5 ms·

A bit of both. The long-term vision is to move (some portion of) economic activity onto a globally accessible stablecoin. We think this has potential to reduce

A bit of both. The long-term vision is to move (some portion of) economic activity onto a globally accessible stablecoin. We think this has potential to reduce friction in international finance & commerce, which will grow the economic pie. (The fact that it's actually still pretty hard to venmo someone from the US to Canada, or move dollars out of Argentina, creates a lot of deadweight loss and opportunities for rent-seeking.) But ultimately Glo is redistributive. In the near-term, putting money into Glo is like putting money into a T-bill-linked savings account, except someone else gets the yield. Hope that helps, happy to keep chatting, etc.

an1sotropy 4y ago
Re-hashing "long-term vision" with happy talk does not actually answer the question. Try answering the question.
- setgree 4y ago
  Which part could I have done better on? I interpreted the question as asking whether we grow the size of the pie or redistribute differently and i answered that the goal is to do both. Step 1 is to be a good (the best, ideally) stablecoin, step 2 is to become increasingly viable as a currency, etc. We articulate these steps in more detail in the OP link, and for serious, if there is a part you’d like more clarity on or that you think isn’t very well fleshed out, I’ll do my best to engage directly with it. Also, I know that crypto has a lot of scams and there’s good reason for distrust, but let me disclaim that answering these questions is literally part of my job and I’m trying my best to be candid and responsive. Please be kind if you can, thank you.
  - an1sotropy 4y ago
    Poverty is the part you could have done better on. For a family living in poverty, what about Glo specifically helps them?
    - glocoin 4y ago
      That they get a basic income of $30/month, which if you live on less than $1.90/day helps.
      - an1sotropy 4y ago
        ok but if GiveDirectly is doing good work, why not side-step the crypto-everything and spend your efforts helping people with IRAs to make qualified charitable distributions give directly to GiveDirectly? Or other ways of directly supporting GiveDirectly?
        balanceisgolden 4y ago
        I find the idea of "Passive Philanthropy" revolutionary. This would be the first model to demonstrate such a concept. That alone is worth the effort IMHO
        AnimalMuppet 4y ago
        For prior art, see "taxes". I mean, yes, a charity that is 1) not a government, and so not subject to politics, 2) doesn't require continual donations because it is self-funding, and 3) big enough to do massive good... that combination is in fact revolutionary. I'm just saying that government programs to help the poor, and even to do foreign aid, are kind of on the same model, except for point 1. [Edit: I guess foundations are also kind of prior art. It's just that none of them are big enough for the kind of impact that Glo is reaching for.]
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        balanceisgolden 4y ago
        (In the future, at scale) Imagine if foundations kept their funds in Glo. That would be a philanthropic force multiplier. They are doing good on the front end and the back. We aren't a replacement of any giving channels but we could potentially be a maximizer to any of them.
- AnimalMuppet 4y ago
  He did. The question was, "create more stuff" or "redistribute existing stuff", and the answer was "redistribute existing stuff", with a side helping of "increase existing stuff by reducing deadweight loss".

an1sotropy 4y ago

Re-hashing "long-term vision" with happy talk does not actually answer the question. Try answering the question.

setgree 4y ago
Which part could I have done better on? I interpreted the question as asking whether we grow the size of the pie or redistribute differently and i answered that the goal is to do both. Step 1 is to be a good (the best, ideally) stablecoin, step 2 is to become increasingly viable as a currency, etc. We articulate these steps in more detail in the OP link, and for serious, if there is a part you’d like more clarity on or that you think isn’t very well fleshed out, I’ll do my best to engage directly with it. Also, I know that crypto has a lot of scams and there’s good reason for distrust, but let me disclaim that answering these questions is literally part of my job and I’m trying my best to be candid and responsive. Please be kind if you can, thank you.
- an1sotropy 4y ago
  Poverty is the part you could have done better on. For a family living in poverty, what about Glo specifically helps them?
  - glocoin 4y ago
    That they get a basic income of $30/month, which if you live on less than $1.90/day helps.
    - an1sotropy 4y ago
      ok but if GiveDirectly is doing good work, why not side-step the crypto-everything and spend your efforts helping people with IRAs to make qualified charitable distributions give directly to GiveDirectly? Or other ways of directly supporting GiveDirectly?
      - balanceisgolden 4y ago
        I find the idea of "Passive Philanthropy" revolutionary. This would be the first model to demonstrate such a concept. That alone is worth the effort IMHO
        AnimalMuppet 4y ago
        For prior art, see "taxes". I mean, yes, a charity that is 1) not a government, and so not subject to politics, 2) doesn't require continual donations because it is self-funding, and 3) big enough to do massive good... that combination is in fact revolutionary. I'm just saying that government programs to help the poor, and even to do foreign aid, are kind of on the same model, except for point 1. [Edit: I guess foundations are also kind of prior art. It's just that none of them are big enough for the kind of impact that Glo is reaching for.]
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        balanceisgolden 4y ago
        (In the future, at scale) Imagine if foundations kept their funds in Glo. That would be a philanthropic force multiplier. They are doing good on the front end and the back. We aren't a replacement of any giving channels but we could potentially be a maximizer to any of them.
AnimalMuppet 4y ago
He did. The question was, "create more stuff" or "redistribute existing stuff", and the answer was "redistribute existing stuff", with a side helping of "increase existing stuff by reducing deadweight loss".