|
|
|
|
|
by scsilver
1957 days ago
|
|
The money transfered from late adopters to early adopters is the massive amounts of old money mad from the wealth of kingdoms and colonialization. Personally I think having an infinitely divisible, fixed asset, protected by cryptography and not statutes, is a democratic upheaval of captured financial systems. You dont need blood, legacy, heritage to capture these assets, just information. Maybe having physical wealth ripped from my family multiple times in the past 150 years makes me feel this, this asset is a bit more useful than gold or jewelry when dealing with an uncertain future. |
|
So great, we have regulatory capture of financial systems - and you want to replace it with a system that can't protect against bad actors via financial punishment for known bad behaviour e.g. via the Magnitsky Act? Don't you think that's a problem?
You like Bitcoin because it allows you revenge - but the problem is it's not taking out revenge on the people who may deserve it, it's taking it out on all of society. That's disturbing that you, and I imagine others, aren't thinking critically of those consequences - or if you are that you don't care; in fact this is a fundamental element of Bitcoin and how the mob/"army of HODLers" grows - the price drops and the buy people who bought later, at or below the current price, have now lost money and haven't realized any - so they are now entrenched in the MLM scheme.