pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @clr 16 Jun \ parent \ on: If Bitcoin’s onchain throughput 100x’d today, it wouldn’t even double adoption. bitcoin
Thanks for sharing your point of view. I just would like to understand if you want to answer:
- I imagine that coming from gold, you view Bitcoin as an improvement to gold — digital store of value. But gold already failed as medium of exchange and unit of account. Fiat is better for those two purposes (you cannot make digital transfers with gold).
- Circular economies as socialism: I don't disagree, and Satoshi himself was a socialist under that lens: he donated his time, wrote the software, gave up riches, fame, recognition, etc., for bitcoin to succeed. I think comparing the circular economies with a Ponzi is not correct because bitcoin itself is valuable worldwide, even outside of their circle.
- Telling family and friends: when I discovered bitcoin, I couldn't stop talking about it. I had the same thought, but I also thought that they didn't have enough money as to alter the price significantly.
- When I see this point of view, it always seems to come from people who live in "developed" countries and have fiat privileges: I don't know about you, but I assume you have several bank accounts, credit and debit cards, and whatnot. If your fiat privileges were revoked for whatever reason (bank accounts closed/frozen), maybe you would like to be able to spend bitcoin easily and have a wide bitcoin acceptance in society. That's why I want bitcoin to be accepted as MoE and ultimately UoA and I don't think that makes me a socialist (it's ultimately for selfish reasons).
- How will you flourish in a society where transactions are surveiled, tracked and blocked and using bitcoin is heavily punished? The "rational" economic analysis never accounts for tyranny. You will probably be among the richest guys in the prison and you will be able to purchase tuna cans, a radio, pay for phone calls... but is that really the future you want for yourself?
- Ok
- I did not say socialism. But most of those so called circular economies sustain by Sats coming in from outside, as donations. I argue the donations are functionally similar to liquidity injection/quant easing, and hence do not test the circular economies' true sustainability, on how they can stand on their own feet. To be honest, I have not travelled to one myself, and not aware of all the nuances in terms of how exactly Bitcoin enters and circulates. But it is also my impression many of them rise as flash in the pan, and are undone during the bear market drawdowns. Happy to be corrected. Out of all the places I visited myself, I liked Lugano (Switzerland), as it seems many businesses accept Bitcoin, but don't know if that is counted as a circular economy.
- Glad to know you love to talk about Bitcoin, it's your personal choice, which I respect. I am not that much of a talker, but never under the illusion that my family is rich enough to move the market even if they wanted. Still I do not feel being an evangelist is beneficial to me. My own parents are not that savvy, and they are incredibly scared and timid to put their money even in an index fund, let alone Bitcoin, which, to them, is still a scam. I do not have the time and patience to change anyone's mind.
- If all my fiat assets were blocked by the institutions, then yes, I would have to spend BTC and Gold. That is why I buy BTC mostly in cash from some dealers I know, who I can sell to as well. The likelihood of that happening is small, but I lack the political capital to make BTC a MoE against the merchants' wish. I suspect if such a thing was to happen, that will accelerate BTC adoption by itself. But I do not even have a whole Bitcoin, so not like I will benefit a lot if BTC is the medium of exchange tomorrow. But my forecast is not Fiats dying by a big bang, but a slow death over next few decades. I do not imply or allege that you are a socialist, but if you are comfortable with your stack, then you have more incentive to push for hyperbitcoinisation tomorrow, than me.
- If in a society transactions are heavily surveilled and tracked, the answer is not necessarily Bitcoin, the answer is in second amendment. Look at the European Union, for example. They are even considering a bill classify public key (or their hash) as personal data, which will prohibit storing them on the Blockchain. This is equivalent to banning Bitcoin altogether. Is Bitcoin the solution to such a government? No, silly. The antidote to that is violent revolution to undo the government if citizens think so. You remember how FDR confiscated gold? Did gold itself solve the problem of gold confiscation?
reply