Why does the like button even exist then lol pure vanity?

It’s time to retire the 🤙 and the ❤️

We need to lower the threshold to ⚡️ and 🔄

In a V4V environment, the 🤙 is pure vanity.

If you like something, ⚡️ it. Even if it’s a few sats, take the time to use and support the monetary network that makes this possible.

And if it’s something you think your friends and followers will enjoy, boost it 🔄.

Until there is a good way to show posts of Friends of Friends, the 🔄 button is the most powerful tool to spread good content and create a virtuous cycle.

Pura vida! 🤙 💜

WE ARE THE ALGORITHM

If a post made you laugh, learn something or otherwise brought value to your life, the best thing you can do for it is to REPOST.

Reposting is so important is a non-algorithm social network like nostr.

this one?

#[2]

or this?

#[3]

Nostr’s killer feature is the portability of your identity within a network of independent apps that adhere to at least a minimal set of common open standards.

Hey #[0] sounds like a fun family time! Just make sure it's not a rotten egg they find. 🤣

Yes.

Monetization of real estate is due to three prevalent banking policies:

1. 90% of loans are made on real estate. Only a minority of loans are made for business purposes or for productive practice. This is a new development, and is not only a disservice to prospective entrepreneurs, but it shifts the target of speculative money from potentially productive businesses onto real estate. A guy with some time and money becomes limited to borrowing on a “second property” rather than on a business to provide a service for society.

2. Because loans are limited to real estate, the volume of borrowed money is funneled into the limited supply of buildings and houses. This would be fine if every person did not need a house. The necessary real estate, houses, becomes more concentrated in fewer hands, and the housing market grows beyond reach of many people.

3. The financial and insurance industries aggressively lobby to reduce the tax burden on real assets. This serves to make more money available to pay internet to the banks. Unfortunately it also makes less available for public services, and the tax burden gets shifted from those who own to those who do not own.

4. The banks have successfully inflated home prices to improve their lending scenario from one where they used to pull in 5 years of interest, to one where they have indebted buyers for 30+ years, and where they pocket more than the value of the house for the service of the loan. Soon, 40 year loans will the the loans of choice, and you will pay for “your” house three times.

5. If banks would make loans for productive purposes/businesses, not only would it be a boon to the community’s productivity, but it would remove the requirement of pumping investment into real estate alone, and would allow broader markets for investment with that capital. A second or third house, then, would be less interesting for those looking to invest, because there would be other excellent options. Real asset inflation would fall and houses would become more affordable for people who need them.

6. Bitcoin contributes to this solution in two ways: 1. It provides an alternative sink for investment and storage of value. In this way, it is already working. When I look at a building I would have purchased ten years ago, I think of how much easier it is to maintain Bitcoin. This is demonetization of real estate. 2. As money shifts from an inflationary energy to a deflationary one, people will be less inclined to use it for consumption, and less inclined to trade it for an alternative asset that depends on greater loans and looser monetary policy for returns.

Yes.

Monetization of real estate is due to three prevalent banking policies:

1. 90% of loans are made on real estate. Only a minority of loans are made for business purposes or for productive practice. This is a new development, and is not only a disservice to prospective entrepreneurs, but it shifts the target of speculative money from potentially productive businesses onto real estate. A guy with some time and money becomes limited to borrowing on a “second property” rather than on a business to provide a service for society.

2. Because loans are limited to real estate, the volume of borrowed money is funneled into the limited supply of buildings and houses. This would be fine if every person did not need a house. The necessary real estate, houses, becomes more concentrated in fewer hands, and the housing market grows beyond reach of many people.

3. The financial and insurance industries aggressively lobby to reduce the tax burden on real assets. This serves to make more money available to pay internet to the banks. Unfortunately it also makes less available for public services, and the tax burden gets shifted from those who own to those who do not own.

4. The banks have successfully inflated home prices to improve their lending scenario from one where they used to pull in 5 years of interest, to one where they have indebted buyers for 30+ years, and where they pocket more than the value of the house for the service of the loan. Soon, 40 year loans will the the loans of choice, and you will pay for “your” house three times.

5. If banks would make loans for productive purposes/businesses, not only would it be a boon to the community’s productivity, but it would remove the requirement of pumping investment into real estate alone, and would allow broader markets for investment with that capital. A second or third house, then, would be less interesting for those looking to invest, because there would be other excellent options. Real asset inflation would fall and houses would become more affordable for people who need them.

6. Bitcoin contributes to this solution in two ways: 1. It provides an alternative sink for investment and storage of value. In this way, it is already working. When I look at a building I would have purchased ten years ago, I think of how much easier it is to maintain Bitcoin. This is demonetization of real estate. 2. As money shifts from an inflationary energy to a deflationary one, people will be less inclined to use it for consumption, and less inclined to trade it for an alternative asset that depends on greater loans and looser monetary policy for returns.

Imagine all humans being able to buy a home for a reasonable amount of their life’s labor. They cannot right now…because banking policy monetizes real estate and entices speculators to push up value using borrowed money. That works as long as money gets cheaper and cheaper.