Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by sparkie 2010 days ago
> yet the prices of houses continues to rise

Or, the value of the money continues to decline.

If you measure house prices in bitcoin over the past 10 years, then house prices have been in decline relative to bitcoin. This trend is likely to continue for some time.

Under disinflationary money, houses will become a consumable rather than an attempt to store wealth. The cost of housing will decrease over time (although wages will also decrease over time). Having a home sat there not collecting rent will cause you to lose money.

The desire to redistribute wealth will hit a hurdle when the wealth owners can store it in their heads and have it be completely unseizable, plausibly deniable and undetectable anyway.

1 comments

Bitcoin isnt money, you cant pay for almost any house with bitcoin. Deflation also isnt good because that will cause debts to rise relative to wages. If houses cease to be a source of wealth that will mean ruin for million. What does storing wealth in your head even mean?

If this is how low your understanding of economics are then i understand why you are a libertarian

Bitcoin is money. The best money that has ever existed because it can't be debased and is more difficult to steal.

That it isn't widely accepted as a form of payment yet is nothing to worry about. It will come. It is inevitable.

Deflation is good because things get cheaper over time. The solution to debt is to stop getting into it.

Houses have already ceased to be a source of wealth. All house prices are declining in value w.r.t bitcoin. You can't stop this. Complaining won't get you anywhere. You can choose to ignore or accept this reality.

Storing wealth in your head means you can memorize a passphrase or BIP-39 seed phrase and recover access to your bitcoin anywhere on any machine, without having physical backups of your private keys which might get stolen.

How much do you understand about economics? Have you read any of the Austrians or are you just a fiat economist who ignores them?