Nostr Web Client

The possibility of signifcant increase in buying power for bitcoin is not simply a function of its speculative nature. Buying and holding bitcoin for principled reasons is actually quite difficult and represents significant risk--the factors at play are more than just personal gain and storing the value of one's labor, but also a more sound monetary asset and the separation of money and state. The possibility of significant gain represents an incentive to help motivate those who take these risks to take them both prudently and courageously, and to persevere in the face of extreme difficulty and distraction. That is no small thing. A dictum in this respect would be: Show me the incentives, and I'll show you the outcome. Bitcoiners are serving a noble good and the possibility of monetary gain is one factor among many important factors that helps to incentivize what would otherwise be unimaginably difficult for most people.

Stated by nostr:nprofile1qyv8wumn8ghj7cm9d3kxzu3wdehhxarj9emkjmn99uq3wamnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwdehhxarj9e3xzmny9uq3zamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0qyghwumn8ghj7vf5xqhxvdm69e5k7tcpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ukzcnvv5hx7un89uq3kamnwvaz7tm5dpjkvmmjv4ehgtnwdaehgu339e3k7mf0qqsp4lsvwn3aw7zwh2f6tcl6249xa6cpj2x3yuu6azaysvncdqywxmgf9qw43 in more forceful terms:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCLt7oUl43I

I also think the idea of intrinsic value is a distraction in this discussion. Correct me if I'm wrong: in the sense you're using it here, "intrinsic value" means "good for something other than being used as money, and therefore [more] free from speculative abuse". But the claim is that bitcoin is a new form of money that creates digital scarcity through the binding of real world energy expenditure to an immutable distributed ledger in order to secure it from attack and recalibrate the accuracy of the price signal. Digital scarcity is such a profound innovation that it's hard to make a comparison to other monetary phenomena. "Intrinsic value" is something like a skeuomorph of the prior forms of money that were necessarily physical. A skeuomorph is "a derivative object that retains ornamental design cues from structures that were necessary in the original." But bitcoin is innovative precisely because it eliminates the need to bind scarcity to physicality, offering pure scarcity in the digital realm by the capture of energy through proof-of-work.

(You can weigh in any time, nostr:nprofile1qy28wumn8ghj7un9d3shjctzd3jjummjvuhszxmhwden5te0w35x2en0wfjhxapwdehhxarjxyhxxmmd9uq3zamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0qyfhwumn8ghj7ur4wfcxcetsv9njuetn9uq3samnwvaz7tmxd9k8getj9ehx7um5wgh8w6twv5hsz9mhwden5te0wfjkccte9ehx7um5wghxyctwvshsqgqr6w2khgwqxwfqylc7232g883ypnlxxa8ex50kmvghmpz3kzvxuvywsart )

Mark B 1y ago

Great conversation, I don't know I have much to add. Am I right that this thought around speculation is what keeps the New Polity guyd from Bitcoin?

I guess I struggle with speculation in general. If I buy Apple stock with the expectation of a profit, that wouldn't be immoral, right? And if I buy gold because it's a store of value, and it just so happens to appreciate because it's a really good SoV and people don't like financial chicanery(ie money printing), that's fine. By extension, if I buy the ability to transact globally with a permissionless software protocol network, that others come to realize is truly scarce and are willing to pay even more to participate in... Is there harm?

Was Our Lord talking about speculation when he told the parable "the kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field. When a man found it, he hid it again, and then... sold all he had and bought that field?"

I know there's a line where it becomes immoral I just don't know where.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Penta Sophia 1y ago

The New Polity guys have some good points, but I think they miss the mark when it comes to investing.

Been a while since I listened to that episode; but if I remember correctly, their arguments were grotesquely misunderstanding dividend payments. The shipping industry as an example regularly pays out dividends based on the profitability of the company in a given quarter.

Regarding Bitcoin and speculation in general,

If the entire action consists of buying low with the hope that the price will be higher later, sure, that would be purely speculative for monetary gain.

Yet in many industries futures contracts and thus speculation provide an important function.

A cattle rancher could have a large fluctuation in the sale price of the finished cattle and this fluctuation could make it nearly impossible to plan future production numbers.

Herein lies the value of speculation and futures markets. An “investor” can agree to lock in a price for the rancher, taking on the price volatility and risk, with the hope of being rewarded with a higher price in the future. The same can be said for the grocery store or meat market buying at a set price before the actual market price becomes known.

None of these individual steps are immoral, and each provides a valuable market driver which facilitates commerce at large.

For Bitcoin specifically, certain hodlers could similarly be said to be taking on the risk and price volatility in hope of future gains.

In that light, the New Polity guys’ argument that risk must be taken on to justify gains is still relevant and would thus make Bitcoin speculation itself moral.

I would push beyond that argument and harken to the earlier comments about the soundness of money and the value that brings to society.

By hodling in parallel with fostering a Bitcoin circular enonomy, one can easily see the advantages of promoting sound money and having the commerce needed to support Bitcoin as this sound money and currency.