Speculative Attack, Season 2 | Satoshi Nakamoto Institute
The more mainstream Bitcoin becomes, the more compelling the speculative attack will be.
This was a head scratcher from Nic because he's been so solid on a lot of topics.
The reason of course why he is wrong (from a US point of view, unless he's secretly rooting for a US demise/reboot) is that the US has zero chance in even extending the fake entitlement ponzi UNLESS they do something like this. Since their playbook is in fact extend and pretend, not doing this is one of the dumbest things of all time. And of course that's just 1 of the reasons ...
Over time I've kind of accepted that UK and Australia are just vastly different from the rest of the world in terms of enforcing dystopian rules.
Anyway, I'm convinced this "firm" would happily accept that Onlyfans money, while they condemn crypto.
Next time a financial institution asks me this question, “OnlyFans income” is going to be my answer.
I read the article. The author seems ignorant. Firstly he cited statistics for crypto ownership in the U.S.A. in 2022 which is misleading since it has increased exponentially since then a fact he conveniently left out.
Secondly gold reserves do matter how markets treat/value the U.S.A. dollar. If the U.S. did not hold those gold reserves the U.S.A. dollar would be weaker than it is.
Then we have the problem of no one actually knowing how much or where we supposedly have the gold ...
The level of crypto ownership by private citizens (either direct or through Bitcoin ETFs) is not really relevant to his argument against the concept of a strategic Bitcoin reserve owned by the government.
I largely agree with his assessment. The amount of gold the U.S. holds plays a very, very minor role in supporting the dollar compared to the other factors he listed.
Overall I found his arguments very persuasive, especially considering that in contrast, the pro-Bitcoin reserve arguments I've read are basically a combination of gross economic ignorance, pie in the sky thinking and utter delusion (there was an article on ZH the other day by the "Progressive Bitcoiner" arguing how the federal government buying Bitcoin will strengthen the welfare state
).
What's your best guess on what happens to the debt and entitlement issue in the US? That is, how does the USA "get out" of the impossibility of paying the debt back and/or providing some claim on Medicare or SS?Overall I found his arguments very persuasive, especially considering that in contrast, the pro-Bitcoin reserve arguments I've read are basically a combination of gross economic ignorance, pie in the sky thinking and utter delusion (there was an article on ZH the other day by the "Progressive Bitcoiner" arguing how the federal government buying Bitcoin will strengthen the welfare state
You just don't get it do you? Nothing is happening. Everything you think you know is an illusion. Debt? The US has no debt. We owe nobody nothing. China's taking our farmland? Give me a break. Take a nuke on the head if you don't like it. Jewtin and Xi and mossad aren't the only faggots that can play Russian Roulette.
Bitcoin is a satanic jew dominated gambling cult. Get some help.
First, it's important to recognize that economies are relative. The fact that the U.S. has serious problems is inarguable - but when compared to the rest of the world, the U.S. actually doesn't look that bad, and I expect this trend will continue for the next several decades. On the matter of debt in particular, there is obviously no possibility that it will be "paid back". But this is largely because it shouldn't be. When you have a debt-backed currency (one that also functions as the world reserve currency), paying it off is massively deflationary. A focus on the dollar itself is too myopic - currency matters much less than you and chance vought think it does. What really matters is the sum total of the economy that the currency facilitates. The economy itself is what produces wealth, the currency simply facilitates economic activity.
So basically, I expect that the U.S. will "get out" of this situation by simply being a better economic alternative than the other major world economies, and by continuing to inflate the dollar (the same thing they've been doing for decades). Note that people have been ringing the alarm bell about inflation for decades also, crying that the dollar faced imminent destruction/hyperinflation and that deficits were completely unsustainable. None of those concerns have panned out, for the simple reason that, as I stated above, the currency itself is much less important than the actual economy. In other words, it really doesn't matter if you're paying 5 cents for a loaf of bread or ten dollars. What matters is that someone is willing to bake the bread in the first place, and that you have the amount of currency in your pocket necessary to purchase it. Thus, anyone who owns stock, real estate, gold or other real assets will simply float along with the rising tide of inflation the way they have throughout history. Currencies come and go, but real assets always maintain long term value.
- When I refer to the dollar, I’m referring to the “dollar system” of debt slavery, not just the currency.
- This grossly unfair system is not only a bad deal for average people - it is terrible for other nations that can’t print dollars, and especially bad for the BRICS that have had assets frozen and banking rails turned off by the USA.
- The dollar today is completely different than what has historically been monetary systems based on money, instead of debt. The debt money system has only existed in its current form for 50 years, and possibly since 1933 or 1913. It’s been a gradual process. However nation states could still redeem dollars for gold until 1971.
- Is a Bitcoin strategic reserve going to be chaotic? Possibly. But worse things will happen if many other nations build stockpiles of Bitcoin and the US is dead last and broke. This leads to a very bad outcome I would prefer to avoid:
“As we explore later, inflation as revenue option will be largely foreclosed by the emergence of cybermoney. New technologies will allow the holders of wealth to bypass the national monopolies that have issued and regulated money in the modern period. The state will continue to control the industrial-era printing presses, but their importance for controlling the world's wealth will be transcended by mathematical algorithms that have no physical existence.
In the new millennium, cybermoney controlled by private markets will supersede flat money issued by governments. Only the poor will be victims of inflation.
Lacking their accustomed scope to tax and inflate, governments, even in traditionally civil countries, will turn nasty. As income tax becomes uncollectable, older and more arbitrary methods of exaction will resurface. The ultimate form of withholding tax--de facto or even overt hostage-taking will be introduced by governments desperate to prevent wealth from escaping beyond their reach. Unlucky individuals will find themselves singled out and held to ransom in an almost medieval fashion.”
Excerpt From
The Sovereign Individual
James Dale Davidson, Lord William Rees-Mogg
- This grossly unfair system is not only a bad deal for average people - it is terrible for other nations that can’t print dollars, and especially bad for the BRICS that have had assets frozen and banking rails turned off by the USA.
- The dollar today is completely different than what has historically been monetary systems based on money, instead of debt. The debt money system has only existed in its current form for 50 years, and possibly since 1933 or 1913. It’s been a gradual process. However nation states could still redeem dollars for gold until 1971.
- Is a Bitcoin strategic reserve going to be chaotic? Possibly. But worse things will happen if many other nations build stockpiles of Bitcoin and the US is dead last and broke. This leads to a very bad outcome I would prefer to avoid:
“As we explore later, inflation as revenue option will be largely foreclosed by the emergence of cybermoney. New technologies will allow the holders of wealth to bypass the national monopolies that have issued and regulated money in the modern period. The state will continue to control the industrial-era printing presses, but their importance for controlling the world's wealth will be transcended by mathematical algorithms that have no physical existence.
In the new millennium, cybermoney controlled by private markets will supersede flat money issued by governments. Only the poor will be victims of inflation.
Lacking their accustomed scope to tax and inflate, governments, even in traditionally civil countries, will turn nasty. As income tax becomes uncollectable, older and more arbitrary methods of exaction will resurface. The ultimate form of withholding tax--de facto or even overt hostage-taking will be introduced by governments desperate to prevent wealth from escaping beyond their reach. Unlucky individuals will find themselves singled out and held to ransom in an almost medieval fashion.”
Excerpt From
The Sovereign Individual
James Dale Davidson, Lord William Rees-Mogg
Hold the phone here for a second, and scorpion, you should take note. Purple is now actively emoji'ing all my posts with nonsense, and I'm still not calling for censoring, so it's fine. I just don't see how I get suspended for actually talking about topics that are important, and when I try to be much less controversial even (as was the post this reply was to), I get basically spammed/harrassed.
You know we also here who are BTC proponents agree with this, but it's not the question I posed.
The US is promising SS and healthcare, and it quite frankly will not be able to deliver it way sooner than anyone is even admitting. Not even close. That has major implications beyond the fact that it technically "doesn't have to pay off the debt" which is obvious. Do you understand my question now?
Entitlement payments are a separate issue entirely from the dollar itself. Social Security is actually fairly sound from an actuarial and financial standpoint, and could easily be continued indefinitely into the future with only minor modifications (reduced payments, increased SS taxes, a limited degree of means testing for recipients). The real budget buster is Medicare and Medicaid, which have become bloated through decades' worth of criminal levels of corruption and a combination of corporate, medical and government malfeasance. The healthcare sector comprises something like 20% of GDP, when it should be more like 5% (Karl Denninger has written about this extensively). All of that money is simply being siphoned away from taxpayers and the public at large (essentially anyone paying health insurance premiums) into the pockets of those connected to the bloated medical/insurance industry.
At some point - and I think you're correct that we're rapidly approaching this point - the system simply cannot continue as it currently exists. What do I think will happen? Basically, it will collapse as we know it. Which despite substantial short term pain will be a very good thing in the long run from both a financial and public health perspective. Getting the government out of the healthcare business will not only reduce costs significantly, but will encourage people to take responsibility for their own health (which is ultimately the only sensible and realistic way people stay healthy in the first place. Hopefully RFK Jr. will begin to lead on this issue as HHS Secretary).
Again, it's important to emphasize that these type of economic dislocations are hardly unprecedented or catastrophic. They happen all the time throughout history and across the world, and life goes on. Humans beings are remarkably adaptable and tend toward cooperation and organization, and as a result trade, prosperity and economic development inevitably follow to greater and lesser degrees (depending on the abilities of the populations in question). Despite its economic challenges, the United States remains the best positioned country to thrive over the next several decades. And that's really what matters most, because economic investment is ultimately a sort of popularity contest where people vote with their dollars. And in a room full of ugly women, the best-looking one might not be a stunner, but given the competition she's invariably the one that everyone would pick for themselves.
The Byzantine Empire did not adopt gunpowder, and in a few decades ceased to exist.
Nuclear weapons are a technology
Air power is a technology
Stirrups and mounted knights are a technology
Bitcoin (engineered perfectly scarce money) is a technology - (crypto and blockchain are NOT)
Technology can be ignored, but its existence changes society anyway.
Nuclear weapons are a technology
Air power is a technology
Stirrups and mounted knights are a technology
Bitcoin (engineered perfectly scarce money) is a technology - (crypto and blockchain are NOT)
Technology can be ignored, but its existence changes society anyway.
I like the metaphor of the USA as a hard 6 in a room full of fatties. As a hertiage American, I'll take it.
Yes, you know we agree.
I find it amusing that a lot of people think that there is some sort of God(ly) intervention in these types of things, when it's quite clear that the world keeps trucking regardless of who is "in charge" at any given time. It's that problematic human conflict or paradox of naturally wanting to be successful in the world, but also realizing the teachings of Christ, which is that the world isn't that important; certainly its opinion is not. In this light, your examples show that dominion on the earth, fair or not, has more to do with what tech is procured or advanced. Since there clearly is a relation of archetypes that humans are largely incapable of utilizing technology in harmony, or in balanced ways, it's a very confusing situation indeed. To be an American at this point and not see all the bad things from imbalanced or highly advanced tech is to not be living or understanding how old and basic human instincts are.
The thing about BTC, whether it ends up doing as much good as it can or not, it absolutely has the potential to solve the monetary debasement of people, and it will - even if that's just for some.
There are a few problems with debt even if you don't pay it back (or inflate it away).
One is that every person's debt is somebody else's asset. Think of all the 60/40 stock and bond portfolios and how many people's retirement savings will be decimated if the bond market implodes and how many bank balance sheets will also implode when the bond market implodes. Yes by not repaying debt or by inflating it away you will stiff foreign creditors but you will also hurt your own banking system (which hold a lot of bonds) and your retirement saving system.
The problem is if the bond market is effectively shrunk due to massive inflation or sovereign default then deficits will have to be reduced or eliminated and the deficit spending everyone has grown accustomed to will have to be curtailed. This means at least for a period of time everybody's standard of living will drop.
The problem with inflation in the U.S.A. has been yes real assets have maintained value but the Cantillon effect has redistributed so much wealth that the working class is getting wrecked. A wrecking ball has been taken to the average person's living standards. There is a limit to this process where if wages keep falling behind inflation at some point the system will collapse as its not sustainable. Some kind of dictatorship could be implemented after the societal collapse if history is any guide.
Also inflation is a non-linear process. Once it reaches a critical mass it can quickly collapse the whole system.
You cannot separate the real economy from the currency as they are intertwined and there are complex feedback loops. There is a reason living standards have dropped so much since Nixon closed the gold window.
Last edited:
As I already mentioned the currency does matter not only the real economy. The proof of this is that every economy with a very weak currency also has a weak economy. The two go hand in hand. The Argentinian economy is weak, the Venezuelan economy is weak, the Turkish economy is weak, etc. A weak currency and a weak economy go hand in hand. Even in the U.S.A. the real GDP growth rate long-term trend line has been decelerating for decades.
A basic reading of Richard Cantillon, Murray Rothbard, Frederich Hayek, Ludwig Von Mises, Carl Menger, Milton Friedman, Henry George, etc will provide ample evidence that the currency does matter. You act as if it works like a corporation doing a stock split. If Apple shares are a thousand dollars and then you do a 10 for 1 stock split all the shareholders are in the same position as before. With currency it does not work that way. Firstly debt holders and savers (in cash) get stiffed and there is also the Cantillon effect causing certain individuals to get even richer. Inflation distorts the structure of the economy in a million different ways.