TexasRebel said:

---

So…
Productive real estate.

---

Under the current system, it's one of few viable options. At the same time, what if people didn't feel compelled to pour resources into real estate and home prices fell to their utilitarian value such that young people were not priced out of the housing market?

Read the last two pages since my comment and here's where I'm at:

Let's say I want to buy a coin tomorrow (if someone will sell it, as it's their property). I pay ~17k and now I have one.

The next week 10 people want to buy one. Now there is greater demand so it's $18k per

The next month a million people want one. Now it's $28k.

A year later 100 million people want one. Now it's $200k per.

A year later a billion people want one. Now it's $200,000,000 per.

A year later the world decides Bitcoin is the future. Now it's beyond laughable to buy one…

This an abbreviated timeline, but the fact remains if BTC were to become the standard, the precipitous increase in value (and corresponding decrease in wealth for many as they buy in) is inevitable.

If the world were to actually move towards the adoption of BTC as "the thing" as one poster put it, anyone not on the front lines will be selling themselves into slavery to afford one. BTC holders aren't going to accept local currencies, as they're worthless. A handful of people will become trillionaires for no other reason than they purchase BTC first. Billions will become even more bankrupt than they are today. And since BTC is finite (meaning plebes can't find or make more of it) we'll be back to lord and vassal status immediately. This is how wars start.

It's a pipe dream from BTC to become the universal currency. It's also a pipe dream to believe BTC can survive in a world where the major world powers ban it, outside of a primitive black market trade token. Too many individuals already own it, too many in power would be removed from it and too many individuals would lose their entire net worth in the transition. It will never, never, never, ever become the one world currency. A one world currency will come. You will not like it. It will be traceable. BTC will not help you unless you find greater dignity in being a homeless outlaw rather than a sellout.

Unless I'm missing something in my analysis above, I feel like the conclusion is this:

-BTC has value as an technology. Immediate transfer of wealth at minimal transaction cost has value. Utility is good for BTC
- BTC has potential to be an appreciable asset because of its potential value listed above.
- BTC can not possibly become the predominant currency without causing civil unrest in every country across the world simultaneously. Both world wars combined would look like a joke compared to the simultaneous civil war in every country that exists at the time over the crippling loss of wealth.

A government would roll out a BTC alternative (BTCA) intelligently enough to pacify the poor masses with free BTCA. The middle class will get the prison shower, but they're a small enough segment that it won't matter from a civil unrest perspective. They'll take their devalued BTCA and like it. The "leaders" will get better than 1:1 because they're better than us. We move forward as sheep and the world continues to go round until the second coming.

The only way to short circuit this cycle is to start the shooting sooner rather than later. I'm not advocating for that. I doubt it would do any good with the technology that exists today. If you overthrew your government, the new leaders would just adopt the same practices as the people they overthrew. That's what greed does to a person. I have no solution nor will I pretend to have one. I will simply state with as much resolve as I can that BTC will not be the solution to the authoritarian state. It will never become the reserve currency. BTC can still be an interesting investment because of its utility and I have been convinced to owning some because of that.

Only the sith deal in absolutes.

You done much reading on Weimar Germany and hyperinflation? How quickly did that happen?


Never never never!

But seriously, you're not focusing on the big picture nor accurately portraying how bitcoin has spread into the hands of 300 million people globally, over 14 years.

Maybe just start at the beginning.

Read the white paper.

Then buy 2 dollars worth if bitcoin and and take half and split it amongst 10 friends.

**** around and find out.

Adverse Event said:

---

Only the sith deal in absolutes.

You done much reading on Weimar Germany and hyperinflation? How quickly did that happen?

---

Jump off a roof. How confident are you that you won't smash into the ground? Some things are absolute. It's less common than most people generally want and much more common than free thinkers want to admit. You seem to be a free thinker (in a good way) but those absolutes won't change for you.

I've studied hyperinflation a decent amount, although I'm no scholar. Because of that, I believe your example proves my point that BTC operates as a potential inflation hedge and/or black market currency, and nothing more than that. Not to say that isn't valuable, but it is BTC's ceiling. Let's play this out:

- German currency starts to stumble
- the front line of Germans purchase BTC.
- the next set of Germans see BTC as valuable and buy from their peers at a slightly higher amount with no major issue.
- roughly 10-20% of Germans decide to buy in. Prices are painful and assets are lost, but at least I'm not dependent on the mark
- the mark craters and we're all buying BTC now. Those early purchasers are not going to give it up altruistically. They want their due for being an early investor. By the time we hit the halfway point (probably before) people are giving up all assets in order to own a fraction of a BTC, because BTC owners sure as hell won't accept the mark (another proof that BTC is measured by a government currency) This is when the unrest begins. You will literally have people selling themselves into slavery rather than be asset-less. This is the problem with a finite supply. This problem is very old, well studied and will not change.

This is why a government can roll out a new currency. They can forgive debts (by fiat) exchange your old currency for new "1:1" (by fiat), pacify the masses with a little bonus and leave everyone relatively "whole". Your assets aren't under imminent threat. There is no new civilian ruling class. Instead you have the same old politicians that got you into this mess, but it's not as threatening as your neighbor buying 100 houses in your neighborhood for pennies and charging rent because of the simple fact that they converted their currency first.

So, your assumption makes it clear that no people are spending anything, they are just hoovering bitcoin until everything dies.

People gotta eat. People gotta get paid.

People are already getting paid and more every day in bitcoin

People are spending their bitcoin for all types of food, services etc.

The wealth is spreading out. It's not just into wallets and gone forever, and the ones that haven't moved in umpteen months, when the time is necessary will be spent as well.

Holding onto your bitcoin, ie not spending it or losing it, is pretty damn difficult.

There's 2.1 quadrillion total units of bitcoin that can exist (satoshis) and in lightning that can expand to 210 quadrillion units (microsats). That is more than enough units to conquer all stores of value and currency.

The speed/efficiency of the changes depends far far more on how quickly the trust in governments and institutions are destroyed.

the Twitter files is an excellent example of why "trusted" "sacred" institutions deserve none of the responsibilities we've delegated (with or without permission) to them.

That's why a trustless protocol is such an important innovation, and why the adoption is one of the quickest technological adoptions in human history.

Time has told a story thus far.

I post this part separately because I don't want to combine two arguments and make you defeat both in a singular response.

Government is inevitable. For every decent person you know that wants to just be left the hell alone, there are 100 who have no desire to leave you alone. They either want what's not theirs or they want to be in charge of deciding how what is not theirs is utilized. We can't truly disassociate from the concept of government because we'll be outvoted by the idiots that want it. Or if there is not vote, those with the army will simply go to war with us. That is human nature, and neither BTC nor any other invention will solve that.

You and some others have won my interest in an inflation hedge. I'm in no way interested in a black market currency. I would genuinely, and with a full heart, suit up for war before cowering in the dark corners the government can't find. It's a far better outcome, win or lose, than hiding. But the idea that a decentralized currency can exist without all governments assenting to it (inherently making it centralized) is a foolish hope in every sense of the phrase.

The Bitcoin Bros just don't give up do they?

You're living in a Fantasyland if you think Bitcoin will ever become a currency.

The Banned said:

---

I post this part separately because I don't want to combine two arguments and make you defeat both in a singular response.

Government is inevitable.
if government is inevitable, is MORE government ALWAYS inevitable, or are there means to claw back the excessively swampy, regulatorily captured encroachments into our everyday lives?
The invention of bitcoin demands it, at least for now. If government has no Cantillion Effect, so many incentives for terribly negative behavior at all levels drop off overnight.

For every decent person you know that wants to just be left the hell alone, there are 100 who have no desire to leave you alone. They either want what's not theirs or they want to be in charge of deciding how what is not theirs is utilized. We can't truly disassociate from the concept of government because we'll be outvoted by the idiots that want it. Or if there is not vote, those with the army will simply go to war with us. That is human nature, and neither BTC nor any other invention will solve that.

You and some others have won my interest in an inflation hedge.

I'm in no way interested in a black market currency. what does Black Market mean to you? Is it only "drugs, illegal guns, crime, trafficking, etc?" Trading your neighbor for meat or cheese and not reporting it to the IRS is black market. So don't write it off so casually. Black markets save lives in corrupt countries.

I would genuinely, and with a full heart, suit up for war before cowering in the dark corners the government can't find. It's a far better outcome, win or lose, than hiding.
gotcha, see bottom

But the idea that a decentralized currency can exist without all governments assenting to it (inherently making it centralized) is a foolish hope in every sense of the phrase.
your false assumption here is that there are absolute incentives to dissenting against bitcoin. The way the protocol operates, the more anyone attempts to attack it, the more resilient it becomes, and ever more trustworthy. [See china, see ECB and ESG nonsense]

---

If they turn the lights off, we got plenty more problems to deal with. If the US attempts to rewrite the constitution and eliminate free speech, which code is free speech, you'd take up arms, right?

If the US bans bitcoin. You just stated you'd suit up and fight. Did you not? Or are you a liar who would actually curl into a ball and say something hypocritical like "well, we can't have unlimited free speech."

Welcome to the Bitcoin army, you just voluntarily enlisted.

Adverse Event said:

---

So, your assumption makes it clear that no people are spending anything, they are just hoovering bitcoin until everything dies.

People gotta eat. People gotta get paid.

People are already getting paid and more every day in bitcoin

People are spending their bitcoin for all types of food, services etc.

The wealth is spreading out. It's not just into wallets and gone forever, and the ones that haven't moved in umpteen months, when the time is necessary will be spent as well.

Holding onto your bitcoin, ie not spending it or losing it, is pretty damn difficult.

There's 2.1 quadrillion total units of bitcoin that can exist (satoshis) and in lightning that can expand to 210 quadrillion units (microsats). That is more than enough units to conquer all stores of value and currency.

The speed/efficiency of the changes depends far far more on how quickly the trust in governments and institutions are destroyed.

the Twitter files is an excellent example of why "trusted" "sacred" institutions deserve none of the responsibilities we've delegated (with or without permission) to them.

That's why a trustless protocol is such an important innovation, and why the adoption is one of the quickest technological adoptions in human history.

Time has told a story thus far.

---

My assumption is not that people aren't spending. My assumption is that those with "the thing" will inevitably flex their muscles because they have more of "the thing" than the others. People may buy things or pay people in BTC right now. Why? Because that BTC has a conversion rate into their local currency (as many have pointed out to you throughout this thread). I won't bother with going through how a government could outlaw all essential services form receiving BTC again, and how the inability to covert BTC to local currency ruins BTC. Let's say for sake of argument that is impossible and BTC reigns supreme. Here's what happens next:

Your bread is worth 5 marks and my BTC is worth 5. But really, you know your mark will be worth 3 tomorrow so I'll Give you 4/5 of my BTC and call it even. That person then takes their 4/5s of a BTC to the guy selling tomatoes. Your tomatoes are worth 3 marks? 3 marks should be 3/5 of a BTC but I'm not giving you 3 of my 4 so let's do 2. And the tomato guy will take it because he knows those 2/5 of a BTC is better that whatever marks he has in hand. The marks precipitously fail and people are required to give physical assets for a fraction of a BTC. This becomes very, very severe very, very rapidly once tipping point is reached. Soon they turn to selling their labor for a fraction of a BTC. The free market being what it is, you'll find it harden (due to scarcity) and you'll be working 60 hours a week for 1/5 of a BTC in a year.

I hate that our overlords print at will. I appreciate your enthusiasm in stopping that. The problem I believe you have is that you think you can stop that by not playing their game. In reality you can only stop it through force. You choosing not to play the game and hoping everyone can transition to a new, finite currency that is already 100% owned by private citizens without undue harm to the wealth of the late adapters is foolish. You have a far greater chance of being kidnapped and tortured for your password than billions of people voluntarily accepting servitude for no other reason that you bought BTC first.

Yeah you haven't read up on Weimar.

The fluctuating prices went up and down dramatically to the point people got paid at the beginning of a work shift and had an hour to go buy all of their necessities before beginning the work day, because by end of shift the market would change dramatically. There was no way to plan, people went INSANE literally drawing zeros until their hands bled on walls and everything because of the stress of trying to calculate how many wheelbarrows they'd need to bring to buy some bread.

I can't imagine the mental anguish people went through, although being a retailer and seeing the supply chain the last three years, I'm starting to catch a whiff of what it could be like.

Sorry, only read a few lines and started responding. Redoing.

Adverse Event said:

---

The Banned said:

---

I post this part separately because I don't want to combine two arguments and make you defeat both in a singular response.

Government is inevitable.
if government is inevitable, is MORE government ALWAYS inevitable, or are there means to claw back the excessively swampy, regulatorily captured encroachments into our everyday lives?
The invention of bitcoin demands it, at least for now. If government has no Cantillion Effect, so many incentives for terribly negative behavior at all levels drop off overnight.

For every decent person you know that wants to just be left the hell alone, there are 100 who have no desire to leave you alone. They either want what's not theirs or they want to be in charge of deciding how what is not theirs is utilized. We can't truly disassociate from the concept of government because we'll be outvoted by the idiots that want it. Or if there is not vote, those with the army will simply go to war with us. That is human nature, and neither BTC nor any other invention will solve that.

You and some others have won my interest in an inflation hedge.

I'm in no way interested in a black market currency. what does Black Market mean to you? Is it only "drugs, illegal guns, crime, trafficking, etc?" Trading your neighbor for meat or cheese and not reporting it to the IRS is black market. So don't write it off so casually. Black markets save lives in corrupt countries.

I would genuinely, and with a full heart, suit up for war before cowering in the dark corners the government can't find. It's a far better outcome, win or lose, than hiding.
gotcha, see bottom

But the idea that a decentralized currency can exist without all governments assenting to it (inherently making it centralized) is a foolish hope in every sense of the phrase.
your false assumption here is that there are absolute incentives to dissenting against bitcoin. The way the protocol operates, the more anyone attempts to attack it, the more resilient it becomes, and ever more trustworthy. [See china, see ECB and ESG nonsense]

---

If they turn the lights off, we got plenty more problems to deal with. If the US attempts to rewrite the constitution and eliminate free speech, which code is free speech, you'd take up arms, right?

If the US bans bitcoin. You just stated you'd suit up and fight. Did you not? Or are you a liar who would actually curl into a ball and say something hypocritical like "well, we can't have unlimited free speech."

Welcome to the Bitcoin army, you just voluntarily enlisted.

---

Yes? More government is always inevitable unless you "claw back" those rights. This has a proven formula throughout history and it is with the use of force, not pretending their force doesn't exist. You can not wish yourself into a parallel society/economy. Those in power will force the issue and you can not say "I have a separate currency so you can't get me". To assume any power will let you live in anything more than a fringe lifestyle is wishful thinking. You are ignoring human nature.

Your post about being able to buy meat, etc prices the point. You are boasting about being able to purchase illicit goods without government interference as a positive. In reality, it means you've lost long ago and did nothing about it. You will not be able to buy a house. You will not be able to go to a gas station. You will it be able to lay your taxes (those aren't going away, after all). You will not be able to live a normal lifestyle of any kind simply because you can buy food on the black market (and no, as I've demonstrated before I do not believe the black market is simply drugs etc. black market is contraband and contraband can be whatever the government decides it is).

You can show a small percentage of Chinese citizens exchanging goods via BTC as a positive, but in reality, we already know that citizens have lost. They're simply making the best of a ****ty situation. They're screwed until their government is ousted, if ever.

As for myself, I don't know what my red line is. I ponder it from time to time. I'm certain that at the rate we're moving, it'll will crossed at some point. I pray daily that we see a reversal in policy and that we see freedom start to reign again. I would love to see a world in which BTC can be used for the utility it seems to hold instead of it's ability to be untraceable. I'm well aware of how much war sucks and I'm not trying to act tough here. I'm
Merely trying to show that the world you envision where BTC is a necessity for survival from an authorities government is a world in which you are far too late in fighting for real freedom.

The Banned said:

---

Adverse Event said:

---

So, your assumption makes it clear that no people are spending anything, they are just hoovering bitcoin until everything dies.

People gotta eat. People gotta get paid.

People are already getting paid and more every day in bitcoin

People are spending their bitcoin for all types of food, services etc.

The wealth is spreading out. It's not just into wallets and gone forever, and the ones that haven't moved in umpteen months, when the time is necessary will be spent as well.

Holding onto your bitcoin, ie not spending it or losing it, is pretty damn difficult.

There's 2.1 quadrillion total units of bitcoin that can exist (satoshis) and in lightning that can expand to 210 quadrillion units (microsats). That is more than enough units to conquer all stores of value and currency.

The speed/efficiency of the changes depends far far more on how quickly the trust in governments and institutions are destroyed.

the Twitter files is an excellent example of why "trusted" "sacred" institutions deserve none of the responsibilities we've delegated (with or without permission) to them.

That's why a trustless protocol is such an important innovation, and why the adoption is one of the quickest technological adoptions in human history.

Time has told a story thus far.

---

My assumption is not that people aren't spending. My assumption is that those with "the thing" will inevitably flex their muscles because they have more of "the thing" than the others. People may buy things or pay people in BTC right now. Why? Because that BTC has a conversion rate into their local currency (as many have pointed out to you throughout this thread).
I'm not sure what's hanging you up here, re: converting to local currency. Maybe someone else understands your hangup.

I won't bother with going through how a government could outlaw all essential services form receiving BTC again, and how the inability to covert BTC to local currency ruins BTC. Let's say for sake of argument that is impossible and BTC reigns supreme. Here's what happens next:
if our government is capable of doing what you say, then they've passed your threshold to take up arms. Secondly, ive supported the thread with real world events of goverments. States and institutions accepting bitcoin as legal tender and the ones who've actively banned it have seen minimal changes in their cotizens vehavior or increased adoption despite the attempts at banning or slandering it. Moot points.

Your bread is worth 5 marks and my BTC is worth 5. But really, you know your mark will be worth 3 tomorrow so I'll Give you 4/5 of my BTC and call it even. That person then takes their 4/5s of a BTC to the guy selling tomatoes. Your tomatoes are worth 3 marks? 3 marks should be 3/5 of a BTC but I'm not giving you 3 of my 4 so let's do 2. And the tomato guy will take it because he knows those 2/5 of a BTC is better that whatever marks he has in hand. The marks precipitously fail and people are required to give physical assets for a fraction of a BTC. This becomes very, very severe very, very rapidly once tipping point is reached. Soon they turn to selling their labor for a fraction of a BTC. The free market being what it is, you'll find it harden (due to scarcity) and you'll be working 60 hours a week for 1/5 of a BTC in a year.
everything divided by 21 million is hard to conceptualize. I don't disagree. Personally, it's hard not to imagine that by 2050, a microsat may be on par with today's penny.


I hate that our overlords print at will. I appreciate your enthusiasm in stopping that. The problem I believe you have is that you think you can stop that by not playing their game.

In reality you can only stop it through force.
Here's some Space Force perspective from Jason Lowery, regarding bitcoin and force. He's writing his thesis on Mutally Assured Preservation. I'll add a few videos here (again?)



You choosing not to play the game and hoping everyone can transition to a new, finite currency that is already 100% owned by private citizens without undue harm to the wealth of the late adapters is foolish.
The US Government have some of the largest bitcoin wallets on the planet, fyi, from seizing dark market servers and or wallets, and that's what we actually KNOW they have. China has some big bags as well.

Describe what you mean by undue harm.

You have a far greater chance of being kidnapped and tortured for your password than billions of people voluntarily accepting servitude for no other reason that you bought BTC first.
sounds similar to precious metals, and wealth in general. This is why the best advice is never tell anyone how much bitcoin you have, even if it's a only 1000 sats.

---

My red line was crossed a decade ago, and my weapon is bitcoin.

I'll ****ing die on this hill.

Hth.

I'm not in this for money. Bitcoiners have declared war on Clown world.

LMCane said:

---

WTF is this?

"Bitcoin topped $17,000 Wednesday, marking a two-year high for the world's largest digital coin."

Uh, BTC was at $66,000 barely a year ago.

---

Highest price ever was $64,400 on November 12, 2021, so you're damn close on the price and correct in your over-arching point

Sometimes I wonder, if Thomas Paine and others were writing their essays today, if anyone here would read them.

Adverse Event said:

---

The Banned said:

---

Adverse Event said:

---

So, your assumption makes it clear that no people are spending anything, they are just hoovering bitcoin until everything dies.

People gotta eat. People gotta get paid.

People are already getting paid and more every day in bitcoin

People are spending their bitcoin for all types of food, services etc.

The wealth is spreading out. It's not just into wallets and gone forever, and the ones that haven't moved in umpteen months, when the time is necessary will be spent as well.

Holding onto your bitcoin, ie not spending it or losing it, is pretty damn difficult.

There's 2.1 quadrillion total units of bitcoin that can exist (satoshis) and in lightning that can expand to 210 quadrillion units (microsats). That is more than enough units to conquer all stores of value and currency.

The speed/efficiency of the changes depends far far more on how quickly the trust in governments and institutions are destroyed.

the Twitter files is an excellent example of why "trusted" "sacred" institutions deserve none of the responsibilities we've delegated (with or without permission) to them.

That's why a trustless protocol is such an important innovation, and why the adoption is one of the quickest technological adoptions in human history.

Time has told a story thus far.

---

My assumption is not that people aren't spending. My assumption is that those with "the thing" will inevitably flex their muscles because they have more of "the thing" than the others. People may buy things or pay people in BTC right now. Why? Because that BTC has a conversion rate into their local currency (as many have pointed out to you throughout this thread).
I'm not sure what's hanging you up here, re: converting to local currency. Maybe someone else understands your hangup.

I won't bother with going through how a government could outlaw all essential services form receiving BTC again, and how the inability to covert BTC to local currency ruins BTC. Let's say for sake of argument that is impossible and BTC reigns supreme. Here's what happens next:
if our government is capable of doing what you say, then they've passed your threshold to take up arms. Secondly, ive supported the thread with real world events of goverments. States and institutions accepting bitcoin as legal tender and the ones who've actively banned it have seen minimal changes in their cotizens vehavior or increased adoption despite the attempts at banning or slandering it. Moot points.

Your bread is worth 5 marks and my BTC is worth 5. But really, you know your mark will be worth 3 tomorrow so I'll Give you 4/5 of my BTC and call it even. That person then takes their 4/5s of a BTC to the guy selling tomatoes. Your tomatoes are worth 3 marks? 3 marks should be 3/5 of a BTC but I'm not giving you 3 of my 4 so let's do 2. And the tomato guy will take it because he knows those 2/5 of a BTC is better that whatever marks he has in hand. The marks precipitously fail and people are required to give physical assets for a fraction of a BTC. This becomes very, very severe very, very rapidly once tipping point is reached. Soon they turn to selling their labor for a fraction of a BTC. The free market being what it is, you'll find it harden (due to scarcity) and you'll be working 60 hours a week for 1/5 of a BTC in a year.
everything divided by 21 million is hard to conceptualize. I don't disagree. Personally, it's hard not to imagine that by 2050, a microsat may be on par with today's penny.


I hate that our overlords print at will. I appreciate your enthusiasm in stopping that. The problem I believe you have is that you think you can stop that by not playing their game.

In reality you can only stop it through force.
[Here's some Space Force perspective from Jason Lowery, regarding bitcoin and force. He's writing his thesis on Mutally Assured Preservation. I'll add a few videos here (again?)]

You choosing not to play the game and hoping everyone can transition to a new, finite currency that is already 100% owned by private citizens without undue harm to the wealth of the late adapters is foolish.
The US Government have some of the largest bitcoin wallets on the planet, fyi, from seizing dark market servers and or wallets, and that's what we actually KNOW they have. China has some big bags as well.

Describe what you mean by undue harm.

You have a far greater chance of being kidnapped and tortured for your password than billions of people voluntarily accepting servitude for no other reason that you bought BTC first.
sounds similar to precious metals, and wealth in general. This is why the best advice is never tell anyone how much bitcoin you have, even if it's a only 1000 sats.

---

---

My hang up on it's convertibility is because if BTC is to be slowly adopted into the currency of choice, the majority of people and institutions will still trade in the standard currency. If you still want to pay your mortgage, have credit, open a line of credit for your new business, etc, you will need to deal in standard currency. Once the tipping point is reached and the writing on the wall is that BTC>Dollars/other currency, the fire sale to convert dollars to BTC is on. The dollar is now worthless (similar to the mark) and people will be literally incapable of converting. They'll be forced to convert what they do have, which is physical assets like property, stock, jewelry, etc. These people will go from middle class to poor overnight because they didn't get their cash to BTC fast enough.

Those that don't have assets to trade can only trade what they do have: their labor. Slavery (or at best indentured servitude) rises from the ashes. In short, if the inherent value of BTC is not in the local currency and is instead in the BTC itself, all local currencies are worthless and all humans not currently holding the BTC are at the mercy of those who do have it.

Secondly, I agree. If the government gets to this point we're far, far past the pivotal moment and we accepted it. That's why I am latching on to your currency claim. I will not devalue BTC as a whole. Simply saying if we get to the point that btc is how we transact to survive, we missed the boat. And the fact that you use 3rd world countries and China as the ones using BTC to survive proves this point, in my opinion. And those whose governments have adopted it are only viable because of its ability to be translated into dollars. As you've (or someone else) said prior, governments have settled debts in oil and other goods. Why? Because those goods can be related back to the dollar (or whatever standard was used at the time). Not because the thing itself made them happy. The thing itself frees up x number of "dollars" to spend elsewhere. The value wasn't in the asset itself as much as it is in what else can be purchased now that we don't have to purchase this particular asset. Government will allow BTC because BTC can be turned into dollars to buy other stuff. Not because the BTC itself. Somewhere in the supply chain, BTC reaches a supplier who receives only because of its ability to convert to dollars to transact business upstream. (Dollars or other currency)

I'll watch/rewatch any videos you attach and I can review the thread if you don't feel like reattaching. Not sure if we're speaking the same language there when it comes to force.

Not surprised our government has BTC on hand. If BTC is king, the one alternative to using it as currency is to use it as the new "gold" standard. Gold had to be in hand for the government to mint based off of it. If we went to a BTC standard (more likely than BTC as currency since it's finite nature makes it's a perfect standard) governments around the world will need to physically possess it. This is actually the number one way I see BTC becoming the jackpot investment of all time. If governments want it to create a new standard, they'll start by buying it from people. Then they'll take it, so sell at the right time.

By undue harm, I mean all of those who don't possess it that need to buy a meager amount of it to simply survive and the purchase price will be everything they own. Simply because they were too late to the game/trusted the government currency too much. There is definitely a cruel Darwinism that would happen here.

And lastly, true. People have been killed and warred against for assets since the dawn of time. It's a fools errand to believe the same wouldn't happen to BTC owners should it become the standard. Not telling anyone what you have will only go so far. Any thief can drive through a few neighborhoods and tell you has and who doesn't without any need for disclosure from those that live in those neighborhoods. In this scenario there will be some who have a stack of BTC and live low on the hog and will do well. That will not be the majority of them though.

Watched the video. I'll try to say it this way and see if it comes across clearer:

Had a government(s) created Bitcoin and decided to transfer all individuals wealth at a 1:1 ratio (meanwhile reducing their own power due to the anonymous nature of it), I think it would be an amazing currency. The problem I have now is what I ranted about above. In order for the average individual to buy in to BTC, they will lose some wealth because it will not be 1:1. I will give up $17k to someone who spent much less. I have lost spending power. And as more people adopt it, and people make a "bank run" of sorts in order to get their hands on some fraction of BTC, trillionaires will be made almost overnight and people will lose everything they've ever owned in similar time. It absolutely would not work without massive social upheaval. This is why currency changes have always been sudden, the smaller population of the wealthy/middle class get screwed, and the poorer bottom half get tossed a bone.

I see a "BTC Standard" as a slight possibility. I see BTC eventually falling to government tyranny as much more likely. And that red line that you have found and I believe would have been crossed far before this point will necessitate action or we're screwed.

It's a pretty good short clip on Jason's thesis, that bitcoin is violence (he softened it after the fury of the libertarian/NAP/anarchists opined that bitcoin cant be violence and called it a digital projection of force.

Here's Jason's most recent interview with Marty Bent )3 hours) where he goes much further into his thesis and discovery process.


He's got a ton of good material to really stew on. Can't encourage that rabbit hole enough.

Suffice to say, he thinks bitcoin is a weapon, and I agree. It's many things and it's definitely a weapon too. I agree with him that the DoT and the SEC or CFTC aren't the best entities to provide guidance on this topic.

*** Find a way to make your point without embedding a dozen Twitter shots. You are spamming the thread when you do that, and it's inconsiderate to others -- Staff ***

The Banned said:

---

Watched the video. I'll try to say it this way and see if it comes across clearer:

Had a government(s) created Bitcoin and decided to transfer all individuals wealth at a 1:1 ratio (meanwhile reducing their own power due to the anonymous nature of it), I think it would be an amazing currency. The problem I have now is what I ranted about above. In order for the average individual to buy in to BTC, they will lose some wealth because it will not be 1:1. I will give up $17k to someone who spent much less. I have lost spending power. And as more people adopt it, and people make a "bank run" of sorts in order to get their hands on some fraction of BTC, trillionaires will be made almost overnight and people will lose everything they've ever owned in similar time. It absolutely would not work without massive social upheaval. This is why currency changes have always been sudden, the smaller population of the wealthy/middle class get screwed, and the poorer bottom half get tossed a bone.

you're getting stuck on useless minutiae, imo, and the point is escaping from you.

I see a "BTC Standard" as a slight possibility. I see BTC eventually falling to government tyranny as much more likely. And that red line that you have found and I believe would have been crossed far before this point will necessitate action or we're screwed
looking from your perspective, one which has done minimal homework (no offense), I can understand why you feel this way.

I highly encourage you to stop the mental masturbation and experiment with the protocol instead. You're not dumb. So get after it.

---

Adverse Event said:

---

My red line was crossed a decade ago, and my weapon is bitcoin.

I'll ****ing die on this hill.

Hth.

I'm not in this for money. Bitcoiners have declared war on Clown world.

---

lol

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

So…
Productive real estate.

---

Under the current system, it's one of few viable options. At the same time, what if people didn't feel compelled to pour resources into real estate and home prices fell to their utilitarian value such that young people were not priced out of the housing market?

---

Housing is not productive.

TexasRebel said:

---

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

So…
Productive real estate.

---

Under the current system, it's one of few viable options. At the same time, what if people didn't feel compelled to pour resources into real estate and home prices fell to their utilitarian value such that young people were not priced out of the housing market?

---

Housing is not productive.

---

Even if true, that does not change the fact that housing prices seem to be inflated due to money printing and that demonetization of residential real estate to utilitarian value would solve much of the problem of housing affordability. I would not be surprised if precious metals and residential real estate end up getting demonetized by Bitcoin at some point.

So that Jason Lowery guy being quoted in this thread above…so yet another male under the age of 30 (with an M.I.T. Connection!) who talks like he is real smart and revolutionary, gathering followers to get clicks and views on social media, making money off people wanting to follow his genius….

If I dig around is he also an effective altruism lover looking to spread all the love and wealth around the world just like Sam Bankman-Fried (another MIT genius)?

One of the fascinating things about this crypto craze is the cottage industry of bloggers and youtubers and 'journalists' that has grown up feeding off it…just go to YouTube and search 'Bitcoin' and you will see channel after channel of people in the social media influencer game talking Bitcoin's (and other digital currency) price and news, showing the charts and analyzing them talking about 'resistance points' and 'candle wicks' and 'moving averages' day after day after day.

Good, you're learning. Trust, but verify.

But, have you invented a reality where only 35 and under are capable of creating entities full of fraud?

There's not many under 35 people at the highest tiers of government, but many of those people accepted copious amounts of money from a 29 year old ****coin-arbitragist to look the other way, or promote him as the next carnagie/JPM/JFC/etc. How old were those people, in positions of trust and authority?

Jason's under 35, so he can't run for President. He's not the head of the NIH or working on a decade in Congress, so he's definitively less trustworthy than those folks, prossibly.

And he's not running a ****coin casino. He's writing his own essay on what he thinks Bitcoin has created and allowing his ideas to be tested and attacked as publicly as he can, and tempering it.

Read his ideas, and attack them and allow him the ability to respond if the criticism is valid. That's all he's asking from you. To help flesh out his perspective, which he is taking into the Pentagon. How much trust do you need to give someone to evaluate an idea?

How complicated is it to manage your #Bitcoin in 2022 and why is it important to take self-custody?@maxkeiser explains on @TuckerCarlson pic.twitter.com/2F3TcnZEKP

— Swan.com (@SwanBitcoin) December 2, 2022

That guy wants to be the Mad Bitcoin version of Jim Cramer.

He's a Baylor USSF engineer/acquisitions guy who's doing his PME at MIT. I had worked with him on some stuff in the past but never talked about bitcoins.

Adverse Event said:

---

What percentage of human potential labor is trapped making "financial decisions" because the value of their labor melts away over time due to inflation/etc?

If you weren't stuck 20 years in finance, what would you have done with your life instead?

---

Inflation is growth. BTC is stagnant. Stagnation is complacency. Complancency gets extinguished by competition

Your problem isn't with credit markets or fiat.

Its with governments that spend money it doesn't have

Adverse Event said:

---

It's a pretty good short clip on Jason's thesis, that bitcoin is violence (he softened it after the fury of the libertarian/NAP/anarchists opined that bitcoin cant be violence and called it a digital projection of force.

Here's Jason's most recent interview with Marty Bent )3 hours) where he goes much further into his thesis and discovery process.


He's got a ton of good material to really stew on. Can't encourage that rabbit hole enough.

Suffice to say, he thinks bitcoin is a weapon, and I agree. It's many things and it's definitely a weapon too. I agree with him that the DoT and the SEC or CFTC aren't the best entities to provide guidance on this topic.

---

If BTC is modern gold obviously its power will be wielded by the 1000 or so whales that actually have some. Power in the hands of few. I'm not BTC is useful but if I'm wrong we're heading down a dangerous path of consolidation of power in the hands of few

*** Edited to remove the long trail of Twitter shots that were embedded in the post that was quoted. No other changes -- Staff ***

Pumpkinhead said:

---

So that Jason Lowery guy being quoted in this thread above…so yet another male under the age of 30 (with an M.I.T. Connection!) who talks like he is real smart and revolutionary, gathering followers to get clicks and views on social media, making money off people wanting to follow his genius….

If I dig around is he also an effective altruism lover looking to spread all the love and wealth around the world just like Sam Bankman-Fried (another MIT genius)?

One of the fascinating things about this crypto craze is the cottage industry of bloggers and youtubers and 'journalists' that has grown up feeding off it…just go to YouTube and search 'Bitcoin' and you will see channel after channel of people in the social media influencer game talking Bitcoin's (and other digital currency) price and news, showing the charts and analyzing them talking about 'resistance points' and 'candle wicks' and 'moving averages' day after day after day.

---

Grifters and rent seekers. How much skin do they actually have in the game?

TexasRebel said:

---

Its Texas Aggies, dammit said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

So…
Productive real estate.

---

Under the current system, it's one of few viable options. At the same time, what if people didn't feel compelled to pour resources into real estate and home prices fell to their utilitarian value such that young people were not priced out of the housing market?

---

Housing is not productive.

---

False as it has non-zero value and provides opportunities for creation of goods and services.

tysker said:

---

Pumpkinhead said:

---

So that Jason Lowery guy being quoted in this thread above…so yet another male under the age of 30 (with an M.I.T. Connection!) who talks like he is real smart and revolutionary, gathering followers to get clicks and views on social media, making money off people wanting to follow his genius….

If I dig around is he also an effective altruism lover looking to spread all the love and wealth around the world just like Sam Bankman-Fried (another MIT genius)?

One of the fascinating things about this crypto craze is the cottage industry of bloggers and youtubers and 'journalists' that has grown up feeding off it…just go to YouTube and search 'Bitcoin' and you will see channel after channel of people in the social media influencer game talking Bitcoin's (and other digital currency) price and news, showing the charts and analyzing them talking about 'resistance points' and 'candle wicks' and 'moving averages' day after day after day.

---

Grifters and rent seekers. How much skin do they actually have in the game?

---

Speaking of rent seekers and grifters, have you looked into the IMF, World Bank and Foreign Aid?

Exp posted this episode with Alex Gladstein who's written a thesis on the World Bank &IMF and the way they manipulate countries to starve themselves (my words) in order to demand more imports and never exiting their debt cycles, just refreshing them.

Nearly everyone on this forum ONLY has the ability or knowledge to view the world from an American (propogandized) Perspective. I'd highly encourage either reading the thesis or at least listening to the podcast:
[Audio]
https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/podcast/how-the-imf-world-bank-exploit-poor-countries
[Video]


https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/bitcoin-a-currency-of-decolonization

[Other essays]
https://alexgladstein.com/essays/

What aspect of any crypto solves that problem?
Where in the various BTC white papers and research reports is this addressed?