Ever heard the term, “epistemic arrogance”? You’re like a textbook example of this.

Good joke.

What path? You guys are all so confident about your world views that you forget to actually justify them. If you knew a little about math you’d understand chaotic systems and how little it takes to fuck with your predictions. If they were as powerful and competent as you’re claiming the technologies you’re espousing would either be ineffective or not exist at all in the first place. Please think even just one step past grand global conspiracy and contemplate what you’re saying implies.

Most of what I see here is Bitcoin maximalists and conspiracy theorists. That’s fine, everyone should have a voice - but I’d like to see more types of people. Another thing is I see a lot of ideological posts and not a lot of general social posts, but I guess that’s just another way of saying the first sentence

Could be more diverse, but on the whole I’m optimistic.

Sounds like you didn’t understand my point. The scale of operation here is too large to have consistent results. You’re attributing effectively mystical powers to people. Banks are motivated by market interests, not malice - they literally benefit from economic growth. Even autocratic governments rely on the good will of the people to survive - a thing that can’t be sustained with bad results. Pretty obviously incompetence if you’ve ever worked with other people before.

Sustainable decentralization is a good thing, I hope the blockchain and nostr models achieve that. That being said, there’s no reason the banks and governments would be against human flourishing. You attributing to malice what is pretty clearly incompetence.

I think you’re reading a little too much into it.

I think the importance of certain things were less obvious when most of the countries around today were being established, unfortunately.

I think the best we can hope for is more federated power. The US has the basic concept right, but has inconsistent execution. You just want to have more states trying different things and iterating on each-other, you get more choice and the quality of those choices is usually better too.

It does, the concept of ownership in the physical world requires a state to establish - at least as we think of it.

Been thinking the same thing. Fine by me, VAT is more voluntary and doesn’t require direct effort for citizens to pay like income tax does.

Why

I don’t think anyone has the vision to plan and execute within a 4 year cycle, let alone past it.

I’m not sure anyone is capable of playing the long game at that scale.

Why would you trade away something that’s growing in value faster than the thing you’re trading it for? It’s not even an issue of what’s good for the economy, it’s an issue of whether or not the thing even constitutes a currency in practice if just holding onto it increases your effective wealth. Ideally the currency itself isn’t an investment medium. But that’s just my take.

Inflation being bad doesn’t make deflation good. Really, you probably want stability. I don’t think you’ll find many books that make you feel better about your opinions here.

Hopefully, a completely worthless speculation vehicle that never ends up fully realizing it’s intended purpose and has such massive technical failures that an entire extra network needs to be built on top of it for it to even begin to resemble something useful isn’t exactly something we need more of.

You aren’t smart for being right, you’re smart for knowing how to be right.

So you don’t want to learn skills? That’s amazingly retarded.