pull down to refresh
72 sats \ 22 replies \ @Undisciplined 14 Jun \ on: Would You Rather Have Money Manipulated by Governments or Private Companies? bitcoin
Definitely private companies, because they can't force you to use the currency they're manipulating or to back up their losses when they fail.
During the periods when America had no central bank, private banks would engage in fractional reserve lending. Just like today, they were trying to make an easy buck. The problem was that their competitors would accumulate their over-issued notes and go claim all of their gold reserves.
When it's private actors, they have to worry about getting wrecked by the very scheme they're trying to perpetrate.
I agree with this take. I don't think private companies are any bit more pure and kind hearted - but in the end they have a responsibility to customers, whereas the government they can just smooth over anything with further QE.
reply
Definitely private companies, because they can't force you to use the currency they're manipulating or to back up their losses when they fail.
Someone has never heard of company scrip.
reply
If they're using force, then they are no longer a private company. They would be a criminal organization, like the state.
reply
lol at the naïveté
Companies use force and power projection all the damn time.
reply
It's not naivete. We're just using the words slightly differently and it's tricking you into thinking you have a point.
reply
A business doesn't just stop being a business when they use force.
Have you ever heard of a for-profit prison? Have you ever had to fund someone's commissary? Maybe if you had, you'd know how badly a company will treat a captive audience.
reply
You're missing my point entirely. Also, bad treatment and criminal aggression are not the same thing.
I'm making a distinction between private actors and criminal actors (and, yes, I'm aware it's not a clean distinction). Private actors respect the property rights of others. Criminal actors violate the property rights of others.
There are many criminal organizations that are not generally regarded as such, or are not known to be such. That doesn't change anything about the point.
Private prisons are a euphemism. They are still part of the state and as such they are criminal organizations.
reply
Private prisons are a euphemism. They are still part of the state and as such they are criminal organizations.
Sir you are 0 for 3. Do some research.
reply
That has nothing to do with what I said.
Private prisons enforce state sentences, with state authorization, using state funds. They are part of the state in all but name.
reply
They'll take stupid risks, but the ones that do so too much are put out of business by their competitors. Just like natural selection, over time the most sustainable business models survive.
deleted by author
reply