|
|
|
|
|
|
by jfengel
1464 days ago
|
|
|
* I think our understanding of the dollar system was poor back then because it was the first time we questioned it.* Depends on who you think of as "we". If by "we", you mean "economists", then no. This is elementary economics. If by "we" you mean "tech bros", then yeah, maybe this was a novelty to them, along with everything else in economics past the first couple of weeks of Econ 101. So the economists watched them fast-forward the last three centuries of economic history in a decade. It doesn't take a war to back Bitcoin. What it takes is convincing a major government to replace its currency with a blockchain version. Which is what various central banks are doing. Except it won't be Bitcoin. It'll be a "proof of stake" system, where your "stake" is your existing currency, and the central bank holding a majority. It'll never be Bitcoin-brand crypto because the bitcoin owners don't have the guns you mentioned. They missed the very first lesson on why any currency (not just fiat currency) works. They could have asked the economists, but being tech bros, figured they knew better. |
|
|
Professional economists have been and continue to be three generations behind reality in their discipline. Ask them today what gives the dollar value and they’ll sound like Do Kwon talking about UST: “well, we trade bonds to stabilize the value, and also we have all this gold to back it up in case anything goes wrong.”
You’re right that Bitcoin has no guns. The question is what happens in a regime change situation, which seems to be very likely in a certain part of the world.