> For the first part, I'll just say that you vastly overestimate our technical abilities if you think we could even specify the problem of arbitration in such a way that a computer could solve it, nevermind actually implement the solver. You've chosen a relatively simple case (proof of property) but arbitration in general is much more complex.
I'm not saying it's realistic with the current model, but these are all just software problems at the end of the day, what makes it slow, arbitrary and inefficient is the Human component. I look forward to a World where we can count judges and lawyers on a single sheet. The US's problem is regulatory capture from vying interests and lobbyists, that won't be possible if a smart contract is what is needed to approve or decline as their is no Human to corrupt, and while that seems insane just look at how much is done Online from the brick and mortar World from the 90s.
> For hyperinflation, I have been born and continue to live in Romania, a country that went exactly through that in the 90s, to the extent that a loaf of bread that was initially maybe 10-20 ROL would cost 10k ROL. I remember as a child not being able to afford popcorn when going to the park with my grandparents, or my grandfather selling his old car and buying the family's first color TV with the money. I remember living as a family of four in a 2 bedroom apartment (my parents had their bedroom, while my brother and I shared the livingroom until we were in our twenties).
That's for the context, I worked with many Romanians when I did my Ag apprenticeship in Germany; Dictatorship and the collapse really took a toll on that Society that people still pay to this day.
> But that wasn't the problem of our economy, it was just what kept it (barely) working! If we couldn't go to hyperinflation, we would have simply not payed salaries or other debts.
That's a very Central Banks apologist view, that I think doesn't hold up to reality, but you're entitled to your opinion of how you've internalized the experience. Also consider that as Romania entered the EU it still isn'e exactly immune to the many maladies that came from entering and the PIIGS nations showed how detrimental not having control of your currency is when Germany will devalue it to support its export based economy.
> Scarcity is a problem of production, not of money. Money itself is almost immaterial. If we could produce enough food, water, energy, cars, fridges, computers, furniture etc. for every single person on Earth, and all of their children, to have all they need at the same time, we could renounce money entirely, Star Trek style.
I agree, but I think it's only a part of it, but the need to discuss such lofty goals as post-scarcity is an absurd notion when you're dealing with such challenges as mass hunger and poverty in your life. Productivity and efficiencies are not a big concern when you cannot afford basic things like food/water/soap, which falls on deaf ears. Having at least a stable currency, which I'd argue you don't have, nor do I in the US despite it being the World's Reserve currency and represents opposite sides of the spectrums. I agree, with you conclusion, though: money is means not an end. We're still in the transitional phase, Bitcoin represents another vital step toward the need to do away with the concept of money (even the immense abstraction of it, ans all it is private keys/data).
> You have a terrible understanding of economics (and of the plight of people who lived through hyperinflation, like myself) if you think that people in a country experiencing hyperinflation would fare any better if they could trade in BTC instead of the de-valued fiat. The only ones who would be better off are the rich, whose reserves of cash would not suddenly lose their value. But people who live off wages would see pay cuts and eventually just stop getting payed if the currency were forced to a global standard instead of suffering inflation.
Do I? I mean one of the things that is remarkable consistent in these hyperinfalted currencies is captial controls, in which the central banks refuse to allot more than X amount of YOUR currency per day, and even in the EU will make transaction above an arbitrary amount is illegal. Hell, in Cyprus they had bail ins, in Spain their was talk about 'corralito' which is essentially the same thing. Do I need to talk about how horrendous the situation in Greece was, which uses the EUR and still suffered the same situation.
I'm not trying to make light of your situation, far from it I actually really sympathize with you, but I've dedicated the last 19 years of my life to addressing this very core problem and lived and worked in these countries and assessed them with these type of analysis.
> Oh, and guess what - the country got richer and better without the currency having to go through deflation! In fact, bread still costs 10-20k ROL, and a PC still costs 40-50 million ROL, we just 're-branded' our currency to RON at a fixed 1:10k RON:ROL exchange rate to make the numbers more manageable. We started having productive industries with products that others wanted to buy, and governance got better (we still have huge problems and some of the poorest regions in the EU, but that is besides the point).
> Oh, and guess what - the country got richer and better without the currency having to go through deflation! In fact, bread still costs 10-20k ROL, and a PC still costs 40-50 million ROL, we just 're-branded' our currency to RON at a fixed 1:10k RON:ROL exchange rate to make the numbers more manageable. We started having productive industries with products that others wanted to buy, and governance got better (we still have huge problems and some of the poorest regions in the EU, but that is besides the point).
No, you didn't: but this also helps me see what the core of your logic fallacies are particularly with the omissions of the trade requirements from being a core EU nation, and your dismissal of being the poorest region in the EU is much more poignant than you are making it out to be.