38 sats \ 14 replies \ @SpaceHodler 13 Aug \ parent \ on: On Toxic People mostly_harmless
You're posting this protectionist stuff in every other thread and not engaging with responses.
It looks spammy, downzap?
reply
why am I seeing new yorker links?
reply
Do you have a problem with The New Yorker as a source?
Or would you like to question the facts and issues raised in the article?
reply
New Yorker is not a reliable source
Your source is also from 2022
The topic of this post is Toxic People
reply
'Your source is also from 2022'
Yes- The source was published days before the invasion of Ukraine.
'The topic of this post is Toxic People'
Yes and in my initial comment I explained why I raise this issue-
Raising this because while you celebrate Bitcoiners ability to engage in sound reasoned debate, some major relevant issues seem to remain ignored or denied.
Sometimes it feels like the Bitcoin community only wants to hear the good news and not deal with real and potential challenges.
reply
What is a 'reliable' source in your opinion?
What content in the article I linked do you think is unreliable?
My impression is that most of the MSM and social media have NOT covered the treaty signing between China and Russia that came days before the invasion of Ukraine- yet this seems to me to be a very relevant and important piece of reporting and still highly relevant to the ongoing conflict in Ukraine.
How does reporting on this very significant event when most(all?) other 'news' outlets remained silent make The New Yorker 'unreliable'?
reply
Protectionist stuff?
Not engaging with responses?
- that's simply not true.
You have made two false assertions while not responding to any of the facts and issues raised.
reply
reply
If you read my comment you will see that I am giving the article and related issue as an example of an issue that the Bitcoin community in my experience is very reluctant to engage upon in an open minded fair and fact based contest of ideas. I was making this point in turn in retort to the OPs assertion that in 'the Bitcoin community is that there is a deep respect for real argument, particularly from first principles.'
While I would agree Bitcoiners are probably overall more open minded and prepared to question established power structures and norms I would not agree this is universal and especially where any issue that is difficult and challenging to Bitcoin is raised...such as the example I gave.
Summary- even among Bitcoiners toxicity can emerge when challenging ideas are raised.
reply
I see what the connection is. I did read you comment, it just didn't seem clear that there was a link. After re-reading, I get it.
I get it. But I don't know if I necessarily agree that people would ignore this side of a debate or argument. I read tonnes of stuff on here that cites this exact idea or projection for the future. Many posts on economics and politics that highlight China's strength in many areas, and the EU or US lack of prowess in them.
Sorry, I didn't read any of your previous comments relating to it. FWIW, I wouldn't dismiss the point you are making about the shift in dominance of East-West.
As far as the point relating to Bitcoiners unable to engage in debate. Sure that is a fact that many of us still have out biases. We have different experiences, knowledge sets etc.
Fair enough. Sorry I skipped over the point you were making.
reply
reply
I come as a refugee from reddit where there was a much less open and informed r/bitcoin community that seems to exist here- there I would rarely if ever see the east west issue raised (unless it was myself)... so great to hear this matter is mentioned on here and can be discussed and I look forward to seeing that and others views because while I think it is a challenging topic for Bitcoin it is also IMO a fascinating one.
reply
I responded to your comment in another thread and you didn't engage.
The point I made was that the USD hegemony was destroying the US by causing a trade deficit and digging it into a negative net international investment position (NIIP).
It's not sustainable and the longer it goes on for, the harder it will fall when the fuel runs out.
reply
Apologies for failure previously to reply. Yes and that trade deficit has been in large part fueling the serial Chinese surpluses which have in turn funded Chinas expansion. A key difference between the Chinese model and the US model is that in China the government (composed of more than 60% engineers) direct capital, while in the west capital directs our so called elected governments. We have crony capitalism operated by private banks who control fiat debt issuance of capital while the CCP directs their fiat capital issuance toward their project to relentlessly grow Chinese wealth and power. Ironic that an unelected CCP nevertheless knows that if they do not deliver ongoing results they will be removed (Mandate of Heaven) , while our 'democratic' governments are little more than fronts of varied hue behind which corporate sponsors direct the flow of capital and wealth.
PS Lyn Alden talks about as you mention how the USD reserve fiat currency hegemony has become a toxic curse and undermined the incentives toward productivity and development and instead left a growing deficit and failing infrastructure and investment, growing debt and no savings, but that is as much about an empire in decline as fiat...while China has milked the global reserve dynamic of the US very successfully. China has managed the fiat system with conscious deliberation while the US has allowed fiat capital issuance to be dominated by private bankers who have misused it primarily to pump and dump non productive speculative assets rather than building long term productive assets and infrastructure.
reply