Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Peter Petrosino's avatar

This smells of sophistry. While doing an admirable job of delineating the desirable characteristics of sound money, it is, at best, misguided to advocate for Bitcoin. Do you expect people to jump on board with a digital, not physical, currency created by a mysteriously anonymous figure, a digital construct that has miraculously been left unscathed by the many assaults on other digital currencies, that is mentioned off-handedly by government officials as a potential future vehicle for them, and that relies on the magical blockchain encryption that data indicates has already been compromised? It is a shame to have laid out such a wonderful framework for sound money, only to reach such a flawed conclusion.

Expand full comment
Jonathon's avatar

As economist Richard Werner describes, ordinary credit, created by banks, is perfectly capable of propelling economic growth. What matters is how the money is allocated—asset purchases, consumption credit, or business investment.

https://youtu.be/IzE038REw2k?t=363

The existence of credit renders a currency's nominal immutability moot.

The implicit assumption in the bitcoinist thesis is that hard-capped money, in other words, radical monetary austerity, is somehow more beneficial for the economy than the ability to fund multiple business ventures with the same dollar.

Expand full comment
33 more comments...

No posts