You acknowledge they can’t raise rates. What about my stance is old timey or ideological? It’s purely rational. Old timey is a 60/40 portfolio.
we've done 12 rounds on this before, you think deflation is good and largely parrot austrian school stuff that is very popular in the crypto community
None of that matters. They have to print. You can either own the greatest monetary asset in history in that macro environment, or you can keep opposing it. Your position is far more of an ideologue than mine.
I keep coming back to this in my head. Maybe you can help me out. If BTC only goes up, why would anyone ever spend it? Part of what makes fiat have such velocity is the fact that it's inflationary, right? By the time BTC is worth enough for HODLers to sell, there won't be anything to sell it for, because BTC will be the currency. While I think being responsible with money should be rewarded, that's not the way the world currently works.
That is one of my biggest questions as well. Everyone says it is the currency of the future but nobody wants to actually spend it because what they really want is for it to go up indefinitely and not become an every day currency.
A few thoughts: -If you buy into the world view of Saylor and others, once all currencies are central bank digital currencies, we'll likely live in a world with the US dollar and the Yuan and maybe the Euro as the only currencies. People will still transact in those currencies, and they'll save in btc. This is exactly what I and countless others do now. I keep limited spending money in a checking account, and everything else goes into btc as my savings account. Saylor's most recent podcast with Pompliano discusses this in quite a bit of detail. So ultimately, btc never has to be a daily transactional currency to be a $100T plus asset (although it could be). -It is theoretically possible that btc is eventually a world currency that people spend (this already happens in El Salvador). But that's far from necessary for anyone to think it is worth buying. If you think it will simply demonitize the monetary premium in gold, real estate, negative yielding bonds, etc., then there's no real reason that it isn't a $10-20T plus asset.
It never has to be a currency to be worth $100T or more. But setting that aside, you're basically asking why something hasn't skipped steps 3 and 4 below: Using modern terminology, money always evolves in the following four stages: Collectible: In the very first stage of its evolution, money will be demanded solely based on its peculiar properties, usually becoming a whimsy of its possessor. Shells, beads and gold were all collectibles before later transitioning to the more familiar roles of money. Store of value: Once it is demanded by enough people for its peculiarities, money will be recognized as a means of keeping and storing value over time. As a good becomes more widely recognized as a suitable store of value, its purchasing power will rise as more people demand it for this purpose. The purchasing power of a store of value will eventually plateau when it is widely held and the influx of new people desiring it as a store of value dwindles. Medium of exchange: When money is fully established as a store of value, its purchasing power will stabilize. Having stabilized in purchasing power, the opportunity cost of using money to complete trades will diminish to a level where it is suitable for use as a medium of exchange. In the earliest days of Bitcoin, many people did not appreciate the huge opportunity cost of using bitcoins as a medium of exchange, rather than as an incipient store of value. The famous story of a man trading 10,000 bitcoins (worth approximately $94 million at the time of this article’s writing) for two pizzas illustrates this confusion. Unit of account: When money is widely used as a medium of exchange, goods will be priced in terms of it. I.e., the exchange ratio against money will be available for most goods. It is a common misconception that bitcoin prices are available for many goods today. For example, while a cup of coffee might be available for purchase using bitcoins, the price listed is not a true bitcoin price; rather it is the dollar price desired by the merchant translated into bitcoin terms at the current USD/BTC market exchange rate. If the price of bitcoin were to drop in dollar terms, the number of bitcoins requested by the merchant would increase commensurately. Only when merchants are willing to accept bitcoins for payment without regard to the bitcoin exchange rate against fiat currencies can we truly think of Bitcoin as having become a unit of account. https://vijayboyapati.medium.com/the-bullish-case-for-bitcoin-6ecc8bdecc1
Sushiswap or uniswap will work. Just need to manually copy/paste the contract addy for it to show up. You can find it here https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/ethereum-name-service edit: if on mobile click the show info button
My wife has a square at each of her offices for payments. Can we set it up so it instantly converts a % of the daily transacitons into BTC? Or instantaneously changes a payment to BTC?
Quick question, (not loaded). Not a BTC or hard money person What is the MMT ideal outcome at the end of all this? We print to invest in infrastructure, social programs, etc....indefinitely. Is there a debit limit that matters or it just keeps going? Legitimately asking, MMT'ers seem to be fully in control so wondering what is their theory on what happens next?
Not sure if the technical ability to do that with Square/cash app. My assumption is that El Salvador has something similar in place. It’s probably easier to set up recurring buys at a place like Swan.
Ha I figured that’d get a response from someone. Whatever. I think it’s right. And time will tell. Not off to a bad start.
I asked a EU macro economist this during a webinar, response went along the lines of “Debts don’t matter, Things can continue into perpetuity without broader social unrest or another COVID-19 like event.” To me it seems like they don’t really know.
I didn't know Bulgaria holds more than 1% of the 21m Bitcoin. They have 213,519 BTC. 4x more than the rest combined. https://www.buybitcoinworldwide.com/treasuries/
The "debts don't matter" is something I was trying to explain to someone and I don't have a good enough understanding to put it in lay terms. Basically the US can pay off all it's debt if they want by just printing more money.
the idea MMT'ers are fully in control and not just a return to more Keynesian guidelines is a little goofy imo. you're still seeing the neoliberal economic folks clamoring, and even beyond them the monetarist types, especially in the crypto communities whinging. The rate to borrow money right now is negative or 0. If you can get any ROI just stack that paper, which infrastructure you can end up with 20x+ ROI, social welfare programs tend to be 3-5x+. The debt only matters relative to other measures of economic activity, by itself it's irrelevant. Similar to money supply, it's an irrelevant component in modern economics.
There’s been enough debt and deficit propaganda and misinformation put out over the last half century; normies gotta unlearn and relearn a ton.
Get a grift going and buy stuff with the profits. Scamming is the most profitable business in the US.
Sending fractions of a penny to anyone on the planet for what amounts to basically zero transaction cost =\ dogshit for payments. Might want to do a bit more research. Or not. Won’t matter.
Oh the Evergrande bullshit strikes again China just constantly fucking with markets is getting so tiring
I think Americans don't really care about Lightning because they can send dollars to each other instantly for free. I, personally, am fine waiting the one day it takes to get from Venmo into my bank account. Remittances to other countries, fine sure, but doesn't really matter to me personally. Twitter thing feels gimmicky, plus the Strike app is KYC / centralized which seems antithetical to crypto values. It just doesn't change my life in anyway
I didn’t and won’t. The XRPL is superior to any proof of work network except maybe litecoin and it’s forks. I called Lightning network a XRPL trust line knock off. Pre-funded Peer to peer Off main net Cheap Requires special wallet app Hell you can store BTC in a trust line and send it faster and cheaper than lightning
Your life? No. Someone in the US sending a remittance to a family member in El Salvador (or fill in the blank for any other country)? Yes.
Xrp ledger being superior to all proof of work networks except litecoin? Lol yikes. Thanks for the laughs today. Been awhile since I came across an xrp diehard. Keep going. Maybe you’ll get it eventually.
die hard? Kiss my a$$. Don’t assume my bags (they’re diversified, try it out). Stuffs gotta compete against Venmo and Zelle at this point for p2p transactions as far as cost and BTC and eth don’t cum close. Check out this video from 2013. Chris Larsen sending BTC over the XRPL v fast v cheap, before lightning white paper even written. Maybe u will 1 day understand there’s more then 1 way 2 make it. Maximalism is very very risky.
In the history of the world, monetary maximalism has never been risky. Owning gold was not risky when others denominate in seashells. You don’t diversify your steel building by tossing some wood into the foundation. I’d be far more concerned owning any random altcoin that is almost certainly a security and that isn’t being bought and adopted en masse by public companies, massive funds, billionaires, and countries. But that’s just me.