Reply from my anti-Bitcoin colleague.

Who fancies replying to this? Sats sent of course đŸ«Ą

“Yeah this is where you’ve lost me now with the central bank conspiracies.

If you’re concerned with the socializing of losses that’s a matter for regulators, which most central banks usually aren’t. The same people who are pushing the narrative at the highest levels of the Fed being the root of all corruption are also the ones who lobbied policymakers to defang regulators and massively deregulate financial markets in the 1990s. They criticize government for being ineffective, and then do everything in their power to make it ineffective. This is a classic playbook of right-wing economic thought which has permeated into the platforms of political parties the world round, from the Republicans to the Tories to Georgian Dream.

Central banks are part of the social contract. They are able to introduce (they aren’t always the wisest, but they are able to) policies that can help mitigate the effects of financial crises. The pandemic relief in the United States is a perfect example. At the order of the government, they were able to provide small benefits to people to help live through the pandemic.

Now crypto people, especially the bitcoin maxis, often froth at the mouth when this example is brought up, as people spending about 1,600 bucks on rent and food is apparently an immeasurable evil and despicable tyranny, despite it being an objectively positive societal good.

If people are truly concerned about the inflation this could cause (CEOs, “founders” and the beloved “builders” of the world create far more inflation than small stimuli for food do) there are myriad controls that policymakers can introduce to mitigate inflation, they just never do because of the prevailing political forces that view any sort of proactive move from government, other than a monopoly of violence, as an act equal to tyranny.

Instead (because apparently collective or political action is not viable or legitimate in libertarian thinking) we have to for some reason literally reinvent money in the form of this technological silver bullet (I’m looking at the cotton gin and the gatling gun) to cure the ills that are the result of capitalism as usual.

In end, this idea of a Bitcoin standard doesn’t seem like anything new to me at all. It’d be the late 19th century all over again. Early adopters would be the robber barons of the new era, issuing private money as they please and developing Bitcoin based derivatives. Bubbles and busts would still happen.

What’s more we’d be at there mercy of these feudal early adopters to provide more monetary supply in the event of shocks and crises, which happen with no less frequency in a deflationary system.

The technological silver bullet becomes more fuel for the dumpster fire it was supposed to put out.”

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

You've lost. Honestly, hfsp is the best response to this one

I mean, hfsp is the first thing that comes to mind ...

You did not ask him wtf happened in 1971


Yep shared the link 😊

He’s stubborn. There is a false sense of safety some people find in trusting institutions that should not be trusted.

Social contract? What social contract? Money is a collective psychosis.

If this is still going on on Saturday I can join the debate, with pleasure đŸ˜‚đŸ€Ł

If he believes in fairy tales like social contract he is not just anti-bitcoin. He is anti-freedom.

Bubbles happen when people find more value in something other than money itself. If the money is sound, will people demand such products?

“objectively positive societal good” đŸš©

OK. Let me try... tell him that his preferred option is for people to make rules and force others to follow them. Bitcoin is voluntary and open to everyone without restriction and you think that's a good thing for the world. A respectful disagreement is best because he's obviously way into his statist ideology and you won't change that.

Yeah I’m really hoping he just comes out as a communist. Would make it all a lot easier 😂

I am not one to write a long, well-formed response but it seems like he has a pretty weak argument that central bank actions are both effective and fall within some social contract. He chooses a straw man argument by pointing pandemic response (that wasn’t even the fed?), but the reality is that historically, the majority of FED actions give liquidity to the banks, not the people directly. Is it really a shock that those types of actions increase inequality?

Furthermore, even if you are an American on-board with the the US fed, none of this holds up if you live in another country whose currency is impacted by fed decisions or if you live in another country that has a corrupt central bank. If your friend is claiming that corrupt central banks don’t exist then đŸ€·â€â™‚ïž.

The argument for politically neutral currency is not really that difficult. I have a harder time reconciling the logic for an argument against a global, neutral currency.

“Central banks are part of the social contract.”

Kindly show me when and how this became so.

He literally believes central bankers and politicians are special and better than normal humans

Tell him he can keep his central bank and food stimulus at a nation state level. Each printer free to do as they wish or feel is needed. Try the global check and balance approach. There should at least be an alternative for countries who don't wish to be at the whim of US financial policy. With this he could envision reining in the overhyped silicon valley bubbles he dislikes.

As for the fueldalism you can tell him that this conversation right now is you trying to combat that. You literally create youtube video of yourselve giving money out. Props to you by the way.

He is not ready to hear it. When ready he will bring it up with you. Pointless debating when someone is so dug in.

Excellent point

you need to study bitcoin.

try to understand it

you did not even figure out what the fake disease hoax was about

your anti bitcoin colleague needs to try to study bitcoin basics. he sounds like warren buffet ten years ago when he was still sharp and refused to study bitcoin

Coincidentally I just finished re-listening to this podcast. If anything could open his eyes it’s Robert Breedlove laying it out as simple as possible from first principles thinking. If he doesn’t get it after that, there is nothing that will convince him. But I highly doubt he will take the time and listen to it. The arrogance seems high with this one.

nostr:note16mtnwfg5e29tlszq5dsf5sk3rf49mqvm4wkvv7wmwunmpkeyr2ds4m7ut7

Thanks will give it a listen I just can’t stand Lex unfortunately 😂

I understand. In that one he isn’t talking too much though, because Roberts intelligence and eloquence doesn’t leave space for too many stupid questions. The short sequences of Lex talking are really bearable.

That's ok. He loves you anyway.

đŸ€Ł