Just listened to a call with David Marcus from Lightning startup #Lightspark, where he highlighted zaps on #Nostr! He also talked about streaming money for content creators

Elon is to shit coins as Satoshi is to Bitcoin

How bad is the USD? I just sold a 2020 Tacoma TRD off-road back to the dealership for $800 more than I bought it 3 years ago. I made 0 improvements.

Lol a social compact that you get thrown in prison for breaking if you disagree with.

And there’s no opt out.

Kinda like slavery was a social compact yeah? Lmao

I’m confused, friend. I never said taxation was theft. I don’t think it is. In fact, I used taxation as the case in which government collecting money from its citizenry is explicitly *not* theft. It’s based, in principle, on the consent of the governed.

Happy to give you the last word here. 🍻

He never implied that. You just assumed the implication and you still do after he refuted it plainly:

"I’m not seeing how (2) is relevant though. If there’s benefit to theft, it doesn’t take it not theft. If you steal five dollars from everyone and put in a park, it doesn’t mean you didn’t steal five dollars. "

An increase in the money supply can cause price inflation, however your example was the price of eggs do to supply disruption which is different.

The more money printed, the more it will cost generally for everything and the harder you will have to work to get products.

The difference between endless fiat money printing and the bitcoin standard is the fixed supply. The price of eggs can go up or down based on their supply but not up or down based on bitcoins supply which is fixed.

I don't know your level of understanding so I explained it like I would to a 5th grader. No offense.

Not my convo but there are several types of inflation. Your egg example is price inflation which has nothing to do with monetary inflation, ie. money printing.

"They" are the government. And they are not that mysterious. Or would you disagree? Are you trying to make #[5] look like a conspiracy theorist, because your arguments lack common sense?

The first assumption is not necessary.

Money printing always dilutes the value of the money that is already in existence. It does not matter what the CPI says. Even if CPI is negative and we experience an overall price decrease, printing money is still diluting the value of the existing money. Preventing an even more pronounced price decrease.

#[5] does not make the second assumption at all. He's just saying that money printing is stealing. Arguing "but what if I sometimes benefit from being stolen from" is not arguing against that fact that you are being stolen from. It just says you like to be stolen from by the government, because you think they make better use of your money than you can yourself. That's a personal choice. And btw. inflation comes on top of the already existing taxes.

Your comparison with the egg producer is nonsensical. Luckily it highlights the importance of bitcoin though.

The egg producer can charge whatever he wants. If he charges more than his competition, I'll buy at the competition and he'll change his mind or goes broke.

There is no competition in FIAT Money though. The government forces you to use their currency. If you don't, you go to jail. That is why bitcoin is important as competition to keep them honest.

Should they, like the egg producer ramp up the money supply by 50%, I have the option to use the competing currency called bitcoin instead of being fucked over by their decision.

I said it was an oversimplification. Maybe to the point that it’s not a useful analogy (?) - but you asked what they meant. I think that’s what they mean when they say that.

I understand that you can price inflation under any monetary system.

I’m not seeing how (2) is relevant though. If there’s benefit to theft, it doesn’t take it not theft. If you steal five dollars from everyone and put in a park, it doesn’t mean you didn’t steal five dollars.

Maybe the best good-faith way to put it is this: The “theft” is the extent to which monetary inflation causes the non-consensual decrease in buying power of the monetary energy a citizenry has accumulated.

This is an oversimplification, but basically money printing decreases the value of your money because it increases the supply of money. Your $100 can't by the same amount of stuff that it could before.

The government wants to spend money on something, but instead of increasing taxes to pay for it (which the citizenry would presumably know about), they print money. Suppose it's 2% inflation rate. your $100 can now only buy $98 of goods and services. They've taken $2 in buying power from you, without your consent. They've stolen $2 from you. (Had they proposed a 2% tax, you would've been more likely to say no, so they fund projects in this way instead.)

Again, this is an oversimplification. But that's the basic idea.

Bitcoin is issued over time. Everyone agrees to participate in the predetermined issuance schedule voluntary. That's why it's not stealing.

truly open source development ❤️ #[0]