Read on Twitter
I enjoyed this. Props to both.
My meta take is that @profplum99 refers negatively to a number of things that are features, not bugs. His take is very typically Gen X.
https://twitter.com/nic__carter/status/1353485200492285952
My meta take is that @profplum99 refers negatively to a number of things that are features, not bugs. His take is very typically Gen X.
https://twitter.com/nic__carter/status/1353485200492285952
Green's main critiques of Bitcoin seem to be:
1) Citizens opting out of USD diminish power of the US gov, harming domestic unity
2) BTC empowers dissidents with the ability to undermine the rules-based USD reserve currency system
3) BTC removes money from the democratic process
1) Citizens opting out of USD diminish power of the US gov, harming domestic unity
2) BTC empowers dissidents with the ability to undermine the rules-based USD reserve currency system
3) BTC removes money from the democratic process
On citizens opting out of the US dollar, and consequences for governance:
Mike (and Grant) take a view on BTC thatâs common among Gen X that Iâve spoken to â that BTC so undermines the institutions of the day that it has no chance/cannot be allowed to succeed.
Mike (and Grant) take a view on BTC thatâs common among Gen X that Iâve spoken to â that BTC so undermines the institutions of the day that it has no chance/cannot be allowed to succeed.
I think this is a failure of imagination for two reasons:
1) Moral hazard within the current system
2) The information age transition
Letâs examine each of those in turn:
1) Moral hazard within the current system
2) The information age transition
Letâs examine each of those in turn:
1) After socialization of the losses of the GFC among tax-payers, it became legitimate in popular discourse to ask whether govts should have the power to force citizens to take such a hit.
GFC hit when I was 16 â to those my age âthe systemâ has never *not* had moral hazard.
GFC hit when I was 16 â to those my age âthe systemâ has never *not* had moral hazard.
1.1) It is therefore morally just, even patriotic, for ppl to opt out of the system by buying Bitcoin.
Personally I would go further than 'moral hazard'.
I believe our reaction to the GFC, regardless of whether it represented the greater good, has broken the social contract.
Personally I would go further than 'moral hazard'.
I believe our reaction to the GFC, regardless of whether it represented the greater good, has broken the social contract.
2) Governance structures are emergent and reactive â they reflect the character of the economy beneath them.
The modern nation-state grew up within the industrial era, but our economy is fundamentally changing.
We should not expect information age govt to look like indust. govt
The modern nation-state grew up within the industrial era, but our economy is fundamentally changing.
We should not expect information age govt to look like indust. govt
From this view Bitcoin is part of a wider transition, not the transition itself.
The internet is also part of the shift - and therefore threatens 'domestic unity' - is that a problem too?
The internet is also part of the shift - and therefore threatens 'domestic unity' - is that a problem too?
On Bitcoin empowering dissidents to undermine the USD:
First, the US dollar will lose its monetary hegemony with or without BTC â the US shrinks as a prop. of global GDP while the conseqs. of the system for parts of US society are becoming untenable.
https://www.lynalden.com/fraying-petrodollar-system/
First, the US dollar will lose its monetary hegemony with or without BTC â the US shrinks as a prop. of global GDP while the conseqs. of the system for parts of US society are becoming untenable.
https://www.lynalden.com/fraying-petrodollar-system/
Second, Greenâs model seems to equivocate allyship with morality.
It seems odd to paint Iran â a nation penalized under the current system - so negatively without referencing Saudi Arabia â a nation gilded under the current system.
It seems odd to paint Iran â a nation penalized under the current system - so negatively without referencing Saudi Arabia â a nation gilded under the current system.
Also, if BTC undermines the US govt then it undermines tyrannical regimes too, and liberates the people underneath them.
'Threatening domestic unity' can look an awful lot like liberation, depending on your perspective.
'Threatening domestic unity' can look an awful lot like liberation, depending on your perspective.
Third, I fail to see how itâs a bad thing for humanity to move towards a *neutral* monetary settlement mechanism.
BTC doesnât favour anyone â what Green refers to as advtgs. for dissident states is just the de-weaponisation of money.
USD hegemony is a historical anomaly.
BTC doesnât favour anyone â what Green refers to as advtgs. for dissident states is just the de-weaponisation of money.
USD hegemony is a historical anomaly.
On Bitcoin removing money from democratic oversight:
This is *the whole point* of Bitcoin.
This is *the whole point* of Bitcoin.
-- For some it's ideological - they advocate for an end to 'monetary policy' as a moral principle
-- For others it's more utilitarian - the negative, unintended consequences of monetary policy intervention outweigh the positive, intended effects
-- For others it's more utilitarian - the negative, unintended consequences of monetary policy intervention outweigh the positive, intended effects
From my perspective, I go back to the difference between Millennials and Gen X.
Through greater indebtedness and diminished chances of home-ownership, Millennials are paying for the lifestyles of Gen X.
I will not ask my children to do the same for me.
Through greater indebtedness and diminished chances of home-ownership, Millennials are paying for the lifestyles of Gen X.
I will not ask my children to do the same for me.
Finally, both M & G say that although 'Bitcoin as inflation hedge' is a popular narrative, it's speculation that's driving adoption.
But the two aren't exclusive.
BTC's qualities as an inflation-resistant savings vehicle means Bitcoinâs TAM is huge.
But the two aren't exclusive.
BTC's qualities as an inflation-resistant savings vehicle means Bitcoinâs TAM is huge.
To quantify BTC's total addressable market (TAM), one needs to try to quantify the monetary premium of assets from real estate to precious metals to stocks and bonds.
As the best ever store of value, Bitcoin will eat a huge portion of the monetary premium of these assets.
As the best ever store of value, Bitcoin will eat a huge portion of the monetary premium of these assets.
So the two - inflation hedge and speculative investment - are completely coherent.
Once we reach maturation, Bitcoin is an inflation-resistant savings vehicle.
Until then, there is massive upside - and speculative potential - as more come to realise what BTC is.
Once we reach maturation, Bitcoin is an inflation-resistant savings vehicle.
Until then, there is massive upside - and speculative potential - as more come to realise what BTC is.
At maturation, Bitcoin gives ordinary working people, who can't afford the deposit for a house and don't understand the complexity of the investment sphere, access to an inflation-resistant savings vehicle.
This is liberating.
This is liberating.
