Cryptocurrency: Bitcoiners Debate Econ101
grarpamp
grarpamp at gmail.com
Thu Feb 9 22:18:23 PST 2023
The US dollar is going to zero. (i.redd.it)
submitted 15 hours ago by notlarangi123
354 comments
share
save
hide
report
top 200 commentsshow all 354
sorted by:
best
Want to add to the discussion?
Post a comment!
[–]NotAPotHead420 97 points 13 hours ago
It's already at $1 that's only a dollar away from zero
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]EdwardTheGamer 33 points 11 hours ago
Dollar cannot lose value, it has been stable at $1 for hundreds of years!
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]TexasBoyz-713 50 points 10 hours ago
1 USD = 1 USD
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]aboutthis1220 27 points 10 hours ago
Few understand
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]imeeme 9 points 10 hours ago
A dollar is a dollar
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]t1MacDoge 7 points 10 hours ago
1 dollhar == 1 dollhair
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]MoonDogeXx 11 points 10 hours ago
You gotta think of shit.
Some year: 1 dollar = some shit.
Next year: 1 dollar = less shit.
Many years later: 1 dollar = no shit.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]ExplanationDull5984 123 points 13 hours ago*
Can you guys please stop this nonesense? It makes us look stupid
infront of anyone that has some knowledge.If any country would really
adopt a depreciating currency they would fall back in economic terms.
The profit spread between holding and investing gets much smaller. So
investing is not so lucrative and also not even needed after you amass
enough money.Today wealthy people have almost all their wealth
invested, so they can retain the purchasing power. Any investment that
makes any profit is better than -2% yearly loss. Even if it is risky.
This I think is the main driver of developement.On the other hand if
your currency appreciates, people dont have to risk anything. They
just live of the appreciation, and leave their offspring the same
purchasing power.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]dancehowlstyle3 30 points 13 hours ago
You're fighting an uphill battle my friend 😂
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]ExplanationDull5984 21 points 10 hours ago
I am very impressed I got 27 upvotes. Most of the time I get downvoted
to oblivion in other groups for sharing non mainstreem arguments.Today
I got -127 for saying 15min city is not what they want us to belive.
So this btc inflation argument was a huge win :D
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]aleksfadini 7 points 10 hours ago
Exactly this! Here is one more upvote.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]aleksfadini 22 points 10 hours ago
Honestly, that’s exactly how I feel about this sub. Those feel like
posts made by high school students. Making stupid statements makes
bitcoin look bad, cos it paints an image of a community made of
ignorant silly people, which I would like to think the bitcoin
community is not.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (2 replies)
[–]Sorrymisunderstandin 5 points 8 hours ago
Can confirm it makes you guys look very dumb
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Objective_Digitredditor for 3 months 4 points 11 hours ago
It makes us look stupid infront of anyone that has some knowledge.
What you mean is it upsets Keynesians.
Mostly the well-off invest (because fiat sucks). The average man is
stuck with fiat and his savings slowly lose value. Thankfully he now
has Bitcoin.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]stumblinbear 10 points 8 hours ago
The average man is stuck with fiat
You could just buy stocks. This isn't locked behind some monetary
minimum, you can just go do it. There are literally thousands of ETFs
that take pretty much all the guesswork out of it.
Not saying BTC isn't neat, I'm only arguing the one point I snipped out.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (5 replies)
[–]a10lber 3 points 13 hours ago
You should look into Austrian economics.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]ExplanationDull5984 6 points 11 hours ago
I looked into it, but found nothing that disproves my point. Did you?
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]paul__k 6 points 12 hours ago
The school of economics that is entirely unscientific, is completely
discredited, and is a running joke amongst people who understand
anything about the economy? That Austrian economics?
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Libertarian_Florida 3 points 12 hours ago
The school of economics that is entirely unscientific, is
completely discredited, and is a running joke amongst people who
understand anything about the economy?
No, he said Austrian economics, not Keynesian.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]paul__k 5 points 11 hours ago
Can you prax this out for me? Austrians are like the Flat Earthers of
economics, mate.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Libertarian_Florida 2 points 11 hours ago
No they're not lol
Just because you hold such an opinion does not make it true, mate
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]croto8 -2 points 8 hours ago
Yes they are. You saying they’re not does not make it true.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Libertarian_Florida 1 point 8 hours ago
false
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Turbulent_Clerk4508 2 points 9 hours ago
Sound money makes you a flat earther?
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–]bitcorner22 1 point 9 hours ago*
why do you think you understand anything? You are just mindlessly
parroting keynesian economics.
If there is lack of interest in investment, prices drop and yields go
up which attracts new investors.
Basically markets work just fine and there will always be capital for
good investments. yields will increase to a point where investment
makes sense.
What you actually want to do is to manipulate the market and FORCE
people to invest so that they will just pump money into investments
without caring about the investment itself.
How is that supposedly any better? You just prevent a market from
functioning properly by interfering with it.
This I think is the main driver of developement.On the other hand
if your currency appreciates, people dont have to risk anything. They
just live of the appreciation, and leave their offspring the same
purchasing power.
vs buying up all assets and houses and living off them so that they
are out of reach for the average person.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (4 replies)
[–]ItsAllJustASickGame -2 points 13 hours ago*
But if someone had invested all their wealth into gold in the 1800s or
1900s, their offspring could literally live off the appreciation and
require no risky investments. It's literally no different than that.
Edit: People, ffs. Do I need to spell this out? Yes, investing in
businesses is good for the economy. Investing in gold, back when you
could also invest in business, was like investing in Bitcoin. You
could buy stocks or invest in startups, which was risky, or you could
buy gold. Gold was always useful. It had fluctuations, but it required
zero effort or labor. It was simply putting cash into an appreciating
piece of material. If one had gone all in on gold, back then, they'd
probably be million or billionaires now. OP is arguing that this kind
of asset is bad for economies because it serves no purpose. I'm saying
there is plenty of key data proving that is fundamentally untrue and
it's quite the opposite. People holding gold did quite well if they
actually held it. The California gold rush is akin to the miner rush
we have now.
Just because some rando comes and posts something on Reddit with
confidence, doesn't mean they're right.
The economy won't break because people invest in Bitcoin, unless that
economy was corruptly dependent on the previous system. This is just a
thing people can buy that grows in value as the crypto space grows
just as gold grew in value as gold use cases grew.
And Bitcoin is not a depreciating currency. It's inflation becomes
less, then it stagnates. Nothing is burned.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]AdamJensensCoat 20 points 13 hours ago
If this same time traveller put their money into an SP500 or Dow Jones
index over the same period of time they would be significantly ahead
of the gold investor.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]uniquelyavailable 6 points 13 hours ago
Interesting way of looking at it. Gold and silver are fiscally
conservative, as long as fiat doesnt fall on its ass then it currently
is more aggressive. Supporting data
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (6 replies)
[+]TransientState1 -7 points 13 hours ago
Stop believing this Keynesian myth. Economics is not science- you
cannot run two parallel experiments on the economy at the same time.
So most economists cherry pick data to support their narrative.
Especially Keynesians.
First off, there are 3 kinds of inflation:
Inflation of the money supply
Inflation in goods and services (CPI)
Inflation in assets (investing)
Holding all things equal, inflation of type 1 will ALWAYS lead to
inflation of type 2 and/or 3. This is simple logic: when the
circulating money supply expands, that money has to go somewhere. It
goes to 2, 3, or both which absorb the new money like a sponge.
Here is why the "inflation discourages hoarding" theory is wrong. It's
because in order to inflate, new money must first be printed. Who is
printing that new money? Whoever it is, that entity is STEALING from
the rest of us, they have gained $$$ just by printing. Google the
Cantillon effect.
So the logic is, in order to stop "hoarding", somebody has to STEAL
from everyone else. How ridiculous is that???? Theft is ok????
Reminder that it's not the government that prints money. It is the
Federal Reserve. Important distinction.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]stumblinbear 2 points 8 hours ago
it's not the government that prints money.
Federal Reserve
Federal
An institution created by Congress and under congressional
jurisdiction alone
Dam I wonder if it's the government. By that logic, the FTC, FCC,
Treasury, etc aren't the government either. Which is asanine.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]ExplanationDull5984 3 points 11 hours ago
Most of the new money (90%) that is coming into circuilation is from
mortgage backed loanes. So people get the money, how is this stealing.
I agree that politics using the printing press to fill their budget
holes is wrong, but that is another argument.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]TransientState1 1 point 10 hours ago
Wrong. First, mortgages are only 30% of the Fed balance sheet.
Second, its mortgages. The people borrow the new money. The banks are
the ones who get the new money. (And interest)
The banks get to spend this new money before it's filtered out through
the rest of the economy and prices have inflated. It's like a
counterfeiter spending his counterfeit money; it's just free money at
the expense of/stealing from everyone else.
In this context, the people are actually hurt more because they're on
the other side of the trade; they had to borrow the new money, and
borrowing = shorting, so they're technically "short" the new money,
they're the ones paying "full price" for the new money.
Even if your reasoning was correct (lol), it means that money-printing
benefits people with mortgages over people without. How is it fair to
benefit a select group at the expense of everyone else?
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (6 replies)
[+]Libertarian_Florida -6 points 12 hours ago
downvoted with no rebuttal. SAD!
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]notlarangi123[S] -1 points 13 hours ago
Deflating money gives to average people what only the rich can afford.
Btw El Salvador seems to be doing alright.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]mesmoothbrain 7 points 12 hours ago
why would anybody take the risk of opening a business, when HODLing
meant guaranteed profit?
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]notlarangi123[S] 1 point 10 hours ago
Because it's not enough profit. You would need to have something like
$500 000 in bitcoin to even think about retiring.
Btw people could just buy gold and get profits as well, why doesn't
everyone just buy gold???
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]mesmoothbrain 3 points 10 hours ago
we don’t use gold as currency ??
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Amir-Iran 4 points 12 hours ago
Deflation is the death of the economy. If everything gets cheaper day
by day, then why do I have to buy stuff? Why do I have to invest my
money in business, real state, or buy good such as a new car or a TV?
I just HOLD. The exact thing that bitcoiners do! Will you ever buy a
house or TV with Bitcoin? I don't think so.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Libertarian_Florida 2 points 12 hours ago
then why do I have to buy stuff?
because you need stuff to live? You'd still buy the stuff you need,
you would however be discouraged from buying dumb shit you didn't
need, as it should be. I would 100% buy a house or TV with bitcoin if
the seller accepts it!
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Lokki78 2 points 11 hours ago
Yeah I definitely need to put my money in shares and etfs to drive
innovation in order to live. I definitely need two mechanical
keyboards and 3 laptops to live. Sure… yes that’s exactly the case. I
buy all this cause I need it to live. I put my money in funds and AI
stocks, because I can’t live without it.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Libertarian_Florida 1 point 11 hours ago
You just described all the things you DON'T need to live. I was
referring to food, water, and shelter you dumb dumb
https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/732/494/c35.gif
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Lokki78 2 points 11 hours ago
I was being sarcastic. Because exactly those purchases drive
innovation and economy forward. Because I’m risking capital in
investments and I can afford shit like that if they turn green.
Otherwise I just sit on my flash drive bitcoins and eat bread with
mayo and beef jerky. Why invest and risk capital? If deflation brings
me solid 5% year this means risking capital expected return should be
30% to start with. And those fancy ai stuff we see would require ROI
of 100%f for the regular investors. That becomes extremely costly to
borrow capital.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Libertarian_Florida 1 point 11 hours ago
You can still risk capital and make investments with sound money. The
only difference is you'd be less risky with your decisions because
you'd only invest in things if you knew they might provide a greater
return than just sitting on the money.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Lokki78 1 point 10 hours ago
No man. It makes literally everything riskier as it would require a
lot more return. If you can get return from deflation without taking
ANY risk. This makes the risk a lot more expensive.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Libertarian_Florida 1 point 10 hours ago
That means only the most productive ideas would be invested in, and
the less productive ones wouldn't. Sounds good to me.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
continue this thread
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–]Zero_Effekt 138 points 14 hours ago
I can never respect people that genuinely claim we 'need' inflation to
keep the economy going. I guess that's what happens when a generation
is born into a Fractional Reserve Banking system with perpetual debt
accumulation (that can literally never be paid off).
They didn't drink the kool-aid; they were birthed in it.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]HalfRick 73 points 14 hours ago
We don’t need inflation to keep the economy going. But deflation is
worse than inflation and the existing tools are too blunt - so a low
inflation target is more stable than a zero-inflation target.
This is because increased money supply in itself isn’t inflationary,
we can have deflation whilst seeing the money supply increasing if the
money supply increases slower than the production increases. So if we
want zero inflation, it’s not just a question of stopping the
printers, but of keeping it balanced.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Bitcoin_Maximalistredditor for 3 months 3 points 13 hours ago
Where does the 2% inflation target orginates from?
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]HalfRick 6 points 12 hours ago
It’s a best guess of a low enough long term target which they can hit
without deflation. It’s not to have inflation, it’s to avoid
deflation.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]HODL_monk 43 points 13 hours ago
Deflation is only 'worse' than inflation if its the explosive
'everything is defaulting on their debt and going bankrupt all at
once' deflation. Did you panic when TV's got $20 cheaper every year ?
did you hang on to your tube TV for 27 years, because a new flat
screen would be $20 cheaper next year ? Of course you didn't, because
the whole idea that we would hoard cash for an under 5 % increase in
purchasing power is absurd. Now what you WOULD hold cash for is you
expect Woolworth to go bankrupt, and price their TV's at 50 % off, but
that is not the deflation we are talking about in this forum. The Fiat
Appologists always trot out this apples oranges comparison of 2 %
inflation to the Great Depression, but that is not the deflation we
are talking about. Try the period from 1860 to 1910, you know, the
time when America was great the first time. Pretty steady deflation
the whole time, no one was hoarding cash, it was the gilded age, and
things were getting better and cheaper everyday, as the world
industrialized, THAT is the deflation that we think is better, because
it IS better.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]HalfRick 21 points 12 hours ago
Price decreases due to innovation in an economy with overall inflation
isn’t something I’m panicking over, you’re absolutely correct about
that.
What you’re not correct about though is the inflation during the
1800’s. There was both inflation and deflation, and the timespan
you’re talking about hit it off with 25+% inflation…
But using words like panicking and insinuating that I’m comparing with
the Great Depression is a pretty odd response to me just saying that
when you’re targeting a stable economy, missing by hitting slightly
over is better than hitting slightly under. It makes me think you’re
not being interested in an honest discussion.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]TransientState1 6 points 11 hours ago
You're the one not interested in an honest discussion.
Stop believing Keynesian myths. Economics is not science- you cannot
run two parallel experiments on the economy at the same time. So most
economists cherry pick data to support their narrative. Especially
Keynesians.
First off, there are 3 kinds of inflation:
Inflation of the money supply
Inflation in goods and services (CPI)
Inflation in assets (investing)
Holding all things equal, inflation of type 1 will ALWAYS lead to
inflation of type 2 and/or 3. This is simple logic: when the
circulating money supply expands, that money has to go somewhere. It
goes to 2, 3, or both which absorb the new money like a sponge.
Here is why the "inflation discourages hoarding" theory is wrong. It's
because in order to inflate, new money must first be printed. Who is
printing that new money? Whoever it is, that entity is STEALING from
the rest of us, they have gained $$$ just by printing. Google the
Cantillon effect.
So the logic is, in order to stop "hoarding", somebody has to STEAL
from everyone else. How ridiculous is that???? Theft is ok????
Reminder that it's not the government that prints money. It is the
Federal Reserve. Important distinction.
And yes, I'm fully aware that inflation isn't 100% always caused by an
increase in the money supply. But it is mostly caused by this, and to
argue otherwise is disingenuous.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]HalfRick 4 points 10 hours ago
You’re so caught up in your own world that you don’t even see why your
argument doesn’t make sense. That’s pretty impressive.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]esuil 6 points 9 hours ago
It would help if you outlined what in their argument makes no sense.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]HalfRick 2 points 9 hours ago*
He says that the reason why inflation does not discourage hoarding is
because new money is printed and because his opinion is that newly
printed money is theft.
Make it make sense.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]TransientState1 4 points 8 hours ago
Suppose you counterfeit money. This means you're stealing from
everyone else. You just printed and spent fake money that you got for
free while everyone else has to work for their money.
Money printing is theft. This is not a difficult concept to
understand. You are not arguing in good faith.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]BennyDaBoy 3 points 8 hours ago*
Not u/HalfRick who you responded to, but this seems contrived.
The relevant bit from your earlier comment said
Here is why the “inflation discourages hoarding” theory is wrong.
It’s because in order to inflate, new money must first be printed. Who
is printing that new money? Whoever it is, that entity is STEALING
from the rest of us, they have gained $$$ just by printing. Google the
Cantillon effect.
Ignoring the bit about framing inflation as theft, which I’ll mention
in a second, this is in fact why inflation discourages hoarding.
Individuals and firms have an incentive to spend currency because the
value of their currency decreases. The argument that you made doesn’t
go against that theory.
I think it’s a bit odd to frame this as theft. Suppose you have some
gold. A large new gold reserve is found in Argentina. The relative
scarcity of your gold is now lower than it was because the supply is
higher than it previously was. Is that theft? That seems to be a
strech.
Also your point about the Fed being different from the government is
strange. That’s like saying “the government doesn’t take your taxes,
the IRS does.” The Fed is a government agency appointed the regular
means. Hypothetically the government does benefit from increased
monetary supply because the debt decreases. I’m not sure specifically
which Cantillon effect taking place you’re referring to, but if you
mean the relative inflation that purchasers of OMOs can take advantage
of, it is less devious than you seem to imply. Banks haveing greater
liquidity is somewhat desirible if you want things like loans to be
distributed so that the economy can grow.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
continue this thread
[–]HalfRick 1 point 8 hours ago
I understand that this is what you believe in your heart. Just like
others believe in god or Buddha or Vishnu or that they remember a
previous life.
It does however not explain how it’s an argument against inflation
disincentivising hoarding.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–]FishRelatedCrimes -1 points 10 hours ago
Well put 👏
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]218cambredditor for 3 months 1 point 13 hours ago
Couldn’t have been explained any better, bravo.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]aercurio 0 points 12 hours ago
Exactly, well done
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]BuyRackTurk 7 points 14 hours ago
But deflation is worse than inflation
Why do you think so? You realize you have been lied to, or you dont ?
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]albacore_futures 6 points 10 hours ago
Deflation is worse than inflation, for a couple of reasons:
Deflation discourages investment. Why invest in something today
when you can invest in the same thing, tomorrow, for cheaper?
Deflation makes putting off spending economically rational. This can
easily create a deflationary spiral: as people hold off on spending,
prices go down because demand has collapsed, encouraging more people
to hold off, causing prices to collapse further, etc. All as everyone
acts in their own economic self-interest.
Our existing tools to handle deflation are worse than our existing
tools to handle inflation. Volcker showed how to fix high-inflation
environments: you starve the economy of credit, induce a recession,
and let excess money evaporate. This is painful - it takes years - but
is doable. It took Volcker about 5 years. Deflation, on the other
hand, has a far worse track record: Japan has been in a deflationary
environment for 35 years without success, and the EU has been in one
since 2010.
The last two times the US had severe deflation were ~1875-1900 and
~1930-1935. Both times were absurdly painful to recover from. The
first circumstance shaped American politics for fifty years, caused
multiple violent uprisings, and inspired the Wizard of Oz; the second
similarly entailed a complete change in the American social-economic
fabric from laissez-faire to the welfare state.
The ideal money would expand and contract with demand for it,
instantaneously. We kind of have that, with fractional reserve banking
which expands / contracts credit with market conditions (and the
inherent instability caused when the banks make bad decisions). FWIW
Satoshi mentioned this in one of his posts - making Bitcoin expand and
contract with demand for it - but dismissed it as too difficult to
implement, which it might well be.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]BuyRackTurk 2 points 10 hours ago
Deflation discourages investment.
Yes, it discourages bad investments. A bad investment is not just a
waste of your own resources, it is a waste of societies resources.
Discouraging bad investments is an important function of natural
deflation, and it is perfectly self regulating.
But deflation encourages the best possible investment for someone who
doesnt have any amazing ideas or unique talents: savings. Its also the
perfect way to return wealth to the working class in return for their
investments in society.
Our existing tools to handle deflation are worse than our existing
tools to handle inflation.
If we eliminate fiat, we dont need any "tools" of theft and privilege.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]albacore_futures 5 points 9 hours ago
Deflation doesn't discourage only bad investments. It discourages all
investments, because the prices of everything are dropping. It also
discourages lending, because the cost of borrowing money has gone up.
If inflation encourages wasteful investment - and I wouldn't argue
with you that it does, to some degree - deflation does the opposite.
It discourages some good investment, along with the bad.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]BuyRackTurk 2 points 9 hours ago
Deflation doesn't discourage only bad investments. It discourages
all investments, because the prices of everything are dropping.
Natural deflation only discourages bad investments. If your idea does
not beat the natural rate of deflation, then is discourages because
you would take a loss by not saving. If your idea does beat the
natural rate of deflation, then it is still an incentive, because you
would earn less by saving.
Its a natural self regulating equilibrium: the rate of deflation will
only be so high as the rate of innovation, and innovators will only
benefit from the inverse cantillion effect so long as they keep
innovating and improving society.
So when productivity is very high, all but the best ideas are
discouraged, and risky ideas are put aside until easy gains are taken.
its logical.
It also discourages lending, because the cost of borrowing money
has gone up.
Good. Most lending is consumer debt, and it is a huge negative thing.
Only very strong, very short term, low low risk, conservative concept,
proven model, high collateral, productive debt has any reason to
exist. the rest is damage.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]CunningCobraredditor for 5 weeks 12 points 13 hours ago
It's not thinking, it's believing. It's what people are taught in
economics intro classes.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]BuyRackTurk 7 points 13 hours ago
It's not thinking, it's believing. It's what people are taught in
economics intro classes.
Right, thats true for "into to keynesian lies", it would never be
taught in a real economics class.
In real economics, deflation is wonderful. Its the profit-taking step
for society, in which all people get more products and services for
the same amount of work.
In keynsian fiat systems, deflation is bad, because it causes a
cascading failure of their theft bubble, and makes people realize they
have been robbed and are now in very bad condition.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]albacore_futures 6 points 10 hours ago
Monetary deflation is different than deflation resulting from
productivity enhancements. Monetary deflation is systemic: the prices
of everything are falling, not because of productivity gains, but
because changes in the money supply are affecting prices (same logic
applies for monetary inflation). Productivity deflation, for lack of a
better word, is variegated across products. It's not universal.
Nobody's claiming that cheaper bread means people will stop buying
bread. What we're talking about is systematic deflation, where prices
fall across the board over time at similar rates.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]HalfRick 5 points 9 hours ago
It’s interesting how easy it is to spot people with even the most
basic understanding of economics amongst “self taught” people who at
the very most have read a few texts on mises.org.
It saddens me that this subreddit has so many of the second type and
so few of people like you. At least the vocal ones.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–]Percyheckendorf 5 points 13 hours ago*
well measuring the economic growth by gdp is only relevant to the
investor class meaning it’s classist and insufficient to a wholistic
view of the economy. Yet it is the core metric. You’re right, people
who study economics must not like critical thinking
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]BuyRackTurk 3 points 13 hours ago
gdp is total nonsense
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]great_healthy_cook 3 points 13 hours ago
Because with deflation people just hoard their dollars instead of
using it buy things. This is pretty bad for a few reasons, one of them
is because it decreases economic activity and people lose jobs.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]TransientState1 6 points 13 hours ago
Stop believing this Keynesian myth. Economics is not science- you
cannot run two parallel experiments on the economy at the same time.
So most economists cherry pick data to support their narrative.
Especially Keynesians.
First off, there are 3 kinds of inflation:
Inflation of the money supply
Inflation in goods and services (CPI)
Inflation in assets (investing)
Holding all things equal, inflation of type 1 will ALWAYS lead to
inflation of type 2 and/or 3. This is simple logic: when the
circulating money supply expands, that money has to go somewhere. It
goes to 2, 3, or both which absorb the new money like a sponge.
Here is why the "inflation discourages hoarding" theory is wrong. It's
because in order to inflate, new money must first be printed. Who is
printing that new money? Whoever it is, that entity is STEALING from
the rest of us, they have gained $$$ just by printing. Google the
Cantillon effect.
So the logic is, in order to stop "hoarding", somebody has to STEAL
from everyone else. How ridiculous is that???? Theft is ok????
Reminder that it's not the government that prints money. It is the
Federal Reserve. Important distinction.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]great_healthy_cook 7 points 13 hours ago
Your comment that you keep copy and pasting is based on a false
premise - that inflation is caused by increase in money supply only.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]TransientState1 1 point 12 hours ago
You are not arguing in good faith. Inflation is mostly caused by an
increase in the money supply; my argument remains sound.
Look at this chart. It's obvious. You are not arguing in good faith.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Aerith_Gainsborough_ 4 points 12 hours ago
Because with deflation people just hoard their dollars instead of
using it buy things.
Do you really believe that crap? Oh right, I won't buy a house so I
can keep hoarding money, I am ok living on the streets.
it decreases economic activity
Wrong, it will make things better, since it will require a significant
improvement on products and services for people to consider worth
expending on it.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]great_healthy_cook 8 points 12 hours ago
Oh right, I won't buy a house so I can keep hoarding money
Actually this dynamic has been happening the other way for a long
time. House prices have been inflating in dollar terms in the same way
that crypto did for years (ie if houses were a currency it would be
deflationary) which removes the incentive to sell. This further drives
up house prices meaning poor people can't get onto the property ladder
and now housing is unaffordable.
Wrong, it will make things better, since it will require a
significant improvement on products and services
Why even make products and services when you can just sit on the cash instead?
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Aerith_Gainsborough_ 0 points 12 hours ago
Why even make products and services when you can just sit on the
cash instead?
It may be shocking to you but some people enjoy inventing/building
stuff, creating/researching something new, innovating. Some even
devote their entire life for those reasons.
Actually this dynamic has been happening the other way for a long
time. House prices have been inflating in dollar terms in the same way
that crypto did for years (ie if houses were a currency it would be
deflationary) which removes the incentive to sell. This further drives
up house prices meaning poor people can't get onto the property ladder
and now housing is unaffordable.
So? The reasons aren't because people just want to sit on their money.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]great_healthy_cook 7 points 12 hours ago
It may be shocking to you but some people enjoy inventing/building
stuff, creating/researching something new, innovating. Some even
devote their entire life for those reasons.
So people are going to, for example, grow food, drive trains, plumb
toilets, construct buildings, out of the goodness of their hearts?
So? The reasons aren't because people just want to sit on their money.
The point is to illustrate what happens with deflation. If that
happened to the entire currency and not just one asset class it would
be a crisis.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]BuyRackTurk 3 points 13 hours ago
Because with deflation people just hoard their dollars instead of
using it buy things.
hoarding money is good.
This is pretty bad for a few reasons, one of them is because it
decreases economic activity and people lose jobs.
only in a fiat bubble. In real economics, deflation is natural and wonderful.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]albacore_futures 3 points 10 hours ago
Deflation in some things is natural and wonderful, nobody complains
about that. What people worry about is systematic deflation.
If I want a new car, and the car I want costs $45,000 today, but based
on trends will cost $35,000 next year, why would I buy it today? Now
do that math across every non-essential product in the economy, and
apply it to every person with disposable income.
That's what people fear, not "oh no bread is more affordable for poor people"
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]great_healthy_cook 0 points 13 hours ago
It's not good. It discourages investment in the economy. It just
rewards rich people for sitting on cash instead of investing.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]BuyRackTurk 1 point 13 hours ago
It's not good. It discourages investment in the economy. It just
rewards rich people for sitting on cash instead of investing.
sitting on money is investing. Its the purest and best possible
investment. It simply makes other people's money more valuable. Its a
natural and perfect investment in 100% of all other humans.
Its keynesian economics which rewards only the rich; by letting them
counterfeit at will, and it destroys everyone elses savings, both by
neutralizing the most moral investment possible, and forcing people
into waste and gambling.
Deflation and inflation are both good, and both serve a good purpose.
Its keynesian-fiat which is bad, and makes everything else bad too. It
is a poison on society. It has to be ended, and that is why we
bitcoin.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]great_healthy_cook 3 points 12 hours ago
makes other people's money more valuable
So rich people with tonnes of cash just sit around and get richer
without investing, and poor people with no cash get poorer? Sounds
great
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]BuyRackTurk 2 points 12 hours ago
So rich people with tonnes of cash just sit around and get richer
without investing, and poor people with no cash get poorer? Sounds
great
In fiat world, yes. They steal from everyone by printing money, do
nothing useful, and get richer at the expense of the working class. It
does not sound great at all, but that is how the dollar economy works.
In a sound money economy, such as bitcoin, the savings of the working
class can not be diluted, so they would gain wealth rapidly at the
expense of the undeserving rich and elites. It will be a wonderful
deflation, moving purchasing power to those who merit it, and away
from wealthy parasites.
The bitcoin economy cannot come soon enough.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]Omar___Comin 3 points 12 hours ago
sitting on money is investing. Its the purest and best possible
investment. It simply makes other people's money more valuable. Its a
natural and perfect investment in 100% of all other humans.
Bruh this is so dumb I don't even know where to start
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]Webonics 1 point 13 hours ago
lol You know some big secret the rest of the world is oblivious to, do
you? Did your god tell it to you? There are no mysteries left in the
world friend. You don't know some secret no one else knows. You just
have a deep visceral need to feel like you do.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]BuyRackTurk 5 points 13 hours ago
lol You know some big secret the rest of the world is oblivious to, do you?
Sure... its a "big secret" in the sense that "the sun rises in the
east" is a "big secret, and "only i know it" in the sense that anyone
who is not some kind of insane flat-earth keynesian knows it too.
There are no mysteries left in the world friend.
its a mystery why some idiots are keynesians.
You don't know some secret no one else knows.
yep. you are getting closer.
You just have a deep visceral need to feel like you do.
lol, not really. I read a 101 level economics book. you should try it.
"basic economics" by thomas sowell.
Common sense aint so hard, I recommend you try it.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]godofleet 5 points 14 hours ago
so a low inflation target is more stable than a zero-inflation target.
this pretty much implies you agree with centralized, trust-based,
corruption-infused control over the monetary system... monetary
inflation (the actual increase of units of the money) is fundamentally
artificial...
it doesn't matter how "stable" of a target they set or how accurate
they stick to it... it's blatantly clear humans can't accomplish this
on their own... nearly all fiat monies have died, most within less
than 50 years.
this is what makes bitcoin such an incredible and imperative
discovery... absolute mathematical scarcity will free us from
ourselves by enabling a sound money system for anyone, by anyone. it
will force the price of everything else down, improving everyone's QoL
/ prosperity.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]HalfRick 11 points 12 hours ago
My comment is independent on whether the [crypto]currency is
centralised, decentralised, public, private, or anything else.
Whatever you use as an intermediary unit of trade in an economic area,
be it USD or BTC, you want the value to be stable. The value can be
stable only if the supply changes with productivity. If productivity
decreases and the supply remains stable - the value of each unit
increases, and vice versa.
This assumes that what’s being used is the only thing being used and
that it is used for all transactions. Strong assumptions, but I hope
the underlying point is clear.
The fixed supply of BTC is a blocking point for it to become a
mainstream currency. Because the more mainstream it becomes, the
higher its value. So people who believe in and hold BTC will keep
holding it and use other currencies for their consumption instead of
paying with it - and this is the opposite of how to make it
mainstream.
Look at the amount of BTC which hasn’t moved in a year. That’s not a
good thing. A good thing would have been an ever increasing number of
small transactions due to increased adoption by business where people
use their BTC for everyday purchases.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]godofleet 3 points 12 hours ago
This is all entirely your assumptions and opinions...
Whatever you use as an intermediary unit of trade in an economic
area, be it USD or BTC, you want the value to be stable. The value can
be stable only if the supply changes with productivity.
This isn't definitively true, it's an opinion/theory. We've never
actually trialed a globally sound money, there has always been
someone(s) meddling in the supply of the monetary good. Nearly all
examples of fiat have failed within ~50 years... The dollar and yuan
show us similar flimsy characteristics.
I believe, like others here, that perpetual experiment that has been
fiat money has clearly failed and we should try something different.
Bitcoin is that something.
I don't think the supply of money needs to change with production, nor
do i think we can accurately, meaningfully measure production without
massive human-introduced entropy and corruption... Further, no one
really knows how many dollars even exist... like other fiat monies,
it's a black box for corruption and chaos rather than the "controlled
environment based on assumptions" (which itself is an oxy-moron to
me...)
The fixed supply of BTC is a blocking point for it to become a
mainstream currency. Because the more mainstream it becomes, the
higher its value. So people who believe in and hold BTC will keep
holding it and use other currencies for their consumption instead of
paying with it - and this is the opposite of how to make it
mainstream.
You can believe this all you want, that doesn't make it true...
reality actually proves quite the opposite thus far, but only time
will tell. People continue to opt out of fiat and into bitcoin... I
suspect many who understand this peaceful revolution will be DCA'ing
until the day they die...
But we aren't stupid, we won't just starve or freeze while stacking
sats, if need be (like when my dollars won't buy me a loaf of bread) -
i will spend sats.
That circular economy hasn't really formed yet in privledged
(blissfully ignorant) financial environments like the west, but if you
pay any attention to the global south, it's happening.
Look at the amount of BTC which hasn’t moved in a year. That’s not
a good thing.
To some one like yourself that may be the case... to me, I see it as a
ever dwindling supply of a finite asset with an ever increasing
demand.
ESPECIALLY as people continue to realize their fiat money is
definitively robbing them of their purchasing power and privacy (CBDCs
looming) - More are/will discover bitcoin and stack a bit... The
scarcity is unlikely anything our species has ever known... logically
it makes the most sense that a tightening supply and gradually
increasing demand will eventually result in increased bitcoin
purchasing power and increased desire from the masses to stack...
You think all the hodlers won't buy houses? cars? food? ... You think
they won't start businesses or put their kids through school? The
whole point of bitcoin is that we don't have to worry about money as
much because it simply works... That we're not perpetually chasing
yields, gambling on stock markets or unsustanbly cutting corners in
every facet of human society to beat inflation.
Bitcoiners are dreamers and doers ... we just want to save for the
future rather than rob our future selves via fiat systems of
generational debt slavery/strife...
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]HalfRick 2 points 10 hours ago
You lack insight into the history of money.
You seem to think you’re saying I’m wrong, yet you do nothing but
confirm that I’m right. Perhaps you want to read what I wrote again?
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]godofleet 1 point 9 hours ago
oh the irony... lmao
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[+]Mintleaf007redditor for 3 months -6 points 14 hours ago
lol deflation is good. literally buy more with less and you think
thats bad. this post is about you.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]smallbluetext 9 points 13 hours ago
With deflation you are rewarded for not spending. So if everyone buys
and holds and never spends, what happens to the economy?
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]CardGameFanboy 7 points 13 hours ago
Maybe we should all buy less and consume less useless products that
destroy the planet. People will consume what is needed to survive and
will choose better to consume useless stuff.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Webonics 0 points 13 hours ago
Maybe that's your opinion you fucking hippy. Maybe you shouldn't tell
the entire world how to fucking live.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (2 replies)
[–]Mintleaf007redditor for 3 months 3 points 13 hours ago
it moves to necessities that people still have to purchase.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]smallbluetext 4 points 13 hours ago
That would be catastrophic for the global economy
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (6 replies)
[–]Ok_Aerie3546 2 points 13 hours ago
People die coz they kept holding money instead of buying food.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]cyxobcyxob 1 point 12 hours ago
or maybe they die due to stupid economy model and greed of their govt
that does not allow to get great medicine and food for cheap
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Ok_Aerie3546 3 points 12 hours ago
Dont worry. Once shit becomes free coz no ones buying it. Ill buy it
all and feed the hungry everyday.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]RagingBullClimbing 1 point 13 hours ago
So nobody buys new electronics because they can buy better things with
less money later, right?
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]smallbluetext 1 point 12 hours ago
The better ones don't exist right now, so they have no choice when
they live in the present. If your currency is deflationary you know
for a fact you are spending more now than you would be by waiting,
regardless of what you're buying. That includes food.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]RagingBullClimbing 2 points 11 hours ago
But people won't (can't really) wait to buy food because it's
necessary for survival. We buy things either out of necessity or out
of want. If you need it, waiting until it costs less isn't much of an
option. If you want it enough, you'll buy it when the cost-benefit
balance makes sense to you.
And your argument missed my point. People buy the latest and greatest
electronics (phones, computers, etc) because they want them now even
though in a year they could get the exact same thing for significantly
less money. The market for electronics is inherently deflationary.
That doesn't stop people from spending money on them.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]notlarangi123[S] 0 points 13 hours ago
That's why no one buys smartphones, they just have to wait two years
and a better one comes out. Oh wait.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]smallbluetext 2 points 12 hours ago
Terrible comparison. Why would I buy a smart phone with deflationary
currency when not only will the phone be newer and better in the
future, but my money will also be worth significantly more? With
inflation your money will be worth less, so yes go ahead and buy it
now.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]notlarangi123[S] 1 point 10 hours ago
Well, because you need a phone, duh.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]nickystockboyredditor for 3 months 6 points 14 hours ago
So you have zero understanding of economics and no desire to learn. Interesting.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]CunningCobraredditor for 5 weeks 1 point 13 hours ago
And you make zero effort to teach.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]nickystockboyredditor for 3 months 1 point 13 hours ago
That's right.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Mintleaf007redditor for 3 months -2 points 14 hours ago
if inflation is good then why not 10,000% inflation? venezuela seems to love it?
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]nickystockboyredditor for 3 months 3 points 14 hours ago
Brilliant
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Mintleaf007redditor for 3 months 2 points 13 hours ago
well with 10,000% deflation you can retire after working for a year.
with 10,000% inflation you can work your entire life and never afford
a house. one of these things is not like the other.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]HalfRick 1 point 13 hours ago
I don’t think you know how percentages work.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–]HalfRick 1 point 13 hours ago
If it’s good to drink a glass a water per day, why don’t you drink 10
000 glasses of water per day?
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]HalfRick 1 point 13 hours ago
It incentivises hoarding rather than investing and consuming.
Depending on your point of view, this could be good. Many who are
against capitalism, want to abolish different types of production and
so on would like this kind of world. Those who aim to be self
sufficient.
But for someone whose livelihood is dependent on the consumption
society and capitalism in general, especially employees but also self
employed, deflation is much, much worse than inflation as the
decreased cash-flows has a direct impact on their possibility of
making a living.
Deflation also means that we would see salary cuts rather than salary
increases. Because just as the salary increases today are often
intended to balance out inflation, salary cuts would be used to
balance out deflation.
“We can buy more with less so it’s good” is about the shallowest
analysis you can make with regards to deflation.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]sztormwariat -3 points 14 hours ago
inflation is by definiton an artificial increase to money supply. The
whole term comes from baloon that appears bigger but lacks real
substance.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]StreetPlenty8042 5 points 13 hours ago
The average person doesn't care about changes to the money supply
They care about changes to their purchasing power, which is more
complicated than money supply changes. Money supply, environmental
issues, politics, these all impact purchasing power.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]great_healthy_cook 3 points 13 hours ago
No it's not, it's a decrease in purchasing power. Can be driven by
shortages of resources or labour, supply chain issues, tariffs etc.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
[+]TransientState1 -5 points 13 hours ago*
Stop believing this Keynesian myth. Economics is not science- you
cannot run two parallel experiments on the economy at the same time.
So most economists cherry pick data to support their narrative.
Especially Keynesians.
First off, there are 3 kinds of inflation:
Inflation of the money supply
Inflation in goods and services (CPI)
Inflation in assets (investing)
Holding all things equal, inflation of type 1 will ALWAYS lead to
inflation of type 2 and/or 3. This is simple logic: when the
circulating money supply expands, that money has to go somewhere. It
goes to 2, 3, or both which absorb the new money like a sponge.
Here is why the "inflation discourages hoarding" theory is wrong. It's
because in order to inflate, new money must first be printed. Who is
printing that new money? Whoever it is, that entity is STEALING from
the rest of us, they have gained $$$ just by printing. Google the
Cantillon effect.
So the logic is, in order to stop "hoarding", somebody has to STEAL
from everyone else. How ridiculous is that???? Theft is ok????
Reminder that it's not the government that prints money. It is the
Federal Reserve. Important distinction.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (4 replies)
[–]Alascala8 6 points 13 hours ago
1990’s Japan would like a word with you
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]Anchorman_1970redditor for 5 weeks 4 points 12 hours ago
You cant save everyone
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Thepopewearsplaid 1 point 11 hours ago
I know Bitcoiners don't like to hear it, but a tiny little bit really
is good for the economy. Do we need this bullshit we're on now?
Absolutely fucking not, maybe like .1% or so is fine. Case in point,
if it were up to me, I'd literally sit on my money, as I know it's
safe and not losing value. I need it liquid for when I buy a house
(also I'm traveling now, so need liquid cash for hotels, food, etc).
But because of this nasty inflation, I have the vast majority of my
money in safe investments with dividend payouts etc (for anyone
reading, don't do this if you're under the age of retirement - my
situation is a bit more unique). I'm stimulating the economy. What
good would my money be if I had my way and it was sitting in a safe at
home?
I know it sucks, but a tiny little bit of inflation actually is good
for the economy. Our inflation rate has been much too high both
recently and historically, but it's not a bad thing if implemented
correctly. That said, it is NOT being implemented correctly, and the
federal reserve absolutely, without a doubt, needs to go... But
inflation is not inherently bad.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Explodicle 2 points 8 hours ago
We don't like to hear it because it's the falsehood that Bitcoin was
designed to remedy.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]notlarangi123[S] -1 points 14 hours ago
The post is already on Buttcoin with people saying inflation is good lol.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Zero_Effekt 6 points 13 hours ago
They'll buy at the price they deserve. ;)
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]HurricaneHarvey7 4 points 13 hours ago
I imagine they're already pissed off that Bitcoin is +40% on the year already
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]Stompya 1 point 12 hours ago
Actually, it does make sense.
If your dollar will have more buying power next year, you will just
sit on it. Inflation that’s too high is also bad, but if there is zero
or negative inflation then people stop spending their money.
Keep in mind that your government, especially conservative ones,
represent business, not you.
The story that healthy business benefits the workers is a story that
benefits business too.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]mesmoothbrain 1 point 12 hours ago
but.. we do?? it’s a very basic rule for currency. you guys can’t just
make ur argument “no it doesn’t because we don’t want it to”
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (4 replies)
[–]madmax9186 3 points 14 hours ago*
Note that this is (on average) <3% inflation.
EDIT: To be sure, I mean annual inflation.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]looneytones8 2 points 11 hours ago
Compounding inflation is a bitch
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Umpire_State_Bldgredditor for 3 months 21 points 15 hours ago
"Money printing," that is, inflating the fiat currency supply is a
form of theft. Theft is wrong.
When ultra-rich banking criminals get to legally steal from the poor,
the elderly, the sick/disabled, and the middle class via "money
printing" -- you know that their "banking system" is fucked up: it's a
form of organized crime.
Wake up, people. It is time for Bitcoin.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]bittercoin99 3 points 14 hours ago
Good luck convincing people of that. They know they're being robbed,
you can show them a chart of their purchasing power being eroded by
debasement, but they just cannot accept that money is the heart of the
problem.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]BuyRackTurk 10 points 14 hours ago
but they just cannot accept that money is the heart of the problem.
TBF its not easy. people grow up their whole lives measuring
everything around them in dollars, and it gets stuck in your head that
the dollar is some kind of fixed magic unit like inches or pounds or
seconds.
It takes quite a bit of awareness to realize that not only is the
dollar fluctuating in value like mad, but that they dont really have a
stable unit of value to compare things to because the central bank
tries like hell to make that impossible.
They dont want the people to have a stable sense of value because it
would expose their theft, and the real cost of taxation, and pretty
much the whole game would be up. They need everyone to be comfortably
numb and blame their problems on abstract problems like "a bad
economy" or "that political party" instead of seeing the real
situation.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]StalkerBat 3 points 8 hours ago
Good luck convincing people of that.
there is no point in trying to convict them. When they will eat enough
shit from govt that they will want to run to btc and embrace it - we
will mee them
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]Elite_Slacker 12 points 13 hours ago
Winning a fictional argument in your head by posting pictures of
crying cartoons to people that probably agree with you.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]Stew-Cee23 2 points 12 hours ago
Inflation can work if wages consistently outpace it, but we have a
large enough sample size to know that's a fantasy.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]Guyute18 2 points 11 hours ago
Rooting against the dollar is also rooting against the US as the
worlds main superpower. The dollar is what keeps the US in a position
of power. The US government will do what they can to maintain that
power until they can somehow harness the stronghold over digital
currency.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]disignore 2 points 11 hours ago
where can i find such thing said? I have yet to find someone saying
that about inflation.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]IndubitablyBen 2 points 10 hours ago
Ngl the buttcoiners are right on thisnone. Steady inflation is good.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]twaltemode 2 points 8 hours ago
Some just have learnt that their beloved fiat is also having
weaknesses and inflation is one of them
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]ElderBlade 2 points 7 hours ago
As a data person, I love how the 2nd chart has a title and labeled x
axis along with a source at the bottom. That's proper visualization of
data.
It also sort of conveys the notion that no coiners don't verify what
they're looking at. They just trust it on the surface. Bitcoiners,
however, take the deep dive into the rabbit hole to understand the
truth.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]misterbigtime 4 points 9 hours ago
these memes fucking suck stop posting this shit
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]Lucifers_Tits 2 points 8 hours ago
hey guys check out this imaginary argument that I won
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Altruistic-Use-1104 4 points 13 hours ago
Banks control most property, and business, and education. IF the
mighty Dollar dies, and banks don't accept Bitcoin, and they foreclose
on everyone and everything, what value does Bitcoin hold? If you can't
pay with it, or trade it for useless cash.. It will just be a messy
string of numbers and codes.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]tombdweller 5 points 13 hours ago
This must be the most stupid thing I've seen on this sub yet. Everyone
here will celebrate when bitcoin value in dollars goes up, yet this
comic presents the dollar value collapsing as somehow "le epic winn
for bitcoin!!"? No one accepts payment in bitcoin, it's value is
completely tied to the dollar. This must be a new level of economic
illiteracy.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]215illmatic 6 points 11 hours ago
More of a highly advanced coping strategy but yes.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Webonics 4 points 13 hours ago
This is fucking embarassing.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]TrueCryptoInvestor 2 points 14 hours ago
The meltdown is real.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]ComputerTE1 2 points 14 hours ago
20 years from now US dollar would still be here
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]chadman350 2 points 13 hours ago
These people don’t actually exist right?
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]ZEVSmusic 1 point 13 hours ago
BENOTAWARE
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]Anchorman_1970redditor for 5 weeks 2 points 12 hours ago
I like how the dude on the right with hair looks exactly like the kind
of guy that would say some shit like that
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]Magnock 2 points 15 hours ago
I wonder what happened in the 30s must have been a time of great
economic prosperity 🤔
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]notlarangi123[S] 7 points 14 hours ago
People see 50% deflation after 90% inflation and say deflation is the
problem ahah.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]CantDrinkSoWhatredditor for 1 week 1 point 14 hours ago
Yes, when the value of every asset collapses, the value of fiat rises.
We are concerned with the long-term, programmatic collapse of fiat.
That function ain't going back up.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]ok46reddit -1 points 15 hours ago
Bitcoin doesn't care about the purchasing power of fiat.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]TreborDeadward 2 points 14 hours ago
Why would it, since Bitcoin isn’t used to purchase anything
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]xbsd 5 points 14 hours ago
Bitcoin is widely used in many online and offline shops
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]thinkadrian 6 points 13 hours ago
But none that normal people use.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
load more comments (3 replies)
[–]BuyRackTurk -3 points 14 hours ago
Great call out.
Commies economics are deeply self contradictory.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]mesmoothbrain 3 points 12 hours ago
which of these are the commies?
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]BuyRackTurk 1 point 12 hours ago
the ones who advocate for plank 5 of the communist manifesto: central banking.
permalink
embed
save
parent
report
give award
reply
[–]solotronics 0 points 13 hours ago
Based.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]beaker38 1 point 14 hours ago
unmasked
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]Diuqil69 1 point 13 hours ago
Compare purchasing power now with tax rates.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]Oglark 1 point 13 hours ago
These dumbass memes are annoying. Just give me links to that cheap $500 BTC
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]Jetjones 1 point 13 hours ago
Well, that’s it - I’m off to Bitcointalk.org
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]murram20 1 point 13 hours ago
The uno-reverso card
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]OfWhomIAmChief 1 point 13 hours ago
Real.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]thinkadrian 1 point 12 hours ago
So if bitcoin is losing value and the dollar is losing value, how does
that make bitcoin better? Are you saying that X bitcoin = Y dollars?
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]jaredearle 1 point 12 hours ago
Don’t they realise that the purchasing power of Bitcoin is even worse
as it’s valued relative to USD?
1btc at $20k is worth less than 1btc at $20k last year.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]Deus_Desuper 1 point 12 hours ago
In order for this to be any relevance to real world, would for BTC
purchasing power to be stable long enough to want to use it to buy
anything.
Right now I wouldn't buy anything with BTC, because in 2 weeks it
might be worth double and I 'lost' that much buying power.
Until then, and until you can buy everything with it, it's going to be
used for investing, to be changed into fiat, to spend later
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]uncontrollableop 1 point 12 hours ago
"going" to zero? it already lost over 95% of its value.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]mnorkk 1 point 12 hours ago
Zero what?
Todays $1 bills or coins might not be worth $1 in the future but $1
will always be worth $1.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]FIZUK9 1 point 11 hours ago
And you earn less of them on top of that
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
[–]ghostlyman789 1 point 11 hours ago
It’s weird seeing people root for the downfall of the dollar. You’ve
gotta realize that if the dollar fully crashes and becomes worthless,
Bitcoin won’t be the automatic de facto currency. Sure 1 Bitcoin may
be worth however many thousands or even millions at that point but if
you can’t cash it for usable fiat or if you can’t actually spend the
Bitcoin at major retailers… then what’s the point? Nothing changes the
fact that we aren’t in the full adoption phase, that’s gonna take more
time unfortunately.
While I believe in Bitcoin it is pegged to fiat and needs it to be
spendable at most places currently.
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
load more comments (1 reply)
[–]iamvalleyjoe 1 point 11 hours ago
🤣👏👍 man that was a good one! Ha
permalink
embed
save
report
give award
reply
More information about the cypherpunks
mailing list