3 ms·

Sorry, I don't see how that responded to my initial question. > War, genocide, mass murder, bureaucracy etc... These are only enabled because people are being

Sorry, I don't see how that responded to my initial question. > War, genocide, mass murder, bureaucracy etc... These are only enabled because people are being compensated on something they need to acquire goods and services in a region, So in a world where all fiat currency is replaced by bitcoin, aren't people still going to be compensated and then acquire goods and services? So how does bitcoin avoid that problem? If arms manufacturers are paid in bitcoin, they are still going to lobby the US government to get involved in wars to increase demand. If your main critique is capitalism, then I at least understand the specific philosophy you're criticizing. But if that's the case, then I don't see why bitcoin is a necessary part of that solution. I'm really not understanding how "fiat" is the root evil here. Currency has value because people have trust in it preserving that value and being recognized by others for that value, no?

Melting_Harps 6y ago
> Sorry, I don't see how that responded to my initial question. Only because you don't understand the nature of money, and I want to preface I cannot solve that for you but I will try to clarify. > So in a world where all fiat currency is replaced by bitcoin, aren't people still going to be compensated and then acquire goods and services? I personally don't think it will just be Bitcoin, thier will be other alts. I just want make sure we make that clear. > So how does bitcoin avoid that problem? If arms manufacturers are paid in bitcoin, they are still going to lobby the US government to get involved in wars to increase demand. First, you're missing a critical understanding in what makes money 'valuable' and thus a currency, this has been understood since Aristotle laid it out: what you're missing is bitcoin is scarce, and thus cannot be created to fund these types of expenditures, and if they can it won't go on for very long. It's not that we just transition to a new medium of exchange, but a new value system itself which will demand that a scarce thing like Bitcoin be used rather a non-scarce thing like USD be used to bomb Syrians non-stop for matters that the CIA deems vital to it's geo-political strategy but that the soldier in Arkansas who fights these wars can acquire doing more valuable thing in Society--for example regenerative agriculture of hemp to create opioid replacement therapies. You cannot run a deficit budget like the US or any empire before it has to fund it's militaristic pursuits with a scarce token based system--it's impossible due to the scarcity of the token to amass armaments on that level upon something we have all accepted has value and can be used for more productive ends like the 3 things I mentioned before that will serve Mankind rather than the lobbyists who promote warfare. This is economics 101, but the short thing is Warfare is an economic driver of the State, and it's affiliate Arms contractors, if you now level the playing field for what you're willing to die for why not just do the thing that promotes greater wealth creation for all than kill for Rayhtheon who does business with an entity that has created an unpayable $24+ trillion debt? You have to understand the paradigm shift that is happening within this model, too: not just in monetary terms but in the Social Value structures that it depends on. Most people have lost confidence in their governments with COIVD, for good reason, wealth inequality has never been worse, which is why I think people are now willing to accept something like Bitcoin at all as the see how terrible all Government have conducted themselves thus far--only the smallest island nations being the exception. > If your main critique is capitalism, then I at least understand the specific philosophy you're criticizing. But if that's the case, then I don't see why bitcoin is a necessary part of that solution. I'm an Anarcho-Capitalist. I'm arguing we haven't had Capitalism due to a lack of open currency creation and independent systems outside the influence of the State, and the very nature of the Nation-State which creates and back fiat systems. Bitcoin and what it represents is the first true form of actual free market capitalism we have seen, and it revealed the litany of problems withing it too mind you; but this cronyist-capitalist system most call 'capitalism' is the problem and is just as bad as the socialist/communist doctrines as it assumes it knows better than the Market (producers and consumers) and is often just as willing to take it's perverse models to near extinction of it's users--look at the aforementioned 3 aspects and why they are so critical in modern life on Earth. > Currency has value because people have trust in it preserving that value and being recognized by others for that value, no? That is one of a currency's supposed properties, yes; but as I explained, Nation-State based currencies (PM backed or fiat) don't have a very good track record at doing that, hence my arguments thus far. > I'm really not understanding how "fiat" is the root evil here. Then you are beyond my help, just as I cannot teach you the value of PgP encryption in the 90s that led to the first crypto wars and was something Zimmerman was willing to go to jail for and created work arounds to bypass the ITAR weapons and arms 'violations.' I simply cannot give you an education in History, Politics, and Economics in this format, much less why that should matter to YOU as an individual. I don't know you, nor do I understand your ideological underpinnings that make you reluctant to see what I have explained thus far. But just know that what I have said can all be independently verified if you apply the effort. Should you want to continue this with more research on your end and at some later time want to carry this conversation on in a more nuanced manner than just 'I don't get it,' I'm open to that possibility. Edit: And HN has now blocked me from posting again from the down vote brigade, this is so tiring...

Melting_Harps 6y ago

> Sorry, I don't see how that responded to my initial question. Only because you don't understand the nature of money, and I want to preface I cannot solve that for you but I will try to clarify. > So in a world where all fiat currency is replaced by bitcoin, aren't people still going to be compensated and then acquire goods and services? I personally don't think it will just be Bitcoin, thier will be other alts. I just want make sure we make that clear. > So how does bitcoin avoid that problem? If arms manufacturers are paid in bitcoin, they are still going to lobby the US government to get involved in wars to increase demand. First, you're missing a critical understanding in what makes money 'valuable' and thus a currency, this has been understood since Aristotle laid it out: what you're missing is bitcoin is scarce, and thus cannot be created to fund these types of expenditures, and if they can it won't go on for very long. It's not that we just transition to a new medium of exchange, but a new value system itself which will demand that a scarce thing like Bitcoin be used rather a non-scarce thing like USD be used to bomb Syrians non-stop for matters that the CIA deems vital to it's geo-political strategy but that the soldier in Arkansas who fights these wars can acquire doing more valuable thing in Society--for example regenerative agriculture of hemp to create opioid replacement therapies. You cannot run a deficit budget like the US or any empire before it has to fund it's militaristic pursuits with a scarce token based system--it's impossible due to the scarcity of the token to amass armaments on that level upon something we have all accepted has value and can be used for more productive ends like the 3 things I mentioned before that will serve Mankind rather than the lobbyists who promote warfare. This is economics 101, but the short thing is Warfare is an economic driver of the State, and it's affiliate Arms contractors, if you now level the playing field for what you're willing to die for why not just do the thing that promotes greater wealth creation for all than kill for Rayhtheon who does business with an entity that has created an unpayable $24+ trillion debt? You have to understand the paradigm shift that is happening within this model, too: not just in monetary terms but in the Social Value structures that it depends on. Most people have lost confidence in their governments with COIVD, for good reason, wealth inequality has never been worse, which is why I think people are now willing to accept something like Bitcoin at all as the see how terrible all Government have conducted themselves thus far--only the smallest island nations being the exception. > If your main critique is capitalism, then I at least understand the specific philosophy you're criticizing. But if that's the case, then I don't see why bitcoin is a necessary part of that solution. I'm an Anarcho-Capitalist. I'm arguing we haven't had Capitalism due to a lack of open currency creation and independent systems outside the influence of the State, and the very nature of the Nation-State which creates and back fiat systems. Bitcoin and what it represents is the first true form of actual free market capitalism we have seen, and it revealed the litany of problems withing it too mind you; but this cronyist-capitalist system most call 'capitalism' is the problem and is just as bad as the socialist/communist doctrines as it assumes it knows better than the Market (producers and consumers) and is often just as willing to take it's perverse models to near extinction of it's users--look at the aforementioned 3 aspects and why they are so critical in modern life on Earth. > Currency has value because people have trust in it preserving that value and being recognized by others for that value, no? That is one of a currency's supposed properties, yes; but as I explained, Nation-State based currencies (PM backed or fiat) don't have a very good track record at doing that, hence my arguments thus far. > I'm really not understanding how "fiat" is the root evil here. Then you are beyond my help, just as I cannot teach you the value of PgP encryption in the 90s that led to the first crypto wars and was something Zimmerman was willing to go to jail for and created work arounds to bypass the ITAR weapons and arms 'violations.' I simply cannot give you an education in History, Politics, and Economics in this format, much less why that should matter to YOU as an individual. I don't know you, nor do I understand your ideological underpinnings that make you reluctant to see what I have explained thus far. But just know that what I have said can all be independently verified if you apply the effort. Should you want to continue this with more research on your end and at some later time want to carry this conversation on in a more nuanced manner than just 'I don't get it,' I'm open to that possibility. Edit: And HN has now blocked me from posting again from the down vote brigade, this is so tiring...