|
|
|
|
|
|
by 0x445442
3098 days ago
|
|
|
Yeah one has to buy into the premise that debt based money is a good thing but I reject that premise. At least each BTC represents a certain amount of work (in the form of electricity expended) that's already been performed. Debt is great as long as there is enough work to be performed to square the accounts. |
|
|
1) a system with a lot of (risky) debt
2) a system in which debt is impossible
Then have competition between these 2 options. There is no doubt about the outcome. System 1 will devastate system 2 (in that the total economy size of system 1 will be a LOT larger than system 2).
Therefore the Nash equilibrium is a debt based system.
Nobody's claiming there aren't any advantages to a system where debt is not a possibility. I guess people are just claiming that not having debt is too expensive, in terms of missed opportunities.
The strength of bitcoin is the inflexibility and general incompetence of government based money systems. It wouldn't be too hard, I think, for a government to make a money system that would trounce bitcoin. Of course, they'd have to be prepared to trounce banks and most of the financial sector to do this.