Nostr Web Client

Transactions do not negate Bitcoin’s value as money outside traditional control. Also, the State is not a monolith – it consists of various entities with different goals and levels of influence. Assuming uniformity in government action oversimplifies reality. It is worth considering these nuances when evaluating Bitcoin’s role and value.

If we consider the regime's control of the money supply, which, through inflation, funds foreign wars and expands the regime's control, the contrast between Bitcoin and fiat currencies becomes stark.

gsovereignty 1y ago

At the end of the day, companies comply with the regulators, who basically work for the money printer.

You can't just transact bitcoin as a company, it's permissioned by the regulators.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Nicholas 1y ago

While I agree that the effect you speak of is real, it is not all-encompassing and does not negate the most important aspects of Bitcoin. If we were on the gold standard, the government could contract to pay in gold, and that would still restrain government. So, I don’t think this is something to be afraid of

gsovereignty 1y ago

The critical aspect is that this is a type of fork. One branch is genuine permissionless bitcoin, and the other is permissioned by the regulators.

Companies are not permitted to use genuine bitcoin, they are only allowed to use a form of bitcoin that is permissioned by the regulators.

This might not matter so much right now because the two branches of this fork are mostly interoperable, but as the parasites become more threatenned by bitcoin, the fork that companies are pouring all their resources into will be increasingly locked down and ultimately only money launderers will be able to move coins between them.