4 ms·

You are under another misconception: the broken window fallacy. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parab

by mrb 13y ago

You are under another misconception: the broken window fallacy. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window Creating/sustaining an inefficient financial industry [1] is a bad use of society's resources. Just like breaking a mirror for the sake of giving work to the repair man is a net loss to society. [1] I claim "inefficiency" compared to crypto-currencies. Example: transferring $150 million via Bitcoin uses less resources than doing it via the legacy financial system: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6782706 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6782706

drzaiusapelord 13y ago
Providing services is not "broken windows." Bitcoin isn't going to get me a mortgage or a business loan. Or have a real live person to yell at when I have an issue. Or provide a level of consumer protection for me. Or give me an entity to sue when I feel wronged. >Creating/sustaining an inefficient financial industry [1] is a bad use of society's resources. Not only are you being reductionist and naive, that statement is 100% opinion. Its not "inefficient" to have banks and the services they provide. That's just your pie-in-the-sky take here.
- mrb 13y ago
  I am not calling all financial services inefficient/useless. Obviously there is value in providing loans, customer support, etc. But at least some activities of the traditional financial sector can be made more efficient by crypto-currencies, hence the value they provide to society. (Again I refer you to this one example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6782706 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6782706)
kaonashi 13y ago
The broken window fallacy is itself fallacious in that it is often used with an implicit assumption that all economic choices are zero-sum. Some times you can fix your windows and make shoes. That isn't to say you should break your windows on purpose. That's just stupid.

by mrb 13y ago

drzaiusapelord 13y ago

Providing services is not "broken windows." Bitcoin isn't going to get me a mortgage or a business loan. Or have a real live person to yell at when I have an issue. Or provide a level of consumer protection for me. Or give me an entity to sue when I feel wronged. >Creating/sustaining an inefficient financial industry [1] is a bad use of society's resources. Not only are you being reductionist and naive, that statement is 100% opinion. Its not "inefficient" to have banks and the services they provide. That's just your pie-in-the-sky take here.

mrb 13y ago
I am not calling all financial services inefficient/useless. Obviously there is value in providing loans, customer support, etc. But at least some activities of the traditional financial sector can be made more efficient by crypto-currencies, hence the value they provide to society. (Again I refer you to this one example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6782706 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6782706)

kaonashi 13y ago

The broken window fallacy is itself fallacious in that it is often used with an implicit assumption that all economic choices are zero-sum. Some times you can fix your windows and make shoes. That isn't to say you should break your windows on purpose. That's just stupid.