people use bitcoin in Venezuela (separate from the fact a single transaction costs a few weeks wages)? It’s been 11 years and were still waiting like skeletons for op to deliver. How did the Petro change the situation there?
- lifty 6y ago
  People actually use Bitcoin in Venezuela [0], not en mass, but still, it provides some very useful escape hatches for a part of the population. 0. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47553048 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47553048
  - arcticbull 6y ago
    Part of the population solves none of the problem, as I outlined. The monthly minimum wage is 1 bitcoin transaction fee. It's only the wealthy that can afford to use it in the first place. It's doing nothing to increase the total welfare of the system. I never disputed that a select few couldn't benefit from it, it's not a good general solution, though.
    - zalkota 6y ago
      Then use dai? Much lower fee. When ethereum scales to thousands of transactions a second, it will be the top solution.
      - arcticbull 6y ago
        That does not solve the initial distribution problem.

arcticbull 6y ago

Because allowing the transfers enriched those in power, helping keep the leadership in place and the people down. For the record this is something you can vote on and change, because it’s a group decision. Unlike all those poor scammers who keep getting blacklisted from exchanges and such. Secondarily, crypto is no panacea here. You can’t solve the initial distribution problem. How do you decide which individual gets how many coins to start? If you ignore that issue, and if you can only trade within the country the total amount of crypto and the total amount of local currency remains the same meaning the total net welfare has not improved. If you can trade outside the country a myriad better options exist. Crypto doesn’t help here either, it just purports to through magic of the blockchain. What’s necessary isn’t magic beans that live in computers but for the locals to rise up and overthrow their local governments and institute proper monetary and fiscal policy. Concrete example: why don’t people use bitcoin in Venezuela (separate from the fact a single transaction costs a few weeks wages)? It’s been 11 years and were still waiting like skeletons for op to deliver. How did the Petro change the situation there?

lifty 6y ago
People actually use Bitcoin in Venezuela [0], not en mass, but still, it provides some very useful escape hatches for a part of the population. 0. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47553048 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47553048
- arcticbull 6y ago
  Part of the population solves none of the problem, as I outlined. The monthly minimum wage is 1 bitcoin transaction fee. It's only the wealthy that can afford to use it in the first place. It's doing nothing to increase the total welfare of the system. I never disputed that a select few couldn't benefit from it, it's not a good general solution, though.
  - zalkota 6y ago
    Then use dai? Much lower fee. When ethereum scales to thousands of transactions a second, it will be the top solution.
    - arcticbull 6y ago
      That does not solve the initial distribution problem.