Interesting, so your belief is that money printing caused all the wealth divide. You also extend your beliefs to disconnect capitalism and money printing. I implore you to further your research beyond speculative beliefs. I presented you with historical and present day facts, yet I am met with opinions.
Discussion
What does money printing have anything to do with capitalism? All governments print money. Doesn't matter the system.
Would a capitalistic endeavor be incentivized to lobby or promote money printing from any institution? Same question for banks who I assume you would say are capitalist, and create/print money through loans.
Any endeavor is incentivezed to create their own money. Doesn't matter who it is. Everyone wants more than they have. That's human nature.
Unfortunately that is incorrect, not all endeavors/people wish to create/print their own money. It is also incorrect to assume that “everyone “ wants more than they have or need. However, greed is a characteristic in humans that can be throttled, present, or close to absent. If you’re are making the case for capitalism with the slogan “We are all greedy humans.”, I would attempt to market it differently.
That being said, you have not addressed the facts first presented about the nature of capitalism and where we are today.
I can tell that you definitely support collective bargaining, and would like your thoughts on it.
I support people's right to do whatever they want with their property. If that means spending it on lobbying, that's their choice. That doesn't mean I don't see problems with the current entanglement of government and private corporations. Any system with a central bank will have these problems. The only way to fix it is seperateing money from state. The economic system of capitalism is the most just one we have.
Quick question, you think that separating money and state will eradicate wealth inequality altogether?
Eventually yes. That doesn't mean there won't be poor people and rich people. There will always be a heirachy of wealth. But without money printing that devide would be based on their actual contributions and not who holds more assets.
I think this unfortunately disregarding what we both agree is a human trait and flaw of some, greed.
Greed doesn't make you more money. In a hard money standard it will potentially ruin you.
Potentially, yes, automatically, no. However, we have historical data within a system of hard money where the capital still centralizes. So you would need to address the inconvenient facts.
We've never had decentralized money. Hard money historically centralized because of its physicality. You know that... Bitcoins distribution has always trended to more smaller holders and don't the opposite of centralizing. How do you address that fact?
Address what? Your speculation that a new technology means capitalism will deter greed and centralization of capital?
Your obsessed with capitalism having a role. Capitalism doesn't give a shit. It just means you are entitled to your labor/time/energy. That's it. The only incentive that creates is for the individual to progress. By what means is irrelevant. The means are determined by the incentives of the money. Not the economic system you choose. With hard money, there is no progress without proof of work.
Obsessed, no, but I don’t blindly ignore facts and history. I know capitalism doesn’t give a shit, that’s what I’m conveying to you. “By what means is irrelevant “ wow, you hung that piñata out there.
The fact that Bitcoin is more distributed over time, not less.
Has Saylor aquired more Bitcoin over time or less? Is the U.S. trying to acquire more bitcoin or less?
They want more. Everyone wants more. What's your point? That doesn't make the pie any bigger. We all still have the same amount of Bitcoins to buy. I want more, you want more. New people will want some. As price goes up, large holders take profit. Those coins make their way to new hodlers. Happens every cycle. So utxo count grows.
Oh, I thought it gets more distributed with time. So, one day everyone will have equal amounts of bitcoin. That seems off but if you say so.
Well... I mean there will always be exceptional humans and mediocre humans. So there will always be a gap based on ability. The problem now is mediocre humans can make profit without proof of work by rent seeking. That's causing regression.
Yes, rent seeking behavior is abhorrent. If you break down the psychology of rent seeking behavior, you may find overlap in other areas. You think you can’t “rent seek” with labor? Could I use bitcoin for “rent seeking” behavior?
Rent seeking is not as profitable as proof or work on a hard money system. Incentive is to build, not seek rent.
That makes no sense but it was a pleasure conversing with you.
Hard to make money renting property when it doesn't have a 70% monetary premium attached to its assets price... Property taxes, maintenance, bills... It's a huge liability as it can be easily confiscated. It's not portable at all. All a leaking faucet for your money. The only reason real estate is so expensive is because it demands a monetary premium because our money can't store any value. On a hard money system real estate will lose its monetary premium since you can store that in the money instead. Rent seeking becomes much harder. You have to build the house if you want profit in this system.
Hell, Lyn Alden wrote the book “Broken Money” and she doesn’t even assume what you are implying.
I'm not implying it, you can look at UTXOs on chain. They're growing, not decreasing. They always grow. They decrease slightly when chain fees are low and some consolidate, but they always grow in number. That means factually Bitcoin supply is becoming more distributed. Not centralizing.
Well, I would hope so considering global adoption is what, 1 to 3%. We are talking about historical ideologies/facts vs what you want to happen. I get it, I want what you want to…everybody to not have to work and collect money.
You're telling me you don't want more money tomorrow than you do today? Send me some of yours then if you don't want more. Everyone wants more than they have. That's the greed. An economic constant in any system.
Sure, I need money in our current system to survive, and I do “want” to survive. To imply that is greed, well, I would require your definition of greed.
You "want" better food tomorrow than you had today. This is human nature. To want progress in your life. What's the point of doing anything if it's not going to benefit you.
I never said I want “better” food. I do “want” what I “need”. Yes, surviving and helping others is human nature. Progress, yes, but this can be relative. You are confusing “benefit me” at the cost of “what”?
If you have more, or better capital goods, you have more capital goods to share with those around you as well. More profit means more jobs.
I didn't say you said you want better food. I'm saying you do whether you want to admit it or not.
A little humorous for you to tell me what I can admit to myself or not. Also ironic considering you assume more profit automatically means more jobs. Seems that you have a romanticized relationship with this capitalistic utopia that doesn’t exist.
More profit does mean more jobs or better capital goods and deflation. One of the two. Either way more profit is more progress. That's just factual.
I’m sorry, what does “progress” mean to you and while you’re at it, what did you “progress” mean to…I don’t know Omo 1, a homo sapien that lived approx 233k years ago?
Progress is just having more today than yesterday. It's the story of mankind.
More what?
Just more. More purchase, power, more goods, 1+1 is progress. 1-1 is regress
Again, this isn't something unique to capitalism. Happens in any system. All governments print money. They always will.
I never singled out capitalism being the only cause of money printing.
I never said you did. You are countering my statements about capitalism though. You clearly infer the system incentivezes it. I'm arguing it doesn't.
Well of course I am countering your statements, because unfortunately they are factually/historically incorrect. Capitalism puts the “ends” of profit above the “means” of acquisition. You obviously do not agree with this comfortably provable statement, to which one would think you would provide evidence to “counter”.
Of course it does. Because everyone does. That's always a trade-off. But you can't profit at all without any means. Unless you regulate the two together, your company will go bankrupt... Unless of course... You have a central bank.
Not a capitalism problem. A money printing one. There is nothing wrong with the incentive structure to improve profits. More profit means more progress. The problem again, is money printing, as now they can profit without progress. That's not possible with hard money.
Ahhhh, “profit without progress”, I found the splinter. See, I’m a believer in “proof of work” and see the wealth divide as a problem due to “exploitation of labor” and the “means of production”. What was your definition of greed?
Wanting more tomorrow than you have today. Everyone has this to some degree or another. The means by which you deal with that greed can be good or bad. Labor can't be exploited in capitalism. You have the freedom to work or not work wherever you want for whatever amount you freely agree to. Labor IS exploited in communism and socialism. Us capitalists have greatly benefited (in terms of our purchasing power relative to theirs) from external exploitation of labor in THESE systems. To our detriment of hollowing our industrial base. By extension, exporting our labor to unjust systems has been the cause of global wealth disparity.
This is completely, factually not true, so much so that you are intentionally or naively ignoring history.
Tell me how my labor is exploited in capitalism. Please. How can one be exploited when they are free to work wherever they want for whatever wage they agree to?
Easy, research Chinese factory workers for many different corporations. Do you need examples? Or, look up coal miners. Then read more on socio economics.