Can Cryptocurrency Be Ethical?
sfexaminer.com
sfexaminer.com
Bitcoin, not "crypto" fixes the problem, because everyone must work for bitcoin, and nobody may "print" it without putting in the work.
Anybody can create new "crypto" with little or no work.
The dollar is printed to help the economy and fuel growth, production must catch up to justify the supply. As long as this is backed up by people's production, real value is created.
Whereas nothing really backs bitcoin except for cyber-crime, speculation, and daydreaming tech. It is the perfect leech society currency, fueled by social media hype and brainwashing, where machines instead of people "work hard" for it - no value is really created.
If the dollar were to be an ethical currency, the newly created dollars would be evenly distributed among US citizens. Evidently, you and I receive none of the new dollars initially, but they trickle down the economy along with the price inflation which they cause. By the time we receive these new dollars, they are worth less than the old dollar before the time they were created. However, the people who got to spend the new money first got to do so at the old value of the dollar. This would certainly fit the description of "leech society currency."
The value of bitcoin is precisely to end this unfair arrangement and to have a means of saving which cannot be deliberately debased by a privileged few.
When new bitcoin are released into the economy, no new wealth is created, that's for sure. The releasing of new bitcoin is itself an expansion of the money supply and would, if demand were to stay the same or decrease, lead to a reduction in purchasing power of bitcoin until the time when no new bitcoin will be released. The reason we do not see a reduction in purchasing power with time is because there is a high demand for people to save money which cannot be deliberately debased. People will voluntarily choose a volatile, riskier option which might retain its purchasing power over the alternative option of holding an asset which is guaranteed to continue declining in purchasing power. So far, people who have made this bet and held onto it for a few years have all seen an increase in their purchasing power.
"crypto" enthusiasts try to include Bitcoin under their umbrella because the name recognition helps them to sell their scams, which are just alternative digital versions of fiat money (by decree). But 100% of crypto projects were birthed in a world where a fair money (bitcoin) already existed, and they attempt to bring back the old, unfair version of money, where a privileged few get early access to the new money.
Bitcoin is not "crypto." It is a unique invention which cannot be duplicated because duplication erases all of the characteristics which make it worth having. Primarily, that no privileged insiders get early access to the money. Satoshi did not grant himself any bitcoin before making it public. The bitcoin he mined in the first year or so when bootstrapping the network have never been spent. Miners are not privileged because they must put in the work and risk their own assets in attempt to gain rewards later. There is no guarantee of profit for them.
Bitcoin does not leech of anything or anybody. People choose to transfer assets to it, either by hard work, exchange of goods, services and time, or by exchanging electricity in effort to update the ledger and obtain transaction fees plus a subsidy (a subsidy which declines and will eventually end). The only way to obtain bitcoin is to put in the work.
That is not true for dollars, nor "crypto."
However, the economy does not work or grow with a society of hoarders, or people expending electricity without producing any real (not virtual) work.
Money is just a tool for value transaction and creation, bitcoin does not fill neither of those roles. It is theoretically useless for society.
To give you an analogy, compare the stagnant (no inflation) Japan vs. USA economy (controlled inflation). This gives you an idea of how monetary policy is used; it has nothing to do with "intentionally devaluing currency to steal our work", it is about keeping up with population and economic growth.
I get it, bitcoin's popularity coincides with a lot of millennials and generation Z who could not find work or were stalled professionally because of the 2009's crisis and now COVID. But a shortcut is not the answer.
Young people will soon learn the value of real work, not quick and easy money. The last three crises were mostly fueled by greedy rich people selling lies: dotcom, mortgages, I hope crypto is not another one (but it fits the pattern).
Suggested reading: "How an economy grows (and why it doesn't)"[1]
At present, due to rapid depreciation of the dollar and a growing demand in bitcoin, there are not many effective uses of the capital which would net the saver an increase in their purchasing power versus just holding onto bitcoin. This is likely to continue for some years to come, and bitcoin holders will be rewarded for their thrift. Eventually bitcoin holders must invest their capital or they will see their purchasing power stay the same or depreciate. In practice, bitcoiners will invest some of their capital into bitcoin-related projects, as this improves the likelihood of fast adoption of a more equitable form of money, and if this money does succeed in eclipsing fiat money, the companies developing these tools will be lucrative.
Money is not merely a tool for transacting. It is a store of value, a means of exchange, and a unit of account. Bitcoin serves all 3 purposes well. Admittedly, there are some issues with scaling the means of exchange, but I'm very confident that these will be addressed by solutions which are in the works. (Disclaimer: I am a contributor to one such solution)
Also disclaimer: I've been holding (and investing) bitcoin since 2011, before shitcoins were a thing, and for precisely the reason I've outlined here, because I immediately recognised it as a solution to the scam of fiat money, although I never actually expected it to take off at the time and it was more of a pipe-dream. What is surprising is how few of its proponents actually understand its reason for existing. Most are merely in it "for the gainz" and don't realize they're positively contributing towards replacing unethical fiat money with a superior tool.
> Young people will soon learn the value of real work, not quick and easy money. The last three crises were mostly fueled by rich people selling lies: dotcom, mortgages, I hope crypto is not another one (but it fits the pattern).
Incidentally, it was bitcoin that encouraged me to work harder, because the opportunity to acquire it NOW while it is cheap is too big to miss, since it will be more expensive later, I will acquire much less with the same amount of work. I work my ass off, am thrift and pile as much as I can into bitcoin.
"crypto" is definitely a bubble. It is fueled by SV investors and scammers promising "the next bitcoin," but are all solutions in search of a problem. Bitcoin alone fixes the inflation problem. You can't fix inflation by creating more money, as is done by all "crypto."
Thanks for the resource, I checked the author (as I do with any source). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irwin_Schiff
Is bitcoin biased by a libertarian viewpoint? Schiff does not believe in paying taxes.
It might not look apparent in the US, but countries where politicians are actually corrupt and devalue their currency without backing it with any production, tax evasion is a major contributor in furthering a country's GDP decline.
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/070115/under....
Bitcoin is absolutely biased towards a libertarian/individualist/voluntaryist viewpoint. If we consider that inflation is effectively a hidden tax that you have no ability to vote on, then it is an immoral tax to which you should not be subjected.
Not all bitcoiners are anti-tax, and there are many classic liberals among us who share the belief of no taxation without representation. Some of us are less favourable to governments, having understood lessons from history, and would prefer to keep the government at a bare minimum or not even have it at all.
To people who would rather decide how their own money is spent, bitcoin is an invaluable tool. It can be held in ways which are unconfiscatable, untaxable, uncensorable and plausibly deniable. People have greater ability to choose where there money is spent, rather than having a gang of armed thugs demand you pay up and then they decide how the money is spent. Irwin Schiff was a victim of such violence - right up to his death in a prison hospital.
We don't need to look back in history to understand where excess governmental power can lead us though, as we only need to look at China. In China, the majority of the population use WePay for commerce, and every single transaction goes through a central point of failure (the government). The financial activity of citizens is traced and linked to their social credit scores, along with other things like obedience towards the state. Disobedience can leave you with a credit score too low to allow you to board a train out of your region, or leave the country at all. Complete robbing of individual liberties in the name of the "collective good," but none of it is about being good towards your fellow neighbour, it is about being obedient to the State.
If unchecked, this social credit score system will almost certainly be coming to the US. We are already dangerously close with vaccine passports. Those in power would absolutely love for a Central Bank Digital Currency to be rolled out where they can know everything about everyone and prevent undesirables from transacting.
Bitcoin is currently the thorn in their side - the only viable alternative to despots controlling every aspect of your life.
Are you sure? Where do you think social security, public education, infrastructure, hospitals, parks, national defense, etc, come from? They were funded by the government with taxes. COVID relief?
In authoritarian or corrupt states this is a concern. But for the US and many Western nations, the state is mostly a force for good
American bias: you take for granted and don't appreciate what you have
I was referring to the social credit system, not just taxation. Social credit is an absolutely inhuman way of treating people. We are not slaves of a government.
In regards to where income comes from: it comes from the tax-payer, not the government. The trouble is the tax-payer did not contribute to this of their own volition, but did so under duress because they were extorted by the government which threatens violence for non-compliance. If people deem the services you listed as ideal or necessary, they would of course, contribute to them without the need for force.
How does a State become authoritarian, and what put these western states in the position they are in today?
The answer is that the ancestors people of those states fought numerous violent rebellions against their slave-masters to obtain the freedoms that are enjoyed (in decreasing fashion) today.
But what happens when a population becomes docile, or robbed of their ability to fight a rebellion against a corrupt government. What if the docile even encourage putting their fellow neighbour into such position of helplessness?
Governments are not a force for good. They never have been in history. The only thing that keeps them on a good path is the ability of their populations to hold them accountable. If you remove that ability, you will soon find out that your government is not a force for good. Cambodians found that out after surrendering their arms. Australia is learning the hard lesson as we speak.
I'm not American anyway, but America enjoys the most freedom in the world thanks to its thoughtful founders, who put some constraints on future governments. Today, these constraints are often ignored and you even have the docile calling for them to be abolished.
You underestimate human nature, most people will be greedy and take advantage of their fellow beings if there is no central authority (accountable to the people) to enforce rules
It's a branch of finance, which is intrinsically amoral, and outside of what lay people think of as ethics.