Nostr Web Client

Im a hard money proponent. But I often think of the advances humans have made due to money printing. Some advancements don't have an economical aspect to it and only governments will fund. Blue sky medical, space research, building large hadron colliders etc.

What will advancement look like on bitcoin is not clear to me but I don't think saving is necessarily good for advancing technologically.

I agree with your point on bitcoins time. We have already run the money printing experiemnent many times. Bitcoin is a well worth experiment to run.

If the only outcome of a bitcojn standard was that wars couldn't happen (ie printing = funding wars) I'd say that was a worthwhile outcome.

Hoshi 2y ago

good point!

I hear bitcoiners say that civilization/technology advances (like it would be a law of nature) and therefore money should increase in value.

The question that I miss is: how should money be, such that it advances civilization/technology best.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Luffy 2y ago 💬 1

It's a good question. I think money has to be based on truths. No manipulation/unfair advantage/sleight of hand.

As soon as there is manipulation in money things downstream end up distorted.

Truth is best for civilisation I believe. We are not taught to find truth. We are taught to seek approval. School does this best!!

Let's run the bitcoin experiment I say.

Hoshi 2y ago

That is true. Blockchain is the best ledger. But I suspect that reducing the block rewards for miners to zero is a mistake that will harm the security of the chain and reduce incentives to invest/innovate. They perform a service for the store of value but will get the rewards only from current transactions. That feels wrong. The inflation from mining should help to motivate investments. Why should inflation be 0? It could be greater 0 or negative (by burning a part of transaction fees). 0 is a nice number but why is it the best?