10 ms·

In most of the west, capital already has the highest power. Unfortunate, but folks seem ok with it. I’m a big believer in sound money and sound fiscal policy.

In most of the west, capital already has the highest power. Unfortunate, but folks seem ok with it. I’m a big believer in sound money and sound fiscal policy. Deficit spending is stealing from the future. Bitcoin is sound money, hard money. You can’t steal from your children to pay your bills today.

malermeister 5y ago
I strongly disagree with your views on "sound money" and fiscal policy. If you look at what Bruno Kreisky did, you'll see that he didn't "steal from" the future, he invested for it. He basically built the modern Austria I know and love. I also think the whole "stealing from the future" talking point is BS - to paraphrase Keynes, in the future we'll all be dead :-). But it's okay for us to disagree here. In a democracy, we can just vote for somebody that represents our views. If either of us can convince the majority to see things our way, we'll get our way. Now if we had an inflexible monetary system like the one you're proposing, even if the vast majority voted to do things my way, we couldn't anymore, because we robbed the democratically elected state of its power. This is what I mean when I say Bitcoin is antidemocratic. It entrenches your ideology on a technological level and removes all democratic control.
- randomhodler84 5y ago
  And that’s a Good thing. As Satoshi said before releasing 0.1 “The central bank must be trusted not to debase the currency, but the history of fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust.” You don’t want people messing with the money. You can’t trust people and you certainly can’t trust the Keynesians. Taking this power away from the abusers gives power BACK to the people.
  - malermeister 5y ago
    That's just more of you projecting your ideology. Fact is, you are trying to force your ideology on the world in an authoritarian manner and remove democratic choice. You might not agree with my view, but to try to suppress it is antidemocratic. > You don’t want people messing with the money. You don’t want people messing with the money. I do. You're trying to remove my democratic right to elect somebody who will do what I want. I don't care what Satoshi said - he's not some all-knowing saintlike figure. I want the central bank to be able to debase currency. I don't believe in the same things as you and you are attacking my democratic right to see my values reflected in society. > Taking this power away from the abusers gives power BACK to the people If you define "the people" as "everyone that agrees with you", sure. But that's an awfully authoritarian thing to do, isn't it?
    - randomhodler84 5y ago
      Hang on there. This is always been about voluntary involvement. You are completely free to ignore cryptocurrency. There is no coercion at all. Nobody is trying to suppress anything. You are free to believe, transact or vote for whomever you like. There is no loss of democratic choice. The ideology is completely voluntary. The good thing about the parallel economies is we can both have it. You can have your rapidly inflating made up Euro, manipulated by your elected and unelected politicians and Bitcoiners can divide everything of value on the planet by 21M BTC. Thing is, as the fiat gets worse and worse, more people will choose to save in things like Bitcoin. Are you familiar with Gresham’s Law? You are trying to word this like folks are pushing this on you. Nothing is further from the case. Opt-in. I’m not defining the people as anything. Everyone is free to believe whatever they wish.
      - malermeister 5y ago
        By creating a shadow currency you are undermining the one we democratically agreed on. Your opt-in is actively harmful to democratic society. You're saying "don't worry, you don't need to break the social contract, but we will and we'll make it easy for others to do so, too. And if our sabotage makes everything collapse, well I guess that proves we were right all along. wink"
        randomhodler84 5y ago
        This is quite inconsistent. so the emperor has no clothes. If fiat cannot survive in the presence of cryptocurrency, it is not cryptocurrency that is sabotaging anything. Either it can exist with it, or it will die by its own death. The irony of course is that I have been saying cryptocurrency is voluntary; and you have been saying fiat only is mandatory. Who’s pushing their authoritarian agenda now.
        malermeister 5y ago
        > If a building cannot survive in the presence of people setting up explosions at its base, it is not the terrorists that are sabotaging anything. Either it can exist with it, or it will die by its own death. The irony of course is that I have been saying terrorism is voluntary; and you have been saying wanting to live in peace is mandatory.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > You don’t want people messing with the money. The only worse thing than having people that might practice bad monetary policy having power over the currency is having bad monetary policy immutably baked into the structure of the currency.

malermeister 5y ago

I strongly disagree with your views on "sound money" and fiscal policy. If you look at what Bruno Kreisky did, you'll see that he didn't "steal from" the future, he invested for it. He basically built the modern Austria I know and love. I also think the whole "stealing from the future" talking point is BS - to paraphrase Keynes, in the future we'll all be dead :-). But it's okay for us to disagree here. In a democracy, we can just vote for somebody that represents our views. If either of us can convince the majority to see things our way, we'll get our way. Now if we had an inflexible monetary system like the one you're proposing, even if the vast majority voted to do things my way, we couldn't anymore, because we robbed the democratically elected state of its power. This is what I mean when I say Bitcoin is antidemocratic. It entrenches your ideology on a technological level and removes all democratic control.

randomhodler84 5y ago
And that’s a Good thing. As Satoshi said before releasing 0.1 “The central bank must be trusted not to debase the currency, but the history of fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust.” You don’t want people messing with the money. You can’t trust people and you certainly can’t trust the Keynesians. Taking this power away from the abusers gives power BACK to the people.
- malermeister 5y ago
  That's just more of you projecting your ideology. Fact is, you are trying to force your ideology on the world in an authoritarian manner and remove democratic choice. You might not agree with my view, but to try to suppress it is antidemocratic. > You don’t want people messing with the money. You don’t want people messing with the money. I do. You're trying to remove my democratic right to elect somebody who will do what I want. I don't care what Satoshi said - he's not some all-knowing saintlike figure. I want the central bank to be able to debase currency. I don't believe in the same things as you and you are attacking my democratic right to see my values reflected in society. > Taking this power away from the abusers gives power BACK to the people If you define "the people" as "everyone that agrees with you", sure. But that's an awfully authoritarian thing to do, isn't it?
  - randomhodler84 5y ago
    Hang on there. This is always been about voluntary involvement. You are completely free to ignore cryptocurrency. There is no coercion at all. Nobody is trying to suppress anything. You are free to believe, transact or vote for whomever you like. There is no loss of democratic choice. The ideology is completely voluntary. The good thing about the parallel economies is we can both have it. You can have your rapidly inflating made up Euro, manipulated by your elected and unelected politicians and Bitcoiners can divide everything of value on the planet by 21M BTC. Thing is, as the fiat gets worse and worse, more people will choose to save in things like Bitcoin. Are you familiar with Gresham’s Law? You are trying to word this like folks are pushing this on you. Nothing is further from the case. Opt-in. I’m not defining the people as anything. Everyone is free to believe whatever they wish.
    - malermeister 5y ago
      By creating a shadow currency you are undermining the one we democratically agreed on. Your opt-in is actively harmful to democratic society. You're saying "don't worry, you don't need to break the social contract, but we will and we'll make it easy for others to do so, too. And if our sabotage makes everything collapse, well I guess that proves we were right all along. wink"
      - randomhodler84 5y ago
        This is quite inconsistent. so the emperor has no clothes. If fiat cannot survive in the presence of cryptocurrency, it is not cryptocurrency that is sabotaging anything. Either it can exist with it, or it will die by its own death. The irony of course is that I have been saying cryptocurrency is voluntary; and you have been saying fiat only is mandatory. Who’s pushing their authoritarian agenda now.
        malermeister 5y ago
        > If a building cannot survive in the presence of people setting up explosions at its base, it is not the terrorists that are sabotaging anything. Either it can exist with it, or it will die by its own death. The irony of course is that I have been saying terrorism is voluntary; and you have been saying wanting to live in peace is mandatory.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > You don’t want people messing with the money. The only worse thing than having people that might practice bad monetary policy having power over the currency is having bad monetary policy immutably baked into the structure of the currency.