24
Tommy Trooper
241e0ab7871b6e2c7b2a9042e5a34d8b7b37fe709db1da405141a1adc6c12821
BTC Banter mostly

Hi Tomoko. I look at Trump as a master negotiator. The tariffs are not there to be imposed but avoided. They are a threat to get nations to change their behavior in favor of Trump’s demands. I don’t think Trump intended them as a lasting arrangement. At the moment it is probably easier to bend to US demands than switch trade relations to China and Brics.

Hey Carl, I have been mining for about 3 years and it’s tough. Even though the house doesn’t cheat, the big guns still get the newest and fastest miners and us little guys get the crumbs. Constantly playing catch up with newer machines and increasing difficulty adjustments.

Replying to Avatar Lyn Alden

People often assume that whoever their god is, that it is standing with them specifically. In the US, they often separate this view along party lines.

Conservatives to some extent imagine Jesus standing with them on the border with a rifle protecting Christendom against anarchy. Even if many of those immigrants are ::checks notes:: also Christians. If a "woke" bishop calls for compassion on immigrants and is not a fan of the twice-divorced President who can't name his favorite bible chapter and forgot to put his hand on the bible when being sworn in, she's somehow the baddie rather than him, even among Christians.

Progressives to some extent imagine Jesus walking around in Gaza or Haiti or Sudan attending to the least advantaged among us. He shuns the empire and tends to them. And yet, while Jesus called for pacifism and was a rhetorical saint among chill speakers, many of them find a way to mentally turn extremists into heroes. Anything the underdog society does against the dominant society is justified. Even if it's violent toward civilians. In our media rebels are cool, but in reality they often like to kill the gays or the civilians, so it gets awkward pretty fast rather than being like the cool Star Wars rebels vs the Empire.

I find myself in a weird camp that almost nobody is onboard with.

I'm like, "Yes, we actually need to secure our borders. We need to be more scrutinizing for our society's sake. We need slower, higher-end immigration. And we actually need to enforce the rule of law for theft on the streets."

But also,

"No, I don't think Jesus of Nazareth as depicted in text would be onboard with this border view. He'd view us like Rome. Let's not re-imagine him as onboard with this. We're rooting for ourselves; he'd root for the underdogs."

I'm too woke for the conservatives and too based for the progressives.

The US was involved with multiple coups in Latin America. We ran the reserve currency and tried to bend them to our will with their dollar-denominated debt 40 years ago by spiking the value of that debt. Some of them went into retarded socialism and rekt themselves throughout that time period too; it's not all our fault. But it's some of our fault.

And then we militarily entered the Middle East. We made deals with them, funded them against the Soviets, and then turned against them. We've invaded them at like a 100:1 ratio vs them invading us with one major incidence (9/11). And as much as I am a fan of Jews as a people (as someone who grew up in Northeastern USA where Jews are relatively dense, I'd happily have them settle all around here), Israel is a state is colonial; our western powers displaced Gazans to make it and have been fighting that reality ever since.

We're Rome. And like Rome, we think we are justified. And along those lines, we're probably partially right, and probably partially wrong.

When you take a view, imagine every possible view opposing it.

And as the US dominates as neo-Rome, I think we will realize how distant we are from Jesus the hippie.

Thank-you for sharing this, Lyn. I appreciate the way you think.

How Austrian School Economists Crushed Karl Marx’s Socialism

1️⃣ Ludwig von Mises and the Economic Calculation Problem

Beyond Incentives: Mises argued that the fundamental flaw in socialism isn’t just the lack of incentives to work hard or perform undesirable tasks but the inability of central planners to make rational economic decisions.

Absence of Prices: He highlighted that without private ownership of the means of production, there could be no genuine market, no price formation, and thus no way to calculate profits and losses. This makes rational economic planning impossible.

Inevitability of Chaos: Mises concluded that without market prices, central planning leads to arbitrary, chaotic decisions and the irrational allocation of resources, resulting in widespread shortages and the collapse of the planned economy.

2️⃣ F.A. Hayek and The Knowledge Problem

Dispersed Knowledge: Hayek demonstrated that in the real world, information is dispersed among countless individuals, making it impossible for central planners to possess the specific knowledge needed to manage an economy.

Spontaneous Order: He argued that only individuals with localized knowledge can coordinate supply and demand effectively through a price system.

Limitations of Central Planning: Hayek highlighted that central planning is not only presumptuous but also harmful, as it prevents those with the necessary information from making optimal decisions. The market’s price system functions as a “telecommunication network,” efficiently transmitting knowledge without bureaucratic interference.

3️⃣ Carl Menger and Subjective Value

Subjective Value: Menger refuted Marx’s labor theory of value by showing that a good’s value is subjective and determined by individual utility, not the amount of labor invested.

Labor Doesn’t Create Value: He argued that labor alone doesn’t give value to a product; the value depends on whether someone finds the product useful and is willing to pay for it.

Diminishing Marginal Utility: Menger introduced the concept that the value of additional identical goods decreases as their quantity increases, further challenging Marx’s idea that value is tied solely to labor.

4️⃣ Eugen Böhm-Bawerk and Time Preference

Surplus Value Debunked: Böhm-Bawerk refuted Marx’s idea that capitalists exploit workers by underpaying them, emphasizing that wages reflect the time preference of present goods over future profits.

Time Preference: He introduced the concept of time preference, where capitalists advance wages (present goods) in exchange for future goods (profits), accounting for risk and waiting time.

Wage Differences: The wage difference isn’t exploitation but a fair trade of present wages for future profits, with workers receiving immediate compensation and avoiding future risks.

✒️: Students for Liberty

Great review. Wish it went as as far as Friedman too.

You cannot live in a USB drive, but please start buying Bitcoin again when you can.

Here for the uncensored banter. Want to meet fellow bitcoiners and improve my knowledge of crypto in general.

#introductions