pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @orangecheckemail_isthereany 8h \ parent \ on: What's the most ridiculous and poisonous Bitcoin critique till date? AskSN
Remember that one way to think about money is as fungible favours.
When I work for someone he gives me a token which I can then use to get others to work for me.
I do someone a favour and instead of that specific guy owing me a fovour I can now ask a favour of anyone who uses that particular kind of token as money.
Money printing then is kind of like stealing favours,
and successfully pretending like you did people a whole bunch of favours for which other people now owe you favours.
It seems like a bad thing to allow people who didn't provide any value for others to go around bossing people around (literally lol)
compared to
the people who provided the value for others getting to steer the economy.
I guess there's a technocratic argument for why we shouldn't allow the people who did the favour to be the ones allowed to ask favours back
and that instead a wise philosopher king should be able to direct the favours
But that's awfully convenient
Maybe it will be true for one in a million
And that person probably will not ever be the one who seeks it
So that's a hard pass for me.
I say he who gains the money through mutually voluntary interaction gets to spend the money