2 ms·

This implies a probably lack of understanding of what Central Banks do. "When the ships come into harbour, nail them to the dock" - not realizing that eventual

This implies a probably lack of understanding of what Central Banks do. "When the ships come into harbour, nail them to the dock" - not realizing that eventually, when the tide goes out - the ship will go down several feet relative to the dock and be damaged by the fixed boarding blanks. You have to use ropes to fix ships, because the water moves. Dumping the Central Bank and even using hard currency would lead to economic collapse the very first time there is an existential shock - and the only 'saviour' would be a different form of monetary intervention i.e. fiscal policy (i.e. government budget). Also, in a completely unregulated scenario, powerful financial interests would leverage ownership of the crypto scheme and power would even be further centralized. Bitcoin is disproportionately owned by a small number of players who have absolutely zero civic perspective, they're looking to make a Trillion dollars out of nothing. If you don't like that money is managed by a large swath of banks working together with government and regulatory oversight and frankly relative transparency ... then you really won't like it when your monetary system is managed by the insane tyrant offspring of the Winkelvi and Satoshi dynasties who own 30% of the economy. Crypto mining that is energy intensive should be banned immediately on that basis alone. Aside from that, anyone declaring monetary value on a crypto asset should have to declare it, and if they don't, they go to actual prison for tax evasion. I'm looking forward to those people replacing weed smokers in prison - that would be effective public policy.

reedjosh 5y ago
> Aside from that, anyone declaring monetary value on a crypto asset should have to declare it, and if they don't, they go to actual prison for tax evasion. I'm looking forward to those people replacing weed smokers in prison - that would be effective public policy. You're both pro legalization of weed and pro government? The war drugs is one the many fronts of the war on personal freedom. Ironically the thing you're railing against -- being an anonymous uncensured transaction platform -- is one of the few ways weed dealers and consumers can continue to transact. > Crypto mining that is energy intensive should be banned immediately on that basis alone. Which is only neccessary to prevent > Also, in a completely unregulated scenario, powerful financial interests would leverage ownership of the crypto scheme and power would even be further centralized. PoS _is_ succeptible to this as ownership means a voting stake. PoW prevents entrenched interests from controlling it.
- jollybean 5y ago
  I'm 'not' for people not going to jail because they smoke weed, and 'for' people going to jail for tax evasion. The kind of straw manning that reveals itself here due to the complete lack of civic thinking in some circles is really disturbing. There is no necessity for mass energy usage for crypto, there are any number of ways to distribute new units of currency. Again the use of the term 'necessary' here is a hint at the false understanding of currency through the lens of a particular form of crypto. Crytpo, at least today, is a dystopia. Go and live for a few weeks in a country with weak civic institutions and see for yourself. This joke is less and less funny as time goes on, the experiment, in it's current form, has run it's course, it's long since over.
  - reedjosh 5y ago
    > the complete lack of civic thinking in some circles is really disturbing. I used to love the idea of the government fixing societies' woes. Unfortunately in my lifetime I've seen several business cycles wherein the rich get bailouts and the rest of us lose our shirts. My country has entered wars I didn't then, and don't now support. I've seen 3 letter agencies topple foreign governments, and I'm watching China leverage its social credit system and implementing CBDCs. I've seen the infrastructure in my country become dilapidated and homelessness skyrocket. I voted for 'change' and got none. I am civic minded, and to me the government is starting to look like the problem. As such, I support any peaceful alternative. There is no such thing as consent of the governed, and I plan continue believing what I see with my lying eyes.
    - imtringued 5y ago
      >I used to love the idea of the government fixing societies' woes. Tax the damn land and do negative interest rates on cash and use the negative interest to pay for the deposit insurance. That's it. Bonus: Get rid of other regressive taxes. Lower income tax, corporate income tax, capital gains tax, sales tax, VAT and so on. Rather than redistributing incomes redistribute jobs. In a world where economic rents are eliminated, income = spending is true on an individual and country level and jobs are fairly allocated there is no need for charity and welfare. It would be one small step closer to utopia yet it will not happen because nobody will recognize it as a "free market" that is supposedly the be and end all of economics even though it would be free-er than anything the capitalists will come up with. Yes, here is the homework: If the solution is so simple how come there are so many people wanting to keep the system unfair and rigged? Here is my answer: It's because the rich need to trick people into believing that the source of inequality is fair and morally justifiable. After all, if inequality has no place in a moral framework then any source of inequality would be tackled immediately. https://youtu.be/Qe4x2Fv9to4 https://youtu.be/Qe4x2Fv9to4

reedjosh 5y ago

> Aside from that, anyone declaring monetary value on a crypto asset should have to declare it, and if they don't, they go to actual prison for tax evasion. I'm looking forward to those people replacing weed smokers in prison - that would be effective public policy. You're both pro legalization of weed and pro government? The war drugs is one the many fronts of the war on personal freedom. Ironically the thing you're railing against -- being an anonymous uncensured transaction platform -- is one of the few ways weed dealers and consumers can continue to transact. > Crypto mining that is energy intensive should be banned immediately on that basis alone. Which is only neccessary to prevent > Also, in a completely unregulated scenario, powerful financial interests would leverage ownership of the crypto scheme and power would even be further centralized. PoS _is_ succeptible to this as ownership means a voting stake. PoW prevents entrenched interests from controlling it.

jollybean 5y ago
I'm 'not' for people not going to jail because they smoke weed, and 'for' people going to jail for tax evasion. The kind of straw manning that reveals itself here due to the complete lack of civic thinking in some circles is really disturbing. There is no necessity for mass energy usage for crypto, there are any number of ways to distribute new units of currency. Again the use of the term 'necessary' here is a hint at the false understanding of currency through the lens of a particular form of crypto. Crytpo, at least today, is a dystopia. Go and live for a few weeks in a country with weak civic institutions and see for yourself. This joke is less and less funny as time goes on, the experiment, in it's current form, has run it's course, it's long since over.
- reedjosh 5y ago
  > the complete lack of civic thinking in some circles is really disturbing. I used to love the idea of the government fixing societies' woes. Unfortunately in my lifetime I've seen several business cycles wherein the rich get bailouts and the rest of us lose our shirts. My country has entered wars I didn't then, and don't now support. I've seen 3 letter agencies topple foreign governments, and I'm watching China leverage its social credit system and implementing CBDCs. I've seen the infrastructure in my country become dilapidated and homelessness skyrocket. I voted for 'change' and got none. I am civic minded, and to me the government is starting to look like the problem. As such, I support any peaceful alternative. There is no such thing as consent of the governed, and I plan continue believing what I see with my lying eyes.
  - imtringued 5y ago
    >I used to love the idea of the government fixing societies' woes. Tax the damn land and do negative interest rates on cash and use the negative interest to pay for the deposit insurance. That's it. Bonus: Get rid of other regressive taxes. Lower income tax, corporate income tax, capital gains tax, sales tax, VAT and so on. Rather than redistributing incomes redistribute jobs. In a world where economic rents are eliminated, income = spending is true on an individual and country level and jobs are fairly allocated there is no need for charity and welfare. It would be one small step closer to utopia yet it will not happen because nobody will recognize it as a "free market" that is supposedly the be and end all of economics even though it would be free-er than anything the capitalists will come up with. Yes, here is the homework: If the solution is so simple how come there are so many people wanting to keep the system unfair and rigged? Here is my answer: It's because the rich need to trick people into believing that the source of inequality is fair and morally justifiable. After all, if inequality has no place in a moral framework then any source of inequality would be tackled immediately. https://youtu.be/Qe4x2Fv9to4 https://youtu.be/Qe4x2Fv9to4