3 ms·

> So no, BTC does not solve any problems at all. If you define the problems away, certainly! But look at the logical coordination: your point #2 depends on po

by 1996 6y ago

> So no, BTC does not solve any problems at all. If you define the problems away, certainly! But look at the logical coordination: your point #2 depends on point #1 being true. Remove the belief in monetary policy and it all falls into place. > the panic to fixed currency will shut everything down It's an opinion. Lots of people think the deflationary incentives built in are bad for the economy. Another alternative view is to look at all the busywork (extraction and wastage of resource) that happens because of our current system: far fewer turkeys will be allowed to fly with a crypto that just can't be inflated. You may still argue for expansation during demand crisis (another opinion). A government could still obey Keynesian prescriptions with BTC as the world currency: however, it would have to balance things out by building tax revenue during happy years, to spend it away on sad years - with a hard limit. That "small detail" of an hard limit will certainly change a lot of things: the government will have to tax/steal/confiscate what it can't wish into existence (or print). It doesn't change much in practice, but it will be quite fun to watch! I think it will be the end of social democracy! > And of course, there is no institution that we trust, internationally. ... now let me tell you about trustless and crypto :)

jariel 6y ago
I won't respond to every point, but I will say that yes - none of the responses I articulated are guaranteed outcomes, it' not black and white, however, they are rational, moreover there is a 100% chance that effective monetary policy is better than no monetary policy. There is 100% chance of economic calamity if there is an external shock. You can tie your boat to the dock with rope (flexible) or you can use boards and nail them to the dock and the boat (inflexible). As long as the boat stays in the same place, the planks are probably better than rope. But the moment the tide comes in or leaves (i.e. cycles in the economy) or a big wave hits (existential shock) - your planks are going to break and the ship will be wayward. It is not an 'opinion' that as an economy expands, it needs 'more currency' or else prices get weird and the entire point of the currency fails. And yes, as I said straight off in my comments, currency debasement is a legit problem. As for 'trusting crypto' - it's pointless because BTC 'numbers' are completely worthless. I would rather trust the a poorly managed 'World Bank Dollar' that maps 'Global Dollars' to assets in some roughly transparent way, then a 'distributed network of numbers' - which is basically ridiculous. Bitcoin is a neat idea, worthy of experimentation, but most of the Bitcoin people a) don't understand currency or b) are on some level of the Ponzi koolaid latter or both. Finally, none of this is to say that BTC won't take hold. If enough people want to use it for whatever, it will be used for that whatever. That doesn't mean it makes any sense, but we do a lot of things in this world that make no sense.
- 1996 6y ago
  > I won't respond to every point fair enough > There is 100% chance of economic calamity if there is an external shock. It was only in 1929 that things got serious, and a lot of people believe the government wanton destructions of goods and forced price policy only made the crisis longer. Personally, I believe it was due to technological progress: before, governments couldn't easily enforce their will due to lack of efficient long distance communications, organized police forces, etc. > else prices get weird That's for sure, but it remains to be seen how much of a problem this "weirdness" could be, with modern technology (like electronic labels) > I would rather trust the a poorly managed 'World Bank Dollar' that maps 'Global Dollars' to assets in some roughly transparent way, then a 'distributed network of numbers' - which is basically ridiculous So far in your arguments I have mostly noticed opinions, which are plausible and debatable. However, this is plain wrong. Value does not come from an external authority (when it attempts to, Gresham law applies!) but from a coordinated opinion at the society level. US Dollars are worth keeping in Argentina not because of the US military might, or the Argentinian goverment orders (which does everything it can to limit dollarization) but because people seems to agree that it does a good job in being both a unit of account and a store of value. Eventually, people will learn to skip the middleman. This is what's already happening in India and even more so in Nigeria: look at how the remittances seen by the regular banking sector shrunk to nothing, and how these governments are now attacking crypto. I think it proves most people do not share your trust in systems. This is why I follow with great interest the robinhood/gamestop saga: when these idle hands will realize the game is crooked, they will move to crypto. They will start noticing interesting profits, and it will be the beginning of the end for the existing fiat system. The pandemic, causing boredom and excess cash, is certainly precipitating the outcome. > Finally, none of this is to say that BTC won't take hold. If enough people want to use it for whatever, it will be used for that whatever And you are totally correct. I try to limit my discussions with nocoiners on HN (it's sterile), except to understand their arguments. Your argumentation is more solid that most people, but based on opinions (inflation is good, monetary policy is good) that may not withstand the passing of time and technological changes.
  - jariel 6y ago
    If you cannot 'trust the system' then nothing works - there is no avoiding it, everything breaks down. If you do not want to accept USD for reasons relating to 'trust' then there is no way to effectively exchange with the US economy - other than by using something else that has value. Like maybe Oil. (FYI if the US was small, you could use the currency of a different nation). It has nothing to do with armies, power, or even really the petro dollar. Crypto solves absolutely nothing - there is not a single benefit to anything related to BTC, other than experimental value. There is no rationality whatsoever in a convention of regarding the 'exchange of numbers'. The 'way forward' is to build systems with integrity, because we depend on them - there is no avoiding the fact we need a credible Medical system, Justice system, Monetary system, Regulatory system etc. The 'libertarian/trustless' notion behind BTC is without foundation, it's completely irrational. If Argentinians want to trade with Americans then they have to qualify the value of that trade with how much they 'trust' Americans and their system and there is no way around that.

by 1996 6y ago

jariel 6y ago

I won't respond to every point, but I will say that yes - none of the responses I articulated are guaranteed outcomes, it' not black and white, however, they are rational, moreover there is a 100% chance that effective monetary policy is better than no monetary policy. There is 100% chance of economic calamity if there is an external shock. You can tie your boat to the dock with rope (flexible) or you can use boards and nail them to the dock and the boat (inflexible). As long as the boat stays in the same place, the planks are probably better than rope. But the moment the tide comes in or leaves (i.e. cycles in the economy) or a big wave hits (existential shock) - your planks are going to break and the ship will be wayward. It is not an 'opinion' that as an economy expands, it needs 'more currency' or else prices get weird and the entire point of the currency fails. And yes, as I said straight off in my comments, currency debasement is a legit problem. As for 'trusting crypto' - it's pointless because BTC 'numbers' are completely worthless. I would rather trust the a poorly managed 'World Bank Dollar' that maps 'Global Dollars' to assets in some roughly transparent way, then a 'distributed network of numbers' - which is basically ridiculous. Bitcoin is a neat idea, worthy of experimentation, but most of the Bitcoin people a) don't understand currency or b) are on some level of the Ponzi koolaid latter or both. Finally, none of this is to say that BTC won't take hold. If enough people want to use it for whatever, it will be used for that whatever. That doesn't mean it makes any sense, but we do a lot of things in this world that make no sense.

1996 6y ago
> I won't respond to every point fair enough > There is 100% chance of economic calamity if there is an external shock. It was only in 1929 that things got serious, and a lot of people believe the government wanton destructions of goods and forced price policy only made the crisis longer. Personally, I believe it was due to technological progress: before, governments couldn't easily enforce their will due to lack of efficient long distance communications, organized police forces, etc. > else prices get weird That's for sure, but it remains to be seen how much of a problem this "weirdness" could be, with modern technology (like electronic labels) > I would rather trust the a poorly managed 'World Bank Dollar' that maps 'Global Dollars' to assets in some roughly transparent way, then a 'distributed network of numbers' - which is basically ridiculous So far in your arguments I have mostly noticed opinions, which are plausible and debatable. However, this is plain wrong. Value does not come from an external authority (when it attempts to, Gresham law applies!) but from a coordinated opinion at the society level. US Dollars are worth keeping in Argentina not because of the US military might, or the Argentinian goverment orders (which does everything it can to limit dollarization) but because people seems to agree that it does a good job in being both a unit of account and a store of value. Eventually, people will learn to skip the middleman. This is what's already happening in India and even more so in Nigeria: look at how the remittances seen by the regular banking sector shrunk to nothing, and how these governments are now attacking crypto. I think it proves most people do not share your trust in systems. This is why I follow with great interest the robinhood/gamestop saga: when these idle hands will realize the game is crooked, they will move to crypto. They will start noticing interesting profits, and it will be the beginning of the end for the existing fiat system. The pandemic, causing boredom and excess cash, is certainly precipitating the outcome. > Finally, none of this is to say that BTC won't take hold. If enough people want to use it for whatever, it will be used for that whatever And you are totally correct. I try to limit my discussions with nocoiners on HN (it's sterile), except to understand their arguments. Your argumentation is more solid that most people, but based on opinions (inflation is good, monetary policy is good) that may not withstand the passing of time and technological changes.
- jariel 6y ago
  If you cannot 'trust the system' then nothing works - there is no avoiding it, everything breaks down. If you do not want to accept USD for reasons relating to 'trust' then there is no way to effectively exchange with the US economy - other than by using something else that has value. Like maybe Oil. (FYI if the US was small, you could use the currency of a different nation). It has nothing to do with armies, power, or even really the petro dollar. Crypto solves absolutely nothing - there is not a single benefit to anything related to BTC, other than experimental value. There is no rationality whatsoever in a convention of regarding the 'exchange of numbers'. The 'way forward' is to build systems with integrity, because we depend on them - there is no avoiding the fact we need a credible Medical system, Justice system, Monetary system, Regulatory system etc. The 'libertarian/trustless' notion behind BTC is without foundation, it's completely irrational. If Argentinians want to trade with Americans then they have to qualify the value of that trade with how much they 'trust' Americans and their system and there is no way around that.